By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Am I supposed to take VR seriously?

the-pi-guy said:
Lafiel said:
fleischr said:

... and now you're expecting people to put this on their heads?

 

 

 

 

 

 

that looks so dumb, all we need is faster horses

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said bigger TVs.  


I see what you're trying to say with the horse vs. car innovation track.

The only difference is that the car not only proved to be better, it was also a better interface.

Going from a TV screen to something shielding your face? The initial reaction is "not a better interface, not more useable." Hands-on experience might change some people's minds. But the prior failures of 3D in the marketplace do not bode well for VR.

VR will get destroyed by 4K -- which provides a the lifelike visual experience literally without the overhead.

VR is a more costly, unnecessary gimmick than the Kinect or Wii U Gamepad.



I predict NX launches in 2017 - not 2016

Around the Network

Xbox fans would be more positive about it if there was a rumor the xbox one was getting it.



I'd be into seeing where VR would take us in gaming. I've actually been wanting to try it since the 90's.



SvennoJ said:

People used these


So why not these


VR is the next step in immersive gaming. It's still early though, for a comfortable long time experience I believe you really need dual 4K at 120fps. But you got to start somewhere. Nobody ditched 3D games when they looked like crap next to 2D games at the time.

Articulate points. Those are pretty beastly parameters though. We have so few next-gen games that truly run in 1080p 60fps that it'll take some time before such larger numbers could be accomplished easily.

The Sony design there seems better than VB, but I still think the product design would have to minimalized further to the point where they just look like a pair of wraparound sunglasses to be a commercial success.



I predict NX launches in 2017 - not 2016

lucidium said:
Xbox fans would be more positive about it if there was a rumor the xbox one was getting it.


Pure speculation. I think people have a threshold for how many gimmicks they tolerate at once.



I predict NX launches in 2017 - not 2016

Around the Network
fleischr said:
ethomaz said:
Game changer... you need to try first to see.


Even if it's really good, doesn't change the fact you have to put this strange thing on your head.

Yeah, that's why I've never riden a motorbike.



 

The PS5 Exists. 


Jizz_Beard_thePirate said:

The thing with this is, is that it enhances people's quest for the ultimate virtual sex experience so even though it may not do that well as a gaming device, it will defiantly do well as a "pleasure" device

I mean, sure, running and gunning in cod and etc gives people a headache and what not but laying on ur bed while having a virtual girl sucking you off is another experience entirely!


Every great technology had the potential for porn, excluding wheel.

Print, television, internet, phone, ...

VR is going to do great =D



fleischr said:
the-pi-guy said:

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said bigger TVs.  


I see what you're trying to say with the horse vs. car innovation track.

The only difference is that the car not only proved to be better, it was also a better interface.

Going from a TV screen to something shielding your face? The initial reaction is "not a better interface, not more useable." Hands-on experience might change some people's minds. But the prior failures of 3D in the marketplace do not bode well for VR.

VR will get destroyed by 4K -- which provides a the lifelike visual experience literally without the overhead.

VR is a more costly, unnecessary gimmick than the Kinect or Wii U Gamepad.

Comments like this really show you've never tried it before and are talking from a point of ignorance. This isn't just something "shielding your face", the interface is superior in nearly every way that counts. 3D is nothing like VR, and neither is 4K. They're not even in competition with each other. If anything, 4K is a complementary tech that will get added to VR when feasible.

4K TVs & 3D are still passive forms of visuals even if they're designed to improve immersion. The screen stays in one place and your mind is fully aware of the fact you're sitting in a room passively watching (or playing) something.

With VR, you're completely immersed, all you can see is what's in the game (no lights being turned on/off, no cat walking in front of the screen etc.). Now add in motion tracking whereby every motion of your head changes in time with what you see on screen. Imagine playing a flight sim and being in a fighter, you start getting shot from a position behind you and instead of a button press to check exactly 180degs behind you you twist your head round to see exactly where they're shooting you from.

VR adds a level of immersion that simply cannot be replicated on traditional TV technologies.



kowenicki said:
No. I 100% agree.

Its fairly ridiculous and expensive.

Not to mention nauseating, niche and nerdy


Exactly. It actually pains me to see Sony throwing money at this. 



Platinums: Red Dead Redemption, Killzone 2, LittleBigPlanet, Terminator Salvation, Uncharted 1, inFamous Second Son, Rocket League

fleischr said:
lucidium said:
Xbox fans would be more positive about it if there was a rumor the xbox one was getting it.


Pure speculation. I think people have a threshold for how many gimmicks they tolerate at once.

You mad bro?