Support NeoGAF

[Grinchy]

It won't be long before I can try a PSVR out on my own setup. I was always really impressed by the Move controllers back on the PS3. In the Giant Bomb stream, when they played Tumble, you could see the controller bugging out a lot. I never saw anything like that 5-6 years ago from the old Move version of Tumble and that was on the PS3 Eye camera.

So I have some hope that it will at least function as well as it did on PS3. I'll know for sure soon enough.

 

[Soi-Fong]

The company that makes Job Simulator (Owlchemy Labs) did a AMA about the PSVR version. Someone asked about the process of porting it to PS4 and they replied:



https://www.reddit.com/r/PSVR/comments/56tcod/we_are_owlchemy_labs_the_makers_of_job_simulator/

AFAIK, this is the first confirmation of what settings a developer is able to get from PS4 that could be compared to the PC version. I was really happy to see that they went for 90fps native instead of doing the 60-120 reprojection.

I would rebuy Job Simulator just for them really striving for that, but I've already exhausted the heck out of that in the Vive.

 

[Yautja_Warrior]

Personal opinion here, but the more I try VR, the "more meh" I feel about it.

At first, VR really seemed like the next big thing, but as I started to see the disadvantages it has regarding interaction (movement, feedback, etc.), it has started to seem really gimmicky to me. There's lots of constrains in VR games and suddently it feels like I'm better off playing with a mouse-keyboard/controller than bothering with VR.

Has anyone else felt this? Is there a VR game I should really try out that my change my mind?

Well its still early days yet and I guess for a lot of people it will be down to the games that are available. I've not brought a Vive yet because there is just nothing I want to play right now, my friend has one and its great but he said he's hardly played on it since launch and is waiting for games now.

Developers are finding their feet with VR and while there are a lot of (really cool) tech demos out there right now, some already show real promise for the future. I don't expect full on, 60+ hour RPG's, as VR is better played in shorter bursts anyway but with Sony already pushing a nice number of full games for PSVR from day one, hopefully more bigger budget games will now appear soon on PC too.

 

[Lister]

It won't be long before I can try a PSVR out on my own setup. I was always really impressed by the Move controllers back on the PS3. In the Giant Bomb stream, when they played Tumble, you could see the controller bugging out a lot. I never saw anything like that 5-6 years ago from the old Move version of Tumble and that was on the PS3 Eye camera.

So I have some hope that it will at least function as well as it did on PS3. I'll know for sure soon enough.

I think the main problems with Move is that they are more susciptible to ambient conditions than what Vive and Oculus uses for trackign, and while they are pretty good for tracking your 2D special movements (ignoring obvious occlusion problems) they are not as precise when dealing with an actual virtual 3D space.

 

[Lister]

Personal opinion here, but the more I try VR, the "more meh" I feel about it.

At first, VR really seemed like the next big thing, but as I started to see the disadvantages it has regarding interaction (movement, feedback, etc.), it has started to seem really gimmicky to me. There's lots of constrains in VR games and suddently it feels like I'm better off playing with a mouse-keyboard/controller than bothering with VR.

Has anyone else felt this? Is there a VR game I should really try out that my change my mind?

You're basiclaly getting in on the ground floor of VR. It's basically Atari 2000 or whatever days. You're playing the pong and asteroids of VR today. In 10 years the things VR will do will be amazing.

 

[Soi-Fong]

Well its still early days yet and I guess for a lot of people it will be down to the games that are available. I've not brought a Vive yet because there is just nothing I want to play right now, my friend has one and its great but he said he's hardly played on it since launch and is waiting for games now.

Developers are finding their feet with VR and while there are a lot of (really cool) tech demos out there right now, some already show real promise for the future. I don't expect full on, 60+ hour RPG's, as VR is better played in shorter bursts anyway but with Sony already pushing a nice number of full games for PSVR from day one, hopefully more bigger budget games will now appear soon on PC too.

Yup. Colin actually stated in the podcast for kinda funny that it would be huge for even 5% of console owners to get the PSVR. That would translate to 2 million units.

That's huge compared to miniscule number I heard of the Vive which has hovered around 150k units sold which is tiny.

That's the big reason why developers haven't jumped on VR. The numbers just isn't there and Sony has a big opportunity to really deliver VR to the actual masses and not just the hardcore with crazy gaming PC's.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

Personal opinion here, but the more I try VR, the "more meh" I feel about it.

At first, VR really seemed like the next big thing, but as I started to see the disadvantages it has regarding interaction (movement, feedback, etc.), it has started to seem really gimmicky to me. There's lots of constrains in VR games and suddently it feels like I'm better off playing with a mouse-keyboard/controller than bothering with VR.

Has anyone else felt this? Is there a VR game I should really try out that my change my mind?

What are some of the games you've played so far? You on Oculus or Vive or both?

 

[McBryBry]

So. I finally got to try VR. Was at a mall in the area wandering around with my girlfriend a couple of days ago, and we came across the Microsoft store with a Vive demo.

Wow. I wasn't sure yet but I'm all in now. It sucks that I can't really afford it at the moment (especially when I would rather upgrade my GPU at the moment anyway) but damn if I'm not ready to get my grubby hands on it.

I'm sure its common knowledge of what the demos are, but the first was a little showcase thing. Underwater on a sunken ship and the ability to look around you. This one was cool but freaked me out due to my fear of the ocean. The second demo was an archer/defend the castle game. I was VERY pleased with how accurate and responsive the controllers were for this. Shooting the bow felt pretty easy with them. The final demo reminded me of Housemarque games like Super Stardust or Resogun. Controlling a little ship, dodging bullets and taking out ships was something I didn't expect to be fun in VR but it was pretty cool.

Overall, I'm very impressed. I'm excited. I want to try cockpit games with this for sure. Who wants to give me a nice Christmas present?

 

[Zalusithix]

So. I finally got to try VR. Was at a mall in the area wandering around with my girlfriend a couple of days ago, and we came across the Microsoft store with a Vive demo.

Wow. I wasn't sure yet but I'm all in now. It sucks that I can't really afford it at the moment (especially when I would rather upgrade my GPU at the moment anyway) but damn if I'm not ready to get my grubby hands on it.

I'm sure its common knowledge of what the demos are, but the first was a little showcase thing. Underwater on a sunken ship and the ability to look around you. This one was cool but freaked me out due to my fear of the ocean. The second demo was an archer/defend the castle game. I was VERY pleased with how accurate and responsive the controllers were for this. Shooting the bow felt pretty easy with them. The final demo reminded me of Housemarque games like Super Stardust or Resogun. Controlling a little ship, dodging bullets and taking out ships was something I didn't expect to be fun in VR but it was pretty cool.

Overall, I'm very impressed. I'm excited. I want to try cockpit games with this for sure. Who wants to give me a nice Christmas present?

The first experience was the whale sequence from theBlu. There's another couple of much longer sequences in the full "game", but obviously not something you'd want to do if you have a phobia of the ocean.

The second and third games were part of The Lab - a free collection of mini-games and experiences from Valve. Both are great introductions to VR, but they're launch titles. I'm kind of surprised they haven't switched things up to add something new to the mix.

 

[Tripolygon]

Already posted?
PS VR teardown performed by Sony's very own mechanical design director.

Youtube link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ad73KXerChk

 

[Situacao]

What are some of the games you've played so far? You on Oculus or Vive or both?

I can use Occulus and Vive at work, and I've played several games now: Job Simulator, EVE, all the demos that came with Vive, etc.. From those, the only thing that actually grabbed my interest was Tiltbrush.

You're basiclaly getting in on the ground floor of VR. It's basically Atari 2000 or whatever days. You're playing the pong and asteroids of VR today. In 10 years the things VR will do will be amazing.

I know that. The thing is, I was also tremendously hyped for Kinect and, after buying it, I felt the exact same thing. That's why this is keeping me from getting truly hyped.

Well its still early days yet and I guess for a lot of people it will be down to the games that are available. I've not brought a Vive yet because there is just nothing I want to play right now, my friend has one and its great but he said he's hardly played on it since launch and is waiting for games now.

Developers are finding their feet with VR and while there are a lot of (really cool) tech demos out there right now, some already show real promise for the future. I don't expect full on, 60+ hour RPG's, as VR is better played in shorter bursts anyway but with Sony already pushing a nice number of full games for PSVR from day one, hopefully more bigger budget games will now appear soon on PC too.

Basically, I'm having the same impressions as your friend. VR seems like it's synonimous with lackluster experiences now, there hasn't been a game that surprised me (in a positive way) since that initial "Wow, this is VR and it's real" phase. Hopefully that will change though.

Raw Data.

OK, that looks like it's more of my alley. RIGS also seems cool but I can't afford a PSVR yet.

 

[awcarew]

Personal opinion here, but the more I try VR, the "more meh" I feel about it.

At first, VR really seemed like the next big thing, but as I started to see the disadvantages it has regarding interaction (movement, feedback, etc.), it has started to seem really gimmicky to me. There's lots of constrains in VR games and suddently it feels like I'm better off playing with a mouse-keyboard/controller than bothering with VR.

Has anyone else felt this? Is there a VR game I should really try out that my change my mind?

I honestly don't feel that way about VR at all. Unfortunately, there are only 2 games that have truly sold me on VR: Half-Life 2 VR and Alien: Isolation VR. Sadly, neither are available for the HTC Vive or Oculus Rift CV1 but if they were, I'd have little interest ever gaming on a monitor.

 

[120v]

Personal opinion here, but the more I try VR, the "more meh" I feel about it.

At first, VR really seemed like the next big thing, but as I started to see the disadvantages it has regarding interaction (movement, feedback, etc.), it has started to seem really gimmicky to me. There's lots of constrains in VR games and suddently it feels like I'm better off playing with a mouse-keyboard/controller than bothering with VR.

Has anyone else felt this? Is there a VR game I should really try out that my change my mind?

The honeymoon period is over for me personally but - for me - it has nothing to do with the medium, it's still pretry mindblowing when I dust off my rift from time to time but there just isn't any software worth plunking my time into when there's so many good non vr games this year

So I tag it on "the games arent there yet" more than anything. As a rift owner I'm kind of missing out, on motion control and roomscale but I'm not about to throw $200 on touch after selling a kidney for a headset

 

[Lister]

Yup. Colin actually stated in the podcast for kinda funny that it would be huge for even 5% of console owners to get the PSVR. That would translate to 2 million units.

That's huge compared to miniscule number I heard of the Vive which has hovered around 150k units sold which is tiny.

That's the big reason why developers haven't jumped on VR. The numbers just isn't there and Sony has a big opportunity to really deliver VR to the actual masses and not just the hardcore with crazy gaming PC's.

You don't need a crazy hardcore PC to run PC VR though. And the number of gmaing PC's out there with the minimum (read better performance than a non Pro PS4) DWARFS the install base of the PS4.

The thing is: PC VR has no real marketing push behidn it, and it also costs $800. Those are huge barriers ot overcome.

I expect all VR products to spike up once PSVR comes out and VR as a product receives a marketing push. And once prices start to come down both PC and PSVR will also start creeping up in numbers.

I own a high end PC, and I am interested in PC VR... but not at $800. That's $200 mroe than I spent on my very high end GPU.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

I own a high end PC, and I am interested in PC VR... but not at $800. That's $200 mroe than I spent on my very high end GPU.

See, when I make that same comparison, it's the graphics card that comes out looking overly-expensive. One gives you somewhat improved frame-rates and IQ, whereas the other gives you an (almost?) entirely new and exciting form of media to experience.

I don't mean to downplay the importance of IQ and frame-rates (inside or outside of VR), but to me, the Vive is a clear winner in terms of value. And this is coming from someone who's been pretty frustrated as of late about lack of content for the Vive.

 

[Soi-Fong]

See, when I make that same comparison, it's the graphics card that comes out looking overly-expensive. One gives you somewhat improved frame-rates and IQ, whereas the other gives you an (almost?) entirely new and exciting form of media to experience.

I don't mean to downplay the importance of IQ and frame-rates (inside or outside of VR), but to me, the Vive is a clear winner in terms of value. And this is coming from someone who's been pretty frustrated as of late about lack of content for the Vive.

That unfortunately is really subjective. Any common consumer looks at that $800 number and unless it's a phone will immediately balk at it.

 

[Chairmanchuck]

Anyone actually kinda "mad" about the VR prices? Just saw that Serious Sam VR came out, excited, then saw its priced almost as similar as an AAA game, while, from what I saw of the game, is just the "Horde Mode" similar to Brookhaven.

 

[Zepp Twofist]

Price almost similar to AAA games? It's about half as much. You can make the argument that it's the same price as AA games, and production quality wise that is exactly what this is. Sure, it is more expensive than a flat screen game would be for the same amount of content, but they're not exactly got a huge market to sell their game to at this point.

 

[Chairmanchuck]

Price almost similar to AAA games? It's about half as much. You can make the argument that it's the same price as AA games, and production quality wise that is exactly what this is. Sure, it is more expensive than a flat screen game would be for the same amount of content, but they're not exactly got a huge market to sell their game to at this point.

Sure, but does that tactic work?

I mean I have a headset, but wouldnt really wanna buy a 40$ game like Serious Sam now, because it really seems like Brookhaven, a fun game, but nothing more. I am sure no one would have paid 40$ for it if it would be a flatscreen game.

At least for me I will wait for a sale for most of these games if they are priced like that.

 

[Zalusithix]

Anyone actually kinda "mad" about the VR prices? Just saw that Serious Sam VR came out, excited, then saw its priced almost as similar as an AAA game, while, from what I saw of the game, is just the "Horde Mode" similar to Brookhaven.

Doesn't bother me. The writing was on the wall from the get go for this gen. When you're dealing with a small niche market, there isn't much choice in the matter. Devs are quite literally cutting their potential market to <10% of what it would have been in traditional gaming. Even the higher attach rates that early adopters bring can't make up for that sort of difference. When the choice is between more expensive games or no games, I'll take the more expensive option.

Obviously I won't accept this as the market matures, but for now, I'm content.

 

[Tain]

Sure, but does that tactic work?

I mean I have a headset, but wouldnt really wanna buy a 40$ game like Serious Sam now, because it really seems like Brookhaven, a fun game, but nothing more. I am sure no one would have paid 40$ for it if it would be a flatscreen game.

At least for me I will wait for a sale for most of these games if they are priced like that.

Looks like it has more variety and polish than Brookhaven to me. The scope of it doesn't bother me (I'm willing to pay a lot for focused arcade experiences, last gen I regularly dropped $70 for home ports of Cave's arcade games) and it's inherently functionally different from a flatscreen game.

Of course, it could still suck, and I do hope prices come down in general, but I'm not upset right now.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

Smaller possible customer base = each customer must pay more for a game to be profitable. It's pretty simple economics and I don't see it changing any time soon.

I don't mind paying a bit more for VR games, personally. They feel like a different medium.

 

[Zalusithix]

I don't mind paying a bit more for VR games, personally. They feel like a different medium.

Speaking of different mediums, the prices for VR games are still a better value for the money than going out to watch a movie at the theater. (Speaking purely from a dollar to time entertained ratio.) Yet for some reason the later is quite accepted.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

Speaking of different mediums, the prices for VR games are still a better value for the money than going out to watch a movie at the theater. (Speaking purely from a dollar to time entertained ratio.) Yet for some reason the later is quite accepted.

And the difference is even greater if you compare it to a broadway show, or a trip to disneyland.

That's kind of what I meant with regard to different mediums. Traditional games are priced in a certain way based on the economics of game development and distribution. Those economics are inherently different for VR, at least right now, so of course the price is going to be different. In exchange, you're getting a very different kind of experience.

This is ALSO why I didn't have a problem with e.g. The Assembly charging a higher price for the VR version. Adding VR support required additional development work that would be useful to a far smaller user base, so it makes sense to have different prices.

 

[mckmas8808]

My wife playing PSVR for the first time. This experience alone made the $40 for VR Worlds all worth it because I can't get her to play any other "regular" PS4 games with me.

I've completely changed my perspective when it comes to cost now. If these are the experiences that I can have I'll be willing to pay the money for the games.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0nZBytQfYI



Fake Edit: She said she literally felt the cage shaking and moving lol.

 

[Zalusithix]

Well today, less than one week after its creation, the PSVR OT will surpass the Rift OT in length. I mean, the Rift OT isn't the most popular here, but that's still more than half of the Vive OT, and ~1/3 the PCVR threads combined. I'm not sure if that's indicative of PSVR's success or the console centric nature of GAF, but it's nice to see VR finally being taken seriously and enjoyed by a good chunk of the forum.

 

[Tain]

Well today, less than one week after its creation, the PSVR OT will surpass the Rift OT in length. I mean, the Rift OT isn't the most popular here, but that's still more than half of the Vive OT, and ~1/3 the PCVR threads combined. I'm not sure if that's indicative of PSVR's success or the console centric nature of GAF, but it's nice to see VR finally being taken seriously and enjoyed by a good chunk of the forum.

Yeah, I'm really happy about the reception to PSVR around here, ultimately. It's nice to see a ton of people so excited about it.

Well-deserved, too. It's nice hardware for the price and the launch lineup is great.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

My one big worry with PSVR is that all that content will stay locked away on the PSVR. For all that Vive owners complain about Oculus exclusives, you at least have the option to use ReVive.

The VR market is too small for its catalog to start getting split up like this. I hope that at least a majority of the PSVR's lineup eventually makes its way to PC as well. And vise versa, where possible given hardware limitations.

 

[Zepp Twofist]

My one big worry with PSVR is that all that content will stay locked away on the PSVR. For all that Vive owners complain about Oculus exclusives, you at least have the option to use ReVive.

This whole year has just been a series of let downs when it comes to locking VR content to platforms in my opinion. Now with the PSVR and Oculus Touch, I expect the situation to become worse since titles that I might actually want to play start coming out on locked down platforms.

 

[Zalusithix]

My one big worry with PSVR is that all that content will stay locked away on the PSVR. For all that Vive owners complain about Oculus exclusives, you at least have the option to use ReVive.

The VR market is too small for its catalog to start getting split up like this. I hope that at least a majority of the PSVR's lineup eventually makes its way to PC as well. And vise versa, where possible given hardware limitations.

Short of first party / Sony funded games, I don't expect much to remain locked to PSVR. Unlike a PCVR -> PSVR port, there's no technological restrictions on porting to the PC that would require major changes to a game. I can't see a dev willingly ignoring a sizable chunk of the market for no reason. Especially when you can just target OpenVR and hit both the Vive and Rift.

 

[AbandonedTrolley]

My wife playing PSVR for the first time. This experience alone made the $40 for VR Worlds all worth it because I can't get her to play any other "regular" PS4 games with me.

I've completely changed my perspective when it comes to cost now. If these are the experiences that I can have I'll be willing to pay the money for the games.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0nZBytQfYI



Fake Edit: She said she literally felt the cage shaking and moving lol.

Played VR Worlds last night, hadn't bothered taking it out the wrapper, but wish I had done sooner, it's so polished, played London Heist, the first of the Dives and also Danger Ball

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

suddently it feels like I'm better off playing with a mouse-keyboard/controller than bothering with VR.

Why not both? M/k or controller is all I've been able to do with Rift so far anyway.

 

[DirtyLarry]

So I have shared in the PSVR threads I actually returned my PSVR after 2 unsuccessful days trying to get the tracking to work. It was always meant to be used in my living room and I did have a sneaky suspicion it may not work due to the size, setup, and natural light of the room, but I really did not think the tracking would be as poor as it actually was. There was no way I was rearranging or removing furniture in my house (even if I wanted to, my wife would never go for it) just to get it working. The few games I did get to see work (more or less), I was pretty impressed with how it handled things.

It also did not help that I owned Oculus as well. Which I had setup in 10 minutes and it worked so, so much better than PSVR overall. Oculus was setup in my office, which is much smaller in size and much simpler as far as decorations and all of that, but the difference in setting up the two systems was vast. Add in the fact that the one that was way easier to setup provided the much better experience overall, and I just decided to call it a day with PSVR. I did have a few personal reasons as well. I want to focus on my own art more, and VR of any form was not helping that cause.

I enjoy VR when it works. I have gotten to experience it. I do think when done right it can provide the next level of gaming and that is not hyperbole, I do believe it can be done.

However as someone astutely pointed out above, we are basically in the Atari 2600 days of VR. Since I am 41, I can remember those original Atari 2600 days way back when I was 5 years old. I will be down to jump back into VR once we are at the NES days (sticking to the analogy). The biggest factor is since my time to play games these days is extremely limited to begin with, I have taken myself out of the VR equation for now. I very much look forward to revisiting it a few years down the line when the hardware is more refined, a bit more powerful, and the games are no longer relying on the Wow factor of VR itself and are really starting to do new, unique things that only the medium can provide.

This is just of course my own personal experience with it. I am sure plenty feel the exact opposite and will be completely immersed with VR from this point on. I actually do hope that is the case as that will provide the developers more incentive to keep going and pushing things.

 

[Chairmanchuck]

To get back to the "VR games are quite expensive" debate, now that Eagle Flight has been released.

From reading reviews it actually seems more like a "minigame" game than a full game, similar to the side missions you had in Just Cause 3.
The game seems fun, but 40$ for what seems like could be a minigame in AC seems far too high in my opinion.

 

[KingSnake]

To get back to the "VR games are quite expensive" debate, now that Eagle Flight has been released.

From reading reviews it actually seems more like a "minigame" game than a full game, similar to the side missions you had in Just Cause 3.
The game seems fun, but 40$ for what seems like could be a minigame in AC seems far too high in my opinion.

Good that the Oculus exclusivity solved this dilemma for me.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

Good that the Oculus exclusivity solved this dilemma for me.

It's actually out for Vive on Dec 20th.

 

[DudeWithNoName]

Man, if the Vive went on sale this holiday...

 

[KingSnake]

It's actually out for Vive on Dec 20th.

So I should pay the expensive price AND reward this habit? Not tempted.

 

[Zalusithix]

So I should pay the expensive price AND reward this habit? Not tempted.

If it was worth it, I could see buying it. From the reviews I've read though, it's not. Certainly not at that price point and months late.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

Okay, so quite frankly, everyone who's still complaining about Oculus "exclusive" games needs to grow up.

1. As of this writing, there is no such thing as an Oculus game that Vive users can't play. ReVive is 100% compatible with all but a tiny handful of games, and no game in that handful is exclusive to the Oculus Store.
   
2. ReVive takes a couple minutes to install, if that. The Oculus Store may take a bit longer depending on your internet connection, but unless you're using dial up the process should be fairly painless. If you're not willing to install the Oculus Store to play a game, the game couldn't have been worth much to you in the first place. By the way, I guess you've never played a high-profile EA, Ubisoft, or Blizzard game on PC in the last four years.
   
3. Creating a VR game is very risky right now. There's no guarantee that any developer will see a return on their investment, particularly on higher budget projects, which are something we all want to see more of. If Oculus wants to fund the development of virtual reality software, which in turn allows for bigger and better VR experiences that I can still play on my Vive, I for one am all for it!
   
4. Refusing to buy a SteamVR game just because it was previously exclusive to the Oculus store encourages future developers to not port stuff to SteamVR.

In my opinion, there is exactly one valid argument for refusing to buy stuff from the Oculus Store: Palmer Lucky and his ties to racist alt-right groups. However, as I see it, if you use the Oculus Store to buy a couple of exclusive games&#8212;which, remember, Oculus poured lots of money into&#8212;and then play those games on a competing hardware platform and make future purchases through Steam, that's not so much a show of support as it is a giant middle finger. One that doesn't cause collateral damage to other VR developers and lets you play whatever games you want.

[/endrant]

 

[Zalusithix]

After returning to this thread after playing Accounting, I feel the need to flip this topic of expensive games on its head and say that we've actually gotten a fair amount of good free content for something so new. (Speaking from a PCVR perspective; I can't comment on PSVR.) Sure a lot of it is shorter experiences, but that doesn't make them any less enjoyable.

 

[Zepp Twofist]

Okay, so quite frankly, everyone who's still complaining about Oculus "exclusive" games needs to grow up.

1. As of this writing, there is no such thing as an Oculus game that Vive users can't play. ReVive is 100% compatible with all but a tiny handful of games, and no game in that handful is exclusive to the Oculus Store.
   

There is no reason to trust that games you pay for will work through Revive. It is unofficial, unsupported and Oculus has sabotaged it in the past. That doesn't seem like risks worth paying money for. If Oculus had made reassurances or efforts about compatability I would have been more inclined, but they haven't. It still boggles my mind why a company claiming to want to earn money on software have taken a stance to actively limit their customer base. Maybe they weren't telling the truth in the first place?

I'm not against picking up titles that get ported later on though. It just seems to me that a lot of developers aren't even bothering to do that, or maybe it's just that we are too early for any of the exclusivity deals to have run their course.

 

[KingSnake]

Okay, so quite frankly, everyone who's still complaining about Oculus "exclusive" games needs to grow up.

1. As of this writing, there is no such thing as an Oculus game that Vive users can't play. ReVive is 100% compatible with all but a tiny handful of games, and no game in that handful is exclusive to the Oculus Store.
   
2. ReVive takes a couple minutes to install, if that. The Oculus Store may take a bit longer depending on your internet connection, but unless you're using dial up the process should be fairly painless. If you're not willing to install the Oculus Store to play a game, the game couldn't have been worth much to you in the first place. By the way, I guess you've never played a high-profile EA, Ubisoft, or Blizzard game on PC in the last four years.
   
3. Creating a VR game is very risky right now. There's no guarantee that any developer will see a return on their investment, particularly on higher budget projects, which are something we all want to see more of. If Oculus wants to fund the development of virtual reality software, which in turn allows for bigger and better VR experiences that I can still play on my Vive, I for one am all for it!
   
4. Refusing to buy a SteamVR game just because it was previously exclusive to the Oculus store encourages future developers to not port stuff to SteamVR.

In my opinion, there is exactly one valid argument for refusing to buy stuff from the Oculus Store: Palmer Lucky and his ties to racist alt-right groups. However, as I see it, if you use the Oculus Store to buy a couple of exclusive games&#8212;which, remember, Oculus poured lots of money into&#8212;and then play those games on a competing hardware platform and make future purchases through Steam, that's not so much a show of support as it is a giant middle finger. One that doesn't cause collateral damage to other VR developers and lets you play whatever games you want.

[/endrant]

• I don't like this habit of splitting an already very small market.
• I don't want to have all the Oculus services on my computer. The store itself I don't mind.
• There is no guarantee that spending money in Oculus store on games played through Vive will mean the games will work tomorrow too.
• The "developers won't port in the future to SteamVR" is bullshit. Buying games just to support developers never worked that well. Which brings me to the next point
• If the game can't be profitable without Oculus pouring money in it, maybe the game is not too good to begin with? Or the whole market is fucked and Oculus paying for 5, 10, 15 games won't save it. Or maybe not selling to only half of the market is a better idea?
• If Oculus pays so well, then why it's so damn expensive?
• It's my right to decide on what to spend money on and I rather spend it on games that are conveniently available and on time.

 

[Chairmanchuck]

1. As of this writing, there is no such thing as an Oculus game that Vive users can't play. ReVive is 100% compatible with all but a tiny handful of games, and no game in that handful is exclusive to the Oculus Store.
   
   
   [/endrant]

1. 
   
   That will change when Oculus Touch comes out though. Oculus Touch has "fingertracking" so the Oculus Touch exclusive games can only be played with Oculus Touch. Even if Revive works with those games, the Vive controllers cant emulate that yet (though the new Vive controllers next year seems to have that).
   
   And I am saying this as an Oculus owner.

 

[Zalusithix]

That will change when Oculus Touch comes out though. Oculus Touch has "fingertracking" so the Oculus Touch exclusive games can only be played with Oculus Touch. Even if Revive works with those games, the Vive controllers cant emulate that yet (though the new Vive controllers next year seems to have that).

And I am saying this as an Oculus owner.

It also has one more face button. Short of the touchpad difference, the Touch is effectively a superset of the Vive controllers. If a game makes full use of all the Touch functions, the Vive controllers simply won't be compatible.

The question is how long Oculus will have the superset advantage. Vive owners will have had that benefit for close to 2/3 of a year by the time Touch launches. It's total speculation on my part, but I think Valve is fast tracking the new controllers and will release them themselves independent of HTC early in 2017. They've already proven they can manufacture controllers on their own, and there's little need to have a protracted test phase for what's more or less an iteration of the existing controller with proven tracking tech. They'd immediately work with every existing Vive game, and devs could patch in specific support quickly. Meanwhile it'd allow more or less direct Touch ports to SteamVR. I could easily be wrong, but that's what it seems like to me.

 

[mrklaw]

how many devs are going to design for touch and exclude themselves from vive for the sake of one button? None.

Im more concerned about vive "360 tracking with motion controls" being left behind due to the much larger installed base of "sit down with a controller" of PSVR and OR, or the smaller "motion controls but only 180 degrees" of move + touch

 

[Zalusithix]

how many devs are going to design for touch and exclude themselves from vive for the sake of one button? None.

You can be certain that devs with Oculus exclusivity agreements will. For these games, ReVive is the only way, and having the ability to directly map between controllers would be a boon for ReVive users. (Also, it's one button plus the virtual capacitive buttons.)

For official ports of non-exclusive games, devs will no doubt find ways to alter the control scheme to work with the Vive controllers. That said, the altered control scheme could end up being less effective/ideal than the original. Having a more similar controller will allow them to port the game more faithfully for those with the hardware to take advantage of it.

 

[Augustiner]

There is no reason to trust that games you pay for will work through Revive. It is unofficial, unsupported and Oculus has sabotaged it in the past.

How did they sabotage compatibility?

 

[Zepp Twofist]

How did they sabotage compatibility?

Some months ago they implemented a hardware DRM scheme into Oculus home so that software could not be started without checking that an Oculus HDM was connected to the computer. The Revive guy broke this DRM, but made very clear that this was implemented explicitly to stop things like Revive. Oculus, after major backlash, removed the hardware DRM a few weeks later.

In a somewhat related vein, a new patch for Dirt Rally released yesterday that makes it completely incompatible with Revive, in spite of developers having stated in the past that they would not do anything to explicitly break compatibility. This thing is still under development though, so nobody has any idea why they did it.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

How did they sabotage compatibility?

They added the headset check when ReVive got popular under the guise of "security" but comments afterwards suggested it was also in part to break ReVive compatibility since they considered it an unauthorized "hack". They later walked that back after some backlash and have since removed the check. For now, I don't think they'll try to actively sabotage it again, but ReVive can and probably will break as games and Oculus Home get updated.