So you're telling me it's illogical to compare new VR to old VR in terms of market appeal? The Virtual Boy was a vr headset, same as the rift, same as the vive.
They are newer, they are far better, but it's the same thing in principal.
Also as I said, "Other vr devices."
The Virtual Boy wasn't the only thing out there,
https://www.google.com/search?q=VR+...hXH6yYKHZ5DAYYQ_AUICCgD#imgrc=xm0znBMTDBfr9M:
The 90's had plenty of arcades with VR headsets, complete with motion controls even, both where you stood and sit down.
When you mention VR to almost any average person they are going to think of things like the Virtual Boy and the older headsets that you'd see at theme parks and other places to try because many people know of them and that's what they picture when they hear "VR."
All I said was that VR had came and failed before, and it has.
This go around I hope it doesn't, but to tell me that I can't state facts or that it's somehow irrelevant to use VR and how it failed once before to this makes no sense.
My entire point of the post you quoted was that VR isn't some new "technology" or "marvel of the world", that it's already tried (and failed) before to gain appeal or be successful and that this time they need to get over the hurdles of the past, lest they be doomed to go down the same road as thevirtual boy and other VR systems of that era.
Virtual boy was a VR headset without motion tracking, forgive me for not mentioning that huge difference.
Meanwhile you are aware that they DID have headsets in the 90's that did feature motion tracking? Complete with motion controls and other things, as I said, "other vr experiences."
You do also understand that almost anyone who knows of the Virtual boy associates it with VR? It just lacked some of the better technology, but even then it featured things better (like the first led screen for consumers).
