you cant flip back and forth between 'VR needs to be like consoles not like PCs' (exclusives and AAA titles) 'VR needs to be like PC not like consoles' (lots of titles)
nevermind the fact that 1. past forumlas for success are rarely a requirement for future successes 2. PC gaming was not made popular BECAUSE of large library of indies games
your not even in the same universe as understanding this.
You're the one comparing consoles ...
Most important part in Bold below
I had to stop reading right there and I am going to ask you to stop responding to me.
The point has been made many times that for VR to succeed it needs to have AAA titles and preferably AAA tiles that are exclusives.
HOWEVER: 1. VR is not PC, its console, its PC and its mobile. 2. What consoles prooved is that you DONT need thousands of hours of playtime in order for a technology to be successful.
3. success of PC gaming, console games or mobile gaming has never been dependent on them having more content then the other. That is a random horseshit theory pull out of the sky.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
VR in its current form is a joke and is nothing like what VR should be in my eyes. VR in Disney, that I tried back in the early 90's, was better than what you are getting with current occulus and other VR tech. /shrug
by the way, one of the largest investors into this era of VR and has been very tight lipped about what they are doing is.....Disney
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Vomit Reality is going to one of the funniest things to happen in retail technology when it hits mainstream. I just had a hilarious conversation with some folks at the local game shop.
Any company betting the farm on it right now and planning on playing catch-me-if-you-can with the public fallout deserves all the misfortune and recourse.
Interesting that you call it that, because although I experienced some odd inner-ear buzzing during my first experience, and some dizzyness on the more adventurous rides, there was nothing that made me feel like I had to stop and take off the set due to nausea nor did I get nauseous in the slightest. Further, this effect seemed to diminish the more I used VR; it is possible to become acclimated, and this happened relatively quickly for me.
As for the "folks at the local game shop" I'm sure they were looking for something to talk about at the end of the day's shift, if you catch my drift. The story as presented depends a lot on setting, social cues, and... well, intent.
Well the actual conversation was more a saleswoman stumbling into some floor display, dumping the headset, then running to the back with her hand over her mouth (I'm assuming this all wasn't in awe of the graphic fidelity). I guess it was her first encounter as well, because why do that again right?
Either way this isn't the first time I've heard about or saw this. and at NAB this year one of floor reps for HTC kept it 100 about the readiness of VR as a whole and the inner ear problem.
I'm sure there's a bunch of people who will wear the headsets like champs but way too many can't in their current state. That's why all these folks talk around the subject or act subjectively dumb when questioned about it.
These companies are pushing these to market regardless of all this and THAT's where the ensuing hilarity will happen.
so the question is
are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I've had the vive since May this year. One of the best purchases I have ever made and it is one of the reasons I don't browse this site as much anymore (despite being an active member here for almost 10 yrs). Once the games you can actually be INSIDE the games you are playing, its hard to go back to 2D no matter how great or hyped up the game is. Although it is in its infancy right now, VR is here to stay and is going to be the next generation of gaming, whether you like it or not. Youtube videos do not give VR justice, it is hard to comprehend what the actual experience is unless you actually try it yourself. Monsters and characters appear life size, environments are interactive... it can be both amazing and terrifying at the same time.
anyway, I was a cynic before and I remained a cynic until I actually had the opportunity to try it myself. I won't expect anyone on the forums to be any different lol.
edit: i also want to add that you cannot compare smartphone VR with Vive/Rift. They are two different beasts. My friend had google cardboard for the longest time then tried the vive, it was like night and day. Its even hard to compare vive and occulus at the moment because until oculus touch ships, one is a room-scale/touch experience while the other is a seated/controller experience.
Most memorable games: AoC(Tryanny PvP), RIFT, GW, GW2, Ragnarok Online, Aion, FFXI, FFXIV, Secret World, League of Legends (Silver II rank)
edit: i also want to add that you cannot compare smartphone VR with Vive/Rift. They are two different beasts. My friend had google cardboard for the longest time then tried the vive, it was like night and day. Its even hard to compare vive and occulus at the moment because until oculus touch ships, one is a room-scale/touch experience while the other is a seated/controller experience.
Just wanted to address this part of your post:
GearVR is not the same as Google Cardboard; it's a significant step up, from what I'm told. Personally, I've been very satisfied with the 2016 GearVR (Wired did a nice article on it here); it has far exceeded my expectations. If Vive and Rift are again exponentially better, I can only imagine what the experience must be like.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
"The only comparable product to release within the last 10 years has been the XBox Kinect device (which bombed) but you aren't willing to make that comparison"
I wouldn't be willing to make this comparison either; it isn't a good one. I've used both a Kinect and a Virtual Reality headset, the analogy is weak.
With the Kinect, your motions in real life translate to what a character is doing on screen, or in some way affects the game state on screen.
The whole idea behind VR gaming is to do away with the screen altogether and put you directly in the game space. It changes the experience by an utterly different degree.
Having used both it's just not a very good analogy, and I don't see many others that have used VR technology making that comparison either. Conceptually, yes, I can see how physically they are both pieces of hardware that might be considered peripherals. However, the way they affect the play experience is completely different, and it's not just because one is more recent. With a Kinect, you are still playing a game on a screen, with a VR headset you are there.
"Finally, I'm willing to be proven wrong."
Glad to see it!
"at the moment VR only provides a better gaming experience with full HOTAS setups"
Not my experience at all. As I've stated elsewhere, being in a virtual space is compelling enough with current hardware as to nearly obviate the need for complex setups like HOTAS. There are plenty of great VR experiences that do not require a controller at all (see, for example, Annie Amber or Land's End) let alone Hands-On-Throttle-And-Stick.
"I've yet to see, read about or experience any other situations where VR improves the overall experience."
You must have missed many of my posts on the subject over the past 2 weeks. I've written very favorably on Minecraft, Eve Gunjack, Dreadhalls, Jump, Bait!, and other non-game experiences like "America's National Parks". I've done the best I can to describe what the experience is like, yet you continue to be an expert on the subject without having tried it.
I realise that Kinect vs VR isn't a great comparison, but I believe it is the closest we can can make:
Both are peripheral devices
Both are targetted at gamers
Both had no direct competitors / pre-existing technology on the market
Both replaced a fundamental aspect of gaming (input / vision)
Both released into similar market
I can't think of any other peripheral device for gamers that meets similar criteria to VR. I guess you could go back to earliest introductions of steering wheels, joysticks, consoles, etc but the gaming market back then was so vastly different to now that comparisons are useless.
As to the rest, yeh, I've read all the threads on VR and am closely following the development of the technology to see if it takes off. I've used VR in a hotas setup and the benefit was apparent - the gameplay was improved via depth perception (being able to spot apexes) and as long as you didn't experience nausea, none of the other downsides of VR were apparent.
This is not the case for other genres. I agree that simply being "in" the world is great, hell, its awesome! But, that awesomeness is short lived, at some point I actually want to play the game and at that point I always end up having a worse gaming experience compared to non-VR equivalents.
Now, my VR experience is limited - I've only played one racing game (I was working in QA for the company, the VR experience was purely for internal testing and has never been released to the public) as well as job simulator on a friend's vive.
When reading about your experiences, as well as Seans, I can understand your excitement as you both seem to highly value to visual improvements and can ignore all the downsides. But, I can't. The massive problem of user input will forever get in the way of gameplay until they invent more sophisticated VR input devices. The only time that seems not to be true is for hotas setups or for games that are incredibly simple (like minecraft), but even then the two people I know personally who have tried VR minecraft said that after 30min-1hr they just gave up on VR and went back to playing normally. The movement was far too jarring (because of the disconnect between how you move and how you perceive it) and the VR version made it too difficult to get proper perspective on what they were building, making it harder. What they'd do instead is build something normally, then switch to VR for a short amount of time to admire and test, then go back to normal again to continue building / playing.
So, I do have experience, albeit limited, but I've also worked in the gaming industry, I still work in software development and have a good understanding of technology changes (I'm in charge of our development team and have to analyse emerging technology to see whether it is worth adopting).
I like VR for it's visual enhancements - being "in" a virtual environment is awesome I dislike VR for it's gaming experience - outside of hotas, the gaming experience is worse
This is why I've labeled VR as a gimmick - it does not improve the gaming experience at all, only the visual. It gives with one hand and takes away with the other. Given the billions that have been invested into VR, combined with all the developers stating that gamers are their target market, I'm extremely sceptical about it taking off and doing well.
It obviously has a niche audience and I really want to try out the non-gaming VR experiences.
But, still waiting to see an example game that "proves" VR can overcome it's present limitations and actually improve the overall experience.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
There is a misunderstanding that if user input CAN be different then it MUST be different in all cases and that is not the case.
We have been moving, running, jumping, shooting in video games now for more than 30 years. just because we CAN do those things differently in VR doesnt mean we HAVE to.
in order words, you dont have to physically move your legs in order to run in a VR experience. you do have to make some adjustments so that one doesnt get sick but in general people are playing FPS games in VR without physically moving their legs and not getting sick.
example:
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I've had the vive since May this year. One of the best purchases I have ever made and it is one of the reasons I don't browse this site as much anymore (despite being an active member here for almost 10 yrs). Once the games you can actually be INSIDE the games you are playing, its hard to go back to 2D no matter how great or hyped up the game is. Although it is in its infancy right now, VR is here to stay and is going to be the next generation of gaming, whether you like it or not. Youtube videos do not give VR justice, it is hard to comprehend what the actual experience is unless you actually try it yourself. Monsters and characters appear life size, environments are interactive... it can be both amazing and terrifying at the same time.
anyway, I was a cynic before and I remained a cynic until I actually had the opportunity to try it myself. I won't expect anyone on the forums to be any different lol.
edit: i also want to add that you cannot compare smartphone VR with Vive/Rift. They are two different beasts. My friend had google cardboard for the longest time then tried the vive, it was like night and day. Its even hard to compare vive and occulus at the moment because until oculus touch ships, one is a room-scale/touch experience while the other is a seated/controller experience.
I have been in awe, found myself spontaneously smiling and feeling it to my core, and turned my head closing my eyes in fear more than once while doing VR. Rarely does any of that ever happen for me in regular gaming.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I realise that Kinect vs VR isn't a great comparison, but I believe it is the closest we can can make:
Both are peripheral devices
Both are targetted at gamers
Both had no direct competitors / pre-existing technology on the market
Both replaced a fundamental aspect of gaming (input / vision)
Both released into similar market
I can't think of any other peripheral device for gamers that meets similar criteria to VR. I guess you could go back to earliest introductions of steering wheels, joysticks, consoles, etc but the gaming market back then was so vastly different to now that comparisons are useless.
As to the rest, yeh, I've read all the threads on VR and am closely following the development of the technology to see if it takes off. I've used VR in a hotas setup and the benefit was apparent - the gameplay was improved via depth perception (being able to spot apexes) and as long as you didn't experience nausea, none of the other downsides of VR were apparent.
This is not the case for other genres. I agree that simply being "in" the world is great, hell, its awesome! But, that awesomeness is short lived, at some point I actually want to play the game and at that point I always end up having a worse gaming experience compared to non-VR equivalents.
Now, my VR experience is limited - I've only played one racing game (I was working in QA for the company, the VR experience was purely for internal testing and has never been released to the public) as well as job simulator on a friend's vive.
When reading about your experiences, as well as Seans, I can understand your excitement as you both seem to highly value to visual improvements and can ignore all the downsides. But, I can't. The massive problem of user input will forever get in the way of gameplay until they invent more sophisticated VR input devices. The only time that seems not to be true is for hotas setups or for games that are incredibly simple (like minecraft), but even then the two people I know personally who have tried VR minecraft said that after 30min-1hr they just gave up on VR and went back to playing normally. The movement was far too jarring (because of the disconnect between how you move and how you perceive it) and the VR version made it too difficult to get proper perspective on what they were building, making it harder. What they'd do instead is build something normally, then switch to VR for a short amount of time to admire and test, then go back to normal again to continue building / playing.
So, I do have experience, albeit limited, but I've also worked in the gaming industry, I still work in software development and have a good understanding of technology changes (I'm in charge of our development team and have to analyse emerging technology to see whether it is worth adopting).
I like VR for it's visual enhancements - being "in" a virtual environment is awesome I dislike VR for it's gaming experience - outside of hotas, the gaming experience is worse
This is why I've labeled VR as a gimmick - it does not improve the gaming experience at all, only the visual. It gives with one hand and takes away with the other. Given the billions that have been invested into VR, combined with all the developers stating that gamers are their target market, I'm extremely sceptical about it taking off and doing well.
It obviously has a niche audience and I really want to try out the non-gaming VR experiences.
But, still waiting to see an example game that "proves" VR can overcome it's present limitations and actually improve the overall experience.
I really don't want to ignore the downsides; I don't think I've ever stated that current VR is "perfect". Laughably, my S6 tends to overheat while plugged in to my GearVR headset (this is true of some apps more than others) and I will sometimes have to cool it down with a refrigerated gel pack. You are correct that I am enthusiastic.
I suppose my thesis would be that, as a consumer, I tried to be educated and to have realistic expectations going in; GearVR managed to smash those expectations: it was much better than I had hoped for.
I wasn't ready to put down more than a thousand dollars on something I hadn't tried, and I didn't think I would get an accurate picture of the tech from a public demo. GearVR provided a nice entry point, as I was already in the market for a new phone. I never expected it to become the most fascinating way to use my new phone, but it has.
You could say I was already "sold" on the concept of VR before trying it, and once I did I was sold on the implementation. I am really looking forward to seeing where it goes from here.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
VR in its current form is a joke and is nothing like what VR should be in my eyes. VR in Disney, that I tried back in the early 90's, was better than what you are getting with current occulus and other VR tech. /shrug
by the way, one of the largest investors into this era of VR and has been very tight lipped about what they are doing is.....Disney
I'm willing to bet that what ever Disney is doing with "VR" has nothing to do with Consumer Head Sets.
VR is much more than head sets. They've been using VR applications in their amusement parks for decades.
I've had the vive since May this year. One of the best purchases I have ever made and it is one of the reasons I don't browse this site as much anymore (despite being an active member here for almost 10 yrs). Once the games you can actually be INSIDE the games you are playing, its hard to go back to 2D no matter how great or hyped up the game is. Although it is in its infancy right now, VR is here to stay and is going to be the next generation of gaming, whether you like it or not. Youtube videos do not give VR justice, it is hard to comprehend what the actual experience is unless you actually try it yourself. Monsters and characters appear life size, environments are interactive... it can be both amazing and terrifying at the same time.
anyway, I was a cynic before and I remained a cynic until I actually had the opportunity to try it myself. I won't expect anyone on the forums to be any different lol.
edit: i also want to add that you cannot compare smartphone VR with Vive/Rift. They are two different beasts. My friend had google cardboard for the longest time then tried the vive, it was like night and day. Its even hard to compare vive and occulus at the moment because until oculus touch ships, one is a room-scale/touch experience while the other is a seated/controller experience.
Incorrect. You very much can compare smartphone VR with Vive and Rift. With Vridge you get the majority of the experience with a framerate drop, but the majority of the games can be playable. I've tested pretty much everything on the market today, and own a gear set and use VRidge, it's a very comparable experience.
Right now with Gear VR you can get the majority of a rift experience. They also have peripherals to add room scale and touch controls to mobile and PC so you can have an even better experience if need be. You don't need to spend thousands on VR to get a comparable experience if you take 20 minutes to run a search.
That being said, there are people like you out there, that love VR, but you'll have to understand there's a good portion that will never be into it. I've had one gear VR system for over a couple months and another on the newest phone (which has a better resolution than both sets) for a few weeks and have tested it with VRidge and a handful of Rift Games. I don't play it everyday... and really, there isn't much that has me coming back once a week and keeps my interest for more than a few hours.
Now as you said, perhaps after the touch controls come out, or I decide to get room scale and touch controls and play Vive Games will it really change my perspective.... but... I've tried the Vive with the touch controllers, I don't find that I'll want to stand around doing that much more than I want to stay seated and play PSVR for long periods of time either. (I do have plans to buy PSVR this year).
edit: i also want to add that you cannot compare smartphone VR with Vive/Rift. They are two different beasts. My friend had google cardboard for the longest time then tried the vive, it was like night and day. Its even hard to compare vive and occulus at the moment because until oculus touch ships, one is a room-scale/touch experience while the other is a seated/controller experience.
Just wanted to address this part of your post:
GearVR is not the same as Google Cardboard; it's a significant step up, from what I'm told. Personally, I've been very satisfied with the 2016 GearVR (Wired did a nice article on it here); it has far exceeded my expectations. If Vive and Rift are again exponentially better, I can only imagine what the experience must be like.
Pop on over to a best buy and find out. I do not feel like you'll see such a huge difference in quality and function - well. .perhaps YOU will if you have overheating issues on your S6. But for the most part, s7's have been pretty strong in taking mobile VR to very comparable heights.
I played that Vive Bow and Arrow castle defense thing at our office. It was amazing! But yeah,..so far it's like sitting around like the Nintendo R.O.B.
It's on developers to actually push content for it. Promising,..but still early. Hang tight!
Vomit Reality is going to one of the funniest things to happen in retail technology when it hits mainstream. I just had a hilarious conversation with some folks at the local game shop.
Any company betting the farm on it right now and planning on playing catch-me-if-you-can with the public fallout deserves all the misfortune and recourse.
Interesting that you call it that, because although I experienced some odd inner-ear buzzing during my first experience, and some dizzyness on the more adventurous rides, there was nothing that made me feel like I had to stop and take off the set due to nausea nor did I get nauseous in the slightest. Further, this effect seemed to diminish the more I used VR; it is possible to become acclimated, and this happened relatively quickly for me.
As for the "folks at the local game shop" I'm sure they were looking for something to talk about at the end of the day's shift, if you catch my drift. The story as presented depends a lot on setting, social cues, and... well, intent.
Well the actual conversation was more a saleswoman stumbling into some floor display, dumping the headset, then running to the back with her hand over her mouth (I'm assuming this all wasn't in awe of the graphic fidelity). I guess it was her first encounter as well, because why do that again right?
Either way this isn't the first time I've heard about or saw this. and at NAB this year one of floor reps for HTC kept it 100 about the readiness of VR as a whole and the inner ear problem.
I'm sure there's a bunch of people who will wear the headsets like champs but way too many can't in their current state. That's why all these folks talk around the subject or act subjectively dumb when questioned about it.
These companies are pushing these to market regardless of all this and THAT's where the ensuing hilarity will happen.
so the question is
are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
The question is what is the sweet spot of people NOT getting ill from disorientation, to rush a piece of still unready fad tech to mass market?
I have a feeling you'll say a % that is absolutely NOT an acceptable number. Before you do this, take into consideration the percentage of people who actually experience issues from regular PC games (google "FOV slider"). Those experiences are actually manageable by lighting and distance from displays in some cases, things that can't be corrected while having a display helmet slapped over your eyes.
Obviously you won't take any of the above into consideration because obvious is obvious. It still doesn't change the fact that these issues are attached to a $300-$700 investment.
If these hit mass market like how the book smart street dumb developers dream, there is great potential for all types of hilarity and brand embarrassment.
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
Vomit Reality is going to one of the funniest things to happen in retail technology when it hits mainstream. I just had a hilarious conversation with some folks at the local game shop.
Any company betting the farm on it right now and planning on playing catch-me-if-you-can with the public fallout deserves all the misfortune and recourse.
Interesting that you call it that, because although I experienced some odd inner-ear buzzing during my first experience, and some dizzyness on the more adventurous rides, there was nothing that made me feel like I had to stop and take off the set due to nausea nor did I get nauseous in the slightest. Further, this effect seemed to diminish the more I used VR; it is possible to become acclimated, and this happened relatively quickly for me.
As for the "folks at the local game shop" I'm sure they were looking for something to talk about at the end of the day's shift, if you catch my drift. The story as presented depends a lot on setting, social cues, and... well, intent.
Well the actual conversation was more a saleswoman stumbling into some floor display, dumping the headset, then running to the back with her hand over her mouth (I'm assuming this all wasn't in awe of the graphic fidelity). I guess it was her first encounter as well, because why do that again right?
Either way this isn't the first time I've heard about or saw this. and at NAB this year one of floor reps for HTC kept it 100 about the readiness of VR as a whole and the inner ear problem.
I'm sure there's a bunch of people who will wear the headsets like champs but way too many can't in their current state. That's why all these folks talk around the subject or act subjectively dumb when questioned about it.
These companies are pushing these to market regardless of all this and THAT's where the ensuing hilarity will happen.
so the question is
are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
The question is what is the sweet spot of people NOT getting ill from disorientation, to rush a piece of still unready fad tech to mass market?
I have a feeling you'll say a % that is absolutely NOT an acceptable number. Before you do this, take into consideration the percentage of people who actually experience issues from regular PC games (google "FOV slider"). Those experiences are actually manageable by lighting and distance from displays in some cases, things that can't be corrected while having a display helmet slapped over your eyes.
Obviously you won't take any of the above into consideration because obvious is obvious. It still doesn't change the fact that these issues are attached to a $300-$700 investment.
If these hit mass market like how the book smart street dumb developers dream, there is great potential for all types of hilarity and brand embarrassment.
When I think of this type of thing, I think of Sea Sickness. I went on a tour out to the Great Barrier Reef one time and was astonished at the amount of people who suffered Sea Sickness.
I don't know if there is any kind of correlation and I'm not going to try to make one.
I think this issue is much more a factor with the applications, rather than with the devices themselves.
Vomit Reality is going to one of the funniest things to happen in retail technology when it hits mainstream. I just had a hilarious conversation with some folks at the local game shop.
Any company betting the farm on it right now and planning on playing catch-me-if-you-can with the public fallout deserves all the misfortune and recourse.
Interesting that you call it that, because although I experienced some odd inner-ear buzzing during my first experience, and some dizzyness on the more adventurous rides, there was nothing that made me feel like I had to stop and take off the set due to nausea nor did I get nauseous in the slightest. Further, this effect seemed to diminish the more I used VR; it is possible to become acclimated, and this happened relatively quickly for me.
As for the "folks at the local game shop" I'm sure they were looking for something to talk about at the end of the day's shift, if you catch my drift. The story as presented depends a lot on setting, social cues, and... well, intent.
Well the actual conversation was more a saleswoman stumbling into some floor display, dumping the headset, then running to the back with her hand over her mouth (I'm assuming this all wasn't in awe of the graphic fidelity). I guess it was her first encounter as well, because why do that again right?
Either way this isn't the first time I've heard about or saw this. and at NAB this year one of floor reps for HTC kept it 100 about the readiness of VR as a whole and the inner ear problem.
I'm sure there's a bunch of people who will wear the headsets like champs but way too many can't in their current state. That's why all these folks talk around the subject or act subjectively dumb when questioned about it.
These companies are pushing these to market regardless of all this and THAT's where the ensuing hilarity will happen.
so the question is
are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
The question is what is the sweet spot of people NOT getting ill from disorientation, to rush a piece of still unready fad tech to mass market?
I have a feeling you'll say a % that is absolutely NOT an acceptable number. Before you do this, take into consideration the percentage of people who actually experience issues from regular PC games (google "FOV slider"). Those experiences are actually manageable by lighting and distance from displays in some cases, things that can't be corrected while having a display helmet slapped over your eyes.
Obviously you won't take any of the above into consideration because obvious is obvious. It still doesn't change the fact that these issues are attached to a $300-$700 investment.
If these hit mass market like how the book smart street dumb developers dream, there is great potential for all types of hilarity and brand embarrassment.
When I think of this type of thing, I think of Sea Sickness. I went on a tour out to the Great Barrier Reef one time and was astonished at the amount of people who suffered Sea Sickness.
I don't know if there is any kind of correlation and I'm not going to try to make one.
I think this issue is much more a factor with the applications, rather than with the devices themselves.
Is is 100% down to the applications, rather than the hardware.
Sea sickness (or motion sickness in general) is caused by conflicting signals in the body - your body is experiencing motion but your eyes aren't seeing it. This is why you're better off being outside on a ship, rather than in your room, or better off sitting in the front passenger seat of a car, rather than in the back.
The causes are reversed in VR - your eyes are seeing movement but your body isn't moving - but the effects are the same: your body enters a general state of alarm and makes you feel sick. Not sure if there has been any research into whether the reversal of inputs will change the frequency of motion sickness / nausea, I'm assuming it will occur less often as only one sense providing input for movement (sight) whereas sea sickness has multiple inputs for movement (balance, touch, stuff in your stomach moving about etc).
This is part of the reason why hotas setups for VR feel better - your body's movements match up with ingame actions - and why most games feel really jarring whilst moving about.
VR headsets can never solve this problem by themselves, but once devs invent some new input devices we'll be alright.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
VR in its current form is a joke and is nothing like what VR should be in my eyes. VR in Disney, that I tried back in the early 90's, was better than what you are getting with current occulus and other VR tech. /shrug
by the way, one of the largest investors into this era of VR and has been very tight lipped about what they are doing is.....Disney
I'm willing to bet that what ever Disney is doing with "VR" has nothing to do with Consumer Head Sets.
VR is much more than head sets. They've been using VR applications in their amusement parks for decades.
I suspect that is true.
Like I have been saying for awhile now I predict VR will be bringing back the 'arcade' days of going to the mall for a gaming experience because what you can do with VR on a larger more pricy scale is very very good...aka The Void.
So I see public space VR ventures to be very much a part of the VR happenings of late.
Vomit Reality is going to one of the funniest things to happen in retail technology when it hits mainstream. I just had a hilarious conversation with some folks at the local game shop.
Any company betting the farm on it right now and planning on playing catch-me-if-you-can with the public fallout deserves all the misfortune and recourse.
Interesting that you call it that, because although I experienced some odd inner-ear buzzing during my first experience, and some dizzyness on the more adventurous rides, there was nothing that made me feel like I had to stop and take off the set due to nausea nor did I get nauseous in the slightest. Further, this effect seemed to diminish the more I used VR; it is possible to become acclimated, and this happened relatively quickly for me.
As for the "folks at the local game shop" I'm sure they were looking for something to talk about at the end of the day's shift, if you catch my drift. The story as presented depends a lot on setting, social cues, and... well, intent.
Well the actual conversation was more a saleswoman stumbling into some floor display, dumping the headset, then running to the back with her hand over her mouth (I'm assuming this all wasn't in awe of the graphic fidelity). I guess it was her first encounter as well, because why do that again right?
Either way this isn't the first time I've heard about or saw this. and at NAB this year one of floor reps for HTC kept it 100 about the readiness of VR as a whole and the inner ear problem.
I'm sure there's a bunch of people who will wear the headsets like champs but way too many can't in their current state. That's why all these folks talk around the subject or act subjectively dumb when questioned about it.
These companies are pushing these to market regardless of all this and THAT's where the ensuing hilarity will happen.
so the question is
are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
The question is what is the sweet spot of people NOT getting ill from disorientation,....
the answer to that question is in my obveraation. I will re-type it but ask you how does my obversation not suggest an answer to that question.
...so the question is are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Vomit Reality is going to one of the funniest things to happen in retail technology when it hits mainstream. I just had a hilarious conversation with some folks at the local game shop.
Any company betting the farm on it right now and planning on playing catch-me-if-you-can with the public fallout deserves all the misfortune and recourse.
Interesting that you call it that, because although I experienced some odd inner-ear buzzing during my first experience, and some dizzyness on the more adventurous rides, there was nothing that made me feel like I had to stop and take off the set due to nausea nor did I get nauseous in the slightest. Further, this effect seemed to diminish the more I used VR; it is possible to become acclimated, and this happened relatively quickly for me.
As for the "folks at the local game shop" I'm sure they were looking for something to talk about at the end of the day's shift, if you catch my drift. The story as presented depends a lot on setting, social cues, and... well, intent.
Well the actual conversation was more a saleswoman stumbling into some floor display, dumping the headset, then running to the back with her hand over her mouth (I'm assuming this all wasn't in awe of the graphic fidelity). I guess it was her first encounter as well, because why do that again right?
Either way this isn't the first time I've heard about or saw this. and at NAB this year one of floor reps for HTC kept it 100 about the readiness of VR as a whole and the inner ear problem.
I'm sure there's a bunch of people who will wear the headsets like champs but way too many can't in their current state. That's why all these folks talk around the subject or act subjectively dumb when questioned about it.
These companies are pushing these to market regardless of all this and THAT's where the ensuing hilarity will happen.
so the question is
are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
The question is what is the sweet spot of people NOT getting ill from disorientation,....
the answer to that question is in my obveraation. I will re-type it but ask you how does my obversation not suggest an answer to that question.
...so the question is are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
the same could be said about demos set up for very short tests on games specifically meant to be as comfortable as possible - which is misleading to what most people would experience on the games they would be playing at home.
At Best Buy you can go check out each system, I'd suggest you do so. Even at short intervals of less than 5 minutes people are getting sick. I witnessed it first hand as well. Extrapolate that with taking a set home after testing it for 5 minutes and expanding on that time frame and gameplay.
Take into consideration that the guiness book of world records holder for longest time in VR, despite disorientation stayed in VR for many many hours and promptly threw up upon removing it.
Think about people like me that never experienced sickness in the store with any of the VR systems, yet after playing for several hours I have experienced it bad enough to put the set down for several days.
There are probably lots of people that won't ever get sick in VR, and many that won't be using it for games that are usually the culprit.
Then there are some that will always get sick in VR no matter what they try.. probably a lot more people than those that get sick from watching 3D movies.
Vomit Reality is going to one of the funniest things to happen in retail technology when it hits mainstream. I just had a hilarious conversation with some folks at the local game shop.
Any company betting the farm on it right now and planning on playing catch-me-if-you-can with the public fallout deserves all the misfortune and recourse.
Interesting that you call it that, because although I experienced some odd inner-ear buzzing during my first experience, and some dizzyness on the more adventurous rides, there was nothing that made me feel like I had to stop and take off the set due to nausea nor did I get nauseous in the slightest. Further, this effect seemed to diminish the more I used VR; it is possible to become acclimated, and this happened relatively quickly for me.
As for the "folks at the local game shop" I'm sure they were looking for something to talk about at the end of the day's shift, if you catch my drift. The story as presented depends a lot on setting, social cues, and... well, intent.
Well the actual conversation was more a saleswoman stumbling into some floor display, dumping the headset, then running to the back with her hand over her mouth (I'm assuming this all wasn't in awe of the graphic fidelity). I guess it was her first encounter as well, because why do that again right?
Either way this isn't the first time I've heard about or saw this. and at NAB this year one of floor reps for HTC kept it 100 about the readiness of VR as a whole and the inner ear problem.
I'm sure there's a bunch of people who will wear the headsets like champs but way too many can't in their current state. That's why all these folks talk around the subject or act subjectively dumb when questioned about it.
These companies are pushing these to market regardless of all this and THAT's where the ensuing hilarity will happen.
so the question is
are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
The question is what is the sweet spot of people NOT getting ill from disorientation,....
the answer to that question is in my obveraation. I will re-type it but ask you how does my obversation not suggest an answer to that question.
...so the question is are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
the same could be said about demos set up for very short tests on games specifically meant to be as comfortable as possible - which is misleading to what most people would experience on the games they would be playing at home.
At Best Buy you can go check out each system, I'd suggest you do so. Even at short intervals of less than 5 minutes people are getting sick. I witnessed it first hand as well. Extrapolate that with taking a set home after testing it for 5 minutes and expanding on that time frame and gameplay.
Take into consideration that the guiness book of world records holder for longest time in VR, despite disorientation stayed in VR for many many hours and promptly threw up upon removing it.
Think about people like me that never experienced sickness in the store with any of the VR systems, yet after playing for several hours I have experienced it bad enough to put the set down for several days.
There are probably lots of people that won't ever get sick in VR, and many that won't be using it for games that are usually the culprit.
Then there are some that will always get sick in VR no matter what they try.. probably a lot more people than those that get sick from watching 3D movies.
I went on a 3 1/2 hour high speed catamaran out to the Great Barrier Reef 20 years ago and I was astonished that about 80% of the passengers got Sea Sick and puked there guts out multiple times.
Me... I was lucky, My dad loved boating and loved the ocean
I went on a 3 1/2 hour high speed catamaran out to the Great Barrier Reef 20 years ago and I was astonished that about 80% of the passengers got Sea Sick and puked there guts out multiple times.
Me... I was lucky, My dad loved boating and loved the ocean
I've been on several boats over the years, small boats, large boats.. I've never gotten sea sick. There have been several cases in VR that I've felt sick though.
Vomit Reality is going to one of the funniest things to happen in retail technology when it hits mainstream. I just had a hilarious conversation with some folks at the local game shop.
Any company betting the farm on it right now and planning on playing catch-me-if-you-can with the public fallout deserves all the misfortune and recourse.
Interesting that you call it that, because although I experienced some odd inner-ear buzzing during my first experience, and some dizzyness on the more adventurous rides, there was nothing that made me feel like I had to stop and take off the set due to nausea nor did I get nauseous in the slightest. Further, this effect seemed to diminish the more I used VR; it is possible to become acclimated, and this happened relatively quickly for me.
As for the "folks at the local game shop" I'm sure they were looking for something to talk about at the end of the day's shift, if you catch my drift. The story as presented depends a lot on setting, social cues, and... well, intent.
Well the actual conversation was more a saleswoman stumbling into some floor display, dumping the headset, then running to the back with her hand over her mouth (I'm assuming this all wasn't in awe of the graphic fidelity). I guess it was her first encounter as well, because why do that again right?
Either way this isn't the first time I've heard about or saw this. and at NAB this year one of floor reps for HTC kept it 100 about the readiness of VR as a whole and the inner ear problem.
I'm sure there's a bunch of people who will wear the headsets like champs but way too many can't in their current state. That's why all these folks talk around the subject or act subjectively dumb when questioned about it.
These companies are pushing these to market regardless of all this and THAT's where the ensuing hilarity will happen.
so the question is
are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
The question is what is the sweet spot of people NOT getting ill from disorientation,....
the answer to that question is in my obveraation. I will re-type it but ask you how does my obversation not suggest an answer to that question.
...so the question is are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
the same could be said about demos set up for very short tests on games specifically meant to be as comfortable as possible - which is misleading to what most people would experience on the games they would be playing at home.
At Best Buy you can go check out each system, I'd suggest you do so. Even at short intervals of less than 5 minutes people are getting sick. I witnessed it first hand as well. Extrapolate that with taking a set home after testing it for 5 minutes and expanding on that time frame and gameplay.
Take into consideration that the guiness book of world records holder for longest time in VR, despite disorientation stayed in VR for many many hours and promptly threw up upon removing it.
Think about people like me that never experienced sickness in the store with any of the VR systems, yet after playing for several hours I have experienced it bad enough to put the set down for several days.
There are probably lots of people that won't ever get sick in VR, and many that won't be using it for games that are usually the culprit.
Then there are some that will always get sick in VR no matter what they try.. probably a lot more people than those that get sick from watching 3D movies.
I went on a 3 1/2 hour high speed catamaran out to the Great Barrier Reef 20 years ago and I was astonished that about 80% of the passengers got Sea Sick and puked there guts out multiple times.
Me... I was lucky, My dad loved boating and loved the ocean
That's funny because certain games with poor FoV or mouse smoothing cause me nausea, yet being on small or large boats in the ocean, bay or river do not make me sick; in fact I find it relaxing.
I went on a 3 1/2 hour high speed catamaran out to the Great Barrier Reef 20 years ago and I was astonished that about 80% of the passengers got Sea Sick and puked there guts out multiple times.
Me... I was lucky, My dad loved boating and loved the ocean
I've been on several boats over the years, small boats, large boats.. I've never gotten sea sick. There have been several cases in VR that I've felt sick though.
I wonder if you would have the same experience?
Played around with the DK1 and DK2. Never had a problem with feeling sick, although I felt sick of it after 15-30 minute stretches.
Vomit Reality is going to one of the funniest things to happen in retail technology when it hits mainstream. I just had a hilarious conversation with some folks at the local game shop.
Any company betting the farm on it right now and planning on playing catch-me-if-you-can with the public fallout deserves all the misfortune and recourse.
Interesting that you call it that, because although I experienced some odd inner-ear buzzing during my first experience, and some dizzyness on the more adventurous rides, there was nothing that made me feel like I had to stop and take off the set due to nausea nor did I get nauseous in the slightest. Further, this effect seemed to diminish the more I used VR; it is possible to become acclimated, and this happened relatively quickly for me.
As for the "folks at the local game shop" I'm sure they were looking for something to talk about at the end of the day's shift, if you catch my drift. The story as presented depends a lot on setting, social cues, and... well, intent.
Well the actual conversation was more a saleswoman stumbling into some floor display, dumping the headset, then running to the back with her hand over her mouth (I'm assuming this all wasn't in awe of the graphic fidelity). I guess it was her first encounter as well, because why do that again right?
Either way this isn't the first time I've heard about or saw this. and at NAB this year one of floor reps for HTC kept it 100 about the readiness of VR as a whole and the inner ear problem.
I'm sure there's a bunch of people who will wear the headsets like champs but way too many can't in their current state. That's why all these folks talk around the subject or act subjectively dumb when questioned about it.
These companies are pushing these to market regardless of all this and THAT's where the ensuing hilarity will happen.
so the question is
are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
The question is what is the sweet spot of people NOT getting ill from disorientation,....
the answer to that question is in my obveraation. I will re-type it but ask you how does my obversation not suggest an answer to that question.
...so the question is are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
the same could be said about demos set up for very short tests on games specifically meant to be as comfortable as possible - which is misleading to what most people would experience on the games they would be playing at home.
At Best Buy you can go check out each system, I'd suggest you do so. Even at short intervals of less than 5 minutes people are getting sick. I witnessed it first hand as well. Extrapolate that with taking a set home after testing it for 5 minutes and expanding on that time frame and gameplay.
Take into consideration that the guiness book of world records holder for longest time in VR, despite disorientation stayed in VR for many many hours and promptly threw up upon removing it.
Think about people like me that never experienced sickness in the store with any of the VR systems, yet after playing for several hours I have experienced it bad enough to put the set down for several days.
There are probably lots of people that won't ever get sick in VR, and many that won't be using it for games that are usually the culprit.
Then there are some that will always get sick in VR no matter what they try.. probably a lot more people than those that get sick from watching 3D movies.
I went on a 3 1/2 hour high speed catamaran out to the Great Barrier Reef 20 years ago and I was astonished that about 80% of the passengers got Sea Sick and puked there guts out multiple times.
Me... I was lucky, My dad loved boating and loved the ocean
That's funny because certain games with poor FoV or mouse smoothing cause me nausea, yet being on small or large boats in the ocean, bay or river do not make me sick; in fact I find it relaxing.
so here is the thing. If in a game you are flying and doing loops and all matters of craziness trying to land in a stunt formation good immersion to that experience SHOULD make you sick unless you are used to it.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Vomit Reality is going to one of the funniest things to happen in retail technology when it hits mainstream. I just had a hilarious conversation with some folks at the local game shop.
Any company betting the farm on it right now and planning on playing catch-me-if-you-can with the public fallout deserves all the misfortune and recourse.
Interesting that you call it that, because although I experienced some odd inner-ear buzzing during my first experience, and some dizzyness on the more adventurous rides, there was nothing that made me feel like I had to stop and take off the set due to nausea nor did I get nauseous in the slightest. Further, this effect seemed to diminish the more I used VR; it is possible to become acclimated, and this happened relatively quickly for me.
As for the "folks at the local game shop" I'm sure they were looking for something to talk about at the end of the day's shift, if you catch my drift. The story as presented depends a lot on setting, social cues, and... well, intent.
Well the actual conversation was more a saleswoman stumbling into some floor display, dumping the headset, then running to the back with her hand over her mouth (I'm assuming this all wasn't in awe of the graphic fidelity). I guess it was her first encounter as well, because why do that again right?
Either way this isn't the first time I've heard about or saw this. and at NAB this year one of floor reps for HTC kept it 100 about the readiness of VR as a whole and the inner ear problem.
I'm sure there's a bunch of people who will wear the headsets like champs but way too many can't in their current state. That's why all these folks talk around the subject or act subjectively dumb when questioned about it.
These companies are pushing these to market regardless of all this and THAT's where the ensuing hilarity will happen.
so the question is
are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
The question is what is the sweet spot of people NOT getting ill from disorientation,....
the answer to that question is in my obveraation. I will re-type it but ask you how does my obversation not suggest an answer to that question.
...so the question is are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
the same could be said about demos set up for very short tests on games specifically meant to be as comfortable as possible - which is misleading to what most people would experience on the games they would be playing at home.
At Best Buy you can go check out each system, I'd suggest you do so. Even at short intervals of less than 5 minutes people are getting sick. I witnessed it first hand as well. Extrapolate that with taking a set home after testing it for 5 minutes and expanding on that time frame and gameplay.
Take into consideration that the guiness book of world records holder for longest time in VR, despite disorientation stayed in VR for many many hours and promptly threw up upon removing it.
Think about people like me that never experienced sickness in the store with any of the VR systems, yet after playing for several hours I have experienced it bad enough to put the set down for several days.
There are probably lots of people that won't ever get sick in VR, and many that won't be using it for games that are usually the culprit.
Then there are some that will always get sick in VR no matter what they try.. probably a lot more people than those that get sick from watching 3D movies.
I went on a 3 1/2 hour high speed catamaran out to the Great Barrier Reef 20 years ago and I was astonished that about 80% of the passengers got Sea Sick and puked there guts out multiple times.
Me... I was lucky, My dad loved boating and loved the ocean
That's funny because certain games with poor FoV or mouse smoothing cause me nausea, yet being on small or large boats in the ocean, bay or river do not make me sick; in fact I find it relaxing.
so here is the thing. If in a game you are flying and doing loops and all matters of craziness trying to land in a stunt formation good immersion to that experience SHOULD make you sick unless you are used to it.
No. Roller Coasters don't make a lot of people sick when you're flying and doing loops and spinning all crazy.
It's mostly about the software and proper movement in game. Games that "should make you sick" "should" not exist.
Comments
Most important part in Bold below
I had to stop reading right there and I am going to ask you to stop responding to me. The point has been made many times that for VR to succeed it needs to have AAA titles and preferably AAA tiles that are exclusives.
HOWEVER:
1. VR is not PC, its console, its PC and its mobile.
2. What consoles prooved is that you DONT need thousands of hours of playtime in order for a technology to be successful.
3. success of PC gaming, console games or mobile gaming has never been dependent on them having more content then the other. That is a random horseshit theory pull out of the sky.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
anyway, I was a cynic before and I remained a cynic until I actually had the opportunity to try it myself. I won't expect anyone on the forums to be any different lol.
edit: i also want to add that you cannot compare smartphone VR with Vive/Rift. They are two different beasts. My friend had google cardboard for the longest time then tried the vive, it was like night and day. Its even hard to compare vive and occulus at the moment because until oculus touch ships, one is a room-scale/touch experience while the other is a seated/controller experience.
Most memorable games: AoC(Tryanny PvP), RIFT, GW, GW2, Ragnarok Online, Aion, FFXI, FFXIV, Secret World, League of Legends (Silver II rank)
GearVR is not the same as Google Cardboard; it's a significant step up, from what I'm told. Personally, I've been very satisfied with the 2016 GearVR (Wired did a nice article on it here); it has far exceeded my expectations. If Vive and Rift are again exponentially better, I can only imagine what the experience must be like.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
- Both are peripheral devices
- Both are targetted at gamers
- Both had no direct competitors / pre-existing technology on the market
- Both replaced a fundamental aspect of gaming (input / vision)
- Both released into similar market
I can't think of any other peripheral device for gamers that meets similar criteria to VR. I guess you could go back to earliest introductions of steering wheels, joysticks, consoles, etc but the gaming market back then was so vastly different to now that comparisons are useless.As to the rest, yeh, I've read all the threads on VR and am closely following the development of the technology to see if it takes off. I've used VR in a hotas setup and the benefit was apparent - the gameplay was improved via depth perception (being able to spot apexes) and as long as you didn't experience nausea, none of the other downsides of VR were apparent.
This is not the case for other genres. I agree that simply being "in" the world is great, hell, its awesome! But, that awesomeness is short lived, at some point I actually want to play the game and at that point I always end up having a worse gaming experience compared to non-VR equivalents.
Now, my VR experience is limited - I've only played one racing game (I was working in QA for the company, the VR experience was purely for internal testing and has never been released to the public) as well as job simulator on a friend's vive.
When reading about your experiences, as well as Seans, I can understand your excitement as you both seem to highly value to visual improvements and can ignore all the downsides. But, I can't. The massive problem of user input will forever get in the way of gameplay until they invent more sophisticated VR input devices. The only time that seems not to be true is for hotas setups or for games that are incredibly simple (like minecraft), but even then the two people I know personally who have tried VR minecraft said that after 30min-1hr they just gave up on VR and went back to playing normally. The movement was far too jarring (because of the disconnect between how you move and how you perceive it) and the VR version made it too difficult to get proper perspective on what they were building, making it harder. What they'd do instead is build something normally, then switch to VR for a short amount of time to admire and test, then go back to normal again to continue building / playing.
So, I do have experience, albeit limited, but I've also worked in the gaming industry, I still work in software development and have a good understanding of technology changes (I'm in charge of our development team and have to analyse emerging technology to see whether it is worth adopting).
I like VR for it's visual enhancements - being "in" a virtual environment is awesome
I dislike VR for it's gaming experience - outside of hotas, the gaming experience is worse
This is why I've labeled VR as a gimmick - it does not improve the gaming experience at all, only the visual. It gives with one hand and takes away with the other. Given the billions that have been invested into VR, combined with all the developers stating that gamers are their target market, I'm extremely sceptical about it taking off and doing well.
It obviously has a niche audience and I really want to try out the non-gaming VR experiences.
But, still waiting to see an example game that "proves" VR can overcome it's present limitations and actually improve the overall experience.
There is a misunderstanding that if user input CAN be different then it MUST be different in all cases and that is not the case.
We have been moving, running, jumping, shooting in video games now for more than 30 years. just because we CAN do those things differently in VR doesnt mean we HAVE to.
in order words, you dont have to physically move your legs in order to run in a VR experience. you do have to make some adjustments so that one doesnt get sick but in general people are playing FPS games in VR without physically moving their legs and not getting sick.
example:
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I suppose my thesis would be that, as a consumer, I tried to be educated and to have realistic expectations going in; GearVR managed to smash those expectations: it was much better than I had hoped for.
I wasn't ready to put down more than a thousand dollars on something I hadn't tried, and I didn't think I would get an accurate picture of the tech from a public demo. GearVR provided a nice entry point, as I was already in the market for a new phone. I never expected it to become the most fascinating way to use my new phone, but it has.
You could say I was already "sold" on the concept of VR before trying it, and once I did I was sold on the implementation. I am really looking forward to seeing where it goes from here.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
VR is much more than head sets. They've been using VR applications in their amusement parks for decades.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Right now with Gear VR you can get the majority of a rift experience. They also have peripherals to add room scale and touch controls to mobile and PC so you can have an even better experience if need be. You don't need to spend thousands on VR to get a comparable experience if you take 20 minutes to run a search.
That being said, there are people like you out there, that love VR, but you'll have to understand there's a good portion that will never be into it. I've had one gear VR system for over a couple months and another on the newest phone (which has a better resolution than both sets) for a few weeks and have tested it with VRidge and a handful of Rift Games. I don't play it everyday... and really, there isn't much that has me coming back once a week and keeps my interest for more than a few hours.
Now as you said, perhaps after the touch controls come out, or I decide to get room scale and touch controls and play Vive Games will it really change my perspective.... but... I've tried the Vive with the touch controllers, I don't find that I'll want to stand around doing that much more than I want to stay seated and play PSVR for long periods of time either. (I do have plans to buy PSVR this year).
But yeah,..so far it's like sitting around like the Nintendo R.O.B.
It's on developers to actually push content for it. Promising,..but still early. Hang tight!
Gotta start somewhere.
I have a feeling you'll say a % that is absolutely NOT an acceptable number. Before you do this, take into consideration the percentage of people who actually experience issues from regular PC games (google "FOV slider"). Those experiences are actually manageable by lighting and distance from displays in some cases, things that can't be corrected while having a display helmet slapped over your eyes.
Obviously you won't take any of the above into consideration because obvious is obvious. It still doesn't change the fact that these issues are attached to a $300-$700 investment.
If these hit mass market like how the book smart street dumb developers dream, there is great potential for all types of hilarity and brand embarrassment.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I don't know if there is any kind of correlation and I'm not going to try to make one.
I think this issue is much more a factor with the applications, rather than with the devices themselves.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Sea sickness (or motion sickness in general) is caused by conflicting signals in the body - your body is experiencing motion but your eyes aren't seeing it. This is why you're better off being outside on a ship, rather than in your room, or better off sitting in the front passenger seat of a car, rather than in the back.
The causes are reversed in VR - your eyes are seeing movement but your body isn't moving - but the effects are the same: your body enters a general state of alarm and makes you feel sick. Not sure if there has been any research into whether the reversal of inputs will change the frequency of motion sickness / nausea, I'm assuming it will occur less often as only one sense providing input for movement (sight) whereas sea sickness has multiple inputs for movement (balance, touch, stuff in your stomach moving about etc).
This is part of the reason why hotas setups for VR feel better - your body's movements match up with ingame actions - and why most games feel really jarring whilst moving about.
VR headsets can never solve this problem by themselves, but once devs invent some new input devices we'll be alright.
Like I have been saying for awhile now I predict VR will be bringing back the 'arcade' days of going to the mall for a gaming experience because what you can do with VR on a larger more pricy scale is very very good...aka The Void.
So I see public space VR ventures to be very much a part of the VR happenings of late.
A new 'VR Themepark' from Universal
http://www.digitaltrends.com/virtual-reality/universal-studios-vr-repository/
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
...so the question is are the majority of people in line getting sick or are we taking one person in a line of about 30 people and calling it evidence that its a majority and clearly not being biased about said position?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
At Best Buy you can go check out each system, I'd suggest you do so. Even at short intervals of less than 5 minutes people are getting sick. I witnessed it first hand as well. Extrapolate that with taking a set home after testing it for 5 minutes and expanding on that time frame and gameplay.
Take into consideration that the guiness book of world records holder for longest time in VR, despite disorientation stayed in VR for many many hours and promptly threw up upon removing it.
Think about people like me that never experienced sickness in the store with any of the VR systems, yet after playing for several hours I have experienced it bad enough to put the set down for several days.
There are probably lots of people that won't ever get sick in VR, and many that won't be using it for games that are usually the culprit.
Then there are some that will always get sick in VR no matter what they try.. probably a lot more people than those that get sick from watching 3D movies.
Me... I was lucky, My dad loved boating and loved the ocean
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
I wonder if you would have the same experience?
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
If in a game you are flying and doing loops and all matters of craziness trying to land in a stunt formation good immersion to that experience SHOULD make you sick unless you are used to it.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
It's mostly about the software and proper movement in game. Games that "should make you sick" "should" not exist.