HTC Vive is going to cost $799. Will come with two games bundled. And Vive Phone Services.
242 replies, posted
Only thing I care about is how the Vive can play nice with OR programs/codes - and how learned I need to be on programming to fudge it if I have to.
Because ironically, most of the stuff I want VR with is already 100% working with OR, but I'm not sure the interest would spread to Vive anytime soon. Like gz3Doom and War Thunder.
[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;49785393]I guess it will take quite a while for things to move up, at least a year or two; we had to go through Pacman, Tetris, Wolfenstein etc.. until we got to Crysis, Witcher 3 and XCOM 2.[/QUOTE]
This isn't an apt comparison at all.
Pacman and Tetris are notably ancient, one being an Arcade machine that wasn't even possible to be ported to home entertainment ASAP. And Wolfenstein was played with a [B]keyboard [/B](and later Doom, [B]Keyboard and Mouse[/B].)
Crysis, Witcher, and XCOM are also played with a [B]Keyboard and Mouse[/B]. (On a monitor with an audio device, etc.)
[B]VR is an entirely new peripheral[/B], and it's definitely not one that can transition into many games very well. Of which - anything that's not played in the first person perspective, because otherwise it usually ends up being a gimmick.
[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_Oculus_Rift_support[/URL]
This list looks big at a glance, but it's very apparent how very small it is. Most of the bulk is indie shovelware, tech demos, cheap adult games, and things that aren't even launched yet. The real heavyweights are Source, Unreal, and a handful of simulators.
For me, VR is still a gimmick. One I really, really want - but a gimmick none the less.
[QUOTE=Doom14;49785430]
This isn't an apt comparison at all.
[/QUOTE]
You didn't even bother to understand my point. What I was implying is that it would take a while until we get something worthwhile of a good VR experience.
[QUOTE=Lolkork;49785475]VR might just become another ps vita, people wont buy them because they don't offer enough big 'exclusives', but big developers wont develop for them because the userbase isn't large enough.
But VR wont die off like the ps vita did, it will just stay silent until it becomes affordable for the average gamer. And then the big developers will come in and there will be a vr boom.
This is just a thought, it might become a massive hit instantly or it might die off completely.[/QUOTE]
it'll never die off, as people love the idea far too much, but it certainly could become extremely niche for a while, kind of like 4k monitors were for the longest time, and THEN go big
hell, it died off for a little after the 90's, but eventually came back. Not that you're saying literally "It'll die off"
[QUOTE=Doom14;49785430]Only thing I care about is how the Vive can play nice with OR programs/codes - and how learned I need to be on programming to fudge it if I have to.
Because ironically, most of the stuff I want VR with is already 100% working with OR, but I'm not sure the interest would spread to Vive anytime soon. Like gz3Doom and War Thunder.
This isn't an apt comparison at all.
Pacman and Tetris are notably ancient, one being an Arcade machine that wasn't even possible to be ported to home entertainment ASAP. And Wolfenstein was played with a [B]keyboard [/B](and later Doom, [B]Keyboard and Mouse[/B].)
Crysis, Witcher, and XCOM are also played with a [B]Keyboard and Mouse[/B]. (On a monitor with an audio device, etc.)
[B]VR is an entirely new peripheral[/B], and it's definitely not one that can transition into many games very well. Of which - anything that's not played in the first person perspective, because otherwise it usually ends up being a gimmick.
[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_Oculus_Rift_support[/URL]
This list looks big at a glance, but it's very apparent how very small it is. Most of the bulk is indie shovelware, tech demos, cheap adult games, and things that aren't even launched yet. The real heavyweights are Source, Unreal, and a handful of simulators.
For me, VR is still a gimmick. One I really, really want - but a gimmick none the less.[/QUOTE]
I think you may be totally missing his point, like.... completely
[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;49785470]You didn't even bother to understand my point. What I was implying is that it would take a while until we get something worthwhile of a good VR experience.[/QUOTE]
VR is more of an attachment to a game though. Sure, you could build a game from the ground-up with VR in mind, but (in a first person game) you're essentially simulating the exact same camera we've already been using with fluid head control.
That's excellent for simulator games, but comes off as more of a tack-on for something like Source. Even if you add full on motion controls for the experience, I think it will more come down to some actually good blockbuster games with native VR support (whether they need it or not) to put VR on center-stage.
[QUOTE=J!NX;49785494]I think you may be totally missing his point, like.... completely[/QUOTE]
Huh, maybe I did then.
[QUOTE=Doom14;49785502]VR is more of an attachment to a game though. Sure, you could build a game from the ground-up with VR in mind, but (in a first person game) you're essentially simulating the exact same camera we've already been using with fluid head control.[/QUOTE]
That's only one part of it though. Full VR is headset + positional tracking + motion controllers which can create experiences that would either be straight up impossible in a regular game or would have to be significantly simplified.
[QUOTE=Lolkork;49785475]VR might just become another ps vita, people wont buy them because they don't offer enough big 'exclusives', but big developers wont develop for them because the userbase isn't large enough.
But VR wont die off like the ps vita did, it will just stay silent until it becomes affordable for the average gamer. And then the big developers will come in and there will be a vr boom.
This is just a thought, it might become a massive hit instantly or it might die off completely.[/QUOTE]
At the same time the VR player base is a lot more enthusiastic and have more money to throw away.
Also no self respecting game company will miss a chance to try out this new platform, it's not even that much harder to make games focused on VR.
We're just gonna have to wait and see where it goes.
[QUOTE=Lolkork;49785475]VR might just become another ps vita, people wont buy them because they don't offer enough big 'exclusives', but big developers wont develop for them because the userbase isn't large enough.
But VR wont die off like the ps vita did, it will just stay silent until it becomes affordable for the average gamer. And then the big developers will come in and there will be a vr boom.
This is just a thought, it might become a massive hit instantly or it might die off completely.[/QUOTE]
That's not really a fair comparison, part of the reason that developers don't develop for systems like the Vita are the limitations that they bring, VR doesn't have those limitations, it actually instead just opens up more doors.
[QUOTE=Doom14;49785502]VR is more of an attachment to a game though. [B]Sure, you could build a game from the ground-up with VR in mind[/B], but (in a first person game) you're essentially simulating the exact same camera we've already been using with fluid head control.
[/QUOTE]
most devs are doing this actually
VR is no doubt awesome for cockpit simulators, but they definitely dont take full advantage of what VR can do, at that point it's really just a super immersive trackIR.
[editline]21st February 2016[/editline]
dont get me wrong though, cockpit simulators are cool as hell in VR
[QUOTE=Orkel;49784733]It's really dumb. Millions of people buy a $700 smartphone every 1-2 years but somehow for those same people an amazing new tech that has only been in science fiction before, is too expensive even at Rift's $600 price not to mention Vive's $799.[/QUOTE]
Because it requiers another 4-6 hundred dollars just to run the Vive and Rift?
[QUOTE=Kylel999;49784724]Found the perfect product for you
(muffed) "Yup, this is definitely the future"
[img]http://www.roadtovr.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/3dhead-oculus-killer-ces-2015.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
Talk about a neck breaker. I mean fuck, that looks like something an evil company would use to control your brain.
[QUOTE=SPESSMEHREN;49785378]I'm guessing the endless flood of "indie" games that offer nothing but a cheap quick laugh. Support for AAA games will be very slim, almost no AAA cross-platform games will offer it since game companies already do a piss-poor job at porting games to PC to begin with, so realistically you're looking at only at a very small set of PC-exclusive games that will add support for VR. And as of right now that list of games is extremely small and the games are for very niche audiences that most certainly do not appeal to a large demographic of PC gamers (most of the hype I'm seeing are for simulators and space sims).[/QUOTE]
You're forgetting that there are quite a few that a few games have partial compatibility right now, first thing i'm planning on doing when i pick up mine is having a go on Arma 3 or putting on Elite Dangerous again. There is plenty of stuff on the horizon for VR, the guys making System Shock 3 are considering picking up VR, Star Citizen can use VR right now as a matter of fact. War Thunder can handle it. While there might not be official support for a game, you can be certain that someone will try hacking it in if it is a popular video game or improvising it. I'm not even mentioning the games i haven't tried, Alien Isolation! Euro Truck Simulator 2! Assetto Corsa! Dying Light! Subnautica! Even fucking Dear Esther.
While i'm not going to lie that stuff does break occasionally in a fraction of the games i have mentioned , the core experience still remains.
You don't really need a full headset either, a Gear VR and a headset will suffice too. So really to be honest the market is open to anyone. I use Trinus VR on my phone and it works fine for whatever i want to play on, with a huge variety of settings that i can customise for what i want to play. It took me a bit of getting used to with the head tracking but especially when i've been playing Arma 3 recently i pull the Gear VR out for a few fun scenarios i've got from the workshop and it's alot of fun.
Stuff like this encourages future VR Support, if people want to play their favorite games through VR then that's a good thing and shows interest in the technology. It might take awhile but im optimistic with my experience just using Gear VR/Google Cardboard.
If Gear VR is just a more basic experience then i'll probably preorder the Vive too.
[QUOTE=Combine 177;49784688]Considering how valve loves new innovative things it is bit weird how they don't go and sell their product with a loss.[/QUOTE]
I imagine HTC has a stake in it.
[QUOTE=Lolkork;49785271]And once you have enough money your computer is too outdated to play the new games. You have to realize that these things are only for the people with a lot of disposable income.[/QUOTE]
The graphics coming out this year are probably going to be the last large leap for a few years, they'll be more than capable of running VR and robust to last a few years. I don't see VR getting that much better in terms of graphics as photorealistic graphics have been shown to actually cause motion sickness, right now the issue is running it, and within 2 years most manufacturers will have mid range VR cards
This is how all electronics work. They start off expensive and niche and come down in price over time.
nvm they edited it out
[QUOTE=IrishBandit;49785641]This is how all electronics work. They start off expensive and niche and come down in price over time.[/QUOTE]
Aaaactually that's false. That's a perception of gaming technology.
Every other piece of electronic always races to the bottom to get to the largest number of people. Gaming is weird in that regard.
[QUOTE=pentium;49784934]Let me use a better example from the 90's, also ironically costing $700.
[img]http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a166/ballsandy/Computer%20related/VFX1/IMG_7196.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
[quote]The helmet featured dual 0.7" 263 x 230 LCD displays capable of 256 colors. Field of view was 45 degrees diagonally.
Head movements were tracked with internal sensors for pitch (70 degrees), roll (70 degrees), and yaw (360 degrees). A hand-held controller called the Cyberpuck offered three buttons and internal sensors for pitch and roll. [highlight]It could emulate a mouse[/highlight], and connected to the helmet via an ACCESS.bus interface cable.[/quote]
why the fuck do we care about oculus anymore when we could spend $1500 90's dollars on this nex gen shit right here with TWO sources of gyro-controlled mouselook and such beautiful graphical capabilities? Just look at that raw resolution
[img]http://i.imgur.com/OxPX5w5.png[/img]
[editline]e[/editline]
on a monitor that isn't a decade and a half old pentium
[QUOTE=Timebomb575;49785330]tbh I initially thought the same thing about the phone services, but then it occurred to me that you are basically completely cut off from the outside world while wearing a VR headset (from a visual [I]and[/I] auditory perspective), and might be for hours during a long gaming session, so it's probably a good idea to have something like that phone service so people can still get ahold of you.[/QUOTE]
I'd agree with this, but the earliness of this first wave of HMDs still results in VR becoming extremely fatiguing both physically and mentally in relatively short amounts of time.
And the optional headphones included with some HMDs (which most people will be using) are quite open and don't have any sort of means of noise cancellation, so I'm sure you'd still be able to hear your phone or doorbell ringing.
The phone services to me really just seems like some extra fluff that HTC feel they had to add on because they're a phone manufacturer, not really because you could be too immersed in VR to forget about your phone.
[QUOTE=dai;49785743]
[img]http://i.imgur.com/OxPX5w5.png[/img][/QUOTE]
this image is so old it has a gamespy logo
VR has me pretty dissapointed, I was expecting an improved DK2 and that's all I wanted. Instead we're getting these headsets that are crammed full of stuff and features I don't want.
[QUOTE=Saxon;49786019]VR has me pretty dissapointed, I was expecting an improved DK2 and that's all I wanted. Instead we're getting these headsets that are crammed full of stuff and features I don't want.[/QUOTE]
I don't really know what you are on about.
The Oculus CV1 is pretty much just an upgraded DK2.
[QUOTE=Saxon;49786019]VR has me pretty dissapointed, I was expecting an improved DK2 and that's all I wanted. Instead we're getting these headsets that are crammed full of stuff and features I don't want.[/QUOTE]
i wish vive room tracking was an optional purchase
i play video games so i don't have to move
[QUOTE=Saxon;49786019]VR has me pretty dissapointed, I was expecting an improved DK2 and that's all I wanted. Instead we're getting these headsets that are crammed full of stuff and features I don't want.[/QUOTE]
You're disappointed by the fact that VR isn't just a screen strapped to your face? If that's what you're looking for, get Cardboard or a GearVR.
Even at 720p and having the screen door effect, I can't play TF2 without my DK1 anymore, I've been spoiled.
Here's to VR having a successful future in commercial and entertainment applications.
[QUOTE=Jund;49786128]i wish vive room tracking was optional
i play video games so i don't have to move[/QUOTE]
It is though? You can still play seated games in the Vive.. I seriously don't get how people come to the conclusion that the Vive forces you to run around your room. Do you think it just stops working if you sit still?
[QUOTE=Jund;49786128]i wish vive room tracking was optional
i play video games so i don't have to move[/QUOTE]
this doesn't even make any sense to say
what??????? how is it NOT optional?
[QUOTE=srobins;49786136]It is though? You can still play seated games in the Vive.. I seriously don't get how people come to the conclusion that the Vive forces you to run around your room. Do you think it just stops working if you sit still?[/QUOTE]
because it costs more money? for something i probably won't use?
[QUOTE=srobins;49786133]You're disappointed by the fact that VR isn't just a screen strapped to your face? If that's what you're looking for, get Cardboard or a GearVR.[/QUOTE]
Haha good one!
No, I'm annoyed I have to purchase a bundle with an xbox controller and headphones I don't want then theirs the Vive with fucking phone services, I mean come on.
[QUOTE=Jund;49786152]because it costs more money? for something i probably won't use?[/QUOTE]
then get the rift?
[QUOTE=Saxon;49786154]Haha good one!
No, I'm annoyed I have to purchase a bundle with an xbox controller and headphones I don't want then theirs the Vive with fucking phone services, I mean common.[/QUOTE]
I believe the bundle is free at loss of Oculus, actually
I guess I will just wait like with all new tech. When 3-4 more upgraded models of the original come out and the original is considered somewhat affordable trash. :v:
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.