@GDC - I just wanted to thank you for the amazing content you keep coming out with! I learnt sooooo much about the industry, and as I been slowly making an indi game in my spare time - It constantly gives me the respect,info,ideas and push to keep going.. Many Thanks..
Yeah, he kind of glossed over the fact that the reason low-price titles aren't making money is likely because they're (majorly) just people trying to cash-in on being in a market that needs content.
The problem is not content theory, or maybe I think. VR freezes over time and does not evolve. It is clear that for more marketing this will not improve.....We need an open platform for hardware and software and less marketing based "game experience" and "game content" ( ... which is just crap verbiage). Let's dream with VR-oriented operating systems, but sounds like fiction!
***** I don't know what you mean by the start of that, but I definitely agree with the VR OS. For years I've wanted many things, like a projector to have my screen on my ceiling, monitor mounts to move around my desktop where I wanted it, but they all fell short. Then I opened up Bigscreen and realized VR is what I've always wanted. My desktop should be easy to manipulate in 3d and be scaled to exactly the size I need. VR Does this for me, and while AR might work slightly better, VR is good enough for now. As tech improves, the two will merge anyway.
That's a given for any new market so I wouldn't necessarily say he "glossed over it". In fact, he stated that there's not much of a hardware install base available and it won't really be a big thing until VR 3.0 (aka "Mobile VR") hits it's stride.
I'm sure you see a different VR. I accept that you believe in the power of the free market, but it is not different from the 90s Boom, perhaps they did not have the same faith that you have in the modern VR. This is not a VR for everyone, it is for few people. While you see the VR 2.0 I already saw the VR 3.0, and this happened and already was burned in advance. Thank you!
Getting really dizzy was something I really wasn't expecting. One of the main things that isn't really talked about in VR is the fact that you will get dizzy and will take time to adapt and build up your tolerance. I hope in future games they can work on minimizing this side effect.
"isn't talked about" basically everyone that talks about developing for VR talks about nausea as if it's something that happens to everyone. It's legitimately talked about too much as the people affected are usually affected by everything that doesn't actively limit immersion. There's a reason so many games have annoying teleport functionality or awkward arm-waving functions instead of normal joystick movement.
It took me 30 minutes to get used to it. After that i could play 3 hours straight before my eyes needed a break. You should take breaks more often than that anyway. Nausea happens because many developers fail to implement a believable momentum system in the game or application. With realistic movement speeds you're fine with just a little bit of practice.
I've never had dizziness or nausea in VR, so not everyone gets it. I've even played 8 hours of DCS world with little 5-10 minute breaks every hour or two
That's what makes it tough, though. It really varies person to person. I've never gotten motion sick from even intense VR stuff, but I have friends that can barely handle mild VR experiences. Devs are getting a lot better about avoiding things that make a larger percentage of people sick, though.
Sonce he's only using Steam stats, he's missing a lot of data for direct sales and sales from the Oculus store. That's pretty skewed. Consider Elite Dangerous, a game which has many VR players and considered by many to have the deepest/most immersive experience in VR. But it's actually not a VR only title, sells many copies directly from it's own store, and from the Oculus' store. It's not reflected in his sales stats at all.
Very disingenuous misquotes @3.15 about 50 to 100 million units - Mark Zuckerberg continued next saying that it would take "a few cycles of the device to get there" - www.pcgamer.com/facebook-oculus-rift-will-need-to-sell-50-100-million-units-to-be-meaningful/ So, then matching that to Iribe's quote for the first device cycle lifetime quote is wrong. It's a bit more believable to consider the VR unit sales by gen. 3 or 4 reaching the 50~100 million.
@GDC - I just wanted to thank you for the amazing content you keep coming out with! I learnt sooooo much about the industry, and as I been slowly making an indi game in my spare time - It constantly gives me the respect,info,ideas and push to keep going..
Many Thanks..
Modern VR is really Marketing Vaporware!! and thank you for video!! ;)
Yeah, he kind of glossed over the fact that the reason low-price titles aren't making money is likely because they're (majorly) just people trying to cash-in on being in a market that needs content.
The problem is not content theory, or maybe I think. VR freezes over time and does not evolve. It is clear that for more marketing this will not improve.....We need an open platform for hardware and software and less marketing based "game experience" and "game content" ( ... which is just crap verbiage). Let's dream with VR-oriented operating systems, but sounds like fiction!
*****
I don't know what you mean by the start of that, but I definitely agree with the VR OS. For years I've wanted many things, like a projector to have my screen on my ceiling, monitor mounts to move around my desktop where I wanted it, but they all fell short. Then I opened up Bigscreen and realized VR is what I've always wanted. My desktop should be easy to manipulate in 3d and be scaled to exactly the size I need. VR Does this for me, and while AR might work slightly better, VR is good enough for now. As tech improves, the two will merge anyway.
That's a given for any new market so I wouldn't necessarily say he "glossed over it". In fact, he stated that there's not much of a hardware install base available and it won't really be a big thing until VR 3.0 (aka "Mobile VR") hits it's stride.
I'm sure you see a different VR. I accept that you believe in the power of the free market, but it is not different from the 90s Boom, perhaps they did not have the same faith that you have in the modern VR. This is not a VR for everyone, it is for few people. While you see the VR 2.0 I already saw the VR 3.0, and this happened and already was burned in advance. Thank you!
Getting really dizzy was something I really wasn't expecting. One of the main things that isn't really talked about in VR is the fact that you will get dizzy and will take time to adapt and build up your tolerance. I hope in future games they can work on minimizing this side effect.
there's lots
look up "VR motion sickness", that's why there's teleporting in most vive games
"isn't talked about"
basically everyone that talks about developing for VR talks about nausea as if it's something that happens to everyone. It's legitimately talked about too much as the people affected are usually affected by everything that doesn't actively limit immersion. There's a reason so many games have annoying teleport functionality or awkward arm-waving functions instead of normal joystick movement.
It took me 30 minutes to get used to it. After that i could play 3 hours straight before my eyes needed a break. You should take breaks more often than that anyway.
Nausea happens because many developers fail to implement a believable momentum system in the game or application. With realistic movement speeds you're fine with just a little bit of practice.
I've never had dizziness or nausea in VR, so not everyone gets it. I've even played 8 hours of DCS world with little 5-10 minute breaks every hour or two
That's what makes it tough, though. It really varies person to person. I've never gotten motion sick from even intense VR stuff, but I have friends that can barely handle mild VR experiences. Devs are getting a lot better about avoiding things that make a larger percentage of people sick, though.
What was the game that got the worst ratings on the chart but was used more than anything outside of Virtual Desktop?
Sonce he's only using Steam stats, he's missing a lot of data for direct sales and sales from the Oculus store. That's pretty skewed. Consider Elite Dangerous, a game which has many VR players and considered by many to have the deepest/most immersive experience in VR. But it's actually not a VR only title, sells many copies directly from it's own store, and from the Oculus' store. It's not reflected in his sales stats at all.
I put hundreds of hours in Non-steam PC games, so I don't count for some of those statistics.
Very disingenuous misquotes @3.15 about 50 to 100 million units - Mark Zuckerberg continued next saying that it would take "a few cycles of the device to get there" - www.pcgamer.com/facebook-oculus-rift-will-need-to-sell-50-100-million-units-to-be-meaningful/
So, then matching that to Iribe's quote for the first device cycle lifetime quote is wrong. It's a bit more believable to consider the VR unit sales by gen. 3 or 4 reaching the 50~100 million.
Cash me ousside, howbow dah