Support NeoGAF

[James Sawyer Ford]

This thread:

People with ONLY xbox say yes
People without xbox say no

As expected.

I actually like VR in small doses but I would rather MS focus on other things. When they start rolling out games on regular basis, they will probably turn their attention to it.

Fixed this for you. I have an Xbox. I actually wish MS would try and innovate in VR, but I just realize that they are very unlikely to be able to support it given the state of their studios.

There's no doubt that many of the people that say "YES" probably haven't played the best VR has to offer like Half Life Alyx, AstroBot Rescue Mission, etc. OR they simply played some very basic and outdated VR and shrugged it off entirely.

There is no doubt that the technology is extremely compelling and will be the future. Microsoft risks being left behind if they don't participate at all.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Space is so nascent still that it takes people willing to risk artistic or innovative endeavors that will drive the tech forward. Not surprised MS bailed, but no doubt they will do what they do and buy their way to the top once VR hits the big leagues.

 

[MarkMe2525]

The reveal was in bad faith not my opinion of it. Clearly you don't see the main reason vaporware like that is shown at an xbox E3 event exactly when your competitor is showing a VR device peripheral releasing within the year.

An enterprise device didn't need a showing at an xbox focused E3 event just to see the moonshot project and you don't need to be baffled why some 'uninformed people' got the impression that it was coming to xbox one. A lot of people did, polygon, the verge, game informer and the countless people here I had to constantly argue with to tell them it wasn't coming when most people here (especially xbox fans) were adamant it was. It was deliberate and designed to be ambiguous. You think otherwise and that's fine too. Maybe to you it was obvious.

You don't need to try and convince me though that MS weren't bullshitting people but actually giving us some kind of privilege I should be grateful for because I don't believe that for a minute.

They always darted around the subject when asked directly because it was good PR to attach xbox one to that vaporware 'games' peripheral.

Game informer:
We asked Ronald about the likelihood of being able to plug a HoloLens device into an Xbox One in the future, and though there are no immediate plans, Ronald offered a vague, but optimistic answer. “I think we’re early in the days of HoloLens and how do we provide those great rich, experiences," Ronald said. "From my perspective, I think the future is wide open as we continue to innovate on the hardware and the sort of experiences we can deliver, I think there are all kinds of opportunities ahead of us.”

Do you honestly believe they thought that $3000 'standalone device' was in any way viable for xbox one?

A good faith answer would have been to tell it how it is. We don't see xbox one support happening within its lifetime, it's a standalone enterprise product mostly, but never say never.

Don't link the device to xbox with an xbox E3 show. It was misleading just watching that show alone. Even after reading up on it after the show the 'hope' was given in all the interviews for all that didn't know better. It's a $3000 device with no xbox games support. it was clear from the beginning it wasn't viable as VR/AR for xbox one but that didn't stop them from trying to pass it off with possible future support and do their damn best to associate this enterprise 'standalone device' with xbox though. It's not hard to guess why it was. You don't see it that way, but that's your opinion.

More bad faith arguments. It's almost as if you didnt read my direct quote from Phil Spencer were he stated the words "stand-alone" twice in one paragraph to then follow up with the demo "ran on the device itself". It was never ever remotely advertised as having some form of tie in to xbox one. When ASKED by journalists if it would have a connection to the xbox one, the only integration even hinted at was being able to use the hololens as a display device.

I just watched the demonstration again, which was prompted with the quote "we are always looking for new ways to play minecraft, and this is a version SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED FOR MICROSOFT HOLOLENS"

If this is confusing for you, I'm sorry, but the only people who thought this was tying into the xbox platform, were either just hopefully optimistic or being disingenuous with the info given. So which category do you fall in? To claim MS were bullshitting people when they were 100% transparent with their intentions is asinine.

 

[Three]

Fixed this for you. I have an Xbox. I actually wish MS would try and innovate in VR, but I just realize that they are very unlikely to be able to support it given the state of their studios.

There's no doubt that many of the people that say "YES" probably haven't played the best VR has to offer like Half Life Alyx, AstroBot Rescue Mission, etc. OR they simply played some very basic and outdated VR and shrugged it off entirely.

There is no doubt that the technology is extremely compelling and will be the future. Microsoft risks being left behind if they don't participate at all.

VR is absolutely amazing and I love it because It is the most immersive most interactive form of gaming out there and I wish all games were in VR but I don't understand this idea that it's going to become the norm of gaming. I don't believe that. The hardcore side of the gaming spectrum is VR and on the opposite side mobile games. Mobile games is the mainstream and VR more the niche. Console gaming is somewhere in the middle.

I don't think their studio states are the problem to no VR support. The people framing it like that just want to see no VR as some kind of GAIN for their interests rather than a LOSS for the platform.

The excuses that it's niche or is not as lucrative as regular games don't make sense either. like saying everyone should just go to mobile gaming because that's mainstream and you shouldn't support things that are less mainstream or not as lucrative.

But the most strange take is the idea that we somehow lose something with added VR features. Am I supposed to believe that a feature not being supported is helping get more regular games? because I should be concerned a trillion dollar company's 'resources' would be stretched too thin by supporting VR? Doesn't make any sense when you look at the situation. VR was promised in 2016. It's been 6 yrs. Did not supporting VR for 6 yrs and counting help the regular games situation at all? Did it stop first party games like Flight Sim and Minecraft, wasting "valuable resources" on VR for other platforms other than xbox? Not really.

Say it's not worth it in terms of revenue, fine. Say it isn't viable, fine. But people trying to paint it as some kind of good thing or that they're gaining something are really, really reaching.
It would be as ludicrous as saying "I'm happy Sony don't offer a BC program. BC is too niche and not lucrative and I have no interest in playing old games. Not supporting a program like that means they can concentrate resources on new games which is more important and doing great" yet that's the sort of thing people are doing here. They have nothing to do with eachother and you can do both. MS devs are even doing both already but supporting VR on other platforms.

More bad faith strawman arguments. It's almost as if you didnt read my direct quote from Phil Spencer were he stated the words "stand-alone" twice in one paragraph to then follow up with the demo "ran on the device itself". It was never ever remotely advertised as having some form of tie in to xbox one. When ASKED by journalists if it would have a connection to the xbox one, the only integration even hinted at was being able to use the hololens as a display device.

I just watched the demonstration again, which was prompted with the quote "we are always looking for new ways to play minecraft, and this is a version SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED FOR MICROSOFT HOLOLENS"

If this is confusing for you, I'm sorry, but the only people who thought this was tying into the xbox platform, were either just hopefully optimistic or being disingenuous with the info given. So which category do you fall in? To claim MS were bullshitting people when they were 100% transparent with their intentions is asinine.

Whatever, it's clear we won't see eye to eye. You think people could have determined that "SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED FOR MICROSOFT HOLOLENS" clearly means not on xbox one. I don't and most people didn't.

If I said "specifically designed for Valves Index or Sony's PSVR" thats not making it clear it means no Steam or Playstation 4 support.

Most people didn't even know it was standalone and they even had an "xbox one" splash screen at the end of the video. Presented by CVP of "Next gen experiences". It was misleading and I was here for the aftermath where everyone thought it was xbox one support because it was misleading, but you think otherwise. Like I said that's fine but I'm not the one arguing in bad faith here.

 

[MarkMe2525]

.
Whatever, it's clear we won't see eye to eye. You think people could have determined that "SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED FOR MICROSOFT HOLOLENS" clearly means not on xbox one. I don't and most people didn't.

If I said "specifically designed for Valves Index or Sony's PSVR" thats not making it clear it means no Steam or Playstation 4 support.

Most people didn't even know it was standalone and they even had an "xbox one" splash screen at the end of the video. Presented by CVP of "Next gen experiences". It was misleading and I was here for the aftermath where everyone thought it was xbox one x support because it was misleading, but you think otherwise. Like I said that's fine but I'm not the one arguing in bad faith here.

Are you sure most people thought that? You, or the 6 people you argued with on NeoGaf about the subject, are not good barometers of public perception. Regardless of the confusion that may have came about when they said it was "a stand-alone device", they never gave misleading statements. Hence why I again say your description of their demonstration as "bullshit" is at best misguided, at worst disingenuous.

 

[Three]

Are you sure most people thought that? You, or the 6 people you argued with on NeoGaf about the subject, are not good barometers of public perception. Regardless of the confusion that may have came about when they said it was "a stand-alone device", they never gave misleading statements. Hence why I again say your description of their demonstration as "bullshit" is at best misguided, at worst disingenuous.

The "it's a standalone device" was only mentioned in interviews some time later and as I said they didn’t shut down rumours of hooking up to xbox one for game support in those interviews either even when mentioning it's standalone. They were vague and ambigious as always. You weren't even here and you're trying to gaslight me with this 6 people you argued with thing.

Sorry you can't convince me that xbox E3 where they had xbox plastered everywhere and an "xbox one" splash screen at the end showing off a product not called xbox or associated with xbox, with 'games' that didn't even publicly launch for those who paid $3000 for an enterprise device not called xbox was not disingenuously being marketed or associated with xbox support:



We disagree, that's alright. I'm not the one who is 'misguided' or being disingenuous though.

 

[Crayon]

More bad faith arguments. It's almost as if you didnt read my direct quote from Phil Spencer were he stated the words "stand-alone" twice in one paragraph to then follow up with the demo "ran on the device itself". It was never ever remotely advertised as having some form of tie in to xbox one. When ASKED by journalists if it would have a connection to the xbox one, the only integration even hinted at was being able to use the hololens as a display device.

I just watched the demonstration again, which was prompted with the quote "we are always looking for new ways to play minecraft, and this is a version SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED FOR MICROSOFT HOLOLENS"

If this is confusing for you, I'm sorry, but the only people who thought this was tying into the xbox platform, were either just hopefully optimistic or being disingenuous with the info given. So which category do you fall in? To claim MS were bullshitting people when they were 100% transparent with their intentions is asinine.

Oh, no. They trotted out hololens right in time for console war and lo, that day vr was a dead and and hololens was where it's at. Sony announced vr when the hype was through the roof and hololens was the fake answer. They showed it with gaming demos and blatantly advertised vr for the x1x knowing that they had no intention of following through. And knowing that the fandom is infinitely forgiving of any bullshit he spins, they could confidently false advertise a major feature and quietly yank it whenever. That he said some stuff that contradicted that (the truth) with little fanfare is only further indication that they were only intending to muddy the waters by showing off hololens and advertising vr.

 

[MarkMe2525]

The "it's a standalone device" was only mentioned in interviews some time later and as I said they didn’t shut down rumours of hooking up to xbox one for game support in those interviews either even when mentioning it's standalone. They were vague and ambigious as always. You weren't even here and you're trying to gaslight me with this 6 people you argued with thing.

Sorry you can't convince me that xbox E3 where they had xbox plastered everywhere and an "xbox one" splash screen at the end showing off a product not called xbox or associated with xbox, with games that didn't even publicly launch for those who paid $3000 for an enterprise device not called xbox was not disingenuously being marketed as an xbox device with xbox support:



We disagree, that's alright. I'm not 'misguided' or being disingenuous though.

"This demonstration was made SPECIFICALLY FOR HOLOLENS" very vague. Why do they always have to be so cryptic? You are right, they should be on game forums shutting down wild speculation of the $3000 xbox peripheral.

 

[MarkMe2525]

Oh, no. They trotted out hololens right in time for console war and lo, that day vr was a dead and and hololens was where it's at. Sony announced vr when the hype was through the roof and hololens was the fake answer. They showed it with gaming demos and blatantly advertised vr for the x1x knowing that they had no intention of following through. And knowing that the fandom is infinitely forgiving of any bullshit he spins, they could confidently false advertise a major feature and quietly yank it whenever. That he said some stuff that contradicted that (the truth) with little fanfare is only further indication that they were only intending to muddy the waters by showing off hololens and advertising vr.

The only thing that I find that makes sense in all of that is MS did indeed originally announce VR support for X1X. They then retracted that before launch. Now your claim that they never even intended to have VR support and were lying, that is just straight made up speculation. It's ok to speculate, but don't present these unfounded thoughts as facts.

 

[Three]

"This demonstration was made SPECIFICALLY FOR HOLOLENS" very vague. Why do they always have to be so cryptic? You are right, they should be on game forums shutting down wild speculation of the $3000 xbox peripheral.

It's like you completely ignored my previous post mentioning that means absolutely nothing in terms of clarifying anything and the fact that on the previous page I mention that the price released some time later was actually what shut those people I was arguing with up. AFAIR that was 4 months later though.

 

[MarkMe2525]

It's like you completely ignored my previous post mentioning that means absolutely nothing in terms of clarifying anything and the fact that on the previous page I mention that the price released some time later was actually what shut those people I was arguing with up. AFAIR that was 4 months later though.

Because everything you said is irrelevant and does not deserve response. Your claim is they bullshit their customers, they didn't. Its pretty simple. If people wanted to speculate on the future of xbox and hololens, that's on them and completely fine, but MS never made such claims.

Edit: I'm not going to address every bad faith argument laid out to me.

 

[Crayon]

The only thing that I find that makes sense in all of that is MS did indeed originally announce VR support for X1X. They then retracted that before launch. Now your claim that they never even intended to have VR support and were lying, that is just straight made up speculation. It's ok to speculate, but don't present these unfounded thoughts as facts.

Did it really seem like they put too much thought into VR for x1x? You don't think it seemed more like they just slapped it on there cuz it was the hot thing? Speculation is almost kind of a strong word in this case. Feels more like putting two and two together.

 

[Three]

Because everything you said is irrelevant and does not deserve response. Your claim is they bullshit their customers, they didn't. Its pretty simple. If people wanted to speculate on the future of xbox and hololens, that's on them and completely fine, but MS never made such claims.

Edit: I'm not going to address every bad faith argument laid out to me.

What was irrelevant? Honestly, you are arguing in bad faith. You responed to me but ignored what I said. Just because you disagree with me it doesn't make what I've said irrelevant. I said

"So they bullshitted people with a $3000 hololens at E3 and said XB1X will have VR support."

And I stand by that. They did that. even though you seem to think that means making false statements whereas I think just misleading people and trying to associate a (not known to be) $3000 enterprise device to xbox gaming when you know it isn't a viable product in that space and not being clear about that was the bullshit.

 

[Menzies]

VR is absolutely amazing and I love it because It is the most immersive most interactive form of gaming out there and I wish all games were in VR but I don't understand this idea that it's going to become the norm of gaming. I don't believe that. The hardcore side of the gaming spectrum is VR and on the opposite side mobile games. Mobile games is the mainstream and VR more the niche. Console gaming is somewhere in the middle.

I don't think their studio states are the problem to no VR support. The people framing it like that just want to see no VR as some kind of GAIN for their interests rather than a LOSS for the platform.

The excuses that it's niche or is not as lucrative as regular games don't make sense either. like saying everyone should just go to mobile gaming because that's mainstream and you shouldn't support things that are less mainstream or not as lucrative.

But the most strange take is the idea that we somehow lose something with added VR features. Am I supposed to believe that a feature not being supported is helping get more regular games? because I should be concerned a trillion dollar company's 'resources' would be stretched too thin by supporting VR? Doesn't make any sense when you look at the situation. VR was promised in 2016. It's been 6 yrs. Did not supporting VR for 6 yrs and counting help the regular games situation at all? Did it stop first party games like Flight Sim and Minecraft, wasting "valuable resources" on VR for other platforms other than xbox? Not really.

Say it's not worth it in terms of revenue, fine. Say it isn't viable, fine. But people trying to paint it as some kind of good thing or that they're gaining something are really, really reaching.
It would be as ludicrous as saying "I'm happy Sony don't offer a BC program. BC is too niche and not lucrative and I have no interest in playing old games. Not supporting a program like that means they can concentrate resources on new games which is more important and doing great" yet that's the sort of thing people are doing here. They have nothing to do with eachother and you can do both. MS devs are even doing both already but supporting VR on other platforms.

To me the current market for VR is largely tacked-on modes from third parties and indies, with few games actually designed and built around the technology.

Whilst MS supporting VR with 'oh you can play this in VR mode' is nice for some, I think most are more interested if they took their best first party developers and actually made something best experienced in VR. There is a reason why people talking about VR always come back to Half Life Alyx and Astrobot. The VR modes just largely aren't delivering the optimal gameplay experience.

On that end, it's not a giant leap to say this is "really, really, reaching" that there is now, actually, a choice and sacrifice to be made. If given the choice, I would prefer their first party kept to more regular experiences, because I would play longer sessions on the couch.

 

[MarkMe2525]

Did it really seem like they put too much thought into VR for x1x? You don't think it seemed more like they just slapped it on there cuz it was the hot thing? Speculation is almost kind of a strong word in this case. Feels more like putting two and two together.

Why would I pretend to know the behind the scenes discussions that go on at MS. I think what you are proposing sounds silly and more comparative to a conspiring theory than a real possibility.

 

[Crayon]

Why would I pretend to know the behind the scenes discussions that go on at MS. I think what you are proposing sounds silly and more comparative to a conspiring theory than a real possibility.

Well that's all right. I've got a conspiracy theory and you got an extraordinarily charitable theory.

 

[pasterpl]

That’s why they keep investing and developing new versions of HoloLenses, with goal being as small and light as possible and they partner with likes of hp, valve to make windows mixed reality headsets. I would say they innovate more in space than any other company at the moment. Space is not great gaming but overall vr/ar. Windows is home for customer vr/ar.

 

[MarkMe2525]

What was irrelevant? Honestly, you are arguing in bad faith. You responed to me but ignored what I said. Just because you disagree with me it doesn't make what I've said irrelevant. I said

"So they bullshitted people with a $3000 hololens at E3 and said XB1X will have VR support."

And I stand by that. They did that. even though you seem to think that means making false statements whereas I think just misleading people and trying to associate a $3000 enterprise device to xbox gaming when you know it isn't a viable product in that space and not being clear about that was the bullshit.

You are correct in that was your original statement, but then I replied to you asking how was the hololens bullshit. Your response was that MS was being ambiguous and unclear with their demonstration and was implying (or letting people believe) that it has something to do with xbox. You then gave quotes and links to support this stance. If you want to backtrack now, that is fine, I'm also tired of reiterating that your claim is baseless.

 

[pasterpl]

Whatever, it's clear we won't see eye to eye. You think people could have determined that "SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED FOR MICROSOFT HOLOLENS" clearly means not on xbox one. I don't and most people didn't.

I have understood this in this is exact way, that it clearly means not on Xbox.

 

[MarkMe2525]

Well that's all right. I've got a conspiracy theory and you got an extraordinarily charitable theory.

So it's an extraordinary charitable thought to believe MS pivoted from their VR plans? You honestly believe your concocted scheme of dishonest bait and switch is more likely? I mean, you do you.

 

[MarkMe2525]

I have understood this in this is exact way, that it clearly means not on Xbox.

It's almost as if.... it means what it says.

 

[Menzies]

Fixed this for you. I have an Xbox. I actually wish MS would try and innovate in VR, but I just realize that they are very unlikely to be able to support it given the state of their studios.

There's no doubt that many of the people that say "YES" probably haven't played the best VR has to offer like Half Life Alyx, AstroBot Rescue Mission, etc. OR they simply played some very basic and outdated VR and shrugged it off entirely.

There is no doubt that the technology is extremely compelling and will be the future. Microsoft risks being left behind if they don't participate at all.

I just think this is a bad philosophy for any business to have to enter into a new market.

A business should only enter if they have a vision for it. They need to believe it in, wholeheartedly and gamble big.

To carry that attitude, would only result in a meek effort destined to become a 'me too', 'also ran', 'bit player' that straddles commitment and does the bare minimum. From where I sit, not unlike what Sony is doing.

 

[Three]

I have understood this in this is exact way, that it clearly means not on Xbox.

Cool I guess. I'm sure to you and some other people mentioning "MINECRAFT BUILT SPECIFICALLY FOR MICROSOFT HOLOLENS" at xbox's E3 is very clear and was correctly interpreted as MS Hololens is not an AR headset for xbox but a standalone enterprise device not really aimed at gaming. For others it wasn't and that's what most of the arguments were about.

some articles from known xbox people at around that time clearly didn't think like you either though

Jez Corden.
Microsoft HoloLens augments Xbox One @ E3

https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft-hololens-confirms-its-presence-e3-2015



You can go back to threads and see the confusion. You can even find Crayon making the correct prediction in 2015 that the VR promise for XB1X and Oculus is not going to be something they will actually do. It just took several years until most people started to accept that as a fact.

 

[MarkMe2525]

Cool I guess. I'm sure to you and some other people mentioning "MINECRAFT BUILT SPECIFICALLY FOR MICROSOFT HOLOLENS" at xbox's E3 is very clear and was correctly interpreted as MS Hololens is not an AR headset for xbox but a standalone enterprise device not really aimed at gaming. For others it wasn't and that's what most of the arguments were about.

some articles from known xbox people at around that time clearly didn't think like you either though

Jez Corden.
Microsoft HoloLens augments Xbox One @ E3

https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft-hololens-confirms-its-presence-e3-2015



You can go back to threads and see the confusion. You can even find Crayon making the correct prediction in 2015 that the VR promise for XB1X and Oculus is not going to be something they will actually do. It just took several years until most people started to accept that as a fact.

My my my you just linked this article as if it gives your position any credibility. The dang title is "Microsoft HoloLens augments Xbox One @ E3 2015: Speculation, hopes, dreams" Do you see the words dreams....hopes....speculation. Do you know what those mean?

Did you even read the article that you posted, or did you just scramble for any headline that mentioned Xbox and Hololens in the same breath? I wonder because this article for sure isn't confused about if the Hololens is a product for the Xbox or not.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Microsoft has much bigger problems to address with their first party. I am doubtful they'd be able to adequately support a VR platform. So from their perspective, it probably makes sense. You only have so many resources, and when you go years without major exclusives despite huge buying sprees you can't really manage to effectively support that platform.

I am just glad that we have someone like Sony that can step in and provide a superb platform with a multitude of support by some of their smaller devs and partners.

Sony has spent years building out its internal studios before seeing sustained mainstream success even similar to what we see with Nintendo, year in and year out.

Microsoft was really late to the party there. Ironically they started out with Bungie and Rare, two studios who at the time were probably better or more consistent than anything Sony had with the then exception being Polyphony Digital. Rare's quality immediately dropped off under Microsoft and there was probably a mismatch in terms of culture there. Microsoft's focus on Halo reminds me of countries that are oil-rich and don't invest elsewhere. They used exclusives (short-term and long-term) to buoy them in the early Xbox years. Splinter Cell, Ninja Gaiden, KOTOR.

They probably should have bought Epic or bought into Epic.

But in 20 years in the market, they really haven't developed any of their franchises.

Halo is probably at an all-time low in terms of approval
Forza/Forza Horizon is just what it is
Gears is mostly dead at this point
Fable is going to get a new game but does anyone have high hopes for it?

Microsoft's big success has been their purchase of Mojang and they have a lot riding on the next Elder Scrolls game. And they have a lot riding on the Activision buyout with CoD.

So the idea that they had the bandwidth to really dive into VR at this point is somewhat suspect, but they probably could have and should have partnered with Oculus here on VR for Xbox Series. They're repeating the same mistakes they've made over the last 20 years, which is they'll be left having to buy studios adept at making VR games and franchises, rather than internal teams that have experience with it. That strategy CAN work out, but it has its own risks involved.

Meanwhile, Sony is going to be synonymous with VR on consoles, even as it goes through the bumps and bruises and the Iron Man VRs.

On the other hand, you can also stretch yourself thin by working on different things. The PSP and Vita probably set Sony internal development back a decade. We might still have Zipper Interactive and maybe we still have Sony Bend if it wasn't for the handhelds. Maybe Evolution Studios/BigBig studios could have focused on shipping a better console sku? Who knows.

 

[Three]

My my my you just linked this article as if it gives your position any credibility. The dang title is "Microsoft HoloLens augments Xbox One @ E3 2015: Speculation, hopes, dreams" Do you see the words dreams....hopes....speculation. Do you know what those mean?

Did you even read the article that you posted, or did you just scramble for any headline that mentioned Xbox and Hololens in the same breath? I wonder because this article for sure isn't confused about if the Hololens is a product for the Xbox or not.

What happened, I thought you were "tired of reiterating that my claim is baseless"?

I know perfectly fine what those mean and I read it but you have your head pushed so far up somewhere that you don't seem to get the difference between something being misleading and ambiguous to completely false statements. We got to that point several replies back though and it became clear you disagree with that E3 video being misleading by associating an enterprise product to xbox or you think that nobody thought the enterprise product Hololens is somehow being associated to xbox one when it very clearly was. Didn't stop you coming back even though you're tired of it though. It may have been clear to you having seen it maybe? Have fun regardless because I'm tired too now.

 

[Robb]

Seems like it. It’s not like the VR space has had much of a boom yet.

If it does I’d expect MS to give it a go as well though.

 

[Three]

This comes down to personal belief. I believe both the occulous and the hololens are being deliberately conflated with the xbox and windows 10/everything. But It's not like I can prove anything. And you can't prove otherwise either.

A post from 2015. Now that it's become clear Oculus and Hololens in fact had nothing to do with xbox and were being associated with it Crayon is just a conspiracy theorist according to some. Even with hindsight.

 

[Crayon]

A post from 2015. Now that it's become clear Oculus and Hololens in fact had nothing to do with xbox and were being associated with it Crayon is just a conspiracy theorist according to some. Even with hindsight.

Damn seems like yesterday lol.

 

[TBiddy]

Tell me you never try VR without telling me you never tried VR

I don't even know what this means. I've tried VR plenty of times and it's the same everytime. Fun for a few minutes at parties, but fucking annoying after a while.

 

[anothertech]

They weren't right. They were bluffing.

Big difference.

If it really went down, they would have bought out some poor company actually trying to push forward the tech then dropped them like a red headed step child similar to the Kinect 2.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

I distinctly remember arguing with people that this was not coming to xbox one as a consumer product, they were adamant it was based on E3.

MS were all to happy to let vaporware hype overshadow real products by not mentioning this is not going to really be a consumer facing product any time soon. Only later when we learned about its cost did that become clear to some people. Unsurprisingly literally nobody was saying "why are they wasting resources on this" at the time.

Nobody watching that video should think that it has something to do with the Xbox One. Hololens was clearly a standalone device. The only tie to Xbox is that it was able to run one Xbox game, Minecraft.

 

[crackajack]

I like VR, might even get VR2, but I'd rather have Sony make a PS5P (or PS4P since crossgen is a thing anyway) and PS5-S (and with that HW the PSVR2 wireless) than doing just wired VR again. They are not commited anyway with no mandatory VR modes for every game and so far lackluster number of AAA reveals. Meta can burn money, Valve seems to like experimenting instead of just making games, but Sony misread the oppurtunity like with streaming and their much too early buying of gaika and onlive.
Handhelds would clearly be a better oppurtunity. Switch is moving bigger numbers than Quest. And Steamdeck and similar devices probably are about to take off in coming gens when we get 720 or 1080 with ever lower power draws and maybe other, longer lasting battery tech.

So, yeah not investing much beyond that Hololens shite was the right call.

 

[Resenge]

I don't even know what this means. I've tried VR plenty of times and it's the same everytime. Fun for a few minutes at parties, but fucking annoying after a while.

 

[Ic3man]

I will never ever use VR on a daily basis, so I'm glad they are not investing in it.

 

[sigrad]

I didn't read through all the posts, but the Series X was supposed to have VR via third party VR headsets? Systems?...
Whatever you call them
I remember hearing that in some interview with Phil I think.

 

[IDKFA]

I'd love VR support for the series X. There are so many amazing VR titles that more people should experience. A VR mode on Starfield, Elder Scrolls 6 or even Halo would be fantastic.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

I just think this is a bad philosophy for any business to have to enter into a new market.

A business should only enter if they have a vision for it. They need to believe it in, wholeheartedly and gamble big.

To carry that attitude, would only result in a meek effort destined to become a 'me too', 'also ran', 'bit player' that straddles commitment and does the bare minimum. From where I sit, not unlike what Sony is doing.

In what galaxy is Sony’s approach bare minimum? Their headset is offering a number of big improvements to the space with foveated rendering, haptics, and dedicated VR teams leveraging their AAA IP and engines

 

[Sosokrates]

Tea for God and other non-euclidean games kind of already do that (sans the scanning, it just uses your already-defined play space), and they can be played on a standalone Quest 2.

Theres a game which can scan your home and then useing procedural generation, place the characters and environment in the space and then play out a story?

I very doubt that
The closest thing ive seen was a shooting game, at the quest 2 conference, where they scanned a real world environment and maprd the digital version to be in sync with the real world. But that was done by the devs, not as sophisticated as what im talking about.


Edit:
I just checked out tea for god, and yes something along those lines, but bigger and better. Maybe instead of just a room the game will ask you to scan an upstairs room, a downstairs room and the staircase, and there needs to be improvemnts to tracking and positioning so your real lofe body and the virtual body are both on sync, I think with something like that made by a great developer would greatly help VR, because movement in VR is problematic still having the virtual world and the physical world be 1.1 should feel like your just walking around in a real place.

 

[Three]

Nobody watching that video should think that it has something to do with the Xbox One. Hololens was clearly a standalone device. The only tie to Xbox is that it was able to run one Xbox game, Minecraft.

Unfortunately not even General James C. McConville could play it on his standalone Hololens device. The game shown itself was also vaporware.

 

[Azelover]

I think VR has a promising future, but we are just not there yet. It would be wise to invest some money into It a R&D, just to keep up. But dont throw a million people at It.

 

[Menzies]

In what galaxy is Sony’s approach bare minimum? Their headset is offering a number of big improvements to the space with foveated rendering, haptics, and dedicated VR teams leveraging their AAA IP and engines

The same galaxy where there is exactly 1 first party purpose-built game announced.

Where indies and third parties hybrid games are expected to drive adoption.

 

[sendit]

Nobody watching that video should think that it has something to do with the Xbox One. Hololens was clearly a standalone device. The only tie to Xbox is that it was able to run one Xbox game, Minecraft.

Agreed. You're 100% correct. People are stupid to think Hololens showcased at an Xbox event has anything to do with Xbox. How gullible can people be?

 

[lukilladog]

The same galaxy where there is exactly 1 first party purpose-built game announced.

Where indies and third parties hybrid games are expected to drive adoption.

Yeah, maximum commitment would be having all of their franchises on VR... and then some new ones. It's like they don't believe their stuff will succeed.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

The same galaxy where there is exactly 1 first party purpose-built game announced.

Where indies and third parties hybrid games are expected to drive adoption.

Announced being the key word

Of course they have a lot more in the works

 

[DeepEnigma]

Jabroni's be fronting if they don't want to play as Master Chief in VR.

 

[MarkMe2525]

Agreed. You're 100% correct. People are stupid to think Hololens showcased at an Xbox event has anything to do with Xbox. How gullible can people be?

Yeah, one would have to be pretty gullible after the they say "we developed a version of Minecraft SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED FOR HOLOLENS". To then go on to show the demo all the while, never mentioning, hinting, or alluding to any type of xbox compatibility.

This is straight up revisionist history and blatantly taking a video clip out of context. This was the windows 10 portion of the conference were they discussed gaming on windows 10, their partnership with valve vr, and potential experiences on their new "holographic computer". The demonstration was part of Mojangs talk of the future of minecraft and their upcoming Minecon. I was in attendance and their was no confusion to anyone I spoke with on the show floor.

✂️ hololens clip

60 seconds · Clipped by Mark Gonsoulin · Original video "Full Microsoft E3 2015 Press Conference - IGN Live E3 2015" by IGN

youtube.com

This is a clip of what was said immediately before the video posted earlier in the thread.

Now, did journalists speculate about a potential future of connectivity with MS newly unveiled Hololens and Xbox? They sure did. Did people on the internet (like many here) see the clip and articles and take speculation as fact without looking into it themselves? They sure did.

 

[Crayon]

I will never ever use VR on a daily basis, so I'm glad they are not investing in it.

I love vr and I only play like every month. It's not that easy to find a time when I can go all in. And I like to go all in. Playing space pirate trainer for a half hour is fun but playing no mans sky for 3 hours is amazing. Take off the heaset to go for a piss and my appartment looks fake lol.

It's not a replacement for regular gaming. I wish people could realize this and stop trippin. It's a pretty intense, next level game experience but it's far more demanding than plopping on the couch. Plopping on the couch is better for me 95% of the time but I'll always have a headset now because there is just nothing else like it. I've been waiting for this since I was 12 and it's finally here.

I'd love VR support for the series X. There are so many amazing VR titles that more people should experience. A VR mode on Starfield, Elder Scrolls 6 or even Halo would be fantastic.

Yah know.... I hadn't even thought of those games. I might budget a little extra for my next gpu to make sure I'm ready for the vr mods.

 

[mrBarrelNut]

Some new HoloLens pictures:

Army receives first batch of mixed reality goggles, more work ahead

Despite delays, IVAS developers continue to improve the device.

www.defensenews.com

 

[remember_spinal]

"i think one day VR will be an amazing experience, although i hope no one actively invest and makes the market competitive at this time due to imaginary money and resource constraints"

lets root for my preferred platform to spend billions on buying publishers (with games we were already getting) because why not, they got the money. But slow down on investing into R&D for future technologies, we don't want them to go bankrupt now!