I think all the comments on here about how exciting and brilliant VR is are all paid shills by an industry desperately trying to create itself out of thin air.
It hurts your neck, you look silly, you have to constantly move your head and eyes around. You are disorientated. Your house could be being robbed as you sit their like a wally. You still need a control pad. Waggle sticks are cumbersome.
There is nothing practical about VR at all.
The best possible use of it as as a kind of iMax at home.
VR is cool. Everyone who likes games should think so. VR is also in its infancy still. It's gonna become better, and that's where I plan to jump in. Some people think it's worth it to shell out money for right now. I personally don't, but I definitely will when VR is better.
I personally don't think everyone who has a VR headset and say they like it to be paid shills. That's tin foil hat-wearing moron-stuff.
I love it and think it's awesome. It may not be for everyone and it not perfect yet, but that's alot easier to believe than "everyone who says they like it are paid off by corporations."
Just because you don't like something doesn't mean the whole world shares your point of view. *shrugs*
I have a PSVR and I find it to be okay. I want to like it more. Currently, I think it needs improvements, but this is a start. I'd love to see where the tech goes.
Maybe when it's more affordable. I don't want to make a big investment into something that's only going to make me dizzy. Regular video games can already do that.
Psvr owner here (sorry for 190€ psvr with games included on black friday so I had to buy it. Cant resist when prices go down a lot haha).
I got blowned away by the idea of psvr. I wanted to touch the images. Its true it needs improvement. Low resolution is a problem for me but some games are playable in my opinion.
If you never tried VR and if you have both pc and ps4 Id recommend getting it for your pc (if you have gtx 1660ti or 1070 or vega 56) or even stronger gpu it will be an amazing experience.
I think alot of the enthusiasm is for what it could be rather than what it offers at the moment.
Litchie VR is cool. Everyone who likes games should think so.
If you're hoping for realism, then forget it because Unreal Engine is not quite there yet.
If you're hoping for gameplay, you have made a fundamental error as there are no advantages in this respect. Only immersion. That immersion only works if the game is involving and engrossing and for the few games that even support it.
I'm seeing alot of shovelware on this platform. No big developers are developing for it. \
It is a toy alot of people regret buying but they are dumb because of course it's sh*t. These are the people that make me have to watch a film in 3d because there are no 2d spaces left and I have to sit like a d*ck in 3d which doesn't work in a film which is 30% darker and I can't even see the picture properly.
VR is just the most pointless thing.
Even if it did work perfectly and it was as easy as wearing tanning shades (for those booths). I would be bored before too long unless the game was actually good.
Otherwise. It doesn't seem like so much a gaming device as another input device which is also an output device. I don't think it's future is in games. It would only work in vehicle cockpits as otherwise you will be required to look around too much as field of view is limited to the amount of direction you can turn your head.
I know we talk about this whole VR thing a hot mess and all of that but I'll just throw in my opinion.
VR is still exploring in the world of gaming, its still learning itself, and it's price tag will always be quite high compared to other gaming experiences, at least in any foreseeable future. I feel like VR is so much more interesting as a way to reboot the worlds of Arcade era in ways. But as of right now, the main problem is it seems everyone is pushing for a costumer-owned experience and IMO, its a bad idea for now and not alot to go by since VR is still in it's early infant stage. In short, the tech has to start somewhere and the same can be said for Nvidia's Raytracing on RTX, all of this stuff is going to take it's time to build.
@jackamomo said:
There is nothing practical about VR at all.
Now that's a complete BS!
VR can be used for:
Therapy.
Education.
Engineering/design.
Training employees. (UPS already uses it, Walmart is about to start using it)
Medicine. (training doctors, allowing patients to take their mind off of surgery to the point that they need less anesthesia, helping paralyzed people or amputees by stimulating the brain, etc),
Long distance meetings that feel like you're right there due to the extra presence.
Virtual tourism.
Watching movies. (maybe future movies will be VR so you can watch from whatever angle you please)
Recreating crime scenes for court cases.
Shopping. (get an idea of what clothes look like on you before you get them)
Entertainment. (non video game...like combining VR with roller coasters or watching sports as if you were at the stadium without having to leave home)
Filmmaking. (I believe they made use of the HTC Vive while making "Ready Player One")
Programming. (in the future they could visualize their code in VR. I think it sounds ridiculous but who knows?)
I think alot of the enthusiasm is for what it could be rather than what it offers at the moment.
Litchie VR is cool. Everyone who likes games should think so.
If you're hoping for realism, then forget it because Unreal Engine is not quite there yet.
If you're hoping for gameplay, you have made a fundamental error as there are no advantages in this respect. Only immersion. That immersion only works if the game is involving and engrossing and for the few games that even support it.
I'm seeing alot of shovelware on this platform. No big developers are developing for it. \
It is a toy alot of people regret buying but they are dumb because of course it's sh*t. These are the people that make me have to watch a film in 3d because there are no 2d spaces left and I have to sit like a d*ck in 3d which doesn't work in a film which is 30% darker and I can't even see the picture properly.
VR is just the most pointless thing.
Even if it did work perfectly and it was as easy as wearing tanning shades (for those booths). I would be bored before too long unless the game was actually good.
Otherwise. It doesn't seem like so much a gaming device as another input device which is also an output device. I don't think it's future is in games. It would only work in vehicle cockpits as otherwise you will be required to look around too much as field of view is limited to the amount of direction you can turn your head.
You really don't know much do you?
VR induces presence which means it can induce realism to the point where your brain subconsciously believes it's real.
Gameplay has no advantages? This one gave me a good laugh. What about how you have much more precise control over your movements, how you can interact with things in a more natural way, and how depth perception helps you judge distances, important for things like platforming.
These should be pretty self-explanatory:
There are loads of big developers making games for it.
This thread is the most pointless thing. I can't even tell what you're trying to do here, because it's clearly not working very well.
No questions initially. I am a strictly one way information dispenser.
I feel like VR is so much more interesting as a way to reboot the worlds of Arcade era in ways. But as of right now, the main problem is it seems everyone is pushing for a costumer-owned experience and IMO, its a bad idea for now and not alot to go by since VR is still in it's early infant stage.
What is the 'worlds of Arcade' and what is a 'customer owned-experience'?
You see, when you start talking about vr the bs starts to flow so thick and strong.
VR is in it's advanced stages. It's been worked on since the early 90's; that's thirty years or so mature.
All those things you said it could do are just being a screen. The head movement tracking is irrelevant.
It's not useful in engineering 'therapy' or education. What therapy is this? Is is some stupid story pulled from some hack online blog? Thought so.
There's only one thing it's useful for and that is controlling remote vehicles and interactive movies. Which is two things.
Neither of those things were games.
[edit] Going through your list is so darling how hard you tried. Take long distance meetings. How are you going to map a face onto a 3d model so you're not talking to a floating flat face plastered onto a cube? How would they see your face?
Having a degree of knowledge of programming, I can't see how looking around can be more advantageous than using windows and desktops.
It could be more fun. But you don't understand coders if you think they are impressed by such whimsy.
Go to start button Keanu, down, left, keep going. OK now press Applications...
[edit] It could be good for coding but a new language of shape would need to be devised as text would not be legible at distance. This is not likely to happen soon.
I think all the comments on here about how exciting and brilliant VR is are all paid shills by an industry desperately trying to create itself out of thin air.
It hurts your neck, you look silly, you have to constantly move your head and eyes around. You are disorientated. Your house could be being robbed as you sit their like a wally. You still need a control pad. Waggle sticks are cumbersome.
There is nothing practical about VR at all.
The best possible use of it as as a kind of iMax at home.
This is the only way it will sell.
I don't have issues with my neck, and looking around should be pretty natural to you by now, no? I don't feel disoriented, and I can have a virtual camera setup to observe the house if I need to. I don't really use a control pad much, as I mostly use my Oculus Touch controllers like most Oculus users.
No questions initially. I am a strictly one way information dispenser.
I feel like VR is so much more interesting as a way to reboot the worlds of Arcade era in ways. But as of right now, the main problem is it seems everyone is pushing for a costumer-owned experience and IMO, its a bad idea for now and not alot to go by since VR is still in it's early infant stage.
What is the 'worlds of Arcade' and what is a 'customer owned-experience'?
You see, when you start talking about vr the bs starts to flow so thick and strong.
VR is in it's advanced stages. It's been worked on since the early 90's; that's thirty years or so mature.
All those things you said it could do are just being a screen. The head movement tracking is irrelevant.
It's not useful in engineering 'therapy' or education. What therapy is this? Is is some stupid story pulled from some hack online blog? Thought so.
There's only one thing it's useful for and that is controlling remote vehicles and interactive movies. Which is two things.
Neither of those things were games.
That's not how R&D works buddy. Neural Networks have been a thing for decades as well, and those have only started becoming useful and widespread in the last few years, because there was an AI winter with little development. Why? Because it just wasn't feasible and didn't produce good enough results.
Same with VR. It wasn't feasible in the 90s, and as such basically all funding and R&D outside of several institutions stopped. Meaning, there was basically no real R&D going on from 1995-2010. All of a sudden, it came back again and now almost every large tech company in the world is investing in the VR/AR/MR space.
It is useful in education, it's already producing real world results. It is useful in engineering, it's already producing real world results. It is useful in therapy, it's already producing real world results.
Now, what does VR stand for. Do you at least know that much? We can take this a little bit at a time with you.
I think alot of the enthusiasm is for what it could be rather than what it offers at the moment.
Litchie VR is cool. Everyone who likes games should think so.
If you're hoping for realism, then forget it because Unreal Engine is not quite there yet.
If you're hoping for gameplay, you have made a fundamental error as there are no advantages in this respect. Only immersion. That immersion only works if the game is involving and engrossing and for the few games that even support it.
I'm seeing alot of shovelware on this platform. No big developers are developing for it. \
It is a toy alot of people regret buying but they are dumb because of course it's sh*t. These are the people that make me have to watch a film in 3d because there are no 2d spaces left and I have to sit like a d*ck in 3d which doesn't work in a film which is 30% darker and I can't even see the picture properly.
VR is just the most pointless thing.
Even if it did work perfectly and it was as easy as wearing tanning shades (for those booths). I would be bored before too long unless the game was actually good.
Otherwise. It doesn't seem like so much a gaming device as another input device which is also an output device. I don't think it's future is in games. It would only work in vehicle cockpits as otherwise you will be required to look around too much as field of view is limited to the amount of direction you can turn your head.
You really don't know much do you?
VR induces presence which means it can induce realism to the point where your brain subconsciously believes it's real.
Gameplay has no advantages? This one gave me a good laugh. What about how you have much more precise control over your movements, how you can interact with things in a more natural way, and how depth perception helps you judge distances, important for things like platforming.
These should be pretty self-explanatory:
There are loads of big developers making games for it.
This thread is the most pointless thing. I can't even tell what you're trying to do here, because it's clearly not working very well.
The problem with VR is not the games or the lack thereof, it´s the disconnect there is between the headset, controls and what you see on screen.
If you have tried VR, I bet you have at least once or twice been ripped out of the immersion because of the horrible controls or the horrible wired headset
So until you get controls which can feel as genuine as hands, you can link all the strange video sources you want of games where you see "two arms doing shit" because when it comes to actually playing it, you will either have a gamepad or horrible Oculus or Vive controls in your hands which never will feel real and always remind you that they are there.
I think alot of the enthusiasm is for what it could be rather than what it offers at the moment.
Litchie VR is cool. Everyone who likes games should think so.
If you're hoping for realism, then forget it because Unreal Engine is not quite there yet.
If you're hoping for gameplay, you have made a fundamental error as there are no advantages in this respect. Only immersion. That immersion only works if the game is involving and engrossing and for the few games that even support it.
I'm seeing alot of shovelware on this platform. No big developers are developing for it. \
It is a toy alot of people regret buying but they are dumb because of course it's sh*t. These are the people that make me have to watch a film in 3d because there are no 2d spaces left and I have to sit like a d*ck in 3d which doesn't work in a film which is 30% darker and I can't even see the picture properly.
VR is just the most pointless thing.
Even if it did work perfectly and it was as easy as wearing tanning shades (for those booths). I would be bored before too long unless the game was actually good.
Otherwise. It doesn't seem like so much a gaming device as another input device which is also an output device. I don't think it's future is in games. It would only work in vehicle cockpits as otherwise you will be required to look around too much as field of view is limited to the amount of direction you can turn your head.
You really don't know much do you?
VR induces presence which means it can induce realism to the point where your brain subconsciously believes it's real.
Gameplay has no advantages? This one gave me a good laugh. What about how you have much more precise control over your movements, how you can interact with things in a more natural way, and how depth perception helps you judge distances, important for things like platforming.
These should be pretty self-explanatory:
There are loads of big developers making games for it.
This thread is the most pointless thing. I can't even tell what you're trying to do here, because it's clearly not working very well.
The problem with VR is not the games or the lack thereof, it´s the disconnect there is between the headset, controls and what you see on screen.
If you have tried VR, I bet you have at least once or twice been ripped out of the immersion because of the horrible controls or the horrible wired headset
So until you get controls which can feel as genuine as hands, you can link all the strange video sources you want of games where you see "two arms doing shit" because when it comes to actually playing it, you will either have a gamepad or horrible Oculus or Vive controls in your hands which never will feel real and always remind you that they are there.
Not true, and not many people have this issue with good motion controllers on PC. Yes, you are reminded at times, but when you are really into the thick of things, it goes to the back of your mind. The wires can also be ignored at times too. Ideally we need wireless and that will come in time, but that doesn't mean it's always breaking immersion - because it simply isn't.
Presence is well documented and is scientifically proven to happen with VR as a means of the brain believing the virtual world is real at a subconscious level. This is why people try to sit on virtual chairs and fall through, because their brain believed it.
Unless someone has a condition like parkinson's, we all hold our heads steadily. You never notice any micro-movements.
Depth of field isn't even related to what I'm talking about. Depth Perception means the ability to judge depth to a 1:1 scale.
I know we talk about this whole VR thing a hot mess and all of that but I'll just throw in my opinion.
VR is still exploring in the world of gaming, its still learning itself, and it's price tag will always be quite high compared to other gaming experiences, at least in any foreseeable future. I feel like VR is so much more interesting as a way to reboot the worlds of Arcade era in ways. But as of right now, the main problem is it seems everyone is pushing for a costumer-owned experience and IMO, its a bad idea for now and not alot to go by since VR is still in it's early infant stage. In short, the tech has to start somewhere and the same can be said for Nvidia's Raytracing on RTX, all of this stuff is going to take it's time to build.
@jackamomo said:
There is nothing practical about VR at all.
Now that's a complete BS!
VR can be used for:
Therapy.
Education.
Engineering/design.
Training employees. (UPS already uses it, Walmart is about to start using it)
Medicine. (training doctors, allowing patients to take their mind off of surgery to the point that they need less anesthesia, helping paralyzed people or amputees by stimulating the brain, etc),
Long distance meetings that feel like you're right there due to the extra presence.
Virtual tourism.
Watching movies. (maybe future movies will be VR so you can watch from whatever angle you please)
Recreating crime scenes for court cases.
Shopping. (get an idea of what clothes look like on you before you get them)
Entertainment. (non video game...like combining VR with roller coasters or watching sports as if you were at the stadium without having to leave home)
Filmmaking. (I believe they made use of the HTC Vive while making "Ready Player One")
Programming. (in the future they could visualize their code in VR. I think it sounds ridiculous but who knows?)
Watching Porn (I hate porn and I'm a Hentai fan)
Anymore questions? No, good.
Hopefully in the future once we bypass the technical limitation if will be like that scene in Blade Runner 2049, seemed pretty plausible. Instead of attaching it to your head with a bulky scouter a room fitted with it projecting augmented reality.
I'll finally get to bang Chun Li, just hide the drug riddled prostitute underneath. Make myself look like Ryan Gosling as well for shits and giggles.
Presence is well documented and is scientifically proven to happen with VR as a means of the brain believing the virtual world is real at a subconscious level. This is why people try to sit on virtual chairs and fall through, because their brain believed it.
That's not "presence", that's good old fashioned stupidity. You'd have to be a moron to try and sit in a virtual chair that any rational person would know isn't actually there.
@jackamomo: you're trolling up the wrong tree..I chose the place I live based off the fact that it has a large space for room scale VR
I welcome any further advancements like lenses with a larger sweet spot, higher resolution and eye tracking to improve things, but its already pretty cool. Being tethered doesn't really bother me as I'd rather have that then to have latency inserted into my interaction with the virtual world or be limited to shittier resolutions.
Presence is well documented and is scientifically proven to happen with VR as a means of the brain believing the virtual world is real at a subconscious level. This is why people try to sit on virtual chairs and fall through, because their brain believed it.
That's not "presence", that's good old fashioned stupidity. You'd have to be a moron to try and sit in a virtual chair that any rational person would know isn't actually there.
Uhh, no. People far smarter than me or you have been tricked at the subconscious level with examples like this. Your intelligence has nothing to do with it, because it's a subconscious reaction which takes complete control over your higher brain functions.
To me I would describe the current state of VR as the early 3d era(ps1, n64, 3dfx voodoo 1 era). The graphics are kinda crappy, the controls are kinda wonky, but I can see the potential when it matures a couple generations down the road.
To me I would describe the current state of VR as the early 3d era(ps1, n64, 3dfx voodoo 1 era). The graphics are kinda crappy, the controls are kinda wonky, but I can see the potential when it matures a couple generations down the road.
Aye.
At one point people on radio were saying TV would never take off.
Presence is well documented and is scientifically proven to happen with VR as a means of the brain believing the virtual world is real at a subconscious level. This is why people try to sit on virtual chairs and fall through, because their brain believed it.
That's not "presence", that's good old fashioned stupidity. You'd have to be a moron to try and sit in a virtual chair that any rational person would know isn't actually there.
Uhh, no. People far smarter than me or you have been tricked at the subconscious level with examples like this. Your intelligence has nothing to do with it, because it's a subconscious reaction which takes complete control over your higher brain functions.
I've used VR, and frankly, I was afraid to move because I feared tripping over something in my immediate vicinity that I couldn't see. There's no way I would have tried to sit on something displayed to me in the goggles because my brain on both a conscious and subconscious level was well aware that I was looking at something artificial that didn't exist in the real world. I think people who would try to sit on a virtual chair are the kind of people who still think computers are magic.
@jackamomo: Are all of your opinions bad or just this one?
Look...I get it, you’re poor and can’t afford a good rig to run VR properly. One day though you’ll have grown up money from a grown up job and you won’t need to convince yourself of nonsense to sleep at night.
Presence is well documented and is scientifically proven to happen with VR as a means of the brain believing the virtual world is real at a subconscious level. This is why people try to sit on virtual chairs and fall through, because their brain believed it.
That's not "presence", that's good old fashioned stupidity. You'd have to be a moron to try and sit in a virtual chair that any rational person would know isn't actually there.
Uhh, no. People far smarter than me or you have been tricked at the subconscious level with examples like this. Your intelligence has nothing to do with it, because it's a subconscious reaction which takes complete control over your higher brain functions.
I've used VR, and frankly, I was afraid to move because I feared tripping over something in my immediate vicinity that I couldn't see. There's no way I would have tried to sit on something displayed to me in the goggles because my brain on both a conscious and subconscious level was well aware that I was looking at something artificial that didn't exist in the real world. I think people who would try to sit on a virtual chair are the kind of people who still think computers are magic.
To me I would describe the current state of VR as the early 3d era(ps1, n64, 3dfx voodoo 1 era). The graphics are kinda crappy, the controls are kinda wonky, but I can see the potential when it matures a couple generations down the road.
Aye.
At one point people on radio were saying TV would never take off.
History repeats itself.
Exactly, every technology ever invented had it's share of media outlets that thought they were fads. The Internet itself was mostly figured to be a fad by the media.
Log in to comment