Preface: I want VR to be a Thing and I want it to be good, immersive, and visceral. I want to be able to tune out the world and go on a fantasy trip and feel like it's real.
Post: Current VR technology is a huge gimmick. I've used it, I've developed for it, it's a huge empty farce. Creating functional controls for a VR game is incredibly difficult, yes even with a motion controller (if anything, that makes it harder to make the control scheme functional! If done well it's smooth as butter, but doing it well....)
Really? What hardware did you develop for / on? Have you used any of the consumer products, or did you give up because developing for it was "incredibly difficult"?
For me, even just the glimpse of the tech I've had through the GearVR was a transformative experience. I can hardly wait to explore it deeper. This is speaking as a consumer, not a developer.
It's real. It's here to stay.
"real" and "here to stay" doesn't mean it's not a gimmick and it's not a fad. People say "you can't compare it to 3D TV" (3D TV technology is here to stay too. Look at movie theaters, do you remember 3D before with the red and blue glasses? Now it's clear as the technology went towards the consumer market. Just because its not doing well for consumers doesn't mean it's not still here)
SO instead I read a recent article that placed VR akin to more of the rise of wearables, which does seem closer to what VR will actually be, especially since it will be required to be a wearable. (So will Hololens, etc.)
With that in mind.. the wearable market was meant to be a skyrocket business in the billions, everyone would have one, company after company put millions into it - Microsoft, Samsung, Sony, HTC, Garmin, way more companies tossed as much if not more money into wearable development. We're seeing the same companies do the same thing for VR.
Now thats not to say wearables have declined, I think they've reached saturation in a relatively short time. I own a Fitbit and I just got a gear s2 for free that will be shipped to me, so sure the wearable market is still around and will never go anywhere. It's a business.
That being said though, its meteoric rise has hit a few snags, this was the first year the industry declined, whereas it had projections initially to steadily climb through 2020.
""real" and "here to stay" doesn't mean it's not a gimmick and it's not a fad. "
You're right; I can't see the future. I don't have precognitive talent. However, I do know that those simple five minutes in virtual reality were the most important moment in computing for me since early childhood. It is something that will be getting my money and support.
Comparing it to any other technology is pointless, in my opinion. It's not like other tech.
I doubt I would have the same emotional reaction to a FitBit that I had to the opening scene of my first VR experience. Wearables don't have the ability to 'take me to another place' like Annie Amber.
As @SpottyGekko said, describing it is kind of like talking about a concert experience. However, concerts have been around for a while; this is new.
I just want to make sure you're aware that I didn't specifically state that VR in its current iteration was or wasn't a gimmick. Honestly in its current iteration I feel it's a feature. I don't believe it to be something far and away revolutionary. It is now a FEATURE of current phones. It's an - in addition to - for a computer.
I'm not sure of how many all inclusive systems there are right now, but as a piece of hardware alone it doesn't really stand out to the masses. It requires something to power it, much like how most wearables do. You really NEED a samsung phone to make the most out of the gear watches. You NEED a phone to get the best info out of your fitbit. You NEED a high powered PC to get your VR headset to even work. You NEED one of these cell phones and an applicable headpiece to use mobile VR.
I mean... for as much as people say I hate VR and so on, I'm probably one of the few on this site that actually owns VR capable devices and have used them for VR. (even though I did get one for free and paid 50 dollars for a "used" new in box one),
I get the "wow" factor that people get initially, its what prompted me to pay the money to see what all VR has to offer, but right now, I can see why many people are saying it's just a gimmick. A slight visual treat for the first few tries, sure... but in all honesty when I played Minecraft with the kids, it sure wow'ed them but it looked as horrible as ever to me.
eventually this will become our future... VR gaming... VR browsing.... ect... its cool yeah.. but this will be the start of the west falling into a decline (nah its already happening)... Heck im sure you will go to school in VR,why not? ... today i see many half living people.. its scary to think what will happen in a few years. Dont forget life is more then just some pixels.
Basically clicking away text windows ruins every MMO, try to have fun instead of rushing things. Without story and lore all there is left is a bunch of mechanics. Reply Add Multi-Quote
Really? What hardware did you develop for / on? Have you used any of the consumer products, or did you give up because developing for it was "incredibly difficult"?
For me, even just the glimpse of the tech I've had through the GearVR was a transformative experience. I can hardly wait to explore it deeper. This is speaking as a consumer, not a developer.
I have a VR headset and I use it fairly regularly and I have played about 10 'experiences' total and it is what you 'want'
Wow! TEN whole experiences! Man, that must be totally worth the $700 for the hardware.
thats more games then I play in a year and I play games every weekend bro.
to be completely frank if you want to live in a universe in which you 'wish' to have experience that I am actually having every night but you dont want to believe it that is ok with me. I am all for you limiting your life expereinces as much as possible.
so F off
In this post - Life Experience ='s Wearing a Headset alone at home connected to a computer where a developer programs exactly what you can and can't do and who you can and can't interact with.
I was going to give this a LOL, then an "insightful", then I realized no, it's really not like that.
In a sense you're right, and this is a good reality check. However, games are almost always about agency. You have choices, and maybe the opportunity to develop skill. So, yes it's partly about how a developer programs a game, but it's also about how any given player plays. In this regard, I agree with @SEANMCAD when he's stated elsewhere that watching a YouTuber stream a game is a fundamentally different experience than playing it oneself. In fact, if there is a game I know I'll be interested in playing, I most often will not watch footage of it on YouTube because I feel like I'm cheating myself out of part of the experience.
So... I agree and I disagree. Mostly I think you're missing the point. Thank you for the reality check, though. :-)
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
Really? What hardware did you develop for / on? Have you used any of the consumer products, or did you give up because developing for it was "incredibly difficult"?
For me, even just the glimpse of the tech I've had through the GearVR was a transformative experience. I can hardly wait to explore it deeper. This is speaking as a consumer, not a developer.
I have a VR headset and I use it fairly regularly and I have played about 10 'experiences' total and it is what you 'want'
Wow! TEN whole experiences! Man, that must be totally worth the $700 for the hardware.
thats more games then I play in a year and I play games every weekend bro.
to be completely frank if you want to live in a universe in which you 'wish' to have experience that I am actually having every night but you dont want to believe it that is ok with me. I am all for you limiting your life expereinces as much as possible.
so F off
In this post - Life Experience ='s Wearing a Headset alone at home connected to a computer where a developer programs exactly what you can and can't do and who you can and can't interact with.
your on a gaming site bro..
how is that different from all other games you have played?
regardless I really dont care if he wants to believe what he does and I frankly am glad he is not trying VR and I take pleasure in him missing out so I my desirre to convince him otherwise really isnt that high
Just saying, games are entertainment. Can entertainment advance what one would consider a "life experience".
Does a documentary about a family surviving a war change your life experiences to match that of the family that went through the hardship?
Does playing fallout 4 give you the life experience of living in a post apocalyptic world?
Life experience was probably not the term you wanted to use there. If anything the life experience you earned was that of someone that enjoys video games. Your VR experience is no different than my girlfriends kids playing MineCraft. Or that guy playing Lego Star Wars.
all of it is a trap,all of it is a total waste of time,people that are bored of life that cant focus ,escape to games,to movies,to social networks... yes all of these can be use in a good way... but who actually really just uses it for the purpose and not as a time sink for boredom and a fake sense of purpose... Watch this video.. maybe you will understand...
Basically clicking away text windows ruins every MMO, try to have fun instead of rushing things. Without story and lore all there is left is a bunch of mechanics. Reply Add Multi-Quote
Really? What hardware did you develop for / on? Have you used any of the consumer products, or did you give up because developing for it was "incredibly difficult"?
For me, even just the glimpse of the tech I've had through the GearVR was a transformative experience. I can hardly wait to explore it deeper. This is speaking as a consumer, not a developer.
I have a VR headset and I use it fairly regularly and I have played about 10 'experiences' total and it is what you 'want'
Wow! TEN whole experiences! Man, that must be totally worth the $700 for the hardware.
thats more games then I play in a year and I play games every weekend bro.
to be completely frank if you want to live in a universe in which you 'wish' to have experience that I am actually having every night but you dont want to believe it that is ok with me. I am all for you limiting your life expereinces as much as possible.
so F off
In this post - Life Experience ='s Wearing a Headset alone at home connected to a computer where a developer programs exactly what you can and can't do and who you can and can't interact with.
your on a gaming site bro..
how is that different from all other games you have played?
regardless I really dont care if he wants to believe what he does and I frankly am glad he is not trying VR and I take pleasure in him missing out so I my desirre to convince him otherwise really isnt that high
Just saying, games are entertainment. Can entertainment advance what one would consider a "life experience".
Does a documentary about a family surviving a war change your life experiences to match that of the family that went through the hardship?
Does playing fallout 4 give you the life experience of living in a post apocalyptic world?
Life experience was probably not the term you wanted to use there. If anything the life experience you earned was that of someone that enjoys video games. Your VR experience is no different than my girlfriends kids playing MineCraft. Or that guy playing Lego Star Wars.
all of it is a trap,all of it is a total waste of time,people that are bored of life that cant focus ,escape to games,to movies,to social networks... yes all of these can be use in a good way... but who actually really just uses it for the purpose and not as a time sink for boredom and a fake sense of purpose... Watch this video.. maybe you will understand...
Socrates famously stated "The unexamined life is not worth living". Video games, like any media, have the capacity to reveal aspects of who we are as individuals; they also tell larger stories about our culture at the time they are made. There's a reason the Museum of Modern Art includes 21 video games in its collection.
The answer isn't to sit in a corner and never look into the shadow, or never interact with art that others have created.
It's like being part of this ongoing dialog between artist, designer and end-user. VR is just another new medium, like radio, movies, and video games themselves once were.
On the other hand you're right that it's easy to get caught up in the vanity of it all, especially if one is "bored of life" and looking for a quick answer. I think that one has to bring to the medium a deeper sense of meaning, and this will take the shape of whatever life experiences, ideas, or disposition the person who experiences the medium has. Without this, it becomes vapid, or even dangerous.
That's my newbie's 2c.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
Reading posts like these remind me why I'm sometimes glad I'm not a developer :-)
No, really... it's a career path I've considered, but it seems a bit like the Hollywood industry from what I can gather. Sometimes it's nice to just sit back and enjoy a game without worrying about the nuts and bolts of it, or to understand that someone probably spent a lot of hard work going over something again and again to the point where any initial luster it had for the designer has long since worn out, but to 35-year-old-me seeing it for the first time it still shines.
I can totally understand that opinion (being able to sit back and just enjoy and not think about the nuts and bolts) the problem is that every time you run across a game that didn't bolt something together well (and there are various ways this can go, such as 30FPS, non-rebindable keybinds, no graphical options, bad voice acting...) you notice.
Sometimes a game is so good that you'll push through that proud nail anyway (take Pathologic and it's awful translation from Russian: the sheer level of craft put into the horror aspect is so good, the voice acting doesn't even matter). But with VR you can't just suffer, the game becomes virtually unplayable.
As an example, one of the last things I developed at my last permanent position used the XBox Kinect as its input device. My boss wanted people to stand about 8 feet away from a giant TV and be able to reach out and select icons with their hands.
Making that selection actually happen was a huge problem. You couldn't just reach out and "boop" the button things. It was a fight every step of the way (as a user) to figure out where the hell the system thought your hand was in relation to the thing you were trying to select. Then a minute later you'd just sweep your hand through the air reaching for another option and the one you didn't want would get selected instead (and then you'd fight with the one you DID want). Of course I'd modify the system so the "hit area" was larger or anchored somehow to the user's body so it was always "six inches in front of them" or whatever, nothing worked, it was always a fight. Ended up being the project I quit over because it went from a demo of "hit some buttons" to a full fledged project overnight including more customized interactivity ("grab the thing and move it around" or whatever) and the deadline was--I kid you not--the following day. There was no way I was going to do all that needed to be done assuming I even had a viable user control scheme.
Anyway, TL;DR, VR has a massive problem in terms of creating a fluid input method. Sure there's the remote thing or the Vive's wands, but that's only half the problem. The developer still needs to figure out how to map that input to their gameworld. And if they half-ass it, then the game is unplayable at a level worse than awkward keybinds that you can't change ("HJKL for movement? What?")
Edit: Why I'm a developer:
Because nothing is more satisfying than creating something from scratch that performs in the desired manner, doing precisely what you want it to do, only for it to surprise you and do something even cooler.
I absolutely love creating procedural generation systems. Things that use simple rules to create complex systems and the joy that comes from seeing something emerge that I didn't anticipate.
Of course, non-proc-gen content is a lot of fun, too. But if you think about it, a computer program is itself procedurally generated content: I've created simple rules (code) that describe a complex system (the game) that gives rise to unexpected behavior (bugs).
Reading posts like these remind me why I'm sometimes glad I'm not a developer :-)
No, really... it's a career path I've considered, but it seems a bit like the Hollywood industry from what I can gather. Sometimes it's nice to just sit back and enjoy a game without worrying about the nuts and bolts of it, or to understand that someone probably spent a lot of hard work going over something again and again to the point where any initial luster it had for the designer has long since worn out, but to 35-year-old-me seeing it for the first time it still shines.
Anyway, TL;DR, VR has a massive problem in terms of creating a fluid input method.
to be honest you dont need an input system even as good as it currently is for the experience to be very compelling and a lot of variety of content is possible. so your just fundamentally wrong here and its not subjective.
Unlike traditional games that have elements in which people have experienced in the past and as a result can form an opinion on without trying a specific game generally speaking VR for those who have not tried it and are not as good at conceptualization as I suppose I am, tend to often post things that are flat out wrong. I was lucky in that how it was described to me I was able to accurately conceptualize the expereince. some people appear to have a problem doing so and as a result consistently state woefully inaccurate information.
also i should be clear and I hope the mods read this correctly. I think its fair for everyone involved to understand what a person is really thinking. I think that it should be less offensive then hiding something even more so when its something that I am about say. I very honestly (and i might be wrong here) dont believe that you think VR is a gimmick or anything near such phrases. I know that might make people upset and they might be offend but I think its a bad idea to cover that view up in the intrest of not making people upset.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Reading posts like these remind me why I'm sometimes glad I'm not a developer :-)
No, really... it's a career path I've considered, but it seems a bit like the Hollywood industry from what I can gather. Sometimes it's nice to just sit back and enjoy a game without worrying about the nuts and bolts of it, or to understand that someone probably spent a lot of hard work going over something again and again to the point where any initial luster it had for the designer has long since worn out, but to 35-year-old-me seeing it for the first time it still shines.
Anyway, TL;DR, VR has a massive problem in terms of creating a fluid input method.
to be honest you dont need an input system even as good as it currently is for the experience to be very compelling and a lot of variety of content is possible. so your just fundamentally wrong here and its not subjective.
Unlike traditional games that have elements in which people have experienced in the past and as a result can form an opinion on without trying a specific game generally speaking VR for those who have not tried it and are not as good at conceptualization as I suppose I am, tend to often post things that are flat out wrong. I was lucky in that how it was described to me I was able to accurately conceptualize the expereince. some people appear to have a problem doing so and as a result consistently state woefully inaccurate information.
also i should be clear and I hope the mods read this correctly. I think its fair for everyone involved to understand what a person is really thinking. I think that it should be less offensive then hiding something even more so when its something that I am about say. I very honestly (and i might be wrong here) dont believe that you think VR is a gimmick or anything near such phrases. I know that might make people upset and they might be offend but I think its a bad idea to cover that view up in the intrest of not making people upset.
Pretty sure you can't tell developers they're wrong when they're the ones creating the game and you don't know thing 1 about programming input methods for VR.
Reading posts like these remind me why I'm sometimes glad I'm not a developer :-)
No, really... it's a career path I've considered, but it seems a bit like the Hollywood industry from what I can gather. Sometimes it's nice to just sit back and enjoy a game without worrying about the nuts and bolts of it, or to understand that someone probably spent a lot of hard work going over something again and again to the point where any initial luster it had for the designer has long since worn out, but to 35-year-old-me seeing it for the first time it still shines.
Anyway, TL;DR, VR has a massive problem in terms of creating a fluid input method.
to be honest you dont need an input system even as good as it currently is for the experience to be very compelling and a lot of variety of content is possible. so your just fundamentally wrong here and its not subjective.
Unlike traditional games that have elements in which people have experienced in the past and as a result can form an opinion on without trying a specific game generally speaking VR for those who have not tried it and are not as good at conceptualization as I suppose I am, tend to often post things that are flat out wrong. I was lucky in that how it was described to me I was able to accurately conceptualize the expereince. some people appear to have a problem doing so and as a result consistently state woefully inaccurate information.
also i should be clear and I hope the mods read this correctly. I think its fair for everyone involved to understand what a person is really thinking. I think that it should be less offensive then hiding something even more so when its something that I am about say. I very honestly (and i might be wrong here) dont believe that you think VR is a gimmick or anything near such phrases. I know that might make people upset and they might be offend but I think its a bad idea to cover that view up in the intrest of not making people upset.
Pretty sure you can't tell developers they're wrong when they're the ones creating the game and you don't know thing 1 about programming input methods for VR.
no you can
more over, last time I checked me not being able to reach out and touch something has existed in gaming for more than 30 years as it stands. so why is it a deal breaker now? 'oh because its not VR without it' well I say to that so what, VR is just a term used to describe this thing that improves existing game play. it might as well be called Fred for the purposes of this conversation.
so with that, why not a problem for 30 years but now is?
oh and the last time I read his post he hasnt even tried VR let alone program for it
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Comments
I'm not sure of how many all inclusive systems there are right now, but as a piece of hardware alone it doesn't really stand out to the masses. It requires something to power it, much like how most wearables do. You really NEED a samsung phone to make the most out of the gear watches. You NEED a phone to get the best info out of your fitbit. You NEED a high powered PC to get your VR headset to even work. You NEED one of these cell phones and an applicable headpiece to use mobile VR.
I mean... for as much as people say I hate VR and so on, I'm probably one of the few on this site that actually owns VR capable devices and have used them for VR. (even though I did get one for free and paid 50 dollars for a "used" new in box one),
I get the "wow" factor that people get initially, its what prompted me to pay the money to see what all VR has to offer, but right now, I can see why many people are saying it's just a gimmick. A slight visual treat for the first few tries, sure... but in all honesty when I played Minecraft with the kids, it sure wow'ed them but it looked as horrible as ever to me.
Dont forget life is more then just some pixels.
Basically clicking away text windows ruins every MMO, try to have fun instead of rushing things. Without story and lore all there is left is a bunch of mechanics.
Reply
Add Multi-Quote
In a sense you're right, and this is a good reality check. However, games are almost always about agency. You have choices, and maybe the opportunity to develop skill. So, yes it's partly about how a developer programs a game, but it's also about how any given player plays. In this regard, I agree with @SEANMCAD when he's stated elsewhere that watching a YouTuber stream a game is a fundamentally different experience than playing it oneself. In fact, if there is a game I know I'll be interested in playing, I most often will not watch footage of it on YouTube because I feel like I'm cheating myself out of part of the experience.
So... I agree and I disagree. Mostly I think you're missing the point. Thank you for the reality check, though. :-)
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
Watch this video.. maybe you will understand...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9FGgwCQ22w
Basically clicking away text windows ruins every MMO, try to have fun instead of rushing things. Without story and lore all there is left is a bunch of mechanics.
Reply
Add Multi-Quote
Socrates famously stated "The unexamined life is not worth living". Video games, like any media, have the capacity to reveal aspects of who we are as individuals; they also tell larger stories about our culture at the time they are made. There's a reason the Museum of Modern Art includes 21 video games in its collection.
The answer isn't to sit in a corner and never look into the shadow, or never interact with art that others have created.
It's like being part of this ongoing dialog between artist, designer and end-user. VR is just another new medium, like radio, movies, and video games themselves once were.
On the other hand you're right that it's easy to get caught up in the vanity of it all, especially if one is "bored of life" and looking for a quick answer. I think that one has to bring to the medium a deeper sense of meaning, and this will take the shape of whatever life experiences, ideas, or disposition the person who experiences the medium has. Without this, it becomes vapid, or even dangerous.
That's my newbie's 2c.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
Sometimes a game is so good that you'll push through that proud nail anyway (take Pathologic and it's awful translation from Russian: the sheer level of craft put into the horror aspect is so good, the voice acting doesn't even matter). But with VR you can't just suffer, the game becomes virtually unplayable.
As an example, one of the last things I developed at my last permanent position used the XBox Kinect as its input device. My boss wanted people to stand about 8 feet away from a giant TV and be able to reach out and select icons with their hands.
Making that selection actually happen was a huge problem. You couldn't just reach out and "boop" the button things. It was a fight every step of the way (as a user) to figure out where the hell the system thought your hand was in relation to the thing you were trying to select. Then a minute later you'd just sweep your hand through the air reaching for another option and the one you didn't want would get selected instead (and then you'd fight with the one you DID want). Of course I'd modify the system so the "hit area" was larger or anchored somehow to the user's body so it was always "six inches in front of them" or whatever, nothing worked, it was always a fight. Ended up being the project I quit over because it went from a demo of "hit some buttons" to a full fledged project overnight including more customized interactivity ("grab the thing and move it around" or whatever) and the deadline was--I kid you not--the following day. There was no way I was going to do all that needed to be done assuming I even had a viable user control scheme.
Anyway, TL;DR, VR has a massive problem in terms of creating a fluid input method. Sure there's the remote thing or the Vive's wands, but that's only half the problem. The developer still needs to figure out how to map that input to their gameworld. And if they half-ass it, then the game is unplayable at a level worse than awkward keybinds that you can't change ("HJKL for movement? What?")
Edit:
Why I'm a developer:
Because nothing is more satisfying than creating something from scratch that performs in the desired manner, doing precisely what you want it to do, only for it to surprise you and do something even cooler.
I absolutely love creating procedural generation systems. Things that use simple rules to create complex systems and the joy that comes from seeing something emerge that I didn't anticipate.
Of course, non-proc-gen content is a lot of fun, too. But if you think about it, a computer program is itself procedurally generated content: I've created simple rules (code) that describe a complex system (the game) that gives rise to unexpected behavior (bugs).
Unlike traditional games that have elements in which people have experienced in the past and as a result can form an opinion on without trying a specific game generally speaking VR for those who have not tried it and are not as good at conceptualization as I suppose I am, tend to often post things that are flat out wrong. I was lucky in that how it was described to me I was able to accurately conceptualize the expereince. some people appear to have a problem doing so and as a result consistently state woefully inaccurate information.
also i should be clear and I hope the mods read this correctly. I think its fair for everyone involved to understand what a person is really thinking. I think that it should be less offensive then hiding something even more so when its something that I am about say. I very honestly (and i might be wrong here) dont believe that you think VR is a gimmick or anything near such phrases. I know that might make people upset and they might be offend but I think its a bad idea to cover that view up in the intrest of not making people upset.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
more over, last time I checked me not being able to reach out and touch something has existed in gaming for more than 30 years as it stands. so why is it a deal breaker now? 'oh because its not VR without it' well I say to that so what, VR is just a term used to describe this thing that improves existing game play. it might as well be called Fred for the purposes of this conversation.
so with that, why not a problem for 30 years but now is?
oh and the last time I read his post he hasnt even tried VR let alone program for it
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me