Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I have agreed with many here. There are older games that currently do things much better than the newer ones..
My wife and I still log into EQ2. I am having a blast running around AoC. Newer games like ESO and BDO are fun, but lack the depth of older games, specifically in combat mechanics: ninety-percent eyeroll and ten-percent "elite" endgame.
I want a game that I can both play to relax or play to be challenged.
I (and some friends) have been waiting for a good new MMO for years. Currently, I play DDO and WoW. I just got back into WoW a couple months ago and am already wondering how long I'm going to keep playing. If nothing else, the economy in WoW is FUBAR (everything is priced for end-game players which means unaffordable for everyone else).
I still have EQ1 installed but find myself not playing for two reasons: corpse runs and WAY out-of-date graphics (given there have been over 19 expansions, it's ridiculous that the graphics haven't been updated since iirc expansion 3).
One of the biggest problems with a lot of potentially good new MMOs has been open-world PvP. I don't personally know ANYONE that wants this in a game and, as soon as I (and those I know) see this, we're gone before it even releases.
Active: D&D Online (alpha,beta,&unlimited)
Retired: Anarchy Online, Archlord (beta), Auto Assault (beta), CoH/CoV, Dark Age of Camelot, Dungeon Runners, Elder Scrolls Online, Everquest, EVE, Guild Wars, Lord of the Rings Online (beta,live), Pathfinder Online (beta), Rift (beta,live), Secret World (beta,live), Star Wars Old Republic, Vanguard (beta), Warhammer (beta,live), World of Warcraft
Another problem with new MMOs is the devs themselves. It's like they have no real plan for the future of a game. GW2 had this manifesto that they were going to follow to not be like other MMO's. But shortly after launch, the forums got flooded with ex wow player saying the game would fail if it's not like wow. So the threw out their plans and made it a wow clone.
At the same time there are smaller scale games that seems to fare rather well such as Conan Exile. Even Fallout 76, despite its numerous issues, is still alive.
May be people are looking for games that are less massive, in which they have more impact.
I want a game that I can both play to relax or play to be challenged.
Have you tried Guild Wars 2? It is exactly what I would call relaxing and challenging at the same time. You can either follow the story and have some really tough missions (I don't know any other MMORPG where I've died so many times as I did in GW2) or you just explore the maps and participate in all the side activities while listening to your favourite music. It can be pretty relaxing. Just a suggestion ;-)
Everquest was never re invented. i feel as if all goes well,and Ashes does not stray from their dream. it will be what alot of us people who are now in our 40s have been waiting for. a new online world where we can thrive with no bullshit cash shops, where i can just sub and have fun and immerse myself
I think MMOs will make a comeback as soon as one is made for VR. Something that may seem run of the mill on a standard monitor is made completely different in VR causing the entire dynamic of a game to change.
Even the idea of an "Oasis" environment without MMO qualities seems appealing to a lot of people.
If that's the case why is E:D not a smashing success? I see people claiming its VR implementation is good. E:D has decent success but is nowhere near being the next big thing.
Then you have Orbus VR...
I think VR on its own is not enough to propel a game.
I think VR has a slight more way to go but might be enough to sell a game in the future.
Why not yet?
Well, for example I LOVE my VR headset. I bought specifically to play games that have it implemented.
Have I mentioned I love it? For 10 minutes. If that. Then I get very nauseous.
If they can solve that issue, I think it will be a smash hit for future games.
Getting your VR legs can be rough if you have problems with nausea. I don't know what HMD you have, but peripheral vision picking uplow frame rates can cause it. This is why some games like Skyrim VR have brought in peripheral vision when moving. Other HMDs have a stretched peripheral to increase FoV. This can definitely cause nausea.
I think MMOs will make a comeback as soon as one is made for VR. Something that may seem run of the mill on a standard monitor is made completely different in VR causing the entire dynamic of a game to change.
Even the idea of an "Oasis" environment without MMO qualities seems appealing to a lot of people.
If that's the case why is E:D not a smashing success? I see people claiming its VR implementation is good. E:D has decent success but is nowhere near being the next big thing.
Then you have Orbus VR...
I think VR on its own is not enough to propel a game.
E:D has had a lot of success, but it's not an MMO.
VR has not had much success, mostly because as it stands, it's mostly a gimmick. It's not even virtual reality, it's just virtual eyesight. When we get proper virtual reality, then things will really take off! (i spend too much time daydreaming about such a day!)
As to the main thrust of the article, yes, it's sad that there has been such a long drought for new MMOs. I haven't been able to find an mmo I enjoy since 2013.
I blame the drought on lack of innovation and quality implementation, but mostly on a lack of research. When I see studio after studio repeating the same mistakes of their predecessors, i am not surprised they keep failing to attract or retain enough players. MMO devs have just never really adopted the right attitude for building RPGs in a massively multiplayer environment. The challenges and possibilities are vastly different from the single player world, yet devs keep replicating what we find in single player games. It may be less risky to do so, but it misses the point and potential of the entire genre!
I'm not sure what you mean by VR being "gimicky". I believe last time we had this discussion you admitted to not having played since the DK2, like 8 years ago.
Are you one of those people that say "talk to me when I can have a holodeck"?... as if gaming can't proceed forward from a flat monitor until we have holodeck technology?...lol
Maybe you should actually try VR this decade before speaking on it.
I think MMOs will make a comeback as soon as one is made for VR. Something that may seem run of the mill on a standard monitor is made completely different in VR causing the entire dynamic of a game to change.
Even the idea of an "Oasis" environment without MMO qualities seems appealing to a lot of people.
If that's the case why is E:D not a smashing success? I see people claiming its VR implementation is good. E:D has decent success but is nowhere near being the next big thing.
Then you have Orbus VR...
I think VR on its own is not enough to propel a game.
E:D has had a lot of success, but it's not an MMO.
VR has not had much success, mostly because as it stands, it's mostly a gimmick. It's not even virtual reality, it's just virtual eyesight. When we get proper virtual reality, then things will really take off! (i spend too much time daydreaming about such a day!)
As to the main thrust of the article, yes, it's sad that there has been such a long drought for new MMOs. I haven't been able to find an mmo I enjoy since 2013.
I blame the drought on lack of innovation and quality implementation, but mostly on a lack of research. When I see studio after studio repeating the same mistakes of their predecessors, i am not surprised they keep failing to attract or retain enough players. MMO devs have just never really adopted the right attitude for building RPGs in a massively multiplayer environment. The challenges and possibilities are vastly different from the single player world, yet devs keep replicating what we find in single player games. It may be less risky to do so, but it misses the point and potential of the entire genre!
I'm not sure what you mean by VR being "gimicky". I believe last time we had this discussion you admitted to not having played since the DK2, like 8 years ago.
Are you one of those people that say "talk to me when I can have a holodeck"?... as if gaming can't proceed forward from a flat monitor until we have holodeck technology?...lol
Maybe you should actually try VR this decade before speaking on it.
A gimmick is something where one particular aspect is highly promoted in order to attract attention or drive sales whilst also obscuring a raft of downsides.
That is where VR is.
They try to sell us on a few novelties: 3D vision, head tracking and motion controllers. This is pushed at us in all the sales material. But, it obscures a host of problems, like the nausea, inability to see your controllers and the lack of improvement to actual gameplay.
That's what makes it a gimmick. There is not a single game out there which anyone has every been able to point to and say "Look, here is where virtual reality has improved the gameplay". Literally hasn't happened. And that is purely down to the limitation of the devices.
The DK2 was the first one I played, and that was only 6 years ago before official release. Don't try to twist timelines! Oculus only officially released 4 years ago. I've played some more recent headsets as a few friends of mine bought them (all of whom have sold them since, due to the gimmicky nature). I keep an eye on the market because I am genuinely interested in VR and I do want a headset, but I only want one for ED and Project Cars, as they are the only two types of games where VR offers a straight up improvement over the normal experience (but, only if u own hotas / wheel, which i do).
I don't believe in the holodeck, that's not where I'm at.
What I'm looking for is simply more virtual reality.
We have the headsets: they can give basic input (head tracking) and good output (3d vision).
We have motion controllers: they give really basic input and really shit output.
And thats it.
How is that "virtual reality"? It's virtual eyesight with some really shit input devices. It's a start, sure, but its a really basic start with a hell of a long way to go. The experiences you can have today, with regards to gameplay, are at a level equivalent to the early 90s. Fun for 20-30 minutes, but then you can see through the shallowness of the gameplay.
I'm not saying you can't have fun, clearly you can and clearly the gimmick of the 3D vision and basic input appeals to a small subset of people, of which you seem to be a part of. Nothing wrong with that at all, I'm glad you're having fun. But obviously the wider market doesn't yet agree, given the disappointing sales numbers and lack of quality games. Something is missing.
What I'm looking for is an increase to the number of body parts that are in virtual reality. So far we only have your head. I'm looking for arms, torso and legs if possible. And not just as input devices, but with proper feedback too. If I swing a sword at someone in VR and it hits someone, my arm needs to feel that hit in real life. If it doesn't, it instantly breaks immersion (and gameplay) which is where we're at today.
The tech to do this already exists.
In 2003, I used a VR glove to catch and throw a frisbee in VR, as well as to write with a virtual pen. That's 17 years ago! And it worked! Scale up from a glove to the whole body and you've got what I want. We can definitely do it, 100% possible with tech we already have. Just need someone to do it.
To make it even better, we can introduce something like a haptic suit for more realistic feedback, but I'd rather focus on input and output, not just output. There are plenty of people working on haptic gloves already (most accurate lets you feel individual raindrops on your hand) so im sure the tech will get there eventually.
On a final note, I really believe that the current VR stuff has been mis-handled. Aiming it at gamers was a mistake, given the lack of improvements to gameplay. But, I think if they could have aimed it at TV / film people, it would have found a much better market.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
"A gimmick is something where one particular aspect is highly
promoted in order to attract attention or drive sales whilst also
obscuring a raft of downsides.
That is where VR is.
They
try to sell us on a few novelties: 3D vision, head tracking and motion
controllers. This is pushed at us in all the sales material. But, it
obscures a host of problems, like the nausea, inability to see your
controllers and the lack of improvement to actual gameplay.
That's what makes it a gimmick. There is not a single game out there
which anyone has every been able to point to and say "Look, here is
where virtual reality has improved the gameplay". Literally hasn't
happened. And that is purely down to the limitation of the devices. "
---Nausea, if you're prone to it, is temporary. I had it a little in some games. Other people don't get it at all or get it really bad. It isn't a universal issue. And inability to see your controllers?... see, it's things like this that make you question your claims that you've even tried VR. You can almost always see your hands or controllers in game. I can't think of a single game in which you can't.
Gameplay is completely different, not just "better". Skyrim VR is a completely different game, and in my opinion better, than Skyrim on a flat screen. Same goes for No Mans Sky, The Forest, Fallout and every sim available... not to mention games made for VR. It's better because it's so different. This is why I think MMOs would be rejuvenated with VR.
"What I'm looking for is simply more virtual reality.
We have the headsets: they can give basic input (head tracking) and good output (3d vision).
We have motion controllers: they give really basic input and really shit output.
And thats it.
---How is that "virtual reality"? It's virtual eyesight with some really
shit input devices. It's a start, sure, but its a really basic start
with a hell of a long way to go. The experiences you can have today,
with regards to gameplay, are at a level equivalent to the early 90s.
Fun for 20-30 minutes, but then you can see through the shallowness of
the gameplay."
Wrong. You have a full 6DOF in todays VR, not just "basic 3D". Many of the controllers have finger articulation (Oculus Touch and Valve Knuckles) and great arm articulation and body movement algorithms. The input isn't basic or shitty. This makes me think you haven't played since the use the Vive wands or Xbox controller...6 years ago.
"What I'm looking for is an increase to the number of body parts
that are in virtual reality. So far we only have your head. I'm looking
for arms, torso and legs if possible. And not just as input devices, but
with proper feedback too. If I swing a sword at someone in VR and it
hits someone, my arm needs to feel that hit in real life. If it doesn't,
it instantly breaks immersion (and gameplay) which is where we're at
today.
The tech to do this already exists.
In
2003, I used a VR glove to catch and throw a frisbee in VR, as well as
to write with a virtual pen. That's 17 years ago! And it worked! Scale
up from a glove to the whole body and you've got what I want. We can
definitely do it, 100% possible with tech we already have. Just need
someone to do it.
To make it even better,
we can introduce something like a haptic suit for more realistic
feedback, but I'd rather focus on input and output, not just output.
There are plenty of people working on haptic gloves already (most
accurate lets you feel individual raindrops on your hand) so im sure the
tech will get there eventually."
---Yeah bro, you can buy body trackers and haptic suits now. Most people don't want to spend the money because "basic" VR is so immersive it isn't really needed. Just out of curiosity, how much haptic feedback do you expect when playing on a standard monitor? Why is it all or nothing for VR, but you will happily accept the same old with a standard monitor? Why not enjoy what VR has to offer now rather than pretend it has to be something so much more that you think it is now before you will entertain the idea of it?
"On a final note, I really believe that the current VR stuff has been
mis-handled. Aiming it at gamers was a mistake, given the lack of
improvements to gameplay. But, I think if they could have aimed it at TV
/ film people, it would have found a much better market."
---You're still all over the wrong. There are virtual 3D movie, TV and sports parties all the time. There are whole groups that just use VR for social activities like this.
There are millions of these things in use that people utilize in all sorts of ways. Maybe it's time you actually take a more serious look because your knowledge seems basic and dated. There's a f
---Yeah bro, you can buy body trackers and haptic suits now. Most people don't want to spend the money because "basic" VR is so immersive it isn't really needed. Just out of curiosity, how much haptic feedback do you expect when playing on a standard monitor? Why is it all or nothing for VR, but you will happily accept the same old with a standard monitor? Why not enjoy what VR has to offer now rather than pretend it has to be something so much more that you think it is now before you will entertain the idea of it?
I'll try to put it a simpler way:
On a scale of 0% VR (real life) to 100% VR (matrix, holodeck), where do you think we are right now?
I'd put us at about 1% (headset only) to 5% (headset + best gloves/suits).
Thats not enough for me. Whilst I admit I have not used any modern gloves, the stuff I have tried out was shit. Such a small amount of the experience being virtual reality creates a massive disconnect in my brain and I fucking hate it. It feels awful. When my eyes tell me to expect something to happen, like someone shooting me in the head, or someone swinging a sword at me, and then it doesn't actually happen because the devices don't exist, I feel disconnected from the experience. It creates a discord in my brain and it makes me disappointed, sometimes angry.
In short, existing VR (outside of racing and space games with devices) leave me feeling worse than when I started playing. That is a really bad thing for an entertainment device to do. I should feel better after the experience, not worse.
Now, as that percentage of VR starts to increase, so will my enjoyment. We'll all have different minimum levels for enjoyment. For you, clearly what we have now is good enough and you're enjoying that. Great. For me, it's not enough. I need more. My expectation is that level is going to come at around 15-20% VR.
As to your comments about why I can accept what I get from a standard monitor?
Simple.
Gameplay.
The single most important thing to me when playing games is the gameplay. A monitor is just a feedback device so doesn't affect the gameplay at all. It can improve the experience, but has no effect on the gameplay. Also, buying a new monitor is always a direct upgrade over what I had previously.
VR, if you just have a headset, doesn't change the gameplay at all, it just changes the experience, but it's a sideways change, not a direct improvement.
If you're using other VR devices, it does actually change the gameplay, and it makes it worse (for my preferences). The gameplay is much shallower than what I can get elsewhere. I have a worse time playing something in VR than I do playing a normal PC game.
If VR improved the gameplay, I'd already have the tech and be using it.
That's why I keep arguing / pushing for improved VR devices. I see massive potential in the technology and I can envisage massive improvements to society when we finally get there. I mean, just think of the health benefits if we actually had to run in real life when playing CoD instead of using our left thumb to move?!?! VR is the future, we're just a long way from getting there.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
On a scale of 0% VR (real life) to 100% VR (matrix, holodeck), where do you think we are right now?
I'd put us at about 1% (headset only) to 5% (headset + best gloves/suits).
Thats not enough for me. Whilst I admit I have not used any modern gloves, the stuff I have tried out was shit. Such a small amount of the experience being virtual reality creates a massive disconnect in my brain and I fucking hate it. It feels awful. When my eyes tell me to expect something to happen, like someone shooting me in the head, or someone swinging a sword at me, and then it doesn't actually happen because the devices don't exist, I feel disconnected from the experience. It creates a discord in my brain and it makes me disappointed, sometimes angry.
In short, existing VR (outside of racing and space games with devices) leave me feeling worse than when I started playing. That is a really bad thing for an entertainment device to do. I should feel better after the experience, not worse.
Now, as that percentage of VR starts to increase, so will my enjoyment. We'll all have different minimum levels for enjoyment. For you, clearly what we have now is good enough and you're enjoying that. Great. For me, it's not enough. I need more. My expectation is that level is going to come at around 15-20% VR.
As to your comments about why I can accept what I get from a standard monitor?
Simple.
Gameplay.
The single most important thing to me when playing games is the gameplay. A monitor is just a feedback device so doesn't affect the gameplay at all. It can improve the experience, but has no effect on the gameplay. Also, buying a new monitor is always a direct upgrade over what I had previously.
VR, if you just have a headset, doesn't change the gameplay at all, it just changes the experience, but it's a sideways change, not a direct improvement.
If you're using other VR devices, it does actually change the gameplay, and it makes it worse (for my preferences). The gameplay is much shallower than what I can get elsewhere. I have a worse time playing something in VR than I do playing a normal PC game.
If VR improved the gameplay, I'd already have the tech and be using it.
That's why I keep arguing / pushing for improved VR devices. I see massive potential in the technology and I can envisage massive improvements to society when we finally get there. I mean, just think of the health benefits if we actually had to run in real life when playing CoD instead of using our left thumb to move?!?! VR is the future, we're just a long way from getting there.
I'd say were at about 75% because there isn't a natural sight FoV (Index gives 130 degrees out of a natural 210). Pimax has a wider FoV but it's stretched in the peripheral to get there which I don't like.
Your
conclusion here is ludicrous. You get angry because if you get shot in
the head or hit with a sword in a VR game, you don't feel it in real
life? Dude, for real?
Just out of
curiosity, what's the FoV on your monitor and how much do you feel in
games now while playing on a monitor? What's with the ridiculous need
for something in one but not the other. It's galled a HMD... head
mounted display. It's an advanced display for gaming, not a combat
simulator shooting rubber bullets and swinging wooden swords.
VR gameplay is different. Now, if you don't enjoy the gameplay that VR offers, that's one thing, but that isn't what you're saying. You're coming here and saying VR isn't ready or that it's a gimmick, which is simply untrue. Most of the things you claim about VR aren't subject to interpretation, they are flat out untrue. This is why I keep arguing.
It's like a gamer coming here saying MMORPGs are a gimmick because they played MUDs... that guy would look ignorant to anyone who new better.
On a scale of 0% VR (real life) to 100% VR (matrix, holodeck), where do you think we are right now?
I'd put us at about 1% (headset only) to 5% (headset + best gloves/suits).
Thats not enough for me. Whilst I admit I have not used any modern gloves, the stuff I have tried out was shit. Such a small amount of the experience being virtual reality creates a massive disconnect in my brain and I fucking hate it. It feels awful. When my eyes tell me to expect something to happen, like someone shooting me in the head, or someone swinging a sword at me, and then it doesn't actually happen because the devices don't exist, I feel disconnected from the experience. It creates a discord in my brain and it makes me disappointed, sometimes angry.
In short, existing VR (outside of racing and space games with devices) leave me feeling worse than when I started playing. That is a really bad thing for an entertainment device to do. I should feel better after the experience, not worse.
Now, as that percentage of VR starts to increase, so will my enjoyment. We'll all have different minimum levels for enjoyment. For you, clearly what we have now is good enough and you're enjoying that. Great. For me, it's not enough. I need more. My expectation is that level is going to come at around 15-20% VR.
As to your comments about why I can accept what I get from a standard monitor?
Simple.
Gameplay.
The single most important thing to me when playing games is the gameplay. A monitor is just a feedback device so doesn't affect the gameplay at all. It can improve the experience, but has no effect on the gameplay. Also, buying a new monitor is always a direct upgrade over what I had previously.
VR, if you just have a headset, doesn't change the gameplay at all, it just changes the experience, but it's a sideways change, not a direct improvement.
If you're using other VR devices, it does actually change the gameplay, and it makes it worse (for my preferences). The gameplay is much shallower than what I can get elsewhere. I have a worse time playing something in VR than I do playing a normal PC game.
If VR improved the gameplay, I'd already have the tech and be using it.
That's why I keep arguing / pushing for improved VR devices. I see massive potential in the technology and I can envisage massive improvements to society when we finally get there. I mean, just think of the health benefits if we actually had to run in real life when playing CoD instead of using our left thumb to move?!?! VR is the future, we're just a long way from getting there.
I'd say were at about 75% because there isn't a natural sight FoV (Index gives 130 degrees out of a natural 210). Pimax has a wider FoV but it's stretched in the peripheral to get there which I don't like.
Your
conclusion here is ludicrous. You get angry because if you get shot in
the head or hit with a sword in a VR game, you don't feel it in real
life? Dude, for real?
Just out of
curiosity, what's the FoV on your monitor and how much do you feel in
games now while playing on a monitor? What's with the ridiculous need
for something in one but not the other. It's galled a HMD... head
mounted display. It's an advanced display for gaming, not a combat
simulator shooting rubber bullets and swinging wooden swords.
VR gameplay is different. Now, if you don't enjoy the gameplay that VR offers, that's one thing, but that isn't what you're saying. You're coming here and saying VR isn't ready or that it's a gimmick, which is simply untrue. Most of the things you claim about VR aren't subject to interpretation, they are flat out untrue. This is why I keep arguing.
It's like a gamer coming here saying MMORPGs are a gimmick because they played MUDs... that guy would look ignorant to anyone who new better.
75%??!?!?!?
So, current, on the market VR equipment can give us:
Sense of taste
Sense of touch
Sense of heat
Sense of texture
Sense of pressure
Gravity / g-forces?
etc etc
You really think that 75% of what we experience in reality has been replicated in virtual reality?!?!
We're clearly on a different wavelength here. You don't seem able to comprehend what I'm talking about, so im out.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
So, current, on the market VR equipment can give us:
Sense of taste
Sense of touch
Sense of heat
Sense of texture
Sense of pressure
Gravity / g-forces?
etc etc
You really think that 75% of what we experience in reality has been replicated in virtual reality?!?!
We're clearly on a different wavelength here. You don't seem able to comprehend what I'm talking about, so im out.
Dude, it's "virtual" reality, not reality 2.0. It allows you to stand in front of a dragon without actually getting scorched by fire or eaten alive... run through the forest without actually having to run through a forest... kill zombies, not smell them... fly a jet or spaceship, not pass out from g-forces.
You can get basic feedback on the controllers (or a little more with haptic suits) but I don't think anyone really wants the full blown feedback you're suggesting, not even you.
Again, you are dismissing an advanced method of display because it doesn't apply 100% of the rest of "reality". You currently look at a flat screen that you can only view directly in front of you with none of the "reality" attached but claim VR is a gimmick because it allows real world visuals without the rest of the "reality" attached.
You do realize how ludicrous that sounds, don't you?
And the fun thing is games like Anarchy online, EVE Online, Everquest are still around, and they are still a lot of fun even though they sure don't hold your hand exactly
Well the title really has nothing to do with old school still being around FFXi is also still around it has more to do with IMPROVING and having a REASON to actually want to buy a new mmorpg.
We don't need more the exact same,we already have that choice,we need new and better choices.Better being an important word because if a new game is not better why bother,just play the better game you already own. So there are two MAJOR reasons i believe why we are seeing a stagnant hobby.
1 ADDICTION:It really does appear that there is an addiction in gaming,this facilitates tons of money h being spent foolishly and makes for an easy sell of bad games.Right this moment a possible game changing lawsuit is happening against Fortnite and no it isn't Apple.A Montreal lawyer is about to sue or has already done so claiming Fortnite is an addiction to minors.
2 The Large media outlets/websites:The media is a powerful tool,that is why so much money is spent on advertising and marketing.This is also why we see giants like Apple and Google raping devs of 30% of their profits because devs understand the power and size of giants facilitates more sales.The problem is NONE of these money making ventures ever say anything bad about the games,all they do is market them and shill them to the point every single game bad or even average is given high fives.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
So, current, on the market VR equipment can give us:
Sense of taste
Sense of touch
Sense of heat
Sense of texture
Sense of pressure
Gravity / g-forces?
etc etc
You really think that 75% of what we experience in reality has been replicated in virtual reality?!?!
We're clearly on a different wavelength here. You don't seem able to comprehend what I'm talking about, so im out.
Dude, it's "virtual" reality, not reality 2.0. It allows you to stand in front of a dragon without actually getting scorched by fire or eaten alive... run through the forest without actually having to run through a forest... kill zombies, not smell them... fly a jet or spaceship, not pass out from g-forces.
You can get basic feedback on the controllers (or a little more with haptic suits) but I don't think anyone really wants the full blown feedback you're suggesting, not even you.
Again, you are dismissing an advanced method of display because it doesn't apply 100% of the rest of "reality". You currently look at a flat screen that you can only view directly in front of you with none of the "reality" attached but claim VR is a gimmick because it allows real world visuals without the rest of the "reality" attached.
You do realize how ludicrous that sounds, don't you?
If you read my posts
I said on a scale of 0% VR to 100% VR, im looking for 15-20%.
It's a sliding scale, and each of us is going to have a minimum level where it starts to feel comfortable and immersive.
For me, the current level is too low, I hate the disconnect between what my eyes are seeing and what my body feels. It induces nausea on occasion, but mostly it just completely fucks over any sense of immersion. I'm constantly getting mixed signals and that sucks.
For you, clearly the current level of VR is great. Good for you.
I'm not dismissing VR headsets, I even said that I want one, its just the price point is too high for the limited benefits. If I could get a decent headset for under £100, I'd get one right now.
What I am saying is that a headset is not a straight up improvement over a monitor. It offers some benefits, like 3D vision, 6DOF and whatever else you want to say. It also offers some downsides, like being uncomfortable, putting pressure on your neck, inducing nausea, blocking your view of the real world.
So for me, the benefits of a VR headset do not outweight the downsides.
For you, clearly they do. Good for you.
Does my arguement at least make sense to you now?
Please remember that I haven't dismissed your arguments and opinions. I like hearing them, you are clearly a fan of VR and it's useful to me to hear your opinions, because I have a different opinion. It would at least be polite of you to attempt to understand my opinions, rather than just getting defensive and aggressive.
I know, I know, this is the internet, maybe that's too much to ask.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Comments
Welcome to the forums!
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
My wife and I still log into EQ2. I am having a blast running around AoC. Newer games like ESO and BDO are fun, but lack the depth of older games, specifically in combat mechanics: ninety-percent eyeroll and ten-percent "elite" endgame.
I want a game that I can both play to relax or play to be challenged.
TSW, LotRO, EQ2, SWTOR, GW2, V:SoH, Neverwinter, ArchAge, EQ, UO, DAoC, WAR, DDO, AoC, MO, BDO, SotA, B&S, ESO,
Both. It depends on outlook. The narrower it is the less games will fit in that person's field of vision of what a MMORPG is.
I still have EQ1 installed but find myself not playing for two reasons: corpse runs and WAY out-of-date graphics (given there have been over 19 expansions, it's ridiculous that the graphics haven't been updated since iirc expansion 3).
One of the biggest problems with a lot of potentially good new MMOs has been open-world PvP. I don't personally know ANYONE that wants this in a game and, as soon as I (and those I know) see this, we're gone before it even releases.
Active: D&D Online (alpha,beta,&unlimited)
Retired: Anarchy Online, Archlord (beta), Auto Assault (beta), CoH/CoV, Dark Age of Camelot, Dungeon Runners, Elder Scrolls Online, Everquest, EVE, Guild Wars, Lord of the Rings Online (beta,live), Pathfinder Online (beta), Rift (beta,live), Secret World (beta,live), Star Wars Old Republic, Vanguard (beta), Warhammer (beta,live), World of Warcraft
Which time?
May be people are looking for games that are less massive, in which they have more impact.
I'm not interested in any more focus group games for shareholders.
Have you tried Guild Wars 2? It is exactly what I would call relaxing and challenging at the same time. You can either follow the story and have some really tough missions (I don't know any other MMORPG where I've died so many times as I did in GW2) or you just explore the maps and participate in all the side activities while listening to your favourite music. It can be pretty relaxing. Just a suggestion ;-)
Getting your VR legs can be rough if you have problems with nausea. I don't know what HMD you have, but peripheral vision picking uplow frame rates can cause it. This is why some games like Skyrim VR have brought in peripheral vision when moving. Other HMDs have a stretched peripheral to increase FoV. This can definitely cause nausea.
I'm not sure what you mean by VR being "gimicky". I believe last time we had this discussion you admitted to not having played since the DK2, like 8 years ago.
Are you one of those people that say "talk to me when I can have a holodeck"?... as if gaming can't proceed forward from a flat monitor until we have holodeck technology?...lol
That's what makes it a gimmick. There is not a single game out there which anyone has every been able to point to and say "Look, here is where virtual reality has improved the gameplay". Literally hasn't happened. And that is purely down to the limitation of the devices. "
---Nausea, if you're prone to it, is temporary. I had it a little in some games. Other people don't get it at all or get it really bad. It isn't a universal issue. And inability to see your controllers?... see, it's things like this that make you question your claims that you've even tried VR. You can almost always see your hands or controllers in game. I can't think of a single game in which you can't.
Gameplay is completely different, not just "better". Skyrim VR is a completely different game, and in my opinion better, than Skyrim on a flat screen. Same goes for No Mans Sky, The Forest, Fallout and every sim available... not to mention games made for VR. It's better because it's so different. This is why I think MMOs would be rejuvenated with VR.
You can get basic feedback on the controllers (or a little more with haptic suits) but I don't think anyone really wants the full blown feedback you're suggesting, not even you.
Again, you are dismissing an advanced method of display because it doesn't apply 100% of the rest of "reality". You currently look at a flat screen that you can only view directly in front of you with none of the "reality" attached but claim VR is a gimmick because it allows real world visuals without the rest of the "reality" attached.
We don't need more the exact same,we already have that choice,we need new and better choices.Better being an important word because if a new game is not better why bother,just play the better game you already own.
So there are two MAJOR reasons i believe why we are seeing a stagnant hobby.
1 ADDICTION:It really does appear that there is an addiction in gaming,this facilitates tons of money h being spent foolishly and makes for an easy sell of bad games.Right this moment a possible game changing lawsuit is happening against Fortnite and no it isn't Apple.A Montreal lawyer is about to sue or has already done so claiming Fortnite is an addiction to minors.
2 The Large media outlets/websites:The media is a powerful tool,that is why so much money is spent on advertising and marketing.This is also why we see giants like Apple and Google raping devs of 30% of their profits because devs understand the power and size of giants facilitates more sales.The problem is NONE of these money making ventures ever say anything bad about the games,all they do is market them and shill them to the point every single game bad or even average is given high fives.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.