I'm actually eagerly looking forward to what I guess would be called Fantasy Tourism.
VR apps that let you explore or even live in fully fleshed-out fictional locales. Of course it would probably just start off as Virtual Tourism, where you can remotely visit real-world cities and landmarks and interact with other visitors there, before adding beautiful, bizarre or surreal places that don't exist (or can't exist) out there.
I grew up and live in a fairly squalid corner of the world, and seeing pictures like [1] [2] [3] [4] fills me with a wistful longing. I'd totally spend most of my waking hours in these if I could.
[1]: http://i.imgur.com/F13RGuh.jpg (courtesy of 防人 on pixiv)
[2]: http://i.imgur.com/AKV5QkR.jpg (Raphael Lacoste from DeviantArt)
[3]: http://i.imgur.com/jlbAXdq.png (三登 on pixiv)
[4]: http://i.imgur.com/I6psL2j.jpg (by Ford Nostalgia)
No doubt popular brands will jump in sooner or later and start offering tickets to say Tatooine or the Shire.
They don't need to have any "gameplay" per se, but they should still have realistic physics (more than most proper games), be "staffed" by real people (running the in-world shops etc.) and of course offer lots of character/cosmetic customization features.
Whoever makes the first killer application of that idea will probably become THE social hangout for the kids of tomorrow to spend their time in, maybe killing Facebook and the like. That is, if Facebook doesn't come up with something like that themselves.
Come to think of it, VR in arcades could actually take off. Think of a physical enclosure designed to contribute to the presence of the VR experience. Arcade rail shooters have been accomplishing this for years through the use of a chassis that moves based on events within the game.
The tech is already here - the hurdles are pretty minimal, it's just a question of setup.
I can't imagine playing Xortex (a game in Valve's 'The Lab') on a 2D monitor. It just wouldn't be possible to even come close to replicating the experience.
Valve also has a new product called "Destinations" which is basically creation tools and a viewer for photogrammetry scenes. One of their examples is Mars, with a realistically rendered model of Curiosity on the surface (which itself is based on photos from Curiosity). It's the closest I'll ever get to walking on Mars. And being able to walk around an actual-sized Curiosity is quite something in itself.
I get what you're saying, but I think that's a rather terrible way to contrast radioplays and content made for TV. The experience of watching "Game of Thrones" isn't that different from listening to the BBC radioplay of "Lord of the Rings"[r]. I think "The Wire" or "Generation Kill" might be better examples of things that I think work better on TV, than I can imagine them doing on the radio. Or maybe "The Expanse" or even "Firefly".
Doesn't mean I don't like "Game of Thrones", I love the adaptation - but with its many characters and demanding storyline (even for those of us that have read the books) - I don't know. Somehow, while it is a beautiful production, I think it could've worked with a similar script for radio.
[l] Apparently the original series, in its 13 episode format isn't available to download/buy - if I understand it correctly the following Amazon link is to the remaster: https://www.amazon.com/Lord-Rings-Fellowship-Ring-Dramatised... See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings_%281981_...
A search did turn up this: https://soundcloud.com/inkmore/sets/lord-of-the-rings-radio
Which I assume should probably be taken down due to copyright infringement.
There is still a large sentiment that compares this technology to the Wii style motion controls, and they really aren't even close... at all.
First there's the expense of the headset. Granted, it might come down a bit, but it's still a large expense on top of a console.
Second, there's the space that you need to play a Motion + VR game. It's not trivial for people to get that. A simple console + TV setup can fit in any tiny apartment around the world. Dedicating a whole room just to play a game? That's like asking people to move house just to play VR...
Even in my house which is fairly spacious, I'd still need to move around furniture everytime I want to play. It's just not going to happen.
Motionless VR, or at least, seated + arm movement VR, has a fair amount of potential however.
The headset itself will basically be a plastic holder with lenses.
Google is already preparing for this future with Daydream (https://vr.google.com/daydream/).
The best idea I've heard so far is VR arcades, that would be fun.
Just because you're not able to do it, or unwilling to adjust a few things, doesn't mean others won't. HTC & Valve have sold nearly 100,000 Vives, Oculus probably similar.
I'm waiting for laser tag arenas that are fully mapped in VR. Walking up real stairs while seeing them in VR... What do you call it when it's past room-scale? Building-scale?
https://imgur.com/topic/Gaming/swpjI58
That does actually look like a great use for VR in gaming. Stationary character, mobile viewpoint.
It's not at all like a Wii style motion control. Gestures aren't merely mapped to button presses. You have precise control, so you can do something like swing a sword between a monster's shield and helmet.
That said, if the game is reducing the motion controllers to something like the Wii motion controls, then it is a gimmick, and you might as well be sitting on your couch.
It seems most who are calling it a gimmick either haven't tried it, or tried the dk2, or tried it at a trade show and haven't tried living with it.
I use it daily, for everything from a workout in holopoint to racing in project cars (all non vr driving games are now ruined for me, I of course picked up a wheel etc.), from minecraft to playing table tennis. I never thought I'd one day be in the minecraft world I started many years ago.
Playing greenwater at the moment and having to put it down frequently, as code has never made me jump and scream before.
Anyway. It's not a wiimote type gimmick. It's the future of human interfaces.
There is no doubt in my mind this is no gimmick, it's the next step.
It's just the whole movement thing I don't buy.
They've really got to think about the size of their market as well. Time and time again, any gadget or gizmo with limited hardware penetration has failed in the past. Motion + VR not only requires some fairly expensive hardware, but also requires a large clear space in your house somewhere. They're heavily limiting their market with that. No big publisher will seriously risk making a AAA game with such a small market.
Motionless VR has some serious potential though.
I'm not involved with them, at all. Just a fellow enthusiast waiting for this technology!
It would be nice to have something like that by my desk when I'm getting stressed out from work. Take 15 minutes and visit the tropics, Antarctica or the Andromeda galaxy.
Besides, I really enjoy playing 2D games in VR through Steam in that giant theatre room.
I don't even like wearing ear buds or headphones all day. There's no way I would last all day wearing a visor. I think for specific tasks it's pretty useful, but not for all day everyday.
If you are hanging out with friends, pull a little box out of your pocket, press it against the side of your face and start talking to some invisible people and acting as if the people right in front of you don't exist... then you are being a jerk.
But, what if you were physically separated from your friends and wanted to hang out with them. Imagine if you could pull out a little box, press it against your face, start talking to them and suddenly it was as if they were right there with you no matter where they were on Earth. That would be a tremendous social enabler.
VR is like the telephone, but more so.
That's my rant anyway. On a lighter side: You are right that hanging around someone who is playing a game in VR is no fun. And, currently most VR games are still single-player because there currently isn't enough market to support the budgets required for many good networked multiplayer experiences. But, social VR is so awesome that there is no doubt that it will be a major use, if not the majority of use of consumer VR.
Even if you're not playing a multiplayer VR game, the people around you are having a blast watching and playing along with you. See the thousands of YouTube videos where people play VR with friends recording.
> This is just plain wrong. Please see Rec Room.
I have a 2 year old and wife at home. During regular gaming, if my son or wife want my attention I am aware of it and it's trivial to pause and give them the attention they deserve. Goggles on the other hand are fundamentally isolating. It's hard to describe, but others that aren't sharing the experience with you feel cut off and almost hurt. Maybe that's not the best way to describe it but it's close.
The experience has put me off getting VR at this stage.
Lag needed to be improved a bit, but I think Metroid Prime and Resident Evil 4 on Wii had the best FPS type controls ever. Even with lag it was really fluid. Headshots in RE4 Wii were so easy.
We had the exact same problems with motion controls. They might momentarily enjoy the novelty of a motion game, but it's just a gimmick. When you get down to it, a lot of people enjoy just sitting on the couch twiddling their thumbs to get the character to do all the work.
They play games to relax, not get a workout. If you force them to stand up and move, you've already failed.
Where I do see VR having some interesting applications is in the workplace. Replacing all your monitors and work environment with a virtual space of unlimited scope.
Imagine remote working - where one moment you could be typing away on a sunny beach, the next you're in a scheduled meeting room with all your colleagues, without having to move an inch.