So what’ll be the actual deal with VR software/games on PC /v/?
>Will the Rift and Vive essentially be technologically similar and interchangeable peripherals with slightly different specs that you can use with any “VR-compatible” title, no matter where you buy it?
>Or will you be locked down to whatever platform you choose to invest into. Being able to enjoy Steam VR games if you purchase the Vive or only Facebook/Windows Store games if you get the Rift.
I actually can’t find definitive answers to this simple but ridiculously crucial question online.
I didn’t preorder the Rift yesterday because I was surprised by the high price but now I’m starting to regret because the preorder date already slipped from March to fucking June.
$ 599 seems to be a lot but it isn’t that much all things considered. Any above-average boring as fuck UHDTV, smartphone or tablet costs more. And the Rift actually seems to be a high-end peripheral that will not see any major updates for at least a couple of years.
And if I’m sure I CAN use the Rift with future Steam VR games and I’m not locked to Facebook/Oculus Store games it’s really kind of a no-brainer to me, even at this price.
I don't think the game always has to be specifically VR compatible. I played F.E.A.R, Skyrim and Opposing Force using Cardboard and that worked fine. Neither of those have VR modes or anything.
Vive will have all the Valve exclusives (Portal 3 already teased and HL3 possibly later)
You must be clinically retarded to buy into shitbook rift on launch
Just wait 1 year till everything is out and prices are dropping
In the meantime just get Google cardboard to fap to vr porn
People will probably "break it open" to allow you to play unlicensed products, but from what I heard CV1 is going to play/launch stuff from the Oculus Store and will use your Oculus Name/ID throughout all those products.
aka no porn on CV1 until someone cracks software which usually happen on day one anyways.
That is nothing like using a real VR headset, i wish people would stop pretending like it's an alternitive. Each game does need to be altered so it is compatible with the headset and include stuff like head tracking.
Well if both headsets have glorified head-mounted-screen modes obviously they are going to work with pretty much anything. Even your OS desktop.
But actual VR goes deeper than that and for the best experience games have to be pretty much programmed from the ground up with virtual reality in mind.
My question is:
Will games be programmed only for one platform (either Steam VR or Oculus VR) and maybe sold in separately for both on different stores (similar to current multi-platform console games).
Will games be programmed to be “VR-Compatible”, and work with either headset on the market, adopting some sort of standard? Which means VR headsets would be just like computer screens or gamepads and other gaming peripherals. (Obviously best scenario).
Is anyone else not that excited about VR
You still have to use a "controller" to interact with most things.
Technically, the headsets are interchangeable. The inputs (Oculus Touch vs Valve's wands) are not. But the biggest thing is that both Valve and Oculus are trying to create closed ecosystems. *Probably*, the same games will come out for both, but if you buy it in one appstore, you can't use the competing appstore's headset.
I'm not interested at all.
Can't have proper competitive gaming with a vr headset.
For some games it's fine, but for most games it's just a nuisance and a gimmick.
I'll take my 144hz display over VR any time of the week.
I don’t buy into this whole “VR Controller” bullshit that’s supposed to replace your hands. It’s simply a terrible idea just like motion gaming or waggling before. VALVe’s “gaming space” and lighthouse technology is even more stupid for a lot of reasons.
As a means to create incredibly immersive experiences played with a standard Xbone controller however, I’m really looking forward to VR.
>Can't have proper competitive gaming with a vr headset.
It's not really aiming for that kind of market though, so that makes sense. VR is more for immersion and would put you at a massive dissadvantage in a competitive game.
>playing multiplayer games
Just how fucking pathetic are you?
Heh, I knew it.
It's okay being trash at every single game so you take refuge in singleplayer trash where you play against braindead machines, but don't try to pretend it's anything else.
Sorry m8, I play games for fun.
Enjoy being autistic I guess.
Erm, what. I play games for fun. And I find good and skilled competition that challenges me to be the epitome of fun.
Singleplayer games just can't compare.
>competition is about autism and not fun
wew lad, you sure took in the jaded 4chan meme master lifestyle
People who have played EVE: Valkyrie reported that they could have never been that efficient at dogfighting with actually being able to look around.
Why the fuck would looking at a colored square panel make you more skilled and “at an advantage” compared to actually being in the game and having full 360° awareness of your surroundings at all times, as opposed to being distracted by your cat licking its ass.
Something like Battlefield would probably be ok, but i could see it giving a dissadvantage is a competitve game like CS:GO. Although now that i think of it, i havnt tried my DK2 with a multiplayer game yet, so maybe it isnt all that bad.
It depends on what you're playing. In some games such as racing and flight sims, having proper depth perception and stuff gives you a major advantage. In an arena shooter, not so much. That said, you could still design a competitive FPS for VR only which would probably be fun as fuck.
I don't see where you're getting the Ouya comparison.
The Ouya didn't force it's own platform at all, you installed Google Play out of the box, you could sideload APKs with no restrictions, there was no "workarounds" to be had.
Seems to me you're just trying to play the /v/ "Everything is TORtanic 2.0"
VR is still good for allowing free look, regardless of input method.
Being able to move your "head" around without moving your gun in an FPS is very useful.
For things like flight/driving sims, being able to freely look in any direction without taking your hands off the controls is huge. Things like TrackIR have been around for a good while, but you can only turn your head so far while still looking at a monitor.
I'm one of the few people where it's different. I would spend whatever it was. Gamers are not known to be the most affluent population of people. If something's even $600, it doesn't matter how good it is, how great of an experience it is - if they just can't afford it, then it really might as well not exist .We're going for the mainstream, but time will tell what the market is.
Are you crazy, nothing changes as much as playing vs human oponents with a brain of their own.
People do unexpected shit, they pull out new strats, they do all kinds of things that would be a pain in the ass to program and would most likely never make it into the braindead AI of a singleplayer game.
It's very obvious to me you've never taken part of anything with high skill competition. But it's fine.
The problem with competitive autists is that they are only using games specifically designed for traditional screen-based games as a reference. Of course you will be at a disadvantage playing CS:GO on a Rift. The entire genre has been developed and optimized for Screen, Mouse + Keyboard for over 20 years. I games where situational awareness or camera control is key however, it’s actually the other way around and Rift users have an advantage. Like EVE: Valkyrie.
I an the full opposite. I don't care about an experience that will be exactly the same without the VR, because its designed fully for controller use. I want an experience that you will only get because its designed to be full VR.
>Gamers are not known to be the most affluent population of people
Console gamers maybe, but PC gamers tend to have more money and be willing to spend more for a better experience. People who own computers capable of running the Rift can afford to buy it.
But head-tracking only is still limited, you can only turn your head so far, and you have to keep your eyes on the stationary monitor.
Having a full HMD setup allows you to look freely in any direction.
I'm not saying the Oculus is worth 599 US Dollars, but in a few years when the prices come down and a single GPU can reliably run the necessary resolution/framerate, VR will be great for certain genres.
Alright calm down anon
I didn't say Cardboard was better, I just said its possible to play some games regardless.
Obviously there are alterations that need to be made for true VR but even without them I still got depth perception on Skyrim.
Do you jump down everyone's throat in real life?
as far as I know, valve are trying to make everything free and open, and if people use the API that they've created (called OpenVR) then their game will work on all devices. but oculus have their own rift-specific SDK.
we don't really know what's going to happen yet - it makes more sense for developers to use valve's API, but you'll bet that oculus will try and prevent that
for now, don't make any bets
But it will be “fully VR”. Just like you currently use a gamepad to do anything from military infiltration in MGS to driving soccer playing cars in Rocket league, you can use the same pad to get around in VR.
All you have to do is accept the fact that you are not literally, as a person, with all your body and appendages in the VR space. Using the VR controllers to simulate hands is LITERALLY a ham-fisted and inherently flawed attempts at trying to force this.
Instead, imagine that you’re in a cockpit, controlling a mech, driving a car, even controlling a third-person avatar that incidentally isn’t you since you’re a guardian angel on a floating cloud right behind him.
Doesn’t change the fact that you’re still immersed in a fucking awesome virtual world.
Yea, Valve isn't exactly an underdog indie startup, but at least they seem to be in support of everything being open.
Oculus Rift had a promising future, but they threw it away when they sold out to Facebook.
You guys really have to let go of current games and playing them on VR.
VR isn’t just strapping a screen to your face and playing your FOTM online shooter with better immersion.
It’s an entirely new paradigm and entirely new genres or at least radical modifications of existing ones will have to be created from the ground up for the best possible VR experiences.
i belive there will be some big kind of "fuck you" that both companies will pull with their devices.
right now there are only 9 games that would work technically with the rift, and the only point to the rift that i could see being useful is just that added layer of immersion.
now i have fucked up vision, really bad astigmatism and RGB colorblind, so the magic of vr is already going to be somewhat dead to me, but a $600 gamble on if i can even perceive the stereo 3d effect is something im not going to bother with unless i can try a physical demo at a brick and motor store.
i usually play 2d games or some random odd ball games from time to time, cities skylines binding of issic killingfloor2, skyrim. and i feel that only 2 might be good, the others might as well be played on a regular monitor.
>Anon, imagine a good swordfighting game with Wii Remote. That's pretty much all I want from the Wii.
>Anon, imagine a good swordfighting game with Kinekt. That's pretty much all I want from the XBox 360.
yeah nah I'm good