*Patiently waitiing for a REAL Sword Art Online VR game

Then we'll start discussing! XD

But there was this thing on fb I saw where these korean fangirls tried out a game (I think its on HTc or one of them) where they be in this first person view with a famous korean actor who is driving the car and talking to you.

I think there is a market for these fangirls and fanboys. Using singers and actors as the main attraction.

binary solo said: hershel_layton said: Sorry but it won't be a revolution until it becomes cheap(like smart phones. They were a niche product until the iphone)   That doesn't make sense. iPhone has always been the most expensive phone on the market. iPhone made smartphones sexy and cool, it did not make them cheap and accessible for the mass market. It just convinced the mass market that you were a second class citizen if you didn;t have one. And carriers were able to do payment plans so you didn't have to pay the full cost of the phone up front. iPhone is a poor comparison in terms of VR's pathway to big success. VR can succeed with lower price, better screeds and some way to prevent nausea, wireless connection and consequently light, low heat, long life battery tech, which I have no idea when that would be feasible, less bulky headsets or some design that at least doesn't look uncool.

 

Compared to other smartphones, the iPhone was not exactly expensive, especially for what it was able to do. It was essentially an iPod and phone put together for 300/400. With the iPod being 200 and a typical phone being around 250 during 2006/2007, it was actually a pretty good deal, especially for those who never had an ipod. I agree with you on VR though. I think it will become affordable, just not within the next 2 years. Hopefully smartphones become an affordable method to use vr.

Jranation said: *Patiently waitiing for a REAL Sword Art Online VR game Then we'll start discussing! XD

Pretty much how I've felt on VR for a long time now.

I mean, yeah...duh.

VR really is a change unlike anything we've seen in a long time. I can't wait to see what VR looks like in 5 years, and in 10 years and beyond.

sorry but I don't see any must have video game for the tech, so not a revolution just yet.

I feel like by the time it becomes viable for mass market appeal, there will be something better so, not in my books.

VR has the same issue, in my mind, as motion controls: even at it's absolute finest, it's *contextually* excellent. It's got a specific subset of games in which it provides worthwhile improvements to the experience. It has a broader range than motion control interfaces. But still, same kind of problem.

Lastly, VR has a lot of barriers to entry. It's expensive, it causes motion sickness to random individuals with completely random games, it's highly isolationist and cuts you off from your surroundings which makes it inconvenient. It's just not practical for mass market appeal, not at the moment. And I certainly don't see it replacing traditional gaming wholesale or even the majority of it. Far too many genres where it's not worth it.

I do think it can succeed as a part of the market. But I don't think it is the revolution where it is the only future.

binary solo said: WagnerPaiva said: If we could get a navigator controler along with the PSMOVE for better controls PSVR would be the king of the Hill, I can see it.   They need to make a PSmove2 with better tech and more precision. I think it's wrong of them to double down on old motion-control tech. PS4 camera is a much better device than PSeye for PS3 so a better motion control handset should be doable.

When you set it up right it works well enough. This first version shows how much they did to make it somewhat affordable. Considering their previous static headset, HMZ-T3W with twin 720p Oled screens still is about $1500, $400 is damn good for a 1080p RGB OLED VR headset.

Re-using old tech lowered the entry level a bit further, although retailers quickly jacked up the price for move controllers packs. If the price started at $700 with new sensors and controllers included it would start off even slower. The camera also tracks the standard DS4 controllers, which would not work with a different tracking solution.

Hopefully the psvr ball will keep rolling, as the high entry price and system requirements seems to have stalled Vive and OR adoption. At least the tech in psvr is old hat, simple, easy to reduce manufacturing costs over time. The breakout box kinda sucks yet they were right to include the social screen.

Despite all the little inconveniences and what could have been better, it already is an amazing experience. Well worth waiting 20 years for. 
Perhaps Sony will do one more revision of the pro for VR, bundle with the headset that plugs directly into the pro. Pro $100 price cut, Head set $100 price cut, breakout box integrated could absorb the cost of the camera, $600 without move. Buy move bundle separately (most games don't need it)

Not any time soon, since it's quite expensive and using it for games it very difficult. You can't just slap VR on an existing game and expect it to even work, let alone be better. A lot of traditional control methods have issues with motion sickness etc. in VR, so games have to be designed to take advantage of VR from the beginning. Maybe devs will eventually learn how to do it, but we're probably still pretty far from that moment, if it's even possible to create enough sufficiently good mainstream experiences with VR. Doing controls well in VR can be extremely tricky, and FPS games are the first victim in general. That should give a pretty good idea about the scale of the change that VR requires.