Originally posted by Takoo Everyone saying vr is a gimmick has not tried the new tech. Go try it and get back to us.
I remember when this first came out in arcades.
And guess what, at the time it was the "new tech". That didn't change the fact that it was a gimmick and never caught on. Same thing with LaserDisc, Minidiscs, and countless other examples of "new tech" that never became popular.
SOOO.....Home video is a Gimmick because Beta and VHS went out of style..or...could..it be....we improved on the technology...?
oh hell no that is crazy talk..right?
Improving on the technology of VR doesn't change the fact that it's still a gimmicky peripheral device. When that VR arcade booth that i posted a pic of came out back in the early 90's, people were convinced that it was gonna be the next big thing. Here we are 2 decades later, and not only did that particular incarnation of VR flop badly, but VR devices in general haven't gained widespread popularity.
Originally posted by Takoo Everyone saying vr is a gimmick has not tried the new tech. Go try it and get back to us.
I remember when this first came out in arcades.
And guess what, at the time it was the "new tech". That didn't change the fact that it was a gimmick and never caught on. Same thing with LaserDisc, Minidiscs, and countless other examples of "new tech" that never became popular.
SOOO.....Home video is a Gimmick because Beta and VHS went out of style..or...could..it be....we improved on the technology...?
oh hell no that is crazy talk..right?
Improving on the technology of VR doesn't change the fact that it's still a gimmicky peripheral device. When that VR arcade booth that i posted a pic of came out back in the early 90's, people were convinced that it was gonna be the next big thing. Here we are 2 decades later, and not only did that particular incarnation of VR flop badly, but VR devices in general haven't gained widespread popularity.
And it might have been the next big thing if it actually worked as intended.
People got sick of VR because no one could do it right. It just didn't work. It didn't die down because no one wanted it. It died because the tech didn't work.
Edit: This time it works, for sure, people have already tried it. So what is stopping it from becoming big this time?
As far as I can tell .. nothing at all. It does what it is suppose to do ... and it does it well. Unlike all past attempts.
How do I know this? Cause even I hated those past attempts at VR. You would get so excited and put the helmet on and realize it feels nothing like VR. I tried Virtual boy and other so called VR head sets .. and the one thing they all lacked was actually being VR.
Originally posted by Takoo Everyone saying vr is a gimmick has not tried the new tech. Go try it and get back to us.
I remember when this first came out in arcades.
And guess what, at the time it was the "new tech". That didn't change the fact that it was a gimmick and never caught on. Same thing with LaserDisc, Minidiscs, and countless other examples of "new tech" that never became popular.
Originally posted by Takoo Everyone saying vr is a gimmick has not tried the new tech. Go try it and get back to us.
I remember when this first came out in arcades.
And guess what, at the time it was the "new tech". That didn't change the fact that it was a gimmick and never caught on. Same thing with LaserDisc, Minidiscs, and countless other examples of "new tech" that never became popular.
So you have tried new tech vr?
Nope, and the fact that I haven't is probably why I can maintain an objective viewpoint on the matter and realize that history usually repeats itself. Unlike the people who have tried it and get all caught up in the "ohhhh new shinies!!!" mindset and make the same bold claims that were made 20 years ago, yet still never came to fruition. Bookmark this thread and come back to it in 5 years. I can guarantee you that 2 things will be true at the time. 1. VR in video games won't be significantly more popular than it is now, and 2. People will be saying the exact same thing about whatever new VR incarnation is available at that time that is being said in this thread, i.e. "This new technology is gonna be a game changer for VR!".
Originally posted by Takoo Everyone saying vr is a gimmick has not tried the new tech. Go try it and get back to us.
I remember when this first came out in arcades.
And guess what, at the time it was the "new tech". That didn't change the fact that it was a gimmick and never caught on. Same thing with LaserDisc, Minidiscs, and countless other examples of "new tech" that never became popular.
So you have tried new tech vr?
Nope, and the fact that I haven't is probably why I can maintain an objective viewpoint on the matter and realize that history usually repeats itself. Unlike the people who have tried it and get all caught up in the "ohhhh new shinies!!!" mindset and make the same bold claims that were made 20 years ago, yet still never came to fruition. Bookmark this thread and come back to it in 5 years. I can guarantee you that 2 things will be true at the time. 1. VR in video games won't be significantly more popular than it is now, and 2. People will be saying the exact same thing about whatever new VR incarnation is available at that time that is being said in this thread, i.e. "This new technology is gonna be a game changer for VR!".
lol wow .. I can't believe you are serious.
Got news for you, people in the past didn't try it as well when it was hyped. It lost it's hype WHEN people tried it because it wasn't really VR.
In this case, the opposite is happening. People are calling it a gimmick until they try it. Then it's hyped.
Also History doesn't really repeat itself. Other wise we would still think cell phones are crap and only meant for business people.
Same with computers.
Edit: But I agree .. let's bookmark this thread lol and come back in a few years from now. That way I can say I told you so XD. Cause we are both immature like that.
Also, question. Can you have an objective viewpoint of a book you did not read? If so, do you think that view point would be right or wrong?
In my opinion, your view point actually wouldn't matter to most people. Because you have nothing to go on besides you jsut saying so.
VR sounds like a great idea for FPS games, flight sims etc but for MMO's I'd say no. If I 'm going to go play in a fantasy world as a fantasy character I like to see that character. I like watching my avatar on screen so VR wouldn't do anything to enhance that experience.
At the end of the day, who cares? Let's start by having a MMO that doesn't lose over half it's player base within it's first month of release. Is this thread really happening?
Got news for you, people in the past didn't try it as well when it was hyped. It lost it's hype WHEN people tried it because it wasn't really VR.
I recall trying the 'early 90's' version of VR and it sucked pretty bad. I'll admit to having been pretty excited about it, and the idea of VR, until having tried it out. It left me pretty jaded to the idea that VR would ever be achieved in an enjoyable manner. That said, the current generation of tech in this area is a world apart (as it should be by now).
Ultimately, we've all seen products go to market before their time and not succeed in the manner people imagined they would. I think we are still a little "before its time" with the current generation tech, but still, looking at the old version and the current version, how can you not be optimistic about where this technology will go and its potential?
If nothing else, I haven't seen this level of interest, or people/companies throwing money at, VR in a long time. Even if it doesn't result in an amazing gaming experience, I'll be interested to see how the technology develops and what non-gaming (and non-porn) markets it finds. It's easy to look at the ideal of a Holodeck and say "current VR sucks because it isn't as good as that!", but what does it hurt to change your point of view to say "we are closer to a Holodeck-like experience then we were yesterday and that's pretty cool"? It doesn't cost anything to watch the progress.
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers. Do something wrong, no one forgets" -from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
Got news for you, people in the past didn't try it as well when it was hyped. It lost it's hype WHEN people tried it because it wasn't really VR.
I recall trying the 'early 90's' version of VR and it sucked pretty bad. I'll admit to having been pretty excited about it, and the idea of VR, until having tried it out. It left me pretty jaded to the idea that VR would ever be achieved in an enjoyable manner. That said, the current generation of tech in this area is a world apart (as it should be by now).
Ultimately, we've all seen products go to market before their time and not succeed in the manner people imagined they would. I think we are still a little "before its time" with the current generation tech, but still, looking at the old version and the current version, how can you not be optimistic about where this technology will go and its potential?
If nothing else, I haven't seen this level of interest, or people/companies throwing money at, VR in a long time. Even if it doesn't result in an amazing gaming experience, I'll be interested to see how the technology develops and what non-gaming (and non-porn) markets it finds. It's easy to look at the ideal of a Holodeck and say "current VR sucks because it isn't as good as that!", but what does it hurt to change your point of view to say "we are closer to a Holodeck-like experience then we were yesterday and that's pretty cool"? It doesn't cost anything to watch the progress.
lol that is what I meant. Back then, it was hyped, until people tried it. Hyped, tried, dead.
This time. People where skeptical, then they tried it and then it was hyped. Skeptical, tried, hyped.
I said that because he is saying his opinion remains objective because he hasn't tried it and he isn't falling into the hype because of that.
I point out, back in the day the hype came before the actual trying it. While it's the opposite today. As soon as you tried it in the past you realized it was garbage.
I personally think the tech is here right now. It's not at it's best obviously, but nothing is to begin with. Televisions didn't start out as LEDs. XD
The VR of today actually does what it's suppose to do. It does what all other VR attempts failed to do. It stands to reason that VR has a very good chance of doing extremely well because this time ... it's actually the real deal lol.
Some people just are doom and gloom. They think if it failed before then it will fail again. Yet the reason it failed before is fixed. I really don't understand how they reason. It's like they ignore all information and just say nay.
Got news for you, people in the past didn't try it as well when it was hyped. It lost it's hype WHEN people tried it because it wasn't really VR.
In this case, the opposite is happening. People are calling it a gimmick until they try it. Then it's hyped.
Also History doesn't really repeat itself. Other wise we would still think cell phones are crap and only meant for business people.
Same with computers.
Edit: But I agree .. let's bookmark this thread lol and come back in a few years from now. That way I can say I told you so XD. Cause we are both immature like that.
Also, question. Can you have an objective viewpoint of a book you did not read? If so, do you think that view point would be right or wrong?
In my opinion, your view point actually wouldn't matter to most people. Because you have nothing to go on besides you jsut saying so.
My viewpoint on VR has nothing to do with the quality, or lack thereof, regarding the current technology. I have no doubt that Occulus Rift is very impressive visually. But that has absolutely nothing to do with the fact it's still a peripheral, and peripherals have been, by and large, gimmicky and only moderately successful at best. The majority of gamerss don't want to buy additional devices and wear a big clunky headset while gaming. The majority of game developers don't want to waste funds developing games that are specifically compatible with a device that the majority of players aren't interested in. This isn't a matter of me commenting on a book i've never read. It's a matter of me commenting on a segment of the industry based on trends that have been repeated time and time again.
I think VR is going to be monumentally successful, just not for gaming.
It has a ton of applications in medicine and various types of training like pilot, military, etc.
But when it comes to mass consumption for entertainment you run into a few obstacles (esp in gaming):
It needs software to sell it. So game developers will be taking a risk in building games for it, because there's no guarantee for sales.
It's not multi-platform friendly. Exclusives are generally subsidized by the console owners (Nintendo/Sony/MS) in order to even be exclusive, because game studio need to sell as many copies as possible with as little effort in adapting it to other platforms.
Bugs (that exist in all game) will be magnified when your face is all up in the game world. What you might overlook in a regular game, might ruin your entire experience on VR.
You still have to wear it on your face. Just thinking about sitting around pulling it on and off whenever I need to do something is already annoying me. It's going to require truly dedicated gaming time.
Good games don't need gimmicks. Look at Nintendo, Captain Gimmick, the Wii and Wii U. Do their stupid controllers matter? No, because good games come out on all sorts of hardware, the gimmick will only serve as a novelty for so long. Gamers will go to where the good games are. So while VR might be cool for a bit, they have a lot to prove because once people get used to the gimmick, there better be an amazing gaming experience to go with it.
Got news for you, people in the past didn't try it as well when it was hyped. It lost it's hype WHEN people tried it because it wasn't really VR.
In this case, the opposite is happening. People are calling it a gimmick until they try it. Then it's hyped.
Also History doesn't really repeat itself. Other wise we would still think cell phones are crap and only meant for business people.
Same with computers.
Edit: But I agree .. let's bookmark this thread lol and come back in a few years from now. That way I can say I told you so XD. Cause we are both immature like that.
Also, question. Can you have an objective viewpoint of a book you did not read? If so, do you think that view point would be right or wrong?
In my opinion, your view point actually wouldn't matter to most people. Because you have nothing to go on besides you jsut saying so.
My viewpoint on VR has nothing to do with the quality, or lack thereof, regarding the current technology. I have no doubt that Occulus Rift is very impressive visually. But that has absolutely nothing to do with the fact it's still a peripheral, and peripherals have been, by and large, gimmicky and only moderately successful at best. The majority of gamerss don't want to buy additional devices and wear a big clunky headset while gaming. The majority of game developers don't want to waste funds developing games that are specifically compatible with a device that the majority of players aren't interested in. This isn't a matter of me commenting on a book i've never read. It's a matter of me commenting on a segment of the industry based on trends that have been repeated time and time again.
I am with Forgrimm here. This technology is like 3D for movies. No difference. Sometimes it can be great and really add to the experience of the movie. But most of the time it just appears to be fluff added on because it is the new trend, or because the mega corporations which control our media wish to hype it up so that they can sell more expensive TV's or discs or whatever.
Eventually 3D or VR may become the norm, but I think that really won't happen until they can accomplish it easily, without the bulky and expensive peripherals.
Case in point, I have a 3D capable projector but I likely won't be using that feature because first I have to find relatively inexpensive glasses to use, plus I have to find either downloadable content to watch, or pay for more expensive discs to watch. Not that many movies I would care to watch in 3D anyway so I am willing to wait before jumping into this. None of the 3D movies I have seen in theaters has impressed me greatly.
So not saying I wouldn't want to have it. It just has to be worth the trouble for me to want to have it and spend the money to get it.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
Got news for you, people in the past didn't try it as well when it was hyped. It lost it's hype WHEN people tried it because it wasn't really VR.
In this case, the opposite is happening. People are calling it a gimmick until they try it. Then it's hyped.
Also History doesn't really repeat itself. Other wise we would still think cell phones are crap and only meant for business people.
Same with computers.
Edit: But I agree .. let's bookmark this thread lol and come back in a few years from now. That way I can say I told you so XD. Cause we are both immature like that.
Also, question. Can you have an objective viewpoint of a book you did not read? If so, do you think that view point would be right or wrong?
In my opinion, your view point actually wouldn't matter to most people. Because you have nothing to go on besides you jsut saying so.
My viewpoint on VR has nothing to do with the quality, or lack thereof, regarding the current technology. I have no doubt that Occulus Rift is very impressive visually. But that has absolutely nothing to do with the fact it's still a peripheral, and peripherals have been, by and large, gimmicky and only moderately successful at best. The majority of gamerss don't want to buy additional devices and wear a big clunky headset while gaming. The majority of game developers don't want to waste funds developing games that are specifically compatible with a device that the majority of players aren't interested in. This isn't a matter of me commenting on a book i've never read. It's a matter of me commenting on a segment of the industry based on trends that have been repeated time and time again.
Well it being big and clunky isn't even going to remain true. Which I have to mention most people mention they even sometimes forget it's on their head as it is. Consumer release is going to be much smaller and even lighter then it already is.
This isn't really just a peripheral. It can be considered an entire replacement for a screen. However, both you and I know that isn't the way it's going to be viewed and it will most certainly be viewed as a peripheral anyway.
Creating a game that started as flat screen to VR is really a no go. It works but the experience is degraded by a lot doing it that way. It doesn't work well due to scaling and such. However, going from VR to to flat screen is another story. It's certainly possible to do that and make both experiences pleasurable.
The majority of game developers are indeed interested in creating VR games. Actually the Oculus rift is pretty popular among industry professional. Very few are not interested. I know this because I am a game developer and frequent a developers news website and discuss about these things with other devs.
Heck, you don't even need to be a game developer to know that. The fact you keep hearing about VR from companies should be a pretty nice hint at developers being highly interested. Some even go as far as to think it will reshape the entire game industry. Though that might be a bit of stretch lol.
In the past many people where interested in VR. When I say many people, I mean a very large portion of gamers. I imagine most gamers are interested in a VR experience, they are just very skeptical due to past attempts. Those past attempts didn't do well specifically because it wasn't actually VR. It was full of false promises and it never met expectations.
This time around, all it takes is people giving it a try. Yes, many gamers are skeptical. Yes, many are not interested in peripherals. Yes, many may not want to wear something on their head. However, once they experience it first hand. Who is to say that experience will not out weigh those minor negatives? Wouldn't you say if the experience amazes people, all those things will no longer matter?
The issue with you is your throwing it to the side, way to soon. You just assume it's going to fail, with out actually even giving it a chance. You compare it to past attempts which really make little sense, since all those attempts where not even really VR in the least bit. They where simply disappointments. Those past attempts, hardly matter.
Again, your trends talk is non sense. The reason VR failed in the past was because it specifically wasn't VR. It was said to be VR when it wasn't. People didn't flock to it because it was a terrible experience. That is the only reason it didn't work out. It had nothing to do with it being a peripheral . It had nothing to do with development costs. It had to do with it being crap.
Today ... VR isn't crap. It's extremely good. That fact alone gives it a really good chance to succeed. I would find it relaly hard to believe that it would do poorly. A person would have to be a really boring person to not enjoy the Oculus Rift. Minus those who get sick from it, since that isn't their fault lol. Hopefully they work that out more to cause people to get less sick. For the most part, many people are fine with it. It's not nearly as bad as in the past and it's only getting better.
Got news for you, people in the past didn't try it as well when it was hyped. It lost it's hype WHEN people tried it because it wasn't really VR.
In this case, the opposite is happening. People are calling it a gimmick until they try it. Then it's hyped.
Also History doesn't really repeat itself. Other wise we would still think cell phones are crap and only meant for business people.
Same with computers.
Edit: But I agree .. let's bookmark this thread lol and come back in a few years from now. That way I can say I told you so XD. Cause we are both immature like that.
Also, question. Can you have an objective viewpoint of a book you did not read? If so, do you think that view point would be right or wrong?
In my opinion, your view point actually wouldn't matter to most people. Because you have nothing to go on besides you jsut saying so.
My viewpoint on VR has nothing to do with the quality, or lack thereof, regarding the current technology. I have no doubt that Occulus Rift is very impressive visually. But that has absolutely nothing to do with the fact it's still a peripheral, and peripherals have been, by and large, gimmicky and only moderately successful at best. The majority of gamerss don't want to buy additional devices and wear a big clunky headset while gaming. The majority of game developers don't want to waste funds developing games that are specifically compatible with a device that the majority of players aren't interested in. This isn't a matter of me commenting on a book i've never read. It's a matter of me commenting on a segment of the industry based on trends that have been repeated time and time again.
I am with Forgrimm here. This technology is like 3D for movies. No difference. Sometimes it can be great and really add to the experience of the movie. But most of the time it just appears to be fluff added on because it is the new trend, or because the mega corporations which control our media wish to hype it up so that they can sell more expensive TV's or discs or whatever.
Eventually 3D or VR may become the norm, but I think that really won't happen until they can accomplish it easily, without the bulky and expensive peripherals.
Case in point, I have a 3D capable projector but I likely won't be using that feature because first I have to find relatively inexpensive glasses to use, plus I have to find either downloadable content to watch, or pay for more expensive discs to watch. Not that many movies I would care to watch in 3D anyway so I am willing to wait before jumping into this. None of the 3D movies I have seen in theaters has impressed me greatly.
So not saying I wouldn't want to have it. It just has to be worth the trouble for me to want to have it and spend the money to get it.
3D isn't even in the same realm as VR ... I don't know why people seem so ... tempted to compare the 2. The technology is nothing like 3D for movies. The only similarity is it requires you to wear something.
3D is only a visual effect that doesn't add anything to a game at all. It still plays in the same exact manner. Just instead of a flat screen you have stupid crap popping out in front of your face.
VR actually changes the gaming experience entirely. Look around you, and now imagine what you see is VR. Does that seem anything like 3D glasses to you? Or do you see real life through 3D glasses?
That is essentially what VR is, what you see now is how you would see it in a game using a VR headset. Meaning you actually feel like someone threw you into an actual video game world. This changes even game play mechanics to a very large extent. So it gives you an entirely new experience they you likely have never experienced in you life thus far.
I would say that is vastly different then 3D glasses. And comparing the 2 ... is a no no.
Originally posted by Takoo Everyone saying vr is a gimmick has not tried the new tech. Go try it and get back to us.
I remember when this first came out in arcades.
And guess what, at the time it was the "new tech". That didn't change the fact that it was a gimmick and never caught on. Same thing with LaserDisc, Minidiscs, and countless other examples of "new tech" that never became popular.
using the example of 1995 VR is similar to saying Telsa cars will fail because electric cars have been tried before.
VR of 1995 way far too soon. why? BECAUSE OF THE TECHNOLOGY...
Comments
Improving on the technology of VR doesn't change the fact that it's still a gimmicky peripheral device. When that VR arcade booth that i posted a pic of came out back in the early 90's, people were convinced that it was gonna be the next big thing. Here we are 2 decades later, and not only did that particular incarnation of VR flop badly, but VR devices in general haven't gained widespread popularity.
And it might have been the next big thing if it actually worked as intended.
People got sick of VR because no one could do it right. It just didn't work. It didn't die down because no one wanted it. It died because the tech didn't work.
Edit: This time it works, for sure, people have already tried it. So what is stopping it from becoming big this time?
As far as I can tell .. nothing at all. It does what it is suppose to do ... and it does it well. Unlike all past attempts.
How do I know this? Cause even I hated those past attempts at VR. You would get so excited and put the helmet on and realize it feels nothing like VR. I tried Virtual boy and other so called VR head sets .. and the one thing they all lacked was actually being VR.
I remember when this first came out in arcades.
And guess what, at the time it was the "new tech". That didn't change the fact that it was a gimmick and never caught on. Same thing with LaserDisc, Minidiscs, and countless other examples of "new tech" that never became popular.
So you have tried new tech vr?Nope, and the fact that I haven't is probably why I can maintain an objective viewpoint on the matter and realize that history usually repeats itself. Unlike the people who have tried it and get all caught up in the "ohhhh new shinies!!!" mindset and make the same bold claims that were made 20 years ago, yet still never came to fruition. Bookmark this thread and come back to it in 5 years. I can guarantee you that 2 things will be true at the time. 1. VR in video games won't be significantly more popular than it is now, and 2. People will be saying the exact same thing about whatever new VR incarnation is available at that time that is being said in this thread, i.e. "This new technology is gonna be a game changer for VR!".
lol wow .. I can't believe you are serious.
Got news for you, people in the past didn't try it as well when it was hyped. It lost it's hype WHEN people tried it because it wasn't really VR.
In this case, the opposite is happening. People are calling it a gimmick until they try it. Then it's hyped.
Also History doesn't really repeat itself. Other wise we would still think cell phones are crap and only meant for business people.
Same with computers.
Edit: But I agree .. let's bookmark this thread lol and come back in a few years from now. That way I can say I told you so XD. Cause we are both immature like that.
Also, question. Can you have an objective viewpoint of a book you did not read? If so, do you think that view point would be right or wrong?
In my opinion, your view point actually wouldn't matter to most people. Because you have nothing to go on besides you jsut saying so.
I recall trying the 'early 90's' version of VR and it sucked pretty bad. I'll admit to having been pretty excited about it, and the idea of VR, until having tried it out. It left me pretty jaded to the idea that VR would ever be achieved in an enjoyable manner. That said, the current generation of tech in this area is a world apart (as it should be by now).
Ultimately, we've all seen products go to market before their time and not succeed in the manner people imagined they would. I think we are still a little "before its time" with the current generation tech, but still, looking at the old version and the current version, how can you not be optimistic about where this technology will go and its potential?
If nothing else, I haven't seen this level of interest, or people/companies throwing money at, VR in a long time. Even if it doesn't result in an amazing gaming experience, I'll be interested to see how the technology develops and what non-gaming (and non-porn) markets it finds. It's easy to look at the ideal of a Holodeck and say "current VR sucks because it isn't as good as that!", but what does it hurt to change your point of view to say "we are closer to a Holodeck-like experience then we were yesterday and that's pretty cool"? It doesn't cost anything to watch the progress.
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers.
Do something wrong, no one forgets"
-from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
lol that is what I meant. Back then, it was hyped, until people tried it. Hyped, tried, dead.
This time. People where skeptical, then they tried it and then it was hyped. Skeptical, tried, hyped.
I said that because he is saying his opinion remains objective because he hasn't tried it and he isn't falling into the hype because of that.
I point out, back in the day the hype came before the actual trying it. While it's the opposite today. As soon as you tried it in the past you realized it was garbage.
I personally think the tech is here right now. It's not at it's best obviously, but nothing is to begin with. Televisions didn't start out as LEDs. XD
The VR of today actually does what it's suppose to do. It does what all other VR attempts failed to do. It stands to reason that VR has a very good chance of doing extremely well because this time ... it's actually the real deal lol.
Some people just are doom and gloom. They think if it failed before then it will fail again. Yet the reason it failed before is fixed. I really don't understand how they reason. It's like they ignore all information and just say nay.
My viewpoint on VR has nothing to do with the quality, or lack thereof, regarding the current technology. I have no doubt that Occulus Rift is very impressive visually. But that has absolutely nothing to do with the fact it's still a peripheral, and peripherals have been, by and large, gimmicky and only moderately successful at best. The majority of gamerss don't want to buy additional devices and wear a big clunky headset while gaming. The majority of game developers don't want to waste funds developing games that are specifically compatible with a device that the majority of players aren't interested in. This isn't a matter of me commenting on a book i've never read. It's a matter of me commenting on a segment of the industry based on trends that have been repeated time and time again.
I think VR is going to be monumentally successful, just not for gaming.
It has a ton of applications in medicine and various types of training like pilot, military, etc.
But when it comes to mass consumption for entertainment you run into a few obstacles (esp in gaming):
I am with Forgrimm here. This technology is like 3D for movies. No difference. Sometimes it can be great and really add to the experience of the movie. But most of the time it just appears to be fluff added on because it is the new trend, or because the mega corporations which control our media wish to hype it up so that they can sell more expensive TV's or discs or whatever.
Eventually 3D or VR may become the norm, but I think that really won't happen until they can accomplish it easily, without the bulky and expensive peripherals.
Case in point, I have a 3D capable projector but I likely won't be using that feature because first I have to find relatively inexpensive glasses to use, plus I have to find either downloadable content to watch, or pay for more expensive discs to watch. Not that many movies I would care to watch in 3D anyway so I am willing to wait before jumping into this. None of the 3D movies I have seen in theaters has impressed me greatly.
So not saying I wouldn't want to have it. It just has to be worth the trouble for me to want to have it and spend the money to get it.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
Well it being big and clunky isn't even going to remain true. Which I have to mention most people mention they even sometimes forget it's on their head as it is. Consumer release is going to be much smaller and even lighter then it already is.
This isn't really just a peripheral. It can be considered an entire replacement for a screen. However, both you and I know that isn't the way it's going to be viewed and it will most certainly be viewed as a peripheral anyway.
Creating a game that started as flat screen to VR is really a no go. It works but the experience is degraded by a lot doing it that way. It doesn't work well due to scaling and such. However, going from VR to to flat screen is another story. It's certainly possible to do that and make both experiences pleasurable.
The majority of game developers are indeed interested in creating VR games. Actually the Oculus rift is pretty popular among industry professional. Very few are not interested. I know this because I am a game developer and frequent a developers news website and discuss about these things with other devs.
Heck, you don't even need to be a game developer to know that. The fact you keep hearing about VR from companies should be a pretty nice hint at developers being highly interested. Some even go as far as to think it will reshape the entire game industry. Though that might be a bit of stretch lol.
In the past many people where interested in VR. When I say many people, I mean a very large portion of gamers. I imagine most gamers are interested in a VR experience, they are just very skeptical due to past attempts. Those past attempts didn't do well specifically because it wasn't actually VR. It was full of false promises and it never met expectations.
This time around, all it takes is people giving it a try. Yes, many gamers are skeptical. Yes, many are not interested in peripherals. Yes, many may not want to wear something on their head. However, once they experience it first hand. Who is to say that experience will not out weigh those minor negatives? Wouldn't you say if the experience amazes people, all those things will no longer matter?
The issue with you is your throwing it to the side, way to soon. You just assume it's going to fail, with out actually even giving it a chance. You compare it to past attempts which really make little sense, since all those attempts where not even really VR in the least bit. They where simply disappointments. Those past attempts, hardly matter.
Again, your trends talk is non sense. The reason VR failed in the past was because it specifically wasn't VR. It was said to be VR when it wasn't. People didn't flock to it because it was a terrible experience. That is the only reason it didn't work out. It had nothing to do with it being a peripheral . It had nothing to do with development costs. It had to do with it being crap.
Today ... VR isn't crap. It's extremely good. That fact alone gives it a really good chance to succeed. I would find it relaly hard to believe that it would do poorly. A person would have to be a really boring person to not enjoy the Oculus Rift. Minus those who get sick from it, since that isn't their fault lol. Hopefully they work that out more to cause people to get less sick. For the most part, many people are fine with it. It's not nearly as bad as in the past and it's only getting better.
3D isn't even in the same realm as VR ... I don't know why people seem so ... tempted to compare the 2. The technology is nothing like 3D for movies. The only similarity is it requires you to wear something.
3D is only a visual effect that doesn't add anything to a game at all. It still plays in the same exact manner. Just instead of a flat screen you have stupid crap popping out in front of your face.
VR actually changes the gaming experience entirely. Look around you, and now imagine what you see is VR. Does that seem anything like 3D glasses to you? Or do you see real life through 3D glasses?
That is essentially what VR is, what you see now is how you would see it in a game using a VR headset. Meaning you actually feel like someone threw you into an actual video game world. This changes even game play mechanics to a very large extent. So it gives you an entirely new experience they you likely have never experienced in you life thus far.
I would say that is vastly different then 3D glasses. And comparing the 2 ... is a no no.
using the example of 1995 VR is similar to saying Telsa cars will fail because electric cars have been tried before.
VR of 1995 way far too soon. why? BECAUSE OF THE TECHNOLOGY...