Constellation Tracking Could Be a Long-Term Mistake for Oculus

[Simplex]

Sure, buddy, you know best. You won that argument, all that "fucks" really drove the point home. VR is shit, no developers make games for it, it's all true, as was foretold.

 

[Hagrid]

Those might be major developers but those are not major titles and you goddamn fucking know it. Quit with this bullshit. You guys act like if Steven Spielberg released a snapchat vid tomorrow it would garner the same attention as his next blockbuster. My point when I said major companies are not interested in VR is that they are not putting forth much effort to release content for it, and all any of you have done is proven my point with these silly demos & patches for existing games that came out fucking years ago.


Serious Sam? Are you kidding me? You just fucking stand there and do nothing but shoot a horde of incoming enemies. Thats your example of a major title?

The Climb? THERE'S ONLY THREE FUCKING LEVELS

I'm not even going to bother calling out the faults in the other titles mentioned because it's a waste of my time and we both know what you're doing. These are not the kind games people want for VR and releasing this kind of crap will be its downfall.

Why so mad bro?!

VR is growing! There will be major titles. It already has awesome games for it that show some of what it can do. I think the major thing that could hold it back is if VR 2.0 comes out with higher resolution. That will be when we need dual cards.

 

[nysmo]

Why so mad bro?!

I just dont like people making disingenuous arguments. "James Cameron hasnt released a movie for years" (releases youtube video of him taking a shit) "OMG DUDE HE JUST RELEASED SOMETHING YESTERDAY" - quality of every argument presented so far.

I ask where's the CoD caliber of VR game, guy lists an "experience" consisting of a single level to prove me wrong.

I ask where's a big name franchise for VR, guy lists Serious Sam, which hasnt been relevant in over 10 years and even then it was debatable.

I ask where's a big time developer releasing a VR game, guy lists Doom VR port, nothing more than a patch that is completely unplayable in multiplayer mode and probably not very playable in single player either.

It's not that I hate VR or want to see it fail or anything, I've already bought 4 of them, and spent who knows how much of my allowance money in the 90's on the arcade versions. I love VR, I've been following Palmer and his cardboard kit he demo'd backstage at E3 or whatever years ago. But the best it's probably ever going to be is a niche product for delivering unique experiences that involve being an observer for the most part. While they are visually stimulating it ends there. Gameplay sucks, replay sucks, challenge sucks. There's simply nothing good to really do in VR that you cant do much better in other formats. And it will fall completely flat on its face if the consumer gets angry that they were manipulated into spending their hard earned money on it through a bunch of broken promises and convincing brand names that ultimately panned out to be nothing more than short lived very limited spinoff's of what they were expecting.

Whenever i demo'd these things to friends and colleagues they would often ask me if it's worth buying for their kids or themselves. I always had to regretfully say "well.... not really.. i mean you saw how awesome it was just now, but in a few days you'll probably stop playing that game and try something new. After you've been through 10 or so games you'll probably end up shelving it and that'll be that" because I dont want to piss them off saying "gee thanks for convincing me to waste $600 on a toy that I played for a month".

 

[Simplex]

I need to remind you again what you said: ""Not one single major 1st party company or 3rd party company seems to have any interest in VR at all". - do you see the stupidity of that claim now? At least have the balls to admit this was bullshit.
Throughout this whole discussion you just kept moving the goalposts and using a strawman - I never claimed that there are CoD like experiences available in VR yet (there can't be because of the locomotion sickness issue) - but I did point out that Activision, Square Enix and EA were interested in VR enough to provide free VR demos/experiences for Battlefront and Call of Duty.

You asked wheres a big name franchise for VR, I gave you Resident Evil, Fallout and Doom. Sure, it's slim picking for now, but VR market is not even 1 year old at this point, so it's unrealistic to expect a swath of AAA games.
You asked where's a big time developer releasing a VR game - I gave you Epic, Crytek, Ubisoft, Insomniac, Capcom and Bethesda. How's that for "Not one single major 1st party company or 3rd party company seems to have any interest in VR at all"?

For a person claiming to love VR you sure sound exactly opposite:

Gameplay sucks, replay sucks, challenge sucks. There's simply nothing good to really do in VR that you cant do much better in other formats.

There's at least one thing that VR does better than other formats and that's shooting - shooting in a game on a flat sceeen does not compare to holding a gun in VR, aiming it and shooting almost as if it was a real gun. It's a fantastic experience, only bested by shooting actual guns.

Whenever i demo'd these things to friends and colleagues they would often ask me if it's worth buying for their kids or themselves. I always had to regretfully say "well.... not really.. i mean you saw how awesome it was just now, but in a few days you'll probably stop playing that game and try something new.

VR is now for early adopters with too much disposable income, I would not recommend it to anyone who hasn't got money to burn and hasn't got an early adopter mindset. Maybe you got burned by VR because you hat unrealistic expectations about it.

After you've been through 10 or so games you'll probably end up shelving it and that'll be that" because I dont want to piss them off saying "gee thanks for convincing me to waste $600 on a toy that I played for a month".

I've had a vive since May and I am using it regularly, playing dozens of games, actually enjoying them. My friend recently bough his and he's doing the same (he is Elite: Dangerous fan - this game in VR is almost a religious experience). Unbelievable, right?

I'm glad that [H] editors also enjoy VR: http://www.hardocp.com/reviews/vr/

Our experiences with the HTC Vive and VR room scale gaming have been incredible.

Why is he saying that? We all know that "Gameplay sucks, replay sucks, challenge sucks."

As you can probably tell from what is written above, we have gotten to be big fans of VR in the last couple of months. The Vive has gotten me as excited about gaming as AMD Eyefinity did back in March in 2010, and that was pretty damn excited. And in a few ways, I personally see the Vive and Rift being Eyefinity and NVIDIA Surround killers. Between VR, the appearance of 4K TVs with low input lag gaming, and Pascal generation GPUs being able to easily drive these devices, Eyefinity’s and Surround’s days are numbered in my opinion. I have personally used 3-display Eyefinity and Surround for over 6 years and I just recently replaced it with a single Samsung 48" JS9000. Now that I have the Vive I will never again deal with a multi-monitor desktop where gaming is involved.

 

[nysmo]

I need to remind you again what you said: ""Not one single major 1st party company or 3rd party company seems to have any interest in VR at all". - do you see the stupidity of that claim now? At least have the balls to admit this was bullshit.

You're just using gotcha tactics. I should not have to preface every single thing I say with subtext clauses that make sure can follow the conversation. We're trying to have an earnest discussion about a system designed for mass market appeal. You damn well know what kind of content this requires, so if we're going to talk about it then we need to talk about it at scale. When I say "not one single 1st party company has any interest in VR" and then you go and mention something an intern cooked up over his summer vacation you're just distracting from the real discussion. We dont have time to play semantics with irrelevant small details like "well ok Crytek released a game with 3 levels, and they're a big developer, so scratch that whole statement". No, crytek can release Crysis5 or whatever and THAT would be acceptable. Anything else is not.

I never claimed that there are CoD like experiences available in VR yet

But you are implying it. If someone were to come to this thread trying to figure out if they should buy VR with the expectation that there is tons of great solid content available for it and yours was the only opinion they read, they'd probably think they were set. I am trying to be truthful and paint the whole picture for them. Yeah there are a few big companies who threw their yearly budget surplus at VR because they had nothing better to spend it on, but if you used those brand names as your basis for buying VR you would be sorely disappointed. In fact a lot of people already feel deceived at the money they spent on steam playing all the shovelware that was produced under the premise that they were full games.

but VR market is not even 1 year old at this point, so it's unrealistic to expect a swath of AAA games.

Why is it unrealistic? Is it unrealistic to expect the Nintendo Switch to have solid content upon release? Is it unrealistic to expect the next playstation or xbox to have AAA titles upon release? There's literally not one single major game for VR yet, and there really isnt anything on the horizon either. You mention a few random titles but we dont know how good those are going to be. We can pretty much feel safe with any next-gen console that there will at least be a few quality titles worthy of your system purchase.

You asked where's a big time developer releasing a VR game - I gave you Epic, Crytek, Ubisoft, Insomniac, Capcom and Bethesda. How's that for "Not one single major 1st party company or 3rd party company seems to have any interest in VR at all"?

I dont consider anything they have released to qualify as a game. In my opinion they are all just demos.

There's at least one thing that VR does better than other formats and that's shooting - shooting in a game on a flat sceeen does not compare to holding a gun in VR, aiming it and shooting almost as if it was a real gun. It's a fantastic experience, only bested by shooting actual guns.

This depends on how you define "better". You might find it more enjoyable, but I promise you I'll score more headshots using a mouse than you ever will using a VR gun. And as fun and enriching as you may find holding a VR weapon to be, if you were squared off with a pc gamer who had a monitor/mouse to compete against you would eventually grow tired of losing and revert back to something that can exploit your skill curve better. Even if you played games where only VR weapons were allowed, you'd secretly yearn to use the latent abilities you possess with a mouse and do some serious damage in any other game. You'd probably be like "this is cool and all, but goddamn im so much better at shooting shit in a traditional game, and I miss that feeling".

VR is now for early adopters with too much disposable income, I would not recommend it to anyone who hasn't got money to burn and hasn't got an early adopter mindset. Maybe you got burned by VR because you hat unrealistic expectations about it.

I dont feel burned, because I knew what I was getting. I just dont like people pretending like VR is ready by spouting off a bunch of semi A-list developers and throwing brand titles around as an example of whats available when all of those titles are mostly trash or cheap ports.

And actually I do feel a little guilty because after I showed a coworker my Vive he told me the next week that he bought 10k of nVidia stock because of the reliance upon VR and quality GPU's. I didnt say anything, and I did check to make sure NV stock was improving and it was, but I still thought that was a little brash.

I'm glad that [H] editors also enjoy VR: http://www.hardocp.com/reviews/vr/



Why is he saying that? We all know that "Gameplay sucks, replay sucks, challenge sucks."

I wonder what they play more

 

[Gorankar]

After playing Elite Dangerous in VR, there was no going back to playing it without the HMD for me. Same for Aerofly FS and Dirt Rally.

 

[jnemesh]

The lighthouses don't use bluetooth they have wireless communication but with each other using light not with the pc, like i said they are pretty simple in terms of equipment. It's like a wii mote ir emitters with sensors on the thing you hold that do all the work. You seemed to take offense by that there is nothing deeply wrong with that set up, maybe you just hated the comparison to the wii.

Also both VR sets have wireless solutions in the work. It's not hard to to find out just type in "oculus wireless" in a search engine.

I'm not betting on any horse, i'm not buying VR anytime soon.

I understand it as a pure enthusiast product not something that will interest me because the scope and availability is too small. Whole room experiences is obviously where they want to go but that automatically kills most of the potential user base.

Game industry is all about user base, users bring in money and profitability. Neither of these devices are long term VR solutions, iterations will be present in the follow years. Oculus seems to be set up to mitigate that cost to the user base over time and they also have a lower threshold in terms of set up requirements and cost, again flexibility equating to wider user base.

Not everyone wanting VR experiences can afford the floor space for 360 VR, infact i would suggest that most people interested in VR could not afford that floor space. I arrive at this conclusion based on failure points of the wii and kinect, floor space is a premium in ways money is not. Mainly because this is also floor space that shares space with the TV/computer/w.e entertainment set up you have.

They most certainly DO use bluetooth, and communicate to the PC! Do your homework. Also, the Vive can be used in a seated or standing stationary position, like the Rift, but the reverse isn't true on the Rift! They are TRYING to get it working, but are having serious issues. Even IF they figure it out, you are still paying MORE for an inferior tech.

 

[Hagrid]

They most certainly DO use bluetooth, and communicate to the PC! Do your homework. Also, the Vive can be used in a seated or standing stationary position, like the Rift, but the reverse isn't true on the Rift! They are TRYING to get it working, but are having serious issues. Even IF they figure it out, you are still paying MORE for an inferior tech.

What exactly is not working? I have been using the rift for quite a while and it works just fine. User error?

 

[Youn]

Even if you played games where only VR weapons were allowed, you'd secretly yearn to use the latent abilities you possess with a mouse and do some serious damage in any other game. You'd probably be like "this is cool and all, but goddamn im so much better at shooting shit in a traditional game, and I miss that feeling".

I don't think twitch shooters will ever translate well within VR

 

[sboucher]

What exactly is not working? I have been using the rift for quite a while and it works just fine. User error?

Oh there are a number of tracking issues since their last update that was intended to fix tracking issues.

I'm running a Rift with a 3 sensor setup. Before the last update things were working fine, but now I'm getting the shifting guardian and floor height bug. It's all over Reddit and Irbe is saying update soon should fix it.

At any rate, not defending the guy you responded too. I'll concede Vive tracking seems to have a slight edge on a good day, but the Rift headset and controllers ARE better.

 

[Hagrid]

Oh there are a number of tracking issues since their last update that was intended to fix tracking issues.

I'm running a Rift with a 3 sensor setup. Before the last update things were working fine, but now I'm getting the shifting guardian and floor height bug. It's all over Reddit and Irbe is saying update soon should fix it.

At any rate, not defending the guy you responded too. I'll concede Vive tracking seems to have a slight edge on a good day, but the Rift headset and controllers ARE better.

Oh, I did not know about the height thing. It did it to me the other day, but I thought it was just me. Maybe they are taking update lessons from MS?