Virtual Reality might not have taken off in quite the way that its biggest advocates would have you believe, but there's no denying that the market is slowly but surely growing as the technology matures. Sony's PSVR platform has sold 5 million units to date, while Oculus – backed by the not-inconsiderable financial might of Facebook – has impressed many players with its Quest headset.
VR may not be quite ready for the mainstream yet, but there's definitely a feeling that it's going to happen eventually – and 17-BIT boss Jake Kazdal says he would love to see Nintendo – which is apparently being cautious with the tech, according to Miyamoto – be at the vanguard. The company has already dipped a toe with Labo VR, a low-cost headset which offers very basic functionality, yet showcases some surprisingly creative mini-games.
17-BIT – which has titles like Skulls of the Shogun and Galak-Z to its name – is currently working on a VR title for an undisclosed system, but Kazdal admits that Labo VR isn't in the running. However, he adds that it is his desire to see Nintendo enter the VR space seriously and build on the good work done with the 3DS' glasses-free 3D display.
Speaking to Nintendo Life in an exclusive interview, Kazdal says:
My gaming time is literally split in half – I love the first-party Nintendo stuff and all the great indie games I play all the time, and when I have time to jump into something really juicy I break out my Oculus Quest and Rift, and my PSVR. I would love more than anything for Nintendo to properly enter this space and just own it; their experiments so far are fantastic, and I really miss the extra dimension available in 3D. In fact, I’m playing Super Mario 3D Land again right now on 3DS. It just is so much more satisfying than playing on a flat 2D screen.
He also champions VR with a fair amount of passion, stating:
I think there are a lot of misconceptions about VR, people somehow think you need a dedicated room in your house, and I thought so too at first, but it turns out I do most of my VR sitting down on a stool or on my couch, fully engaged in the world but safely settled in the real world not knocking things off the shelves or banging around. With the perfect camera control (humans, it turns out, are very good at using their necks and eyes as cameras) you can focus 100% on playing the game, and being inside the game world as opposed to peering into it through a little 2D window, is just a different world. The experiences are just exponentially more than you can experience on a flat-screen TV.
Could Nintendo really enter the world of VR and "own" it, as Kazdal says? It seems unlikely now, but look at consoles like the Wii, DS, Game Boy and Switch; these were not cutting-edge consoles at the time of their release, but they have risen to the top of their respective markets (well, in the case of Switch, it's sort of created its own market).
Could Nintendo leverage maturing VR tech to produce a game-changing headset which wins over the masses, just like the Wii championed motion controls and the DS popularised touch interfaces? Who knows – but it will be interesting to see it at least try.
Comments 48
I'd love to see it too, I just don't think where there just yet.
Though the new half-life game may push things further.
It's a no brainer for them to enter the market eventually.
I hope Nintendo are working on a true VR experience for next gen. Nintendo games would be perfectly suited for the VR space.
The ultimate Nintendo Switch Pro hook would be that it would be VR capable with the extra power. Just a dream though, I don't have
insider info or anything.
Virtual reality will never be popular. It's a useless gimmick, just like the Virtual Boy and the 3D feature of the 3DS. There's a reason Nintendo turned the 3DS into the 2DS: almost no one cares about 3D visuals. Even at the cinema, they rarely offer films in 3D anymore. Nobody cares about this stuff, and it gives most people a headache. Nintendo should have learned their lesson by now. If they are as smart as I think they are, they will abandon all these gimmicks and let Sony drown in the futile pursuit of virtual reality.
In a way, they were the first to go there with Virtual Boy.
That said, I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a secret VR project somewhere in their offices.
@thewingedavenger ''and it gives most people a headache.'' [citation needed]
@magnumc500 Like the Oculus Quest? I could see that. I don't think the Switch is quite there yet, you need to have really good screens and a bit more processing power (PSVR on vanilla PS4 seems to be the baseline based on what I've experienced). But with their next console? I could see it happening.
@thewingedavenger virtual reality become a bit stronger every day
It will one day become huge
@thewingedavenger rarely offer films in 3D anymore? I have no idea where you’re from but around here most big movies release in both 2D and 3D (with the 3D option being pricier and only lasting a few weeks so they can cycle more in). There’s constantly 3D movies in theaters. Constantly.
As long as it’s not a cardboard headset.
Nintendo doesn’t seem to jump onto trends until they can add their own twist or they’re already fairly established. I have a feeling they’re waiting for VR to become more mainstream, at which point they’ll try to innovate it with something more immersive. Which could be cool. I hope whatever they eventually come up with is truly immersive though. I look forward to the day we have tech like haptic gloves that simulate touch. VR is certainly improving but it’s still jarring in many ways due to it only utilizing sight and sound. It’s weird moving around in a 3D space and seeing things you can’t feel.
I really enjoy digging out my PSVR from time to time, though I'll admit that I still play way more regular games.
I've played Astro Bot, Moss, Farpoint, Arca's Path, and the Last Labyrinth, and while they're all solid games, Astro Bot is the only one I'd say stands alongside the best in it's genre. I also picked up Tetris Effect recently, so that'll be my next VR game when I dig it out next.
I would enjoy seeing what Nintendo could come up with, if they had a proper set.
Hopefully the Switch successor has a 1080 (or higher) screen capable of VR
My unrealistic dream is that Nintendo will make a 3d hologram machine for your room that you can play games on without the need of a headset.
Sorry but no thanks.
@RR529 Same!
Right now, I'd settle for a hands-free head mount and a port of Galactic Pinball. I actually considered buying a Virtual Boy just for that game.
@thewingedavenger those 3D experiences before VR didn't sustain because they still had a border and the viewer didn't have 1-1 body control with where they looked with their head and moved their limbs. Full presence didn't exist and they were really best for 2D. VR is having a slow start because of cost, those who haven't tried don't really know what it is and the content hasn't reached the real AAA levels in quality until very recently. But the growth is there. As they enhance the specs and make it as approachable as possible it won't just be a fad. And it certainly doesn't give most people a headache.
@Tantani Virtual reality gets more popular every year only because the videogame industry gets more popular every year. Virtual reality will always constitute less than 1% of the videogame market.
@Octane When I go to the cinema with other people and the film is being shown both in 2D and 3D, everyone wants to watch it in 2D. There's a reason 3D is dying. Virtual reality will die once the videogame companies finally understand that almost no one wants it. People who are curious to try something new may try it, but I don't know one single person who admits to having a 3D headset. Who would admit to sitting in their room with a freaking helmet covering their entire head? It's ridiculous. The idea has no future whatsoever.
@ShadJV I have to admit I'm not aware about the availability of 3D in the West. All I can say is that in Moscow where I live, the only film that is available in 3D is Star Wars, and not one of the many Star Wars fans I know have watched it in 3D.
@mjjmedia Would you be willing to wear a big helmet that covers your eyes, just to play a freaking videogame? It's the most comical thing I've seen. And what happens when someone comes into the room to talk to you? Wouldn't you be embarrassed to be seen with that huge thing on your head? And what if the phone rings? And would you go to the bathroom with the helmet on? VR is a silly concept on its own, but when you add all the physical complications, it becomes unviable. We'll talk about it in a few years when it completely disappears. It's like "New Coke": do you remember that? It was an unnecessary item that no one wanted, and so it disappeared.
Finally got mine on Black Friday for PC. Was waiting for PS5, but the price was right.
Lone Echo, DIRT 2.0 and End Space in VR are just mind blowing -and sold me on it. Even if just a pair of games a year - the experience is worth it (Can't wait for Half-Life: Alyx)
Nintendo does not have the hardware for it. VR with Crappy performance is really rough on you.
I played Captain Toad Treasure Tracker with Labo VR a few months back and found the experience to be delightful. The only thing that irritated me was the fact that I needed to hold the Switch onto my head.
Labo itself fizzled away and took Labo VR with it, but Nintendo could make some serious in-roads into the VR market if they tried. A Switch successor using a 2020/2021 Nividia mobile processor and a 1080p screen would go a long way.
@thewingedavenger,
1. "Would I wear a helmet that covers my eyes just to play a video game"?
2. "What if someone wants to talk to me or the phone rings"?
3. "Do I take the headset with me to use the bathroom"?
@thewingedavenger I have a PSVR. Recently two of my friends got an Oculus Rift. It's not dying. Even Nintendo experimented with VR in Labo.
@RR529 VR just sounds like an extra complication. The console, the controllers, now a helmet. Obviously here in this comment section there are people who have a VR set - it's the comment section for an article about VR. If lots of people are playing VR, they're certainly not talking about it out in the face-to-face world, and VR sales are abysmal. But hey, you guys might be right and we might be back here in a few years talking about what a huge success VR is.
I think the whole VR thing was really overblown a few years ago, and it has really died down. Most people have tried it by now and only a few people really seem to love it. It's one of those things where it's interesting but not exactly the kind of thing everyone wants to be doing all the time.
@Octane My prediction is that it won't become popular because it's too much of a hassle for what it adds to the game. I doubt most people care to add that dimension to their games anyway. 3D home-theatre technology has been possible for years, and it never caught on. People don't seem to care about adding all this stuff to their entertainment. If Nintendo continue pursuing VR, they'll end up in the same quagmire Sony is headed toward.
@Octane Motion sickness and headaches related to VR use is a very well documented occurrence:
https://www.google.com/search?q=vr+and+motion+sickness
As you can see there is no shortage of citations that can be noted. In fact it is so common that there is tons of "how to avoid headaches/motion sickness while using VR" videos.
Nintendo was right about VR, it's not time yet.
@thewingedavenger From what I have seen VR is one of those things that is really attractive to a niche audience who is very enthusiastic about it, but they are pretty much the only people who really want it on average. It seems like in every discussion related to VR gaming on the internet there will always be a few hardcore VR enthusiasts who try to assure everyone how it is this amazing thing that nobody could possibly dislike for any reason that is destined to be the future of home entertainment, but the reality is nowhere near as favorable or optimistic.
The way internet conversations go is always about polarizing, and as discussions continue people get more and more stuck in their respective camps. There are no camps! VR can and will co-exist in harmony with everything else out there, it's a new way to consume media and has found its - expanding - place. This trend will continue, without a shadow of a doubt, with second generation of headsets. Those who played AstroBot and Beat Saber are sold on the tech and can see what it can do. And if you think it's isolating, I recommend throwing a Beat Saber party with your friends...
Edit: do a game with Mario that plays just like AstroBot, it will sell MILLIONS.
Nintendo made it clear how seriously they take VR when they made the VR Labo. Until they stop treating it like a gimmick, Nintendo won't be taking advantage of all the opportunities VR can bring to their games. I'd love to see it, but I won't hold my breath
I think VR will only ever become truly mainstream when the VR formfactor evolves into a pair of slightly oversized glasses, rather than the bulky strap-on headsets that most VR devices are today. Maybe that's when Nintendo will take VR seriously.
@JayJ I totally agree with you - you just worded it much better than I did. It's basically like the 3D feature on the 3DS: a small minority of players loved it (see MetalJesusRocks), while most people said they kept the 3D off. But the few people who like it think it's awesome.
@thewingedavenger You just have to try it for awhile to understand. I got my first VR headset in June and because of what I knew I could get out of a better one, I upgraded last September. It was a HUGE hit with my friends and family over the holidays. Some got their own because of it and now in a three-dimensional experience I can hang out with someone hundreds or thousands of miles away. I can visit worlds of any kind and walk, fly, jump around. Will it replace traditional gaming? Of course not, its its own thing although kind of in the same space. Yes it hasn't gone hugely mainstream yet but it will stay on the rise. Also to clarify some of your questions, even at full volume yes you can still hear a knock on the door, you can hear the phone ring... taking any video game device in the bathroom in general is silly, but to each their own.
@mjjmedia Chances are, I'll try VR in 2020 and I'll be its number-one fan. I just have serious doubts that any company will make decent money off it. I worded it very poorly, but what I meant about taking it to the bathroom is that if you're playing a game and have to go to the loo, it's a chore to have to pause the game, unstrap the big headset, take it off, then put it and the controller on the chair before finally being able to go. I was just trying to illustrate what a hassle these VR headsets are. With normal consoles, you pause, put the controller down and go. You're probably right that VR will always exist for a niche audience.
@thewingedavenger Oh haha got it, thanks for the explanation. Yeah its certainly a bit more baggage that comes with it, it took some thought for me on how to make my space more efficient for VR, but actually now if I need to go, just takes me 4-5 seconds to take off the gear. My hope is that niche will grow more than where it is but yeah traditional gaming will always be more accessible. For me one isn't necessarily better than the other.
@thewingedavenger First, plenty of people love 3D, myself included. Most cinemas make the picture quality suffer, but for films which are designed for it, it looks fantastic. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse needs to be seen in 3D, IMO. I'm so glad I decided to watch it in 3D, and I wish I could recreate that experience just once more.
Second, it's obvious you have never actually tried virtual reality; with modern implementations, it really doesn't make you dizzy. There's a reason that high framerates are pushed, though I don't quite think it's there yet. I'm waiting for mainstream HMDs to have HDR before I purchase my own system (ATM it generates an unsafe amount of heat).
VR is incredible, it just needs a while to hit its true potential. Maybe one day it'll be able to interact with our unconscious mind, allowing for true 1-1 immersion, but for now I'll wait.
It's not a "useless gimmick", though, I guarantee you. This phrase is quite overused nowadays, but I think this is the perfect time.
OK boomer.
@westman98 I totally agree. I have tried out some of the VR headsets of today and it's kind of just an improved and more accessible version of the old 90's VR. It's still a big and clunky headset that you gotta wear, it's still connected to wires most of the time or it's just rather simple, and it has numerous issues related to performance. I think by the time we got it down to where it's like putting on sunglasses it will be a completely different experience.
@thewingedavenger : I think you are being quite short-sighted in terms of why stereoscopic 3D has not been as successful as perhaps it could have been. There are a lot of variables at play that the layperson is unaware of in terms of how stereoscopic 3D works, and how disingenuous handling of stereoscopic 3D across the industry broadly has lead to negative perceptions by the masses who often dismiss it as being a mere gimmick.
One of the reasons why stereoscopic 3D hadn't caught on with the 3DS was due to the minimal wiggle room to be able to view the game as intended, which probably put a lot of people off. The New 3DS included a face-tracking infrared camera to improve the feature substantially, but this really should have been included in the base model if Nintendo hoped for 3D to gain any traction beyond being a passing "gimmick" to most of the audience. I for one love the feature and wouldn't play any compatible games without it. I think the 2DS systems are also a great option for those who prefer not to use (or otherwise cannot see 3D) the feature as it gives customers the option to not have to pay for a feature that they do not intend to use.
The reason why 3D films have not been as successful as perhaps they could have been is because a lot of them are faked in post-production and are not in real 3D, hence why the masses have largely found their experiences to be underwhelming or less enjoyable than otherwise viewing such films in 2D. In order to create a 3D film, they must be shot with two cameras side-by-side or with a dual-lens camera in order to create that sense of depth. With 3D animated films, all they need to do is render a second image with the virtual camera tilted slightly (which is basically how the 3D versions of the first two Toy Story films were retroactively created as they already had the original digital assets to work with).
There are websites that disclose which films are authentic and which are not. For those interested in 3D cinema, I would strongly, strongly recommend watching authentic 3D films and avoid most that are faked (most special effects-heavy films are likely to be faked, though there are exceptions to the rule, such as Life of Pi and Prometheus).
As for 3D TVs, they were a cynical attempt by the industry to push more TVs (similar to how UHD TVs are being peddled now, even though there is not a lot of native UHD content available for viewing at present, and only very, very few broadcasting anything at that resolution), and I think the inclusion of the "2D to 3D" feature of a lot of 3D TVs (which merely makes 2D images look lumpy by adding grooves for each eye) was a mistake as that sort of functionality, similarly to allowing audiences to stretch 4:3 content to 16:9, creates a false perception of how images are supposed to look.
Of course, some just don't like 3D at all, even if the best of 3D images were to be presented to them, and that's fine, obviously, and some people cannot view 3D at all due to eye conditions or other factors, but to flatly dismiss it is doing a disservice to what this often misused and misrepresented technology is intended to do.
As for VR, it has come a tremendously long way, but I think it will still take some time before it becomes accessible to the mass market. It simply isn't feasible for most people to use at home as it requires a fairly large space for it to be viable with the headsets that are currently available. I think it will eventually get to a point where it can be used in a seamless way and not require external trackers that current headsets require. As the technology improves and becomes cheap enough to appeal to the mass market, only then will it really take off. Software is also critical as the current selection is quite underwhelming (with the best games at present largely being VR-converted ports of past games).
Given the VR PC world has no real legs to stand on. Nintendo is smart to stay out of this.
@Electric-Dreams Virtual Boy 2.0??
@Silly_G If they do it right, I'll definitely give it a chance!
@Braok You're right, I've never given VR a try, but that's because users have complained of motion sickness. I've got sea sickness a couple of times on ferries, and I would rather not have that experience again. But I'm definitely intrigued by what you, Silly_G and others have said, so I'll definitely give VR an honest chance when they really make it flawless.
Yes it would be neat but it would never happen. I love Nintendo but they dont even understand "That new-fangled internet thing". They havent even added simple functions to the Switch and the UI hasn't changed at all. People have been asking for folders and wallpapers since it launched in March 2017. If they cant even update a UI or have a proper party or voice system of any kind there is no way in hell they would get something as complex as VR right.
"It seems unlikely now, but look at consoles like the Wii, DS, Game Boy and Switch"
Oh yeah? Well, I prefer to think of consoles like Nintendo 64 and its many experiments. Nintendo 64DD was one of them, and these had interesting ideas in the form of Mario Artist. Oh, and Nintendo 3DS like Jake was refering, also had some AR projects. If Nintendo wants to own the space, they'll need the right hardware, the next Switch. And yeah, their experiments on Labo VR have been surprisingly fantastic!
Tap here to load 48 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...