Do you think VR will actually take off in a meaningful way?
What VR device are you looking forward to seeing?
I think Starbreeze's StarVR looks pretty cool, but like any one of the headsets I want the chance to try one out before I purchase it, but this one seems to offer the most field of view, and a pretty decent resolution.
My only worry is if computer hardware technology will advance enough to let us play the new super realistic graphics VR games at the like 120fps or whatever it require for VR headsets to not look like dogshit when in motion.
>>320467754
unless they can fix the motion sickness shit it wont. As it is now if you want to make a VR game it has to essentially play like a phone game and thats fucking dumb
>>320469730
A lot of the motion sickness stuff is from like the "Screen door" effect, and the low fps, plus the field of view ans such not being adequate.
I think it'll get fixed eventually.
vr will take off but it won't go anywhere until they figure input devices out
this shit looks cool:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFpdHjA9uR8
but i have zero knowledge if they have the technology to make these kinds of things work smoothly enough for day to day use
>>320471621
Man just imagine playing like Star Citizen or something with that.
Get to actually grab and operate the controls of each ship.
>>320471621
currently many simulations like the DCS series support it
however you are correct about input devices being a problem for most games, picture people sitting with plastic rifles for shooters
I'm holding out hope for cybersex going to the next extreme
maybe people will finally start making internet connected sex toys worth a damn
>>320467754
I'm waiting on this one also, since it's the only one that doesn't have a shitty FOV and resolution per eye.
not until graphic chips stop being overpriced. so 5 years? assuming wwiii doesnt start.
>>320472239
It also looks the least dorkiest honestly, other than the PS4's Morpheus thing.
They actually tried to style the thing instead of just attaching a box of screens to your face.
>>320472323
Yeah I agree, I'm sure it'll cost a decent chunk of change, but I'll start saving up for it or something similar now.
>>320472442
>>320472323
Where can I buy it?
>>320467754
>Do you think VR will actually take off in a meaningful way?
Yes, just not within the next five years.
>>320472583
Can't buy/preorder right now, still in development.
I'm skeptical, it's going to be very dependent on the price and it's going to need a number of killer apps, but I've gotten to use it and I do believe the technology is very cool and impressive. Got to play some Mechwarrior Online with itand jerked off to some VR porn.I'm sold on the concept, but we'll have to see if it actually gets meaningful support to not just fall into the pit of forgotten gimmicks like the Wii U and Kinect, especially since it'll probably be $400-$500.
>>320472867
Any dates? If it's anything more than a year then why not just get an oculus or something. I'm pretty sure they're working on a wide FOV headset too for v2.
>Do you think VR will actually take off in a meaningful way?
I think it will. As far as I can tell they advertised the gaming market pretty well and has done a good job at it. From everyone I've talked to that has tried it are willing to buy it which seemed to be around $400. They play a single game such as CSGO? Then they still seemed interested, but not willing to go that much into price.
HTC+Sony+Oculus just needs to show it off as an insane tv. Microsoft has done that with hololens, but that's more AR.. ignoring the god awful fov. Still has the problem for mass market of it not being wireless.
>>320467754
>Do you think VR will actually take off in a meaningful way?
Yep
>What VR device are you looking forward to seeing?
Doesn't matter. They're all more or less equivalent. I think people are caring too much about equipment specs and not the amazing experiences you can have
>My only worry is if computer hardware technology will advance enough to let us play the new super realistic graphics VR games at the like 120fps or whatever it require for VR headsets to not look like dogshit when in motion.
It doesn't matter waht the graphics look like. They don't have to be "advanced" to be immersive. even playing shit like minecraft with vr headsets will be great.
>>320473028
Nah, no dates. I would go with Oculus if they produced something with similar specifications (and made the consumer edition a little nicer looking), but until then I'll wait for StarVR.
>>320473159
Eh, that makes it sound like vaporware or something. Was it even that good? Did anyone ITT even try it?
>>320467754
none of the PC headsets will take off in any meaningful or relevant way. These first revisions will be for enthusiasts-only and even a decade down the line no one other than the top 10% of PC gamers will delve into the types of VR games we think would be perfect (good graphics is what I mean, demanding games like start citizen)
This will forever be the case because barely anyone right now has PCs that can handle games like witcher3 at 120fps and resolutions above 1080p. You might be numerous here, but I hope you are aware you are an exception, e need only to look at Steam users and the types pffft toasters most of them have.
TL;DR: not many people have high end PCs to begin with, and even less have VR-ready PCs. PC VR headsets won't sell a whole lot and games will be mostly restricted to small indie projects or at best kickstarter projects like start citizen. VR won't sell games
----
the only headsets that will (or already have) see success are mobile and console ones. The only ones that are mass market accessible and will get actual meaningful game support down the line (which might even help the PC models when it comes to multiplats getting VR as a worthwhile option profit wise for the devs). within the next decade Samsung and Google VR will sell the most by far, followed by Sony's VR with moderate adoption, and at the far end everyone else.
I think the motion sickness is going to keep a lot of people away to be honest. At least as far as games are concerned. I started feeling nauseous within minutes of using it. There are other cool things and apps to use it for obviously, but none that really rival games as a reason to buy.
>>320473715
>no one other than the top 10% of PC gamers will delve into the types of VR games we think would be perfect (good graphics is what I mean, demanding games like start citizen)
yeah you're exactly wrong though as i said here >>320473135
"graphics" matter far, far less than art style. VR has the power to trick your mind into believing you are in a world no matter what it graphically looks like. If it is interesting and moves well, it'll be appreciated.
VR isn't a replacement for reality. It's about the ability to go into different realms completely.
>>320474319
So far, you're the only guy to get any of it ITT. Good job on not being a pleb.
I think that it will if website developers start engineering their websites to be compatible with VR. Facebook, Youtube, twitter, etc... Imagine having all of those thing's within one singular room (your desktop) a flick away as you're playing your games. That's just from the perspective of a gamer. The applications are endless, really. Think Johnny mnemonic, but, well, realistic, and streamlined.
>>320467754
It's needs to be affordable first and foremost. It then needs to be easy and comfy to wear. After that, it needs to be compatible with as many devices as possible.
Only then will it be a success.
![s1200_thumbs_up[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/1tGeDLK.jpg "s1200_thumbs_up[1].jpg")
>>320474539
I've been around games for a very long time, longer than most of /v/ has been alive. Significantly.
Stuff like this I could've only dreamed about when I was younger. It has been a dream for so long, and now the technology is finally good enough to make it real.
People picking it apart over not being able to run games on "ultra" settings simply don't get it. A lot of VR games will *purposefully have simplistic graphics* because that will actually trick your mind into believing it's real MORE than realistic graphics would. When things get "realistic" the uncanny valley appears. It applies to all things in a way, not just characters.
Imagine playing Wolfire's Receiver in VR for instance, with motion controls. Fucking intense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCThInmzjXw
>>320474606
Well, I mean if you look at all of the development as it stands. We're getting all of those things in spades.
>>320474561
>Think Johnny mnemonic
see >>320471621
>>320474710
Didn't Receiver have a VR version at one point, or am I remembering wrong? I didn't bother looking into it at the time because I didn't have, and couldn't get a Hydra. Too bad STEM was a bust. Fortunately I've used all of these devices and prototypes that were at trade shows quite a bit and have effectively felt what it's like to own some of them. I don't have that much free personal time anyway.
>>320474770
Ha, yeah there ya go, but I'd do without the hands my self. I was thinking more of like transparent indicators of some sort to signify where your hands are.
>>320474981
if you know that movie though, how insane is it that we are now approaching that type of interface as a real, usable thing? it was the first thing I thought of when I saw that.
badass movie. I miss the 90s
>>320474953
I should have also prefaced that by saying I'm a journalist specialized in the field of VR. I won't say which, but it's one of the big 3 in VR news sites that I'm associated with.
This is definitely the future and I have good reason to be biased about it.
>>320467754
For now, lots of companies will be jumping into VR, hoping to actually make it.
From there, the companies that end up being successful will further develop their VR and eventually lead to far more advanced VR a while down the line.
It'll take off, but only if consumers buy them. The companies that survive will end up being the ones that stick around. Think of it like the early console race, where companies everywhere were shitting out game consoles. In the end, Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft are the only significant companies that came out on top.
It'll be the same with VR.
>>320474953
No idea, wouldn't doubt it, david rosen is big about experimenting with new technology. Like when kinect came out he made a kinect plugin for overgrowh where you could control the rabbit with your body and it would pose like you. I dont think he ever released that
>>320467754
No it won't at least not for now, there are just way too many companies trying to do it and they will end up being overpriced shit with no games. Sony already has an external box just so the PS4 would handle it. It's just a huge mess and that's why it won't work.
Either way, I want it to happen because this has a lot of good it can do while we're stagnant for a new way to play. Put it out in the open to work out the kinks and become something incredible.
I know for sure I'm hopping on the ball as soon as something like Occulus comes out. Occ specifically because I followed it through the previous two dev kits with my friends. We never built anything, but we love some of the content it had spawned from the community.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phFM0MJHOu0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vo1k0tgOSHI
>>320474561
http://www.janusvr.com/
>>320475114
Never mind, my memory failed me and now I do remember. They did support Oculus and Hydra controllers I'm pretty sure now. But if that's not enough...
Searching youtube brings up an immediate result:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnH_gqnDFQ0
>>320474710
>When things get "realistic" the uncanny valley appears.
This is seriously what I hope happens. A move away from this current ultra realism trend and instead bringing back a need for a good art style.
You hit a good art style and just barely good enough graphics and like you said, the brain will get tricked into thinking it's real.
What we need to have though is things with actual depth to them. That means shadows have to have way better processing then they do now. Our entire depth and how we perceive shape comes from our perception of shadows on surfaces. If the shadows for something aren't right, then what we see as convex, might actually be concave and we can't have that in these virtual worlds. It would be completely jarring and bring us out of it.
>>320474710
Yeah, I don't even care about muh grafix when it comes to VR, the sole experience of "being there" makes any sort of game incredibly more enjoyable. One example could be Modbox, it has pretty simple graphics but the hability to interact with the game like that makes up for it.
My only issue with VR is how fast will it evolve, I'll be getting either the Vive or the Rift next year but I don't want to keep spending ~400 bucks every year or two for a more optimized/improved headset.
>>320475517
>>320474710
Yup, Palmer himself suggests this.
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2015/12/16/palmer-luckey-discusses-vrs-bright-future-and-the-barriers-in-its-way.aspx?utm_content=buffer0172c&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
A lot of the tricks used in games for graphics don't work well or at all in VR. Lighting and shadows and other visual cues need to match exactly how our brain expects it to, or else it doesn't seem real anymore.
>>320475864
Then don't. Just because new shit is available doesn't mean you have to have it
as a culture we are way too caught up in this idea-- people getting new phones every year or two and shit, etc
>>320476268
You have to get new phones every year or two because technology evolves rapidly you, dolt. Yes, there is money grubbing involved, no denial there, but even without corporate greed. You still have to stay up to date with ALL of the software that is available through the interenet. As well as game engines, framework, and hardware. Stick to your nokia brick if you want to live in the past, but don't hate on tech heads.
>>320476502
>>320476268
>>320475864
Why don't we just wait and see what happens? I'm sure that if one new product that comes out is very much worth upgrading to, reviews will reflect that. You just need to be an educated consumer. Whether or not you deem some features or others worth it will be up to you, however, but you should be able to judge that accurately with enough knowledge. We don't need to buy a product before it comes out.
>>320476747
Also, I shouldn't have to say all of that. This is just consumer 101.
>>320476502
Old school Galaxy S2s still work fine for most everything except the shitty mobage shit you shouldn't be playing anyway
>>320476502
>You have to get new phones every year or two because technology evolves rapidly you, dolt.
Uh, yeah, right.
>>320477294
Taken out of context, that really does look silly.
>>320477294
as someone who took the very-rarely-offered authentic tai chi, from one of the very few lineages of authentic chinese instructors who ever taught the art outside china
what the fuck is he doing
Fells like all those VR device projects are meant to bait investors and flop.
I use head tracking for racing games and flight/space sims and I honestly can't fucking wait for good vr to happen. The most immersed I've ever been in a game is playing Elite with head tracking, voice control and a hotas.
If your character in game is sitting down, vr will be godly.
if you think gameplay is bad now, wait until everything is an extremely slow paced vr walking simulator
>>320477495
cyber taichi
you try uploading a shitload of data into your brain and try to do the flying crane.
DIDNT FUCKING THINK SO MATE
Are there any VR headsets with realtime eye-tracking? I heard only of prototypes.
>>320477974
That's what I believe the biggest weakness of VR is.
If you're going to play any first person game where your viewpoint is while your walking, doesn't the illusion break? I guess you could stand up, but that might make it even odder. I'm excited for VR but it being such a passive experience seems like it would make it that much more uncanny valley than anything else.
I guess racing games and space shooters would be great.
>>320478792
>yfw it will bring back the mech genre to replace fps
>>320478710
FOVE, coming next year
>>320478792
even in seated games your vestibule won't correlate with the acceleration you are witnessing in game.
>>320478875
Personally, I'm excited for the possibility of futuristic racing games to be big with VR. A revival of Wipeout in VR might be the craziest shit ever.
>>320478792
Not being a real gamer and getting something like this
>>320478918
The developer kit is coming next year, and as far as we know, only to their kickstarter backers and perhaps future legit developers. They don't have a consumer product planned yet.
>>320478792
>If you're going to play any first person game where your viewpoint is while your walking, doesn't the illusion break?
The answer is simple anon: put the main character in a wheelchair.
Fuck VR, I want a sweatband thing that let's me control mouse and keyboard functions with me mind.
THEN it will be the future.
>>320479275
This is the same type of thinking that will cause a Killer 7 sequel to be created in VR, right?
>>320469730
> it has to essentially play like a phone game
That's wrong.
>>320475947
>waving hand around
>grab object
>expect to see hand on it
>there is no hand
You expect there to be a hand holding the object, but you don't. Assuming you had infinite 'realistic' grip points, it looks weird with your hand. I thought that was the most intriguing thing about making it seem real. I guess our brain just fills it in with a phantom limb.
oculous rift is the only one making headway into future of VR
the rest are just cheap shitty half ass cash grabs
the "game journalists" who fucking feign enthusiasm for the next gimmick because they actually are being catered to heavily to sell this new gimmick is fucking sad and pathetic
anyone in their right minds can see how ugly and shitty it looks on consoles, they run shit at like not even 480p and it looks liek shit and has shitty FPS
>>320478792
Not really. You'll believe anything that moves in the game, but not yourself. If you make movements that aren't in game, then it breaks the illusion where you start having conflicting thoughts.
>>320479275
Absolutely fucking genius.
>>320467754
I like to think there could be an arcade resurgence with VR
>>320482383
I think it's gonna be less arcade and more laser tag with graphics.
>>320467754
How I can use a VR headset if I use glasses?
>>320482729
Wear the headset over the glasses.
>>320482806
>>320482729
StarVR is the only one that doesn't work with glasses or with anyone who doesn't have good eyesight.
I think some of the VR hype is over. People just don't give as much of a shit anymore.
It was a nice novelty, but it's taken too long to develop.
>>320481745
The people who are making Job Simulator mentioned in their Oculus Connect talk that making the hand disappear whenever you grab something worked surprisingly well, and a bunch of their testers never even noticed they did it.
>>320483572
I wouldn't take their decisions as gospel. When I played Job Simulator, it didn't really feel like you had your hands in the game anyway, because the hands you have don't align with your real hands exactly, and they themselves are a blocky and weird model.
>>320483820
>it didn't really feel like you had your hands in the game anyway
Have you played something that did feel that way?
Will flop horribly, it has before and it will again.
I got a few hours on a friends DK2, and I'm pretty much sold. I'm the type who is hard to get immersed in things and keeps aware of my surroundings, but this got me for a few good chunks at a time. I can point out the "window" of video you see in front of you, but the motion was so close and fast, that you get absorbed if the content is interesting and high detail.
I'd love to get the Vive in April, but I may get the Rift if preorder starts soon.
>>320484162
What did you play on the DK2?
>>320483914
Yes. I've tried an experiment where you take the point cloud data straight from a kinect and display it in VR. It's almost like magic. That one experiment has convinced me that we need body tracking that is 1:1 and accurate to the look and scale of how your actual own hands look. I have used Leap Motion extensively and it is not very good at actually having it feel like you have hands in VR, the pass-through mode doesn't work, either, because the scale of things is off (the stereo cameras need to be at the same depth and distance apart as your eyes to be accurate, but for Leap Motion, the sensor can only be placed on the front of the headset, and the IPD is fixed). Oculus Touch is a bit better than the Vive at giving you that feeling of having your hands in VR, but it's still not as good as that kinect point cloud, because it isn't exactly your own hand and it doesn't exactly match up with what your real hand might be doing at all times.
>>320484162
Pre-orders open up this year nigga.
That means within 14 days.
>>320473715
Your bias is hilarious. Did you just say that because there aren't many pcs that can get 120 fps in the witcher 3, it will cause it to fail?
Do you even know what fps the ps4 gives on the witcher 3? 20-30. Also are you retarded enough to think that the blurred vr trick is exclusive to Sony? Its not but it is won't look as good as true vr. Also on pc people can tone down settings to squeeze extra juice out of they require it. But I don't expect vr in general to get huge fast. It will be a slow process.
>>320481891
560x480 = 268,800
960x1080 = 1,036,800, that is per eye mind you (single 1920x10800 panel split in half)
I don't give two fucks about PSVR grabbing CV1 or vive myself, but PSVR has close to 4 times as many pixels as 480p.
It looks shit not because of the resolution which is only 120x120 off from 1080x1200 per eye. But because the hardware it is running on is fucking shit for VR.
HD 7850 tier GPU for VR in 2015, come the fuck on. They will be gutting the ever loving shit out of their games to get a stable 60fps just so they can get an early piece of the pie.
If it flops hard it could seriously hinder VR's adoption. They should have waited until the next generation of consoles with more compute power.
Many developers will likely go multiplat as well to maximize their profits which means PC users would get shafted even harder with console parity.
Even worse, some developers might decide they want to double dip and design games that work in both VR and on a tv/monitor, so you wouldn't get a game designed from the ground up to utilize motion controls. They would likely focus on gamepad support only with positional tracking being a tacked on gimmick.
Would have been better for oculus to release their motion controllers with their HMD even if it had to be delayed to Q2, that way all HMDs would launch with motion controllers available.
>>320467754
Well now since there's a headset for smart phones to work as a cheap VR thing. Normies will think phones invented it.
>>320485954
but they do use screens designed with phones in mind in all 3 brands of HMDs, do they not?
>>320486075
They used to.
Oculus is the only one that has come out and said the screens they will use for the consumer headset are custom. But it is likely the Sony and HTC headsets also have custom panels at this stage.
>>320486075
The headset I saw used the phone itself as the screen, you just open the front, plop the phone in, and put the thing on.
>>320486075
Pretty sure at least the Rift and PSVR use custom screens by now. But phones are probably the reason doing something like that is even feasible.
>>320484376
>>320484162
within 14 days, well fuck.
Doesn't hurt to wait until january 6 for HTC to announce what features their commercial version will include. Unless CV1 starts shipping before jan 6 which I doubt will be the case, there should be plenty of headroom to preorder.
I am leaning towards CV1 myself, oculus appears to be way more organized than HTC when it comes to PR. I know what to expect from the commercial version of the rift, meanwhile with HTC they've been stringing us along on their wild ride.
I was hype about Vive when they announced their motion controls and early release only to be let down at the last moment when they announced they would be delaying launch until Q2 without a single blip about their consumer version.
meanwhile oculus has been showcasing their consumer ready version which looked much more compact and ergonomic, especially their motion controllers which blow away the competition as they are much more compact, feel much more natural, and have the same layout as Vive with an additional feature to boot even if limited to pointing your finger.disappointing you can't flip people the bird
I hope Vive one ups oculus with some crazy features, but I severely doubt that is going to happen at this point.
