The Current State Of Virtual Reality Just Isn't Fun, Says Nintendo's Reggie Fils-Aime  

VR hasn't taken off. People are talking about it, but how long was occulus rift out there and bought by facebook and nothing has happend? I think the hololens stuff from microsoft is much more where we should be headed in terms of "VR".

VR is still the kind of thing you try for a bit, and then take off and relax and play normally because it is still mostly giant and clunky.

He's right, but looking at hololens you can see the tech itself has uses in line with what nintendo is suggesting.

Nintendo usually creates the most fun stuff anyways, so if they find a fun way and use for it, I'm all ears.

Don't really disagree with Reggie on this. What I do disagree with is all the people that will come in here and misconstrue what he said as an attack of some kind. Reggie is in a big "cant win" week it seems.

I don't think it's wise for him to go slagging off the competition after the overwhelming disappointment of Nintendo's E3.

Nintendo aren't going to get into VR because they don't think it's fun. They're not going to get into it because it's probably not going to make any money. It's something a lot of us technology geeks are excited about, because frankly it's awesomely fun, but I don't think it's going to become mainstream. It's certainly not going to drag people into gaming like the DS and the Wii did.

It would be nice if they could just say it looks interesting but they're not working on it, you know like a lot of other companies would do. If he can't bring himself to do that, then just say it's not something Nintendo are interested in.

He's said a lot of unwise things this week! He even claimed that Federation Force's reception was very similar to Splatoon last year. It's so refreshing when you hear guys like Phil Spencer, Shuhei Yoshida and Adam Boyes jump on podcasts in E3 week and just casually talk about games, and come across as gamers. Meanwhile you've got Reggie over here that's never out of PR mode.

I dont know if its fun or not but...

its clearly one of the futures, better embrace it.

These companies like Sony and Microsoft can make the VR technology look as cool as they want, but money is still going to be a very big deal, along with the support it gets software wise. I often think that this technology might get some people right away, but may not have a lasting impact.

"Perhaps NX will have some kind of VR or Augmented Reality support?"

Well I was going to say "NX is a VR headset confirmed" but the article kind of beat me to it.

I'm glad Nintneod is skipping this. Sony has already said "several hundreds of dollars" for Morpheous, and I'm sure Oculus will be similar.

Nintendo already did the right thing by avoiding selling $500 3D displays, skipping this seems like the right thing as well.

Gaempad use in Starfox is kind of the same thing anyway. And ZombiU and Fatal Frame. In a way Nintendo has already done it, you just hold it instead of wear it. (If only Wii U was powerful enough to give us some great graphics on the low resolution Gamepad screen.)

He better not say the same garbage about 4K with NX because NX will come out and f it is 1080p, PS5 and XBOXTwo will come out 1-2 years later and big N will be in the same dilemma...

@Peach64 - "He even claimed that Federation Force's reception was very similar to Splatoon last year."

Not that I would ever doubt you, but did he really say that?

Did I miss the petition signed by 12,00 people last year to get Splatoon not made?

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2015-06-18-over-12-000-sign-petition-to-cancel-metroid-prime-federation-force

I'm not sure if Gamesindustry.biz is an actual games industry publication or just some kid ni a basement trying to sound professional but Bloomberg news has covered this as well (I had the link yesterday but lost it)

Oh cripes. This is as stupid as his comment from last fall that "the Wii U is a better value" than two consoles with about 8 times the power and capabilities for about the same price.

Sony's Press Conference is where the social aspect of VR was demonstrated, as they made it clear that multiple Morpheus sets could be used on a single PS4 for large social gaming, and they promoted multiplayer games for the device.

I guess Nintendo has completely forgotten about they were once the tech innovators in the industry. Now they sit on the sidelines, innovating nothing, and criticizing those that do. Here's the thing, VR will never get to it's promised uses and integration if not for the kind of experimenting and innovation that is happening now with Oculus, Morpheus, and Hololens.

Reggie is basically saying, "the luxury car isn't there yet, and we're not going to make any car at all until luxury cars are built first." You have to build the Model T first, genius.

This also reminds me of the "Twitch isn't fun" statement he made a year ago, around the time millions were finding tons of fun in Twitch.

I agree with Reggie on this one. I want my holodeck! Besides there are still too many issues with VR for people that don't have good vision.

Seems to me like he's closing doors here for no reason whatsoever. Everything Reggie has said as of late has been pretty off to be honest.

@Captain_Gonru -Gee, whatever game could you be referring too?

I do get it though. A few years back Sony took their trilogy of great platforming icons - Jak, Sly and Ratchet - and put them in a video game together. The heavens sang. It was called Heroes on the Move (until they changed it to something bad I've erased from my memory). Now here's the kicker - 3 of the greatest platforming heros of all time (time being limited to the PS2) are put into a video game together - and they don't JUMP. There is no JUMP button in a platforming game w/ 3 iconic platforming mascots.

It's been 4 years now and I'm still sore. (Well that and Jak X was a bad racing game and we haven't had a proper Jak game since. And the last 2 R&C games were weak - A4O multiplayer and Into the Nexus tower defense - and Sly hasn't been good since 3. ) So I get it.

I tried occulus rift last year, it wasn't much fun, I wasn't overly impressed. It has potential but I still felt a bit of motion sickness using it.

Has he even tried it?

I actually think VR could possibly be widely accepted in Japan because of the small nature of the living areas. It makes it so there is no need for a TV kinda like how Wii U had some popularity because of its lack of need for a TV. The isolation factor is strange but not for online gaming.

@rjejr

Can't tell if trolling or serious. Comparing the GamePad to something like Oculus or Morpheus isn't just comparing apples and oranges, it's comparing apples the International Space Station. The GamePad is the apple. It's not even close to actual VR.

And GameIndustry.biz demonstrates it's seriousness with the ".biz" in the address and that, even rudimentary searching through the site indicates a very strong connection to the gaming industry as a whole. I can't help but wonder if you're "kid in a basement" comment is based around the numerous articles that sprung up criticizing Nintendo over what is arguably the worst E3 in their history.

Judging by e3, Reggie opinion of fun differs from gamers.

I don't really care about VR, so I'm not upset by these comments at all.

@rjejr It was the same interview where he said Iwata wasn't apologising.

http://www.polygon.com/2015/6/18/8802789/reggie-fils-aime-iwata-didnt-apologize-for-nintendos-e3-we-make-great

"Take for example Splatoon, he said.

Splatoon, a new sort of shooter unveiled at last year's E3 based on an entirely new IP, didn't receive an entirely positive reaction at the show. At least not initially.

"Splatoon is a game that people are loving right now, but if you rewind to E3 last year, Splatoon was being viewed as, 'Yes, it's innovative and it's different, but the controls are a little hard and I don't understand the mechanic of turning into a squid and going through the ink.' There were all of these complaints. But now you look at the finished product and the satisfaction is huge."

I don't remember any such complaints last year. People were thrilled Nintendo was doing a new IP, thrilled they were doing an online game, and very, very positive about it.

I think it's more that Nintendo doesn't make the kind of games that would compliment VR to the extent of Sony and Microsoft. I think VR has great potential to rule the kingdom one day just not the mushroom kingdom

Reggie really is a muppet sometimes:/

@theberrage So true... I mean we ask for Animal Crossing and get Animal MArio Party??? We just had a MArio Party release so why do we need 2 in 1 year? Metroid on the other hand actually looks fun, it's just not the metroid people wanted and the art style s deplorable. Otherwise it looks kinda neat. Mario Tennis instead of Mario Galaxy?? ugh... Don't even get me started.

I don't have a problem with his opinion, because everyone has one. Not everyone will enjoy VR.

But I think he should not voice his opinions out in any official capacity because it will reflect back on Nintendo itself. The first part of his statement sounds fine from a company standpoint because I do believe Nintendo has been researching the VR option for the future. But the second part reads like all personal opinion, and will get taken as company statement.

@WaveBoy Sprinkle a little bit of "Amanda" in that VR session, eh?

To be real, I agree with is statement about VR. I'm certainly not sold on it and believe that ship has sailed long ago. HOWEVER, dude (Reggie) just looks salty that Nintendo had a terrible conference and looks to be ragging on the competition.

I agree, I tried a VR machine once and it wasn't that enjoyable. I don't think that the tech will be able to advance enough in the foreseeable future to enable an immersive gaming experience

@Peach64

I don't know why anybody expects Reggie to talk like a gamer. He was the CEO of Pizza Hut before Nintendo hired him. He's a corporate stooge, not a gamer.

Right, just like online gaming wasn't becoming a thing in the early to mid 2000s. Nintendo said that would never catch on; they'd rather you connect your Game Boy Advance to your Game Cube - that's the future! They ended up dugging themselves a hole that they're still trying to get out of.

Nice to know that Nintendo learns from their mistakes. Forever being left behind...

@shaneoh That is until they apply it to Google Glass contacts that have been in development for some time.

I agree. Currently, anything that has something to do with VR just seems forced (kinda like the Virtual Boy back in the day) and ends up being nothing more than a mere gimmick imo, where people can go, "oh look, something new", try it, find it interesting, then put it aside due to it's extreme prematurity. It's still too early, so let's give it some time and just enjoy the content we have at present.

I don't necessarily disagree but who cares what Reggie has to say about games. He doesn't seem to be a gamer anyways. After all he runs a company 16 hours a day. This guy is clueless

Maybe it isn't fun until implemented with Genei Ibun Roku X 0_o

@Goginho

I find an incredible irony/hypocrisy in Nintendo fans calling something else a "gimmick." Gimmicks have been the backbone of this company for far too long.

If Nintendo is concerned with being social, how about including Voice Chat in the few online multiplayer games they offer. While they are at it, include online multiplayer in games that would clearly lend itself to it (Star Fox Zero)

@garthvader
It's not the headgear, that will get small enough, it's the external factors, mainly touch that present the largest problem. For instance; levels will need to be flat, because there is no way a person's living room is going to be able to simulate a slope, and the experience of falling is kind of spoiled when you can feel your feet touching the ground

I'm sorry but I couldn't disagree more. In fact there's nothing else I'm as excited for. VR is the future and the current generation will probably blow allot of people away once they actually try it.

Well Nintendo as a whole better hope he is write, because if that suddenly explodes like motion controls did, it will leave the NX in the dust.....

VR is NOT a gimmick. Sorry guys but this is the future of gaming whether you like it or not. I predict VR will explode onto the scene and change everything. Until you try it, you really have NO IDEA how immersed you feel in the experience. I for one can't wait and am very disappointed in Nintendo for not jumping on the bandwagon. I think it's a huge mistake that will have them playing catch up in the future. Ultimately time will tell.

Personally, I don't really care for the Hololens(not that I hate it, just don't care for it now). However, with the way gamers usually plead for traditional gaming, I don't think VR will take off just yet.
I could say something else, but I don't want unnecessary emails in my inbox.

@shaneoh Yea you are right about that. I have played occulus a little bit because my friend develops games on it. He works for the defense industry making tank, helo, and jet simulators so he has a lot of dev. experience. I played a few things he made for occulus and it was cool but I didn't feel full immersion. Promising though but not perfect and I can see where input will be an issue.

@HawkeyeWii Well, motion controls might have exploded, but gamers don't want it anymore. Kinect failed. Move failed. People are turning off the motion controls in Nintendo games. People are saying they won't buy Star Fox if it uses motion controls only. See the pattern here?

@Everly Perfect example how the "Top Men" at Nintendo are so ignorant of the "times". I have heard Reggie and Miyamoto several times say how online games really aren't that fun and "we could implement if we wanted to, but we don't see the use". It is thinking like that, that solidifies the fact that we need new men in charge at Nintendo because they have their mindset caught in the late 80's and 90's.

I worry that VR is going to take the gameplay out of games that use it and focus more on the "ER MAH GEWRD YOU CAN SEE IT" aspect that its currently going for. Its probably because we havent really had the use we needed for it. Only time will tell and I dont blame Reggie for being on guard about it.

@VeeFlamesNL I'm not saying people like them anymore. I'm saying that motion controls saved and sold the Wii. End of story. Without that, it would have failed. So if VR sells like hotcakes and Nintendo has nothing to show for it but putting it down then the NX could be in trouble.

@Quorthon
Just because Reggie was CEO of Pizza Hut doesn't mean he wasn't/isn't a gamer... CEO's change industries often.... Besides how long ago was that???

@Akira_1975 Exactly! I haven't tried myself yet, but can only imagine how immersive it is. "Playing catch up". A phrase that Nintendo is pretty darn familiar with since the GCN days.

@HawkeyeWii
Yeah it's a gamble ... I think Nintendo should just stick to their plan and move forward ...
I'm probably one of the few looking forward to the new NX.
Reggie's opinion is his opinion.... Who cares move on...

VR is still a work in progress. It's not quite there yet, but from what i played with the Oculus, it was definitely very fun!

@arrmixer What I am most concerned about is the graphical power of the NX, which is another I have seen Nintendo execs put down before. This is nothing to joke around about. If the NX isn't at least as powerful as the PS4, then this might very well be the last Nintendo home console we will ever see.

@arrmixer

Pizza Hut was immediately before he joined Nintendo. No, it doesn't mean he's not a gamer, but he didn't grow in his status as a gamer or an industry insider. It was a similar problem with Don Mattrick before he finally left Microsoft.

Look at the people running things over at MS and Sony. They're gamers, they come off as gamers, and they talk like gamers. Even Iwata just talks like a corporate stooge most of the time.

CEO's may change companies now and then, but I think industries is quite a bit rarer. After all, who would you rather have in charge of your toy company? A guy who worked at a different toy company, or a guy who was in charge of toothpaste previously? While some corporate strategies may transfer over, it's a completely different industry, and understanding any specific industry is as much an art as it is a science as it is a bit of a gut intuition.

Miyamoto had this intuition back in the 80's and early 90's. He clearly does not have it now. I don't think Reggie ever had that intuition concerning video games.

VR is an idea that came out a long long time ago, and has failed to get off the ground. It might be something that you see at an expo, maybe it will actually get a console release, but I really feel it will never be something popular or something that is supported well by any of the consoles.

Old guy can't comprehend it. That's why he can't have fun with it. He still thinks VR works like Virtual Boy.

@Peach64 - Well OK, at least he didn't outright compare this years over the top outrage to a few complaints batted about last year. Not everybody was happy last year w/ Spaltoon, the same people who want Metroid and FZero this year wanted them last year as well, not everybody was happy about a cartoony looking squid shooter.

So on a very base level he's right, but there is no comparison from the good side of things as last year Spaltoon support was overwhelmingly positive despite the few complainers, it's just the opposite this year.

That's actually a fairly mild guffaw for Reggie.

I don't think VR is going to take off for games, at least not for another good 10 years. Oculus and Morpheus are giant things - as someone said, if people couldn't be bothered to get 3D glasses, what will motivate them to get a very expensive VR headset? Nothing. Considering that every single time something new appears in the industry, gamers complain, VR will have the same fate as the motion controls - Nice for some time, then awful mechanics. Now, if you asked me if other industries will find a good use for VR? That's another story..

I don't think this will get as popular as mainsteam gaming until another few more years.More than likely will be very expensive to buy too so that won't help.

My opinion:
VR: No thanks. (Too early right now in my mind or use rail shooters like Star Fox maybe).
AR: Yes please ^^.

Right now I feel the AR technology is more suited for gaming than the VR technology, due to things like you can actually see where you are walking when you are suing AR which you can't really now with VR ;^^. (If VR can, please update me).

I mean in my view Pokémon would be perfect for AR ^^, as you could actually see and interact with them as long as you don't touch them since you would got right through with your hand.

The Zelda formula could fit the AR like when you have a (tree) stick you could ask the AR device to create a layer that would make the stick look like a sword .

Also like when you are jogging you could have a path of rupees/(Nintendo theme reward) and the amount of rupees you can get could be calculated from how long and how fast you run.

There probably thousand of other things I could have mentioned, but right now I think AR look more promising than VR .

@Quorthon - My ""kid in a basement"" comment is to cover myself from all the fanboi who would go "VGchartz sux" if I linked to them. I'd never heard of gameindustry before so I wasn't going to vouch for their credibility and be taken to task over a site I don't understand.

I like your ISS - apple comparison. The thing needs more recognition. (ISS, not apples)

Really? Facebook buys Oculus and Reggie honestly thinks it's not going to be social? Yeah, it's only tech right now, but that's not a bad thing, it's an opportunity. Nintendo needs to be jumping on this as well, but it sounds like they're going to take the same approach as they did with high definition and wait too long.

How does vr work for somebody like me who can only see from one eye? Does it work or not if not I will be avoiding vr like I do with 3d

Here they go again, in the HD era jump, nintendo said it was nos needed for videogames, then the wii was bought mostly by casual gamers, leaving nintendo with a dim fan base that supported him on the wii u.

VR could not be ready yet, but MS and Sony are on a race to perfect it, and in something like 3 years it will be, i had read that most of the sickness effect has been removed from this e3 demos. and lets be honnests, all of us would die if this games EVE:Valkyrie was start fox https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XzMLg-yA6Q that would be simply awesome.

And nintendo doesnt understand how the internet works, so how could they vision vr as social.

@Quorthon
Well business is more of social science not an art Quorthon. Don't confuse the two... Also, your industries comparison is flawed ... A good example was the CEO of Boeing who move to Ford and did an amazing job revitalizing a company... Most CEO's are recruited to different Industries because of their unique knowledge and philosophy....
But hey that's your opinion.. 😉

@HawkeyeWii
Yeah I'm worried about that too... I'm just staying positive... But you're right.... Maybe in a perfect world the NX would be more powerful..

I think VR is cool, but I don't know if I'd want to use it in any significant way. I'd rather not become blind and deaf to the world while I'm playing video games.

@Feremiev
When he was talking about the social aspect, he was probably referring to actual socialization. VR could be used for online connectivity, but at the cost of completely cutting you off from those around you while you use it. Nintendo has always promoted local multiplayer, and VR is the complete opposite.

Please step down Reggie. You are hurting Nintendo more than you are helping it.

@gamermole you have two screens over each eye, taking up your complete peripheral vision. Yes, you won't get the depth perception from it since you only will see one screen (just like with 3D stuff). However, when you move your head, the view moves too. It's just like you were actually looking at a real world. You have full view of everything around you, like in real life. Also the audio in the headsets move too. You won't get the full effect, but you will still feel immersed like never before.

VR is A LOT of fun! Also, it can easily be social. You get two head sets, and it's all of a sudden social. You can have two people exploring and playing in a world, and they can either be in the same room, or in a different country.

Also, a lot of what Nintendo does is not social. When has core Legend Of Zelda games been social? When has Metroid games (REAL Metroid games) been social? You don't have to make it social to make it fun.

Reggie is correct. I remember walking into an Arcade and trying a really cool VR headset that put me in a WW plane. I could look around, behind me, and it was really cool. It was 1993. I think it's safe to say that if after 22 years, this still comes out as a novelty, that it's not taking off. Next. Nothing to see here. Reggie is 100% right.

@Goginho So how much time have you spent playing the current VR headsets to form such an opinion?

Did Reggie not see Sony's press conference? Because Sony sure found a way to make Project Morpheus social. Honestly, the only thing that's missing from VR at this point is a good motion control scheme. VR isn't a big innovation until you have a way to interact with the games as if they were real life. And this sort of thing is Nintendo's wheelhouse, they love coming up with new control schemes that affect the way you play. In fact, this would be the logical conclusion of everything that's been done with devices like the Wii Remote and Kinect.

@dumedum I hope that was all sarcasm....

Also I want to point out I'm not for or against Reggie or iwata at this point.... The decisions made with the Wii U were horrible even comical at best ... Especially here in states with regard to marketing.... Everyone I show the machine loves it and they didn't even know it existed!!! They just thought it was just another Wii.... I'm talking about regular adults ... Which is funny because everybody knows ps4 > ps3... But not Wii U > Wii?
Maybe a lost in translation I guess .... I personally think Iwata or the board doesn't give Nintendo NOA or EUR the atonomy to do what is best for their markets .... This will hurt Nintendo more than anything else.... But that's my opinion..

The Wii was a gimmick. It came with motion controls that no one else had tried at the time, made money at launch, and sold 100m units. It cost the consumer $249 for the console and a game that was a sure fire hit that Kids, Parents, and Grandparents could figure out immediately.

VR is a gimmick. But there are at least 3 companies trying to develop it all with different systems. It will cost some where in the region of $500 dollars, plus a $300+ console or PC, and a game to play on it of questionable quality. There is no guarantee you'll be able to play it without motion sickness or that it won't hurt your head or neck, so it's far less inclusive than the wii.

The word 'gimmick' isn't the issue. Price is. Audience is. Quality is. Safety is. Immediacy is. The 'Fun' wouldn't come from the headset, but the games developed for it. At the moment VR is for hobbyists, not for the mainstream living room which is where the money has always been to recoup R and D expensive costs. I think VR will just be too expensive and uncertain to grab hold of the consumer.

Neither are gyro controls, but that didn't stop you.

Well, Reggie's not wrong. From what I've played VR is little more than a tech demo which causes eye strain. VR has been around for awhile now and no one has been able to create that killer app.

@HawkeyeWii I don't really think there's much to worry about in the near future. The Wii sold bucketloads because it introduced an innovation for a great, cheap price. The VR, as you may have heard, is expensive to develop and produce. I won't be surprised if a single unit(Oculus, Morpheus or Holo) cost more than a single respective console unit, to be honest. And people won't be running out to buy it.
Before I forget, I think Reggie should just stop talking for now. His comments and opinions are doing WAAAAY more harm than good. I love the guy, but I just think he needs to accept that Nintendo had an underwhelming E3. I hope the next Direct gives us juicy details.

TrueWiiMaster
I think thats just a safe postition for nintendo. Its not like it prioritizes local multiplayer, splatoon is the best example, its local coop mode is just a joke compared to the rest of the game. Its more of a position nintendo is facing because it decided to play safe in the past, while the other two big companies invested a lot on their networks. Nintendo is just starting to understand how it works, so they face a lot of problems with it(the other two faced these problems on their times)

Its like Reggies comment that the wii u is doing fine in the rest of the world... nintendo is and will be a proud and a "arrogant" enterprise that dont recognises when makes mistakes.
Also the technologie is just that, how its used is a different history, nintendo is only taking on the safe place here. Now they have a lot to provee and loose also, so lets see what happens.

@dumedum That was 1993 tech. A lot has changed. Also, VR hasn't had a chance to take off. Occulus Rift and everything are still being worked on. They aren't in their complete final stages yet. Once they are finished, released to the masses (at a competetive price), with the right games, VR could skyrocket!

In fact, I wish I could get my hands on an Occulus Rift headset for when Cyan's (Creators of MYST and RIVEN) new game OBDUCTION comes out. Man that would be something.

@Feremiev correct. I don't think anyone here watched the PC game segment where the Eve Online creators showed off a space shooter built with Oculus support. If this were Starfox people would lose their minds.
All the negative comments here read as if these people haven't improved things since the Virtual Boy. Hands on tests of Oculus a year ago were positive. Other than some people still getting a little motion sick I haven't seen any complaints about it.

Has anybody played with google cardboard? $15 and hours of fun (5-15 min at a time).

I think it is fun. But with VR headsets your $600 phone can plug in to, its hard for nintendo to compete in that market (because they'd can't put out a dedicated device for it and come close to the performance of smart phones while charging $200).

The key thing is not clear people spend can spend money on it (for a dedicated VR device), and the technology is advancing so quick, its hard to bring a dedicated device to market. Why do we think Oculus has been stuck in demo phase for years?

To avoid eye strain and fatigue a VR headset needs both screens to render images at a high resolution and a high frame rate (unless graphics quality is to be significantly compromised). This will be a challenge for Nintendo if it is to continue with its low cost approach to console hardware with the NX. So, I suspect that Reggie might be trying to downplay the charms of VR so that people don't consider its absence from the NX an important issue when deciding whether to buy one.

In other words, Reggie might be trying to shape our expectations to match what the NX is going to offer. It'll be interesting to see if this downplay of VR is a message that Nintendo continues with in the future.

@MrGawain, yes you have a point, but i think that also right now the gamer community is waiting for the next big thing, in the past the wii proveed how motion controls can be implemented on videogames, sony and ms showed how graphics and power can change the gaming experience by increasing the size of the virtual worlds they created. Now what? the new gen wanst the revolution everyone was expectign in the terms of graphics. so everyone is with the expectation of the new thing, as for the price, gamers and casual gamers are different, a casual gamer buy one game per year or two, a hardcomer gamer buys 2, 3 or more games per month, so they dont care much about the price. Pc gamers specialy, they pay like 2k for a good gaming pc, 300$ for an aditional periferial wountd be a big problem.

See the amiibo phenomena, its not because of their functionality that its popular, its because its the physical representation of the gaming classic mascots, and the price is not a problem, you can see on amazon how amiibos at 20 dollars or more disapear in seconds after their release, even when they are more expensive than the ones from the other companies.

@Quorthon Well, put it this way, everyone has their own perspective on what a gimmick is. I, for one, wouldn't call the motion controls that the Wii introduced (which caused a major breakthrough) a gimmick, nor would I call the stereoscopic 3D that the Nintendo 3DS introduced a gimmick. The Wii U GamePad is also not a gimmick in my opinion, as all of these elements have added a lot to the gaming experience without having to sacrifice practically anything (something that the Virtual Boy had to do). Are they a major requirement to gaming? Probably not, since all you need is a standard controller and one simple screen, i.e. the way it was for decades now.
Of course, you may or may not have had these three examples that I mentioned in mind, but in case you did and in case you think motion controls or 3D is a gimmick, then fine, so be it. Like I said, everyone has their own definition for gimmick.
This doesn't mean that a certain mechanic can't get in the way. Devs can actually take it too far and force the player to strictly use something that should be optional, such as the motion-controlled parts in Yoshi's New Island's tranformation sections, which imo seem totally unnecessary and can only frustrate a player. But using the GamePad as an inventory or a map, which is not only useful, but also clears up the clutter from the main screen (two birds with one stone), is a great example of the difference between innovation and gimmick. Using the 3D for games like A Link Between Worlds or the Pushmo/Pullblox series is also far from being a gimmick, as it helps the player. Believe it or not, Skyward Sword's motion controls made me not want to go back to standard controls for future console Zelda games, seeing as they can expand on this concept and polish the precision up even more as technology advances. I had a lot of fun with the game as it is and, ideally, they'd implement both standard and motion control options to Zelda U, which I doubt would happen though. I understand that some players didn't find motion control all that great in SS, so adding both options would be the only way to appease all types of players.

@RantingThespian what's the difference between the 1993 tech and today's tech? Have you been to places like Disney Quest? They have lots of VR there and it's working. A magic carpet, a swordfighting game. It feel like it's all been done a thousands times now. What exactly are they working on? The resolution will still not be HD as I understand, so what else are they actually doing? It's like they keep experimenting it forever, and just ends up being nothing all the time. If it was ready, it would be instead of controllers and everything, it will be the platform itself.

@Effinae not at all.

The Occulus Rift doesn't even have an MSRP yet and one of the founders has hinted that it will be expensive and will require a serious gaming PC.

Wow this is a touchy issue. I'll just be right here and not say anything and not choose a side...

Reggie Translator:

"Not fun" = "We can't make a profit off of it"

Hmmm, so Reggie, that Wii U Animal Crossing board game is your idea of fun then? 'Cos it ain't mine. Pricing definitely reflecting the quality of the research and development there.

@Peach64 well, he mentioned Nintendo is experimenting with it. As far as what he has 'seen' that's not very fun could potentially be nintendo's very own vr experiments. He admitted to not paying attention to what was demonstrated at E3. But, yeah, these are the exact type of quotes that get willfully misinterpreted for sensationalism.

It's my dream to get trapped inside a video game. Whoever puts me in the best position to achieve this dream will have my support, even if it takes me away from my Nintendroning.

Just go away dude.

VR I think is the future as far as gaming goes. However, I think Oculus will take off while Morpheous will not. Why? I just don't think the audience is there on PlayStation. I feel like too many people on PlayStation would be too hesitant or would pass it off as a gimmick for Morpheous to take off. On PC however, there's a far bigger audience, and one that happens to be largely tech enthusiasts. Oculus has a far larger chance of taking off.

Now, on a different note comes Microsoft's AR headset Holo Lens. That I think is the future, but for non-gaming stuff more so than gaming. It has a broader appeal in my opinion. I will say that the Minecraft Holo Lens demo was very impressive.

I think, ultimately, the challenge for VR is creating a whole new concept of gaming. What works with controllers won't work with vr. Sure, certain types of games could be vastly improved like games where you're inside a cockpit with a bunch of buttons and levers needed to be mobile like a spaceship, car, or giant robot but the majority of today's games where you're required to move around on foot doesn't seem too fun or practical in VR. So right now, ironically, VR gaming choices seem pretty limited until they reinvent the video game.

What do you know, I finally agree with something Reggie said this week!

The last thing Nintendo fans need is for them to start investing in virtual reality. I don't understand the appeal, and I'd wager it's not gonna really take off anytime soon.

I agree with Reggie. VR may be the future, but right now, it is just a fad because a bunch of companies are trying to push it. VR has existed for decades. It's nothing new, so just because it can support stereoscopic 1080p @ 90fps doesn't mean a thing other than you'd need significant resources just to use it. Not only that, but the use of the tech already has problems. For one, you strap it onto your head. That already causes instances with neck problems. Second is things like motion-sickness and headaches. Third are people who can't even use the headset because they lack depth-perception, whether they only have one eye, or something else. If the 3DS can cause problems with people, then certainly VR headsets will too. The difference between the two is that one has a switch to turn the effect off, while the other basically means not using the headset at all.

Not only that, but it's optional. Consumers aren't just going to pick it up because it exists. Only the true hardcore are gonna pick it up, and that'll be such a minority that developers would end up not worrying about designing games around it. As said, it takes a significant amount of resources to run it, so whatever amazing game a company would make would all of a sudden need to drop the quality a generation or two to have it running on the VR sets.

I'm not saying the tech isn't cool, but so many things are getting in the way of it for it to be a staple in gaming that at this time, it just won't take off, and there's no guarantee it ever will. It's a risk.

@MrGawain That's exactly what I think (and I'm not even a motion control fan; quite the contrary, in fact). Thanks for writing that.

Sort of like 3D, Gyroscope and off screen play.

Sony, Microsoft, Facebook (by buying Occulus ), and Valve (in partnership with another company) are all investing in VR. Those are some big names and wallets all investing in the technology. If Nintendo doesn't find it to be a financially viable pursuit, then they can say that, but to insult it is childish.

People complaining about getting neck problems and headaches from something they haven't tried...
And how will this technology survive without support from all those people with only one eye?
Gimme a break...

Edit: I don't care if Nintendo goes for the tech or not, but to say it isn't fun or not ready yet sounds silly. Sure, I can't run around and punch things like real virtual reality, but any game with a first person PoV will vastly benefit this from an immersion standpoint.

I think VR is cool, but I don't think it will take off either. Sony has mounted display thing for a long time, so it's natural that they will push it on PS4. I personally think it will end up like PS Move, it's great and work well but just didn't sell that well in the long run. Hololens is really cool too, but I can't see how it could be properly used in gaming (Minecraft demo is nice, but forgetable once you see it), I think it will end up like Kinect. At the end of the day, I guess VR won't be a massive seller, it won't be Virtual Boy, but it'll be niche.

The wii u without a lot of good games is also just 'tech'

Reggie definitely speaks the truth here, and he (or Nintendo in general) is in the right position to say that, since the experience gathered from the Virtual Boy has only been trumped by one little thing: better technological support.
The fact that it's basically just a closer screen hasn't changed at all, since Virtual Reality always remains a superficial concept when only your optical senses are drawn closer, but everything else remains on the couch.
I'm not saying that people couldn't possibly have fun with it, but if somebody truly claims that VR in its current state is more fun than playing on TV, then the very statement shows a severe lack of understanding of entertainment, a mentality that already degenerated a lot of media over the past years.

@Kaze_Memaryu that's a good point on sensory immersion or lack thereof.

I really see VR being important and beneficial in certain industries like healthcare and having limited and niche uses in entertainment.

VR is dead before it has even started.

The concept isn't anything new, it's been in existence for over 20 years.

People don't care. As soon as you have to wear something on your head or face to use it, it's a none starter.

Home 3D is standard but very rarely used, it is only market standard as it's addition had barely any cost today and it wouldn't make sense to remove a cheap feature that may remove their product from the range offered to the minority who want 3D.

VR will not ever work in the mass market until they develop a display medium that enables all local viewers to participate in the same environment, from any position in that environment and using only the naked eye.

The 3DS was a phenomenal leap in 3D display and made it possible for use in a casual and mobile environment. Transferring that to a TV and possible from varying viewing angles at once would be a leap again.

Once you have that, then you can look at AR projection.

VR? No. Not now, not ever. It's the trekkies pipe dream that is just too many generations away to even bother any attempt at a mass market launch. This will be move and kinect all over again.

Nintendo are right to leave it alone, they've enough on their plate anyway to design and manufacture a viable home console after the utter screw up they managed with the wii u. The wii u hasn't failed, nintendo has failed the wii u.

@Mr_Zurkon Oh snap, completely forgot about the industrial and medicinal uses! That's an entirely different point! Thanks for the reminder!

personally for me, VR... I just don't care for and I don't see it being the next huge thing but others will enjoy it. However if you get Holodecks working... I'm there

@gamermole #65
"How does vr work for somebody like me who can only see from one eye? Does it work or not if not I will be avoiding vr like I do with 3d"

Well, if you can only see with one eye, you can't see 3D of course. But the VR like Oculus will be still usable in the similar way you see naturally. You can't see depth, but the image will still be wrapped around your head so to speak, and the head motion control will make it feel like you're in the game.

I suggest you try it if you can find a place to do that and judge for yourself.

@SomeBitTripFan it's not an insult, it is a factual observation. He didn't say it's crap, or it doesn't work.

VR is impressive tech, but it isn't fun. It has way more potential with industrial applications than it has to the media. If they manufactured the units at a higher price for use with AutoDesk design products and the such like, I could see its worth. Playing as a goalie in my front room? It really seems pathetic and I wouldn't even consider it. If I ever saw anyone, sat alone in their front room with a helmet on talking to the TV I think I'd give them a hug and take them out for a walk.
It just takes away every single reason that video games were devised for in the first place.

@Feremiev
It doesn't always prioritize local multiplayer in games, but ever since the N64 (the first system with 4 controller ports, I believe) it's been a big part of Nintendo's hardware. A VR headset would fall in the hardware category.

I can see his point about the social aspect of VR as opposed to in person living room gaming, but calling it un-fun is just pointlessly downplaying the format.
A better argument against pursuing VR would be the limited game designs it is suited to. In other sense VR could be a breeding ground for totally new kind of games that wouldn't be possible with a monitor.

As others have said I'm more interested in Augmented Reality too. Imagine multiple persons using their own Hololens devices to view the same 3D gameboard from different angles on the living room floor, moving around it and making their moves!

VR is social, in the same way that a piñata is social.

Im not surprised by what reggie said because it's exactly with what Miyamoto(or Iwata) said last year in an interview about the same question. It was met with a more positive reception.
But of course this time around everything Nintendo says is somehow an attack or a personal insult to people because Nintendo didn't do as well as other companies at E3.

Virtual reality is fun, its just not marketable yet. The oculus and other virtual reality units are heavy, uncomfortable to wear, and hurt if you use them for to long. Technology gets smaller as years go on, maybe in three or four years things like the oculus will be as big as sunglasses and regular headphones, but until then, its still clunky and hard to sell.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=5HiEVf-tBMGxogSEmL-4Bg&url=http://time.com/2881482/interview-nintendo-miyamoto-virtual-reality/&ved=0CB0QFjAA&usg=AFQjCNFDAVreugPkrWDodgLUd03skwNVng&sig2=QZd5CsxpyAoEC0fSXWGB8g

Same question with Miyamoto last year with a very similar response. Nothing new here.

I can just imagine him having flashbacks to the Virtual Boy and cringing a little when asked about it...yes, I know he wasn't a part of the company yet, I'm just trying to make a joke. Also, I don't really know anything VR-related other than a basic idea of what it is, so I can't really say anything about it.

He's right, who's exactly going to enjoy having a bulky VR helmet on your head while blocking everything else out while having the games controlled by head tracking and motion control?

With the Wii resulting controllers thrown at TV I feel VR in peoples living rooms will end up with people tripping over or bumping into furniture and hurting themselves. That's even ends up in peoples homes considering there's no big hit for VR, it doesn't have its Wii Sports and the only company who's ever made mandatory peripherals into massive hits with Software like Wii Sports and Nintendogs thinks VR isn't fun.

It just seems like a bad idea and it doesn't seem like it has a real way to even get a foot in the door to an average household. Most computers won't be good enough for Oculus Rift and Sony has a history of releasing peripherals not making any decent software for them and then dropping them.

@Goginho

Most of those things are gimmicks. In gaming, gimmicks are defined as temporary, fads, and trends, but having no longevity and offering no long-lasting change or improvement in anything. The Wii Motion controls inspired other gimmicks, that all died. The GamePad inspired nothing. These are, by definition, gimmicks. A cheap device to get quick attention, and that's exactly what Nintendo went for with the Wii Remote, GamePad, 3D (yet again), and Amiibo. Gimmicks to sell plastic. This is how modern Nintendo works. And then shoehorn that plastic into as many games as possible.

gim·mick
ˈɡimik/
noun
a trick or device intended to attract attention, publicity, or business.
synonyms: publicity stunt, contrivance, scheme, stratagem, ploy; informalshtick
"the trivia contest was a gimmick to sell more newspapers"

They were throw-away concepts to sell a lot of hardware for a short period of time. The Wii Remote worked in this capacity, but it was still a gimmick.

So no, it's now "how you see a gimmick," it's whether or not you understand the accepted definition of words.

In gaming, innovation leads to expansion.

I find the staggering hypocrisy here amusing that so many Nintendo fans are quick to call VR a gimmick we're not ready for, while defending actual failed gimmicks and concepts from Nintendo. That is fanboyism defined.

VR's time may very well have come. More time has been spent on developing these technologies than Nintendo put into the GamePad, and nearly all early press has been very positive.

No doubt, if Nintendo was doing VR instead of Sony or Oculus/Facebook, the tone here would be drastically different.

@Savino exactly, people thought motion controls would have you moving around but now it is just you flicking your arm/ wrist. lol

@Savino "You play with VR sets in the same way you play with your TV! Sitted!!!!!!!"

Then it's not really VR then is it? It's just two screens tied very close to your face. If that's the standard you might as well call the Virtual Boy a virtual reality device.

The only good use for VR without a huge setup I can think of is porn and I doubt Nintendo will go that route.

Oh and Sims. Like driving, planes, etc.

Sorry I'm late, just here for the comments...

What so everyone has to be excited for VR because they are? Christ, it is amazing companies that invested in it and their partners think it is amaazing!

I don't think glasses free 3D was fun and it was definitely not social so who are they to talk

@SetupDisk

I hope Sony secretly has Team Ninja working on a Dead or Alive Extreme game for Morpheus... only think that can save Morpheus in my opinion

@Quorthon it makes a change for Sony not to copy Nintendo, oh wait a minute they're copying the Virtual Boy, my mistake, ignore the comment

@Savino I was joking

@Sir_JBizzle
Lol love it! Get the popcorn ready!

Reggie is just a PR mouthpiece. Dude isn't an inventor or a gamer.

You guys know about the Oculus Touch controller?
It's totally like a "Wiimote 3.0"

Here's an impression:
http://uk.businessinsider.com/oculus-touch-hands-on-2015-6?r=US

Surprised this much discussion came from this. It doesn't line up with what Nintendo is doing or planning right now. Nintendo is still ostensibly a champion of couch multiplayer. That social interaction where you are actually with the person you are playing with.

@Quorthon The multiple morpheus sets in the same room is not what I saw from Sony. I saw multiple players with only one wearing a VR helmet. Similar to the asynchronous ideas that Nintendo rocked with in Nintendo Land but then dropped when no one seemed to get it. If Sony did show 4 Morpheus players on one PS4 I have to see that absurdity. It would have to be very basic imagery to get frame rates that don't make everyone puke. Genuinely don't know if it was shown, though.

VR has tons of promise, but it would make literally no sense at all for Nintendo to go that direction right now. 2016 will be the year for experiments and early adopters with the first very solid VR hardware ever made. It will be exciting and I've been looking forward to it for a long time. It will not be the main way people play games for quite some time to come and Nintendo needs to grow its market.

As some have said, I'd say the Hololens style is a much better match for Nintendo and I could see them doing some great stuff with that. Nintendo is just not in a position to go there and I think Reggie's reasons are basically right, just a little disingenuous.

Well, I guess I shouldn't have been so surprised about this much discussion.

Virtual Reality isn't going to get mainstream popularity any time soon. However, it could be a very big thing in the future once the technology improves. I think it would make a lot of sense for Nintendo to start investing in VR technology now just in case VR is the next big thing.

@DESS-M-8: Reggie's statement, that VR isn't fun, isn't a fact and is about as far from being a fact as something can be. It's an opinion. Many other individuals clearly enjoy using VR, their opinion. Contrary to your statement, Reggie is insulting current pursuits of VR. He says "but at least based on what I've seen to date, it's not fun, and it's not social. It's just tech". The key here is the last sentence, "It's just tech". He's stating that current VR pursuits are nothing more than a display of technology. He's belittling and simplifying them through that word, "just". There's no reason for one of the head representatives of a company to subtly attack other companies for trying something. VR isn't very suitable for Nintendo. It's costly to develop, still has some issues to iron out, and appears to have limited potential outside of First Person games. I won't fault Nintendo for not pursuing it, but I will fault Reggie's unprofessional behavior for trying to put others down for pursuing it.

Who knows if this is going to take off or not, but to sit there and dismiss the competition like that would be foolish.

All i know is that if this thing takes off in Japan then VR is going to be a sure fire hit... Just take a look at Bandai Namco's Summer Lesson made for Morpheus https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIl2-5f8NTo

But don't worry Nintendo already has their own VR aka VRBoy2

We all know what VR is really for and its not gaming lol, Definitely not for me I enjoy playing on my 60 inch sharp led tv way less headaches

VR is stupid, get a life nerd!

3d Televisions..... Back to 2d but 4k.....

Gonna have to agree here. I know a lot of people are excited for VR now because Sony's doing it, but I can't see it taking off past a niche audience myself. The only VR game I'm interested in is the Walking Dead game and one game isn't going to push me into buying one. It just seems like VR will be a new gimmick that will fade very quickly. Playing multiplayer VR games sounds pretty terrible. Only one person can use the VR at a time while the other people are experiencing the game normally. Which isn't a bad thing but it just sounds like a mess.

Nintendo should just wait until all the VR tech is sorted out and established and the tech is common and cheap enough to do something good with that is accessible to everyone.

It's a same the hololens didn't seem to display particle effects like smoke etc from the fires.

It's interesting that folks are mentioning the HoloLens when all I've been reading after this week's E3 is how disappointed reviewers have been with the difference between the prototype and the near-final version. Because Microsoft wanted to untether the HoloLens, the field of view has been substantially reduced. As a result, the feeling of "immersion" is significantly reduced.

Reggie could be pulling a Ballmer--recalling when Steve Ballmer addressed the new iPhone dismissively--and that Nintendo will miss the VR revolution. But it's also possible, as the HoloLens seems to be proving, that the technology still isn't mature enough to be mainstream.

Personally, I see VR at the same place that Kinect is and was: it's fun technology, but not essential. And I'm not sure I'd rather spend long playing sessions with weighty goggles strapped to my head or in front of a gigantic, 40" 4K monitor. (I'm inclined to think the latter.) VR might be fun for awhile, and it will certainly have a "wow" factor, but I'm not sure it's poised to change gaming.

Good riddens. Nintendo does not need a "Virtual Boy II"

Gonna have to say Reggie is wrong on this. The current state of VR IS fun, and it doesn't need to be social to be fun. Actually it can be seen as a revolutionary piece of technology enabling people living miles apart to be social while also immersing themselves in the games.

The only real problem with VR is the pricing. Project Morpheus and Oculus Rift are already seeing a great amount of support regardless, so yeah.

Better luck next time Reggie. Long live VR.

True. The current crop of VR tech just isn't viable as a mass-market medium. The hype is generated by companies looking for investors / cash to burn but it won't catch on..

This coming from the company who's figuratively stuck in the past... There's some irony to his statement.

The arguments against VR in these comments have been entertaining. As if things have not improved since virtual boy.

Regarding the first sentence of the article; Nintendo weren't the first to do motion controls with the Wii, not by a long shot (if that's what's being referred to).

VR is a snooze, everyone is upset and it's hilarious. Pray tell people what games or software are you looking forward to for either VR headset coming out? Is there even anything other than Endless Ocean clones and Otaku Zooming In On Breasts games being developed?

Yeah...I'd like it if someone could make something interesting with VR, but so far it looks like Kinect 3.0 - more gimmicky hardware that no one knows what to do with.

@Blizzia I'm thinking that price is the real reason why Nintendo doesn't want to do it. You'd have to be blind not to see the fun in VR, it's pretty obvious. And now Morpheus proves that VR can be social, so that's not an issue either. The only real issue with VR is it's not profitable, it's very expensive tech right now and the audience isn't big enough to sustain those huge losses. Other than that, VR is right up Nintendo's alley, it's the natural conclusion to what Nintendo's been doing with motion control gimmicks in past consoles.

@Bolt_Strike I agree. VR is definitely the next step in immersive gameplay. Looking at how Nintendo has evolved itself over the past few consoles suggests that they are seriously considering VR. The Wii introduced movements as if playing in game and the Wii U introduced looking around in space and seeing the game around you. Merge the two and you get VR.

The development of VR is unfortunately not in a far enough stage to be cost effective. Looking at the gaps between consoles I expect the NX to appear in about two years, which is too short for VR to develop to a profitable scale.

But VR will become the new standard over the next decade and I'll be joining in for sure. Imagine Mario Kart inside the game, way too epic.

Provided the evidence of the past, VR is likely to fail. The further you move from the television screen, the worse things seem to get; unless its a Nintendo handheld. Those things are great.

Merging gaming with social features is the most stupid idea of this generation. I hate social aspects in my games, specially doing stuff with friends or having random people interfering in my games (ie.: Super Mario 3D World). It's just annoying. Gaming isn't meant to be social in general. There is a branch, however, called social gaming, and it should stay as a separate genre. At least I hope so.

@HawkeyeWii Online games aren't fun usually. they are full of mean spirited people who cus and swear a lot and that is not Nintendo's definition of fun.
I myself tend to shy away from online gaming simply because of how agressive people tend to react online.

@rushiosan yeah I know what you mean like a lot of games tend to be 'ashamed' of solely being singleplayer so they throw in a multiplayer mode or they have to cut single player develepment resources so they can shoe horn in some multiplayer features.

@TruenoGT : Exactly! Companies try to bring 3D mainstream like every 25 years and it never works. VR will never be mainsteam until the delivey method changes.

@khululy That is not true. And you do know you can play online games with people muted? Practically every game that has online multiplayer had that option. A lot of games are an absolute blast to play online. Mario Kart games especially! This is also your opinion and mine. There are obviously a lot of people who love playing online today, so not giving people a solid option like this for a console today is mindless.

The NX is most likely going to have VR.

Hope they try using it before they make a console after it's become a mainstream household item and claim that VR stole the Wii Me's thunder or something.

Yeah who needs VR. Make F-Zero instead.