Support NeoGAF

[D23]

Alyx, Lone Echo, Gran Turismo 7 VR, Resident Evil 8 VR, Beat Saber, Pavlov, Astrobot, Rez (Area X with Eye-Tracking)

are all must-play but i get it, its still a niche product and will never replace flat gaming but for those that can and have access to top tier VR... yeah i think were doing all right and see it as transformative experience and one that greatly enhanced this medium.

 

[VolticArchangel]

Unless it's a slew of world renown IP's across pop culture, likes of Pokemon/Harry Potter etc., which draws in millions of customers worldwide, get 90+ meta must-play AAA explosive games, and most importantly, the entry point barrier being "home affordable" (~$300), VR will never go mainstream.

 

[Schmendrick]

You speak on behalf of 70 million players?

Those 120+ million Wiis, 100+ million PS2s were not permanently banished after 2 weeks.

Considering the size of the gaming market Vs the actual interest in VR I seem to actually speak for a lot more even.
Also comparing universally loved mainstream hardware with massive software support both first and 3rd party to the geeky niche VR sits in... Very..veeeery forced on your side.

 

[Talkin Hawkin]

Considering the size of the gaming market Vs the actual interest in VR I seem to actually speak for a lot more even.
Also comparing universally loved mainstream hardware with massive software support both first and 3rd party to the geeky niche VR sits in... Very..veeeery forced on your side.

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/almo...series-consoles.1653671/page-2#post-267676164

cool story bro.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

So I saw this stat way before Reggie posted it, and the reason why I didn't post it yesterday was because the data wasn't recent and was from two years ago from 2021.

So apparently Reggie wasn't ready to read the datey before he posted the spaghetti.

To be fair though, the chart probably would look worse now.

 

[mckmas8808]

nah some real fun gameplay concepts. esp with all the cardboard stuff the immersion was way better then other vr headsets, because of this.
have you even played it? Friends i know that are also in vr where plesently surprised how nintendo made something so lowtech work.

And no it's not better then alyx ffs

The bolded can be true, but yeah lets just not get carried away lol.

 

[mckmas8808]

So I saw this stat way before Reggie posted it, and the reason why I didn't post it yesterday was because the data wasn't recent and was from two years ago from 2021.

So apparently Reggie wasn't ready to read the datey before he posted the spaghetti.

To be fair though, the chart probably would look worse now.

It's stupid to interpret the data in any negative way to began with. Only lazy people or idiots would look at this data and think VR is dead or not worth it.

 

[Schmendrick]

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/almo...series-consoles.1653671/page-2#post-267676164

cool story bro.

Cool grasping for straws "bro" when we've probably all seen the active user count on steam charts by now and we know that the retention rates for the quest specifically f.e. fall below 50% within 6 months....
That's millions of people having their vr hardware gathering dust on their shelves.
Classic cases of pr hype followed by buyers remorse.

 

[Alebrije]

VR is the future ...just look at Cyberpunk....on a few decades you could have inside your brain your favorite artist ..like Justin Beaber or Kenny G.

 

[Captain Toad]

If SquareEnix makes FF17 VR only then we'll see VR explode

If Rockstar make GTA6 VR-only then we'll see VR explode

 

[Trilobit]

We're the verge of having this form factor in the next 3-4 years at an affordable price

VR ain't ever dying. It's like saying that cars will not take off because those early ones with steam engines were more trouble than horses. We're going VR/AR inevitably. It's a question of when.

Delicious!

But give me steampunk or give me death:

 

[mckmas8808]

Delicious!

But give me steampunk or give me death:

2040

 

[leo-j]

Well the entry price is $1100 for true VR in the early 2020s….. that's a lot for a video game platform, I think it needs more demo stations and a cheaper mass market bundle like $799 with a ps5 and a VR 2 with a VR game or something for the holidays.

 

[Gusy]

It will never happen.
VR sells the idea of a more "realistic" virtual experience, but it all falls apart when you have to move around or grab things.

For games that only require you to sit and move your head, sure, it works.
For anything else it just feel like a shoehorned solution.

The simple fact of actually being inside a virtual world, in full stereoscopic three dimensions., with the proper scale is more than enough to blow people minds, as has happened to me and lots of friends I know. The act of moving objects , throwing things and shooting weapons feel completely natural when done right. I've been inside Sevastopol station from Aliens Isolation, and the experience was so real and intense that I just couldn't believe it. You can actually feel the rush of driving a super-car in GT7.. If you have a good steering wheel its awfully close to actually driving the real thing.

Gaming actually becomes an infinitely more realistic virtual experience when you actually inhabit the virtual world and you feel the magic of presence. Of course it's not perfect yet.. that would be like aspiring to have the most complete and immersive cinematic experience with films from the silent era. Of course the barrier of entry is still high if you want a premium experience, this happens with every single innovative technology in this medium, and of course is not for everybody. Tolerances for motion sickness, compromised image quality and general comfort all play a role.

VR is only beginning, but it is already a transformative experience if you have the right hardware, the right software and more importantly your expectations in check (My humble opinion)

 

[Balducci30]

I mean Alyx is must play - but the barrier for entry for that type of experience is way too high. When you can play that but cordless and can walk around at will for fairly cheap you will be good to go

 

[k_trout]

I had no idea Alien Isolation and Doom 3 were VR-compatible. That's tempting. Maybe we need more awareness.

you have to use a controller with alien isolaion but once you get used to that it is by far one of the best vr games and looks fantastic

 

[FeralEcho]

Is he working as captain obviousness nowadays?

Yes,for the No Shit Sherlock company.

VR already has mustplay titles.HL Alyx,Beat Saber,Astrobot.Problem with it is the price...it's a peripheral that costs as much as the hardware needed to run it. It's a premium device basically.

 

[SafeOrAlone]

you have to use a controller with alien isolaion but once you get used to that it is by far one of the best vr games and looks fantastic

But you still look around with your head right? You don't control the camera with the stick I assume. Or do you?

 

[k_trout]

But you still look around with your head right? You don't control the camera with the stick I assume. Or do you?

ye full head movement , just moving and interactions are controller, perfect for sitting on the couch

 

[mcjmetroid]

So it needs to become like something that failed - 3D glasses? Wouldn't becoming like 3D glasses just be a failure like 3D movies? Maybe the average gamer simply rejects any type of 3D even if it was free and totally effortless? Who knows.

Well 3d glasses failed because it was not used well in most movies and therefore gimmicky and the quality of the glasses themselves sucked and made everything too dark.
I saw Avatar recently and it's still the case, it could be the theatre I saw it in but there's the problem. Not everyone has access to an IMAX.
I don't think anyone had an issue actually wearing the glasses - Well maybe with people with glasses themselves.

Also there's no real point arguing with me here, people ARE put off by VR. If it's so fantastic then why isn't everyone using them or a LOT more poeple than it is? It's been around now for 2 console generations maybe even more so what's the deal? Easy:

- Size of headsets
- Too expensive
- restrictive genres i.e every game has to be first person. Fighting games won't work, RTS games won't work etc. Not much that can be done here to be fair. The same reason motion controls didn't become mainstream when a lot of people thought they would. More types of games can be done without VR than with VR.
- Not enough AAA games. I'm sorry if I'm forking out for a headset like PSV2 then I don't want to be seeing 7/10 scores for games made exclusively for it like Horizon's latest effort. It needs to be all-in or nothing and I'm getting PSP/PSvita vibes from this.

In other words the tech is still not there for it to be become mainstream and I honestly think the playstation one has a rocky road ahead of it. I believe Microsoft was right to stay away on this one and this could be Microsoft's chance to gain more ground.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Well 3d glasses failed because it was not used well in most movies and therefore gimmicky and the quality of the glasses themselves sucked and made everything too dark.
I saw Avatar recently and it's still the case, it could be the theatre I saw it in but there's the problem. Not everyone has access to an IMAX.
I don't think anyone had an issue actually wearing the glasses - Well maybe with people with glasses themselves.

Also there's no real point arguing with me here, people ARE put off by VR. If it's so fantastic then why isn't everyone using them or a LOT more poeple than it is? It's been around now for 2 console generations maybe even more so what's the deal? Easy:

- Size of headsets
- Too expensive
- restrictive genres i.e every game has to be first person. Fighting games won't work, RTS games won't work etc. Not much that can be done here to be fair. The same reason motion controls didn't become mainstream when a lot of people thought they would. More types of games can be done without VR than with VR.
- Not enough AAA games. I'm sorry if I'm forking out for a headset like PSV2 then I don't want to be seeing 7/10 scores for games made exclusively for it like Horizon's latest effort. It needs to be all-in or nothing and I'm getting PSP/PSvita vibes from this.

In other words the tech is still not there for it to be become mainstream and I honestly think the playstation one has a rocky road ahead of it. I believe Microsoft was right to stay away on this one and this could be Microsoft's chance to gain more ground.

Well said.

For many people, it's not even that complicated. It might not even be about cost, headset size or anything like that.

Some people (like me) just want to sit on a couch with my legs on the ottoman playing games with a gamepad. And when I play PC games, I use m/kb. While I play, I can also check my phone, watch sports on TV (when I'm playing on PC), eat and drink too.

Not everyone is interested in putting on VR goggles and using wrist controllers turning their head, waving their arms or holding their arms up pretending to be shooting at something.

Also as you said, VR games are heavily into first person view. Not every gamer even likes playing games at that cam angle. If I play NHL games, I use classic overhead view. I'm not going to play NHL first person trying to replicate being a player, stickhandling using wrist controllers and shoot the puck like I'm playing Wii NHL 2k10.

 

[Minsc]

Well said.

For many people, it's not even that complicated. It might not even be about cost, headset size or anything like that.

Some people (like me) just want to sit on a couch with my legs on the ottoman playing games with a gamepad. And when I play PC games, I use m/kb. While I play, I can also check my phone, watch sports on TV (when I'm playing on PC), eat and drink too.

Not everyone is interested in putting on VR goggles and using wrist controllers turning their head, waving their arms or holding their arms up pretending to be shooting at something.

Also as you said, VR games are heavily into first person view. Not every gamer even likes playing games at that cam angle. If I play NHL games, I use classic overhead view. I'm not going to play NHL first person trying to replicate being a player, stickhandling using wrist controllers and shoot the puck like I'm playing Wii NHL 2k10.

I agree with you, there's going to be an astronomical number of people who wouldn't care for VR even if it was included, free, effortless and worked perfectly and every single issue was fixed, including even dizziness and every single game had a VR mode.

And you're also right about a heavy focus on first person and flailing around... but GT7 shows there are cases where first person makes sense seated too. Flight sims would also be fun.

And games like Moss, Astrobot and Demeo all show that platforming/isometric point-of-view where you're looking down from above controlling characters like in a traditional game are great fun.

But ultimately the problem with VR is VR itself - people just want flat gaming no matter how appealing you can make VR.

 

[AV]

I feel bad for anyone that can't play through Alyx in VR and I played it late.

 

[Danknugz]

Onward was a must play experience for me, I think it does a decent job of simulating actual firefights and teamwork, more along the lines of CSGO and semi pemadeath with having to wait until the next round when you die, really intensifies and heightens the weight of your actions and decisions. shootig someone actually kind of feels like you just killed someone and saved your own life.

Pavlov is fun but a little too arcadey/gamey to match this sense of realism, to many resppawns and constantly dying, it's fun but doesn't convey the sense of saving your own life.

 

[hyperbertha]

So it needs to become like something that failed - 3D glasses? Wouldn't becoming like 3D glasses just be a failure like 3D movies? Maybe the average gamer simply rejects any type of 3D even if it was free and totally effortless? Who knows.

3d glasses failed because only avatar was worth watching in 3d, and 3d isn't as novel an experience as vr games anyway.

 

[SlimeGooGoo]

.

 

[mckmas8808]

I agree with you, there's going to be an astronomical number of people who wouldn't care for VR even if it was included, free, effortless and worked perfectly and every single issue was fixed, including even dizziness and every single game had a VR mode.

And you're also right about a heavy focus on first person and flailing around... but GT7 shows there are cases where first person makes sense seated too. Flight sims would also be fun.

And games like Moss, Astrobot and Demeo all show that platforming/isometric point-of-view where you're looking down from above controlling characters like in a traditional game are great fun.

But ultimately the problem with VR is VR itself - people just want flat gaming no matter how appealing you can make VR.

The bolded isn't true! The truth is everyone just isn't going to be into VR. There's no "issue" with VR itself. People want to be entertained and there's multiple ways to do so.

Just like the Switch, some people probably never play it undocked. So for them it's a true console. While others may play it mostly handheld. It's up to each individual.

 

[Henry Panic]

Must play games aren't the problem and people keep getting this wrong. It's the content and how long that content can keep someone using and coming back to a headset.

On consoles, you have various experiences online and off for SP and MP games big and small, of varying lengths, and content from sub programs, movies, streaming, dlc support for a long time, clip sharing, so much to keep someone coming back, especially if they are interested in the content.

VR doesn't have this. It's poorly executed media capabilities makes people sick, or has a limited appeal for VR movie watching for a few weeks and then it becomes a hassle.

There's few games, and what's there gives little reason to come back to the headset frequently after a few weeks.

There's barely any additional content to hold users over. People don't want to browse the internet in VR after the excitement wears down.

Anything you can do on your phone will excite people in VR at first, but then ends when that excitement dries up and they can not let the inconvenience slide any longer.

The reason VR is failing isn't because of lacking must play games. It's failing because it's not being treated as a serious media and entertainment platform. Or an information and communication platform like phones, which can do all 4.

VR is being treated like a Tamogatchi. Those were popular because of marketing promises not kept, the perception of it being the future, and it being a new uncommon thing that got people's attention.

But then people stopped using them once they realized there's not much you could do, content was light, it was poorly implemented, and the actual devices sucked when you took a step back.

With VR you can add a hassel to set up, can make you dizzy, and a lot of low polish depthless content, all that resulted in many headsets being thrown in storage.

VR has not been treated like any new major tech platform since the betamax, it's treated worse. We hear about the billions put in, but companies are still unconsciously not taking VR seriously even if they think they are.

Every leading VR headset was part of a boom and bust fad cycle:

Samsung and Google Cardboard = I can use my phone for VR it's the future.

Sony = I can play mobile and console games in the game, it's the future.

Quest = I can be in the "metaverse" by chatting, viewing media, and playing games on a wireless VR headset because future! It's also cheap and won't damage my phone!

This is why the leading headsets sold what they did. Not because of content. That's why we had a decline last year and nothing in VR currently is encouraging serious investment and real growth. Those leading platforms still didn't sell much for being fads except Quest 2, but with many of those sitting in storage.

Apple will be the next fad = Premium VR with motion controls and iOS integration in my headset. Cool.

No one is treating VR as a platform with its own industry. They are treating it as a race to see who can catch on first with an individual product.

The race on who is going to be the next Tickle Me Elmo or Chia pet is why VR is in the situation it is. Quest 2 fad was accelerated by a PR stunt by Facebook who is now Meta. But nothing changed from what they were doing before.

Zuckerberg himself renamed his company on a concept he's not even taking seriously and has yet to act on.

Sony is treating VR no differently now than their first headset.

Chinese brands are just making incremental headsets with no content and just using what already exists. Which is almost nothing.

VR has been a gimmick since this new phase started, and has only been treated as such. People will go ooh and ahh and might buy it, then they stop using them and don't come back, outside of the group that gets sucked into the next fad.

If VR is supposed to be like the smartphone, and a tool for social and communication as well as entertainment, then where are the companies who are serious about VR? Even in enterprise, VR is still not taken seriously outside a few helpful applications in very specific career fields. But companies are rushing to adopt. Something. Because they don't want to be left behind. Something.

Who knows, maybe Apple or one of those other guys will actually push VR as a serious platform, but I have doubts.

 

[Minsc]

The bolded isn't true! The truth is everyone just isn't going to be into VR. There's no "issue" with VR itself. People want to be entertained and there's multiple ways to do so.

Just like the Switch, some people probably never play it undocked. So for them it's a true console. While others may play it mostly handheld. It's up to each individual.

Yeah, I guess what I'm saying is VR will never REPLACE console gaming, much like handheld and regular gaming don't replace one another. No matter how great VR becomes, it will never get to 100% because there will be WAY too many people who simply have no interest at all (like not one singular bit) in VR.

 

[Ev1L AuRoN]

Price is the barrier, if VR starts to receive killer apps left and right, it will still be outside most people's reach in terms of cost.

 

[mckmas8808]

Yeah, I guess what I'm saying is VR will never REPLACE console gaming, much like handheld and regular gaming don't replace one another. No matter how great VR becomes, it will never get to 100% because there will be WAY too many people who simply have no interest at all (like not one singular bit) in VR.

The people that said VR gaming would replace flat screen gaming use to kill me. I hated those people. VR gaming will only be suppletive.

 

[Daniel Thomas MacInnes]

Honestly, I'm half expecting Nintendo to reveal a VR headset for their next home console. They always try for something new, and are infamous for retrying older ideas. If anybody could come up with a compelling must-play experience, it would be Miyamoto and EAD.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

The thing about VR adoption is that it's so focused on gaming and Zuck's metaverse that lot of people dont care about it. BUT, one thing that does kind of interest me is watching live concerts or sports in VR.

If the quality is good and the fee per event is cheap, it sounds interesting. Especially for playoff games which are jacked up in price. I'm not paying $500 for a shitty Leafs playoff ticket, nor am I taking a plane to Boston or Tampa either. But let's say it was $10 and good quality, I might test it out. If it's better than watching a standard flat screen feed, maybe it'll catch on.

I just took a skim of NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL games in VR. It ranges from shit or none to limited games. NBA's VR schedule is literally one VR game per day from a random match up. NHL I think has zero.

To grow VR, the entire industry of VR hardware and content providers have to go beyond video games. And sports/music is something that goes with it. But nobody seems to give a shit. I have never once ever seen a TV ad, in game promotion, or website banner say "Hey, we got pro league games in VR, check it out. Pick different camera hubs, cheap price, here's what you get for $10"

Problem is the hardware is probably a $500 commitment and who knows how good a VR sporting event even is. Do a check yourself on Google about pro sport VR apps and they gets shit ratings already. So it's probably crap too. So not worth risking money on something where sports and concerts have limited selection and unknown quality feeds.

 

[Wildebeest]

Gaming industry is dominated by mobile gaming and VR is a small niche. The popular one is a universal commodity which fits in your hand with an ocean of content rather than some expensive thing that you seemingly have to rebuy every year, to play the same few mini-games. You can use it anywhere, not just some dedicated phone room in your house which has to be just so. It is socially acceptable, and doesn't make you spew from simulation sickness.

 

[MrTroubleMaker]

What a moron, never has any insightful thing to say.

 

[FoxMcChief]

True but isn't Beat Saber a must play?

Sidenote VR need a Pac-Man (Not the knockoffs people been trying out but a well thought out Pac-Man like game

No. It's a must play if you already own a headset. It's not worth entering the VR platform for.

 

[Gojiira]

It literally just needs to be cheaper. HL Alyx and Gran Turismo 7 are both must plays, I'd even argue Blade and Sorcery or Skyrim/Fallout 4 VR is as well. But yeah price is just too high for average consumers.
Its a 'Enthusiast' hobby for a reason.

 

[mckmas8808]

It literally just needs to be cheaper. HL Alyx and Gran Turismo 7 are both must plays, I'd even argue Blade and Sorcery or Skyrim/Fallout 4 VR is as well. But yeah price is just too high for average consumers.
Its a 'Enthusiast' hobby for a reason.

Why is enthusiast being used as a negative in a new gaming market?

 

[Roni]

It will never happen.
VR sells the idea of a more "realistic" virtual experience, but it all falls apart when you have to move around or grab things.

For games that only require you to sit and move your head, sure, it works.
For anything else it just feel like a shoehorned solution.

Room scale works fine with joystick movement if you can handle the motion sickness. I believe it's a matter of time, really: a generation needs to grow up playing it so that a majority doesn't feel sick from free movement for games to really shine and try cool things.

 

[Gojiira]

Why is enthusiast being used as a negative in a new gaming market?

I didnt use it as a negative, just that Enthusiast, expensive peripherals are already a difficult sell. Different story if PS5 was released with it as a standard peripheral for the same price.

 

[Firestartah]

Price is the barrier, if VR starts to receive killer apps left and right, it will still be outside most people's reach in terms of cost.

The fact that you need to wear that shit on your face like a total dork and move your hands around the room like an idiot is the actual barrier. No adult who comes from a day of work wants to do that. This will remain niche until you jack that into a port that goes into your brain. It will never take off in it's current form.

 

[NinjaBoiX]

I'll buy PSVR2 for £200 from some chump that's had it sat collecting dust, just as soon as there are more than 5 compelling games to play.

 

[EekTheKat]

Some of the best VR experiences right now are short fun arcade like experiences. Almost like the first time you picked up a light gun at an arcade machine.

It's sort of like seeing traditional gaming in its infancy again.

It'll get there, but the tech has to advance and be easy enough for people to understand it for it to even have a chance at mainstream.

 

[Romulus]

Well said.

For many people, it's not even that complicated. It might not even be about cost, headset size or anything like that.

Some people (like me) just want to sit on a couch with my legs on the ottoman playing games with a gamepad. And when I play PC games, I use m/kb. While I play, I can also check my phone, watch sports on TV (when I'm playing on PC), eat and drink too.

Not everyone is interested in putting on VR goggles and using wrist controllers turning their head, waving their arms or holding their arms up pretending to be shooting at something.

Also as you said, VR games are heavily into first person view. Not every gamer even likes playing games at that cam angle. If I play NHL games, I use classic overhead view. I'm not going to play NHL first person trying to replicate being a player, stickhandling using wrist controllers and shoot the puck like I'm playing Wii NHL 2k10.

Kinda hard to argue that when the previous bestselling VR device was 6 million in 6 years. Now that is 20 million in 2 years. It is heading in a very different direction than the narrative people here try to push. All the stats in the world about "usage" don't aren't that compelling when companies continue to reinvest. Valve, Sony, and FB are all in, as are many others. It's just really hard to downplay that it isn't improving leaps in bounds in games. Quest 2 was pretty uncomfortable for most and the Quest 3 is half the size with more games and power. It's not going anywhere.
Quest 3 will likely outsell any Xbox ever made, and Quest 2 is pacing both series S consoles in sales combined. Not going anywhere.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

I've been saying since the beginning that the software is arguably the main problem with VR followed by the high price of admission. I agree with Reggie.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

The fact that you need to wear that shit on your face like a total dork and move your hands around the room like an idiot is the actual barrier. No adult who comes from a day of work wants to do that. This will remain niche until you jack that into a port that goes into your brain. It will never take off in it's current form.

Exactly.

VR is one part Nintendo Wii motion flapping and one part 360 degree viewing. At least with Wii it was $250, has tons of games (esp. their popular first party games) and you can play with the family in the living room.

VR is double the price, is an added cost to hardware needed, SP experiences at home, you have a brick on your face, and the games are mostly indie/demo quality.

Give credit to early adopters the past bunch of years buying it for $500, but Meta's data showing 50% of people dont use their VR set anymore after 6 months shows the experience stinks. Considering the games are dirt cheap, if the gaming is so good the VR populace would be all playing and backlogging their game library with tons of low priced games. Instead, half bail ship fast.

 

[Gusy]

Yeah, I guess what I'm saying is VR will never REPLACE console gaming, much like handheld and regular gaming don't replace one another. No matter how great VR becomes, it will never get to 100% because there will be WAY too many people who simply have no interest at all (like not one singular bit) in VR.

"These touch-screen phones will never replace my awesome qwerty blackberry. No matter how great touch-screen phones become, it will never get to 100% because there will be WAY too many people who simply have no interest at all (like not one singular bit) in typing with a touchscreen".. there are a million more examples one could invent like that.

What you're saying just seems so profoundly short-sighted to me. It's not VR the thing people aren't into. What people really aren't into is... expensive hardware, motion sickness or wearing huge shit in their face. All of those things will eventually be solved by the natural evolution of technology. VR will become the natural way of interacting with anything " not real".. eventually. If it's not there yet for you, that's totally fine... but don't generalize with such a lazy argument.

 

[Minsc]

"These touch-screen phones will never replace my awesome qwerty blackberry. No matter how great touch-screen phones become, it will never get to 100% because there will be WAY too many people who simply have no interest at all (like not one singular bit) in typing with a touchscreen".. there are a million more examples one could invent like that.

What you're saying just seems so profoundly short-sighted to me. It's not VR the thing people aren't into. What people really aren't into is... expensive hardware, motion sickness or wearing huge shit in their face. All of those things will eventually be solved by the natural evolution of technology. VR will become the natural way of interacting with anything " not real".. eventually. If it's not there yet for you, that's totally fine... but don't generalize with such a lazy argument.

No I recently jumped on the PSVR2 bandwagon, and probably will also pickup a PC VR set eventually too... but even as much as I love it and wish it would I still don't think it's going to replace flat gaming anymore than 3D TVs could replace 2D TVs.

 

[Romulus]

No I recently jumped on the PSVR2 bandwagon, and probably will also pickup a PC VR set eventually too... but even as much as I love it and wish it would I still don't think it's going to replace flat gaming anymore than 3D TVs could replace 2D TVs.

Now that I completely agree with. Flatscreen gaming isn't going anywhere.

But VR absolutely SMOKES 3dtv in what it was trying to do. There's nothing "3D" about it when you compare it to VR.

 

[mckmas8808]

Exactly.

VR is one part Nintendo Wii motion flapping and one part 360 degree viewing. At least with Wii it was $250, has tons of games (esp. their popular first party games) and you can play with the family in the living room.

VR is double the price, is an added cost to hardware needed, SP experiences at home, you have a brick on your face, and the games are mostly indie/demo quality.

Give credit to early adopters the past bunch of years buying it for $500, but Meta's data showing 50% of people dont use their VR set anymore after 6 months shows the experience stinks. Considering the games are dirt cheap, if the gaming is so good the VR populace would be all playing and backlogging their game library with tons of low priced games. Instead, half bail ship fast.

Because the content isn't there enough. FB dropped the ball here.