Topic: Is gaming media over-hyping VR at our expense?

@Tasuki: It spits out what the VR wearer can see on the TV and there are a couple of asymmetrical multiplayer games in development where the headset wearer has a different experience to those playing on the TV.

Having said that, I don't really understand why VR has to be social personally. Clearly it's intended for individual experiences.

@get2sammyb: VR isn't socially that's what I am getting at, but for the most part gaming is. The biggest worry I have is that it's going to be a niche thing bt companys will try to make it a main staple. The smart thing would be to make it like a controller in the same vain as arcade sticks for fighting games. If you want to use it then great if you don't then great as well. All the need to do is add an option for it in games like remote play for example rather then creating special games for it like Kinect or the Move did.

@Tasuki:

Couldn't agree more.

@Tasuki: The question I'm posing is: does gaming have to always be social? I have a blast with the likes of Rocket League and Mario Kart, and I want those games to continue to exist, but I also enjoy the escapism that gaming uniquely offers; the idea of getting away from the real world and becoming someone I can't be. VR could enhance that.

I see it more of an accompaniment to the current gaming spectrum rather than a replacement, so I guess I'm not sure why the introduction of VR would mean that social games would have to suddenly go away.

@get2sammyb: Ok yeah I see your point, but as I said it's all about how they go. As long as this doesn't become the norm for gaming yeah social gaming will exist but if it does become the norm, well then social gaming will become extict I fear. No gaming doesn't have to be social all the time but it's nice to have that option.

@Tasuki: As long as there's demand, there'll always be supply IMO. I mean look at the Vita: the hardware numbers are atrocious, but fair play to Sony and the smaller devs, they've continued supporting it because a small sub-section of gamers still enjoy it.

Amplify that to the millions upon millions of people who enjoy playing games on a TV/social setting, and I don't think anyone should be worried that VR will take away traditional games. At best it will become a complement or alternative way to play IMO.

@get2sammyb: As long as there's demand, there'll always be supply IMO

That's a really big assumption. What's happened to side scrolling beat em ups, Light gun games and Tennis games? Every single one of those genres would benefit from todays bigger screens but there isn't any.

@Tasuki makes a good point there, as a 360 owner last gen in the latter releases kinect use was shoe horned in. Just imagine for instance metal gear but you need the vr to use the binoculars. A big point nobody has mentioned is this; everything in vr has to be in first person else what's the point?

I think there are a lot of interesting issues surrounding VR. In response to journalism, I've largely stayed away from the bigger sites (I personally think most of them are rubbish anyway) on this topic. For reference, the VR device I've tried is Oculus Rift.

With VR, I think one of the hardest things facing it is how you display it to people. With traditional gaming, you are always going to be seeing it on a similar type of display, so screenshots and videos won't be too dissimilar. With VR that's a little different, because the way you experience it is different and it's hard to relay one person's experience to another. With what is seen is a relatively high price point to gamers, it makes it difficult for them to get excited.

The main hitch for me with VR is this: what games are really going to lend themselves to the technology? What game will be on it that makes it so the only real way you can play is with VR? This was a huge problem with motion control games. Very few games felt like they could only be played in this way. Right now, there doesn't seem to be much that really exists beyond a quick kind of wow factor, something brief that will soon wear off.

Also, with VR and the possibilities of motion tracking - everyone's set up is going to be different. There are too many variables to really go huge distances with the technology in a home setting. I actually think it could be a far better experience to go with VR on site, like laser tag or paintball. That way you can have a set environment, and allow for movement, motion tracking and more functionality from the hardware, especially with the stuff the HTC Vive seems to be capable of. That would be really great I think.

There are other points like VR substituting some senses and not others, and how everyone's senses and perception differ slightly but those are more minor. I'd love it for VR to be great, but I think the focus is more on technology rather than how gaming can be more intrinsic to it.

@themcnoisy: But tennis games genuinely don't sell.

@Churchy: I'd love it for VR to be great, but I think the focus is more on technology rather than how gaming can be more intrinsic to it.

That pretty much sums up my feelings too.

@get2sammyb: Pong was huge in the 70s, Pete Sampras tennis was big on the Megadrive, Top Spin did well on the Xbox (1 mil sales) Wii Sports was basically Bowling and Tennis (only 82 million sales). I disagree when anyone says 'they don't sell as well', there is a market for tennis - some of the biggest sport stars in the world are Tennis players. Big open tournaments are sell outs all over the world and you and I will be shouting come on Tim!! I Mean Andy at the screen in the summer. Maybe the reason for lacklustre sales has been that the last few tennis games have been crap, with zero marketing made on the cheap. But I digress, just because there's a need doesn't mean anyone's filling it. We have been crying out for Sega / Capcom / Konami to get there acts together as we the gamers know how they can appeal to us again - but they don't, wont or cant.

@Churchy: Developers need to think outside of the box, surely? They can't just say: let's make Call of Duty 350 compatible with this thing. The hope is that we'll get new experiences. The problem, as @ShogunRok quite rightly suggested earlier in the thread, is whether the install base will grow to a point that warrants that kind of investment.

@themcnoisy: Virtua Tennis 4, Grand Slam Tennis 2, and Top Spin 4 all flopped, and are the most recent tennis titles. Many tried to emulate the popularity of Wii Sports and failed - though I don't think you can illustrate your point with a pack-in anyway.

Believe me, I'd absolutely love a new tennis game, but at the moment, the market's not there sadly.

@get2sammyb: All you need is Virtua Tennis on the Dreamcast

@Tasuki: True enough! A classic.

Really good thread. I think there is a lot of enthusiastic media coverage because, what else is there? It is a new (or at least, generationally new) technology that just sounds different and cool.

I am looking forward to it in the hope it will provide me with a unique experience to supplement my current gaming habits. That is what the Wii did successfully. If I do become an early adopter, I will of course be concerned about the library and development dedicated to it but then it is always the risk of being an early adopter of anything. I've been burned before, but hey ho.

The truth is that we just can't tell what impact it will have, even those who have had teasers, and what the buying publics reaction will be. I mean, who here scoffed when they first saw the Wii and thought, who would want that?

Besides, variety is the spice of life.

@get2sammyb: Oh definitely. I'd love nothing more than that to happen, but right now there is nothing that makes me think that VR is worth getting. And unfortunately, I could see some games just being an FPS on a screen (even though I hope no one is that lazy). I understand about the concept of the install base, and that certainly is a factor. But the ideas that are there don't seem to be doing anything radically different from what games are doing now

. If I were to buy something like that, I'd want a game that feels as though it couldn't be played in any other way. And right now, it just feels like things are heightened and slightly extended. And for what is essentially going to be hundreds of pounds, it just doesn't seem worth it yet. Could it change? Absolutely. Do I wish it to be great? Definitely. But right now, I'm just not so sure.

I think though, it'd be interesting for there to be an opportunity for people to experience this like a sort of hardware/software tour to particular locations so that the general public can experience it first.

Watch the kinda funny gamecast episode today with Steve Gaynor. Hopefully it made Colin and Greg think a little more.......they do seem to be in a bit of a bubble.

I agree with @themcnoisy. Besides the obvious pricing issues, I don't like that it will be mostly FPS games, or first person games.

The Wii got away with motion controls because it was easy to grasp AND cheap. I know new technology is expensive but this cannot compare to a tablet or cellphone that have many uses besides gaming and they are also portable.

@SkanetWasTaken:

Sammy also has bad taste (we all love you Sammy, just saying).