Yeah, either A) it won't be using the Switch as the screen and they will do a headset like eveyrone else (which, imo, they could easily do and I would be interested in seeing if they could use the streaming tech the Wii U had to do it wirelessly) or B) it will come at a later date along with a hardware revision that gives the Switch a higher res built in display and more grunt when out of the dock.  Cause right now, the three major issues are 1) the Switch lacks the power out of the dock to do anything better than a smartphone which has some interesting experiences but not many, 2) the screen is just not looking like it will have the quality to do acceptable VR for anything meaningful.  

I have no doubt Nintendo will get into VR soon if it looks like it is flourishing.  However, those who think that VR headset patent they filed is going to be how they do it, by just strapping a standard Switch to your face?  Eh, no.  That patent is rather to prevent third parties from creating super crappy VR headset mounts cause there's a CRAP TON of cheapo VR headsets (and some not even doing true vr) and mounts out there now, see them all the time.  And Nintendo doesn't want that tainting the Switch's reputation for VR should they ever want to take the Switch brand in that direction.  

Sigh... don't try and compare a VR Display to a TV.

You don't have a TV strapped to your face 2 inches from your eyeballs.

720p isn't acceptable for VR.

There were just as many "it's fine" comments as "1080p+" comments. Whatever though. I just tried VR for a little over an hour.

So what I didn't tell you guys is that I actually ordered a VR HMD for my iphone, and it came in today! (I can post proof of me wearing it as a profile pic if you don't believe me) So it's basically google cardboard. The exact model is a Xiaomi Mi VR whatever. It was like $20.

Now, just do you know, my phone is an iPhone 5s, which creates two issues for doing VR. 1, the phone is too small for my HMD, so I can actually see the besels(?) on the sides and, sometimes, even light. (The Xiaomi has two holes in the front for adjusting your phone to the center) The other issue is a lot more interesting to our debate. The iPhone 5s has an LCD (i think) screen with a resolution of 1136 x 640. That's much lower than the Switch's 720p. Not only that, but the 5s is exponentially weaker, and I don't have a controller for it.

I tried both video and games for it. Let's focus on the games. I played Vangard V, Endspace VR, Last Order Blackwood Project, and some roller coaster game that sucked, so I deleted it.

Vangard V is a 3rd person rail shooter. More Sin & Punishment than Star Fox. Playing it was fine, except that my phone was to small for the trigger button (the headset has this button on the top that taps the screen while you wear the headset. My phone was to small to be tapped), so I couldn't actually do anything. Didn't feel sick though. Probably be best looking game from an art style POV.

Endspace is a space Shooter. That game allowed for look to shoot, so I could play. It got annoying though because, since there's no controller, I had to physically turn my body around to shoot shit. Either way, I was fine. No VR sickness.

The last one I tried worth mentioning was Last Order, and that's where I definitely did start to feel a strain. It's this FPS like... Not really horror, but it's the apocalypse and you're alone. This allowed you to move around how you wanted and gave the player the most control. Same issue, though, it's extremely disorienting to have to physically spin around to attack enemies. Maybe the disorientation came from the resolution, but I think it was more from having to whip my head and body around so much. Either way, it not something that makes my not want to try it more, or not recommend it to a friend.

Either way, with all of that, I was still taken aback by how immersive it was. You start to get this tunnel vision that focuses on the screen, so I didn't even notice the besels 3 seconds after each game started. The pixels were huge and always noticeable, but I don't really understand what people mean by "screen door effect." Maybe its something you notice once you've used higher res screens, but I never noticed the actual glass on the screen unless I specifically focused on it, and I only remembered to do that once because I was immersed in playing. The big pixels weren't an issue though, because it just felt like that was how the world "was." I will say that the pixels were least noticeable in Last order, which has the most realistic style, and most noticeable in Vangard, which was most cartoony.

The headset itself also isn't very good. Light would peak out of the sides too, so I had to cover the sides with my hands to shut the light out. because it destracts your focus. Once I did, it was fine. One thing I wondered about VR was if it actually encompassed your entire view - it doesn't. At least not with this headset, which was disappointing until I realized how much your mind compensates for that stuff. All the black is in your periferal vision, so I eventually just forgot about the lens. But I feel like that's something no one ever feels like VR - you never really feel like you're in that world because it always looks like you're seeing the world through binoculars. Again, maybe it's just the headset I have, but I have trouble wrapping my head around how it would even be physically possible to fix this kind of issue.

As for the quality of the games, Endspace and Last order were bad. Vangard, the one I couldn't fully play, was alright, mostly because it really looked the best, and rail shooters are fun to control in VR, even if you're not shooting. It also had this quirky girl robot that was actually endearing. I'll definitely go back to that just to experience it. That being said, they were all obvious tech demo fair, and very cheaply made.

Would I pay $100 for this? Absolutely not. Do I regret paying $30 ($20 plus express shipping) for it? Nah. Would I pay $100 for a better HMD with a better screen resolution, a physical controller that doubles as motion controllers, a much more powerful device for prettier games, and Nintendo's full effort with regards to 1st party support? Yeah, in a heartbeat. It good enough, for sure.

PS. Videos were virtually unwatcheable, btw. The videos were extremely blurry, as if the camera was nearsighted and needed glasses. I didn't have this issue at all with the games. They had big pixels, but it was clear.

Update - so 2 things.

1. I just played another game called InCell VR. By far the best game I've played so far. It's this racing game where you're this microscopic white blood cell or something. It's kind of like... Eh, not F-Zero. Like that Shinen cell-fighting game mixed with F-Zero. You're not racing against anything, it's more like a time trial, where you just have to avoid obstacles that slow you down. I don't want to say "it's really good," because it's probably mediocre in reality, but it's by far the most convincing VR experience. It's very simple in gameplay too, do it's not disorienting. You always go forward, and you just tilt your heat to strafe left and right.

2. I played this with both my iPhone 5s, and my father's iPhone 6s Plus, so now I have a way to compare the two. (Played on mine first, then my dad's, then mine again for comparison)

The experience on my dad's phone was definitely better, but that's honestly solely because his phone is bigger, so it took up my entire line of sight (within the goggles). While that does make it harder to go back to my 5s, the resolution difference (6s Plus has a 1920 x 1080 LCD screen) wasn't even remotely this make it or break it deal for me.

I also completely understand the "screen door" thing now, which it literally just the grid like artifact of the screen. It doesn't even remotely effect my immersion as, like I said, you stop paying attention to it once you pay attention to the game. It's not even immersion breaking when you do notice it, at least it isn't for me. The way people describe it, they make it sound like it's this huge, distracting think that always blocks your view, when it isn't that at all. It's just that you can see the artifacts of the screen, which is barely noticeable because of how tiny and clear the grid is. If people honestly thing that people new to VR will consider something so unnoticeable would stop anyone from the mass market from buying VR, they're being extremely naive. If PS VR had a screen with that artifact, I wouldn't care or barely notice. So blown out of proportion.

I also want to fix what I said about big pixels after playing this game. It's really just that those games themselves had really bad aliasing. InCell didn't have that problem, and the best looking game of the bunch, to the point where I really don't see a reason to even still own those other ones. It's really so much better. Nintendo as a software dev has a really bad habit of not using anti aliasing in their games, but like I said before, it wasn't bad, just noticeable. Basically, if Nintendo's aliasing never bothered you in, say, Mario Kart 8 on Wii U, it definitely won't bother you in VR. It's the exact same thing.

Playing InCell make me want to play more racing games in VR. I also showed my dad it in VR (only on mine), and he was legitimately blown away. I know that's anecdotal, but he's a 73 y/o man from Haiti, and he doesn't care about screen doors. He was completely immersed. I'm sure it would blow away all of my friends who have never used VR, and again, this is worse in every single way than what Nintendo could and would do with the Switch.

Also, I don't feel sick. (Still a little dizzy from Last Order, but I'm still fine to play more)

...Was Wii Sports a "robust" console game? Nope, but it was good enough to sell VR to the mass market, which is all I'm getting at.

Nice that you're finally getting to try VR yourself and able to make your own conclusions.

One of the main things you will notice is that the whole "feeling sick" comes from specific experiences where you have control of the movement of the character's body. In VR experiences where you're pretty much sitting in a cockpit this is pretty manageable for the most part, especially if you've been gaming for many years now.

The real problem begins when you have a control pad that allows you to move your your 'body' in the VR space, in which your brain will definitely feel a disconnect between the character's momentum and real body's inertia. This is not as noticeable when you're doing short in/out experiences, but if you're playing for an hour or so.

Another thing to keep in mind is how mentally taxing it is after mid/long playtimes on VR. Once you take off the headset it does not feel like you were playing a videogame, but that you just did a ton of excercise.

Many people suspect it's due to your brain working extra hard to compensate for the low fidelity of the experience and tricking you into feeling you're really inside that VR world. This is the reason why a higher quality screen/higher fps count is crucial to make VR gaming into something that can comfortably be enjoyed. That is the reason why all the VR headset manufacturers spent all this time improving the tech and the standards are way higher than your average couch gaming experience.

You need to take off the headset after a long gaming experience and not have the discomfort (different levels of discomfort depending on the person obviously) that low quality VR headsets bring.

Having said this, for a person who went from never trying VR, to finally being able to experience any form of it, I'm not surprised you're happy with what you felt. It's a complete game changer when you go from playing a game to being inside the game. That's what a lot of people trash talking VR by default do not understand. They think it's like watching a 3d movie, but honestly speaking, to me, it's the most dramatic paradigm shift in gaming since it's very beginning.

Yeah, I mean there's this definite "wow" moment the first time VR works, for sure. For me, it didn't really hit me just how immersed I had become until I would say reach out and touch a wall I forgot was there, or would try to stand up only to forget what direction I was facing. It's really insane. Another issue I'm sure has been solved on better devices is that the your view drifts to the side in cellphone VR, so when playing InCell, I'd end up with my head facing the right or something. That's probably something that's easier to manage once you have a headset.

Honestly, most of the dizzyness I think came from having to jerk my head everywhere to move. But even if this dissiness was present in a Switch VR, the experience has been so gripping that I can't see myself being bothered by it to the point of thinking that it isn't worth $100.

Like I said, my biggest issue with VR is the binocular vision you have. Like, I can't imagine myself ever paying much more than maybe $150 for an experience like this because, regardless of how immersive the experience is when you stop paying attention, it always feels like a parlor trick because you're wearing them and can only see so much. Perhaps other VR goggles have wider lens that make this less of an issue. I'll have to see.

There's an adaptation period definitely and once the novelty wears off, you're left wanting to see the "real" games. That's when you begin to understand why PSVR is really the 'minimum' specs for gaming VR. Honestly even the vanilla PS4 should not be able to pull off hardcore gaming experiences in VR, and it's pretty surprising it plays as well as it does.

When you mention not seeing yourself paying over $150 for VR, that's pretty understandable, because mobile VR is not worth any more than that.

Once you put on the more expensive VR gear then you start understanding where that money is going. And on PC VR, you do need an above average rig to pull it off, plus another $800 or so for a complete VR setup. It's pricy, and definitely not mainstream as it is. But don't make the mistake of thinking it's anywhere comparable to the cellphone VR. 

So yeah, the best bet for gaming VR in this generation becoming more and more mainstreem pretty much is stuck on PSVR.

Next gen hopefully will not only bring better headsets, but also the much needed hardware will become powerful enough to run full AAA games with 0 complaints (though some would argue RE7 is already the first AAA VR game).

Hopefully you'll get to try PSVR sooner or later (preferably on PS4 Pro) and try something like Eve Valkyrie, Dirt Rally VR mode or Ace Combat. Anything on a cockpit feels absolutely amazing in this gen's VR.

Loll 720p @6 inch... Jesus... I'd rather fuck a goat.

Good for some people I guess but if anything, it would turn them off of vr

See, that's the thing, though. I don't think PSVR is VR's best be because I don't think anyone will be willing to pay more than $150 for an accessory device like a VR headset. And I do think that my shitty cellphone VR is impressive, even after the novelty.

I still fail to see how, for example, the Switch would be too weak to host VR experiences. Every game would basically look as good as Mario Kart 8 in split screen in VR. I don't see how that's an issue, especially if Nintendo actually implemented AA. Again, I can obviously imagine a gap in quality, and I'm not denying that, but my point is that I've wowed by VR on a cellphone too small for my headset with a sub-hd resolution screen, no controllers (motion or traditional), and with absolutely no ambitious games.

Where we disagree is that you don't think that a worse VR technical experience for cheaper would do better than the PSVR, while I think it would absolutely destroy PSVR, because no matter how much better PSVR is, people won't care because what ever Nintendo does will be cheaper, more accessable, more convenient, and have a more agressive and deliberate 1st party push, guaranteeing a steady push of high quality games. That's something no other VR headset has, and I don't think people will care enough about the quality difference for it to matter when it comes to mass market success, the same way people buying PSVR don't care that the Vive is better.

You seem stuck on the idea that the Switch isn't powerful enough for "real" VR games. Would Mario Kart 8 not count? Is the Switch not powerful enough to do that game in VR? Of course it is. It's all about building a game around your limitations. Would Mario Kart 8 not be a fun VR game? Would F-Zero not be fun in VR if it looked like an HD remaster of GX? What about Pilot Wings? How realistic would that game have to look for the experience of flying/gliding/hovering to be compelling? A lot of the novelty is wearing off because the games on mobile aren't good. Nintendo games would be good, regularly released, premium experiences, which is something VR still has a massive shortage of. Why does the Switch need to be more powerful for what is essentially just split screen mode?

I understand that, for example, an open world game would need to be 60fps, so that's essentially splitscreen and a perfect framerate, but that's totally achievable. The game just won't look as realistic as a 30fps single-screen open world game on the same system, which is fine because no one paying $100 for VR on the Switch is expecting a game that looks like TLoU in VR, the same way no one who buys VR on mobile expects something that looks like PSVR.

I can immediately see where the flaws of VR are. I can imagine how much better PSVR, Oculus, and Vive are. But there's not a doubt in my mind, even after playing on mobile, that the Switch would easily be home to the most successful VR experience from a mass market POV. If the experience on a $20 headset with an iPhone 5s and shitty mobile games is already this good, what Nintendo would do with the Switch would be out of this world for the mass market.

Nintendo would need something to solve drift, they'd need to figure out a way to cheaply and wirelessly allow people to lean, they'd probably want to figure out a way to output to the TV so the experience could be social, and they'd need to decrease the feeling that you're looking through binoculars (a feeling I know is still present in even the Vive), but they would absolutely and be a dominant force for VR. If there was nothing wrong with a tiny 640p screen for me, the mass market will be absolutely floored with a 720p screen, especially because the next best thing would be $500 to have everything the Switch would give you for $100 - $200 absolute max (on top of the price of the console).

I'm thinking of the Switch as the Wii of VR. Not the best VR, but the one that makes it mainstream.