• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Opinion Hardware Platform Time To Say It: There's No Excuse For Microsoft Not Supporting VR on Xbox

What do you think MS's near-term to long-term move(s) for VR on Xbox are (Choose All That Apply)?

  • 3P VR whitelisted compatibility

    Votes: 76 38.2%
  • 1P VR hardware (9th gen)

    Votes: 8 4.0%
  • 1P VR software (9th gen)

    Votes: 12 6.0%
  • 1P VR hardware (10th gen)

    Votes: 18 9.0%
  • 1P VR software (10th gen)

    Votes: 16 8.0%
  • 1P AR (Augmented Reality/Mixed Reality) hardware (10th gen)

    Votes: 19 9.5%
  • 1P AR (Augmented Reality/Mixed Reality) software (10th gen)

    Votes: 15 7.5%
  • None of the above (MS will never support VR or AR/MR)

    Votes: 106 53.3%

  • Total voters
    199
  • This poll will close: .

DarthBuzzer

Member
Jul 9, 2018
1,290
887
365
Well, this is true in theory, but only for online interaction. VR gaming simply isn't able to provide an engaging local social gaming experience, and for many gamers, the idea of sitting down together on a sofa with friends watching one person ambulate around in a virtual world totally closed off from their friends isn't their idea of a good time.

Practically speaking, however, even online, VR gaming is totally not a dominant social gaming activity the way popular online MP games are. So there's currently far less opportunity for MS to monetize it the way they can with for example Halo MP or Gears 5 online MP. So I'm sorry I just don't think your claim about VR being the "pinnacle of social gaming" holds up to any meaningful scrutiny at all, especially as we're talking about the business of videogames (and not the ability to convey mechanical interaction virtually on a theoretical basis).
Well I did say online, and this is how most people play anyway. Local multiplayer isn't that big compared to online multiplayer. Infact, online multiplayer is much bigger than singleplayer gaming - it's the main method of gaming these days.

Local social gaming experiences can be done with VR too, in the form of asymmetrical games.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
7,298
8,524
555
Anyone who cant aknoledge that sony will have a budget for games is a fool.

Im sorry but when people ignore reality there not much else to really say.

Layden said PSVR hardware makes a profit. Ok great.

But you say I have no evidence, well your wrong here, the obvious Fact that PSVR only sold 5 million units is pretty daming evidence that it was not a platform which would make great profits, especially for smaller games or games with less media coverage.


Youre not even paying attention to me so its useless. And that 5 million number has nothing to do with my point about software cost and r&d. Thats literally unattainable data. Not only that, the 5 million number is irrelevant to my point but also old data.
 

DonkeyPunchJr

Member
Nov 1, 2020
1,219
2,670
425
I’m still not convinced that VR is good for much besides short, novelty, arcade-like experiences. IMO it’s in the same category as Kinect. It’s one of those things you think is THE FUTURE OF GAMING. Then once you spend some time with it you realize it’s a neat toy that offers some unique experiences, but you mostly just want to sit on your ass completely stationary with a gamepad and look at a TV.

It’s been roughly a decade of people swearing that VR is going to explode at any moment. It still hasn’t happened, even with the release of PSVR. If PSVR had really set the world on fire then I’m sure we’d see some answer from Xbox. At this point it makes more sense for them to wait and see.

But hey, thanks for saying what needed to be said, OP. So brave of you to voice this opinion.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
7,298
8,524
555
I’m still not convinced that VR is good for much besides short, novelty, arcade-like experiences. IMO it’s in the same category as Kinect.
It’s one of those things you think is THE FUTURE OF GAMING. Then once you spend some time with it you realize it’s a neat toy that offers some unique experiences, but you mostly just want to sit on your ass completely stationary with a gamepad and look at a TV.

It’s been roughly a decade of people swearing that VR is going to explode at any moment. It still hasn’t happened, even with the release of PSVR. If PSVR had really set the world on fire then I’m sure we’d see some answer from Xbox. At this point it makes more sense for them to wait and see.

But hey, thanks for saying what needed to be said, OP. So brave of you to voice this opinion.


This is pretty much the opposite of what people want for VR. Alyx, Walking Dead, Asgard's Wrath, people want stuff on that level. Kinect never got anything remotely close to Alyx, even if it would have lasted 10 years.

It's also been roughly a decade of people saying VR was dead, and it continues to sell more than the previous year.
 
Last edited:

DarthBuzzer

Member
Jul 9, 2018
1,290
887
365
I’m still not convinced that VR is good for much besides short, novelty, arcade-like experiences. IMO it’s in the same category as Kinect. It’s one of those things you think is THE FUTURE OF GAMING. Then once you spend some time with it you realize it’s a neat toy that offers some unique experiences, but you mostly just want to sit on your ass completely stationary with a gamepad and look at a TV.

It’s been roughly a decade of people swearing that VR is going to explode at any moment. It still hasn’t happened, even with the release of PSVR. If PSVR had really set the world on fire then I’m sure we’d see some answer from Xbox. At this point it makes more sense for them to wait and see.

But hey, thanks for saying what needed to be said, OP. So brave of you to voice this opinion.
It took two decades of people swearing PCs and mobile was going to explode at any moment. Eventually it happened. New tech platforms are just slow to be adopted.

VR is actually good for most 3D game genres, and people like the longer VR experiences as shown by the positive reception of Half Life Alyx, Lone Echo, Astro Bot, and RE4/RE7.
 

01011001

Gold Member
Dec 4, 2018
8,649
13,509
750
they should just try to get a deal with Facebook... sorry I mean Meta of course, and make the Quest headsets compatible using a USB cable or maybe even WiFi

low risk, instant potential install base
 

DonkeyPunchJr

Member
Nov 1, 2020
1,219
2,670
425
This is pretty much the opposite of what people want for VR. Alyx, Walking Dead, Asgard's Wrath, people want stuff on that level. Kinect never got anything remotely close to Alyx, even if it would have lasted 10 years.

It's also been roughly a decade of people saying VR was dead, and it continues to sell more than the previous year.
If there’s so, so much demand for these kind of games then fine. Let Sony prove it. Sony already had the “first mover advantage” several years ago with PSVR and that amounted to jack shit. You can whine all you want about how MS absolutely needs this but reality says otherwise.
 

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
9,857
12,227
815
And it's about to be even more of a waste. Alot more publishers seeing these numbers will not want to miss out. Expect more shitty non VR games and delays as publishers allocate to cash in on the "fad."

So where are all those VR gamers then? Is VR even used for gaming to start with?

Because on steam and twitch VR is practically a corpse already since its creation. VR is now on the market for a while already and yet still no game in the top 100 that gets played. Nobody on twitch that all bought into those helmets is using it.

So what exactly are publishers missing out on?

The same goes for sony and microsoft and nintendo, they can barely feed there main platform u honestly want them to spend resources on VR games that are basically the same level as there tripple AAA games? u will need to get double the amount of devs working on projects and even then u are better of dropping those games on your main platform this is the whole reason why handheld gaming died out. And if you just get VR implementation in current games u will have to reduce the complexity of said games massively to even boot it so GG with that.

So what will happen? they will drop 1 or 2 VR games and deserted it because the main money they probably get out of VR is selling headsets, exactly what valve did with there valve headset and let the market pick up from there which they don't.

VR is a massive waste of time and money. Microsoft stance is pretty dam good on it, let others develop the tech, wait it out and when its actually in a state its useful ( which is probably never ) and the market is there just join them with simple hardware that's cheap and effective and have loads of software available at the time.
 
Last edited:

chromatic9

Member
Oct 17, 2014
4,037
11
500
England
www.flickr.com
Not really there yet but it's coming along well. MS will jump in one day

I said about 8 -10 years ago VR will slowly truck along getting bigger each year. I followed it from when it first returned with Palmer Lucky and Carmack doing the home made prototypes and bought the first Oculus. I could see it wasn't going to die off but also it wasn't going to take the world by storm either, it's a very slow process of technology and software ideas evolving. I sold my Oculus after a year launch around 2017 and not that keen on getting back in until there's really big improvements. Some of the VR fans are quite belligerent it's the best thing going.
 
Last edited:

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
7,298
8,524
555
So where are all those VR gamers then? Is VR even used for gaming to start with?

Because on steam and twitch VR is practically a corpse already since its creation. VR is now on the market for a while already and yet still no game in the top 100 that gets played. Nobody on twitch that all bought into those helmets is using it.

So what exactly are publishers missing out on?

The same goes for sony and microsoft and nintendo, they can barely feed there main platform u honestly want them to spend resources on VR games that are basically the same level as there tripple AAA games? u will need to get double the amount of devs working on projects and even then u are better of dropping those games on your main platform this is the whole reason why handheld gaming died out. And if you just get VR implementation in current games u will have to reduce the complexity of said games massively to even boot it so GG with that.

So what will happen? they will drop 1 or 2 VR games and deserted it because the main money they probably get out of VR is selling headsets, exactly what valve did with there valve headset and let the market pick up from there which they don't.

VR is a massive waste of time and money. Microsoft stance is pretty dam good on it, let others develop the tech, wait it out and when its actually in a state its useful ( which is probably never ) and the market is there just join them with simple hardware that's cheap and effective and have loads of software available at the time.


First off, live streaming VR doesn't work. You cant begin to experience what the streamer is seeing. It looks janky watching in 2d also, so thats a flawed metric from the start.

I mean you can easily search vr yourself. The big games are mentioned here too. My point was bigger publishers will have to take notice. Quest 2 is already keeping ps2s pace and VR has not seen a single year in decline since 2014. Just do the math. Its not slowing down, and all the while getting cheaper and lighter.
 
Last edited:

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
7,298
8,524
555
If there’s so, so much demand for these kind of games then fine. Let Sony prove it. Sony already had the “first mover advantage” several years ago with PSVR and that amounted to jack shit. You can whine all you want about how MS absolutely needs this but reality says otherwise.


Psvr isn't seen as a valid attempt. The tracking was awful, it was expensive, and the controllers were terrible. Psvr2 will be a good intro into vr. Quest 2 on the other hand is outselling every console ever made with the exception of ps2.
 

sainraja

Member
Aug 15, 2007
2,289
1,771
1,480
I think VR exclusive experiences are jarring. I think dev studios need to find a good way to balance the traditional gameplay with VR (e.g. have players put on VR goggles when your in-game character needs to put on something — if a person does not have a VR headset, just overlay that on screen.) That is kinda what I want.

they should just try to get a deal with Facebook... sorry I mean Meta of course, and make the Quest headsets compatible using a USB cable or maybe even WiFi

low risk, instant potential install base
That could work and might be the smart thing to do instead of starting from scratch (unless they have been working on it in secret) but partnerships rarely go the way either party wants.
 
Last edited:

Sosokrates

Founder of western console warring.
Feb 22, 2017
4,947
4,953
665
Youre not even paying attention to me so its useless. And that 5 million number has nothing to do with my point about software cost and r&d. Thats literally unattainable data. Not only that, the 5 million number is irrelevant to my point but also old data.
Huh?
Do you understand English? I address your points.
 

DonkeyPunchJr

Member
Nov 1, 2020
1,219
2,670
425
Psvr isn't seen as a valid attempt. The tracking was awful, it was expensive, and the controllers were terrible. Psvr2 will be a good intro into vr. Quest 2 on the other hand is outselling every console ever made with the exception of ps2.
Lol yeah, okay. I have a feeling 7 years from now you’ll be telling us “hey guys, PSVR2 wasn’t a valid attempt, just wait until PSVR3!! It’s truly wireless and has video pass through. MS better come out with their own VR headset or they’ll be left in the dust!”
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
7,298
8,524
555
Lol yeah, okay. I have a feeling 7 years from now you’ll be telling us “hey guys, PSVR2 wasn’t a valid attempt, just wait until PSVR3!! It’s truly wireless and has video pass through. MS better come out with their own VR headset or they’ll be left in the dust!”


Dude, everyone knows PSVR1 was a joke in terms of hardware. Do I really need to prove that to you? PSVR2 is the first console VR that is actually up to date. Does that mean it will sell a lot? I don't know, but then again it doesn't need to, there is already VR that has figured out where success is.
 

ReBurn

Member
Dec 6, 2008
14,121
6,084
1,405
SC USA
It is more socially engaging.

You get body language, you feel the presence of others due to the immersion of VR, you can perform more actions and express yourself more.

In other words, it's a net gain.
I can see how sitting alone in your room with a big screen attached to your face is more socially engaging, yes.
 

DarthBuzzer

Member
Jul 9, 2018
1,290
887
365
I can see how sitting alone in your room with a big screen attached to your face is more socially engaging, yes.
In the context of an online experience, you are not alone in your room with a big screen. You just see other people's avatars.
 

Sosokrates

Founder of western console warring.
Feb 22, 2017
4,947
4,953
665
No you didn't. You're trying to exhaust me with bullshit and its not working.

And saying im just saying bullshit is really constructive....

Im mean your first point is saying I was muddying the waters... How is stating that we have to take into account R+D and gane dev costs muddying the waters.. it simply stating a reality.

But instead of having a legitimate counter point, u just come out with some muddying the waters nonsense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarkMage619

Boss Mog

Member
Dec 12, 2013
9,347
15,133
1,140
I think if PSVR had sold like 30mil, or like 30-40% of PS4 userbase, they would of been all in this gen.
When you are talking about this headset selling a few million, that headset selling a few million, over multiple years, they obviously dont feel its worth it yet, or mainstream enough yet.
It's amazing though. Astrobot Rescue Mission was one of those games that completely wowed me the same way Mario 64 did when i was a kid. I definitely think VR has a bright future ahead and if anything porn will definitely drive it.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
7,298
8,524
555
And saying im just saying bullshit is really constructive....

Im mean your first point is saying I was muddying the waters... How is stating that we have to take into account R+D and gane dev costs muddying the waters.. it simply stating a reality.

But instead of having a legitimate counter point, u just come out with some muddying the waters nonsense.


You're purposely pretending not to understand my point. Ofc R&D, software costs are a thing. The point was profit and what we know. The guy you were arguing with provided a link and you didn't like it, started talking about things we can't prove and you basically called him dumb. That's muddying the waters with things we will never know. What about software costs bro? Ok, what about software sales? Pointless. You didn't even try to acknowledge that it might have made a profit, just went into suppression mode to maintain your argument.
 

Sosokrates

Founder of western console warring.
Feb 22, 2017
4,947
4,953
665
You're purposely pretending not to understand my point. Ofc R&D, software costs are a thing. The point was profit and what we know. The guy you were arguing with provided a link and you didn't like it, started talking about things we can't prove and you basically called him dumb. That's muddying the waters with things we will never know. What about software costs bro? Ok, what about software sales? Pointless. You didn't even try to acknowledge that it might have made a profit, just went into suppression mode to maintain your argument.

Why you are acting like PSVR making profit in hardware = overall profit over the entire platform?

As ive already said, the fact that PSVR only sold 5 million is the best evidence we have that it was not a great platform to make money with.

Also Ive already aknoledged the PSVR could of made some profit ....
 

01011001

Gold Member
Dec 4, 2018
8,649
13,509
750
That could work and might be the smart thing to do instead of starting from scratch (unless they have been working on it in secret) but partnerships rarely go the way either party wants.

I mean the Quest also works with Steam VR, so this isn't really any different.
 
Last edited:

sainraja

Member
Aug 15, 2007
2,289
1,771
1,480
I mean the Quest also works with Steam VR, so this isn't really any different.
Ah interesting. I haven't followed Steam VR — didn't know it was a thing. Well, I was aware that you could use your VR headsets with Steam but didn't know they had their own platform. Good that they also work with other headsets then and if it is working out well, then yeah good for MS to look into it as well.
 

Abriael_GN

Member
Feb 26, 2019
2,636
11,997
690
Italy
twinfinite.net
Raises hand proudly. Even at lower fps, reduced visual fidelity, playing flight sims in VR is just amazingly good. Playing it on a monitor is just awful by comparison. Theres zero sense of scale and everything looks tiny, no depth perception either. Head tracking without vr sucks.
I don't even think flight sim is well optimized as of January for VR. Still superior.

Its not just "vr enthusiasts" lol

LOL. Keep playing with your crappy graphics and pontifying that it's somehow better. I'll use the hardware I paid for to make things looks as good and detailed (and fluid) as they can. Besides the fact that core simmers use plenty of simulation aids that require looking at additional screens and other things in the real world.

Only the newbies who just "fly around" think VR is a better experience in flight simulation. In reality, it seriously hinders the complexity of the simulation you can partake in. Programming a route in the MCDU of an airliner in VR is a nightmare and a half, when I can simply do it on a linked tablet. Even looking at a chart is a lot more trouble than it's worth. I can print my METAR on a physical printer when I have to configure for landing, and a lot of little things that VR isn't even close to being able to achieve and that add up to an unequivocally superior experience.

Track-IR is used by most core simmers over VR for a reason.

Incidentally, just because a goon on a website writes something with a sensational-sounding headline without actually bringing any solid argument to motivate it, doesn't make it true. From what this person writes, it's obvious he doesn't know a thing about serious flight simulation, like 99% of gaming and tech journalists that drool over irrelevant novelty stuff like "oooh I can fly over my house!" 😂
 
Last edited:

mckmas8808

Ah. Peace and quiet. #ADayWithoutAWoman
May 24, 2005
48,202
15,519
2,000
Opening up to oculus and or vive so that you can play non ms games doesn't make sense to me, every extra player you have playing vr right now while you have zero games is bad for xbox gaming. (Gamers playing other vr games instead of forza or halo)

Now if they had gamepass and a good chunk of the revenue on those existing vr games......maybe. But it would need to be large since they don't have any of thiet own vr ip.

This LITERALLY makes NO sense to me. What are you talking about? They'd still get 30% of all those games selling on a Xbox platform.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
7,298
8,524
555
LOL. Keep playing with your crappy graphics and pontifying that it's somehow better. I'll use the hardware I paid for to make things looks as good and detailed (and fluid) as they can. Besides the fact that core simmers use plenty of simulation aids that require looking at additional screens and other things.

Only the newbies who just "fly around" think VR is a better experience in flight simulation. In reality, it seriously hinders the complexity of the simulation you can partake in. Programming a route in the MCDU of an airliner in VR is a nightmare and a half, when I can simply do it on a linked tablet. Even looking at a chart is a lot more trouble than it's worth. I can print my METAR on a physical printer when I have to configure for landing, and a lot of little things that VR isn't even close to being able to achieve and that add up to an unequivocally superior experience.

Track-IR is used by most core simmers over VR for a reason.

Incidentally, just because a goon on a website writes something with a sensational-sounding headline without actually bringing any solid argument to motivate it, doesn't make it true. From what this person writes, it's obvious he doesn't know a thing about serious flight simulation, like 99% of gaming and tech journalists that drool over irrelevant novelty stuff like "oooh I can fly over my house!" 😂


Damn. You're straight hostile about it. I have the option to play with high fidelity and don't. I'm not alone. Flight sim has a ways to go, but even at this early stage, that's the only thing holding it back. Tom is wrong, we're all wrong though. Keep in mind it'll just get better from here :)
 

Abriael_GN

Member
Feb 26, 2019
2,636
11,997
690
Italy
twinfinite.net
Damn. You're straight hostile about it. I have the option to play with high fidelity and don't. I'm not alone. Flight sim has a ways to go, but even at this early stage, that's the only thing holding it back. Tom is wrong, we're all wrong though. Keep in mind it'll just get better from here :)

Nah, straight amused is a better definition. It always amuses me when I see VR fanatics thinking they know better and pontifying so for pages and pages of threads. It's even more amusing when they bring ignorant clickbait from people who likely can't land anything more complex than a Cessna without aids as "evidence" of their position.

What you forget is that it isn't just VR that gets better over time (very, very slowly).
 
Last edited:

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
7,298
8,524
555
Nah, straight amused is a better definition. It always amuses me when I see VR fanatics thinking they know better and pontifying so for pages and pages of threads. It's even more amusing when they bring ignorant clickbait as "evidence" of their position.

What you forget is that it isn't just VR that gets better over time (very, very slowly).

What's amusing is that you think we're fanatics yet you continually engage with us. What would that make you in that case? You're literally defending your way to play as superior and you're insulted by the opposition. I think my way is better, far better actually and that's fine. I have no problem with you playing sims without VR, but you're literally upset(oh amused I mean.)
And posting Tom's article has nothing to do with evidence lmao, it's just another example that it's known by now. A few old boomers like you believe VR doesn't work for sims but you guys will fade away. Flight sim will go the way of others soon where VR is the definitive way to play. I'm not talking about VR getting better in the long term, I'm talking about Flight sim specifically improving very quickly. It's already near.
 
Mar 7, 2017
3,234
6,700
520
Well I did say online, and this is how most people play anyway. Local multiplayer isn't that big compared to online multiplayer. Infact, online multiplayer is much bigger than singleplayer gaming - it's the main method of gaming these days.

Local social gaming experiences can be done with VR too, in the form of asymmetrical games.

You only addressed the first part of my post.

I already addressed this counter-argument.

Regardless of how big online MP gaming is, online MP VR games are currently NOT a significant part of that success. So the size and popularity of online MP traditional games is entirely immaterial to VR, if VR gaming doesn't currently contribute meaningfully. I can't think of a single example of a hugely successful online MP VR game.

VR is just not a dominant force in the online MP sphere, so it is totally not the "pinnacle of social gaming".
 

Sosokrates

Founder of western console warring.
Feb 22, 2017
4,947
4,953
665
I mean quote where I said hardware sales are everything in terms of profit. That was literally your first point.

No my point is that Microsoft may not want to get into the VR market now because its not a very profitable business, its ina. Growth phase.

You say that I didnt like the other poster bringing up layden saying psvr hardware is making a profit. Its not that I didnt like it, it just does not change my point, VR is still not a big money maker, its still a niche market.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DarkMage619

Menzies

Member
Mar 31, 2021
108
172
250
I don't see why it would be different this gen. They bought studios instead. Firesprite is one of them. If you look at who developed first party VR games on the PS4 it didn't take away from their studios making pancake games back then. It was in addition to rather than instead of.

Sony published VR games like
Blood and truth, Astrobot, Dreams, Farpoint, Bravo team, Wipeout, Firewall: Zero hour, Iron man, GT Sport etc
Weren't made by the likes of Insomniac, Naughty dog, or Sucker Punch. It was Sony studios like London Studios or it was them hiring devs like supermassive games etc. In other cases it was hybrid games where it was a pancake game with VR support. I think you will see a lot of that this gen. Hybrid games like GT7. If they wanted to they could literally support it with no studios at all and still get VR games like Resident evil 7, Ace combat, No mans sky etc. A platform holder supporting VR doesn't mean less pancake games it just means more games.
Nothing stopping Sony throwing the exact same B-tier studio support behind this and other 'tacked on' experiences and expecting a different result I guess...

As others have pointed out, I also see this as another Kinect-style venture, ultimately leading to a lack of focus and taking resources away from the experiences the majority values. The non-zero sum game argument didn't apply there as businesses aren't immune to bad decisions. It was at this point the PS3 started streaking ahead in sales, releasing exclusive after exclusive, whilst MS had pivoted Lionhead to make Fable: The Journey. This is the challenge Sony has now in front of them.
 
  • Fire
Reactions: DarkMage619

Abriael_GN

Member
Feb 26, 2019
2,636
11,997
690
Italy
twinfinite.net
What's amusing is that you think we're fanatics yet you continually engage with us. What would that make you in that case? You're literally defending your way to play as superior and you're insulted by the opposition. I think my way is better, far better actually and that's fine. I have no problem with you playing sims without VR, but you're literally upset(oh amused I mean.)
And posting Tom's article has nothing to do with evidence lmao, it's just another example that it's known by now. A few old boomers like you believe VR doesn't work for sims but you guys will fade away. Flight sim will go the way of others soon where VR is the definitive way to play. I'm not talking about VR getting better in the long term, I'm talking about Flight sim specifically improving very quickly. It's already near.

"you guys will fade away"

LOL. You sound like an anime villain after he's been defeated for the 100th time.

You know absolutely nothing about the flight simulation community and market. Sims are certainly evolving fast, but they do so with increasingly complex, realistic, and hardware-demanding aircraft and applications that make VR *less* viable, not more.

I know you'd love for people who see the shortcomings of VR not to engage with you. It's comfy to have circlejerking threads without opposition, isn't it?

There isn't a single genre that has gone the way "where VR is the definitive way to play." Keep dreaming and calling those who slap reality in your face with petty little insults like "Boomers" while alleging they're upset lol. It's genuinely funny.
 
Last edited:

DaGwaphics

Member
Dec 29, 2019
5,016
6,691
570
Its incredibly simple if sony has a yearly budget of say $600 million for exclusive content and they decide to fund 4 VR games for $150million thats $150 million less for pancake games.

And lol at you comparing the current VR market to the console market. When xbox entered the gaming industry it was an established market where large profits is possible. This has not yet be proven in the VR market.

The tech MS could wait for, better screens, better lenses, better haptics, better sensors and as time goes on they will become cheaper.

I just don't see the reason to wait, at least with a limited approach. If facebook is a problem, try and get WMR on there. If WMR hit Xbox maybe we'd get another round of headsets from third-parties (I'm not sure which WMR headsets are still being sold). Other than getting the headsets supported and developing a VR UI, they wouldn't need to invest much more into it. Maybe get a few VR modes added to some of their FP games and Forza. Even if VR is niche from a business standpoint, I don't think it would cost that much to offer basic support.

Plus, offering any VR support at all would dampen the look that Sony is the only console with VR support and therefore more advanced in some way. A win-win across the board. They had talked about WMR on Xbox during the X1 gen, but I can see those CPUs being a problem.

Quest airlink support would be ideal, IMO. Or the new Valve standalone headset, but knowing valve this one might be expensive.
 

Sosokrates

Founder of western console warring.
Feb 22, 2017
4,947
4,953
665
I just don't see the reason to wait, at least with a limited approach. If facebook is a problem, try and get WMR on there. If WMR hit Xbox maybe we'd get another round of headsets from third-parties (I'm not sure which WMR headsets are still being sold). Other than getting the headsets supported and developing a VR UI, they wouldn't need to invest much more into it. Maybe get a few VR modes added to some of their FP games and Forza. Even if VR is niche from a business standpoint, I don't think it would cost that much to offer basic support.

Plus, offering any VR support at all would dampen the look that Sony is the only console with VR support and therefore more advanced in some way. A win-win across the board. They had talked about WMR on Xbox during the X1 gen, but I can see those CPUs being a problem.

Quest airlink support would be ideal, IMO. Or the new Valve standalone headset, but knowing valve this one might be expensive.

I agree. My first post in this thread I said I think should add WMR compatibility.
 

DaGwaphics

Member
Dec 29, 2019
5,016
6,691
570
I agree. My first post in this thread I said I think should add WMR compatibility.

Would love to see a wireless WMR. I wonder how much hardware power could be removed from Quest if you weren't trying to run games locally, strictly an airlink like situation for PC and Xbox. You could kill most of the storage needs for sure.
 

DarthBuzzer

Member
Jul 9, 2018
1,290
887
365
You only addressed the first part of my post.

I already addressed this counter-argument.

Regardless of how big online MP gaming is, online MP VR games are currently NOT a significant part of that success. So the size and popularity of online MP traditional games is entirely immaterial to VR, if VR gaming doesn't currently contribute meaningfully. I can't think of a single example of a hugely successful online MP VR game.

VR is just not a dominant force in the online MP sphere, so it is totally not the "pinnacle of social gaming".
When I say pinnacle, I mean in terms of quality. It is just a better social experience, and that's been proven plenty at this point.

Is it on the same level of popularity as traditional online gaming? Not even close, but it's also early on for VR so it was never meant to compete at that level yet.

It is easy to see a large growth trajectory ahead though, so this becomes more and more important to jump in over time.
 

DarthBuzzer

Member
Jul 9, 2018
1,290
887
365
"you guys will fade away"

LOL. You sound like an anime villain after he's been defeated for the 100th time.

You know absolutely nothing about the flight simulation community and market. Sims are certainly evolving fast, but they do so with increasingly complex, realistic, and hardware-demanding aircraft and applications that make VR *less* viable, not more.

I know you'd love for people who see the shortcomings of VR not to engage with you. It's comfy to have circlejerking threads without opposition, isn't it?

There isn't a single genre that has gone the way "where VR is the definitive way to play." Keep dreaming and calling those who slap reality in your face with petty little insults like "Boomers" while alleging they're upset lol. It's genuinely funny.
VR in the future will certainly be seen as the default way to play flight sim games considering they are talking about this happening over time, meaning as VR gets more popular and more advanced.

Very few flight simmers will prefer a traditional setup a decade from now because it will meet every need with almost no downsides.
 
Last edited:
  • LOL
Reactions: Abriael_GN
Mar 7, 2017
3,234
6,700
520
When I say pinnacle, I mean in terms of quality. It is just a better social experience, and that's been proven plenty at this point.

Well that's irrelevant to MS.

MS is looking at whether there is a market for social MP gaming on VR. Currently, there just isn't.

You say that the growth trajectory is clear, but there is yet no evidence to support this view and companies like MS make business investment decisions based on data and evidence and not an optimistic outlook or hopes and dreams.

That's my main point.
 

Three

Member
Oct 26, 2014
6,932
4,864
690
Nothing stopping Sony throwing the exact same B-tier studio support behind this and other 'tacked on' experiences and expecting a different result I guess...

As others have pointed out, I also see this as another Kinect-style venture, ultimately leading to a lack of focus and taking resources away from the experiences the majority values. The non-zero sum game argument didn't apply there as businesses aren't immune to bad decisions. It was at this point the PS3 started streaking ahead in sales, releasing exclusive after exclusive, whilst MS had pivoted Lionhead to make Fable: The Journey. This is the challenge Sony has now in front of them.
Funnily enough during the PS3 Sony made the Move controllers and PS Camera games too yet they didn't have this issue with focus according to yourself.Eyepet, Book of spells, Eye of Judgment, LBP, Sports Champions, etc.

You can do both.
 
Last edited:

Abriael_GN

Member
Feb 26, 2019
2,636
11,997
690
Italy
twinfinite.net
VR in the future will certainly be seen as the default way to play flight sim games considering they are talking about this happening over time, meaning as VR gets more popular and more advanced.

Very few flight simmers will prefer a traditional setup a decade from now because it will meet every need with almost no downsides.

Lol. I've heard this 10 years ago. And 20 years ago.

Imagine thinking you can predict what a community you obviously don't belong to and know very little to nothing about will think in 10 years.
 
Last edited:

Menzies

Member
Mar 31, 2021
108
172
250
Funnily enough during the PS3 Sony made the Move controllers and PS Camera games too yet they didn't have this issue with focus according to yourself.Eyepet, Book of spells, Eye of Judgment, LBP, Sports Champions, etc.

You can do both.
The difference now being that they're much more matched for exclusive content.

As one becomes distracted with supporting a 'side-project' whilst the other side maintains a steady stream of releases, there's the same risk the community looks over the fence with envy and eventually moves away.
 

Sosokrates

Founder of western console warring.
Feb 22, 2017
4,947
4,953
665
Nothing stopping Sony throwing the exact same B-tier studio support behind this and other 'tacked on' experiences and expecting a different result I guess...

As others have pointed out, I also see this as another Kinect-style venture, ultimately leading to a lack of focus and taking resources away from the experiences the majority values. The non-zero sum game argument didn't apply there as businesses aren't immune to bad decisions. It was at this point the PS3 started streaking ahead in sales, releasing exclusive after exclusive, whilst MS had pivoted Lionhead to make Fable: The Journey. This is the challenge Sony has now in front of them.

Great points.
Imo sony needs to make games for PSVR2 that are the same quality as there PS4 pancake games.
You cant have a successful game platform with only average games.