Support NeoGAF

[Three]

Before the launch, they'd already made it clear VR wasn't a priority for the One X. Zero VR talk at E3 2017, all mentions of VR were scrubbed from the product page and by October 2017 the general public already figured out that VR was likely not happening.

Yeah bullshit, it was a vaporware announcement by the same people who coined the term and used it in much the same way all those years ago. To pretend they have something just as exciting in the works when a competitor had an actual product to announce at the time. That's why it was barely talked about, because MS didn't really have anything to show but was bullshiting about it like they did.

 

[Ozriel]

They are going to swoop in in a few years after apple makes it cool. That's what they always do.

They were in VR and AR years before Apple. And if Apple's vision succeeds, the VR race largely becomes about productivity and entertainment, not high end gaming.

As for Sony studios, we don't even know what most of them are working on in general let alone if whatever it is has VR support too. I think the releases so far and planned are great so it doesn't matter about first party definitions and all that other nonsense.

this reads like you're basically agreeing with what he's saying about the first party pipeline

Yeah bullshit, it was a vaporware announcement by the same people who coined the term and used it in much the same way all those years ago. To pretend they have something just as exciting in the works when a competitor had an actual product to announce at the time. That's why it was barely talked about, because MS didn't really have anything to show but was bullshiting about it like they did.

I forget sometimes how clueless many of you are about tech.

Microsoft was already heavily involved in VR at that time, with Windows MR. They'd innovated with inside out tracking and pushed a lot of their hardware partners into making VR headsets. So talks of 'vaporware' or a 'me too' investment in VR aren't credible.

By 2016, VR hype was cresting. Seems more likely that they realized two things by 2017:

1. Unlike Sony, the base Xbox One was too underpowered for VR so they'd have had to use a niche audience one one X owners only for their console VR pitch.

2. VR itself wasn't setting the world on fire in 2017.

At the time, I was incredibly disappointed in that decision. But it's hard to sit here today and say they made a poor decision given how things have played out.

 

[Three]

this reads like you're basically agreeing with what he's saying about the first party pipeline

No I'm not because he's fear mongering with it but the reality is that Sony keep their distant games close to their chest regardless of it being a regular console game or VR.

I forget sometimes how clueless many of you are about tech.

Microsoft was already heavily involved in VR at that time, with Windows MR. They'd innovated with inside out tracking and pushed a lot of their hardware partners into making VR headsets. So talks of 'vaporware' or a 'me too' investment in VR aren't credible.

By 2016, VR hype was cresting. Seems more likely that they realized two things by 2017:

1. Unlike Sony, the base Xbox One was too underpowered for VR so they'd have had to use a niche audience one one X owners only for their console VR pitch.

2. VR itself wasn't setting the world on fire in 2017.

At the time, I was incredibly disappointed in that decision. But it's hard to sit here today and say they made a poor decision given how things have played out.

Calls me clueless about tech then proceeds to suggest that MS only realised that they had released an underpowered Xbox one 4yrs ago that couldn't do VR a year after making a VR announcement.

WMR, Hololens and all that investment yet where was VR on xbox? You're trying to make the link between a windows initiative, unrelated products like hololens at E3 and xbox, just like MS does. You fail to realise though that all this is about vaporware hype for the platform knowning nothing was coming for xbox.

 

[Ic3man]

Good, VR is a gimmick

 

[Mephisto40]

I'm honestly baffled by the amount of people that seem to be under the impression video games are still going to be primarily played on TV's in 20-30 years time

Things are going to change massively in the next 10-15 years, and VR is the way it's going to go, it's not going away as much as you want it to, this is how games are going to be played in the future

 

[ChoosableOne]

"You can't even make 11/10 games for it"

 

[feynoob]

I'm honestly baffled by the amount of people that seem to be under the impression video games are still going to be primarily played on TV's in 20-30 years time

Things are going to change massively in the next 10-15 years, and VR is the way it's going to go, it's not going away as much as you want it to, this is how games are going to be played in the future

That is boomers for you.

 

[Stooky]

They were in VR and AR years before Apple. And if Apple's vision succeeds, the VR race largely becomes about productivity and entertainment, not high end gaming.

Apple was working on it for the same amount of time they just never talked about it. Rumors of apple VFX has been around for years

 

[ArtHands]

It's a Sony Interactive Entertainment game and Sony owns the IP. It's about as first party as say Perfect Dark is for MS or Pokemon is for Nintendo. As for Sony studios, we don't even know what most of them are working on in general let alone if whatever it is has VR support too. I think the releases so far and planned are great so it doesn't matter about first party definitions and all that other nonsense.

I doubt that's the case. I am basing my assessment on the facts, not some hypothetical dreams filled with hope, rainbows and unicorns. Like I said, cool if you are happy that Sony has no announced VR games from their studios.

 

[Three]

I doubt that's the case. I am basing my assessment on the facts, not some hypothetical dreams filled with hope, rainbows and unicorns. Like I said, cool if you are happy that Sony has no announced VR games from their studios.

You doubt what? That firewall is a first party game? Or that some studios like Asobi have unannounced stuff?

 

[ArtHands]

You doubt what? That firewall is a first party game? Or that some studios like Asobi have unannounced stuff?

I am doubting the assessment that Sony has any announced 1st party VR game. Firewall is developed by a 3rd party studio.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I am doubting the assessment that Sony has any announced 1st party VR game.

 

[StueyDuck]

im sorry uncle philly good guy best bud. (yes i know it's matt booty, but i'm just out here memeing ok)

but the market only grows when A) the price drops and B) more people support it.

so unless you are just being a silly willy and petty, you should be really trying to support it in some capacity

(let people use their PC headsets or something, you are MS this should be easy for you)

 

[Ar¢tos]

I doubt that's the case. I am basing my assessment on the facts, not some hypothetical dreams filled with hope, rainbows and unicorns. Like I said, cool if you are happy that Sony has no announced VR games from their studios.

Do they really need many 1st party VR exclusive games? They might be happy with VR modes on selected big games and having 3rd parties/indies carrying the platform.
They only need PSVR2 to improve Playstation appeal, even if only slightly because there is no other console with VR hardware and any extra to brand image helps. They don't need massive sales for it to be profitable, they get profit from both the hardware and the software, the R&D cost was minimal, all of the many sensors and cameras are nothing new, they only needed to create the screens, lenses and downsize the controller haptics and they get the components cheaper either internally or from partners since they manufacture all kinds of electronic devices.
Indies are more than happy to support the platform, less competition than with flat games and if it eventually takes off then Sony can assign studios/hire 3rd parties to make AAA games for it.
It's basically a win-win situation for Sony regardless of it becoming mainstream or not.

Obviously for MS it's different, it's a much bigger investment and they prefer to wait until they are sure they'll get the desired profit before making their VR headset (... or buying a headset maker and rebranding it...).

 

[DeepEnigma]

Do they really need many 1st party VR exclusive games? They might be happy with VR modes on selected big games and having 3rd parties/indies carrying the platform.
They only need PSVR2 to improve Playstation appeal, even if only slightly because there is no other console with VR hardware and any extra to brand image helps. They don't need massive sales for it to be profitable, they get profit from both the hardware and the software, the R&D cost was minimal, all of the many sensors and cameras are nothing new, they only needed to create the screens, lenses and downsize the controller haptics and they get the components cheaper either internally or from partners since they manufacture all kinds of electronic devices.
Indies are more than happy to support the platform, less competition than with flat games and if it eventually takes off then Sony can assign studios/hire 3rd parties to make AAA games for it.
It's basically a win-win situation for Sony regardless of it becoming mainstream or not.

Obviously for MS it's different, it's a much bigger investment and they prefer to wait until they are sure they'll get the desired profit before making their VR headset (... or buying a headset maker and rebranding it...).

Sony did say that third party and Indies are what drives VR the most. Indies in the fact that they will take the most creative risks in VR.

With that said, you are still going to get you GT7s, Firewall, Astro and the like from Sony. Would be cool if they add a VR HR Derby mode to The Show. Or hell, even VR for full games.

 

[splattered]

Well before the cma they'll need to make sure xbox exists in that era. Why would ms give money for vr if their gaming division isn't profitable?

Microsoft can just put some hololense out on shelves and say see! We are struggling in this market and we are afraid that if Sony is allowed to continue to grow unchecked and acquire additional VR devs/publishers our poor company may never recover boo hoo.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Microsoft can just put some hololense out on shelves and say see! We are struggling in this market and we are afraid that if Sony is allowed to continue to grow unchecked and acquire additional VR devs/publishers our poor company may never recover boo hoo.

See that, you're catching on.

 

[Thirty7ven]

They will just buy whatever company they need when VR explodes. MS the great innovator.

 

[splattered]

I think a better option for them would be to pick a specific partner (or two/few?) and build out whatever is needed to allow 3rd party headsets for use with the Series consoles. Would be easier than building your own solution and cheaper than trying to buy out a large VR headset maker.

 

[Ozriel]

im sorry uncle philly good guy best bud. (yes i know it's matt booty, but i'm just out here memeing ok)

but the market only grows when A) the price drops and B) more people support it.

so unless you are just being a silly willy and petty, you should be really trying to support it in some capacity

(let people use their PC headsets or something, you are MS this should be easy for you)

Silly and petty for not supporting a market that still hasn't emerged from niche territory yet?

Microsoft can just put some hololense out on shelves and say see! We are struggling in this market and we are afraid that if Sony is allowed to continue to grow unchecked and acquire additional VR devs/publishers our poor company may never recover boo hoo.

Hololens = AR. Not the same as VR. Pay attention to these things...Trolling works best when it's subtle and there's some smarts behind it.

They will just buy whatever company they need when VR explodes. MS the great innovator.

Valid strategy, since that's pretty much what everyone is doing. But it doesn't look likely to explode for console gaming headsets anytime soon.

Everyone's looking at the Apple Vision Pro and Meta Quest 3 which will be advertised for different target markets

 

[Ozriel]

I think a better option for them would be to pick a specific partner (or two/few?) and build out whatever is needed to allow 3rd party headsets for use with the Series consoles. Would be easier than building your own solution and cheaper than trying to buy out a large VR headset maker.

I don't believe building the hardware has ever been THE problem, since they have the tech and the smarts to do that...and have done so before.

 

[Knightime_X]

Phil was promising VR support for Xbox One X, not Xbox One, in 2016.

Don had left the Xbox division 3 years prior to that. Phil in the Head of Xbox for 3 years at that point and was leading the first console launch under his complete supervision.

It's now apparent, Phil can see into the future.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Silly and petty for not supporting a market that still hasn't emerged from niche territory yet?

So MS has to wait until the "market emerges?" They can't be trailblazers with everyone else?

They sure want to trailblaze the even more niche cloud gaming.

Steve Jobs was right.

 

[fastest finger]

When they say "VR market" I'm pretty sure they mean "Xbox userbase".

 

[Ozriel]

So MS has to wait until the "market emerges?" They can't be trailblazers with everyone else?

Steve Jobs was right.

Upcoming third-party Windows VR headsets will use HoloLens tech

No external sensors will be needed, and the headsets could boast better-than-Oculus-Rift resolution.

www.cnet.com

Ironically, Meta/oculus, HTC and others seem to be pivoting to untethered, affordable headsets as the play now. Ditto for Valve's rumored untethered x86 headset. It's certainly not just MS that got cold feet about tethered, high end VR gaming.

They sure want to trailblaze the even more niche cloud gaming.

They believe Cloud will eventually be a big market. And they're investing heavily towards that. Not sure how you can square that with them having to 'wait until the market emerges'.

So much illogicality in giving them stick for not staying the course in a market you love, but consistently deriding them for trailblazing in another market you don't like

 

[DeepEnigma]

They believe Cloud will eventually be a big market. And they're investing heavily towards that. Not sure how you can square that with them having to 'wait until the market emerges'.

So much illogicality in giving them stick for not staying the course in a market you love, but consistently deriding them for trailblazing in another market you don't like

So does the CMA. Ironic.

And stop projecting.

 

[Romulus]

Let it die off like 3D TV's did.

That ship sailed. Apple, Meta, Valve, and sony all have new headsets this year coming and more AAA games. By this time in 3dtv's life had been dead for years, VR just got at least another 10 years added.

 

[Ozriel]

When they say "VR market" I'm pretty sure they mean "Xbox userbase".

First gen PSVR sold 5+ million units on a userbase of 117 million consoles. That's a 5% take up rate. No matter the userbase, it doesn't seem like there's a lot of uptake from the bulk of consumers.

They probably also looked at how casual demand for console VR sharply tailed off when the Quest launched.

Kudos to Sony for trying to expand horizons that way and persevering with it. I'll keep buying as long as they keep making them...but it doesn't seem to be a big market.

 

[Romulus]

First gen PSVR sold 5+ million units on a userbase of 117 million consoles. That's a 5% take up rate. No matter the userbase, it doesn't seem like there's a lot of uptake from the bulk of consumers.

They probably also looked at how casual demand for console VR sharply tailed off when the Quest launched.

Kudos to Sony for trying to expand horizons that way and persevering with it. I'll keep buying as long as they keep making them...but it doesn't seem to be a big market.

Tbh, PSVR1 was not a good indicator of the potential of VR. Arguably, PSVR2 will fair better and will have games that trump anything on a regular PS5 but I don't think its the poster boy for sales potential. Where I think the holy grail is 10TF+ standalone which is the size of a large pair of glasses at the $400 range. That's coming sooner than you might expect.

 

[hyperbertha]

Microsoft can just put some hololense out on shelves and say see! We are struggling in this market and we are afraid that if Sony is allowed to continue to grow unchecked and acquire additional VR devs/publishers our poor company may never recover boo hoo.

Phill's son will buy htc vive and say 'see our product is trash. Pls cma can we pls buy quest 4 and rename it to xbox vr?'

 

[Pejo]

Good thinking, let Xbox stick to what it's great at.

Such as... uh....

 

[Three]

First gen PSVR sold 5+ million units on a userbase of 117 million consoles. That's a 5% take up rate. No matter the userbase, it doesn't seem like there's a lot of uptake from the bulk of consumers.

Now do 5% of 50M and you would see why.

 

[Robb]

That ship sailed. Apple, Meta, Valve, and sony all have new headsets this year coming and more AAA games. By this time in 3dtv's life had been dead for years, VR just got at least another 10 years added.

Yeah, you're definitely right. I'm just not a huge fan. Cool tech though.

 

[splattered]

Silly and petty for not supporting a market that still hasn't emerged from niche territory yet?




Hololens = AR. Not the same as VR. Pay attention to these things...Trolling works best when it's subtle and there's some smarts behind it.




Valid strategy, since that's pretty much what everyone is doing. But it doesn't look likely to explode for console gaming headsets anytime soon.

Everyone's looking at the Apple Vision Pro and Meta Quest 3 which will be advertised for different target markets

But it was supposed to be silly i wasn't trying to be serious...

 

[Romulus]

Yeah, you're definitely right. I'm just not a huge fan. Cool tech though.

It's definitely not for everyone. In my case, I can barely muster the motivation to play non-VR games anymore, especially flight, driving sims, or any fps game.

 

[Rayderism]

VR just seems to have built-in limitations that will always be a problem that can't be overcome. Some people get headaches using it. Some people get motion sickness from it. Some don't have room in their house to dance around with a VR unit without knocking into stuff or injuring themselves or others, because their view of the real world is severely limited, or non-existent, while wearing the headset. Some people are blind in one eye (like me) and so can't enjoy the main feature of VR.....stereoscopic 3D. I'm sure their are other physical issues I'm not considering that deter people from VR.

Then there's the software side....let's take PS5 and PSVR2 as an example. There are somewhere between 35-40 million PS5's in gamer's hands, but there's currently less than a million PSVR2's out there. (according to some quick Googling) So, someone makes a game for PS5, they have 35-40 million chances for people to buy their game. But with PSVR2, they have less than a million chances (currently) of people buying their game, especially if it absolutely REQUIRES the VR headset to play. And I'm sure there has never been any game that has sold at 100% parity with the number of platforms it can be played on. So that's limitations within limitations.

I can't tell you how many times I saw some game that looked like it would be really fun to play an was about to buy it, but then saw it REQUIRES VR, and I'm forced to go, "Nevermind"....lost sale of the game by default. And it's due to it being confined to a VR headset that I will never buy, or be able to enjoy properly due to my above-mentioned disability, not to mention the physical limitations others may have, as stated in my first paragraph, that prevent people from buying into VR in the first place.

With what it costs to make games nowadays, I don't understand why any company would purposely make games for the "by default" gimped sales potential of "only on VR", versus making a game that will play on a standard console or PC with many multiple times more chances to sell. I can only assume that people making VR-only games have been given some kind of upfront monetary compensation to make them. Otherwise, why bother?

So in this particular case, I 100% agree with the head of XBOX Game Studios point of view. It's not really practical.

 

[Crayon]

Good thinking, let Xbox stick to what it's great at.

Such as... uh....

Shoveling money into a furnace?

 

[Eotheod]

You have no clue how businesses work. No risk no reward. It's the reason they are doing pathetically bad with xbox, always playing catch up and failing. The reason the market is niche is because the tech hasnt developed to have mainstream appeal. Ms has the resources for proper r&ding a superior product that can lift vr from niche. They had every opportunity to get a leg up on sony. They simply choose not to.

It has always been "VR could be big" or "just you wait and it'll go mainstream imitating Ready Player One!" It still has yet to hit that delivery of solid titles or even better fit alongside your everyday lifestyle. It is still just an accessory to play games in a more immersed setting, and unfortunately that is a hard sell.

Trust me, I know how these businesses work when it comes to VR. I hate using the word, but I literally worked at a VR studio delivering consumer-level VR arcade experiences at Zero Latency. It's a great genre, but it's limited and unable to expand as of yet. Can't blame Microsoft for being smart here and not throwing billions of dollars into a field of hope.

I remember the first Oculus, probably still have it somewhere in fact. It was amazing, but it soon became obvious that the kit, while a developer model, was limited in true functionality.

 

[ReBurn]

I think VR is too small for another major player but I don't think it's too small for Xbox to support an existing player. Glom onto someone else and just supply a link cable and games.

 

[ArtHands]

Do they really need many 1st party VR exclusive games? They might be happy with VR modes on selected big games and having 3rd parties/indies carrying the platform.
They only need PSVR2 to improve Playstation appeal, even if only slightly because there is no other console with VR hardware and any extra to brand image helps. They don't need massive sales for it to be profitable, they get profit from both the hardware and the software, the R&D cost was minimal, all of the many sensors and cameras are nothing new, they only needed to create the screens, lenses and downsize the controller haptics and they get the components cheaper either internally or from partners since they manufacture all kinds of electronic devices.
Indies are more than happy to support the platform, less competition than with flat games and if it eventually takes off then Sony can assign studios/hire 3rd parties to make AAA games for it.
It's basically a win-win situation for Sony regardless of it becoming mainstream or not.

Obviously for MS it's different, it's a much bigger investment and they prefer to wait until they are sure they'll get the desired profit before making their VR headset (... or buying a headset maker and rebranding it...).

I didn't say they need many 1st party game. I am saying there's 0 announced upcoming 1st party game.

 

[CitizenKratos]

It's also much too innovative.

 

[KXVXII9X]

The industry is hesitant to invest in new/different technologies. It is a catch-22. Without support, VR will always be small. Since it is small, it is too risky to be supported by big companies.

I have a Quest 2. While it isn't perfect, it has shown me so much potential with gaming. Even simple games like Superhot VR brings so much to gaming and opens up new possibilities of gameplay. It is also perfect for games like Walkabout Mini Golf and Eleven Table Tennis which feel exactly like the real thing. VR also excels at interactivity and has more attention to physics.

There is so much more to gaming than increasing pixels or framerate. Like some people mentioned, Bethesda already has a few games that were put in VR like Skyrim and Fallout 4. Forza would be cool in VR and I could see something like Sea of Thieves, Grounded, or Avowed in VR.

 

[AeonGaidenRaiden]

He aint wrong. So far the only games I saw in VR that I thought are system sellers are Alyx and GT7. Everything else its a bunch of indies that are more like arcade games. Once we get more story driven and quality games such as Alyx, Id jump on. Right now the entry point is too high for a paper weight. Its still uncomfortable to play on VR for hours in a row, they need to fix all that first but more importantly we need to see equal effort put into AAA games for VR.

 

[Fatal Chuck Yeager]

The thing is, Microsoft have never made their own consumer VR hardware and from a logical standpoint don't need to.

They can support 3rd party headsets, just as they did on windows with WMR.

Why would they support an industry without making money that has one breadwinner that can't keep customers and has no player base with the majority of best selling software which are only impressive sales wise compared to the rest of VR where there's barely any traction?

The biggest issue is the fact that they aren't hesitating in purchasing developers who were previously more than happy to (and had plans to continue to) support VR. If you're going to do that then at least allow them to have a pathway to continue to develop for VR, even if it's only via PC.

Allow them a pathway to split resources to get into a segment of the market where's there's no money? You're suggesting they should because "they can" but getting rid of the common sense fact that there wouldn't be any benefit to doing so.

 

[Ar¢tos]

I didn't say they need many 1st party game. I am saying there's 0 announced upcoming 1st party game.

They had Horizon, and I'm sure Astro Bot is coming in the holidays period. Two 1st party games per year is enough to keep it going.

 

[ArtHands]

They had Horizon, and I'm sure Astro Bot is coming in the holidays period. Two 1st party games per year is enough to keep it going.

Except there's 0 upcoming announced VR title in development from Sony studios since Astro Bot isn't announced and Horizon is released.

 

[Ar¢tos]

Except there's 0 upcoming announced VR title in development from Sony studios since Astro Bot isn't announced and Horizon is released.

And that's bad how?
You prefer the MS way? Announce games 5-6 years too early and release a CGI trailer every year until the release year?

 

[hyperbertha]

He aint wrong. So far the only games I saw in VR that I thought are system sellers are Alyx and GT7. Everything else its a bunch of indies that are more like arcade games. Once we get more story driven and quality games such as Alyx, Id jump on. Right now the entry point is too high for a paper weight. Its still uncomfortable to play on VR for hours in a row, they need to fix all that first but more importantly we need to see equal effort put into AAA games for VR.

What about Skyrim, re7,8?

 

[ArtHands]

And that's bad how?
You prefer the MS way? Announce games 5-6 years too early and release a CGI trailer every year until the release year?

if 0 upcoming announced 1st party PSVR2 game is not bad then I will leave you to it. I am just saying this is exactly what affirming MS' decision to not invest in console VR.

 

[nikolino840]

True..better the cloud market