Poll: Virtual Reality - Fad or Innovation?

[Level 7 Dragon]

Salute, Escapist

It was my tenth birthday when I got a Nintendo Wii. Virtual bowling was fun to entertain friends for the evening, though I quicky realized that most of the mechanics that could be accomplished with motion controls could have been accomplished more efficiently with more traditionals methods, such as controllers and keyboards.

Now VR headsets are emerging from the horizon, like a lone cowboys from an intro to a spegetti western. It made me think, what would virtual reality tech do that is impossible to accomplish with current means?

-What are you planning to do with the system ones you get your hands on it and a computer powerful enough to support it?

-What kinds of games/simmulations you want to see be developed for the headsets?

-Do you believe it's a passing fad, like motion controls, or something truly innovative?

-How do you see the wave of VR games interacting with established development intitutions and movements? Do you think AAA devs will risk millions developing for the new tech?

 

[Gray-Philosophy]

I suppose the thing it can do that nothing else can, is bring the player closer to having a truly vivid experience. But I don't think it's going to be a "common" gaming experience anytime soon. The oculus rift alone for example, despite being well known and popular, isn't something just anyone can go get their hands on. It's too expensive.

If I ever got my hands on it though, I would no doubt use it, probably a lot. I love first person games already, I think VR tech would make it so much sweeter.

I'd love to see some physical involvement from the games developed.. I kind of like the idea of running around in a shooter, getting excercise while on a virtual playground while having fun with it.

I think it definitely has the potential to be innovative, if done perfectly right. I'm just not sure we're there yet.

I don't think AAA devs are gonna risk anything until there's a sudden surge in VR popularity, because some guy did it very succesfully.

 

[tippy2k2]

I think it's going to be like 3D; a neat experience but is never ever ever going to replace "traditional" gaming and like 3D in movies, there are going to be plenty who just don't like it period.

For something to take over traditional controls, it would have to take over EVERY aspect of traditional controls and VR is missing a key component in that; tactile feedback.

If I'm in a boxing game on the headset, my character is getting his head hit, snapping it back and forcing his hands back since he just got punched in the face. My real hands/face and the game hands/face are now in two different spots. In a sword fighting game, my sword has been blocked but in real life, my hands are continually swinging through because they haven't actually hit anything. My real hands and the game hands are now in two different spots.

Basically the problems Yahtzee has with the Kinect are the same problems that I don't see being solved with VR (although get rid of the camera problems part because one would hope the VR system wouldn't have that problem).

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/4863-Kinect

Except for a few special types of game, you're always going to run into the tactile feedback problem and you're always going to get pulled out of the game because of it. It'll be excellent for individual experiences (think of how epic a game like Rock Band could be since the tactile feedback IS the controller so that's not a problem) but it will never replace gaming itself. Once the Holo Deck shows up, then we might have a contender but until then...

 

[Lufia Erim]

I suppose the thing it can do that nothing else can, is bring the player closer to having a truly vivid experience. But I don't think it's going to be a "common" gaming experience anytime soon. The oculus rift alone for example, despite being well known and popular, isn't something just anyone can go get their hands on. It's too expensive.

If I ever got my hands on it though, I would no doubt use it, probably a lot. I love first person games already, I think VR tech would make it so much sweeter.

I'd love to see some physical involvement from the games developed.. I kind of like the idea of running around in a shooter, getting excercise while on a virtual playground while having fun with it.

I think it definitely has the potential to be innovative, if done perfectly right. I'm just not sure we're there yet.

I don't think AAA devs are gonna risk anything until there's a sudden surge in VR popularity, because some guy did it very succesfully.

I disagree. If AAA can be the first to establish a series of very good VR games. They would be known as the go to VR guys and could make a LOT of money. I think the devs/publishers would pounce on a new market like this.

OT: I truly believe this could be the future of First person gaming. It has a lot of potential to be engaging and immersive. But potential is a double edge sword, you never want to be the guy who has potential for too long.

 

[Aeshi]

As far as I'm concerned it's just the shitty Wii/Kinect/Move motion control gimmick wearing a slightly different hat. And say what you like about motion controls but at least they didn't render you incapable of looking at things other than your "monitor."

There'll probably be a period where every game is trying to shoehorn it in and then it'll just slink off to the Junk Pile when people remember that a mouse can achieve the same sort of rotation with far less physical effort.

Plus VR doesn't seem particularly suited to fast-paced movement. I'd like to see someone Rocket Jump around while using it compared to someone using a regular old Monitor.

 

[Maximum Bert]

Could be good but I feel the Oculus has priced itself out of the market for many so will not have wide spread adoption unless it blows everyones mind and people decide to save up for that PC and kit instead of a holiday.

Morpheus could do better but ofc depends on price (and experience). I dont see a need to speculate really however its not like I have shares in them or anything I will just see how it plays out.

 

[Pyrian]

Pixar. Pixar needs to get into VR. Give us a Toy Story in VR, and the world will adopt it overnight.

 

[Saetha]

Let me sum up my opinion via a short conversation I once had.

[Me, a year or two ago, when everyone seemed to be losing their shit over VR]: Oculus Rift? What's Oculus Rift? It... oh.

[Me]: It's a tv screen strapped to your face.

[Someone else]: NO. It's NEW and INNOVATIVE and it's gonna CHANGE HOW WE PLAY GAMES. It's JUST WHAT THE INDUSTRY NEEDS to SHAKE IT OUT OF THIS RUT.

[Me]: ...It's a tv screen strapped to your face.

Maybe it's just me (Because I value my ability to look away from my damn monitor - can you just imagine how many Diet Cokes and water bottles I'd knock over otherwise?) but VR headsets always seemed like a neat gimmick to me, and the more I heard about them, the worse the problems seemed to get. I guess they could be useful so slow-paced, simply-controlled games that rely a lot on immersion, but otherwise, after five minutes of blindly pawing your keyboard, knocking over shit on your desk, being pranked by any friends or family in the immediate area, and having your tactile sensations even further divorced from your visual feedback, you're probably gonna give up and go back to the monitor.

And you know, there's a problem with VR in general I don't see a lot of people bring up. Like, yeah it's neat and awesome, yeah it's "the future," and if we ever develop a VR system that provides the full experience, even feedback to the player, it'll probably be incredible. An awesome experience that could genuinely innovate things and change the industry.

But here's a thing about people - they're lazy as hell. And they're going to figure out pretty quick that running and jumping and getting shot are all a lot more enjoyable when they're done sitting on the couch, controller in hand, lazy ass firmly planted on the ground.

 

[G00N3R7883]

Personally I'm not excited about VR at all. I'm perfectly happy playing games on a monitor. Its kind of like when Kinect / motion controls was supposed to be the next big thing and I was like "... but I'm perfectly happy with mouse and keyboard".

I play lots of games in lots of different genres, and the only genre I can see it benefitting is FPSes. (Maybe also racing games but I don't play those). I mean, the whole point of VR is to enhance immersion of a game where you're looking through your character's eyes. Which means for Civ / Total War / Xcom style strategy games? Pointless. Dragon Age / Pillars of Eternity style RPGs? Pointless. Batman / Tomb Raider / Witcher style 3rd person? Pointless. Telltale style adventures? Pointless. Tower defence? Pointless.

I will admit there is the possibility some talented developers could invent new genres that take advantage of VR, but by definition, I don't know what that is so I don't know whether or not I'll like it.

Plus there's that whole "you can only play for 20 minutes before you start to feel sick" thing which might be an issue ...

 

[09philj]

VR has somewhat limited applications, but it's worth having as an enthusiast for them. Like steering wheels and fight sticks, they won't be a part of every gamer's hardware, but there is a market for them which will remain consistent. Everyone who thinks it's a gimmick and fad has clearly either never played Elite Dangerous on it or doesn't like Elite Dangerous.

 

[Raven_Operative]

VR - as it is - is probably going to have a very limited set of customers, with little market penetration with mainstream or casual gamers. It seems like it's current iterations are best suited for flight sims, exploration games or driving sims (games where the user's view point remains from the seated position), rather than first person shooters.

VR as a technology, however, is probably going to be one of the biggest and most important technologies for the development of the human race once it gets perfected in the future. Saying that just because our current primitive versions of the tech are gimmicky, the entire field has no future is just short sighted. Make no mistake, a time will come when VR is everywhere. That time is still probably a good 30 years away, though.

 

[Pyrian]

I play lots of games in lots of different genres, and the only genre I can see it benefitting is FPSes.

This notion is widespread, and it doesn't seem to be accurate - in either direction. Without something like an Omni (and that has its own issues), FPS's bring along a sort of uncanny valley effect when you move your avatar in-game.

EDIT: Really, FPS is kind of the crown jewel of the monitor setup. Interacting with objects at 5-50 meters works really well. FPS never worked all that great for interacting with objects very near to your avatar (which is why platforming and melee games are overwhelmingly more likely to be third person, with only a handful of famous exceptions like Mirror's Edge and Dark Messiah).

VR inverts this; it works best when interacting with objects 0.5-3.5 meters away. First person melee games are already cropping up (like EvadeVR).

...for Civ / Total War / Xcom style strategy games? Pointless.

I think these are going to be your truly ideal game application. The sense of space provided by the system, plus the ease of looking around, makes VR really good at these sorts of games. When you use a grab-to-scroll system where you're moving the board instead of yourself, there's no nauseating movement disconnect, either.

Telltale style adventures? Pointless. Tower defence? Pointless.

Two more where it'll work really well, for similar reasons. I mean, tower defense is basically strategy, so sense of space is fantastic. And Telltale games are basically minorly interactive plays, which can work very well.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

The only interest I currently have in VR gaming is the chance for a developer of first person games to use head tracking to let me instinctively point my character's head in a direction of interest while my avatar's body remains pointed/walking forwards. It is something I've always wanted in FPSes but knew was extremely unlikely to see happen with traditional control and display setups.

VR right now could be called a "fadnovation." The technology is getting better as research progresses, but it still might need more work before it breaks out of niche status. 3D cinema took 3-4 major tries to become a permanent fixture in it's industry, with tech leaps every generation. VR at least only had maybe one failed attempt where it disappeared from mainstream attention in the early 90's. The tech today should at least be able to keep a large niche audience, much like racing wheels, flight sticks, fighting sticks, multi-monitor setups and other unique hardware have their markets.

I don't think VR will see a large market unless the hardware drops in price and it feels like more than a gimmick to the average consumer. The former will eventually be solved when sales finally cover the development costs and manufacturing processes are streamlined, like with other tech. Those smartphone VR headsets might even be a good stopgap for some consumers until full headsets and computers that can run them at decent framerates are more affordable. Game devs will have to be creative about the latter. They will have to make the systems worth the consumer's investment. There is also skepticism about the motion sickness issues being resolved, and it will take years for many people to even bother to try a headset because of that.

Regardless of how VR's popularity goes with games, I see it becoming a powerful tool for training in different fields, therapy, research, and many other utilitarian uses. The head tracking alone makes it more natural for dealing with 3D models and environments. If other intuitive input devices can be made to compliment the headsets, VR's uses can only increase. Some of those future input devices may even go over to, or come from, the game side of VR. It may even be the key to making 3D cinema at home a success.

TL;DR: Current VR offerings will be make a good, permanent niche market, but it will take a while to see if it really breaks into mainstream gaming.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Considering it is a properly functional peripheral unlike prior motion controls where they couldn't figure out what you were actually doing this will surely have it's place.
But it is very expensive for this market, as in new console expensive, so my best guess is the market for it will be the same as racing wheels/flight sticks. Some people will have them and they will be heaps of fun, but both their sales and usability will be limited. Especially tricky selling to people who never got to wear one because looking at a video of it just doesn't explain the functionality.

Once the displays get better this stuff could replace all monitors especially if the scan line laser tech can be brought to a high enough quality. Because it really is a lost cause to keep buying more monitors for every room and device you use just to get that tiny bit of extra view angle where VR can turn everything into a monitor.
Right now the low resolution makes fine details like text really problematic, but some day this will be fixed along with it's size.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

until it's relative to sword art online, I don't think I'll really get into it. It's neat, don't get me wrong, just nothing I would consider dishing money on and not enough games designed for it.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Telltale style adventures? Pointless. Tower defence? Pointless.

Two more where it'll work really well, for similar reasons. I mean, tower defense is basically strategy, so sense of space is fantastic. And Telltale games are basically minorly interactive plays, which can work very well.

I could see it being extremely immersive for telltale, as long as you basically become the main character, but if you're just the floaty ghost puppet controller in the background, eh, maybe not so much.

I do think it could be great for strategy games though, (more specifically for civ and such) it'd be extremely neat to visually see the "fog of war" while in your kingdom walls, and next turn have multiple units pop out aggro style.

 

[FPLOON]

Virtual Reality is the way of the future! Isolation with one another is the true evolution of mankind! Also, it'subjectively better than real life... ;p

Other than that, it's going to be interesting to see what would actually top it once it's [even] reaches the "almost one in every home" dynamic... Then again, just like capitalism, they would be so many competitors that they would all "feel" the "same" in "general"...

 

[Johnlives]

The two questions I'd ask are, can I use it sitting down and can I chat with my friends/family whilst using it? If the answer to one of those is no then I'd bet on fad.

There's also the problem of compatibility with different sets. If you divide certain experiences between different sets you run up an already expensive entry point putting people off.

I don't see AAA taking the risk, other than integrating it into existing game models, on creating something new and specifically designed for a VR experience without a high enough starting audience.

 

[ffronw]

I don't think it'll be a fad, but I don't see it being "the future of gaming" either. What it will be is a niche product with a killer app here and there. Why?

First, I don't think that people are going to buy into the idea of sitting around playing games with a big thing strapped to their face. Shutting yourself off from the world is fine in theory, but in real life, you're constantly interrupted while playing games (especially if you have kids or a spouse - trust me).

Second, I don't think you're going to see widespread development on VR games, largely because the market is so niche. Much like games on any other console with a limited install base, the financial return will be limited.

Honestly, I think where you're going to see VR really take off isn't gaming. It's in other applications, like social media and shopping. Imagine being able to walk through your friend's vacation videos, or explore museums and ancient ruins from your living room. That sort of thing will be VR's "killer apps," and that is why Facebook spent so much money acquiring them.