VR is a fad and will never take off

DarthBuzzer

Member
Jul 9, 2018
817
417
200
It won't take off because a screen bolted on your eye balls is a very bad idea to start with.
No, it really isn't. It's a hell of a lot more promising than a TV or a smartphone. Having a screen bolted on your eyes means it can become a complete extension and rewiring of the human perceptual system, which will have a lot more uses and impact than other screens in our lives.

Also almost nobody gets sick/nause from tv, but almost all get some from VR and many get so sick that cant play vr games at all
You're not understanding how sickness occurs in VR. It's the disconnect in movement, which means that you can always avoid it by playing games that don't have that disconnect.. If you want to play such games, then using comfort options or other methods to reduce sickness, and just generally having exposure to it will in all likelihood get rid of the issue.

And no, a small minority of people do get sick from first person games on a TV with fast movement.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Zannegan and gifgaf

Racer43

Member
Jun 14, 2018
252
195
195
The next couple of years, the stars will align for VR.

As it stands, my bet is that Sony is the one that will make this mainstream and it will be a HUGE success for them.

PS5 will be a system designed with VR in mind. Navi will be equipped with several key technologies built for foveated rendering with dynamic pixel and mesh shading (VRS++). Wireless will most likely be built directly into the SOC, using AMD tech (Nitero tech which AMD bought some years ago). Will probably be using 60Ghz beamforming (no line of sight required) and IEEE 802.11ay (Qualcomm has chipsets ready right about now) The available bandwith easily supports huge resolutions and is super low latency. Patents from Sony suggests that they are invested in this (foveated rendering and eye tracking). Tracking will probably be inside out with cameras (Sony is a leader when it comes to optics, both cameras and lenses.) ala Oculus Insight (for ease of use). Rumors has it even DS5 will be equipped with cameras. In regards to screens, Sony has their own partnerships and experience in building screens, and is probably developing their own custom VR screen. With foveation, expect high resolution pr. eye.

Software. Here they are second to none. Both in regards to re-engineering the rendering pipeline to take full advantage of foveated rendering, to content itself. Also, they have a HUGE headstart marketwise and internally.
 
Last edited:

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
4,764
4,401
510
If Stadia (or another streaming service) can take off then I think VR has a chance. Until then it will be niche.

If you can stream then you can make a headset for about the cost of a console and it can play AAA games at super specs and resolutions, while its wireless and lightweight then ya it will take off.
 

Fox Mulder

Member
Jul 1, 2009
17,415
778
735
Greensboro, NC
I don't think it's a fad, but it's also a pricey clunky console peripheral and hard to demo. I doubt Sony does something like bundle VR at ps5 launch to guarantee users get it like MS tried with Kinect.

I'm not interested in it at the moment. I don't play on PC and the games look like indie games or limited modes on the PS4.
 

MagnesG

Member
Apr 20, 2019
84
24
180
Wow love this thread of gold.

Make it affordable and 'easy'. Until then, just bunch of beta players trying to fit in a wire-heavy peripheral on their heads.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcjmetroid

ArchaeEnkidu

Vincit qui se vincit
Jan 30, 2018
3,478
5,556
485
Kinect sold 29 million and you needed an Xbox 360/Xbox One to use that. That is outselling all the manufactuerer's headsets combined.
The Kinect was also bundled into the original Xbox One launch as well as a few Xbox 360 SKUs. If you are going to troll, at least be smarter about it.
 
Jun 9, 2012
3,564
1,180
455
I put it in the same bucket as stereoscopic 3D and Kinect. It’s one of those things that seems self-evidently better than what you already have, until you actually try it and realize it’s more hassle than it’s worth. People think they want it but they’re going to realize that they don’t.

At best I think it’ll have a future at mall kiosks and arcades. I do not think VR will be a standard home gaming platform.
 

Hendrick's

Member
Jan 7, 2014
4,120
2,623
390
VR is the future

even if its not the immediate future

if u think people will be staring at flat screens while pressing buttons 2 thousand years from now ur fooling urself
To be realistic, in 2 thousand years they won't be wearing headsets either.
 

DarthBuzzer

Member
Jul 9, 2018
817
417
200
I put it in the same bucket as stereoscopic 3D and Kinect. It’s one of those things that seems self-evidently better than what you already have, until you actually try it and realize it’s more hassle than it’s worth. People think they want it but they’re going to realize that they don’t.

At best I think it’ll have a future at mall kiosks and arcades. I do not think VR will be a standard home gaming platform.
Again, no one that has any idea of VR would declare it as having more of a future in arcades.

The hassle becomes easily fixed with refined hardware, and in fact would be less hassle over time than turning on a TV.

What's faster? Going to your fixed-location TV and turning it on via remote/voice commands or having an always-on wearable that can be accessed anywhere you go in your daily life.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Romulus and kizito

Bogey

Member
May 4, 2014
198
93
230
I wish VR was ready to take off quickly!

But in reality, I can't see that happening at all until (if ever) they come up with a clever way to solve motion sickness.
 

Bogey

Member
May 4, 2014
198
93
230
I've heard of research like this. I even recall a very similar story from right before the Oculus Rift was released - but so far, nothing seems to be anywhere close to hitting the consumer market, unfortunately.

I can't judge the potential time horizon though, nor what else would be involved in getting this out to consumers (a device that sends permanent white noise to parts of your nerval system - I'd picture that needs a fair bit of medical testing). Nor could I judge how promising it really is - companies over-promising on their research is unfortunately not exactly rare.

Having said that, I hope of course that we'll eventually see a finished product that successfully does manage to address nausea! I really do think that could be one of the main essentialls to help a wider breakthrough for VR.
I won't even mention other things like wireless headsets (I think some actually already exist by now?), more comfort, better displays etc., because I think it's nearly guaranteed these problems can be solved eventually.
 
Last edited:

HeresJohnny

Member
Mar 14, 2018
1,132
1,323
250
I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a fad. In order for something to be a fad it has to first become popular.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
322
302
185
Cause I don't want it to become the main form of gaming in the industry or taking away from flat screen gaming.

If VR gaming takes over, we will have only Sony to blame. Don't let it happen.
That's already starting to happen and probably the reason for this thread. Huge games are going for both psvr and oculus. Most of those devs would be working on regular games if it weren't for VR so I'm glad you have to deal with that. Sales are improving every year too so its only going to get worse because people with VR headsets buy alot of games.
It wont take over but it'll continue to pull more resources from regular games and I take joy in you watching it happen. :)
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Wonko_C

ColdToffee

Gold Member
Oct 24, 2017
1,568
1,366
360
Portugal
Wireless VR needs batteries, which means charging, low battery warnings mid gaming, more weight from batteries.... No thanks.
I'll take a single cable VR over wireless anytime.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
322
302
185
I put it in the same bucket as stereoscopic 3D and Kinect. It’s one of those things that seems self-evidently better than what you already have, until you actually try it and realize it’s more hassle than it’s worth. People think they want it but they’re going to realize that they don’t.

At best I think it’ll have a future at mall kiosks and arcades. I do not think VR will be a standard home gaming platform.

In my experience of demoing it to hundreds of people it's always better than people expected. On gaf where people want it fail, sure, it sucks in this world but not in real life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthBuzzer

somerset

Member
Apr 15, 2019
150
244
160
Only a *moron* would call VR a 'fad'. VR is a technology- now thanks to products like the Vive, Rift and the misnamed MS MR (with its perfect inside out tracking) very well defined.

As a technology, VR only had to reach certain points of achievement. Tracking was a big deal- and that is now amazing. Sub-pixel stability. The quality of display and power of the system driving the display matters, of course- but now both rely on standard non-VR advances in the tech industry.

The PS5 and AMD's tech will make VR more mainstream than ever- up til today the no.1 problem in VR has been Nvidia, and the rotten games that company plays in *collapsing* rendering performance in order to sell massively over-priced ultra-high-end solutions. This paradigm doesn't apply to console hardware tho. And if AMD has implemented a GPU per eye solution for PS5 VR, VR rendering will take a very happy leap.

It would have been the easiest thing in the world for Nvidia to support and promote one GPU per eye- but two low end cards are *far* faster than one high end card at *far* less than the high end card sells for- and Nvidia thus *hates* any method that lets you use two or more cards in gaming.

Idiots claim VR either has the hours per month usage of trad 2D gaming or it is a 'flop'. While headsets remain 'oppressive' (heavy with sweat issues in warm environments), most gamers would VR game for the highly 'special' experience, like seeing some films at the cinema, but still expect to do most gaming 2D. But VR 'hobbyiests' like hard core flight sim peeps, will have a room decked out just for VR to spend long room scale immersion periods in open world games.

The success of VR was always two lines finally crossing over- as with most tech products. One line is the classic negatives, that must reduce with time. The other the classic positives that must increase with time.

Mouthbreathers said portable computers would never take off, when the first were 'luggables' with the size and weight of a small filled suitcase. They actually said the same thing about the modern Internet - and how vividly I recall that *fact* having used the net from shortly after wen the very first web pages went live.

Such idiots take a pride in being stupid. But the psychology is interesting. They usually know someone who uses the thing they criticise, and have a personal animosity with that person. So they laughably try to convert that animosity into a wider philosophical 'debate'.

I'll say this about VR. It stands where shooter 3D games stood *before* Doom and then Quake. Lots of 3D games had been made earlier- all of them highly unsatisfactory from a conceptual position- especially control. *lookspring*, the breakthru method of using keyboard to move and mouse to look around, changed everything.

The data structure design of Doom and Quake changed everything.

All of a sudden everyone knew how to do continuous area 3D games on a computer, and have them compelling.

VR games are at the pre-Doom stage. Too many are just a dumb conversion of 2d-monitor games- especially since the traditional '3D' game can be trivially ported to stereo. This is a giant mistake. What is fun on a monitor is not worthwhile in VR. The gimmick of stereo rendering is not the point of VR. VR *must* be about unique VR suitable game play mechanisms- things only possible in VR.

Nvidia's *murder* of real physics in computer games for the last decade now has a big impact. Thanks to Nvidia, actual game coders don't even consider real physics in VR. Its as if they think it has been proven that gamers do not want real physics. Only slowly is the cancerous effect of Nvidia fading, and game coders begiining to think "maybe gamers are OK with physics afterall".

Today it is chicken and egg for VR software. Good games will drive VR sales, but low current VR sales makes the incentive to develop good VR software low. The PS5 will change this- as Sony provides stable income to the best VR games devs. And while I'm certain RDR2 VR will be a massive day one Sony 'exclusive' (Rockstar has spent a fortune on VR dev), the PS5 will have a ton of true VR games that are not just ports.
 

DarthBuzzer

Member
Jul 9, 2018
817
417
200
Wireless VR needs batteries, which means charging, low battery warnings mid gaming, more weight from batteries.... No thanks.
I'll take a single cable VR over wireless anytime.
You can swap batteries. Not a problem. The weight is barely any different.
 
Last edited:
Jun 9, 2012
3,564
1,180
455
In my experience of demoing it to hundreds of people it's always better than people expected. On gaf where people want it fail, sure, it sucks in this world but not in real life.
Kinect also demoed well. So much so that it sold tens of millions.


Then the novelty factor wore off and people dropped it.
 

DarthBuzzer

Member
Jul 9, 2018
817
417
200
Kinect also demoed well. So much so that it sold tens of millions.


Then the novelty factor wore off and people dropped it.
The novelty factor of VR isn't going to wear off so long as the tech improves. Real life experiences do not wear off. Skydiving the first time and the 50th time are still going to be impactful. Likewise, realistic VR (meaning, as it develops more) will tap into our perceptual system in a way that feels very believable, and thus can't be a novelty. Not to mention you have various objective measures such as AI and social multiplayer which will always be at their best in VR. Those will not wear off because they are fundamentals in human nature.
 
Last edited:

xGreir

Neo Member
Apr 1, 2019
34
41
90
So... In summary, you are saying that a whole revolucionary concept as the complete immersion (before anything brain related), and the obvious response to open worlds, connectivity, and true digital worlds is... A fade.

Right now maybe, we just reached "photorealistic" games in our 2D screens at 30/60 fps commonly, resolutions between 1080/4k, but for VR being well developed, we need at least these same graphics, at 90 fps, in 2 screens at the same time, and an affordable price.

We haven't reached that point yet, and you say that it is a fade? Another gimmick failure?

Of course, we will see how the VR googles concept develop in the future, but what is for sure is that immersion and virtual reality is the tech we are aiming for, is the next way to feel the games, and that is innamovible.
 
Last edited:

Elcid

Gold Member
Jul 27, 2018
584
588
345
I love VR and 3D. I hope both take off more! I miss 3d gaming and VR is the next best thing. I hope they let us use our VR headsets for just 3d versions of games.
 

DarthBuzzer

Member
Jul 9, 2018
817
417
200
I love VR and 3D. I hope both take off more! I miss 3d gaming and VR is the next best thing. I hope they let us use our VR headsets for just 3d versions of games.
I mean you can use virtual screens with better 3D functionality than 3D TVs. The only issue is the resolution needs to catch up.
 
Jun 9, 2012
3,564
1,180
455
The novelty factor of VR isn't going to wear off so long as the tech improves. Real life experiences do not wear off. Skydiving the first time and the 50th time are still going to be impactful. Likewise, realistic VR (meaning, as it develops more) will tap into our perceptual system in a way that feels very believable, and thus can't be a novelty. Not to mention you have various objective measures such as AI and social multiplayer which will always be at their best in VR. Those will not wear off because they are fundamentals in human nature.
You’re assuming people even want that.

What most people want is to sit on their asses and be entertained with the lowest amount of effort possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cryptoadam

Digital Gex

Member
Feb 20, 2019
65
30
155
It is a fad it will die in gen 2, and then come back 10 year from now with better technology just like the last 3 times VR died and came back.

No one had discovered any design philosophy to make VR a mainstream product and that won't change until better tech 10 years from now. The only real improvement we have seen is FOV quality and consumer level prices (for real non-mobile VR) but the design philosophy is the same as it was in the 90's and people over look that because they may favor 1-2 games on VR platforms.

The only way that will change is when we have full quality image on each eye with high quality view, full FPS equality, less helmet, more large sunglasses,great tech at a consumer level price, and wireless. You're not getting that before the next 10 years.
 

DarthBuzzer

Member
Jul 9, 2018
817
417
200
You’re assuming people even want that.

What most people want is to sit on their asses and be entertained with the lowest amount of effort possible.
Pretty sure that billions of humans entertain themselves in the outside world in ways that involve movement. As VR attempts to replicate many experiences and activities, a number of people are going to do this in their own homes.

And since when does VR even require you to stand? You can sit. As soon as headsets are comfortable enough without extra hassle, it will allow for a more convenient and more relaxing way to play than traditional gaming.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Wonko_C and gifgaf

DarthBuzzer

Member
Jul 9, 2018
817
417
200
It is a fad it will die in gen 2, and then come back 10 year from now with better technology just like the last 3 times VR died and came back.

No one had discovered any design philosophy to make VR a mainstream product and that won't change until better tech 10 years from now. The only real improvement we have seen is FOV quality and consumer level prices (for real non-mobile VR) but the design philosophy is the same as it was in the 90's and people over look that because they may favor 1-2 games on VR platforms.
This is just your random guess without having done any research into the state of VR.

There are no signs of VR dying off, and in fact, everything suggests gen 2 will be far bigger than gen 1. Plenty of people know what the design philosophy is for mainstream VR. It's the standalone form factor. And you've only seen a few improvements so far because get this, we're in generation 1? Were you expecting huge breakthroughs with refreshed products? 'The breakthroughs aren't happening until gen 2, but they are very much on their way and will radically change the landscape of VR.

The only way that will change is when we have full quality image on each eye with high quality view, full FPS equality, less helmet, more large sunglasses,great tech at a consumer level price, and wireless. You're not getting that before the next 10 years.
Sunglasses, who knows. Could be longer than 10 years, but we're almost certainly going to get waveguide displays in the next 5-10 years, and that will allow for far smaller headsets. Wireless, high resolution, high FoV, high refresh rate are all achievable with 2nd gen headsets in the next 3 years, let alone what we get in the 7 years after that.
 
Last edited:

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
322
302
185
Kinect also demoed well. So much so that it sold tens of millions.


Then the novelty factor wore off and people dropped it.
Kinect didnt demo well unless it was young kids or families. It fucking sucked from the get go, it sold well because it had Wii type games, gimmicks. Wii also did well but they dont have the market that will support them for the long haul, those are impulse buys. I demo VR to mostly gamers, completely different demographic people that laugh at kinect. The problem is in 2019 most gamers still haven't tried VR, my experience demoing has proven that to me.

Kinect never had a big budget single player game either, VR has several.
 
Last edited:

Wonko_C

Member
Jul 5, 2010
4,269
294
670
Cancun, Mexico.
Pretty sure that billions of humans entertain themselves in the outside world in ways that involve movement. As VR attempts to replicate many experiences and activities, a number of people are going to do this in their own homes.
Yeah. I know the world is becoming more complacent with all the convenience technology is providing us, I pray we don't end up like:
 

Rhazer Fusion

Member
May 2, 2006
9,470
762
1,205
In my own world.
m.youtube.com
VR is nice technology, but it needs more good and deeper gameplay experiences imo and not glorified tech demos. I don’t think it will reach mainstream success until a very long time especially at the current price of admission.
 
Last edited:

Dragon Lord

Member
Jan 26, 2019
252
125
205
A fad? I don’t think that VR has in any respect even come into its own yet. VR is neither a fad nor a gimmick—it is a burgeoning technology which has not yet found its foothold. I think it will likely become much bigger in the future once it has time to improve and once there are more games which are tailored to it.
 

Nikana

Member
Jan 26, 2016
2,530
642
265
No because companies are forcing it despite the horrible sales. I fear all companies will adopt an exclusive VR strategy to their gaming direction because it's far cheaper to make games for VR than regular flat screen gaming.
How are they forcing it? If anything theyare doing the opposite which is why it's not above 3 million.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
322
302
185
You want to bet on VR, it’s so easy to go against VR when there’s only like 3 entertaining games but more will come out.

Three? That's probably the least I've ever heard someone give it credit for. It's about 50-60 for me. More than regular PS4 and Xbox One combined.

Even outside of exclusives, games like Dirt Rally, Wipeout, Skyrim, Super Hot, Borderlands 2 etc in VR are magnitudes better than the flat version. So much that it feels like its own thing completely. You can easily so "meh, its already on the flat version" but my goodness its another animal completely. Wipeout VR is literally mind-blowing. That's no exaggeration either. Of the 40 or so people that I've demoed that to, not a single person hasn't been shocked playing that.
 

JCK75

Member
Apr 19, 2018
589
531
285
It's not even remotely a fad, it's just in an awkward place where the tech needs to improve before it appeals to more than a niche group. Once GPU's evolve to be able to push 4k per eye at 144hz it will be a much better experience.. that's a ways off.
 

lukilladog

Member
Feb 6, 2018
592
235
205
Why is people still comparing VR to things like analog sticks, 3d games, quake, and multiplayer?. It´s not even a good analogy, go compare to stuff that actually radically changed the way people play games, like 3d vision, virtual boy, motion controls, and kinect. Anyway, it seems VR isn´t gaining much public attention anymore, pay due respects to the Virtual Reality twitch category, have to give credit to Zimtok5 who supported it till the end:


 

DarthBuzzer

Member
Jul 9, 2018
817
417
200
Why is people still comparing VR to things like analog sticks, 3d games, quake, and multiplayer?. It´s not even a good analogy, go compare to stuff that actually radically changed the way people play games, like 3d vision, virtual boy, motion controls, and kinect. Anyway, it seems VR isn´t gaining much public attention anymore, pay due respects to the Virtual Reality twitch category, have to give credit to Zimtok5 who supported it till the end:


The comparisons are made because gamers do not know when to accept beneficial advancements in the industry, regardless of how big or small they are. There is no mention of Motion controls, Kinect, Virtual Boy, and 3D because they were all extremely limited in scope and offered little room for growth - and never proved themselves to any serious degree. Yes, you had some masterpiece Wii games like Mario Galaxy 1 and 2, but those barely utilized motion controls and were not making a case for the tech. Skyward Sword is very divisive. Kinect had Fru, which was a really great game, but simply not enough to justify the tech.

VR is the opposite. It's the first radical gamechanger since 3D graphics that actually works as intended, has actually proven itself, and has limitless potential for growth. It also compasses everything that came before it. 3D, Motion controls, Kinect. They are simply precursors to VR, and unlike those, VR has no descendant. Unless we count the merging of VR and AR into one device.

And no, VR is not dead. This is merely the gartner hype cycle playing out, just as it did for all technology mediums. PCs, Smartphones, Tablets - each of these were hyped up to a certain point by the media/anaylsts and all fell short of where the media/anaylsts expected them to be. They all went into the trough of dillusionment before eventually rising out and reaching, then surpassing the initial wave of hype.

Basically, blame the media. They are responsible for an artificially induced 'crash and burn' of all technologies.
 
Last edited: