Vive Pro Launch

[Thony]

On 19/03/2018 at 9:09 PM, orbitalbuzzsaw said:

I don't see the point. the Vive is more than good enough as it is.

So is any smartphone but they keep releasing new ones...

 

Its about improving the experience. Anything and everything can be better. If nobody tried do better we would still be hunting mammoths butt naked in the jungle ?

 

If the Vive is all u need for your Vr experience then good for you, u are set for years. Not everyone has same experience as you.

[Jtalk4456]

6 hours ago, Sakkura said:

Wireless will definitely be a big deal, and yes it's way too expensive right now.

 

Having 2 people in the same room playing in VR is not a good idea. You're just reducing the usable area for each. One of the great things about VR is it virtualizes presence, so you can be playing with someone thousands of kilometers away but feel like you're standing right next to them.

Same as above, being next to each other in the real world is unimportant with VR.

I get what you mean with being able to see someone thousands of miles away, but I'm not saying people want to be in the same room, but rather that being in the same room might just be the way things are for some. Ex: 2 siblings who live together in parent's house want to play vr game with each other. paying double to have 2 setups in different rooms is hard to justify. Also 2 friends in the same neighborhood but one friend's set of parents is fairly well off while the other cannot afford vr, so friend 2 comes over to friend 1's house and plays vr with friend. That's why I'm saying it's important to be able to have them in the same room. Not everyone has the ability to get vr, so it is a necessity for vr to support 2 people in the same room so that friends and families don't have to wait to afford a second vr setup

[Sniperfox47]

1 hour ago, Jtalk4456 said:

I get what you mean with being able to see someone thousands of miles away, but I'm not saying people want to be in the same room, but rather that being in the same room might just be the way things are for some. Ex: 2 siblings who live together in parent's house want to play vr game with each other. paying double to have 2 setups in different rooms is hard to justify. Also 2 friends in the same neighborhood but one friend's set of parents is fairly well off while the other cannot afford vr, so friend 2 comes over to friend 1's house and plays vr with friend. That's why I'm saying it's important to be able to have them in the same room. Not everyone has the ability to get vr, so it is a necessity for vr to support 2 people in the same room so that friends and families don't have to wait to afford a second vr setup

...they have to do that with consoles now >.> Wanna play Splatoon or CoD with your sister? Buy a second console and hook it up to a second TV.

 

At the end of the day VR is even more of a single-person activity than normal console gaming. I agree with the word of mouth issue inherent in VR, but it's a fundamental issue with marketing VR and isn't going away anytime soon.

[Jtalk4456]

3 hours ago, Sniperfox47 said:

...they have to do that with consoles now >.> Wanna play Splatoon or CoD with your sister? Buy a second console and hook it up to a second TV.

 

At the end of the day VR is even more of a single-person activity than normal console gaming. I agree with the word of mouth issue inherent in VR, but it's a fundamental issue with marketing VR and isn't going away anytime soon.

Why would you buy a second console and hook it up to a second tv vs just playing multiplayer with 2 remotes?!

 

[Drak3]

14 minutes ago, Jtalk4456 said:

Why would you buy a second console and hook it up to a second tv vs just playing multiplayer with 2 remotes?!

 

Many games are getting rid of local multiplayer.

 

I actually kept my fIrst PS4 specifically for this reason.

[Jtalk4456]

43 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Many games are getting rid of local multiplayer.

 

I actually kept my fIrst PS4 specifically for this reason.

Fair enough, but that's a critique of the game, not the console. I'm talking about what the console can do, and VR needs to be able to do it if it wants to catch on as a consumer item

[Drak3]

13 minutes ago, Jtalk4456 said:

Fair enough, but that's a critique of the game, not the console. I'm talking about what the console can do, and VR needs to be able to do it if it wants to catch on as a consumer item

No, it doesn't.

 

It's a nice perk, but it doesn't need it, just like how gaming PCs don't need it.

[Jtalk4456]

10 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

No, it doesn't.

 

It's a nice perk, but it doesn't need it, just like how gaming PCs don't need it.

We'll have to agree to disagree, 'cause I don't see how it's going to catch on without it. My wife can't play a vr game with me because of this issue, it's limited to singleplayer if I want to involve my family they can just sit there and watch me play. that's no fun

[Drak3]

14 minutes ago, Jtalk4456 said:

We'll have to agree to disagree, 'cause I don't see how it's going to catch on without it. My wife can't play a vr game with me because of this issue, it's limited to singleplayer if I want to involve my family they can just sit there and watch me play. that's no fun

LAN party in the same room also works. That's what Rooster Teeth does in multiplayer VR The Champions episodes.

[Jtalk4456]

4 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

LAN party in the same room also works. That's what Rooster Teeth does in multiplayer VR The Champions episodes.

Again that requires purchase of two systems, where as buying two controllers for one console is a lot cheaper

[Drak3]

6 minutes ago, Jtalk4456 said:

Again that requires purchase of two systems, where as buying two controllers for one console is a lot cheaper

That's something you'd have to do to game together in most multiplayer PC games anyways.

[Jtalk4456]

2 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

That's something you'd have to do to game together in most multiplayer PC games anyways.

We seem to be going in circles, I'm not talking about PC gaming at all, I'm saying the reasons consoles have been so widely adopted is the ease of multiplayer with friends and family without requiring two gaming machines. That's why VR hasn't taken off past the enthusiast level, people like playing games with family and friends and current VR either puts you apart from each other while playing or is too expensive for both parties to enjoy it. If they can go 2 headsets into one PC or console at a reasonable cost, It will take off in the consumer market

[Drak3]

Just now, Jtalk4456 said:

We seem to be going in circles, I'm not talking about PC gaming at all, I'm saying the reasons consoles have been so widely adopted is the ease of multiplayer with friends and family without requiring two gaming machines. That's why VR hasn't taken off past the enthusiast level, people like playing games with family and friends and current VR either puts you apart from each other while playing or is too expensive for both parties to enjoy it. If they can go 2 headsets into one PC or console at a reasonable cost, It will take off in the consumer market

As of right now, VR gaming is primarily PC gaming.

 

And PC gaming is growing, console gaming is stagnant. VR gaming is following, faster than I expected.

[Jtalk4456]

13 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

As of right now, VR gaming is primarily PC gaming.

 

And PC gaming is growing, console gaming is stagnant. VR gaming is following, faster than I expected.

I think you think you're disagreeing with me, but I think you're actually agreeing. VR gaming is primarily PC right now, because console gamers are used to having a player 2 in the same room, and that isn't practical right now with console VR, which is why I say if they fix that, console VR will gain a lot of ground on PCVR, especially if the cost stays low for the headsetI would actually. I'm curious how you got to the conclusion that Console gaming is stagnant. the PS4 Sales say otherwise

[Thaldor]

4 minutes ago, Jtalk4456 said:

 

Two VR players on the same system is quite far away fetched, at least if we want something that looks more like modern day game than mobile game. At least without hardware that is "extremely expensive" as in 3 VR players 1 PC -video. So, we get to the point where VR comes even more expensive or we need to deal with VR thats quality is something that no one really wants.

 

Console that could that, well, just wait 10 more years for a console that can even run Vive/Rift class VR. While there is great debate which is better Vive or Rift, there's no debate about PSVR being the worst of all (if we exclude mobile VR like Gear VR and cardbox). It can't even run "normal" (for VR) 90 FPS and it uses only shared 1080p screen (it runs in even 60Hz, 90Hz or 120Hz, but even with 60Hz they use asynchronous reprojection and if developer has choicen to use 90Hz or 120Hz PSVR just adds more intermediate frames and with 120Hz there's really noticeable lag and motion blur is just awful). Even PS4 Pro really didn't help the problem, IIRC it can run PSVR 60Hz without asychronous reprojection, but that really isn't much. So, you do the math when we have a console that can run two VR headsets while at the moment we have a console that barely can run one.

Also remember that on the rendering side it's not just going from 1080p to 2K rendering stress when using two headsets. It's more like going from 1080p to 4/8K, because the GPU doesn't need to render one bigger image but two images at the same time and this is where those "high" HW requirments for Vive/Rift come from.

 

Also in technical problems there the tracking. Vive and Rift can use more sophisticated tracking because they are usually connected to a machine that can easily handle that. PSVR in the other hand uses the old PS Move system, which compared to Vive/Rift is quite shitty (excuse my French). And for two players room scale is almost a must, just for safety and with current tracking PSVR is very far from having room scale tracking, and while Vive and Rift have it, it doesn't mean Sony can just use theirs (Oculus/Facebook already got into a trouble with Zenimax for their tracking). And that also requires more performance from the console.

 

Then there is still the same problem that I mention probably the third time. Humans. Something like DK1/DK2 time sitting and playing with Xbox/PS-controller style games can work with 2 players playing from one machine and sharing the same space because they don't require moving at all (but we don't want those back, they are the reason why still many people believe that VR causes motion sickness easily and today developers know that first thing you want to steer away as much as possible is to move the game character without player moving). But when you put two VR players close each other, even when they can see each other in the game, it gets violent and fast. This could be countered by having good buffer zones between the players, but that starts to grow the space requirments and already quite many critizes that the VR needs so much room.

[Sniperfox47]

5 hours ago, Jtalk4456 said:

We'll have to agree to disagree, 'cause I don't see how it's going to catch on without it. My wife can't play a vr game with me because of this issue, it's limited to singleplayer if I want to involve my family they can just sit there and watch me play. that's no fun

I think you have a massive misunderstanding of why consoles have gotten popular.

 

Just because that's how you use consoles doesn't mean that's the reason why they're selling. For the Wii? Sure. But for the PS4, Xbox One, and Switch? Not in the slightest.

 

The *vast* majority of modern gamers are not people sitting down to play party games with friends and family. The vast majority of players are the ones playing CoD, Destiny, Overwatch, NHL, GTA 5, PUBG,  Fortnite, Halo, Splatoon and other online multiplayer titles with their friends.

 

And then your second biggest playerbase are your Assassin Creed, Skyrim, Farcry, Horizon Zero Dawn, Breath of the Wild, Mario, LotR, and other primarily single player games.

 

Even on the switch, a console literally designed with on the go party games and multiplayer ease of use in mind the primary sales are coming from these areas.

 

P.S. I love playing games like Kirby with others, don't get me wrong. I'm not much of a competitive multiplayer game guy myself. But at the end of the day, that's what most of the people buying these consoles are.

[Jtalk4456]

11 hours ago, Sniperfox47 said:

I think you have a massive misunderstanding of why consoles have gotten popular.

 

Just because that's how you use consoles doesn't mean that's the reason why they're selling. For the Wii? Sure. But for the PS4, Xbox One, and Switch? Not in the slightest.

 

The *vast* majority of modern gamers are not people sitting down to play party games with friends and family. The vast majority of players are the ones playing CoD, Destiny, Overwatch, NHL, GTA 5, PUBG,  Fortnite, Halo, Splatoon and other online multiplayer titles with their friends.

 

And then your second biggest playerbase are your Assassin Creed, Skyrim, Farcry, Horizon Zero Dawn, Breath of the Wild, Mario, LotR, and other primarily single player games.

 

Even on the switch, a console literally designed with on the go party games and multiplayer ease of use in mind the primary sales are coming from these areas.

 

P.S. I love playing games like Kirby with others, don't get me wrong. I'm not much of a competitive multiplayer game guy myself. But at the end of the day, that's what most of the people buying these consoles are.

And I think you're confusing why they are popular now with how they got popular in the first place. Consoles were originally marketed as a family activity (regardless if that's what happened or what is currently happening or popular now). That marketing worked and it worked well, which is why consoles are still around. Now a days it's become a standard for a kid to be into gaming, so the marketing has moved to how good the gaming experience is. VR is still in the early stages of adoption and needs that first step of making it a social activity so that families want to have it in their living room. Once prices drop and it catches on in the family setting, it won't matter that most people don't use it socially, the adoption will be there and they can focus on marketing towards how powerful it gets

[Sakkura]

18 minutes ago, Jtalk4456 said:

And I think you're confusing why they are popular now with how they got popular in the first place. Consoles were originally marketed as a family activity (regardless if that's what happened or what is currently happening or popular now). That marketing worked and it worked well, which is why consoles are still around. Now a days it's become a standard for a kid to be into gaming, so the marketing has moved to how good the gaming experience is. VR is still in the early stages of adoption and needs that first step of making it a social activity so that families want to have it in their living room. Once prices drop and it catches on in the family setting, it won't matter that most people don't use it socially, the adoption will be there and they can focus on marketing towards how powerful it gets

Just because that marketing was helpful for consoles in the 1980s doesn't mean it's necessary for VR in 2018. The market is different now.

 

And remember, gaming PCs are commonplace without ever having had that type of family entertainment image.

[Jtalk4456]

16 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Just because that marketing was helpful for consoles in the 1980s doesn't mean it's necessary for VR in 2018. The market is different now.

 

And remember, gaming PCs are commonplace without ever having had that type of family entertainment image.

I beg to differ

[Sakkura]

3 hours ago, Jtalk4456 said:

I beg to differ

Marketing is not truth.

 

PCs had a business image for a long time. You might remember the Mac ads trying to reinforce that image much later, about 10 years ago.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get_a_Mac

[Jtalk4456]

1 hour ago, Sakkura said:

Marketing is not truth.

 

PCs had a business image for a long time. You might remember the Mac ads trying to reinforce that image much later, about 10 years ago.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get_a_Mac

I didn't say it's what it was used for in the end, I said it was marketed for that. I'm not talking about truth, but rather perception and marketing driven adoption

[Sakkura]

19 minutes ago, Jtalk4456 said:

I didn't say it's what it was used for in the end, I said it was marketed for that. I'm not talking about truth, but rather perception and marketing driven adoption

But what they say in marketing is not the same as the actual perception and what drives purchases.

[Jtalk4456]

1 hour ago, Sakkura said:

But what they say in marketing is not the same as the actual perception and what drives purchases.

OK dude, apparently, we just need to agree to disagree, I remember the perception from my childhood being family oriented, but maybe you didn't. Either way, I personally would love to play VR with my wife without buying a second console or having a second computer in a separate room, defeating the purpose of playing together. But either way, IF that happens, it's a ways off regardless so lets stop torturing people following this thread