Xbox VR stuff would come to PC lol
Regardless, it's fine that they're not making a headset or even investing in VR games. But having the console not having the functionality for any VR content or ports is a real missed opportunity imo
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Phil Spencer "VR is not a focus of Project Scarlett because our customers aren't asking for it."
- Thread starter MauroNL
- Start date
Regardless, it's fine that they're not making a headset or even investing in VR games. But having the console not having the functionality for any VR content or ports is a real missed opportunity imo
Sounds right, everyone I know going in on VR is doing it on a PC for the versatility. PSVR is cool, but it came during the novelty period, so it was easier to justify getting one. Now that VR is established, it doesn't quite have the novelty and the convenience still isn't quite there (price, space, etc.) Designing your console around the traditional experience is better for 90+% of the user base. XB1 being designed around Kinect was a huge waste, considering people can't even use the thing very much if they want to.
I don't want MS to make their own headset, but with their pc compatibility , I think they should allow pc headsets to work on the X. And with their acquisitions they have enough studios that they could make some vr games. Let double fine and Compulsion games make vr games. Your other studios can make non vr titles.
WMR with Acer looks promising but is 440$ in my country. Not to mention you need a powerful PC to run these things on high res right (as was case some years ago). Would a laptop's GTX 1660Ti work with WMR or Oculus/Vive ?
I really wish in some alternative timeline Xbox and Oculus would have worked together more. The first Rift came with am Xbox One controller, it'd be really nice if down the line they got something akin to Oculus Link working with a future version of the Quest and Scarlett.
PSVR has a bundle going on rn with the headset and 5 games for $200 though.
Microsoft released a mid-gen $500 console and two elite controllers with the second version being $180.
Making the console VR compatible for people who already have headsets is really not that big of an ask, especially when you consider how focused MS is on PC right now.
Doesn't MS support the enthusiast gamer VR market with Windows and the whole mixed reality headsets? Those even support Steam and HL:Alyx. I own one, they even have games with Xbox achievements that are VR games on PC. They even have a Halo experience. I thought VR was neat on PC but ended up boxing it up. I still have my PSVR near my TV but I couldn't even finish Trover with it. It just feels too isolating for longer games.
ok lol. if i'm just wrong it's not really a "lie", now is it?
but based on pretty much every VR video game i've looked at it's all about standing in a small room manipulating objects, teleporting around an environment to slash/shoot at enemies, or controlling a spaceship to shoot at other spaceships.
full body mapping the ability to play soccer in a realistically sized soccer field just sounds like playing soccer with extra steps, or glorified motion capturing.
the kind of futuristic games that seem interesting to me are the ones in Her, where it's less about trying to make you feel like you're really doing stuff and leaning into the fact that video games always feel like you're manipulating a separate little world. Has anyone considered that maybe people like feeling that way, and don't WANT to pretend the game is "real" or whatever?
Well that represents nothing about VR because that is not what it's like at all. Games are not like that, and you've only seen a few small examples.
A GTX 1660TI would work fine for most games for any headset. That's roughtly equivalent to a 1070, though the laptop version likely performs slightly worse since due to thermal throttling. The min recommended spec for VR is a 1060, and in general with a few exceptions you don't need too much more than that obviously having better hardware will give you a better experience, but no need to dive all the way in.
People are cheering that the focus at launch is on gaming experiences we already know we love, versus on experiences for optional peripherals.
I also question your assumption that an enthusiast focused peripheral makes more sense on a console than a casual focused peripheral... The numbers don't lie, motion peripherals sold better, had more support, and were more popular than VR peripherals on console.
And regarding your 'familiar subsection' bullshit, there is a poll up top with over 1k votes. The majority agree it would be a waste of resources. You are the familiar subsection.
Last edited:
oh you're right, there's also the ones where it's a god mode perspective and you're looking down at a character that you're piloting using a controller.
that seems ok but also i don't really care.
I mean I might as well say gaming is all about shooting things while running done corridors. It's really no different than what you said in your last comment.
Yes which is why there are games where you are a 3rd person camera. I wish there was more though, I hope Sony has VR camera mode for all their 3rd person games on psvr2
The fact that you think action games all use teleporting when that's pretty much optional for every single one and is just used as a way to reduce motion sickness for first time players is pretty odd.
I mean I get that not everyone is interested in VR but there are no games that work outside of VR that don't work with VR, even if all the VR does is add depth of field/3D space lol
i believe there are some where it's not an option, though that may indeed have been from closer to the launch of the rift and such. and if the game was going to work fine on a TV then what am I buying the expensive goggles for?
I've never seen a VR game that seems like it NEEDS to be in VR or that it looks better and has more features because it's in VR. Whenever I see anything that can only be done in VR it's mostly just about head tracking, or independent aiming/looking.
I'm not trying to say I know everything about it, but understand that I just don't share your excitement or interest. To me it's a separate thing that exists because it can exist, not a replacement for or upgrade from looking at a screen.
and i'm not saying this because i'm worrying about screens going away. I just have no interest in this stuff and don't feel any obligation to "support" it.
You have no interest because you think VR is something it isn't; it's much more than you think.
This is really disappointing, VR is the single most innovative and exciting thing happening in the videogame industry for a very long time and one of the big three still thinks it's not worth it and nobody wants it anyway on their platform.
Gamepass and Xcloud might be the pinnacle of videogame services but it doesn't add anything new to the table, VR does and it'll keep on doing so.
At least those who don't care for VR won't have to complain about getting something they don't want and I won't have to buy a Xbox Two untill it's 150$.
Gamepass and Xcloud might be the pinnacle of videogame services but it doesn't add anything new to the table, VR does and it'll keep on doing so.
At least those who don't care for VR won't have to complain about getting something they don't want and I won't have to buy a Xbox Two untill it's 150$.
Cause sure, Xbox is famous for its local multiplayer experiences.
Gosh.
Nothing wrong with this. Just moved differentiation between the platforms.
They seem to be doing more AA than anything else though.
They seem to be doing more AA than anything else though.
it... kind of is though? local multiplayer halo was a big deal and people got super mad after it went away.
Well I'd argue it's much more famous for Xbox Live.
(of course, that's also "a communal, kind of together experience". But you can have online multiplayer in VR too.)
Sorry, what the fuck is he talking about with the communal / social comment?
VR is absolutely the most I've played WITH people in the same room for years. I'm not playing a proper singleplayer or even multiplayer game if someone is in the room.
VR is absolutely the most I've played WITH people in the same room for years. I'm not playing a proper singleplayer or even multiplayer game if someone is in the room.
Completely agree. That would be far more attractive to me than yet another version of a VR device entering the market, and it would mean significantly less R&D costs for them. If they ever want to get in on the VR market, that's how they should do it, by inviting everyone who already owns VR on the PC (not me by the way, in case you're wondering why I lean this way =P) and offering some great VR software.
you can play local split screen while playing online. It's like forming an xbl party but IRL.
i'm not saying this is itself an argument against VR. but it's definitely something people already value versus something they might value after it's fully developed.
And I know that theoretically people could play VR together in the same room with separate headsets. but again, that's not exactly what people already liked and were used to.
haha I was just pointing out two awesome vr experiences I had. That was more like two separate thoughts.
being able to just put on the headset and play instead of having to mess with cables and cleanup and stuff. Im also bitter about the breakout box situation with psvr v1 owners. that hardware update helped setup a bit.
Lots of hyperbolic takes in here. Just because someone doesn't want Scarlett to focus on VR at launch, doesn't mean they aren't hyped for VR.
Ever hear of Halo?
Super popular for couch coop and LAN parties.
Ever hear of Halo?
Super popular for couch coop and LAN parties.
Not gonna lie I don't blame xbox for not wanting to launch a VR platform near their console launch. Even PSVR waited a few years before coming out for PS4 (I also expect PSVR to take a few years to arrive on the PS5). Though I do expect to see something 2-3 years into the Scarlett's life
Still a silly argument.
Mind you, I actually kind of agree with the conclusion of not focusing on VR, but that specific sentence is kind of silly.
It works for all game genres and all perspectives, even 3rd person works beautifully and adds a lot. Movement is not limited to teleportation; in many ways movement is less limiting in VR because you have much more control. That's what VR is for gameplay: control - the amount of agency you have in a game world is as big (or bigger) as the step from 2D->3D graphics.
It simply improves so many aspects of gaming. It means AI can finally be more reactive, stories can be more emotionally involved and more personal, gameplay can be more versatile with many more options open due to the agency increase, you get to feel new emotional states that games haven't been able to invoke before, multiplayer is infinitely more social and dynamic, roleplaying is increased significantly, and it is overall a more visceral/powerful medium.
Here are some good demonstrations of what it can offer for gameplay.
I'm sorry, I wasn't trying to be a dick, but like I didn't know what to say to your rhetorical question! Of course Xbox is known for local multiplayer experiences! Halo is super popular, and one of the major reasons is the coop and LAN experience.
Lol sorry I was being snarky too :) No offense taken.
But yeah, everyone keeps saying Halo... but that's kind of it. Ok maybe Gears had local multiplayer... but Microsoft isn't Nintendo, the core focus of the console certainly isn't local multiplayer.
Again, I see why they're not focusing on VR, but the motivations feel like PR talk.
yeah this. while there are more and more interesting VR games coming, the technology is still too expensive.
You are misinformed. But, that's a good thing! I'm happy VR isn't as you describe it.
Also, VR is not about 'pretending', your brain will actually be convinced that it is experiencing real things (even when the graphics are heavily stylized) - thus, a virtual reality is established!
Have the developers said anything about headset support? I always assumed that it would not receive it, but seeing as it will likely come on Steam.. I remain hopeful.
The neat thing about the VR nay-sayers is that if you call them out on it, each one of them have never experienced it.
And I don't care if you are not excited about VR or aren't entertained by it - it is those that act like it is the harbinger of doom, a gimmick, or a fad that get me bothered. We need some kind of moderation rules for this - because would we allow people to come into every Nintendo thread to talk shit about Nintendo? We should be better than that as a community.
Last edited:
Yep, passing the headset around when people come over is one of the best things about it as people are blown away if they haven't tried VR before or just having a laugh with beat saber or something. People don't come around to play co-op halo or something, they want me to get the VR headset out or Jackbox.