http://www.develop-online.net/news/vr-momentum-slows-dramatically-on-steam/0223756 Considering the hype and the intense debates, this is surprising to me. And an alarm sign for this market segment already, imo. Racing games are better suited than most other game genres to embrace VR, so in the racing game communities there might be slightly more people having gotten a set. But lets not forget that complex games, not to mention complex simulators and especially complex cockpit flight simulators like the moduels by PMDG, needing complex controls and thus interaction with the keyboard, cannot reasonably make use of these sets at all. And the current market price is way too high. It remeinds a bit of the hype around 3D movies and TVs some years ago. 3D was the word to say in those days. And suddenly - they almost completely disappeared. The quality of movies was too bad, having sacrificed quality of story for ways to arrange the scenes and shots in a way maximising 3D effects. Regarding TVs, people, families, couples simply did not care to wear those shutter glasses at home. It all depends on whether the low sales nevertheless can fuel mass production so that the prices drop SIGNIFICANTLY - or producers quit and call it a failed bet before they start to lose too much money. Also, there must be a massive and lasting support in titles that make good use of this VR techznology. Ifd thew game is only focussing on doing something in 3D, howerver, but what is being done is done in a bad way or is a boring game concept, than we can start to dig the graves out for this latest attempt to install VR (its not the first there was - all that came before, failed as well). But it is too early to already starting the requiem, okay, i admit that. As the article says, it is a reasonable assumption that the deals for those willing to get on board with the first generation devices for prices in the 700-800 bucks range (plus a very robust system!) , by now all are aboard already. I think for the forseeable, imminent future, no dramatic changes ot this disappointing situation can be expected. Sobering.
I got myself a cheap DK2, works great with my system and the immersion is indescribable even on the DK2:s lower resolution!! But the prices of the consumer versions, and the fact that many will have to up their systems to run them well surely holding the market down.. More will probably get onboard with newer and more VR models coming out, making the prices drop. VR and Sim Racing are a match made in heaven, as if it was made with sim racing in mind! About flight sims I have tried War Thunder, which works great with the DK2 and a Thrustmaster T-Flight X Hotas that I have mapped to all the nessesarry actions. But other more complex flight sims like DCS and FSX with mouse controlled buttons needs a bit more resolution than the DK2 has to be able read all the gages, controls on all small buttons and stuff. But they are also working with the Leap Motion, so you are able to see your hands and operate the virtual buttons in VR.
Yes, that is the way ^. But it needs much better implementation. In a combat sim like DCS series, because you must be able to run over the buttons much faster and yet reliable and precise, due to the quickness of events on the battlefield, and in PMDG-style super-complex cockpits due to their complexity that outclasses the stuff that FSX has packed into its content box by default. Third person view games, roleplaying games like Bethesda's, or ArmA, or the upcoming Kingdom Comes: Deliverance (big tip of mine!) , that are quite demanding in specs already now, then will need even beefier systems. To handle the VR. And to handle the game itself. And this at a time when the traditional CPU development is showing its physics limits now.
There is no doubt that vr is awesome. But I said this before here, it's not there yet for me. First the prices are way too high and I think that the software or usage for me would be limited to racing only with a few rounds in star citizen or other space sim. I just don't think it's worth the investment. But I will always keep an eye open, if the vive drop to about 60% of its current price I think I might take the plunge. But until then I got plenty to keep me busy with.
It doesn't tell the whole story though. Every new technology will have a small base of tech-aficionados jumping on ASAP, which is what we're seeing. Everyone who might be interested is watching for reviews. Interestingly enough, a survey made by ESA states that some 22% of all 'frequent' gamers are likely to purchase VR unit within the next year. ( http://essentialfacts.theesa.com/Essential-Facts-2016.pdf ) But..... I'm in complete agreement with @Skybird that it really depends on what software gets developed for VR. Simulation is an obvious avenue for it, but that's a pretty niche genre when looking at the complete gaming market. Aside from that I've only seen a few horror/survival titles, and what are basically glorified tech-demos (flying and climbing mostly). And if developers try to go the same way as the 3D TV, and go for games that showcase the technology but leave out immersion and story-telling, it'll flop. IMO, we'll find out in December. If the VR devs can't show significant sales leading up to the holidays, I'd start to get worried. Then again, I'm also pretty convinced that VR will eventually be the way to go. Might not be this generation, but it's not too far off. Oh and...... Who the hell spends $500 on a VR headset, and then uses it to fly a default 737??
The moment they get this one LINK-VIDEO working in that visual detail and resolutiuon, managable and handable with good precision and speed, and all that for a reasonable price - that will be the moment when I start thinking in terms of "we finally got there".
Let's see how the PS4 + VR will be doing, that has potential for bigger reach to mainstream. Imo we are still in the "developing" phase for VR, the devices are cheap enough for enthusiast and especially developers and professional users to build new forms of entertainment, applications.... That will keep it afloat for some more generations for sure. If you look at professional use, the devices are ridiculously cheap compared to CAVEs and give much better results for inspecting objects up close. There is also related investments in the AR space (hololens, magic leap...), which has huge potential for everyday as well (think of providing mechanics x-ray vision and hints where to replace parts...), and there is a certain overlap in things you want to solve for both of them. Nothing is a sure thing, but big investments are made and it will probably be 5 years or more until we can say it's over the edge. However I am very positive that it will work out, because the use-cases are much more versatile than 3d tvs were, it's an all new experience. Companies throwing that money around for r&d know to be a bit more patient.
Regarding the statement that chip design is gonna be harder, that for sure is true. However, even as we may hit some new barriers, people are clever to find new ways. It will also mean we will be more and more clever about the design. If you look at Kepler vs Maxwell, there were still great gains made, despite the same chip process "simply" by working hard on improving the desgin. And if you look at some of the early PS3 games and the latest, you can also see how much developers can squeeze out of the same old hardware by being experienced and clever So that will keep us going, it may be "harder" than it used to be, but there is a common interest to push further and further.
This article doesn't surprise me much. Even if the current VR headsets are out since a few months, but we are still just at the beginning of a new VR generation. It's not fair to compare it with the rise and fall of 3D TVs. VR isn't just a three-dimensional effect. VR is giving you presence. You're not just a spectator (like with 3D movies), but a visitor of a virtual world. But VR needs more time to evolve. Many VR fans haven't jumped on the VR train yet, because of different things. The entry into VR is currently not a cheap one. Besides the pricy VR headset you need a beefy PC to get the optimal experience. And if you have finally invested all the money for the needed hardware, you're actually still left with half-baked VR software support. A lot of VR tech demos with just a playtime of under 10min. VR support for Racing sims are growing, but not where it should be. I agree with @heppsan that Simracing in VR is heaven. The immersion is mindblowing. At the other hand the consumer versions of the Oculus Rift and HTC Vive are technically still far away from being optimal. The resolution and screendoor effect is still on the edge of drivability. I think that many VR fans are still in the "wait and see" phase. I have only a DK2 and even if i'm very interested in Rift CV1 or Vive, i'm currently waiting for the second generation of Rift or Vive (or at least for lower prices).
The so far climax of the genre on PC. There are youtube videos proving that people got the 737 running on P3D. Flawlessly. But that was version 1, and I never went into P3D myself. Do you mean you cannot run these compleity monsters in later versions anymore? And what has come of PMDG's announcement to develope for P3D (some years ago)? Im out of flight sim business since three years or so, so I am not up to date. Sometime I miss the European flight schedules I ran. Had a good supply of airport sceneries by aerosoft scattered all across Europe.
I did not compare the sensation the viewer has, and did not intend to do so. I compared business policies and plans and expectations - and why they may fail (and have failed) in the past. I have just two 3D movies. Malificent, which I only bought to test the new function, and then got positvely surprised by the movie itself (its rather good), and Life of Pi, an excellent movie that really benefits from the 3D, there are scenes that quadruple their visual beauty in 3D, all while the effects got not overdone or did not push the movie to focus on them.
Yeah, you could trick the 737 into thinking v1 was FSX, but that stopped when Lockheed optimized the engine in v2 and onwards. The 777 is software locked, so you can't even attempt it. But sure, PMDG is developing for P3D as well. Only...... About 18 months ago they released the 737 for v2. All you had to do was fork over another $120 for it. No loyalty-bonuses, no upgrade prices for those who already had the FSX version, nada. In the meantime, Aerosoft, A2A, Alabeo, QualityWings, Majestic, OrbX, and Carenado all managed to update their fleet, either for free or for a nominal fee in A2As case. So that's when I (and quite a few others) decided that I had bought my last PMDG product. Well worth it though. As I said, I do miss the PMDG but being to able to fly through proper clouds, with proper cockpit shadows and no risk of OOMs is far better. The difference between FSX and v3 is night and day. Which incidentally is also why I'm considering investing in VR. Not so much for racing, but getting proper depth-perception in a flight-sim would be awesome.
I know nothing about vr but I presume with the headset on you can't see anything else but what would usually be on the screen? If so how can you navigate all your buttons on wheels, button boxes etc?
Judging from the amount of videos I see linked on /r/simracing and pop up in my youtube feed I'd say that sim racers are on the ball when it comes to VR. 0.18% of Steam Users is still more then 2 million adopters in less then a year. I'm unwilling to plunk down the cash myself until I have a chance to try a headset, and the Vive while awesome is priced too high since room scale thingie is out of the question in the mancave/rig corner so I'm holding out atleast until the Rifts start appearing in stores here in Sweden. Currently working in my favor I guess as it seems R3E is bleeding paying and prolific customers over VR. Edit: Just listened to Inside Sims Racings weekly thing where R3E was mentioned only in passing as the sim where the question no matter the news has been "when's VR coming?". It's a vocal minority to be sure at this point, but one that's grown quite fast in our little niche.
Well, accounts. But tbh I cannot remember where my mind grabbed the figure from so consider the numbers a poor guesstimate at best. Looking at the steam hardware survey reporting the 0,3% figure for VR doesn't state hard numbers either. =/ Still, I'd argue that VR adopters being a higher percentage of simracers than say the DOTA crowd is still valid.
0.18% of 125 million (this is the last total user stat Valve released) is only 225,000 people, not 2 million. VR's biggest problem atm is just its cost. Basically all the early adopters have bought in at this point, but for most of us the cost is still too high. It will be quite interesting to see how it evolves and changes, if it sticks around, over the next few years.
It's unclear what the baseline for those % values is... Last official claim was about 125 million "active" accounts, for whatever that's worth, even I have several accounts and I wouldn't consider myself a power user. So yea, probably more like 200k, if those numbers are based on those 125 mil. From my pov the price is one thing, long-term usability is the other. When I play I tend to do so for several consecutive hours and from what I've heard/read so far many people struggle when using a headset for longer periods, official recommendations are to pause for some minutes after half an hour? Maybe some of our early adopters could share their views/experiences on that topic.