Virtual reality is a gimmick

vr is the natural evolution of motion controls

No, because eventually it will be how lots of video games are played, no matter how hard it currently flops. The tech just is in its infancy and is going to be for a long time to come. You can fuck your waifu in another decade or two maybe user.

Agreed, they're doing damage control so hard it's cringy. Such as taking down this article.
quora.com/How-big-an-issue-is-the-nausea-problem-for-Virtual-Reality-products/answer/Steve-Baker-9

I returned mine, couldn't deal with the circular lines getting in the way of vision, was annoying as hell.

>No, because eventually it will be how lots of video games are played, no matter how hard it currently flops.

You could say the exact same thing 25 years ago. But it doesn't justify buying VR today.

Pretty much this. Move controllers were pretty accurate and trackable at high angles but most game devs treated them like wimotes; always pointed directly at the screen and doing silly gesture commands. It was a waste of the tech.

Also this. The basic technology is the same but being in VR means the controls can be 1:1 with your hands instead of on a tv.

Anyone who thinks its a gimmick hasn't tried it.

Maybe its a gimmick currently, but in the future it will be the best way to play games.

Teleport to move will kill the tech. Unless more games start coming out with "normal" movement schemes it's dead in the water.

They need to stop catering to weak faggots who can't stomach movement.

>leaving out everyone that can't use VR because of impaired vision
suuuuuuuuuuuuuuure

"Onward" did this and I approve of it

>25 years ago
Think about what you're saying. VR back then was only possible on monstrosities like pic related and it was laggy low-res crap compared to what we have now. Of course it didn't work then.

Glasses fit inside the headsets. Some headsets even have a dial on each eye piece to focus them manually.

Onward was a godsend for my vive. I wish it was more single player but I was happy someone came out with something sensible for once.

>playing duke 3D at an amusement part on these

Top fun

It's not going to replace screen if almost no one can afford one

>he paid less than 800 dollars for his tv

are you poor or something?

I doubt that could fix a still healing retina that barely functions for depth perception and not much else.

>New
Mate, VR is a gimmick that comes back and forth at least since mid 80s

>yfw they reboot Fight Night to be a strictly VR title

I've said it once, and I'll say it again.

VR will never make it market wise until its has a price tag comparable to a cheap monitor, or it manages to unlock sensorial feedback.

Not him, but if you have such problems, probably last thing you should do at all is gaming, so stay rekt

Eye position tracking.
The tech is there, it needs to be cheap, older gens wasnt cheap to cover 110° of the view, it was far less. and the imput lag was really shit, so far that is covered, but now the screens, the fucking screens, a shit samsung or a low res sony. this gen of "VR" is fucked too.

>VR Hajime No Ippo
>VR Punch Out

Retinas heal extremely fucking slowly, if at all.

It's not even that

low-latency VR with positional correction is fantastic tech with a variety of valuable implementations. None of those implementations are gaming-related. Besides the technology being expensive and unwieldy it also introduces massive hurdles to the game experience in all but the most simplistic of designs. Even the games that should translate the best, first-person shooters, suffer greatly as a result of the increased physical exertion and decreased ability to rapidly correct camera and aim.

VR has amazing and disruptive applications in design/prototyping/manufacturing, medicine and surgical training, and (in terms of the consumer sector) pornography. Not gaming.

We're waiting on price drops and at least one must-have VR title to land before we can see just how far it will actually go.

I kind of doubt market penetration will ever be insanely high since normal people will probably always want a normal screen as well, but I wouldn't be surprised to see 50%+ adoption rates among actual gamers if they ever drop sub 250 and have a good library

You can use the samsung gear VR, and other related apps as a normie test field, most normalfags will buy the case, try it once or twice, and then let it dust, but some will stay.
any app to transform videos or actual games could show you how dead it is.
Its not dead, but its not like we are all going to have one, despite having a capable phone.

give it 10 years

its not, it allows you to watch movies like in movie theater, with no assholes around you. Obviously its not fully yet 100% ready, since screen resolution is to small, we need like 4k per eye, to actually get decent 1080p quality.

That's very unlikely in the current climate. The only groups with any incentive to really put money into VR game dev are Valve and Facebook. Valve will never ever release a product in a timely fashion and Facebook isn't interested in high-cost game development.

Combine the lack of a strong user base, low interest from established publishers/developers, the fact that you have to design the game specifically for VR as opposed to just making a normal game and stapling on VR support...

Unless something changes drastically VR has no place in the gaming industry.

Still valuable tech, though. Plenty of B2B applications. It won't be viable as a mass-market product until the tech is far far more advanced, to the point where it would seem like magic today.

Also looks fun-

youtube.com/watch?v=uYYPG4RQ63w

>Literally going to replace screen.
We'll sooner have AR than everyone going full VR.

AR enhances what we already have.
VR does the complete opposite and let's you crawl back into your own personal space like the recluse that you are so that you can live out your sexual fantasies in the corner of your own bed.

Now I am not really shitting on VR here, the latter there is pretty damn amazing in itself. I am however making the statement that only one of these have potential for lasting and widespread mainstream appeal. While the latter will most likely only stay strong among dedicated enthusiasts.

Yeah, because after the Wii Nintendo totally kept putting their resources into developing the Wiimote and waggle controls, right?

They immediately dropped the Wiimote with the WiiU because the Wiimote/waggle controls flopped. They were good for a generation, but weren't interesting, useful, or complex enough to keep mass appeal. The Wii was a toy and an experimental one at that. After all the normies got bored of their novel waggle remote toy within its generation, they stopped buying games and didn't get the WiiU either.

So sure, the Wii as a whole was very FINANCIALLY successful for its run, but technologically, the Wiimote (you know, the thing that made the Wii a Wii and not just a severely underpowered half-console for its gen) was a flop, or else it would have carried over into the current Gen.

Yep, my Vive has had use 2-3 times a week for ~3 hours at a time, every week since I got it. VR, even with first generation technology is the shit.

What do you play with it?

And how good is it to play non-VR games with a Vive?

You speak truth, though. The majority of Pokemon GO's success was from its AR aspects.

>it allows you to watch movies like in movie theater, with no assholes around you

user, people who say this are not people who even like going to the movies, so you're not going to sell it this way to anyone who actually enjoy being in a movie theatre.

Also, even Vive at its current state is not near high enough resolution to give off the feeling of being at a movie.

Why is it that I never finish watching good shows? What was the name of that animoo?

Dennou Coil.

Non VR games suck dick in VR, really fucking terrible experience.

I mostly play Audioshield, Space Pirate Trainer, Hover Junkers if anybody is online (great multiplayer experience), Paddle Up is a fun ping pong game, meet people online, shoot the shit whilst playing. Rec Room is pretty cool. There's a ton of shit worth playing. I also regularly have friends over who play too, it's a super social thing.

Why are you people so determined to say VR is a failure?

No one was amazed by 3D TVs the first time they saw one. Literally everyone is amazed by the Vive or PSVR when they try it. It comes off really lame that you're constant fly shitposting.

>after the Wii Nintendo totally kept putting their resources into developing the Wiimote and waggle controls, right?

Wiimote did get an upgrade during the original Wii's life though: MotionPlus. At the end of the Wii's life it was even integrated into all new controllers.

>They immediately dropped the Wiimote with the WiiU because the Wiimote/waggle controls flopped

Uhh you DO realize the Wiimote is an official peripheral of the Wii U right? It's still sold as such. Considering the Wii U only supports one Gamepad screen, you're supposed to use Wiimotes for multiplayer.

>After all the normies got bored of their novel waggle remote toy within its generation, they stopped buying games

Nintendo discontinued the development of motion control games before casuals stopped buying them. Look at the sales figures.

>the Wii as a whole was very FINANCIALLY successful for its run

Not just for its run. Nintendo made more profit on the Wii than every Sony console combined (even if you exclude the PS3, which was a net loss).

>or else it would have carried over into the current Gen.

It did

AR would be great for desktop/household applications and mini-games, like what Halolens is doing. It's not going to replace games where you want to be somewhere other than your house though.

it seems you never been to a movie theater
>ppl disturbing and slightly movie your chair
>ppl using smart phones
>ppl chattering
>etc etc
If you go to movies you should know this happens all the time and its fucking annoying as fuck.

VR isn't a failure, just as a mass-market gaming product. As a platform it is too cost-prohibitive, has too small a consumer base, and it lacks cross-platform appeal for developers.

VR is fucking incredible technology for, say, training surgeons or collaborative prototyping and design. Perhaps anxiety or PTSD treatment and therapy. Expensive pornography.

Just not gaming.

"VR" isn't video games, it's just simulation. It's the quasi-official platform of degenerate-era games.

Jellypoors.

>It's just a gimmick! It's the next wagglan! Get ready for a flood of half-baked shovelware games that put VR Goggle gimmicks above actual gameplay and overall quality, then say goodbye to VR for another 20 years!

>It's revolutionary! It will change video games forever! Goodbye TV screens, this is the new monitor and controller! VR is the future of video games and will make every game so much more immersive and advanced! Can't wait for virtual full-body tactile senses so we can get our VR sex waifus!

Am I one of the only people who seem to think that neither of these outcomes will be the reality?

It's clear that VR is bigger than just some new controller gimmick. There is so much money being put into this, and so many mega-companies competing in the field, that it's being developed far beyond any simple motion-tracking wand. Also, the whole sight + sound + body tracking thing literally puts you inside your favorite first-person games, aside from tactile sensation (sense of touch). Also, it's not having games simply made FOR it, like Link's Crossbow Training and such. Popular, fully-fleshed-out games that already exist will be compatible.

But, on the other hand, I don't see this ever replacing video games as we know them. VR isn't the "future" of video games, because VR isn't the same thing as video games. VR has a specific purpose, and that's to amplify immersion in first-person games. There are still many many games that work best with third-person perspective, and VR, while possible to use with these games, wouldn't really add anything to them aside from feeling like you're playing them on a screen so wide it fills your peripherals, and maybe letting you move the camera by turning your head.

In the end, I see VR developing ALONGSIDE video games. It would be like flightstick technology. Flightsticks and control decks have far more buttons and options than normal game controllers, but they didn't replace game controllers. They developed with them.

>does anyone else think VR is going to do well, but not in gaming right now?
Yes.

This.

VR could work in many other applications, but not for vidya. The VR eveyone wants for gaming still is far ahead in the future

>>does anyone else think VR is going to do well, but not in gaming right now?
That is not at all the question I was posing.

what about porn games?

>cool new EVE game comes out for PS4
>PSVR required
>o-oh...
Fucking aren't they not even available for preorder? Everyone says they sell out instantly. Are they even going to be available for everyone who wants one? Is it gonna be like the Vita where they make good ones at launch and after a year or two they make a dumbed down version?

Yes, that particular niche (probably more accurate to call it simulated sex than porn games) will absolutely be a primary financial mover for VR going forward.

Porn is usually on the front lines of funding for technological advancement. Remote credit card transactions? Porn. Streaming video? Porn. Increase pressure for higher bandwidth from ISPs? Porn. Flash? Referral rings? Web chat? Porn, porn, porn.

>It's not going to replace games where you want to be somewhere other than your house though.

>Play regular game. With a regular TV/Display. With a regular controller.
>Turn on your AR glasses, and all of a sudden you've got a HUD and other user interface elements beside or ontop of the screen or whatever
Really. The entire thing about AR is that it enhances what you already see, or augments it so to speak. AR doesn't need to be some super gimmicky thing restricted to what you see on your living room table or whatever. It can easily just contribute to how we already play games.

Or, just replace or enhance what we already use smart phones for. Always easy to access customizable screens anywhere in your field of vision. For communication, browsing the internet, etc, etc. The very fact that AR can so easily lend itself to such quality of life enhancements already lends itself towards potential mainstream appeal in ways VR does not, even if it had nothing to do with gaming.

>tfw good VR is too hardware intensive and I cant integrate it into a mobile platform without it being 20+ lbs.
My cyberdeck will have to wait.

>Bothering with an AR enhanced screen when you can just have your entire view put inside the game with 1:1 scaling.

I don't think you understand why people are so excited about VR. Tried it myself and monitor now feel very tiny and limited.

AR is handy and neat but people don't buy games just to wander around their house or get strange looks from people in the street as you fight imaginary aliens. People want new sights.

Pokemon Go's success was from geolocation, not from screen-overlay AR, which most players turn off.

AR is a million different technologies that don't exist yet. It's foolish to say it will overtake VR when VR is a lot more practical (in terms of projecting a player into a fake 3D world) than AR (in terms of projecting a fake world on top of the real world, which has to be identified and parsed by the computer).

Why has my waifu been de-rezzed into a Faaux gif

Yes much of what he said, non VR games require 3rd party apps to work so I haven't even fucked with it. I play a ton of paddle up currently, LAB, project cars, Rec Room, Pool Nation VR, Gamecube games in Dolphin VR. Before I bought the Vive I figured I wouldn't care for room scale but it is exactly the opposite, room scale truly is the future.

I don't know but I found the effect attractive so I saved it.

just come from playing some onward knife only matches

this shit is awesome

Careful user. Naysayers will just call you a shill.

it's a new tech, too expensive, it will become cheaper on next generations, then mainstream, this happened every time, smartphones, flat screens....

I agree with that. Same with people saying not to buy 1st gen.

I'm talking about the parrots who just keep yelling "fad!" and "gimmick!" over and over whilst everybody who has tried it themselves confirms that it's good stuff.

>this happened every time
Because everyone fucking loves their Wiimotes and Kinects!
Oh wait.

nah those games where casual shit boring fast

Yes, but only because of the motion controls itself
>inb4 my nausea
I don't care, I'd rather throw up then play with an awkward controller that can't allow me to actually move.

Seriously, if the controller can't even make the player MOVE (and no clicking at a spot to teleport isn't really good movement) then you fucked up somewhere.

Onward is fucking great though.

Not only is VR a gimmick, but Palmer's memes are going to bring the end of VR sooner than expected.
Occulus was the first big VR company, but the damage to their PR is way too big to fix.

Have you considered the possibility that Wiimotes and Kinects were just bad ideas that could never deliver the level of immersion that was marketed?

Meanwhile VR delivers exactly want it promises, as confirmed by several hundreds of people who own or try it.

Why are we still having this debate?

VR also shuts off the world.
It might be appealing to you, but for many that just means it's cumbersome and not suitable for when you aren't alone.

While I agree that VR seems to deliver what it was marketed in the first place, the problem for me at least is what it's marketing isn't really worth buy.

VR is a cool experiment but the average person isn't going to spend 800$ on an experiment that might not even work for them considering the product needs a certain room size to even work.

Sitting down at your computer with headphones on or watching TV alone in your house are things that many people do on a daily basis.

Well that's kind of the point of immersion, yeah.

Plus I had fun putting my friends through Alien Isolation's Survivor mode whilst we watched their view on the monitor.

>Can we finally agree that VR is the new motion control?

It could end up there, but people want VR to work harder than anyone ever wanted motion control to work.

There are some HUGE fucking problems though. Camera turning for example. The fact that humans can't turn their necks 360 degrees makes camera control, something that was 100% solved in normal games already, a fucking nightmare in VR.

can we finally agree that someone really doesnt want vr to catch on for some reason for all this shilling to be constantly happening?

In what sort of game is camera turning an issue?

Is it worth buying solely for pornography?

In literally any first or third person game in VR. Because the way it's supposed to work, your head controls the camera, right? That was one of the main points of VR. But you can't actually do that, because your camera needs to be able to rotate full circles, and your head can't. Every VR game where you move or look around instead of merely sitting and watching just fumbles like crazy over how to handle the camera. Something that's a complete non-issue in non-VR games since thumbsticks and mouses have no limits.

That's your problem. Take better care of yourself next time

>will replace screen
seriously its so much safer and more efficient
i mean would you rather have a $600 40lb giant fucking flat glass thing on an entire wall that could break from getting tapped slightly too hard,
or
would you rather have for the same price a little 1lb plastic thing the size of your head that you can tuck away at any time thats just as detailed AND blocks out all glare and other light and has 3d?
i can honestly see tv manufacturers getting pissed as hell pretty soon

Oh, I see what you mean. Yeah, it's an issue for seated experience if you're relying solely on head pointing to turn the player character, but if you're doing M+KB it shouldn't be an issue. Office chair+controller also works pretty well from what I've heard, and in third person games it's fears of nausea that stop people from adding camera rotation.

>Literally going to replace screen.

Literally never going to happen.

This won't be an issue for at least a few generations because current VR headsets have nowhere near the resolution required to duplicate a TV-on-the-walls experience and cannot be shared with other people in the room.

motion controls are amazing, but vr is just shit.

if your retina is still healing from whatever horrific fucking shit happened to it to put it in that state, then you dont need to be stressing it the fuck out with all the rapid movements and accomodation and light changes and shit youd be doing with vr anyways

>Yeah, it's an issue for seated experience if you're relying solely on head pointing to turn the player character, but if you're doing M+KB it shouldn't be an issue.

The second half of the problem is that using mouse + keyboard (or thumbsticks) to control your camera in VR disorients people like nothing else ever. Because all of a sudden your viewpoint is being wildly spun around by something external.

This is a hard problem to solve. They'll probably figure it out eventually, but if you've wondered why nobody just makes "real games" on VR devices yet, this is one of the main reasons. In real games you need to be able to run and jump and spin around, and your camera needs to be able to handle that while not making you puke your guts out. Most VR things currently try to keep the player seated instead, circumvent the problem, since they don't have a solution yet.

what we need to do is get some fucking vr arcades going, that will fix the price issue until the manufacturing process becomes efficient enough for such a low price
isnt that exactly why regular arcades started in the first place? cause people couldnt afford giant home consoles/ computers?

It is not a gimmick for racing sims because depth perception matters.
It wouldn't be a gimmick for flight sims if it had high enough resolution.
These are niche markets.

For everything else it's a gimmick.

They have backpack pc's designed to run vive heavy hitters.

If you have the disposable funds that is...

>Is it worth buying solely for pornography?

Eventually, probably. VR is porn is something that people want VERY badly to exist and be good, so I have confidence that it will be good at some point. The question is, will it be used for anything else.

Yeah, it's been extremely disheartening, but Onward is a conventional Insurgency-esque VR shooter that uses joystick movement and apparently has had minimal problems for players. Probably because the movespeed is very slow. Hearing about its success has given me reason to hope again.

You can super sample well above 4k per eye but you need an absolute monster of a pc to run 90fps.

>800 dollar TV

Console cucks need to go

VR will never take off as tool for innovative gaming if left to the west. Japanese developers are actually exploring the medium, but the userbase for VR is too small in Japan due to console dominance and tight living spaces.

So I guess enjoy your western garbage and VR facebook.

> crawl back into your own personal space like the recluse that you are so that you can live out your sexual fantasies in the corner of your own bed.
>only one of these have potential for lasting and widespread mainstream appeal.
give it time user, everyone's lives are becoming much emptier and lonelier as time goes on
japan already seems to be most of the way there
soon we will all be neets

>full motion arcade units are available from China relatively cheap
>VR for sitting in a chair with a wheel and/or HOTAS is perfectly usable

A golden age is upon us, all we need now are AI waifus like in Summer Lesson to be our co-pilots

VR is good for people working on their computers. Blocks out distractions and allows the eyes to focus at a farther distance. You also get a massive virtual workspace.

>tight living spaces.
Funny you should mention that, your webm is from a tech demo for jog-in-place locomotion to solve this

youtube.com/watch?v=epEIQn0v1vw

now bring on the mech pvp boiz

VR is going to take off, whether you like it or not. The mass consumer is certainly not Cred Forums. The majority of the public is blown away when they try vive. Once again, most of Cred Forums is shiteater poor fags.

been done. everyone realized it's boring and moved on.
Genre died for a reason 15 years ago.

Unfortunately the resolution on first-gen headsets isn't good enough to do real work with. Small text can't be read, you have to lean in close to see stuff on your virtual monitor, so on and so forth. Maybe in a couple of years it will make sense to use VR for general productivity: for now it seems mainly useful for people working with 3D models.

>other people in the room
pfft check out this casual
i bet you have friends too
and a living room

"First gen" was like thirty years ago my guy

Cred Forums has actually been getting slightly more informative with their VR threads. I think it's due to Sony working on a headset since this is a playstation dominate board.

>not also using the tv as your monitor
retards need to go

What do we call this one then? I'm aware VR has had a long history of stumbling attempts, but I'm talking about the 2010s mainstream VR push that's going on right now hitting its very first consumer generation.

I just tried Gear VR and it's absolute okay product

See
It's not going to be idea for most businesses but mega corperations (google etc) and government agencies do have access to the tech required to run high levels of SS.

Supersampling helps but I'm not convinced it can overcome low pixel density in the foveal area.

First consumer generation was still a good ten years ago mi amigo, headsets from that generation are still at use in military and academic research labs

I don't think you can really call military and academic researchers 'consumers', but whatever. What do we call this generation then?

I dunno man, the difference between 1.0 (2160x1200) and 2.0 (4320x2400) is as clear as night and day.

As I mentioned previously it's extremely performance intensive so like you previously stated it's not feasible to the mainstream currently.

Then again nobody has made a bare bones "Microsoft Office" type program so without all the visual flare a modern computer probably could run high levels of SS provided the program focused on just text and images.

The headsets in question were commercially available for consumers, it's just that they were $2300 and very few people bought them.

Î guess it's really something for space/flight/driving sims. And walking games, especially the spoopy kind for the epic LPer reactions XD.

Beyond that it's going to stay a gimmick, as far as vidya is concerned.

Who the fuck would pay $800 for a fucking phone???????????????

vr is plagued by the gimmick of motion control
i just want to play normal games in 3d but control the camera with my head

Impossible for reasons described in

you make it sound really normie and gay. why the hell would you want vr just to physically invite people over? what a counterintuitive idea. sounds like the wii 2.0

im fine with doing broad, 180+ degree movements with a mouse/controller and doing everything else with my head

This. The WHOLE POINT of VR is to be able to forever cut off contact with other people. To strap on your give-up machine and leave this shitty world.

Forget VR, hologram rooms are going to break the market.

Forget holorooms, temporary custom-made physical realities are the real game-changer.

You guys are all doing it wrong. Half Life 2 and using the mouse to aim the gun, while also rotating the body, and the head tracking is totally separate, allows you to run around quickly and shoot stuff with accuracy while keeping your head very still. It's amazing. And fuck motion controls. And fuck the people who need it to not get motion sick. These people are what's holding back game development for VR.

The human race would go extinct

But VR is motion control plus a monitor. How can it be the new X when it incorporates X?

I believe this is true. It began as soon as the oculus buyout happened.

Different use of X in combination with other stuff.

It's like comparing a pancake to a crumpet.

What's preventing you from just turning around? How does that not sove it?
As far as The Locomotion aspect is concerned Why don't they just make it to where you can control movement over large areas with the d-pad or analog and then once you get to that area you can stop moving and start using the headset and walking within your designated space to explore it in more detail, rather than using blink locomotion

AR is much harder to get right. It's literally impossible for current tech to analyze everything you're looking at

Crumpet isn't the new pancake, though

Non-VR games suck ass in VR.

One of the best Vive games is called Onward VR. Seriously, look that shit up.

Onward VR does exactly this and it is the best game on Vive right now by far.

So you can run to cover using the analog then use room scale to move about? Thats awesome. Is there offline play?

>What's preventing you from just turning around?

You're sitting on a chair, and your head is connected to all sort of shit with wires.

Locomotion issue seems simple if they designed a game where you're just running in a straight line from point A to point B to then further exploring point B using the room scale it seems like that should be manageable even with people that are prone to motion sickness. Especially in games like Skyrim where you quickly traverse wide open spaces and then stop for melee combat or exploration.

Vive? Just stand up? Also attaching the cables to the ceiling using a dog walking leash or clothesline reel works pretty well.

No, because motion controls were cheap and actually had a wide appeal. VR is expensive and only has a niche market.

>So you can run to cover using the analog then use room scale to move about?

Yep!

>Is there offline play?

Only shooting ranges and target practices. Its a primarily online only game. I think you can start a match by yourself and walk around an empty map if you really want to though.

I want to plug my brain into a computer, not velcro a screen to my face.

ITT: People who have not used a Vive.

I was 100% against VR until I used a vive.

Fml satalite internet.

Yes, and its amazing.

youtu.be/BSxuj3z9JUo?t=7m37s

Start at the time stamp- 7 minutes and 37 seconds in and watch from there until the end. Gives you an idea of what a typical match looks like.

It already did.

>Move was the better motion controller
move is utter dogshit technoloy. kinect was shit yes, but kinect for xbone has seen use in other applications outside of vidya. it's becoming very useful in many ways, it's just the responsiveness isn't there.

move was just wii controllers with balls. same way sony's vr will just be a baby gimped oculus/vive- fucking hilarious that it uses the move controllers.

I just bought a Vive and it should be delivered on Saturday, this thread makes me both apprehensive and excited. Where can I get the best waifu sex simulator?

better vid

youtube.com/watch?v=PbNqjOXxNCs

This.. looks... like so much fun!

VR is only good for /d/ material.

Such as.... I'm asking for a friend..

I really want a Vive but I just can't justify owning one yet. There aren't enough games and the technology itself feels rough. It gets really fucking hot too.

>tfw i desperately want VR
>tfw i'm willing to spend that much money just so i can play euro truck simulator 2 and american truck simulator

i really have zero interest in those shitty shooting gallery games. i get the feeling i should get an oculus because i won't be using much roomscale stuff. i imagine i'd get bored of it after a week, whereas a standard cockpit experience in vr would be great.

Extreme size difference . First person vore.

I've seen some games that would work great.

Hoho shit.. i didn't even consider that.. the possibilities..

>reticule jittering all over the place because you can't keep unbraced one-handed motion controllers steady

power gloves fucking when?

forgot pic

Manus VR is taking pre-orders for their hand tracking glove and Dexmo is teasing a force feedback unit for your fingers, no idea when either of those are coming out though

There's also unicorn horn camera modules you can tack onto the front of the HMD to track your hands without gloves

i have never liked tracking cameras since they were never precise and always jumpy to some degree

Not really fetish related but I'd like to see a game where you can possess NPCs to achieve a goal.

The twist being that your vision height and over stuff are effect by that character. Short or long sighted have a DoF effect that makes mission stuff hard to see, Colorblind could have the red spectrum or another greyed out, short characters can see or reach things taller ones can, etc.

Sounds like it would be a weird puzzler. Jumping between hosts to make them work together for your goal.

fuck, cant wait to E X P L O S I O N with this

Megumin would cry if she saw these pitiful explosions

youtube.com/watch?v=7sJy0rL6lsI

>VR will never take off as tool for innovative gaming if left to the west.

Yes because Asian culture is a veritable spring of original ideas and creative innovations rather than cultural appropriations and knock offs LOL.

>taco bell is even jumping in on the VR bandwagon
Its only begun you silly faggot.

>VR will never take off as tool for innovative gaming if left to [corporations who only want immediate profit]

Fixed that for you.

Add on to this that all they want to use it for is VR waifu simulators

That technically isn't even a requirement for AR. Even if you just had a bunch of virtual displays overlaid in the corner of your vision at all times that would still be VR even if it didn't relate to anything in the environment.

>Japanese developers are actually exploring the medium

>Posts a "be the loli" game

Fuck you.

Liek the others.

They're all okay.

Just not. That exciting.

Solid ideas man. Outside the box. I like it.

>custom physical realities

Isn't that what we do when we build a set and put people in costumes, though?

My vive and rift have sat unused for 3+ months. You are forcing yourself to use it aren't you? Maybe when there are some 'killer apps' that are not 95% modded to supporrt a HMD.

>vr isnt a gimmick
Whats it like being retarded Cred Forums?

I would like to see what people do with those types of games.

Imagine if they took one of those 'sleep with your waifu' sims and made a horror game out of it.

Like a scooby-doo-ish "You'll only inherit my fortune if you spend one night in my mansion" scenario. You must remain in your bed as strange things creep and happen around you.

try playing sims instead of gimmicky shit

>he fell for the VR meme

I just wish people would stop calling it VR everything display technology comes with a couple new input technologies to tag along.

The VR people are currently buying in to is just a loosely defined set of input/output technologies, and not a very expansive one at that.

We'll need a couple more core technologies to be standardized before ordinary people will give much of a toss.

Not that user, but that sounds lame.

Not him but I use mine daily with tiltbrush, onward and space pirate trainer (big update recently).

Hover Junker's is working on a single player campaign as well looking forward to that.

Personally I think this shit just needs time. Many games were pretty shit when we shifted into 3D and I'm going to look at this with the same mindset.

Once the price comes down and devs work out how to make VR games "work", then I reckon it'll be worth it.

>this is lame
youtube.com/watch?v=cndudJShthY
youtube.com/watch?v=tbHou0IMVPI

People saying that VR is a fad like motion controls are brainless idiots.

VR will be a game changer, just not right now, because it's still too way early for it to be good enough and actually mass marketable.

I mean, you naysayers are welcome to stay on your flat screens and be miserable but I read The Long Dark is getting VR support, so I'm pumped.

Wii didn't flop. Don't be a revisionist retard

It flopped like everyone knew it would

>Think about what you're saying. VR back then was only possible on monstrosities like pic related and it was laggy low-res crap compared to what we have now. Of course it didn't work then.
I played one of those monstrosities in the 90's.

It was a dumb gimmick 20 years ago and a dumb gimmick now. While the graphics have gotten better and the like, the core concept is the exact same as it was 20 years ago and that concept was shit.

Yes, this is the point, but it's so cool that you just have to tell other people.

It's like when you play a new game and tell your friends or post on Cred Forums about it. You just want other people to get excited too.

I think the problem is that roomscale and motion controllers are stirring things up and many devs want to see where things settle before they commit the time and effort to VR support for their games.

It's not just the hardware either many community demos play with control methods and see what stick. Like the 90s where WASD, IJKL and arrow keys were used in different games until the former became the standard. The more games get made, the more devs feel confident to follow their example.

Would also be nice if devs realise seated VR with regular controls are still valid. Roomscale is great but not everything.

Yeah, I tried one then too and it's nothing at like modern VR. Not just graphics but the FoV and positional headtracking. You're missing out on something good to pursue that pessimistic viewpoint.

jesus that guy needs to shift up more, he was bouncing off the limiter nonstop.

My eyes start to get sore after using my Rift for ~45 mins, anyone else have this problem?

Besides that, it's fun to use, though like others have said there aren't that many great games/apps for it yet. I just ordered a racing wheel the other day to use with Project Cars, and I've had a HOTAS setup for Elite:Dangerous since I got it, which is an amazing experience in VR.