Art_Vandelay

If Premium keeps adding VR demos, I'll definitely consider upgrading from Extra.

As I build my VR legs, I still can't quite put my finger on what causes me motion sickness. I can play Call of the Mountain or RE Village for like an hour no problem but, say, Song in the Smoke or Tales from the Galaxy's Edge hit me pretty much instantly.

The vibes I get from this image are the exact same as when those pictures of the horrendous PS5 dev kit leaked and people reacted as if the console would look anything like that. "Look, there's even a 'V' in there, so it must be the final design.".

@Trousersnake Yeah, Crossfire Sierra Squad looks like the Call of Duty that I actually want to play.

I've never been a fan of FPS because of the disconnect between my actions and the gameplay. I've always felt like I was controlling a camera, not a character, never really feeling I was immersed.

Now, in VR... damn, shooting stuff just feels so satisfying.

@RIGGOR_MORTIS Yeah, and even if the game was free, you don't actually get the car. It's just an in-game rendition of that model, so you can only drive it within the confines of GT7. The nerve.

@gbanas92 Now, here's an idea: trailers for VR games.

In VR.

I know, it's a long shot, with many inherent challenges. And it doesn't solve the issue of bringing new people in. But it's worth considering.

I mean, there might have been attempts at that that I'm not aware of, but the point stands.

@WaveBoy Exactly. One interesting thing that I've recently figured out is the reverse effect of trailers. I explain.

Trailers of flat-screen games almost always make the game look better than it actually is, whereas it's the exact opposite with VR.

Just last week, I was debating with myself which game to pick up from the recent PS Store sale. I had had my eyes on Zombieland for a while, but I was totally turned off by the trailers. I wondered how that underwhelming looking game could be any good, but I'm glad I took the risk and pulled the trigger. That game is crazy fun and it actually looks surprisingly cool inside the headset.

And that is actually one of VR's greatest barriers, right? It's a hard thing to market.

@Johnnycide I don't know exactly how you'd define "failure", but for me and the hundreds of thousands out there who own a PSVR2, it's a massive success.

I'm drowning in incredible titles here, and I haven't had this much fun with videogames since the early nineties.

VR just makes everything so much more compelling that I'm worried I won't be able to enjoy flat-screen games ever again. I initially attributed that to the wow factor being new to VR and all, but it's been almost 6 months and my love for the medium just keeps growing.

Sure, I've played a couple flat-screen games in the meantime but, you know, they fall flat.

@Total_Weirdo You mean first-party support? Honestly, I wouldn't wait. Third-party support has been amazing. I'm drowning in games like I never have before.

I know this hasn't been the feeling outside of the VR bubble, but I guarantee you there are more than enough great VR games to keep you entertained for years already. With many more coming.

The games media coverage of PSVR2 has been appalling. Push Square is certainly better than most, but I would follow Youtube channels such as Without Parole to really get the vibe.

And to be fair, Sony has been a little too quiet on the marketing front, but support hasn't been bad at all. Horizon and GT7 are no joke, and Sony has been funding many VR versions and ports such as Resident Evil (8 and 4).

Take the plunge, dude. The water temperature is just perfect.

I've just had the time of my gaming life yesterday with this game. I bought a PSVR2 at launch but, being new to VR, I had to grow my VR legs before being able to handle Gran Turismo.

Well, the time has finally come. And man oh man.. This is what I've been dreaming of since my Atari 2600 days.

Fun anecdote: today, I was driving IRL and I kept having flashes of memory from my yesterday's GT7 session, as if I had actually raced. VR is so cool.

@Flaming_Kaiser Oh, I totally agree. All of my gaming time has been spent on PSVR2 since February, which feels oddly similar to the whole Dreams saga. It's niche and radically different from everything else, and Sony is still willing to support it. For now, at least.

I just hope Sony learns from the mistakes they made with Dreams, because at the end of the day, it's business. If the product doesn't perform in the market, it eventually gets axed. There's no way around that, apart from a very idealistic and unrealistic view of the world.

@TrickyDicky99 Exactly. The point being the hardware is worth it even though there are relatively few current-gen exclusives. Which isn't to say that games designed with the newer hardware as a baseline aren't going to be even better.

Man, the whole Dreams saga makes absolutely no sense:

1) The "game" is revealed along with the PS4, and nobody can understand what it is.
2) It then takes like a decade to come out.
3) A paid beta program happens right before launch.
4) The game is a commercial flop from the start, but MM and Sony keep supporting it for years.
5) It is one of the very few Sony IPs that never comes out on PC, where it actually had a real chance to flourish.
6) MM finally announces its end of service.
7) Then one of the main features that could give it a real push is announced: the ability to export creations.
8) And then the other thing that could actually save it happens: "free" with PS+.
9) And finally, the seemingly best creation from MM themselves comes out of nowhere.

Really, what is going on?

Edit: look, I'm not bashing on the game here. I actually think it is amazing, but it fell victim to one the worst cases of bad decision after bad decision in Sony's history. PS3-era included

@TrickyDicky99 "2,500 games . . of which 2,475 are PS4 games"
... of which 2,450 run way better on the newer hardware.

The core gameplay is awesome, so they're definitely on the right track to turn a good game into a great game.

"Further, Capcom looks to continue expanding sales with the upcoming release of Resident Evil 4 VR Mode, free downloadable content compatible with PlayStation VR2."

He's right, I know at least one additional copy will be sold as soon as the PSVR2 mode drops.

This game is awesome. I just don't get why reviewers downplayed the VR mode. Most described it as "not adding much to the flat-screen mode", which I totally disagree.

VR adds a much welcome sense of depth and makes navigating the environments easier by virtue of allowing the user to change camera position by simply moving their head.

But most importantly, VR automatically makes everything much, much more awesome. Instead of peering through a 65" 2D window, I'm in there. It hit me the other day, when I was admiring the massive face made out of those tiny people in the central hub, and I had to take out de headset. Geez Luise, how underwhelming was the sight of that same head on my TV. Seriously.

@get2sammyb I beg to differ.

The monetization model has a direct influence on the dynamics of a game. It's not about being single or multiplayer. It's about telling a compelling story with a beginning and an end. That is the traditional model we all know and love.

Live service implies continuity by definition, and that brings along all sorts of really bad inherent characteristics: games become jobs, because they now require max engagement to generate the need or desire to spend the extra money.

These trend chasing shenanigans almost never end well in the gaming business. Games take too long to develop. By the time the game is out, the trend is over.

I worry that Sony seems to be making a very disproportional bet on the live service thing. They claim that the traditional single player experiences will not be negatively impacted, but the latest showcase tells a very different story.

It reeks of "TV, TV, TV" Xbox, or motion controls, or Sony's own recent mobile initiative.

"The District Court’s ruling makes crystal clear that this acquisition is good for both competition and consumers".

Who the hell is stupid enough to buy this crap? So, Microsoft is willing to spend the biggest amount of money ever spent by any tech company to benefit the competition and consumers? WTF?

I don't know, man... The whole thing smells reeeal fishy. Money talks...

@Shepherd_Tallon I remember that. And funnily enough, it aligns perfectly with another quote, but from the other side: when asked about Bethesda games' exclusivity, Phil Spencer said it would be available "wherever Game Pass exists", or something along those lines.

See, not on Xbox. On Game Pass.

Stranger Things have happened.

Here is the only way this could work: Microsoft gets out of the console business and Game Pass ends up on PlayStation (and every other remaining platform).

It may sound absurd now, but that is where we seem to be heading in my view. Either that, or one of the two platform holders will implode in the long run.

Oh, let's all flock to that social media platform where people who I don't agree with are censored. Yay!

@Trousersnake "VR IS the future of gaming".

It's hard to look decades into the future but, for now, VR is a future of gaming. Not the future. This nuance matters, because it's not a competition. VR should be seen as a great alternative to flat-screen gaming, a complementary way to play.

Since I got my PSVR2 in February, my gaming time has been like 80% VR, 20% flat-screen. I'm new to VR, so it's hard to say how this split will trend. But I can see VR eating the lion's share of my gaming for the foreseeable future.

I use a little trick with this game, since my space is quite limited: I stand on a memory foam pillow, which makes it very hard to move my feet.

This way, I'm sort of planted on the ground which leads me to rely on the sticks for lateral movement. I also never physically move front or backwards, since it's unnecessary afaik.

@Balosi Good point. It's a careless and serious mistake that could help changing the tides on this thing. Not necessarily in court, but public perception matters. It's a bit of a PR nightmare, at the very least.

@Tharsman "If that email is the only email that voices that opinion, I think its safe to say no one else agreed with the stance."

This email is not an exhibit, it's a slip up. Plain and simple. This is not the kind of remark you make in writing, regardless of it being discussed behind closed doors or even simply being implied. Which it totally is by Microsoft's past and present actions and behavior, not only but very much with Xbox.

If you don't think that pretty much everyone at Microsoft agrees with that statement, you have absolutely no grasp at corporate reality.

@Fiendish-Beaver "It is an email between two friends, where no caution was shown in their choice of words, as we all do in unguarded moments."

Bingo. What defines a person's true character is what they do when no one is looking. You take off your mask, we see your face. You drink a couple beers, you're more likely to tell the truth.

@themightyant "Do they think everyone is an idiot and believes every word they say?"

No, they think they can throw their weight around and bulldoze this acquisition. Just look at what's happening in the UK, where Microsoft has straight out threatened to pull their business out. It's sickening.

Not to mention the lobbying and god knows what else.

@Tharsman "Fast forward a few years, and both Sony and Xbox have spent way more than that in acquisitions."

Sony was obviously forced into this escalation game, but they know they can't compete. And that's exactly when market authorities such as the FTC must come in and tip the scales in order to guarantee fair play.

The ABK deal is nothing but a (massive) piece in the puzzle and cannot be looked at in isolation.

If that doesn't seal (or rather unseal) the deal, I don't know what will.

What Spencer means by "not understanding the platforms" is that he hopes to have Game Pass on PlayStation by the time TES6 releases.

Microsoft is a software and services company first and foremost. The hardware is a bump on the way, and the Xbox division would actually love to become just that: a software and services brand.

Sure, Sony would not allow GP on PlayStation as long as the Xbox console exists. But if Microsoft drops the machine, why wouldn't they?

@Neither_scene It's not about the exclusivity.

It's about ownership and control of the IP.

@Pat84 You probably need more contrast around you for the headset cameras to use as anchors. I think stuff with right angles work best. I've had issues especially with my floor and found that splattering cushions around helped quite a bit.

I wonder if the resurgence of GT7 has anything to do with the fact that PSVR2 has been available at retail stores.

The symbiotic relationship that some key games - Gran Turismo, Resident Evil - have with the headset is certainly an important reason that drove Sony to keep investing in VR. It strengthens and invigorates the whole ecosystem.

The actual problem with these events is the timing. Rigid dates and the yearly frequency simply don't work in an environment where development cycles usually take 5 or 6 years.

I wonder how many of those sales were driven by PSVR2.

RE Village is probably the de facto experience on the headset along with GT7. And I recall Capcom saying something like "most PSVR2 owners have played Village". Sure, a good number of those already owned the game, but I for one only picked it because of the VR support. And considering the headset is probably closing in to 1 million by now (600k in April followed by retail availability in May)... food for thought.

I see all these comparisons with TV streaming services, but the truth is that even those are plateauing. The difference is that the ceiling is much lower with games.

I'm cancelling my Netflix subscription for the first time in over a decade. I'm tired of throwaway movies and hit n' miss shows. Netflix is the definition of quantity over quality.

And that was my main concern with Game Pass when it was announced and heralded as the best value in gaming. Lo and behold, it's all getting clear now.

@NEStalgia To be fair, the closed ecosystem does have its advantages, especially for the layman. But the price to be paid is borderline ridiculous. I used a Mac for the few years I attended the University, and it was fine. But I went straight back to PC as soon as I was done with my degree and never looked back.

@NEStalgia Oh yeah, I guess this is part of the ecosystem, right? And I'm with you there, the world has become a caricature of itself. These are the dark ages. VR to the rescue lol.

Now, getting back to the matter at hand, I think the main target audience for this first iteration is actually the developers. If Apple can convince this group alone and, again, if the tech is solid, it will eventually thrive.

And honestly, it does have its little tricks. The outward facing screen, the dial, the 3D camera; these are all unique features. And the specs are also pretty impressive, price notwithstanding.

But what I hate about Apple is how they present all the other 99% of features as the innovation of the century. You know, stuff that have been present in competitors offers for years. And… people f'in fall for it. It's disgusting.

@NEStalgia You're failing to see the big picture here. Yesterday's presentation made it clear that this product is geared towards both professionals and consumers. But not this product per se, but this product line.

XR is ground breaking technology that will still take years to mature. Apple's first foray into this market is clearly an early adopter stepping stone that has the primary objective of planting the seeds of a healthy ecosystem. If the tech is solid, it will attract both enthusiasts and developers which is a fundamental first step for future mainstream adoption.

The same sources that had been reporting on the Vision Pro have leaked Apple's roadmap, which point to both a cheaper version in one or two years and a "true AR/MR" iteration further down the line.

Look, I hate Apple but its influence in the tech industry is undeniable. So, I actually think that Vision Pro will be good for VR in general because it does shift people's perspective. You know, a rising tide lifts all boats.

Oh man, I'll be all over this. The 7th Guest was one of those momentous occasions back in the day, along with Wing Commander 3, Rebel Assault and Under a Killing Moon, which required an obscene 16 MB of RAM to run.

@gaston "why are all the gaming media so negative in regards of vr and playstation's vr in particular?"

That's a bloody good question. The only reasonable explanation I can come up with is the good old resistance to change. People feel threatened when something so radically new comes about. It seemingly jeopardizes their very identity in a rather subconcious level.

I know it may sound like a bit of a stretch, but what else?

@TrickyDicky99 So, which is the argument? I was referring to your comment about the Quest 3, which is totally apples and oranges.

Supply and demand, well... it could make sense if you ignored all the other variables that compound the price of a product.

But mainly: PSVR2 is not supposed to sell in huge numbers like the console itself. It's a value add. It makes the PS5 look state-of-the-art. "It even does VR". It is geared towards tech enthusiasts that pay whatever price and buy games by the buckets. And since it is relatively small in sales volume, Sony has to make a healthy profit on the hardware itself. Add that to the aforementioned high attach rate, and you have a winner.

In addition, it's a marathon not a sprint. Lowering the price to $400 now is a bad look. It's stupid marketing. Now, temporarily lowering it to $499 on black Friday.. that would be smart.

@gollumb82 Yeah, PC compatibility would be a game changer...

For Valve, who would get all of the profit with Steam sales without moving a finger.

People need to understand once and for all that console manufacturers make their money on content and services, not hardware sales. That's their whole business model.

@TrickyDicky99 That's like saying that Sony needs to lower the PS5 price because Steam Deck packs a screen, controller and all the processing onboard.

Sure, except that the difference in processing power is like 10X.

Geez, can we just enjoy PSVR2 for what it is? Yes, it is expensive. Yes, it is hard for Sony to justify funding AAA titles for the platform. Yes, it is niche. Yes, there are tens of flat-screen game releases for every VR release. So, does it make PSVR2 a failure?

Maybe it is, for those who have "no interest" on it and yet waste their time reading and commenting articles about it. But for me, PSVR2 is a massive success because it solves the two main problems I have with games these days: time investment and lack of innovation.

Sure, GOW Ragnarock was awesome, but it was more GOW. Forbidden West was also great, but it was more Horizon. Same goes for Spider Man 2 by the looks of it. I've been gaming for 35 years, and I felt like I had seen it all until VR came along.

Not to mention the time investment. I'm a 44 year old with adult responsibilities. I'm lucky if I can get 1 hour of playtime on a given day. So these games take me months to complete, which in turn adds to the feeling of sameyness.

Now, VR turn games like Resident Evil, Horizon or GT7 into completely new experiences. Also, AA or indie games suddenly become super interesting because they're not the average side scroller or whatever that I've seen and played a million times on the flat-screen. And they're much cheaper and only take a few hours to complete. Jackpot.

So, not enough games? Well, I'm new to VR so I already have a backlog that will take me a couple years to go through. And new games are coming out slowly but surely; more than I will ever be able to handle. Plus, I have an endless source of gaming fun in GT7 alone with my racing rig and headset.

But, you know… it's 2023 and people's main hobby is to complain online.

People must stop referring to how things used to be done back in the PS3 or even the PS4 days. The comparisons simply don't hold up because the realities of games development have changed dramatically over the last decade.

The 3-year cycle is now the exception, with the rule being 5, 6 or even 7 years for a game to go from concept to release. Therefore, we need to adjust our expectations accordingly, otherwise we're poised to eternal frustration.

The alternative is to have games being announced half a decade before they come out. Not ideal, if you ask me.

@JB_Whiting That's the way it goes in 2023. The pace of tech has dramatically decelerated when compared to the PS1/PS2/PS3 days.

With node shrinks inching closer to atomic limits on the hardware side, and games development getting increasingly complex, we won't be playing anything close to that Matrix Awakens demo in 60 fps anytime soon.

If you want to get blown away by new games, you really need to look elsewhere. VR is where the real revolution is happening now. Feels like the good old days.

I must say I wasn't expecting that, given that the wording in the original announcement was "VR content also in development". Sounded like DLC, with a total lack of commitment for full game support.

It makes sense though, given the brilliant work they've done with Village. Probably the best thing to come out of that Showcase.

As some of us have been saying from the start, the February 22nd has most definitely been a soft launch. Consider all of the following:

• PSVR2 only launched at Amazon/retail stores on May 12th.
• PSVR1 launched right into the shopping season (October).
• The console install base for PSVR2 is several times smaller at the time of launch when compared to the original PSVR.

Now, PSVR2 is strategically important to Sony and this is why:

• It's another tick in the console box. Even if a consumer doesn't plan to get a headset right from the start, it's nice to have the option. That indirectly drives console sales.
• The attach rate is sky high with VR headsets (games bought per user). The average PSVR owner has the characteristics that platform holders love: they're mostly hyper enthusiasts with disposable income.
• VR still has this patina of bleeding edge tech, thus making the related console look more advanced hence more attractive. I look at the main competitor and see, you know, "services", "value", and so on. These are great, but what is more exciting (not to mention the games, of course)?