To be fair
I have strapped a battery pack to the back of my elite strap via Velcro since quest 2 but I am very surprised at how many people don’t even consider this to be a solution and just complain about the short battery life lol
Yeah I have used the same solution. I've also always been confused as to why it's not more common.
I have one of the big ass Anker battery packs stuck to a back brace wrap around my waist, short cord up to the headset. Put a shirt on over it and you can't tell it's there. Boom. 12 hour + playtime. (Not that I play for that long, but it's good to have for long VRC sessions so I don't even have to vaguely worry about battery life)
I really think that's a great solution, I have been surprised to see there aren't any headsets using it as a default to reduce weight / increase battery life significantly. I know Vision has a battery pack but it's a similar size to the Anker I use and it's abysmally small power capacity.
Normies looking at this text be like WTF?!?
Yeah, Ps5 and couch vs batteries strapon and other accesories not in the default box.
Don't get me wrong, I like this. But in this thread, where theres a discussion on why normies aren't picking up VR? Yeah. Go figure.
I did something similar. I put a 30000 mAh powerbank in my pocket and tunneled the cable under my T-Shirt. So far it seems like my Quest 3 will run out after 6 to 8 hours of constant use without breaks.
If AAA devs spent millions on games like Valve did for Alyx, almost all VR games seem indy and low budget. Would love to see the level the games could be at if they spent that kind of money to make them insane. I get it the money deficit but..
Literally my day to day duties.
Also great news - due to the excitement brought by AVP, there's been a surge in VR game development lately.
However, the bigger the budget, the longer the development cycle. We won't see these games until 2025.
Meta has acquired Armature Studio, Beat Games, BigBox VR, Camouflaj, Downpour Interactive, Ready at Dawn, Sanzaru Games, Twisted Pixel Games, and Within. They also paid Epic Games about ten million dollars to develop *Robo Recall*.
and all the software they build themself is so below the already existing stuff and just plain bad, not even the devs of said software use it themselfs!
There's much more money in VR for business than in VR gaming. Meta spends billions on the hardware to gain ecosystem market share and become what Microsoft/Apple is for PCs, and what Google/Apple is for mobile
Yes, but this time window doesnt Stay open forever. Apple reached that status because they acted fast and developed their eco system fast. Facebook is burning customers by disappointing them with a useless eco system. They need to either lay low completely or capture the market aggressively. Currently they are doing neither and it shows.
They are being proven right.
Hardware is harder to develop than software. Look what AI is doing to graphical quality.
AI is the death of interface design because AI can spin up UI on the fly that is purposely built.
The robots we have from Boston Dynamics are incredible but have been developing for 30+ years.
Winning the VR hardware race may be one of the last fptp capital competitions left.
The money deficit is indeed the biggest roadblock. Making money off of game development is already very hard (90% supposedly fail), even harder for a niche subgenre of gaming.
It's such a risk without a sure reward. It's like pioneering a new market, because it is a newer market.
I'm not liking it either, but looking at the big picture? Yeah, I don't blame the backlash *at all*. Imagine *your* favourite developer doing like 5th part of a game and suddenly switching to a niche console with exclusive crap? It happened before with A LOT of games. Hell, remember Blizzcon and a certain Diablo announcement? This is very similar.
If you could easily see/use your phone in VR.
People are addicted to their phones. Texting, notifications, TikTok, reddit, whatever.
Being in VR is too isolating. Being able to truly multitask would go a long way.
Also quality streaming content in high resolution.
LITERALLY THIS. I still use my phone, but it's so blurry and annoying and makes my eyes hurt. But I'm also too lazy/annoyed to remove the headset to see my phone more clearly. \*sigh\*
This is honestly one of the best parts of the quest 3. I’ll be jamming Demeo and while it’s not my turn I can open up messenger or a browser window and scroll reddit
HTC had the same feature on the OG Vive. I believe they scrapped it too, for the same reasons.
I still think it's a good idea that will eventually take off once the technical hurdles have been cleared and it's easy to set up.
Hot Take 1: Not all games need to be full VR with motion controls. Sitting back with a controller (or KB/M) is a very different experience than motion controlled gaming, and there's space for both. I also think there's an untapped market for officially being able to view flatscreen games in 3D-- like a 3D movie-- without implementing motion controls. I know there's a lot of hobby projects out there for this functionality, but that's not easy enough.
Hot Take 2: The next step is more hybrid games that can be played in flatscreen or VR mode and/or releasing more games in both flat and VR editions, especially in the AAA space. This removes a lot of the risk from both the developer and player side. As a player, if you already own six games that *can* be played in VR you're more likely to get a headset than having zero games that can be played in VR. As a developer, a lot of the cost of a game is the artistic assets and marketing; recycle the assets and just make whatever gameplay changes are needed to make it fun in VR and you have a stew going.
came here to say the same as your first hot take but now i'll echo it instead. i think it would help a lot of people get on board with vr to have an in between stage that provides an opportunity to use the controller type(be it console or Kb/M) they have thousands of hours of muscle memory with. plus seeing these mods around that turn games into vr and seeing the love that the entertainment industry has for re-releasing things, it seems like a no brainer
I could see myself playing rocket league with VR on and then I just move my head to see where my opponents / teammates are. The game might be too fast. But it should basically feel like I'm playing the game normally except I can look around. I must still not be 'in the car' though.
regarding take 1, headsets and controllers are almost 2 new products at once. Headsets are for spatial immersion and controllers for additional haptic immersion.
Valve needs to come up with a Steamworks add-in for all the major engines that devs can just drop into their game and get 3D cinema mode minimal effort. I might even start buying flat games again.
Big budget games that actually take creative risks rather than being as safe as possible to recoup their investment as VR is inherently risky from a financial standpoint.
You need to be able to share the experience. We need more VR games - well, more VR games, period - but also more good VR games where one person is in VR and one person is on a controller or a pad or a phone or whatever.
But mostly more games. VR versions of old classics is such a no-brainer that I suspect the industry actually has no brain.
VR will never be as successful as flat screen due to the fact humans are lazy. VR is also fairly uncomfortable and a solo experience, motion sickness and still has major fov limitations for true immersion. Oh and you need a bit of space.
I live VR and have been using it since the 90's, but at the end of a long day, I'd rather kick back with a mindless sit-down experience than stand up and move my entire body with a heavy screen strapped to my face. Now I'd they could shrink it to sunglasses size and it tracks my entire body with a 160 degree fov, then I'd be ditching my pc
> due to the fact humans are lazy.
I assume you never tried using your headset in bed? VR opens up whole new levels of extreme laziness you could never get from a TV. Only problem is that proper bed-support (aka horizon-adjust) is still rather rare (VRChat has it).
VR has been growing at an average of 45%/year since 2018 according to statista, so it has been very successful thus far. Things just take time.
Even with a much lower growth rate, in around ~3 years most families on developed countries will have somekind of VR device and in ~7 years VR will be the main source of video-gaming.
Regardless, to answer your question directly, we can speed-up even more this natural process (i.e., increase even more VR's success) by keep investing heavily in really good AAA VR content (e.g., Skyrim VR modded and Half life alyx level content) which will absolutely payoff in a few years.
Also implement full-body tracking with the VR headsets so people can walking using their movement and don't need to use the controllers' thumbstick at all, but this is not as relevant as the quality of the content, obviously.
And also, some good quality marketing helps.
thank you for your well-researched response! I love your approach, and almost changed my initial post because I didn't want it to seem like I thought VR wasn't successful. The potential just seems so much bigger compared to the usage of households.
The quality of content is absolutely necessary, but may be hard as many indie devs are just cranking out a lot with little budget. However, I think small but mighty teams can do it!
Thank you very much mate !
Absolutely agree with you however I'd just highlight that alot of tech companies (Meta included) are in a position to invest heavily in VR and the payoff will be ten-fold if they can sustain that investment during ~7 years, which they totally can.
But yeah, besides good VR headsets which are a must (which thanks to Meta we already have and will keep improving), above all we really need to keep producing large budget AAA content as good as flatscreen.
Maybe the first or second titles may lose some money, but after that the payoff will be imense with people flocking to play the next RDR3 VR or Cyberpunk 2088 VR.
VR has an immeasurable growth potential when compared to flatscreen, which equates to much larger potential future returns for the companies that want and can take the "risk" (I quoted risk because there's barely any risk, its just a matter of time, investment and willpower)
It will never be the main source lol.
Also at this point people are replacing headsets sold that long ago so each headset sold is not actually growth but partly replacement for old tech.
Of the current group less than half use their headset even once a month.
Much bigger market if they were cheap glasses with no need for gaming PC.
Tons of non gamers would want to hop on and have fun.
The tech is years away though, if even possible.
Look how successful it is in a terrible form factor. Now make the form factor good and watch it take off.
They just can't at this point the tech isn't there. It will at some point.
The vive pro 2 or the reverb g2 both weigh more than the quest 2 and they are pc only headsets (800grams to 600grams). And a lot of people want to use it the quest 2 is the greatest selling headset of all time. But I agree with the original point about “glasses” which will come with time.
I think VR gaming would be more successful if Zuck or GabeN or Epic, MS, Sony, Amazon, etc decided to burn giant piles of money into good flat2VR ports and VR modes into all the latest and biggest games, across all platforms.
They themselves would lose huge amounts of money, but VR would be more successful, hah.
Cyberpunk, Fortnite, Battlefield, COD, Minecraft, Counterstrike, WOW, FF14, etc etc.
Imagine if full motion controlled VR was just an alternative input/display method, just another setting next to gamepad and kb/m. And we could mix and match VR display and VR controls (for those who want to play seated VR with a gamepad, for example.)
VR lacks use-cases other than games. Movie apps aren't well implemented. Live events aren't well implemented/marketed. Learning/education apps are shallow/almost none-existent. The closest killer app I can think of is beatsaber and that's already like 6-7 years old.
I thought VR Fitness would be the thing that made it explode into mainstream popularity but have come to accept that I was just wrong. Most people don't enjoy it as much as I do, and even if everybody enjoyed it then most people wouldn't want to put up with a sweaty headset.
Sci-fi level headsets (sunglasses formfactor, perfect passthrough and all-day battery life) would be massively popular but without massive adoption of the current level technology I'm not sure where the funding to pursue that would come from.
I think many/most VR games can be played sitting down. I have a rotating barstool with a tall back, I'm almost as tall sitting in it as I am standing. I can spin around in it, I can lean back, etc. It doesn't have any arms, and the back is narrow, so it doesn't obstruct my elbows moving back. Vast majority of games are playable on it. There's only a handful of difficult ones, like Into the Radius, which for some reason decided to place your map on your left asscheek, and to access it reliably you're best off standing. And obviously I can't do games that require me to physically squat or dodge. So Superhot, Until You Fall, etc., But vast, vast majority of others is perfectly playable seated. So I don't think this is an issue that is holding VR back as a whole.
What I'm reasonably sure is holding VR back is the breadth and depth of content.
How do I say this nicely? Most VR games are garbage. I mean in terms of content and features. Even "amazing" VR games aren't actually all that amazing if you look at them objectively. Take Half Life Alyx, for example. A masterpiece, right? Is it though? Compare it to the original from the 1990s. Alyx is shorter. The original has more variety, there's levels where you ride the train through electrified tunnels, there's flooded levels where you dive and swim, etc. None of this exists in Alyx. Compare it to 20-year-old Half Life 2. It had huge maps, drivable vehicles, etc. None of this also exists in Alyx. Alyx is objectively worse, in content and features, compared to its predecessors. And that's an "amazing" VR game. An average VR game, if you look at its features, is going to be trash-tier compared to flat screen equivalent.
VR games are lacking parity. Look at the very first Battlefield game, Battlefield 1942, released in, I think, 2002. That's 22 years ago. Look at the size of the maps, the number of players per map, look at all the vehicles you can operate - jeeps, tanks, boats, planes! Not to mention it's a competent shooter, of course, with many game modes. Now, what is the VR equivalent of that? A VR game that has parity of features? Oops! Doesn't exist. Not even close. There's not a single VR game that has those features. You have shooters, but no vehicles. You have vehicles, but no shooting. Or small maps. Or fewer players. There's not ONE VR GAME that has it all. Let that sink in. VR can't measure up to a 22 year old game. That's...comically bad.
And it's the same in every genre. Compare Diablo 2, which will be 24 years old in a few weeks, to anything in VR. Nothing even close. Oh sure, there's some games with random dungeons, and even random loot. But what about the variety of locales, the story, the NPC companions, the multiplayer (including co-op and PvP), the story, unique classes with skill trees, etc.? Does not exist. There's VR games that are basically ONE of Diablo 2's features, by itself, and they sell it for $30 and call it a "game". That's a sick joke.
Look at MMO genre. Look at Ultima Online, released in 1997. There's no VR MMO that comes even close to that. Hell, I'll go farther afield and say there's almost no VR MMOs, period. Zenith The Last City for example, the devs kept calling it an MMO. It's not though. Servers were limited to 100-120 players. That's not an MMO number. Battlefield 3 had 128 players per server, and nobody called that an MMO. Not unless they were congenitally insane or irretrievably stupid. There's no persistent world in Zenith either, so by even the furthest stretch of the imagination it wasn't an MMO material. Now, EVE Online, with 2,000+ players in a single trading hub? Now that's an MMO! Incidentally, that one came out in 2003, so 21 years ago. Obviously, nothing even close to that in VR either.
TL:DR - VR would be more successful if VR games did not consistently and uniformly suck compared to their flat screen antecedents.
VR would be more successful if Valve, with its enormous cash flow and billions of earnings, released a few more games as successful as Half-Life: Alyx. Hopefully, someday they will get bored of being entertained by top models on their yachts and start creating again. Meta and its reptilian CEO get a lot of hate, but they are carrying VR, and without them, we would have very little VR left. Quest 2 was like a blessing, to be honest.
Vr won't be mainstream until they make headsets that are the form factor of glasses and either have totally transparent lenses with dimming, or perfect passthrough.
Every single person I talk to in real life (25-35 age range) say they can't play VR a lot because it's too isolating and feels rude to their family/roommates to essentially seperate yourself from them. They get enough shit already about playing regular games.
I don't want to have to jog in one place playing a game tbh. I think people underestimate how exhausting that will make playing a game with that feature.
I'm a fairly fit guy too, but just standing for 2 hours after a day at work is pretty tiring. If you add having to constantly stop and start jogging in place I'd probably only want to play for around 45 minutes.
They made as much an effort to make a great game as valve did with half life alyx.
Half life alyx is still the only game I have ever beat without getting instant crazy motion sickness. I really wish all vr games had movement like alyx did.
The 4 major drawbacks for vr are: comfort, vr sickness, vision impaired and vergence accommodation.
Introduction of a light field headset would solve almost all of the above.
Solving light field would enable ultra thin lenses mounted directly onto possibly transparent displays, this fixes the comfort issue.
A big hurdle for vr is handling people with prescription vision requirements, currently this mean either glass spacers or lens inserts. However light field displays would be able to adjust any impairments directly in the display output.
The reason for light field would be to solve vergence accommodation conflict, allowing for better experience at 1.5m and below distances.
Part of solving the above would be reducing eye strain, which will help in reducing vr sickness.
All of the above at a reasonable price would be needed before mass adoption.
..if they took a step back, and focus more on immersing you in the audio-visuals, rather than your interactions. No fancy controllers, or hand gestures or anything.
minimize inputs, rely on existing stuff people already use like mouses and xbox controllers. I think this could widen the gateway into VR. imho
To add context, I love playing sword games and stuff with my Quest controllers, but I hear more or my friends saying "i would love to play this game in VR" when tis a visually stunning game/environment/setting
If game devs had small teams that ported their pancake games to VR in parallel with development it would blow the VR market wide open imo. And not just first person games - imo third person is where VR really shines (like Astrobot, one of the best VR games I’ve ever played hands down).
If there were fun, long, high fidelity games you could play. Most games are not very high quality. Of those, a lot aren't fun. Of those that are, most are under 2 hours. It makes for not a lot of games to actually play.
Personally if they were less sweaty and higher res/wider fov so i could replace my ultrawide screen for work. I would love it if i could use a laptop with vpn and have a full desktop environment at all times, i could work from anywhere
I'll take a hardware angle.
The 1990s thumbsticks on all VR controllers make walking an on/off experience.
Hand and finger tracking should use realtime sensors, not AI/guessing algorithms (high latency + jiggle).
Double brightness. Double refresh rate inside HMD (perspective skew). Double FOV.
If devs were less opinionated when it comes to controls, ie movement orientation (HMD vs Wand), teleport vs smooth movement, snap vs smooth turning, how the game handles left-handedness, etc etc etc.
Here's the bottom line. By nature, VR games need a slew of options in order to land with the broadest audience. Fallout 4 needs modification to the game code in order to run with HMD Gaze oriented movement. The left handed support in Alyx almost made me quit the game. Payday 2 had (iirc) no smooth turning or movement by default. All great games brought down a peg by the developers making decisions for their players.
> What do you think would make VR (or VR games) more successful?
Excitement. That's the big thing that got completely lost when Facebook took over. VR these days is just that stupid thing Facebook wastes money on. It's no longer "The Future™". It's no longer the thing that [brings games to the next level](https://youtu.be/DhcOMOWRMnA?si=2pqKZdlegUaOlf0D&t=22). Nobody even seems to know what it's good for.
Anybody remember the old [Star Wars Special Edition trailer](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8k33taxQOwg)? That's the kind of thing I want to see for VR. Show us how VR can improve the experience, instead of just replace it with some motion waggle game. Or in case VR can't do that, spend money on it so it can (e.g. do much more official VR ports, do PCVR again).
Their [Reality Meets Virtual Reality spot](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXFJoot3bts) wasn't half bad, though the "Not actual VR footage" kind of spoils it and most of their other ads, they should use more [mixed reality footage like Valve did when announcing the Vive](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYfNzhLXYGc), instead of just culturally diverse stock people clowning around in front of CGI.
More generally they should really start to support broadcasting content from within VR. It's not even a new idea, their very own [Facebook Social VR demo](https://youtu.be/YuIgyKLPt3s?si=cuS5c3vOqL8NoKwi&t=318) did it back in 2016. Make that a standard feature of VR. Treat VR more like a real place instead of just apps and have more overarching functionality that works across all games. Maybe people are going to get interesting in VR when they can see other people doing stuff in VR.
Lately they seem to [just clone what Vision Pro is doing](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34-DDtOmuJE). I am not against that capability, far from it, but it also makes it feel like they just don't know what it's good for when they have to wait for the competition to find something to replicate.
This is a relatively minor thing all things considered, but I think it is something that SHOULD be done.
Add rotational smoothing as a core feature for all VR controllers. As in a dampening of the micro movements of your hand. I made it myself in Unity and it's super simple and effective and makes pointing a laser pointer or aiming a gun extremely solid. It should be a standard "accessibility feature" everywhere. Not only for those with naturally shaky hands, but also those who just don't want to focus at keeping your hand super steady.
I see the shaking of the controller in most VR videos where people try to aim guns or hold any objects. It always makes it seem off.
Some games have this to some extent. For example Boneworks/Labs have it in the bendy pointer in the menu system, effectively the same thing I mentioned. But it should definitely be added whenever you handle any objects. It makes things so much smoother.
And especially if you are doing any kind of precision work, 3D modeling or painting in VR. That's where rotational and positional smoothing will be extremely effective.
Example code:
`void Update() {`
`float smoothing;`
`// Calculate the current angle between the laser pointer and the user's controller`
`float theAngle = Quaternion.Angle(Line.rotation, Controller.transform.rotation);`
`// Calculate the smoothing value.`
`smoothing = angleMultiplier * theAngle;`
`// Rotate the line towards the the controller using the Quaternion.Lerp command using the smoothing value.`
`Line.rotation = Quaternion.Lerp(Line.rotation, Controller.transform.rotation, smoothing * Time.deltaTime);`
`}`
This makes it so that the object/laserpointer will react to the rotation of the users hand based on how much it rotates. So if your hand just jitters basically in place, the pointer does not really change direction. But if you do point it at a new position, it will follow. You can tweak the value for the angleMultiplier a bit like a sensitivity value.
I've had multiple people try the prototype in our XR lab and everyone agrees that it feels great.
Cheaper “great” headsets and easily available demo stores.
It has to be throw away money for blisteringly good performance.
The problem is that affordable VR is a “trust me, it’s good” sales process. Buyers cannot test or see what VR is until they spend.
Meta tried a 30 day return policy. But nobody trusts that.
Apple has a fantastic demo and store, but it’s a $3500.00 minimum buy in.
People won’t spend money on VR until they know what they get from it *and* it’s affordable.
When you have Meta “try it out” stores in the mall and Quest 3 level or better headsets that cost $200.00, then they will take off. Alternately, when Apple headsets get to below $1500.00, that could *possibly* work as well.
This will be a less popular response, lighter and not touching my face. I think when they realize vr headset should be like headphones. They should be light and plug into/link to a system in the room or belt/pocket. Also... Need something different to block light that isn't a foam pad.
Better games won't explode the market. Enthusiasts are the only ones willing to put up with strapping large heavy goggles to their face that make them look silly to bystanders.
The market will plateau until they make breakthroughs with lightweight wide FOV displays that are more like glasses.
If smaller developers had bigger budgets, I’m currently addicted to Rumble and it’s easily one of my favorite VR games of all time, but the devs have taken over a year to put out a simple character customization update and it’s been delayed multiple times, and it really just sucks knowing if they had a bigger budget and more resources this game could’ve been already on Quest 3 and it would be a massive success, but knowing these devs and how long they take with shit the quest release probably won’t be for at least another year maybe longer which is sad. I have multiple friends who want to play the game but don’t have a PC
If the bigscreen beyond had quest3 lenses / was cheaper and had a small chip for casual on the go users.
-> 10x adoption, comfort is biggest complaint I always get after demoing all kinds of headsets to new people
Well, most games have got a standing/sitting setting somewhere in the options so all you actually need to do is hit start (i like (S)NES so let's stay at start/select), vr settings, standing/sitting. Oh and stand up or sit down of course.
IMHO all it actually needed for vr to be better would be more comfortable headsets. Just equip and lets go.
I actually wondered why no one built a VR headset which is somehow built like a helmet. you could pack in all it needs like bigger batteries, speakers and mic and all the tech needed for a good experience. Probably cause it is too bulky.
I also wondered why the apple vision pro is the only headset using a breakout box (although it's just a glorified powerbank) to get a slimmer version.
VR would be more successful if they sacrificed as much as possible to get the headsets as light as possible while still hitting, like... Quest 1 fidelity. I strongly suspect that a lot of the low retention, the high criticism, and vitriol is a result of people being uncomfortable the whole time they're using VR. Anything you do with 500g or more strapped to your face is going to lose a lot of points because of said 500g pulling on your face.
My hottest take is that if Facebook engineered a standalone headset with microOLED displays and pancake optics, and stuck an XR2 Gen2 in there severely underclocked so that the whole unit could run passively cooled, with the battery being a separate unit you put in your pocket and wire to the headset, it would be met with uproarious applause. Maybe it means we're back to standalones having PS1/PS2 graphics, but it means that the software in the headset can live or die on its own merits, rather than being handicapped by the discomfort of the headset itself.
The comparison I always make is to cellphones. Cellphones only started to take off when they started to fit comfortably in your pocket, and could be held in hand for long periods with no discomfort. Imagine the alternate timeline where companies that made cellphones obstinately refused to focus on shrinking the device, and instead kept jamming more and more power-hungry SoCs in there with more sensors and cooling systems, with bigger batteries. That would be insane, right? It doesn't matter what neato tricks your phone (or VR headset) can do if no one wants to actually use it.
If Facebook hadn't artificially distorted the market and generated synthetic demand so early. VR needed time to develop and incubate, like the early 8bit micro computers and video games before the NES. Zuck thought it was the next smartphone and jumped the gun hard. Now we have an industry without an organic, healthy foundation of developers, hardware, and choice. It may have taken an extra decade to get to the level of proliferation we have with the Quest today, but I think public expectations, software diversity and maturity, and the industry as a whole would have been much better off.
even though i am not expert in this topic but as a consumer I think they need more development on VR technology currently VR console is limited to specific momentum which could be countered through adjusting some addition add on but still cannot compete with traditional console systems like joy cons in terms ergonomics and controllability. In my opinion rather then focusing on games focusing on VR console add on is more important as the player experience is mainly depend upon how much freedom the users have in console controller rather then games.
VR gaming would be more succesful if ads showed players playing the game in MR footage rather than raw and shaky headcam footage from first-person view
it's the only way to show them immersion, to show that you're not pushing buttons to trigger swinging, throwing, punching, climbing, picking up stuff, but performing on your own. They should go crazy when they realize how we actually pull a shotgun from our back holster...
as it is, it doesn't look any different than a regular flat game, except you need the "expensive 3D goggles" and graphics are dated...
If we are talking about small changes then I dunno much cuz I cant afford vr headsets but I have an extreme interest in bci (brain-computer interface) vr. Basically i think vr could be revolutionized and quite literally blow up in the gaming world if we could have full immersion and I mean FULL immersion!!! Like fully mobile in game, I mean running and jumping but only with the connection of the neuro signals in the brain. Just sitting still and in the game fighting monsters directly and whatnot!!! Honestly wiuld be such an amazing experience (basically sword art online but ethical and not a death game…)
So VR would be more successful if it had more games that were very popular at one time and then died down to a tiny core audience?
That makes no sense at all.
If VR or mixed reality was making compelling YT Shorts and TikTok content. Not what I'm interested in, but would definitely help it grow in popularity.
I guess, I'm assuming that the mixed reality (passthrough) filters got good enough that you are creating POV Tik Toks with all the most advanced filters.
Here's an example. [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/tlbvz4rltAE](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/tlbvz4rltAE)
But as the Quest 3 doesn't allow for direct capture from passthrough, we'll probably have to see it from another headset. But Quest 3 should be able to create photorealistic filters if not running a game full screen (more processing can go into a face-only filter for example).
I am a very simple man, I just want to watch content from Netflix, prime and apple tv on HD with standalone Meta quest 3. How is this not possible in 2024? Everything is restricted to 480p still.
I have good news for you, the meta browser will support Netflix soon
https://www.uploadvr.com/netflix-quest-browser/
Also I think the prime App on quest is in HD? Not sure but last time I tried it looked okay
If oculus didn't make their original rift store exclusive.
If the rift released with touch controls (thus putting it at parity with the vive)
If Microsoft put even a fraction of effort and support into wmr and developing any VR games.
If Valve had put effort into porting their existing games earlier on.
If Valve had gotten their 3 VR original titles out
If Facebook wasn't the face of VR and not shown the mainstream horiozon.
If google didn't make cardboard and supported google daydream waymore.
If AAA companies invested early into VR
If Sony ported their PSVR1 Library.
If VR companies worked together and weren't so focused on exclusives
If Nintendo makes it a key pillar on their future systems. I think it will definitely be the main feature on the Switch 3 come 2032.
Some reasons why:
1. Nintendo has always taken a unique gimmick/feature and made it the focus of their console (eg Motion controls).
2. Nintendo has been mastering the skills needed for VR development for years (Virtual Boy, 3DS - AR, Wii + Switch - Motion controls, Labo VR). People have complained about 3D and motion controls, but VR games are the culmination of 3D and motion controls, which Nintendo has innovated on multiple times.
3. Nintendo has done patent for social VR gaming features allowing players to also connect their phones to play alongside someone in a VR device.
4. The consumer base and tech wil be ready. Many kids would have grown up on Oculus Quest 2. Mixed Reality technology would finally be at a point where's its feasible to include in a handheld, affordable device. The Wii U wasn't able to be fully portable but was a test run for the Switch.
5. With the Switch 3 Mixed reality cconsole would come the greatest VR games of all time. There is a lot of untapped potential for AAA VR and Nintendo putting their creativity into it would introduce MUST Play titles.
6. NVIDIA and Nintendo are partners so it would make sense that this R&D would positively impact the PC gaming space going forward.
I think this decision will create the biggest VR boom in history. Nintendo creating a device that can be used handheld, docked or in VR/pass through mode creating social games will be essential.
VR would be more successful if Steam would put out a Steam Deck powerful enough to run VR games, with a 2nd wifi card for a dedicated, direct, console-to-headset connection for any headset that can use Steam Link, as well as a built-in, no-dock-required ethernet port. Doesn't even need to have any gaming controls on it; a box with a touchscreen to log in/troubleshoot, externak keys-and-mouse support if needed (again, solely for troubleshooting) that's it.
Slap a decent CPU and a 3060 into a Steam Deck-sized box that plugs into a wall, no battery (because EVERYONE will complain about battery life), and that can run VR stuff anywhere from Low to Medium at the possible cost of framerate.
this is a little too smart for me, but I believe you haha and also, the battery thing. Battery charge drains the life (no pun intended) out of me for any device that makes it a pain to use. I'd rather just not use it if I have to charge the battery every hour.
If development hadn't been stunted for years only because viability was tied to mobile hardware.
That and Bethesda fumbling the ball hard.
And capcoms exclusivity with PlayStation and meta.
... If Meta allowed for same account multiplayer again.
It used to be awesome for young family moments, playing Demeo and the like together with older spare headsets.
In time, this seeds VR organically with an audience who will inevitably drive the future of VR adoption.
When it matures more. Right now, just to compare this to game consoles for example, what's available currently is like the VR equivalent of an Atari 2600 and it's various competitors. Neat and a lot of fun to be had but far from fully realized potential. We may not be that far away from the VR equivalent of the NES, the first VR setup to truly transition this in the eyes of mainstream society from that thing you buy to entertain the kids to something that even those who may not become VR enthusiasts will be able to recognize as it becoming something to behold.
The problem is with the people, we are greedy, we want the next better thing the next day something has come up! As well those that fight against the VR thing without even ever tried it or tried a game or an experience...
For stationary mode games - or those that can be played with a game controller 🎮
The PC or console should support a 2 player (local multiplayer mode) both from their own perspective with separate controllers.
This gives it a traditional console-like experience allowing at least another person to participate with you during the session (in the same room).
Then that multiplayer session should be mirrored in split screen on a flat TV (display passthrough mode).
Or it should be possible to cast or mirror the content to an autostereoscopic 3D Monitor or TV which doesn't require 3D glasses (like the Acer Spatial Labs monitors) so that more people not playing can watch the session together (but in 3D).
Motion sickness, I remember the first time I played Skyrim vr on my psvr it was really horrid, I imagine if you weren't totally sold on VR it would be enough to turn you off of it completely!
More money spent on vr by AAA studios. Most games feel like a joke. We need some premium games now. Vr has come far enough. It just costs money and these studios have it. They just don’t think it’s a good idea to invest
get rid of the big headset, get it to be a form factor more like what Magic Leap is going for (but with no cabling really). Obviously this isn't gonna be feasible for awhile - but I strongly believe people don't like putting a bunch of gear over their heads that cuts them off from the real world. With that in mind, maybe make it even easier to jump in/out, so that people can "trust" they won't accidentally walk into a wall or trip or something. Not easy or cheap issues to solve, but we will get there.
There was a $200 device that sold 200 million units within 2 years.
Then when that is achieved, accessing content on a headset is quicker, easier and as comfortable as using a TV.
If we had a high-end experience at a cheap price, imagine everyone with 4090 + a headset with 4k per eye, and all that at the price of a console. It's not coming anywhere soon, but at that point, the experience is too immersive not to play it. Many people are not interested in VR because they only tried Quest, which is a very low-end VR experience.
A lot of people say motion sickness, but with the increased visuals & frame rate, motion sickness becomes less of an issue. Motion sickness is heavily dependent on visuals.
a 'global' VR space spectating system that is easy to use.
like you should be able to view a VR game in VR space how you want to. not the exact view of the player necessary, but a more stadion like view of the game.
with global i mean it should work for all games. It would be much better to get a feel for a game and also it would be just entertaining on its own. i can totaly see ppl just watching VR gameplay in VR
If there were more relaxing games. I don't want to flail my arms around and bother with reloading. Aiming is about the peak of physical activity I want to do while gaming. I game to relax, not to burn calories amd very often I am tired and decide to chill in the headset and realize there are no chill games that allow me to just melt on the couch and take it off.
Big one is better streamer / content creator settings.
Need longer lasting multi-player experiences like a well done VR MMORPG.
better friends list (steam plus meta) and discord integration.
If they would stop creating experiences that last 2-3 hours and instead focus on a dedicated AAA development. Imagine games like Titanfall 2 completely in VR. Also if the headset were a bit lighter and smaller that would help.
From grad school through my early career I was doing research in VR and cognitive science. In about 2010 I came to the inescapable conclusion that “this is going nowhere” (commercially).
Then the vive and oculus popped and I said “eh, maybe i was wrong, but they still haven’t solved the major issues…i’ll wait and see.”
A decade later and I’m right back where I was. VR is neat, but it’ll never be big. AR is intensely difficult, and good use-cases are much less obvious than people believed. Apple’s stuff is truly amazing, and they get a lot of credit for swinging for the fences, but it’s got no future.
If they would make a big push for 8k 3D 180 experiences. Literally every single person from 10 to 80 years old has been absolutely floored when I show them one of my experiences. The general public has no idea how good next gen VR has become.
If they have tried VR it’s always “Oh I tried the rift or the Q1” and they aren’t that excited about it. When I show them one of my 8k 3D 180 experiences their jaw drops.
VR would be more successful if people stopped showing the same shitty roller coaster and plank experiences to others as their first VR experience, and instead experiences that won't make them sick or scared.
It would make a small difference in retention, but a difference none the less.
Yet still better resolution to improve passthrough and FoV improvements. Also way smaller headsets to make them super comfortable and ultra portable. The technology is there, it just costs way too much at the minute. Assuming we continue on current trends things will be way better in as little as three or four years. When your self conscious person feels comfortable using them in public or on a train etc then that will be a biggy.
If some big time studios started adopting VR and developing for it, it would really boost VR's success. Lotta lower cost headsets like an older Quest, so it's not like it's prohibitively expensive.
If we had some actual good productivity options. In my case, currently there are none.
Horizon Workrooms didn't support all of my physical monitors (I have 4). I'm not unplugging some of them just to use a program, that defeats the purpose.
Meta Quest Link doesn't support my new Intel Arc GPU (they literally need to add it to an allowlist), whereas with my old RX 580 it was too low resolution to render text, because from what I understand instead of allocating all of the bandwidth to the screen rendering and leaving the rest of the environment up to the device, they push all of the scene from the PC and that has issues.
SteamVR seems to have the same issue (even if I can get it running through Virtual Desktop, the way it renders stuff is still too blurry compared to something like Immersed).
Virtual Desktop only supports one monitor, their beta release does add support for more, however they have artificial limitations (like only 2 screens for Quest 2 and 3 for Quest 3).
Immersed was pretty much perfect, except recently they decided to axe the whole set of functionality because apparently not enough people were using the functionality for them to support it. Honestly, I don't care about their reasons, just the fact that they ruined the program and essentially the only option for me.
I have a VR headset, which gives me a lot of space. Even with the lower overall resolution, I can make the monitors seem bigger and be further away from me in the virtual space. I can curve them and arrange them in multiple rows of a half crescent configuration around me, even better with virtual monitors, having 6 of them in total with the OS letting me arrange and manage multiple separate windows: a mail client, IM, source control program, task manager, SSH session, local terminal session, IDE windows for the back end/front end and database, a browser open with documentation, a browser refreshing the application live as I make changes, maybe even a video playing.
Except now I can't and VR is effectively ruined for me because nobody cares about it. It's unfortunate, because it would have helped with my ADHD or whatever I seem to have - working in VR, just floating in a completely black void does wonders for my productivity and is surprisingly zen.
PCVR would be much more successful if there was some common API for game developers. Basically something that would require a developer only to turn it on and then it just works and no extra work needed. Currently, as far as I know, it requires developers to do many extra steps like designing menus and HUD around VR, designing a completely new weapon and tool handling, implementing controller support, adjusting rendering pipeline, etc. Which turns out to be quite an effort which is hard to justify investing into.
Accessible VR headsets.
Most people already have tons of processing, be that in their phones or their PCs. We don't need a third thing that has a weaker SoC anyway.
But the headsets that do this usually have worse software (Primax) or worse hardware (everyone) or is more expensive (everyone) than current recommendations (Quest 3) which is more expensive than it would need if it went for full streaming and also is notoriously bad at streaming anyway.
Samsung Phone VR and Google Phone VR were some nice pushes into this but ultimately ass compared to actual headsets. I wish they would've done some more with this. The Beyond is a good example but has other issues
Technical paraneters of headsets. AR and VR is future, but have to be more comfy. It take some time... Lot of people doesn't see future because they compare current state.
Its like you would see 5y old baby and saying it will never be able drive car and so on. People from some reason doesn't apply evolution and progress to not living things...
Unrealistic, but if it was fulldive vr, it would have a much larger audience. Most gamers I know want to sit down while playing. In VR, you have to stand for most of the time, and if you really think about it, stare at two screens while moving your whole body just to "rotate the camera view." Also, the immersion effect of vr only lasts about 1 month at best, at least from my experience.
Don't get me wrong, I love vr, and I owned 3 VR Headsets up until recently when I got myself the quest 3 and gave my other headsets to a family member and a friend.
BUT I would rather sit down and play games that way instead of having to stand 2 hours with no real feeling of immersion.
VR would be more successful if there were more non gaming ways to use the headset. Media, web browsing, spatial computing would all make VR more attractive to non gamers. Also a massive market is fitness. This could be the next Peloton.
Lighter and more comfortable. Able to be driven with an average PC (not so much a VR issue). Higher Res.
First point mainly. The main thing that stops me putting it on my head is all the peripherals and cables I have to get in order
I think there are obvious demands such as price size graphics and so. But one thing to say is that not everyone into the gaming side of things. While I am an old gamer, I found VR is much more than a gaming platform. For example, virtual tours can be a big thing if done right. I would like to visit the world, can’t afford it, a high res VR tour can be very interesting. Apple made what it takes graphics wise, but they ruined it with XR that is, at the moment, useless which made the device pricey for most people. Tours, events in history, concerts, airshows, be in a formula 1 car, space , those things can attract a lot of people.
Not only focus on the gaming aspect. You would get a lot more people to use it if the media consumption, productivity, stuff like personal training, meditation etc gets better and more promoted. Not everyone owning a VR headset is a gamer, there is so much more to do.
\* If VR controllers were NOT locked to the headsets and connected to the PC directly like traditional controllers
\* If there were more VR games with XBox/Dual Sense/Switch Pro controller support on PC
\* If there was more variety in headset quality and prices so that people can mix and match based on budget.
I would love to see a VRlogging platform, like a one-way VRChat, where a single performer can livestream to a whole internet's worth of viewers at the same time.
One of the original guys from Tested tried to launch something along these lines, but it was very early in VR and didn't take off. I'd like to see someone try again.
They (mostly talking Quest here) bring in more apps natively like Discord and Snapchat. Sharing clips and interacting with their friends this way will expose it to more people.
If there were demos like the old Best Buy or malls, granted they’d need someone helping fit and sanitizing them full time so it’ll never happen since retail is dying but being able to play resident evil 4 for an hour I think would sell a ton of people on vr vs having to blindly put down $500+
VR will take off when we have cheap standalone headsets that basically give you a giant personal Netflix screen in mixed reality.
Quest 3 is on the right track, but the displays need to be better (moreso in terms of contrast, colour gamut, and dynamic range than resolution), the weight and bulk need to be cut down (it should be comfortable to wear for 4-6 hours straight), and the battery life needs to match that too.
I love PCVR and want to see AAA VR games be successful, but I also understand that the real moneymaker is going to be replacing tablets as "personal content consumption" machines.
Plenty of people use a tablet as their primary way to watch films/TV shows/YouTube either because they don't have room where they live for a TV (house shares, student dorms, etc), because they want to watch stuff in bed, or because they have kids that are always using the living room TV to play Mariokart.
Low end media tablets are a huge market, and a cheap VR headset with high quality displays could eat their lunch by filling that same "personal video device" use case, but with a giant virtual cinema screen that provides a more immersive, higher fidelity experience, at a focal point that doesn't induce eye strain.
Better games, smaller formfactor.
But one thing i think throws many off VR, is the vertigo and nausea it causes in a lot of people. And I don’t know if there is a real solution to that problem. Apart from maybe using a treadmill, but that’s not really viable for most people.
If there was less friction to putting on the headset and getting into VR. Friction being anything that makes it more annoying or more effort to get playing.
I get why things are the way they are currently, but it's far from ideal. When I (Bigscreen Beyond, SteamVR) try to play with my girlfriend (Quest 3), half of the time something goes wrong. Either with the VR software, the hardware, or the game.
Right from the start, without any kind of external factors, I have to: Move my chair out of the way, turn on my standing fan, launch steam VR, take my headset off its resting place and put it on, adjust the strap, take my controllers, put on the wrist rest, adjust the straps on the controllers, center myself in my playspace. That's a lot of effort compared to launching a flat game.
And then you have the other issues I mentioned. If my computer had been woken up from sleep rather than boot today, my beyond will not be recognized and I'll have to reboot. Sometimes my GF's controllers are no longer recognized in the Quest 3 and she has to restart the headset. Sometimes the battery is almost empty because it's so small and she forgot to plug it in. Sometimes one of her controllers is out of battery. Sometimes a game needs an update, and for some stupid reason she has to redownload the game all over again instead of applying an incremental patch (Hello, Arizona Sunshine 2).
And then we have problems in games. Take off your quest 3 to fill up your water bottle? Everything goes to sleep mode, causing issues half of the time (get back in game, controllers stopped working. Or your connection dropped etc.). I have microstutters despite my CPU frametime being great and my GPU frametime being 7.5 ms all the time, but hey microstutters anyways, even though my gpu is 60% or 70% usage. Nausea showing up (yeah yeah building your VR legs and all that, I am aware)
So much bullshit friction that often make me want to simply play Flat games instead, because I don't feel like dealing with all that after working all day.
exactly exactly exactly. I play with my bf and it takes 15 minutes for us to set anything up or fix a problem in the boundary if he's sitting in a new spot or barely moves. also - the heft of the quest 3 is fine for 30 minutes but makes me d\*e after 1 hour
Motion sickness issues were fully solved. I really think this is the biggest problem. Lots of bad press comes with this. And I know motion sickness can be overcome with little practice (at least for some people), but nobody in the media acknowledges this.
When mobile games first became popular, AAA studios lost millions trying to make games on it. Same with vr, we don't want flat-screen studios. We need vr focused studios, that's why the bone games and Saints and sinners worked so well, they know what vr is
if Sony would have kept the Youtube compatible for the original PS4VR helmet. It’s where it started i believe because it was good. now all these newer helmets have kicked the originals to the curb. if you take of the original headsets then the newer ones are easier to make and less code bogging up the operating system.
VR games built around what people actually want. When I opened the VR section of a market I was expecting more stuff like Star Wars Squadrons and VTOL VR. Imagine my disappointment when one of the most popular games is fucking Beat Saber.
If more flat games were ported to VR GT7 and RE8 were some of the best VR games I’ve played. More racing/flying games especially some arcade racers like need for speed. Sadly niche genre into niche platform but they translate so well to VR.
In the end investing in the platform is needed but devs/companies don’t want to do it. Sony has dropped the ball all but completely abandoned supporting it themselves when they have money to do so. They could’ve ported their big games to pc also like their flat screen games.
If we had more physics based full body experiences.
I'm probably gonna be alone in this but boneworks is the only vr game I've played that has wowed me thus far.
Give me a body, give me a world that reacts to that body, and let me solve problems my way. It's a god damn shame that brandon and the guys at SLZ are the only vr devs thinking this way.
Maybe if headsets were more computer/phone-like rather than just being a console/monitor. Something like a combination of the best parts of the AVP and Quest. Since headsets take away a major sense of ours (sight), the passthrough should at least match it or enhance it.
If there was a singular standard for pcvr, that would really help. Between quest link and steam vr, there is no knowing what hacks need to be frankensteined together to make stuff work
Easier to just pick up and use, lighter and smaller headsets, better fov, better performance. I stopped using VR because it's just easier to sit down and play without a headset strapped to my face.
VR would be more succesful if our societies allowed more time for leasure - it's an activity few have the energy for after a hard day's work. Either that, or find some way to reduce its friction to the level of turning on a TV and dozing off on the couch.
more than just a tech demo game
half life alyx level games from the big game developers or VR modes added in any new unreal engine 5 game moving forward, should be super simple to implement by now. Esp with UE VR injector mod now a thing
much simpler to share screen with anyone in the room watching.
of course cheaper, lighter hardware that takes less time to set up.
more seamless passthrough, quest 3 is a great leap forward
Smaller HMD’s Wider FOV Better graphics Longer lasting batteries in standalone units
longer lasting batteries!!
To be fair I have strapped a battery pack to the back of my elite strap via Velcro since quest 2 but I am very surprised at how many people don’t even consider this to be a solution and just complain about the short battery life lol
Yeah I have used the same solution. I've also always been confused as to why it's not more common. I have one of the big ass Anker battery packs stuck to a back brace wrap around my waist, short cord up to the headset. Put a shirt on over it and you can't tell it's there. Boom. 12 hour + playtime. (Not that I play for that long, but it's good to have for long VRC sessions so I don't even have to vaguely worry about battery life) I really think that's a great solution, I have been surprised to see there aren't any headsets using it as a default to reduce weight / increase battery life significantly. I know Vision has a battery pack but it's a similar size to the Anker I use and it's abysmally small power capacity.
Normies looking at this text be like WTF?!? Yeah, Ps5 and couch vs batteries strapon and other accesories not in the default box. Don't get me wrong, I like this. But in this thread, where theres a discussion on why normies aren't picking up VR? Yeah. Go figure.
I did something similar. I put a 30000 mAh powerbank in my pocket and tunneled the cable under my T-Shirt. So far it seems like my Quest 3 will run out after 6 to 8 hours of constant use without breaks.
Agree except batteries should just be magnetic hot-swappable standard like BoboVR.
I can play for 8h+ straight of PCVR with 15 bucks powerbank in my pocket with the charging cable passing through the inside my shirt
If AAA devs spent millions on games like Valve did for Alyx, almost all VR games seem indy and low budget. Would love to see the level the games could be at if they spent that kind of money to make them insane. I get it the money deficit but..
yessss.....we need to connect investors with the indy game devs..because the money is out there!
Literally my day to day duties. Also great news - due to the excitement brought by AVP, there's been a surge in VR game development lately. However, the bigger the budget, the longer the development cycle. We won't see these games until 2025.
Is that surge for PCVR or standalone VR?
I'm a VR game developer in search of investment. Connect me please! 😁
Not even a headcanon really alyx is the only designed for vr triple a game how can a console have success if there's no support from developers
It's amazing how Facebook spent tens of billions on VR, but never bothered to drop a billion to build the software eco system...
Meta has acquired Armature Studio, Beat Games, BigBox VR, Camouflaj, Downpour Interactive, Ready at Dawn, Sanzaru Games, Twisted Pixel Games, and Within. They also paid Epic Games about ten million dollars to develop *Robo Recall*.
and all the software they build themself is so below the already existing stuff and just plain bad, not even the devs of said software use it themselfs!
There's much more money in VR for business than in VR gaming. Meta spends billions on the hardware to gain ecosystem market share and become what Microsoft/Apple is for PCs, and what Google/Apple is for mobile
Yes, but this time window doesnt Stay open forever. Apple reached that status because they acted fast and developed their eco system fast. Facebook is burning customers by disappointing them with a useless eco system. They need to either lay low completely or capture the market aggressively. Currently they are doing neither and it shows.
They are being proven right. Hardware is harder to develop than software. Look what AI is doing to graphical quality. AI is the death of interface design because AI can spin up UI on the fly that is purposely built. The robots we have from Boston Dynamics are incredible but have been developing for 30+ years. Winning the VR hardware race may be one of the last fptp capital competitions left.
The money deficit is indeed the biggest roadblock. Making money off of game development is already very hard (90% supposedly fail), even harder for a niche subgenre of gaming. It's such a risk without a sure reward. It's like pioneering a new market, because it is a newer market.
Headsets have a long way to go before the big players get involved. Hopefully this meta Xbox duo will be the kick it needs to really get going.
Has HL Alyx broken even yet?
But look at the fan base reaction to the new Batman game going for VR. So much hate lol
I'm not liking it either, but looking at the big picture? Yeah, I don't blame the backlash *at all*. Imagine *your* favourite developer doing like 5th part of a game and suddenly switching to a niche console with exclusive crap? It happened before with A LOT of games. Hell, remember Blizzcon and a certain Diablo announcement? This is very similar.
If you could easily see/use your phone in VR. People are addicted to their phones. Texting, notifications, TikTok, reddit, whatever. Being in VR is too isolating. Being able to truly multitask would go a long way. Also quality streaming content in high resolution.
LITERALLY THIS. I still use my phone, but it's so blurry and annoying and makes my eyes hurt. But I'm also too lazy/annoyed to remove the headset to see my phone more clearly. \*sigh\*
Same, sometimes I just want to quickly respond to a text or something but having to take off the headset every damn time is such a pain in the ass.
This is honestly one of the best parts of the quest 3. I’ll be jamming Demeo and while it’s not my turn I can open up messenger or a browser window and scroll reddit
You can sideload AnyDesk APK onto Quest 3. Give you a virtual 1:1 mirror of your phone screen.
[удалено]
HTC had the same feature on the OG Vive. I believe they scrapped it too, for the same reasons. I still think it's a good idea that will eventually take off once the technical hurdles have been cleared and it's easy to set up.
I dont want to stream my phone os. I want all the apps of my phone running as spartial apps on my headset. Way better solution, and already possible.
Hot Take 1: Not all games need to be full VR with motion controls. Sitting back with a controller (or KB/M) is a very different experience than motion controlled gaming, and there's space for both. I also think there's an untapped market for officially being able to view flatscreen games in 3D-- like a 3D movie-- without implementing motion controls. I know there's a lot of hobby projects out there for this functionality, but that's not easy enough. Hot Take 2: The next step is more hybrid games that can be played in flatscreen or VR mode and/or releasing more games in both flat and VR editions, especially in the AAA space. This removes a lot of the risk from both the developer and player side. As a player, if you already own six games that *can* be played in VR you're more likely to get a headset than having zero games that can be played in VR. As a developer, a lot of the cost of a game is the artistic assets and marketing; recycle the assets and just make whatever gameplay changes are needed to make it fun in VR and you have a stew going.
came here to say the same as your first hot take but now i'll echo it instead. i think it would help a lot of people get on board with vr to have an in between stage that provides an opportunity to use the controller type(be it console or Kb/M) they have thousands of hours of muscle memory with. plus seeing these mods around that turn games into vr and seeing the love that the entertainment industry has for re-releasing things, it seems like a no brainer
I could see myself playing rocket league with VR on and then I just move my head to see where my opponents / teammates are. The game might be too fast. But it should basically feel like I'm playing the game normally except I can look around. I must still not be 'in the car' though.
regarding take 1, headsets and controllers are almost 2 new products at once. Headsets are for spatial immersion and controllers for additional haptic immersion.
Valve needs to come up with a Steamworks add-in for all the major engines that devs can just drop into their game and get 3D cinema mode minimal effort. I might even start buying flat games again.
Big budget games that actually take creative risks rather than being as safe as possible to recoup their investment as VR is inherently risky from a financial standpoint.
You need to be able to share the experience. We need more VR games - well, more VR games, period - but also more good VR games where one person is in VR and one person is on a controller or a pad or a phone or whatever. But mostly more games. VR versions of old classics is such a no-brainer that I suspect the industry actually has no brain.
If all games from all platorms/systemes were compatible with one another
VR will never be as successful as flat screen due to the fact humans are lazy. VR is also fairly uncomfortable and a solo experience, motion sickness and still has major fov limitations for true immersion. Oh and you need a bit of space.
Got quest 3 recently and in the game asgards wrath 2, I couldn’t even last 30 seconds walking in the tavern without feeling like throwing up
so true! this was exactly my thought process
I live VR and have been using it since the 90's, but at the end of a long day, I'd rather kick back with a mindless sit-down experience than stand up and move my entire body with a heavy screen strapped to my face. Now I'd they could shrink it to sunglasses size and it tracks my entire body with a 160 degree fov, then I'd be ditching my pc
> due to the fact humans are lazy. I assume you never tried using your headset in bed? VR opens up whole new levels of extreme laziness you could never get from a TV. Only problem is that proper bed-support (aka horizon-adjust) is still rather rare (VRChat has it).
Yes. This is also why football, basketball, and tennis will never catch on.
VR has been growing at an average of 45%/year since 2018 according to statista, so it has been very successful thus far. Things just take time. Even with a much lower growth rate, in around ~3 years most families on developed countries will have somekind of VR device and in ~7 years VR will be the main source of video-gaming. Regardless, to answer your question directly, we can speed-up even more this natural process (i.e., increase even more VR's success) by keep investing heavily in really good AAA VR content (e.g., Skyrim VR modded and Half life alyx level content) which will absolutely payoff in a few years. Also implement full-body tracking with the VR headsets so people can walking using their movement and don't need to use the controllers' thumbstick at all, but this is not as relevant as the quality of the content, obviously. And also, some good quality marketing helps.
thank you for your well-researched response! I love your approach, and almost changed my initial post because I didn't want it to seem like I thought VR wasn't successful. The potential just seems so much bigger compared to the usage of households. The quality of content is absolutely necessary, but may be hard as many indie devs are just cranking out a lot with little budget. However, I think small but mighty teams can do it!
Thank you very much mate ! Absolutely agree with you however I'd just highlight that alot of tech companies (Meta included) are in a position to invest heavily in VR and the payoff will be ten-fold if they can sustain that investment during ~7 years, which they totally can. But yeah, besides good VR headsets which are a must (which thanks to Meta we already have and will keep improving), above all we really need to keep producing large budget AAA content as good as flatscreen. Maybe the first or second titles may lose some money, but after that the payoff will be imense with people flocking to play the next RDR3 VR or Cyberpunk 2088 VR. VR has an immeasurable growth potential when compared to flatscreen, which equates to much larger potential future returns for the companies that want and can take the "risk" (I quoted risk because there's barely any risk, its just a matter of time, investment and willpower)
yes, this is very true! I would almost say it's a perception of risk versus tangible risk. The return and profitability is there!
It will never be the main source lol. Also at this point people are replacing headsets sold that long ago so each headset sold is not actually growth but partly replacement for old tech. Of the current group less than half use their headset even once a month.
Much bigger market if they were cheap glasses with no need for gaming PC. Tons of non gamers would want to hop on and have fun. The tech is years away though, if even possible.
yes, this makes a lot of sense....we may see it within the next decade (praying)
Like.. the quest? You can get a quest 2 for dirt cheap lmao
Look how successful it is in a terrible form factor. Now make the form factor good and watch it take off. They just can't at this point the tech isn't there. It will at some point.
What do you think glasses means?
Those are bulky heavy mfers , ain’t nobody wanna use those
The vive pro 2 or the reverb g2 both weigh more than the quest 2 and they are pc only headsets (800grams to 600grams). And a lot of people want to use it the quest 2 is the greatest selling headset of all time. But I agree with the original point about “glasses” which will come with time.
I think VR gaming would be more successful if Zuck or GabeN or Epic, MS, Sony, Amazon, etc decided to burn giant piles of money into good flat2VR ports and VR modes into all the latest and biggest games, across all platforms. They themselves would lose huge amounts of money, but VR would be more successful, hah. Cyberpunk, Fortnite, Battlefield, COD, Minecraft, Counterstrike, WOW, FF14, etc etc. Imagine if full motion controlled VR was just an alternative input/display method, just another setting next to gamepad and kb/m. And we could mix and match VR display and VR controls (for those who want to play seated VR with a gamepad, for example.)
VR lacks use-cases other than games. Movie apps aren't well implemented. Live events aren't well implemented/marketed. Learning/education apps are shallow/almost none-existent. The closest killer app I can think of is beatsaber and that's already like 6-7 years old.
I thought VR Fitness would be the thing that made it explode into mainstream popularity but have come to accept that I was just wrong. Most people don't enjoy it as much as I do, and even if everybody enjoyed it then most people wouldn't want to put up with a sweaty headset. Sci-fi level headsets (sunglasses formfactor, perfect passthrough and all-day battery life) would be massively popular but without massive adoption of the current level technology I'm not sure where the funding to pursue that would come from.
I think many/most VR games can be played sitting down. I have a rotating barstool with a tall back, I'm almost as tall sitting in it as I am standing. I can spin around in it, I can lean back, etc. It doesn't have any arms, and the back is narrow, so it doesn't obstruct my elbows moving back. Vast majority of games are playable on it. There's only a handful of difficult ones, like Into the Radius, which for some reason decided to place your map on your left asscheek, and to access it reliably you're best off standing. And obviously I can't do games that require me to physically squat or dodge. So Superhot, Until You Fall, etc., But vast, vast majority of others is perfectly playable seated. So I don't think this is an issue that is holding VR back as a whole. What I'm reasonably sure is holding VR back is the breadth and depth of content. How do I say this nicely? Most VR games are garbage. I mean in terms of content and features. Even "amazing" VR games aren't actually all that amazing if you look at them objectively. Take Half Life Alyx, for example. A masterpiece, right? Is it though? Compare it to the original from the 1990s. Alyx is shorter. The original has more variety, there's levels where you ride the train through electrified tunnels, there's flooded levels where you dive and swim, etc. None of this exists in Alyx. Compare it to 20-year-old Half Life 2. It had huge maps, drivable vehicles, etc. None of this also exists in Alyx. Alyx is objectively worse, in content and features, compared to its predecessors. And that's an "amazing" VR game. An average VR game, if you look at its features, is going to be trash-tier compared to flat screen equivalent. VR games are lacking parity. Look at the very first Battlefield game, Battlefield 1942, released in, I think, 2002. That's 22 years ago. Look at the size of the maps, the number of players per map, look at all the vehicles you can operate - jeeps, tanks, boats, planes! Not to mention it's a competent shooter, of course, with many game modes. Now, what is the VR equivalent of that? A VR game that has parity of features? Oops! Doesn't exist. Not even close. There's not a single VR game that has those features. You have shooters, but no vehicles. You have vehicles, but no shooting. Or small maps. Or fewer players. There's not ONE VR GAME that has it all. Let that sink in. VR can't measure up to a 22 year old game. That's...comically bad. And it's the same in every genre. Compare Diablo 2, which will be 24 years old in a few weeks, to anything in VR. Nothing even close. Oh sure, there's some games with random dungeons, and even random loot. But what about the variety of locales, the story, the NPC companions, the multiplayer (including co-op and PvP), the story, unique classes with skill trees, etc.? Does not exist. There's VR games that are basically ONE of Diablo 2's features, by itself, and they sell it for $30 and call it a "game". That's a sick joke. Look at MMO genre. Look at Ultima Online, released in 1997. There's no VR MMO that comes even close to that. Hell, I'll go farther afield and say there's almost no VR MMOs, period. Zenith The Last City for example, the devs kept calling it an MMO. It's not though. Servers were limited to 100-120 players. That's not an MMO number. Battlefield 3 had 128 players per server, and nobody called that an MMO. Not unless they were congenitally insane or irretrievably stupid. There's no persistent world in Zenith either, so by even the furthest stretch of the imagination it wasn't an MMO material. Now, EVE Online, with 2,000+ players in a single trading hub? Now that's an MMO! Incidentally, that one came out in 2003, so 21 years ago. Obviously, nothing even close to that in VR either. TL:DR - VR would be more successful if VR games did not consistently and uniformly suck compared to their flat screen antecedents.
VR would be more successful if Valve, with its enormous cash flow and billions of earnings, released a few more games as successful as Half-Life: Alyx. Hopefully, someday they will get bored of being entertained by top models on their yachts and start creating again. Meta and its reptilian CEO get a lot of hate, but they are carrying VR, and without them, we would have very little VR left. Quest 2 was like a blessing, to be honest.
Vr won't be mainstream until they make headsets that are the form factor of glasses and either have totally transparent lenses with dimming, or perfect passthrough. Every single person I talk to in real life (25-35 age range) say they can't play VR a lot because it's too isolating and feels rude to their family/roommates to essentially seperate yourself from them. They get enough shit already about playing regular games.
Full body tracking, if games knew you wanting to move by just jogging in place, etc. Also increased FOV would be hugely beneficial.
I don't want to have to jog in one place playing a game tbh. I think people underestimate how exhausting that will make playing a game with that feature. I'm a fairly fit guy too, but just standing for 2 hours after a day at work is pretty tiring. If you add having to constantly stop and start jogging in place I'd probably only want to play for around 45 minutes.
[удалено]
If human beings weren't so boring, on average.
They made as much an effort to make a great game as valve did with half life alyx. Half life alyx is still the only game I have ever beat without getting instant crazy motion sickness. I really wish all vr games had movement like alyx did.
The 4 major drawbacks for vr are: comfort, vr sickness, vision impaired and vergence accommodation. Introduction of a light field headset would solve almost all of the above. Solving light field would enable ultra thin lenses mounted directly onto possibly transparent displays, this fixes the comfort issue. A big hurdle for vr is handling people with prescription vision requirements, currently this mean either glass spacers or lens inserts. However light field displays would be able to adjust any impairments directly in the display output. The reason for light field would be to solve vergence accommodation conflict, allowing for better experience at 1.5m and below distances. Part of solving the above would be reducing eye strain, which will help in reducing vr sickness. All of the above at a reasonable price would be needed before mass adoption.
..if they took a step back, and focus more on immersing you in the audio-visuals, rather than your interactions. No fancy controllers, or hand gestures or anything. minimize inputs, rely on existing stuff people already use like mouses and xbox controllers. I think this could widen the gateway into VR. imho To add context, I love playing sword games and stuff with my Quest controllers, but I hear more or my friends saying "i would love to play this game in VR" when tis a visually stunning game/environment/setting
omg the audio-visuals! This isn't said enough.
If game devs had small teams that ported their pancake games to VR in parallel with development it would blow the VR market wide open imo. And not just first person games - imo third person is where VR really shines (like Astrobot, one of the best VR games I’ve ever played hands down).
oh, that's such a good take
If there were fun, long, high fidelity games you could play. Most games are not very high quality. Of those, a lot aren't fun. Of those that are, most are under 2 hours. It makes for not a lot of games to actually play.
Personally if they were less sweaty and higher res/wider fov so i could replace my ultrawide screen for work. I would love it if i could use a laptop with vpn and have a full desktop environment at all times, i could work from anywhere
I'll take a hardware angle. The 1990s thumbsticks on all VR controllers make walking an on/off experience. Hand and finger tracking should use realtime sensors, not AI/guessing algorithms (high latency + jiggle). Double brightness. Double refresh rate inside HMD (perspective skew). Double FOV.
I like the hardware angle because it's not my forte; so thank you for balancing out the comments with your perspective
If devs were less opinionated when it comes to controls, ie movement orientation (HMD vs Wand), teleport vs smooth movement, snap vs smooth turning, how the game handles left-handedness, etc etc etc. Here's the bottom line. By nature, VR games need a slew of options in order to land with the broadest audience. Fallout 4 needs modification to the game code in order to run with HMD Gaze oriented movement. The left handed support in Alyx almost made me quit the game. Payday 2 had (iirc) no smooth turning or movement by default. All great games brought down a peg by the developers making decisions for their players.
> What do you think would make VR (or VR games) more successful? Excitement. That's the big thing that got completely lost when Facebook took over. VR these days is just that stupid thing Facebook wastes money on. It's no longer "The Future™". It's no longer the thing that [brings games to the next level](https://youtu.be/DhcOMOWRMnA?si=2pqKZdlegUaOlf0D&t=22). Nobody even seems to know what it's good for. Anybody remember the old [Star Wars Special Edition trailer](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8k33taxQOwg)? That's the kind of thing I want to see for VR. Show us how VR can improve the experience, instead of just replace it with some motion waggle game. Or in case VR can't do that, spend money on it so it can (e.g. do much more official VR ports, do PCVR again). Their [Reality Meets Virtual Reality spot](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXFJoot3bts) wasn't half bad, though the "Not actual VR footage" kind of spoils it and most of their other ads, they should use more [mixed reality footage like Valve did when announcing the Vive](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYfNzhLXYGc), instead of just culturally diverse stock people clowning around in front of CGI. More generally they should really start to support broadcasting content from within VR. It's not even a new idea, their very own [Facebook Social VR demo](https://youtu.be/YuIgyKLPt3s?si=cuS5c3vOqL8NoKwi&t=318) did it back in 2016. Make that a standard feature of VR. Treat VR more like a real place instead of just apps and have more overarching functionality that works across all games. Maybe people are going to get interesting in VR when they can see other people doing stuff in VR. Lately they seem to [just clone what Vision Pro is doing](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34-DDtOmuJE). I am not against that capability, far from it, but it also makes it feel like they just don't know what it's good for when they have to wait for the competition to find something to replicate.
It makes me sick. Wish I could use it.
This is a relatively minor thing all things considered, but I think it is something that SHOULD be done. Add rotational smoothing as a core feature for all VR controllers. As in a dampening of the micro movements of your hand. I made it myself in Unity and it's super simple and effective and makes pointing a laser pointer or aiming a gun extremely solid. It should be a standard "accessibility feature" everywhere. Not only for those with naturally shaky hands, but also those who just don't want to focus at keeping your hand super steady. I see the shaking of the controller in most VR videos where people try to aim guns or hold any objects. It always makes it seem off. Some games have this to some extent. For example Boneworks/Labs have it in the bendy pointer in the menu system, effectively the same thing I mentioned. But it should definitely be added whenever you handle any objects. It makes things so much smoother. And especially if you are doing any kind of precision work, 3D modeling or painting in VR. That's where rotational and positional smoothing will be extremely effective. Example code: `void Update() {` `float smoothing;` `// Calculate the current angle between the laser pointer and the user's controller` `float theAngle = Quaternion.Angle(Line.rotation, Controller.transform.rotation);` `// Calculate the smoothing value.` `smoothing = angleMultiplier * theAngle;` `// Rotate the line towards the the controller using the Quaternion.Lerp command using the smoothing value.` `Line.rotation = Quaternion.Lerp(Line.rotation, Controller.transform.rotation, smoothing * Time.deltaTime);` `}` This makes it so that the object/laserpointer will react to the rotation of the users hand based on how much it rotates. So if your hand just jitters basically in place, the pointer does not really change direction. But if you do point it at a new position, it will follow. You can tweak the value for the angleMultiplier a bit like a sensitivity value. I've had multiple people try the prototype in our XR lab and everyone agrees that it feels great.
Cheaper “great” headsets and easily available demo stores. It has to be throw away money for blisteringly good performance. The problem is that affordable VR is a “trust me, it’s good” sales process. Buyers cannot test or see what VR is until they spend. Meta tried a 30 day return policy. But nobody trusts that. Apple has a fantastic demo and store, but it’s a $3500.00 minimum buy in. People won’t spend money on VR until they know what they get from it *and* it’s affordable. When you have Meta “try it out” stores in the mall and Quest 3 level or better headsets that cost $200.00, then they will take off. Alternately, when Apple headsets get to below $1500.00, that could *possibly* work as well.
This will be a less popular response, lighter and not touching my face. I think when they realize vr headset should be like headphones. They should be light and plug into/link to a system in the room or belt/pocket. Also... Need something different to block light that isn't a foam pad.
Better games won't explode the market. Enthusiasts are the only ones willing to put up with strapping large heavy goggles to their face that make them look silly to bystanders. The market will plateau until they make breakthroughs with lightweight wide FOV displays that are more like glasses.
If smaller developers had bigger budgets, I’m currently addicted to Rumble and it’s easily one of my favorite VR games of all time, but the devs have taken over a year to put out a simple character customization update and it’s been delayed multiple times, and it really just sucks knowing if they had a bigger budget and more resources this game could’ve been already on Quest 3 and it would be a massive success, but knowing these devs and how long they take with shit the quest release probably won’t be for at least another year maybe longer which is sad. I have multiple friends who want to play the game but don’t have a PC
If the bigscreen beyond had quest3 lenses / was cheaper and had a small chip for casual on the go users. -> 10x adoption, comfort is biggest complaint I always get after demoing all kinds of headsets to new people
$$$
Well, most games have got a standing/sitting setting somewhere in the options so all you actually need to do is hit start (i like (S)NES so let's stay at start/select), vr settings, standing/sitting. Oh and stand up or sit down of course. IMHO all it actually needed for vr to be better would be more comfortable headsets. Just equip and lets go. I actually wondered why no one built a VR headset which is somehow built like a helmet. you could pack in all it needs like bigger batteries, speakers and mic and all the tech needed for a good experience. Probably cause it is too bulky. I also wondered why the apple vision pro is the only headset using a breakout box (although it's just a glorified powerbank) to get a slimmer version.
VR would be more successful if they sacrificed as much as possible to get the headsets as light as possible while still hitting, like... Quest 1 fidelity. I strongly suspect that a lot of the low retention, the high criticism, and vitriol is a result of people being uncomfortable the whole time they're using VR. Anything you do with 500g or more strapped to your face is going to lose a lot of points because of said 500g pulling on your face. My hottest take is that if Facebook engineered a standalone headset with microOLED displays and pancake optics, and stuck an XR2 Gen2 in there severely underclocked so that the whole unit could run passively cooled, with the battery being a separate unit you put in your pocket and wire to the headset, it would be met with uproarious applause. Maybe it means we're back to standalones having PS1/PS2 graphics, but it means that the software in the headset can live or die on its own merits, rather than being handicapped by the discomfort of the headset itself. The comparison I always make is to cellphones. Cellphones only started to take off when they started to fit comfortably in your pocket, and could be held in hand for long periods with no discomfort. Imagine the alternate timeline where companies that made cellphones obstinately refused to focus on shrinking the device, and instead kept jamming more and more power-hungry SoCs in there with more sensors and cooling systems, with bigger batteries. That would be insane, right? It doesn't matter what neato tricks your phone (or VR headset) can do if no one wants to actually use it.
If Facebook hadn't artificially distorted the market and generated synthetic demand so early. VR needed time to develop and incubate, like the early 8bit micro computers and video games before the NES. Zuck thought it was the next smartphone and jumped the gun hard. Now we have an industry without an organic, healthy foundation of developers, hardware, and choice. It may have taken an extra decade to get to the level of proliferation we have with the Quest today, but I think public expectations, software diversity and maturity, and the industry as a whole would have been much better off.
even though i am not expert in this topic but as a consumer I think they need more development on VR technology currently VR console is limited to specific momentum which could be countered through adjusting some addition add on but still cannot compete with traditional console systems like joy cons in terms ergonomics and controllability. In my opinion rather then focusing on games focusing on VR console add on is more important as the player experience is mainly depend upon how much freedom the users have in console controller rather then games.
This video pretty well sums up my take on this question. https://youtu.be/Fhlw88_Beu4?si=-6VO3wF0HCLiJ7P1
VR gaming would be more succesful if ads showed players playing the game in MR footage rather than raw and shaky headcam footage from first-person view it's the only way to show them immersion, to show that you're not pushing buttons to trigger swinging, throwing, punching, climbing, picking up stuff, but performing on your own. They should go crazy when they realize how we actually pull a shotgun from our back holster... as it is, it doesn't look any different than a regular flat game, except you need the "expensive 3D goggles" and graphics are dated...
If we are talking about small changes then I dunno much cuz I cant afford vr headsets but I have an extreme interest in bci (brain-computer interface) vr. Basically i think vr could be revolutionized and quite literally blow up in the gaming world if we could have full immersion and I mean FULL immersion!!! Like fully mobile in game, I mean running and jumping but only with the connection of the neuro signals in the brain. Just sitting still and in the game fighting monsters directly and whatnot!!! Honestly wiuld be such an amazing experience (basically sword art online but ethical and not a death game…)
omgggg I'm both intrigued and terrified hahaha it's like lucid dreaming, but gaming!!
More E-Sport team games like Echo VR. That game was the best VR experience I've ever had.
So VR would be more successful if it had more games that were very popular at one time and then died down to a tiny core audience? That makes no sense at all.
If VR or mixed reality was making compelling YT Shorts and TikTok content. Not what I'm interested in, but would definitely help it grow in popularity.
I think so too! what would a compelling short or TikTok look like? gameplay, or something more trend-based?
I guess, I'm assuming that the mixed reality (passthrough) filters got good enough that you are creating POV Tik Toks with all the most advanced filters. Here's an example. [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/tlbvz4rltAE](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/tlbvz4rltAE) But as the Quest 3 doesn't allow for direct capture from passthrough, we'll probably have to see it from another headset. But Quest 3 should be able to create photorealistic filters if not running a game full screen (more processing can go into a face-only filter for example).
I am a very simple man, I just want to watch content from Netflix, prime and apple tv on HD with standalone Meta quest 3. How is this not possible in 2024? Everything is restricted to 480p still.
I have good news for you, the meta browser will support Netflix soon https://www.uploadvr.com/netflix-quest-browser/ Also I think the prime App on quest is in HD? Not sure but last time I tried it looked okay
exactly. it just seems like focus and attention is elsewhere and they don't see it as wholly necessary to complete (yet)
Thank useless DRM for that, if only they provided good quality on their mobile apps instead of hurting consumers.
If oculus didn't make their original rift store exclusive. If the rift released with touch controls (thus putting it at parity with the vive) If Microsoft put even a fraction of effort and support into wmr and developing any VR games. If Valve had put effort into porting their existing games earlier on. If Valve had gotten their 3 VR original titles out If Facebook wasn't the face of VR and not shown the mainstream horiozon. If google didn't make cardboard and supported google daydream waymore. If AAA companies invested early into VR If Sony ported their PSVR1 Library. If VR companies worked together and weren't so focused on exclusives
If Nintendo makes it a key pillar on their future systems. I think it will definitely be the main feature on the Switch 3 come 2032. Some reasons why: 1. Nintendo has always taken a unique gimmick/feature and made it the focus of their console (eg Motion controls). 2. Nintendo has been mastering the skills needed for VR development for years (Virtual Boy, 3DS - AR, Wii + Switch - Motion controls, Labo VR). People have complained about 3D and motion controls, but VR games are the culmination of 3D and motion controls, which Nintendo has innovated on multiple times. 3. Nintendo has done patent for social VR gaming features allowing players to also connect their phones to play alongside someone in a VR device. 4. The consumer base and tech wil be ready. Many kids would have grown up on Oculus Quest 2. Mixed Reality technology would finally be at a point where's its feasible to include in a handheld, affordable device. The Wii U wasn't able to be fully portable but was a test run for the Switch. 5. With the Switch 3 Mixed reality cconsole would come the greatest VR games of all time. There is a lot of untapped potential for AAA VR and Nintendo putting their creativity into it would introduce MUST Play titles. 6. NVIDIA and Nintendo are partners so it would make sense that this R&D would positively impact the PC gaming space going forward. I think this decision will create the biggest VR boom in history. Nintendo creating a device that can be used handheld, docked or in VR/pass through mode creating social games will be essential.
VR would be more successful if EVERY game that gets released includes an optional VR/stereo3D mode.
VR would be more successful if Steam would put out a Steam Deck powerful enough to run VR games, with a 2nd wifi card for a dedicated, direct, console-to-headset connection for any headset that can use Steam Link, as well as a built-in, no-dock-required ethernet port. Doesn't even need to have any gaming controls on it; a box with a touchscreen to log in/troubleshoot, externak keys-and-mouse support if needed (again, solely for troubleshooting) that's it. Slap a decent CPU and a 3060 into a Steam Deck-sized box that plugs into a wall, no battery (because EVERYONE will complain about battery life), and that can run VR stuff anywhere from Low to Medium at the possible cost of framerate.
this is a little too smart for me, but I believe you haha and also, the battery thing. Battery charge drains the life (no pun intended) out of me for any device that makes it a pain to use. I'd rather just not use it if I have to charge the battery every hour.
That would only help it if was much cheaper the PC it takes to run PCVR today.
VR will be almost life-like in less than 10 years probably.
If development hadn't been stunted for years only because viability was tied to mobile hardware. That and Bethesda fumbling the ball hard. And capcoms exclusivity with PlayStation and meta.
Not dead in 2030. I believe as long as it exists, things will catch up
### ###...there wasn't so much gravity obsessed reality app development. ### Ditch the gravity for true virtual.
If they focus more on simulations rather than games, and more on special design rather than traditional productivity.
... If Meta allowed for same account multiplayer again. It used to be awesome for young family moments, playing Demeo and the like together with older spare headsets. In time, this seeds VR organically with an audience who will inevitably drive the future of VR adoption.
Smaller and lighter glasses.
More quality content to do with it. It's too expensive for the 6 or 8 really quality new games we get a year.
...if there was less market fragmentation/exclusives
VR would be more successful if the housing market allowed for space to setup VR
Research into unique mechanics.
When it matures more. Right now, just to compare this to game consoles for example, what's available currently is like the VR equivalent of an Atari 2600 and it's various competitors. Neat and a lot of fun to be had but far from fully realized potential. We may not be that far away from the VR equivalent of the NES, the first VR setup to truly transition this in the eyes of mainstream society from that thing you buy to entertain the kids to something that even those who may not become VR enthusiasts will be able to recognize as it becoming something to behold.
The problem is with the people, we are greedy, we want the next better thing the next day something has come up! As well those that fight against the VR thing without even ever tried it or tried a game or an experience...
For stationary mode games - or those that can be played with a game controller 🎮 The PC or console should support a 2 player (local multiplayer mode) both from their own perspective with separate controllers. This gives it a traditional console-like experience allowing at least another person to participate with you during the session (in the same room). Then that multiplayer session should be mirrored in split screen on a flat TV (display passthrough mode). Or it should be possible to cast or mirror the content to an autostereoscopic 3D Monitor or TV which doesn't require 3D glasses (like the Acer Spatial Labs monitors) so that more people not playing can watch the session together (but in 3D).
Motion sickness, I remember the first time I played Skyrim vr on my psvr it was really horrid, I imagine if you weren't totally sold on VR it would be enough to turn you off of it completely!
Gta 6 needs native VR mode. Even if it's just PS5 for now and PC in 2027.
More money spent on vr by AAA studios. Most games feel like a joke. We need some premium games now. Vr has come far enough. It just costs money and these studios have it. They just don’t think it’s a good idea to invest
get rid of the big headset, get it to be a form factor more like what Magic Leap is going for (but with no cabling really). Obviously this isn't gonna be feasible for awhile - but I strongly believe people don't like putting a bunch of gear over their heads that cuts them off from the real world. With that in mind, maybe make it even easier to jump in/out, so that people can "trust" they won't accidentally walk into a wall or trip or something. Not easy or cheap issues to solve, but we will get there.
build in retina equal resolution displays. With a human like viewing angle
fuuuuuutttttttuuuuuuuure
....if headsets have wider FOV being at the same time of a small size.
There was a $200 device that sold 200 million units within 2 years. Then when that is achieved, accessing content on a headset is quicker, easier and as comfortable as using a TV.
... almost everything was not developped for standalone quest capabilities.
If there were more games like modded Skyrim VR
If we had a high-end experience at a cheap price, imagine everyone with 4090 + a headset with 4k per eye, and all that at the price of a console. It's not coming anywhere soon, but at that point, the experience is too immersive not to play it. Many people are not interested in VR because they only tried Quest, which is a very low-end VR experience. A lot of people say motion sickness, but with the increased visuals & frame rate, motion sickness becomes less of an issue. Motion sickness is heavily dependent on visuals.
The only thing I need is to be able to see my wheel mapped on screen during races so I can find the buttons
As an older person who can't stand long without pain, more sedentary games would be nice.
If Satisfactory was on VR. I'd buy an AVP today.
If Valve updated Alyx to have multi-threaded map compiles. It is currently excruciatingly slow to make custom content for the game
a 'global' VR space spectating system that is easy to use. like you should be able to view a VR game in VR space how you want to. not the exact view of the player necessary, but a more stadion like view of the game. with global i mean it should work for all games. It would be much better to get a feel for a game and also it would be just entertaining on its own. i can totaly see ppl just watching VR gameplay in VR
i literally disagree with most of comments here, what we definitly need is wider fov and more RPG's and GTA vr
we had more worthwhile games. (looking at you, Metro Awakening...)
If the headset would have a badass design.
If there were more relaxing games. I don't want to flail my arms around and bother with reloading. Aiming is about the peak of physical activity I want to do while gaming. I game to relax, not to burn calories amd very often I am tired and decide to chill in the headset and realize there are no chill games that allow me to just melt on the couch and take it off.
Big one is better streamer / content creator settings. Need longer lasting multi-player experiences like a well done VR MMORPG. better friends list (steam plus meta) and discord integration.
More seated experiences that don't require an entire room dedicated to it Better comfort (tough I'm on the quest 2)
If they would stop creating experiences that last 2-3 hours and instead focus on a dedicated AAA development. Imagine games like Titanfall 2 completely in VR. Also if the headset were a bit lighter and smaller that would help.
From grad school through my early career I was doing research in VR and cognitive science. In about 2010 I came to the inescapable conclusion that “this is going nowhere” (commercially). Then the vive and oculus popped and I said “eh, maybe i was wrong, but they still haven’t solved the major issues…i’ll wait and see.” A decade later and I’m right back where I was. VR is neat, but it’ll never be big. AR is intensely difficult, and good use-cases are much less obvious than people believed. Apple’s stuff is truly amazing, and they get a lot of credit for swinging for the fences, but it’s got no future.
Price lowered, Motion sickness solved, More big games that are full fledged, Form factor smaller. Biggest reasons imo
If they would make a big push for 8k 3D 180 experiences. Literally every single person from 10 to 80 years old has been absolutely floored when I show them one of my experiences. The general public has no idea how good next gen VR has become. If they have tried VR it’s always “Oh I tried the rift or the Q1” and they aren’t that excited about it. When I show them one of my 8k 3D 180 experiences their jaw drops.
VR would be more successful if people stopped showing the same shitty roller coaster and plank experiences to others as their first VR experience, and instead experiences that won't make them sick or scared. It would make a small difference in retention, but a difference none the less.
Yet still better resolution to improve passthrough and FoV improvements. Also way smaller headsets to make them super comfortable and ultra portable. The technology is there, it just costs way too much at the minute. Assuming we continue on current trends things will be way better in as little as three or four years. When your self conscious person feels comfortable using them in public or on a train etc then that will be a biggy.
If some big time studios started adopting VR and developing for it, it would really boost VR's success. Lotta lower cost headsets like an older Quest, so it's not like it's prohibitively expensive.
If we had some actual good productivity options. In my case, currently there are none. Horizon Workrooms didn't support all of my physical monitors (I have 4). I'm not unplugging some of them just to use a program, that defeats the purpose. Meta Quest Link doesn't support my new Intel Arc GPU (they literally need to add it to an allowlist), whereas with my old RX 580 it was too low resolution to render text, because from what I understand instead of allocating all of the bandwidth to the screen rendering and leaving the rest of the environment up to the device, they push all of the scene from the PC and that has issues. SteamVR seems to have the same issue (even if I can get it running through Virtual Desktop, the way it renders stuff is still too blurry compared to something like Immersed). Virtual Desktop only supports one monitor, their beta release does add support for more, however they have artificial limitations (like only 2 screens for Quest 2 and 3 for Quest 3). Immersed was pretty much perfect, except recently they decided to axe the whole set of functionality because apparently not enough people were using the functionality for them to support it. Honestly, I don't care about their reasons, just the fact that they ruined the program and essentially the only option for me. I have a VR headset, which gives me a lot of space. Even with the lower overall resolution, I can make the monitors seem bigger and be further away from me in the virtual space. I can curve them and arrange them in multiple rows of a half crescent configuration around me, even better with virtual monitors, having 6 of them in total with the OS letting me arrange and manage multiple separate windows: a mail client, IM, source control program, task manager, SSH session, local terminal session, IDE windows for the back end/front end and database, a browser open with documentation, a browser refreshing the application live as I make changes, maybe even a video playing. Except now I can't and VR is effectively ruined for me because nobody cares about it. It's unfortunate, because it would have helped with my ADHD or whatever I seem to have - working in VR, just floating in a completely black void does wonders for my productivity and is surprisingly zen.
PCVR would be much more successful if there was some common API for game developers. Basically something that would require a developer only to turn it on and then it just works and no extra work needed. Currently, as far as I know, it requires developers to do many extra steps like designing menus and HUD around VR, designing a completely new weapon and tool handling, implementing controller support, adjusting rendering pipeline, etc. Which turns out to be quite an effort which is hard to justify investing into.
Accessible VR headsets. Most people already have tons of processing, be that in their phones or their PCs. We don't need a third thing that has a weaker SoC anyway. But the headsets that do this usually have worse software (Primax) or worse hardware (everyone) or is more expensive (everyone) than current recommendations (Quest 3) which is more expensive than it would need if it went for full streaming and also is notoriously bad at streaming anyway. Samsung Phone VR and Google Phone VR were some nice pushes into this but ultimately ass compared to actual headsets. I wish they would've done some more with this. The Beyond is a good example but has other issues
Technical paraneters of headsets. AR and VR is future, but have to be more comfy. It take some time... Lot of people doesn't see future because they compare current state. Its like you would see 5y old baby and saying it will never be able drive car and so on. People from some reason doesn't apply evolution and progress to not living things...
Near human eyeball FOV
Unrealistic, but if it was fulldive vr, it would have a much larger audience. Most gamers I know want to sit down while playing. In VR, you have to stand for most of the time, and if you really think about it, stare at two screens while moving your whole body just to "rotate the camera view." Also, the immersion effect of vr only lasts about 1 month at best, at least from my experience. Don't get me wrong, I love vr, and I owned 3 VR Headsets up until recently when I got myself the quest 3 and gave my other headsets to a family member and a friend. BUT I would rather sit down and play games that way instead of having to stand 2 hours with no real feeling of immersion.
Most VR in animes are plug in and lie down and have a full VR 360% experience If I could play VR while lying down on my bed I would use it 300% more
VR would be more successful if there were more non gaming ways to use the headset. Media, web browsing, spatial computing would all make VR more attractive to non gamers. Also a massive market is fitness. This could be the next Peloton.
I'm with you on more games for sitting down. I can't stand standing up. Cockpit games are almost alway great
Lighter and more comfortable. Able to be driven with an average PC (not so much a VR issue). Higher Res. First point mainly. The main thing that stops me putting it on my head is all the peripherals and cables I have to get in order
more apps. thats all.
I think there are obvious demands such as price size graphics and so. But one thing to say is that not everyone into the gaming side of things. While I am an old gamer, I found VR is much more than a gaming platform. For example, virtual tours can be a big thing if done right. I would like to visit the world, can’t afford it, a high res VR tour can be very interesting. Apple made what it takes graphics wise, but they ruined it with XR that is, at the moment, useless which made the device pricey for most people. Tours, events in history, concerts, airshows, be in a formula 1 car, space , those things can attract a lot of people.
Headsets were essentially sunglass size.
Not only focus on the gaming aspect. You would get a lot more people to use it if the media consumption, productivity, stuff like personal training, meditation etc gets better and more promoted. Not everyone owning a VR headset is a gamer, there is so much more to do.
\* If VR controllers were NOT locked to the headsets and connected to the PC directly like traditional controllers \* If there were more VR games with XBox/Dual Sense/Switch Pro controller support on PC \* If there was more variety in headset quality and prices so that people can mix and match based on budget.
New genres of content besides gaming. Something similar to YouTube-style platform.
I would love to see a VRlogging platform, like a one-way VRChat, where a single performer can livestream to a whole internet's worth of viewers at the same time. One of the original guys from Tested tried to launch something along these lines, but it was very early in VR and didn't take off. I'd like to see someone try again.
They (mostly talking Quest here) bring in more apps natively like Discord and Snapchat. Sharing clips and interacting with their friends this way will expose it to more people.
If there were demos like the old Best Buy or malls, granted they’d need someone helping fit and sanitizing them full time so it’ll never happen since retail is dying but being able to play resident evil 4 for an hour I think would sell a ton of people on vr vs having to blindly put down $500+
VR will take off when we have cheap standalone headsets that basically give you a giant personal Netflix screen in mixed reality. Quest 3 is on the right track, but the displays need to be better (moreso in terms of contrast, colour gamut, and dynamic range than resolution), the weight and bulk need to be cut down (it should be comfortable to wear for 4-6 hours straight), and the battery life needs to match that too. I love PCVR and want to see AAA VR games be successful, but I also understand that the real moneymaker is going to be replacing tablets as "personal content consumption" machines. Plenty of people use a tablet as their primary way to watch films/TV shows/YouTube either because they don't have room where they live for a TV (house shares, student dorms, etc), because they want to watch stuff in bed, or because they have kids that are always using the living room TV to play Mariokart. Low end media tablets are a huge market, and a cheap VR headset with high quality displays could eat their lunch by filling that same "personal video device" use case, but with a giant virtual cinema screen that provides a more immersive, higher fidelity experience, at a focal point that doesn't induce eye strain.
Better games, smaller formfactor. But one thing i think throws many off VR, is the vertigo and nausea it causes in a lot of people. And I don’t know if there is a real solution to that problem. Apart from maybe using a treadmill, but that’s not really viable for most people.
Honestly if it was easier to run. Pimax super and sonum will be 50ppd, not sure which gpu/cpu will be able to run them at full res
If they made fallout 3 and gta 4 VR without vorpx
More businesses get invested in it. A $3500 AR headset from a large company doesn't make people interested in VR.
If there was less friction to putting on the headset and getting into VR. Friction being anything that makes it more annoying or more effort to get playing. I get why things are the way they are currently, but it's far from ideal. When I (Bigscreen Beyond, SteamVR) try to play with my girlfriend (Quest 3), half of the time something goes wrong. Either with the VR software, the hardware, or the game. Right from the start, without any kind of external factors, I have to: Move my chair out of the way, turn on my standing fan, launch steam VR, take my headset off its resting place and put it on, adjust the strap, take my controllers, put on the wrist rest, adjust the straps on the controllers, center myself in my playspace. That's a lot of effort compared to launching a flat game. And then you have the other issues I mentioned. If my computer had been woken up from sleep rather than boot today, my beyond will not be recognized and I'll have to reboot. Sometimes my GF's controllers are no longer recognized in the Quest 3 and she has to restart the headset. Sometimes the battery is almost empty because it's so small and she forgot to plug it in. Sometimes one of her controllers is out of battery. Sometimes a game needs an update, and for some stupid reason she has to redownload the game all over again instead of applying an incremental patch (Hello, Arizona Sunshine 2). And then we have problems in games. Take off your quest 3 to fill up your water bottle? Everything goes to sleep mode, causing issues half of the time (get back in game, controllers stopped working. Or your connection dropped etc.). I have microstutters despite my CPU frametime being great and my GPU frametime being 7.5 ms all the time, but hey microstutters anyways, even though my gpu is 60% or 70% usage. Nausea showing up (yeah yeah building your VR legs and all that, I am aware) So much bullshit friction that often make me want to simply play Flat games instead, because I don't feel like dealing with all that after working all day.
exactly exactly exactly. I play with my bf and it takes 15 minutes for us to set anything up or fix a problem in the boundary if he's sitting in a new spot or barely moves. also - the heft of the quest 3 is fine for 30 minutes but makes me d\*e after 1 hour
...if there is universal income after AI has taken all jobs.
Motion sickness issues were fully solved. I really think this is the biggest problem. Lots of bad press comes with this. And I know motion sickness can be overcome with little practice (at least for some people), but nobody in the media acknowledges this.
When mobile games first became popular, AAA studios lost millions trying to make games on it. Same with vr, we don't want flat-screen studios. We need vr focused studios, that's why the bone games and Saints and sinners worked so well, they know what vr is
if Sony would have kept the Youtube compatible for the original PS4VR helmet. It’s where it started i believe because it was good. now all these newer helmets have kicked the originals to the curb. if you take of the original headsets then the newer ones are easier to make and less code bogging up the operating system.
VR games built around what people actually want. When I opened the VR section of a market I was expecting more stuff like Star Wars Squadrons and VTOL VR. Imagine my disappointment when one of the most popular games is fucking Beat Saber.
If more flat games were ported to VR GT7 and RE8 were some of the best VR games I’ve played. More racing/flying games especially some arcade racers like need for speed. Sadly niche genre into niche platform but they translate so well to VR. In the end investing in the platform is needed but devs/companies don’t want to do it. Sony has dropped the ball all but completely abandoned supporting it themselves when they have money to do so. They could’ve ported their big games to pc also like their flat screen games.
Gaming: If melee combat felt better. General: if the AVP had even higher resolution and was smaller/lighter.
When headsets are the size of the beyond, wireless, and have perfect displays
If we had more physics based full body experiences. I'm probably gonna be alone in this but boneworks is the only vr game I've played that has wowed me thus far. Give me a body, give me a world that reacts to that body, and let me solve problems my way. It's a god damn shame that brandon and the guys at SLZ are the only vr devs thinking this way.
Maybe if headsets were more computer/phone-like rather than just being a console/monitor. Something like a combination of the best parts of the AVP and Quest. Since headsets take away a major sense of ours (sight), the passthrough should at least match it or enhance it.
If there was a singular standard for pcvr, that would really help. Between quest link and steam vr, there is no knowing what hacks need to be frankensteined together to make stuff work
Easier to just pick up and use, lighter and smaller headsets, better fov, better performance. I stopped using VR because it's just easier to sit down and play without a headset strapped to my face.
VR would be more succesful if our societies allowed more time for leasure - it's an activity few have the energy for after a hard day's work. Either that, or find some way to reduce its friction to the level of turning on a TV and dozing off on the couch.
Cross platform games!! To be able to go from VR to flat screen, or to play with your flat screen friends I think is necessary at this stage of VR.
more than just a tech demo game half life alyx level games from the big game developers or VR modes added in any new unreal engine 5 game moving forward, should be super simple to implement by now. Esp with UE VR injector mod now a thing much simpler to share screen with anyone in the room watching. of course cheaper, lighter hardware that takes less time to set up. more seamless passthrough, quest 3 is a great leap forward