Quoting: EikeYeah, that's why people replaced their little Nokias with big Smartphones. Oh, wait...

I hear you say "But these do way more!"
Yes, just like VR devices.

Not a valid comparison.
Smartphones are carried around just like old Nokias. They are bigger, but still fit in pockets, jackets, etc.
I had/have both, there really isn't much of a difference.

And those that really are too big simply don't sell much - or are tablets, which is a completely different thing altogether.

But here, we are talking about something that supposedly replaces monitors at some future point in time.
Which, again - for all the reasons I wrote above and more - is just very unlikely.

Have this situation, outside of gaming:
A team of marine biologists are on the ocean, letting their mini-robot into the depths to do some research.
The drone is piloted by one of them - via VR (a good use case, I'd say).
The others are not sitting by idly. They are analyzing the data that is gathered live by the drone and also watch the live images (cause it's interesting!).
How will they do all of that at once? All sitting in their chairs, having VR-headsets on, using their VR-Excels and VR-Browsers? :lol:
Probably not. They will be in front of their own monitors, analyzing, while also looking at the big one that displays what the pilot is seeing (and possibly more).

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: TheSHEEEPWhat I care about is the claim that this tech with limited use-cases is THE FUTURE.

Who said that, apart from yourself?

Not too many here, actually.
I just made that point as it comes up time and time again in too hype-y articles, discussions, etc.

Some of the people here just saw their big hobby attacked by me calling it a gimmick and jumped in its defense, going all "you're just a negative nancy, mememe" on me for daring to have some points (none of which have ever been disproved, btw) that do not exactly speak in favor of VR ever becoming a really big thing.

I don't actually care too much about VR, funny enough.
Calling people out on their BS is a hobby of mine, though, if you were about to ask about why I'm still doing this.
I'm actually having a good time.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: scaineWeird - you still think this is an argument. Like you're "right" and we're all "wrong". If I don't like olives, do you really think you can argue my position on them? That you can argue their case and I'll be like "Woah, you're right! I need to eat more of these delicious olives! I've been wasting my life not eating them!".

I like olives.
Other than that, the "metaphor"/example didn't really work.

Quoting: scaineMove on. I'm excited by the notion that I can play VR on Linux. Really excited, because I've tried it on Windows and it was (for me) an incredible, game-changing (literally) experience. You're not. That's all there is to it. Your "facts" don't matter to me, clearly, since I've tried it and still love it, right? (Sorry - didn't read any of the rest of your post/facts, since... well, why bother?)

I couldn't care less if you love it or not.
If you still think that this is what I'm arguing, you have fully failed to get what I'm saying.

What I care about is the claim that this tech with limited use-cases is THE FUTURE. The thing that will finally replace those monitors, mice, ...
Because that is just incredibly unlikely, for all of the reasons I wrote above. And probably more.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: beniwtvThat's not a fact. Did you try the new wireless Vive Pro yet to know how heavy it really is? What about all these new battery technologies that make them very light that are being developed as we speak? What about other future developments? Remember - computers used to be the size of a house!

Again, Moore's Law. It has been disproved. There is a natural limit to how small things can be.
But it doesn't matter, my main point is, it will always weigh more than nothing and will always require you to put something on top of your head. Which will always be more than putting nothing on your head.
Big breakthroughs and replacements of current tech are only established if something is LESS cumbersome, not more cumbersome. See cars, smartphones, etc.
Getting into VR will always be more cumbersome than just looking at a screen.

Quoting: beniwtvAgain, that is not a fact - but your opinion. Plenty of people that played VR vs non-VR disagree with you here, and find the experience way better, including gameplay-wise. There's some cool things you can to with the VR controllers - specially the Occulus Rift ones - that aren't possible (or more cumbersome) with your keyboard and mouse. Like moving fingers, picking things up, moving / rotating them around, etc...

There seems to be a confusion here about what gameplay is. I might have misused the term, or you did, or it is just one of those terms that are too broad.
What I meant was NOT controls (which is what you describe), but game mechanics. AI, player motivation, short/mid/long-term goals, basic game mechanics, various calculations, etc. All of these need to work regardless of how the player views or controls it all.
Again, look at games like EUIV, StarCraft, Sonic, etc. Being in VR changes nothing about how those games work, therefore it cannot improve them on that level. That is not an opinion.
Neither is it an opinion that extra effort is required by developers of those games for very little gain.

Quoting: beniwtvYes, you need a bit of space to take full advantage of VR, which is a fact well pointed out. I barely have space, but I'll make sure to have space when moving into a new house. But here you're assuming again that people don't have space and don't want to make space, which honestly, again is your opinion.

An own house?
How nice for you. Too bad the majority of people live in (rather small) flats in cities...

And how many people exactly do you think are willing to make the space for VR? Except for gamers/enthusiasts?
Again, remember this is supposedly the "future way people will view/experience things", replacing normal screens and monitors. Nobody has given any point as to why the average person should care. And the average person is very much required for anything to be "the future".

Quoting: beniwtvAgain, your opinion. You assume everyone wants to have other things running while playing VR, or hates not being able to interact with the world around them while playing. And honestly, grabbing a drink you can still do when taking a break while playing...

It is simply a fact of life for the majority of people that you cannot really be in your own sphere for large amounts of time. People have families, jobs, responsibilities. Most people I know are happy if they can find one day on the weekend they can spend with their hobby. The rest of the time, they can maybe spend time with their hobby while also having to be somewhat involved in other things.
Only few can afford that VR kind of isolation often. And for something that can only be done rarely, why would you spend the cash?
Anything that wants to be a truly big deal (see above) just cannot be that situational. This is not an opinion.

Quoting: TheSHEEEPWrong. Calling people for what they are behaving like is simply the truth and I will continue to do so. If you think me short-sighted, call me out on it, I'll gladly disprove that.
Let's not get to the kindergarden level of "let's all say nice things only", please. That doesn't lead anywhere useful. I rather have people speak their mind than trying to be nice for the mere sake of being nice.

Quoting: beniwtvWhoa! If you don't want to have a civilized discussion, but instead insult people, then let's just stop right here. Because THAT really doesn't lead to anything useful.

If you think that civilized means holding back because someone's feelings could get hurt and nicety for the sake of nicety, then I can only fully disagree.
For me, that sounds like kindergarden, not a discussion among adults. Sometimes, steam must be vented, and I am rather a willing target of that than to try and force others to hold back what they truly think. Nor will I let others hold me back, it's not like I frothingly throw tantrums around ;)
If we all did your form of civilized, we would live in a society of mutes, because everything that could be said, could hurt someone. Better to let things out and allow people to grow in the face of adversity.

I was always more of a Klingon, really. What can I say? Deal with it.
Or ignore me. I do not care too much, either way.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: TheSHEEEPThere's a small increase in immersion due to the hardware, but due to the player just looking at the field, that is very, very limited.

I don't know why it didn't work for you. But you must have noticed that it's hugely different for many people. In fact I cannot remember a single one, in real life, online or journalist not having experienced a huge increase in immersion. For me personally, it was like having stepped into the monitor after more than three decades of sitting in front of it. That's what VR is all about.

That point was made for non-FP games.
For first person games, I agree with you, it does increase the immersion.
Personally, it is not an immersion that I really need - for me that comes from gameplay mechanics, storytelling, etc. I guess this might be simpler for other people?
How I look at the world - that is just a window. If I move the mouse or hold that controller toward an item - it is just an input command. And the mouse is way more reliable - just looking at some Twitch streamers trying to grab stuff with the Vive controller. Seems to be a challenge on its own - though I would expect improvements with tech advancements here.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: scaine

Quoting: TheSHEEEP"Passionate argument about something they hate

You don't like VR, we get it. This isn't something you can actually argue about though, you know? You have your opinion, other people have theirs.

Ahh, the good old "I'm all out of arguments, so let's make all these facts opinions so I don't have to discuss them any more".

The only opinion part about what I'm saying is the part where VR will never be the widespread, replacement-of-current-peripherals thing some make it out to be. That's obviously in the future, and while I base my predictions on logic, I haven't quite reached prophetic levels yet ;)

But all the rest is not opinions, it is facts.

Wireless can be done, but that introduces a need to keep your headset charged. Which introduces the need for a battery of some kind. Which increases the weight. Even if the devices do get lighter as a whole, there are limits to how light they can be, Moore's Law has been disproved years ago. There will always be that.

Games not specifically made for VR, but just supporting it cross-peripherals (VR is not a platform, it is a peripheral) can never be a significant improvement gameplay-wise, yet require effort by the developer to support VR. There will always be games not supporting VR because it wouldn't make sense to support it.

The other way around: Games made specifically for VR could always be made working for monitors as well. There is no movement my head can make that cannot be imitated with mouse & keyboard.

Space: The "full body" VR experiences (which offer significantly more than just sitting with the headset) require a ton of space. Most people simply don't have that space or are not willing to spare the space. For some proper movement that doesn't feel restricted, you'd need at least 2x2 - 3x3 meters. That's the size of a trampoline. Compare it to the space PC & monitor needs.

Price: The better the tech gets, the more expensive the devices will be. They do get cheaper with time, but just as every proper hardware, they will remain on a not-cheap level. And that will always be in addition to the PC/console - which already cost quite some dough as well.

No multi-tasking. When I play a game, I like to have something else running on my other monitor. Maybe a guide, maybe something entirely different. I can always have both in my view at the same time. And I can interact without problems with the world around me, too. Like looking at someone when talking to them. Or grabbing a drink. Good luck with any of that while you have the VR headset on...

I'll stop here, but there's more. And all of that combined should already make it clear to any neutral observer that, no, VR will most likely not be the widespread current-tech-replacement some make it out to be. It is simply not practical enough. It will remain something for people with the space and money to make use of it.

And no, I don't hate VR. That's something you came up with to not having to bother disproving any of my points. I'm neutral about VR. I might even buy a device, would like to try it out once Star Citizen comes out. Or rather, IF it does...

What I do hate is human stupidity and mostly baseless hype.

Quoting: scaineRegardless of where you stand on the subject though, there's no need to get personal. Calling people sheep, or narrow-minded/short-sighted for not agreeing with your opinion only undermines your own position.

Wrong. Calling people for what they are behaving like is simply the truth and I will continue to do so.
If you think me short-sighted, call me out on it, I'll gladly disprove that.
Let's not get to the kindergarden level of "let's all say nice things only", please. That doesn't lead anywhere useful.
I rather have people speak their mind than trying to be nice for the mere sake of being nice.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: beniwtv

Quoting: TheSHEEEPI did try it at a VR arcade. Played some zombie shooter with a friend. It was fun for an hour or two - if I had been alone, it would have been even less.

Sorry, but I don't think that is enough to get a good picture of VR games and it's capabilities.

Funny, first you make the suggestion, then you say it's not enough.
Grasping for arguments, are we?

I don't need to do or play more than that to see what is going on. As a gamer for over 20 years and a 3D programmer for more than 10, I know more than enough to recognize this whole thing for what it is:
Lots of hype with not-nothing but fairly little substance behind it.

There'll be some games, I can see some use cases in the medicine or military sector. Maybe there'll even be a few movie-like experiences made for it - I mean, besides porn.
An industry of some size will be established around it.

But this is not the hottest thing since cars or the internet. Its use cases are too limited. Too little gain for the consumer for too much effort (and cost, obviously).

Quoting: beniwtv

Quoting: TheSHEEEPWhat developer would ever go the extra mile to offer that?

Just one I know of the top of my head:
http://store.steampowered.com/app/238280/Legend_of_Dungeon/ [External Link]

Some others I found searching 5 minutes (there are probably others as well):
http://www.playfulcorp.com/#lucky [External Link]
https://www.oculus.com/experiences/rift/1026648920729545/ [External Link]

All of these are good examples for my points, so thank you.
Not one of those games offer better gameplay due to VR - of course not, because they (would) work just the same with a normal monitor. There's a small increase in immersion due to the hardware, but due to the player just looking at the field, that is very, very limited.
Just not enough for all but enthusiast devs to bother with it. I could see it as an interesting tech to play with and implement in a game from the developer perspective - but a worthwhile one? Eh...

Quoting: beniwtvLook, nobody says you should like VR or get VR, but please make sure you inform yourself about the subject, before calling all gloom and doom.

I'm not calling gloom and doom. I'm calling it what it is: A gimmick with limited use cases, too cumbersome, conceptually flawed and expensive all around to ever spread really wide.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: calfretYou apparently have never actually tried VR. ... Give it a shot at a VR arcade before throwing the idea out completely.

I did try it at a VR arcade. Played some zombie shooter with a friend. It was fun for an hour or two - if I had been alone, it would have been even less.
After the initial phase, I could only think about what lame gameplay that game actually had. And of course it had to. No way you could play something more challenging with that headset on, cables around and the weird "controllers" in your hand.
It was really just that - a fun gimmick for a while.

And yes, it was clunky and heavy. At least in contrast to wearing exactly nothing on your head.
You can also completely forget about interacting with the world around you - say, someone wanting to show you something (or simply wanting your attention for other reasons). For that you gotta remove the set, then put it back on, etc.
No amount of technological advancement will solve these issues. There are conceptual flaws.

Quoting: beniwtvIf we take out the "specifically made for VR" games (which I don't think is the best example of VR), there are some really good games for VR out there - Serious Sam / Talos Principle / Everspace for Linux, Lone Echo / Doom 3: BFG Edition with VR Mod / Star Trek Bridge Crew / Fallout 4 / Elite Dangerous for Windows, Resident Evil 7 for Playstation VR, just to name a few.

Of course it works for some games, I'm not denying it is an improvement in some cases.
But, not surprisingly, only for first person games.
Which in itself limits the viability extremely.

Good luck playing in VR something like Europa Universalis, Street Fighter, Factorio, StarCraft, Sonic... the list is endless.
It would take an extreme amount of effort to make non-FP titles even somewhat usable in VR - and the result would still at best be at the same level. You won't see a noticeable increase of immersion when playing a non-FP game in VR. What developer would ever go the extra mile to offer that?

Quoting: TheSHEEEPI can tell you this though: VR is indeed the future. All the big names are signing onto this for both production as well as gaming enterprises.

Amazing. Despite me bearing the name, it is you being the sheep.
You being dragged blindly into some hype that has little to no basis.
All the big names have been signing into this for years. And it went... precisely nowhere. Sure, it spread a little. And it will continue to do so.
But this will at no point reach any spread even close to majority.

"All the big names" always jump at any hype as it could turn out to be profitable.
It is certainly no proof of anything except the fact that there is a hype, if you think otherwise you are strangely naive.

Remember when 3D in cinemas was THE THING? And where are we now? A certain portion of movies (mostly action) utilize it, the rest doesn't and of the movies that utilize it, maybe 30% utilize it well. For the rest it was a waste of money to spend the extra cash to see the movie in 3D. And that stuff was praised as THE FUTURE decades ago.
In a few decades from now, the exact same will be VR. An accepted thing, a tool, a gimmick, probably normal to see every now and then but certainly nothing the majority deals with regularly.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quite honestly, I still see VR as little more than a gimmick.

I can see absolutely no breakthrough for a tech that requires you to have a rather clunky and heavy (even the lightweight ones) device on your head all the time.
And don't even get me started on most of the games made specifically for VR. Horrible stuff. Remove the VR aspect from them and what you're left with is games that wouldn't even sell on mobile because of simplicity and bad design.

With the improving tech and otherwise ease of use, I can see it as a gimmick with a somewhat increasing audience, though.
But they way some people jump at it as if it was THE FUTURE... lol

Reminds me a little of the Wii or Kinect when it came out.
Forget about those pesky controllers and keyboards! Right.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

What a weird question...

On which platform would you like to play Iron Harvest on the most*?
*We are developing IH for PC first. The Kickstarter campaign and all Alpha/Beta builds will be PC-only. We’d like to gauge the level of interest in versions for other platforms.

Windows PC
PlayStation 4 / PlayStation 4 Pro
Xbox One / Xbox One X
MacOS
Linux

And it is single-choice.
Should be multiple choice, really. Even people who dual-boot are rather likely to pick Windows as they just know it makes most sense.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Hmmm... I'm happily using Steam, so a launcher would have to have an easy Steam integration (including downloading/installing Steam games), etc.
The Steam client itself is severely lacking in the library department (unable to filter my own games by tag, or anything really)...

I'd really only see an advantage in an additional game launcher if it is better than Steam in that regard.

View this comment - View article - View full comments