Grand Theft Auto parent publisher "impressed" by Oculus Rift

Take-Two CEO Strauss Zelnick says, "I'm encouraged by anything that gets people more engaged with interactive entertainment."

by

Could a future Grand Theft Auto or Red Dead Redemption game be played using virtual reality technology like Oculus Rift? Maybe, according to Strauss Zelnick, CEO of Grand Theft Auto parent publisher Take-Two Interactive.

"Oculus Rift was a big smash and wonder at CES--and our folks were very impressed with it," Zelnick told GamesIndustry International, noting that he has not tried the technology himself because he is a "suit" not a "gamer." "It remains to be seen what we can do with it, but [Oculus] has already addressed some of the big challenges (such as users getting motion sick) that it faced early on. ... I'm encouraged by anything that gets people more engaged with interactive entertainment."

It's not only Take-Two that's impressed by virtual reality technology like Oculus Rift. Yesterday during a D.I.C.E. presentation in Las Vegas, PlayStation 4 lead system architect Mark Cerny said virtual reality could be a pretty big deal in the next decade. "The impact of virtual reality technologies could be pretty significant going forward in that time frame," he said.

Sony is reportedly working on its own virtual reality headset for the PlayStation 4 (outside of its current head-mounted displays), which make Cerny's comments all the more interesting.

The Oculus Rift virtual reality headset launched for developers last year, but creator Oculus VR has not announced details regarding its commercial release just yet. Creator Palmer Luckey has major ambitions for the technology, saying during D.I.C.E. yesterday that the headset has the potential to be "one of the most important technologies in the history of mankind."

Discussion

51 comments
Creed02
Creed02

I can imagine gta with oculus.. very delightful 

lonesamurai1
lonesamurai1

Good to know PC Gamers will get the non-experimental version of Grand Theft Auto V that console gamers had to deal with.

kazikbak5
kazikbak5

saying during D.I.C.E. yesterday that the headset has the potential to be "one of the most important technologies in the history of mankind."


He did NOT say that about the headset. He said that about advanced VR technology in future as a whole (with all senses simulated including touch). He specifically referred to the impact on every day life, meeting with people from the other side of the planet "in person" with no perceived difference. And he is right, with telepresence this would be basically teleportation becoming "real". It would have a gigantic impact on our civilization.

Fursnake
Fursnake

Oculus Rift=PC. Grand Theft Auto parent publisher=impressed by Oculus. Therefore we must deduce that GTA5 musty come to the PC.

nl_skipper
nl_skipper

Do they seriously need to call these guys "GTA's parent publisher" EVERY time they are mentioned?  It's kind of annoying at this point, everyone knows who these guys are and they publish a hell of a lot more than just GTA games. 

playstationzone
playstationzone

I don't want Headset for future GTA game so really no and I don't thing VR Headset going to come and go like 3D is .

Dannystaples14
Dannystaples14

GTA on Oculus Rift would be great. But my main issue with the whole Virtual Reality thing is it isn't really Virtual Reality.

It is just a small screen strapped to your head.

I've never had an issue becoming immersed in games. I've never felt that a TV screen or monitor was somehow not enough.

I mean starting at the white pages of a novel has never stopped me falling straight through the pages into the world. If anything I find reading THE most immersive form of entertainment possible.

When I'm sat at my computer of choice and I'm playing, I'm still sat on a chair, which I can feel, I can still hear ambient noises like people downstairs or someone on the phone in another room. I still know I am somewhere outside of the game on my face. Sure a pair of headphone will work but I feel that will only make me more likely to be jumpy of the things around me. I am still moving the sticks on my controller or pushing buttons on a keyboard.

If anything I hate that they tout this as VR, is they called it face vision or something I'd be much more okay with it.

And lets not lie to ourselves, games look great today but everyone who isn't mentally unstable knows the difference between a game and real life.

SphinxDemon
SphinxDemon

Here's to hoping an SAO in the next ten years

kane6911
kane6911

no this is a bad ideal. all this will do incite more random violence. this is why this game should be banned out right. for the reason of thing like this. VR and this game should not even be a topic of discussion 

turbojugend16
turbojugend16

OR won't work on consoles (thank God for that), so I'm curious why does consoles-focused publisher yap about OR...

Spartan_418
Spartan_418

@lonesamurai1 unfortunate that PC gamers are willing to pass up an amazing game for months, if not forever, because they value resolution and framerate more than anything else

GTA V will likely come to PC but it's possible that it won't. Red Dead Redemption didn't.

mr_nee
mr_nee

@Fursnake  I used to be impressed by Angelinas looks, doesn't mean I married her (Brad beat me to it and also I found a hotter looking wife).


But hey, maybe GTA6?

merrickx
merrickx

@Dannystaples14  The effect is profound enough that 20 years of VR crap-birthed skeptics, like myself, are convinced that this is pretty damn good for "virtual reality," even though it's relatively cheap and simple.

Ashok
Ashok

@Dannystaples14 "my main issue with the whole Virtual Reality thing is it isn't really Virtual Reality.

It is just a small screen strapped to your head."  That's a very excellent argument and it's the very reason the Sony HMZ has no future.   Sony's head-mount display isn't really Virtual Reality, it's just a small screen strapped to your head.  


That argument doesn't hold true against the Oculus Rift.  It really is a VIRTUAL REALITY helmet.  You don't feel like you're looking at a screen when you put it on.  You literally feel like you've stepped thru a portal outside of your living room and are standing someplace else. 

NikoKun
NikoKun

@Dannystaples14 Unless you've tried the Crystal Cove prototype yourself.. I don't think you can claim such an opinion about it.

From those who have tried it, it's no longer just "immersion". It's something beyond that, something even better. They're calling it "Presents", as in you actually feel a sense of presents of being Actually INSIDE the virtual reality.

If that isn't what you call VR, I dono what is..

chad_schofield
chad_schofield

@Dannystaples14  When you're looking around a game world in VR, it is so solid and physically real looking that your brain, on a subconscious level, is convinced that it is real.  So subconscious reactions like your fear of heights is very real when looking over the edge of a VR cliff.  When you are sitting in an airplane or spaceship cockpit, you really feel confined within it.

vanfanel1car
vanfanel1car

@Dannystaples14 But it is VR.  It may technically be a screen in front of your face but it is not the same thing as watching a screen in front of your face.  When you try it out for the first time you'll understand what people mean by being completely immersed in a game.  It's unlike anything you've experienced before.  Give it a shot first before making a judgement.  i've gamed on triple screens, at 1600p and I would rather go back in the rift.

nl_skipper
nl_skipper

@Dannystaples14  I agree whole heartedly with most of this, but it's amazing how many times I hear people complain about their "immersion" being broken, as though a little glitch or out of character moment is enough to totally destroy some peoples suspension of disbelief, it's a bit ridiculous...


I'm with you though, I don't need some kind of all encompassing thing to wrap around me and try and convince me I'm really in the game..  A decent screen and some headphones is really all it takes to bring me there!  I don't really consider the Oculus rift a "VR" set anyway, it's really more of a personalized-3D screen with side to side motion tracking enabled, which is cool but far from what I'd consider a real "virtual reality"

SphinxDemon
SphinxDemon

I see your point, but in the end this game is for 18+ anyways. Assuming your a responsible citizen of society.

billlabowski
billlabowski

@turbojugend16 The sudden realization that this gen, it's not about consoles, it's all about PC and how it's driving entertainment forward while consoles are stagnant. 

Ashok
Ashok

@Spartan_418 @lonesamurai1 Red Dead Redemption?  Unlike GTA5, Rockstar North didn't even make the game.  Of course it didn't ship on PC.

merrickx
merrickx

@mr_nee @nl_skipper  Played it. Meh. Too many great games over the last year. The PC version will fall toward the middle of my to-play list.

NikoKun
NikoKun

@Dannystaples14 @playstationzone $300 is an amazing price for this sorta thing.. Considering previous HMDs that weren't even as good, usually cost at least $1000, and sometimes over $10,000.

$300 is the price of a great quality gaming display.. And that's what this is, an input-output gaming display. It's not quite a monitor replacement yet, but it certainly has the potential to be someday. It's a revolutionary advancement, not just for gaming, but for all sorts of uses.


Mark my words, this is not just a "3D gimmick".. This is the next evolution of gaming. Without something like it, we have no where to go, when it comes to advancements in gaming technology. Games will never become more than just eye candy in a square window sitting on your desk/living room. That's not an impressive future for gaming.


3D failed because it was stupid. It still relied on the limited square window.. The 3D effects were usually unrealistic and didn't add anything important to the experience.. And the screens were usually WELL over $300, usually no where near that.  OH, AND there wasn't really that much great content for it.


VR failed in the past, because the hardware technology was not ready, and because of that, there was little to no good software written for it.. You could still have a far better experience on a flat square-window screen.


All those problems have been solved now. VR is immersive, feels good, and is awesome and fun. The newest prototypes (which show off features of the consumer version) are SO immersive that you feel a sense of "presents" of actually BEING IN that virtual world. At least, that's what people who've tried the Crystal Cove prototype are saying. I have a Dev Kit myself, and even tho it's not as good, I still love it, and can feel the immense potential this technology has. Playing games on even this lower-quality model, is incredible, and I don't want to go back to gaming the "old way".


AND if you're following the news around VR and the Oculus Rift lately, it certainly wont just be a "handful of games". Tons of big developers are very enthusiastic about this! Many are contemplating adding support to their future games, and some are already developing "Made for VR" exclusive titles!  Eve: Valkyrie has already been confirmed to be a Rift VR exclusive, and upcoming games like The Witness and Star Citizen will have support. There's a growing list of probably over 100 games already, being produced by smaller and indi devs, ranging from simple demos and non-game exploration experiences, to full high-budget story-driven epics.

My point is, VR isn't going to die off as a gimmick. We're well past that point already, even tho the consumer version is still at least half a year away. The software is there, and the hardware is now affordable and high quality.


If you haven't tried an Oculus Rift yet, I suggest you try to find the opportunity.. Although at this point you'll probably get a more impressive experience if you wait to try the DK2 or Consumer model, once those are around. DK1 is already an outdated experience, but it's still a great early look at VR's potential. Keep in mind, they've solved the resolution, blur, and nausea problems DK1 had, so no worries about that.

Dannystaples14
Dannystaples14

@NikoKun Erm this isn't opinion this is me imagining myself sat in my room playing a game using the Rift and thinking about all of my senses. You don't need to try one to imagine that.

Who is calling it "presents" (surely presence would be better)? The people making the Rift. If so they can shove their marketing.

I won't believe the Rift is anything but a gimmick, I don't think, until I've tried one.

Dannystaples14
Dannystaples14

@chad_schofield I've NEVER been convinced that a game is real. Because it looks like a game and I know games are not real. I've never been convinced that a film is real, even though that actually does look real, because my brain knows it isn't real.

merrickx
merrickx

@nl_skipper @Dannystaples14  It's not side-to-side, the 3D is achieved through complete stereopsis, and the motion tracking works on all axis and is just about 1:1, and nearly the entire field of view is used. Those three components deliver a very profound experience. You'd be surprised. It's certainly "VR," it's just head-mounted VR; not exactly what we see depicted in some flicks what with tapping into the brain and such.


Sony's HMZ is more of a "personalized 3D screen." After trying out the OR in many, many different types of demos, I consider it sooooo much more than that. It really gives a sense of presence. Like I said, the effect is just profound.

Dannystaples14
Dannystaples14

@nl_skipper I know this is kind of far fetched and kind of lame but the closest thing I've ever seen or imagined that I feel would be close to "true" VR is Inception, or super science fiction with neural implants which can physically manipulate your brain chemistry into believing something. 

Kind of like I guess hallucinations. They can be vivid and they can invoke something that can scare people near to death because it is so realistic. Only when I can be shot and it causes pain or stabbed or I can feel someone's breath on my neck or the lips of a woman on my own. THAT will be VR, the sort of VR that will put many people into mental hospitals. We are SO far from that it is unreal but I can't help but think that anything short of such a thing wouldn't be enough for me personally.

A small sound, a smell, a vibration through the floorboards under my feet is more than enough. In fact when I'm concentrating on something like when studying I literally have to use sound scapes like SimplyNoise to completely purge all sound. Music is distracting to me. Someone talking in a room next door is probably worse because my mind is TRYING to pick up the words and it can't which means it is taking concentration from me. It might not be a great characteristic of a person but it is one I have.

solarrainuk
solarrainuk

@nl_skipper @Dannystaples14  In movies and games, there are so very many factors that can interrupt immersion like framerate issues, bad animation, inconsistent animation/graphics, inappropriate use of screenshake/badly cued music, audio problems, weird glitches and bugs, a full on crash which is probably the rudest of all immersion breakers..the list is endless. Any one of these things can break someone's immersion, and some people are more sensitive than others.


Either way, novels or games/movies, it still requires the user having a good imagination and some people are more sensitive to interruption than others.

Spartan_418
Spartan_418

@merrickx  You missed the point there. I'm talking about a PC gamer's reasons for refusing to play a console game, even when that game's not available on PC.

PC gamers will refuse to play The Last of Us because it's 720p 30fps, and it's their loss.

I'm not talking about general reasons to choose PC over consoles.

Spartan_418
Spartan_418

@Ashok  RDR was developed by Rockstar San Diego with "additional work" by Rockstar North. No reason they couldn't have ported it to PC or had another dev do it for them. 

merrickx
merrickx

@Dannystaples14 @NikoKun  They've sold 80k+ devkits to anyone and everyone. They've not marketed shit, really; that's been done by the hundreds of thousands who've tried it. I've been enthralled with head-mounted displays since the early 90's, and it has always been crap. That's why so many people are excited about *this*; it's finally not crap, and it's even affordable.


Hell, even the unevolved first developer kit version delivers a pretty amazing experience. I can't wait for the higher resolution, combined head-tracking, and low-persistence versions to come out.

SphinxDemon
SphinxDemon

I don't know many crazies, maybe one or two

merrickx
merrickx

@Dannystaples14 @billlabowski  Except the tech industry does care, you're just not privy to it. Every time a new tech comes along, especially in-game tech/methods, it's a big deal, and then all the console kids go crazy over it when those branches adopt the tech a year or two later.

merrickx
merrickx

@Dannystaples14  Nobody's oozing over the 780Ti, or the classified that was sneak-previewed? People didn't scoop up massive amounts of the whole R series that came out? Your anecdotes, for one, are just that, and secondly, they're not very accurate.

merrickx
merrickx

@Dannystaples14 @billlabowski @turbojugend16  And when is the only time you see the same for consoles...? At their launch. When a new, robust GPU generation hits the market, you see some people lining up, but mostly in online queues.

EepSquared
EepSquared

@Dannystaples14 The problem with PCs is that they aren't for dummies, which most people who play console games are (compared to PC gamers). PCs tend to have lots of stupid idiosynchrisies that need to be fixed in order to even play a game for the first time (patches, cracks--if you don't want to play with the stupid CD/DVD in the drive, etc). Until PC hardware and software developers get their act together and stop releasing intentionally buggy products, consoles will continue to attract people looking for quick access to games (which tend to be more mindless than their PC equivalents). Yes, I'm PC-biased but I recognize the dumbdownedness of consoles and understand their marketability. I hate how PCs are so damn complicated and annoying/frustrating to use a lot of the time, but I like their versatility compared to what consoles (and now tablets--Android et al) can do.

Dannystaples14
Dannystaples14

@billlabowski Who waits outside for games? My point was when consoles make a change people queue up for it. When PC does something, it gets published in a shit magazine and no one cares.

Dannystaples14
Dannystaples14

@nl_skipper God just the thought of buying a Mac from a store makes my hair stand on end. Also I was talking about new hardware. Where was the fanfare for the latest GPU? A new PC GPU is probably three times the Xbox One and PS4 and still no one cares.

Dannystaples14
Dannystaples14

@poopinpat @billlabowski @turbojugend16  Constantly evolving should be a positive thing yet people still regularly choose consoles over PC. That is how bad PCs have become that they can't even get people over to them by offering superior hardware.

That either means that PC has many other problems that offset that advantage or power simply isn't important. Either way doesn't make me want to run out and build a PC.

nl_skipper
nl_skipper

@Dannystaples14 PC gamers prefer digital downloads... no lines!  And only suckers buy PC's from a store,  they aren't like Apple products that have millions of people stupefied

billlabowski
billlabowski

@Dannystaples14 Poor peasants waiting out in the cold for their hardware. We just have ours mailed to us. As for games, Steam lol. Enjoy waiting outside.