SvennoJ said:
rolltide101x said:
So VR in arcades do not count? Those were a thing in the early to mid 90s. Do not even get me started on the Virtual Boy lol. There really never were any video games before Pong that had any type of a chance. With all of this said I think the Pong analogy that someone made is deeply flawed as Atari/Nintendo were creating a brand new audience where VR headsets have the massive advantage of an already established base and a much easier time of advertising to that base
Also I never claimed to be able to see into the future. I said I do not THINK that VR will ever be anything other than a niche which so far is being supported pretty well. Now what the future holds exactly none of us know but acting like it is anything but a niche at this point is absurd
|
The virtual boy was a parallax 3D viewer. It has as much to do with VR as a 3D tv or 3DS.
Arcades are a very different type of games, short experiences which VR now has to get away from. There was no reason to develop long complex games in the 90's as there was no home market to speak of. No new ways of story telling to figure out, no long term comfort issues, etc. It took videogames a long time to get away from arcade conventions, heck Nintendo is finally ditching the lives system in 2017. Home VR is brand new, with new challenges.
VR does have the advantage of an established base of video game players. Or is it really an advantage? It seems most gamers are reluctant to try anything new or deviate from their comfort zone... Early videogames didn't have the problem of established expectations and ingrained control schemes. It doesnt look detailed enough, too low res, too experimental, just a tech demo, nobody ever said of those early systems. It seems that non/casual video game players are more enthusiastic over VR than the conservative hardcore crowd.
It's still a niche, an odd one thouh with new headsets coming out on a monthly basis and lots of software/experiences released every week. What's absurb is already claiming that pong had a bigger impact on the industry than VR. VR or the idea of VR has had a much bigger impact on pop culture, books, tv, movies. We've been playing in virtual worlds since games moved beyond the arcades. The headset merely provides a new and better way to experience and interact with those worlds.
I find it hard to go back to the limitations of a controller on a screen. I can't imagine how fantastic contraption could even work without a 3D input method, definitely not at the speed and ease you can put things together in VR. Manipulating things in a 3D environment with a 2D input device will always suck. Hence the pinnacle of video game design so far is the gun, point and shoot. VR finally allows games to move beyond point and click gameplay. (while improving gunplay as well)
|
I was with you until that (as the majority of what you said was a different opinion. But to compare VR to Pong is just hilarious. Pong was a mainstream gaming phenomeon that inspired countless clones on countless systems compared to a niche product..... Also VR is not "better", almost every VR game is dumbed down compared to its "normal" counterpart. You guys are just way to defensive over VR. If you like it that is fine but do not pretend it is anything outside of a niche product at this point and there are no signs of it ever being anything but (yet, it is possible it will someday but not anytime soon. I still do not think so)
Essay Pro