Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'GBAtemp & Scene News' started by Costello, Oct 13, 2017.
Personal opinion, resolution did it for me.
It's great for pron
Any other reason?
— Posts automatically merged - Please don't double post! —
I’d of kept it with the current spec if it was cheaper. The initial price was just too much for the product after trying it out.
It is a flop at this rate since they sell it as a gaming medium. They should sell it for the mass market and accelerate the adoption rate.
Minus price and resolution/specs...is there any other reason you dont like it?
We really need 8k in each eye, considering how frikin' close they are. and since we're just now getting to 4k with honkin machines, really amazing VR is still a ways off. But I think it's important we pioneer the tech, even if it isn't perfect.
I'm interested in the potential, but right now I don't think it's worth it due to the current hardware/software and price.
I'm excited about VR gaming the same way I am excited about cake: there is good cake, there is terrible cake, good cake is good, one should not dismiss all cake based on the terrible ones they've tried... and there is a time and a place for cake, and it doesn't need to be shoved into everything. This applies to any innovation but gaming seems to be the worst offender when it comes to shoving cake down people's gullet and making people sick of it. Speech recognition is fine, it has many legitimate uses, but imagine if MS Word banned keyboards and forced everyone to use speech recognition instead of typing. And that's exactly what game devs/producers are doing, trying to port everything into VR, regardless of whether it works or not, and people will get sick of it soon.
VR is a hiccup that comes back to the world of gaming every couple of years when people think that "now the technology really *is* here!", and they've yet to catch on with the mainstream. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for immersive gaming experiences, my only caveat is that I don't think I necessarily need a headset and two prongs to get there. I was quite immersed playing NES games on a small 15 inch CRT over fuzzy aerial, I'm not sure how much of an improvement a headset could provide. I'm not really looking for "the feeling of really being in the game" - I've got this thing called a brain and I can just think that, what's the difference between that and fooling myself into thinking I'm in the game? VR has always been a big leap for me that I could never quite justify, but with affordable headsets around I might give it a try one day. I mean, I already have a PS4 Pro, I might as well put that extra muscle to good use. I guess I'm just ambivalent towards it - it comes across as glueing a TV to your face. I get the 3D depth of field, cool, I'm just not that interested.
just another gimmick like 3D
i would rather ask if anyone is old enough to know this one :
back to topic, i could try the PS VR with the game Rush Of Blood ; and i must admit i really enjoyed the game and the feeling.
Now, saying i should pay 'bout €1000 to play it at home...
€1000 is a huge stretch, the headset costs €400 and you need to add the camera on-top which costs around €60. The Move controllers are optional, but even if you pick them up, a set of two costs around €80, totalling at €520, and you can slash that to €400 if you grab it pre-owned, it's hardly expensive at this point, it's no dearer than a quality TV set.
I own a Vive and EVERYONE I've had try it has come away amazed and surprised that the technology is as good as it is at this early stage. It definitely has that wow factor.
Only problem for me is that most of the games are essentially glorified tech demos. With the current software there isn't really any long term appeal.
VR has the potential to be HUGE and definitely much more than just a gimmick, but I think both the software and hardware need to mature a bit first.
Until it's wireless and affordable it won't take off.
I'm more interested in the practical applications than gaming with it.
Then add a PS4. Another €400. Here we are.
The tech is maybe not quite there for the consumers (I still maintain the fetish for high frequency could be solved by sorting out motion blur) and the moves by the early players to lock it all down in proprietary protocols and DRM mean I am out until it proves itself.
The tech is however quite useful for a few things I do for people so if the gaming types want to continue funding that like the high frequency trading finance types did for FPGAs a few years back then I am OK with that.
It looks fun, but given the lack of quality, non-gimmicky games and the stupidly expensive prices really put me off. And why in 2017 isn't all this shit wireless??? DITCH THE 50,000 CORDS ALREADY!!!!! The price probably pisses me off the most though, a stupid VR helmet and controllers shouldn't run anywhere near $500 or $600 dollars. More like $200 or less, since it doesn't do any rendering or heavy lifting.
I think it needs more time. Maybe in 5-10 years VR will be worth really looking into buying for me. While it has the potential to be great, the way a lot of games are using it is fairly gimmicky.