[QUOTE=srobins;53004939]I don't disagree, VR is full of boring shooting gallery bullshit and frankly I've never had any interest in buying H3VR because after 15 minutes of playing it at a friends house the novelty of clanking my controllers together to reload a tactical rifle got really really boring. But to me sitting at a desk with a headset is even more piss boring than a motion controller shooting gallery. Obviously, ideally, I want a combination of both motion controls [I]and[/I] actual gameplay.[/QUOTE]
tbh for me its a matter of 'give me something that has good motion controls like hover junkers and actual gameplay'
I want to have a game that makes me panic while I spin the pad to reload a revolver, while running around using the other controller to avoid enemies
Serious Sam is fun, but its missing a lot of details that VR can add that flat games would never had. Obviously, them being optional is important, and obviously the control gimmick isn't what makes it fun in and of itself.
I just see a lot of nitpicking from people. We're in the second commercial year of VR, yet you expect so much from the developers, you guys really are just willfully halting progress by being so hesitant over such [i]small[/i] details. A lot of these vague complaints just seem to stem from the Skyrim rerelease meme.
Yeah, it's a bad port; but you know what? Buying this will show publishers that people want VR. You can't just port games to VR forever, eventually you're going to get big projects once they see it's a commercially viable market.
Until you actually spend the money to show you're going to fund those future projects; all you're going to get are the lazy ports.
[QUOTE=Downsider;53004889]It's not sustainable. You need gameplay to encourage long game sessions, not motion controls.[/quote]
The motion controls are part of that gameplay though. I could play a game where the gun is strapped to my face in VR, but at that point I'd just play the flatscreen version. Without the motion controllers I'd have no incentive to use VR.
[quote]
Eventually, reloading in VR becomes as boring as pressing R. At the core, it's the same. It's a motor function with no variables, nothing interesting about it. But instead of being as easy as pressing R, you have to smash your controllers together and grab imaginary dials and knobs. Once the novelty (or if you're more optimistic, you can call it [I]satisfaction[/I]) wears off, WHICH WILL HAPPEN, it's frustrating and annoying. It's [I]more[/I] cumbersome.[/quote]
Again, different preferences.
I love messing with those "imaginary dials and knobs", because that's not something I could do with a keyboard and mouse. That's another appeal of VR to me.
Maybe I will get tired of "smashing my controllers together" eventually, much like how I might get tired of pointing my controller at things and mashing the trigger to shoot. But for the time being, I'm enjoying it.
And there's nothing wrong with that.
[quote]It literally adds nothing of value. What [I]is[/I] valuable is the game itself, the gameplay, the carefully constructed universe and storytelling, AI, gameplay mechanics, countless hours of QA to optimize feedback loops.[/quote]
Different genres of games exist, you know. Not everything has an amazing storyline or world building, and they don't necessarily need them.
Sometimes I just want to shoot zombies/robots/hotdogs/etc without having to care for those things.
[quote]
Motion controls for reloading, stabbing yourself with a syringe, doesn't do [I]anything[/I].[/quote] What about immersing yourself in the game?
I've had some great moments in H3VR struggling to reload my gun while under fire. I've had similar experiences in Pavlov, even with its more simplified reload mechanics. A button reload can't really capture that sense of panic.
[Quote]
There is no difference between a VR game and a normal game in terms of what's actually [I]fun[/I]. [/QUOTE]I disagree completely. A game like Arizona Sunshine would be mindnumblingly boring as a flatscreen title, since you just shoot zombies and progress along a linear path with a rather forgetable story.
As a VR title it's substantially better, because the added immersion makes it more enjoyable. You physically open up car doors, inspect objects, grab ammo, aim a flashlight, etc. That's not really doable on a mouse and keyboard.
Isn't Fallout 4 VR literally just a mod file? Like they took the laziest route?
[editline]25th December 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=grob;53004962]I just see a lot of nitpicking from people. We're in the second commercial year of VR, yet you expect so much from the developers, you guys really are just willfully halting progress by being so hesitant over such [i]small[/i] details.
Yeah, it's a bad port; but you know what? Buying this will show publishers that people want VR. You can't just port games to VR forever, eventually you're going to get big projects once they see it's a commercially viable market.
Until you actually spend the money to show you're going to fund those future projects; all you're going to get are the lazy ports.[/QUOTE]
No no, this will incentive lazy ports because they'll figure the community is so hungry for games they'll take anything.
[QUOTE=srobins;53004896]We've had "sit at the computer with a headset" since the DK2. I don't know why you're upset that people are excited about futuristic technology and the crazy new gameplay experiences it brings.[/QUOTE]
I'm not upset, I just think a very narrow view of what VR games 'should be' has taken over the community and I find those games incredibly boring. Once you get over the wow factor of "Wow everything is so big", "Wow I can pick up everything", "Wow I can aim the gun/bow or swing the sword" those types of games get very tedious IMO. LA Noire looks like fun in VR, but does the ability to slap anyone or manually turn over bodies actually add anything to the game?
It just seems to me that there are two camps when it comes to VR, and both sides see what the other side prefers as a gimmick. Some people, like me or Downsider, would prefer more traditional games with VR features even if it doesn't utilise everything a VR set up can do. Other people, like Willerin, would prefer games use all the features of VR even if it means it only does a small handful of things.
It's just a difference in opinion. What bothers me is that the idea that liking VR means you HAVE to want room scale, full body tracking in everything or "Why even bother" has become the norm among VR enthusiasts. Honestly, VR enthusiasts are the worst thing to happen to VR, they constantly, and consistently push people who aren't full on the VR hype train away, and now they're doing it to people who don't want the exact same VR as them.
Not that anyone in this thread is that extreme.
I'm more worried about development costs and the already ballooning shit that comes with developing games because that shit isn't cheapening out any time soon.
In fact its getting worse. We already get so little now with games that don't have contrived monetary strings attached to them.
[QUOTE=Lolnoob1;53004964]The motion controls are part of that gameplay though. I could play a game where the gun is strapped to my face in VR, but at that point I'd just play the flatscreen version. Without the motion controllers I'd have no incentive to use VR.[/QUOTE]
I agree, but there are diminishing returns. FO4 VR does more than enough.
[quote]Again, different preferences.
I love messing with those "imaginary dials and knobs", because that's not something I could do with a keyboard and mouse. That's another appeal of VR to me.
Maybe I will get tired of "smashing my controllers together" eventually, much like how I might get tired of pointing my controller at things and mashing the trigger to shoot. But for the time being, I'm enjoying it.
And there's nothing wrong with that.[/quote]
You're right. There's nothing wrong with you enjoying it. But once you realize how trivial it is, will the games still be fun? Probably not, because there's no substance outside of those dials and knobs.
[quote]Different genres of games exist, you know. Not everything has an amazing storyline or world building, and they don't necessarily need them.
Sometimes I just want to shoot zombies/robots/hotdogs/etc without having to care for those things.[/quote]
The reload-gun-and-shoot-at-lifeless-objects-with-no-goal genre is very boring.
[quote]What about immersing yourself in the game?
I've had some great moments in H3VR struggling to reload my gun while under fire. I've had similar experiences in Pavlov, even with its more simplified reload mechanics. A button reload can't really capture that sense of panic.[/quote]
And once it becomes a basic motor function like aiming a mouse or moving with WASD or counterstrafing in CS, you will no longer have this exciting experience and you'll realize the mechanic is just annoying and cumbersome.
[quote]I disagree completely. A game like Arizona Sunshine would be mindnumblingly boring as a flatscreen title, since you just shoot zombies and progress along a linear path with a rather forgetable story.
As a VR title it's substantially better, because the added immersion makes it more enjoyable. You physically open up car doors, inspect objects, grab ammo, aim a flashlight, etc. That's not really doable on a mouse and keyboard.[/quote]
Penumbra and Amnesia did this very well.
[QUOTE=grob;53004962]I just see a lot of nitpicking from people. We're in the second commercial year of VR, yet you expect so much from the developers, you guys really are just willfully halting progress by being so hesitant over such [i]small[/i] details.
Yeah, it's a bad port; but you know what? Buying this will show publishers that people want VR. You can't just port games to VR forever, eventually you're going to get big projects once they see it's a commercially viable market.
Until you actually spend the money to show you're going to fund those future projects; all you're going to get are the lazy ports.[/QUOTE]
While you're right, its also more that people are disappointed at the attitude that Bethesda has. They're selling something that many games give as a free update, for full price, for a game that already exists and can be bought for a quarter of that at this very second
[t]https://i.imgur.com/HR6ZeXT.png[/t][t]https://i.imgur.com/P0wJpPC.png[/t]
It not only has the performance issues still, but its effectively as good as a free update would have been for four times the cost. I'd call people babies if this was DLC, but this is more than that. It's a cynical move on a good game with a good market.
IT would have been fine if previous owners received a discount
it would have been fine if they had a Christmas sale or lowered the price
but it adds no content or optimizations, its not $60 worth of work from them. The only people here that win didn't already buy fallout.
[QUOTE=SunsetTable;53004965]Isn't Fallout 4 VR literally just a mod file? Like they took the laziest route?
[editline]25th December 2017[/editline]
No no, this will incentive lazy ports because they'll figure the community is so hungry for games they'll take anything.[/QUOTE]
That is the opposite of how things work. If they aren't selling; people are hesitant to produce. Once you buy, the developers themselves will start pitching big projects to the publishers; which will be much easier to follow through with, due to the success of the market.
[QUOTE=grob;53004990]That is the opposite of how things work. If they aren't selling; people are hesitant to produce. Once you buy, the developers themselves will start pitching big projects to the publishers; which will be much easier to follow through with, due to the success of the market.[/QUOTE]
That is not the opposite. All you have to do is look at fucking loot boxes to see that all it takes is a few people willing to let a few dollars go to watch the fucking flood infest [B]everything.[/B]
[QUOTE=SunsetTable;53004994]That is not the opposite. All you have to do is look at fucking loot boxes to see that all it takes is a few people willing to let a few dollars go to watch the fucking flood infest [B]everything.[/B][/QUOTE]
You seem to have the generic "fuck the game industry" angst going on in your posts. I'm sorry but that's just not how business booms my friend. People don't suddenly scramble to start copying someone who is losing money on their investments.
[QUOTE=grob;53005005]You seem to have the generic "fuck the game industry" angst going on in your posts. I'm sorry but that's just not how business booms my friend. People don't suddenly scramble to start copying someone who is losing money on their investments.[/QUOTE]
Generic wh-I was defending the fucking Destiny 2 shit like a month ago. And no its not, lazy ports don't equal suddenly good ports. It took developers how many years during the 360/PS3/Wii era to finally figure out that good PC ports are important.
[I]And we still don't get them at all?[/I] Infact across the board, optimization has become toxic in almost everyway because unless its a first party game, every game seems to suffer from terrible optimization, period.
[QUOTE=Downsider;53004987]I agree, but there are diminishing returns. FO4 VR does more than enough.
You're right. There's nothing wrong with you enjoying it. But once you realize how trivial it is, will the games still be fun? Probably not, because there's no substance outside of those dials and knobs.
The reload-gun-and-shoot-at-lifeless-objects-with-no-goal genre is very boring.
And once it becomes a basic motor function like aiming a mouse or moving with WASD or counterstrafing in CS, you will no longer have this exciting experience and you'll realize the mechanic is just annoying and cumbersome.
Penumbra and Amnesia did this very well.[/QUOTE]
There is one thing that you are right about here though that I can totally agree with, VR can't run on games that are all about control gimmicks
I'd rather my games have [I]those[/I] gimmicks, but making the game be only about those gimmicks doesn't really make a game at all. VR does opening doors much better than penumbra and amnesia, but it currently suffers from the effects of trying to find a place in gaming.
as cool as H3VR is there is really no goal in it and nothing really happens. It's a fun sandbox, but it's not really a fully fledged game, not yet anyways.
[editline]25th December 2017[/editline]
If anything, I'd say you would be right in saying we should focus on making Serious Sams and Fallouts before we make other things.
Though I still agree that we should try and make out H3VR's and games like that sort to experiment and see what works and what doesn't. Manual reloading still has a good place above button reloading after all
[QUOTE=Downsider;53004987]I agree, but there are diminishing returns. FO4 VR does more than enough.
[/Quote]I won't really speak on the quality of FO4 VR since I don't actually own it, I just thought that the button press reload didn't really fit with a role-playing game. Immersion would be pretty important for that genre, and even small details like a manual reload help (as an option, of course.)
Syringe injection seems a bit much though.
[quote]
You're right. There's nothing wrong with you enjoying it. But once you realize how trivial it is, will the games still be fun? Probably not, because there's no substance outside of those dials and knobs.[/quote]
I'm well aware that those details are trivial, but it still hasn't lost its charm to me.
The games I mentioned with such reload mechanics (mainly Pavlov and H3VR) still have some substance outside of that. Pavlov still plays like a CS clone in VR, and the dev is even working on an obligatory battle royale mode.
H3VR has more than just shooting ranges if you've kept up with the updates. There are gamemodes like survival 'horror' (not really) and a recent one where you try to take and defend areas from enemies.
I haven't played Onward much, but people on the Payday 2 forums love to talk about how great it is in comparison (and they always bring up the reload mechanics).
[quote]
The reload-gun-and-shoot-at-lifeless-objects-with-no-goal genre is very boring.[/quote]I'll agree with you on that in regards to wave shooters. Many of them lack progression entirely and generally play the same.
[quote]
And once it becomes a basic motor function like aiming a mouse or moving with WASD or counterstrafing in CS, you will no longer have this exciting experience and you'll realize the mechanic is just annoying and cumbersome.[/quote]
I don't know if it'll turn annoying, but pretty much any game and its mechanics eventually lose their charm. It's no different for a VR game.
[quote]
Penumbra and Amnesia did this very well.[/QUOTE]Not sure if those are quite like Arizona Sunshine (because it's way more lighthearted with the character dialogue), but I'll check them out.
I pose a question to the people complaining about this port.
Would you rather them spend copious amounts of resources so that this Fallout port is Goldilocks "just right" for you? Or would you rather them spend those resources on the Elder Scrolls game that's going to be announced next year?
I think Bethesda specifically not spending as much time on this specific port is actually a better thing in the long run. Fallout 4 VR is just another small thing to fill the time until next years E3. It has its downsides but it's also a stepping stone; treat it as such.
[QUOTE=grob;53005145]I pose a question to the people complaining about this port.
Would you rather them spend copious amounts of resources so that this Fallout port is Goldilocks "just right" for you? Or would you rather them spend those resources on the Elder Scrolls game that's going to be announced next year?
I think Bethesda specifically not spending as much time on this specific port is actually a better thing in the long run. Fallout 4 VR is just another small thing to fill the time until next years E3. It has its downsides but it's also a stepping stone; treat it as such.[/QUOTE]
It's a[I] 60 dollar[/I] stepping stone.
[QUOTE=Bertie;53005152]It's a[I] 60 dollar[/I] stepping stone.[/QUOTE]
That is the only point I'd agree with.
I'd still ask you to answer the question though.
[QUOTE=grob;53005155]That is the only point I'd agree with.
I'd still ask you to answer the question though.[/QUOTE]
No, I agree with you. It's just the price tag that bothers me. Also, if anyone was actually surprised when this turned out to be a half-baked cash grab, they clearly weren't paying attention to Bethesda's output lately.
[QUOTE=Downsider;53004889]It literally adds nothing of value. What [I]is[/I] valuable is the game itself, the gameplay, [/QUOTE]
Reloading is part of the gameplay. 'Motion controls' for reloading means you can do it slower or faster depending on how good you are at it, and that's fun. Did you not notice how popular shooting bows and arrows is in VR? I think that shows pretty clearly that people like having more interaction requirements for handling weapons than what flat screen games can provide.
Clearly, the whole interactivity is a completely new thing in gaming, with only a couple of examples so far. You could look at H3VR for the mechanistically advanced mechanics, which I would say is good for a game that [I]focuses[/I] on the guns, whereas you might look at Hover Junkers for reloading mechanics that optimizes making it fun during [I]action[/I].
[QUOTE=Downsider;53004987]And once it becomes a basic motor function like aiming a mouse or moving with WASD or counterstrafing in CS, you will no longer have this exciting experience and you'll realize the mechanic is just annoying and cumbersome.[/QUOTE]
Taking Hover Junkers as an example, the game would be much more boring if reloading was just a button press. Reloading is simple and fun because you can get good at it and then be able to beat an opponent by reloading faster. If you don't think that's fun, then that's fine, but remember it would be exactly as valid to say that aiming at enemies isn't fun and that you'd prefer to just click the mouse and not worry about the gimmick of having to move the cross hair. It's fun because [I]you[/I] have to do it, and you can get good at doing it, and then you'll feel great when you can smoothly headshot five dudes in a row / hit targets while shooting from the hip / reload faster than your enemy / shoot arrows really precisely. Notice how the last three examples are either literally not possible in flat screen games, or significantly less interesting.
[QUOTE=Downsider;53004549]annnnnd the disagree ratings I have coming from a gun nut, a guy who doesn’t even own a VR headset, and a guy who’s owned one for about a week. Pretty much confirms what I’m saying. I invite you to go on /r/vive and find someone who isn’t enjoying Fallout 4 because you can’t reload by hand.[/QUOTE]
I realize it might not make a difference because you'll arbitrarily decide that only a DK1 owner can truly have an opinion here, but I've owned a Vive since April 2016, and I completely disagree with everything you're saying. The interactive mechanics that are being experimented with in VR currently are not gimmicks, because contrary to motion controls they are actually precise. This means that two-handed aiming, bow and arrow shooting, throwing, etc. is [I]reliable[/I], and thus a VR game doesn't have to dumb it down just to get it to work - the game can actually expect the player to get good at it and enjoy doing it. [I](As a related example, see how PC users are expected to be able to aim, which is fun, while console games often help the player because aiming with an analog stick is unreliable and therefore often not fun)[/I] Yes, people are generally enjoying FO4VR, but that doesn't disprove that VR specific mechanics make a VR game [I]more[/I] fun.
According to this thread wanting arms and VR games to use VR features is a meme/gimmick
:thinking:
[QUOTE=Nemisis116;53006556]According to this thread wanting arms and VR games to use VR features is a meme/gimmick
:thinking:[/QUOTE]
"I prefer to use a button that means everyone should too"
never mind the fact that motion controls themselves can be easier than using buttons if done right
God I wish this didn't cost extra because if I had a headset I'd love playing it, but goddamn $60, fuck off Bethesda.
[QUOTE=Downsider;53004520]Anyone who’s been remotely following the VR scene knows that solving IK for two hands and a head looks like shit no matter how you cut it and is insanely stupid looking/disorienting. It’s better just to have two floating hands.[/QUOTE]
I played through Lone Echo without IK ever incorrectly positioning my arms. I think Bethesda certainly has the resources to do it convincingly.
[QUOTE=Nemisis116;53006556]According to this thread wanting arms and VR games to use VR features is a meme/gimmick
:thinking:[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=J!NX;53006918]"I prefer to use a button that means everyone should too"
never mind the fact that motion controls themselves can be easier than using buttons if done right[/QUOTE]
Is there a law that says once you get aboard the VR hype train you have to use strawman bullshit and generally act like an asshole? Most people are discussing this stuff reasonably. Why do you have to keep posting inflammatory bullshit?
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;53006994]Is there a law that says once you get aboard the VR hype train you have to use strawman bullshit and generally act like an asshole? Most people are discussing this stuff reasonably. Why do you have to keep posting inflammatory bullshit?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Downsider;53004549]
annnnnd the disagree ratings I have coming from a gun nut, a guy who doesn’t even own a VR headset, and a guy who’s owned one for about a week. Pretty much confirms what I’m saying. I invite you to go on /r/vive and find someone who isn’t enjoying Fallout 4 because you can’t reload by hand.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Downsider;53004987]
You're right. There's nothing wrong with you enjoying it. But once you realize how trivial it is, will the games still be fun? Probably not, because there's no substance outside of those dials and knobs.[/QUOTE]
"Pretty much confirms what I’m saying." and completely dismissing that someone might maybe just actually like something. I'm an asshole for that post though. Good to know.
[editline]26th December 2017[/editline]
Everyone is allowed to like a certain style of controls. There's nothing wrong with them boring someone.
But casually dismissing what others tastes and preferences are because ones tastes are different is ridiculous.
Imagine if I went into your steam profile and said "This guy is a dark souls fan. Pretty much confirms what I’m saying.". You wouldn't continue arguing with me. But I don't do that because I'm above that. Why is it ok for Downsider to do that?
Alright, fair enough but that doesn't mean you should act like a dick too. You blew him off earlier by telling him he shouldn't even bother with VR because he doesn't care for motion controls.
[QUOTE=J!NX;53004911]The entire point of VR is that you can have those small intuitive details. You're still on the 'input gimmick' argument. Maybe we should just use a keyboard and mouse instead of controllers then, because motion controls are nothing but an effective and fun "gimmick"
[b]it sounds like you shouldn't even bother with VR if that's the attitude.[/b] I found Serious Sam to be far more fun in VR than outside of it. I also found many games fun that I never would have even bothered with. Yes controls should be accommodating, but part of the charm is, so long as it works perfectly, figuring out the motions of reloading and using items.[/QUOTE]
I shouldn't have called you guys out specifically, but VR threads always turn into people being assholes to each other just because they want different things from VR. You shouldn't shit on others because they want different things from VR, if you do you're just one of the assholes who puts people off even trying it in the first place.
I just think it's baffling how someone can say "I'm not buying this because I can't reload by hand and I can't see my arms" and not "It's $60"
The tech involved in making it fit your arm preferences is too costly and time consuming to be viable with their future schedule.
[QUOTE=grob;53007214]I just think it's baffling how someone can say "I'm not buying this because I can't reload by hand and I can't see my arms" and not "It's $60"
The tech involved in making it fit your arm preferences is too costly and time consuming to be viable with their future schedule.[/QUOTE]
As far as I know that's a side-discussion about the game itself and what could be modded into it, rather than why they didn't buy it. I think everyone can mutually agree that the price point is ridiculous. If anyones complaining about features, I'm willing to bet its because they feel its not $60 worth of features, and they're reasonable for doing so.
While I'd rather have my Fallout 4 VR's and Serious Sams than my H3VR's and job sims, if they have optional features like being discussed, I would like them even more if implemented well. I would so be into an H3VR/HoverJunkers style Fallout 4 open world RPG. Having to panic-reload during a raid would be pretty amusing and make some pretty fun moments.
[QUOTE=grob;53007214]I just think it's baffling how someone can say "I'm not buying this because I can't reload by hand and I can't see my arms" and not "It's $60"
The tech involved in making it fit your arm preferences is too costly and time consuming to be viable with their future schedule.[/QUOTE]
The incredibly costly and time consuming process that vrchat does automatically no matter what ridiculous proportions you upload and looks fine?
Maybe I'm just asking too much for a game where you are constantly collecting, swapping and customizing armour to actually be able to see it
[QUOTE=J!NX;53007270]As far as I know that's a side-discussion about the game itself and what could be modded into it, rather than why they didn't buy it. I think everyone can mutually agree that the price point is ridiculous. If anyones complaining about features, I'm willing to bet its because they feel its not $60 worth of features, and they're reasonable for doing so.
While I'd rather have my Fallout 4 VR's and Serious Sams than my H3VR's and job sims, if they have optional features like being discussed, I would like them even more if implemented well. I would so be into an H3VR/HoverJunkers style Fallout 4 open world RPG. Having to panic-reload during a raid would be pretty amusing and make some pretty fun moments.[/QUOTE]
I'm not disagreeing with you guys; no one is... Of course it would be awesome to have realistic proportions and the ability to see your player model.
What we're saying is; it was not viable to have those features and stay within the release schedule, and also your venom towards the game for not having those features is unjustified.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.