-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
When VR hits. Who's going VR only?
- Thread starter cyberheater
- Start date
Spiritwalker
Member
LOL
that's like skipping pretty much all games ever
that's like skipping pretty much all games ever
DXLelouch153
Banned
until we have the tech to experience SAO levels of VR that will never happen
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
But I'm not calling anyone a "techno snob." Although you are proving my "people are getting defensive over VR" point just fine though.
Real_Madrid
Member
Thanks for the reply! Also glad to hear that VR can solve some eye-issues. Imagine a Google Maps VR or something like that, it could be a huge thing for some people.
I absolutely adore VR but I certainly don't see it replacing traditional gaming either.
There may come a time when the hardware evolves WAY beyond what we have today not just in terms of capabilities but in terms of comfort an interaction with the outside world.
The issue for me is simply that wearing a VR headset, especially with glasses, just isn't comfortable for very long. It's awesome while you're in there but is tiring.
There may come a time when the hardware evolves WAY beyond what we have today not just in terms of capabilities but in terms of comfort an interaction with the outside world.
The issue for me is simply that wearing a VR headset, especially with glasses, just isn't comfortable for very long. It's awesome while you're in there but is tiring.
7DollarHagane
Banned
No, there is no real depth in vr.. It's the same kind of effect you get from the 3ds or 3d glasses. I have tried the oculus and its impressive but it works almost exactly like a 3d TV for the depth perception.
Honestly, if that's how you feel, then I'm thinking you have some sort of perception issue. While using it, I feel it is nothing like typical 3DTVs or the 3DS in terms of depth. That's a really strange comment to read, to be honest.
I have discovered, while showing it to people, that not everyone can see 3D in the same way (if at all).
7DollarHagane
Banned
I'm saying even when they were popular, thanks to a much bigger technological and computational revolutionary step like 3d graphics and physics simulation, they were pretty small compared to the Minecraft, dota, cod phenomenons of today.
Pestilence11
Member
I can almost guarantee that nobody will go VR only, no matter how good it turns out. Fatigue and lack of genres it's made for are two big reasons.
I beat Half Life 2 without taking a break. There is some problems I had. Since Hl2 has tons and tons of platforming, you constantly feel like you are under real life stress. Its fun at times, but becomes overstimulating. There is the broken bridge section that just kills my brain.
It is crucial for a game to have pacing in VR. Moment to moment interactions are highten. You can't have too much shooting because it will be too intense. You may have wondered why there are not many shooters announced for it. It's because no one wants that kind of in your face ergancy all the time. Seeing a face hugger jump at you is just as annoying as swatting a bug in real life.
It's a thing.
So, I've recounted this before, but my first attempt into VR as a career was actually in teledildonics (remote, virtual sex, in other words). I had built a VR demo using the SDK for a mechanical vagina from a company called RealTouch. Unfortunately, shortly after, Real Touch lost the license to a key component of their technology and could no longer produce or manufacture the hardware and that basically killed all prospects.
but the sort of things we were envisioning were wild and extremely sexually liberal. Real Touch actually had a system that linked up a man and a woman remotely. The woman basically pleasured herself with an automated dildo that was covered in capacitive touch sensors. The friction of her skin would pick up on the sensors and transmit equivalent motion to motors inside this giant mechanical vagina that would work the opposite of whatever she was doing. So a thrust inward on her end would result in an an equivalent but opposite motion in the mechanical vagina. The idea was to get them both going the same way eventually, so if the man thrusted into it, the woman would feel the same sort of motion.
We thought about what ramifications this would have for, example, gender fluidity. Imagine two men being able to have sex with each other - each thrusting into a receptacle, but the other would feel the "counter thrust" on their end. Or two lesbians with automated dildos.
Then we started realizing that what we had boiled sex down to was essentially a series of instructions for motors and servos in these apparatuses. And you could store those instructions and play them back at will. Meaning you could actually record sex and then relive those sexual encounters whenever you wanted. We thought about VR swingers - people swapping sexual data with one another.
And it would have all been safe, too. Entirely STD and pregnancy resistant, because the two people would never actually physically engage.
I still very much believe in that industry, I just have taken my career in another direction. But the genie is out - eventually what I describe will come to fruition. It's obvious.
7DollarHagane
Banned
I had to shove my glasses into the thing and it wasn't really fitting on well either. I tried that demo where you're on a rollercoaster underground.
Are the newer ones better about glasses? It was awfully uncomfortable when I tried it.
And prior to the wii, I'm sure nobody thought that a bowling game would be the best selling game of last gen.
VR is the biggest component of flight games. It's more important, IMO, than 3D acceleration itself. 3D acceleration doesn't make flight games a hit, but VR will.
7DollarHagane
Banned
Is it weird to think of this as tremendously unhealthy and creepy? Because I think most people would think of it as that.
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
How will you like your crow served.
this is completely, factually wrong. 3DTVs and 3DS work on polarity, and are subject to cross talk. VR stereoscopy doesn't work like that at all. You are presented two wholly independent images.
Sure, I bet a bunch of prude people would think that. That doesn't surprise me at all.
Luckily, people are free to be perverted in their bedrooms without having to explain it to anybody else if they want to. This will happen, it's inevitable.
Which unit did you try?
I'm not sure what demo you're talking about but if you load up something like New Retro Arcade I can absolutely guarantee you (unless you have a legitimate eye problem) that you will be blown away. It truly feels as if you are in that space. The sense of depth and realism is incredible. When you stand up in that world and just start looking around it feels unlike anything else.
I own a DK2 and wear glasses. I don't love wearing it with glasses either, if I'm honest, but it's not terribly uncomfortable for decent sessions. It is early dev hardware, though, and the consumer units appear much more comfortable.
PlayStation VR, for instance, is very comfortable to wear and works perfectly with my glasses. A huge leap from DK2.
I've used Crescent Bay as well, which was not an improvement for my glasses, but I'm holding out hope for the final unit. No idea about Vive, though.
Well I also own a Sony HMZ-T1 which uses two OLED screens but displays traditional 3D content rather than VR stuff. It lacks the depth of proper VR due to the way content was designed, though the lack of cross-talk did help a lot.
Google Maps VR actually exists, but it's a cardboard app.
InaudibleWhispa
Member
I will say to this point, I have never had anything more than a passing interest in flight games. Until Elite: Dangerous I'd never bought one, or been excited by them. But I bought Elite because I owned a DK2 and it was one of the few full VR games available, and like many people who have played it in VR it was a revelation. I put dozens of hours into it. I recently sold my DK2 to prepare for CV1/Vive and I'm back to having no interest in playing Elite -- or anything like it -- until I can do so in VR again. Pretending to fly a jet on a 2D screen continues to hold little interest to me. VR can make even the most mundane activities engaging and exciting so when it comes to something as thrilling as flying a jet or a spaceship, and actually feeling like you're doing it and not just playing a game on a screen, it's legitimately mind blowing.
BibiMaghoo
Member
The first link: 180 million people responded, based on if the price was acceptable to them.
9% of all respondents were "very interested" in buying a VR headset.
24% were "somewhat interested.
21% were "not very interested".
39% showed no interest at all.
A massive sample set. Over half the people were not very interested or less. That sits in the same range as people that didn't want to wear glasses.
The second link: 2,282 Americans responded.
80% of people in the survey said they have some awareness of VR.
10% indicated they know a lot about it.
20% of those surveyed said they were interested in a specific brand at this time.
60% of all respondents said they will not pay more than $400 for a VR headset.
Over half of those surveyed reported they had some form of concern about trying VR.
23% of respondents cited worries about their health.
11% fretted about "losing touch with the real world.
5% thought they might get addicted, and another 5% said they thought VR systems would cost too much.
A relatively small number of Americans. Over half were concerned at health issues.
The third link: 500 kids from ages 1017. Lots of stats regarding child awareness of VR and brands within it. Not terribly relevent.
So, where in those studies do you reach the conclusion that those people that have an issue with wearing a headset want VR? If anything, they marry up with them surely? These statistics show awareness among youth and greater demand for VR if a person is already in an ecosystem that can use it, and that the market has great appeal. They also show that concerns are present and not to be ignored. Which was entirely my point.
KatamariOnTheRocks
Member
Things like this have me so excited for games like Euro Truck Sim, as I've had fun playing it traditionally, but I feel like the additional cues would really make it something special.
Playing that with a wheel, an hmd and a moving car Simulator that simulates turns would be incredible.
Edit: something like this: https://youtu.be/mrSEhzwgohU
Embarraing like Drivclub VR & RIGS, both playable on the floor and getting kudos from loads of places? Or Rez Infinite?
Yeah, one tech demo goes wrong & your salt about PSVR shows through.
InaudibleWhispa
Member
Yeah Euro Truck Sim would be great in VR. It has DK2 support but it ran like shit on my computer.
how is this a caveat? Of course people will consider something only on the condition that they can afford it. And, based on other surveys, that price is right about the price of a new console... which is what VR headsets are aiming for.
A massive sample set. Over half the people showed some signs of interest.
why yes, if you combine those two in-congruent figures, you do arrive at a figure that is similar to the number of people who complained about wearing glasses. Too bad that number doesn't represent the people who don't want to use VR at all, like you want it to represent.
And, as we know from the last survey, those concerns do not affect their intent to investigate VR.
LOL? no, less than a quarter were concerned with health issues. 23% != >50%
No? You can only get the figures to "marry up surely" once you start counting groups of people into categories they don't fit into.
The statistics show that the concerns are all minority figures, and the demand and interest and intent to investigate VR is still majority. Were "wearing glasses" a deal breaker, you would not have a majority interest in VR. In fact, the figures show that those who are concerned about "weight of VR on their face" isn't even a quarter of those polled.
here's the bottom line stat that you cannot argue against:
"75% of those surveyed said they would ask for a VR headset if the price was right (about the range of a new console)"
clearly "wearing something on your face" is not a deal breaker, and not even to anywhere close to a majority.
You're not going to observe real life in VR though, real life is much better at that. You're going to observe things that require much more effort than real life. From filling in missing qualities to actually doing superhuman stuff.
(and of course there's the scuba setup, blurriness, limited fov, pressing against your face, weight, etc.)
lol what a nonsense sentence. "when you look in VR, you look harder"
no, no you don't. And nobody gets up and says "whew! I'm exhausted from all that looking"
Gameindustry messed up that article. If 180 million people responded that would easily have been the largest scientific survey ever conducted by a factor of thousand (barring a complete census). The time period also doesn't make sense. They interviewed some thousand most likely, generalizing to the population size of the sum of the countries.
I freak out when a character falls a great hight in a third person playgonal game. VR is NOPE for anything but sitting in a safe room playing good music.
Uhm yes, it's called visual search, but observing is more than moving your eyes, it's also interpreting images.
InaudibleWhispa
Member
In my experience, eye strain wasn't much of a problem in VR. Coming out of VR is about as disorienting as walking out into bright light after the cinema, or after sitting in a dark room watching TV; you blink a few times to re-adjust and that's it. Our eyes get used to artificial light sources pretty quickly. Most of the strain from say, looking at a phone in the dark, is from unnaturally focusing on a 2D point in front of your face for a while, which doesn't apply to VR.
These are automatic processes we do millions of times per day. You will perform visual searches IRL just as frequently as you perform them in VR. It doesn't take more to interpret a VR image than it does any other image.
anothertech
Member
I could see that happening when the mmo of my dreams is released and full virtual worlds are created to enjoy with my friends.
For now I'll enjoy it in sessions of EVR and summer lesson along with my usual game programming lol.
For now I'll enjoy it in sessions of EVR and summer lesson along with my usual game programming lol.
Of course you do. I just explained why. You need to fill in more gaps because of limited mutimodal information and you are often taking on roles or viewpoints with epistemic frames that are alien to you.
VR doesn't have a deficit of multimodal information on a order high enough to cause fatigue like you are saying. At best, you're going to be as fatigued as you would be watching any animation on any kind of screen.
Nobody is going to get winded or exhausted from observing VR, that's hyperbolic nonsense. You're extrapolating a minor difference to paint a dumb argument.
No - nobody gets tired from looking in VR.
Best post.
At first thought I thought the op was crazy.. But then I thought about it, and it's not so crazy after all. I mean, I only have limited time for my hobbies, and going VR-only is probably going to cover the amount of hours that I usually dedicate to gaming anyway. I'm going to spend most of my VR time on simulator experiences, and I've already prepared by buying flight sticks/HOTAS and wheel/pedals. So, with a couple of years of VR experience under my belt I already know that I'm not going to do much traditional gaming in the future.
Of course you're not going to get exhausted, but you said it would take the exact same amount of effort, which is simply not true, and easy to see why not. 1. Fatigue from using VR is well documented (and eye fatigue is also a correlate of simulator sickness), 2. Actually yes, narrative transportation from watching an animation does require more effort, though not as much as when it takes over all your senses 3. Animations don't require actions. 4. You were using hyperbole to counter someone's hyperbole and then accuse me of hyperbole, nope.
Do you limit yourself to 3D movies and gaming only?
I find this very interesting and fascinating. Imagine if you could record and play back emotional experiences. The App Store would be a very different place then.
slavesnyder
Member
It's like going Kinect only.
wanderingprostheyltite
Member
I find this very interesting and fascinating. Imagine if you could record and play back emotional experiences. The App Store would be a very different place then.
Heh...
Decent flick about selling people's recorded experiences on a black market of people banging pros and playing them back in a VR/neural headset, though fuckery ensues, of course.
As the tech progresses I expect whole new sexual identities and communities to emerge in its wake, not just with the teledildonics stuff but VR porn in general. Its gonna be a weird and wild future. Human sexuality ain't seen nothin yet.
Same. Can't do VR only
tattooed_dwarf
Member
Of course not, I'm not gonna limit my gaming experiences just to get VR fix. It could be part of my gaming hobby, sure.