246
Survey says half of developers consider VR market on decline or stagnation
(www.gamedeveloper.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2024
246 points (98.8% liked)
Games
16580 readers
1599 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This is why there hasn't been a refresh on the Valve Index: not enough interest, not enough games. Half Life Alyx is still one of the few major games with any depth to them in the market, and you can't access it easily outside of the Steam ecosystem. In other words, it's unavailable for a lot of VR headsets. They aren't going to dump more resources into more VR games if people aren't buying the headsets or the games.
Steam Deck on the other hand? Huuuuuuge market, people want that shit.
True, but there are 2 sides to this: the majority won’t buy VR, unless there are enough games to play.
Studios should be actually investing and taking a risk, maybe it works out and becomes a big market, maybe not. If they keep going the current path, VR will forever remain an expensive niche gimmick. Which they seem to okay with.
There are probably better returns on making games for the existing markets, vs gambling money making games hoping to grow a new market. If VR ever truly takes off, they can always jump in later. (Which is a shame because I would love it if there were a ton of great VR games)
VR will never take off the way some other gaming platforms did. The situations where you can use it are just too limited.
I hate to say this, but I played through Half-Life: Alyx and my response was to the effect of “…That’s it?”
It performed badly, gameplay was largely based around very uncreative shooting (take out gun, shoot combine 10 times around corner, eject magazine, reach back, put magazine into gun, pull slide, shoot around corner 4 more times, repeat) and there were only 3 guns. Even the gravity gloves weren’t used in combat.
I was even more wowed by the few VR combat games that made some innovations or had features in the level to outsmart enemies.
Stand alone headsets can play PCVR games too, especially steam games, that is the most accessible market for PCVR on standalone. Most do it wirelessly, which likely isn't as bad as you are thinking, but some also still do it with wired and some even with uncompressed video over wire. But honestly, as the resolution and bitrate keep going up, the difference between raw and compressed gets harder and harder to spot. At this point, you can only really tell in side by side comparisons of still frames which feed is compressed.
The main remaining problem of compressed streams is the total latency added, most importantly the decompressing time, since it's done on the headsets mobile hardware. And the networking time. Though a dedicated network device, either a router or a bespoke VR streaming tool can get that down to 5ms or less now. My streams total latency to my wireless headset is about 30ms now. I wouldn't be able to professionally compete in a frame counting fighter game... but that is about the only type of game where that level of latency is too much. Heck, people of my generation grew up through a point in time where TV screen latency was over 100ms... And while I will admit that there is still a benefit to sub 14ms latency, it's not as big of a difference as it used to be. And that is only when I stream PCVR stuff, it's still under that for stand alone content. Which also is not as bad as you likely think it is.
I have a total of about 250 VR games currently, and I only buy about 10% of the ones I want to buy. But I have also been in VR for 10 years now. About 150 of my games are standalone and about 100 PCVR. With about 30 of them being titles that gave both versions for the price of one. There is no shortage of games, I could not possibly play even all of just the good ones.
A VR headset is basically a console now, except one you can stream your PC to if you want. Even just for flat games too, I have a Virtual 4k 120hz monitor in my VR headset because in real life my 4k screen is an older TV that can only do 60 hz pc input or a very janky 120hz for 1080p. The nice thing about streaming to a VR headset instead of some hand held device, other than 4k 120fps, is that I don't have to look at my hands or hold my hands up to my eyes to play. My neck feels so much better than it did when Phone, Switch, and Steamdeck were the best way to game away from a computer.
My headset is comfortable, I can, and unfortunately often do, wear it for 16 hours a day. I have a single third party mod for it that was less than 100 dollars to convert it from a 2 hour headset, to an infinity headset. There are multiple options, but I went with BoBoVR, dumb name, but quality product.
But my headset has basically replaced my computer monitor, I haven't used my computer in person in like 2 years now. When I want to play a game on my computer, I just stay in my recliner, put my headset on and open Virtual Desktop, the same software I use to stream PCVR when I'm in the mood to be in the game instead.
There is basically no downside anymore, they aren't even expensive. While a Quest 3 is notably better, the lower end 3s is a totally viable headset at 300USD, notably cheaper than most consoles. Just do yourself a favor, if a Quest 3 seems too expensive, do not try it on. Stay with 3s and don't see how much greener the grass is for a little bit more, it's very easy to talk your way up to a real Quest 3.
Also, Steam deck has sold about 5 million units extrapolating from last known good data, Quest 2 sold over 20 million, Quest 3 is seemingly up to 10-15 million so far judging from old sales data for pacing and some recently reported hardware ratios from game devs, and still has about 4-5 more years left of active sales.
So if the Steam deck is a "huge market", then I don't know what you would call the stand alone VR market now. Considering that is just one brand of standalone headset. It's the market leader, sure, but there are other brands that do at least as well as the steam deck. Distant second as that may make them, seems like it's still relevant to include given the context.
You have an extremely warped view of the popularity of VR, possibly because you like it so much yourself that you literally can't imagine how other people feel about it. Wearing a VR headset 16 hours a day? Most people wouldn't do that if it literally gave them orgasms.
I very much know how other people feel about it, we can be different and both our opinions can still be valid. I don't think at any point in there I said that everyone is wearing their headset 16 hours a day.
But the matter remains that one headset has sold 4x as much as the steamdeck, and the second most sold is 2-3x as much as the steam deck... so why is the steam deck considered a good seller and VR is considered dying?
I was just making a pre-emptive counterpoint to the arguments people usually make against VR. That the headsets "aren't comfortable", which has been less and less true for the out of the box experience over time, and has never been true for people that are willing to tailor the experience to their individual headshape and preferences. I have always worn my headsets for 8+ hours even right from the dk2 days, first step: battery bank on the back, to get the weight counter balanced and for older headsets a different choice of facial interface was often a good idea. Eventually, once I tried a few options, I determined my personal best comfort came from "halo" style headstraps. So I have since just been buying BoBoVR's kit for each headset I buy that is an all-in-one cenversion kit to take headsets from 2 hours of play time to infinity with no other adjustment needed.
I think honestly most people have only tried VR once or twice, and don't even know what state it is in now. The Quest 3 crossed a threshold, now that you can use it as a 4k 120hz screen, it's the first headset I would say is clear enough that normal people would find it worth using. I do still think the tech barrier is a bit too high. I'm very aware that if I didn't show her how, my Mom would have had trouble figuring out on her own how to do virtual calls with my sister in New Zealand. But she very much appreciates being able to sit in the same room as her and have face to face conversations now. And even though desktop streaming is something built right into the headset, the default option isn't the one that would sell people on it, Virtual Desktop is so much better. If in the future that becomes the default, and the desktop streaming client half of it is just baked into the headset software. Or if the default solution just learns from Virtual Desktop and at least looks as good as it even without all the extra bells and whistles... either one would be a huge help. The built-in desktop streamer just hasn't been revisited since the screens are clear enough to actually see 4k, so it's still unoptimised and kind of muddy looking.
But, my Mom did figure out on her own how to launch and play Tetris Effect, she loves it. Also Puzzling Places and Cubism. My mom is a bit of a gamer though. She doesn't like anything with killing, but she has made some exceptions like for Stardew Valley. My Dad on the other hand still needs me to launch games for him from the phone app, hehe. He just "doesn't want to break it", to be fair he prefers the Quest pro, which is still a pretty expensive headset. So I can understand his hesitation, he's used to windows 95... where you very much could break it by clicking the wrong thing. But he loves city building games, and there are a few good ones to choose from in VR. Cities:Skylines VR for "professional" city building ported to VR, and Little Cities for "fun" city building made for VR first are his favourites so far.
My brother only really got into it when I gave their family my old Quest 2, he still just plays the default "normal people" games like beatsaber and other exercise stuff. But he doesn't have his VR legs yet, he does want to play adventure/rpg games with me, but they tend not to have comfort settings, as they would be kinda ruined with teleporting and stuff. I explained to him how to go about training for not needing the safety features any more, but he keeps taking it too far any time he tries, he likes the games so much that he doesn't want to stop playing so soon when he first starts feeling the symptoms. But that is the most important part, otherwise you are working to make your VR sickness worse instead...
So yeah, there are definitely hurdles still. Maybe there should be supervised programs for getting your VR legs. You very much need to stop as soon as you notice the very first symptom for you, usually face flush, but can be different per person. The earlier you stop, the more you convince your brain it doesn't need to "save you from the poison berries". The bodies reaction to a vestibular mismatch is to assume you must have eaten poison, and it should save you by throwing up. But you can train it to leave you alone. Done well, you can gain as much as 5 more minutes of playtime each attempt. Doesn't take long until you don't even have to think about it any more.
That's not why. There's a very high chance Valve is actively working on new standalone VR since some years, there are regular leaks confirming some progress.