LittleBusters
Banned
When Apple is LAST to market everyone hails them as geniuses because they always 'get it right'. When Microsoft tries to do the same thing, they get terrorized by the media.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Here's what happened to Microsoft's Xbox VR gaming headset.
- Thread starter IbizaPocholo
- Start date
When Apple is LAST to market everyone hails them as geniuses because they always 'get it right'. When Microsoft tries to do the same thing, they get terrorized by the media.
bitbydeath
Member
It wasn’t VR in a cinema environment, you had no interactions with the game via VR at all. If you turned your head you’d look around the cinema. So it was nothing hardware taxing.
Nobody else does it because it was a silly idea to add a distraction while gaming.
Last edited:
octiny
Banned
That picture you keep quoting is exactly that. Playing a normal game on a screen within a Cinema room where you can move around your head as you play. You really don't know what you're talking about. Just stop while your ahead. Not taxing?
Research before you type. It's more taxing than playing a straight up VR game as you're rendering two enviroments at a high refresh rate at once. This is not debateable. It's fact.
There are hundreds of apps on Vive & Oculus which do exactly what I'm saying. Thousands of threads particularly for BigScreen Beta, which I think is the best one that can put it into laymen terms for you. This is WHY PSVR does not include a virtual enviroment with PSVR while using Cinema Mode. So your poor attempt at dig on Xbox VR saying "Xbox was only good enough for this" is actually a compliment, when you thought it wasn't lol. In any event, neither console is powerful enough for it.
Last edited:
mango drank
Member
Console VR seems to be the path to mass VR adoption. Because of that, it'd be nice to get some competition going between Sony and MS. I was hoping MS would release their own headset next gen, and maybe they still will after a few years (instead of waiting till Xbox 2026), but I'm kinda disappointed they're not jumping in straight away. Like others have said, more money poured into development and games means more sales, which means more money for faster VR research and iteration, which means faster progress towards lighter, cheaper, and wireless VR, which will be the tipping point. By delaying their entry into the market MS is delaying mass adoption of VR.
I don't think VR is going to "die" again before the tech becomes good enough for mass adoption. It's just going to limp along slowly until MS kickstarts the competition again. That said, I'm excited to see what Sony comes up with for PSVR2 this coming gen.
I don't think VR is going to "die" again before the tech becomes good enough for mass adoption. It's just going to limp along slowly until MS kickstarts the competition again. That said, I'm excited to see what Sony comes up with for PSVR2 this coming gen.
danielberg
Neophyte
Its impossible for me to going back playing wipeout none vr, its insane how much more i appreciate the games physics in vr to the point my entire body swings with the turns and i naturally use the best line in races, it even turned my most hated track sebenco climb into my favorite because i love the feeling of getting tricky corners just right.
This shit needs to catch on sooner rather than later, we need headsets and cards that can power 4k or at least 2k resolutions in vr lol
This shit needs to catch on sooner rather than later, we need headsets and cards that can power 4k or at least 2k resolutions in vr lol
Lol, what? No, just no.
octiny
Banned
Yes. This is not debateable & common sense.
It's hilarious how some people clearly don't understand this.
Playing a standard non-vr game, meaning it will play at it's native resolution (with no downgraded VR graphics) to the virtual screen while in a 3D rendered virtual enviroment (not just a black screen around the big virtual screen) with head tracking is taxing on both the CPU & GPU even for the most powerful systems out there such as mine. You are rendering the game, then using capture to forward that stream into the 3D rendered enviroment, on top of having to keep a respectable framerate in the 3D rendered enviroment while also keeping the game at a playable framerate.
Last edited:
nowhat
Member
I just returned the PSVR I had borrowed from a colleague, and during those months I had it most of the time it was not plugged in. The reasons for this were twofold, a) it was a first-gen unit, not allowing HDR passthrough - juggling the cables is tiresome, and b) the breakout box has a rather loud fan, or at least that unit did. Yes, my Pro can get quite loud with some games, but I also use mine for Youtube/Netflix/HBO Nordic, and when watching streaming video I don't like the added noise.
Still, while I feel it is still very much a first-gen product, there were two games that are pretty much "there": RE7 and Wipeout. RE7 is terrific, even without HDR. It may have cheap jump scares at times, but the whole experience is just so different than regularly. Wipeout is... transformative. It can also transform the contents of your stomach back to where it came from, when you turn off all the "assists", but the feeling of speed and motion is just unbelievable. I think the next-gen of VR devices will truly show the potential (hopefully with fewer cables too), but I dare any skeptics to try either of those on PSVR and not be impressed.
Arkage
Banned
The biggest problems for me were the weight of the headset and the set-up. I value sitting on my ass too much while gaming, or even in booting up a game. Also I use 4kHDR and PSVR made that a pain in the ass. The Vive and PSVR were fun for a while but I'll just wait for the next few innovations.
danielberg
Neophyte
The weird thing is i played resi7 with snap turning cause ordinary movement made me feel ill so i played half of resi7 with assists and then just to try it tried it again without any assists and from that point i had no issues anymore.
Its not even that i noticed it but i literally got my vr legs in a matter of 3 days without noticing it. I also now play wipeout without any comfort settings locked to pilot view with 0 problems even while working my body in the hairpins lol.
nowhat
Member
Oh I turned off the snapping in RE7 immediately, it just felt off. A little while of adjusting and I was good - and so was the game. Personally, "moving" virtually (while not doing so physically) can feel a bit off, but just teleporting around feels much more disorienting.
Elenchus
Banned
Is that why you keep talking about them in the abstract or referring to unreleased games you know far too little about to pin your hopes to?
This is nonsense. PSVR’s entire library is a shovelware buffet and there is nothing there worth spending $400 plus dollars (can’t forget the move controllers Sony charges extra for) to play.
Just stop misleading people. Even the biggest Sony fanboys on YouTube or Twitter barely make mention of PSVR. It’s about as alive as Vita is at this point.
How can you possibly recommend a buy in good conscious?
cryptoadam
Banned
And how much does this all cost not to mention I don't have a high end PC that can run games in 4K.
So if I want to get in the VR game what am I looking at? 2000$? 3000?
When VR is 3-400$ all inclusive then it will take off. Till then thank you early adoptors for beta testing it and spending a shit ton of $$$ to do so
CloudStrife_ca
Member
The games I've played are definitely not shovelware, one of the biggest issues and this was coming from a friend I had over to try VR for the first time, so coming from a non-biased opinion. Is when watching game play whats shown (in like a review or on youtube) its much different than what it actually plays like in PSVR. In his words it looked down scaled when viewing from a flat perspective from what it actually is in PSVR. Because PSVR doesnt have that high of an adoption rate among the huge user base, I feel the games dont get alot of coverage.
I think anyone who spent a week with a PSVR ver 2 headset, a PS4 Pro and a couple of games, despite this being a first gen product, would in all likelyhood end up recommending PSVR.
Last edited:
bitbydeath
Member
Do you have any links backing up what you're saying cause that doesn't sound accurate at all.
Happy to be proven wrong though.
Alexander DeLarge
Member
Considering I got $799 worth of hardware for $299 over a year ago (Oculus CV1+Xbox Controller+Oculus Touch controllers+7 free games) and have watched similar price drops happen, I have no reason to believe the Pimax/Vive Pro/Vive 2/Oculus CV2 won't reach the same price points in a similar time. Current gen high-end PCVR can be done for under a thousand dollars. Easily (with sales).And how much does this all cost not to mention I don't have a high end PC that can run games in 4K.
So if I want to get in the VR game what am I looking at? 2000$? 3000?
When VR is 3-400$ all inclusive then it will take off. Till then thank you early adoptors for beta testing it and spending a shit ton of $$$ to do so
These are the specs you'd be looking at this price range. 1440p/60 max settings in everything. 4K/30-40 maxed out in most.
https://pcpartpicker.com/list/Mcf4ZR
Also, when 4K is done in VR, it'll be done with foveated rendering that tracks your cornea and renders what you're focused on 100% and scales down what's out of focus at lower percentages. Should be just as easy to run as current gen VR is.
Last edited:
octiny
Banned
Reddit/SteamVR forum are your friends. There's tons of VR threads on this, and if you don't know how to find them then maybe it's a subject you shouldn't speaking on. Start with BigScreen Beta or Virtual desktop.
Tell me this.
How do you think a non-vr ps4 game rendered? The GPU/CPU correct? Now take the game out of the equation.
How is the 1080P 60fps+ VR 3D Cinema environment with seats, ceiling, textures, dynamic lighting & all that goodness rendered? The GPU. Also let's add the head tracking into this, which puts more of a strain on a cpu. Following me?
Put the non-vr game, say God of War 4 back into the equation. How does is the GPU supposed to cope with the game+environment if the GPU (especially the CPU) is already being pushed to the max by the game? What happens? Everything slows to a crawl because there's no headroom.
Now what happens if you take away the environment? And just use a black void like the Cinema mode on PS4 uses. See where I'm going with all this?
Now let's forget about all that. What happens when you play a native VR game, downgraded for VR to push the frame rate? It plays as it should. It was made for it, you're not rendering a 2nd environment.
I'm sure you can figure this out all by yourself & whoever else thinks stuff is just magically rendered without a performance hit. Especially on something already taxing everything to the max (in this case, God of War 4).
It's easy to do this with say watching a movie, but a full blown 3D game? You're out of your mind if you don't think it's extremely taxing and wouldn't bring current consoles to it's knee. Each & every non-vr PS4 game would need to be specifically downgraded in resolution, graphics/effects & so forth to co-exist with the 3D Cinema rendered environment. Not worth it, thus, we get the black void.
Cheers.
Last edited:
A.Romero
Member
I was a VR skeptic but my SO got me a Rift a couple of weeks ago. Luckily my PC is beefy enough to run it decently and I've had a great experience so far.
It doesn't replace traditional gaming (at least not for me) but VR games and apps on themselves are great. I have enjoyed Robo Recall and other games a lot and I haven't even started experimenting with mods. I wish PC had some of the games that PS4 has like RE7 and Wipeout. However, PCVR offers the best VR experience period.
Also, VR Porn is just amazing.
It doesn't replace traditional gaming (at least not for me) but VR games and apps on themselves are great. I have enjoyed Robo Recall and other games a lot and I haven't even started experimenting with mods. I wish PC had some of the games that PS4 has like RE7 and Wipeout. However, PCVR offers the best VR experience period.
Also, VR Porn is just amazing.
You aren't thinking this through well. First off bigscreen beta is not the same. What was shown is NOT the same as bigScreen beta. bigscreen beta has a lot more going on than a static position camera in a room, it's lan parties and walking around. It also isn't some hobby side project hack. Second nobody is saying a game that maxes out the hardware can then get extra resources to render even more. Nobody has said that. I can tell you this rendering a static position camera with a non VR game on a screen in it is less "taxing" in terms of trying to do things more efficiently to maintain framerate and visuals than a full blown VR game. In terms of the GPU for the cinema enviroment you will render the actual game in a far lower resolution because it takes up far fewer pixels on the screen. That extra GPU power can then be used. Rendering an environment for a fixed camera position is the least taxing thing you can get too. In fact it can be 2 simple images. Now tracking that isn't done by some huge CPU load it would simply be 3 angles polled from the VR device which is doing all the actual tracking, that's not 'more taxing' on the CPU than a full VR game. All this also ignores another possibility that is the breakout box. A simple very low cost mobile processor in the breakout box can provide graphics for the simple add on environment. All this means is that it is far less taxing for the same visuals however you want to look at it. Unless you are somehow saying Full VR games don't use the full resources available to them while your screen within a screen somehow does. Which seems to be what you are now suggesting.
Last edited:
octiny
Banned
Wrong. Big Screen Beta has an offline mode which TONS of people take advantage of, which emulates exactly what that picture depicts. In similar fashion as Virtual Desktop, it's competitor. You can use the online mode, which is a completely different animal in it's own right. Completely different. I won't even get into all the other Cinema apps available.
Wrong again. That is not how it works. The VR screen resolution has no affect on what the source is currently rendering at. The non-vr game will be rendered & captured to the Virtual screen at the native resolution the developers coded it for, thus we get what's called super-sampling on the PSVR screen. This is not a PC, you can't change it like you can on there to extract more performance. It doesn't matter the size of the virtual screen or not, the source will be playing at it's native resolution. All that affects is the super-sampling applied in the given pixels in that screen area (which is more like 540P). In similar fashion as playing a 4K movie on a 1080P tv, it simply super-samples it. This is why super-sampling is huge in VR.
This is the exact reason why it's more taxing than actual VR games, and when I say "more", I'm saying the PS4 can't do it nor the Xbox. The fidelity in graphics on VR games are in no way even remotely close to non-vr games, because it needs keep that framerate up, it's using the full power but in doing so they have to make sacrifices. So rendering a non-vr game, native resolution, no sacrifices on top of a 3D cinema environment (60fps) is a completely different beast. Thus, we get the black void in the PS4 Cinema mode. There's no more power to spare. How many times does this need to be explained in a different way? I think I'm on the 6th try.
So what you're saying is, you need extra power? Thanks.
Cheers.
Last edited:
Nobody said you can't play offline. BigScreen beta however lets you walk around because of that fact though. it has translation and renders a full 3D environment . it is more taxing than a simple 2d stereoscopic cubemap . This was a 2D image with a flickering light
( With extreme screentear to boot)
The other point made is that this isn't some startup hobby/hack they CAN lower game resolution and the game would be less demanding.
Yes on a given hardware maxed out you would need extra power to render the environment if you waste that power rendering at a higher res than you need with that environment there. This wasn't the issue raised by anyone though.
Somebody said that the console wasn't powerful enough for full VR games so they went the silly screen within a screen route, and they are somewhat right in making that claim. The XB1 would struggle far more to do a full VR game because of the ESRAM limitations it was facing. You are saying that this cinema screen is actually 'doing more' when it's not because unlike a full VR game which is far more taxing on the hardware and on the developer there are simple workarounds to get a screen within a screen that don't actually tax the console and work around the limited console power. Either by applying it on a breakout box or streaming to some other machine
You can't have those workarounds on a full VR game. You could even do it however by lowering res even further than XB1 did and applying a cubemap environment around a screen. This is not 'more taxing' than a full VR game in any way and does not address the point the poster mentioned.
Last edited:
octiny
Banned
Again, so you're saying it's not powerful enough? Along with stating it takes more power to do to render a non-vr game on top of the virtual cinema environment? Which would be correct & what I was saying the entire time. Sony avoided that by just using the black void, even with crap tons of people requesting it, if only even for movie watching. It's not worth the time or effect, given the negative downgrades in SS that would've come with it which is extremely important in VR at this stage.
What you're describing is network streaming via PC (Render on Xbox, stream to PC with PC powering the 3D Cinema Environment).That is completely different than what I was describing or what the PS4 does with non-vr games. Or what any Virtual Cinema apps are inherently designed to do as their primary function.
Tons of devices stream into VR. Microsoft's intent wasn't to say "oh hey we're doing this because we can't do VR". It was only to give an option, like many other devices out there. My point still stands on why they didn't go VR in one of the first posts I made on here. It has nothing to do with "power". You can run WMR on the shittiest of shit devices, far less powerful than a XB1.
Again, the poster didn't clarify what he meant by the picture. So to that avail, this whole back & forth conversion has been utterly pointless. Of course networking streaming a device into another device is going to use WAY less power. Though all my points regarding non-vr games being rendered on PS4 (not network streamed & rendered on a different source) on top of a 3D virtual cinema environment still stand.....which were being argued, even after it was pretty clear exactly what I was talking about from the get go.
On that note, looks like we're done here lol.
Last edited:
LittleBusters
Banned
Hololens 2 is coming in early 2019 and I think their VR solution will follow later in 2019. Stay tuned.
DarthBuzzer
Member
The only nonsense here is what you're spouting. You don't even know what the library is like, so don't try and claim it's entirely shovelware. RE7, Wipeout, Moss, Firewall, Thumper and more - none of these are shovelware.
So take your own advice, stop misleading people. I'm an expert in VR, you're just trying to intentionally cause misinformation. It's funny how you even think it's $400. Go do some research.
You're making yourself look like a complete clown.
DarthBuzzer
Member
For a PC + headset, it's $1000-1300 depending on the headset. Windows MR is $200, Rift is $400, Vive is $500. Rift is generally the best offer these days, as it also comes with free games.And how much does this all cost not to mention I don't have a high end PC that can run games in 4K.
So if I want to get in the VR game what am I looking at? 2000$? 3000?
When VR is 3-400$ all inclusive then it will take off. Till then thank you early adoptors for beta testing it and spending a shit ton of $$$ to do so
Dontero
Banned
His point is still valid. VR games are in fact either ports of normal games usually cut down or "experiences" aka 5 minute garbage you forget exist in 5 seconds after you finish it or handful of exclusives which very very much in quality and i can't really point out any exclusive VR game that actually was 9/10 let alone 10/10. Devs are just to hyped about their own farts to see that most of people don't care about some VR experiences and they barely care about motion gaming for anything else than shooters (which is right fit)
From my experience best VR games were:
- Re7
- Fallout4
- Fallout New Vegas
- Dragon's Dogma
Notice a thing ? They were good game to begin with and VR only made them better and they weren't cut down 5 minute wasters either.
DarthBuzzer
Member
Lone Echo is 89/100 on metacritic. People generally love the game. Moss is also highly rated. So is Robo Recall. So is Brass Tactics.
Hayfield
Banned
Strange the change in perspective isn't it?
Last edited:
Elenchus
Banned
None of the games you now list in desperation are considered "must plays", GOTY contenders, or even just system sellers for VR, by anyone and I think you know that. That was the whole reasoned you began pointing to the so called unreleased AAA games to begin with. As for the $400, that was the launch price for the hardware. Do I know how much they've discounted it now to address the flagging sales? No. Do I have any interest in researching that? Not particularly, because I have no interest in the platform.
I only remark on it because every time a discussion is raised regarding whether MS should jump into VR, everyone begins pointing to PSVR as this shining example of success when it actually is a cautionary tale that should ward MS away from the whole venture. Now I understand why PSVR fans, that otherwise have no use for MS, try so hard to guilt MS into jumping into VR to create the broader user base PSVR needs to survive, but I just do not believe MS has much to gain from it and should leave Sony to sink or swim on its own on this one.
There are plenty of third party VR and mixed reality headsets in development and its just as easy to make those compatible with the next Xbox and call it a day. Sinking the R&D Sony spent on this debacle just to have a MS branded headset seems beyond foolish. I'd prefer to see more resources going towards traditional game development (whether its MS, Sony, or Nintendo) and its time for the gimmicks to die. There are other more innovative and interesting ways to push the medium forward than whatever IGN shills as the latest must have plastic gaming peripheral. Time to move on.
DarthBuzzer
Member
You're changing your tune here. I counteracted your point about shovelware, now you bring up GOTY quality? I never claimed those games were winning GOTY awards, just that they aren't shovelware, and are really great games getting high praise.
If you actually think VR is a gimmick, lay down some reasons. I'd love to hear it. No one has ever successfully made a valid attempt, so good luck being the first among everyone.
And if you think anything can push gaming forward more than VR than you are delusional. It is and always will be the biggest change in gaming. Again, name this magical technology that you think can innovate and change gaming even more.
What a joke you are.
Last edited:
I thought Alien Isolation only works on Oculus; the point being its not officially supported. I'm also with you on Wipeout, that is the single best VR game for the PSVR, and its a free update. Puts to shame the rest of the crap released. There are even options to reduce the sickness.
My point is that there is not enough quality VR content, sure there is stuff here and there but as Wipeout has shown the content needs to be of a certain quality otherwise its just pointless. Dont get me wrong I love VR, its just going the way of Kinect. Great idea, but suffers from the majority of content being just a bit bollox.
Louis Cyphre
Banned
Kinect didn't really show the strength of it in many games, VR is a whole new level. Problem is once again the device is a peripheral and will be treated as such. Sony has double the install base as Microsoft and only managed to sell 3 million units. Then to compound the situation the vanilla Xbox One is less powerful so many big titles would have a hard time doing justice. The Xbox One X could do VR quite well but that is even a smaller install base. That's why Microsoft never adopted it yet on consoles. When you see the FRACTION of investments Sony is making it becomes crystal clear why Microsoft would be even less interested.
DarthBuzzer
Member
Nothing says it's going the way of the Kinect. Everyone is still pushing it with long-term intentions. And there are 5 AAA exclusives on the way for PC VR. (Maybe Valve's games will come to PSVR too, who knows)
As for PSVR, you have Wipeout as said, RE7, Firewall which just released, Moss, Sprint Vector, Thumper, Rez Infinite, and upcoming games like Astro Bot, Blood & Truth, Dreams, Deracine, Ace Combat, and the all-popular Beat Saber.
The content is better on PC right now, but even PSVR has more great titles than you give it credit for.
Last edited:
I'm probably not giving it the credit it deserves. Its a fantastic piece of hardware, but the software is just so Meh or just outright crap. Id give "Ace Combat" a go but the rest of the titles you listed I just dont have much interest in (I already mentioned wipeout in a previous post was actually pretty awesome).
It almost certainly will go the way of the Kinect unless there is some piece of software that propels it into the mainstream. My opinion is though beyond vehicle simulation type games its just an expensive novel peripheral. that makes you sick. Saying that, VR on PC will stick around for quite sometime I believe.
DarthBuzzer
Member
Saying that it makes you sick, as if it's going to happen no matter what is just untrue. Sickness doesn't occur for everyone, varies completely by game, and most people are able to overcome it over time if they are even affected in the first place.
What genres or type of games do you actually find interesting? I'd bet I can list some games that are up your alley. Unless you tell me you only play NetHack or something.
Alexander DeLarge
Member
Shout out to Sairento (Warframe meets Ghost in the Shell VR), Lone Echo and Budget Cuts. If these aren't killer apps, I don't know what is.
Budget Cuts in particular reminded me of a traditional Valve game.
Budget Cuts in particular reminded me of a traditional Valve game.
Last edited:
Dirk Benedict
Gold Member
They always wait and get left behind. If this takes off, they better strike while the iron is hot. Also, they won't be able to claim they led VR to where it is today. Opportunistic and typical Microsoft.
I know they will do what's right for them. Either way, they're not detrimental to VR. The progress in technology is and those who are actively funding the R&D for that progression.
I don't own a VR headset, but I am a believer in the tech. I've spent time with it and it's there. It just needs more time to become cost effective enough to penetrate the mainstream. I believe Nintendo is probably waiting as well. Heck, the Virtual Boy was a decent stab at it, eons ago.
I'd be surprised if it wasn't part of their future plans.
FacelessSamurai
..but cry so much I wish I had some
This is the Xbox App on Oculus BTW. I’d know as that is what they showed at the reveal conference and it’s also something you can try yourself right now on a Oculus Rift. It’s Xbox Game streaming to your PC but in a VR environment, has nothing to do with VR on Xbox One.I recall they tried and this was all they could accomplish on XB1.
It's just not powerful enough for VR.
Man people here will just try to find anything they can to bring down MS, going as far as making shit up!
Also, VR is dead in the eater right now, no amount of higher resolution or wireless will bring it back to life. I actually sold my Rift because of a lack of worthwhile and decently priced content. Not worth paying 50-60$ for 4 hour experiences.
Best games were Rez VR and Superhot VR and even those were seriously overpriced. Microsoft did well waiting it out and leaving hololense to businesses only for the time being.
DarthBuzzer
Member
What $50-60 games were you even trying to buy? Most of the high budget AA games are $30.
Did you even give Lone Echo / Echo VR a go? Brass Tactics? The Mage's Tale? Moss?
You'd be completely wrong by the way. 2nd gen headsets will see a massive spike in sales, especially combined with Valve's 3 AAA games.
It makes me sick, and for some games really sick. So sick in fact that after about 3 minutes of playing rigs I had to lay down for like 2 hours; and I agree it may not happen for everyone, but I seriously doubt its just me. Its not a fun sick either.
I cant really say what games I would be interested in as so far almost every game I have played on PSVR has either made me sick, bored or both. Apart from Wipeout, it is honestly the only game I have been able to play for any period of time. with saying that, I need a compelling reason to risk feeling sick for the next few hours if the game doesn't work out. If you have any recommendations I would check em out, I may not play them but I would check them out.
DarthBuzzer
Member
If you're playing at a consistent 90 FPS with a game that doesn't move you around without your own movement, you should be fine. Moss is a good one to try. Literally just your own movement inside a miniature world. Beat Saber is coming later this year for PSVR and that's a big hit on PC. Firewall Zero Hour may or may not cause you issues. But the movement is slow at least.
Wonko_C
Member
Before I got my VR legs my motion sickness red flags were the following: Strafing a little bit while walking forward in RE7, smooth camera rotation with the analog stick, and driving in Dirt Rally and Driveclub. Admiteddly I still use segmented turning for RE7, Doom VFR, Skyrim and Farpoint (Maybe at this point I could use smooth turning without issue but I got used to segmented turning), but for other games like Megaton Rainfall (with the Move patch), GT Sport, DiRT Rally, and Wipeout I can play for 2+ hours without tiring myself out.
Initially I did a lot of research before getting my PSVR and started little by little: I played stationary games first, then when I felt confident I started playing short sessions of the more intense games. As soon as I felt a little odd (which were like the first 5 minutes) I stopped playing. Next day I tried again and every day I noticed I could play longer and longer.
I could say by doing this I nearly avoided getting sick, except for 1 time where I pushed through just to reach a save point and ended up feeling bad for 30 minutes, I never felt that sick since playing Half-Life 2 for the first time on my PC more than a decade ago (That one time was actually worse, I spent half a day in bed). I know people just want to jump in and play the hottest stuff, but patience pays off.
Initially I did a lot of research before getting my PSVR and started little by little: I played stationary games first, then when I felt confident I started playing short sessions of the more intense games. As soon as I felt a little odd (which were like the first 5 minutes) I stopped playing. Next day I tried again and every day I noticed I could play longer and longer.
I could say by doing this I nearly avoided getting sick, except for 1 time where I pushed through just to reach a save point and ended up feeling bad for 30 minutes, I never felt that sick since playing Half-Life 2 for the first time on my PC more than a decade ago (That one time was actually worse, I spent half a day in bed). I know people just want to jump in and play the hottest stuff, but patience pays off.
Last edited:
diablos991
Can’t stump the diablos
MS is smart here.
Current VR is not good and pulling the trigger now would only hurt them.
Current VR is not good and pulling the trigger now would only hurt them.
FacelessSamurai
..but cry so much I wish I had some
HTC Vive Pro hasn’t exactly been flying off the shelves now has it!
Oculus lowered their price and still it isn’t selling all that well. Also, this games you mentionned, Line Echo got boring really quickly and I couldn’t bring myself to buy any of those games after looking at video previews.
One of the most interesting games to me actually was the climb, and at 60$ (exactly what it costs here in Canada ) I would expect a lot more as from what I’ve heard it doesn’t last you more than a few hours.
Even Super Hot VR at 20$ at launch didn’t offer enough content. Nothing in VR right now feels AAA.
The person who bought my Oculus is actually using it exclusively for VR Chat. That actually says a lot...
DarthBuzzer
Member
Well the Vive Pro is intended only for prosumers / enterprise. It's a 1.5 gen device that was only ever expected to be super-niche.
Gen 1 HMD lifetime sale targets on PC (at least for Oculus) are 1 million units. Oculus Rift will no doubt surpass that in 2019. If Lone Echo got boring, you might still enjoy Echo VR as it's much faster paced with more action. Also, video previews are never a good indication of judging a VR game.
12Dannu123
Member
Pure VR has no place in the mainstream market. The better future is Mixed Reality where you can do VR and AR, that's the direction they will take with VR, they have Hololens to prove it and it has a rich ecosystem.