View Post

I don't see any huge changes in the status quo for quite some time.

There is still too much demand for physical console games for them to go away any time soon, and the drawbacks for streaming are simply too obvious for it to ever replace physical copies and/or digital downloads. A recent survey from Nielsen showed that a large majority of console gamers (about two-thirds IIRC) still preferred physical to any kind of digital. I've discussed my opinions on digital and streaming at length elsewhere on this site, so I won't reiterate myself. If you've seen my previous posts on the subject, you know where I stand.

As for VR, it will have its niche, but I doubt it will ever be the norm. After nearly 30 years of seeing VR hyped up as "the future," I've grown more than a little skeptical. PSVR has an attach rate to the PS4 of less than 5%, showing that it is far from being considered a must-have mass market peripheral. Any sort of hardware innovation that has remained a permanent fixture in video gaming has met at least one of the following three criteria: A) It offered a substantial qualitative improvement to game design in general, B) it offered a substantial qualitative improvement over some previous accessory that was similar, or C) it was borne out of pure practical necessity. In many cases, the innovations that have stood the test of time and become standards combined "C" with either "A" and/or "B."

Gamepads had D-pads added because those were generally easier to use and less obtrusive than bulky joysticks or dials, then they had more buttons added because it was necessary to facilitate more complex gameplay (imagine trying to play Street Fighter 2 with only two buttons), and then they had analog sticks added to better facilitate moving your player character around in 3D games (the original PS1 controller's lack of analog sticks is arguably why we had clumsy control schemes like tank controls for earlier 3D games on the system), and then they had rumble/force-feedback/haptic tech added, which when done correctly can offer useful feedback to players (such as sustaining damage in a shooter, or feeling the heavy footsteps of an unseen large enemy). Memory cards were necessary when discs became the standard as battery back-up was no longer an option, and memory cards were in turn replaced with hard drives as the the default storage method (though portable storage has continued to exist). Online was a natural extension of old local multiplayer and co-op, but far more convenient as it doesn't require setting up a specific time with a group of IRL friends, potentially having one or more of them cancel and having to lug around systems, controllers, and games, plus with online you aren't just limited to your IRL friends, thus allowing a greater pool of players to play with. While local play has its charm, and nothing beats playing with people you actually know in the same place, maybe even having pizza or whatever during downtime, the advantages of online connectivity for multiplayer games cannot be discounted. All of these innovations have been indispensable for moving the medium forward (I predict that solid-state drives on the PS5 and Scarlett will end up falling under this category due to the significant practical benefits).

Meanwhile, other innovations never stood the test of time. Motion controls had limited applications and did not offer any substantial qualitative benefits for general video gaming over a standard gamepad; there were many Wii games with forced waggle existing where a simple button press would have been preferable. Motion controls have been almost entirely abandoned on Xbox and PlayStation since very early this generation (Kinect, despite a brief but large period of popularity on the 360, was already dead on arrival when the XBO was released), and have only a token presence on the Switch. Dual-screen tech likewise proved to have limited staying power; it did not help the Wii U out, and Nintendo did not pursue it with the Switch, the elderly 3DS being the last vestige of the technology. And speaking of the 3DS, 3D tech has fizzled out. At the start of this decade there was a resurgence in interest in 3D, both with and without glasses, in video gaming, movies, and TV, but that interest has rapidly waned as the decade progressed. Now 3D is dead in video gaming and TV/home video, and is steadily losing ground to 2D in cinemas. 3D was purely a novelty.

So, does VR really move the industry forward by improving video gaming in a meaningful, qualitative way that would be considered an indispensable necessity, or is it just another novelty that will wane with time? I tend to think it's the latter. The headsets are expensive. If you want to have a local play session, you need multiple headsets. There are still health concerns. They seem like they have limited applications for gameplay. Many VR games also implement motion controls, which as mentioned have demonstrated that they are not objectively better than conventional gamepad controls. Finally, it's arguable that VR's appeal is its "wow!" factor, and that it doesn't offer any meaningful practical improvements to gaming as a medium.

Given that VR has been around for decades and they're still trying to iron out all the kinks, and given how no company has yet to demonstrate that it is indispensable for moving the medium forward, I doubt that it will be the future of gaming, at least not anytime within the next 10-20 years. Maybe if they ever get to full "deep-dive" stuff like we see in science fiction. But I doubt what we have now is going to cut it.