nicked on 16/9/2015 at 12:11
In terms of catching on, I just have to ask myself, "Would anyone miss VR if it wasn't there?"
Real innovation comes from filling a need, or at least a want in the case of entertainment. Who are these hypothetical people who play current normal videogames and feel like their experience is seriously lacking because they're looking at a screen a few feet away rather than attached to their head? It's in the same bracket as motion controls for me - nobody asked for motion controls, they were never, and could never, be as easy and intuitive as pressing a button like we always have, therefore they slowly fade into niche and obscurity. 3D too - no-one ever watched a movie and thought "This film is good, but if I could just get some sense of depth perception, it would be even better!"
Thirith on 16/9/2015 at 12:22
Quote Posted by nicked
In terms of catching on, I just have to ask myself, "Would anyone miss VR if it wasn't there?"
Real innovation comes from filling a need, or at least a want in the case of entertainment. Who are these hypothetical people who play current normal videogames and feel like their experience is seriously lacking because they're looking at a screen a few feet away rather than attached to their head? ...
Whether VR proves a huge success, a niche industry or an abject failure, your description above strikes me as rather off. It's a bit like describing TV as "Who goes to the cinema and thinks it's lacking because the screen is a few dozen feet across rather than 45 inches?" If VR delivers on its promise (and based on what people have said and written about Oculus Rift and Vive, there's a good chance it will), the player won't just be *looking at* the game - in sensory and cognitive terms, he'll be *in* the game. The upcoming VR devices aren't just screens, they're input devices at the same time. You're able to look around, close in on things and see them up close not by pressing buttons or sticks but by doing what you do in real life: look around, close in, have a closer look.
Whether that's enough or not for VR to succeed (whatever that means specifically), we'll find out. But if you don't understand or acknowledge what it actually does, no wonder you don't see how it could succeed.
Pyrian on 16/9/2015 at 12:30
Quote Posted by nicked
Who are these hypothetical people who play current normal videogames and feel like their experience is seriously lacking because they're looking at a screen a few feet away rather than attached to their head?
For starters, everybody who's ever bought a larger screen. That's all I ask. A simulation of having the ultimate screen to play on. ...Preferably not viewed through a screen door.
Quote Posted by nicked
It's in the same bracket as motion controls for me - nobody asked for motion controls...
In a sense, motion controls aren't even competing with traditional video games. They're competing with things like going outside and playing sports. ...Poorly, I'm afraid. People who's primary desire in leisure is to sit down and twiddle their thumbs were never the target audience. The target audience bought a Wii, played it a bit, and then went back to doing real stuff.
henke on 16/9/2015 at 13:24
Quote Posted by nicked
Who are these hypothetical people who play current normal videogames and feel like their experience is seriously lacking because they're looking at a screen a few feet away rather than attached to their head?
Noone, just like noone in 1991 felt their gaming experiences were lacking just because they didn't have 3D graphics.
Have you seen that new Sonic the Hedgehog game? It's so fast! Cutting edge! We'll never need more modern hardware than this! :D
PigLick on 16/9/2015 at 13:40
fuck yeh 91 represent! still a few people probly didnt experience the amazingness of the early 90's gaming. Who can blame them?
I remember when Landstalker came out for the genesis and thinking that was as good as gaming was going to get
p.s I was right
Renault on 16/9/2015 at 16:14
There's got to be an ease of use factor for VR to have any mainstream success. Can I get the headset on and off quickly, or does it take 5 minutes to strap it all on and engage? Is it heavy and cumbersome? Also, I'm going to take a lot of convincing on control schemes. Will I ever be able to see my kb/mouse? I mean, I guess I don't understand how it will all work if you have to hit non-standard keys (meaning non qwerty), like Function keys, or Ctrl/Alt/Shift or the 10 key pad. Last thing I want to be doing is blindly stabbing around for a key in the dark when something is happening live on screen. Or air grasping for my mouse if I've temporarily let it go.
Pyrian on 16/9/2015 at 16:23
Quote Posted by Brethren
Will I ever be able to see my kb/mouse? I mean, I guess I don't understand how it will all work if you have to hit non-standard keys (meaning non qwerty), like Function keys, or Ctrl/Alt/Shift or the 10 key pad.
Put a board over your keyboard and mouse. Place a picture of the keyboard on it at first as a training wheel. You won't need to look at your keyboard anymore, very quickly, and indeed will probably be a better, faster typist as well. They've been doing this in typing classes, since the typewriter days. Sucks if you move to a new keyboard layout, though.
Renault on 16/9/2015 at 16:37
This is what I'm talking about - ease of use. People aren't going to train themselves on how to use a KB in the dark just so they can use VR. Not going to happen. Oculus and whomever else are going to have to find a better way to do it. Maybe it takes some type of proprietary textured keyboard or some specialized voice command software, but it's got to be better than this.
Wait, did you just ask me to put a a piece of wood over my keyboard?
henke on 16/9/2015 at 18:21
Oculus revealed the controller 3 months ago. At the big event. Palmer Luckey wore sandals on the stage, REMEMBER?
