Comments Locked

44 Comments

Back to Article

  • Ikefu - Thursday, June 11, 2015 - link

    The Xbox controller was a really smooth move considering how the terrible controller on the Ouya almost deep-sixed that thing by itself. I'm curious to see if something later down the road develops for VR straight from the XBone with DX12. If morpheus can work with the PS4 you'd think something might be able to happen.
  • Impulses - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    What's the point of VR if your control points are identical tho? Wouldn't games just sort of... play the same? Sure it can be more immersive and there's head tracking which certainly can add a dimension to some games, but I think the most innovative stuff would have to revolve around the free held controllers.

    Reminds me of Sword Art Online a little bit (anime series that centers around VR)... Not sure how they could possibly wait until this late stage to reveal the control interface(s) tho.
  • nevcairiel - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    Personally, being a primary PC gamer used to a mouse, I've always found it weird to use the controller to look around, move and somehow "target" things at the same time. If looking around is replaced by head motion tracking, that should already give it a much smoother gameplay.
  • Impulses - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    Ehh, in that sense it could be just as much of a boon for certain PC games/gamers... We're just way too used to FPS conventions where you're always looking and aiming in the same direction, mouse made that way too natural and easy so it suck.

    There's open world or 3rd person games and MMORPGs where if you aren't panning your camera 360 degrees *while* moving in another direction (and possibly doing other things) then you're just getting owned by those that are successfully doing so... And it can be a chore.

    That's always been a challenge mouse or not, I imagine any kinda semi effective head tracking would make that sorta scenario both easier to handle and more immersive. It all goes back to the games for sure... Without some great showcases that actually leverage the tech it might as well be a Nintendo Virtual Boy. :p
  • sabrewings - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    I think it'll become much easier with a VR headset. If the mouse serves to turn you torso left and right for aiming and steer your movement, that's perfect. Being able to look left and right while moving without having to rotate and strafe is a huge boon. It's a huge boost to the immersion factor as well.
  • Murloc - Saturday, June 13, 2015 - link

    yeah right now that's done by moving with WASD and looking around with the mouse but this thing would help a lot, except for the problem that you can't rotate your head 360°.

    I guess you could make it so that a 90° rotation of your head translates to a 180° rotation in-game, but I wonder if that would be barf-inducing or not.
  • Wolfpup - Friday, June 19, 2015 - link

    I'd assume you'd still control things exactly like you do now, but also be able to look around. Like wherever you're pointed "forward" using the right stick, you can look around to the sides and up and down as much as your head can move in real life, but the center point is still controlled with the right stick.

    I THINK that sounds like it would work fine...though without being in one who knows!
  • Brett Howse - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    VR is never going to take off if every single app needs to be specifically VR only. The Xbox controller makes perfect sense since it will allow games to ship with VR as an option.
  • JeffFlanagan - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    VR is not only going to take off, it's going to be huge.

    I have the S6 version of VR gear, which is terribly limited compared to what the PC-based Rift, HTC/Valve, and even PS4 headsets will be, and it's an amazing device, even with the virtual worlds looking like phone games.

    People will be blown away by these devices. They haven't experienced anything like it. There's a reason Zuckerberg put so much money into this project; Feeling like you're present in a space, rather than looking at a screen, makes a huge difference in how we interact with software.

    Some games could easily be made for both screen and VR since the rift extensions for 3D development environments just behave like an in-game camera that follows head-tracking, so I expect that what you're looking for will happen, but it's by no means essential.

    In multiplayer, I expect that people in VR will dominate the people using screens as long as the game has realistic physics. Millions of years of evolution honed our ability to interact with environments. We've only been playing games on screens for about 65 years
  • Wolfpup - Friday, June 19, 2015 - link

    Geez, we've been VR-ing since what, the Genesis? I don't know...I'm holding judgement until I try one. This SEEMS like it could be cool, but I'm not totally convinced it's not another "motion controls" or so-called "3D", both of which were absurd jokes and nothing but marketing (and both LESS immersive).

    Even if it really does work, make things better, and even if 90% first person games start being adapted specifically for it STILL may not take off. You've got an expense, and people are really price conscious. You've got the factor that it arguably looks ridiculous and some people may care about that. It may not be crazy safe either (and for that matter might cause motion sickness).
  • flexy - Wednesday, June 24, 2015 - link

    I tend to agree although we VR "enthusiasts" are always met with a lot of skepticism, something I cannot understand. I knew that this is the future the first time I've been in an Imax, at a time where the idea of a 3D TV at home, let alone VR for the masses was still a dream many years away. I personally predict this not only to "take off" for games, but it will likely revolutionize EVERYTHING from social media, to "watching" movies, sports etc..etc.. The step from "2D surfaces" like TV or movie screens to getting really immersed into a virtual environment is just too big that this simply CAN not go by just as a fluke. Let me compare this to...horses vs. cars/planes....or photographs vs. movies. People are still just skeptical because because of things like needing to wear some awkward device (understandable)....but those are all technical hurdles than will be solved in time. (People today are not carrying 300lbs cathode ray tubes around, you can watch movies on stamp-sized mobile device today. In other words: The tech will get better, devices faster, smaller, more comfortable etc.)
  • flexy - Wednesday, June 24, 2015 - link

    >>
    In multiplayer, I expect that people in VR will dominate the people using screens as long as the game has realistic physics. Millions of years of evolution honed our ability to interact with environments.
    >>
    The irony is that interacting (or watching a movie, or playing a game etc.) from a 3D world projected onto a flat 2D screen is more abstract and less "natural"..and I "predict" this silliness will be forgotten within the next...hmm..20 years. OF COURSE everything will happen in real 3D space by then and people will think back and laugh at the idea how we played games or watched movies in 2D. You know it, I know it this will happen :)
  • Guspaz - Monday, June 15, 2015 - link

    Since effective VR games need to be designed from the ground up as primarily VR games (in the same sense that you're not going to take a high-end PC game and stick it on a smartphone) I don't think you'll see that many games with that sort of an option. It's such a huge difference in how the game needs to be made, from the "latency and framerate are king" aspect to the graphics engine to the UI to the gameplay.
  • flexy - Wednesday, June 24, 2015 - link

    It is true that game devs need to think anew, but I don't see this is a problem whatsoever. The rest of the things you mention, latency, frame rates etc...are hideously tiny "obstacles" which will be solved as technology progresses, as PCs and GPUs get faster. The same with the size of the actual device which IN MY OPINION "for the masses" is still possibly a turn-off...but this too is just a matter of time until tech is so far advanced and goggles etc. get as small and comfortable as glasses.
  • Wolfpup - Friday, June 19, 2015 - link

    Well not just that, it may be the best input method for VR. Sure it SOUNDS nifty to say it needs some new input method, but hte reality is all the alternate input methods we've tried other than regular pad descended from the NES pad or a mouse/keyboard don't actually work, and destroy immersion.

    I'd assume using a good controller but also have the immersion of being able to look around would just make things more immersive than they already are. Wii, Kinnect, Move don't actually work, and so would break immersion, and probably any other input method they made up would too-besides you're already getting a 'head look' input that you don't have normally just by moving your head.
  • Wolfpup - Friday, June 19, 2015 - link

    I'm not sure whether alternate controls could help, or hurt. They might wind up being terrible, just as they were for....well, absolutely everything except a standard controller and mouse/keyboard.

    It makes total sense to me...I mean you're playing a first person game, you already know how to control it, but you can look around in the game world too just by looking around. That sounds intuitive to me, and it actually works/won't hurt gameplay (hopefully).

    Honestly, the idea of playing a game I actually like, a good FPS or something like Bioshock or Fallout or something...playing something I actually love and want to play anyway, but playing it on one of those things where everything's blocked out and I can look around and see nothing but game world? I have to admit I'd actually like to try that.

    Of course, I don't know that One really has the horsepower to drive this....hmm.

    You need a way faster refresh rate than the console's can draw...but maybe it just needs to refresh that fast and the frame rate is okay. The resolution's even higher than 1080p, and the Xbox already can't do 1080p, sooooo clearly they'd have to render at 900p or below and scale up, and drop down graphics even more if they need to hit like 60 or 90FPS instead of 30ish.

    Even still I guess it's not TOO far outside its capabilities...like I'm sure One could do a last gen game, run it at a high resolution and at 90fps or whatever, so long as it's not as detailed as current gen stuff can be.
  • Wolfpup - Friday, June 19, 2015 - link

    Yeah, just using an Xbox controller is smart. Seems win/win. Right out of the gate it has a real, good controller that works with Xbox One and PC games, which also makes it feel like "oh hey, this thing already plays games" right out of the gate. And Microsoft doesn't have to worry too much about if they'll lose sales to not having a VR headset, and maybe places a One controller in more people's hands, selling more PC games and Ones.
  • ClamShall - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    Looking forward to watching immersive porn on this thing.
  • jrbris - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    "That groinal attachment's supposed to have a lifetime's guarantee. You've worn it out nearly three weeks."
  • hbsource - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    She wasn't jailbait. She was 17.
  • Wolfpup - Friday, June 19, 2015 - link

    Heh, I would be too, were there any LOL
  • Impulses - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    I'm still skeptical this is going anywhere, but as someone that lost the war over the living room a long time ago I'm still intrigued.
  • sabrewings - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    Have you tried a DK? Ever since I tried the DK2 at the Interstellar release event, I've been convinced this is going somewhere. I plan to get the SteamVR as well as an Oculus. I feel both will have their place, but if one is significantly better than the other and doesn't suffer any drawbacks, I'll sell the inferior one (probably the Oculus, IMO; SteamVR has gotten much more praise by those who have used both it and Crescent Bay).
  • Wolfpup - Friday, June 19, 2015 - link

    Ugh, shouldn't these companies make sure this stuff is all compatible?

    What's the deal with that HTC thing? I hear HTC and I think "oh, it's going to be some junky phone low end SOC when I'm sitting here with piles of massively more powerful PCs and consoles that STILL aren't powerful enough"
  • Wwhat - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    I think the XBOX controller is a weird move and seems it might just be a case of them not being ready with their own controllers and a stopgap.
    I base my self on the logic of a gamepad not being the thing for VR and their announcement that the headgear will be out Q1 2016 but the VR controllers are given a 'first half of 2016' date, so 3 to 6 months later.

    And I think it's an area of concern, if the enthusiasts have their enthusiasm broken by that silly gamepad and that 'using it as a giant screen for the XBOX' (with no VR functionality really) then the whole project could fail, and that could have a knock-on effect for the competition where people lose interest in the Valve one and such offerings.

    As for the statement of the gamepad being 'a preferred controller', that must be a joke surely.
  • sabrewings - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    For "traditional" games, like an FPS, the controller could work well if they use the head tracking as part of the controls. It would offload a lot of the need of a precision setup like a keyboard and mouse, if implemented well. For games where you interact more, that's where the rings come in.
  • Wwhat - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    From seeing people try the oculus or other VR headsets, where you see people move their hands in the air, and hearing them talk about their intuitive response, you cannot help but conclude you definitely do not want to sit around with a gamepad when doing VR and that that's not for VR.
    But sure if you play non-VR games with a VR headset then it can be used I suppose... in a crippled way. But actually even then I have to disagree that gamepad is any good for a FPS. But people are so used to the massive aim-assist you get with (semi-)FPS on consoles I guess many don't know any better anymore.

    Still though, the larger crowd that excitedly jump into VR for the first time will most likely be bummed out by having to use a gamepad. And a VR headgear really should include a real VR controller.
  • sabrewings - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    My first interaction with VR was entirely passive and it was still a great time. I can't wait to get a headset just to sit and play Elite: Dangerous or Star Citizen as I already do, but with immersion taken up about five notches. You don't need fancy controllers to get into it. The headset can give you that immersion just by becoming your world that your senses can perceive.

    Hell, to tide me over until an actual headset is out, I bought a Google Cardboard (foam style). For a simple device that simply straps a smartphone to your face with a couple lenses, it does an incredible job at immersion that is on par with DK2. I crack up at people experiencing it for the first time. And those are either passive experiences or limited input from the magnetic sensor or by where you look. I'd totally play a Halo game with a controller and an Oculus and have no doubt the immersion would be there. Controller for movement and aiming while the Oculus allows you to "swivel" your head about the torso. That will easily provide huge immersion.

    Now, for some real VR games that are reaching even further on the interaction/immersion level, I agree that fancy input devices will be needed. I'd love to incorporate them into flight sim games where I can use my HOTAS or take my hands off it and do something else in game/ cockpit.
  • sabrewings - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    And I totally agree on the controller for FPS. I'll take a mouse/ keyboard any day, but I forced myself to use a controller for Halo only. However, with the VR headset, I can see a controller being more suitable than without the headset.
  • Wwhat - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    From other comments both here and a few other places it seems many people are generally positive about that XBOX controller thing.
    But even so, will/would they be if they had a VR headset I wonder. And I don't think Google cardboard counts in that discussion, it's not even meant for playing games and is for temporary use.
    And of course the initial WOW factor will soon enough be replaced with people discovering the flaws, and I still believe the first thing will be people realizing that XBOX gamepad just is too confining. The forced use of both hands on a single object is already enough to irk soon enough I expect. Let aone the general attempt to interact with VR objects with a gamepad.
  • Murloc - Saturday, June 13, 2015 - link

    there are virtual reality things that you stand in being developed.
    I've seen one on youtube and it's not pricey stuff at all. Basically it's a harness with a slippery floor, so you just walk inside of that thing with your socks on and you don't move but you also don't fall down because the harness keeps you in place so your feet just slide.
    And then it also rotates, and you can sit down and the harness will keep you seated at a certain height, so you can like enter a car.
  • JeffFlanagan - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    I currently use a Samsung controller with my VR Gear to move forward/back and fire in games.

    A 2D treadmill for movement, and a toy gun that appears to be a real weapon in-game would be better from my perspective, but a lot of people want to sit when they game, and most people don't want to buy and give up space to a 2D treadmill. In that case you need a hand-held controller.
  • Wwhat - Friday, June 12, 2015 - link

    But the oculus VR controllers are handheld, just more 3D and one for each hand.
    And if you just want to sit at a desk staring straight ahead, then why an oculus? Won't a simple monitor, or 3D monitor if need be be, be your thing?

    It's not like I expect all VR users to run around and install treadmills though, but the VR demos and experience is about being in a virtual 3D world, not just looking at a virtual screen or looking AT a 3D world.

    Although clearly MS wants oculus to push their gear as the 'looking at a virtual screen' concept, but that is not the design concept of it.
  • sabrewings - Sunday, June 14, 2015 - link

    " Won't a simple monitor, or 3D monitor if need be be, be your thing?"

    It's not the same. I get the feeling you haven't tried a real VR setup. Simply turning your head and being able to look around without being confined to a box in front of you makes a huge difference in presence. It's how your brain is trained to be able to take in info. You want to look left, you turn your neck, feel the change in orientation through your vestibular system, and take in the new data. Even if I'm only going to sit and look around a cockpit in E:D, No Man's Sky, or Star Citizen, it is worth it. Being able to lean forward in E:D and get a better look out the cockpit side windows, or move around to see around the "wing" of the craft adds a huge sense of realism. Plus, for flight sim type games a HOTAS is as specialized an input as you're going to need. E:D's in game graphics are even modeled after the X52 HOTAS so when you look down at your "hands" they're doing the same thing and using the same controls as your real hands.

    VR is as much about presence as it is interaction. Try not to get too caught up in how you're going to interact with it and start with how much you'll feel like you're there just by observation. It's really very powerful. I agree 100% that the 3D controllers Steam and Oculus have come up with are better than a controller, and they will even be required for a lot of experiences and games. However, your notion that without them the headset is useless is far from the case.
  • Wolfpup - Friday, June 19, 2015 - link

    I'm not understanding the confusion. The game not actually supporting VR, and just appearing as a screen, has nothing to do with the input device.

    In either case, a game has to be built to actually support VR so it puts you "in" the world and uses head tracking, etc. That's going to be immersive if done right, I'd assume, and it will be regardless of controller input.

    At that point a controller that actually works-i.e. either a gamepad or a mouse/keyboard, is going to be superior to some gimmicky "motion" controls that are horribly imprecise and don't work. That's going to be much less immersive, just as it is without VR.
  • Wolfpup - Friday, June 19, 2015 - link

    Oh, and regarding the "clearly MS wants oculus to push their gear as the 'looking at a virtual screen' concept, but that is not the design concept of it.", I don't think that's clear. The point is that that lets any game USE it. That's the fallback mode for if a game isn't built for VR. That doesn't mean Microsoft doesn't want people to build stuff specifically for VR, it would just be lame if ALL games couldn't be displayed on it, regardless of whether they use it for anything but a "regular" type display.
  • Murloc - Saturday, June 13, 2015 - link

    virtuix omni + oculus rift will be a win. It's not even a treadmill so cheaper and smaller.
    The current videos are stupid because they aren't tracking the gun so it's useless to aim with it, but with IR leds they will be able to separate gun pointing and head movement.
  • Wolfpup - Friday, June 19, 2015 - link

    But some kind of motion control wont' respond quickly, or at all. It doesn't work without VR so I don't know why it would magically start working with it. Even if it did work, you're still sitting in one spot, and you're still not actually touching anything. Abstracting it away one small step, but adding in much more precision-i.e. leaving things how they are, seems like it'll end up a MUCH superior option, just as it is without VR.
  • Wolfpup - Friday, June 19, 2015 - link

    I'm guessing a traditional controller (or mouse/keyboard) will be ideal for VR just like they are normally. Every alternative input method has been a joke, imprecise and no fun at all.
  • sabrewings - Tuesday, June 23, 2015 - link

    Granted, I haven't tried them, but that's not the impression I've gotten from anyone who used SteamVR's controllers. Not one person has said they are imprecise. In fact, I've read in several independent articles that it's so precise that when they hand them to you and you can see them in the virtual world you have no problem reaching out to grab them since they're right where your brain (and the SteamVR tracking system and headset) says it should be. Combine that with testers of the HTC Vive prototypes saying that its overall experience is better and very resistant to nausea, and I think they have a real winner.

    I can't wait to try them. I know it'll be a premium system but I foresee not wanting an Oculus at all after getting the Steam headset first. I'm concerned that all Oculus will have is brand recognition since it's been in development publicly for so long. SteamVR has been in development just as long and I think they have more "out of the box" ideas than Oculus.
  • Murloc - Saturday, June 13, 2015 - link

    no extra joy stick needed for porn.
  • izmanq - Monday, June 15, 2015 - link

    instead of controller they should've go with something like leap motion
  • eadams9 - Monday, June 15, 2015 - link

    I'm surprised no one has meshed this with the Novint Falcon yet. Perhaps with some game that already has Haptic feedback support....I believe the original Left4Dead did this best. Insofar that I've never felt more in the game as when using anything else (when paired with a good set of headphones and a dark room).

    Only problem was that it destroyed your accuracy compared to other players. Of course, holding down the trigger on a fully automatic weapon SHOULD do that. But, the effect was strong enough that we basically only played on servers with other people who also had a Falcon. Otherwise too much complaining.
  • 7F20 - Friday, June 26, 2015 - link

    I have tried out many of what I would consider second or third generation game demos and experiences, and it is amazing. The single biggest obstacle to VR is going to be managing people's nausea. Not everyone will get nauseous, but enough people do that it's a problem. This is the reason that the hardware is just going so slowly; because the HMD makers are all trying to get the "comfort" thing right. If you go onto the Oculus share (where the demos are) you can see a "comfort" rating on apps and games. That should tell you something about just how important that factor really is.
    I can also tell you that every aspect of the experience has to be smooth and imitate reality as closely as possible in order to prevent nausea (in different people to varying degrees). The frame rate, the resolution, and the sound all have to sound believable. For the sound, they licensed RealSpace 3D Audio, which is like a physics based 3D sound thing that is similar to 3D video rendering, but for audio. The move to use such a high resolution video screen is going to be really important as well, but the system requirements for VR are going to really high. There has already been a enormous amount of graphic rendering optimization work put into smoothly rendering such high resolutions, but it's still going to take (according to oculus) a $1500 system to use it. In any case, whether or not this is the moment for VR, I have tried it, and it is paradigm-changing. VR will eventually be huge for certain.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now