Currently Online 
KBG29 said:
The problem with VR right now from my view point as a major user of the format is the lack of resolution, and high enough frame rates. Current VR works well for simple games, and light asset core titles. Where problems arrise is in the draw distance on many titles. Racing games, and FPS titles are incredible on VR with motion controls, but the problem I have had with all three major heasets is the lack of draw distance. I have 20/15 vision, and even I find it hard to clearly make things out in the distance, others that have played with the headsets with more average eye sight have said this was a massive issue for them. This is directly an issue of resolution, a 2MP image stretched out to 300+ inches just can not deliver a comfortable level of detail in anything but the most simple art styles. I agree that the set-up and controls need to become simpler and more accurate, but I just don't see people wanting to stick around if the image quality is not pleasent. This is the biggest complaint I have had from the 100's of people that have spent any time with VR. Typically I get people saying, wow the that was really fun, but it is kind of like playing on an old TV, or people going how low/what is the resolution in these headsets? In my expereince image quality is going to be the first major hurdle. |
Are they all graphics snobs :p You get used to the lower resolution, I managed to play tons of racing games at 480p and below not all that long ago. Sure the worlds can't be that detailed in a headset yet, but that's a blessing too. It's not realistic to expect HZD level detail for VR with its still very small userbase. I can't compare yet for racing though since I already knew all DCs tracks like the back of my hand and Dirt Rally is much more focused on close range. GT Sport has familiar tracks again as well. I do also have some nostalgia for playing on an old tv, so I guess I'm biased :)
It's a big difference now that AAA games are courting gamers with 4K high detailed screenshots, while VR is on last gen's sub 720p level of detail at its best. Yet those playing on the Switch aren't the 4K target market. Wii Sports wasn't about image quality. It needs to be easy to pick up and play, and simply work. No dead spots, no drift, no jittery controllers. First hands-on of inside out tracking are positive:
https://uploadvr.com/impressions-hp-windows-vr-headset-dev-kit/
I tried using the HP Windows VR headset in both full roomscale and standing/sitting configurations with great results. Since you don’t need to setup any lighthouse base stations (like with the Vive) or plug in tracking cameras (like with the Rift) I’m honestly shocked the tracking works so well. Using the two embedded cameras on the front of the device, the HP VR headset always knows where you are inside your environment.
They didn't get a chance yet to test the controllers, but it's a good first step. Whether a revision of the Switch will have the juice to replicate that is another question.
LipeJJ said:
WTF? Wii was good enough... 10 years ago. It would NOT be acceptable to have a Metroid Prime in 2018 or 2019 with 2007 graphics. lol Especially not for such a niche/useless gimmick as VR. |
I think the 3DS is still selling?.. Maybe it's not acceptable to you, I would play it in a heartbeat. Gameplay > graphics imo. Actually for me fov comes first. I've played on a projector since the ps1, yet handhelds leave me cold.
