@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.
@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.
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.
@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.
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.
@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.
@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.
@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.
@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.
@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.
@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.
@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.
@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.
@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.
@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 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.
@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.
@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.
@impurekind Indeed. Analysts, whether they are predicting positive or negative outcomes for VR, are absolutely worthless and to be ignored at all points. They are merely speculating and offer no objectivity.
Unfortunately the media always takes what anaylsts say as fact and try to spread the 'news' as much as possible.
@Mountain_Man There are supposedly 2 billion gamers. It's mainstream, not niche. You seem to be overly pessimistic about everything. Or are you forgetting the entire PC gaming market and mobile gaming market?
Also you seem to pass off everything you say as fact. "I say X is so and so, therefore it's fact and written in stone"
@Mountain_Man At least provide some relevent links, please.
Link 1) Already debunked this. Look into the comment section there as well, as people have figured out it's very misleading.
Link 2) SuperData are notoriously off the mark by large margins. Did you know they thought Google had shipped 88 million cardboard headsets? That was their prediction, and yet Google shortly after announced 10 million, and that's far from their first blunder. They always over-estimate and do more damage than good. They are irrelevant in all things.
Link 3) This is just another article on the topic of the first link. Debunked.
Link 4) Again, this was all expected. The same trend has happened for all now mature technologies. Look up the gartner hype cycle.
So please tell me, what signs are there other than misleading data points and trends that are normal in the growing pains of any technology?
Also no, because phone VR was only meant to be an introduction. Notice how Samsung and Google and Oculus now have standalones either in the works or already released? Because they supersede mobile VR. You cannot push mobile VR much more because we're not going to see phone resolutions increase anymore, and VR needs custom display technology and optics that cannot happen in a phone form factor.
The general public is not interested today because well, it's early. Likewise the general public was not interested in smartphones or PCs in their own early days. Learn some history.
@Mountain_Man That concert example is a made up problem. Talk about cherrypicking. My TV doesn't cook food for me because I don't expect it to.
The whole point of visiting a concert virtually is if you can't go physically, which will be the case most of the time for most people since there are so many concerts and obviously most of them are not within driving distance as they are worldwide events.
So why insert a problem that doesn't need fixing? VR does what it does. It's not supposed to be a solution to curing cancer or in this case, teleporting your physical body. Nothing else can let you visit a concert even as a ghost. (which by the way can be a shared virtual experience) so there's no point in bringing VR down because it's not an actual teleportation pad.
It will not always feel artificial. There will come a time when we've surpassed the uncanny valley and virtual reality and real life are indistinguishable from each other at least in the most important details that you actually notice. I've already hopped into a light-field capture of real life in a VR headset and aside from the limited specs of the headset, the graphics displayed were exactly like real life, including perfect lighting.
A 360 video already looks completely real as if no graphics exist. Once you add the ability to move in that video and that video is broadcast live from a concert, and you add perfect 3D sound, it is completely indistinguishable from reality. The uncanny valley mostly exists for polygon graphics, not for light-fields or video captures which already looks lifelike.
Yes, 3D TVs flopped for several reasons, one being glasses. But the main reason why a glasses form factor failed was because there was very little value in putting on glasses for some extra depth cues. It changes little, whereas VR rewrites media from the ground-up. A change that fundamental has value with the right content.
By the way if you actually looked further, you'd notice most of the numbers in that link are pointless. Vive was out of stock, PSVR's dates were calculated after the holiday rush and only on one bundle, and phone VR was dropped from bundles as was always the plan.
You're moving the goalpast again and again. Look, you think it's going to be niche. Believe it. But 10 years from now, when it's really starting to ride the mainstream wave, you'll realize just how wrong you were.
And if you don't believe me about surpassing the uncanny valley, I do hope you won't deny the irrefutable proof in these:
@Realnoize "There's no conversation to be had with people that constantly cherry-pick their arguments to go with what they believe, and automatically dismiss anything that say the contrary. "
I totally agree. It's just a shame that there is no shortage of this here. I can say I certainly haven't added to it at the very least.
Pretty much sums it up when you have people on here ignoring others just because they can't handle the truth that they might actually be wrong after all.
@Zidentia What on earth do those problems even have to do with VR's F-U-T-U-R-E? Seriously, you're only reiterating the problems that exist today and saying VR will not become mainstream because of today's issues. Which is absurd.
1) This will be fixed in the future. Waveguides will allow sleek visors, and eventually we'll just have sunglasses that switch between AR/VR.
2) Will be fixed in the future with the above.
3) Already said this a dozen times. Merge AR with VR as well as scan real life into VR.
4) With the above three fixed as well as the vergence accommodation problem fixed with depth of focus support, you will not have discomfort unless the content is specifically tailored for the possibility of discomfort which is about developer choice.
Seriously ,your'e trying very very hard to make up a scenario where VR isn't mainstream, and none of it relies on logic. If it did, you'd bring up problems that can never be fixed, of which there are so few so it wouldn't really work in your favor anyway. (like all mature technologies - they all have a few problems that cannot be fixed)
Ultimately, it's just limited thinking. Many people here are not creatively thinking, not thinking outside the box. They cannot see a solution to the many problems that are already being solved.
Just because your limited vision is unable to see something that actually exists does not mean it doesn't exist. Some of you people see through rose tinted glasses, a world that only conforms to your own domain of thinking; a bubble of trapped thoughts that doesn't reflect the many solutions found on the surface.
@Realnoize You're completely misunderstanding what VR actually is. You seem to think it's always going to a device that shuts you out, can't be used everywhere, and has to be planned for.
None of these are true long-term or even short-term. We're still in generation 1, so the pieces are still coming together. Gen 1 consoles played simplistic games and did nothing else. Now they have a slew of entertainment options and online connectivity. The pieces were fitted together with later generations.
Likewise, there are many parts of the VR puzzle still to be solved. The isolation issue is one that will be fixed because we're already seeing prototypes of headsets that can scan real life in real time and merge it with VR, and that's still just phase 1 of the isolation fix.
Oculus Quest can be used anywhere aside from the fact that it cannot at launch scan your environment, making it unsafe in many locations. But it's a generation 1 standalone device. Combine that with a solution above, or a later phase solution like glasses that go transparent or opaque on a whim and you have solved the issue permanently in every situation. You'd be able to use the device anywhere without issue and without isolation. Or you can choose to isolate yourself as it's merely choice; because humans crave escapism.
Again, once you have a device like this, there is no planning. Either you're already wearing it most of the day and just jump into applications on the fly, or you slip some glasses on from your pocket and do the same thing.
You seem to think as if VR will always be exactly the same now forever, as if it will never advance one bit further.
@Mountain_Man You never gave such context. You're now rebounding after I pointed your comment out as if it was meant to mean something else altogether. Maybe it was meant to originally, but you certainly didn't imply that until now.
In the context of entertainment, it is does not have limited appeal. This is once again your own personal feelings coming into play about a subject that can be quantified.
How about we sum it up? VR for entertainment can: Be used for gaming, used for social hangouts, used to simulate infinite screen space for entertainment purposes (looks like we've already surpassed game consoles in it's entertainment coverage), used for 360 degree videos, used for telepresence to teleport to remote events like concerts and sporting events, used for a practically limitless amounts of recreational activities like table tennis, dancing, DJing, sculpting, drawing, chess, darts, card games, D&D etc.
So it turns out that it would have the largest coverage of an entertainment device we've ever had so far because it can simulate all digital entertainment and over time simulate lots of non-digital entertainment and then you can add on all of it's unique offerings.
I have never acted like it's the cure for cancer. I'm merely correcting all the mistakes of the many pessimistic anti-VR people in this thread.
@Zidentia You keep on parading these false beliefs of yours and pass them off as fact.
Stereoscopic glasses and VR also use different principles. The former is literally stereoscopic vision with real photons and nothing else; the latter is stereoscopic vision using artificial photons with tracking for your head in 6DoF and controllers in 6DoF. This makes all the difference in the world. I mean we already know that the difference between a mobile VR headset and a high-end VR headset is eons apart, so why wouldn't stereoscopic glasses be significantly more different?
This isn't even taking into account near-term advances like eye-tracking, facial-tracking, body-tracking, finger-tracking. I can tell you first hand that full body presence changes things completely both for yourself in your sense of presence and in social presence too. It has a fundamental biological effect on your brain that is science fact and cannot be denied, despite you doing so.
Please do not argue with science in the future. Turns out it doesn't work.
Also, I love how you say VR is dying off when nothing suggests this. Another made-up point to add to your already broken argument I suppose.
@Toadie He actually does have a greater chance at predicting the future of VR than most others here. If you have significant knowledge of VR, then you actually know where it can go. If you don't know what it can be used for, then your prediction is less likely to pan out because you'll assume a future based on incomplete information.
Case in point: People here not realizing that isolation can be fixed, not understanding VR's potential for communication, not realizing the power of 6DoF video.
Most people don't know what VR is still so they'll tend to have low opinions of it because they see it as just a gaming device. If I was in that position, I would probably not see it as a world-changing technology and would place my bets on it being niche. But I do know all of it's capabilities, therefore I have a better chance at predicting.
Notice all the "VR will fail like 3D TV" comments here or otherwise? It's only said by those who are in the above position; one of inexperience.
@WiltonRoots Your stance is from lack of knowledge though. Isolation is getting better over time because AR and VR will continue to blend until they are completely merged.
You can feel about it however you want, but why act so defensive about it ("It's never going to happen") when that is nothing but an assumption without knowledge on the subject. If there was no solution in the works then you can certainly say that without criticism, but there IS a solution.
To ignore all the facts out there that prove it's possible to fix, I just have to ask why? Maybe I can answer that. Because it's likely because you're just not interested enough in the subject to do your research.
That's just not healthy thinking. It's too self-absorbed.
@Mountain_Man "I can't wait until people get over the VR gimmick and kick it to the curb like they did with 3D movie theaters and televisions. There are so many other promising technologies we could be exploring."
As implied above, you can't wait for it to die. Now you're just backtracking.
And you seem saying these are insurmountable limitations despite me already telling you the solution. You also failed to list any other promising technologies despite me challenging you to do so. Not making much of a case here are you?
@Mountain_Man Take a look at yourself. You're the one saying VR should die. Anyone wanting a useful technology like VR to die might as well be saying "Lets hope medical technology dies off too because anything that helps humanity should die off."
I get it. You don't want anyone to have fun unless it's on your terms with something you specifically want. This is the epitome of being self-centered.
And it's not about downplaying resistance to isolation. There is no long term problem here. You're projecting your own false beliefs as usual.
@vitalemrecords You're seriously giving Nintendo fans a bad rep you know. Everyone can confirm you have not used VR, so don't even pretend to claim otherwise.
@Zidentia What a load of nonsense. The stereoscope died off for other reasons because it was completely different and unrelated to VR.
Did you know that analog computers died off or at least become extremely niche? And yet here we are, all using computers every waking minute of our lives.
Using your logic, people would never wear a hat that gives them superpowers and the ability to warp reality. All because it's something they have to wear.
No, that's not how it works. People want value. If they have value then they are more willing to put up with an inconvenience.
As VR progresses, it offers exponentially more value to the average person.
Anyone thinking that VR cannot take off until it's just a holodeck without any wearables is absolutely delusional. It's about as ridiculous as the old IBM saying: "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."
@Mountain_Man As I've already explained to you, isolation can be fixed. How many more times are you going to push a false narrative because you want VR to die? Seriously, grow up.
@WiltonRoots Can you stop saying "Never going to happen" as if you're an expert on VR? It will happen, because VR can merge real life into the experience. There is nothing isolating about a VR headset that does this.
Also even now you can visit real world places. If you love real life so much (which many people don't) then you'd probably be happy to visit all sorts of places that even a veteran traveler would not be able to go to.
@impurekind Whatever they played, it wasn't Astro Bot, Lone Echo / Echo VR or something of that caliber. Only playing such games do you gain an actual understanding of VR, and even then it's only an understanding on the games side and not all the other uses for the tech.
If I bought a Switch for 1-2 Switch, Super Meat Boy, and Mario Tennis, is it then fair to say "Switch isn't fun and nothing will change my mind"?
You know what would change my mind? Actually bothering to play high quality games that the system is known for.
@Richnj Standalone VR could fix this. Once you have 100 million people using a standalone VR headset, those 100 million people will start to 'get' VR and branch off into buying high-end headsets.
Best case scenario is a standalone headset that simply docks wirelessly to a console or PC.
AAA Developers will most likely be fine. Today they are getting complete funding from Sony / Oculus or are investing for the future and already calculated the risks.
@Mountain_Man People are opposing you because you actually want VR to die off. In your own words you said that you wish for it to die. Which comes off as extremely narrow-minded and ignorant. This is like me wanting smartphones or PCs to die off because I can't see their use.
You're effectively denying a technology to exist that can improve and save so many lives which is borderline despicable.
I've already counteracted every statement you've made about why you say it will without question be a niche. Please do tell me about these other promising technologies that should exist while VR should die. I'd love to hear about what else has more promise than VR.
@Richnj What you people consider 3D is not really 3D though. It's just extra depth on a 2D image. VR is full 3D just how our eyes see the world. 3D is extremely limiting because it really doesn't change anything, but VR does change everything.
Also there is no next thing after VR; this is the pinnacle. Whatever tries to come next if anything does can just be simulated in VR, such as lightfield TVs.
@Richnj VR might not be a boon to all genres, but it is a boon to many genres. Heck, take a multiplayer game of any genre and VR is a massive boon due to ability to have social presence.
But VR is much more than just a way to play VR games because you can use it to play any traditional game on a perfect dream setup that you wish you had in real life. Just the resolution needs to get higher to fulfill that dream.
@impurekind "but it can and will get much better still."
Very true statement. We're still in gen 1. Everything in VR runs off an exponential curve of improvement. If you increase the resolution by a large amount, you get an exponential increase in immersion. Same with FoV, same with HRTF audio, same with haptics, the list goes on...
You can replay something like Astro Bot in 5 years and be blown away again because of how much more in the world you are. The sense of scale will feel ever more real.
Simply put, if we had retinal resolution headsets today, Astro Bot would be getting something like 98/100 on metacritic because the magic only increases as the hardware increases.
@gauthieryannick People would go crazy if Ready Player One technology was here. You don't need a neural interface for VR to take off. Motion sickness may be solvable using GVS or something similar and even if it cannot be fixed, everyone will still be able to use VR for something because only certain gaming content induces motion sickness, whereas non-gaming (6DoF) content will not. And since I said certain content, this means there will always be games that can freely be played without sickness.
@Richnj You're promising something based on a problem that doesn't exist. Seriously, can we please get past this misconception already? VR does not, I repeat does not automatically mean tired, exhaustive gameplay. That's pure choice.
I mentioned Astro Bot earlier which is a relaxing seated game and yet it's absolutely amazing. VR can be relaxing (even more so) for gaming or intense - it's all up to you.
There are going to be people using VR only for seated games and people using it only for intense games or even just for exercise. Then there are people like myself who will use it for all types of gaming including traditional games on virtual screens.
There is no reason to believe that VR will mostly reside in arcades because 99% of VR doesn't even work in an arcade. Most of VR is meant to be experienced at your own comfort.
@impurekind To be fair he said he wouldn't bet on avatars indistuishable from humans in 4 years, but also wouldn't bet against it. What we'll probably get in 4 years (for avatars) is something like the Facebook engineering video I linked, but with a full body and fingers tracked. Extremely realistic nonetheless and probably a good 10 years ahead of where people think VR would be.
It's pretty clear though that we'll be way past Ready Player One by 2045 at this rate. I'd expect us to quite literally surpass their technology as soon as 2030 even since they didn't account for AR/VR hybrids.
@Dalarrun It's very likely to be here faster than you think, much faster. To quote Michael Abrash, chief scientist at Oculus: "If all of my 4 year predictions come true, and virtual humans also lands, then a virtual workspace that replaces personal computers is a done deal."
He's predicting high fidelity VR with audio so real that it might as well be real sound, with virtual humans basically indistinguishable (or close) from reality, with the ability to replace physical displays, and the ability to see all your body including hands and fingers - all for 2022 at a consumer price.
Believe me, VR is advancing far faster than anyone even comprehends.
Comments 265
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@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.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@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.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
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.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@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.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@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.
Re: 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.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@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.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@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.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@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.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@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.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@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.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@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.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@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.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@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.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@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.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@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.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@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.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@Anti-Matter So basically you hate innovation? Maybe change your name to Anti-Consumer.
Re: Video: Sakurai Declined Offer To Work On Oculus VR Games Because Of The Small Audience
@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.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@impurekind Indeed. Analysts, whether they are predicting positive or negative outcomes for VR, are absolutely worthless and to be ignored at all points. They are merely speculating and offer no objectivity.
Unfortunately the media always takes what anaylsts say as fact and try to spread the 'news' as much as possible.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Mountain_Man There are supposedly 2 billion gamers. It's mainstream, not niche. You seem to be overly pessimistic about everything. Or are you forgetting the entire PC gaming market and mobile gaming market?
Also you seem to pass off everything you say as fact. "I say X is so and so, therefore it's fact and written in stone"
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Mountain_Man At least provide some relevent links, please.
Link 1) Already debunked this. Look into the comment section there as well, as people have figured out it's very misleading.
Link 2) SuperData are notoriously off the mark by large margins. Did you know they thought Google had shipped 88 million cardboard headsets? That was their prediction, and yet Google shortly after announced 10 million, and that's far from their first blunder. They always over-estimate and do more damage than good. They are irrelevant in all things.
Link 3) This is just another article on the topic of the first link. Debunked.
Link 4) Again, this was all expected. The same trend has happened for all now mature technologies. Look up the gartner hype cycle.
So please tell me, what signs are there other than misleading data points and trends that are normal in the growing pains of any technology?
Also no, because phone VR was only meant to be an introduction. Notice how Samsung and Google and Oculus now have standalones either in the works or already released? Because they supersede mobile VR. You cannot push mobile VR much more because we're not going to see phone resolutions increase anymore, and VR needs custom display technology and optics that cannot happen in a phone form factor.
The general public is not interested today because well, it's early. Likewise the general public was not interested in smartphones or PCs in their own early days. Learn some history.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Mountain_Man That concert example is a made up problem. Talk about cherrypicking. My TV doesn't cook food for me because I don't expect it to.
The whole point of visiting a concert virtually is if you can't go physically, which will be the case most of the time for most people since there are so many concerts and obviously most of them are not within driving distance as they are worldwide events.
So why insert a problem that doesn't need fixing? VR does what it does. It's not supposed to be a solution to curing cancer or in this case, teleporting your physical body. Nothing else can let you visit a concert even as a ghost. (which by the way can be a shared virtual experience) so there's no point in bringing VR down because it's not an actual teleportation pad.
It will not always feel artificial. There will come a time when we've surpassed the uncanny valley and virtual reality and real life are indistinguishable from each other at least in the most important details that you actually notice. I've already hopped into a light-field capture of real life in a VR headset and aside from the limited specs of the headset, the graphics displayed were exactly like real life, including perfect lighting.
A 360 video already looks completely real as if no graphics exist. Once you add the ability to move in that video and that video is broadcast live from a concert, and you add perfect 3D sound, it is completely indistinguishable from reality. The uncanny valley mostly exists for polygon graphics, not for light-fields or video captures which already looks lifelike.
Yes, 3D TVs flopped for several reasons, one being glasses. But the main reason why a glasses form factor failed was because there was very little value in putting on glasses for some extra depth cues. It changes little, whereas VR rewrites media from the ground-up. A change that fundamental has value with the right content.
By the way if you actually looked further, you'd notice most of the numbers in that link are pointless. Vive was out of stock, PSVR's dates were calculated after the holiday rush and only on one bundle, and phone VR was dropped from bundles as was always the plan.
You're moving the goalpast again and again. Look, you think it's going to be niche. Believe it. But 10 years from now, when it's really starting to ride the mainstream wave, you'll realize just how wrong you were.
And if you don't believe me about surpassing the uncanny valley, I do hope you won't deny the irrefutable proof in these:
https://youtu.be/a-JX3ZPi720?t=217 (Light field capture)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFobWjSYst4&t=61s (A video you can move inside)
https://media.giphy.com/media/dh231p7ddVAdsUbmy2/giphy.gif (One is a VR avatar, one is real)
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Realnoize "There's no conversation to be had with people that constantly cherry-pick their arguments to go with what they believe, and automatically dismiss anything that say the contrary. "
I totally agree. It's just a shame that there is no shortage of this here. I can say I certainly haven't added to it at the very least.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
Pretty much sums it up when you have people on here ignoring others just because they can't handle the truth that they might actually be wrong after all.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Zidentia What on earth do those problems even have to do with VR's F-U-T-U-R-E? Seriously, you're only reiterating the problems that exist today and saying VR will not become mainstream because of today's issues. Which is absurd.
1) This will be fixed in the future. Waveguides will allow sleek visors, and eventually we'll just have sunglasses that switch between AR/VR.
2) Will be fixed in the future with the above.
3) Already said this a dozen times. Merge AR with VR as well as scan real life into VR.
4) With the above three fixed as well as the vergence accommodation problem fixed with depth of focus support, you will not have discomfort unless the content is specifically tailored for the possibility of discomfort which is about developer choice.
Seriously ,your'e trying very very hard to make up a scenario where VR isn't mainstream, and none of it relies on logic. If it did, you'd bring up problems that can never be fixed, of which there are so few so it wouldn't really work in your favor anyway. (like all mature technologies - they all have a few problems that cannot be fixed)
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
Ultimately, it's just limited thinking. Many people here are not creatively thinking, not thinking outside the box. They cannot see a solution to the many problems that are already being solved.
Just because your limited vision is unable to see something that actually exists does not mean it doesn't exist. Some of you people see through rose tinted glasses, a world that only conforms to your own domain of thinking; a bubble of trapped thoughts that doesn't reflect the many solutions found on the surface.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Realnoize You're completely misunderstanding what VR actually is. You seem to think it's always going to a device that shuts you out, can't be used everywhere, and has to be planned for.
None of these are true long-term or even short-term. We're still in generation 1, so the pieces are still coming together. Gen 1 consoles played simplistic games and did nothing else. Now they have a slew of entertainment options and online connectivity. The pieces were fitted together with later generations.
Likewise, there are many parts of the VR puzzle still to be solved. The isolation issue is one that will be fixed because we're already seeing prototypes of headsets that can scan real life in real time and merge it with VR, and that's still just phase 1 of the isolation fix.
Oculus Quest can be used anywhere aside from the fact that it cannot at launch scan your environment, making it unsafe in many locations. But it's a generation 1 standalone device. Combine that with a solution above, or a later phase solution like glasses that go transparent or opaque on a whim and you have solved the issue permanently in every situation. You'd be able to use the device anywhere without issue and without isolation. Or you can choose to isolate yourself as it's merely choice; because humans crave escapism.
Again, once you have a device like this, there is no planning. Either you're already wearing it most of the day and just jump into applications on the fly, or you slip some glasses on from your pocket and do the same thing.
You seem to think as if VR will always be exactly the same now forever, as if it will never advance one bit further.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Mountain_Man You never gave such context. You're now rebounding after I pointed your comment out as if it was meant to mean something else altogether. Maybe it was meant to originally, but you certainly didn't imply that until now.
In the context of entertainment, it is does not have limited appeal. This is once again your own personal feelings coming into play about a subject that can be quantified.
How about we sum it up? VR for entertainment can: Be used for gaming, used for social hangouts, used to simulate infinite screen space for entertainment purposes (looks like we've already surpassed game consoles in it's entertainment coverage), used for 360 degree videos, used for telepresence to teleport to remote events like concerts and sporting events, used for a practically limitless amounts of recreational activities like table tennis, dancing, DJing, sculpting, drawing, chess, darts, card games, D&D etc.
So it turns out that it would have the largest coverage of an entertainment device we've ever had so far because it can simulate all digital entertainment and over time simulate lots of non-digital entertainment and then you can add on all of it's unique offerings.
I have never acted like it's the cure for cancer. I'm merely correcting all the mistakes of the many pessimistic anti-VR people in this thread.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Zidentia You keep on parading these false beliefs of yours and pass them off as fact.
Stereoscopic glasses and VR also use different principles. The former is literally stereoscopic vision with real photons and nothing else; the latter is stereoscopic vision using artificial photons with tracking for your head in 6DoF and controllers in 6DoF. This makes all the difference in the world. I mean we already know that the difference between a mobile VR headset and a high-end VR headset is eons apart, so why wouldn't stereoscopic glasses be significantly more different?
This isn't even taking into account near-term advances like eye-tracking, facial-tracking, body-tracking, finger-tracking. I can tell you first hand that full body presence changes things completely both for yourself in your sense of presence and in social presence too. It has a fundamental biological effect on your brain that is science fact and cannot be denied, despite you doing so.
Please do not argue with science in the future. Turns out it doesn't work.
Also, I love how you say VR is dying off when nothing suggests this. Another made-up point to add to your already broken argument I suppose.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Toadie He actually does have a greater chance at predicting the future of VR than most others here. If you have significant knowledge of VR, then you actually know where it can go. If you don't know what it can be used for, then your prediction is less likely to pan out because you'll assume a future based on incomplete information.
Case in point: People here not realizing that isolation can be fixed, not understanding VR's potential for communication, not realizing the power of 6DoF video.
Most people don't know what VR is still so they'll tend to have low opinions of it because they see it as just a gaming device. If I was in that position, I would probably not see it as a world-changing technology and would place my bets on it being niche. But I do know all of it's capabilities, therefore I have a better chance at predicting.
Notice all the "VR will fail like 3D TV" comments here or otherwise? It's only said by those who are in the above position; one of inexperience.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@WiltonRoots Right, so you're not interested in VR, yet you still think you're positively right and iron willed about your (false) belief.
I'm not selling anything. I'm merely pointing out the flaw in your thinking.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@WiltonRoots Your stance is from lack of knowledge though. Isolation is getting better over time because AR and VR will continue to blend until they are completely merged.
You can feel about it however you want, but why act so defensive about it ("It's never going to happen") when that is nothing but an assumption without knowledge on the subject. If there was no solution in the works then you can certainly say that without criticism, but there IS a solution.
To ignore all the facts out there that prove it's possible to fix, I just have to ask why? Maybe I can answer that. Because it's likely because you're just not interested enough in the subject to do your research.
That's just not healthy thinking. It's too self-absorbed.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Mountain_Man "I can't wait until people get over the VR gimmick and kick it to the curb like they did with 3D movie theaters and televisions. There are so many other promising technologies we could be exploring."
As implied above, you can't wait for it to die. Now you're just backtracking.
And you seem saying these are insurmountable limitations despite me already telling you the solution. You also failed to list any other promising technologies despite me challenging you to do so. Not making much of a case here are you?
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Mountain_Man Take a look at yourself. You're the one saying VR should die. Anyone wanting a useful technology like VR to die might as well be saying "Lets hope medical technology dies off too because anything that helps humanity should die off."
I get it. You don't want anyone to have fun unless it's on your terms with something you specifically want. This is the epitome of being self-centered.
And it's not about downplaying resistance to isolation. There is no long term problem here. You're projecting your own false beliefs as usual.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@vitalemrecords You're seriously giving Nintendo fans a bad rep you know. Everyone can confirm you have not used VR, so don't even pretend to claim otherwise.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Zidentia What a load of nonsense. The stereoscope died off for other reasons because it was completely different and unrelated to VR.
Did you know that analog computers died off or at least become extremely niche? And yet here we are, all using computers every waking minute of our lives.
Using your logic, people would never wear a hat that gives them superpowers and the ability to warp reality. All because it's something they have to wear.
No, that's not how it works. People want value. If they have value then they are more willing to put up with an inconvenience.
As VR progresses, it offers exponentially more value to the average person.
Anyone thinking that VR cannot take off until it's just a holodeck without any wearables is absolutely delusional. It's about as ridiculous as the old IBM saying: "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Mountain_Man As I've already explained to you, isolation can be fixed. How many more times are you going to push a false narrative because you want VR to die? Seriously, grow up.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@vitalemrecords You've never used VR. Honestly the fact that the gaming community has to put up with people like you is a real pain.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@WiltonRoots Can you stop saying "Never going to happen" as if you're an expert on VR? It will happen, because VR can merge real life into the experience. There is nothing isolating about a VR headset that does this.
Also even now you can visit real world places. If you love real life so much (which many people don't) then you'd probably be happy to visit all sorts of places that even a veteran traveler would not be able to go to.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@impurekind Whatever they played, it wasn't Astro Bot, Lone Echo / Echo VR or something of that caliber. Only playing such games do you gain an actual understanding of VR, and even then it's only an understanding on the games side and not all the other uses for the tech.
If I bought a Switch for 1-2 Switch, Super Meat Boy, and Mario Tennis, is it then fair to say "Switch isn't fun and nothing will change my mind"?
You know what would change my mind? Actually bothering to play high quality games that the system is known for.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Richnj Standalone VR could fix this. Once you have 100 million people using a standalone VR headset, those 100 million people will start to 'get' VR and branch off into buying high-end headsets.
Best case scenario is a standalone headset that simply docks wirelessly to a console or PC.
AAA Developers will most likely be fine. Today they are getting complete funding from Sony / Oculus or are investing for the future and already calculated the risks.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Mountain_Man People are opposing you because you actually want VR to die off. In your own words you said that you wish for it to die. Which comes off as extremely narrow-minded and ignorant. This is like me wanting smartphones or PCs to die off because I can't see their use.
You're effectively denying a technology to exist that can improve and save so many lives which is borderline despicable.
I've already counteracted every statement you've made about why you say it will without question be a niche. Please do tell me about these other promising technologies that should exist while VR should die. I'd love to hear about what else has more promise than VR.
You really have a lot to learn grasshopper.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Richnj What you people consider 3D is not really 3D though. It's just extra depth on a 2D image. VR is full 3D just how our eyes see the world. 3D is extremely limiting because it really doesn't change anything, but VR does change everything.
Also there is no next thing after VR; this is the pinnacle. Whatever tries to come next if anything does can just be simulated in VR, such as lightfield TVs.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Richnj VR might not be a boon to all genres, but it is a boon to many genres. Heck, take a multiplayer game of any genre and VR is a massive boon due to ability to have social presence.
But VR is much more than just a way to play VR games because you can use it to play any traditional game on a perfect dream setup that you wish you had in real life. Just the resolution needs to get higher to fulfill that dream.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@impurekind "but it can and will get much better still."
Very true statement. We're still in gen 1. Everything in VR runs off an exponential curve of improvement. If you increase the resolution by a large amount, you get an exponential increase in immersion. Same with FoV, same with HRTF audio, same with haptics, the list goes on...
You can replay something like Astro Bot in 5 years and be blown away again because of how much more in the world you are. The sense of scale will feel ever more real.
Simply put, if we had retinal resolution headsets today, Astro Bot would be getting something like 98/100 on metacritic because the magic only increases as the hardware increases.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@gauthieryannick People would go crazy if Ready Player One technology was here. You don't need a neural interface for VR to take off. Motion sickness may be solvable using GVS or something similar and even if it cannot be fixed, everyone will still be able to use VR for something because only certain gaming content induces motion sickness, whereas non-gaming (6DoF) content will not. And since I said certain content, this means there will always be games that can freely be played without sickness.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Richnj You're promising something based on a problem that doesn't exist. Seriously, can we please get past this misconception already? VR does not, I repeat does not automatically mean tired, exhaustive gameplay. That's pure choice.
I mentioned Astro Bot earlier which is a relaxing seated game and yet it's absolutely amazing. VR can be relaxing (even more so) for gaming or intense - it's all up to you.
There are going to be people using VR only for seated games and people using it only for intense games or even just for exercise. Then there are people like myself who will use it for all types of gaming including traditional games on virtual screens.
There is no reason to believe that VR will mostly reside in arcades because 99% of VR doesn't even work in an arcade. Most of VR is meant to be experienced at your own comfort.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@impurekind To be fair he said he wouldn't bet on avatars indistuishable from humans in 4 years, but also wouldn't bet against it. What we'll probably get in 4 years (for avatars) is something like the Facebook engineering video I linked, but with a full body and fingers tracked. Extremely realistic nonetheless and probably a good 10 years ahead of where people think VR would be.
It's pretty clear though that we'll be way past Ready Player One by 2045 at this rate. I'd expect us to quite literally surpass their technology as soon as 2030 even since they didn't account for AR/VR hybrids.
Re: Hardware Review: NS Glasses 3D VR Headset for Switch
@Dalarrun It's very likely to be here faster than you think, much faster. To quote Michael Abrash, chief scientist at Oculus: "If all of my 4 year predictions come true, and virtual humans also lands, then a virtual workspace that replaces personal computers is a done deal."
He's predicting high fidelity VR with audio so real that it might as well be real sound, with virtual humans basically indistinguishable (or close) from reality, with the ability to replace physical displays, and the ability to see all your body including hands and fingers - all for 2022 at a consumer price.
Believe me, VR is advancing far faster than anyone even comprehends.
This is where VR avatars are now in research: https://media.giphy.com/media/dh231p7ddVAdsUbmy2/giphy.gif
And if you think that's fake, then this shows a clearer picture, though note it's earlier research: https://www.facebook.com/Engineering/videos/10156364573567200/UzpfSTE5MjkyODY4NTUyOjEwMTU1NjQwNzkzMzI4NTUz/