4 ms·
VR at present is of no immediate concern, as it's simply barely available yet, and games aren't yet robustly supporting it. But even going forward I'd posit th
by shock-value 11y ago
VR at present is of no immediate concern, as it's simply barely available yet, and games aren't yet robustly supporting it.
But even going forward I'd posit that it'll only occupy a (small) niche. Consoles are going to have trouble supporting it -- not due to their never being "powerful enough" (as consoles will of course get more powerful over successive generations) but rather simply due to the power disparity needed to render a game normally vs VR. Developers aren't going to want to release a game at vastly lower detail settings for VR than for general TV-based consumption (and they won't forgo the TV-based audience, except perhaps for niche lower-budget VR-only titles).
Moreover, some of the most popularly streamed titles (anything not first person -- League of Legends, Hearthstone, etc.) are simply not suitable for VR.
- chrischen 11y agoWhen they stream VR, everyone will be watching it from their own VR headsets. Think of horror games done this way.
- TillE 11y agoPeople forget that many genres of games will never make it to VR in any meaningful way. Even in a far-future holodeck scenario, strategy games don't change a whole lot. But it's true that VR is an immersive experience which I can't vicariously participate in the same way I can watch someone playing Hearthstone now. In many ways VR games are likely to remain largely unsuitable for streaming.
- zyxley 11y ago> Even in a far-future holodeck scenario, strategy games don't change a whole lot. I dunno, the classic Civilization style could benefit quite a bit from it. Imagine having a virtual giant globe that you can arbitrarily turn and zoom as the main interface. Even the limited number of platformers with a third-person view on the Oculus Rift hardware are quite successful, since the false depth perception helps with fine control.