• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Xbox says the VR market is currently too small for it to chase

nemiroff

Gold Member
Let it die off like 3D TV’s did.

That won't happen. AR/VR is here to grow. Ironically both 3D TVs and normal TVs died off / will most likely die off in favor of AR/VR in the relative near future. I mean. why would we need physical TVs if we can f.ex. just project and sync the output into the retinas of whomever is in a room.

With that said, while Oculus cleared some of the biggest VR hurdles of the past decades, there are things yet to be solved and iterated. And it's a race sustained by enthusiasts, venture capital, and juggernauts.

Some continuous challenges from the top of my head (And yes; Some are clearly more important than others, some of them clearly overlaps, and some clearly goes away by fixing others)

- Form factor
- Lens tech
- Display tech
- FOV
- Non-seated locomotion
- Motion / force simulation
- UX
- Processing power
- Tracking
- Cost and Price
- Connectivity
- Standards
- Social acceptance
- APIs
- Walled gardens?
- Content availability
- Completely new technology needed? (retina projectors, neural links etc.)

Seems like a lot, but from a helicopter overview we are actually not that far from a huge disruption.
 

nemiroff

Gold Member
I want VR to get big, but I can't get past the fact that I get bad motion sickness when trying to play games with free movement. Idk how they'll ever fix that.
Yeah, you're not supposed to overcome that so-to-speak..

What you're experiencing is dissonance when the brain expects the body to feel gravity and force based on what your eyes see. Yeah, you're not alone, it's a big issue.. Some can tolerate it, but most people will feel exhaustion over time, and some yes; pure nausea.

The only way to fix it in the short term is:

- 1:1 scale tracked motion *
- Teleportation
- FOV reduction
- Motion rig / "threadmill"
- A fixed visual point in your FOV, like a simulated nose also helps a bit

On-rails motion also helps (but which isn't an option for free movement of course)

* Can only be solved by using a room with a size 1:1 to the experience. OR, it can be solved by using algorithms that guides your motion so that you feel like you can walk straight for hours but in reality the algorithms makes you literally go in big circles (and you won't know that because it doesn't feel like it). But you'll need like a warehouse for that.
 

TBiddy

Member
VR is a funny thing. Sure, it's great fun trying VR-simulators in an amusement park (racing, walking the plank etc.), and it can be fun at parties at home. But sitting down, having a prolonged gaming session while wearing VR goggles? Nah. Very few people like that.

Sales numbers are (at best?) okay-ish, but usage numbers tell a different story. People buy the headset, but most rarely or never use it. Maybe things will change in 10 years when Apple delivers a good looking, well working wireless headset for a price that makes sense. But until then, I suspect VR will remain what it is today.
 
Last edited:

Ar¢tos

Member
if 0 upcoming announced 1st party PSVR2 game is not bad then I will leave you to it. I am just saying this is exactly what affirming MS’ decision to not invest in console VR.
The Switch seems to survive well with one or two 1st party games/year, why does an optional accessory needs more than that?
I'm fine with playing indies only, I don't need AAA bloated boredom and the good small AA games from 1st parties are really rare nowadays.
 

ArtHands

Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
The Switch seems to survive well with one or two 1st party games/year, why does an optional accessory needs more than that?
I'm fine with playing indies only, I don't need AAA bloated boredom and the good small AA games from 1st parties are really rare nowadays.

Nintendo only releases 1 or 2 1st party games per year now? Wow, ok man I am not going to stop you lmao
 

DaGwaphics

Member
Hype for VR seems to be going the wrong direction, I can't see much point for players not already involved in the space to jump in now.
 

diffusionx

Gold Member
Let it die off like 3D TV’s did.
I find it surprising that anyone who cares enough about vidya to be posting in a games forum would say this. VR is transformative and revolutionary technology, like when 3D games started coming out in the 1990s. It isn't a fad. It enables all sorts of new experiences that are simply impossible with the existing technology, similar to how 3D games could do things you simply could not on a Super Nintendo.
 
Last edited:

XesqueVara

Member
Didn't the VR market crater this year compared to the last one? Like even PSVR 2 couldn't save it.
 
Last edited:

diffusionx

Gold Member
People have been saying that for years, maybe even decades, though. Yet here we are.
You say this like it is theoretical. You can buy a VR headset, right now, and play games on it. You can see the types of experiences it opens up and how it changes other ones to bring them to a different level.
 

Robb

Gold Member
You say this like it is theoretical. You can buy a VR headset, right now, and play games on it. You can see the types of experiences it opens up and how it changes other ones to bring them to a different level.
Exactly, and yet it’s still considered extremely niche. Most people don’t care.
 

JimboJones

Member
People pointing to the cloud and saying it's a small market too are sorta missing the fact that all the cloud providers already have that infrastructure set up for other parts of their business so it would be foolish for them not to try and establish a presence in that area.
 

Robb

Gold Member
I don't see why that matters for someone who cares enough about videogames to post about them on a forum. You're operating on a niche level and presumably care about advancements and new game designs. VR has all of that, it doesn't need to be mainstream for you to enjoy it.
For sure, I do think it’s cool tech and it definitely provides something that regular gaming can’t. But it’s nothing I’d want to own/purchase for myself.

So naturally I’d rather see most companies put that money/R&D into things I’d actually have an interest in.
 
Last edited:

diffusionx

Gold Member
For sure, I do think it’s cool tech and it definitely provides something that regular gaming can’t. But it’s nothing I’d want to own/purchase for myself.

So naturally I’d rather see most companies put that money/R&D into things I’d actually have an interest in.
Right, so the point is that it is not a fad. 3D TV brought *nothing* to the table. It didn't make games better, it didn't help movies, actually a lot of movies were worse because of that garbage. VR actually brings a lot to gaming and opens up a lot of possibilities. I wish it was more popular, but it's a tough nut to crack.
 

acm2000

Member
3d tv died because people dont want to have to wear special glasses, on top of their glasses and vr has the same issue which will prevent it from full main stream success, it can however be a large "niche" market and already is.

I dont blame MS for not wanting to bother with all the R&D costs Sony has chucked at PSVR but if and when the market truly explodes im sure they will or they will add support for an existing headset range.
 

Eotheod

Member
Yeah, you're not supposed to overcome that so-to-speak..

What you're experiencing is dissonance when the brain expects the body to feel gravity and force based on what your eyes see. Yeah, you're not alone, it's a big issue.. Some can tolerate it, but most people will feel exhaustion over time, and some yes; pure nausea.

The only way to fix it in the short term is:

- 1:1 scale tracked motion *
- Teleportation
- FOV reduction
- Motion rig / "threadmill"
- A fixed visual point in your FOV, like a simulated nose also helps a bit

On-rails motion also helps (but which isn't an option for free movement of course)

* Can only be solved by using a room with a size 1:1 to the experience. OR, it can be solved by using algorithms that guides your motion so that you feel like you can walk straight for hours but in reality the algorithms makes you literally go in big circles (and you won't know that because it doesn't feel like it). But you'll need like a warehouse for that.
That's how Zero Latency solved locomotion sickness, was to utilise large warehouse space (about 20m*20m each game space in Brisbane). This allowed us to make games that trick the players into moving around large areas but in actual fact are retreading ground.

Best use case was elevators, as we wanted verticality but in a safe way so other players on the "ground" level are not run into or cause field of view disruption. So what we did was mapped an area in the quadrant that a user could go to and "feel" like they are entering an elevator to then walk around a deck, but in actual fact it was a static movement to an active contained movement.
 
What about Skyrim, re7,8?
re 7,8 sure are immersive...skyrim is so old I really dont care if its VR or 2D. But again, lets include RE titles, thats such a tiny sum of available games. Plus if I can already play them regular, Im not gonna buy a 3d headset just to see another point of view. It would be a different story if they came out only for the VR.
 
But the hand/body motion market was big enough to build Kinect??

They were working on Kinect in some form before the Wii even came out, it was likely sunken cost to see if they had something that would put them ahead of everyone else in that field. It started out strong but then died off after a few years, all those rip-off kinect device barely moved the needle.

Right, so the point is that it is not a fad. 3D TV brought *nothing* to the table. It didn't make games better, it didn't help movies, actually a lot of movies were worse because of that garbage. VR actually brings a lot to gaming and opens up a lot of possibilities. I wish it was more popular, but it's a tough nut to crack.

3D TV was 2M 3D TV's in 2010, 24M in 2011, 41M in 2012, and 44M in 2013. These jabs at 3D TV don't make any sense given that VR hasn't reached 15M and most of the time is less than 10M per year. I'm not saying 3D TV is better for gaming or not but it clearly appealed to more customers for gaming, movies, and almost everything else with a higher peak.

I’d rather they compete to help push the medium forward. But if it’s not their thing then it’s not their thing. No harm no foul.

Pushing the medium forward would be letting the current incarnation of VR die so something better with better tech and implementation takes it's place. The fact people are desperately trying to save the current form of VR with all it's flaws and lack of appeal with consumers is only going to create more iterative change that doesn't resolve any problems as the market continues to shrink. The longer it takes to refresh to the next cycle the longer it will take for innovation to make it better.
 

diffusionx

Gold Member
3D TV was 2M 3D TV's in 2010, 24M in 2011, 41M in 2012, and 44M in 2013. These jabs at 3D TV don't make any sense given that VR hasn't reached 15M and most of the time is less than 10M per year. I'm not saying 3D TV is better for gaming or not but it clearly appealed to more customers for gaming, movies, and almost everything else with a higher peak.

No, 3D TV was added to TVs that people already were buying, and were in all but the most low end sets. I bet if you did a survey on how many people watched 3D content on those TVs, it was probably less than 10%. If 41 million people were watching 3D stuff regularly at home in 2012 it never would have burned out. I owned multiple 3D sets myself and probably could count the amount of times I watched something in 3D on one hand.

And my point had nothing to do with popularity anyway.
 
Last edited:

Romulus

Member
3d tv died because people dont want to have to wear special glasses, on top of their glasses and vr has the same issue which will prevent it from full main stream success, it can however be a large "niche" market and already is.

I dont blame MS for not wanting to bother with all the R&D costs Sony has chucked at PSVR but if and when the market truly explodes im sure they will or they will add support for an existing headset range.


If VR is a niche, then so is XBox. The Quest platform has been keeping up with Xbox and outsold it for 2 years, both series Xbox consoles.
 

splattered

Member
Someone pointed out to me in the PSVR2 thread you can buy prescription lense caps of some sort so you dont have to wear glasses with VR... i have yet to check it out but would be amazing if it works well.
 

Rob_27

Member
Someone pointed out to me in the PSVR2 thread you can buy prescription lense caps of some sort so you dont have to wear glasses with VR... i have yet to check it out but would be amazing if it works well.
It does I got a pair from vroptician. Cheapest delivery from Germany to UK took 2 weeks from order.
 

Techies

Member
Except there’s 0 upcoming announced VR title in development from Sony studios since Astro Bot isn’t announced and Horizon is released.
Resident Evil 4, is the reason I have not sold my psvr2.

The perfect storm could happen this year for VR.

Resident evil 4 (psvr2)
Quest3.
Unreal Injector.

Xbox app with cloud streaming was announced a while back for Meta, so this is where Xbox is going to make their first entry.

Playing starfield in an augmented reality screen. With the galaxy map on roof.

Not sure they will go that far, but that's the current possibility for Xbox, 2d games on meta device which could make both platforms grow.
 

Wonko_C

Member
I never understood current VR fans stubbornness of not wanting the VR scene today to die so new technology can bring it back in another 5-10 years with new tech and implementation that would make the idea more appealing and more marketable to consumers. Instead we have people desperately trying to avoid the stats and pushing to save headsets that aren't in many areas much different than in 2016.

When 3D glasses were out from the red magnet lens, to the plastic white green and red, than later the plastic white blue and red glasses, then the metal blue and red glasses using lens instead of plastic covers, transparent 3D, and then glasses free, no one was desperately trying to save companies putting out their takes or implementations of red and blue white plastic glasses. No one was doing that the fans used them but knew that those were not going to be the long-term implementations of the 3D TV idea and the concept evolved over time.

But for some reason people since the hysterics from 2016 making this generation of VR seem like "this is it", are still advocating that we are almost there.

People like to go after the death of 3D TV, but when 3D TV's returned last, they shipped 2M 3D TV's in 2010, 24M in 2011, 41M in 2012, and 44M in 201 . This still ended up dying off a few years later because the use and appeal was limited. But I'm sure it will come back with a new implementation as it has several times before that will become appealing for a new age and new generation.

In comparison, VR has never sold 15m in it's best year and for most years has sold less than 10M and has been trending downward for some time.

People will bring u the Quest 2. Fair enough, but from a game developer perspective there's nothing about the Quest 2 that would make you want to put a ton of money on Virtual Reality. Meta can tout whatever number they sold, estimates suggest by now it has passed 20M, but that's just a number.

If you have 20M headsets in the wild but your MP or gaas-lite games don't have a high number of players or you aren't seeing game announcements of 3-4M copies sold, then what's the context behind that 20M? The reason for the sales were two changes compared to other headsets with the Quest was still a new thing: Price and wireless. Period.

Apple may sell a couple million just because of the brand and some businesses and art academies may do something with it on top of the hardcore fans, but there's nothing about their headset that's much different than Quest or Sony's implementation and it shares many of the same problems and has created several new ones. Also unlike what some believe, Apple isn't interested because of seeing growth, they were working on their headset against the suggestions of their own internal leadership for years so the best we got was better lends and a more comfortable strap but similar design ideology from 2016.

If you can't sell units, if you can't have games with 5M players buying MTX, if you don't have the retention for gaas, why would developers poor money on the medium as it is now? There needs to be radical change in VR but many current fans aren't seeing that.
Personally, the fear comes from VR never surfacing again if it dies, also if it's dead that means there isn't any active investment into development and the tech won't advance as fast (if at all). And lastly I wouldn't want there to be no more new VR games to play.
 
God I love VR. I only want more PC VR games using airlink with my Quest. It's the best. But VR absoutely has a content problem. I find myself playing the same games over and over again. And the new games I play just make me want to play older, better games that I've already beaten. You look at the Playstation VR library and it's mainly games that have already been out for years. Some of the best stuff came out when oculus CV1 was first released. Roborecall is still one of the best VR games I've played. Google Earth VR is incredible and has never been updated. How is there no Quest version of Google Earth VR?

A lot of the time, it feels to me like content wise, the best of VR has already happened. Aside from The Compound, I rarely have a good reason to pick up my headset. But I constantly find myself wanting to use it. Just need a good reason.
 
Personally, the fear comes from VR never surfacing again if it dies, also if it's dead that means there isn't any active investment into development and the tech won't advance as fast (if at all). And lastly I wouldn't want there to be no more new VR games to play.

People said this about 3D, the original Smartphone decline and more, but it always ends up that the category comes back because the concepts and ideas can easily work but the implementation needs to be changed. VR cannot fundamentally work as is for mass use, efficiency, and appeal. VR has more pluses and use cases, with many concepts it can be used for than 3D TV's and yet 3D TV's had a height of around 45M and the height of VR has been 12M or less mostly below 10M yearly? 3D TV's had periods of not being cheap just like VR too with less lower options than VR. It's simply the current implementation is just not the one that people need to see.

Apple will get a launch buff because of brand and tech but it's not different from top headsets before outside some smaller improvements that should be farther ahead this many years in, and that's because Apple has partially stopped paying attention to the market, and of what it did it's been building based on the start of the flawed implementation of current VR with this headset being designed for at least 6 years if not more. Which means that not much of their Vision headset, if any, is forward thinking. They just gave a flashier presentation and concept explanation for the layman than Meta did, Google and Samsung announced a partnership which has been hampered by AR people leaving Google and Samsung who can clearly enter buy itself and was one of the big names in VR when they are in it, has no interest in entering themselves. The current VR environment is clearly not where it needs to be.

So when people make claims like Microsoft and Walmart are missing out and they will end up behind when VR becomes big that's a pipe dream VR as it is now isn't in a position to entertain that theory yet. I think people are letting their fears one again hold back the technology.

No, 3D TV was added to TVs that people already were buying,

You have no idea what you're talking about, those numbers were 3D specific TV's from manufactures shipped, which is why the numbers crater after the peak. What's interesting is your entire post can apply to VR so I'm not even sure what point you were trying to make regardless.

Bottom line, VR needs to take time in the oven and come back later with new implementation that is ready for consumer appeal and efficiency with useful software for individuals and businesses, justifying the prices unlike now.
 
Top Bottom