4 ms·

> A major issue is that the price of headsets has remained very expensive. They mention it in passing in a later paragraph, but the cost of the headset is pean

> A major issue is that the price of headsets has remained very expensive. They mention it in passing in a later paragraph, but the cost of the headset is peanuts compared to the cost of a system that can provide a consistent, high-framerate, high-quality image. While cheaper options exist (Daydream/Gear VR, Oculus Quest, PSVR) they just don't have the quality or framerate to really send home the "future of gaming" VR has been sold as. I'd argue we're still minimum three years away from seeing mass adoption of VR in the household/consumer market. With raytracing still being in its infancy and software optimizations for many-core CPUs just beginning, it'll still be some time before mid-level <$800 systems are capable of providing a good VR experience.

donkeyd 7y ago
> they just don't have the quality or framerate to really send home the "future of gaming" VR has been sold as Have you actually played with the Quest? I've had many people use mine, also people who used Vive or Rift before and nobody was disappointed with the quality of it. If realism and frame rate were the most important part of gaming, then Pokemon Go and Candy Crush wouldn't be as profitable as they are. The majority of people want simple, arcade style entertainment, not hyper realistic sagas that take hours to finish.
- AndrewDucker 7y ago
  Agreed. I've seen numerous people put on a Quest, play 5 minutes of Beat Sabre, and come out _very_ excited.
- roenxi 7y ago
  > The majority of people want [X current product] not [Y under active development]. I've lost count of the number of times people have used that template and turned out to be humerously wrong. My favourite is probably when people tried to use it for Japanese phones > iPhones then the next generation iPhone wiped the competition in Japan. People want good entertainment more than they want their senses stimulated, but it seems very likely that good entertainment which stimulates the senses more effectively will have a massive market. We're dealing with something where the output can be strictly better than video in a fairly meaningful way. It'll turn out people want that when someone makes a compelling and high quality game/app. Sure, nobody is going to move over just because the visuals are good; but there is artistic space in VR that hasn't been touched before and some of it is going to be amazing. I suppose the short version is you are right but we've seen people say that before and it presaged massive changes.
  - donkeyd 7y ago
    I'm not predicting though, I'm just observing. The most popular free games on mobile are consistently low quality arcade games. Also, I'm not saying it's the only thing people play, GTA and RDR are super high grossing franchises and they are high quality sagas. I'm mostly rebutting against the notion that lack of quality is holding back consumer grade VR.
    - kipchak 7y ago
      I think performance in terms of keeping things consistent and smooth is really important, but visual realism or duplicating reality is overrated. Not only do you get into uncanny valley territory but more stylized art is often more compelling than imitation of reality. Beat Saber, Superhot, Sprint Vector, or I Expect You To Die for example have varying levels of unrealistic stabilization but are still immersive. Call of Duty on consoles has long been described as feeling better than other shooters, partially because of it's 60fps target since Call of Duty 2. At the time few people would care if "60fps!" was a feature printed on the box, it was more behind the curtain magic.
- megla_ 7y ago
  Those are mobile games and your phone isn't strapped 3 cm away from your eyes, covering your complete sight.
gmueckl 7y ago
Good VR isn't just about graphics quality. Mobile phone GPUs can deliver a high enough frame rate to deliver an immersive experience. The Oculus Quest is proof of that. The only downside is that the graphical content has to be stylized. But in games, stylized looks can be a boon instead of a hindrance. A typical good gaming experience is extremely stylized and over the top, anyway (especially in these "realistic" militaristic FPS games).

donkeyd 7y ago

> they just don't have the quality or framerate to really send home the "future of gaming" VR has been sold as Have you actually played with the Quest? I've had many people use mine, also people who used Vive or Rift before and nobody was disappointed with the quality of it. If realism and frame rate were the most important part of gaming, then Pokemon Go and Candy Crush wouldn't be as profitable as they are. The majority of people want simple, arcade style entertainment, not hyper realistic sagas that take hours to finish.

AndrewDucker 7y ago
Agreed. I've seen numerous people put on a Quest, play 5 minutes of Beat Sabre, and come out _very_ excited.
roenxi 7y ago
> The majority of people want [X current product] not [Y under active development]. I've lost count of the number of times people have used that template and turned out to be humerously wrong. My favourite is probably when people tried to use it for Japanese phones > iPhones then the next generation iPhone wiped the competition in Japan. People want good entertainment more than they want their senses stimulated, but it seems very likely that good entertainment which stimulates the senses more effectively will have a massive market. We're dealing with something where the output can be strictly better than video in a fairly meaningful way. It'll turn out people want that when someone makes a compelling and high quality game/app. Sure, nobody is going to move over just because the visuals are good; but there is artistic space in VR that hasn't been touched before and some of it is going to be amazing. I suppose the short version is you are right but we've seen people say that before and it presaged massive changes.
- donkeyd 7y ago
  I'm not predicting though, I'm just observing. The most popular free games on mobile are consistently low quality arcade games. Also, I'm not saying it's the only thing people play, GTA and RDR are super high grossing franchises and they are high quality sagas. I'm mostly rebutting against the notion that lack of quality is holding back consumer grade VR.
  - kipchak 7y ago
    I think performance in terms of keeping things consistent and smooth is really important, but visual realism or duplicating reality is overrated. Not only do you get into uncanny valley territory but more stylized art is often more compelling than imitation of reality. Beat Saber, Superhot, Sprint Vector, or I Expect You To Die for example have varying levels of unrealistic stabilization but are still immersive. Call of Duty on consoles has long been described as feeling better than other shooters, partially because of it's 60fps target since Call of Duty 2. At the time few people would care if "60fps!" was a feature printed on the box, it was more behind the curtain magic.
megla_ 7y ago
Those are mobile games and your phone isn't strapped 3 cm away from your eyes, covering your complete sight.

gmueckl 7y ago

Good VR isn't just about graphics quality. Mobile phone GPUs can deliver a high enough frame rate to deliver an immersive experience. The Oculus Quest is proof of that. The only downside is that the graphical content has to be stylized. But in games, stylized looks can be a boon instead of a hindrance. A typical good gaming experience is extremely stylized and over the top, anyway (especially in these "realistic" militaristic FPS games).