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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - The Future of VR

SvennoJ said:
VGPolyglot said:

Like how with Doom VFR instead of general movement it's just teleportation, and other games do the same I believe.

There is movement on psvr with the DS4 or the gun thing, both have issues though. I kept swapping between DS4 for run and gun, and the gun thing (what's the name) for big battles. Clearly it was designed for teleportation and ported to movement as a lot of things don't make sense.

Peh said:

I can't say much about psvr. I know that the tech is kinda, well, let's say vive and rift can do way more like precise tracking and letting you walk around in a defined space or circle. You always see the boundaries, so you can't walk into objects if you have set it up correctly.

 

Valve even offers a tutorial for people trying it out for the first time:

 

https://youtu.be/Kg7gPiz8-SU

 

When I intoduce new people to VR, I take the very slow way of them getting adjusted to it. Let them play with the physics and getting a clue about the controls. Not necessarly letting them play a game where locomotion is being used. It was pretty hilarious when I let my mom try it out. I put her on some kind of mountain and this was just too real for her. So she went on screaming >.<

Getting back to the psvr, I hope that Sony supports it with their next gen console.  They could do way more with it, but it depends if their customers are also willing to go further.

When I looked for a VR headset, I wanted to get the best one available around with the best support. Really good tracking is a must for me. So, since I don't like Facebook, I went with HTC Vive. After trying it out for some time, I went for the Pro to get the higher resolution. But the higher res comes with a way higher cost of resources, so here I am hoping for the next gen GPU's.

The vive controller at least has a defined way to hold them with clear buttons. New people can't even figure out which way is up on move, especially not with the headset on.
Some games show you the boundaries of the play area on psvr, most do not though.

Did you play Fallout on Vive? I played Skyrim on psvr for 130 hours with full locomotion and dual move controllers. Once you have it dialed in it works pretty good. However it does fumble now and then with the bow when you're pulling the move back in front on the headset. The ps4 doesn't like the lights overlapping. Comfort level was fine, only in the tilted ship did I feel some nausea. Everything tilted at 30 degrees in VR while sitting straight on a couch feels very wrong.

Immersion level is great though. My 6 year old couldn't stand the lost bear already, too scary. It's a 2D platformer playing out on stage while you watch it in a theater that changes around you. Some things come out of the play area towards you, that was too much lol.

My favorite game to introduce people is Wayward sky. It has a fun play area in the menu select section and is a simple point and click game. Or let them watch Allumette as you can walk around the set and look in and under things as the movie plays out. No controller needed.

I played fallout on my vive pro. It's a blurry mess that ran really bad. The framedrops caused motion sickness. When I reached the vault, it was pretty unplayable for me. I got a refund. I desperately need a gpu which is way faster than the gtx1070. It would probably work fine with the normal vive. But the vive pro takes a lot of ressources. Nevertheless, as far as I have seen, fallout is a bad VR game which could be soooo much more. There are some videos oon youtube which take fallout 4 vr apart. Havn't tried Skyrim, though.

 

So, this makes me thinking when people say that they wait for higher res HMD's. Higher res will need way more power and that power could take some years until it is here. Or rather, a lot of money. As of now, I enjoy what's currently on the market and upgrade when the time is right. 

 

@Viv,

I really hope that VR will survive in order to see the next gen. Development is pretty strong. The gaming market is not the only field where it will be used. 



Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | RTX 3090 FE| Crappy Monitor| HTC Vive Pro :3

Around the Network
vivster said:
Yep, there is still a lot to improve. Which makes the current HMDs kinda disappointing but gets me more excited about future high end VR. I just hope VR support will survive until we reach that high end in a few years.

I'm very sure VR support will survive on PC even if gen2 turns out to be very expensive or a smaller leap than expected resulting in a bit of a market contraction

while PSVR seems to be doing better right now it probably wouldn't survive less successful/stagnant gen2 sales (if we even get gen2)



KBG29 said:
Nice round up of info on the future of VR. Hopefully, with Rift 2, Vive 2, and PSVR2, we will reach the point of pick up and play. I feel like current tech is already strong enough to set the world on fire if it had the proper software backing, but it has become obvious that, that will not be the case.

The biggest drawbacks from me with PSVR hadrwarewise are;

1. Constantly needing to adjust the camera for seated and standing games.
2. Lack of Joy Sticks on the Move Controllers.
3. Inability to track controllers in 360 degrees.

If Sony can solve those problems, while doing the obvious;

-Wider Field of View
-Increased Pixel Density
-Smaller Lighter Headset
-Variable Depth of Field/Eye Tracking

Then PS5 and PSVR2 will be ready to expand VR to a wider market.


I really hope next gen headsets have the option for Wireless and Wired. I think having the wireless option will be key to getting some people to try it, but I would absolutely hate to be limited to the Image Qulaity and Response time issues of a Wireless headset.


Other than that we need games. We need GTA exclusive to VR. We need COD exclusive to VR. We need the major players to take on the role of progressing games to VR, while they let the indies and smaller pubs/devs take on traditional Controller/M&K and TV/Monitor games. I hope we see a good balance between VR and Retro games next gen. In the case of something like COD/Assasins Creed/Far Cry/Battlefield, have a VR exlusive title one year, with Retro the next. For something like Madden/MLB The Show/NBA 2K, make VR the main focus, drive players to VR in tournements, make VR were the money is. Then with first party we need Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo to strike a good balance of studios working VR and studios working retro. Polyphony/Turn 10/Mario Kart should be VR focused, Guerrilla/343/Splatoon should be VR focused.

Every game next gen needs to, at the minimum, support VR from start to finish, even if it is just 360 degree headtracking, with traditional gameplay on a gamepad. There is no game that would not benifit from the wider field of view, next to zero input lag, and immersion that a head mounted display offers.

Almost two years later I am still incredibly excited about VR. It still gives me feelings I have not had since PS1/N64 about where we can go with the future of gaming. In many ways we have reached my expectations for Traditional Controllers and Displays in the last 20 years. Now I look to VR to do the same over the next 20 years. Just imagine where we will be with VR in 2040 if we see the same progression we have seen in games from PS1 to PS4. PS8 and PSVR5 will be freaking amazing!

You're still missing the biggest obstacle in VR. Price. VR needs to solve all of the problems you listed above, and -  be less than $300 including the system. Since the highest volume of consoles are sold consoles are sold when the console hits a price of around $500 or less, that doesn't leave much room for VR.  This means that a VR headset that is comfortable to use for the vast majority of users for hours has to pretty much be the same price as a PS4 or X1 controller. Is that happening in the next generation or so? I highly doubt it.

Your suggestions for VR games is laughable. IF VR needs to be effectively forced onto users to gain mass acceptance, then it's not ready for the mainstream. Making a VR exclusive AAA mainline game is very clearly and obviously just a great way to light money on fire. If you make tournaments VR-mode only, thats a great way to ensure low tournament attendance. There is zero incentive for any franchise to eat the shit sandwich of going VR exclusive on any game that is that typically makes buckets of cash. None of those studios should be VR focused, they should be "making the best, most enjoyable game possible focused". In industry has clearly dictated that at this time that does not involve VR in any way, shape or form.

Also, it;s pretty ignorant calling non-VR video games "retro", considering PSVR headset sales appears to have decreased year over year so far. PSVR sales this year have been so bad that Sony has started obfuscating its sales with other products in its annual sales reports. VR is dwindling at the moment, not flourishing. And please, spare me any arguments mentioning how much VR was mentioned in Sony's E3 conference, because I'll just remind you how much the Vita was mentioned in last year's conference.



So.. Valve released a game for their VR Knuckle Controllers to test the features. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uW60zGVVO_A



Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | RTX 3090 FE| Crappy Monitor| HTC Vive Pro :3