How many of you think VR is the next "BIG THANG?"

[leezard]

its gonna be awesome, exact same way 3D was the next big thing for movie theaters... in other words, NOT.

3D isnt in the same ball park as VR, hell its not even the same game. There is no comparison between the two.

My opinion of 3d was and still is "meh". My opinion of VR, even on my cheap as Samsung Gear is Holy shit this is bad ass, just imagine how much better its going to get!

Much like Kyle posted, I will never forget my first VR experience. A first gen Occulus dev kit flying through the solar system. The resolution was shit but the immersion was complete. I've seen a few 3d movies going way back to when I was a kid and I cant remember one thing about any of them.

 

[FrgMstr]

I just spent four hours playing Island 359 today. BAD ASS.

 

[gulguran]

Everyone comparing VR to 3d is going to feel foolish in a few years.

The reason they aren't comparable is simple. 3d sucks, VR doesn't. Nothing can compare with the immersion that even these primitive first generation headsets provide.

I felt the same way and I picked up the gear vr because it was cheap. Even that implementation which I hear is no where near as good as the vive demonstrates to me that it's not nearly as much of a gimmick as I was thinking. It's actually pretty good and if we get 4k or better per eye at some point it's going to be downright amazing.

 

[gulguran]

They will come with gags or mouth cages to limit wondrous noises.

Haha

 

[Decibel]

In my view when this tech is smaller and can be had in a form factor like the hololens it will be huge. My dream is being able to sit on a plane and be fully immersed in a 4k per eye vr experience. Can you imagine?

Oh yeah, I can totally imagine it. Getting smacked over and over by your VR googles while you thrash around violently while crammed tightly into the middle seat in coach, flinging your controller up down and sideways as you try to keep track of the enemy shooting at you.

I'd rather sit next to a teething toddler with a serious case of diarrhea.

But not those two drunk Russians on my flight from Philly to Pheonix a couple of years ago. Fuck those guys, fuck them especially.

 

[FrgMstr]

I'll have to check it out.

Onward just came out...supposed to be a bit buggy but might end up being a good benchmark.

Just bought it. Thanks for the heads up! Unity engine too. Need to reach out to the devs and see if they are using any sort of special sauce.

 

[MavericK]

More evidence that this isn't just a fad: HTC makes $5 million investment in VR gaming startup Steel Wool Studios

 

[LurkerLito]

I checked out the link of onward, but man I am not sure. It's not a teleporting thing, so I am concerned about motion sickness in that game, but it looks really good even though I don't usually like multiplayer games.

I bought a cheap one today Lightblade VR. There isn't much to it but it gives me my Star Wars fix and it was worth $4. I am on the fence, Raw Data or Island 359. I really want Vanishing Realms but it requires a 2mx2m room and I just don't have it. I only have a 2mx1.5m and that is a bit iffy cause I am constantly thinking I might hit my TV with a controller again. Though it was my own fault I thought I wasn't facing the TV at the time, dam VR so immersive you can get disoriented from the real world so easy.

 

[trajan2448]

It will be a game changer but Matrix quality VR is still quite a few years away. It's ridiculous to call the current state of technology virtual reality.

 

[MavericK]

I picked up Island 359. Very cool, good graphics and kind of gives you that Far Cry 1 feel of being in the jungle. The gameplay itself so far is alright, I wish there was a bit more to it than just shooting dinos and picking up loot (especially since the loot is limited right now in variety). But it is Early Access so I expect it to get a lot better. For $20 you can't really go wrong.

Performance seemed very good as well for the most part.

 

[FrgMstr]

It will be a game changer but Matrix quality VR is still quite a few years away. It's ridiculous to call the current state of technology virtual reality.

Obviously you have never used it for any amount of time whatsoever.

 

[FrgMstr]

I picked up Island 359. Very cool, good graphics and kind of gives you that Far Cry 1 feel of being in the jungle. The gameplay itself so far is alright, I wish there was a bit more to it than just shooting dinos and picking up loot (especially since the loot is limited right now in variety). But it is Early Access so I expect it to get a lot better. For $20 you can't really go wrong.

Performance seemed very good as well for the most part.

What is Island 359 - AMD & NVIDIA GPU VR Performance: Island 359

 

[FrgMstr]

I checked out the link of onward, but man I am not sure. It's not a teleporting thing, so I am concerned about motion sickness in that game, but it looks really good even though I don't usually like multiplayer games.

Bought it, but have not played it yet. Jury is still out.

 

[Dayaks]

There is no way this is a fad. I see estimates in the hundreds of thousands for Vive + Occulus. I tried it yesterday and it completely surpassed my expectations. I can't believe people that call this a fad or compare it to 3D glasses have ever actually tried it.

I also had no qualms with IQ and I doubt it was optimized. If you look at [H] VR reviews some of these games push the highest end GPUs. If you up the resolution you're going to need to magically get a GPU that wont' be out for five years.

If you haven't actually tried it you should check it out, free demos all over:
Here’s where you can try out the HTC Vive without spending $800

 

[LurkerLito]

I can't blame those that think it is a fad. If you really haven't tried it, the 3D glasses is the only thing you have to compare it to and of course that is not even close. I mean I was hesitant at first cause I was thinking, "what if this is really only as good as 3D glasses?" and "I do get motion sick". That's really the main reason I paid for it locally instead of my usual buy it online. A return would be easy if it failed all my expectations. I was hoping to demo it, but it wasn't set up at the time, but I decided to gamble a bit ($800 bet) and I was blown away with the tutorial. Kind of weird that I think I gambled $800 technically lost $800 from my pocket but I think I won . It really is IMHO the future of gaming. It's pretty much exactly what I felt with my first Voodoo card. It's also nothing like the PS3 move which I had high expectations with but it fell flat and felt more like a gimmick. It's not perfected yet and IQ is passable IMHO with lots of room for improvement but I don't think we'll get better IQ for another 3 to 5 years so I am fine with my purchase. Wireless will probably be addressed first followed by IQ due to the need for better GPUs. In 5 years we'll be at a pretty good place with VR.

 

[Nenu]

... A return would be easy if it failed all my expectations...

I thought this.
I didnt even want to return it, I wanted help finding out why it looked so bad.
But there wasnt any support and despite telling them I would return it if they didnt give any, still none.
So I tried returning it via the automated system but wasnt given a return address.
Further attempts at communication were met with canned responses saying the answer is below, when nothing was below.
In the end had to get my bank to refund me.
They contacted them by mail first and also had no response after a week.

Something sucks big time in that company.
If I hadnt paid with a credit card, I would have a crap product and be out £750.
Then heading to small claims court.

 

[FrgMstr]

I thought this.
I didnt even want to return it, I wanted help finding out why it looked so bad.
But there wasnt any support and despite telling them I would return it if they didnt give any, still none.
So I tried returning it via the automated system but wasnt given a return address.
Further attempts at communication were met with canned responses saying the answer is below, when nothing was below.
In the end had to get my bank to refund me.
They contacted them by mail first and also had no response after a week.

Something sucks big time in that company.
If I hadnt paid with a credit card, I would have a crap product and be out £750.
Then heading to small claims court.

Where are you located? Where did you buy it? All important points if you are going to keep telling this story.

 

[FrgMstr]

Context is important. Service here in the USA had been outstanding for me.

 

[MavericK]

I have heard of a lot of complaints from UK customers. Apparently shipping costs to there are atrocious as well.

 

[BababooeyHTJ]

Properly set up 3d vision was mind blowing. Especially later 3d displays. Even with nvidias market share climbing and inexpensive 3d displays taking off due to the refresh rate support died off. It was depressing since I was a fan. I don't know how many people who are commenting here gave it a fair chance for more than a short time.

The fact is that the buy in was far cheaper for 3d vision than vr atm. Yet it still failed. I do also know how once you become accustomed to a certain experience subpar support won't do. There were a lot of games that touted being 3d vision ready that didn't even have a 3d crosshair which was gamebreaking to me.

Due to my love of stereoscopic 3d I'm very interested in vr. But with the investment being more than I'm willing to spend atm it's hard for me to justify something that may not be supported in the short term. At least with 3d vision nvidis paid developers for decent support for quite a while. I'm not seeing here. I feel the need to play the wait and see approach for a while.

Edit: even the second opinion of this poll sounds exactly like every "3d is a fad" complaint that I ever heard. People judge before trying.

Idk, maybe with fewer subpar options it won't be as big of an issue for vr.

 

[spugm1r3]

We got a Vive in the lab at work. Some of the games are pretty "that was neat". Then you fool around with something like Waltz of the Wizard... the immersion is intense.

If you are old enough to battle virtual pterodactyls, this is not that.

 

[MavericK]

The fact is that the buy in was far cheaper for 3d vision than vr atm.

Was it? I seem to recall the monitors being several hundred dollars, and then you had to buy the active 3D glasses kit as well which was another couple hundred.

Plus you had to have a machine capable of playing the games, of course.

 

[Trepidati0n]

Kyle...where do you see "2nd gen" of VR coming in at. I know that the next Vive is just really a "fix a few things we didn't get right the first pass". Your crystal ball tends to be clearer that most.

 

[MavericK]

I'm not Kyle but my guess would be lighter, better lenses, perhaps some sort of wireless functionality?

I would say resolution, but even now you need a top-end rig to run current games on current hardware, so it would probably just push it even further into niche status.

We'll get there eventually, though.

 

[noko]

Properly set up 3d vision was mind blowing. Especially later 3d displays. Even with nvidias market share climbing and inexpensive 3d displays taking off due to the refresh rate support died off. It was depressing since I was a fan. I don't know how many people who are commenting here gave it a fair chance for more than a short time.

The fact is that the buy in was far cheaper for 3d vision than vr atm. Yet it still failed. I do also know how once you become accustomed to a certain experience subpar support won't do. There were a lot of games that touted being 3d vision ready that didn't even have a 3d crosshair which was gamebreaking to me.

Due to my love of stereoscopic 3d I'm very interested in vr. But with the investment being more than I'm willing to spend atm it's hard for me to justify something that may not be supported in the short term. At least with 3d vision nvidis paid developers for decent support for quite a while. I'm not seeing here. I feel the need to play the wait and see approach for a while.

Edit: even the second opinion of this poll sounds exactly like every "3d is a fad" complaint that I ever heard. People judge before trying.

Idk, maybe with fewer subpar options it won't be as big of an issue for vr.

Well Razor's OSVR HDK2 is $400 - that price point is cheaper then the 3dVision glasses and a cheaper 3dVision monitor. The issue was that Nvidia did in fact put a lot of resources into the whole experience from drivers, hardware support, monitor makers, developers etc. And it still was not sufficient to make it in the market. AMD was almost a joke with 3d with their support, they just really could not afford anymore is probably the reason. So does HTC (large company with a number of money losses) or Occulus (connected to an almost unbelievable amount of cash) transform or evolve gaming to the next level is anyone's guess. Sony's PS4 VR may become the filter if VR survives or not - maybe pushed ahead or slowed down. If you have hundreds of thousands of gamers proclaiming how awesome PS4 VR is that would definitely stir curiosity and sells - also the opposite as well.

As for Razor or OSVR it will depend more on everyone in general, to make unique hardware, game support etc. which is also a possibility - I don't see Razor having the funds by themselves to make it happen.

Now will Nvidia have their own VR head mounted display? AMD is supposedly has something in the works (vapor rub). Microsoft also will most likely have something unique as well for the next XBox (Or XBox upgrade).

 

[Dayaks]

It's really not a question to me if VR will "survive". Maybe the level of AAA adoption but we already know a few of those are in the works.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

I haven't experienced modern VR yet, and I'd like to try it. But I think it's a gimmick. It surely won't replace desktop for me.

Its not a desktop replacement for ANYONE I think. You really should try it though.

Many try to compare virtual reality with regular stereoscopic 3d displays. Though VR IS a stereoscopic display in itself, its also something entirely different, since its not constructed as looking AT a display that shows a stereoscopic image, but rather as looking THROUGH a stereoscopic display. Instead of looking at a virtual world, you are looking inside a virtual world.

What 3d displays and VR headsets have in common vs. regular screens, is that you sacrifice comfort to gain immersion. I´ve used 3d displays for years and its like using sunglasses while playing games. Not all games are worth it, even if they work well in stereo 3d. I preferred stereo 3d in games with top-down view, like Titan Quest, where the sacrifice in comfort was worth the increased immersion of 3D. In other games, like Battlefield, I preferred the comfort of not having to use glasses.

With VR, the sacrifice in comfort is even greater. You have to wear a headset that gets warm, lower resolution and more eye fatigue. Thats not the worst change in comfort, the immersion itself makes it much less comfortable. You are no longer sitting with a distance towards you and the screen, so you don´t get to feel so disattached to the screen. There is no longer light around you, coffee on the table, phone to check for messages and Facebook updates and other distractions. You can no longer sit comfortably and let yourself NOT be immersed. The virtual world is both on and in your face (pun intended).

Vanishing Realms is my go-to example. Its an indie game made by a single person. If this game would have been made as it is for a desktop monitor with mouse and keyboard controls, you wouldn´t look twice on that game and definitely not pay money for it. For VR, I would warmly recommend to buy that game ($ 19.99 in USA if I am not mistaken and worth the price). This game is a prime example and a testament to how VR is a game changer. The level of immersion you get from VR today is without equal in gaming history. In the first room you get to, after completing the tutorial, you see some floating light go across the room and a pedestal with a chalice and some coins. Normally in 2D, you would quickly see what you can pick up and how to get the hell out of the room as fast as you can. In VR, you stop and look around in the room, suck in the virtual enviroment, teleport over to the pedestal and get that rewarding feeling when you pick up the stuff there. The feeling of "being there" is so strong in VR that you actually stop to look at the enviroment in a much larger degree then what you would do when you just look at a screen.

VR gives you so much more impression from the game world that you can actually get fatigued by all the impressions. Friends have tried my HTC Vive and have actually gotten overwhelmed by the impressions and immersion. Sure, some of the WOW feeling you get from first impressions goes away (though there are new WOW moments all the time), but the level of immersion have a strong staying power. Details in game, sounds, events and everything the developer puts in there, gives you stronger impressions. Things that would be boring and mundane on a regular display can be fun and impressive in VR. The difference is THAT big!

VR is far from perfect, but if a game works well in VR, I would prefer to play it in VR. Fallout 4 is announced to get VR support from the developer. I have VorpX and can play it in VR now, haven´t finished it yet on a regular display, but will not touch it anymore. I want to finish it in VR, even if the developer decides to charge me full price for the game again. VR is THAT much more fun, even with todays headsets!

Don´t think of VR as a replacement for your setup, but rather like an addition. Kinda like a HOTAS. Does´t work with all your games, but can make the games it works on more fun!

 

[MavericK]

^^ Excellent post, could not have said it better.

 

[noko]

Its not a desktop replacement for ANYONE I think. You really should try it though.

Many try to compare virtual reality with regular stereoscopic 3d displays. Though VR IS a stereoscopic display in itself, its also something entirely different, since its not constructed as looking AT a display that shows a stereoscopic image, but rather as looking THROUGH a stereoscopic display. Instead of looking at a virtual world, you are looking inside a virtual world.

What 3d displays and VR headsets have in common vs. regular screens, is that you sacrifice comfort to gain immersion. I´ve used 3d displays for years and its like using sunglasses while playing games. Not all games are worth it, even if they work well in stereo 3d. I preferred stereo 3d in games with top-down view, like Titan Quest, where the sacrifice in comfort was worth the increased immersion of 3D. In other games, like Battlefield, I preferred the comfort of not having to use glasses.

With VR, the sacrifice in comfort is even greater. You have to wear a headset that gets warm, lower resolution and more eye fatigue. Thats not the worst change in comfort, the immersion itself makes it much less comfortable. You are no longer sitting with a distance towards you and the screen, so you don´t get to feel so disattached to the screen. There is no longer light around you, coffee on the table, phone to check for messages and Facebook updates and other distractions. You can no longer sit comfortably and let yourself NOT be immersed. The virtual world is both on and in your face (pun intended).

Vanishing Realms is my go-to example. Its an indie game made by a single person. If this game would have been made as it is for a desktop monitor with mouse and keyboard controls, you wouldn´t look twice on that game and definitely not pay money for it. For VR, I would warmly recommend to buy that game ($ 19.99 in USA if I am not mistaken and worth the price). This game is a prime example and a testament to how VR is a game changer. The level of immersion you get from VR today is without equal in gaming history. In the first room you get to, after completing the tutorial, you see some floating light go across the room and a pedestal with a chalice and some coins. Normally in 2D, you would quickly see what you can pick up and how to get the hell out of the room as fast as you can. In VR, you stop and look around in the room, suck in the virtual enviroment, teleport over to the pedestal and get that rewarding feeling when you pick up the stuff there. The feeling of "being there" is so strong in VR that you actually stop to look at the enviroment in a much larger degree then what you would do when you just look at a screen.

VR gives you so much more impression from the game world that you can actually get fatigued by all the impressions. Friends have tried my HTC Vive and have actually gotten overwhelmed by the impressions and immersion. Sure, some of the WOW feeling you get from first impressions goes away (though there are new WOW moments all the time), but the level of immersion have a strong staying power. Details in game, sounds, events and everything the developer puts in there, gives you stronger impressions. Things that would be boring and mundane on a regular display can be fun and impressive in VR. The difference is THAT big!

VR is far from perfect, but if a game works well in VR, I would prefer to play it in VR. Fallout 4 is announced to get VR support from the developer. I have VorpX and can play it in VR now, haven´t finished it yet on a regular display, but will not touch it anymore. I want to finish it in VR, even if the developer decides to charge me full price for the game again. VR is THAT much more fun, even with todays headsets!

Don´t think of VR as a replacement for your setup, but rather like an addition. Kinda like a HOTAS. Does´t work with all your games, but can make the games it works on more fun!

For non VR games that work with VorpX, are there problems as in gun sights, menu's etc? VorpX does allow playing AAA titles in VR I am just wondering in general your experience so far on different games. There are many that are supported like GTA V, Crysis 3, FarCry 3 and 4 and so on. Of course you will need to drive those type of games with a good setup or very reduced settings - anyways please share any experience there.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

I guess the way I feel about it is that it is cool tech, but everything I have seen designed for it thus far has just looked like a tech demo, not like a real title I'd enjoy playing.

Until it becomes mainstream enough that the AAA titles start coming out with support, I'm going to hold off.

It's cool as all hell, but it's a lot of money, the titles aren't there yet (and I'm not sure they ever will be) and the whole room scale thing is highly inconvenient for us average people who don't have a huge room to dedicate to VR.

 

[Trepidati0n]

I guess the way I feel about it is that it is cool tech, but everything I have seen designed for it thus far has just looked like a tech demo, not like a real title I'd enjoy playing.

Until it becomes mainstream enough that the AAA titles start coming out with support, I'm going to hold off.

It's cool as all hell, but it's a lot of money, the titles aren't there yet (and I'm not sure they ever will be) and the whole room scale thing is highly inconvenient for us average people who don't have a huge room to dedicate to VR.

So you have not really "seen" anything then? It seems all your observations are based upon what you have read from other people who have not "seen" VR either. I get it...it is your opinion..but it is inherently human. This is the same issue as "violence in video games makes people violent" or "video games make men sexist" is something that is portrayed by people who don't play video games based upon data from people who don't play video games but say they are bad.

But, I do think you are eluding to something that is a general problem...the people who are selling VR need to push harder with live demo's. Honestly...Steam should be looking at people in their system who have decent rigs, find pools of them in urban areas, and demo to them. Why? I have yet to have one person who has tried current gen VR that wasn't amazed even if they were for/against it before trying it. If you take the people who have a lower barrier to entry (e.g. already have a good vid card) I think it could help greatly.

Full disclosure: I tried/bought VR in the past twice and it never "caught me". It was oh, that is nice. When OR and vive came out I was again tempted but decided to pass on launch; twice bitten three times stupid? But Kyle's reviews caused me to actively find a demo and I was sold; my new rig and vive are ordered. Yes, even the "weak demos" I could see significantly play time in even if shallow content wise because they were "fun".

If you have a chance, seek out a demo and come back and tell us about it.

 

[MavericK]

As far as live demos go, you can set one up at participating Best Buy locations for the Rift: Ready to experience a new reality?

For the Vive, Microsoft stores seem to have them.

 

[Cr4ckm0nk3y]

As far as live demos go, you can set one up at participating Best Buy locations for the Rift: Ready to experience a new reality?

For the Vive, Microsoft stores seem to have them.

This is what I did before choosing the Vive. Went to a BB here in Denver then a MS store. Vive won hands down IMO.

I read a few gamestops also have demos.

Here is a map of the Vive demo locations:
We’ve made a map so you can find the HTC Vive demo nearest you

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

So you have not really "seen" anything then? It seems all your observations are based upon what you have read from other people who have not "seen" VR either. I get it...it is your opinion..but it is inherently human. This is the same issue as "violence in video games makes people violent" or "video games make men sexist" is something that is portrayed by people who don't play video games based upon data from people who don't play video games but say they are bad.

But, I do think you are eluding to something that is a general problem...the people who are selling VR need to push harder with live demo's. Honestly...Steam should be looking at people in their system who have decent rigs, find pools of them in urban areas, and demo to them. Why? I have yet to have one person who has tried current gen VR that wasn't amazed even if they were for/against it before trying it. If you take the people who have a lower barrier to entry (e.g. already have a good vid card) I think it could help greatly.

Full disclosure: I tried/bought VR in the past twice and it never "caught me". It was oh, that is nice. When OR and vive came out I was again tempted but decided to pass on launch; twice bitten three times stupid? But Kyle's reviews caused me to actively find a demo and I was sold; my new rig and vive are ordered. Yes, even the "weak demos" I could see significantly play time in even if shallow content wise because they were "fun".

If you have a chance, seek out a demo and come back and tell us about it.

No, I have tried on VR headsets. Tech is cool as fuck, and it is amazing how transported you feel into an environment, just by the fact that things move when you move your head, and there is some depth perception.

The issue for me is that I haven't seen any titles that interest me. Just like how there is much more to a game than just its graphics, there is much more to enjoying VR than just the tech itself. Maybe I've just missed the good titles?

When it gets enough market penetration that all (or at least a substantial chunk of) new titles integrate nicely with VR headsets out of the box, that's when I'll get one. I don't feel like being an early adopter with this tech.

 

[DocSavage]

The issue for me is that I haven't seen any titles that interest me. Just like how there is much more to a game than just its graphics, there is much more to enjoying VR than just the tech itself. Maybe I've just missed the good titles?

When it gets enough market penetration that all (or at least a substantial chunk of) new titles integrate nicely with VR headsets out of the box, that's when I'll get one. I don't feel like being an early adopter with this tech.

A lot of people really seem to enjoy playing Elite Dangerous in VR. Here's a decent video:

As for not wanting to be an early adopter, I'm in the same boat. I'd like higher res VR displays, but at the same time, more pixels requires more video card and even top of the line cards are being challenged with the current vr displays.

 

[Dayaks]

No, I have tried on VR headsets. Tech is cool as fuck, and it is amazing how transported you feel into an environment, just by the fact that things move when you move your head, and there is some depth perception.

The issue for me is that I haven't seen any titles that interest me. Just like how there is much more to a game than just its graphics, there is much more to enjoying VR than just the tech itself. Maybe I've just missed the good titles?

When it gets enough market penetration that all (or at least a substantial chunk of) new titles integrate nicely with VR headsets out of the box, that's when I'll get one. I don't feel like being an early adopter with this tech.

You're probably smart waiting a year or two. That said, I do have a lot of fun with it now. Our rigs here on [H] could handle higher res for sure. Problem is if they do that it cuts down on the possible user base... I hope they do it, not convinced they will.

I do feel sore from yesterday. It put me through the ringer with those arcade games. I lift and run regularly too!

But yeah - I enjoy short round games. A lot of games looked meh, but I gave them a go, and they can be a ton of fun. So there's tons of games for me. Not a huge fan of RPGs on any platform, which, are limited right now.

They 1000% have to make a Jedi Knight though. That tease demo they have out... fuckers.
Trials on Tatooine on Steam

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

For non VR games that work with VorpX, are there problems as in gun sights, menu's etc? VorpX does allow playing AAA titles in VR I am just wondering in general your experience so far on different games. There are many that are supported like GTA V, Crysis 3, FarCry 3 and 4 and so on. Of course you will need to drive those type of games with a good setup or very reduced settings - anyways please share any experience there.

My experience with Vorpx is mostly with Oculus DK2. I have spent most of my time with Vive using the games made for VR.

Games that don´t support VR natively are made to be viewed on a screen. That means the developer have made their design choices for a monitor view often trying to take advantage of the screen realestate. HUD and other ingame information is placed on the sides, top and bottom. Even though you can, in a few games, move the HUD, its still unusable for VR.

Text is often unreadable in games not made for VR.

Ingame menus is not usable in VR.

Vorpx (and also Tridef) have a configurable button (Edgepeek) so that you can zoom out the game and view it as a flat screen in full as a workaround for this.

FOV can be a pain, since a game often use one FOV for regular movement and another when you use gunsight or fast movement, depending on which game. This can be tweaked in some games.

Games with geometry 3d can give you positional tracking, while other 3d modes only tracks headmovements as example mouselook does.

Movement and camera angles can also be a bit disorienting and introduce a bit sickness in some games, since its made to be viewed on a screen. Using VR, you get a new opinion of what a "first person" game is. In VR, you are the first person, outside of VR, it more feels like your monitor is the first person and you are looking at a camera screen. Not the best explaination, but the best I could come up with right now.

Using Vorpx requires a fair amount of tweaking to get it right. You get the scaling of the enviroment that makes much of the VR experience fun, but VR is not so forgiving if its not "done right" and you can end up with a serious case of simulator sickness.

That said, its possible to make some games playable and enjoyable, but a lot of work is often required to make it so. You need to have some basic knowledge on how to tweak the games. When you get it up and running, it works and you have fun in VR.

Its fun though and sometimes worth the effort to see the enviroment in VR, even though you afterward would play the game on the screen due to comfort.

Alien Isolation is an example of a game made for desktop (but it had an unused VR option in the system files) that is really fun in VR. Hiding under a desk with positional tracking and being able to peek with your head from under the desk looking at the alien walking around there was a thrill!

I wouldn´t recommend anyone spending money on VorpX before they have gotten their VR legs though and are a bit experienced using VR goggles.

 

[noko]

My experience with Vorpx is mostly with Oculus DK2. I have spent most of my time with Vive using the games made for VR.

Games that don´t support VR natively are made to be viewed on a screen. That means the developer have made their design choices for a monitor view often trying to take advantage of the screen realestate. HUD and other ingame information is placed on the sides, top and bottom. Even though you can, in a few games, move the HUD, its still unusable for VR.

Text is often unreadable in games not made for VR.

Ingame menus is not usable in VR.

Vorpx (and also Tridef) have a configurable button (Edgepeek) so that you can zoom out the game and view it as a flat screen in full as a workaround for this.

FOV can be a pain, since a game often use one FOV for regular movement and another when you use gunsight or fast movement, depending on which game. This can be tweaked in some games.

Games with geometry 3d can give you positional tracking, while other 3d modes only tracks headmovements as example mouselook does.

Movement and camera angles can also be a bit disorienting and introduce a bit sickness in some games, since its made to be viewed on a screen. Using VR, you get a new opinion of what a "first person" game is. In VR, you are the first person, outside of VR, it more feels like your monitor is the first person and you are looking at a camera screen. Not the best explaination, but the best I could come up with right now.

Using Vorpx requires a fair amount of tweaking to get it right. You get the scaling of the enviroment that makes much of the VR experience fun, but VR is not so forgiving if its not "done right" and you can end up with a serious case of simulator sickness.

That said, its possible to make some games playable and enjoyable, but a lot of work is often required to make it so. You need to have some basic knowledge on how to tweak the games. When you get it up and running, it works and you have fun in VR.

Its fun though and sometimes worth the effort to see the enviroment in VR, even though you afterward would play the game on the screen due to comfort.

Alien Isolation is an example of a game made for desktop (but it had an unused VR option in the system files) that is really fun in VR. Hiding under a desk with positional tracking and being able to peek with your head from under the desk looking at the alien walking around there was a thrill!

I wouldn´t recommend anyone spending money on VorpX before they have gotten their VR legs though and are a bit experienced using VR goggles.

Thanks for the rundown - maybe a Vive in November for me. I will see how the PS4 VR shakes out with the users as well - I doubt I will go that route but it may drive down pricing a little.

 

[Nenu]

Alien Isolation is an example of a game made for desktop (but it had an unused VR option in the system files) that is really fun in VR. Hiding under a desk with positional tracking and being able to peek with your head from under the desk looking at the alien walking around there was a thrill!

How did you get round the lighting problems in Alien Isolation?
Each eye got a different lighting perspective when I tried it.
I found it unplayable like that.
Disabling lighting removes a lot of what makes it look good.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

How did you get round the lighting problems in Alien Isolation?
Each eye got a different lighting perspective when I tried it.
I found it unplayable like that.
Disabling lighting removes a lot of what makes it look good.

Long time ago and I spend a lot of time tweaking the game, so I can´t remember. It was with DK2 also, so I might have used the rift .ini setting instead of Vorpx. Next VorpX version will contain an optimizer for this and Sega has hinted it might get VR support, so I would wait if I were you.

You can get to work with shadows using z-buffer instead of Geometry 3D if you want to play it right now. Won´t get the same depth, but it will still be more immersive then without HMD. Remember to override the controller so you get headtracking.