Not tried it myself yet, but the reports from those using it in the Elite:Dangerous Alpha seem very impressed. It seems technology is finally catching up with the concept and developers of newer games ARE including OR support.
It won't be right for all games but it will be a game changer literally, game design will be altered to work with OR. The current expected cost of $300 is not a breaker, sure some people won't be able to afford it but they will in a few years for $100, poor people always have to wait, see Graphics cards, you can get the same experience as a rich person, just two years later.
Even if it works as great as ppl say....how many years will it be before everyone "has" to use it ? Probably never. So why is it so important if it's good or not right now. If I don't like it, or want to be a grumpy old man, I'll probably never be forced to use it.
Originally posted by DamonVile Even if it works as great as ppl say....how many years will it be before everyone "has" to use it ? Probably never. So why is it so important if it's good or not right now. If I don't like it, or want to be a grumpy old man, I'll probably never be forced to use it.
not sure I follow.
Yes its true you dont have to use it but not sure what the outcome of that would be other than you dont get to experience Virtual reality (and yes a head set that takes up 100% of your vision space is virtual reality) but if you dont want to experience that then more power to you
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
No, $300 for a dev kit. We don't know what an OR will sell for.
Oh. Thanks. So Google's $1000 price may not be such a huge difference?
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
I don't think people appreciate that the technology of the displays is leveraging other technologies (ie the displays are for cell phones and not engineered specifically for the occulus rift). The point being the core hardware technologies that drive the device are being supported and developed by the big end of town. The same may end up applying to software depending on what the display manufacturers and NVidia bring to the table in anticipation of other technologies.
While the OP is a bit too enthusiastic, I don't see why some of you are personally attacking him or dissecting his original post in order to find a fatal flaw to exploit.
Regardless, another Rift thread filled with doomsayers, so I will just reiterate what I already said in another post:
Will the Rift change gaming? Yes, after you've experienced your first gameplay on the Rift from a first person or cockpit perspective, it's pretty hard to ever look at those genres the same again.
Will the Rift take over? No, it will be more of a welcomed addition to the gaming genre, but it will not replace your main monitor completely. That's foolish to think otherwise. Also it will take additional years to gain traction in the market since MOST people are hesitant to change.
Oculus still has a few obstacles ahead of them, but the largest hurdles have been dealt with, including price point and ease of development. It is extremely easy to integrate the Oculus Rift API into UDK, Unity, or any other engine, especially those based on C++.
For example it took me literally 15 minutes to setup a multi-camera 3D environment using Rift SDK and Unity 3d game engine in an already existing project I had.
Let's tackle some of the blatant misconceptions:
"The resolution sucks on the Rift, its doomed to fail!" Wrong, the current dev model is in no way a representative of the final resolution from the consumer model that will release 2014/2015. They have stated many times the current model is low res and the consumer model will sport a fancy high res system in place.
"Oh my god, I've seen this before, remember Virtual Boy by Nintendo or 3D vision by Nvidia?" Many people actually enjoy 3D Vision by Nvidia, despite the headache issues associated with it and 3D movies in general. Those same headaches are not exactly the same as the motion sickness induced by VR.
"See, you said it yourself. VR on the Rift makes people sick, so it's doomed to fail!" Wrong again. The term being used in the community is "VR legs" and all the posts on the forums are spot on, it DOES take time to adjust to VR and get your "VR legs", the motion sickness associated with VR can be jarring at first but you can overcome it and it DOES NOT affect everybody. Some people never get it at all.
I would get motion sickness during my first week. It made me wonder how tech like this would ever catch on, but something strange happened around week 2-3, I slowly became adjusted to the VR environment and could keep playing for hours on end, unlike Nvidia 3D which will give me a headache after just one hour.
"Still, people will get motion sickness and it's all the Rift's fault!" Wrong once again. While it is true that the initial motion sickness will hit some people, and yes they can overcome it, the blame is not solely the Rift. There are some bad practices among early developers causing this motion sickness. For example a horribly configured skybox and frame rates of 15fps will get anyone sick.
First rule in VR development: you must maintain 60fps at ALL TIMES!
Another common developer problem is their 3D environments are not up to scale, causing your brain to take time to adjust and figure out what is going on and why the 3D models are moving oddly in relation to you when you move your avatar. Or even worse someone trying to make an isometric game for Rift, it doesn't work, and should never be done.
"OK, there are bad devs out there, but what about devs like those guys who did Skyrim. Surely they know what they're doing and their game sucks on the Rift, so therefore the Rift sucks!" Those games were never developed with the Rift in mind. A lot of problems and motion sickness are caused by the use of 3rd party drivers people are releasing that FORCE games into a stereoscopic environment in order to be used on the Rift. While some games will work fine with these 3rd party drivers, most won't, and it will take a LOT of fine tuning to get it right.
Final Thoughts:
The Oculus Rift is a cool gadget, and it will be a great addition to gaming in general. Oculus must be on to something since Apple, Sony, and Google are now working on their own VR headsets and not just glasses with a LCD screen on them like the Google glasses.
Oculus Rift will not replace anything, but it will add a whole new element of gameplay for the end user looking for more immersion. Unfortunately a lot of companies are shouting "Rift Compatible" as more of a marketing scheme than an actual feature and this will hinder Rift's future success. For example games like Strike Suit Zero, Hawken, and Vendetta Online all sport "Rift Compatible" but none actually work correctly on the Rift, some are just downright unplayable.
In conclusion, I think it is a great time for gamers in general, and to simply discount and trash something you have not tried yourself is both ignorant and a blemish on your own character as a human being.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
While the OP is a bit too enthusiastic, I don't see why some of you are personally attacking him or dissecting his original post in order to find a fatal flaw to exploit.
Why is it hard to see? He's practically calling those who disagree outdated and implying that they are stupid. That kind of approach is bound to create a counter-reaction.
Originally posted by Nevulus Final Thoughts:The Oculus Rift is a cool gadget, and it will be a great addition to gaming in general. Oculus must be on to something since Apple, Sony, and Google are now working on their own VR headsets and not just glasses with a LCD screen on them like the Google glasses.Oculus Rift will not replace anything, but it will add a whole new element of gameplay for the end user looking for more immersion. Unfortunately a lot of companies are shouting "Rift Compatible" as more of a marketing scheme than an actual feature and this will hinder Rift's future success. For example games like Strike Suit Zero, Hawken, and Vendetta Online all sport "Rift Compatible" but none actually work correctly on the Rift, some are just downright unplayable.In conclusion, I think it is a great time for gamers in general, and to simply discount and trash something you have not tried yourself is both ignorant and a blemish on your own character as a human being.
Your whole post was a very good read, and I find myself nodding in agreement with your final thoughts
The underlined is how I see the Rift. Very similar to the Kinect and other "motion detectors" that consoles have added. These did not replace anything, but added a dimension to console gaming.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
3. Its not just for games, with some tweaks it could be used to watch movies, TV, training, experience skydiving, learn motorcycle riding etc.
4. Could it fail? Yes. but the underlining technology is there and if Oculus specifically fails others will enhance and improve with new products. Oculus already has competition in this market.
You can not experience skydiving with a screen strapped to your face, nor can you learn to ride a motorcycle the same way.
The motorcycle comment is just ridiculous, and anyone that's ever rode a motorcycle would know this.
It's a gaming headset, not "virtual reality".
Better is never a guarantee. Most guys I know in the software industry are always lamenting over Linux not being the OS of choice on home PC's. The occulus rift will be like anything else that requires developer support, it will succeed or fail based upon the GAMES that are made for it. If developers don't develop games for it, then it won't matter how much it costs or how "cool" it is, it'll fade from the market.
One article I read summed it up best, it's a chicken or the egg scenario for the Rift. In order for it to succeed it needs developers to develop for it, but developers don't develop for things that don't have a large enough market.
It doesn't matter how good the technology is today, unless there are games to play on it that people want to play then the thing will never go anywhere, and right now they don't actually have any developer support.
Right this very moment, it's more likely it will fail than succeed, because again without developers developing GAMES for it, it's USELESS. Right this moment, they're still trying to get the developer support they need.
someone has already spent a ton of money on sky diving simulator without the headset. I have no doubt headsets will be around the corner
the Rift is not just for games I dont understand how that is not painfully obvious
Regardless of what else they may use the rift for it's a gaming platform, period. If people don't buy it to play games on then it's not going anywhere.
If game developers don't make games for it, it's not going anywhere.
Seriously, you're trying to compare a couple screens strapped to your face to a machine that actually simulates skydiving, a tool that's used to actually train skydivers because it's a REAL LIFE SIMULTION.
I tested out the development kit yesterday, and I felt like puking out my lungs afterwards. THIS THING IS AWESOME.
edit: My only concern is FPS, which will likely be its major market. I'm worried that the head motion tracking will be used to look around AND aim your weapon at the same time, much like you do with the mouse in modern FPS. That's a bad idea imo. I'd like to see weapon aiming and head motion separate.
As long as Oculus Rift doesn't become mandatory I am ok. I just want no part in such a waste of technology. I enjoy games sitting down with my headphones talking with my chums not standing up getting exercise.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Originally posted by azzamasin As long as Oculus Rift doesn't become mandatory I am ok. I just want no part in such a waste of technology. I enjoy games sitting down with my headphones talking with my chums not standing up getting exercise.
Waste of technology? It's already given tons of people a lot of fun and has already made some changes to the industry. That's not a waste. It's not a waste for them, and certainly not a waste for you if you never use it. I'm also sure you won't convince the people who will makes millions from investing in it that it's a waste.
You could launch your same argument against the gaming industry as a whole. Gaming doesn't exactly do much for the human race other than provide generally affordable entertainment, much like a great portion of the technological industry.
Calling what other people do for fun a waste is pretty similar to a nerds mom telling her kid that he's wasting his time playing games. Mind you the typical mother spends about the same amount of time as her kid in front of the computer except instead sitting on the couch watching non interactive television.
Virtual reality has better application in other industries. There's nothing to "embrace" yet. Been there done that in the 90's.
They're just digging up an old fad and monetizing.
Sure, in the sense that we "did" tablets in 1992. I don't think you get technology.
Originally posted by Myria
Personally I think the Rift still isn't ready for prime time. Too limiting, too expensive, and, most critically, to unlikely to gain a sufficiently large install base to ever be anything but a niche novelty. Might turn out I'm wrong, we'll see, should be an interesting ride either way.
I don't know what you mean by "too limiting" or how ~$200 is too expensive. Also, why do you think that it is "unlikely to gain a sufficiently large install base"? The idea of it as a "niche novelty" already seems wrong, considering the response to the developer kit, which is a more expensive and worse product than the consumer release will be, and is already compatible with a wide array of first-person games.
Originally posted by azzamasin As long as Oculus Rift doesn't become mandatory I am ok. I just want no part in such a waste of technology. I enjoy games sitting down with my headphones talking with my chums not standing up getting exercise.
I think you're confusing the Rift with something else.
Favorites: EQ, EVE | Playing: None. Mostly VR and strategy | Anticipating: CU, Pantheon
This is just a gut feeling and may prove to be completely inaccurate, but I strongly believe that by the end of 2015 (latest) there will be 2 large new contenders on the gaming battlefield:
SteamOS
Virtual Reality
I mention both of these because I believe that in some ways their success will be connected, you see… Despite all the attention on the Oculus Rift right now, it should warrant some attention that Valve is currently developing its own VR headset. I imagine they’ll wait to release until after Oculus has opened the doors and been subject to all of the praise and criticism that will inevitably follow, then Valve will release their own headset that addresses any lingering problems identified in the Oculus. http://www.maximumpc.com/valve-developed_vr_prototype_expected_steam_dev_days_conference_2013
The bigger factor in driving VR-games however, will be SteamOS. For anyone unfamiliar with SteamOS, it’s a gaming-centric Operating System being release by Valve and optimized for the Linux platform. Without going into a million details, the end result is going to be something similar to Google’s Android operating system… An OS that is not proprietarily bound to any particular manufacturer’s hardware. In the same way that Nintendo’s systems run Nintendo’s OS exclusively (same with Playstation and Xbox), you can think of the iPhone running the iOS. Now look at Android… Had Android used the same business model of exclusivity, it would have failed. BUT because it opened itself up to be used by any manufacturer that wanted to include it on their hardware, it’s a behemoth. Android can be found on hardware from Samsung, Motorola, HTC, Nokia, etc.
SteamOS is doing the same thing. We will see “SteamBoxes” from all manner of manufacturers; it drives competition, gives different affordability options, and constantly evolves. There will be $99 SteamBoxes and there will be $3999 SteamBoxes (essentially Linux PCs designed for living-room use).
So we will have a manufacturer-independent gaming OS in 2014. Get psyched, it’s happening. And Valve has a solid history of success in their endeavors.
Are PC monitors going anywhere? Nope.
TVs? Nope.
Handhelds/tablets/phones? Nope.
But VR headsets will be making an earnest entrance onto the visual/audio medium field, and I think this time around they are here to stay. As people have said before in this thread, the technology is VASTLY superior to that which was available in the 90s. Gyroscopics are better, resolution is better, 1:1 tracking is better, the gear is lighter and more portable, and the manner in which stereoscopic experiences are DEVELOPED is better (nobody mentioned this last bit yet, it’s important). And the SteamOS, with Valve already stating they are on board with getting behind VR, will likely play a huge role in allowing both AAA and independent developers to get their VR games onto the market and into your virtual space… Another thing that was lacking in the 90s was indie developers and if you just look at today’s Smartphone and Tablet gaming market, you know that this emergence shook up the entire industry.
There are hurdles to VR to be sure… Complete immersion comes with risks of injury, motion sickness, lack of access to keyboard for typing conversation (though I’m sure a virtual solution is already in the works), closing out the world around you (watching a movie with friends on a TV is more practical than a bunch of people on a couch wearing headsets)… And more. So will it make other mediums obsolete? No… Probably never. But will gaming and movie enthusiasts flock to it for the personal experience? I’d put money on it (in fact, the moment Valve goes public I PLAN to put money on it).
So yeah… There are some big changes coming to the gaming industry in the next few years, and I’m inclined to believe that Valve will be leading the charge (though keeping it open for competition and evolution through a non-proprietary business model).
Oh… and while I’m not as confident about this next prediction as the ones above, I have a hunch that one of the factors playing into Blizzard’s decision to go back to the drawing board with “Titan” is their recognition that by the time the game launches, VR will be a factor to consider. I don’t think they’ll build the game AROUND VR… that would be silly, but I kind of expect VR to be one of the display/control options :-)
Cheers to the future!!!
Mikey
"Time is a great teacher, but unfortunately it kills all its pupils." - Louis Hector Berlioz
3. Its not just for games, with some tweaks it could be used to watch movies, TV, training, experience skydiving, learn motorcycle riding etc.
4. Could it fail? Yes. but the underlining technology is there and if Oculus specifically fails others will enhance and improve with new products. Oculus already has competition in this market.
You can not experience skydiving with a screen strapped to your face, nor can you learn to ride a motorcycle the same way.
The motorcycle comment is just ridiculous, and anyone that's ever rode a motorcycle would know this.
It's a gaming headset, not "virtual reality".
Better is never a guarantee. Most guys I know in the software industry are always lamenting over Linux not being the OS of choice on home PC's. The occulus rift will be like anything else that requires developer support, it will succeed or fail based upon the GAMES that are made for it. If developers don't develop games for it, then it won't matter how much it costs or how "cool" it is, it'll fade from the market.
One article I read summed it up best, it's a chicken or the egg scenario for the Rift. In order for it to succeed it needs developers to develop for it, but developers don't develop for things that don't have a large enough market.
It doesn't matter how good the technology is today, unless there are games to play on it that people want to play then the thing will never go anywhere, and right now they don't actually have any developer support.
Right this very moment, it's more likely it will fail than succeed, because again without developers developing GAMES for it, it's USELESS. Right this moment, they're still trying to get the developer support they need.
someone has already spent a ton of money on sky diving simulator without the headset. I have no doubt headsets will be around the corner
the Rift is not just for games I dont understand how that is not painfully obvious
Regardless of what else they may use the rift for it's a gaming platform, period. If people don't buy it to play games on then it's not going anywhere.
If game developers don't make games for it, it's not going anywhere.
Seriously, you're trying to compare a couple screens strapped to your face to a machine that actually simulates skydiving, a tool that's used to actually train skydivers because it's a REAL LIFE SIMULTION.
wrong wrong wrong wrong.
Sorry but the Oculus Rift has as much 'other applications' as a PC monitor does. yes its being pushed as a gaming device because its a clear fit but it can be used for so many other things
Titanfall is working on an Oculus Rift version? no way!...yup.
dont worry the gaming industry ARE making games for it...right now, as we speak.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
3. Its not just for games, with some tweaks it could be used to watch movies, TV, training, experience skydiving, learn motorcycle riding etc.
4. Could it fail? Yes. but the underlining technology is there and if Oculus specifically fails others will enhance and improve with new products. Oculus already has competition in this market.
You can not experience skydiving with a screen strapped to your face, nor can you learn to ride a motorcycle the same way.
The motorcycle comment is just ridiculous, and anyone that's ever rode a motorcycle would know this.
It's a gaming headset, not "virtual reality".
Better is never a guarantee. Most guys I know in the software industry are always lamenting over Linux not being the OS of choice on home PC's. The occulus rift will be like anything else that requires developer support, it will succeed or fail based upon the GAMES that are made for it. If developers don't develop games for it, then it won't matter how much it costs or how "cool" it is, it'll fade from the market.
One article I read summed it up best, it's a chicken or the egg scenario for the Rift. In order for it to succeed it needs developers to develop for it, but developers don't develop for things that don't have a large enough market.
It doesn't matter how good the technology is today, unless there are games to play on it that people want to play then the thing will never go anywhere, and right now they don't actually have any developer support.
Right this very moment, it's more likely it will fail than succeed, because again without developers developing GAMES for it, it's USELESS. Right this moment, they're still trying to get the developer support they need.
someone has already spent a ton of money on sky diving simulator without the headset. I have no doubt headsets will be around the corner
the Rift is not just for games I dont understand how that is not painfully obvious
Regardless of what else they may use the rift for it's a gaming platform, period. If people don't buy it to play games on then it's not going anywhere.
If game developers don't make games for it, it's not going anywhere.
Seriously, you're trying to compare a couple screens strapped to your face to a machine that actually simulates skydiving, a tool that's used to actually train skydivers because it's a REAL LIFE SIMULTION.
This is why I am not taking it all that serious. Just watching and waiting. On top of that if big publishers or companies are making their own versions where does that leave Oculus Rift. It's neat but not excited about any of it. During the console wars there was a lot of neat tech. Some of it was a bit ahead of everything else and still tanked. Don't think that's the case this time. Going to step out on a limb here which I probably shouldn't do and say that most probably don't hate it, they think it's neat, just watching and waiting to see what happens. It's a lot of money for most people for something that may end up being fairly limited use.
Originally posted by Nevulus Zero, Hawken, and Vendetta Online all sport "Rift Compatible" but none actually work correctly on the Rift, some are just downright unplayable.
I'd like to know more about this: specifically, when was it tested, what were the issues you encountered?
I know the devs have been working on Rift support since release last July, and Vendetta Online would probably be the only reason for me personally to purchase a commercial version of the Rift (hopefully other reasons may be found along the way ).
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
My PC monitor cost me almost as much as an Oculus Rift.
My phone with contract cost me almost as much as an Oculus Rift.
My motorcycle pants costs almost as much as an Oculus Rift.
If you want virtual reality then clearly the cost is not that much.
if you are 'meh' about virtual reality then you should stear clear anyway
For many people the cost is not the issue. Its not wanting to spend money on an as of right now unproven & unreleased tech. And one that has been seen as the next big thing a few times since the 90s.
If people can see where this gadget will be worth the $200-$300 or whatever, then cost wont be an issue for most people who are interested in it.
Some of you guys are on these couple of threads shooting down anyone who is not on board right this moment. Give this time to actually release, people to try it, games to come out for it, ect.
I get that you may be excited and it actually does sound really interesting, but most people are not and have not had a chance to even see this thing outside of a youtube video.
Comments like this-
if you are 'meh' about virtual reality then you should stear clear anyway
do not help your cause any at all. Makes you sound like a kid who is pissed the others dont want to play with his toys and should just go home.
Your own arguments as to why people should get behind this are almost as silly as some of the arguments to stay away. Although the best one I have read is in the other OR thread where the guy said he had pets in his room and would need to break up a fight immediately haha.
The very people who are "meh" about VR will be the ones who make it or break it. The die hard early adopters will not. There are a ton more of the "meh" crowd out there than the cheerleaders, OR will need both to be a success.
I will definitely get one if it's well supported. There are many other potential uses besides gaming but that would be my primary interest. I'm also a 3d artist so there some applications there as well.
Imagine a social network virtual reality site. Imagine a virtual college campus. Ever wanted to fly? Imagine a drone synced to the Oculus flying over your neighborhood so you could spy in real time at your neighbors. LOL.
Yeah I will get one. The price point would greatly depend on how well it was supported and ease of use.
My PC monitor cost me almost as much as an Oculus Rift.
My phone with contract cost me almost as much as an Oculus Rift.
My motorcycle pants costs almost as much as an Oculus Rift.
If you want virtual reality then clearly the cost is not that much.
if you are 'meh' about virtual reality then you should stear clear anyway
For many people the cost is not the issue. Its not wanting to spend money on an as of right now unproven & unreleased tech. And one that has been seen as the next big thing a few times since the 90s.
If people can see where this gadget will be worth the $200-$300 or whatever, then cost wont be an issue for most people who are interested in it.
Some of you guys are on these couple of threads shooting down anyone who is not on board right this moment. Give this time to actually release, people to try it, games to come out for it, ect.
I get that you may be excited and it actually does sound really interesting, but most people are not and have not had a chance to even see this thing outside of a youtube video.
Comments like this-
if you are 'meh' about virtual reality then you should stear clear anyway
do not help your cause any at all. Makes you sound like a kid who is pissed the others dont want to play with his toys and should just go home.
Your own arguments as to why people should get behind this are almost as silly as some of the arguments to stay away. Although the best one I have read is in the other OR thread where the guy said he had pets in his room and would need to break up a fight immediately haha.
The very people who are "meh" about VR will be the ones who make it or break it. The die hard early adopters will not. There are a ton more of the "meh" crowd out there than the cheerleaders, OR will need both to be a success.
Then why bring up cost?
I mean if you are not intrested in VR prooven or otherwise then that is that. Its not like the cost is going to make you change your mind so why do people make themselves look like fools by bring it up when its $300 dollars for christ sake. Its not $150,000 like the new samsung TV that just came out.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I managed to mess around with the Oculus Rift at a buddies the other day, and I don't quite understand the buzz surrounding the product, although I can understand why people would want to support the future development by being an early adopter. Personally, I think it's a neat gimmick or toy, but I'll be waiting to purchase one until the device reaches market and studio saturation.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
Comments
Not tried it myself yet, but the reports from those using it in the Elite:Dangerous Alpha seem very impressed. It seems technology is finally catching up with the concept and developers of newer games ARE including OR support.
It won't be right for all games but it will be a game changer literally, game design will be altered to work with OR. The current expected cost of $300 is not a breaker, sure some people won't be able to afford it but they will in a few years for $100, poor people always have to wait, see Graphics cards, you can get the same experience as a rich person, just two years later.
not sure I follow.
Yes its true you dont have to use it but not sure what the outcome of that would be other than you dont get to experience Virtual reality (and yes a head set that takes up 100% of your vision space is virtual reality) but if you dont want to experience that then more power to you
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
While the OP is a bit too enthusiastic, I don't see why some of you are personally attacking him or dissecting his original post in order to find a fatal flaw to exploit.
Regardless, another Rift thread filled with doomsayers, so I will just reiterate what I already said in another post:
Will the Rift change gaming? Yes, after you've experienced your first gameplay on the Rift from a first person or cockpit perspective, it's pretty hard to ever look at those genres the same again.
Will the Rift take over? No, it will be more of a welcomed addition to the gaming genre, but it will not replace your main monitor completely. That's foolish to think otherwise. Also it will take additional years to gain traction in the market since MOST people are hesitant to change.
Oculus still has a few obstacles ahead of them, but the largest hurdles have been dealt with, including price point and ease of development. It is extremely easy to integrate the Oculus Rift API into UDK, Unity, or any other engine, especially those based on C++.
For example it took me literally 15 minutes to setup a multi-camera 3D environment using Rift SDK and Unity 3d game engine in an already existing project I had.
Let's tackle some of the blatant misconceptions:
"The resolution sucks on the Rift, its doomed to fail!" Wrong, the current dev model is in no way a representative of the final resolution from the consumer model that will release 2014/2015. They have stated many times the current model is low res and the consumer model will sport a fancy high res system in place.
"Oh my god, I've seen this before, remember Virtual Boy by Nintendo or 3D vision by Nvidia?" Many people actually enjoy 3D Vision by Nvidia, despite the headache issues associated with it and 3D movies in general. Those same headaches are not exactly the same as the motion sickness induced by VR.
"See, you said it yourself. VR on the Rift makes people sick, so it's doomed to fail!" Wrong again. The term being used in the community is "VR legs" and all the posts on the forums are spot on, it DOES take time to adjust to VR and get your "VR legs", the motion sickness associated with VR can be jarring at first but you can overcome it and it DOES NOT affect everybody. Some people never get it at all.
I would get motion sickness during my first week. It made me wonder how tech like this would ever catch on, but something strange happened around week 2-3, I slowly became adjusted to the VR environment and could keep playing for hours on end, unlike Nvidia 3D which will give me a headache after just one hour.
"Still, people will get motion sickness and it's all the Rift's fault!" Wrong once again. While it is true that the initial motion sickness will hit some people, and yes they can overcome it, the blame is not solely the Rift. There are some bad practices among early developers causing this motion sickness. For example a horribly configured skybox and frame rates of 15fps will get anyone sick.
First rule in VR development: you must maintain 60fps at ALL TIMES!
Another common developer problem is their 3D environments are not up to scale, causing your brain to take time to adjust and figure out what is going on and why the 3D models are moving oddly in relation to you when you move your avatar. Or even worse someone trying to make an isometric game for Rift, it doesn't work, and should never be done.
"OK, there are bad devs out there, but what about devs like those guys who did Skyrim. Surely they know what they're doing and their game sucks on the Rift, so therefore the Rift sucks!" Those games were never developed with the Rift in mind. A lot of problems and motion sickness are caused by the use of 3rd party drivers people are releasing that FORCE games into a stereoscopic environment in order to be used on the Rift. While some games will work fine with these 3rd party drivers, most won't, and it will take a LOT of fine tuning to get it right.
Final Thoughts:
The Oculus Rift is a cool gadget, and it will be a great addition to gaming in general. Oculus must be on to something since Apple, Sony, and Google are now working on their own VR headsets and not just glasses with a LCD screen on them like the Google glasses.
Oculus Rift will not replace anything, but it will add a whole new element of gameplay for the end user looking for more immersion. Unfortunately a lot of companies are shouting "Rift Compatible" as more of a marketing scheme than an actual feature and this will hinder Rift's future success. For example games like Strike Suit Zero, Hawken, and Vendetta Online all sport "Rift Compatible" but none actually work correctly on the Rift, some are just downright unplayable.
In conclusion, I think it is a great time for gamers in general, and to simply discount and trash something you have not tried yourself is both ignorant and a blemish on your own character as a human being.
I want a mmorpg where people have gone through misery, have gone through school stuff and actually have had sex even. -sagil
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Why is it hard to see? He's practically calling those who disagree outdated and implying that they are stupid. That kind of approach is bound to create a counter-reaction.
The underlined is how I see the Rift. Very similar to the Kinect and other "motion detectors" that consoles have added. These did not replace anything, but added a dimension to console gaming.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Regardless of what else they may use the rift for it's a gaming platform, period. If people don't buy it to play games on then it's not going anywhere.
If game developers don't make games for it, it's not going anywhere.
Seriously, you're trying to compare a couple screens strapped to your face to a machine that actually simulates skydiving, a tool that's used to actually train skydivers because it's a REAL LIFE SIMULTION.
I tested out the development kit yesterday, and I felt like puking out my lungs afterwards. THIS THING IS AWESOME.
edit: My only concern is FPS, which will likely be its major market. I'm worried that the head motion tracking will be used to look around AND aim your weapon at the same time, much like you do with the mouse in modern FPS. That's a bad idea imo. I'd like to see weapon aiming and head motion separate.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Waste of technology? It's already given tons of people a lot of fun and has already made some changes to the industry. That's not a waste. It's not a waste for them, and certainly not a waste for you if you never use it. I'm also sure you won't convince the people who will makes millions from investing in it that it's a waste.
You could launch your same argument against the gaming industry as a whole. Gaming doesn't exactly do much for the human race other than provide generally affordable entertainment, much like a great portion of the technological industry.
Calling what other people do for fun a waste is pretty similar to a nerds mom telling her kid that he's wasting his time playing games. Mind you the typical mother spends about the same amount of time as her kid in front of the computer except instead sitting on the couch watching non interactive television.
Sure, in the sense that we "did" tablets in 1992. I don't think you get technology.
I don't know what you mean by "too limiting" or how ~$200 is too expensive. Also, why do you think that it is "unlikely to gain a sufficiently large install base"? The idea of it as a "niche novelty" already seems wrong, considering the response to the developer kit, which is a more expensive and worse product than the consumer release will be, and is already compatible with a wide array of first-person games.
I think you're confusing the Rift with something else.
This is just a gut feeling and may prove to be completely inaccurate, but I strongly believe that by the end of 2015 (latest) there will be 2 large new contenders on the gaming battlefield:
I mention both of these because I believe that in some ways their success will be connected, you see… Despite all the attention on the Oculus Rift right now, it should warrant some attention that Valve is currently developing its own VR headset. I imagine they’ll wait to release until after Oculus has opened the doors and been subject to all of the praise and criticism that will inevitably follow, then Valve will release their own headset that addresses any lingering problems identified in the Oculus. http://www.maximumpc.com/valve-developed_vr_prototype_expected_steam_dev_days_conference_2013
The bigger factor in driving VR-games however, will be SteamOS. For anyone unfamiliar with SteamOS, it’s a gaming-centric Operating System being release by Valve and optimized for the Linux platform. Without going into a million details, the end result is going to be something similar to Google’s Android operating system… An OS that is not proprietarily bound to any particular manufacturer’s hardware. In the same way that Nintendo’s systems run Nintendo’s OS exclusively (same with Playstation and Xbox), you can think of the iPhone running the iOS. Now look at Android… Had Android used the same business model of exclusivity, it would have failed. BUT because it opened itself up to be used by any manufacturer that wanted to include it on their hardware, it’s a behemoth. Android can be found on hardware from Samsung, Motorola, HTC, Nokia, etc.
SteamOS is doing the same thing. We will see “SteamBoxes” from all manner of manufacturers; it drives competition, gives different affordability options, and constantly evolves. There will be $99 SteamBoxes and there will be $3999 SteamBoxes (essentially Linux PCs designed for living-room use).
So we will have a manufacturer-independent gaming OS in 2014. Get psyched, it’s happening. And Valve has a solid history of success in their endeavors.
Are PC monitors going anywhere? Nope.
TVs? Nope.
Handhelds/tablets/phones? Nope.
But VR headsets will be making an earnest entrance onto the visual/audio medium field, and I think this time around they are here to stay. As people have said before in this thread, the technology is VASTLY superior to that which was available in the 90s. Gyroscopics are better, resolution is better, 1:1 tracking is better, the gear is lighter and more portable, and the manner in which stereoscopic experiences are DEVELOPED is better (nobody mentioned this last bit yet, it’s important). And the SteamOS, with Valve already stating they are on board with getting behind VR, will likely play a huge role in allowing both AAA and independent developers to get their VR games onto the market and into your virtual space… Another thing that was lacking in the 90s was indie developers and if you just look at today’s Smartphone and Tablet gaming market, you know that this emergence shook up the entire industry.
There are hurdles to VR to be sure… Complete immersion comes with risks of injury, motion sickness, lack of access to keyboard for typing conversation (though I’m sure a virtual solution is already in the works), closing out the world around you (watching a movie with friends on a TV is more practical than a bunch of people on a couch wearing headsets)… And more. So will it make other mediums obsolete? No… Probably never. But will gaming and movie enthusiasts flock to it for the personal experience? I’d put money on it (in fact, the moment Valve goes public I PLAN to put money on it).
So yeah… There are some big changes coming to the gaming industry in the next few years, and I’m inclined to believe that Valve will be leading the charge (though keeping it open for competition and evolution through a non-proprietary business model).
Oh… and while I’m not as confident about this next prediction as the ones above, I have a hunch that one of the factors playing into Blizzard’s decision to go back to the drawing board with “Titan” is their recognition that by the time the game launches, VR will be a factor to consider. I don’t think they’ll build the game AROUND VR… that would be silly, but I kind of expect VR to be one of the display/control options :-)
Cheers to the future!!!
Mikey
"Time is a great teacher, but unfortunately it kills all its pupils." - Louis Hector Berlioz
wrong wrong wrong wrong.
Sorry but the Oculus Rift has as much 'other applications' as a PC monitor does. yes its being pushed as a gaming device because its a clear fit but it can be used for so many other things
Titanfall is working on an Oculus Rift version? no way!...yup.
dont worry the gaming industry ARE making games for it...right now, as we speak.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
This is why I am not taking it all that serious. Just watching and waiting. On top of that if big publishers or companies are making their own versions where does that leave Oculus Rift. It's neat but not excited about any of it. During the console wars there was a lot of neat tech. Some of it was a bit ahead of everything else and still tanked. Don't think that's the case this time. Going to step out on a limb here which I probably shouldn't do and say that most probably don't hate it, they think it's neat, just watching and waiting to see what happens. It's a lot of money for most people for something that may end up being fairly limited use.
On the subject of cost..
My PC monitor cost me almost as much as an Oculus Rift.
My phone with contract cost me almost as much as an Oculus Rift.
My motorcycle pants costs almost as much as an Oculus Rift.
If you want virtual reality then clearly the cost is not that much.
if you are 'meh' about virtual reality then you should stear clear anyway
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I'd like to know more about this: specifically, when was it tested, what were the issues you encountered?
I know the devs have been working on Rift support since release last July, and Vendetta Online would probably be the only reason for me personally to purchase a commercial version of the Rift (hopefully other reasons may be found along the way
).
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
For many people the cost is not the issue. Its not wanting to spend money on an as of right now unproven & unreleased tech. And one that has been seen as the next big thing a few times since the 90s.
If people can see where this gadget will be worth the $200-$300 or whatever, then cost wont be an issue for most people who are interested in it.
Some of you guys are on these couple of threads shooting down anyone who is not on board right this moment. Give this time to actually release, people to try it, games to come out for it, ect.
I get that you may be excited and it actually does sound really interesting, but most people are not and have not had a chance to even see this thing outside of a youtube video.
Comments like this-
if you are 'meh' about virtual reality then you should stear clear anyway
do not help your cause any at all. Makes you sound like a kid who is pissed the others dont want to play with his toys and should just go home.
Your own arguments as to why people should get behind this are almost as silly as some of the arguments to stay away. Although the best one I have read is in the other OR thread where the guy said he had pets in his room and would need to break up a fight immediately haha.
The very people who are "meh" about VR will be the ones who make it or break it. The die hard early adopters will not. There are a ton more of the "meh" crowd out there than the cheerleaders, OR will need both to be a success.
I will definitely get one if it's well supported. There are many other potential uses besides gaming but that would be my primary interest. I'm also a 3d artist so there some applications there as well.
Imagine a social network virtual reality site. Imagine a virtual college campus. Ever wanted to fly? Imagine a drone synced to the Oculus flying over your neighborhood so you could spy in real time at your neighbors. LOL.
Yeah I will get one. The price point would greatly depend on how well it was supported and ease of use.
Then why bring up cost?
I mean if you are not intrested in VR prooven or otherwise then that is that. Its not like the cost is going to make you change your mind so why do people make themselves look like fools by bring it up when its $300 dollars for christ sake. Its not $150,000 like the new samsung TV that just came out.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
My bet is .. (the first fail) the second copy and improve...
So Sony and MS will make their versions better and more cooler and they will grow on the corpse of the Oculus rift ...