When you read or hear the name Masahiro Sakurai, you're likely to think of the Super Smash Bros. series or the famous pink puffball, Kirby. Either way, this legendary video game director and designer has commonly been associated with multiple Nintendo projects over the duration of his career.
There was one point, back in 2015, when Sakurai was given the opportunity to make virtual reality video games by the American company Oculus. Video game historian Liam Robertson recently discovered this by talking to the author Blake J. Harris after he had completed his second book, The History Of The Future, chronicling the founding of Oculus and its endeavors to bring Virtual Reality to mainstream audiences.
In a 2013 Famitsu column, Sakurai spoke positively about the Oculus Rift. He went onto explore the medium's possibilities in a 2014 follow-up article and shared his own VR ideas while listing a few games that could utilise this technology, such as the PlayStation title Jumping Flash! and other games like the LovePlus series. He even admitted he would love to make his own game, under the right circumstances. Obviously, he was too busy with ongoing Super Smash Bros. development.
Sure enough, the Oculus founder Palmer Luckey heard all of this. With Smash Bros. being Luckey's all-time favourite video game series, his intentions were to recruit Sakurai to work on a VR game. With Sakurai not being a Nintendo employee, and working on a contractual basis, as long as his business with Nintendo was fulfilled, he was allowed to take on other proposals. This led to a meeting between the two in Tokyo in 2015, where Sakurai was given the chance to work on VR game with complete creative control and would receive a generous payment in return. In the end, Sakurai said if he did such a project, he would want to give it his all, but felt the audience for Oculus was simply too small, potentially limiting the game's exposure. At this point, discussions ended.
To hear the full story and the finer details, watch the video above.
Would you like to see Sakurai release a VR game one day? Are you glad he's all about bringing games to as many players as possible? Tell us in the comments below.
He is right, i have played those games and really dont like it. Just give me a controller and awesome games to play with it.
VR is sometimes fun but gets bored really fast.
VR will be mainstream when they can make it like The Matrix. Until then, they'll never find the audience.
No more VR games anymore whatsoever.
He made the right decision, I play those VR games on the HTC Vive, Oculus Rift, and PlayStation VR and never really feel hook. They are compelling and gets you excited at first but that's it, once the excitement are gone there's really nothing to them and it's back to couch gaming again. VR gaming just doesn't hook me the same way as arcade, computer, handheld, and console gaming did. They had potential but that potential just doesn't live up to what the experience offer and after a while it end up making me sick rather than satisfied. Sorry VR you guys try, VR gaming and mobile gaming are two markets that are really difficult for me to get into.
I’m sure if Sakurai ever makes a VR game, it’ll be good.
Get on with Kid Icarus Switch.
@The-Chosen-one He has stated that he likes Oculus and wants to design a game for them. The audence is just too small right now, or was in 2016.
@Anti-Matter I'm willing to bet the Switch successor will be VR.
@Yoshinator none are even close, PSVR is the most successful and that's around the 3 million mark.
I own PSVR and some of the games are incredible in it and many beyond what's capable on a normal screen in terms of immersion. Unfortunately few big developers have really taken advantage of it leaving the majority as just small puzzle games. Yet when they try the results are outstanding, Resident Evil VII is the best horror gaming experience I've had when played in VR and Astro Bot is a stunning platformer beaten only by Mario's best and Beat Saber is also incredible.
The problem at the moment is inconvenience, there are still too many cables and plenty of storage required which isn't suited for all homes plus the issue of me not being able to see my 2 year old whilst playing.
I don't think it's taken off as expected and the likes of Xbox have backed away from it as have Samsung in the mobile arena. The watershed moment will be if Sony still supports it on the PS5 and if not that will be the end of it
PS VR is the most successful because it's the cheapest and easiest to get set up, but it doesn't compare to Oculus, which is much better quality but also much more expensive.
I'll probably never get into VR gaming, even if it does become successful. I don't like the idea of not being aware of my surroundings, especially when I have kids.
VR as a learning tool in Education and Manufacturing would have its good uses but as gaming there far to little and not really immersive gaming. Plus the cost to get the setup doesn't mean anyone can get go out and get it. From those one hit wonder games VR industry itself is its worst enemy not trying to do more itself to garner more buying consumer buyin.
@Edu23XWiiU Yeah, that's a load of BS. Even the most jaded of skeptics would be convinced by Ready Player One style tech, which given recent advancements is likely only 10 years away. VR really needs to be more convenient and comfortable to take off, but I can assure you that it's producing some incredibly good games already. Astro Bot is the biggest step forward in platformers since Mario 64; something I very much want Nintendo to do with a future console. Mario in VR would have me throwing money real fast.
And VR has many world-changing use cases that would allow it to gain billions of users eventually. What happens if you give someone a device that takes them anywhere, real or fictional and let's them socialize with anyone no matter where they are in the world, as if it's a real world conversation. Those are just a few of the things that VR will do for society. Combine AR in the same device and you have effectively the most important computing device ever, a true successor to the smartphone.
@Anti-Matter So basically you hate innovation? Maybe change your name to Anti-Consumer.
@Spudtendo VR headsets will produce a mixed reality in the near future. People have this idea that you are always blind in VR. Untrue with such tech as the above; you'd see everything in the real world that you want to see, but with the immersion of VR.
There is also a line of people that say "I will never use VR" and that may hold up, but it's unlikely. VR's future is one of necessity. Just like all of us have smartphones today, all of us will have XR glasses in the future (VR+AR), so it's almost definite that you will be using it, just that it may or may not be in gaming. Although considering Nintendo want to do VR at some point, even that is hard to escape for those who are big Nintendo fans.
Good, VR is definitely not for everyone, it gives me motion sickness.
I'm old enough that I was around the first time VR took off & there was much more of a buzz. I'm pretty sure there is a place for VR in gaming.. but I doubt it will ever be the "next big thing"
Much like 3D TV, VR will pop back up every few years claiming to revolutionise gaming & then slink back into the shadow, taking people's hard earned money with it.
@DanteSolablood VR's buzz has been far bigger this time. Investment never really happened in the 90s. Nintendo, SEGA and ATARI all tried to do VR but never released anything, and so the only products ever released were from small companies that had almost no funding. The concept of a serious VR research team didn't even exist until a few years ago. Now billions is being poured in by many of the worlds biggest companies. The hype is much less now than 2 years ago, but that applies to all growing technologies, even the most successful. Look up the gartner hype cycle.
And comparing 3D TVs is pointless. They are TVs with depth cues, a small change that does nothing except lightly affect digital media. VR on the other hand rewrites all aspects of media, and has loads of world-changing use cases outside of entertainment. Being able to connect to anyone on the planet as if they physically exist in front of you, along with visiting any real place or fictional place as if it were a real visit, being able to replace any screen with infinite computing space, and more. These are all game changers at a level beyond even smartphones. Once VR and AR combine into one hybrid device, and it's a pair of sunglasses, that's it - this is when billions of us use it daily. The market will be just as large, if not more so than smartphones.
@DartBuzzer if that’s so true then where is it? Seems like a goldmine so why is VR still an intrusive mess? “Infinite computing space” you’re speaking of technological singularity fairly tales.
VR fans can only speak in fairy tales and rhetoric, remember “Mario 64 moment” last year? If VR had its “Mario 64 moment” then it would have pushed hardware sales and caused a shift in gaming. Until these mythical sunglasses appear then it’s niche technology.
@DartBuzzer I disagree with your analysis that the buzz behind VR has been bigger this time around. On VR's first go of the wheel we had game shows, movies, changes to our language and rolling news reports depicting how VR would revolutionise our world - this time around (even 2 years ago) most of the news around VR was in tech news & looking at how it could bring sales to the gaming industry.
I do admit however that my comparison to 3D TV was based purely on the cyclical nature of VR & not to it's usefulness. VR has had some practical uses such as keyhole surgery - though most of your other examples have been concepts since the late 80s/early 90s.
You may be correct about the Google Glass concept however! I will never discount any vision of the future OR assert that I have any better foresight than anyone else.
@SalvorHardin Because you don't wave a magic wand and suddenly get perfect technology? VR is very hard cutting edge stuff - AR is even harder. It takes time and investment for things to improve. In fact, all successful technologies have taken at least 10 years to truly take off. This iteration of VR has only been around for 3 years in consumers hands.
Infinite computing space means you can have 5, 10 monitors, and utilise spatial computing in 3D space. It's the best work / productivity environment you could ever create, once the tech gets there that it becomes convenient to use.
Also, a Mario 64 moment means a game that gives those same feelings of awe, which Astro Bot does for almost everyone I've seen. Ever head of hidden gems? It's one. There was very little marketing behind it, and it's a new IP, and it's still a AA game.
What will get a lot of attention is a AAA game in an existing IP that is revolutionary. We haven had that yet, but when it happens, possibly with the new Half Life game, it will make a big impact in giving attention to VR.
@DanteSolablood It doesn't really matter if the concepts have existed for decades. The concept of Quantum Computing had been around for a long while, yet its impact is somewhere in the future.
Likewise, if we could have this conversation in the same way that people do in the OASIS in Ready Player One, that would impact the world on a huge scale, because distance would be irrelevant in many more cases. Think of distant families who can barely afford to travel to each other once a year, or long distance relationships, or lonely people, or people in care homes, or even just the nature of society being one where lots of us have more friends online than offline, but can't truly be with them. VR allows all of that.
@DartBuzzer PSVR lineup last year was better than Switch’s.
I am sorry but until is it is truly immersive, as in no headset, it will never be successful.
No more girlie/chibi games anymore whatsoever.
@Zidentia No one would really notice wearing sunglasses, so that statement is completely ridiculous.
If you don't think that sunglasses that does VR at a quality equal to Ready Player One, and with AR in the same device will ever take off, you must be joking. It's obvious. In fact it would take off so much that it would be more then a dozen times bigger then the console industry.
I own PSVR and Occulus Rift.
Playing VR is like visiting a theme park. It’s great fun, once a year or so. But it’s not something you want to experience every day, and its quite a burdensome hassle planning the trip. If I want to play I have to 1 Turn TV on, manually, since the PS4/PC don’t properly turn it on like Switch does with a controller, 2 Turn the PS4/PC on, 3 Unwind the VR headset and turn it on, 4 Find the Bose earbuds and plug them in, 5, Launch a VR game and then slide the visor on, adjusting it for a while to get the right focus and comfort, 6 Realize I forgot where I set the controller, take the visor off to find it, then repeat step 5
It was great for the first couple weeks. But I haven’t had the desire to go back to it since. I think I’ve played my VR like three different times once the initial excitement wore down. I will say though, with the right game, it’s a phenomenal experience everyone should try at least once. That said, the game lineup is super lame now. Even Vita and Wii U libraries put VR to shame. After the initial launch window with a few good but short (like 1-5 hour) AAA experiences, support dropped off a cliff. Now it’s just a bunch of indie stuff and the ultra-rare, occasional AA or AAA game which, 9 times out of 10, is a budget $20-30 sub-5 hour experience. I haven’t bought a VR game in over a year. There’s simply been nothing releasing worth my while. I hear Borderlands 2 is coming. That’s like, the biggest thing on the horizon. They just shop that game around, same as they did on Vita, where it was one of the worst experiences on the handheld. I expect nothing better in VR. I learned from Skyrim and DOOM that games forced to fit VR don’t work, especially with those garbage Move controllers that don’t have analogs. Pointing and warping to move around, pressing 4 micro buttons on the front. No thanks. And without motion, it kills half the experience of VR. At least Rift has solid controllers.
D-daddy sakurai OwO
@JaxonH Yeah I have had PSVR since it launched and I have to this day only used it a handful of times. It was kinda cool to show off to friends at first, and I was enjoying the novelty of it the first couple times I used it, but I would hate it if I had to rely upon it every time I want to play a game. For one I don't like the commitment of having to eliminate the outside world while I use it, a lot of the time I am playing video games I have other things that I like to be aware of. Then there is the fact that it is generally a bit uncomfortable and awkward to use. Just turning on the TV and grabbing a controller is a lot easier and more satisfying for me.
If you whisper “VR Headset” in the mirror five times apparently DartBuzzer will appear behind you.
Having Sakurai work for Oculus would have been a huge get for the company.
Too bad the VR headsets have still yet the outsell the Wii U combined lol
@BetaWolf A lot of the haters would become believers the minute Nintendo announce a product. This is the syndrome where people hate what they don't have access to.
But he made software for Wii U?
I agree with your statement and I will add to this. The real reason VR, in its current form, will never take off is the lack of environmental control. When you put on a pair of cataract glasses or the mythical "sunglass" model you lose your connection to your environment and it becomes disorientating for most people. This disconnect outweighs the occasional killer program. I was around when it first came out and I have been involved in coding projects for VR and holographic displays. Holographic immersion is the hot ticket that will get the butts in the seats and spend money. When you can be fully immersed yet have sensory input from elements outside the VR world this will win over the market.
Legitimately more users than Rift, sad as it may sound.
@Pod I guess this explains why I never got smash brothers on virtual boy. (Would have saved the system)
I think the reason for VR's flop is the same reason the Wii succeeded. Imagine if when Nintendo presented the Wii they didn't have Wii Sports or Twilight Princess using motion control and instead were just hoping a third party would come up with the system selling motion control software.
I think it was kind of foolish for the VR hardware producers to toss the hardware onto the market while expecting another company to create the software that would sell the system. Oculus should never have released their hardware until they had came up with system selling software of their own.
@DartBuzzer I am a Sony fan too and I am still not buying anything VR right now. It's simply just too costly for what you get at this point. I am sure it will improve, but right now it's just not the same value as AAA games on console and PC when you consider how much smaller the experiences on offer are.
Muttering something about Ready Player One.
A pair of sunnies isn't going to convey touch, taste and smell. Until they manage to implement all five senses, then it isn't a virtual reality.
Ya. I tried telling rjejr that before he bought one, but he had his mind set. I think he got more use out of his before burning out than me though.
It’s a genuinely awesome experience. Just... not one that I wish to integrate into my daily gaming regimen. Once every year I might throw the visor on, on a weekend or Christmas break. And that’s fine. At least it’s there for occasional annual use.
The biggest hurdle VR has is cost. A lot of people are cash strapped and have little house space. Until most ordinary people have lots of cash and larger average house space again VR, AR, and holographic reality (HR) displays won't take off and gain mass popularity. Only when that happens will there be lots of big budgets for lots of great VR/AR/HR AAA games.
This also gives the Switch the possiblity of exploding in popularity as word gets out that it's a great gaming/fitness console that is more affordable and is very space saving. But of course in this social era the Switch needs much better social sharing features and capability to truly succeed. For example voicehat and WhatsApp sharing integration.
VR is definitely the future. Games are so much more immersive and it opens up the gate for new genre. Ace Combat style or racing games feel so real. VR adds another dimension to games. I can’t wait until Nintendo is finally doing triple A games in VR.
If you think about it, Nintendo is already preparing for VR:
.) Modular console design with separated display, that you could slide in a VR helmet in future iterations: check!
.) two controllers with motion detection, one for each hand: check!
.) a slower type of shooter to avoid motion sickness: splatoon: check!
.) creating immersive open 3D Worlds with lots of Love for the Detail: Mario Odyssee & BOTW: check
.) had products with 3D buildt in: Virtual Boy & 3DS: check!
I bet Switch 2 will get a better 3DS effect and Switch 3 (like in 10-15 years) will be totally VR ready with a detachable 4K Display to play Mario Kart & so on in VR.
Maybe Nintendo ditches the stereoscopic effect for the Switch 2 and will go directly to VR. 5 Years from now on we will have 8K displays as small as in Smartphones.
Until we have a full-dive VR system with an open-world sandbox Pokémon game I'm not interested.
@Zidentia What exactly are you asking for? The ability to see the real world? VR headsets will have various forms of AR/MR, and will even be better at it than dedicated AR headsets for a long time to come. So that issue gets resolved fast.
Or is it haptics you are talking about? Haptic gloves would solve that, in addition to full body suits as an optional purchase for the hardcore.
Ultimately there is no issue here. You are talking about something that just doesn't exist as a long term issue.
@Dr_Lugae You are implying that VR has flopped; it hasn't. The growth is up year to year. It's a slow process because that's how all technology adoption works, nothing gets there fast.
The mainstream uptake of VR is something that everyone working on VR knew beforehand would take time.
@shaneoh Do you really think taste is remotely important for VR's succsss, and even smell? No, taste only occurs when you are eating. Being able to eat any virtual food you want would be incredible, but no one is going to care to wait for taste if everything else is in check. "I can do everything but eat this steak, deal breaker!" Yeah right.
Also, a pair of haptic gloves with an optional suit would convey touch, texture, shape, temperature. So you are wrong that sunglasses wouldn't allow for this.
@Finlderp People say this, and then they try good VR games, see the case uses for it, and where it can go, and they always 100% of the time admit they are wrong. This is likely going to occur with you too.
@UnbreakableAlex That's the wrong view. VR is dead in the water for gaming and has so been from the getgo. Developers never liked it and the cost killed it from the start and don't mention the delays and vaporware that never came to be. VR industry has themselves to blame for their utter failure. They never promoted or push VR but also failed to tell customer the TRUE cost of VR wasn't for everyone.
@SwitchForce What are you blabbering on about? Recent statistics show VR is growing year to year, which objectively means it's not dead. I'm amazed I have to spell that our for you, but you clearly didn't get it.
Developers actually have plenty of interest in VR. Kojima, Nintendo, Blizzard are examples where they haven't jumped in, but have said they want to in the future. The developers that have jumped in are many of the best and largest. Only a few are working on AAA VR games for the time being, but only 3 years in, this is hardly surprising.
@DartBuzzer Nah I've tried it before, multiple games, multiple different VR sets and on multiple occasions and it has just never gotten me interested enough to really want to invest my time or money in it. It's not where I want it to be right now. But if we get to the point where we have full-dive technology and games like I mentioned in my previous post then I'll 100% be interested. It's just not good enough yet is all.
@DartBuzzer Really where then? Your blabbering about vaporware is more like it. Any Game magazine has little to nothing about VR Vaporware more like barely any coverage of it. Like I said people keep saying VR but then they themselves don't buy into it at all. If you want to toot their horns by all means go ahead but reality VR is dead on arrival.
Here's something you also didn't read and why your not a Developer. Read what the Title Says.....
"Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience"
@Finlderp You say it needs to be full dive, yet that would skip the endless list of advancements that VR will have, many of which completly change the landscape of VR. This is like saying "I'll wait for PS15" when the PS1 released instead of waiting for PS4, which while not perfect like a PS15 probably would be, is still very compelling and is well past the blocky pologonal nature of the original.
There is very unlikely going to be anyone uninterested in VR's perfect form before full dive. Sunglasses style VR like Ready Player One would be enough to convince anyone, and therefore put full dive into a future wish list instead of some roadblock to adoption.
Well then why did he work on Wii U games? 😋
@SwitchForce I feel like I'm losing brain cells talking to you. Clearly I need to educate you. Firstly, this: https://uploadvr.com/vr-steam-grew-2018/
Secondly, Oculus launched Go last year and considered it a success beyond their expectations.
As for magazines and media not covering it, well duh, did you see much media coverage of smartphones in 2003? At lest apply some level of thinking when you type. The gartner hype cycle applies to every now succesful technology. A technology is hyped up, it gets quiet, and over a slow period it reaches that initial hype again. This is what happened with smartphones, PCs, tablets, etc. In other words, you might as well be saying those are dead on arrival.
@DartBuzzer Hey man, you're entitled to your opinion 💁 All I'm saying is that I'm not interested in the current state of VR but I'll gladly watch and see if it advances to a stage that interests me in the future. 🤷 I feel like you're leading this down the rabbit hole though so I'm gonna split here. 😋
@DartBuzzer Looks like we got a VR fanboy here. VR just won’t change the future of gaming.
It’s an expensive hobby inside of an already very expensive hobby, so there’s no way it will become a one for every gamer type of thing.
There are extreme problems with immersion that can cause motion sickness and the like.
Furthermore, no matter how appealing it could be, we will never be able to get a Ready Player One experience, and if it did, have you read the book or seen the movie? Eventually one company would control it all and make it oppressive instead of fun like it is supposed to be.
By the way, none of this is being said bc the only console that has it is PS. I don’t care if it’s on every console, VR just won’t work, it’s really not possible.
@GyroZeppeli It's better to be passionate about something than bash it without reason like some people have here. Your reasons have no logic behind them by the way. Saying it will never be mainstream because of the price makes zero sense, because get this, it goes down over time. Every now succesful technology was extremely expensive in this part of the life cycle that VR is in. PCs cost tens of thousands, TVs cost thousands, and smartphones cost thousands - all before they hit a certain point.
As it happens, Oculus Quest launches soon for $400, which being equivalent to console prices is quite fair considering it's all self contained - it's basically a VR console.
On top of this, VR over time with newer tech, will be so useful for every daily life, with so much value packed in that even the average joe will easily spend double Quest's price to get their hands on it, just like how the average joe spends that much on a smartphone today.
VR/AR will take over and supersede smartphones, so it fits in nicely in the regard. Instead of X person buying another smartphone, they just buy a headset, or rather glasses in the future.
Heck, the simple fact that future VR could let you replicate 10 4K monitors and an IMAX theater automatically makes it worth loads just by way of the physical goods it replaces.
Also, could you stop saying "Uhh this is never possible" when you don't know the first thing about how the technology even works? You do not have any knowledge of VR, so stop assuming things. We already have everything in place for Ready Player One tech, just at an early stage. We have treadmills, gloves, wireless headsets, body suits, full body avatars with facial expressions mapped. Much of this is in research and development phase, but regardless it all exists. We're likely only 10 years away from surpassing the movie's technology. Everything is moving at a lightning fast pace.
It's a real shame that it's so hard to have an intelligent conversation on nintendolife. A whole bunch of "VR will never work / take off" comments, and a slew of uneducated people on the topic, plenty of which are so filled with confidence on their illogical opinion despite everything in reality disagreeing with their thoughts.
This is an echo chamber. People here believe only what they know based on very limited knowledge.
Looks like I need to google what Ready Player One is and just accept that’s the future we’re heading too, good to know.
I don't really care either way. I'm not into VR
Its pretty sad getting down voted for stating the truth, huh? I've been a Nintendo fan since 1983 and watching the pettiness of SNES/N64 owners (PSX and Saturn were superior systems and I regretted my N64 purchase outside of 8-10) games. during the 16 and 32-bit eras was something else.
VR is the future and they'll learn to accept that fact sooner or later.
My advice, just save your time and energy with these guys until they finally get it in the next 5-10 years.
@TurboTEF I'm used to seeing it. VR is the punching bag of the game industry, people just like to hate on it for any reason they can think of.
But when people try good VR and see what it's leading to, skeptics literally always reverse their stance. The trouble is that likely less than 5% of gamers have tried any form of VR so far, let alone good VR.
VR is totally not quite ready for prime time, and at the same time really really incredible when it 'works', often in ways you wouldn't consider. I bought a cheap windows MR headset on sale for my gaming PC, and still use it semi regularly.
My wife on the other hand plays for like an hour every day. Playing what you ask? VR pinball. Which is actually totally awesome. Being able to move your head around the table to line up your shots is a tiny but incredibly important thing that fixes many of the problems with video pinball.
I'm not saying VR pinball is the killer app that will make it mainstream, but there are still a lot of unique vr experiences that haven't been tapped, it just comes down to smoothing out the technology. Less cables, lighter headsets, and things like varifocal lenses/foveated rendering will be a game changer. It's not going away, but it also won't supplant regular gaming for a very long time.
VRChat but with Nintendo characters
@DartBuzzer Just take it easy bro, there are other people in nl sharing your point of view. Remember that time will give you or not the reason, not some up or down votes or statements of other users in any site.
Statement was correct, sunglasses aren't a suit. You also need to kiss someone if you think that the only time taste is used is when you eat. Or are you still at the girl germs stage?
A lot of people here haven't played Beat Saber huh
Wow, the amount of VR hate is incredible here.
The problems of VR basically boil down to:
3. Few games
4. Some people get motion sick.
While point 4 will probably never get fully resolved for SOME people, everything else will get resolved over time as technology progresses (like it always does).
And is VR a flop so far?
I am not sure about that. For sonething to be a flop, it must sell a lot less than expected. So the question is, how much did they expect to sell?
Given how expensive it is, probably not a lot...
Right now, it's basically like saying Ferraris are a flop, because there are few people using one.
Let's just wait and see where this is going.
Personally, I love it and would like to See it get bigger over time.
@DartBuzzer Like Ready Player One? It'll take off once the tech is cheap enough to do so. That or it offers more than the kind of immersion that doesn't have to take a large part of the room. The most impressive I've seen VR had usage of was in Ace Combat 7. But the tech is as restrictive as it is innovative. It greatly enhances immerssion but the trade off is the perspective that limits many devs. Many will try to go the first person view again just because its VR.
Now Oculus is owned by Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg can offer Sakurai a billion dollar to make games for them.
@BetaWolf That is why the word "some" in point 4 is important.
I have never gotten motion sick myself, just as most people won't as long as the tech works well.
There are always a few people who just get too easily motion sick though, for them VR will probably never be great.
(Just as 3D, some people can't handle that.)
good decision, VR is just TOO MUCH!!**
go outside.!!** haha-**
I honestly do not see a lot of "haters" on the side of non fans. I see the majority of these people saying they do not feel VR is right for them and the reasons why. The real issue that arises in this discussion and most of them in todays environment is people forgot how to disagree without resorting to hateful speech and vitriol. The problem with that is you never win an argument or get someone to see your side with that approach.
I personally like the concept of VR and I was a very early adopter and have written programs for systems. The implementation in place today and even the near future is flawed because it does not offer the "universal appeal" that many successful products do. An example would be smart phones. They now have been standardized and market tested enough that they offer enough universal appeal to win a large market share. Even in light of this many people still do not like them.
I love VR. My Rift is easily one of my favorite ways to play .
I am hoping the next switch can be converted into a VR headset. I feel like the joycon could be a match for the touch controllers. They seem like a very good fit for vr.
@shaneoh So you can't kiss someone in VR, therefore it's not VR? First of all, the definition of VR has always been what we have today; full dive VR has only ever been thought of as the final form of VR.
But just because you can't replicate a kiss does not mean it cannot reach mass adoption, or not fit the definition of VR.
@Zidentia The issue stems from the fact that many people here have zero experience with VR, or no real knowledge (including yourself on the knowledge part) yet feel the need to state their opinions as facts. "VR will NEVER take off" and the reasons they give are always fixable, which completely breaks their point.
That's a shame. I would love to see what Sakurai could create in VR. With the Oculus Quest, I think VR has the chance to become more mainstream, by offering a $399 all-in-one device, maybe that's the type of device Sakurai needs to try to quell his interest.
@DartBuzzer here we go again cherry picking Smartphone compared to VR they couldn't be so different tech. One is portable one is not. And one has more uses while the one just one and so far it has done a poor job at it. You can cherry pick all you want but any local Electronics retailer barely has any VR demo or display so that is the true test of hardware acceptance. Something you missed when learning about consumer buying trends. I'll point out to you again read the Title of the Topic. But we all know you latch on like a tick something that did themselves a disservice buy doing nothing to promote or improve their hardware sales. And least you forgot when they first starting coming out they made people wait and wait and then told them it's on HOLD. That already tells then never really invested the resources to make it mainstream. And now the fairytale wedding is over and well that's what it was a fairytale with no legs. Also he has more insider knowledge and access to tech you don't and you claim to know more than HE does that is just ludicrous to hear from you. If you say you do let's get a Real person behind this name for all to see and verify.
@DartBuzzer "But just because you can't replicate a kiss does not mean it cannot reach mass adoption, or not fit the definition of VR."
Equally falsehood-you chalk up about VR experiences and at the same time try to dismiss interactive actions. So what is it then now? I figure sooner or later they would trip themselves up and you just did that.
TFW a guy who worked on several games for WiiU tells you your platform is to insignificant to work on......
@NEStalgia Even is he worked on games we know he got access to knowledge and hardware we only can dream of using or seeing or some may never come to production. This is where alot of VR talkers forget.
@JayJ @jaxonh Yeah I hear you guys. I honestly love the PSVR, and I have a number of games I want to play with it (just added a few more on the December sales sweep.) But....I still haven't done it. It started with rearranging the room and I couldn't put the camera anywhere. Then I finally rearranged and can set it up again....every week I say I'll do it...and then I don't. I love the experience, but starting and stopping is just so dar inconvenient. I can't leve the camera permanantly up since the cable crosses the room. so every time I use it I have to set up the camera, position it, fiddle with it, get it "almost" right, then put the visor on, fiddle with it, get the sweet spot of focus dialed in, then put headphones on over it, blindly....then realize the camera isn't quite angled right, get up and redo the camera , take the gear all off, then put it all in again, only to fiddle with it and balance it again. Then play. Then when I'm done, wind up the camera wire and helmet wire again etc.
I want to love it ,and it's not THAT huge a project, but irritating enough I never feel like doing it. But when I do get into it it's awesome.
If they can fix needing "stationary equipment" I think I'd do it more. The camera/sensors are a problem. If I could just slap the visor on I'd use it a lot more often I think.
@SwitchForce VR is portable, so would you mind stop making things up? Thanks. Oculus Go, Oculus Quest, Vive Focus, Pico Neo, and Lenovo Daydream Mirage all work anywhere, on the bus, a toilet, a plane - everything is self contained.
And VR has far more use cases than a smartphone. A smartphone lets you text, call, use the web, use AR, utilize apps, and do gaming / entertainment. VR headsets do everything there apart from texting, calling, and AR. Texting and calling can be accessed via the web anyway (discord etc) and AR will be common in all VR headsets as time goes on. So therefore, VR overtime does as many things as a smartphone, before talking about many of the new things it does such as screen simulation, telepresence, and avatar social connectivity.
Who has more knowledge than
me on this topic in here? No one, because I've counteracted many false points, and the guy you are referencing has not worked on VR games or hardware, I have. I follow every detail of VR, many papers, research, talks, events. You have never used VR before, and haven't got the slightest idea about the tech on any level. You're effectively just some spiteful, hateful person with nothing better to do but produce lies and bash things that you don't own. It's pathetic.
@NEStalgia Windows MR headsets and all standalone headsets work immediately as you put them on without any camera setup, or without wires in the case of standalone. It always takes only a second to get in and out of VR with Oculus Go, with it in your hands. All headsets will follow suit as time goes on.
@DartBuzzer There's a reason those are separate from the full setups though, where position tracking and at times controller tracking are important though. lt might, if they all adopt WiiU gamepad level gyros in the HMD and controllers...but for now, "regular" VR still needs the absolute position tracking to deal with proper inputs beyond head tracking. Hopefully that will change, because as-is it's annoying and inconvenient.
@NEStalgia Oculus Quest is basically perfect tracking in almost all scenarios, as it only has a small blind spot behind you. A future successor can just add 2 more cameras to the back of the headset to get 360 tracking without room for failure.
@DartBuzzer That's cool. How about input tracking? I'm not a fan of the handheld controllers like Move, etc, but I know that's important for a lot of people with VR.
@NEStalgia It uses an almost identical design to the Oculus Touch controllers which means it feels a generation ahead of PS Move, because it feels more natural since you get finger tracking and better hand presence.
@BenGrimm Yeah it seems impossible to discuss VR without having some avid VR enthusiast jump in and demand that everyone likes it because they happen to be a really big fan of the concept. I think that's the thing with VR though, it is very niche and the kind of people who are fans of the niche are very enthusiastic about it but they are for the most part exceptions and most people will have a hard time relating to them.
@JayJ That isn't how things are. VR fans often educate people because they are knowledgable about a topic that no one else understands. In this thread, many have commented about how VR has X problem that can't be fixed, therefore it will always be niche. They know they didn't research into it, they know that they don't care much to look, and yet despite knowing this they still cannot back down from their incorrect stance, because they can only ever see themselves as being right and nothing can convince them otherwise even though they are objectively wrong.
This is the mentality of someone who doesn't have creative thinking. They judge books by the cover, and cannot imagine solutions. If there is a literal physical limitation, then by all means they can state how it cannot be fixed ever, but otherwise they come off as arrogant and judgmental people that don't bother to look at the facts.
Just look at the guy in this thread who said VR isn't portable. It takes a few seconds on Google to immediately dismiss that false claim. Again, someone who said VR is dying, where I provided statistics showing growth doubling on Steam.
No, I'm saying that VR can't replicate touch, taste or smell, therefore it isn't true VR. You're just cherry-picking one point.
" First of all, the definition of VR has always been what we have today;"
No the definition of VR has always been a fully simulated experience. If you're cutting out three of the five senses, then it isn't fully simulated. The definition has never been "strapping a screen to your face."
@DartBuzzer A lot of the people you are arguing with also have VR setups or have had experience with them. You are confusing a lack of agreement with a lack of knowledge. In any case you are clearly very decided on how you feel about it and while that is great for you it isn't the kind of thing that can be applied to everyone.
Just reminds me of a religious nut on a mission to educate the masses.
Considering he only comments on VR topics...
@shaneoh Oh how wrong you are. The term Virtual Reality was coined by Jaron Lanier, who has always said it involves a HMD, and he himself worked on a HMD. The actual headsets themselves have been around long before the full dive / brain interface concept was thought of in fiction. Dreams used in fiction are the only thing that preceded HMDs.
Again, the average person does not care about having to wait for a brain interface - when they try VR they almost universally become believers in HMDs, but often want to wait for cheaper prices, better comfort etc.
It's only you in your tiny bubble that thinks it needs to be this perfect device to meet your made up definition.
You hit it on the head.
They were so occupied with hitting the "cool" factor with the hardware, and figuring out how to create their own little closed digital stores, they forgot how software is the most important bit for moving expensive tech.
That beer app that would tilt with your iPhone and deplete as you held it? That probably sold a million units all by itself. And as you say, unlimited bowling and golfing for the elderly shifted Wiis like nobody's business.
Meanwhile, VR's killer app is Beatsaber. A rudimentary rhythm game with only a few original songs and almost no visual identity to call its own. And the kicker? It doesn't even require an HMD to play it.
@JayJ Reread what I said. This isn't about someone saying "VR is still too early for me", it's about people literally spreading false points about the tech which I have corrected in many cases, some of which have, or claim to have experienced VR.
Just so we are clear, some form
of VR experience does not mean they are educated on VR. If someone tried a demo, they have no idea what games there are or what they are like. If someone tried only single player VR games, they have no idea what social VR is like. And even with lots of experience, that means nothing except knowledge of current gen VR. Until you research advancements, look at papers, talks, and find out how VR is shaping as it progresses, you do not have any true understanding of the medium, just like how no one understood PCs in the 70s without GUI and the web.
Likewise, the vast majority of VR tech has yet to be integrated into HMDs, all of which drastically change what VR is like and what it can do.
@JayJ If you read the details DartBuzzer works or has worked in the VR industry, so he/she's technically shilling as an industry evangelist.
Every article on VR involves Dart addressing each and every complaint, criticism, or misrepresentation of VR fervently. The corrections are not necessarily inaccurate or inappropriate, but it's the degree of relentlessness that makes it stand out. It could be helpful information, but it reads as a mixture of aggressive PR defense for the industry and platform evangelization consisting of features and tech that doesn't even exist for purchase yet. It's a bit like Peter Molyenaux "I've seen the future and it's amazing, but I can't tell you about it yet."
@Pod Bear Saber requires a HMD because you need positional tracking and depth perception to properly hit blocks. Even disregarding that, making a spinoff would be entirely different and miss all the beats of the original. Without the immersion, you lose some of the drive of pushing through, which is good exercise People can go at it for so long because VR is literally helping their brain forget that it's exercise. Overall it just wouldn't be nearly as fun.
Also, Oculus have done a lot to push software with more than a dozen AA games funded and 3 AAA games on the way. They haven't forgotten anything, just like everyone else here you didn't bother to look. What a surprise, no one does their research.
@NEStalgia By saying this, you are saying every developer for anything is a shill if they defend their market. No, if I was shilling, I'd be linking to deals, and trying everything to get someone to buy a headset today. I have not done anything of the sort.
Do you really think I'm going to throw flower petals at someone saying VR is dying, it will never work, it needs to die ASAP, etc?
I'll respond in a fitting manner. VR is the punching bag of gaming as I've said before.
He may have coined the term, but the concept has been a part of fiction long before the term was around. Try the holodeck as a popular example. Perception of true VR is that of a fully immersive experience, any of the five senses can be engaged at any point in time.
@shaneoh So first you get the definition of VR wrong, now you want to add to that with the definition of shill? I'd order a dictionary if I were you.
And FYI, VR in real life has been around longer than Star Trek, so that example doesn't work.
I hosted an entire expo for VR software this past autumn, so I did indeed look. It's just that I weren't as impressed as I'd hoped I would be with most of the things I were looking at.
I realize Oculus are funding games, and great creative tools as well, though I think they might have found it sensible to wait with the big public push until one of those games were already finished and looking amazing. Shifting hardware without a killer app ready at launch is difficult.
And you can totally play Beatsaber without wearing the HMD, but yes, the controllers are of course mandatory as you say.
@Pod The longer oculus waits, the more money they lose without a chance of ROI. Because they jumped in fast, we actually have some great AA games to play and they are providing Favebook with actual earnings worth mentioning to investors. They made the right choice to jump in sooner.
You cannot play Beat Saber as it exists without a HMD. You could only make a spinoff which feels nothing like the original.
So we are in agreement that VR has been around longer that Jaron Lanier. As I said, he may have coined the term, but the perception of what VR is has long since been established.
@MH4 Think of it... Smash Bros. ReVRlution!
@shaneoh Sci-Fi has often taught us that VR uses all 5 senses. But no fiction ever detailed this until after the very first VR HMD was created. There were loose concepts like lucid dreaming that have been around forever, but nothing that says "This is technology that takes over your 5 senses"
You can play it as it is without wearing the HMD.
Also, I'm not really worried about Facebook's return on investment. I'm worried that the slim sales of the actual hardware means some developers are giving up on VR becoming much more (for the time being) than a specialized piece of equipment for professionals in a handful of specific lines of business.
And I consider you straight up wrong on the notion that they jumped in at they right time. Oculus and HTC alike. Sony As well, even if they are tragically the most successful. Had they done things differently, we might already have had much better sets available at much better prices at this very point in time.
I'm not out to paint the tech as useless, worthless, or glib. But it just ain't there yet for the broader consumer base for a number of reasons. It'll get there, but just who takes it to the next level remains to be seen.
The portrayal in scifi has always been a simulation indistinguishable from reality (in terms of senses). If you're missing one sense, let alone three, then you don't have that simulation. Intangible objects, no smell, no taste, not a reality.
Also on the shill point, you only seem to be around for the VR articles... Just because you aren't posting links, doesn't mean you aren't trying to sell us something.
@Pod Explain how positional tracking works without a headset. How are you supposed to realiably dodge walls?
You cannot do so without a HMD.
Again, Oculus and others lose more the longer they wait. You can't expect them to do secret research and development for 5+ years without releasing products.
@shaneoh Sci-Fi's depiction of VR is a later representation of VR after the hardware had already existed in reality, as I said before. Therefore it's not a real definition of any sort.
I stick around for VR articles because it's my main interest in discussion. I passively absorb Nintendo news for any future switch details.
Head mounted displays is to actual virtual reality as slapping a band-aid on a wound is to brain surgery. Not even close.
Not much of a discussion if everyone not agreeing with you is wrong...
@shaneoh It isn't much of a discussion when you keep disagreeing with established definitions. Everyone in the tech industry worth their salt would agree that what we have today is indeed VR. This is easy to see given how the majority of the bigwigs in the tech industry is working on HMDs for VR/AR. You and a small minority of people discussing this think of it as a brain interface, along with the general public that has yet to try it.
You can track the head for wall-dodging without wearing the Head-Mouted Display. The game works perfectly fine on a big projector screen with just basic tracking of the head position. It is not a game that really requires you look in all directions, even if the sensation of being present does add to it, and lets you track some of the notes better.
And I'm not really saying they shouldn't release their hardware when it's ready for release. I'm saying they should've invested in good software earlier.
@Pod You're acting like you've tried this. If that were the case, you wouldn't be confusing head tracking with positional tracking. Tracking your head does nothing to help with dodging walls.
@DartBuzzer "Everyone in the tech industry worth their salt would agree that what we have today is indeed VR."
Probably because they want people to buy their products
"You and a small minority of people think of it as a brain interface, along with the general public that has yet to try it."
So a minority plus the majority.
Earlier you asked about positional tracking. There literally is no other tracking happening in that game than tracking of the head and the hands. The hands are tracked by the controllers in relation to the sensor towers. The angle and position of your head can be tracked by an external camera.
I realize that the HMD itself is what would usually be tracked by the towers for position of your body, but being Head-Mounted and all, it REALLY just tracks your head.
And dude, I'd be lying if I didn't say that playing it without the headset feels sub-optimal. Even if I'm no fan of the fuzzy feel to the screens, the added weight to my head, and all the wires we unfortunately still need.
It's a really fun game that works up a sweat every time. But as it stands, it has so little personality of its own going on, and I'm starving for some games that both dazzle with gameplay AND a unique universe.
I had the Rift setup with a 1080GTX over a year ago and there were a few compelling experiences and a few great games like Lone Echo but in the end I felt like it put more of in between me and most games than it added, which is actually how I have felt about almost every Nintendo "innovation" too.
Sure there are a few experiences that are impossible without a second screen, a screen on the controller, motion controls, detachable joycons or a big head tracking VR headset but there's only so much you can do with any of those things. That's why I don't think VR will ever truly take off, when it's good it's great but there's a very limited number of things that are truly improved by VR once you get past the novelty. Anyway after I had really explored the Rift I gave my setup to a friend so he could play with his kids. I'm pretty convinced that a comfortable, standard controller and a single screen is still the optimal way to enjoy video games.
@GhostGarrity I think the issue is you haven't played a wide variety of different VR games. Lone Echo is really great, but it's just one example.
If I told you that 1st and 3rd person platformers were hugely benefited by VR, you might not believe me.
Some of the genres that gain large benefits (already mentioned platformers above) are as follows:
Stealth - Being in complete control of how you hide yourself, and the interactivity, and the adrenaline really amps things up.
Horror- Quite obvious.
Racing, Flight Sims, Cockpit games - Obvious.
Any form of multiplayer - There is one thing that will never get boring for humans, and that is other humans. VR is the only way you actually get real human interaction through technology, which means multiplayer games have the most longevity they could ever have.
RPGs - Obvious.
Action and/or Adventure. Obvious.
RTS. This is a bit of a weird one as I believe competitive E-Sports RTS games will be preferred outside VR. But singleplayer RTS games have a lot to gain in VR, because you can really feel like the commander of an army.
Puzzle Games. Escape rooms are popular in VR. And it's VR we are talking about, you have full control over the perceptual system, meaning you can make mind-bending puzzle games like A Fisherman's Tale, or experiment with non euclidean spaces.
Sports Games: They can become actual sports. Echo Combat is like a new sport for example.
Fighting Games: Taking the UFC franchise into 1st person can make it really engaging, offering very personal 1 on 1 fights in both multiplayer and singleplayer.
So clearly VR has benefits for much of the gaming landscape.
I pretty much played everything available at the time. Lone Echo was just my favorite, it's a great game with great graphics and the VR aspect never gets in the way of the actual game. It's just really well designed with the locomotion and targeting.
I think you are someone who enjoys VR a lot but for most people I think it puts more in the way of the gaming experience than it adds.
Lucky's Tale is an example of a VR platformer. It is a good game but I don't think anyone but a VR enthusiast is going to wear the big, hot headset for hours just so they can look around when playing it. The best VR games are games that could not exist without VR and hand/head tracking, not regular video games with VR elements added and I just don't see a lot of potential for that. A big part of it is the big headset but even getting past that as the tech improves motion controls will still be a huge barrier. Games have had every opportunity to incorporate motion control with the Wii, Kinect and Move and even one-offs like that silly Tony Hawk skateboard and it fizzled out every time. The Wii sold like a hundred million consoles and yet here we are with almost no demand for motion controls in games. Yeah, doing the bow and arrow thing is fun in VR the first twenty times but play some Skyrim in VR and most people who aren't VR enthusiasts are going to want a regular controller within a couple hours and at that point the only thing you have is the ability to look around which starts to get in the way of walking and aiming. Pretty soon most people realize the game is actually a lot more fluid and intuitive on a TV. Skyrim is still really neat in VR but a couple of hours will wear most people out even after they've found their VR legs and you can easily lose a whole weekend in Skyrim with a regular controller and TV.
Anyway, VR and motion controls are often cool but rarely compelling. I personally like it but I don't think it's the future of gaming.
@GhostGarrity Lucky's Tale is a poor example though. Astro Bot, another platformer, has glowing reviews. Many even consider it platformer of the generation.
You are talking about the headset weight, but use words like "ever truly" in regards to mainstream appeal - which is a contradiction because you assume no drastic improvements will happen. People would be fine with a small visor or sunglasses.
As it turns out, Astro Bot is getting lots of people, even non-gamers addicted to the headset. I've seen plenty of posts of people's partners, often non-gamers, take over the headset for hours straight because of that game.
Yes, the best use of VR is to embrace it fully, but utilzing it half-way is still very compelling, with games like Hellblade, Wipeout, RE7. People adore those games despite not fully utilizing the tech.
Motion controls are hardly the end-goal of VR. Oculus are confident they can nail haptic gloves within 10 years. That would be an addiction beyond imagining, because it adds a lot of power to our normal human lives.
@BetaWolf And I even corrected that in some places already...
Autocorrect can be horrible If you come from a different language.
Tap here to load 122 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...