Is it just me, or do people trash VR a little too much?

[Mindfreak191]

There's extremes on both sides, and I've been on both sides, before I got my own headset I was in the "shit's too expensive, it will never take off, what's so great about it?" boat, after I got it I lauded it as the second coming of Christ (still kinda am but not as much), but you gotta admit that news outlets are doing their best to trash it for no reason. Like, there was a thread that was saying that the steam VR userbase grew 1% in the last year, which when you do the numbers is huge (people keep forgetting how many steam users there are), yet the next day some news outlet had an article titled something like "Steam VR user adoption rate up by a miserable 1%" fucking lol

 

[Taffy Lewis]

Every point in your replies to me has been wrong, period. Don't get confident in ignorance.

And no, that's not a dumb argument because we're not talking about a few skepetics here and there. People largely could have cared less about PCs and phones in the early 80s.

Of course I don't mean to say that VR is automatically going to be success for those reasons; I believe VR will be successful because of how much value it has combined with the fact that it will solve the issues that stop the average user from wearing one.

Click to shrink...

Of course it's a dumb argument, because plenty of people were skeptical of plenty of technologies that ultimately failed. Also, PCs were a transformative technology for businesses in the 80s, as were phones.

 

[Raccoon]

even if it doesn't cure amblyopia, strabismus, or other convergence problems, part of the way we perceive depth is through microsaccades that VR facilitates. Our brains are built to use visual offsets to discern depth, not just through stereoscopy, but also via temporal displacement. It's why this works:

Click to shrink...

very neat

and another indication OP that a lot of criticism of VR comes from ignorance

 

[Deleted member 12790]

What are the hugely successful VR multiplayer games?

Ah, I see. Guess I'm right, then.

Click to shrink...

VRChat, prior to Beat Saber, was called VR's breakout success. 30% of VR chat's 4 million users have only ever used VR headsets, roughly 1.2 million VR users in an exclusively multiplayer experience.

 

[Taffy Lewis]

Yep, crazy how much the Virtual Boy is still selling just because it was around and people just had to keep buying it.....Do you read your arguments before hitting send?

Niche is a subjective term, and you proclaiming something to be the truth(it will remain a very s mall community) immediately reeks of motivated reasoning. We don't know what the upper limit is, but so far we haven't found it. And the onus is sort of on you to provide actual evidence for how you seem to know where it is?

Click to shrink...

You're doing the opposite - how is that not "motivated reasoning"? So far, observable reality shows that VR hasn't interested the masses. The evidence is there, now the onus is on you to prove that VR is about to take off, which you won't be able to do.

 

[DarthBuzzard]

Bizarrely defensive response my friend; no need to come at me so aggressively. I'd love to be wrong on this, but the overwhelming number of MP experiences I've had in VR have died a death relatively quickly - the exceptions being Palvov, VR Chat, Echo Arena and a few others.

Click to shrink...

It's annoying when people claim something as if they are some prophet, yet they can be proven wrong in a flash.

I could care less if a literal prophet appeared and said X and Y about VR, if they were at least able to prove it.

Just because most of your MP experiences have died does not somehow mean VR is permanently going to be a niche mostly solitary experience. This is what happens in the early days of a medium - typical growing pains.

 

[DarthBuzzard]

Not knowing anything but that short blurb, that sounds like something that's not going to be successful because it's not how people work. No one wants to strap an isolating contraption to their face to talk with their coworkers.

Click to shrink...

Correction. No one wants to do that with current headsets. Learn the difference between a box on your head and a pair of swimming goggles or a thin visor. Also do some research on how VR isolation can be fixed. I posted about it further up.

 

[Iron Eddie]

Isn't it the same attitude as "it doesn't fit my needs therefore I don't care what anyone else thinks"? Same attitude towards first person games (thinking of you Cyberpunk) or exclusive deals, or even online multiplayer.

 

[skeezx]

most people hate it because they can't play it. sounds elitist but i noticed when psvr hit $200 or thereabouts it was like OMG THIS IS THE SHIT

 

[DrHercouet]

I'm a LOT into VR but yeah, it's niche. I've never felt it really trashed, the most negative people I met were just... people who never really considered VR. I've met disappointed enthusiasts as well as skeptics who turned out to be the biggest VR prophets ever. You want hate? EA, Stadia... yeah. But VR isn't really trashed, it's mostly not really considered. But then again, the Quest has made salesmen of us all owners.

 

[shaneo632]

It's annoying when people claim something as if they are some prophet, yet they can be proven wrong in a flash.

I could care less if a literal prophet appeared and said X and Y about VR, if they were at least able to prove it.

Just because most of your MP experiences have died does not somehow mean VR is permanently going to be a niche mostly solitary experience. This is what happens in the early days of a medium - typical growing pains.

Click to shrink...

Alright, so you're just committed to being obnoxiously combative about this then? Bye.

Also, it's "I couldn't care less," btw.

 

[Raccoon]

Let's just say there's a big, big, BIIIIIIG announcement that is upcoming in the sector that perhaps people like I would be privy to, that is informing my business decisions, that many on this board would not be privy to.

Click to shrink...

dude coronavirus was announced months ago

 

[Nola]

You're doing the opposite - how is that not "motivated reasoning"? So far, observable reality shows that VR hasn't interested the masses. The evidence is there, now the onus is on you to prove that VR is about to take off, which you won't be able to do.

Click to shrink...

So far, observable reality has shown VR has had a constantly increasing adoption base, most recently to the point of selling out the entire supply chain. So we really don't know what the ceiling looks like. And this is in a period where the barriers to entry are rather high.

And to quote myself:

Niche is a subjective term, and you proclaiming something to be the truth(it will remain a very small community) immediately reeks of motivated reasoning. We don't know what the upper limit is, but so far we haven't found it. And the onus is sort of on you to provide actual evidence for how you seem to know where it is?

I'm certainly not discounting the possibility that it may reach a ceiling sooner than later, but there are A LOT of reasons to think it also won't. And given the companies pouring big money into the space(Facebook, Apple, Sony, Valve, etc.) they seem to be hedging toward the latter, and that says something.

 

[PennyStonks]

VR sucks because my kids will die if I can't see or hear them, and my neck might break from the bowling ball attached to my head.
If you can't literally wake me up from the matrix don't even bother deving VR

 

[DarthBuzzard]

Of course it's a dumb argument, because plenty of people were skeptical of plenty of technologies that ultimately failed. Also, PCs were a transformative technology for businesses in the 80s, as were phones.

Click to shrink...

The argument being made is that VR is not uniquely filled with skepticism. You were the one that used the point of how skepticism of one other technology (3D graphics) is not a good argument to be making.

Well now all of a sudden when I turn that around on you by stating how it's universal, now you have a problem? Dude, my point has always been that large skepticism is unavoidable with newly emerging tech; I never meant that gives VR a unique boost. What it does do is show how VR isn't being crushed under the weight of skepticism just because it's the odd one out.

 

[Alucardx23]

This is a dumb argument, because you'll always find someone being skeptical of any technology. That doesn't mean any new technology is going to be successful, everything has to be judged on its own merits. And VR has the problem of being a very isolating and unappealing experience to many people.

Click to shrink...

What do you think about the graphs that have been shared with you about how VR has been growing every year? If VR will always be a niche, where does these graph stop or level out? What do you expect will happen as headsets become lighter, wireless, with a higher resolution and a lower price?

2019 Was a Major Inflection Point for VR—Here's the Proof

VR adoption is accelerating thanks to the Oculus Quest. We’ve seen over 100 VR titles break $1 million in revenue, growing the total VR software market by 3x in 2019. Top grossing VR titles have cleared $10 million in revenue, and can reach up to $60 million in sales given the current...

www.roadtovr.com

 

[DarthBuzzard]

Alright, so you're just committed to being obnoxiously combative about this then? Bye.

Also, it's "I couldn't care less," btw.

Click to shrink...

I can see you have trouble admitting when you're in the wrong.

 

[EchoChamber]

I always bring my popcorn when the usual users come to the VR threads.

 

[Jon God]

I feel like it's two sides of the same coin every time VR is brought up.

VR IS THE FUTURE.

Why do people still care about VR?

-sigh-

 

[XR.]

Same as VR evangelists coming into every VR thread telling you that it's the second coming of Christ, there's extremes on both cases.

Click to shrink...

Is it really the same?

I don't see the problem with people being passionate about their interests. I do, however, see a problem with narcissistic viewpoints that essentially conveys the idea of "this shouldn't exist" or "this should be tailored for my interests instead".

 

[julian]

Same as VR evangelists coming into every VR thread telling you that it's the second coming of Christ, there's extremes on both cases.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, I appreciate VR and would never knock somebody for enjoying it but I know it's not something I want to invest heavily in and wouldn't use enough to warrant getting it. When I explain why I get several posters telling me how wrong I am and all the things that are coming out later that will make it better or how my issues are minor. Holy shit. I'm not telling somebody else not to enjoy it. I'm explaining why it's not for me at this time.

 

[Alucardx23]

I feel like it's two sides of the same coin every time VR is brought up.

VR IS THE FUTURE.

Why do people still care about VR?

-sigh-

Click to shrink...

Check which side is sharing the graphs that support their point.

 

[DarthBuzzard]

Is it really the same?

I don't see the problem with people being passionate about their interests. I do, however, see a problem with narcissistic viewpoints that essentially conveys the idea of "this shouldn't exist" or "this should be tailored for my interests instead".

Click to shrink...

This is actually pretty spot on.

There is a serious lack of creative thinking with people who are overly negative. You can tell they really struggle to see past current tech and fail to understand some of the points they actually attempt to make. Meanwhile the enthusiasts are beaming with all sorts of possibilities because they actually took the time to think about it - not only that, they have the ability to think about it in the first place.

Now there is a point where you go too far, and that's stuff like VR will kill off non-VR.

 

[Raccoon]

ahh so these are the fabled usual posters

I sense I am in the presence of legends

 

[Th0rnhead]

I get when people say non-VR games are horrible after playing VR or how traditional gaming is going to die out, but to say it's not a gamechanger, well what is?

I mean the 2D->3D graphics jump is quantifiably less of a gamechanger to the user experience than VR. If VR isn't a gamechanger, then surely nothing ever has been? Sometimes things come around that really are just that much of a gamechanger. VR is one of those things.

I can easily say that people who speak negatively of VR are confused. They might have valid criticsms, but there's always one or several misconceived or false points which could completely change their opinion on the topic. If they get past a simple sentence with the word gimmick in it, then It's always something like "The games are just tech demos" or "The headsets are bulky so it will always be niche" or " "Well 40-70% of people get sick"

Point is, if people want to make a judgement call, they should do their research.

Click to shrink...

I guess I should've phrased it as overstating how game changing it is. I definitely think there's a lot of innovation in the VR space that will shape the game industry as a whole, but sometimes little things get blown up as being the single most incredible thing ever. It can also come off as dismissive of other non-VR innovations in gaming, when the tone is that of 'VR is the only thing pushing the medium forward!'. There's also the idea being pushed, that VR is the only path forward for gaming (which I personally don't agree with, and I do think that it irritates people).

If someone is attacking VR with an argument that doesn't hold water, by all means, explain to them why you disagree. I dislike the people that drop the drive-by negative comments—to be clear, I don't think it is justified, even if it is pushback against overzealous VR enthusiasts. But it does suck when people bring up their bad experience or misgivings about VR and get hand waved away by enthusiasts that don't see a problem.

This is a very good example of people reading in innocuous statements what they want to hear. i've seen this same FUD repeated directly my way many times. An example from the old board:

Most of these poor justifications for "push back" are straw men from people who are claiming people have said things they didn't say. Pushing back against something people aren't saying just makes for really, really shitty discussion. Someone being enthusiastic about a technology, does not mean they're going around saying whatever thing you like is doomed to die. And definitely isn't justification for the kind of awful posting that permeates every discussion of VR on this site. "Niche" this and "gimmick" that. like, people are aware that gaming as a whole is "niche" right? The vast, vast majority of the planet doesn't play playstation games. literally everything is a niche.

Click to shrink...

To be clear, I don't think it's justified or solid reasoning—it's just how I can see people justifying it to themselves. Y'know, console wars type bullshit. And I don't think there's an issue with being enthusiastic about something, but some people can really take it a bit far. I personally wish the conversation could be a little bit more grounded. I've definitely seen some posters here and elsewhere claim that VR will replace traditional videogames, even traditional media, or cause widespread societal change. It's totally a thing. I'm sure some people see that and feel like they need to "fight back" against it.

I've read a few of your threads about VR, and I've always found them to be interesting. Never annoying or anything like that. You're definitely more visible in discussions about VR, but I don't think those attacks against you were warranted.

 

[NekoNeko]

VR will be cool if they keep developing it. VR now is awful imho.

 

[mute]

It could be the bees knees and it would still catch a bunch of crap just because of the price.

 

[Nola]

Check which side is sharing the graphs that support their point.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, I'm pretty new to this whole thing(and in the process a convert that was once apathetic) but it seems like in this thread at least, you have mostly reasonable takes then two passionate groups, an enthusiast side offering reasonable takes backed by facts, and you have another set of Strong opponents getting into their feelings and offering a lot of non-substantiated hot takes and dropping poison down the well.

Then a third group both-sidesing everything or wanting to shape the Overton window on the conversation.

I think after experiencing it, it is game changing and it is likely the space for the most significant innovation in the medium. Just because it is such a different experience and by the very nature of that will require adaptation and innovation to try and align with that. Whereas traditional gaming has pretty largely found most of their boundary lines. Not sure why having that opinion is disqualifying or taking things too far.

 

[DarthBuzzard]

I guess I should've phrased it as overstating how game changing it is. I definitely think there's a lot of innovation in the VR space that will shape the game industry as a whole, but sometimes little things get blown up as being the single most incredible thing ever. It can also come of as dismissive of other non-VR innovations in gaming, when the tone is that of 'VR is the only thing pushing the medium forward!'. There's also the idea being pushed, that VR is the only path forward for gaming (which I personally don't agree with, and I do think that it irritates people).

If someone is attacking VR with an argument that doesn't hold water, by all means, explain to them why you disagree. I dislike the people that drop the drive-by negative comments—to be clear, I don't think it is justified, even if it is pushback against overzealous VR enthusiasts. But it does suck when people bring up their bad experience or misgivings about VR and get hand waved away by enthusiasts that don't see a problem.

Click to shrink...

It's not just a little thing though. VR literally is the biggest change in gaming since it's inception. This isn't even arguable. How can anything be a bigger shift than the removal of the frame or box that all media has existed on?

Now if you mean little things within VR, you'd have to clarify what you're talking about. Certain innovations we've seen like full-body physics are a gamechanger, and we're still at the beginning of this path - the big changes are yet to come.

've definitely seen some posters here and elsewhere claim that VR will replace traditional videogames, even traditional media, or cause widespread societal change. It's totally a thing. I'm sure some people see that and feel like they need to "fight back" against it.

Click to shrink...

Yes, me. I've said VR has the ability to change society completely, and it's all within logical reasoning. If distance is tangible and I can hop to any place or visit any person, how is that not a huge change in society? That's only part of the story as well, there's more impact that VR can enable.

 

[ClickyCal']

ahh so these are the fabled usual posters

I sense I am in the presence of legends

Click to shrink...

 

[ghibli99]

I find the HMDs to be a bit too much right now. I can't wait until they get to the point where they're far less bulky/heavy, which I know will come at some point. Right now, as much as I like my PSVR, it's bulky, has a wire coming off it that I get tangled up in regularly when playing things like Beat Saber, and with temperatures here being in the 90s F and our A/C unable to truly keep up, playing VR games is pretty low on my list. But I would never "trash" it. I think the technology is exciting, and the games, when they hit and do things right (AC7, Beat Saber, Astro Bot, etc.), are really special experiences.

 

[Plasma]

I'm not to fussed when I see it anymore, it's kind of easy to ignore when you can see how many headsets are getting sold and how many good games there already are to play.

 

[AllBizness]

It's console wars is all it is.

 

[Alucardx23]

This is actually pretty spot on.

There is a serious lack of creative thinking with people who are overly negative. You can tell they really struggle to see past current tech and fail to understand some of the points they actually attempt to make. Meanwhile the enthusiasts are beaming with all sorts of possibilities because they actually took the time to think about it - not only that, they have the ability to think about it in the first place.

Now there is a point where you go too far, and that's stuff like VR will kill off non-VR.

Click to shrink...

I'm in that group, but I think I'm able to defend my point with good arguments. I do expect for traditional flat gaming to eventually stop as we know it, but this of course will take several years for it to happen (20/30+). I first expect for TVs to gradually be replaced by AR glasses, once this happens, developers will keep evolving the way they make games, because even though you can simulate an AR TV in a living room, you are not bound by the same limitations a physical TV has. You could easily imagine a traditional horror game played on a virtual AR TV, but things like a hole in the middle of your room physical room could open, or the lights could flicker. The same type of experience could be duplicated on a fully VR environment where you are playing a traditional game. If you play a traditional flat game as I'm describing it, are you really playing a traditional game at that point?







Not AR/VR, but you should get the idea.

 

[Th0rnhead]

It's not just a little thing though. VR literally is the biggest change in gaming since it's inception. This isn't even arguable. How can anything be a bigger shift than the removal of the frame or box that all media has existed on?

Now if you mean little things within VR, you'd have to clarify what you're talking about. Certain innovations we've seen like full-body physics are a gamechanger, and we're still at the beginning of this path - the big changes are yet to come.

Click to shrink...

No, I definitely wasn't saying VR is a little thing. I mean small game mechanic innovations or software innovations. Like tiny tweaks to control methods or rendering, etc.

Yes, me. I've said VR has the ability to change society completely, and it's all within logical reasoning. If distance is tangible and I can hop to any place or visit any person, how is that not a huge change in society? That's only part of the story as well, there's more impact that VR can enable.

Click to shrink...

Maybe. That future is at least a decade away, if not two or three.

 

[DarthBuzzard]

I'm in that group, but I think I'm able to defend my point with good arguments. I do expect for traditional flat gaming to eventually stop as we know it, but this of course will take several years for it to happen (20/30+). I first expect for TVs to gradually be replaced by AR glasses, once this happens, developers will keep evolving the way they make games, because even though you can simulate an AR TV in a living room, you are not bound by the same limitations a physical TV has. You could easily imagine a traditional horror game played on a virtual AR TV, but things like a hole in the middle of your room physical room could open, or the lights could flicker. The same type of experience could be duplicated on a fully VR environment where you are playing a traditional game. If you play a traditional flat game as I'm describing it, are you really playing a traditional game at that point?

Click to shrink...

What I mean is the existence of non-VR games ending. Maybe, maaaybe in the Matrix, but I still expect people jacked in would play traditional games for recreational purposes.

With Ready Player One level technology, I actually do expect a lot of people to play their non-VR games inside VR (and AR), it's just that they will still exist.

There will still be a demand for games without these extra effects you talk about because some people will want the pure unaltered flatscreen experience, especially when it comes to 2D games.

 

[DarthBuzzard]

Maybe. That future is at least a decade away, if not two or three.

Click to shrink...

A decade? Sure. Two or three? You'd be surprised at where things are in R&D labs.

Realistic avatars:


Smaller headsets with no eye strain or headache issues:


Reconstruction for realistic real world spaces:

 

[Datajoy]

Personally, I'm annoyed by the breathless proclamations that VR is the future of media when it hasn't really proven its reach beyond a dedicated niche. I also wish a larger share of game development resources would go toward traditional gaming experiences.

 

[Magic-Man]

Let me be clear. I don't think VR will take over the world, at least not for a while. But within a decade or so it'll be as selling as much as Xbox/Playstation/Nintendo are today.

 

[Magic-Man]

Personally, I'm annoyed by the breathless proclamations that VR is the future of media when it hasn't really proven its reach beyond a dedicated niche. I also wish a larger share of game development resources would go toward traditional gaming experiences.

Click to shrink...

You can't grow a technology without dedicating resources to said technology.

 

[Deleted member 2620]

Honestly, I slightly get being annoyed by something like Alyx, which is probably the only notable case where a sequel in a major traditional gaming franchise is VR-exclusive. There are some developers that I've liked in the past that are now spending less time or even no time on the specific things that I like. I get being vocal about wanting developers to work on things that you'd like. RIP Cave. I don't particularly agree in this case, because I'm not convinced a traditional Half-Life could have possibly been as impactful to me, but I can see the stance if I squint.

What I find completely alien, though, are posters concern trolling through the lens of deeply caring about the financials of gigantic technology corporations. I'd argue that most of the people that have been excited about VR through the years on Era and the prior forum have, maybe except for in the earliest days, fully understood that VR won't replace traditional gaming in the foreseeable future. All of the major VR platform owners completely understand this as well.

I'd suggest that the latter posters come to terms with the fact that VR gaming is appealing enough to platform holders and to game development studios to continue getting exclusives, and to let the enthusiasts enjoy their games without turning every VR thread into an argument about the long-term viability of VR as a whole.

 

[Datajoy]

You can't grow a technology without dedicating resources to said technology.

Click to shrink...

Yes I have no personal interest in the growth of VR so I'd prefer that large game companies dedicate those resources to traditional gaming experiences.

 

[Magic-Man]

Yes I have no personal interest in the growth of VR so I'd prefer that large game companies dedicate those resources to traditional gaming experiences.

Click to shrink...

If you don't mind me asking, have you ever tried VR? Wouldn't it be better to play your games as if you actually lived in that world?

 

[Nola]

Yes I have no personal interest in the growth of VR so I'd prefer that large game companies dedicate those resources to traditional gaming experiences.

Click to shrink...

This isn't some binary zero sum relationship.

As VR grows and traditional gaming continues to grow, companies will dedicate increasing resources to fill each. Cell phones didn't kill off consoles and VR is unlikely to kill off traditional gaming unless the technology is so powerful that there is a huge exodus because it does better than all the things traditional gaming does, and at that point, who cares?

 

[BrickArts295]

Its like exclusives, you gotta buy an expensive peripheral or in the case of PSVR, a console on top of that in order to be able to play a game like Astro Bot.
I understand why some just aren't into it.
Then you have the actual VR games, people don't like change and so if your favorite game company all of sudden decides to make a VR game (specially an exclusive VR game tied to a single platform), a lot of people will feel left out and thus the trashing begins.

It's easy to trash because the user base is pretty low to fight back. I love my PSVR and definitely seen my share of *eyes rolls* whenever I talk about possible dream games.

 

[Mukrab]

Personally I don't care about VR and don't think i ever will. Im not interested in moving around to play a game and prefer keyboard and mouse or a regular controller. I watched a bit of Alyx anf i mean moving around is just teleporting 2 meters at the time and again personal opinion i couldn't think of something more stupid. Sure you are inside the game and that itself is awesome but then you press a button to teleport to move, that sounds ridiculous to me and doesn't look like fun at all. I guess VR could be cool for me playing traditional and have it just replace the monitor but at that point it's just a gimmick. To be quite honest with you if i got a VR headset i would be more excited for porn than for games.

 

[Deleted member 12790]

I watched a bit of Alyx anf i mean moving around is just teleporting 2 meters at the time and again personal opinion i couldn't think of something more stupid.

Click to shrink...

 

[Nola]

Personally I don't care about VR and don't think i ever will. Im not interested in moving around to play a game and prefer keyboard and mouse or a regular controller. I watched a bit of Alyx anf i mean moving around is just teleporting 2 meters at the time and again personal opinion i couldn't think of something more stupid. Sure you are inside the game and that itself is awesome but then you press a button to teleport to move, that sounds ridiculous to me and doesn't look like fun at all. I guess VR could be cool for me playing traditional and have it just replace the monitor but at that point it's just a gimmick. To be quite honest with you if i got a VR headset i would be more excited for porn than for games.

Click to shrink...

You can use continuous movement in Half Life Alyx.

I also suspect this is the nexus of a lot of sentiment.

People that haven't tried it, knock it before hand, then build up additional rationales for why they hate it, again, without having tried it.

 

[DarthBuzzard]

Personally I don't care about VR and don't think i ever will. Im not interested in moving around to play a game and prefer keyboard and mouse or a regular controller. I watched a bit of Alyx anf i mean moving around is just teleporting 2 meters at the time and again personal opinion i couldn't think of something more stupid. Sure you are inside the game and that itself is awesome but then you press a button to teleport to move, that sounds ridiculous to me and doesn't look like fun at all. I guess VR could be cool for me playing traditional and have it just replace the monitor but at that point it's just a gimmick. To be quite honest with you if i got a VR headset i would be more excited for porn than for games.

Click to shrink...

You probably don't care about VR because you think you have to move around so much. You really don't. Only motion controls and specifically room-scale games get you moving around. You can simply sit down with a gamepad and barely move.

You can move in Alyx with a joystick, and you can't judge VR from videos; it's never representative of the experience.

There's no question you're going to be extremely surprised when you try VR, because it's not how you think it is.

 

[EvilBoris]

even if it doesn't cure amblyopia, strabismus, or other convergence problems, part of the way we perceive depth is through microsaccades that VR facilitates. Our brains are built to use visual offsets to discern depth, not just through stereoscopy, but also via temporal displacement. It's why this works:

Click to shrink...

Yep, There are a loads of monocular cues our brains use to help perceive depth and distance, even seemingly obvious things such as small=far away something being occluded means it's further away because it's behind another object.