VR?

[Hey Joe]

It's time for this old peanut again.

With the wii showing that interactivity will outsell graphic excellence, is the development of VR the way forward for console gaming? Once upon a time it was the fancy of the sci-fi writer, but now is it actually viable?

How would it be implemented? Or, do you think Virtual Reality is a crock?

DISCUSS

 

[Gooble]

Cannot wait for VR, just hope it's perfected in my lifetime. Seems the main problem is the amount of concentration required to even perform simple in-game tasks, which would need to be addressed, but you could always just have a thing at the moment where you see the entire game through your own eyes, as it were, and play with a controller.

 

[haruvister]

Whenever I hear mention of VR I think of that episode of Red Dwarf, 'Back to Reality' - awesome.

With the birth of 3D graphics I think interest in VR piqued too early, and it became something of a laughing stock because, let's face it, it wasn't anywhere NEAR replicating reality, let alone virtually there. Perhaps Nintendo can tap into the gimmick for their next assault on the casual market.

 

[TheGreenManalishi]

Only if it was like the holodeck from Star Trek

 

[number2301]

I haven't seen sales figures but long term I'd be shocked to see the Wii outsell its competitors (combined, as that's the most appropriate for the assertion you're making), its a novelty mainly, and doesn't suit the predominantly solo nature of gaming, whether that be single player or on line multiplayer.

But anyway, VR has a few huge obstacles to overcome to be worth while. First what's the point of moving your hand to pick something up on screen if you can't actually feel it? You need that feedback. Second, if you're to actually walk about just think of the space you'd need, and again you wouldn't be able to feel anything in game.

Without either of those two things all you've got is a set of fancy glasses.

 

[Conqueror Kenny]

Whenever I hear mention of VR I think of that episode of Red Dwarf, 'Back to Reality' - awesome.

If that ever did happen I would get that game in a heartbeat.
V.R does seem like a good idea but i'm not sure if we are that advanced yet perhaps another 10-20 years, if you think there isn't really any new technology with the wii.

 

[shatnershaman]

Hasn't the 360 and PS3 combined outsold Wii?

VR is a crock to me. Even if it works it will cost way too much.

 

[HSIAMetalKing]

I own a Virtual Boy. Hopefully future advances in VR technology will give me something better than that.

 

[SargentToughie]

I honestly don't think V.R. will ever actually come to be. Think about all of the things you interact with in every day life before you get breakfast, Each footstep you take, the things you punch (I'm looking at you, snooze button) and so on. There is no way that any technology in our lifetime will ever come close to simulating real life.

 

[Easykill]

I'm hoping for it, and I don't think we're that far off. Screw reality, I'm gonna catch me some pokemons!

 

[Alex_P]

With the wii showing that interactivity will outsell graphic excellence, is the development of VR the way forward for console gaming?

No.

Is the Wii successful because of some magical immersive quality of waving the little stick or simply because it's priced right and its offerings successfully appeal to a variety of players?
 

Moreover, I take exception to the term "interactivity" here. The Wiimote is certainly a somewhat novel and quite reasonable design, but it's no more "interactive" than keyboard-and-mouse or a standard console controller. Heck, Wii Tennis is functionally equivalent to, what, pressing a single button? Games like Okami show us that a lot of tasks that seems to be just right for the Wiimote can also be done well with a vanilla controller.

And let's not forget that far more "immersive" interfaces have been around for years -- light guns, dance pads, tiny plastic guitars. The pre-historic Tennis for Two had little paddles (and gameplay analogous to Wii Tennis)!
 

The whole "virtual reality" thing is all about buying into the same ideas that drive the graphics craze, anyway. They're two faces of the same "realer is better" ideology of design. While that stuff has its place -- training simulations are a huge market right now, -- I think it's a pretty myopic design philosophy that, ultimately, does players and creators a great disservice by discouraging the carefuly examination of the medium as a medium.

-- Alex

 

[ElArabDeMagnifico]

I think VR will only be able to work out if we had really advanced "AI" or "VI" (using "Mass Effect" terms here) - once I can have a real conversation with an NPC, or just slap them when they are rude to me and then say "WELL I NEVAH!" - and they react accordingly.

That's the first step we should take if we plan on making VR - then the holodeck.

 

[Jumplion]

Of course we'll have VR someday, but not in the way people think.

What i think is that VR will be like the first consoles coming out; limited graphics, gameplay machanics, sound, and the such-but it would be re/evolutionary.

VR will not just all of a sudden be like you're automatically in a completely different world, it will be limited. But as technology grows, so can the VR.

 

[PingPongJoe]

VR just seems like a silly idea to me. It makes me imagine games where a simple task like walking will exaust you in a matter of minutes. Instead of trying to force "manufactured" fun and depth on to people with such crazy gimmicks such as VR, developers should be working on creating true fun with great gameplay and true depth with excellent storytelling.

 

[Asehujiko]

With the wii showing that hype and the name "nintendo" will outsell anything, is the development of VR the way forward for console gaming?

fixed that for you.

On topic: I greatly doubt we will get vr anytime soon. Most of the "alpha" versions consist of an even more cumbersome mouseglove then the wiimote already is and the screen strapped to a helmet. Which is not vr but a great way to ruin your eyes.

 

[fix-the-spade]

Is the Wii successful because of some magical immersive quality of waving the little stick or simply because it's priced right and its offerings successfully appeal to a variety of players?

The Nail, you just caved it's skull in.
Alex P has a good point here. The Wii's success is at least partly down to it costing less than £200. Although the enormous cost of Remotes and Nunchucks cancels this out a bit.
The Virtual console and Gamecube compatability help it too


As for VR, I don't think it's ever going to take off in the way Virtual Boy intended it to. I think the next step graphics wise will be iMax style 3-d. Silly cardboard glasses and all.

 

[Alex_P]

As for VR, I don't think it's ever going to take off in the way Virtual Boy intended it to. I think the next step graphics wise will be iMax style 3-d. Silly cardboard glasses and all.

Well, it might not be cheap cardboard 3-D glasses. I've seen some $50 peripherals around that let you do stereo 3-D on a standard gaming video card; it looks like the glasses do something themselves (they are powered), but I'm not sure what. Anyway, here's a link [http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16826504001&Tpk=glasses]. From the reviews it sounds like the technology is still in its "fiddly and dysfunctional" stage.

-- Alex

 

[Silver]

Airsoft, LARPs and the experimental "gaming-of-the-future"-thingy I was on is as close as we'll get I think. The first two are already real, but it's not that much virtual about them, just a little. The third though was awesome. Running around with a lot of experimental technology, following ley lines, visible through the monitor of one of our devices and hear and see the story unfold, both by actors coming at us, and through our cellphones and then the climactic ending in a tower with glass walls overlooking the whole city. That was awesome, but then again, the budget of such things is probably going to be a lot less when the experiment is concluded, I seem to remember they had a budget of several thousands dollars for just a ten people game

Oh, the homepage is still up, check it out: http://www.interference.nu/

 

[BallPtPenTheif]

it's the same complaint i have with the wii. i prefer my user input in a game to be an abstract representation not an analogues gesture... similarly i want my entertainment presented on a screen, not to be a visceral visual detachment from reality.

games are already engrossing as they are, i can't imagine taking it a step further to a level of immersion that would be the equivalent of a hyperbaric chamber.

there probably are some great entertainment applications for VR, but games as we know them now, are not a part of that. more than likely, VR entertainment will be a quick fun novelty for parties and gatherings... like karaoke or the wii.

 

[Jamash]

One major obstacle I see with VR, is the negative health issue. I'm no expert, but I'm sure those VR goggles which enclose your eyes must be really bad for them.
For instance, if you're completely immersed in a virtual world & looking at something in the distance, your brain & eyes will focus on the distance, when in reality the screen & object is only a few centimetres from your eyeballs. Surely this can't be good for your eyesight.

I'm only guessing this from my experience in using a digital SLR camera. I get a headache & sore eye if I've been looking through the viewfinder for too long, especially when I've been photographing something a long way away, so I would imagine the same would be true of VR headsets.

Would the VR headsets even be legal now? I think they were invented before the obligatory epilepsy warning was put into games, & now that everyone is more aware of the chances of seizures caused by video games, would VR even get past the health & safety bods?

Speaking of Red Dwarf, does anyone remember that VR game show hosted by Craig Charles? It was pretty crappy, if I remember correctly, but at the same time probably near the pinnacle of practical VR technology.