I'm having a great time in VR. Those I've shown it to have been very impressed as well.
It is very impressive technology, but it has some pretty glaring problems that it needs to work through before it's going to see better adoption. Not addressing those problems could sour enthusiasm in all but the most ardent fans and stunt its growth.
It faces serious competition in the holiday sale season from mature products sold at deep discounts. It faces serious competition from non-tech products. It's an election year and people tend to spend more conservatively for several months during a transition between the two parties.
I think one of the biggest dangers fragmentation brings is that enthusiasm will wane. At some point a new tech darling will come on the scene. Everyone will want to be a part of that thing. Studios and pubs will jump on that just like they always do and VR could be sidelined as a niche gimmick. That would truly be a shame. I don't think that's the likely outcome but it's a reasonable possibility and fragmentation is the biggest factor in contributing to it.
For the sake of discussion, I'll bite...
"What problems?"
Just to be clear, I'm not claiming this tech is perfect. Anything but: I see it as very transitional. However, after trying it some "problems" I anticipated turned out to not be a big deal, whereas other issues I hadn't considered surfaced.
...so let's get it all out on the table for everyone's mutual enlightenment.
1. platform fragmentation 2. physical side effects 3. application appeal is niche 4. cost 5. limited time in the spotlight
1. that problem, like VHS, will resolve itself overtime and then quickly (like VHS) be replaced by a new standard. LP records, cassette tapes, MP3 players, cell phones. every technology that delievers media has been changing quickly. from Blue-Ray to DVD to Streaming. Because there is a battle, doesnt mean there is not going to be a winner.
2. WAY over blown by forum posters mostly.
3. Most people can not conceptualize well so if they havent experienced then have no idea if they want it or not because they cant conceptualize what 'it' is in the first place.
4. agreed
5. times moves on that is not a challenge. it just moves on.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I get the feeling now over the entire course of a year everytime you have said 'they need' or 'its a failure because' you have been refering to Predictions. wow! what a MAJOR misunderstanding.
to me 'they need' and missing 'that need' when the 'need' is a prediction made by superdata and a VR company ACTUALLY needing to hit that target are very very very very radically different things
... Like Zuckerbergs quote where they NEED 100 Million units to become profitable. ....
like this statement.
1. its not even accurate. 2. its not related to any time frame it could be 1 year or 100 years he doesnt say WHEN in their plans (like the orginal xbox) that they want to become profitable. 3. its related to hardware and at least Oculus has stated more than once they do not plan to make money from the hardware..but rather...the sells of games, advertising and software.
define "not accurate" it came directly from zuckerberg. I think it's very accurate.
Nothing in that call stated they were not hoping to make money on the hardware. I would like links to that quote please.
1. because of items 2 and items 3 on my list of which you ignored.
2. again if someone asks me 'how long does it take to get to downtown' my answer to that question does NOT mean I 'need' to go downtown. He was being asked 'generally speaking' how much to break even or become profitable on the hardware. He was not being asked if it was there plan to sell at a loss in the FIRST FUCKING PLACE!!!!!!!!!!!!! which is not uncommon stradegy
but you didn't prove that items 2 or 3 on your list were accurate.... Just prove 3 is accurate on your list and we can proceed from there.
and the fact that you dont even address 2 or 3 just gives me more confidence that I am right.
look lets try not to do another circle jerk around this. those are my reasons peroid end of story. you dont have to like it or agree with it but that is my stance..peroid
additionally he was not refering to 2016 in the first place. or 1 year or 10 years or 100 years or 1000 years...we dont know what his goals are.
if you confront me again on items 2 and 3 I am going to have to ask you to tell me what time frame Mark Z was refering to specifically
LOL Prove that he said they weren't looking to make money on the devices. You can't prove it because you're making it up. Your reasons, to state plainly, are stupid. There's no such thing as "reasons" as a response when trying to quote something accurately, you just do. Like this quote:
"Oculus VR CEO Brendan Iribe acknowledged that fact back in May, when he said that restricting the device to gaming could limit its user base to "only 10, 20, or 50 million" people, and Zuckerberg echoed Iribe's hopes of ultimately achieving a billion users connected through the device.
Over a five year time frame, we have a number of services, which we think are well on their way to reaching one billion people. Messenger, WhatsApp, Instagram and Search are a number of them. And once we get to that scale, then we think that they will start to become meaningful businesses in their own right,"
As soon as a title I want to play comes to VR I'll upgrade and buy some goggles.
Thats the problem with new tech like this. You need developers to back it to work and you need people buying the product to get the developers. I have been reading reviews and I have not seen a game for VR that I want to play.
right so I am a developer (web and enterprise) and here is how I see it.
Pre-release of a product as a developer you are granted APIs that are work in progress. Great! a little risky because your not sure how much will change by the time of retail but not a big deal. but wait...its VR...oh really? well hold on a tick there is a LOT that can change during the hardware development stage maybe I hold off. I dont want to have to rewrite my entire code because they release motion controllers later on (which is exactly what they did).
So I wait closer to retail.
ok now its retail, let me fire up my tools and get to work. great! ok so are you done yet? no why? because it takes 3 years to develop a game is why.
As soon as a title I want to play comes to VR I'll upgrade and buy some goggles.
Thats the problem with new tech like this. You need developers to back it to work and you need people buying the product to get the developers. I have been reading reviews and I have not seen a game for VR that I want to play.
right so I am a developer (web and enterprise) and here is how I see it.
Pre-release of a product as a developer you are granted APIs that are work in progress. Great! a little risky because your not sure how much will change by the time of retail but not a big deal. but wait...its VR...oh really? well hold on a tick there is a LOT that can change during the hardware development stage maybe I hold off. I dont want to have to rewrite my entire code because they release motion controllers later on (which is exactly what they did).
So I wait closer to retail.
ok now its retail, let me fire up my tools and get to work. great! ok so are you done yet? no why? because it takes 3 years to develop a game is why.
This is not how development works.
actually it absolutely is and i know because I had started. keep in mind I am a developer by trade and yes, I have in fact Unity on my machine at home
now in first party situations its slightly different but not much.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
As soon as a title I want to play comes to VR I'll upgrade and buy some goggles.
Thats the problem with new tech like this. You need developers to back it to work and you need people buying the product to get the developers. I have been reading reviews and I have not seen a game for VR that I want to play.
right so I am a developer (web and enterprise) and here is how I see it.
Pre-release of a product as a developer you are granted APIs that are work in progress. Great! a little risky because your not sure how much will change by the time of retail but not a big deal. but wait...its VR...oh really? well hold on a tick there is a LOT that can change during the hardware development stage maybe I hold off. I dont want to have to rewrite my entire code because they release motion controllers later on (which is exactly what they did).
So I wait closer to retail.
ok now its retail, let me fire up my tools and get to work. great! ok so are you done yet? no why? because it takes 3 years to develop a game is why.
This is not how development works.
actually it absolutely is and i know because I had started. keep in mind I am a developer by trade and yes, I have in fact Unity on my machine at home
now in first party situations its slightly different but not much.
Just because you have Unity on your machine at home doesn't make you a developer. Unity is created to deploy out as multiplatform releases, there would be NO reason to wait on development on a unity game.... How does that have any bearing on development at all?
As soon as a title I want to play comes to VR I'll upgrade and buy some goggles.
Thats the problem with new tech like this. You need developers to back it to work and you need people buying the product to get the developers. I have been reading reviews and I have not seen a game for VR that I want to play.
right so I am a developer (web and enterprise) and here is how I see it.
Pre-release of a product as a developer you are granted APIs that are work in progress. Great! a little risky because your not sure how much will change by the time of retail but not a big deal. but wait...its VR...oh really? well hold on a tick there is a LOT that can change during the hardware development stage maybe I hold off. I dont want to have to rewrite my entire code because they release motion controllers later on (which is exactly what they did).
So I wait closer to retail.
ok now its retail, let me fire up my tools and get to work. great! ok so are you done yet? no why? because it takes 3 years to develop a game is why.
This is not how development works.
actually it absolutely is and i know because I had started. keep in mind I am a developer by trade and yes, I have in fact Unity on my machine at home
now in first party situations its slightly different but not much.
Just because you have Unity on your machine at home doesn't make you a developer. Unity is created to deploy out as multiplatform releases, there would be NO reason to wait on development on a unity game.... How does that have any bearing on development at all?
no the 'just because' is because I am a developer by trade.
The development process is how I described it and for 1st party agreements (which is likely what you are thinking of) it is different however Oculus did not take that approach, thus it actually is exactly as I said it is and as a side note the reason I had Unity on my machine is because it was tinkering around with the...wait for it.....Oculus API of which at the time ONLY worked in Unity.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
The early adopters have them and that is about it. Too many stories of headaches and disorientation have convinced many of us to take a wait and see attitude. It does not help that they are a bit on the expensive side and not a lot of the popular games support VR.
VR will be exciting when we get Star Trek simulation rooms.
I dont think that wewill ever get Star Trek simulation rooms .
It would be near impossible without headsets, unless someone figures out how to use VR tech inside of contact lenses. Haha.
As soon as a title I want to play comes to VR I'll upgrade and buy some goggles.
Thats the problem with new tech like this. You need developers to back it to work and you need people buying the product to get the developers. I have been reading reviews and I have not seen a game for VR that I want to play.
right so I am a developer (web and enterprise) and here is how I see it.
Pre-release of a product as a developer you are granted APIs that are work in progress. Great! a little risky because your not sure how much will change by the time of retail but not a big deal. but wait...its VR...oh really? well hold on a tick there is a LOT that can change during the hardware development stage maybe I hold off. I dont want to have to rewrite my entire code because they release motion controllers later on (which is exactly what they did).
So I wait closer to retail.
ok now its retail, let me fire up my tools and get to work. great! ok so are you done yet? no why? because it takes 3 years to develop a game is why.
This is not how development works.
actually it absolutely is and i know because I had started. keep in mind I am a developer by trade and yes, I have in fact Unity on my machine at home
now in first party situations its slightly different but not much.
Just because you have Unity on your machine at home doesn't make you a developer. Unity is created to deploy out as multiplatform releases, there would be NO reason to wait on development on a unity game.... How does that have any bearing on development at all?
DUDE this is hysterical
do you know what was the ONLY game engine that worked with Oculus at first? yeah..it was Unity and at that time do you know what the API had for motion controls? NOTHING. why? BECAUSE THEY DIDNT EXIST
So yes, the leadtime of a work in progress hardware DOES effect the timeline of creating games for the hardware!
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I played VR for the first time a few weeks ago (PS4).
I was blown away. The feeling of real depth was certainly there. It felt like I was part of the game. When I would look over a mountain side, I was actually pretty afraid. Moreover, I couldn't believe how responsive the controls were. They are certainly on the right path.
#2. Game selection. The games, as far as I know, are very short lived. The Indy devs over at Unity3D are going VR crazy, though.
#3. Motion sickness. I was able to play for a good 30 minutes before I started to feel a tad noxious. It wasn't as bad as I thought, but the feeling was there for at least an hour after playing.
If the price for the VR was around $200, I would buy it now in an instant. If there were some AAA CoD-like Multiplayer games or WoW/EQ-like MMORPG games available for VR, I would certainly pay $500 for it.
Yep. People really need to experience it before dismissing it. I was a skeptic at first too.
People are waiting for cheaper headsets and lower PC requirements too. The software also needs to catch up, because the selection is still a microcosm compared to regular video games.
As soon as a title I want to play comes to VR I'll upgrade and buy some goggles.
Thats the problem with new tech like this. You need developers to back it to work and you need people buying the product to get the developers. I have been reading reviews and I have not seen a game for VR that I want to play.
right so I am a developer (web and enterprise) and here is how I see it.
Pre-release of a product as a developer you are granted APIs that are work in progress. Great! a little risky because your not sure how much will change by the time of retail but not a big deal. but wait...its VR...oh really? well hold on a tick there is a LOT that can change during the hardware development stage maybe I hold off. I dont want to have to rewrite my entire code because they release motion controllers later on (which is exactly what they did).
So I wait closer to retail.
ok now its retail, let me fire up my tools and get to work. great! ok so are you done yet? no why? because it takes 3 years to develop a game is why.
This is not how development works.
actually it absolutely is and i know because I had started. keep in mind I am a developer by trade and yes, I have in fact Unity on my machine at home
now in first party situations its slightly different but not much.
Just because you have Unity on your machine at home doesn't make you a developer. Unity is created to deploy out as multiplatform releases, there would be NO reason to wait on development on a unity game.... How does that have any bearing on development at all?
no the 'just because' is because I am a developer by trade.
The development process is how I described it and for 1st party agreements (which is likely what you are thinking of) it is different however Oculus did not take that approach, thus it actually is exactly as I said it is and as a side note the reason I had Unity on my machine is because it was tinkering around with the...wait for it.....Oculus API of which at the time ONLY worked in Unity.
I develop programs for my business all the time, and have done several custom freelance jobs as a consultant.. you can do quite a bit of work in games before having to worry about where you're releasing especially if you're USING AN ENGINE.
Newsflash, I also have unity on my PC's at home, and I have several free licenses activated that I received from the IGDA when I used to frequent their meetings in Houston. BFD.
You don't wait for a consumer release with an engine built for multiplatform support. Especially, ESPECIALLY since mobile VR games can still utilize a similar format.
VR is still to expensive and not quite good enough to be a X-mas hit this year. A few more games and a drop in prices and maybe next year... But my guess is 3 more years.
As soon as a title I want to play comes to VR I'll upgrade and buy some goggles.
Thats the problem with new tech like this. You need developers to back it to work and you need people buying the product to get the developers. I have been reading reviews and I have not seen a game for VR that I want to play.
right so I am a developer (web and enterprise) and here is how I see it.
Pre-release of a product as a developer you are granted APIs that are work in progress. Great! a little risky because your not sure how much will change by the time of retail but not a big deal. but wait...its VR...oh really? well hold on a tick there is a LOT that can change during the hardware development stage maybe I hold off. I dont want to have to rewrite my entire code because they release motion controllers later on (which is exactly what they did).
So I wait closer to retail.
ok now its retail, let me fire up my tools and get to work. great! ok so are you done yet? no why? because it takes 3 years to develop a game is why.
This is not how development works.
actually it absolutely is and i know because I had started. keep in mind I am a developer by trade and yes, I have in fact Unity on my machine at home
now in first party situations its slightly different but not much.
Just because you have Unity on your machine at home doesn't make you a developer. Unity is created to deploy out as multiplatform releases, there would be NO reason to wait on development on a unity game.... How does that have any bearing on development at all?
no the 'just because' is because I am a developer by trade.
The development process is how I described it and for 1st party agreements (which is likely what you are thinking of) it is different however Oculus did not take that approach, thus it actually is exactly as I said it is and as a side note the reason I had Unity on my machine is because it was tinkering around with the...wait for it.....Oculus API of which at the time ONLY worked in Unity.
I develop programs for my business all the time, and have done several custom freelance jobs as a consultant.. you can do quite a bit of work in games before having to worry about where you're releasing especially if you're USING AN ENGINE.
Newsflash, I also have unity on my PC's at home, and I have several free licenses activated that I received from the IGDA when I used to frequent their meetings in Houston. BFD.
You don't wait for a consumer release with an engine built for multiplatform support. Especially, ESPECIALLY since mobile VR games can still utilize a similar format.
I am going to say this once
when the Oculus API came out for Dev kit 1 there was no motion controllers, the only game engine that it worked with directly was Unity and it didnt work well. The API changed radically over the course of about 2 years and I am not sure even if today the existsing developer API even has code for the controllers.
It was possible to do Oculus VR on Unreal but it involved a great deal of custom coding because there was not an API for it. so if you wanted to develop on Unreal you had to put in a lot of your own front end work with full knowedge that later an API would be create of which is exactly what happened.
The reason I know this is because I followed it while it was happening.
HTC Vive on the other hand was different. it was completely secret, no API was released to the public and only a very small handful of developers got to work on it. do you really think I am making this shit up?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
As soon as a title I want to play comes to VR I'll upgrade and buy some goggles.
Thats the problem with new tech like this. You need developers to back it to work and you need people buying the product to get the developers. I have been reading reviews and I have not seen a game for VR that I want to play.
right so I am a developer (web and enterprise) and here is how I see it.
Pre-release of a product as a developer you are granted APIs that are work in progress. Great! a little risky because your not sure how much will change by the time of retail but not a big deal. but wait...its VR...oh really? well hold on a tick there is a LOT that can change during the hardware development stage maybe I hold off. I dont want to have to rewrite my entire code because they release motion controllers later on (which is exactly what they did).
So I wait closer to retail.
ok now its retail, let me fire up my tools and get to work. great! ok so are you done yet? no why? because it takes 3 years to develop a game is why.
This is not how development works.
actually it absolutely is and i know because I had started. keep in mind I am a developer by trade and yes, I have in fact Unity on my machine at home
now in first party situations its slightly different but not much.
Just because you have Unity on your machine at home doesn't make you a developer. Unity is created to deploy out as multiplatform releases, there would be NO reason to wait on development on a unity game.... How does that have any bearing on development at all?
no the 'just because' is because I am a developer by trade.
The development process is how I described it and for 1st party agreements (which is likely what you are thinking of) it is different however Oculus did not take that approach, thus it actually is exactly as I said it is and as a side note the reason I had Unity on my machine is because it was tinkering around with the...wait for it.....Oculus API of which at the time ONLY worked in Unity.
I develop programs for my business all the time, and have done several custom freelance jobs as a consultant.. you can do quite a bit of work in games before having to worry about where you're releasing especially if you're USING AN ENGINE.
Newsflash, I also have unity on my PC's at home, and I have several free licenses activated that I received from the IGDA when I used to frequent their meetings in Houston. BFD.
You don't wait for a consumer release with an engine built for multiplatform support. Especially, ESPECIALLY since mobile VR games can still utilize a similar format.
I am going to say this once
when the Oculus API came out for Dev kit 1 there was no motion controllers, the only game engine that it worked with directly was Unity and it didnt work well. The API changed radically over the course of about 2 years and I am not sure even if today the existsing developer API even has code for the controllers.
It was possible to do Oculus VR on Unreal but it involved a great deal of custom coding because there was not an API for it. so if you wanted to develop on Unreal you had to put in a lot of your own front end work with full knowedge that later an API would be create of which is exactly what happened.
The reason I know this is because I followed it while it was happening.
HTC Vive on the other hand was different. it was completely secret, no API was released to the public and only a very small handful of developers got to work on it. do you really think I am making this shit up?
Why does that matter? Motion controllers aren't changing much, just create a function for support later on - you can't hold off for every piece of hardware that may ever release in the future that you may or may not know about.
There are currently VR games that use character motion classes that take information from the gyroscopes, in addition to controllers... how is that different because a new controller is on the market?
Games add controller support after a game is on the market all the time. So what are you trying to say? Wait until all systems mature before you put a game out? Thats a sad, sad state of development.
As soon as a title I want to play comes to VR I'll upgrade and buy some goggles.
Thats the problem with new tech like this. You need developers to back it to work and you need people buying the product to get the developers. I have been reading reviews and I have not seen a game for VR that I want to play.
right so I am a developer (web and enterprise) and here is how I see it.
Pre-release of a product as a developer you are granted APIs that are work in progress. Great! a little risky because your not sure how much will change by the time of retail but not a big deal. but wait...its VR...oh really? well hold on a tick there is a LOT that can change during the hardware development stage maybe I hold off. I dont want to have to rewrite my entire code because they release motion controllers later on (which is exactly what they did).
So I wait closer to retail.
ok now its retail, let me fire up my tools and get to work. great! ok so are you done yet? no why? because it takes 3 years to develop a game is why.
This is not how development works.
actually it absolutely is and i know because I had started. keep in mind I am a developer by trade and yes, I have in fact Unity on my machine at home
now in first party situations its slightly different but not much.
Just because you have Unity on your machine at home doesn't make you a developer. Unity is created to deploy out as multiplatform releases, there would be NO reason to wait on development on a unity game.... How does that have any bearing on development at all?
no the 'just because' is because I am a developer by trade.
The development process is how I described it and for 1st party agreements (which is likely what you are thinking of) it is different however Oculus did not take that approach, thus it actually is exactly as I said it is and as a side note the reason I had Unity on my machine is because it was tinkering around with the...wait for it.....Oculus API of which at the time ONLY worked in Unity.
I develop programs for my business all the time, and have done several custom freelance jobs as a consultant.. you can do quite a bit of work in games before having to worry about where you're releasing especially if you're USING AN ENGINE.
Newsflash, I also have unity on my PC's at home, and I have several free licenses activated that I received from the IGDA when I used to frequent their meetings in Houston. BFD.
You don't wait for a consumer release with an engine built for multiplatform support. Especially, ESPECIALLY since mobile VR games can still utilize a similar format.
I am going to say this once
when the Oculus API came out for Dev kit 1 there was no motion controllers, the only game engine that it worked with directly was Unity and it didnt work well. The API changed radically over the course of about 2 years and I am not sure even if today the existsing developer API even has code for the controllers.
It was possible to do Oculus VR on Unreal but it involved a great deal of custom coding because there was not an API for it. so if you wanted to develop on Unreal you had to put in a lot of your own front end work with full knowedge that later an API would be create of which is exactly what happened.
The reason I know this is because I followed it while it was happening.
HTC Vive on the other hand was different. it was completely secret, no API was released to the public and only a very small handful of developers got to work on it. do you really think I am making this shit up?
Why does that matter? Motion controllers aren't changing much, just create a function for support later on - you can't hold off for every piece of hardware that may ever release in the future that you may or may not know about.
There are currently VR games that use character motion classes that take information from the gyroscopes, in addition to controllers... how is that different because a new controller is on the market?
Games add controller support after a game is on the market all the time. So what are you trying to say? Wait until all systems mature before you put a game out? Thats a sad, sad state of development.
WHAT?????????????????????????????????????
'the motion controllers are not changing that much'
motion controllers change a shit ton.
1. namely in them existing or not which is the main point. A triple A VR title is not going to begin before anyone has access to the motion controllers API because the motion controllers do not exist.
2. The actual motion is VERY different from the standard mouse and WSAD setup so you DO need that API and you DO need that API fairly solid and complete
also, think on this. how many Wii SPECIFIC games where created the first year the Wii came out. Not 'games that work on Wii' but Wii Specific games as in games that used the features in question
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Well what did they expect its 2016 and people are becoming smarter with their purchases based on experience. Buying something like new technology as soon as it comes out is not the best idea. Imagine starships existed and planetary travel recently came out, do you think people will spend 20 mil+ when they don't even know if it will malfunction or something. Better off for people to wait for it to be more affordable and like people said, improve VR.
The acronym MMORPG use to mean Massive Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game.
But the acronym MMMORPG now currently means Microscopic Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. Kappa.
As soon as a title I want to play comes to VR I'll upgrade and buy some goggles.
Thats the problem with new tech like this. You need developers to back it to work and you need people buying the product to get the developers. I have been reading reviews and I have not seen a game for VR that I want to play.
right so I am a developer (web and enterprise) and here is how I see it.
Pre-release of a product as a developer you are granted APIs that are work in progress. Great! a little risky because your not sure how much will change by the time of retail but not a big deal. but wait...its VR...oh really? well hold on a tick there is a LOT that can change during the hardware development stage maybe I hold off. I dont want to have to rewrite my entire code because they release motion controllers later on (which is exactly what they did).
So I wait closer to retail.
ok now its retail, let me fire up my tools and get to work. great! ok so are you done yet? no why? because it takes 3 years to develop a game is why.
This is not how development works.
actually it absolutely is and i know because I had started. keep in mind I am a developer by trade and yes, I have in fact Unity on my machine at home
now in first party situations its slightly different but not much.
Just because you have Unity on your machine at home doesn't make you a developer. Unity is created to deploy out as multiplatform releases, there would be NO reason to wait on development on a unity game.... How does that have any bearing on development at all?
no the 'just because' is because I am a developer by trade.
The development process is how I described it and for 1st party agreements (which is likely what you are thinking of) it is different however Oculus did not take that approach, thus it actually is exactly as I said it is and as a side note the reason I had Unity on my machine is because it was tinkering around with the...wait for it.....Oculus API of which at the time ONLY worked in Unity.
I develop programs for my business all the time, and have done several custom freelance jobs as a consultant.. you can do quite a bit of work in games before having to worry about where you're releasing especially if you're USING AN ENGINE.
Newsflash, I also have unity on my PC's at home, and I have several free licenses activated that I received from the IGDA when I used to frequent their meetings in Houston. BFD.
You don't wait for a consumer release with an engine built for multiplatform support. Especially, ESPECIALLY since mobile VR games can still utilize a similar format.
I am going to say this once
when the Oculus API came out for Dev kit 1 there was no motion controllers, the only game engine that it worked with directly was Unity and it didnt work well. The API changed radically over the course of about 2 years and I am not sure even if today the existsing developer API even has code for the controllers.
It was possible to do Oculus VR on Unreal but it involved a great deal of custom coding because there was not an API for it. so if you wanted to develop on Unreal you had to put in a lot of your own front end work with full knowedge that later an API would be create of which is exactly what happened.
The reason I know this is because I followed it while it was happening.
HTC Vive on the other hand was different. it was completely secret, no API was released to the public and only a very small handful of developers got to work on it. do you really think I am making this shit up?
Why does that matter? Motion controllers aren't changing much, just create a function for support later on - you can't hold off for every piece of hardware that may ever release in the future that you may or may not know about.
There are currently VR games that use character motion classes that take information from the gyroscopes, in addition to controllers... how is that different because a new controller is on the market?
Games add controller support after a game is on the market all the time. So what are you trying to say? Wait until all systems mature before you put a game out? Thats a sad, sad state of development.
WHAT?????????????????????????????????????
'the motion controllers are not changing that much'
motion controllers change a shit ton.
1. namely in them existing or not which is the main point. A triple A VR title is not going to begin before anyone has access to the motion controllers API because the motion controllers do not exist.
2. The actual motion is VERY different from the standard mouse and WSAD setup so you DO need that API and you DO need that API fairly solid and complete
also, think on this. how many Wii SPECIFIC games where created the first year the Wii came out. Not 'games that work on Wii' but Wii Specific games as in games that used the features in question
You're completely missing the point as usual. You do not stop development, or not start development on a project because you have no idea if controllers will become available in the future or not.
Input is quite simple AND INHERENT IN UNITY IN GENERAL. Simply calling a function for controller detection or support isn't the toughest thing in the world and DOESN'T REQUIRE A COMPLETE REWRITE OF EVERYTHING. Do you get that? Do you get it? It doesn't require anything, it's mostly inherent in the engine. Do you get it?
"Did you read my comment or any of the rest of the thread"
Yes... I just wanted to respond to you directly without growing the list of nested comments...
Briefly:
"1. platform fragmentation"
I don't think this is as big of an issue as it seems on the outside. Many titles are getting ported from Gear VR to Rift and Vive. It's already happened with Jump, Dreadhalls, Eve Gunjack, Dead Secret, Annie Amber, and Minecraft. That's just off the top of my head and ones I've tried. More are on the way. I see it sort of like a sieve to let quality experiences rise to the surface. The PC+Mobile VR vs. Console VR division might become real, but overall the "fragmentation" isn't really what I'd consider a "problem", currently. It looks much worse than it is considering all the different hardware available.
"2. physical side effects"
I'm not going to say most can become acclimated to this, but it certainly happened with me. My tolerance for VR is much greater than when I first began. Starting with experiences that included very gentle motion and limiting my time was key, then working up from there. I never experienced anything like nausea, although some games did give me temporary vertigo and were rather dizzying. I've noticed my motor coordination suffers slightly for about 15 minutes after a considerable session.
It's weird that it has a physical effect at all, but it is real. That's why I think "comfort ratings" for experiences are so crucial; this will let people determine their own tolerance, and possibly "improve" with time.
You wouldn't go into a gym after years and immediately start trying to bench 225 lbs, would you? Same concept applies. Ease into it.
Whether this is a deciding factor for each individual depends on how enthused s/he is about the tech, I suppose. I can say for me today it's a non-issue, although I wouldn't drive or operate machinery for 15 minutes after a VR session.
"3. application appeal is niche"
I'm not sure about this. I thick escapism and the desire to "be elsewhere" is a pretty universal human trait. It's more than just a defense mechanism: it's the reason we tell stories.
Everything in moderation, but it's a pretty great tool for this.
"4. cost"
Roughly $500 for me so far, if you want to include the price of the phone plus the apps. Well worth it in my opinion.
I expect the relative cost of all current sets to continue to come down with time, and for newer sets to be less expensive than the first generation on entering the market, relatively speaking.
"5. limited time in the spotlight"
Again, I'm not sure about this. I don't have a crystal ball, but I don't think 'being in the spotlight' is necessarily a requirement for the continued growth and market penetration of this tech.
Now, a couple downsides to this tech from my perspective I did not expect:
My phone overheats. It hasn't exploded in my face or anything, but my Gear VR would shut down initially after about 15 minutes in many experiences. At first, this was great because that's about all I felt comfortable with in the beginning. Now that I'm acclimated, I'm demanding better performance and longer sessions. I've found it necessary to rig a cold pack to the front of my Gear VR with a couple rubber bands. It adds a little weight. Nothing too bad, but now the "limiting reagent" in my VR sessions is actually the pressure on my sinus which becomes very, very uncomfortable after about an hour of continual use. VR face to the max. Still, this doesn't stop me from taking a break then continuing for another hour.
The "wow" effect wears off. I never thought it would, but some experiences I start to take for granted. When this happens, it's usually a signal to me to let up on the VR or to try cycling through some experiences I haven't dived into for a while. After about a week, the "wow" is back. It's a great new medium.
"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
You're completely missing the point as usual. You do not stop development, or not start development on a project because you have no idea if controllers will become available in the future or not.
Input is quite simple AND INHERENT IN UNITY IN GENERAL. Simply calling a function for controller detection or support isn't the toughest thing in the world and DOESN'T REQUIRE A COMPLETE REWRITE OF EVERYTHING. Do you get that? Do you get it? It doesn't require anything, it's mostly inherent in the engine. Do you get it?
your wrong on many many counts.
1. you dont START the project if you have no API for the controllers its literally IMPOSSIBLE to start without it. The only option you have is to make a game without the new control scheme. Trust me I have been in cases when developing on brand new technologies (at the time SharePoint) in which LITERALLY things where LITERALLY NOT POSSIBLE, because the API required to do what you wanted DIDNT EXIST. and DID exist later. The product in question has to be in a fairly stable position before you can start creating content against it. PEROID. I know this from experience.
2. The control mechanics of Oculus Touch and HTC in a sense of geometry is very different then mouse and keyboard in what you can do and that does not translate the same to a mouse and keyboard in nearly the same way.
3. Creating a VR project today is Unreal is very easy compared to what it was a little less than 2 years ago. By contrast creating VR content in Unity a little less then 2 years ago was very easy BECAUSE of the API. As a developer 2 years ago you would have wasted a TON of work starting a VR project on Unreal, today. no problem.
It makes total sense to wait until a product is more or less solid before starting to develop against it.
because oculus went the 'open route' they didnt have a hidden pipeline of APIs that they were feeding 1st party developers like Microsoft and Sony does.
Additionally, even in those 1st party situations when a new product comes out the content that uses those specific new technologies DO NOT come out gang busters in the first quarter anyway as evidence by me suggesting you look at the history of Wii.
Finally, despite what you think there is actually MORE content created for VR then for any other new hardware EVER in this history of humanity in the same time frame of hardware release. when I say this a game that is backwards compatiable to work on a Xbox One does not count as content created for the Xbox One explicitly.
I am not talking about this anymore, you could not possible be any more incorrect in this.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Now, a couple downsides to this tech from my perspective I did not expect:
My phone overheats. It hasn't exploded in my face or anything, but my Gear VR would shut down initially after about 15 minutes in many experiences. At first, this was great because that's about all I felt comfortable with in the beginning. Now that I'm acclimated, I'm demanding better performance and longer sessions. I've found it necessary to rig a cold pack to the front of my Gear VR with a couple rubber bands. It adds a little weight. Nothing too bad, but now the "limiting reagent" in my VR sessions is actually the pressure on my sinus which becomes very, very uncomfortable after about an hour of continual use. VR face to the max. Still, this doesn't stop me from taking a break then continuing for another hour.
The "wow" effect wears off. I never thought it would, but some experiences I start to take for granted. When this happens, it's usually a signal to me to let up on the VR or to try cycling through some experiences I haven't dived into for a while. After about a week, the "wow" is back. It's a great new medium.
The sinus pressure thing happens to me fairly quickly. I've try readjusting to pull the set back and have the straps sit lower on my neck but it doesn't help. It also makes the screen blurry because I'm not looking at it from the right angle.
I'd say one big downside, since I don't have my Note7 any more, is that with my S7 (I decided against the pixel due to water resistance) the set doesn't fit well with a case on, so I find I don't use my set very often because my case is a pain to take off.
I think I'd like to see gear bluetooth connectivity also... like streaming data and video through BT so that cases can fit in these sets and strap down without having to have the connectors in them.
When I create 360 content I have to kind of do some guess work because I just HATE taking my case off
You're completely missing the point as usual. You do not stop development, or not start development on a project because you have no idea if controllers will become available in the future or not.
Input is quite simple AND INHERENT IN UNITY IN GENERAL. Simply calling a function for controller detection or support isn't the toughest thing in the world and DOESN'T REQUIRE A COMPLETE REWRITE OF EVERYTHING. Do you get that? Do you get it? It doesn't require anything, it's mostly inherent in the engine. Do you get it?
your wrong on many many counts.
1. you dont START the project if you have no API for the controllers its literally IMPOSSIBLE to start without it. The only option you have is to make a game without the new control scheme. Trust me I have been in cases when developing on brand new technologies (at the time SharePoint) in which LITERALLY things where LITERALLY NOT POSSIBLE, because the API required to do what you wanted DIDNT EXIST. and DID exist later. The product in question has to be in a fairly stable position before you can start creating content against it. PEROID. I know this from experience.
2. The control mechanics of Oculus Touch and HTC in a since of geometry is very different then mouse and keyboard in what you can do and that does not translate the same to a mouse and keyboard in nearly the same way.
3. Creating a VR project today is Unreal is very easy compared to what it was a little less than 2 years ago. By contrast creating VR content in Unity a little less then 2 years ago was very easy BECAUSE of the API. As a developer 2 years ago you would have wasted a TON of work starting a VR project on Unreal, today. no problem.
It makes total sense to wait until a product is more or less solid before starting to develop against it.
because oculus went the 'open route' they didnt have a hidden pipeline of APIs that they were feeding 1st party developers like Microsoft and Sony does.
Additionally, even in those 1st party situations when a new product comes out the content that uses those specific new technologies DO NOT come out gang busters in the first quarter anyway as evidence by me suggesting you look at the history of Wii.
Finally, despite what you think there is actually MORE content created for VR then for any other new hardware EVER in this history of humanity. when I say this a game that is backwards compatiable to work on a Xbox One does not count as content created for the Xbox One explicitly.
I am not talking about this anymore, you could not possible be any more incorrect in this.
No. I'm not wrong. 2 years ago you would have wasted nothing because the RIFT HAD XB CONTROLLER SUPPORT. CONTROLLER SUPPORT IS INHERENT IN UNITY. You're still not understanding it... its NOT IMPOSSIBLE. It's actually very doable and people DO IT ALL THE TIME.
You're not writing the controller support from scratch... your points are completely invalidated due to the fact that WIIMOTE SUPPORT has been available for YEARS. When you create content FOR THE WII you can EASILY utilize BOTH wiimote support AND CLASSIC CONTROLLER SUPPORT. A lot of games have that interactivity. How is this any different? ITS NOT.
You're completely missing the point as usual. You do not stop development, or not start development on a project because you have no idea if controllers will become available in the future or not.
Input is quite simple AND INHERENT IN UNITY IN GENERAL. Simply calling a function for controller detection or support isn't the toughest thing in the world and DOESN'T REQUIRE A COMPLETE REWRITE OF EVERYTHING. Do you get that? Do you get it? It doesn't require anything, it's mostly inherent in the engine. Do you get it?
your wrong on many many counts.
1. you dont START the project if you have no API for the controllers its literally IMPOSSIBLE to start without it. The only option you have is to make a game without the new control scheme. Trust me I have been in cases when developing on brand new technologies (at the time SharePoint) in which LITERALLY things where LITERALLY NOT POSSIBLE, because the API required to do what you wanted DIDNT EXIST. and DID exist later. The product in question has to be in a fairly stable position before you can start creating content against it. PEROID. I know this from experience.
2. The control mechanics of Oculus Touch and HTC in a since of geometry is very different then mouse and keyboard in what you can do and that does not translate the same to a mouse and keyboard in nearly the same way.
3. Creating a VR project today is Unreal is very easy compared to what it was a little less than 2 years ago. By contrast creating VR content in Unity a little less then 2 years ago was very easy BECAUSE of the API. As a developer 2 years ago you would have wasted a TON of work starting a VR project on Unreal, today. no problem.
It makes total sense to wait until a product is more or less solid before starting to develop against it.
because oculus went the 'open route' they didnt have a hidden pipeline of APIs that they were feeding 1st party developers like Microsoft and Sony does.
Additionally, even in those 1st party situations when a new product comes out the content that uses those specific new technologies DO NOT come out gang busters in the first quarter anyway as evidence by me suggesting you look at the history of Wii.
Finally, despite what you think there is actually MORE content created for VR then for any other new hardware EVER in this history of humanity. when I say this a game that is backwards compatiable to work on a Xbox One does not count as content created for the Xbox One explicitly.
I am not talking about this anymore, you could not possible be any more incorrect in this.
No. I'm not wrong. 2 years ago you would have wasted nothing because the RIFT HAD XB CONTROLLER SUPPORT. CONTROLLER SUPPORT IS INHERENT IN UNITY. You're still not understanding it... its NOT IMPOSSIBLE. It's actually very doable and people DO IT ALL THE TIME.
You're not writing the controller support from scratch... your points are completely invalidated due to the fact that WIIMOTE SUPPORT has been available for YEARS. When you create content FOR THE WII you can EASILY utilize BOTH wiimote support AND CLASSIC CONTROLLER SUPPORT. A lot of games have that interactivity. How is this any different? ITS NOT.
You have very little understanding of Unity.
no what you do not understand is that I am not talking about xbox one controllers.
its pretty much universally understood even by you that the goal post for mega utlra AAA VR content is not with an xbox controller. we are talking about Oculus Touch and HTC Vive controllers and you know it.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
no what you do not understand is that I am not talking about xbox one controllers.
its pretty much universally understood even by you that the goal post for mega utlra AAA VR content is not with an xbox controller. we are talking about Oculus Touch and HTC Vive controllers and you know it.
Thats not what I'm arguing. I'm arguing interactivity between touch and motion controls in comparison to gamepad or M&K support.
there's a reason why you see so many Mobile ports to VR. It's fairly simple for the controls to translate.
Maybe you've missed it, but we're talking about simple touch controls on a mobile game translating to gyroscopic 3 dimensional controls with additional view and touch support. It is NOT hard for ported games to add additional control schemes, it just isn't.
Look at your Oculus Store, it won't take you long to find dozens of mobile ports that translate simply and easily, and I promise you, as soon as touch controls come out, they too, will equally be available.
What you are stating isn't impossible in the least. Games could and should have been created during the 4 years worth of development kits were released.
no what you do not understand is that I am not talking about xbox one controllers.
its pretty much universally understood even by you that the goal post for mega utlra AAA VR content is not with an xbox controller. we are talking about Oculus Touch and HTC Vive controllers and you know it.
Thats not what I'm arguing. I'm arguing interactivity between touch and motion controls in comparison to gamepad or M&K support.
...
is VERY different using contollers like Oculus touch.
case in point, hold out your hand flat, rotate your wrist so that your palm is facing up, now move your elbow in so that your palm is facing your chest but only 2" and at a 45 degree angle, now move your hands above your head.
now translate that movement with a xbox controller.
in other words, in a top of the line VR experience that we are expecting this is currently possible. reach out your hand pick off a flower, turn the flower around 180% throw it over you right sholder, turn around, pick it up and eat it.
you cant do that with an xbox one controller translated easier to an unknown API later
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Honestly, this picture sums up why the sales of VR this holiday season are going to be low:
It just costs too goddamn much. The primary consumer for these devices are going to be the children of the parents who are buying the presents. Ask the majority of kids if they want one $800 present for Pagan Winter Solstice Holiday, or whether they want 3-4 games and some other assorted stuff, and they'll pick the games nine times out of ten.
When Palmer Luckey (Is that a porn name, or his real name??) first got kickstarted, he said that they would sell these things for around $300-400. However, after they sold out to BookFace, good ole Zuckerberg saw cash register tills ringing out of control and bumped that price up by double. When he did that, a lot of people went from "Sure, that looks like fun!" to "My entire Christmas budget on one thing, or lots of cool things that don't cost a mortgage payment?"
Honestly, this picture sums up why the sales of VR this holiday season are going to be low:
It just costs too goddamn much. The primary consumer for these devices are going to be the children of the parents who are buying the presents. Ask the majority of kids if they want one $800 present for Pagan Winter Solstice Holiday, or whether they want 3-4 games and some other assorted stuff, and they'll pick the games nine times out of ten.
When Palmer Luckey (Is that a porn name, or his real name??) first got kickstarted, he said that they would sell these things for around $300-400. However, after they sold out to BookFace, good ole Zuckerberg saw cash register tills ringing out of control and bumped that price up by double. When he did that, a lot of people went from "Sure, that looks like fun!" to "My entire Christmas budget on one thing, or lots of cool things that don't cost a mortgage payment?"
interesting except that the average age of a gamer is 34 and rising
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Comments
2. WAY over blown by forum posters mostly.
3. Most people can not conceptualize well so if they havent experienced then have no idea if they want it or not because they cant conceptualize what 'it' is in the first place.
4. agreed
5. times moves on that is not a challenge. it just moves on.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
LOL Prove that he said they weren't looking to make money on the devices. You can't prove it because you're making it up. Your reasons, to state plainly, are stupid. There's no such thing as "reasons" as a response when trying to quote something accurately, you just do. Like this quote:
"Oculus VR CEO Brendan Iribe acknowledged that fact back in May, when he said that restricting the device to gaming could limit its user base to "only 10, 20, or 50 million" people, and Zuckerberg echoed Iribe's hopes of ultimately achieving a billion users connected through the device.
Over a five year time frame, we have a number of services, which we think are well on their way to reaching one billion people. Messenger, WhatsApp, Instagram and Search are a number of them. And once we get to that scale, then we think that they will start to become meaningful businesses in their own right,"
now in first party situations its slightly different but not much.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
The development process is how I described it and for 1st party agreements (which is likely what you are thinking of) it is different however Oculus did not take that approach, thus it actually is exactly as I said it is and as a side note the reason I had Unity on my machine is because it was tinkering around with the...wait for it.....Oculus API of which at the time ONLY worked in Unity.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
this is hysterical
do you know what was the ONLY game engine that worked with Oculus at first? yeah..it was Unity and at that time do you know what the API had for motion controls? NOTHING. why? BECAUSE THEY DIDNT EXIST
So yes, the leadtime of a work in progress hardware DOES effect the timeline of creating games for the hardware!
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
People are waiting for cheaper headsets and lower PC requirements too. The software also needs to catch up, because the selection is still a microcosm compared to regular video games.
Newsflash, I also have unity on my PC's at home, and I have several free licenses activated that I received from the IGDA when I used to frequent their meetings in Houston. BFD.
You don't wait for a consumer release with an engine built for multiplatform support. Especially, ESPECIALLY since mobile VR games can still utilize a similar format.
when the Oculus API came out for Dev kit 1 there was no motion controllers, the only game engine that it worked with directly was Unity and it didnt work well. The API changed radically over the course of about 2 years and I am not sure even if today the existsing developer API even has code for the controllers.
It was possible to do Oculus VR on Unreal but it involved a great deal of custom coding because there was not an API for it. so if you wanted to develop on Unreal you had to put in a lot of your own front end work with full knowedge that later an API would be create of which is exactly what happened.
The reason I know this is because I followed it while it was happening.
HTC Vive on the other hand was different. it was completely secret, no API was released to the public and only a very small handful of developers got to work on it. do you really think I am making this shit up?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
There are currently VR games that use character motion classes that take information from the gyroscopes, in addition to controllers... how is that different because a new controller is on the market?
Games add controller support after a game is on the market all the time. So what are you trying to say? Wait until all systems mature before you put a game out? Thats a sad, sad state of development.
'the motion controllers are not changing that much'
motion controllers change a shit ton.
1. namely in them existing or not which is the main point. A triple A VR title is not going to begin before anyone has access to the motion controllers API because the motion controllers do not exist.
2. The actual motion is VERY different from the standard mouse and WSAD setup so you DO need that API and you DO need that API fairly solid and complete
also, think on this.
how many Wii SPECIFIC games where created the first year the Wii came out. Not 'games that work on Wii' but Wii Specific games as in games that used the features in question
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
But the acronym MMMORPG now currently means Microscopic Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. Kappa.
Input is quite simple AND INHERENT IN UNITY IN GENERAL. Simply calling a function for controller detection or support isn't the toughest thing in the world and DOESN'T REQUIRE A COMPLETE REWRITE OF EVERYTHING. Do you get that? Do you get it? It doesn't require anything, it's mostly inherent in the engine. Do you get it?
"Did you read my comment or any of the rest of the thread"
Yes... I just wanted to respond to you directly without growing the list of nested comments...
Briefly:
"1. platform fragmentation"
I don't think this is as big of an issue as it seems on the outside. Many titles are getting ported from Gear VR to Rift and Vive. It's already happened with Jump, Dreadhalls, Eve Gunjack, Dead Secret, Annie Amber, and Minecraft. That's just off the top of my head and ones I've tried. More are on the way. I see it sort of like a sieve to let quality experiences rise to the surface. The PC+Mobile VR vs. Console VR division might become real, but overall the "fragmentation" isn't really what I'd consider a "problem", currently. It looks much worse than it is considering all the different hardware available.
"2. physical side effects"
I'm not going to say most can become acclimated to this, but it certainly happened with me. My tolerance for VR is much greater than when I first began. Starting with experiences that included very gentle motion and limiting my time was key, then working up from there. I never experienced anything like nausea, although some games did give me temporary vertigo and were rather dizzying. I've noticed my motor coordination suffers slightly for about 15 minutes after a considerable session.
It's weird that it has a physical effect at all, but it is real. That's why I think "comfort ratings" for experiences are so crucial; this will let people determine their own tolerance, and possibly "improve" with time.
You wouldn't go into a gym after years and immediately start trying to bench 225 lbs, would you? Same concept applies. Ease into it.
Whether this is a deciding factor for each individual depends on how enthused s/he is about the tech, I suppose. I can say for me today it's a non-issue, although I wouldn't drive or operate machinery for 15 minutes after a VR session.
"3. application appeal is niche"
I'm not sure about this. I thick escapism and the desire to "be elsewhere" is a pretty universal human trait. It's more than just a defense mechanism: it's the reason we tell stories.
Everything in moderation, but it's a pretty great tool for this.
"4. cost"
Roughly $500 for me so far, if you want to include the price of the phone plus the apps. Well worth it in my opinion.
I expect the relative cost of all current sets to continue to come down with time, and for newer sets to be less expensive than the first generation on entering the market, relatively speaking.
"5. limited time in the spotlight"
Again, I'm not sure about this. I don't have a crystal ball, but I don't think 'being in the spotlight' is necessarily a requirement for the continued growth and market penetration of this tech.
Now, a couple downsides to this tech from my perspective I did not expect:
My phone overheats. It hasn't exploded in my face or anything, but my Gear VR would shut down initially after about 15 minutes in many experiences. At first, this was great because that's about all I felt comfortable with in the beginning. Now that I'm acclimated, I'm demanding better performance and longer sessions. I've found it necessary to rig a cold pack to the front of my Gear VR with a couple rubber bands. It adds a little weight. Nothing too bad, but now the "limiting reagent" in my VR sessions is actually the pressure on my sinus which becomes very, very uncomfortable after about an hour of continual use. VR face to the max. Still, this doesn't stop me from taking a break then continuing for another hour.
The "wow" effect wears off. I never thought it would, but some experiences I start to take for granted. When this happens, it's usually a signal to me to let up on the VR or to try cycling through some experiences I haven't dived into for a while. After about a week, the "wow" is back. It's a great new medium.
"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
1. you dont START the project if you have no API for the controllers its literally IMPOSSIBLE to start without it. The only option you have is to make a game without the new control scheme. Trust me I have been in cases when developing on brand new technologies (at the time SharePoint) in which LITERALLY things where LITERALLY NOT POSSIBLE, because the API required to do what you wanted DIDNT EXIST. and DID exist later. The product in question has to be in a fairly stable position before you can start creating content against it. PEROID. I know this from experience.
2. The control mechanics of Oculus Touch and HTC in a sense of geometry is very different then mouse and keyboard in what you can do and that does not translate the same to a mouse and keyboard in nearly the same way.
3. Creating a VR project today is Unreal is very easy compared to what it was a little less than 2 years ago. By contrast creating VR content in Unity a little less then 2 years ago was very easy BECAUSE of the API. As a developer 2 years ago you would have wasted a TON of work starting a VR project on Unreal, today. no problem.
It makes total sense to wait until a product is more or less solid before starting to develop against it. because oculus went the 'open route' they didnt have a hidden pipeline of APIs that they were feeding 1st party developers like Microsoft and Sony does. Additionally, even in those 1st party situations when a new product comes out the content that uses those specific new technologies DO NOT come out gang busters in the first quarter anyway as evidence by me suggesting you look at the history of Wii. Finally, despite what you think there is actually MORE content created for VR then for any other new hardware EVER in this history of humanity in the same time frame of hardware release. when I say this a game that is backwards compatiable to work on a Xbox One does not count as content created for the Xbox One explicitly. I am not talking about this anymore, you could not possible be any more incorrect in this.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I'd say one big downside, since I don't have my Note7 any more, is that with my S7 (I decided against the pixel due to water resistance) the set doesn't fit well with a case on, so I find I don't use my set very often because my case is a pain to take off.
I think I'd like to see gear bluetooth connectivity also... like streaming data and video through BT so that cases can fit in these sets and strap down without having to have the connectors in them.
When I create 360 content I have to kind of do some guess work because I just HATE taking my case off
You're not writing the controller support from scratch... your points are completely invalidated due to the fact that WIIMOTE SUPPORT has been available for YEARS. When you create content FOR THE WII you can EASILY utilize BOTH wiimote support AND CLASSIC CONTROLLER SUPPORT. A lot of games have that interactivity. How is this any different? ITS NOT.
You have very little understanding of Unity.
its pretty much universally understood even by you that the goal post for mega utlra AAA VR content is not with an xbox controller. we are talking about Oculus Touch and HTC Vive controllers and you know it.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
there's a reason why you see so many Mobile ports to VR. It's fairly simple for the controls to translate.
Maybe you've missed it, but we're talking about simple touch controls on a mobile game translating to gyroscopic 3 dimensional controls with additional view and touch support. It is NOT hard for ported games to add additional control schemes, it just isn't.
Look at your Oculus Store, it won't take you long to find dozens of mobile ports that translate simply and easily, and I promise you, as soon as touch controls come out, they too, will equally be available.
What you are stating isn't impossible in the least. Games could and should have been created during the 4 years worth of development kits were released.
case in point, hold out your hand flat, rotate your wrist so that your palm is facing up, now move your elbow in so that your palm is facing your chest but only 2" and at a 45 degree angle, now move your hands above your head.
now translate that movement with a xbox controller.
in other words, in a top of the line VR experience that we are expecting this is currently possible. reach out your hand pick off a flower, turn the flower around 180% throw it over you right sholder, turn around, pick it up and eat it.
you cant do that with an xbox one controller translated easier to an unknown API later
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
It just costs too goddamn much. The primary consumer for these devices are going to be the children of the parents who are buying the presents. Ask the majority of kids if they want one $800 present for Pagan Winter Solstice Holiday, or whether they want 3-4 games and some other assorted stuff, and they'll pick the games nine times out of ten.
When Palmer Luckey (Is that a porn name, or his real name??) first got kickstarted, he said that they would sell these things for around $300-400. However, after they sold out to BookFace, good ole Zuckerberg saw cash register tills ringing out of control and bumped that price up by double. When he did that, a lot of people went from "Sure, that looks like fun!" to "My entire Christmas budget on one thing, or lots of cool things that don't cost a mortgage payment?"
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me