There is nothinng much to it, really. Like, i was scepitikal when i tried first, but in the second taht the roaller costaer started to fall down, i remenber screamming internally "i believe!!!!!". Months after, and i tried again. This time around, i was more aware that wans't really there, taht it wasn't there. I was also more aware of the poor texture, low density of pixels and everything that you come to expect ina game made in modern times.

OP used the term "like mario 64 revolution". Well that push for 3D games killed a lot of franchises that never stopped being good, but simple because wans't 3D, companies stopped making them. Even worse, they  tried to put games that could never work in 3d... in 3D, and the result was the death of many other good franchises.

I believe that VR can produce unique experiences, but that doesn't mean that i want every high buget game trying to push the technology. How VR can improve a 2D plattaformer? A 2D figther? A TPS? Should all the games in those genres take the back seat? For me, VR will go the same way of racing wheel: Its cool to support, some kind of games gets better for supporting, and could even be considered stupid for some games to not suppot it, but should not replace the option to play the games in the traditional way, and will not fit every major gaming experience. And will always be expensive to get the best experience.

The only VR I've experienced is PSVR. What kind of games are on PC? Are they fully 3D where you can almost touch what you see or are they static 2D images wrapped around you like 360 degree videos?  

Okay. I see this post, now.

What about you d21lewis, you have had VR for like two weeks now. Is the excitement wearing off at all yet?

How do you imagine you and PS VR a few months from now, do you think you will launch the device several times per week and play it in any longer sessions? Will you feel excitement and that sense of immersion you have described? Or do you think the same can have happened to you like the guys above described, where the excitement just isn't there and you just want to play regular games on a 2D monitor?

Sony's VR is low quality. HTC Vive and a high end PC are the way to go ATM.

PSVR looks great, even better on the pro. Plus it refreshes at 120hz instead of 90hz, more comfortable and less screendoor effect due to RGB Oled screen. For example Windlands looks great on the base ps4, ported over from Vive, runs without a hitch. Eagle flight, the same thing. Requires GTX 970 on PC, runs perfectly fine on base ps4.

Robinson: The Journey looks really good on the pro, I only wish the ship exploration part was longer. Fallout or Dead space made for VR would be awesome. I rather have new and exciting gameplay than a bit shinier textures.

Color TV is an awful comparison. It was just a logical step and everyone could see it and use it. VR has been around since the 80s and sure the picture in the screen looks nicer all the other problems with VR still remain. It didn't take color TV 30+ years before it looked fine cheap and included everyone.

Nope. Still loving it. Last time I gamed, it was VR. Still loving it. The feeling of "I am actually in this game" hasn't worn off, yet. The only problem is that I have so many games that I jump between them every few minutes.

And my Pro somehow has no record of my earlier gameplay in Until Dawn. My budget for new games has been spent but I'm tempted to buy The Eagle Flight and Robinson. AND Flower isn't even made for VR but I recently played through it with the headset on.  Still loving it!

There are the same, of the top of my head Eve Valkyrie, Job Simulator, Windlands, Brookhaven experiment were all on PC first, Eagle flight comes out on pc on Decemer 20th. On PC you did have a lot more quick cash in experiences, and you can also play normal games with VR patched in.

Maybe that has dampened the experience somewhat? There was a lot of negativity over all the expensive demos for OR and Vive and putting VR in after the fact is not the best way to go, see DriveClub VR sitting at the bottom for quality experience. Same with Super stardust VR, my least played game. The straight dump to VR doesn't really add anything to it. At least with Bound you get a new perspective, plus it works much better than super stardust which doesn't use sense of scale or 'being there' at all. It's just a globe hanging in front of you instead of on a screen. It's actually easier to play on a screen since you have better overview instead of having to scan around. However in Thumper (can also be played in 2D) VR does help a lot to see things coming more clearly. Same with DriveClub, even though it looks much worse, racing is and feels so much better.

I dunno how bad the screendoor effect is on OR or Vive, or wether the pentile screen takes some of the immersion away. The screendoor is a barrier much more than the low resolution though. I don't really see it in bright games, yet in the darker sections of Robinson it does sit between you and the game. It needs a patch to fix the black level instead of bottoming out at a uniform dark gray, which highlights the screendoor effect.

VR is not for all games, same as 3D is not for all games, or even color! Yet for most 3D games, VR adds a lot.

Color TV was around since the late 40's. We got one when I was 10, 1984. Sales of color tv didn't exceed b&w until 1972 in the US.
In a few decades or probably less we'll also see VR as the next logical step in gaming. We're just at the step of the first commercially viable vr sets, or 1954 in analogy with color tv. It took VR a lot longer from concept to commercially viable, yet it is also already a lot more affordable than color tv in 1954 $1,000 for a 19" color set in 1954. ($8,975 adjusted for today)
Btw color tv didn't look fine until hdtv, Never The Same Color :p