Why not both? Different strokes for different folks. I personally want an extremely immersive experience without needing a bunch of space. My desire for VR is having a really good headset. I spend about 5-10 hours in the gym every week and row competitively. I weigh 160 lbs at 5'10", I'm in very good shape. For me, games are not exercise, sports are exercise. With that said, more physically demanding games are good too. My sister's boyfriend for example does use VR as exercise.
From the moment I understood the weakness of my flesh, it disgusted me. I craved the strength and certainty of steel. I aspired to the purity of the Blessed Machine. Your kind cling to your flesh, as though it will not decay and fail you. One day the crude biomass you call the temple will wither, and you will beg my kind to save you. But I am already saved, for the Machine is immortal… Even in death I serve the Omnissiah. Joking aside, I agree on almost all parts.
My comment dissappeared?!?? Oh well.. I was saying I agree with you mostly.. BUT.. I'm 46 I do 60-80 hours of physical work in the week (I work in events, I build events.. so rigging lights.. Big events in big venues I have my 10000 steps before coffee.... I sometimes walk 20-ish km a day... I climb I rig stuff... This does mean, that if I get home and I've got time to do some gaming, which isn't very often.. I don't necessarily feel like crouching IRL to crouch in game.. I've usually done enough of that in the course of the week... I think devs should leave us a choice... If you want to be physical when gaming.. you should be able to.. If you don't you shouldn't have to..
I can see them all, no worries. I get where you're coming from but in that scenario where both passive and active styles have to be equally accounted and designed for, it holds back the potential for innovations and more interesting ways to use the tech. By its nature the passive design has to not allow other options to exceed it, limiting the entire package, especially if there are multiplayer elements. Personally, I think we've become a 'little' entitled at the behest of creativity, and need to review our attitudes and not expect the medium to pander and adjust to all our circumstances, it's impossible and only results in dilution and stagnation for the big picture. We should instead be adjusting ourselves to the rules of the world we're stepping into, so with VR, a 1:1 motion tracking interface, we should expect to have to be physical. We understand this with any other activity or product and will naturally acquiesce to its rules, yet for media entertainment, particularly gaming, we oddly expect the design to bend over backwards to accommodate us, no matter the sacrifices made to do so. I feel this collective attitude is hamstringing the creativity of devs. Yes, you may be a touch too tired or stiff because you've worked hard and sometimes don't have the energy to participate, it happens to all of us. So instead we can engage in a non-physical game, there are plenty, or just rest this time. And be happy for and cheer on those others who get to enjoy the interesting physical innovative experience in our place. We shouldn't be holding them back just because we're tired. EDIT: And to clarify, I'm talking of VR more commonly having regular light movement as a minimum (arms needing to swing/sway to move faster etc) which I personally wouldn't class as exercise. I don't mean jumping around or jogging on the spot regularly.
@@MrVRVoice I can see them now as well.. are you screening comments? Also I'm sorry I got a bit frustrated.. I typed a comment pressed post and it disappeared for me, and again.. So sorry for spamming. In multiplayer it shouldn't matter to you how other people crouch/jump (really that is what I want VR to be too)... It's the forcing everyone to get physical, I need a physical support to crouch IRL.. So that means I would need a chair in my playspace (you can see how that would be a problem right?). Just in that department that annoys me... While it doesn't have to be.. The possibilities are there. and not getting in the way of innovation at all.. Swinging hands for running is no problem, climbing ladders and walls, no problem with it actually being climbing.. It's just my knees are already worn out.. And if every game would force me to physically crouch.. It wouldn't be long before I couldn't play VR at all anymore... I don't think that is true, passive design can be a menu choice... and not get in the way of active design at all.. I don't mind standing I don't mind turning, I don't mind physically bashing enemies.. I expect that.. That's also why I said "I agree with you mostly" I also like actually doing stuff in VR vs button mashing.. That's my gripe with AAA ports like Hitman (It uses so many buttons it's actually immersion breaking.. Walk up to a ladder, ladder says to you press A to climb ladder.. That needs to stop).. That I agree with.. Climb a ladder by climbing a ladder, not by pushing A.. Bash someone's head by actually bashing someone's head and not press trigger (I want that too from VR gaming)... but after a day of crawling under stages climbing rigs my knees are already in pain etc (And this is pretty much every day for 7 days a week)... I don't need my gaming pushing it over the edge.. But if you get older and your knees hurt from being overused all day... And you don't have a button to crouch that kinda makes shooters a lot more difficult to be competitive in because of my age and work... It shouldn't matter to the other players how I go to crouch... So in that case both option should be there... I guess all I'm saying is "Yes, you may be a touch too tired or stiff because you've worked hard and sometimes don't have the energy to participate, it happens to all of us. So instead we can engage in a non-physical game, there are plenty, or just rest this time." (Yes if you make work weeks like I do that would mean I couldn't game the genre I like at all...) Reply to EDIT: That's what I like VR to be as well.. That's why I said, "I agree with you mostly" Just crouching should be an exception, a choice.. Wouldn't hurt anyone wouldn't stifle innovation.. And would make it possible for me to play after a long day of work" Kinda what Ghost of tabor already has.. If you calibrate seated you have a crouch button.. If you calibrate standing you don't... It's really that simple... I do think that things you actually do with your hands IRL should be done with your hands in VR.. But I do agree with you that Skyrim VR or Hitman VR are not the direction we want to be moving in.... So I don't disagree with you, I just think some exceptions should be made..
I want the immirsion of into the radius, the vehicles of vtol vr, the quality of half life alyx, the tangability of h3vr and boneworks (not bonelab) and the physicality of tea for god (as an option).
I think what vr is missing the most is immersive high fidelity software. My dream game would have Graphics like half life alex, physics like boneworks and gameplay like gta or red dead (preferably with a multiplayer mode on the side and story missions as the priority). The only game to ever get somewhat close is Pc into the radius but even then, the graphics are only ok, and the story was alright. you can deff tell the game was made in unity.
Some of my best VR experiences were playing with a gamepad. Astro Bot, Red dead redemption 2, GTA 5.. it was/is just amazing to feel being in those worlds.
Haven't watched video yet but im gonna type my thoughts up before hand. The most important thing for me in vr is interactions. I think its the single most important thing in immersion and fun. I think a lot of vr games fail this horribly. For instance most vr shooters do the bare minimum for interaction. They have you reload your gun using your hands and aim as you would in real life. But you cant flip a table over and take cover behind it, you can't crack open a door a little and shoot through the wood to get that guy camping behind it, and you cant climb on top of houses or huts in a warzone to snipe. They do the bare minimum of having the weapons be as interactive as they would be in real life and nothing more. On the other hand ive had experiences that focus on interaction but not in the way that I would notice. An example is half life alyx. I honestly dont like that game. The interaction with the world is amazing but its focused mainly on animations like throwing a soda at a cat or poking an npc and having them move. Which is a good thing. But for the smaller things id think of doing i often got disappointed. Some examples are not being able open a match box and light a match, not being able to open breifcases, and worst of all not being able to melee any enemies. When i played boneworks and was able to do practically anything I could think off outside of a few things (like opening beers and crushing soda cans) I had a much better time with the game and felt 1000x more immersed. Ive talked to a few people about what they think about the two and it seems to be split between half life alyx's interaction and boneworks. I think that since people differ so much on what they prefer to be interactive vr developers need to account for all the different ways the player will think to interact with the world and i just dont think many do. There are gems like half life alyx and boneworks that account for at least their version of interact ability but plenty more of those that dont focus on it at all. To put it simple i think vr games can get a million times better overnight if developers started to recognize that vr players want to be able to open a god damn book! Even the most interactive games in vr dont let you do that! Half life alyx would be a lot better if they accounted for the smaller stuff. Like really small stuff like opening that match box. And boneworks couldve been better if they accounted for the Bigger stuff like interactive animation like half life alyx has.
I'll be honest, I can be pretty easy to please. As long as it's an actual game and it works, I'll likely be satisfied and don't need extreme levels of interactivity. Like the Serious Sam vr port (for the most part. times where weapon selection doesn't work irritate me). The biggest draw for me is merely being in the space. I just find it awesome being within the game worlds that I'm playing, ESPECIALLY if its a game I've played on a flatscreen and loved. Like the vr mods for doom 3 or Half-Life 2. I grew up with those games and actually being in them and seeing the places and enemies right in front of me is jawdropping, and that feeling comes back everytime I play a flat game I love in vr. However, to be perfectly honest, the vr games I love the most and play and get hooked on are games that take advantage of the medium. Into the radius, Tales of Glory 1 and Hard Bullet are absolute favourites of mine to play in vr. The best way to describe this is that interactivity that I said I don't need earlier, but I most certainly appreciate it. It manages to make mundane actions such as opening drawers, climbing or reloading more exciting. It brings me into the game world more than ever, and act like I was there instead of just enjoying the perspective of being in it. Circumstances such as in ITR, having to be crouched real low and having difficulty aiming my bulky ak between the openings of a destroyed car so I could return fire, struggling to aim down the sights since I'm forced to hold it sideways and am panicing at being unable to fight against the approaching enemies. Even fumbling my reload due to that panic where I drop a full magazine, pick up the empty, and become dumbfounded as to why my clean rifle won't fire. Or in Tales of Glory participating in a large 50 v 50 battle, and a large number of enemy knights surround me and close in on me to the point where I can't swing my two-handed weapon properly, so I headbutt one and use that opening to get past them to effectively use my weapon again. Hard Bullet allows me to pretend I'm either a John Woo protagonist or John Wick due to it having multiple reload styles, and with the regular reload style, I had to fight a lot like Wick would fight in the movies. My favourite moment was after stabbing an enemy with a pencil, another came around the corner so I grabbed his rifle and smacked him in the face then shot his comrades. Couldn't shoot him because the gun was empty, so after quickly reloading it, I smacked him back down and finished him off with a headshot. Felt so fucking awesome to pull off. If that game wasn't just a sandbox, I'm certain it would be extremely popular. Hope this describes what I like in vr. And maybe describes what I want, cause there are a lot of game experiences that I think could be transferred to vr very well with this interactivity but not done, or not done well
When I play VR games, I play them to try and immerse myself in the setting and mechanics of the game. In many cases, the "fidelity" of the game is really almost a secondary priority: If the game is "immersive", I will find excuses to play it. It's hard to describe this sentiment without examples so humor me for a moment: When I play Blade & Sorcery VR, I do so knowing the AI is relatively janky, attacks a little too quickly or frequently, or will frequently run directly into my weapons while trying to catch up; I do so knowing the game has a certain level of jank either induced by third party modifications or simply my own sheer bad luck, in which enemies go flying at complete random, or wherein my FPS drops. However, there are many golden moments: Duelling fencers and sabreurs, or swordsmen and clashing blade-on-blade multiple times as both my enemy and I try to bypass the other's guard. Of course, at its core, I don't *need* to do any of this, but the way the weapons are virtually weighed down, and the way enemies hold their blades to guard against your strikes, and the sound and visual effects that occur as a result of these clashes tickle a certain part in my brain that encourages me to continue in this virtual play-fight against the AI. Naturally, there are downsides to this: The modified game's FPS drops only worsen with certain mods or scenarios -- while fighting a jedi/sith with a lightsaber using a certain mod is definitely satisfying, seeing the sparks from a lightsaber clash remain simply takes me out of it. That's not the game's fault, of course, but it is what it is. In virtually every case, I blame and praise the mods to B&S; without the game, however, the mods would simply not exist. A similar thing occurs when I play a game like Pavlov VR: An ever-stagnating peak casual shooter with just enough gunplay mechanics sprinkled in to give me a reason to blindfire around corners with my sidearm -- which, in most other situations, I simply forget about. The way Pavlov adjusts your avatar's fingers to grip a bolt, hold a magazine, or hold the grip is something that is, believe it or not, kind of rare in games that actually do support multi-hand weaponry. Even some games that have poses -- say, Into the Radius -- don't support them for the vast majority of secondary actions; racking a bolt, pulling the charging handle, and so on. The hand (as far as I recall; it's been about two years) simply hovers at the bolt as you operate it. This sort of "hand-interactivity", for lack of a better term, is a trend I found replicated much more in the funded, sponsored, highly polished "experiences" you find on the Meta store. Think Vader: Immortal, Robo Recall (ancient as it is), and so on. Alas, I've long since moved on from the Oculus Rift, and have used a Valve Index since. A tradeoff for the finger-tracking that made games like Boneworks and Bonelab enjoyable for about 32 hours each, and Half-Life: Alyx a true blast to play, is that the vast majority of other VR games on the Steam store have simply not lived up to the scrutiny I, as a player, am seeking. B&S is not the best at this either, mind: It simply does everything else really well. A litany of micro-disappointments in other games make them almost completely unenjoyable for me. Skyrim VR is a fun RPG when you iron away the countless fundamental design problems... with mods. Boneworks and Bonelab are enjoyable sandbox games if you can bear the mildly annoying pitch-shift between each gunshot, no doubt intended to make the weapons have variety, but ultimately just making me feel like I'm firing a toy gun -- and that's not counting the lack of replayability, esoteric modding support (I'm seriously disappointed in the custom maps people have made for 'lab, but I think I would sooner put the blame on the modding tools), and motion sickness-inducing character locomotion. Of course, the hand dynamics and physics interactivity are wonderful in SL0's games, but that's practically the best parts thereof. Another problem I find is VR multiplayer games. Pavlov and Contractors are big games, yes, but what about VAIL? Davigo? Iron Rebellion? 38, 2, and 1 player, respectively, at the time of writing, with peaks of 96 (VAIL, Respectable); 22 (Davigo, counting the VR players only); and 5 (Iron Rebellion) in the last 24 hours. Every time someone makes a multiplayer-only VR game, they're making a niche game for a niche community within a niche community. In conclusion, I think I'm one of the more pedantic VR players. Hell, I'd probably play Skyrim VR much more if I didn't feel unusually suspicious about it possibly overheating my system for no reason... and if streaming it on Discord wasn't completely and utterly stupid. Various games deserve an honorable mention: TWD Saints & Sinners is a good and enjoyable game that I do not find the urge to play for some reason (I may have a distaste for scavenging zombie games; the stamina bar is mildly bothersome). H3VR is a game I frequently play again and again, but only to indulge my obsession with weapon details. Half-Life: Alyx is a game I enjoy playing, even if it is a game designed for the greater VR player audience (and is, in turn, relatively "simplified" with regards to weaponry and player interactivity).
It seems to me the major issue with VR right now is the lack of money in PCVR. Alyx shows what's possible, but the market shows what we get. We get shallow, shitty games, with low difficulty, low production value, etc. The money just isn't there. These dev teams are often like 1, or 2 people large and they're making games that are technically MORE challenging to build correctly than KB / Mouse games. I'm not trying to give an excuse to all the shitty games out there but it does honestly seem like the lack of money in VR has a big part to play in it.
I have more than 9k hours in SteamVR and basically all of it was spent in social vr. All I want out of VR is better hardware, basically all my software needs are met.
Well said, my friend. I stream and play a lot of VR and your ideas are very similar to mine. I hope developers continue to push new technology and try various ways of playing.
I agree completely with your point about movement. When I play games like grimlord or blade and sorcery I can swing hard punch hard but it doesn’t feel as hard as I’m punching or swinging. I have real swords and even spears and bows and they don’t have the same punch in games that they do in real life. It’s either too soft or godly strong. I know how fast I can swing or stab something and I know how much impact it’ll leave but none of these games just feel accurate. I want to move more and have my real inputs rewarded rather than dumbed down or again have them be over the top strength wise. I do apologize for the wording used and how my sentences don’t flow quite right but I am quite tired and can’t be bothered to fix it. In all though VR games need to try more to become VR games instead of normal games but you’re standing in them
when i hop in a vr game, its because i want to actually do something physical, as the character i am playing as does. when we have hand holdy mechanics like objects meant for throwing being given a boost in velocity upon leaving the hand, we take a tiny, tiny step backwards that will eventually add up and snowball us back to flatscreen mechanics. Things like hud and small presses of buttons on controllers are lazy and add to that snowball, not to mention inhibit the developer's ability since now that they put something that could've been a motion control is now just a button, it takes up a button on an already (most likely by design) limited controller. We need more motion controls, we need gun interactions to be much less lenient, we need things we do to be unique motion controls. Stop it with the point and click menus, stop it with the extreme leniency, stop it with buttons. Make me do the action, otherwise why am i playing vr in the first place?
Can't agree more, I feel like VR can be used to personally enhance the body, while at the same time, maintaining the fun of video games as a interactive medium would be the ultimate form of entertainment. But that being said, have you been able to check out Broken Edge? I've been intrigued by it's concept, having to follow stances and outwit your opponent, in few decisive strikes.
id say the vr space is having 2d standards of games/ game making and money making, think rushed good looking puddles passed off as games to get you to open your wallets, vr hasn't had it real golden age yet and until publishers and devs figure that out they will do nothing but kill it through a slow battle of attrition
3:28. Hopefully as the vergence-accommodation conflict gets resolved by hardware advancements games will be more comfortable putting menu options in range of the player to be directly manipulated. As VR headsets are now it is more comfortable reading text that's greater than arms length away. kinda sucks.
As someone with an acute eye for detail, games which boast 'realism' in their primary features tend to be the most immersion-breaking. What I want from VR is more titles like Compound or Rumble, where the focus is instead on providing the player with a *game*, rather than a glorified tech demo. I'd much prefer a cartoonish game with cartoonish mechanics than yet another Pavlov-adjacent VR shooter. In other words, VR is the perfect outlet for escapism, but escapism doesn't work if you're just escaping to something easily achievable in the real world. As an aside, I was introduced to this channel by your review of Compound, and greatly appreciate the voice (both literal and figurative) you give to those of us who can't be satisfied by status-quo games. Keep making videos, and I'll keep watching, Mr. VR.
Id reslly like a real melee vr game eith ai smarter then a Minecraft pig at bare minimum. A reason ingsme to do more physically damanding moves. Youre correft id like to move more snd keep way more in shape, give me something lke dsrk souls vr where i gotta be ready at every moment
As someone who's gotten into VR recently due to a intro to VR class in my colleges game design degree, heres my two cents. The big thing VR needs imo even more so then the interaction (although I agree that's important) is difficulty. For me a lot of VR games are way too easy, and it makes them feel dull. This even applies to big PCVR titles like Boneworks (maybe HLA is an exception, but I still need to play the previous games). I'm not saying that I want every game to be Dark Souls or Getting Over It, but I need some form of difficulty the majority of the time. And I do think there are VR games that manage to have a good mix of difficulty and player movement imo. A couple of examples are Cosmodread (the natural difficulty of rougelites, mixed in to the trembling of your body in fear when trying to aim a weapon), A Rouge Escape (the rougelite aspects again because I'm addicted to these kinds of games, mixed in with using your body to reach around and manage the hulking behemoth your piloting) , and Broken Edge (the mix of mastering your preferred class and trying to plan the other players physical movements). On a side note, one other benifit that would come from using interactable menus instead of laser pointers is that I would actally be able to see the menus without nearly bumping into my wall.
I do to some extend agree with you.. BUT... I'm 46 I do physical work 60-80 hours a week... I would like devs to give us a choice if we want to crouch IRL or with a button in VR... After a 70 ish hour work week with lots of walking and carrying stuff (I work in events... I build events...) I get my exercise at work pretty much. I don't really feel like exercising in my free time while playing to relax a bit..
The problem for me is I don't want to sweat with an HMD on my face, so I wouldn't want to do any more physical movement than standing VR games currently allow. If the HMD was more like sunglasses, I'm sure I'd be fine with more physical movement.
That’s fair, though my meaning isn’t having to engage in aerobic manoeuvres normally, just regular light rhythmic movement (arms needing to swing or sway a little with movement etc). HMD’s becoming smaller and lighter is an eventuality so naturally (hopefully) one thing will enable the other.
I expect options. I understand both the want for physical interaction, and those who are fine with just playing seated with a controller in hand. I myself play seated (sciatica), but I do want 6DOF motion controls, Proper environmental collision (I hate when my hands go right through the geometry), Physics based interactions, and definitely not being limited to a controller, or any one type of setup.
I'm not a fan of Ready Player One Style "SUITING UP". The idea of dressing up in haptic suits, Gloves, goofy shoes and standing in a tread mill, connecting yourself to a catheter so you can poop in VR, just sounds like way too much effort for playing videogames. I say keep that for special outings at an amusement park or arcade or VR/AR sporting event. I'm also not a competitive gamer, I game to relax, or let off steam (man stuff like Blade and Sorcery is good for that), so the whole "SUITING UP" thing, while cool, just isn't realistic or affordable for most people, including myself. Yes the audience is there. Yes it and all options regarding mobility should be considered. Just remember not everyone is as able bodied as you are, and having inclusive options, like smooth turning, a crouch button, and height adjustments should be imperative. OPTIONS! OPTIONS! OPTIONS! I want an "Active Mode", a "Seated Mode", and a "Control Pad Mode", but mostly I just want better games with better interactions.
Escapist entertainment. To be immersed in interesting places and situations. VVR. The Under Presents. Tales from soda island. Walkabout mini golf. tours and documentaries.
For FPS games, I would prefer if guns DO NOT sound like BB guns and actually sound punchy and powerful, have satisfying, immersive reloads with great sounds, and have enemies victim to a gun, like a sniper rifle, actually one shot an enemy in the HEAD and in the body rather in a game like COD, a full magazine of M82 rounds, point-blank, at an enemy’s head, just makes it a little dazed.
I feel like the FPS games quantity isnt as big as the the narrative driven games that are just basic vr functions jumbled together. Then you look at the pool of FPS games and the quality is skewed towards arena/wave shooter. My headset is collecting dust, I haven't played a game in 9months.
@@shinobusensui9395 To be honest, I would prefer a dedicated VR FPS game with a solid, memorable campaign, solid multiplayer, have free cosmetics(?), etc. The guns themselves should include all the things I had listed on my comment.
@@kevinle1083 I don't really care much for the online game. I have had bad experiences since counter strike and half life deathmatch on the PC. If I had enough personal friends that had VR I would but I only have 1 friend who has my old headset
My god, you are like the only person I can find saying this. When I first tried the Wii's motion controls, I immediately knew the future I wanted for gaming. I play games cause I want to experience those worlds. Physically moving in those worlds is what Ive always desired so I despise how much people seem to be against it. This is why I kind of dislike the current prevalence of Flat to Vr games. The tech is awesome yes and its great to get actual full-fledged games in vr, but these games offer no virtual interaction and only frustrate me.
I like good games. Having great interactions and physics are nice bonus, but not needed to have good games - indeed many great games I've played in VR have barely any interaction or physics, inclusive native games and ports...
My main problem and the one people rarely seem to talk about is aesthetics. Just in this video you're comparing DMC5 to GrimLord. It jumps out at you right away, one has great visual design and great music and at least attempts to do a compelling story, the other looks like an asset swap. GrimLord is trying to imitate Dark Souls, would DS ever have bosses as generic as that? I understand the budget limitations but that's no reason to have everything in your world look as generic as possible. Don't have money for an art team, use an AI generator, it will produce more original designs than the ones we see in these indie games. Small budget shouldn't be a reason for bad art direction in this day and age. And it's absurd to hear flat gamers say they won't play VR until it's a full dive experience, as they're playing a flat game that's even less immersive. Why is a flat game compelling enough for them with those ridiculous expectations of perfect immersion? Because flat games offer something VR games don't, a world you actually want to be in, even if it's not very immersive. They would rather be slightly immersed in Dark Souls than fully immersed in GrimLord and that's completely understandable. When they say they want full dive what they mean is these generic worlds won't be worth visiting until full dive. Give them a world they actually like and they'll want to visit it even it's just via letters on a page of a book.
I agree. And it's not just art direction. Something I don't see people using is displacement or height maps. Being able to see depth is one of VR's greatest features, yet whenever I look at VR games, they're all using flat textures.
@@ethyr mainly cause those tricks dont look nearly as convincing when you can see the actual depth since these maps dont alter the depth just how light reacts to it so its much more of a trick than actual depth
Point of standing still or sit, or none fit vr game IS! Most are vr players are nerds, not fit, fat, don´t have space and so on. Why create a 5 million dollar game that one i fit for? or have the space for? This video are all out and sailing. First we just need games for the masses so we can show vr are ready. Dev teams just need to come out with polished games. But!! WHEN THEY CAN´T DO A NORMAL AAA GAME POLISHED HOW SHOULD THEY MAKE VR GAMES!! xD
@@VRnamek I can see them now again, they just disappeared on my when I pushed reply.. I do not agree... That that's what flat screen games are for... I can't do flatscreen anymore not in shooters not in simulation... I just don't want to physically crouch after a long day of physically crouching..
if you dont want to be limited then go get a life. oh wait, your self proclaimed introvert and what not, so you have every excuse to not live a life. excuse me.
lol klean tries some 3rd party experience and generalizes all of VR saying it'll be good when you need to be fit to be good even tho that's already how it is
No it’s not. The vast, VAST, majority of VR games are designed with concessions and crutches that allow you to successfully play while sitting, standing, laying stone still with a tiny bit of arm or wrist movement.
@@MrVRVoice I mean, most gun games that's true. Since gun games are focused around the .. well, gun, it makes sense that it could be played while stagnant. Now, i'm not a supporter of vCrouch or anything, but until we have omni treadmills more normalized and consumer-friendly, it's likely going to be the norm for a bit. However, there are a lot of games (particularly in the mideval/sword fighting genre) that require a lot of movement. Beat Saber, one of the most popular VR games of all time, is bordering on workout level. Broken Edge. Blade and Sorcery. The list goes on ! Just need a different genre. I see the argument though. Games like Breachers have added more and more abstractions where they arent needed. Crouch buttons, 1 button reloads, etc.
@@MrVRVoice eh I still think it's a generalization because even if there are lots of games like you describe I can also name a ton of PvP games (rec room/pavlov/contractors) where people who actually duck/dodge/juke in their playspace preform better than those standing stiff like a scarecrow. I can't tell you the number of times I've killed someone 1 on 1 because I just decided to drop to the floor or bend so they miss. Or physically dash to the side, duck behind a pillar etc. Someone who's not fit won't be able to play beat saber, kayak vr mirage, sprint vector nearly as long, as fast, or as well as players who are fit. Even something like rumble, creed, space pirate trainer or any fps is comparatively more effort required than flat gaming. All of which I think falls under the notion of athletic "to an extent"- like you don't have to be a true athlete training 40hrs a week but I can't play kayak vr mirage competitively (shooting for top 5 world wide) without tapping out after 30mins. Yeah there are a lot of games that make concessions or are walking simulators or whatever but it's not like games that require athletic endurance/skill don't exist. That being said I'd love for more of it but I just felt it was a weak follow-up argument. Like he was on the right track with the realism aspect (I think he mainly wants the fidelity of RP1) but doesn't realize the other part of what he wanted out of VR (that games actually make you have to be athletic to an extent) does exist. The only thing I can think to illustrate what I mean is this guy who said that diablo V was trash because it's psudeo mmo and he doesnt want players running around killing his stuff spamming him, and while not liking the pseudo mmo aspect is valid for many reasons, anyone whose actually played it knows its a ghost town because theres no general chat for the most part, no way to easily party with ppl, people running by might as well be bots because they rarely interact with you in any meaningful way. Basically he did what klean did, had a solid argument but used the wrong logic to go about it (IMO ofc)
Productivity, that's the only way for it to go. For entertainments sake, sure, a few things, but to achieve what people want is really only possible in a theme park setting. A full Desktop VR OS is the future for this tech. Integration is the only realistic route for it to go. The sooner people let go of their pipe dreams, the better.
are games really a part of vr's future in a substantial and meaningful way? i think the signs point to probably not, whilst i believe gaming is an important part of our culture and will probably continue to evolve alongside our technology i believe that perhaps there is too much emphasis and expectation for vr as a medium to deliver games that should provide a sense of meaningful interaction in the space of vr. Why should gaming be a focus for the development of vr as a platform when the funding and popular interest just simply is not there? surely if gaming is like art and is a reflection and a manifestation of our culture then we should expect its development to mirror the development of our culture, so far on a whole we do not have much of a culture surrounding the use of vr in todays society and so by association we should not expect vr gaming to amount to much either. Now i do believe this is changing but i cant help be think we are jumping the gun when it comes to our expectations of the vr gaming scene and perhaps we should focus on our use and implementation of vr as a technology that can add meaning and substance to our lives in a fundamental way that can include games but does not have to be its primary concern. I believe that we will get great vr games in the future but i also think that for this to happen vr needs to have more relevance to our lives beyond gaming itself.
That's a very fair observation. I think games will be substantial and meaningful for VR, simply because the act of play for us as animals is substantial and important throughout all our lives. One thing will lead to another with VR, design breakthroughs for games will enrich other uses for the platform, and vice versa.
Heavy disagree regarding wanting a lot of pointless interaction. Don't make me push a button or pull a lever for a menu. I also wold like to get rid of the laser pointer. We all have two joysticks, a couple of buttons and triggers. Use those to navigate a menu. See Elite Dangerous for an example of a good implementation. No need to move backwards. I'm personally not interested in a game asking me to use chunky motion controllers to load individual bullets into a gun. It feels horrible. We don't need to "sim" everything. Build a game with a wanna-be realistic bolt action gun and I'm going to ignore your game. I can pretend my motion controller is a gun. I have a trigger. Pulling the trigger is the only interaction I want. I can pretend my motion controller is a sword or bat or stick. I'm gonna hit a monster in the face with it. Don't ask me to sit there pretending to sharpen my sword. That's worthless interaction. I can't pretend my motion controller is a small knife used to cut up fruit. I can't pretend I have a two handed weapon in my hand while the game uses janky physics on my avatar.
Seems like you fundamentally have no interest in motion controls or body movement for input whatsoever. I’m curious to know why more natural movement as input is moving backwards in your eyes?
@@MrVRVoice I do have interest in motion controls. I don't have interest in using them for literally everything. Give me a game where I can have a bow on my back. I want to use motion controls to grab and use the bow. I don't want to use motion controls to collect flint and make arrowheads. I like movement. Make me move around to dodge and evade. Don't ask me to "swing your arms to run". That feels gimmicky and gets old very fast. I think the difference is that you want to "sim" everything and I only want to sim specific mechanics. Let me go hunting and kill a boar with a bow. Sim the bow. Don't sim pulling out a little knife and gutting the boar. You want me to collect wood? Fine. Don't ask me to grab an axe and pvp a tree over and over and over.
Why not both?
Different strokes for different folks.
I personally want an extremely immersive experience without needing a bunch of space. My desire for VR is having a really good headset.
I spend about 5-10 hours in the gym every week and row competitively. I weigh 160 lbs at 5'10", I'm in very good shape.
For me, games are not exercise, sports are exercise.
With that said, more physically demanding games are good too. My sister's boyfriend for example does use VR as exercise.
From the moment I understood the weakness of my flesh, it disgusted me. I craved the strength and certainty of steel. I aspired to the purity of the Blessed Machine. Your kind cling to your flesh, as though it will not decay and fail you. One day the crude biomass you call the temple will wither, and you will beg my kind to save you. But I am already saved, for the Machine is immortal… Even in death I serve the Omnissiah.
Joking aside, I agree on almost all parts.
My comment dissappeared?!?? Oh well.. I was saying I agree with you mostly.. BUT.. I'm 46 I do 60-80 hours of physical work in the week (I work in events, I build events.. so rigging lights.. Big events in big venues I have my 10000 steps before coffee.... I sometimes walk 20-ish km a day... I climb I rig stuff... This does mean, that if I get home and I've got time to do some gaming, which isn't very often.. I don't necessarily feel like crouching IRL to crouch in game.. I've usually done enough of that in the course of the week... I think devs should leave us a choice... If you want to be physical when gaming.. you should be able to.. If you don't you shouldn't have to..
I can see them all, no worries.
I get where you're coming from but in that scenario where both passive and active styles have to be equally accounted and designed for, it holds back the potential for innovations and more interesting ways to use the tech. By its nature the passive design has to not allow other options to exceed it, limiting the entire package, especially if there are multiplayer elements.
Personally, I think we've become a 'little' entitled at the behest of creativity, and need to review our attitudes and not expect the medium to pander and adjust to all our circumstances, it's impossible and only results in dilution and stagnation for the big picture. We should instead be adjusting ourselves to the rules of the world we're stepping into, so with VR, a 1:1 motion tracking interface, we should expect to have to be physical.
We understand this with any other activity or product and will naturally acquiesce to its rules, yet for media entertainment, particularly gaming, we oddly expect the design to bend over backwards to accommodate us, no matter the sacrifices made to do so. I feel this collective attitude is hamstringing the creativity of devs.
Yes, you may be a touch too tired or stiff because you've worked hard and sometimes don't have the energy to participate, it happens to all of us. So instead we can engage in a non-physical game, there are plenty, or just rest this time. And be happy for and cheer on those others who get to enjoy the interesting physical innovative experience in our place. We shouldn't be holding them back just because we're tired.
EDIT: And to clarify, I'm talking of VR more commonly having regular light movement as a minimum (arms needing to swing/sway to move faster etc) which I personally wouldn't class as exercise. I don't mean jumping around or jogging on the spot regularly.
@@MrVRVoice I can see them now as well.. are you screening comments? Also I'm sorry I got a bit frustrated.. I typed a comment pressed post and it disappeared for me, and again.. So sorry for spamming. In multiplayer it shouldn't matter to you how other people crouch/jump (really that is what I want VR to be too)... It's the forcing everyone to get physical, I need a physical support to crouch IRL.. So that means I would need a chair in my playspace (you can see how that would be a problem right?). Just in that department that annoys me... While it doesn't have to be.. The possibilities are there. and not getting in the way of innovation at all..
Swinging hands for running is no problem, climbing ladders and walls, no problem with it actually being climbing.. It's just my knees are already worn out.. And if every game would force me to physically crouch.. It wouldn't be long before I couldn't play VR at all anymore...
I don't think that is true, passive design can be a menu choice... and not get in the way of active design at all..
I don't mind standing I don't mind turning, I don't mind physically bashing enemies.. I expect that.. That's also why I said "I agree with you mostly" I also like actually doing stuff in VR vs button mashing.. That's my gripe with AAA ports like Hitman (It uses so many buttons it's actually immersion breaking.. Walk up to a ladder, ladder says to you press A to climb ladder.. That needs to stop).. That I agree with.. Climb a ladder by climbing a ladder, not by pushing A.. Bash someone's head by actually bashing someone's head and not press trigger (I want that too from VR gaming)... but after a day of crawling under stages climbing rigs my knees are already in pain etc (And this is pretty much every day for 7 days a week)... I don't need my gaming pushing it over the edge.. But if you get older and your knees hurt from being overused all day... And you don't have a button to crouch that kinda makes shooters a lot more difficult to be competitive in because of my age and work... It shouldn't matter to the other players how I go to crouch... So in that case both option should be there... I guess all I'm saying is
"Yes, you may be a touch too tired or stiff because you've worked hard and sometimes don't have the energy to participate, it happens to all of us. So instead we can engage in a non-physical game, there are plenty, or just rest this time." (Yes if you make work weeks like I do that would mean I couldn't game the genre I like at all...)
Reply to EDIT: That's what I like VR to be as well.. That's why I said, "I agree with you mostly" Just crouching should be an exception, a choice.. Wouldn't hurt anyone wouldn't stifle innovation.. And would make it possible for me to play after a long day of work"
Kinda what Ghost of tabor already has.. If you calibrate seated you have a crouch button.. If you calibrate standing you don't... It's really that simple...
I do think that things you actually do with your hands IRL should be done with your hands in VR..
But I do agree with you that Skyrim VR or Hitman VR are not the direction we want to be moving in.... So I don't disagree with you, I just think some exceptions should be made..
great video as usual :) - i want vr to be more physical movement based, like some of the fitness / dance games but more so :)
I want the immirsion of into the radius, the vehicles of vtol vr, the quality of half life alyx, the tangability of h3vr and boneworks (not bonelab) and the physicality of tea for god (as an option).
I think what vr is missing the most is immersive high fidelity software. My dream game would have Graphics like half life alex, physics like boneworks and gameplay like gta or red dead (preferably with a multiplayer mode on the side and story missions as the priority). The only game to ever get somewhat close is Pc into the radius but even then, the graphics are only ok, and the story was alright. you can deff tell the game was made in unity.
Some of my best VR experiences were playing with a gamepad. Astro Bot, Red dead redemption 2, GTA 5.. it was/is just amazing to feel being in those worlds.
Haven't watched video yet but im gonna type my thoughts up before hand. The most important thing for me in vr is interactions. I think its the single most important thing in immersion and fun. I think a lot of vr games fail this horribly. For instance most vr shooters do the bare minimum for interaction. They have you reload your gun using your hands and aim as you would in real life. But you cant flip a table over and take cover behind it, you can't crack open a door a little and shoot through the wood to get that guy camping behind it, and you cant climb on top of houses or huts in a warzone to snipe. They do the bare minimum of having the weapons be as interactive as they would be in real life and nothing more. On the other hand ive had experiences that focus on interaction but not in the way that I would notice. An example is half life alyx. I honestly dont like that game. The interaction with the world is amazing but its focused mainly on animations like throwing a soda at a cat or poking an npc and having them move. Which is a good thing. But for the smaller things id think of doing i often got disappointed. Some examples are not being able open a match box and light a match, not being able to open breifcases, and worst of all not being able to melee any enemies. When i played boneworks and was able to do practically anything I could think off outside of a few things (like opening beers and crushing soda cans) I had a much better time with the game and felt 1000x more immersed. Ive talked to a few people about what they think about the two and it seems to be split between half life alyx's interaction and boneworks. I think that since people differ so much on what they prefer to be interactive vr developers need to account for all the different ways the player will think to interact with the world and i just dont think many do. There are gems like half life alyx and boneworks that account for at least their version of interact ability but plenty more of those that dont focus on it at all. To put it simple i think vr games can get a million times better overnight if developers started to recognize that vr players want to be able to open a god damn book! Even the most interactive games in vr dont let you do that! Half life alyx would be a lot better if they accounted for the smaller stuff. Like really small stuff like opening that match box. And boneworks couldve been better if they accounted for the Bigger stuff like interactive animation like half life alyx has.
I'll be honest, I can be pretty easy to please. As long as it's an actual game and it works, I'll likely be satisfied and don't need extreme levels of interactivity. Like the Serious Sam vr port (for the most part. times where weapon selection doesn't work irritate me). The biggest draw for me is merely being in the space. I just find it awesome being within the game worlds that I'm playing, ESPECIALLY if its a game I've played on a flatscreen and loved. Like the vr mods for doom 3 or Half-Life 2. I grew up with those games and actually being in them and seeing the places and enemies right in front of me is jawdropping, and that feeling comes back everytime I play a flat game I love in vr.
However, to be perfectly honest, the vr games I love the most and play and get hooked on are games that take advantage of the medium. Into the radius, Tales of Glory 1 and Hard Bullet are absolute favourites of mine to play in vr. The best way to describe this is that interactivity that I said I don't need earlier, but I most certainly appreciate it. It manages to make mundane actions such as opening drawers, climbing or reloading more exciting. It brings me into the game world more than ever, and act like I was there instead of just enjoying the perspective of being in it.
Circumstances such as in ITR, having to be crouched real low and having difficulty aiming my bulky ak between the openings of a destroyed car so I could return fire, struggling to aim down the sights since I'm forced to hold it sideways and am panicing at being unable to fight against the approaching enemies. Even fumbling my reload due to that panic where I drop a full magazine, pick up the empty, and become dumbfounded as to why my clean rifle won't fire. Or in Tales of Glory participating in a large 50 v 50 battle, and a large number of enemy knights surround me and close in on me to the point where I can't swing my two-handed weapon properly, so I headbutt one and use that opening to get past them to effectively use my weapon again. Hard Bullet allows me to pretend I'm either a John Woo protagonist or John Wick due to it having multiple reload styles, and with the regular reload style, I had to fight a lot like Wick would fight in the movies. My favourite moment was after stabbing an enemy with a pencil, another came around the corner so I grabbed his rifle and smacked him in the face then shot his comrades. Couldn't shoot him because the gun was empty, so after quickly reloading it, I smacked him back down and finished him off with a headshot. Felt so fucking awesome to pull off. If that game wasn't just a sandbox, I'm certain it would be extremely popular.
Hope this describes what I like in vr. And maybe describes what I want, cause there are a lot of game experiences that I think could be transferred to vr very well with this interactivity but not done, or not done well
When I play VR games, I play them to try and immerse myself in the setting and mechanics of the game. In many cases, the "fidelity" of the game is really almost a secondary priority: If the game is "immersive", I will find excuses to play it. It's hard to describe this sentiment without examples so humor me for a moment:
When I play Blade & Sorcery VR, I do so knowing the AI is relatively janky, attacks a little too quickly or frequently, or will frequently run directly into my weapons while trying to catch up; I do so knowing the game has a certain level of jank either induced by third party modifications or simply my own sheer bad luck, in which enemies go flying at complete random, or wherein my FPS drops. However, there are many golden moments: Duelling fencers and sabreurs, or swordsmen and clashing blade-on-blade multiple times as both my enemy and I try to bypass the other's guard. Of course, at its core, I don't *need* to do any of this, but the way the weapons are virtually weighed down, and the way enemies hold their blades to guard against your strikes, and the sound and visual effects that occur as a result of these clashes tickle a certain part in my brain that encourages me to continue in this virtual play-fight against the AI.
Naturally, there are downsides to this: The modified game's FPS drops only worsen with certain mods or scenarios -- while fighting a jedi/sith with a lightsaber using a certain mod is definitely satisfying, seeing the sparks from a lightsaber clash remain simply takes me out of it. That's not the game's fault, of course, but it is what it is. In virtually every case, I blame and praise the mods to B&S; without the game, however, the mods would simply not exist.
A similar thing occurs when I play a game like Pavlov VR: An ever-stagnating peak casual shooter with just enough gunplay mechanics sprinkled in to give me a reason to blindfire around corners with my sidearm -- which, in most other situations, I simply forget about. The way Pavlov adjusts your avatar's fingers to grip a bolt, hold a magazine, or hold the grip is something that is, believe it or not, kind of rare in games that actually do support multi-hand weaponry. Even some games that have poses -- say, Into the Radius -- don't support them for the vast majority of secondary actions; racking a bolt, pulling the charging handle, and so on. The hand (as far as I recall; it's been about two years) simply hovers at the bolt as you operate it.
This sort of "hand-interactivity", for lack of a better term, is a trend I found replicated much more in the funded, sponsored, highly polished "experiences" you find on the Meta store. Think Vader: Immortal, Robo Recall (ancient as it is), and so on. Alas, I've long since moved on from the Oculus Rift, and have used a Valve Index since. A tradeoff for the finger-tracking that made games like Boneworks and Bonelab enjoyable for about 32 hours each, and Half-Life: Alyx a true blast to play, is that the vast majority of other VR games on the Steam store have simply not lived up to the scrutiny I, as a player, am seeking. B&S is not the best at this either, mind: It simply does everything else really well. A litany of micro-disappointments in other games make them almost completely unenjoyable for me. Skyrim VR is a fun RPG when you iron away the countless fundamental design problems... with mods.
Boneworks and Bonelab are enjoyable sandbox games if you can bear the mildly annoying pitch-shift between each gunshot, no doubt intended to make the weapons have variety, but ultimately just making me feel like I'm firing a toy gun -- and that's not counting the lack of replayability, esoteric modding support (I'm seriously disappointed in the custom maps people have made for 'lab, but I think I would sooner put the blame on the modding tools), and motion sickness-inducing character locomotion. Of course, the hand dynamics and physics interactivity are wonderful in SL0's games, but that's practically the best parts thereof.
Another problem I find is VR multiplayer games. Pavlov and Contractors are big games, yes, but what about VAIL? Davigo? Iron Rebellion? 38, 2, and 1 player, respectively, at the time of writing, with peaks of 96 (VAIL, Respectable); 22 (Davigo, counting the VR players only); and 5 (Iron Rebellion) in the last 24 hours. Every time someone makes a multiplayer-only VR game, they're making a niche game for a niche community within a niche community.
In conclusion, I think I'm one of the more pedantic VR players. Hell, I'd probably play Skyrim VR much more if I didn't feel unusually suspicious about it possibly overheating my system for no reason... and if streaming it on Discord wasn't completely and utterly stupid. Various games deserve an honorable mention: TWD Saints & Sinners is a good and enjoyable game that I do not find the urge to play for some reason (I may have a distaste for scavenging zombie games; the stamina bar is mildly bothersome). H3VR is a game I frequently play again and again, but only to indulge my obsession with weapon details. Half-Life: Alyx is a game I enjoy playing, even if it is a game designed for the greater VR player audience (and is, in turn, relatively "simplified" with regards to weaponry and player interactivity).
It seems to me the major issue with VR right now is the lack of money in PCVR. Alyx shows what's possible, but the market shows what we get. We get shallow, shitty games, with low difficulty, low production value, etc. The money just isn't there. These dev teams are often like 1, or 2 people large and they're making games that are technically MORE challenging to build correctly than KB / Mouse games. I'm not trying to give an excuse to all the shitty games out there but it does honestly seem like the lack of money in VR has a big part to play in it.
I have more than 9k hours in SteamVR and basically all of it was spent in social vr.
All I want out of VR is better hardware, basically all my software needs are met.
Well said, my friend. I stream and play a lot of VR and your ideas are very similar to mine. I hope developers continue to push new technology and try various ways of playing.
I agree completely with your point about movement. When I play games like grimlord or blade and sorcery I can swing hard punch hard but it doesn’t feel as hard as I’m punching or swinging. I have real swords and even spears and bows and they don’t have the same punch in games that they do in real life. It’s either too soft or godly strong. I know how fast I can swing or stab something and I know how much impact it’ll leave but none of these games just feel accurate. I want to move more and have my real inputs rewarded rather than dumbed down or again have them be over the top strength wise. I do apologize for the wording used and how my sentences don’t flow quite right but I am quite tired and can’t be bothered to fix it. In all though VR games need to try more to become VR games instead of normal games but you’re standing in them
when i hop in a vr game, its because i want to actually do something physical, as the character i am playing as does. when we have hand holdy mechanics like objects meant for throwing being given a boost in velocity upon leaving the hand, we take a tiny, tiny step backwards that will eventually add up and snowball us back to flatscreen mechanics. Things like hud and small presses of buttons on controllers are lazy and add to that snowball, not to mention inhibit the developer's ability since now that they put something that could've been a motion control is now just a button, it takes up a button on an already (most likely by design) limited controller. We need more motion controls, we need gun interactions to be much less lenient, we need things we do to be unique motion controls. Stop it with the point and click menus, stop it with the extreme leniency, stop it with buttons. Make me do the action, otherwise why am i playing vr in the first place?
Can't agree more, I feel like VR can be used to personally enhance the body, while at the same time, maintaining the fun of video games as a interactive medium would be the ultimate form of entertainment. But that being said, have you been able to check out Broken Edge? I've been intrigued by it's concept, having to follow stances and outwit your opponent, in few decisive strikes.
id say the vr space is having 2d standards of games/ game making and money making, think rushed good looking puddles passed off as games to get you to open your wallets, vr hasn't had it real golden age yet and until publishers and devs figure that out they will do nothing but kill it through a slow battle of attrition
3:28. Hopefully as the vergence-accommodation conflict gets resolved by hardware advancements games will be more comfortable putting menu options in range of the player to be directly manipulated. As VR headsets are now it is more comfortable reading text that's greater than arms length away. kinda sucks.
As someone with an acute eye for detail, games which boast 'realism' in their primary features tend to be the most immersion-breaking. What I want from VR is more titles like Compound or Rumble, where the focus is instead on providing the player with a *game*, rather than a glorified tech demo. I'd much prefer a cartoonish game with cartoonish mechanics than yet another Pavlov-adjacent VR shooter. In other words, VR is the perfect outlet for escapism, but escapism doesn't work if you're just escaping to something easily achievable in the real world.
As an aside, I was introduced to this channel by your review of Compound, and greatly appreciate the voice (both literal and figurative) you give to those of us who can't be satisfied by status-quo games. Keep making videos, and I'll keep watching, Mr. VR.
You'll be seeing a whole lot more of me and RUMBLE once my headset is repaired.
Great vid. Keep up the good fight.
Only time I sit with a headset on is when I am racing or flying.
Id reslly like a real melee vr game eith ai smarter then a Minecraft pig at bare minimum. A reason ingsme to do more physically damanding moves. Youre correft id like to move more snd keep way more in shape, give me something lke dsrk souls vr where i gotta be ready at every moment
As someone who's gotten into VR recently due to a intro to VR class in my colleges game design degree, heres my two cents. The big thing VR needs imo even more so then the interaction (although I agree that's important) is difficulty. For me a lot of VR games are way too easy, and it makes them feel dull. This even applies to big PCVR titles like Boneworks (maybe HLA is an exception, but I still need to play the previous games). I'm not saying that I want every game to be Dark Souls or Getting Over It, but I need some form of difficulty the majority of the time. And I do think there are VR games that manage to have a good mix of difficulty and player movement imo. A couple of examples are Cosmodread (the natural difficulty of rougelites, mixed in to the trembling of your body in fear when trying to aim a weapon), A Rouge Escape (the rougelite aspects again because I'm addicted to these kinds of games, mixed in with using your body to reach around and manage the hulking behemoth your piloting) , and Broken Edge (the mix of mastering your preferred class and trying to plan the other players physical movements).
On a side note, one other benifit that would come from using interactable menus instead of laser pointers is that I would actally be able to see the menus without nearly bumping into my wall.
Agreed. VR games are waaaaaay too easy and ask so little of us as players. It feels like devs are afraid to design interesting challenges.
And sad to say, HL:A, despite being excellent in so many other ways, is brain dead easy.
I do to some extend agree with you.. BUT... I'm 46 I do physical work 60-80 hours a week... I would like devs to give us a choice if we want to crouch IRL or with a button in VR...
After a 70 ish hour work week with lots of walking and carrying stuff (I work in events... I build events...) I get my exercise at work pretty much. I don't really feel like exercising in my free time while playing to relax a bit..
The problem for me is I don't want to sweat with an HMD on my face, so I wouldn't want to do any more physical movement than standing VR games currently allow. If the HMD was more like sunglasses, I'm sure I'd be fine with more physical movement.
That’s fair, though my meaning isn’t having to engage in aerobic manoeuvres normally, just regular light rhythmic movement (arms needing to swing or sway a little with movement etc). HMD’s becoming smaller and lighter is an eventuality so naturally (hopefully) one thing will enable the other.
I expect options. I understand both the
want for physical interaction, and those who are fine
with just playing seated with a controller in hand.
I myself play seated (sciatica), but I do want 6DOF motion controls,
Proper environmental collision (I hate when my hands go right through the geometry),
Physics based interactions, and definitely not being limited to a controller,
or any one type of setup.
I'm not a fan of Ready Player One Style "SUITING UP".
The idea of dressing up in haptic suits, Gloves, goofy shoes and standing in a tread
mill, connecting yourself to a catheter so you can poop in VR,
just sounds like way too much effort for playing videogames.
I say keep that for special outings at an amusement park or arcade or VR/AR sporting event.
I'm also not a competitive gamer, I game to relax, or let off steam
(man stuff like Blade and Sorcery is good for that),
so the whole "SUITING UP" thing, while cool, just isn't realistic
or affordable for most people, including myself. Yes the audience is there.
Yes it and all options regarding mobility should be considered.
Just remember not everyone is as able bodied as you are,
and having inclusive options, like smooth turning, a crouch button, and height
adjustments should be imperative. OPTIONS! OPTIONS! OPTIONS!
I want an "Active Mode", a "Seated Mode", and a "Control Pad Mode",
but mostly I just want better games with better interactions.
Escapist entertainment. To be immersed in interesting places and situations. VVR. The Under Presents. Tales from soda island. Walkabout mini golf. tours and documentaries.
For FPS games, I would prefer if guns DO NOT sound like BB guns and actually sound punchy and powerful, have satisfying, immersive reloads with great sounds, and have enemies victim to a gun, like a sniper rifle, actually one shot an enemy in the HEAD and in the body rather in a game like COD, a full magazine of M82 rounds, point-blank, at an enemy’s head, just makes it a little dazed.
I feel like the FPS games quantity isnt as big as the the narrative driven games that are just basic vr functions jumbled together. Then you look at the pool of FPS games and the quality is skewed towards arena/wave shooter.
My headset is collecting dust, I haven't played a game in 9months.
@@shinobusensui9395 I wonder why? Did you quit Onward after 1.8? Did you also Pavlov because there hasn’t been an update in a year?
@@shinobusensui9395 Or are you interested in other FPS games like Ghosts of Tabor?
@@shinobusensui9395 To be honest, I would prefer a dedicated VR FPS game with a solid, memorable campaign, solid multiplayer, have free cosmetics(?), etc. The guns themselves should include all the things I had listed on my comment.
@@kevinle1083 I don't really care much for the online game. I have had bad experiences since counter strike and half life deathmatch on the PC. If I had enough personal friends that had VR I would but I only have 1 friend who has my old headset
My god, you are like the only person I can find saying this. When I first tried the Wii's motion controls, I immediately knew the future I wanted for gaming. I play games cause I want to experience those worlds. Physically moving in those worlds is what Ive always desired so I despise how much people seem to be against it. This is why I kind of dislike the current prevalence of Flat to Vr games. The tech is awesome yes and its great to get actual full-fledged games in vr, but these games offer no virtual interaction and only frustrate me.
I really want tracking rings I can wear on my fingers to use my actual hands, instead of the built in bogus tracking meta has.
There are a few open scource vr gloves you can 3d print parts for and buy the rest for about $45
I like good games. Having great interactions and physics are nice bonus, but not needed to have good games - indeed many great games I've played in VR have barely any interaction or physics, inclusive native games and ports...
My main problem and the one people rarely seem to talk about is aesthetics. Just in this video you're comparing DMC5 to GrimLord. It jumps out at you right away, one has great visual design and great music and at least attempts to do a compelling story, the other looks like an asset swap. GrimLord is trying to imitate Dark Souls, would DS ever have bosses as generic as that? I understand the budget limitations but that's no reason to have everything in your world look as generic as possible. Don't have money for an art team, use an AI generator, it will produce more original designs than the ones we see in these indie games. Small budget shouldn't be a reason for bad art direction in this day and age.
And it's absurd to hear flat gamers say they won't play VR until it's a full dive experience, as they're playing a flat game that's even less immersive. Why is a flat game compelling enough for them with those ridiculous expectations of perfect immersion? Because flat games offer something VR games don't, a world you actually want to be in, even if it's not very immersive. They would rather be slightly immersed in Dark Souls than fully immersed in GrimLord and that's completely understandable. When they say they want full dive what they mean is these generic worlds won't be worth visiting until full dive. Give them a world they actually like and they'll want to visit it even it's just via letters on a page of a book.
I agree. And it's not just art direction. Something I don't see people using is displacement or height maps. Being able to see depth is one of VR's greatest features, yet whenever I look at VR games, they're all using flat textures.
@@ethyr mainly cause those tricks dont look nearly as convincing when you can see the actual depth since these maps dont alter the depth just how light reacts to it so its much more of a trick than actual depth
@@ImplyDoods They definitely look convincing when it's used correctly.
Point of standing still or sit, or none fit vr game IS! Most are vr players are nerds, not fit, fat, don´t have space and so on. Why create a 5 million dollar game that one i fit for? or have the space for? This video are all out and sailing. First we just need games for the masses so we can show vr are ready. Dev teams just need to come out with polished games. But!! WHEN THEY CAN´T DO A NORMAL AAA GAME POLISHED HOW SHOULD THEY MAKE VR GAMES!! xD
❤
I don't know why my comments keep disappearing ... but I'm done...
Your 3 comments are here. And if you want to chill out while gaming, that's what flatgames are for...
@@VRnamek I can see them now again, they just disappeared on my when I pushed reply..
I do not agree... That that's what flat screen games are for... I can't do flatscreen anymore not in shooters not in simulation... I just don't want to physically crouch after a long day of physically crouching..
Quick answer to the thumbnail... YES, why the hell should i be limited in how i enjoy my game system
if you dont want to be limited then go get a life.
oh wait, your self proclaimed introvert and what not, so you have every excuse to not live a life.
excuse me.
lol klean tries some 3rd party experience and generalizes all of VR saying it'll be good when you need to be fit to be good even tho that's already how it is
No it’s not. The vast, VAST, majority of VR games are designed with concessions and crutches that allow you to successfully play while sitting, standing, laying stone still with a tiny bit of arm or wrist movement.
@@MrVRVoice I mean, most gun games that's true. Since gun games are focused around the .. well, gun, it makes sense that it could be played while stagnant. Now, i'm not a supporter of vCrouch or anything, but until we have omni treadmills more normalized and consumer-friendly, it's likely going to be the norm for a bit.
However, there are a lot of games (particularly in the mideval/sword fighting genre) that require a lot of movement. Beat Saber, one of the most popular VR games of all time, is bordering on workout level. Broken Edge. Blade and Sorcery. The list goes on ! Just need a different genre.
I see the argument though. Games like Breachers have added more and more abstractions where they arent needed. Crouch buttons, 1 button reloads, etc.
@@MrVRVoice eh I still think it's a generalization because even if there are lots of games like you describe I can also name a ton of PvP games (rec room/pavlov/contractors) where people who actually duck/dodge/juke in their playspace preform better than those standing stiff like a scarecrow. I can't tell you the number of times I've killed someone 1 on 1 because I just decided to drop to the floor or bend so they miss. Or physically dash to the side, duck behind a pillar etc. Someone who's not fit won't be able to play beat saber, kayak vr mirage, sprint vector nearly as long, as fast, or as well as players who are fit. Even something like rumble, creed, space pirate trainer or any fps is comparatively more effort required than flat gaming. All of which I think falls under the notion of athletic "to an extent"- like you don't have to be a true athlete training 40hrs a week but I can't play kayak vr mirage competitively (shooting for top 5 world wide) without tapping out after 30mins. Yeah there are a lot of games that make concessions or are walking simulators or whatever but it's not like games that require athletic endurance/skill don't exist.
That being said I'd love for more of it but I just felt it was a weak follow-up argument. Like he was on the right track with the realism aspect (I think he mainly wants the fidelity of RP1) but doesn't realize the other part of what he wanted out of VR (that games actually make you have to be athletic to an extent) does exist. The only thing I can think to illustrate what I mean is this guy who said that diablo V was trash because it's psudeo mmo and he doesnt want players running around killing his stuff spamming him, and while not liking the pseudo mmo aspect is valid for many reasons, anyone whose actually played it knows its a ghost town because theres no general chat for the most part, no way to easily party with ppl, people running by might as well be bots because they rarely interact with you in any meaningful way. Basically he did what klean did, had a solid argument but used the wrong logic to go about it (IMO ofc)
Productivity, that's the only way for it to go. For entertainments sake, sure, a few things, but to achieve what people want is really only possible in a theme park setting.
A full Desktop VR OS is the future for this tech. Integration is the only realistic route for it to go. The sooner people let go of their pipe dreams, the better.
are games really a part of vr's future in a substantial and meaningful way? i think the signs point to probably not, whilst i believe gaming is an important part of our culture and will probably continue to evolve alongside our technology i believe that perhaps there is too much emphasis and expectation for vr as a medium to deliver games that should provide a sense of meaningful interaction in the space of vr. Why should gaming be a focus for the development of vr as a platform when the funding and popular interest just simply is not there? surely if gaming is like art and is a reflection and a manifestation of our culture then we should expect its development to mirror the development of our culture, so far on a whole we do not have much of a culture surrounding the use of vr in todays society and so by association we should not expect vr gaming to amount to much either. Now i do believe this is changing but i cant help be think we are jumping the gun when it comes to our expectations of the vr gaming scene and perhaps we should focus on our use and implementation of vr as a technology that can add meaning and substance to our lives in a fundamental way that can include games but does not have to be its primary concern. I believe that we will get great vr games in the future but i also think that for this to happen vr needs to have more relevance to our lives beyond gaming itself.
That's a very fair observation. I think games will be substantial and meaningful for VR, simply because the act of play for us as animals is substantial and important throughout all our lives. One thing will lead to another with VR, design breakthroughs for games will enrich other uses for the platform, and vice versa.
Heavy disagree regarding wanting a lot of pointless interaction. Don't make me push a button or pull a lever for a menu. I also wold like to get rid of the laser pointer. We all have two joysticks, a couple of buttons and triggers. Use those to navigate a menu. See Elite Dangerous for an example of a good implementation. No need to move backwards.
I'm personally not interested in a game asking me to use chunky motion controllers to load individual bullets into a gun. It feels horrible. We don't need to "sim" everything. Build a game with a wanna-be realistic bolt action gun and I'm going to ignore your game. I can pretend my motion controller is a gun. I have a trigger. Pulling the trigger is the only interaction I want. I can pretend my motion controller is a sword or bat or stick. I'm gonna hit a monster in the face with it. Don't ask me to sit there pretending to sharpen my sword. That's worthless interaction. I can't pretend my motion controller is a small knife used to cut up fruit. I can't pretend I have a two handed weapon in my hand while the game uses janky physics on my avatar.
Seems like you fundamentally have no interest in motion controls or body movement for input whatsoever. I’m curious to know why more natural movement as input is moving backwards in your eyes?
@@MrVRVoice I do have interest in motion controls. I don't have interest in using them for literally everything. Give me a game where I can have a bow on my back. I want to use motion controls to grab and use the bow. I don't want to use motion controls to collect flint and make arrowheads. I like movement. Make me move around to dodge and evade. Don't ask me to "swing your arms to run". That feels gimmicky and gets old very fast.
I think the difference is that you want to "sim" everything and I only want to sim specific mechanics. Let me go hunting and kill a boar with a bow. Sim the bow. Don't sim pulling out a little knife and gutting the boar. You want me to collect wood? Fine. Don't ask me to grab an axe and pvp a tree over and over and over.
Yeah there's a balance. Some grindy activities just aren't fun, preferably they'd be removed from the game altogether.
here is where i want vr to go, in the garbage bin. it is a joke device that lasted for too long.
You should definitely hang around and cry about it more.
@@blankfrankie3747 lets see what mental illness will vr gift to you in 5 years. i know, 5 years? shit takes time to develope.
@@zendraw3468
No shit!
That's exactly what my grandma used to say about NES.