I said they are "the same" only in terms of how your brain can immerse/rewire itself to understand those new controls as if they were artificial limbs. Even with the same level of fluency, some controls are definitely better than others depending on the domain.

So VR is definitely not pointless. Motion tracking for your head/arms/feet unlock many applications that are previously hard or impossible (e.g., 3D sculpting using mouse/tablet vs a motion controller).

But it's not always better than mouse/keyboard input for let's say typing or shooting a target. Having more irrelevant degrees of freedom makes it harder to master your input controllers, even if you already had a lifetime of practice with it in the real world (e.g., I am okay with doing parkour levels of movement with WASD/Space but won't ever try it with my real limbs even though in theory I know how to climb over a real world fence).

VR games that allow you to physically move around are immersive in a way that is unprecedented, IMO, even with very simplistic graphics.

10 seconds of thinking: new gameplays, training, simulations, non-game immersive experiences, communication, art...

I'm not an ayatollah of VR, but without any foundation to support it this is a pedantic and ignorant comment

Sorry to break it to you but many games (like first person shooters) currently have no depth perception and would be greatly enhanced by it. Literally every 3D game you play today can and will be enhanced in VR because of this reason.

I don’t think this is true. In a gaming context VR provides more immediacy of immersion, much greater presence and wider accessibility. These factors also make VR a compelling case outside of gaming for all sorts of tasks.

have you tried a vive?