Of course they can coexist. All computing platforms have had gaming be a major component of it, and since VR lends itself perfectly well to gaming, why would it be any different here?
As an alternative yes, virtual reality gaming is a thing, as an integral part of standard gaming nope, it is getting pushed away already.
You do realize that when I referred to 120 PPD, I was talking about the ability to recreate 8K displays inside VR, not just that the virtual image will feel like a perceived 8K quality in 3D scenes. As long as you correctly adjust size/distance of screen to the optimal values like you would in real life, you will always maintain an 8K resolution virtual display in VR at 120 PPD. Relying on 3D rendering makes zero difference as I'll explain more below.
Where's your source on this? On the other hand, I can bring up a source showing the monthly active VR userbase has doubled from 2018-2019 on Steam, and was also the same in 2017:
https://uploadvr.com/vr-steam-grew-2018/
Those are hardware surveys, but the biggest problem are not the sales, it´s device abandoning:
"You could give a Rift+PC to every single person in the developed world for free, and the vast majority would cease to use it in a matter of weeks or months. I know this from seeing the results of large-scale real-world market testing, not just my own imagination "
Cost-cutting can only take you so far. What if I told you of a new entrant to the VR market that allows you to truly experience anything, anywhere? What if I told you they provide a full-dive virt…
palmerluckey.com
Humans have nearly always craved more immersion and stimulation as long as it delivers it correctly.
The brain is always trying to save energy, gaming is already wearisome as it is. This is why it will never take over standard gaming.
What is this weird assumption you have about drawing things in 3D? There is fundamentally no difference whatsoever to your eyes between virtual renderings and real life, except for current specs and the vergence accomdation conflict which is entirely fixable. Light-field displays are one of several ways that should satisfy your unusual need based on it's definition, as it would project rays of light at lots of different angles to converge on the eye. That's the same concept as how light hits our eyes from natural light sources. Current VR headsets are illusions, but the perception of reality is already an illusion anyway, so there shouldn't even be a need to have anything other than a headset than solves vergence accommodation regardless of how it does it.
That´s not what I´m talking about. You need the highest quality render possible to reduce the synthetic appearance of your virtual display, if you are trying to make it pass as a real one that is, like in augmented reality. You will need some sophisticated rendering.
Again, as several of us have explained to you, reaching maximum specifications for the human eye is
easier in VR and in fact requires barely any power to render a virtual display. We could render at least 4K virtual screens today if we had the equivalent displays in headsets
. Not to mention, raw material cost will be lower for VR because they will be small screens. It costs a lot to manufacture/ship/contain huge TVs that take up retail shelf space that might sit there for weeks or months on end.
If people want a clean living room, why on earth would they go with a huge display? They would opt for VR/AR. Local communal viewing and not having to wear something are the only two benefits you get. The former becomes less important the higher adoption gets, and the latter will be such a small issue when it's likely that people will adapt to wearing these on a daily basis in the first place, and in doing so may even find it more comfortable because then they can lie down in the perfect position without worrying about where the TV is, maybe put themselves in some magical fairy forest too for a calming effect.
With AR/VR virtual displays, you get: practical infinite screen size, practical infinite screens, the ability to share them with anyone in the world outside of your room, built-in 3D capabilities, build-in 'light-field' display capabilities, and the ability to have screens fixed or follow you, built-in support (soon) for intelligent interfacing using eye-tracking, the ability to make them portable on the go via transport, work, at the park, toilet, etc.
Because it´s not only about cleanliness or functionality, go read some psychology about why people likes big things.
You have all these assumptions about VR, and none of them are correct. What are you trying to do here?
We all know what are you trying to do here.