Ok, let's settle this once and for all,
will VR be a gimmick like 3D and motion control were or will it truly change the market?
I personally think it will go down the same road as 3D but it wouldn't be the first time I was wrong.
what ya thinking, /g/ents?
It depends on technical implementation.
And gyros are already used in a lot of applications (most importantly navigation), which is why almost every smartphone now comes with 'em.
>I personally think it will go down the same road as 3D
Most animals and humans have significant amounts of 3D sensors and processing power.
I don't expect animals to adapt VR too soon, though.
I think people who have tried it/own dev kits love it to bits and say its next level immersion. People didn't say that about motion control or 3D. They might have said they are okay but many said especially about 3D that its not there yet and would rather watch 2D than 3D in movies.
Still though neither of those things are not going away either. at some point in motion control you will not need some weird controls and will be able to smoothly control stuff with your hands/body(you can do it now to some extend but its shit and not well implemented). 3D will be a thing when you don't need awful glasses or vr will just make it much better.
In few years VR will come down in price and there will be games/movies/apps/live sports events/live music events/what ever else in the market for it and VR will be common thing in peoples homes.
As someone who hates gimmicks and hates 3D, I don't think it will be a gimmick.
The clips of people using it and the stories they tell of their experiences seem to suggest that it really does feel immersive and is a completely novel experience for people when they use VR technology.
I think if it keeps advancing then it could become something really significant.
Virtual Reality is a niche market; dedicated users doing dedicated tasks, and let's be honest, the big driving force behind VR is gaming.
The gamechanger will be AR, Augmented Reality. Google Glass is a good early example. AR takes the main idea and execution of VR and merges it with everyday real-world usefulness. Where maybe 2-3 people out of 10 will get excited about an immersive VR experience, that is isolating and alienating at the same time, the majority of them would gladly use glasses that act like a HUD while driving, that can scan items at the supermarket and bring up info on them, that will act like a hands-free reminder for scheduled events, etc.
While that sounds exciting, it will also likely be plastered with ads.
VR is niche, AR will be the real gamechanger, but will take at least another 5 years - so they can learn from VR, and so the tech is more feasible.
I'm developing a Vive title at the company I work for. I've tried the Vive, Oculus DK2, Gear VR, and Sony VR. Feel free to ask questions.
The oculus felt like a gimmick to me personally, mostly because I tried a fast paced first person game with it and got motion sickness (been gaming since I was a toddler, so I'm more than experienced and didn't expect to get sick).
However, the Vive has you up and physically walking around. Perfect motion controllers. It's incredible and the immersion is REAL. I honestly think it will be amazing on the market. My company is making some cool stuff and fellow devs around me are making even cooler shit
VR is a brand new platform, and a brand new experience. 3D TV's was just a slight upgrade to something that already existed (which many people didnt even like).
VR is the future, whether or not these first consumer models do well or not. It has endless uses in training, education, gaming, social interaction and more.
VR cannot fail in the long term. Everyone who says otherwise has no idea what they're talking about.
Saying VR will fail makes you as wrong as the people who thought the internet was a fad, and personal computers were a dumb idea.
Dev here again. A couple of years is right. Expect to see cartoony style win at first, because the software to really render two cameras in a game at once sucks.
For example, my machine has a 980, a blank unity project will run around 1000 frames a second. Turn on VR mode, maybe 120 frames per second. If you drop below 90 the headset starts "rubberbanding" frames (it looks like shitty netcode lag, its weird and makes you vomit). So everyone I know is treating VR like a game console with an i7+970 and making games run fast at that spec
Only problem with that is that even if you have the money for Vive and high end computer most people don't have the space for moving around much in their home and don't really want to clear out a whole room just for a gaming device since you computer is usually in your bedroom also. And even if they did they might not have big enough rooms for it.
It's too much of a hassle for normal people. Strapping on this thing is more work than what most people want to do, they just want push a button and be done with it. This VR thing will remain a niche under enthusiasts and maybe the occassional interested person in this new gimmick, but it will remain just that to normal people, a gimmick
Most people have a living room where they could move a few couches? Coffee tables are outdated, throw em in the bin.
But in saying that, developers know this. Most games will be playable within a very small space.
You underestimate how many virgins (and even normal guys) will buy it for their waifus. The human species is going to die out, or hotties will have to settle for very little.
Why would I spend money on dates, work hard to look good, be charming and so on, when I can have virtual dates with Victoria secret models every fucking day and see them naked while I eat Cheetos in my room?
Tbh I think you're missing something important. If you can afford $1500 PC + $800 Vive, you will have a decently sized apartment. This is the assumption all of my devbros are going on.
That being said, some are making seated experiences and Steam will tell you how much space you need for each game before buying.
He asked if VR is going to be a gimmick, not CURRENT GENERATION VR.
VR is the future.
Of course the FIRST GENERATION of it is not going to be mass adopted by the public. No one in their right mind would think this.
Within a decade, VR will be far cheaper, far more accessible, far less bulky (likely something more like google cardboard) and everyone is going to have VR and use it daily.
very inconvenient to have to move your couches every time you want to play. Also if you live in apartment building in a city its probably gonna be pretty small. Just saying that I don't think many people will be able to play too many fast paced fps games on it.
Still I guess you are right about devs knowing this and making games to fit that.
Peoples houses will change in the coming decades.
TVs will go in the bin, and the living room arrangement will be far more heavily geared towards VR.
Just in the same way that the invention of TVs made everyone rearrange their living rooms for optimal TV viewing.
But it's not how you imagine it will go: people coming home strapping on their gear until they go to sleep. They'll want to use is a few hours a week AT MOST, it's too immersive, you underestimate the laziness of people, they don't want this thing strapped to their head 5 hours a day
bullshit. VR takes 100% of your attention and while this immersion is its greatest feature it's also a major flaw.
people want to be able to watch tv and talk to each other or eat some snacks.
just like I want to alt tab and check on my shitposting on my second monitor once in a while.
You would've said the same thing about televisions 50 years ago.
"People dont want to sit there, staring at a screen for 5 hours"
People will want to sit in VR all day, because they'll be hanging out with their friends, watching movies, playing games together, socializing... all inside an incredible virtual reality where nearly anything is possible.
It really depends on how comfortable it is to wear. For example, I wear glasses. Can I still wear them and this thing? How long before my face feels hot, or the weight of it hurts my neck or my eyes are tired?
While everyone else is all about the tech, I'm about the practicality. The best sounding headphones in the world are still shit if your ears bake with them on or it feels like a vice on your head.
Personally, I just want a VR headset and attached it to a drone for the feeling of flight.
Yes, VR games are actually a lot slower paced.
This is something many developers have noted.
Making a game with similar pacing to a regular video game is just overwhelming to the player.
You're so short sighted.
This is just first gen VR.
Think about first gen video game consoles (Atari), compared to current gen video game consoles. The difference is staggering, and it's only been like 30 years.
People WILL be watching movies together with friends, but inside VR. Their friends could be anyone where in the world, and they'll have their own private cinema, where they can run around, throw shit around, be silly, or just chill and watch the movie.
It'll be on super light weight headsets that have augmented reality built in, so you can still easily eat your IRL snacks. Heck, your snacks could even be loaded into VR via the use of cameras.
Imagine a bunch of 200 4chan cunts in a virtual cinema together, all with the freedom to do whatever they want.
>3 ft by 3 ft
how the fuck would you call that moving around? you would be banging you headset on the wall and even if the vr would indicate that its time to turn you would have to turn like every two steps. You would probably get sick and out of the experience because you need to turn all the time. Also only games you could play would be randomly generated or there would be no immersion and all the games would be caves because of the small space you have.
>Also only games you could play would be randomly generated or there would be no immersion and all the games would be caves because of the small space you have.
There's plenty of ways to make a very small area feel large.
The Vive game Budget Cuts feels extremely open and fun, and most people hardly move at all, solely focusing on portals to move around.
To clarify this, while I didn't just mean first gen VR, I'm not talking about 10-30 years into the future. I'm talking about the next few years.
The development of new VR tech will heavily depend on how well the first gen sells so it better be gud.
When you approach a wall in VR a subtle grid overlays to warn you of walls. Pretty simple.
Yes. Slow paced games are easier to do but it's not impossible to make fast paced ones.
Budget cuts does it amazingly well.
VR tech will continue to be developed regardless of how well first gen sells.
The reason? It's the same reason that EVERYONE is already getting involved in VR;
They all understand that it's the future. It's the next giant tech advancement on the level of the personal computer and internet.
Even if the first generations are a complete consumer failure (they wont be), they will still continue researching and improving VR - because it's just a matter of time until there's mass adoption.
>The development of new VR tech will heavily depend on how well the first gen sells so it better be gud.
>599$ (even more for outside US + insane shipping costs)
>needs a really high end gaming pc
The first generation will only sell to a small group of enthusiasts. You saw all interest dwindle to next to nothing when the 599$ price tag for the rift was announced, even under the interested people. VR Gen 1 is very limited in its scope
HTC isn't wrong expecting that kind of install base, there's plenty of people with a spare $1000 to throw at high-end incredible tech, just look at the smartphone market. If a VR killer app is released in the first year, like a Mario 64, 1 million would be a conservative estimate.
Actually, speaking from experience... HL2 VR is not a nice experience.
VR is best when you are walking around IRL, having those movements mimiced in-game.
Traditional movement controllers induce motion sickness, as your body is telling your brain that you're not moving, while your eyes are telling your brain that you're moving.
360 degree video isn't really proper VR. It only tracks head rotation, and not even movement. Can make you pretty sick.
Proper VR porn will be where you can walk around IRL to walk around in the porn world, and actually fuck something, or watch something.
They did fix it.
Motion sickness with roomscale VR (HTC Vive) is virtually non existent.
People who get very motion sick have 0 problems.
Someone recently spent 48 hours in VR on the Vive, and suffered 0 motion sickness.
Sit down experiences can still give motion sickness though, but thats largely based on bad software.
Maybe so, the sense of presence you get from the current VR porn is stunningly weird, in a good way though. Making eye contact with the porn star is nuts. Thankfully I don't get sick from it, although there are other experiences that make me fairly ill - Alien Isolation, for one.
Slow down. VR dev here. It's not a 100% solved problem. Yeah. You can walk around and not get sick with the Vive. But beyond that? Budget cuts has figured out a clever way to move. But some games like Hover Junkers are going to make you vomit.
Everyone is trying something different. It'll be awhile before a standard is found.
Hover Junkers wasnt too bad for me.
Just had a wierd idea though.
Imagine a game where, instead of you moving, the entire world moves around you.
If you could convey that to the player (without it feeling like you're moving), then that could actually counteract motion sickness a lot.
Your body tells your brain that you're standing on idle ground, while your eyes tell you that you're accelerating and cornering at high speeds.
This difference is what causes motion sickness.
But that limits you to very little movement doesn't it? How can I move long distances in a VR world if I'm bound to the limits of my living room?
I understand that you can build games around that but it still sucks. Maybe I'm missing something though.
Teleportation seems to be a popular solution at the moment. As you said, games have to be built around this limitation.
It's still being explored, and the best solutions will become more popular as we progress.
>but it still sucks.
It's easy to look past this limitation because everything else is so incredible.
Correct, especially in the home area.
However, there are some pretty sweet tricks that you can use in a larger space, to make a smallish area feel INFINITELY big to a player.
Watch from 1:19:00
Would be awesome for a dungeon crawler.
You set up a space before playing, where there's nothing to bump into.
When you get near it, you see a faint wall, letting you know youre near the edge.
If you get even closer, you see augmented reality;
Imho VR would be the best tool for escaping reality.
Like after a hard day of wage slaving, you come home, sit in the corner, then load up a scene like this to chill out and forget about everything that bothers you.
>The development of new VR tech will heavily depend on how well the first gen sells so it better be gud.
I disagree. The only piece of VR tech that won't get better on its own is the controller. The rest is basically cellphone parts and a connector to the PC.
I would like to see a 3d modeling program that uses V4. Make models for video games or 3D printers as if you were panting or sculpting in real life. Would instantly take this from gimmick to necessary piece of equipment for any one working in visual arts.
>Imho VR would be the best tool for escaping reality.
All I want is to be able to take long walks in beautiful landscapes using VR and a omni-direcional treadmill without having to worry about ticks, mosquito, bears, or breaking a leg and starving to death in some godforsaken forest.
>1850's Books will rot your brains
>1900's Radio will rot your brain
>1950's Rock music will rot your brain
>1980's TV will rot your brain
>1990's Video Games will rot your brain
>2000's Internet will rot your brain
>2010's VR will rot your brain
I see the Luddites are keeping up with the times .... but if Luddites are suppose to be against progress and change, then why have they changed their view so much?
>VR is a brand new platform, and a brand new experience. 3D TV's was just a slight upgrade to something that already existed (which many people didnt even like).
but i used it in '94, and it was the same. WHY ARE YOU SHILLING