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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Phil Spencer hopes VR isn't the future of gaming.

Normchacho on 23 September 2015
Nem said:
JRPGfan said:
Nem said:

Not to mention it isnt VR at all. Its a lie.

Even having that into account, while its these bricks you must put in your head, it will never be super popular.

What do you call it, when you move your head (in the real world) and your vision ingame follows the motions?

Its real VR.

People need to stop downplaying this already.

 

This is like "ps4 haz no gamez".


A gyro screen?

Its not VR. VR is what you see in the holodeck of startreck. A virtual reality you can interact with. Not a little screen to peek into another world.

"Virtual Reality (VR), which can be referred to as immersive multimedia or computer-simulated life, replicates an environment that simulates physical presence in places in the real world or imagined worlds and lets the user interact in that world. Virtual reality artificially creates sensory experiences, which can include sight, hearing, touch, smell, and taste."

I'm not downplaying anything. They are trying to sell a lie and they know it.

Where did you get that definition? Also, how does the current state of VR not fit that definiton?

Merian-Websters definition: an artificial environment which is experienced through sensory stimuli (as sights and sounds) provided by a computer and in which one's actions partially determine what happens in the environment

Dictionary.com definition: a realistic simulation of an environment, including three-dimensional graphics, by a computer system using interactive software andhardware.

Oxford definition: The computer-generated simulation of a three-dimensional image or environment that can beinteracted with in a seemingly real or physical way by a person using special electronicequipment, such as a helmet with a screen inside or gloves fitted with sensors.

Yup, sounds like the VR we're being advertised.

Edit: Oh, you used the first paragraph from the wiki page...very official...



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Around the Network
asqarkabab on 23 September 2015

Yeah i hope that vr doesnt get the next big thing



REQUIESCAT IN PACE

I Hate REMASTERS

I Hate PLAYSTATION PLUS

Soundwave on 23 September 2015
Nem said:
JRPGfan said:
Nem said:

Not to mention it isnt VR at all. Its a lie.

Even having that into account, while its these bricks you must put in your head, it will never be super popular.

What do you call it, when you move your head (in the real world) and your vision ingame follows the motions?

Its real VR.

People need to stop downplaying this already.

 

This is like "ps4 haz no gamez".


A gyro screen?

Its not VR. VR is what you see in the holodeck of startreck. A virtual reality you can interact with. Not a little screen to peek into another world.

"Virtual Reality (VR), which can be referred to as immersive multimedia or computer-simulated life, replicates an environment that simulates physical presence in places in the real world or imagined worlds and lets the user interact in that world. Virtual reality artificially creates sensory experiences, which can include sight, hearing, touch, smell, and taste."

I'm not downplaying anything. They are trying to sell a lie and they know it. They are just that desperate to sell it and get the return from the investment. This will be as big as the Move/kinect if not less.

Uh, pretty sure the popularly known definition of VR is basically a helmet you put over your head that transposes you into a different reality. That's a concept that's been around and hyped since the 1980s at least. 

I don't think anyone's dumb enough to be expecting the holodeck from Star Trek. 

The Playstation VR/Occulus Rift/etc. are basically the realization of ideas that even Sega and Nintendo were promising from the early 1990s. 



PenguinZ on 23 September 2015
Soundwave said:

Uh, pretty sure the popularly known definition of VR is basically a helmet you put over your head that transposes you into a different reality. That's a concept that's been around and hyped since the 1980s at least. 

I don't think anyone's dumb enough to be expecting the holodeck from Star Trek. 

The Playstation VR/Occulus Rift/etc. are basically the realization of ideas that even Sega and Nintendo were promising from the early 1990s. 


You seem to hold a lot faith in some people's intelligence. I kind of wish I still had that naivety towards that thought.



Current gaming platforms - Switch, PlayStation 4, Xbox One, Wii U, New 3DS, PC

Soundwave on 23 September 2015
PenguinZ said:
Soundwave said:

Uh, pretty sure the popularly known definition of VR is basically a helmet you put over your head that transposes you into a different reality. That's a concept that's been around and hyped since the 1980s at least. 

I don't think anyone's dumb enough to be expecting the holodeck from Star Trek. 

The Playstation VR/Occulus Rift/etc. are basically the realization of ideas that even Sega and Nintendo were promising from the early 1990s. 


You seem to hold a lot faith in some people's intelligence. I kind of wish I still had that naivety towards that thought.


If you believe holodeck technology is possible today (or even in the next 50 years) I have a million dollar warp drive engine to sell you too. And a pill that will let you live forever. 



Around the Network
Nem on 23 September 2015
Soundwave said:
Nem said:


A gyro screen?

Its not VR. VR is what you see in the holodeck of startreck. A virtual reality you can interact with. Not a little screen to peek into another world.

"Virtual Reality (VR), which can be referred to as immersive multimedia or computer-simulated life, replicates an environment that simulates physical presence in places in the real world or imagined worlds and lets the user interact in that world. Virtual reality artificially creates sensory experiences, which can include sight, hearing, touch, smell, and taste."

I'm not downplaying anything. They are trying to sell a lie and they know it. They are just that desperate to sell it and get the return from the investment. This will be as big as the Move/kinect if not less.

Uh, pretty sure the popularly known definition of VR is basically a helmet you put over your head that transposes you into a different reality. That's a concept that's been around and hyped since the 1980s at least. 

I don't think anyone's dumb enough to be expecting the holodeck from Star Trek. 

The Playstation VR/Occulus Rift/etc. are basically the realization of ideas that even Sega and Nintendo were promising from the early 1990s. 


Whatever you want to call it.

There is no sensory experience in it, so i dont see it as anymore VR than a game in your TV. Just cause the screen is in my face it doesnt magically become someting else (this is more in response to other posters).

And yes, i dont think we are even close yet to real VR technology, and yes, Sega and Nintendo were already trying to dupe us back then.



Zekkyou on 23 September 2015
Nem said:

A gyro screen?

Its not VR. VR is what you see in the holodeck of startreck. A virtual reality you can interact with. Not a little screen to peek into another world.

"Virtual Reality (VR), which can be referred to as immersive multimedia or computer-simulated life, replicates an environment that simulates physical presence in places in the real world or imagined worlds and lets the user interact in that world. Virtual reality artificially creates sensory experiences, which can include sight, hearing, touch, smell, and taste."

I'm not downplaying anything. They are trying to sell a lie and they know it. They are just that desperate to sell it and get the return from the investment. This will be as big as the Move/kinect if not less.

It seems a little silly to use wiki's definition of VR to discredit stuff like Morpheus and Oculus when that same article acknowledges HMDs as a type of VR. You can argue it's not 'true' VR, but the concept itself has quite a lot of wiggle room.

Regardless to the definitions from places like wiki and Oxford though, i personally think the biggest validator of these devices being considered a type of VR is that such devices have been referred to as such in science fiction for decades. That's not selling a lie, that's selling a well established idea.



PwerlvlAmy on 23 September 2015

i dont think its the future either. i think it will be a short lived fad in gaming much like motion control and and 3d gaming was



NND: 0047-7271-7918 | XBL: Nights illusion | PSN: GameNChick

Nem on 23 September 2015
Zekkyou said:
Nem said:

A gyro screen?

Its not VR. VR is what you see in the holodeck of startreck. A virtual reality you can interact with. Not a little screen to peek into another world.

"Virtual Reality (VR), which can be referred to as immersive multimedia or computer-simulated life, replicates an environment that simulates physical presence in places in the real world or imagined worlds and lets the user interact in that world. Virtual reality artificially creates sensory experiences, which can include sight, hearing, touch, smell, and taste."

I'm not downplaying anything. They are trying to sell a lie and they know it. They are just that desperate to sell it and get the return from the investment. This will be as big as the Move/kinect if not less.

It seems a little silly to use wiki's definition of VR to discredit stuff like Morpheus and Oculus when that same article acknowledges HMDs as a type of VR. You can argue it's not 'true' VR, but the concept itself has quite a lot of wiggle room.

Regardless to the definitions from places like wiki and Oxford though, i personally think the biggest validator of these devices being considered a type of VR is that such devices have been referred to as such in science fiction for decades. That's not selling a lie, that's selling a well established idea.


The definitions are all similar. Who cares where its from. What matters is what they say. Wiki was just the easiest to copy paste.

Tell me, if this is VR, why isnt the game on your TV VR? The only difference is the proximity of the screen.



Zekkyou on 23 September 2015
Nem said:
Zekkyou said:

It seems a little silly to use wiki's definition of VR to discredit stuff like Morpheus and Oculus when that same article acknowledges HMDs as a type of VR. You can argue it's not 'true' VR, but the concept itself has quite a lot of wiggle room.

Regardless to the definitions from places like wiki and Oxford though, i personally think the biggest validator of these devices being considered a type of VR is that such devices have been referred to as such in science fiction for decades. That's not selling a lie, that's selling a well established idea.


The definitions are all similar. Who cares where its from. What matters is what they say. Wiki was just the easiest to copy paste.

Tell me, if this is VR, why isnt the game on your TV VR? The only difference is the proximity of the screen.

Yeah, all those sources are similar in that, unlike you, they consider HMDs a type of VR :p

As for your question, because unlike a TV, HMDs are not only a more accurate representation of actual sight, but unlike TVs and traditional controllers, they allow you to view that space through a more natural imput (your head and where it's facing). Even if you don't consider HMDs a type of VR, i find it hard to believe that you don't at least consider them a more accurate representation of actual sight and directional input, thus more like VR.

Two things sharing the same base technology doesn't make them the same. If VR provided an experience that was functionally identical to a TV, we'd see that opinion being expressed in all the early hands on reviews. Seeing as we've not, i think it's logical to assume that's not the case.