Is VR going to die because of no software?

Shifty Geezer

uber-Troll!
Moderator
Legend
This was always the concern, and here's the first sounding out of as much...

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...truth-of-vr-development-announces-new-vr-game
He said Out of Ammo was "very unprofitable" despite exceeding sales expectations and "selling unusually well compared to many other VR games"...

But after Death Drive to Italica, well... "Honestly, I don't think I want to make any more VR games," Hall said. "Our staff who work on VR games all want to rotate off after their work is done." And he believes other studios feel the same way.
 
Very Wii-ish. I think that's going to be the major barrier. No-one's going to create a big, meaningful VR experience where the VR is necessary because the market is too small. And with nothing but demos and curios, there's little reason to invest lots in getting VR enabled. Very chicken and egg and I can't see anything that'll turn that around. Not even Sony are going to back VR with the necessary investment (turn a dozen studios to creating VR only AAA content) so reason to own VR is very limited.

Maybe it'll be non-gaming VR experiences that'll be necessary to drive adoption, and when (if) there's a large enough install base, then the games can come?
 
No. Its not because of software. VR is going to die because the experience is too much like the latest 3D TV craze, there just isnt enough of a positive experience to keep it alive.
 
Well my PSVR has been sitting there doing nothing since the third day after launch... There's literally nothing worthy of my time to play.

You go to events and rent it. I got 100 usd per day!

It's my monthly salary lol. But with Psvr, I got it in a day
 
Who will invest in it over the years needed? Who's going to say, "consumers aren't interested in this and there's no money in it, but we'll keep investing heavily until one day it does become something people actually want"?
 
Who will invest in it over the years needed? Who's going to say, "consumers aren't interested in this and there's no money in it, but we'll keep investing heavily until one day it does become something people actually want"?
In the case of MR (which is the future of VR anyway): Google, Microsoft, Apple and probably Amazon.
 
Much of the content went to oculus. Oculus paid for some sort of exlusivity. Touch game lineup is impressive. Also steam has decent amount of non locked content. Some of it must trickle down to ps vr too.
 
In the case of MR (which is the future of VR anyway): Google, Microsoft, Apple and probably Amazon.
That's what I was talking about when I said
Maybe it'll be non-gaming VR experiences that'll be necessary to drive adoption, and when (if) there's a large enough install base, then the games can come?
That's not VR though, and designing games etc. to fit MR is different to creating for VR. I can well see VR dying over the next ten years before headsets maybe be mainstream enough to warrant another crack at VR worlds and games. Until then, I'm not sure anyone's going to keep ploughing away at supporting the headsets with content and building VR games into a self-sustaining business.
 
Very Wii-ish. I think that's going to be the major barrier. No-one's going to create a big, meaningful VR experience where the VR is necessary because the market is too small. And with nothing but demos and curios, there's little reason to invest lots in getting VR enabled. Very chicken and egg and I can't see anything that'll turn that around. Not even Sony are going to back VR with the necessary investment (turn a dozen studios to creating VR only AAA content) so reason to own VR is very limited.

Maybe it'll be non-gaming VR experiences that'll be necessary to drive adoption, and when (if) there's a large enough install base, then the games can come?

That's definitely the vibe I've been getting ever since the Vive and Rift launched. I was keeping an eye on PSVR to see if the trajectory would change dramatically with its launch, but it doesn't appear to be the case. Prior to PSVR launch I was thinking it would more closely match the Wii's fad trajectory with a 2-3 year period of being the thing to get among techies and semi-techies, but after it launched I'm thinking it may be much shorter lived.

The cost investment is just far too high for the experience as it currently exists.

Paradoxically, I think it not only needs to get much better (hardware and software) but it also needs to get significantly cheaper (~99 USD or so) if it wants to have a chance of attaining critical mass and becoming as ubiquitous to gaming as say an aftermarket controller.

If it's going to cost more than ~99 USD, then it needs to be a self contained console/device that doesn't require an additional PC or console, IMO.

Who will invest in it over the years needed? Who's going to say, "consumers aren't interested in this and there's no money in it, but we'll keep investing heavily until one day it does become something people actually want"?

Currently only Facebook and Sony appear to be investing much. Valve/HTC are lagging significantly behind both of them WRT to funding the games that are needed to drive adoption. I have a feeling that Facebook are more invested in it than Sony are.

And you never know the independent PC development scene may come up with something that catches the general publics imagination, which may in turn prompt larger publishers to invest more into copying it. Long shot there though if the current state of indie VR development is anything to go by (most of it is just quick and dirty shovelware on Steam to try to take advantage of the VR hype). Not to say there are some gems, but nothing that's making people want to go out and try to get all their friends to get VR so they can experience it as well.

And that last point is important. I'm hearing more and more from a lot of current and former VR advocates that while they think VR is game changing, they can't in good conscience tell anyone to go out and buy a VR headset currently. The investment is too high (even for PSVR) and the potential return in terms of gaming experience is too small.

I'm waiting to see if the upcoming cheaper Windows OEM VR headsets will change anything, but I don't think it'll change things much.

Regards,
SB
 
That's definitely the vibe I've been getting ever since the Vive and Rift launched. I was keeping an eye on PSVR to see if the trajectory would change dramatically with its launch, but it doesn't appear to be the case. Prior to PSVR launch I was thinking it would more closely match the Wii's fad trajectory with a 2-3 year period of being the thing to get among techies and semi-techies, but after it launched I'm thinking it may be much shorter lived.

The cost investment is just far too high for the experience as it currently exists.

Paradoxically, I think it not only needs to get much better (hardware and software) but it also needs to get significantly cheaper (~99 USD or so) if it wants to have a chance of attaining critical mass and becoming as ubiquitous to gaming as say an aftermarket controller.

If it's going to cost more than ~99 USD, then it needs to be a self contained console/device that doesn't require an additional PC or console, IMO.



Currently only Facebook and Sony appear to be investing much. Valve/HTC are lagging significantly behind both of them WRT to funding the games that are needed to drive adoption. I have a feeling that Facebook are more invested in it than Sony are.

And you never know the independent PC development scene may come up with something that catches the general publics imagination, which may in turn prompt larger publishers to invest more into copying it. Long shot there though if the current state of indie VR development is anything to go by (most of it is just quick and dirty shovelware on Steam to try to take advantage of the VR hype). Not to say there are some gems, but nothing that's making people want to go out and try to get all their friends to get VR so they can experience it as well.

And that last point is important. I'm hearing more and more from a lot of current and former VR advocates that while they think VR is game changing, they can't in good conscience tell anyone to go out and buy a VR headset currently. The investment is too high (even for PSVR) and the potential return in terms of gaming experience is too small.

I'm waiting to see if the upcoming cheaper Windows OEM VR headsets will change anything, but I don't think it'll change things much.

Regards,
SB

Valve just donated OpenVR earlier this week to the Khronos Group and HTC announced Vive Studio today (http://uploadvr.com/htc-announces-vive-studios-publish-deeper-longer-room-scale-vr-games/). The Global Virtual Reality Association (GVRA) was formed yesterday (Acer Starbreeze, Google, HTC VIVE, Facebook’s Oculus, Samsung, and Sony Interactive Entertainment). Lot's of investment going on but we shouldn't expected any jump in wide-spread consumer adoption in the next 3-4 years.

Microsoft is also going all in with their HoloLens inside-out tracking technology (even if it's still far from being as robust at tracking as Valve's LightHouse):


 
Last edited:
I believe the mass market is still in mobile vr, videos and little experiences like vr news. Don't underestimate vr porn videos. The latest ones are really compelling and majorly artifact free. 10GB+ file sizes also make pirating vr porn impractical so there is money to be made.

Vive/oculus is too expensive but that needs to be the case. I have hard time believing vr will not stick around and happen as the highend solutions are amazing. I would have different opinion if rift and touch sucked.

facebook, google, valve, sony, microsoft is enough to push vr through the chasm. Especially facebook is heavily investing to content and also hardware.

On short term I expect some nice vr only content but not enough to justify spending thousand of dollars unless that money is not significant to you.

I'm not expecting aaa expensive vr titles at the moment. There isn't enough devices sold to maintain that. However there will be aaa games that can benefit from vr like car games, space flying games,... fps shooters fit vr really poorly imho so cod crowd has very little to wait for.

I have been thinking of a roomscale version of original populous game. It could be amazing... imagine walking around flat earth and kneeling down to see your subjects real close
 
Last edited:
I don't know who told Indies it would be a good idea to develop for VR, but for me it seems a bit ridiculous to be honest.
How does very low cost games from dev teams counting nickels to survive making games for very expensive platforms with a tiny userbase look like a good fit?
People spending ~$2500 on high-end PC + Vive may buy a couple of good indies to satisfy some curiosity, but at the end of the month they'll want their hardware money's worth in a EVE: Valkyrie or similar.


Is PC VR on the verge of an implosion because Oculus and HTC/Valve got way over their heads by demanding ridiculously high prices for a piece of hardware that has little software to show for? Seems like a possibility, yes.

Is VR itself going to die again? No. PSVR seems to be on the path to blast through all this negativity and become very successful.
The lineup for PSVR is getting very interesting. Just this week it's getting a back-to-roots Resident Evil 7 and Star Trek.
 
I think the idea that's feeding indies is that VR is a relatively unexplored medium from a design standpoint and that because large studios hadn't/haven't had the opportunity to fill the demand for content, that there's some chance for a small team to produce the next Super Mario Bros., Doom, etc (not in terms of commercial sales, but rather in terms of genre-defining design). It's exciting/stimulating to develop for bleeding edge hardware where the design rules for everything from basic menu UI to locomotion are new again. I don't think any reasonable people have entered into this expecting to get rich, or even that it's a reliable investment - after all, I doubt even the likes of Facebook, etc have a good idea of what the industry will look like in a few years time.

Looking back at the last 4 years it's pretty clear that the popularity of VR has always been and continues to be directly tied to the buzz surrounding the advancement of hardware. The content is better and more varied now than it has been, but we're definitely still in a place where the hardware and the idea of the experience is what's being sold rather than specific things it allows you to do. I've always felt that this generation was going to be a bit of a false-start in terms of hardware capability, so I think the larger concern is more in terms of how the public, developers, and related industries react when it comes time for another cycle of hardware.

I'll be curious to see how long Facebook will be willing to fund this consumer product branch of their VR/AR R&D if the hardware sales hits a ceiling of ~1 million or so units. It's a safe bet that they'll continue to pump money into the internal R&D, but you can do that a hell of a lot more cheaply without all the additional logistical support and engineering costs of consumer electronics. Especially if it becomes the case that most of the innovative content and tools ends up coming from their own internal teams.
 
Back
Top