(1) every VR title to this point has been a little more than a tech demo, or simulation. Of course we're going to be suspicious of how much "AAA" we''re talking. The extra developer time needed to build a good VR game means the deep content tends to get tossed, so we will, see if Valve is willing to push that boundary.You guys keep saying small game and demo but in Valve's announcement they said "flagship vr game" implying it's a full on AAA game.
There's a reason why every Nintendo system gets the same treatment with the usual lineup of super-popular first-party game titles; that kind of support is essential and especially so if you're trying to sell a system that breaks from norms expected by the consumer.But why? At that point, you're investing almost a thousand dollars into your VR platform that you probably won't use very often.
I also doubt those are portable between VR headsets.
If you don't already own VR headset, a VR Alyx is not likely to be a system seller.
It means its a Half-Life game for VR. They're trying to grow a platform and ecosystem that'll be worth tens of billions+, not merely deliver another predictable 20-40 SP game for entitled gamers to not be happy with.So now they're going to announce some sort of HL game for VR, but what does this really mean? .
When the iPhone was first announced I remember some people whining "Why doesn't Apple just focus on Macbooks and MacOS - that's all they need to do". At some point you need to look beyond the walls of your own little world.
If they were desperate then I imagine they'd be trying to rush something out, but this game has been in develop for years, on an engine they've been developing for years. As for sales numbers, the whole point of creating killer apps and high profiles games is to increase that - isn't it obvious? Naysayers complain there "aren't any good games" or "its not 8K90 per eye yet" -- so Valve continuing to iterate with more games and better HMD's is attacking both the chicken *and* the egg.What Valve is desperately trying to do here is find a way to kick-off an equivalent of Android OS for VR, but you'll find they lack the sales numbers to get anywhere close.
You're inventing a side of an argument here. The point wasn't "Valve's VR push is the same as iPhone". The point was that there's always the closed minded group that thinks companies should just keep doing what they're already doing and never try something different - especially when they feel that new direction threatens their personal hierarchy of needs.The reason the iPhone was the runaway success it was was not just because it was a decent phone at a decent price - it was because Apple convinced AT&T to provide unlimited data service at unheard of pricing ($20 a month). Hook them on the need for a second Internet Plan, and then raise prices later.
VR needs a whole lot more than just a game from Valve to "kick things off like the iPhone." It needs a more immersive setup (force-feedback treadmill) , and a less-bulky headset, for starters. This is a piddly step in that direction.
Well if he was going for some sort of edgy response it was weird to suggest that Valve would "merely deliver" anything considering that we haven't seen a Half-Life game in 12 years...and that's exactly why I'm skeptical of their commitment to doing anything. They could very well release this game and then fall off the radar for 5 years, but if this is more than simply a game announcement then it could instill more confidence in consumers to purchase a VR unit.I assume he means 20-40 hours. I discard the opinion of anyone who uses "entitled gamers" unironically.
Not on this forum.
And FWIW, an interview excerpt leaked mentioning it'll have a full SP campaign. We'll know Thurs.You guys keep saying small game and demo but in Valve's announcement they said "flagship vr game" implying it's a full on AAA game.