When will we see VR Games go beyond the gimmick phase?

[Vigormortis]

snip

I...never said have? Like literally the word is not even featured in the post.

You said "I can't see VR gaming becoming the main form of gaming..", which implies it will eventually, or inevitably, become the main form.

My question was, why must that be the case? Why are the only options: main form, small niche, failure? Isn't it also possible, like 3d gaming, online gaming, etc, that it simply becomes another branch, another main trunk, of the wide web of gaming options?

 

[Yoshi178]

i don't mind VR at all. i actually like the idea. but it's not the game changer that people make it out to be.

all you're doing is just gluing a tv to your face pretty much.

 

[votemarvel]

In VR there's no such button because you're physically holding the gun and have to do things just like you would with a real gun.

The thing is you aren't holding up a real gun, you're holding up a controller. It may be a different shape to the traditional versions but it is still a controller.

Are you getting the weight in your hands, the feel of the stock hitting your shoulder, the smell you get when firing the weapon, how hot they can get, or simply the sheer damn loudness of the things (I watch movies and TV shows now and find myself wondering "how aren't these people deaf?".)

That's the problem with VR at the moment. You aren't getting the full range of sensations that you would in the real world and that is what I find immersion breaking about it. The sensation that I'm not 'all there', that I'm a spectre capable of the barest level of interaction with the world I find myself now part of.

Now that's not me saying that the current crop of VR games aren't good, rather that there are a great many steps yet to be taken to truly add the reality to virtual reality.

 

[Kyrian007]

It's a gimmick and its day just isn't quite over yet. Remember, 3D TV and 3D gaming with the Playstation 3 was the new "thing." "This is the future of gaming."

No, no it wasn't. It was a neat gimmick that didn't really pan out long term. VR, same thing, different day. There will be some neat, fun stuff for it... sure. And most stuff for it will be pathetic shovelware. And there will be a very limited number of adopters, it won't be viable for the big publishers to do more than make weak ports for it out of their existing games rather than develop for VR. And interest will dwindle away and fade. Interest will spark a couple more times in the coming decades... someone saying "now we'll make it work" and interest will rise for a month or 2 again... but it will die in the long run and is just a passing fad in the short run.

 

[Vinsin]

Seeing as the recent topic began taking a jab at deciding if VR is a gimmick or not; I've found the most telling part to be how versatile it is. It's used in making mesh - blender/maya/construction related things. So roomscale vive VR is really picking up in that corner, the dev market, then theres the standard non-gaming market; watch TV, movies, 360 video, emails ; websites, surfing ect and such, which.. well, I use the thing as my primary monitor now but I"m one of the few; it comes across as pretty clear and easy to read for me. Writing from the Vive right now on Virtual Desktop with a emulated second monitor, the monitors themselves are bigger than .. well.. I could fit in my room.

Lastly, and most importantly (for this discussion) is the gaming side. Well, devs will decide how well and how much VR takes off in that regard, but aside from the demos and short games; (which you have to EXPERIENCE to know what it's like and it's a .. blast. I can't describe.) is perhaps the most important part of making VR mainstream in the gaming market right now --- can it adopt and adapt to gaming not designed for it?

CSGO - Ran epicly ((Still figuring out how to set it up in a way I'll use the headtracking >.>))

Dying Light - The short bit I played, felt like a whole new game. More of a horror than before too, but it was turning night.. I need to upgrade to a 1080 before I'll want to enjoy this one though

Dishonored - You better not have vertigo.

Monstrum - You'll need a change of pants. (Doesn't need vorpx, but revive)

Subnatica - A whole new game, I haven't really dove into yet but I look forward to it.

Dragon Age Inquisition - I only played through the tutorial so far, but just watching the intro made me want to replay it; and I will.. after a lot of other stuff.. starting with dishonored =p

I list these, because I've played them 'if brief' in VorpX and again, I can't describe how it felt different for each one, but I can say as a example Dishonored was a chore and a bore to me before the Vive, I should have loved it I'm a huge fan of the style of game but I just wasn't into it. I nearly beat it - last level sort of deal in the final area and .. just quit, I had no interest in it. Second playthrough -- almost a year+ later has started because my GF wanted to see it --- and then I got the vive just past the second mission -- and I'm ENJOYING it now. I feel a sense of vertigo, a sense of realism and 'rush' I never had before in the game, it's not even BUILT for VR and it's a game I want to play now, Monstrum was terrifying and I do NOT look forward to Alien Isolation (yes I do)

Point being.. VR is at present, even in it's Alpha stages with demos and alpha programs (VorpX has a lot of room for improvement!) -- is a outstanding, breathtaking, overwhelming and indescribable experience in the long run. It's only going to get better, the software & hardware are only going to improve.

It's useful across the board, and it's here to stay. In my opinion. VR isn't going anywhere, it's popularity is still up for debate, who will adopt it and won't -- but it's going to be a part of my system for -- well, forever. I'd rather use the Vive in it's present state that go back to my dull 42" monitor aside from using it to pull up one email or one website and walk away, I'd rather settle into VR.

Granted, I'm losing my Vive to my girlfriend (she's epic at blender / photoshop and will end up taking it from me eventually to use tiltbrush and Kodon (a roomscale 3D sculpting tool with great potential) or in the future the blender>vive mod that I've glimpsed at. Meanwhile I'll be sectioning off my life for Non-VR titles I want to play through again (in VorpX), but the made for VR titles are on a whole new level, it's just up to the devs to make use of it.

(0 Motion sickness by the way)

 

[Jingle Fett]

In VR there's no such button because you're physically holding the gun and have to do things just like you would with a real gun.

The thing is you aren't holding up a real gun, you're holding up a controller. It may be a different shape to the traditional versions but it is still a controller.

Are you getting the weight in your hands, the feel of the stock hitting your shoulder, the smell you get when firing the weapon, how hot they can get, or simply the sheer damn loudness of the things (I watch movies and TV shows now and find myself wondering "how aren't these people deaf?".)

That's the problem with VR at the moment. You aren't getting the full range of sensations that you would in the real world and that is what I find immersion breaking about it. The sensation that I'm not 'all there', that I'm a spectre capable of the barest level of interaction with the world I find myself now part of.

Now that's not me saying that the current crop of VR games aren't good, rather that there are a great many steps yet to be taken to truly add the reality to virtual reality.

You actually are holding a gun. The gun DOES have weight. I'm guessing you haven't actually tried the HTC Vive (the headset by Valve)--that feeling of not 'all there' doesn't happen because the controllers and headset track 1:1 and you have full body room movement. In fact on the contrary, HTC Vive is the only time I actually HAVE gotten the feeling of 'all there'. It's convincing enough that people tend to avoid walking through objects because they forget they aren't real, it's just an automatic instinct. The picture below is what the controllers look like. Because of their shape they can be used as a remote control, a gun, or a sword.

Again, the tracking is 100% perfect, you can throw the controller into the air and catch it without taking off the headset, it's that accurate. Holding a controller is actually more immersive than using motion capture gloves like Perception Neuron (which I have used) because with gloves you aren't actually holding anything and it breaks the illusion. Holding the HTC controllers (you get one for each hand) is sort of like using a robotic claw or the gravity gun to grab something instead of grabbing it directly with your hand--like you're using a tool to interact with the world. And because of this, the illusion remains unbroken.
Furthermore, these controllers have haptic feedback. It's not simple rumble like most controllers, it vibrates in such a way that genuinely feels like you're physically interacting with something. For example in The Lab's archery game, when the arrow rubs against the bow it gives a subtle little clicking, but in Waltz of the Wizard when your hand intersects an item it buzzes in a certain way that feels like there's something there.

With VR the immersion is essentially like the uncanny valley with CG. The valley is hard to cross and you reach a point where the CG is pretty realistic but the small differences make it feel creepy. However, once you do cross the valley, it can still look CG and you know it's fake but it feels natural enough that it doesn't bother you. The Wii remote and Kinect are the equivalent of being in the valley. HTC Vive is the equivalent of crossing it. You know that it's not real, but it's convincing and natural enough that it doesn't break the immersion.

In other words, you know that it's VR. It's just believable enough that your mind and body doesn't care.

If you need further convincing, here's what Glen Keane (animator on The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, Pocahontas) has to say about Tiltbrush for the Vive (which is free and on Steam right now)

 

[jademunky]

I dont think we will see it in our lifetime.
1) The cost, most people are not willing/able to shell out that much for a gaming peripheral, much as I would like to one day play Mechwarrior: VR one day, I am not willing to pay thousands for the privilege.

2) It's..........douchey. Sorry but there is no better word for it, you have this obnoxious hunk of wires and plastic strapped to your head.

3) It cuts off the world around you. Seriously I have a wife (and hopefully in later years kids) at home and like to be able to actually hear what is going on around the house in case I am needed.

4) People evidently get headaches and motion sickness from it. I've never tried it myself but it sounds like this is a very common thing

5) The catch 22, developers are not willing to shell out AAA dollars on games for it because not enough people have bought it to make it worth the cost. Gamers are not willing to buy it because there are no high production value games available to play on it.

 

[Vigormortis]

i don't mind VR at all. i actually like the idea. but it's not the game changer that people make it out to be.

all you're doing is just gluing a tv to your face pretty much.

You really haven't tried VR like the Vive, have you?

It's really not just "gluing a TV to your face".

I dont think we will see it in our lifetime.
1) The cost, most people are not willing/able to shell out that much for a gaming peripheral, much as I would like to one day play Mechwarrior: VR one day, I am not willing to pay thousands for the privilege.

2) It's..........douchey. Sorry but there is no better word for it, you have this obnoxious hunk of wires and plastic strapped to your head.

3) It cuts off the world around you. Seriously I have a wife (and hopefully in later years kids) at home and like to be able to actually hear what is going on around the house in case I am needed.

4) People evidently get headaches and motion sickness from it. I've never tried it myself but it sounds like this is a very common thing

5) The catch 22, developers are not willing to shell out AAA dollars on games for it because not enough people have bought it to make it worth the cost. Gamers are not willing to buy it because there are no high production value games available to play on it.

If I may?

1: The cost will come down. All new tech starts out pricey.

Also: You don't need to "pay thousands" to try out VR. There are already PC build possibilities that put building a VR rig, from scratch, and including the price of a headset, at under $1500.

2: That's your definition of "douchey"? That's...really strange. Sorry.

But what do you expect? The amount of information needed to display those images and communicate your position aren't possible to handle, in real time, via wireless tech. In a few years, maybe, but it's just not feasible right now.

Regardless, the wires are really not as much a hassle as people often think they are.

3: It actually doesn't. At least, the Vive doesn't. The inclusion of the Chaperone system and the front-facing camera allow you to get a real-time view of the real world around you. I've even consumed food and drinks, and used my keyboard, while I had the headset on.

4: People get headaches and motion sickness from the old HMDs. The new crop, notably the Vive, have solved the vast majority of those issues with proper tracking.

I have a friend who would always get motion sickness when using the Rift, usually with minutes. He has yet to get even queasy after hours of using my Vive.

5: This is really presumptive. The devices have been out on the market for less than 2 months. And, prior to this, VR tech had no meaningful presence in the consumer market at all.

These things take time. Besides, big devs are already beginning work on games for VR, and the available library of VR titles is several times larger than any launch lineup for any new console.

 

[crimsonspear4D]

I think that when VR tech becomes as interactive as the holodeck from Star Trek will it have made any headway, because right now its just going as gimmicky and unimpressive as it always has. Wearing some uncomfortable bucket around your head and using jerky movements, or even a controller, will always feel a bit pointless.

However, if VR tech evolves into something like Sword Art Online had (the only actual interesting thing to come out of that mess) then it might seem vindicated in a way. Living in a game while your physical body goes all comatose, that would actually seem cool.

 

[infohippie]

I think the biggest obstacle to VR games becoming more common is simply the price and availability. Hardly anyone has one of these devices because (A) they're really expensive, (B) the hardware required to properly drive one is also really expensive, and (C) they're not yet being manufactured at anywhere near the scale required. When you can pick up a decent quality VR headset for about a hundred bucks at any local store that sells controllers and joysticks, and you can comfortably run it on the PC you already have at home without needing to buy another thousand bucks worth of video card, then we will see VR really taking off.

 

[List]

I think the market is just not ready for VR.

With all the touting of PC master race, It's still the consoles that drive a lot of the industry. And we can clearly see that all the consoles are making a console/upgrade that will support VR. So it's fairly safe to assume that developers are waiting for the specs of these new machines before they start working on a VR game. It's kinda stupid to make a game and gamble if the machine (that is still not released yet) will actually be able to run it.

Of course PC gamers will be able to run it, but how many of them are actually there? I'm pretty sure less than 5% of all pc gamers have their hands on a Vive or Oculus right now. That's not worth the hassle in a business point of view

 

[Vinsin]

I'm not going to go into any major details or opinions past this post, just wanted to point out I built a machine for $700 a *year* ago that's running the Vive just fine. Another $300 for a 1070 or $600 for a 1080 and it'll last for ages; wish I had waited until now to build but I didn't know -then- that I was going to get into VR. No regrets though XD

Still, you can build a machine to run VR for fairly cheap when it's all considered; between $600-1,000 from scratch, with the only upgrade needed for years being the GPU 'if' that depending on what you start off with. Plus, 'Free' to $20 for virtual monitors which I'm loving.

Anyway, all that' and this is the beginning, the price point is just going to drop in the next year or two, CV2 of the HMD's will only get better; and all people can really do is nitpick 'cords this and could be better that' -- nobody has to like VR, but you shouldn't knock it until you've given it a real shot - tried it - until then your just spouting hallow opinions of something you have no experience with. I respect people that have tried it and just can't get behind it though I haven't .. actually heard of anyone doing that aside from those relative few that get motion sickness that they just can't overcome, which I can understand; good reason to say no to VR if your extremely prone to it and just can't get around it. Otherwise though, I actually have trouble finding things 'wrong' with it, it's got room for improvement, but in it's current stage it's still 'my' future, adopted or shunned it's become my primary monitor and method of playing games it doesn't officially support, games not even meant for it; and it's great.

 

[Vigormortis]

Of course PC gamers will be able to run it, but how many of them are actually there? I'm pretty sure less than 5% of all pc gamers have their hands on a Vive or Oculus right now.

You realize there are hundreds of millions of PC gamers across the globe, right? There are over 130 million active (not just registered) accounts on Steam alone, not counting Origin, Uplay, GOG, Desura, Battle.net, or users unaffiliated with any specific platform or storefront. So, even if only 1% of PC gamers had a VR HMD, that would still mean millions of potential users.

Seriously, how small do you think the PC market is? This isn't the early 90s...

With all the touting of PC master race, It's still the consoles that drive a lot of the industry.

Not really. The biggest money makers in the industry are PC only. And, if recent trends in the market are any indication, it shows that even the most stubborn of triple-A developers and publishers are finally starting to realize how large a demographic the PC market represents. Hell, quite a few Japanese developers (of whom were PC averse for years) have now begun releasing many of their new and old titles on PC platforms (like Steam).

And we can clearly see that all the consoles are making a console/upgrade that will support VR.

Is it clear? Little is known about what the new 'upgrades' will house, and you need a very specific minimum of hardware specs to support VR. You effectively have to run two HD displays at a minimum of 90fps. So I question how well the "new" consoles will fair.

So it's fairly safe to assume that developers are waiting for the specs of these new machines before they start working on a VR game.

This isn't true either. There are already a number of bigger devs working on VR titles. Even before the current crop of HMDs hit the market Gorilla Games announced they were making a PSVR game.

It's kinda stupid to make a game and gamble if the machine (that is still not released yet) will actually be able to run it.

But that's what devs do all the time when they start making a game for an as-yet unreleased console. They receive dev kits long in advance from the hardware going public and begin development. How or why would it be any different with the new VR HMDs?

That's not worth the hassle in a business point of view

What's even more of a hassle is trying to penetrate a market long after others have already 'set up shop' and established their own brands.

I'm not going to go into any major details or opinions past this post, just wanted to point out I built a machine for $700 a *year* ago that's running the Vive just fine. Another $300 for a 1070 or $600 for a 1080 and it'll last for ages; wish I had waited until now to build but I didn't know -then- that I was going to get into VR. No regrets though XD

Still, you can build a machine to run VR for fairly cheap when it's all considered; between $600-1,000 from scratch, with the only upgrade needed for years being the GPU 'if' that depending on what you start off with. Plus, 'Free' to $20 for virtual monitors which I'm loving.

Depending on which GPU you're using, you could upgrade for even less when AMD's new RX line hits. The RX480 reportedly surpasses the minimum requirements for VR, but is only $199.

Thanks to the new 14nm process both AMD and nVidia are using, GPUs will be cheaper and less power-hungry, meaning from-scratch VR-ready PC builds will cost much less.

Anyway, all that' and this is the beginning, the price point is just going to drop in the next year or two, CV2 of the HMD's will only get better; and all people can really do is nitpick 'cords this and could be better that' -- nobody has to like VR, but you shouldn't knock it until you've given it a real shot - tried it - until then your just spouting hallow opinions of something you have no experience with.

This is what bugs me most. Many naysayers simply have not tried it. Then, as they share their criticisms of something they haven't tried, others do the same, resulting in an echo-chamber of misinformation.

From my experience, most of those who've yet to try it tend to sit in one of two camps. Either those who are holding judgement until they try it or those who are apathetic about the whole thing.

I respect people that have tried it and just can't get behind it though I haven't .. actually heard of anyone doing that aside from those relative few that get motion sickness that they just can't overcome, which I can understand; good reason to say no to VR if your extremely prone to it and just can't get around it.

I've been amazed at how well the Vive works for those who normally get motion sickness from other VR HMDs. As I've said in other posts on the topic, I have a friend who, within minutes, would always became violently ill whenever he tried using the Rift, even the consumer model. However, he's logged hours with my Vive and has yet to experience even the slightest bit of queasiness.

Otherwise though, I actually have trouble finding things 'wrong' with it, it's got room for improvement, but in it's current stage it's still 'my' future, adopted or shunned it's become my primary monitor and method of playing games it doesn't officially support, games not even meant for it; and it's great.

I haven't quite made the leap to using it as my dedicated "monitor", but I do find myself using it quite often.

I will admit I've been surprised by the games I've spent the most time playing in VR. I keep finding myself going back to "simple" experiences like Audio Shield, The Lab, and Final Approach. There's just something remarkably compelling and immersive, yet intuitive and simple, about those games.

I had purchased my Vive with the intention of developing games for it. I had a wealth of ideas on what I wanted to do before I received it. All sorts of complicated concepts for gameplay mechanics and the like. Yet, after finally using it and realizing how compelling even the simplest of ideas can be in VR, I had to basically abandon my initial ideas. I failed to anticipate how immersive simple movements can be, like reaching behind your back to 'grab' your item backpack, instead of pressing a button or using a menu.

I thought I had everything planned out, but I find myself back in the brainstorming stage.

 

[Vigormortis]

When you can pick up a decent quality VR headset for about a hundred bucks at any local store that sells controllers and joysticks,

While I think this may not be too far off, 'a hundred bucks' seems unrealistic. Would you expect a store to sell you a 40 inch HD tv for $100? Or a top-of-the-line smartphone for $100?

VR HMDs like the Vive and the Rift house two, HD oled screens with ultra-high refresh rates, numerous tracking, tilt, and accelerometer sensors (~70 on the Vive alone), and what ever image processors are required. That's a lot of high-end tech crammed into a small device. (small for what it is)

and you can comfortably run it on the PC you already have at home without needing to buy another thousand bucks worth of video card, then we will see VR really taking off.

You don't need GPUs even remotely that expensive. You can get an AMD R9 290 (within min spec for VR) for less than $250. And the new 14nm process GPUs coming from both AMD and nVidia are well above min specs and are starting at less than $200.

Really, the only big hurdles to entry for VR are the (current) price of the HMDs and the misinformation factor. There's nothing I can do about the former but I'm at least attempting to clear up the latter.

 

[Mcgeezaks]

It's a gimmick and its day just isn't quite over yet. Remember, 3D TV and 3D gaming with the Playstation 3 was the new "thing." "This is the future of gaming."

No, no it wasn't. It was a neat gimmick that didn't really pan out long term. VR, same thing, different day. There will be some neat, fun stuff for it... sure. And most stuff for it will be pathetic shovelware. And there will be a very limited number of adopters, it won't be viable for the big publishers to do more than make weak ports for it out of their existing games rather than develop for VR. And interest will dwindle away and fade. Interest will spark a couple more times in the coming decades... someone saying "now we'll make it work" and interest will rise for a month or 2 again... but it will die in the long run and is just a passing fad in the short run.

I don't think I've heard a single gamer say that 3D is the future of gaming, companies might've but not gamers. While HTC Vive/OR is getting praise from a lot of gamers, it's so much bigger than 3D ever was and it won't go away anytime soon.

 

[infohippie]

When you can pick up a decent quality VR headset for about a hundred bucks at any local store that sells controllers and joysticks,

While I think this may not be too far off, 'a hundred bucks' seems unrealistic. Would you expect a store to sell you a 40 inch HD tv for $100? Or a top-of-the-line smartphone for $100?

I expect to be able to buy a couple-years-old video card for a hundred bucks. I expect to be able to buy a low-to-mid range smart phone for a hundred bucks or less. The original iPhone cost a shitload when it first came out, now you can pick up a Huawei SnapTo for less than a hundred or a HTC Desire 510 for less than fifty. Not top of the line, but serviceable, with all the essentials, and way more powerful than the early smart phones.
If we don't see the equivalent for VR tech in a couple years' time, VR is going to remain a niche product.

 

[Vigormortis]

I expect to be able to buy a couple-years-old video card for a hundred bucks. I expect to be able to buy a low-to-mid range smart phone for a hundred bucks or less. The original iPhone cost a shitload when it first came out, now you can pick up a Huawei SnapTo for less than a hundred or a HTC Desire 510 for less than fifty. Not top of the line, but serviceable, with all the essentials, and way more powerful than the early smart phones.
If we don't see the equivalent for VR tech in a couple years' time, VR is going to remain a niche product.

Well, of course. That goes without saying.

But making the assumption that VR will remain expensive, as many have done, because this very first batch are expensive, is just silly. Like you've said yourself, new, top-of-the-line tech is expensive. These new VR HMDs are new tech. As production increases, as demand increases, as production costs drop, and as the tech advances, the entry-level price will go down too.

I don't think I've heard a single gamer say that 3D is the future of gaming, companies might've but not gamers. While HTC Vive/OR is getting praise from a lot of gamers, it's so much bigger than 3D ever was and it won't go away anytime soon.

And, moreover, the push for 3D TVs and displays were a half-attempt at trying to emulate the essence of VR. It was an attempt to do VR without VR.

So, yes, he's right. 3D was 'just' a gimmick. One that lost traction, for a number of reasons. One of those was the limits of technology. Another, as I said, was because 3D was trying to be an emulation of VR. Or, more to the point, holographic technology.

It's no wonder it 'failed'. But the circumstances surrounding 3D are not necessarily comparable to those surrounding VR. It's a terrible comparison.

 

[Raddra]

Another issue it faces is not many people have the sort of free space it requires.

I literally have nowhere I could put this thing and use it. At least safely.

 

[K12]

Well Half Life 3 is going to unveiled as a Vive exclusive at E3 so probably then.

 

[votemarvel]

SNIP

That it has a trigger does not make it a gun.

Of course I don't speak for everyone, that is something that shouldn't have to be said. I am of course speaking just simply for myself.

Can I reach out in a game and feel the texture of the wall that I'm walking next to? Can I pick that mug up off the table and tell whether it is china or tin? No I can't. They can tell me I'm holding or touching something but can't tell me what it is by my sense of touch.

Smell as well. I should be able to smell if food is burnt or perfectly cooked. And yes, I should be able to taste that as well.

Sorry but I really don't feel part of those worlds at the moment. The Flying Spaghetti Monster itself could come and tell me that it does, and that still wouldn't change the fact that I do not. Every time I notice something like that I am reminded that I'm not actually there.