After a VR-free year from Apple, VR headsets deemed "the biggest loser" of 2016



  • Reply 61 of 64
    Seriously, comparing VR products with smartwatches is bit of stretch, don't you think?
  • Reply 62 of 64
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,571member
    clemynx said:
    Anyone calling VR a gimmick is out of touch with reality and clearly hasn't ever tried it. 
    It's were gaming was always headed, for most forms of games at least. It's just the beginning and it's amazing already. 
    VR has limited utility (games and applications that do not involve all-day exposure to a synthetic environment) and will remain limited by its very nature. It's a confining experience compared to AR, which is more "open" in terms of interaction with the environment, but will likewise remain a niche product. AR will serve a broader niche than VR.
    VR is Playstation/Samsung Gear VR, Google Daydream, Oculus Rift and the like. AR was epitomized by Google Glass. People were initially excited about it, and then pushed by the media (and perhaps prodded by other techs not ready to compete with products) to fear the VR efforts. OMG, a camera!! Sickos and stalkers with them!! HE"S LOOKING AT ME!

    A lot of FUD was floated to destroy Glass and overcoming that now might not be all that easy as it wasn't too long ago we were taught to be afraid.  How to put all that fear back in the bag and say "nevermind we didn't mean it. It's OK. It really is" ?
    edited December 2016
  • Reply 63 of 64

    That's obvious because a tethered headset and joystick are ridiculous things. If it is joystick then I already do that in my 2D flat sreen why would I wear the whole display assembly on my head?

    There is no VR unless you introduce your very self into the scene. That requires an untethered headset and a body kit.
    You have obviously not used this technology. The reason you wear the headset is so you can move and look around in a fully three dimensional environment. This is not the same as moving a controller and watching your view pan around on a TV in front of your eyes. A good example is an interactive "film" type thing on a miniature stage with claymation type characters I was watching, where you could literally peer around a corner to see another character walking down a street that you couldn't see before. Or walking toward an object and looking down into an opening in the top of a ship to see the characters doing stuff inside of it, as if the object is right in front of your chest. By moving your head, and your feet (to a limited degree). Or in a 3D world where you're standing in an alley, and you can look up and crane your head to peer around a fire escape, or around a corner to spot an enemy. It "feels" like you can reach out and literally touch things in front of you. As I said in my previous posts, trying to describe it is difficult. Trust me, it's nothing like your 2D flat screen.

    Edit: maybe you're focusing on the tethered aspect of it, but it's not that big of a deal. Nobody is going to set up a full walk-around multi-camera setup in their living room. The PSVR limits you to probably the average amount of space that most people have in front of their TV/living room area. Move controllers give you wireless dual hand controllers, some software just uses the DualShock controllers which is better suited to some types of games, etc.
    Yes it works exactly as you describe and that is the easiest way to break your neck in a game. If you have to turn your head left right fast enough to fight bandits you'll get a neck injury before even completing level one. This is why they include a game controller, thanks to the game controller you don't have to shift left right so fast, the game controller shifts the view before your eyes. And that makes both game controller and the VR pointless, because since I need a game controller to shift the view, I already do that in my 2D flat screen, why would I wear the whole display assembly on my head?
    Break your neck? Are you joking?

    That's not how it works — head tracking changes your view, not the controller. That's the whole point! Nothing is made pointless by a controller to any degree whatsoever.

    Again, you've obviously not used VR in any capacity. Go pick up a Google Cardboard, it'll give you a decent experience for a few bucks and you'll quickly understand why you're so completely wrong about how it works.
    You've obviously not played games in any capacity. All games are written for keyboard+mouse combo, or game controller. Not a single game re-written from scratch uniquely for VR has been announced yet.
    I have no idea what you're talking about — I have played several games specifically developed for VR with both Move controllers and the DualShock controller, neither of which control your view. Your head movement tracking changes your view, not the controller. That's the whole point. You're describing how these games function in a way that does not mirror reality and I have no idea why.
    I am describing how all games function, not these ones. If there are such games specifically developed for VR then provide names. You cannot just plug a VR HMD in and play COD in it. Then you break your neck.
    I just browsed an entire section of the Playstation Store full of games specifically designed for VR. I own several, which you cannot play without VR — for example, EVE Valkyrie, Batman Arkham VR, Here They Lie, all the games on VR Worlds, not to mention the Demo disc that comes with it with many other designed-for-VR games/experiences that you can get. I don't understand what you're trying to communicate here, it makes zero sense to me and does not reflect reality.

    What is it you think people are playing on VR?

    edited December 2016
  • Reply 64 of 64

    dysamoria said:
    I expected this. So did many people. 

    "You just need to try it", say the supporters. Well, any guess as to why so many of us haven't tried it?

    This isn't like spending 15$+ per person at the cinema to see a 3D movie (which is generally too much for me because that money could feed me instead). It's far easier to do that than to buy into a 3D tv setup. Even worse is the prospect of buying into a 3D gaming platform.
    You could potentially walk into a Gamestop and try PSVR for free.

    Or in my city, there are a ton of VR enthusiast meet ups where you can try out different VR software/hardware, all for free or very cheap.

    If you can't afford to go to movie theaters, yeah you're gonna have a hard time dropping $800 on a gaming system. Obviously not everyone lives by such constrained finances, but the PSVR is far cheaper than the PC-based options out there, and likely to give VR a larger footprint in the living room.

    Sony has sold 50 million PS4s so far. Not every one of those is going to get a VR set to go with it, but many will.
Sign In or Register to comment.