Comment by corytheboyd

2 days ago

I feel like VR would have “happened with the masses” by now given that the quest is wireless, excellent quality, and cheap. Personally I think it did, and it’s a success, it’s just that it has a lower ceiling because it’s an awkward rectangle that you strap to your face.

There is also, IMO, a huge software quality problem with VR.

I am baffled as to why all the first person games don’t copy Alyx’s control scheme, it’s the only one that feels correct to use. The rest of the first person games feel awful to play, once you get past the gimmick of “wow cool”.

Music/rhythm games work really well for VR, but that’s always going to be a niche market. I play beat saber all the time, it’s fantastic.

Everything else seems to be sandbox games. Fucking sandbox games. They’re funny the first time, but you can only throw objects so many times before the magic is lost, you just wish there was an actual game there to play.

I love VR, and I hope developers continue to innovate with it, but it’s never going to overtake console gaming, it’s just too different.

I don’t get why we think AR is going to be any different for games. Why would I want to see my living room while playing a game? VR puts you in whole other worlds. It’s… that simple, I think.

Those limitations provide room for something revolutionary. Figure out how to do VR without a giant rectangle strapped to your face, figure out better controls, figure out motion sickness, and you’ll have a revolutionary device.

For AR, I’m not thinking games, but computing in general. Glasses (or better yet, contacts) that can overlay things on your field of view could be huge. That could be the thing to displace smartphones once this becomes possible and actually good.

  • Oh yeah that would be a great use of AR, totally agree, and feel like we’re not even that far off on this one.

    • I think the biggest unknown is, how do you display dark pixels on a bright world in AR? Battery life will also be an issue. Both seem surmountable.