Iwata: Nintendo to expand beyond games

[alex.rshare]

Yeah, sure.







#Microsoft_Smartglass #PlayStaton_Cross_Controller #Cannot_Replicate_Muh_Nin10doh

First of all, Microsoft Smartglass is ridiculous compared to Wii U. A tablet doesn't even have physical buttons.

Second, they are not integrated and they have technical issues.

Third, no developer will ever focus the main gameplay on these technologies because they could sell the game only to people who have both systems.

Fourth, these are just a poor tentative to "artificially" replicate the Wii U experience by combining TWO systems. It's really not the same thing.

 

[Foxi4]

First of all, Microsoft Smartglass is ridiculous compared to Wii U. A tablet doesn't even have physical buttons. Second, they are not integrated and they have technical issues. Third, no developer will ever focus the main gameplay on these technologies because they could sell the game only to people who have both systems. Fourth, these are just a poor tentative to "artificially" replicate the Wii U experience by combining TWO systems. It's really not the same thing.

You don't need physical buttons on the tablet - you have them on your controller. I don't know what technical issues you have in mind either - it's a matter of the way the developer wants to utilize the technology. No developer ever focuses using these technologies in main gameplay elements, but it's not like they do on the Wii U either, so your point is moot. As for artificially replicating the Wii U experience, using two screens for gameplay on a home console was not Nintendo's idea in the first place - Sony's done this before with the PSP, they just didn't build a controller specifically around the concept. It's not the same thing, no, but you claimed that the experience cannot be replicated on another system - clearly it can, as shown above. Thing is, nobody's barging into stores to get this sensational Wii U experience, so hey.

 

[grossaffe]

You don't need physical buttons on the tablet - you have them on your controller. I don't know what technical issues you have in mind either - it's a matter of the way the developer wants to utilize the technology. No developer ever focuses using these technologies in main gameplay elements, but it's not like they do on the Wii U either, so your point is moot. As for artificially replicating the Wii U experience, using two screens for gameplay on a home console was not Nintendo's idea in the first place - Sony's done this before with the PSP, they just didn't build a controller specifically around the concept. It's not the same thing, no, but you claimed that the experience cannot be replicated on another system - clearly it can, as shown above. Thing is, nobody's barging into stores to get this sensational Wii U experience, so hey.

And Nintendo did it before Sony did with the Gameboy Advance connectivity. While the idea is not entirely new, the scale of integration is. There's much better data bandwidth to communicate to the external screen, which is also a touchscreen adding more interaction, and the integration of motion-tracking opens up more possibilities for this screen, and not just for motion controls like swinging a bat, but having the camera follow your motion opening up the possibilities of a greater sense of presence.

 

[Foxi4]

And Nintendo did it before Sony did with the Gameboy Advance connectivity. While the idea is not entirely new, the scale of integration is. There's much better data bandwidth to communicate to the external screen, which is also a touchscreen adding more interaction, and the integration of motion-tracking opens up more possibilities for this screen, and not just for motion controls like swinging a bat, but having the camera follow your motion opening up the possibilities of a greater sense of presence.

...and Sega did it with Neo Geo-to-Dreamcast connectivity and with the VMU, it's not a matter who does what first, it's a matter who does what right. Essentially speaking the Wii U gamepad inflates the price of the Wii U for the sake of embedding functionality which is considered entirely optional *cough cough* almost like the Kinect.

 

[grossaffe]

...and Sega did it with Neo Geo-to-Dreamcast connectivity and with the VMU, it's not a matter who does what first, it's a matter who does what right. Essentially speaking the Wii U gamepad inflates the price of the Wii U for the sake of embedding functionality which is considered entirely optional *cough cough* almost like the Kinect.

I'm on-board with Nintendo including it as part of the package, and as much as I love to hate on Microsoft and the Kinect, including it as part of the package is the right thing to do if you want it to catch on and garner support. The gameboy connectivity was optional, and as a result we didn't see too many developers doing interesting things with it (although I really liked Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory's use of to monitor your sticky cameras). The Wiimote was part of the package for the Wii and it was a resounding success. The me-too Playstation Move was an optional peripheral and it flopped, despite all the talk about people wanting wii-like controls on more powerful hardware. The gamepad is an important part of the Wii U that separates it from it's competition to bring unique gameplay opportunities. If it were optional to own the gamepad, it wouldn't get much support. If it's the choice between new, unique gameplay and moar power, I'll take the unique gameplay possibilities.

If you want to talk about inflating prices for the sake of embedding functionality, how about those resource-hungry OSes these consoles are running? Using oct-core processors so that you can dedicate a few cores and 4GB of memory to run multiple operating systems? The draw to game consoles for me are:
A) Optimized for playing games. They should be able to perform better than a PC of equal specs because they're optimized specifically for playing games. Now we're running three operating systems concurrently so we can, I dunno, upload videos of playing games?
B) Unique gameplay opportunities. The Wii U certainly does that with it's gamepad. The possibilities of asymmetrical gameplay are pretty huge with it. Nintendo land gave us a taste, and I think there's more where that came from if developers pursue it.
C) Exclusive games.

I'd rather a console put it's money towards giving us unique gameplay opportunities and optimize it's hardware for actually playing video games than a console that puts its money towards more powerful hardware that it puts towards non-gaming overhead.

As it stands now, I can see a reason to own a Wii U and supplement it with a PC to give me the best spread of gaming opportunities. I'll get the unique gameplay opportunities the tablet provides along with Nintendo's exclusives, and I'll get the moar power provided by PC that will play the majority of PS4/Xbone games plus It'll handle more ambitious games like Star Citizen, AND it provides it's own unique gameplay opportunities with more control options and Virtual Reality (yes, I know Sony's going me-too here, but the PS4 does not have the hardware to adequately support VR). And of course, it also doubles as a great machine for me to do work on as a computer engineer, and all that processing power comes in handy when I'm trying to program my FPGA so it takes a matter of seconds to generate the bitstream rather than minutes.

 

[Foxi4]

I'm on-board with Nintendo including it as part of the package, and as much as I love to hate on Microsoft and the Kinect, including it as part of the package is the right thing to do if you want it to catch on and garner support. The gameboy connectivity was optional, and as a result we didn't see too many developers doing interesting things with it (although I really liked Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory's use of to monitor your sticky cameras). The Wiimote was part of the package for the Wii and it was a resounding success. The me-too Playstation Move was an optional peripheral and it flopped, despite all the talk about people wanting wii-like controls on more powerful hardware. The gamepad is an important part of the Wii U that separates it from it's competition to bring unique gameplay opportunities. If it were optional to own the gamepad, it wouldn't get much support. If it's the choice between new, unique gameplay and moar power, I'll take the unique gameplay possibilities.

If you want to talk about inflating prices for the sake of embedding functionality, how about those resource-hungry OSes these consoles are running? Using oct-core processors so that you can dedicate a few cores and 4GB of memory to run multiple operating systems? The draw to game consoles for me are:
A) Optimized for playing games. They should be able to perform better than a PC of equal specs because they're optimized specifically for playing games. Now we're running three operating systems concurrently so we can, I dunno, upload videos of playing games?
B) Unique gameplay opportunities. The Wii U certainly does that with it's gamepad. The possibilities of asymmetrical gameplay are pretty huge with it. Nintendo land gave us a taste, and I think there's more where that came from if developers pursue it.
C) Exclusive games.

I'd rather a console put it's money towards giving us unique gameplay opportunities and optimize it's hardware for actually playing video games than a console that puts its money towards more powerful hardware that it puts towards non-gaming overhead.

As it stands now, I can see a reason to own a Wii U and supplement it with a PC to give me the best spread of gaming opportunities. I'll get the unique gameplay opportunities the tablet provides along with Nintendo's exclusives, and I'll get the moar power provided by PC that will play the majority of PS4/Xbone games plus It'll handle more ambitious games like Star Citizen, AND it provides it's own unique gameplay opportunities with more control options and Virtual Reality (yes, I know Sony's going me-too here, but the PS4 does not have the hardware to adequately support VR). And of course, it also doubles as a great machine for me to do work on as a computer engineer, and all that processing power comes in handy when I'm trying to program my FPGA so it takes a matter of seconds to generate the bitstream rather than minutes.

The OS gripe is true as far as the XBox One is concerned, seeing that the system runs a derrivative of Blade for the games, a Windows kernel for multimedia functionality and an overseer OS - I can see how this could've been simplified with one OS that does it all. On the PS4 however, the system is merely running a small distribution of FreeBSD, much like the PSVita - it's not terribly resource hungry and it does not impact the overall hardware performance to a huge extent.

I fully agree that integrating the Gamepad or the Kinect in the product instead of using it as an accessory is a good way to promote its use, but to do that, you have to have a pre-made array of titles that show the use of this new peripheral device to draw in attention. The Wii kicked off with Wii Sports in the bundle - it got people excited for the new controller because the whole game, albeit practically a tech demo, was oriented around motion controls. The Wii U had Nintendo Land, sure, but it failed to make the same impact. To promote the Gamepad or the Kinect as viable control methods both Nintendo and Microsoft needed a launch line-up that make use of them... and they did not, so the devices are hanging on thin strings and nobody's excited for them.

I agree that the touchpad gives certain gaming opportunities and I too think it can be used creatively, but facts are that it isn't being used now and feels like dead weight. This is not a DS situation where the touchpad is right under the main screen - the screen is on the controller and looking at it necessitates looking away from the TV, so the setup, although similar, is less favourable.

As for the PS4 "not having the resources to support proper VR", I completely disagree - everything depends on how you program the game and how advanced geometry you choose to use. If a game will be designed with VR specifically in mind, it will be designed in a way to support it - plain and simple.

 

[grossaffe]

The OS gripe is true as far as the XBox One is concerned, seeing that the system runs a derrivative of Blade for the games, a Windows kernel for multimedia functionality and an overseer OS - I can see how this could've been simplified with one OS that does it all. On the PS4 however, the system is merely running a small distribution of FreeBSD, much like the PSVita - it's not terribly resource hungry and it does not impact the overall hardware performance to a huge extent.

It can't be all that small if it's taking up 3.5 GBs. For comparison, the PS3's OS ate up 96 MB. Supposedly they'll try to lower the footprint in the future or something? We'll see if anything comes of that. The Xbone, on the other hand, uses up 3GBs for it's OS. I'm also curious about A) how much CPU overhead these OSes have and B) will games even be optimized to take full advantage of oct-core processors? I would imagine fewer cores of greater individual power would be better for this application, but I could be wrong and maybe this will only make PC gaming better by forcing developers to focus more on multi-core programming.

I fully agree that integrating the Gamepad or the Kinect in the product instead of using it as an accessory is a good way to promote its use, but to do that, you have to have a pre-made array of titles that show the use of this new peripheral device to draw in attention. The Wii kicked off with Wii Sports in the bundle - it got people excited for the new controller because the whole game, albeit practically a tech demo, was oriented around motion controls. The Wii U had Nintendo Land, sure, but it failed to make the same impact. To promote the Gamepad or the Kinect as viable control methods both Nintendo and Microsoft needed a launch line-up that make use of them... and they did not, so the devices are hanging on thin strings and nobody's excited for them.

I thought Nintendo Land did a good enough job of showing off potential provided by the touchscreen. Can't speak for the Kinect as I haven't much experience with it or it's launch titles. The Gamepad could use a little help with getting more software that shows it's not just a Nintendo Land device, but if it weren't bundled, you may as well consider it DOA.

I agree that the touchpad gives certain gaming opportunities and I too think it can be used creatively, but facts are that it isn't being used now and feels like dead weight. This is not a DS situation where the touchpad is right under the main screen - the screen is on the controller and looking at it necessitates looking away from the TV, so the setup, although similar, is less favourable.

I disagree. Less favorable for certain applications that the DS does with the second screen? Certainly. But also more favorable for other applications such as asymmetric multiplayer. And the built-in motion-tracking gives you the ability to look around the world through it while the TV fulfills other purposes as a static screen. Having them decoupled has it's advantages and disadvantages, but fortunately we already have a device with the advantage of having the screens coupled in the 3DS, so the Wii U opens up the opportunities of the decoupled second screen.

As for the PS4 "not having the resources to support proper VR", I completely disagree - everything depends on how you program the game and how advanced geometry you choose to use. If a game will be designed with VR specifically in mind, it will be designed in a way to support it - plain and simple.

We'll see. If you want a real good VR experience, you need high resolution, low latency, and high refresh-rate, not to mention it has to render twice to get the stereoscopic effect. Even if it somehow manages a smooth 60 Hz without drops at 1080p with low poly counts, it's still not ideal for VR; maybe it'll be passable. Plus, I'd rather support Palmer's vision for VR than Sony's.

 

[Foxi4]

It can't be all that small if it's taking up 3.5 GBs. For comparison, the PS3's OS ate up 96 MB. Supposedly they'll try to lower the footprint in the future or something? We'll see if anything comes of that. The Xbone, on the other hand, uses up 3GBs for it's OS. I'm also curious about A) how much CPU overhead these OSes have and B) will games even be optimized to take full advantage of oct-core processors? I would imagine fewer cores of greater individual power would be better for this application, but I could be wrong and maybe this will only make PC gaming better by forcing developers to focus more on multi-core programming.

That's not true, the OS of the PS4 does not use 3.5GB. 2.5GB of RAM is reserved for the OS, although it's very unlikely that all this space is used at once - it's simply the maximum allocated amount of space. 4.5GB is dedicated strictly for games and the remaining 1GB of RAM is used as so-called flexible memory which can be used either for the game or for peripheral services - this memory is allocated dynamically by the OS. The reason why most of the memory is pre-allocated is very simple - so that the CPU doesn't have to waste cycles to allocate it on-the-fly - precisely what PC's do and consoles generally don't.

According to Digital Foundry, some of those 2.5GB's may actually be space reserved for functionality that's yet to be introduced, as according to earlier leaks, the system itself was only supposed to need 512MB RAM. I can see how that might be the case, it makes sense.

I thought Nintendo Land did a good enough job of showing off potential provided by the touchscreen. Can't speak for the Kinect as I haven't much experience with it or it's launch titles. The Gamepad could use a little help with getting more software that shows it's not just a Nintendo Land device, but if it weren't bundled, you may as well consider it DOA.

Nintendo Land should've been a game sold with every single Wii U bundle, both Premium and Basic. Moreover, the system should've had more games like it available from the get-go. As far as the Kinect is concerned, I can't think of a single killer app for it as of today (we're talking Kinect 2.0), I think Microsoft thought that using it to control the console itself was a good enough selling point, but it clearly wasn't since most commentators online are expecting a Kinect-less SKU with great anticipation.

I disagree. Less favorable for certain applications that the DS does with the second screen? Certainly. But also more favorable for other applications such as asymmetric multiplayer. And the built-in motion-tracking gives you the ability to look around the world through it while the TV fulfills other purposes as a static screen. Having them decoupled has it's advantages and disadvantages, but fortunately we already have a device with the advantage of having the screens coupled in the 3DS, so the Wii U opens up the opportunities of the decoupled second screen.

I agree, it definitely improves split screen style gameplay, but you don't always play split screen - we're talking about improving the single player experience, and for that you have to look away from the main screen to look at the gamepad unless you play holding the gamepad up (and obstructing the TV while at it). Again, the setup is interesting and it's good for maps, inventories, GUI's of all sorts etc, but it's less than ideal for obvious reasons. It opens a lot of new opportunities, every new peripheral does, but Nintendo failed at the challenge of convincing the public that it's indispensible which is the whole point.

We'll see. If you want a real good VR experience, you need high resolution, low latency, and high refresh-rate, not to mention it has to render twice to get the stereoscopic effect. Even if it somehow manages a smooth 60 Hz without drops at 1080p with low poly counts, it's still not ideal for VR; maybe it'll be passable. Plus, I'd rather support Palmer's vision for VR than Sony's.

I agree, we'll see. Here's for hoping that Sony flicks their magic wand and does something exciting with Morpheus, although personally I'm not a huge VR enthusiast.

 

[osirisjem]

B) Unique gameplay opportunities. The Wii U certainly does that with it's gamepad. The possibilities of asymmetrical gameplay are pretty huge with it. Nintendo land gave us a taste, and I think there's more where that came from if developers pursue it.

asymmetrical gameplay ?
I think you have been drinking too much Nintendo Kool Aid.

Feel free to elaborate how NintendoLand uses the gamepad effectively.

Another reason developers don't embrace the GamePad ... is ... why should they make 2 games (1 for console, 1 for Gamepad) for the price of 1 game.

 

[FAST6191]

asymmetrical gameplay ?
I think you have been drinking too much Nintendo Kool Aid.

The concept of a "Symmetric game" is a fairly important one in game theory, however it certainly does not require* or possibly even terribly benefit from a second hidden screen (that could be the concept of perfect information that comes into play there)·

*a driving game where we get to pick cars with a different amount of speed or acceleration for one (give or take how you might wish to perceive the game's starting point).

Now I have certainly not seen anything that would properly justify the pad's existence in this regard but it is not a complete marketing term, indeed it is a classic example of the "pick a science term and abuse it" strategy.

 

[TripleSMoon]

I don't understand why people downplay the edge the PS4/XBO give over last generation system. Seriously, both offer 16 times the RAM/VRAM memory, +/- 5 times the processing power and 6 times the GPU power. The capabilities of the hardware are absolutely amazing and squeezing out good graphics no longer requires tricks and tedium. Yes, the first batch of games doesn't necessarily rub the huge difference in your face, but that was the case with most generation jumps.

Spoiler

This s*it ain't even funny.

Of course, but there's better cameras and worse cameras, and given the choice, they will pick better ones - same goes with other peripherals and features. If what you're saying was true, the mobile phone business would be stuck in the 90'ies since "all phones make calls so there's no need to upgrade". Technological jumps necessitate upgrading, it's how the cookie crumbles.

I think your avatar text suits this discussion quite nicely.

 

[grossaffe]

asymmetrical gameplay ?
I think you have been drinking too much Nintendo Kool Aid.

Feel free to elaborate how NintendoLand uses the gamepad effectively.

There are multiple instances of asymmetric gameplay effectively using the gamepad in Nintendo Land. Luigi's Mansion, for example, where the user with the gamepad can see everything while the other players cannot see the ghost on the big TV. It makes playing the two roles very different and something you can't do if everyone is on the same screen. There's Chase Mii where the player with the gamepad has a map of every other player's location so he can plan his route to try to avoid them better while the players on the screen only have their own limited view and must communicate and coordinate to find the gamepad player. This was experimented with back on the gamecube with the GBA connectivity in the game Pacman Vs. where one player plays as pacman on the GBA and sees the whole map and the ghosts' locations, while the ghosts use the TV and only have a limited view from their own location. Don't see how this is such a hard concept to understand.

I agree, it definitely improves split screen style gameplay, but you don't always play split screen - we're talking about improving the single player experience, and for that you have to look away from the main screen to look at the gamepad unless you play holding the gamepad up (and obstructing the TV while at it).
Again, the setup is interesting and it's good for maps, inventories, GUI's of all sorts etc, but it's less than ideal for obvious reasons. It opens a lot of new opportunities, every new peripheral does, but Nintendo failed at the challenge of convincing the public that it's indispensible which is the whole point.

Again, it depends on how you plan on using it. Zombi U, I think, had some good ideas in how to exploit the fact that you have to take your eyes off of the TV to go through your inventory in real-time whilst a zombie could be sneaking up on you, creating a sense of tension and requiring you to look over your shoulder, if you will. I will agree that Nintendo could have done a better job of showing off more ways to use it for single-player purposes, though, and that may be causing some of the trouble. The other problem seems to be that developers have this odd idea that unless they make use of the gamepad's second screen, there's no point in having a game on the Wii U.

I agree, we'll see. Here's for hoping that Sony flicks their magic wand and does something exciting with Morpheus, although personally I'm not a huge VR enthusiast.

Well... I'll disagree here, but for somewhat selfish purposes. I want to see Palmer on top of the VR world. The only reason Sony might have a half-decent VR HMD in the first place is because he showed them his prototype before he started Oculus. I'd rather see the true innovator win out over the copycat.

 

[CompassNorth]

Pick up your Nitendo™ Apology Cards at your local store!

 

[Joe88]

Well... I'll disagree here, but for somewhat selfish purposes. I want to see Palmer on top of the VR world. The only reason Sony might have a half-decent VR HMD in the first place is because he showed them his prototype before he started Oculus. I'd rather see the true innovator win out over the copycat.

Copycat?
I hate to tell you but sony has been releasing HMD's (Glasstron) as well as experimenting with VR add on sensors for the HMD's since palmer was just 5 years (probably even before he was born depending on the r&d cycle)

 

[grossaffe]

Copycat?
I hate to tell you but sony has been releasing HMD's (Glasstron) as well as experimenting with VR add on sensors for the HMD's since palmer was just 5 years (probably even before he was born depending on the r&d cycle)

Yes, I know Sony's been doing VR, but it was expensive and nowhere near the quality of the Oculus Rift. So despite them experimenting with VR since Palmer was 5, Palmer still came in and bested them. You didn't see Sony touting their amazing VR before the Oculus Rift with their HMZ-T1, but now suddenly they've made giant advancements after getting a look at the prototype Rift? Are you going to argue that if Palmer never entered the scene with his device and he never showed it to Sony that Sony would still be attempting to bring VR to the PS4?

 

[Pitou]

I just hope they won't go back to this! Loll!

I still have one at home.

 

[DSAndi]

Hmm late reply

Not everyone has the money to build a 'decent' PC, or know what to look for.

As for emulation, people buy consoles to play the games legitimately, and not to pirate them. Playing games on the console that were made for a specific console work much better than to emulate them on PC. Try to play any Wii game that needs the motion functions of the Wiimote, that isn't going to work easily.

You dont need a decent PC to play games. You need a decent PC if u want the highest resolutions, with all extra stuff on. I can play most games that are 1-2 years old just fine with a 4 year old PC 3Ghz, 2Gb Ram, Gigabyte Nvidia GTX460 OC. Even if u buy a new moderate PC with mid grade grafics card u will be able to play all games. Even i can with my old sys.

Emulation is not using pirated software to play games in general. I have a libery of old consoles and games and i can also often even use the original discs to play otherwise i can rip my games ( from discs or carts ) to emulate them.

PC can't emulate neither Xbox360 nor PS3, a 8+ years consoles.

Why emulate em when the games come out for PC aswell ? The few exclusive titels i dont really need.

As i said i dont want to play a new super mario, Zelda and that stuff anymore. If that is ur taste and u like it good for u.
The new games are a lot of fun i bet, but i just cant see em anymore.

Oh as for Sony and Microstoft dont know and dont care for em either.
I will only start buying consoles again if there are no games comming out for PC.
Otherwise im just fine buying Assassins Creed 2 & Brotherhood for 2 Euros and Relevations and 3 for just 7-9 Euro. Batman Arkham asylum & City (booth GOTJ Edition) for 10 € and serveral other games.

With the few time i have to play games i will be fine for the next 15 years with cheap but great games and not state of the art PC.

If your an hardcore player with lots of time, then u need mostly all 3 consoles and a PC, but if your casual a PC is just fine and can do a lot more things then only play games.

 

[Bladexdsl]

If your an hardcore player with lots of time, then u need mostly all 3 consoles and a PC/quote]

no you just need a pc and wiiu.
wiiu: for nintendo games
pc: for everything else

 

[Joe88]

Yes, I know Sony's been doing VR, but it was expensive and nowhere near the quality of the Oculus Rift. So despite them experimenting with VR since Palmer was 5, Palmer still came in and bested them. You didn't see Sony touting their amazing VR before the Oculus Rift with their HMZ-T1, but now suddenly they've made giant advancements after getting a look at the prototype Rift? Are you going to argue that if Palmer never entered the scene with his device and he never showed it to Sony that Sony would still be attempting to bring VR to the PS4?

It comes down to market interest, back in the day those VR units (and not just from sony, there were a few other companies as well that had VR HMD's) were very expensive, had very few supported applications, and the general public just didnt care for them back then, they were bleeding more money then it was taking in so they axed it, sony did continue making HMD's (still very expensive)
but now market interest has shifted to VR, Palmer did help spark this interest with his device
but regardless if a company already had HD+3D HMD's out why would they pay some middleman to buy his device when they can just add gryoscopic sensors to the existing product? they already have experience in the field
the whole VR thing it just another fad that will wear out in time

 

[grossaffe]

It comes down to market interest, back in the day those VR units (and not just from sony, there were a few other companies as well that had VR HMD's) were very expensive, had very few supported applications, and the general public just didnt care for them back then, they were bleeding more money then it was taking in so they axed it, sony did continue making HMD's (still very expensive)
but now market interest has shifted to VR, Palmer did help spark this interest with his device
but regardless if a company already had HD+3D HMD's out why would they pay some middleman to buy his device when they can just add gryoscopic sensors to the existing product? they already have experience in the field
the whole VR thing it just another fad that will wear out in time

It's not just head-tracking that the rift brought in. He brought in a way to vastly increase field of view. Sony's HMZ-T1 only had a horizontal FOV of 45 degrees, compared to his prototype with a 90 degree horizontal FOV. The reason why there wasn't user interest in VR was because the VR on the market was neither adequate nor affordable. The Oculus Rift greatly improved the experience at a fraction of the cost. If he didn't do that, Sony's HMDs would be just as static and expensive as they'd been as they wouldn't have a design to copy.

I mean, heck, Blockbuster was in the movie-rental business long before Netflix came around, but then Netflix came in and revolutionized the industry. Blockbuster tried to me-too Netflix's business model, but where's blockbuster now?