5 ms·

> available exclusively on Meta Quest VR headsets I'm afraid this is going to be our future. There's web standards and VR browsers that allows us to enter any

by Vinnl 5y ago

> available exclusively on Meta Quest VR headsets I'm afraid this is going to be our future. There's web standards and VR browsers that allows us to enter any VR experience using your preferred device, but like Podcasts, there's a lot of effort to create silos that companies can act as a monopolist in.

rjh29 5y ago
'Future' is an odd term, console game exclusivity has been a fact of life for 40+ years.
- Vinnl 5y ago
  The future of VR if it takes off, I guess.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- desmond373 5y ago
  This is why I'm not too worried. I believe general purpose has an innate advantage due to versitility. PC is still around and still great for high performance gaming. Sure there are exclusives but that doesn't mean I can't play them on PC. Just means that some large company doesn't want me to and I'll happily ignore them like so many others. They may Sue me but it's not going to have a real effect unless they start catching way more people or making the fines unbearably huge. I won't give up the fight against exclusivity because my side isn't the uphill fight.
- rplnt 5y ago
  That at least made some technical sense up until recently.
- ______-_-______ 5y ago
  Dedicated fans can get around console exclusivity, as long as you're willing to wait a couple years. I wonder when we'll see the first VR headset emulator?
  - Tarq0n 5y ago
    There already exists software [0] to let you play quest games on steamvr/windows mixed reality, but you still have to use the oculus store unless you pirate the games. [0] https://github.com/LibreVR/Revive https://github.com/LibreVR/Revive
- indigochill 5y ago
  But in the video game industry you have PCs as a pressure valve for people who don't want to be locked entirely into a single company's walled garden. I've been looking for something similar for headsets (albeit not that hard - I welcome someone to correct me on this) and so far haven't seen any commercial options that are free of a single-company chokehold. I'm not sure if even Google Cardboard qualifies since I'm not sure if you could distribute those through alternative app "stores" like F-Droid.
mach1ne 5y ago
To me, the VR headset market seems to be mirroring the early console market. Initially there are many options to choose from, but eventually they are reduced to two or three realistic competitors. Right now it seems to be Valve and Meta.
mojzu 5y ago
I think VR is already there unfortunately, and that it's one of the things holding back wider scale adoption. On PC there's Revive which lets you play Oculus games on other headsets which is great, but it requires a little setup so most consumers aren't going to do it, and if Meta/FB decided tomorrow to remove accounts using it there'd be no recourse. So there are effectively arbitrary silos between hardware/stores on PC already, and any console headsets are unlikely to support OpenVR which further restricts the potential market for the devices and games. Arbitrary software and hardware exclusivity at this stage only seems to be serving the goal of some companies trying to dominate the market
- chaostheory 5y ago
  Normal people don’t care. For example, Apple does just fine with their walled garden. The biggest issue with VR at the moment from my personal experience is the form factor. The giant box you put on your head really intimidates normal people. Even if you take care of the price and complexity of VR, people still don’t want to fully dive in beyond trying out a demo. I am still having trouble understanding why
  - JeremyNT 5y ago
    "Normal people" may not care, but enough of us early adopters / tech savvy people do care to have some impact here. Facebook's reputation is so deep in the gutter that some people will never purchase anything from them (I count myself among those ranks). VR's widespread adoption has been "right around the corner" for at least a decade now, but it keeps failing to actually materialize. These things are niche gaming peripherals still, and proponents can ill afford to ignore potential users if they really want to reach ubiquity.
    - chaostheory 5y ago
      I’m not saying that meta’s past rep isn’t important, but that’s still not as big as the form factor. In my little adhoc experiment, even if you took that away, it didn’t matter. Form factor still drives them away. It’s like being a VR user makes you Neal Stephenson’s “gargoyle” if I’m using the right term from snow crash
JoeDaDude 5y ago
Sad but true. Still, there have been hacks to get Oculus SW to work on Vive and even Windows Mixed Reality hardware. I hope that is the case with this title as well.
xwdv 5y ago
Information wants to be free. Content wants to be controlled.
- uxp100 5y ago
  "Information wants to be free. Information also wants to be expensive. Information wants to be free because it has become so cheap to distribute, copy, and recombine—too cheap to meter. It wants to be expensive because it can be immeasurably valuable to the recipient. That tension will not go away." -- Stewart Brand
baby 5y ago
You already in this future with the iPhone

by Vinnl 5y ago

rjh29 5y ago

'Future' is an odd term, console game exclusivity has been a fact of life for 40+ years.

Vinnl 5y ago
The future of VR if it takes off, I guess.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
desmond373 5y ago
This is why I'm not too worried. I believe general purpose has an innate advantage due to versitility. PC is still around and still great for high performance gaming. Sure there are exclusives but that doesn't mean I can't play them on PC. Just means that some large company doesn't want me to and I'll happily ignore them like so many others. They may Sue me but it's not going to have a real effect unless they start catching way more people or making the fines unbearably huge. I won't give up the fight against exclusivity because my side isn't the uphill fight.
rplnt 5y ago
That at least made some technical sense up until recently.
______-_-______ 5y ago
Dedicated fans can get around console exclusivity, as long as you're willing to wait a couple years. I wonder when we'll see the first VR headset emulator?
- Tarq0n 5y ago
  There already exists software [0] to let you play quest games on steamvr/windows mixed reality, but you still have to use the oculus store unless you pirate the games. [0] https://github.com/LibreVR/Revive https://github.com/LibreVR/Revive
indigochill 5y ago
But in the video game industry you have PCs as a pressure valve for people who don't want to be locked entirely into a single company's walled garden. I've been looking for something similar for headsets (albeit not that hard - I welcome someone to correct me on this) and so far haven't seen any commercial options that are free of a single-company chokehold. I'm not sure if even Google Cardboard qualifies since I'm not sure if you could distribute those through alternative app "stores" like F-Droid.

mach1ne 5y ago

To me, the VR headset market seems to be mirroring the early console market. Initially there are many options to choose from, but eventually they are reduced to two or three realistic competitors. Right now it seems to be Valve and Meta.

mojzu 5y ago

I think VR is already there unfortunately, and that it's one of the things holding back wider scale adoption. On PC there's Revive which lets you play Oculus games on other headsets which is great, but it requires a little setup so most consumers aren't going to do it, and if Meta/FB decided tomorrow to remove accounts using it there'd be no recourse. So there are effectively arbitrary silos between hardware/stores on PC already, and any console headsets are unlikely to support OpenVR which further restricts the potential market for the devices and games. Arbitrary software and hardware exclusivity at this stage only seems to be serving the goal of some companies trying to dominate the market

chaostheory 5y ago
Normal people don’t care. For example, Apple does just fine with their walled garden. The biggest issue with VR at the moment from my personal experience is the form factor. The giant box you put on your head really intimidates normal people. Even if you take care of the price and complexity of VR, people still don’t want to fully dive in beyond trying out a demo. I am still having trouble understanding why
- JeremyNT 5y ago
  "Normal people" may not care, but enough of us early adopters / tech savvy people do care to have some impact here. Facebook's reputation is so deep in the gutter that some people will never purchase anything from them (I count myself among those ranks). VR's widespread adoption has been "right around the corner" for at least a decade now, but it keeps failing to actually materialize. These things are niche gaming peripherals still, and proponents can ill afford to ignore potential users if they really want to reach ubiquity.
  - chaostheory 5y ago
    I’m not saying that meta’s past rep isn’t important, but that’s still not as big as the form factor. In my little adhoc experiment, even if you took that away, it didn’t matter. Form factor still drives them away. It’s like being a VR user makes you Neal Stephenson’s “gargoyle” if I’m using the right term from snow crash

JoeDaDude 5y ago

Sad but true. Still, there have been hacks to get Oculus SW to work on Vive and even Windows Mixed Reality hardware. I hope that is the case with this title as well.

xwdv 5y ago

Information wants to be free. Content wants to be controlled.

uxp100 5y ago
"Information wants to be free. Information also wants to be expensive. Information wants to be free because it has become so cheap to distribute, copy, and recombine—too cheap to meter. It wants to be expensive because it can be immeasurably valuable to the recipient. That tension will not go away." -- Stewart Brand

baby 5y ago

You already in this future with the iPhone