Well, here we go again. Reports (which may or may not be accurate) are claiming that manufacturing of the NX was pushed back to early 2017 to make improvements to the 'console and handheld' integration and to factor in Virtual Reality features. It all seems feasible, if still far from certain and confirmed, but it's been an interesting source of debate for fans. After all, with the hardware falling into next year rather than hitting the previously predicted Holiday 2016 window, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that these sources are correct.
That we don't know for sure, but taken as a talking point the VR aspect brings up an interesting discussion. Would NX incorporating Virtual Reality functionality be a smart move, if true, and what form could it take? Editorial Director Damien McFerran and Editor Tom Whitehead both take on the topic below, looking at the different angles around Nintendo and VR.
Damien
The recent report from DigiTimes is a bit of an eye-opener for many reasons, the most important being the fact that Nintendo has previously enjoyed a rather hot-and-cold relationship with the concept of Virtual Reality. The Virtual Boy remains one of the firm's most embarrassing missteps, and while that system is incredibly primitive when compared to the VR headsets of the present day, it's easy to imagine Nintendo's board of directors squirming uncomfortably in their seats when the the word "virtual" is mentioned during a meeting. No one likes being reminded of past failures, after all.
Add to this the fact that Nintendo has previously stated that it's not interested in VR (before later cryptically adding that it is "looking into it"), and the picture becomes even murkier. Nintendo isn't the kind of firm which likes to slavishly follow industry trends, either - just because Sony and Microsoft do something it doesn't automatically mean that Nintendo will follow suit. The Kyoto veteran likes to do its own thing and confound expectations - the DS and Wii are prime examples of that.
Having said all of this, if there's a company which can really sell the concept of VR to the mass market, it's certainly Nintendo. The current tech - despite its futuristic allure - is far from the finished article; Sony's PlayStation VR costs more than the base console itself and requires you to plug in a multitude of wires and boxes, while HTC's Vive asks players to effectively clear their entire living room to make space to play. Couple this with the fact that there's no definative "killer app" for VR yet, and it's easy to see why so many remain skeptical of the idea, despite the obvious swell of gamer interest.
Carnegie Mellon University professor and game designer Jesse Schell recently said - light-heartedly, it should be remembered - that Nintendo could be the VR victor if it applies its traditional approach to the concept. He mentioned a portable VR device which avoided the issue of plugging into your existing console or PC, thereby allowing it to be played anywhere and without any wires and cables to shackle the experience:
Imagine if you strapped a DS to your face, it's like that or imagine if the Virtual Boy didn't suck. I would bet Nintendo is working on one.
Schell may have been thinking out loud with this prediction, but this kind of "mobile VR" is happening already. Samsung's Gear VR uses a smartphone as its screen and is therefore totally wire-free. While there's a tradeoff to consider here - games aren't as graphically impressive as those seen on the Oculus Rift, HTC Vive or PSVR - the sacrifice is arguably worth it. I've used a Gear VR extensively and come away very impressed indeed; the experience is certainly good enough to be convincing and titles like Land's End and EVE: Gunjack are genuinely appealing adverts for VR.
Gear VR has already sold 300,000 units in Europe and is predicted by some to lead the pack in terms of market penetration. The recent introduction of Minecraft on Samsung's headset won't hurt matters, either. This is the kind of approach I'd like to see Nintendo taking with VR, if the reports are indeed true. If NX really does have a 5-inch screen it could easily be placed inside a headset like the Gear VR - which has its own inertial measurement unit to ensure head-tracking is as precise as possible - and thereby give access to VR without the need to shell out a massive amount of cash, as Sony is expecting PlayStation 4 owners to do.
The catch is that power will be limited and therefore the games won't be as striking as those seen on other formats - but given that the current crop of Gear VR software is still pretty impressive, there's no reason to see this as too much of a negative, and NX could potentially be more powerful than Samsung's latest phones anyway. Besides, Nintendo will no doubt come up with its own "killer apps" which will harness the immersive environment in new and unexpected ways, irrespective of how much processing power is available. It's what it has done time and time again with the DS, 3DS, Wii and Wii U.
While some have reacted negatively to the news that Nintendo could be supporting VR, it's vital to remember that it doesn't have to cheapen the focus of NX - it's an optional bonus, and it could be the unique feature which ensures the console sells to the mass market in the same way the Wii did a decade ago, and that can only be good news for Nintendo fans. It's important to remember that while dedicated players know all about the VR revolution, casual gamers aren't as educated - and NX could therefore be their introduction to the concept. Market intelligence firm Superdata's director of research and head of VR/AR strategy Stephanie Llamas spoke to GamesIndustry.biz in April about consumer awareness of VR, and it's surprisingly low:
The general public are mostly unaware of Virtual Reality with 50 percent of Americans showing no interest in or knowledge of VR. Broad consumer adoption relies on building awareness, but today nearly 80 percent of consumers only occasionally or never hear about VR.
That's a massive open goal for Nintendo, whatever your thoughts may be about VR.
Thomas
I should probably start by acknowledging an article I wrote earlier this year, in which I was "opening myself up for hindsight ridicule if the NX reveal has a VR component". The headline was that Nintendo and Virtual Reality aren't a good fit in 2016, and bear in mind this was written when many analysts and industry followers expected NX this year. Having read that again I'm pretty happy to extend that to early 2017 too; my key point was simple - VR has major potential to go mainstream, but that will come in the more distant future.
Though people like to talk about decades of Virtual Reality history - which is technically correct - I still see the current devices as the first genuine 'generation'. We have multiple competitors utilising impressive but early technology, and price tags that appeal to the enthusiast market. The likes of Vive, Oculus and PSVR will sell out of launch stock, shift a few million units and be a 'success'. Fair enough and hats off to those companies involved, but let's also be real about this - there's a big gap between rocking the socks off tech-fans with plenty of money to spend, and convincing everyone else to jump on board. As I argued in that January article the next generation of headsets may target that mainstream breakthrough, as they'll hopefully be lighter, more efficient and less expensive.
As it stands this initial generation of VR is a tough sell to normal folks that may wave a Wii remote around or even do a bit of blockbuster triple-A gaming on Wii U, PS4 or Xbox One. That's not a criticism of VR, I think it has the potential to be a broader hit in the future, it's just how I see the current state of play.
Damien makes a number of fair points, and highlights the experiences that the likes of Samsung's Gear VR offer - which I haven't even used (as a disclosure). He talks of the fact it's shifted a decent number of units in Europe, is supported by some interesting games and makes the observation that it's rather affordable (it's about £80 in the UK and $100 in the US and requires a compatible Samsung phone). I can buy into the point that if there's a portable component to NX (which is expected by many despite talk around 'MH' as a 3DS successor, if that's even a thing) then a Gear VR-style device could make sense. As a reasonably priced add-on with a bit of Nintendo magic, I for one would happily pick one up if it was in the optional £80 / $100 bracket.
I'm still unsure of whether it'd be a good move, though. It would depend on how well the technology is utilised, to a degree, and pricing is an issue beyond the unit cost. I've argued in the past that Nintendo, as its brand currently stands, is associated with affordable, clever and colourful fun. The Wii and DS weren't technological powerhouses, but used old technology in smart ways that excited consumers. Price point was key, though, especially for Wii - in the early days the Wii was a good bit less expensive than its HD rivals, which combined nicely with the impact motion controls had on an expanded gaming audience.
Nintendo tried to go the premium route with 3DS, at first, which went so well - along with an underwhelming launch window of games - that its price was cut months after its launch. The Wii U wasn't exactly cheap at launch, either, coming in higher than the price bracket that the Wii had in its favour. Add to the fact the Wii U's concept didn't capture the public's imagination - along with various factors - and we had a perfect storm of retail issues that have resulted in its poor sales.
Many reading these pages may argue that Nintendo produces many games of fantastic quality, and shouldn't be regarded as an 'inexpensive' brand. I'd agree with the sentiment, but the reality is that Nintendo is in that position. Its brand power isn't as a 'cool' tech company that can charge top dollar, so value and competitive pricing is key to getting gamers of all types to take the plunge, like with the reasonably priced 3DS options over the years.
Finally, another issue VR could bring is over-complicating the NX launch. Nintendo's had enough branding issues (Wii U, again) to know that it needs to learn from these mistakes, and needs NX to be a concise, understandable product for consumers. Throw in extra bundles and options with VR and you muddy the waters a little, when the priority should be pitching a shiny new gaming platform that offers a new way to play games, as company President Tatsumi Kimishima insists it will. If it is a platform with both portable and home gaming functionality, perhaps with different SKU and purchasing options, that should be enough to deal with early doors.
Those factors are why I hope the DigiTimes report is wrong, or has perhaps mis-interpreted information from its supply-chain sources. If a VR component is coming to NX, perhaps it can be held back for further down the road, 18-24 months after launch. As Sony and Microsoft are currently showing, the idea of a 'generation' of hardware is falling apart; as that's the case, VR can be an area Nintendo moves into as a mid-generation move, which also allows the technology to get better and more affordable.
Still, if the reports are true I'd pay for any VR extras in NX. But then I'm an enthusiast; something tells me my Wii U-owning parents would scoff at the very idea.
Comments (120)
It seems like you guys are still salty about the NX coming out in March 2017. You keep mentioning that you were predicting a Christmas 2016 release in every NX related article.
I see VR as a gimmick. Now, if I wanted only one company to brain storm game ideas for a gimmick (y'know like touch screen or motion controls or heck even analogue sticks) then it would be Nintendo. Thing is, I strongly believe they have their own thing...and they are not letting anyone know about it until they get a head start!
I think Nintendo having a VR device (Vertual Boy 2) connecting to their next hand held and console is a good idea for Nintendo to stay competitive in the industry. I feel if Nintendo doesn't have some sort of VR option out there, the company as a whole will continue to look out of touch to the industry's demands.
I could see VR on the NX being very successful, if it's cheap and undercuts the opposition. Just look at the Wii, that was a cheap console that introduced motion controls, and that worked wonders for Nintendo. I'm saying that's possible, but I'm not saying it's likely.
I will not be strapping anything onto my head that shields the real world from my eyes. I may be in the minority here, but I am really not interested in that type of VR.
On the other hand, give me a tablet that functions as a window to an alternate reality (like the gamepad in NintendoLand) and count me in.
VR is the future—I don't think Nintendo is onboard (at least not yet).
I don't know. Wouldn't the NX cost a small fortune if it were to implement it properly?
Virtual Boy 2?
This time they will add a new color.
That picture with the power glove made me do a double take.
Reminded me of using a hacked power glove with shutter glasses on rend386 back in the day. That was something else.
I think it's dumb to miss the Christmas sales period just for VR. They should have released November with the promise of VR further down the line.
I tried the Steam VR thing at the PC World on Tottenham Court Road and was actually very impressed by it, but I don't really feel it will have a lasting impact on the marketplace. It's a gimmick nothing more, certainly not worth missing Christmas for.
I'm not sure what to think. I believe that Nintendo could do it right, but many people would look at the virtual boy and scoff. I prefer my traditional controller, couch, and TV set up, but I have never used VR, so who am I to talk?
Well, we likely won't ever see a VR headset that doesn't require a physical tether (or they'll invent a new wireless protocol that's able to stream multiple high-definition images without any noticeable lag. IR-based?).
That said, VR is game-changing, and anyone who says otherwise is either short-sighted or being purposefully instigating (or just hasn't tried it, which is understandable). I think in five years, it'll start being cheap and good enough to win over those people with less imagination.
Damo has won me over on the general idea of a mid-range VR option like Samsung Gear (which I've not tried either).
Most of Nintendo's current crop of 1st party games aren't monsters in terms of graphical demands of the hardware in the search for realism - Mario et al would probably work fine in VR without needing a big-bucks unit.
My only concern about it is, if VR is a bit of a last minute addition, it's unlikely that the host of games Nintendo has been hard at work at producing for the NX have in any way been optimised for VR.
Also, Mario, Splatoon etc are all third-person views, whereas VR is obviously most suited for first-person (Metroid Prime 4 VR confirmed!)
It really doesn't matter what NX is at this point. Nintendo has done a great job up til now ensuring whatever it is ends up being a borderline catastrophe.
There's no Wii 2 in the pipeline, that lightning success only strikes once in a blue moon. Before with the NES, and once more with Wii.
Whatever NX is and whenever it finally debuts, the lifetime sales numbers might, just maybe, reflect those of the GameCube IF it's lucky. That's the position Nintendo have put themselves in anymore.
Also, VR in general will never be a mainstream success. Find me 5 people that want to not only spend 600 dollars on that crap, but let alone strap a big clunky device to their head to enjoy the dang thing.
VR is a total flop and losery road. Augmented Reality sounds like the future, if anything, but even that is highly skeptical. I don't think Nintendo will go in to this crap especially since the 3DS' coolness is that it has no glasses. They will come up with something actually useful and cool that will hopefully sell well.
@gatorboi352 If I had the disposable income I would. I liken one of the expensive VR headsets to an expensive steering wheel peripheral - I'd love to have one, but can't justify the cost, so I put up with the cheaper option. Maybe Nintendo is prepared to offer me the cheaper VR.
@SLIGEACH_EIRE I refer you to the AMD RX 480 its >5 TFLOPS power at a price point of U$199 for the public.
if the NX is sporting anything like that, then its much cheaper and likely will work.
@gcunit I don't know how they would do that, not in the next 3-4 years anyway. Regardless, the whole thing is a gimmick. Then again, maybe that's why Nintendo is even interested in it to begin with?
Imagine playing SM3DW in 1st person view - could still be a lot of fun, especially in multiplayer. That could look great on a mid-range VR unit.
I daren't even dream of Mario Kart VR!
My idea.
1.a handheld that looks like the game pad with games(similar to PS vita) that plus in to the VR unit(similar to galaxy VR) and plays(special) VR only games.
2.a port on the handheld that connects to the TV via HDMI.
3.There will be digital and physical games(via a game card(3DS) their will be two models 1.handheld 2.VR only 3.ment for home use only.
Yes this is supposed to be the simplest way to explain my idea.
@TeslaChippie I present to you, the wii U gamepad. all you do with HMD is relay a signal, the console renders the image, then streams it.
laugh all you want, but the wii u gamepad is almost a vr device. Play captain toad minecart levels and then we can talk... the gamepad tracks movement and gives you 1st person perspective. has sound, mic built in. if only it was a vr device and you could use wiimote/nunchuck for controls....if only.
PS. I've tried Gear VR, and while most of the demos they had to show were actually kinda meh—the 3D videos didn't impress me and the one game I played, EVE: Gunjack, didn't either (it seemed be in really low-res, and the level of 3D and immersion in the game didn't impress me either)—I have to say that the simple cinema App really did give me a glimpse of the quality of experience current-gen VR can bring to the table when done right. It wasn't that is was an App allowing me to watch 3D movies in a virtual cinema (even though I think that alone in pretty frikin' cool); it was simply that it was the highest resolution and highest quality 3D of all the examples I got to see/try in Gear VR, and one that made the illusion of actually being in the scene pretty dang convincing.
This is where VR's strengths lie, in immersion that goes beyond anything we've ever experienced before, and if the cinema App demo in Gear VR is any indication, VR is going to blow a lot of people away when it really hits its stride. I've not played either Oculus Rift (Well, I've played on the DK1 but my Gear VR experience was honestly better; the consumer version is orders of magnitude better) or HTC Vive but I imagine those already blow away the Gear VR for the most part.
VR is the future of interactive entertainment (seriously, there's absolutely no doubt about it); I just hope Nintendo is smart enough to realise that—but I still don't really expect to see VR support for the NX either way (but who really knows what the hell Nintendo is up to right now).
@andrew20 edit(this is too long to add on)
4.VR headset(the handheld will slide in to fit on the charger and headphone port then on the bottom a headphone jack and s controller port the controller (idea Wii u pro controller)
5.the home part imagine a PS TV or Roku box.
This is my idea or theory on the console.
@andrew20 that's called a tablet, not a hand held, (fits in your palm).
"1.a handheld that looks like the game pad with games(similar to PS vita) that plus in to the VR unit(similar to galaxy VR) and plays(special) VR only games."
there is mock images of a Virtual boy 2 with a DS like shape, what i'm thinking, gamepad = connect = HMD via Async streaming or advance protocol.
"2.a port on the handheld that connects to the TV via HDMI."
or a dongle that can input a HDMI signal then upscale it to 4K 100htz
3.There will be digital and physical games(via a game card(3DS) their will be two models 1.handheld 2.VR only 3.ment for home use only.
digital yep, physical yes (shelf space is key.)
as for multiple SKUs, likely a digital only SKU, and a Physical SKU
if this is portable, then expandable SD space and Usb 3.0 or Usb C connections.
Yes this is supposed to be the simplest way to explain my idea.
it is very simple, just know that the HMD is optional and likely costs as much as a Gear VR.
@Donutman maybe that's another reason it flopped so hard?
@andrew20 VR is optional remember? so the console is tablet, controller streaming device.
@gatorboi352 what flopped?
@gatorboi352 Not enough of those type of experiences were around in the first year. The mechanic itself is great, people were just already indoctrinated to stay away from the Wii U - it went toxic so early. If they'd been more of those experiences around Day 1, it might have won over the media.
@HSuzumiyaVI yes it optional but it could be sold in all for one bundle for 399.99
Handheld 149.99-199.99 range
Home unit 99.99-149.99
VR headset 99.99
@Kirk don't forget, the guts of the power is NOT found in the head set, its found in the computer.
like the NX, the tablet device needs to be powerful to render 2 1080p monitors for each reticle.
@gatorboi352 Strong words but I fear Nintendo are like a spider trapped in a bath. No way out. It didn't have to be like this but they may at this stage have put themselves beyond the point of no return.
@HSuzumiyaVI yes you got it.
@andrew20 the home unit is a different thing, the handheld is the console it self.
@HSuzumiyaVI yes.
@SLIGEACH_EIRE Nintendo is all about games and lets be honest VR Metroid would be selling out in places world wide.
Honestly I don't care either way. If the system supports it and it is fun to use then alright I am ok with that, if it isn't on the system that's fine with me too. I just come for the games that Nintendo makes and don't really care about the technology behind it because they have proven time and time again that they know how to make fun experiences and though they often get lambasted for requiring there to be a gimmick for certain series to be fun I have found that the games themselves are rock solid and if Nintendo can figure out how to pull off virtual reality in their own unique way then I say good for them.
@HSuzumiyaVI my idea the tablet screen is 1080p-1200p
@andrew20 but it must be able to remote play with TV and PC.
the guts is a tablet with buttons
and the streaming relay is a small microconsole (like Steam link.)
hell, the rumours of Xbox Scorpio talked about a chromecast for windows 10 at E3.
@andrew20 i'd say 1080p, most TVs aren't anything but 1080p so 1080p would be standard, upscale is when you hook up to the box (that means it needs HDMI 2.0)
@HSuzumiyaVI yes it is able but the home unit can be used to help with the VR headset and it will be able to upscale to UHD.
from Nintendo website on gamepad
"The Wii U GamePad controller removes the traditional barriers between games, players and the TV by creating a second window into the video game world.
It also offers a new way for viewers to engage with their favorite entertainment. The GamePad incorporates a 6.2-inch, 16:9 aspect ratio LCD touch screen, as well as traditional button controls and two analog sticks. Inputs include a +Control Pad, L/R sticks, L/R stick buttons, A/B/X/Y buttons, L/R buttons, ZL/ZR buttons, Power button, HOME button, -/SELECT button, +/START button, and TV CONTROL button.
The GamePad also includes motion control (powered by an accelerometer, gyroscope and geomagnetic sensor), a front-facing camera, a microphone, stereo speakers, rumble features, a sensor bar, an included stylus and support for Near Field Communication (NFC) functionality.
It is powered by a rechargeable lithium-ion battery and weighs approximately 1.1 pounds (500 g)."
6.2-inch to 7 inch,
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Car-Rear-View-7-LCD-Mirror-Monitor-Digital-Screen-Car-MP5-Car-Rear-View-SD-USB-/161531974131
it does look like a gamepad.
@andrew20 the streaming device can also be streamed directly to the gamepad as well, the wii virtual console lets me duke it out on Metroid prime with my wiimote and nuchuck, plus, the base station can have a IR emitter
a better example of this is this, (this is 3.5 inch)
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Hyperkin-SUPABOY-Portable-Pocket-SNES-Console-BRAND-NEW-FACTORY-SEALED-/191600017638?hash=item2c9c4040e6:g:TD4AAOSwZd1Veh5A
and the snes carts is a nice touch to my idea of the NX.
@HSuzumiyaVI yes it can.
A company called Esence has come up with all in one solution similar to Samsungs one but as said it has all guts and screen in one unit $120 I think.
@blinder2 link?
plus, go check youtube, hybrid consoles have been done,
in fact the NX is rumoured to be using a smaller chipset than the wii U to it would definitely work an we all know Nintendo likes its watts/performance ratios and also wont do what Microsoft did with the 360 and Sony did with the PS4. overheating issues aside, a 16 finfet architecture would make lithium batteries retain charge.
I think the biggest reason for Nintendo not to do VR is simple - no FPS.
Think about it, how many FPS has Nintendo made? Even Splatoon is 3rd person. So is MK. And arguably one of their biggest hit series, SSB, is a 2D brawler. How much better are Nintendo games going to be in VR, most of their games are 2D platformers.
They aren't getting 3rd party back, they don't make FPS, what's the point?
And besides that, Wii U is the first ever console I've owned with only 1 Gamepad controller. My Atari 2600 had 2. Nintendo makes multilayer couch games. If they could only handle 1 Gamepad, how can they handle 1 console multplayer for MK, SSB, Yoshi, all of their games. And the biggest selling 3rd party games are probably Lego and Skylanders, which are played by parents with their kids, or siblings. If the NX has to power a VR headset, can it also power a 2nd view on the tv.
There is no reason for Nintendo to do VR, and after the lack of Wii U dual Gamepad support there is no reason to think they would be able to pull it off.
The end.
Excellent article damien!
@rjejr two words Metroid Prime
VR is the future of porn. And VR porn will save the future of the "VR gaming industry".
@rjejr yes, Streaming =/= rendering
look at it this way, PSVR requires a box to boost the signal, that costs money,
NX is a tablet in this scenario, and can stream to multiple devices, the HMD could also be done wireless (if its advance enough.) the console does the computing, then streams the image, problem with Wii U was that while it can handle one gamepad, 2 would start to strain the system. how this works is the lack of power and a slower CPU, the processor in the gamepad also goes to sleep making voice chat an issue.
luckily, the streaming device will be an advanced protocol than the gamepad. the base station will likely interface with every device like steam link.
I personally don't want VR on the NX, it's just not something I really care about.
Btw, that picture of the psvr setup is just crazy! You would think that they would make it much simpler than that!
@Splatburst flight sims will likely.
@hYdeks its not whether you want it, but rather is it an option?
Nintendo likely saw that 3rd party wanted this more than Nintendo did. but we all knew power and cost was an issue, well, AMD just hit that nail on the head with the RX 480, smoking the competition with an impressive >5 TFLOPS and crazy pricepoint of U$199
so I retracted my earlier statements due to this starling development. plus, its optional. however the power is well needed.
Please no Nintendo. I have zero interest in VR gaming.
I can get along with anything as long as it's fun gaming time, but I refuse the concept of VR used as a new portable gaming machine, I have NO intention to play with a VR set on my head as I take the train, it's pretty much screaming "Take my wallet and punch me while you are at it!" ^_^;
My opinion:
As I had said, my interest about the "Nintendo NX" will be until Nintendo "shows" that console; while, any rumors, comments, etc .; It is "IRRELEVANT"; Why?, because I do not I want to have the image of something I do not know and if I take the high expectation and it turns out it is not, so I avoid stress out or annoy me; but well, This, in my act and my opinion!
All I have to say is, if it makes Metroid Prime VR more likely, sign me up!
What people are missing with comparisons to the Wii is that the Wii wasn't just successful due to accessibility and affordability - it was successful because it brought people together. VR can't do that, not without multiple headsets, and that adds up. VR, because of its focus on immersion, during the game experience, pushes people apart. I don't see VR being a Wii-level seller, even if Nintendo does it and knocks it out of the park in terms of quality and affordability.
The idea of releasing VR midway through a console's life is terrible. It basically guarantees that it will fail, and there are enough supporting examples. Wii Motion+, Kinect, Move, New 3DS are recent examples if you look at the last generation, but there's tons of Gameboy add-ons that failed such as the Printer, E-Reader, etc. Changing the hardware of a system mid-generation basically makes it harder to make any software that uses that software successful. I hate the term, but it truly makes it a gimmick more than anything else.
Something like VR needs to be integral to the experience or absent entirely.
@HSuzumiyaVI Two words - Federation Force.
After the failure that was the Wii U and the expensive Gamepad, does it really make sense that Nintendo should spend the money to make a viable VR platform on the hopes that Retro makes another Metroid Prime game rather than another 2nd Donkey Kong? When was the last time Nintendo themselves made a Metroid Prime game?
And I think you are confused about how PSVR works and what that "box" does. It doesn't boost the signal, it's transforms the 2 screen 2 eye view of the headset into a view that makes sense on the TV. It's why you can't simply plug 1 wire to the headset and another to the TV, it's a different look, and requires the PS4 to output to that box and that box sends a different signal to the headset and the TV.
In a couch multi player game you would need the console to output 2 completely different views for each player. Think about it, have you ever seen 2 PSVR hooked up to 1 TV or PS4? But Nintendo is all about couch co-op and versus games. It's why they slap on pathetic attempts at multiplayer on SFZ and Splatoon. They'd never get it to work well. Just like they couldn't get dual Gamepad support even though Bill Trinnen told everybody, speaking for Nintendo, that it was coming. And they've already tried and failed once with Virtual Boy. And who knows, VR could be a bust for gaming. How many games still use PS Move? How many games are in 3D after Sony produced it's own 24" 3D display? MS REMOVED Kinect 2 from Xbox One 1 after launch.
Why put so much time, effort and money into such an unknown with such obvious potential for failure?
I've seen several people talk here about low prices. Someone even said the VR headset could be as cheap as 99¤. I don't think you realize.
Among the many problems that we are facing here, price will be the biggest one.
If you really want the visuals, VR and all the rest, don't expect the console and the headset to be anywhere below 300¤ in the best case scenario. 300 EACH.
@bluedogrulez same here. I want to see what's going on around me at all times.
I think this might be another "Well Nintendo should do this" wish that certain people are claiming legit, like "The NX will be more powerful then the Xbox One and PS4," never mind that the last time Nintendo was truly "current" in their tech was the SNES.
We'll have enough salt to keep Alaska roads dry when the NX is properly revealed, all these rumors and theories going around.
Honestly, VR sounds like a gimmick in videogames. I'm not denying it might be useful for other areas - but playing with a thing on your face and ignoring the rest of the world doesn't sound appealing at all.
If its true Nintendo wants to do this, I hope it makes it as an add on, because I'm not interested in paying extra for this. If its mandatory, well.... I'll most likely pass.
Can children use VR headsets? I woulda thought it would be a danger to eyesight like the 3DS.
The tech's there now, there's no reason Nintendo shouldn't be able to pull of VR when plenty of other companies already have. I'm not really interested in VR myself though, as I'm not a fan of first-person games (I like being able to see where my character's actually standing and see a bit behind them) and VR kind of relies on that being your kinda thing. I just hope it's optional, or at least as optional as the Wii U Game Pad which you can usually substitute for the Pro Controller unless the game actually relies on touch controls.
@Damo and @ThomasBW84:
I'm not an VR enthusiast (although I do see what it can bring and am certain that it will go mainstream eventually), but I wouldn't say that "there's a big gap between rocking the socks off tech-fans with plenty of money to spend, and convincing everyone else to jump on board." There's a simple VR solution to close that gap: Google Cardboard. It costs almost nothing and you can also make it yourself.
Nintendo could just include a cheap VR-frame (where you put your smartphone or the Gamepad) with every NX. And if it breaks, you just build yourself a new one with a simple IKEA-like instructions manual. It could be even fun for kids to do handicrafts.
Also, I reject the idea that VR needs a killer app, that's conventional or even backwards-looking thinking. Smartphones didn't need a killer app either, it was their versatility that gave them success. The same applies to the internet, for example.
Thinking that VR will only go mainstream once somebody figures out a "killer app" is completely misunderstanding its concept. There is no killer app. With VR you can play games, you can create/develop games, you can draw and paint, you can watch Netflix or meet your friends around the world. And lots more.
There won't be a killer app, but everyone will have to find their own favourite way of using VR.
The only thing that can bring sucess is word-of-mouth and first-hand experience. The Wii wouldn't have established itself if people who bought it hadn't played it with their friends who then bought one themselves. Smartphones wouldn't be all over the place if people wouldn't have seen what they can do when their friends got one. That's how the appeal of a new device goes mainstream.
I can see F-Zero VR and Metroid Prime VR already.
I guess anything's possible when it comes to Nintendo. I'd say NX is more likely to go the iPad/tablet route then VR.
The two main problems with VR gaming is it's high price and the lack of interesting games. Just give it time. Prices should go down and better games will release.
Maybe I've just become too used to the PC gaming market, but I can't reiterate enough that it currently costs $1000 for a rig that is prepared to push VR as the equivalent of a 9th console gen experience. The upcoming hardware later this year, like AMD's Polaris architecture, likely to be used by the PS4 Neo, is just among the first to truly utilize VR. However, all of the console offerings are going to be gimped performance wise, by comparison to PC. And why bother going for VR if you're only getting a soon to be last gen experience?
Nintendo is likely going to aim for the $300-350 price range again, and this does not allow for enough power to accommodate a good VR experience. So I'm very skeptical that Nintendo will seriously embrace VR as it currently stands. VR is also impossible to showcase, it has to be experienced firsthand. This used to be Nintendo's forte, but that was back in the 90s...
As for mobile VR, I think it's a potentially dangerous method of trying to experience VR. You're essentially zapping your brain with radiation when you keep the phone so close to your head for an extended period of time. We're only meant to keep the phone next to our head in short bursts. With prolonged exposure over a course of years, it could lead to decreased brain functioning, and eventually brain tumors. Very bad idea. Children are more susceptible to this than adults, since their skulls are softer, allowing their brains to soak in cell phone radiation like a sponge. I fear we're going to see a huge increase in brain related health issues over the next 20 years... The US Government is currently contemplating how to reveal their recently conducted findings to the public. :/ (Telecommunications companies will try to prevent it, though.)
And yeah, as shown in the article, setting up VR on a console is a mess- very condradictory to Nintendo's philosophy of simplistic setups. Tech minded people won't have a problem, but that picture is a nightmare for anyone not tech inclined.
Many of you think VR is a gimmick, but with Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Steam pushing it: you can be sure there's no turning back, it will become the future.
And God knows what Apple is doing, they have been very quiet about VR even though they bought many VR and AR companies in the last 2 years. Their upcoming iPhone 7 is said to be bezel-less, the screen covered the entire face of the phone (perfect for a head gear) and it comes with 2 cameras (like 3DS) for 3d photos/videos.
Nintendo knew that if they missed the boat on VR they are going to be left behind again. The kids will be all VR crazy and just like current generation they won't be able to compete with the smartphone/tablet.
I have a hunch that Nintendo is delaying NX for the new ARM chip that will drive all the new phones coming at the end of this year. Without that new chip NX will be obsolete at launch.
@PlywoodStick The new ARM chip is more than enough for Nintendo's games. They don't required photorealistic images, there's no need to aim for AMD Polaris or Nvidia GTX1080.
With a 4K screen running at 120hz, the quality already surpassed Vive, Oculus and PSVR.
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2459687/arms-cortex-a73-chip-and-mali-g71-cpu-set-for-2017s-vr-ready-smartphones
https://www.arm.com/about/newsroom/latest-arm-premium-mobile-technology-to-drive-immersive-experiences.php
@Nintendian Oh yeah, the new ARM chips will handle it, they just won't perform anywhere near as well. They aren't powerful enough to truly render effectively in 4K, even if the screen supports it, though. They'll just upscale using VSR (Virtual Super Resolution), most likely.
Current top PC hardware (meaning over $3000 for the whole rig) is only maxing out at a consistent 120 fps (making full use of 120 hz) rendering at around 2160p for newer, more demanding games. Midline hardware can usually only handle that at 1080p. Nothing today can truly handle rendering natively at 4K to make full use of 120 hz. That will be for the future.
Not to mention, 1080p OLED displays look just as nice as 4K LED displays for smaller screens, if not better, since OLED color saturation is superior to LED, allowing for true blacks. (Very important for good VR.) For VR, a visor with a 1080p OLED display, and a rig that can top out at 120 fps at 1080p is a more realistic goal for most than 4K, of which is wasted on smaller displays anyways. OLED can be more compact and offers reduced blue light based eyestrain, too, without the need for a backlight/enclosure.
@PlywoodStick 1080p has screen door effect regardless of OLED quality, it won't look immersive. I think the better solution is to use a 4K screen and upscale the graphic.
PSVR, Oculus Rift and Vive are all first gen product: by next year when new phones are all using 4k screen, the ver. 2.0 of these VR headsets will be coming out with 4k screen. I think it is foolish to buy any VR product this year.
@Nintendian I dunno about you, but I wouldn't consider any screen that requires an eyestrain inducing backlight and can't offer true blacks and great color saturation to be immersive for VR. Screen door effect can be solved by multisampling antialiasing and tesselation, which are getting a boost for VR with DirectX12. Upscaling via VSR is nice, but it's not a significant boost from 1080p (and especially not 2160p) compared to native resolution rendering. (Which phones won't be able to handle at 4K for another several years.) Those newly upcoming 4K phone screens are just going to be marketing gimmicks.
@PlywoodStick I think they are using 4k screen because of the strict Google Daydream specification, mainly to get rid of the screen door effect. It also needs to be a low persistent screen with 1K motion sensor.
Meh.. Maybe small features kinda vr, but nothing too elaborate ($$$). I must also point out that those things give horrible headaches.
@Nintendian To corroborate your point:
http://www.roadtovr.com/google-existing-smartphones-unlikely-to-qualify-daydream-ready-android-vr-specifications/
http://bgr.com/2016/06/03/2016-google-nexus-huawei-daydream/
So basically, Google has a single upcoming Android compatible phone model, the Nexus 6P, as the bare minimum requirement... So either one buys it with or without a plan, adding up to over $500; waits for newer models; or is just SOL if they either can't afford to upgrade from any model older than Nexus 6P, or their telecommunications provider doesn't support any phone that can handle Google Daydream.
Sounds like just having access to the damn thing is a daydream...
I'd have to pass on the VR. Tried playing the VB when it was first released and could not play it. Even today's 3d (through the Nintendo 3Ds or 3d tv/movies) I cannot stand them at all due to always having weak eyes(can't use right eye since birth). So hopefully they will make VR 100% optional
@PlywoodStick Google recommended the Nexus 6P for developers working on Daydream apps, but it is not a Daydream certified phone. I think it's kinda like NX where developers can't even get access to the actual hardware.
Phones out later this year is going to have the biggest jump in performance and features. I hope they keep it affordable, but the price will definitely go down next year, they always do.
The only VR experience I saw that looked good was the Vive (Steam VR) because of the hand controllers which helped a lot with immersion as you aren't restricted to sitting in a chair with a pad and looking around. Haven't tried one myself yet, only VR I ever tried was a 'google cardboard' type device with a small hand controller with a thumbstick to move. It was neat, but it wasn't immersive.
Vive goes for around $800 so I don't think I'll be jumping on VR until they cost as much as a 'peripheral' should. No peripheral should ever cost more than the console/computer it's plugged in to. Technology will get there one way or another.
Ew... VR is looks like dangerous things. Dangerous for eyes and brain. Morever, Sony? OMG... I can't imagine if there are tons of 18+ content for VR. My gosh, it will become killing machine/satanic dogma/evil simulation game for unlucky people. Seriously, playing ultra violence, sadistic, horrible adult games with that device is completely NIGHTMARE for a human being. Sorry for my serious comment, but i think that's not cool at all to experience the game with that device. I would like use my Wiimote rather than VR device. Simple and safe. Just don't risk your life for something dangerous like that. Some people called that's the Future, for me is the beginning of Doomsday. I just can't stand for something like that.
Don't care for VR, or this hybrid console nonsense. Either make the SNES 2 or go third party.
I think it will be a premium add-on. Just like R.O.B.
If the 3D in the 3DS is damaging to the eyes of children, wouldn't VR be also? Doesn't that hurt sales before it ever hits the store shelves? And even many adult gamers like myself are not in interested in the VR as was stated above, so wouldn't it be an epic flop to release a system like this to the tiny demographic that might consider buying it? If the Wii U sales were bad on a more traditional system, then you can surely bet sales would be absolutely dead with a gimmicky system like this.
@Kiyata has there actually been any evidence on the 3DS hurting kids eyes, I know Nintendo covered their buts legally by putting an minimum age on it but in terms of actual doctors I've only read good things. one even said the 3DS was "perfect" in picking up imbalance in the eyes of children. The kid has an easy yes/no answer to if they can see the 3D effect and it has only once cause.
As long as it's not released at NX's launch date and not bundled with the console, then I really don't see what the problem is
@Wolfenstein83 3D was the trend many years ago since the release of James Cameron's Avatar in 2009. Nintendo did followed the trend and made 3DS, BUT they did it in their own way: 3D without glasses.
If Nintendo is doing VR, you can be sure they will do it differently. But it's hard to imagine VR without using a headgear.
@GrailUK I think the term 'gimmick' is overused. We need innovation in the games industry to drive it forward and to deliver new experiences.
Take Wii controllers/motion control for example. It's always been called a gimmick, yet I played multiplayer Wii Sports on my Wii U just last week for the first time in 6 years and had a blast. These kind of experiences could never be delivered without motion control. Wii U touch screen is called a gimmick by many yet it is the only reason I've been able to game in my living room, so it will be my main console for the next few years.
VR is here to stay and in for the long haul.
@Anti-Matter People said the same thing about jazz and rock music when it became popular: it's devil music. Back in the 90s when World Wide Web was launched, people said the same thing: children shouldn't use the internet it's filled with filth.
Every time something new comes along, there will always be detractors. Then, when it becomes mainstream people stop talking about it because it's part of their lives. Does anyone still talk about the internet or WWW? It's no longer a debate, it's part of your daily life.
@Nintendian If Nintendo are doing VR I agree it will be different, if they create their own headset it will be basically a 'Tomy' toy version of VR, lacking in specs, lower resolution, lower quality and missing features that are being standardised.
Unless they make NX compatible with Occulus and Vive which would be a wise option.
@Megas All those things you mentioned would be enhanced 10X by VR. Imagine actually being in the world of Hyrule...
@liveswired Hmm, I'll concede gimmick is a harsh word for VR. Your right Remember a game called Police 24/7 by Konami. I hope VR is above that level of interaction and not just head moving in a goldfish bowl lol.
@liveswired Oculus most likely, definitely not Vive.
Most console gamers are couch potatoes, Vive demands too much physical activity not to mention the space required. In Japan, people lived in confined accomodations, Vive will never take off there.
THIS JUST IN:
The NX has been delayed in order to include a port to hook up the VIrtual Boy and experience Nintendo Virtual Reality!!
Enjoy Splatoon in beautifuellly rendered Red Lines!
Who is on your team? Who KNOWS!?
This is Splatoon NX-VB BABY!!
(disclaimer - it only works with the New Nintendo NX
and you have to own an original Virtual Boy from 1995.
They aren't making any more of them either - you'll all have to share. And you'll have to use your Wii U power supply - in the name of trying to keep costs down they blah blah blah)
but really, I love Nintendo. They just do so many wacky things.
I've been saying since the original Wii that Nintendo needs to STOP with their dumb, idiotic gimmicks. Ironically, now Nintendo is following dumb gimmicks rather than creating them. This VR stuff is dead in the water. As a gaming input option, VR is fine - key word 'option'. As the main form of input, absolutely not: it's goofy, costly, the list goes on. The threat of the mobile space a la 2008-ish has spooked the gaming industry as a whole into simply goofy things now. Of all the things they could've done, I never would've guessed the industry would've brought back VR...
WoOAaAH! Virtual reality is so RADICAL! It's the future, maaaang!
-80s marketers of funky headbricks
WOAH, DUDE! Virtual reality is so GNARLY! It's the future, dude!
-90s marketers of tripod visor bricks
Hey, You! Virtual reality is so COOL! It's gotta be seen to be believed!
-00's marketers of scuba gear bricks
Hey there. Virtual reality is what's up. Just strap this phone to your head and you'll be taken to another world. It's not the future... It's here.
-'10s marketers of overpriced phones, and face hugger bricks that popular Youtubers pretend isn't slowly breaking their necks
The language has become slightly more sophisticated, but the actual product is still just another brick to strap on your face.
@liveswired How do you know that "VR is here to stay"? That's what people said the last 3 times they came up with some 3D-device!
There's also a bit of a double standard going on, when people say Nintendo should just make a good, powerful console there's an instant chorus chanting that Nintendo should never follow the rest and should go their own way instead, now we have a hint of possible interest in VR (When there are already several devices in production), suddenly that's the way to go, which is it: should Nintendo follow or do their own thing?
I have mild interest in VR, but only as an extra. I don't want a system/set-up that means being blind and deaf to the world to play games. I'll probably get a Gear VR at some point (when I get a compatible phone) to play around with the tech, but I'm not interested in a dedicated VR system.
Nintendo doing VR would be awesome especially if had less wires easy too set up smaller head set, I would pay upto 200-250 bucks no sweat.
I don't think VR is going to hit the mainstream audience. It's expensive and alienating. The major problem is that people will look like total dorks with VR headsets strapped on their faces. I know I don't want it, I like sharing my game with other people across the room.
Nintendo doesn't need to go after that market, it is a market that has nothing to do with them outside the failed Virtual Boy experiment (and even on that one, you could argue that the key point for Nintendo was stereoscopic 3D and not the first-person experience). Nintendo already achieved stereo 3D without goggles.
I'd just like to share something about the screen door effect that I learned recently - screen door effect refers to when you can see the dark area surrounding pixels/subpixels and has nothing to do with resolution. In fact, you can eliminate screen door effect completely by putting a diffusion layer in front of the screen (the trade-off is a bit of blurriness though). future, designed-for-vr screens could be built with ways to get rid of SDE without need for an extra layer, but not necessarily higher-res. That is to say, you could have a 320*240*2 VR headset with no SDE - it'd look blocky and crap, but there wouldn't be any screen door effect.
VR doesn't need insane levels of graphics power. It just needs lots of frames per second and a responsive input>processing>output pipeline. Nintendo are great at using sneaky tricks and artstyle to make things look better than they should (especially in the n64 era), so if they were to tweak their hardware for VR and tie it in to some Samsung gear type cheap goggledock for the handheld, it wouldn't get Oculus/vive ports but definitely would impress...
@rjejr except it currently has a market on PC and Mobile, plus, your PSVR explanation sounds like unviable, really? the box is relaying a feed to the headset, and its also connecting to the TV? you really telling me, the PS4 is rendering one image and the box is splitting the image into 2 FOV for each reticle?
correct me if I'm wrong. but shouldn't the box be smaller? its the same size as a wii and somewhat complicated.
What if....Nintendo releasing Zelda U/NX with vr-features? Lol, if we buy the Wii u version we also need to buy a expensive vr-glasses that won't be used on the Wii u again. I can see it happen, since they are totally out of their minds!
It's doubtful that it will be delayed to add a fully integrated VR headset and such. That's not the kind of thing you can quickly tack on. Just look at how many versions Occulus has gone through to get a version that doesn't make everyone violently sick. Sure Nintendo could skip learning a few on those lessons themselves by doing what Occulus does now, but we all know that's not how Nintendo work.
I think what is most likely is Nintendo will be future-proofing the NX so that it's ready for any VR components to be released later in it's life, without the need for a new model or expansion packs that will split the market. And give them something to boost hardware sales down the line.
So far my experiences with VR have been a mildly underwhelming novelty. There are some great little animations to watch in VR, but it added nothing. There are a few good games but I'd rather play them on a regular console using the sticks to control the camera. I'm not against VR coming to NX (ai actually think it's a good idea), but I'm not excited by it either. I just hope if it does it remains an option in games and earns them enough money to expand their studios and acquire new ones.
I think that a hybrid of VR and AR (or MR as MS calls it) has a lot more potential than VR itself. With current hardware requirements, I don't know if Nintendo, or anyone, could pull that off yet.
@gcunit When you mention SM3DW in 1st person view and Mario Kart VR, that actually makes me excited about VR. I wasn't too bothered about it until you mentioned those games.
I'm not sure with Nintendo and VR. Nintendo always want something new. Think of the Wii, Nintendo put it out there and Sony and Microsoft followed with their ideas. It just doesn't seem to happen the other way around.
In my opinion NX is going to be something completely new and Nintendo have done an impressive job of keeping it quiet.
@wazlon Too right, bruh - I'm a dead-set visionary 😎
Just try imagining a 3D Smash Bros. in VR...
Speaking of which, does the Smash community want the series to go 3D? My guess is, some do, some don't. Like I said, visionary 😝
3D Smash Bros? I'm really not sure on that one, would be interesting but I think the reason it's so popular is because it's easy for a lot of people to pick up and play, 3D would make it too complicated maybe???
If they had Smash in VR that would be cool. I would want to be able to do a super headbutt attack by jolting my head forward.
I really do not want VR at all and I hope that isn't the new gimmick. At the present that is exactly what VR is as far as gaming is concerned: a gimmick. Most of the "experiences" they have currently don't even approach games and we are a far way off from seeing something engaging from VR.
@Donutman
It's true, the GamePad is almost a VR device (Lego City Undercover was the first game to really make me think that). If it was lighter and had a higher resolution screen you could even strap it to your head.
Here's a new game developed for Oculus Rift and NX:
Zocklabs Riverside
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dviqPJ7W1w
@HSuzumiyaVI PS VR mystery box.
Sorry this is so late, but here ya go.
http://www.techradar.com/us/news/gaming/consoles/here-s-exactly-what-playstation-vr-s-mysterious-black-box-does-1317113
"The box is also responsible for displaying the social screen, which is what appears on the TV. The PU undistorts everything in the picture, undoing all the things that are done when games are made for VR. When you "distort" the picture during development to make it work in VR you lose pixel data, and when you undistort it that data is gone.
So the PU tries to fix the problem by cropping the image and fixing it so it looks as normal as possible - although it's never going to be quite as sharp due to the loss of pixel data.
Third, the box allows for Mirroring Mode and Separate Mode, the latter being where a completely separate audio and visual stream is sent the TV (unlike Mirroring Mode), letting the viewer to see and hear something totally different to the person in the headset.
And finally, the PU responsible for the Cinematic Mode. This means you can use the PS4 for non-VR games while still wearing the headset. You can play PS4 games, watch video, and completely operate the console from within the headset while not in a full VR environment.
So there you have it - that's exactly what the PS VR's Wii-sized friend actually does."
@rjejr how much does that box actually cost? I mean, the gamepad adds a 100 to the wii Us RRP so it stands to question how much the headset actually costs.
@MysticX How do I know VR is here to stay? It's not rocket science.
VR is expensive now, but it is a slow burning project, a long game with the biggest businesses across industries proping it up. From gaming to military training VR changes the way we interact - it isn't a Nintendo toy that naively touches on potential for a few gimmick laden laughs without depth, it's the real deal.
Nintendo fans like yourself don't like VR because Nintendo aren't in on it yet.
Tap here to load 120 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...