For someone who follows the VR scene closely (I ordered a Rift and a Vive), this is a pretty bad list. I suspect only a few of the games mentioned are in fact the most compelling ones close to launch (Dead and Buried shouldn't be counted given that the Touch controllers won't be available for at least another 6 months). These are the titles I suggest looking into if you're interested in VR (in no meaningful order):
Eve: Valkyrie, Chronos, Space Pirate Trainer, Budget Cuts, Audioshield, Hover Junkers, The Gallery, The Climb, Edge of Nowhere, Vanishing Realms, Brookhaven Experiment (this one is more iffy). My feeling is that the most interesting games will be on the Vive due to its roomscale capabilities.
I'm sure there are interesting games for PSVR as well, but I don't follow the platform closely.
An important insight about how our experiences shape expectations, though objectively it would seem less innovation is bad, therefore the people demanding new experiences have the better argument. I was 6 in 1984, so I've seen even greater leaps in game design and technology (I started on an Atari 2600). Imagine how disappointed I am by the lack of ambition in AAA games (apart from a few standouts like Irrational, Valve, etc).
However, I just watched the latest series of talks by Oculus on the future of VR, and I can say with confidence we're about to see the greatest period of innovation yet. Brace yourselves.
@hystavito Yeah, they've admitted that their future goal of mass adoption involves experiences powered by cell phones and tablets, so you're right that it won't matter in a few years (in terms of adoption). Regardless, the best experiences will always be on a powerful gaming PC (until cloud computing is worked out, I suppose).
As for whether it will really take off or not, my feeling is that if people are really tricked into believing they're in another place, many (if not most) people will immediately want it. Think about it. Virtual chat, virtual sex, virtual trips...you get the idea. I really believe they will deliver on the tech side, which is why I have faith in this taking off. If you haven't checked it out, I highly suggest watching/reading Michael Abrash's VR keynote at Valve Dev Days. It's what ultimately convinced me this is the future.
@barleybosh @plasticreality Most definitely. In fact, I played a demo that simulated sitting on a couch while playing a 2D game. I've also watched 3D movies on a virtual screen in a virtual theater. Once they get the resolution high enough, watching virtual reality will be the best way to view 3D content of any kind.
Imagine living in a tiny apartment with a medium sized television. You could put on the Rift and simulate an IMAX theater for gaming.
It should also be noted that a "seated experience" is being pushed by Oculus because it significantly reduces nausea. Any time there is a disconnect between what your eyes are seeing and what your body is feeling you will likely become sick. Because we have physically adapted to driving around in cars, building VR experiences in a cockpit taps into that. No matter how good the resolution/latency is, if you think you're walking around but your body knows it's sitting in a chair, you're going to have problems. Work is being done on omni-directional treadmills and such, but no perfect solution has been presented yet.
I skipped the DK2 because of the nausea I felt with the DK1, but I'm totally sold on this being the future of entertainment (notice I didn't say gaming). Once they reach 1440p at 90 fps with sub 20 milliseconds latency, nausea will not only be mostly eliminated, but the physical feeling of presence will be dramatically improved. Oculus is confident they can achieve this for the consumer version, and with all in the industry talent they have siphoned lately (not to mention the FB money), I am too. VR is really happening.
My advice? Start saving money so you can build a high-end gaming PC, as that is likely the only way you'll experience virtual reality at its fullest. It's a hard truth that Oculus has downplayed amidst the hype, but it will be a major barrier for early adoption (most people can't afford a powerful gaming rig).
I'm glad the author recognizes Crash as pretentious nonsense - it gives the review more credibility. I personally long for games that say meaningful things about the human condition (including race, class, and gender, etc.), but very few really pull it off from either a political or an artistic perspective. Because so few developers dare try something innovative or progressive, critics are too quick to give praise simply for making the effort.
For example, Gone Home was given far too much praise for writing that is really on par with teen fiction (e.g. Twilight, Hunger Games). It's laudable the developers wrote a story around a teen lesbian's first romance, and I appreciate an interesting exploration game in a time where too many games involve shooting people, but we should hold the writing in video games to the same standards as literature or film.
A high framerate is important for VR - the higher the framerate, the more "real" the world feels (and the less nauseous the player feels). To some extent I think this is also true for traditional games. I've been playing mostly on a PC for the past year and the greatest gain to the experience (imo) has been higher framerates. The higher resolution and better effects certainly add quite a bit, but I never realized before how important it is to have a high framerate. I won't play anything now at less than 45 FPS.
plasticreality's comments