Some issue - TTLG Forums

Pyrian on 23/10/2016 at 22:06

Quote Posted by EvaUnit02

Firstly VR is currently priced out of the market for most casuals, that includes PSVR.

Doesn't include mobile, though. GearVR has sold (or given away really) quite a few. Sales projections for the PSVR are remarkably bullish; people I know making VR games are pivoting to PlayStation (and GearVR) as hard as they can. I don't know if any of that's going to pan out, though.

Spotted at Marshall's recently:

Inline Image:

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d3/Pyrian/CheapVR_zpstnr1ljms.jpg

Manwe on 24/10/2016 at 09:09

Quote Posted by dethtoll

Everyone is getting on you for the VR thing but I'm just struck by the boring, stupid hostility.

That's rich coming from you, considering you've always been one of the meanest bullies this forum has ever known (and least courageous, always kicking people when they're down), and that I've just been shat on by everyone. But please go ahead and keep ganging up on people while pretending to have the moral high ground.

As for the whole PC master race bullshit, I've said it before, and I'll say it again, I've always been a console gamer first and foremost, and I've probably played more console games than all of you combined. Certainly more than that cave troll ZB. And yes what I've said about immersive sims being better at immersing you in a virtual reality than VR headset themselves is true as far as I'm concerned. Anyway there are no platform barriers any more. Anyone still reasoning in terms of Consoles vs PC is way out of touch with video games.

Quote:

Firstly VR is currently priced out of the market for most casuals, that includes PSVR. Most grandmas don't already own PS4s, let a alone PC with i5 processor, 8GB RAM and a GTX970 or RX480.

Please learn to read: "Clearly the next big thing in the casual/non-gamer market will be VR (well, affordable VR)."
"Until then they'll remain gimmicky gadgets for grandmas and hipsters, or overpriced hardware for tech enthusiasts."

Whether you like it or not, the immediate future of VR is as an affordable gimmick for non-gamers on the one side, and as expensive high-tech equipment for a specific niche on the other side. If VR develops into a proper gaming device, I'll more than happily jump in, but right now it just looks like a glorified EyeToy (which is fine and has some appeal to some people, just not me personally).

Quote:

THERE ARE already developers making compelling games with some depth to them. Just look at some PSVR launch titles like EVE: Valkyrie, Driveclub VR, RIGS and Battlezone. On PC you've got likes of Elite: Dangerous and Dirt Rally.

So cockpit games then? Call me when they have an FPS in there and you can play it for more than half an hour straight without having a headache, eye strain, neck pain, etc.

Quote:

Did you take some blows to your head as an infant? What was being communicated in that pitch video is crystal fucking clear for most people.

No, really it isn't. I have no idea what the processing power of that thing is, and I have no idea where it's coming from (the tablet, the dock via streaming, both?). But if you can point to me where in the video that's explained, I'd be much obliged, because I don't care enough to do any research about it.

EvaUnit02 on 24/10/2016 at 10:34

Quote Posted by Pyrian

Firstly bottom of the barrel budget solutions like Google Cardboard are awful.

The system requirements for Gear VR are FLAGSHIP MODEL PREMIUM HANDSETS. Direct competitor Daydream VR requires Google Pixel ATM. "Affordable VR" my ass.

Another thing is that cellphone VR ATM seems to be marketed more towards giving isolated video viewing experiences than gaming.

Renault on 24/10/2016 at 14:03

Quote Posted by Manwe

It's an introductory, concept video. As someone who's played more console games than everyone here combined, you should know that things like hardware specs and a full list of features are almost never included in an initial announcement. I mean, when they announced the PS4, they didn't even include a picture of what it looked like.

The whole point of the vid was to show you how the system works. Mission accomplished. If you're not stupid.

And maybe you wouldn't get "shat on" by everyone if you didn't barge into every thread, dripping with vitriol.

Manwe on 24/10/2016 at 14:39

Agreed on the specs, but I'd still like to know where the processing power comes from. The tablet alone seems too small to process the graphics we are seeing, and the dock seems too large to be just a charging dock. Also I'm counting at least four different controllers in that video (and that's without the two variants on the basic side controllers). So yeah, maybe that's obvious to you, but it certainly isn't to me. The reason we don't get a full list of specs and features in a reveal trailer for a new console is because we know more or less how it works and what to expect: it's a big box under the TV that makes shiny graphics appear on your screen, and with a controller you can make the shiny graphics move. But this? I have no idea where the shiny graphics come from, and I'm confused as to why there are 6 different controllers to make them move.

Pyrian on 24/10/2016 at 16:03

Quote Posted by EvaUnit02

Firstly bottom of the barrel budget solutions like Google Cardboard are awful.

Yeah. And that's what most people's first experience with VR is likely to be - cheap and awful. I know people who are very worried about that, actually.

Quote Posted by EvaUnit02

The system requirements for Gear VR are FLAGSHIP MODEL PREMIUM HANDSETS. Direct competitor Daydream VR requires Google Pixel ATM. "Affordable VR" my ass.

Also the Note7 sometimes explodes. I got two Galaxy S7's for $672 - they're just not that expensive, and lots of people own them (VR or no VR). As I understand it, the GearVR is outselling the Vive and the Rift combined by something like 2-4 times.

Renault on 13/1/2017 at 15:55

It was announced yesterday, launch date for the Switch is March 3rd. Zelda Breath of the Wild was confirmed as a launch title (and also will be released for Wii U on that day). The other launch titles are underwhelming at best - a game called 1-2 Switch (which kind of demos the new hardware options) Just Dance 2017, and a game called Skylanders Imaginators. Other familiar titles coming out this year are Splatoon 2, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, and the new Mario game, Super Mario Odyssey (not out until Xmas).

Price is $299 here in the U.S., which some people are critical of, but I think it sounds about right. A 3DS will put you back $200, and this has a lot more power and functionality.

That said, I don't really get Nintendo sometimes - games sell consoles. Beyond Zelda, there's nothing that would really motivate me to buy a Switch in the near future. I did read an article that said around 80 games were currently in development for the Switch, but could mean anything. As it stands, I'll probably be picking up Zelda for my Wii U and then waiting a year or two to see what happens.

(http://www.polygon.com/2017/1/13/14241960/nintendo-switch-launch-titles-prices-release-dates)

Renzatic on 13/1/2017 at 17:06

There's a few beyond Zelda and Mario that have my interest piqued. Xenosaga 2, and the new Shin Megami Tensei caught my eye. I might even buy Skyrim for the poops and giggles.

Manwe on 13/1/2017 at 20:10

That new Zelda game really has a weird look to it. Like they turned up the brightness way too high. Maybe to hide the sub-par graphics? Anyway, just watching the trailer is a strain for the eyes so I can't see myself playing the game for too long. Also, while the cartoonish characters look fantastic, the world around them looks very boring and realistic, like it belongs to another game. Like putting the Wind Waker characters inside the world of Twilight Princess. Very jarring.

That new Mario game looks nice though. Except for the whole city level. Not sure what they were thinking there...