-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Is Microsoft's attitude toward VR dictated by a lack of technical foresight or financial reward - or both?
- Thread starter Deleted member 30005
- Start date
Sorry for the misunderstanding, I didn´t mean to say produced by Sony. I wanted to say exclusive , or at least so far, to PSVR.
If I´m not mistaken The Persistance comes to PC on July 2019 and I don´t know about Tetris Effect.
Yeah it may be a little unfair to say that on Xbox One´s wrost year but it is what it is right ? It´s not PSVR fault that Xbox had a terrible year.
If we look into 2018 and see both Sony efforts on PSVR and MS efforts on Xbox, in my honestly opinion Sony´s line up is better. Wich is kinda insane cause like I said PSVR is a secondary plataform to Sony and Xbox is MS primary plataform. The simple fact that we can discuss this show how it´s debatable. I mean I don´t think anyone would come and say Xbox had a better than PS4.
Anyway I was just answering the guy who said that "Sony dropped VR like they always do" when in reality Sony is doing a great job supporting PSVR. If it´s best or worse than the support that others plataforms are getting is just a matter of opinion.
Ok, I guess...but what this has to do with the discussion ?
Holy hyperbole, Batman. I don't doubt that asymmetrical VR multiplayer can be entertaining, but this is just fanboyish. You can't get 'more social' wearing a video blindfold, where you can't see the people sitting next to you. You can definitely feel more immersed in the game world (at least one of you can be), but to call it the highest form of social interaction in gaming is ludicrous.
I said multiplayer gaming, meaning online. It's objectively more social in that no matter what you say. The presence of another human being with tracked avatars and spatial voice vs voice chat on discord. Which is more social?
When you have people sitting next to you, you can either shut them off completely, shut them off slightly (have your microphone pick up their voice to relay to your headphones) or in the near future, don't shut them off at all, as they would be real-time scanned into your VR experience.
That's only when you play games that are meant to be for yourself. When you play party games or asymmetrical games, you are experiencing that with other people in the room. In a way this can be more social because instead of two people staring at a screen, one person would stare at a screen and see your body movements on the screen. As more of our bodies are tracked, this will feel more social.
User Banned (1 day): platform wars, inflammatory generalisations
That first page is classic Sony fancentral era drowning on the kool aid.
Calling Ybarra negative when all you niggas were cumming in your pants over those banderas naugty dog gifs.
Makes it even funnier considering Ybarra has played Sony games on his mixer stream.
Calling Ybarra negative when all you niggas were cumming in your pants over those banderas naugty dog gifs.
Makes it even funnier considering Ybarra has played Sony games on his mixer stream.
Core audience or not, the low attach rate of PSVR suggests it's a hard sell right now.
It's not worth spending a significant portion of their energy on console VR if such a small portion of their customers are even interested in it right now. They have more beneficial things to spend their time and money on.
OP
OP
The notion of a 'killer app' feels so 1990s. A single piece of software that, on its own, is so impressive and compelling a large number of people run out and buy the hardware. When in reality what VR needs most is an ever expanding array of good games that take advantage of the medium. Enough to keep it moving forward as the technology gets even better.
My views on VR's infancy, long-term potential, and hope, that Microsoft will get behind console VR is longstanding and predate the creation of this thread. Your accusation of bad faith says more about your reaction to this topic than about my continuing disappointment with Microsoft's standoffish stance.
You aren't the first person saying this. I'm questioning OP's intentions too. Lol
VR requires a fair bit of support from platform holders, vs third parties, in terms of content investment right now.
Microsoft has struggled with their own content pipeline this gen. They're not yet in the right place to support two distinct content portfolios (or 'one and a half' or however you want to characterize it').
It's a shame because I think VR could benefit from a strong third platform but MS isn't in shape to be that right now. And wasn't in shape when VR was re-emerging midway through the gen. They probably need to focus on their primary screen and getting that house in order first and foremost before branching out.
Ybarra's comments, 'arrogant MS'-humour aside, are just a matter of 'what would you expect him to say?'.
Microsoft has struggled with their own content pipeline this gen. They're not yet in the right place to support two distinct content portfolios (or 'one and a half' or however you want to characterize it').
It's a shame because I think VR could benefit from a strong third platform but MS isn't in shape to be that right now. And wasn't in shape when VR was re-emerging midway through the gen. They probably need to focus on their primary screen and getting that house in order first and foremost before branching out.
Ybarra's comments, 'arrogant MS'-humour aside, are just a matter of 'what would you expect him to say?'.
VR has some of the biggest and awesome companies backing it and its still floundering. I'll wait and see if the Oculus Quest can do anything but I just can't see it.
You claimed that the PSVR is being managed better than the XB1 which isn't true. Low attach rate and people barely talking about its games isn't a good look.
I never said ther wasn't any great games but that is not plentiful at all. How do we expect VR to really take off with such limited funding? You can add up all those games and that would still be less of a investment than a game like God of War had. It takes money to make money and as I said from the beginning it is being treated as a peripheral.
I have Oculus, I want bigger games. Most are just VR experiences. Once in awhile we get great titles like Lone Echo, Robo Recall and Astro Bot but for the most part they are small scale. It's never going to be a killer app until everyone is onboard.
You know what I find weird about the XB execs is that they constantly reference Sony/PS4 and I've never seen, or at least I don't remember, Sony referencing them. I'm sure if you look you'll find the odd tweet here or there throughout the span of this gen but Mike and especially Greenberg seem really focused on Playstation. The excuse used to be that someone asked them about PS in an interview but that's rarely the case on social media. It's a interesting contrast.
Just an observation...
Last edited:
Lol at the comments here: he's right, there is no big VR game that is attracting the masses right now, and the state of the market is such a niche that investing on new technologies is a big risk. Why would you?
If Sony, HTC/Valve or Oculus/Facebook find a way to make this business successful than good for them, MS can always join later, otherwise it's wiser to save those money for new acquisitions and a stronger first party lineup.
If Sony, HTC/Valve or Oculus/Facebook find a way to make this business successful than good for them, MS can always join later, otherwise it's wiser to save those money for new acquisitions and a stronger first party lineup.
Because it's only been 3 years. Did you see any such success in smartphones in less than 10 years? Or PCs in under 15 years? We didn't. Nothing gets there that fast.
Seems bitter, but at least he has an actual reason and stake to, unlike most.
It's weird. VR is this interesting concept that I love playing whenever I try it (just bought a PSVR with Rush of Blood and Astrobots; friend has a vive we use sometimes), but there is nothing on there that made me want to rush out and buy one like with a Switch or PS4. Also you'll never get over the entry level being higher than that of consoles themselves.
Plentiful refers to quantity. No one said anything about budget until you just mentioned it right now. Yes, budgets are not at that level yet, but that doesn't undermine the fact that the library is growing. If you're looking for a God of War budget game, then it's a good thing we have 5 AAA VR games on the way now.
I played VR 20 years ago
I wouldn't call this 'first-generation'
Not as it develops anyway. VR will likely be more convenient and easier than switching on a TV / Console as time goes on.
Personally, qualms with the Oculus is the cabling that has to be routed throughout the room and the extra extenders and mounts that need to be purchased to make it a pleasant experience. Honestly, something like Kinect along with IR on the visor would do wonders to make it easier out of the box. Couple that with a wireless headset and you have something pretty awesome.
20 years ago we had a VR push by a handful of small-time companies that no one really knows about. There wasn't a single big company supporting consumer VR back then. The first time a big company actually released a VR headset was 2015 with Samsung's Gear VR.
Again, he's been attacked by this "fan base" for playing PC and PS4 games. So if he is trying to help the console wars he's not doing a great job.
Which was far cheaper, wasn't a full-blown medium that takes lots of effort to convince people of, and was built on top of lots of similar devices that consumers have gotten used to over the years.
You were literally talking about house parties with Beat Saber and asymmetrical gameplay, not online multiplayer.
Regardless, an avatar will never be able to replace a human sitting next to you, talking to you. You're thinking of a LAN setup - I'm thinking games like Mario Kart, Jackbox, PlayLink, SingStar are infinitely more sociable interactions than VR will ever hope to achieve, simply because of the hardware blockage. "Body movement" doesn't necessarily equate to sociability - discussion and meaningful interaction increases that.
VR is great, don't get me wrong but you're deep down the rabbit hole, mate. It's not the cure-all for all our gaming ailments.
Tons of people played those machines, they were in malls and public places everywhere. It doesn't matter what company produced them, many people experienced them. Owning the headset doesn't really make any difference in the experience
You are going to be attacked by your own mob once in a while. Play with fire, get burned, etc.
Honestly until the cost of VR comes down tremendously and the ways to experience it become easier, its not going to become mainstream. Microsoft realizes that, and is choosing instead to focus on normal games more (which, after all the Kinect BS for half a decade is a breath of fresh air).
Neither? They have a VR platform and provide tech for very advanced headsets, they just don't see the value of adding it to a console yet.
VR is not ready. It is that simple.
Spencer has talk about this many times. MS also is also investing in AR with a wireless technology.
Spencer has talk about this many times. MS also is also investing in AR with a wireless technology.
Mike plays more games than most of us tbh. He's good too. I think that's just his personal belief regarding the state of VR software right now. Microsoft had already laid the foundation for VR on Windows and its letting OEMs make the actual headsets.
OP
OP
While that is true, Firesprite have been working with Sony since 2014. They produced a lot of post launch content for The Playroom before working on The Persistence. Sony also supported development of Tetris Effect but not exclusively.
That Ibarra tweet is so dumb and funny. Like, why the fuck that person would even say "duh I prufurr Playstatiun" in the first place? No rational person does that. I've seen people with PS, Xbox and Nintendo gear and I'd never say anything like "I prefer X thing."
About VR, I personally think it's a waste. Let them build their firsr party's first and maybe in the future they'd want to invest on worthless gimmicks.
About VR, I personally think it's a waste. Let them build their firsr party's first and maybe in the future they'd want to invest on worthless gimmicks.
We are not worthy of your decency.
MS will def pursue VR when its more refined/worthwile. Although there are some neat games that show off VRs potential, Ybarra is right that there's no killer app yet and the tech is indeed still very young. I actually think MS is smart to wait. I'm still more than happy sticking with non-vr games for now.
Hopefully Valve's "HLVR" is real and sets the true bar.
Hopefully Valve's "HLVR" is real and sets the true bar.
Streaming is more likely to enable feather weight, desirable goggles. With hardware on board, even the people that want VR at all costs will find the convenience cost is very high.
Astro Bot and RE7 prove it's ready. The tech needs to become higher resolution and wireless but it's difficult not to stumble across threads singing its praises.
No, your attempted derailing of your own thread by posting completely unrelated tweets does that.
Last edited:
No, I clearly separated the two if you look again.
An avatar today cannot replace someone being right next to you, but in 5-10 years it very well could aside from physical touch.
So this is talking about local play only, correct? This is still false. Because you have VR games with local play. Sure, the person with the headset cannot see the real world today but I already mentioned that the headset would reconstruct reality in a few years and let you see real life merged with VR. When that happens, VR becomes just as social if not more so since the person looking at the TV would see your body movement and be reacting to you as a person.
Finally, you can mix physical and virtual with a setup that reconstructs reality. I can be on my couch next to my friend whilst inside a much better virtual house on a virtual couch alongside some friends that are 5000 miles away and the important part is I can still see the person next to me physically exactly as normal. You need to understand that part. I can see everyone in every reality all at the same time no different than reality.
If you are looking at body movement on a TV, then you are still focused on them as a person and not some random character in a video game. If you are inside VR and seeing body movement, then you get spatial sound, eventually haptics, and most importantly you get social presence where you feel like you are literally together physically. Meaningful interaction is literally the domain of VR by the way.
It's a peripheral on the PlayStation, and it'd be one on the Xbox.
To be fair that's a problem with VR in general, not any particular publisher. But as far as promotions go - Sony has had PSVR bundle-promos at least once per quarter in 2018, and on PSN it's not even a contest in terms of what VR content has the most visibility.
In any case - sales speak for themselves - top 10 PSVR is literally 90% Sony developed/published software - like I said, the only place I've seen 1st party dominate this bad is Nintendo consoles before. Not even Oculus (who has been spending a lot of money on 1st party too) seems to be this dominant on their own store.
Like with VR itself, seeing this game in video tells you nothing about the experience itself. Coming from perspective of hundreds of VR experiences, titles and other media as well as working in the medium, AstroBot doesn't just stand tall, it basically makes most of what's in VR to date look - uninteresting in comparison. And that's coming from someone that's not even a huge platformer fan.
I've said it many times before - VR as a medium is competing with entertainment like amusement parks - not traditional gaming. It'll attract mainstream on its own terms when tech gets out of the way - not as a 'second screen'.
Reference them in what way? Just last month I recall shuhei and Shawn layden congratulating xbox /Phil on Forza Horizon 4 winning at TGA, which is way classier than what Greenberg did in the acceptance speech which was to advertise Game pass.
Dont even bother bringing Greenberg into this. He's the biggest fanboy out of all the execs.
You are confusing arcade VR / enterprise VR with consumer VR. The VR you saw in malls was not consumer VR. Likewise, the computers of the 1950s/60s were not consumer computers, aka PCs.
Also owning a headset completely changes the experience of modern VR, because arcades only demo well, demos. They also don't really demo the social aspect of VR, and very rarely demo telepresence or other useful aspects of VR. Put it this way, you're not going to find a demo of Lone Echo / Echo VR anywhere.
Seems pretty ready to me when I'm playing on it. I mean, AR isn't ready, the tech isn't there, but they're pushing ahead with it. They could use that wireless tech for a VR headset. Hell, they don't even need their own one, just give support for a third party one.