Quantcast
Professional game dev explains why Sony's Morpheus won't get much backing from developers.

Forums - Sony Discussion - Professional game dev explains why Sony's Morpheus won't get much backing from developers.

TheSpindler said:
Yeah I've been seeing the VR hype-train for a while now, and I still don't get why people think this will be successful anytime soon.

VR being successful needs to be taken up by the masses and there are too many roadblocks to that atm. Sony coming in wont really help as Sony has a checklist approach to tech like this. It exists but they wont go full steam ahead with it for it to be successful. A few games will come out from them, they'll fund a few more through third parties and some indies will jump on, and maybe some of the bigger companies will have a VR mode or something, and that'll be it.

How it looks, its graphics really don't matter, its success depends on developer support(which it seems will be a pain, along with the fact that most developers wont be supporting VR anyway) and it being cheap enough to afford and appealing enough for the consumer to pick up, which again comes down to games and how much games and which high profile or good games will have them.

There's also stuff like aesthetics(while wearing them) and awkwardness for the average consumer, but i don't think that its that much of a problem for most.

Really? Considering there's not a full blown commercial product out and there are an increasingly large list of developers on board with different VR projects:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_Oculus_Rift_support

With only the Occulus Rift dev kit, there are already nearing 200 games with native VR support plus others with unofficial mod support. That list is obviously not including studios involved with Sony and we don't know if any additional studios are involved with Valve and HTC's project.

The other factor that sceptics are completely ignoring is the fact that VR is also becoming a great medium for showing movies:

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/27/facebook-oculus-story-studio-virtual-reality-films

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/534791/a-film-studio-for-the-age-of-virtual-reality/

So I very much doubt content will be a major hurdle.

The last problem for VR I see is cost, but we don't know how much these devices will cost yet. Obviously, costs will come down as time goes on though. 



Around the Network
Scoobes said:
TheSpindler said:
Yeah I've been seeing the VR hype-train for a while now, and I still don't get why people think this will be successful anytime soon.

VR being successful needs to be taken up by the masses and there are too many roadblocks to that atm. Sony coming in wont really help as Sony has a checklist approach to tech like this. It exists but they wont go full steam ahead with it for it to be successful. A few games will come out from them, they'll fund a few more through third parties and some indies will jump on, and maybe some of the bigger companies will have a VR mode or something, and that'll be it.

How it looks, its graphics really don't matter, its success depends on developer support(which it seems will be a pain, along with the fact that most developers wont be supporting VR anyway) and it being cheap enough to afford and appealing enough for the consumer to pick up, which again comes down to games and how much games and which high profile or good games will have them.

There's also stuff like aesthetics(while wearing them) and awkwardness for the average consumer, but i don't think that its that much of a problem for most.

Really? Considering there's not a full blown commercial product out and there are an increasingly large list of developers on board with different VR projects:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_Oculus_Rift_support

With only the Occulus Rift dev kit, there are already nearing 200 games with native VR support plus others with unofficial mod support. That list is obviously not including studios involved with Sony and we don't know if any additional studios are involved with Valve and HTC's project.

The other factor that sceptics are completely ignoring is the fact that VR is also becoming a great medium for showing movies:

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/27/facebook-oculus-story-studio-virtual-reality-films

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/534791/a-film-studio-for-the-age-of-virtual-reality/

So I very much doubt content will be a major hurdle.

The last problem for VR I see is cost, but we don't know how much these devices will cost yet. Obviously, costs will come down as time goes on though. 

Like 3D was for gaming? I'm just saying it's not so cut and dry. There are a TON of 3D movies, and quite a few 3D games and it's not a big time hit. The best example we have is the 3DS, and most people prefered to turn the 3D off. 



Sony has gone about this in the best way possible. They haven't forced any non-essential peripheral with their console like the disasters of Kinect 2.0 and the Gamepad. Sure you could argue Morpheus wasn't ready for the PS4 launch, but I reckon it would have been an OPTIONAL accessory if it were. Part of good Business practice is to take risks ; which is exactly what Sony is doing with Morpheus .

Detractors whine and moan about a lack of innovation with the PS4 , then complain that Morpheus will fail/ wont be relevant etc. So what if it doesn't come with every PS4. Does a peripheral HAVE to be sold through a bundle to be sucessful these days, or can't we let it be sucessful on its' own merits instead of making it Mandatory? (Kinect 2.0 says hi).

Damned if you do , Damned if you don't .



bigtakilla said:
Scoobes said:

Really? Considering there's not a full blown commercial product out and there are an increasingly large list of developers on board with different VR projects:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_Oculus_Rift_support

With only the Occulus Rift dev kit, there are already nearing 200 games with native VR support plus others with unofficial mod support. That list is obviously not including studios involved with Sony and we don't know if any additional studios are involved with Valve and HTC's project.

The other factor that sceptics are completely ignoring is the fact that VR is also becoming a great medium for showing movies:

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/27/facebook-oculus-story-studio-virtual-reality-films

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/534791/a-film-studio-for-the-age-of-virtual-reality/

So I very much doubt content will be a major hurdle.

The last problem for VR I see is cost, but we don't know how much these devices will cost yet. Obviously, costs will come down as time goes on though. 

Like 3D was for gaming? I'm just saying it's not so cut and dry. There are a TON of 3D movies, and quite a few 3D games and it's not a big time hit. The best example we have is the 3DS, and most people prefered to turn the 3D off. 

Have you ever tried VR?



Scoobes said:
bigtakilla said:

Like 3D was for gaming? I'm just saying it's not so cut and dry. There are a TON of 3D movies, and quite a few 3D games and it's not a big time hit. The best example we have is the 3DS, and most people prefered to turn the 3D off. 

Have you ever tried VR?

Never in the state it is in now. Yet does it do something that interests me enough to drop $200? Not in the least. 



Around the Network

I wonder how occulus is handling all the different pc builds out there. looking at the steam statistics what people actually are using I don't understand how someone can bitch about morpheus and ps4 not beeing powerfull enough. at least devs know what they are developing for on ps4. on pc you probably have alot of people with different experiences because of different system builds



TheSpindler said:
Yeah I've been seeing the VR hype-train for a while now, and I still don't get why people think this will be successful anytime soon.

VR being successful needs to be taken up by the masses and there are too many roadblocks to that atm. Sony coming in wont really help as Sony has a checklist approach to tech like this. It exists but they wont go full steam ahead with it for it to be successful. A few games will come out from them, they'll fund a few more through third parties and some indies will jump on, and maybe some of the bigger companies will have a VR mode or something, and that'll be it.

How it looks, its graphics really don't matter, its success depends on developer support(which it seems will be a pain, along with the fact that most developers wont be supporting VR anyway) and it being cheap enough to afford and appealing enough for the consumer to pick up, which again comes down to games and how much games and which high profile or good games will have them.

There's also stuff like aesthetics(while wearing them) and awkwardness for the average consumer, but i don't think that its that much of a problem for most.

Here is the problem I have with arguments like these. While if looked at in of itself they seem sound they really are completely flawed cause they are based on theories that simply don't work or apply. I'll try and explain. 

  1. Aesthetics, awkwardness....these are arguments based on past VR examples. At a time when things like 6" smart phones didn't even exist. Fact is that the world over is more tech inclined than ever before and as long as VR today works and can create unique experiences that people like they will try it out. 
  2. Then there are those that talks about there not being a market for it or how small the market is. What I ask is how can anyone know how small or big the market is when VR has not even hit the mainstream yet?
  3. And all this talk about Sony and what kinds support Sony would have to do to make it work. How can some just seem to not notice that unlike every other proprietary tech Sony has pushed and abandoned, this is one thing that they aren't the only ones doing. As it stabds , there are a total of five VR solutions pending release. 3 for home and Two for mobile. The whole fate of VR doesn't solely rest on Sony's hands. And any dev trying to make VR content will naturally try and support as many platforms as possible. 
  4. Lastly, its being extremely narrow minded if people think the fate of VR is tied to gaming. I think gaming is just a small part of it. Just for the early adopters. The way VR will take the mainstream will probably not have a lot to do with games. 


bigtakilla said:

That's the point, what is its audience. 

For now I would say that a large chunk of PS4s´ early adopters, so roughly 10m, are the initial target audience. These are people who have no problem with dropping money for a new technology or device if they deem it interesting. Yep I think lots of early adopters (1st year buyers) are kind of like me in their entertainment purchase habits. By that I mean people who have a disposable income and whose purchase decisions often go something like this: "Does it look interesting? - Yes! Do I have to consider my budget? - Nope! Alright...bought it"



      
Yup...RO friggin rocked  
bigtakilla said:
Scoobes said:

Have you ever tried VR?

Never in the state it is in now. Yet does it do something that interests me enough to drop $200? Not in the least. 

Wait until you've tried it. The word of mouth on this thing once it's properly released is going to be big. This is nothing like the gimmicks of '3D' or even motion controls. VR adds a whole new dimension. It's like the difference between colour TV vs black and white.

You might not jump in with this first gen, but I have no doubt you'll be purchasing some form of VR in the next 3-4 years.



Intrinsic said:
TheSpindler said:
Yeah I've been seeing the VR hype-train for a while now, and I still don't get why people think this will be successful anytime soon.

VR being successful needs to be taken up by the masses and there are too many roadblocks to that atm. Sony coming in wont really help as Sony has a checklist approach to tech like this. It exists but they wont go full steam ahead with it for it to be successful. A few games will come out from them, they'll fund a few more through third parties and some indies will jump on, and maybe some of the bigger companies will have a VR mode or something, and that'll be it.

How it looks, its graphics really don't matter, its success depends on developer support(which it seems will be a pain, along with the fact that most developers wont be supporting VR anyway) and it being cheap enough to afford and appealing enough for the consumer to pick up, which again comes down to games and how much games and which high profile or good games will have them.

There's also stuff like aesthetics(while wearing them) and awkwardness for the average consumer, but i don't think that its that much of a problem for most.

Here is the problem I have with arguments like these. While if looked at in of itself they seem sound they really are completely flawed cause they are based on theories that simply don't work or apply. I'll try and explain. 

 

  1. Aesthetics, awkwardness....these are arguments based on past VR examples. At a time when things like 6" smart phones didn't even exist. Fact is that the world over is more tech inclined than ever before and as long as VR today works and can create unique experiences that people like they will try it out. 
  2. Then there are those that talks about there not being a market for it or how small the market is. What I ask is how can anyone know how small or big the market is when VR has not even hit the mainstream yet?
  3. And all this talk about Sony and what kinds support Sony would have to do to make it work. How can some just seem to not notice that unlike every other proprietary tech Sony has pushed and abandoned, this is one thing that they aren't the only ones doing. As it stabds , there are a total of five VR solutions pending release. 3 for home and Two for mobile. The whole fate of VR doesn't solely rest on Sony's hands. And any dev trying to make VR content will naturally try and support as many platforms as possible. 
  4. Lastly, its being extremely narrow minded if people think the fate of VR is tied to gaming. I think gaming is just a small part of it. Just for the early adopters. The way VR will take the mainstream will probably not have a lot to do with games. 

 

@ bolded

I think a lot of people don't seem to realise this. VR and gaming is a natural fit, but this is a whole medium for which games are only a small part.