Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

VR is the objective future of MMORPGs and nothing can stop it.

2456789

Comments

  • LunoTrickster34LunoTrickster34 Member UncommonPosts: 105
    immodium said:
    Not in it's current state. Far in the future when you can jack your brain directly into the experience like The Matrix. Until I can touch, taste and smell the environment I'm in I'm not interested in VR.
    I call BS. You'll buy into this once all your friends will. Do you want to be one of the few people playing monitor based MMOs in the 2030s or will you accept that everyone else will move on and you'll have to follow suit if you don't want to be relegated to a niche?

    I mean why are you even playing MMOs right now? Surely you shouldn't be interested until they are capable of 50000+ people on a single shard with physically simulated worlds with photorealistic graphics? 
  • LunoTrickster34LunoTrickster34 Member UncommonPosts: 105
    Kyleran said:
    Quizzical said:
    That VR future will get here sometime after the ubiquitous flying cars that are a few decades overdue by now.  The future finds ways to laugh at your predictions about it.
    Kind of like how touchscreens were never going to happen throughout all the decades of sci-fi touch screens, right?

    Wait, nevermind touchscreens are everywhere.
    Never once heard someone say touch screens weren't possible, if you are going to straw man try harder.

    Where the hell are my anti gravity powered jet packs and ship to surface transporters?
    Loads of people said touch screens would never happen or at least it wouldn't happen for a long time. People are just too pessimistic and like to drag flying cars into it because apparently if one of the big staples of sci-fi hasn't made it then nothing else is likely going to.
    NarugAsm0deus
  • MendelMendel Member LegendaryPosts: 5,511
    I both agree and disagree.

    I fully agree that the future of MMORPGs (and all gaming) is in virtual reality.

    I disagree that what we have now (headsets) is virtual reality.


    When the technology reaches a point where I can grip a sword in VR and feel it in my hand, then swing a sword and feel it connect with something. When I can walk my legs in real life and have my legs move in VR. When I can sit in an F1 car in VR and feel the vibrations of the engine in real life....

    That's when we'll have achieved virtual reality. That's when it'll take off in a big way. That's when it will be meaningful and revolutionise the gaming world....and the world in general.


    Until then, headsets are just a different way to view the game, they don't change the gameplay at all. If you also use motion controllers, then that does change the gameplay, changes it into something more visceral but ultimately simpler that what is already possible.

    Let's not forget the olfactory feedback, either.  Imagine, sneaking around an ogre encampment when the wind shifts.  When technology can do that, I'll happily call it the future of immersion.  (Be careful what you wish for).



    immodiumcameltosisAlBQuirky

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • LunoTrickster34LunoTrickster34 Member UncommonPosts: 105
    edited February 2020
    AlBQuirky said:
    I humbly disagree, but that's me. VR is a way to view the game, NOT a mechanic or feature. It doesn't change how a player fights, how a player  crafts, how oa player explores, or how a player interacts socially. VR won't save a shitty game.

    However, since about 80% of game players today think graphics top all, you're [probably right.

    Yet another reason "the future of MMOs" will pass me by...
    If VR is only a way to view a game then why does Half Life Alyx play completely differently? 

    If you like it more as a monitor extension fine, but you're denying the objective truth if you want to say that it literally doesn't fit the definition of being something more than just another way to view a game.

    Again, this is objective proof that you are full of shit:

    https://youtu.be/_zZgnfEMyNo

    It will change everything about the things you list.

    Take social interactions for a second. You'll have player avatars driven by real human movements and it will feel like you are with people in real life, and you'll be able to express yourself much more than a million emotes could hope to achieve.

    Yet you think this is impossible? Weird, but I guess some gamers know jack shit about game design.
    AlBQuirky
  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 8,671
    edited February 2020
    cheyane said:
    cheyane said:
    I'll be dead by the time they actually make something both comfortable with no side effects and affordable for the average player. People can hardly afford to keep upgrading their computers I cannot see this price factor being satisfied in 10 years... pipe dream.
    Oculus already unveiled a headset prototype name Half Dome 3 which fits your definition. It causes no side effects and is much more lightweight.



    The funny thing is that monitors now cause more side effects than that above headset.
    I get ill from first person shooters and car rides. I doubt that very much.
    Wait why is that relevant? It's not the same thing. I get sick in the car all the time but never in VR. I have friends that get sick in 1st person monitor games but not in VR.

    The difference is that in VR you can avoid sickness by matching all the movement in the real and virtual worlds but developers don't go for this outside of VR.
    I tried it in a game shop. I was felt nausea quite quickly and avoided trying it again. Perhaps the technology has improved but I still read about people feeling ill and what is worse they have  accidents like bumping into tables after using it because their perception and sense of depth and other senses are screwed for awhile. It does not seem to be something I want to put myself through until I no longer read about these side effects.

    Those movies in the cinema make me ill too. I was quite exited to try them but after one experience I think one of the horror flicks I had to take the glasses off. I may be particularly sensitive though.

    Chamber of Chains
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 24,851
    VR changes gameplay in ways that make gaming better, objectively. This is a far better way to experience FPS games:

    https://youtu.be/_zZgnfEMyNo

    This is also a far better way to experience multiplayer competitive 1st person games:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14Ha7go6JQY

    Those games play so differently to anything else that it's not even the same medium at that point.
    The basic problem with this thread is that you're trying to say that your opinion is objectively correct.  That's not compatible with what the word "objectively" means.

    Even if you believe that VR is a better way to experience first-person games (which is reasonable, but debatable), there are some very broad classes of games where VR just doesn't make sense.  What would a VR version of a 4X game even mean, other than a dumb gimmick?  How about an RTS, or a puzzle game?  The entire notion of VR seems weird in games where the player isn't controlling a single character at a particular spot in the game world.

    Even in games where you do control a single character, VR doesn't always make sense.  Many games are built around the assumption that the player will have a clear view of what is going on, which is something you don't get from a first-person perspective, even in real life.  While I expect VR to become more common in the future, other forms of gaming aren't going away.
    Mendel
  • UtinniUtinni Member EpicPosts: 2,200
    cheyane said:
    cheyane said:
    cheyane said:
    I'll be dead by the time they actually make something both comfortable with no side effects and affordable for the average player. People can hardly afford to keep upgrading their computers I cannot see this price factor being satisfied in 10 years... pipe dream.
    Oculus already unveiled a headset prototype name Half Dome 3 which fits your definition. It causes no side effects and is much more lightweight.



    The funny thing is that monitors now cause more side effects than that above headset.
    I get ill from first person shooters and car rides. I doubt that very much.
    Wait why is that relevant? It's not the same thing. I get sick in the car all the time but never in VR. I have friends that get sick in 1st person monitor games but not in VR.

    The difference is that in VR you can avoid sickness by matching all the movement in the real and virtual worlds but developers don't go for this outside of VR.
    I tried it in a game shop. I was felt nausea quite quickly and avoided trying it again. Perhaps the technology has improved but I still read about people feeling ill and what is worse they have  accidents like bumping into tables after using it because their perception and sense of depth and other senses are screwed for awhile. It does not seem to be something I want to put myself through until I no longer read about these side effects.

    This happens with un-calibrated devices and low res devices. 
  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 8,671
    Utinni said:
    cheyane said:
    cheyane said:
    cheyane said:
    I'll be dead by the time they actually make something both comfortable with no side effects and affordable for the average player. People can hardly afford to keep upgrading their computers I cannot see this price factor being satisfied in 10 years... pipe dream.
    Oculus already unveiled a headset prototype name Half Dome 3 which fits your definition. It causes no side effects and is much more lightweight.



    The funny thing is that monitors now cause more side effects than that above headset.
    I get ill from first person shooters and car rides. I doubt that very much.
    Wait why is that relevant? It's not the same thing. I get sick in the car all the time but never in VR. I have friends that get sick in 1st person monitor games but not in VR.

    The difference is that in VR you can avoid sickness by matching all the movement in the real and virtual worlds but developers don't go for this outside of VR.
    I tried it in a game shop. I was felt nausea quite quickly and avoided trying it again. Perhaps the technology has improved but I still read about people feeling ill and what is worse they have  accidents like bumping into tables after using it because their perception and sense of depth and other senses are screwed for awhile. It does not seem to be something I want to put myself through until I no longer read about these side effects.

    This happens with un-calibrated devices and low res devices. 
    I am also worried about the long term effects of using these devices for now too. I hope to be wrong and am looking forward to the future when things improve.
    Chamber of Chains
  • immodiumimmodium Member RarePosts: 2,610

    I mean why are you even playing MMOs right now? Surely you shouldn't be interested until they are capable of 50000+ people on a single shard with physically simulated worlds with photorealistic graphics? 
    Because I've never bought into the whole "MMO's are worlds" crap. To me they're just games, nothing more.

    You're right, I wouldn't be playing them if I thought they were virtual worlds/realities as they don't feel like worlds to me.

    My uncle was an early adopter of the Oculus and I tried it, I think it's great at what it does. However you still have to use your imagination a hell of a lot to think that you're in a world.

    Which goes against VR IMO, you're not supposed to be using your imagination.

    And I don't believe the majority of gamers want to be stood up, moving about with more peripherals stuck to them to game.


    Quizzicaldragonlee66

    image
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 24,851
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    That VR future will get here sometime after the ubiquitous flying cars that are a few decades overdue by now.  The future finds ways to laugh at your predictions about it.
    Kind of like how touchscreens were never going to happen throughout all the decades of sci-fi touch screens, right?

    Wait, nevermind touchscreens are everywhere.
    There's quite a difference between saying "I think VR MMORPGs will become common" and "VR is the objective future of MMORPGs and nothing can stop it."  The latter is what I object to.

    I think VR gaming has a future, and probably as a more widespread technology than the small niches where it is today.  I'm skeptical of any particular date that you want to put on it just because the future isn't very predictable.  It could easily be that some great game drives a ton of interest in VR, like how so many other genres of games were popularized or even created by a single, very successful game.  But I have no idea when such a game will show up.

    But non-VR gaming isn't going away, as there are too many situations where someone would like to play a game but needs to also be aware of the world around them.  If anything, the movement in recent years has been toward less immersive gaming that you can do on a cell phone now and then in small chunks of time.
    Sure non-VR will always be here, I'm not debating that. I'm just saying that VR is going to be at the core of MMOs in the future and what most MMOs will be built on. Monitor based MMOs will become a niche because it's an objectively inferior platform for the genre. Some people like retrogaming today, but most people move on to the current and MMOs will follow that suit.

    Don't forget that VR headsets will become MR headsets and let you see your surroundings very easily soon.
    Thus far, there are MMORPGs that are designed to work from a first-person perspective, but they're unusual.  Off-hand, I can't think of one that was popular.  There are some that are built to be played from a third-person perspective, and will let you play the game first-person, but you'll be fairly crippled because everyone else can see what is behind them and you can't.

    So if you were to take literally any MMORPG that I've ever liked, or any that was popular that I can think of even if I didn't like it, and try to make a VR version of it, it's not even clear what that would mean.  If you make it first-person, it's a totally different game, and probably inferior to the original--as there were compelling reasons to make the original from a third-person perspective.  You could try to make it a VR game in the naive way of letting you see how far away your character is by parallax in addition to the other cues that we use for depth perception, but that's much closer to being pointless than revolutionary.
  • immodiumimmodium Member RarePosts: 2,610
    edited February 2020
    Mendel said:

    Let's not forget the olfactory feedback, either.  Imagine, sneaking around an ogre encampment when the wind shifts.  When technology can do that, I'll happily call it the future of immersion.  (Be careful what you wish for).




    But that's what I want from a VR experience. I want to be deterred from entering a dungeon because the smell of it just standing at the entrance. :)
    Mendel

    image
  • LunoTrickster34LunoTrickster34 Member UncommonPosts: 105
    Quizzical said:
    VR changes gameplay in ways that make gaming better, objectively. This is a far better way to experience FPS games:

    https://youtu.be/_zZgnfEMyNo

    This is also a far better way to experience multiplayer competitive 1st person games:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14Ha7go6JQY

    Those games play so differently to anything else that it's not even the same medium at that point.
    The basic problem with this thread is that you're trying to say that your opinion is objectively correct.  That's not compatible with what the word "objectively" means.

    Even if you believe that VR is a better way to experience first-person games (which is reasonable, but debatable), there are some very broad classes of games where VR just doesn't make sense.  What would a VR version of a 4X game even mean, other than a dumb gimmick?  How about an RTS, or a puzzle game?  The entire notion of VR seems weird in games where the player isn't controlling a single character at a particular spot in the game world.

    Even in games where you do control a single character, VR doesn't always make sense.  Many games are built around the assumption that the player will have a clear view of what is going on, which is something you don't get from a first-person perspective, even in real life.  While I expect VR to become more common in the future, other forms of gaming aren't going away.
    Basically I'm saying that VR is improving the game design of these games. An FPS game is limited normally by the range of movement that you have with your weapon and the amount of agency you have is limited. It's inarguable that VR improves this and that's the angle I'm coming from.

    A 4X game in VR could be great just in the visual sense. Visuals are not gimmicks, otherwise color TVf would be a gimmick. 4X in VR would be like commanding and conquering territory as an overseer figure and there's a certain level of empowerment you get there that you wouldn't get on a monitor.

    A puzzle game in VR can be all sorts of mindbending craziness because you have lots of ways in which you have greater agency to solve puzzles in more interesting ways.

    VR also works very well for 3rd person.

  • LunoTrickster34LunoTrickster34 Member UncommonPosts: 105
    immodium said:

    I mean why are you even playing MMOs right now? Surely you shouldn't be interested until they are capable of 50000+ people on a single shard with physically simulated worlds with photorealistic graphics? 
    Because I've never bought into the whole "MMO's are worlds" crap. To me they're just games, nothing more.

    You're right, I wouldn't be playing them if I thought they were virtual worlds/realities as they don't feel like worlds to me.

    My uncle was an early adopter of the Oculus and I tried it, I think it's great at what it does. However you still have to use your imagination a hell of a lot to think that you're in a world.

    Which goes against VR IMO, you're not supposed to be using your imagination.

    And I don't believe the majority of gamers want to be stood up, moving about with more peripherals stuck to them to game.


    ...You can sit down.

    Why on earth are people convinced that VR takes over your muscles and forces you to stand? This is still alien to me, that people think this.

    Besides there's a huuuge difference between better headsets in 10 years than asking for a literal plug at the back of your head. One is a sane response for someone asking for technology to get better for their interests and the other is chasing after a really silly fantasy that is far too over the top just to get someone to enjoy it.
    Narug
  • LunoTrickster34LunoTrickster34 Member UncommonPosts: 105
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    That VR future will get here sometime after the ubiquitous flying cars that are a few decades overdue by now.  The future finds ways to laugh at your predictions about it.
    Kind of like how touchscreens were never going to happen throughout all the decades of sci-fi touch screens, right?

    Wait, nevermind touchscreens are everywhere.
    There's quite a difference between saying "I think VR MMORPGs will become common" and "VR is the objective future of MMORPGs and nothing can stop it."  The latter is what I object to.

    I think VR gaming has a future, and probably as a more widespread technology than the small niches where it is today.  I'm skeptical of any particular date that you want to put on it just because the future isn't very predictable.  It could easily be that some great game drives a ton of interest in VR, like how so many other genres of games were popularized or even created by a single, very successful game.  But I have no idea when such a game will show up.

    But non-VR gaming isn't going away, as there are too many situations where someone would like to play a game but needs to also be aware of the world around them.  If anything, the movement in recent years has been toward less immersive gaming that you can do on a cell phone now and then in small chunks of time.
    Sure non-VR will always be here, I'm not debating that. I'm just saying that VR is going to be at the core of MMOs in the future and what most MMOs will be built on. Monitor based MMOs will become a niche because it's an objectively inferior platform for the genre. Some people like retrogaming today, but most people move on to the current and MMOs will follow that suit.

    Don't forget that VR headsets will become MR headsets and let you see your surroundings very easily soon.
    Thus far, there are MMORPGs that are designed to work from a first-person perspective, but they're unusual.  Off-hand, I can't think of one that was popular.  There are some that are built to be played from a third-person perspective, and will let you play the game first-person, but you'll be fairly crippled because everyone else can see what is behind them and you can't.

    So if you were to take literally any MMORPG that I've ever liked, or any that was popular that I can think of even if I didn't like it, and try to make a VR version of it, it's not even clear what that would mean.  If you make it first-person, it's a totally different game, and probably inferior to the original--as there were compelling reasons to make the original from a third-person perspective.  You could try to make it a VR game in the naive way of letting you see how far away your character is by parallax in addition to the other cues that we use for depth perception, but that's much closer to being pointless than revolutionary.
    Not sure why you're comparing 1st person on a screen to VR? Completely different. 1st person has many issues on a monitor that are immediately solved by VR, like the lack of character involvement, low field of view, or less agency over your actions as it's hard to do a large variety of actions when your only reference point is canned animations from a 1st person perspective, but nothing in VR is a scripted animation of course.
  • immodiumimmodium Member RarePosts: 2,610
    immodium said:

    I mean why are you even playing MMOs right now? Surely you shouldn't be interested until they are capable of 50000+ people on a single shard with physically simulated worlds with photorealistic graphics? 
    Because I've never bought into the whole "MMO's are worlds" crap. To me they're just games, nothing more.

    You're right, I wouldn't be playing them if I thought they were virtual worlds/realities as they don't feel like worlds to me.

    My uncle was an early adopter of the Oculus and I tried it, I think it's great at what it does. However you still have to use your imagination a hell of a lot to think that you're in a world.

    Which goes against VR IMO, you're not supposed to be using your imagination.

    And I don't believe the majority of gamers want to be stood up, moving about with more peripherals stuck to them to game.


    ...You can sit down.

    Why on earth are people convinced that VR takes over your muscles and forces you to stand? This is still alien to me, that people think this.

    So how is it more immersive than sitting in front of a monitor?

    I've got my headset on, I'm playing VR game, I'm walking forward whilst sitting down!

    How does VR make it feel like I'm actually moving in a world whilst sat down?

    image
  • LunoTrickster34LunoTrickster34 Member UncommonPosts: 105
    immodium said:
    immodium said:

    I mean why are you even playing MMOs right now? Surely you shouldn't be interested until they are capable of 50000+ people on a single shard with physically simulated worlds with photorealistic graphics? 
    Because I've never bought into the whole "MMO's are worlds" crap. To me they're just games, nothing more.

    You're right, I wouldn't be playing them if I thought they were virtual worlds/realities as they don't feel like worlds to me.

    My uncle was an early adopter of the Oculus and I tried it, I think it's great at what it does. However you still have to use your imagination a hell of a lot to think that you're in a world.

    Which goes against VR IMO, you're not supposed to be using your imagination.

    And I don't believe the majority of gamers want to be stood up, moving about with more peripherals stuck to them to game.


    ...You can sit down.

    Why on earth are people convinced that VR takes over your muscles and forces you to stand? This is still alien to me, that people think this.

    So how is it more immersive than sitting in front of a monitor?

    I've got my headset on, I'm playing VR game, I'm walking forward whilst sitting down!

    How does VR make it feel like I'm actually moving in a world whilst sat down?
    No one claimed that VR makes them feel like they are actually moving around the world even standing up, outside of room-scale. When people play RE7 or Alien Isolation in VR or Boneworks or basically any highly immersive VR game, they don't care that they aren't physically moving. Maybe they'd prefer it and find it even more immersive, but if people had to go to those lengths to find it more immersive than a monitor then VR would be useless.

    Everyone knows VR is more immersive than a monitor - it's just a simple fact. So to question that because it's more ideal to sit down makes no sense. You'll stick be scared shitless in RE7, you'll still feel like people are physically with you in a VRMMO, you'll still be immersed in the way VR lets you be.

    Are people in real life no longer 'immersed' by real life sounds and visuals if they are wheelchair bound? 
    immodiumKyleran
  • immodiumimmodium Member RarePosts: 2,610
    immodium said:
    immodium said:

    I mean why are you even playing MMOs right now? Surely you shouldn't be interested until they are capable of 50000+ people on a single shard with physically simulated worlds with photorealistic graphics? 
    Because I've never bought into the whole "MMO's are worlds" crap. To me they're just games, nothing more.

    You're right, I wouldn't be playing them if I thought they were virtual worlds/realities as they don't feel like worlds to me.

    My uncle was an early adopter of the Oculus and I tried it, I think it's great at what it does. However you still have to use your imagination a hell of a lot to think that you're in a world.

    Which goes against VR IMO, you're not supposed to be using your imagination.

    And I don't believe the majority of gamers want to be stood up, moving about with more peripherals stuck to them to game.


    ...You can sit down.

    Why on earth are people convinced that VR takes over your muscles and forces you to stand? This is still alien to me, that people think this.

    So how is it more immersive than sitting in front of a monitor?

    I've got my headset on, I'm playing VR game, I'm walking forward whilst sitting down!

    How does VR make it feel like I'm actually moving in a world whilst sat down?
    No one claimed that VR makes them feel like they are actually moving around the world even standing up, outside of room-scale. When people play RE7 or Alien Isolation in VR or Boneworks or basically any highly immersive VR game, they don't care that they aren't physically moving. Maybe they'd prefer it and find it even more immersive, but if people had to go to those lengths to find it more immersive than a monitor then VR would be useless.

    Everyone knows VR is more immersive than a monitor - it's just a simple fact. So to question that because it's more ideal to sit down makes no sense. You'll stick be scared shitless in RE7, you'll still feel like people are physically with you in a VRMMO, you'll still be immersed in the way VR lets you be.

    Are people in real life no longer 'immersed' by real life sounds and visuals if they are wheelchair bound? 

    So not more immersive than a monitor when it comes to controlling a character in a virtual world.

    Jump scares are completely different. You're moving the goal posts.

    If VR could actually make it feel like someone in a wheelchair was actually walking then I could see it making it mainstream.

    To me VR at present is what 3d Films are doing to cinema.

    image
  • LunoTrickster34LunoTrickster34 Member UncommonPosts: 105
    edited February 2020
    immodium said:
    immodium said:
    immodium said:

    I mean why are you even playing MMOs right now? Surely you shouldn't be interested until they are capable of 50000+ people on a single shard with physically simulated worlds with photorealistic graphics? 
    Because I've never bought into the whole "MMO's are worlds" crap. To me they're just games, nothing more.

    You're right, I wouldn't be playing them if I thought they were virtual worlds/realities as they don't feel like worlds to me.

    My uncle was an early adopter of the Oculus and I tried it, I think it's great at what it does. However you still have to use your imagination a hell of a lot to think that you're in a world.

    Which goes against VR IMO, you're not supposed to be using your imagination.

    And I don't believe the majority of gamers want to be stood up, moving about with more peripherals stuck to them to game.


    ...You can sit down.

    Why on earth are people convinced that VR takes over your muscles and forces you to stand? This is still alien to me, that people think this.

    So how is it more immersive than sitting in front of a monitor?

    I've got my headset on, I'm playing VR game, I'm walking forward whilst sitting down!

    How does VR make it feel like I'm actually moving in a world whilst sat down?
    No one claimed that VR makes them feel like they are actually moving around the world even standing up, outside of room-scale. When people play RE7 or Alien Isolation in VR or Boneworks or basically any highly immersive VR game, they don't care that they aren't physically moving. Maybe they'd prefer it and find it even more immersive, but if people had to go to those lengths to find it more immersive than a monitor then VR would be useless.

    Everyone knows VR is more immersive than a monitor - it's just a simple fact. So to question that because it's more ideal to sit down makes no sense. You'll stick be scared shitless in RE7, you'll still feel like people are physically with you in a VRMMO, you'll still be immersed in the way VR lets you be.

    Are people in real life no longer 'immersed' by real life sounds and visuals if they are wheelchair bound? 

    So not more immersive than a monitor when it comes to controlling a character in a virtual world.

    Jump scares are completely different. You're moving the goal posts.

    If VR could actually make it feel like someone in a wheelchair was actually walking then I could see it making it mainstream.

    To me VR at present is what 3d Films are doing to cinema.
    Your experience with an Oculus dev kit 5 years ago is clearly outdated now first of all. The games back then were very shitty and probably didn't show you a good representation of how immersive it can be.

    I'm not moving the goalposts. Alien Isolation is scary as shit just by the atmosphere alone and that is objectively improved by VR.

    Why? Because a) your vision is fully encased. b) it's in full 3D with real depth and scale. c) the sounds feel more real because they react to your head movement. d) it can induce a sense of presence.

    A monitor can never hope to be more immersive for those reasons.

    And that's just with a gamepad game, it doesn't take into account the immersion gains of having a full body avatar driven by yourself.

    VR is nothing like 3D on any level.

    Narug
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 24,851
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    That VR future will get here sometime after the ubiquitous flying cars that are a few decades overdue by now.  The future finds ways to laugh at your predictions about it.
    Kind of like how touchscreens were never going to happen throughout all the decades of sci-fi touch screens, right?

    Wait, nevermind touchscreens are everywhere.
    There's quite a difference between saying "I think VR MMORPGs will become common" and "VR is the objective future of MMORPGs and nothing can stop it."  The latter is what I object to.

    I think VR gaming has a future, and probably as a more widespread technology than the small niches where it is today.  I'm skeptical of any particular date that you want to put on it just because the future isn't very predictable.  It could easily be that some great game drives a ton of interest in VR, like how so many other genres of games were popularized or even created by a single, very successful game.  But I have no idea when such a game will show up.

    But non-VR gaming isn't going away, as there are too many situations where someone would like to play a game but needs to also be aware of the world around them.  If anything, the movement in recent years has been toward less immersive gaming that you can do on a cell phone now and then in small chunks of time.
    Sure non-VR will always be here, I'm not debating that. I'm just saying that VR is going to be at the core of MMOs in the future and what most MMOs will be built on. Monitor based MMOs will become a niche because it's an objectively inferior platform for the genre. Some people like retrogaming today, but most people move on to the current and MMOs will follow that suit.

    Don't forget that VR headsets will become MR headsets and let you see your surroundings very easily soon.
    Thus far, there are MMORPGs that are designed to work from a first-person perspective, but they're unusual.  Off-hand, I can't think of one that was popular.  There are some that are built to be played from a third-person perspective, and will let you play the game first-person, but you'll be fairly crippled because everyone else can see what is behind them and you can't.

    So if you were to take literally any MMORPG that I've ever liked, or any that was popular that I can think of even if I didn't like it, and try to make a VR version of it, it's not even clear what that would mean.  If you make it first-person, it's a totally different game, and probably inferior to the original--as there were compelling reasons to make the original from a third-person perspective.  You could try to make it a VR game in the naive way of letting you see how far away your character is by parallax in addition to the other cues that we use for depth perception, but that's much closer to being pointless than revolutionary.
    Not sure why you're comparing 1st person on a screen to VR? Completely different. 1st person has many issues on a monitor that are immediately solved by VR, like the lack of character involvement, low field of view, or less agency over your actions as it's hard to do a large variety of actions when your only reference point is canned animations from a 1st person perspective, but nothing in VR is a scripted animation of course.
    VR is never going to get better at displaying things from a first-person perspective than real-life.  VR technology will probably improve quite a lot in coming years, but real-life is a hard upper bound for how good it could possibly get.  And a third-person perspective gives me a lot more information about what is going on around my character than I have in real-life.  VR isn't going to be able to change that.

    I'm skeptical that VR will ever get to the point that I personally like it other than for a handful of niche things.  That's partially a statement about my own preferences.  The most recent first-person game that I played much was Faceball 2000--which dates to an era when "2000" sounded futuristic.
  • LunoTrickster34LunoTrickster34 Member UncommonPosts: 105
    edited February 2020
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    That VR future will get here sometime after the ubiquitous flying cars that are a few decades overdue by now.  The future finds ways to laugh at your predictions about it.
    Kind of like how touchscreens were never going to happen throughout all the decades of sci-fi touch screens, right?

    Wait, nevermind touchscreens are everywhere.
    There's quite a difference between saying "I think VR MMORPGs will become common" and "VR is the objective future of MMORPGs and nothing can stop it."  The latter is what I object to.

    I think VR gaming has a future, and probably as a more widespread technology than the small niches where it is today.  I'm skeptical of any particular date that you want to put on it just because the future isn't very predictable.  It could easily be that some great game drives a ton of interest in VR, like how so many other genres of games were popularized or even created by a single, very successful game.  But I have no idea when such a game will show up.

    But non-VR gaming isn't going away, as there are too many situations where someone would like to play a game but needs to also be aware of the world around them.  If anything, the movement in recent years has been toward less immersive gaming that you can do on a cell phone now and then in small chunks of time.
    Sure non-VR will always be here, I'm not debating that. I'm just saying that VR is going to be at the core of MMOs in the future and what most MMOs will be built on. Monitor based MMOs will become a niche because it's an objectively inferior platform for the genre. Some people like retrogaming today, but most people move on to the current and MMOs will follow that suit.

    Don't forget that VR headsets will become MR headsets and let you see your surroundings very easily soon.
    Thus far, there are MMORPGs that are designed to work from a first-person perspective, but they're unusual.  Off-hand, I can't think of one that was popular.  There are some that are built to be played from a third-person perspective, and will let you play the game first-person, but you'll be fairly crippled because everyone else can see what is behind them and you can't.

    So if you were to take literally any MMORPG that I've ever liked, or any that was popular that I can think of even if I didn't like it, and try to make a VR version of it, it's not even clear what that would mean.  If you make it first-person, it's a totally different game, and probably inferior to the original--as there were compelling reasons to make the original from a third-person perspective.  You could try to make it a VR game in the naive way of letting you see how far away your character is by parallax in addition to the other cues that we use for depth perception, but that's much closer to being pointless than revolutionary.
    Not sure why you're comparing 1st person on a screen to VR? Completely different. 1st person has many issues on a monitor that are immediately solved by VR, like the lack of character involvement, low field of view, or less agency over your actions as it's hard to do a large variety of actions when your only reference point is canned animations from a 1st person perspective, but nothing in VR is a scripted animation of course.
    VR is never going to get better at displaying things from a first-person perspective than real-life.  VR technology will probably improve quite a lot in coming years, but real-life is a hard upper bound for how good it could possibly get.  And a third-person perspective gives me a lot more information about what is going on around my character than I have in real-life.  VR isn't going to be able to change that.

    I'm skeptical that VR will ever get to the point that I personally like it other than for a handful of niche things.  That's partially a statement about my own preferences.  The most recent first-person game that I played much was Faceball 2000--which dates to an era when "2000" sounded futuristic.
    You're constantly focused on 3rd person vs 1st person but you're still stuck in the monitor mindset. You need to completely drop the idea of 3rd person being so much better when comparing it to VR.

    I agree with you that I much prefer 3rd person for MMOs without VR and I bet most people agree and certainly the market has shown that. However most people agree that 1st person with VR is preferred over 3rd person. People expect different things from a monitor and VR. This is the important thing you need to take away.

    VR games will be designed in ways to account for your lack of 3rd person perspective. Many things will be easier due to a much wider field of view than a monitor, realistic 3D sound to easily react to surroundings, the ability to feel embodied in a 1st person avatar and have your clothing/limbs move realistically, and so on.

    People will be way, way, way more attached to their VR avatar than some 3rd person character. Studies have actually shown this.



    NarugKyleran
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 24,851
    Quizzical said:
    VR changes gameplay in ways that make gaming better, objectively. This is a far better way to experience FPS games:

    https://youtu.be/_zZgnfEMyNo

    This is also a far better way to experience multiplayer competitive 1st person games:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14Ha7go6JQY

    Those games play so differently to anything else that it's not even the same medium at that point.
    The basic problem with this thread is that you're trying to say that your opinion is objectively correct.  That's not compatible with what the word "objectively" means.

    Even if you believe that VR is a better way to experience first-person games (which is reasonable, but debatable), there are some very broad classes of games where VR just doesn't make sense.  What would a VR version of a 4X game even mean, other than a dumb gimmick?  How about an RTS, or a puzzle game?  The entire notion of VR seems weird in games where the player isn't controlling a single character at a particular spot in the game world.

    Even in games where you do control a single character, VR doesn't always make sense.  Many games are built around the assumption that the player will have a clear view of what is going on, which is something you don't get from a first-person perspective, even in real life.  While I expect VR to become more common in the future, other forms of gaming aren't going away.
    Basically I'm saying that VR is improving the game design of these games. An FPS game is limited normally by the range of movement that you have with your weapon and the amount of agency you have is limited. It's inarguable that VR improves this and that's the angle I'm coming from.

    A 4X game in VR could be great just in the visual sense. Visuals are not gimmicks, otherwise color TVf would be a gimmick. 4X in VR would be like commanding and conquering territory as an overseer figure and there's a certain level of empowerment you get there that you wouldn't get on a monitor.

    A puzzle game in VR can be all sorts of mindbending craziness because you have lots of ways in which you have greater agency to solve puzzles in more interesting ways.

    VR also works very well for 3rd person.

    So let's talk about a few examples.  You're going to have to explain to me how VR can make them better.  For that matter, I'd settle for explaining how going to VR could avoid making the games worse.

    Let's start with one of the most widely played and best-selling games of all time:  Tetris.  How are you going to improve Tetris by using VR?  Even when most games moved to 3D rendering, Tetris is still better off as a sprite-based 2D game.

    Okay then, how about Europa Universalis?  That's a 4X game with an overhead view.  The first two in the series were sprite-based.  The last two moved to 3D rendering, but this didn't really make the games play better.  The main advantage of 3D is the ability to cleanly zoom in and out to show more or less of the map on the screen at a time.  I haven't played EU4, but I'm not sure if it even lets you rotate the camera.  It probably shouldn't, as the only thing that would do is to let you screw up the camera angle and then have to fix it.

    How about Age of Empires, or any of its sequels if you prefer?  As an RTS, you need to be able to see a lot of what is going on at once.  You need the overhead view to get a clear view of the action.  You don't want moving your head to obscure something that you need to see in order to play the game.

    Next let's move closer to MMOs.  How about Spiral Knights?  While it is 3D rendered, it's the overhead view that people sometimes mistakenly call "isometric".  And with combat that is heavy on dodging, it pretty much has to be.  Not seeing what is happening behind you for half a second could get you killed.  It would be basically unplayable in first-person, or at minimum, a totally different and probably far inferior game.  How is VR going to improve on that?

    Let's finish with an actual MMORPG:  Elsword.  That's a side-scrolling game, in case you're not familiar with it.  It is 3D rendered, and certainly could have looked better with some higher polygon models.  But still, what does VR have to offer a side-scrolling game?  If you make it not side-scrolling, that's not an improved version of it.  That's a totally different game, and probably inferior to the original.
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 24,851
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    That VR future will get here sometime after the ubiquitous flying cars that are a few decades overdue by now.  The future finds ways to laugh at your predictions about it.
    Kind of like how touchscreens were never going to happen throughout all the decades of sci-fi touch screens, right?

    Wait, nevermind touchscreens are everywhere.
    There's quite a difference between saying "I think VR MMORPGs will become common" and "VR is the objective future of MMORPGs and nothing can stop it."  The latter is what I object to.

    I think VR gaming has a future, and probably as a more widespread technology than the small niches where it is today.  I'm skeptical of any particular date that you want to put on it just because the future isn't very predictable.  It could easily be that some great game drives a ton of interest in VR, like how so many other genres of games were popularized or even created by a single, very successful game.  But I have no idea when such a game will show up.

    But non-VR gaming isn't going away, as there are too many situations where someone would like to play a game but needs to also be aware of the world around them.  If anything, the movement in recent years has been toward less immersive gaming that you can do on a cell phone now and then in small chunks of time.
    Sure non-VR will always be here, I'm not debating that. I'm just saying that VR is going to be at the core of MMOs in the future and what most MMOs will be built on. Monitor based MMOs will become a niche because it's an objectively inferior platform for the genre. Some people like retrogaming today, but most people move on to the current and MMOs will follow that suit.

    Don't forget that VR headsets will become MR headsets and let you see your surroundings very easily soon.
    Thus far, there are MMORPGs that are designed to work from a first-person perspective, but they're unusual.  Off-hand, I can't think of one that was popular.  There are some that are built to be played from a third-person perspective, and will let you play the game first-person, but you'll be fairly crippled because everyone else can see what is behind them and you can't.

    So if you were to take literally any MMORPG that I've ever liked, or any that was popular that I can think of even if I didn't like it, and try to make a VR version of it, it's not even clear what that would mean.  If you make it first-person, it's a totally different game, and probably inferior to the original--as there were compelling reasons to make the original from a third-person perspective.  You could try to make it a VR game in the naive way of letting you see how far away your character is by parallax in addition to the other cues that we use for depth perception, but that's much closer to being pointless than revolutionary.
    Not sure why you're comparing 1st person on a screen to VR? Completely different. 1st person has many issues on a monitor that are immediately solved by VR, like the lack of character involvement, low field of view, or less agency over your actions as it's hard to do a large variety of actions when your only reference point is canned animations from a 1st person perspective, but nothing in VR is a scripted animation of course.
    VR is never going to get better at displaying things from a first-person perspective than real-life.  VR technology will probably improve quite a lot in coming years, but real-life is a hard upper bound for how good it could possibly get.  And a third-person perspective gives me a lot more information about what is going on around my character than I have in real-life.  VR isn't going to be able to change that.

    I'm skeptical that VR will ever get to the point that I personally like it other than for a handful of niche things.  That's partially a statement about my own preferences.  The most recent first-person game that I played much was Faceball 2000--which dates to an era when "2000" sounded futuristic.
    You're constantly focused on 3rd person vs 1st person but you're still stuck in the monitor mindset. You need to completely drop the idea of 3rd person being so much better when comparing it to VR.

    I agree with you that I much prefer 3rd person for MMOs without VR and I bet most people agree and certainly the market has shown that. However most people agree that 1st person with VR is preferred over 3rd person. People expect different things from a monitor and VR. This is the important thing you need to take away.

    VR games will be designed in ways to account for your lack of 3rd person perspective. Many things will be easier due to a much wider field of view than a monitor, realistic 3D sound to easily react to surroundings, the ability to feel embodied in a 1st person avatar and have your clothing/limbs move realistically, and so on.

    People will be way, way, way more attached to their VR avatar than some 3rd person character. Studies have actually shown this.
    Sure, first-person in VR can give you a wider field of view than first-person with a monitor.  (Or three monitors, which is what I use.)  But it's never going to give you a wider field of view than real-life, unless you intentionally stretch it so as to make it look all wrong.  Third-person gave you a full 360 degree field of view 40 years ago.

    For an awful lot of games, that's essential to gameplay.  The difference between 90 degrees versus 180 versus 270 (which VR won't get you) doesn't matter much.  All that matters is that they're not 360, and therefore, not viable for many genres of games.
  • LunoTrickster34LunoTrickster34 Member UncommonPosts: 105
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    VR changes gameplay in ways that make gaming better, objectively. This is a far better way to experience FPS games:

    https://youtu.be/_zZgnfEMyNo

    This is also a far better way to experience multiplayer competitive 1st person games:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14Ha7go6JQY

    Those games play so differently to anything else that it's not even the same medium at that point.
    The basic problem with this thread is that you're trying to say that your opinion is objectively correct.  That's not compatible with what the word "objectively" means.

    Even if you believe that VR is a better way to experience first-person games (which is reasonable, but debatable), there are some very broad classes of games where VR just doesn't make sense.  What would a VR version of a 4X game even mean, other than a dumb gimmick?  How about an RTS, or a puzzle game?  The entire notion of VR seems weird in games where the player isn't controlling a single character at a particular spot in the game world.

    Even in games where you do control a single character, VR doesn't always make sense.  Many games are built around the assumption that the player will have a clear view of what is going on, which is something you don't get from a first-person perspective, even in real life.  While I expect VR to become more common in the future, other forms of gaming aren't going away.
    Basically I'm saying that VR is improving the game design of these games. An FPS game is limited normally by the range of movement that you have with your weapon and the amount of agency you have is limited. It's inarguable that VR improves this and that's the angle I'm coming from.

    A 4X game in VR could be great just in the visual sense. Visuals are not gimmicks, otherwise color TVf would be a gimmick. 4X in VR would be like commanding and conquering territory as an overseer figure and there's a certain level of empowerment you get there that you wouldn't get on a monitor.

    A puzzle game in VR can be all sorts of mindbending craziness because you have lots of ways in which you have greater agency to solve puzzles in more interesting ways.

    VR also works very well for 3rd person.

    So let's talk about a few examples.  You're going to have to explain to me how VR can make them better.  For that matter, I'd settle for explaining how going to VR could avoid making the games worse.

    Let's start with one of the most widely played and best-selling games of all time:  Tetris.  How are you going to improve Tetris by using VR?  Even when most games moved to 3D rendering, Tetris is still better off as a sprite-based 2D game.

    Okay then, how about Europa Universalis?  That's a 4X game with an overhead view.  The first two in the series were sprite-based.  The last two moved to 3D rendering, but this didn't really make the games play better.  The main advantage of 3D is the ability to cleanly zoom in and out to show more or less of the map on the screen at a time.  I haven't played EU4, but I'm not sure if it even lets you rotate the camera.  It probably shouldn't, as the only thing that would do is to let you screw up the camera angle and then have to fix it.

    How about Age of Empires, or any of its sequels if you prefer?  As an RTS, you need to be able to see a lot of what is going on at once.  You need the overhead view to get a clear view of the action.  You don't want moving your head to obscure something that you need to see in order to play the game.

    Next let's move closer to MMOs.  How about Spiral Knights?  While it is 3D rendered, it's the overhead view that people sometimes mistakenly call "isometric".  And with combat that is heavy on dodging, it pretty much has to be.  Not seeing what is happening behind you for half a second could get you killed.  It would be basically unplayable in first-person, or at minimum, a totally different and probably far inferior game.  How is VR going to improve on that?

    Let's finish with an actual MMORPG:  Elsword.  That's a side-scrolling game, in case you're not familiar with it.  It is 3D rendered, and certainly could have looked better with some higher polygon models.  But still, what does VR have to offer a side-scrolling game?  If you make it not side-scrolling, that's not an improved version of it.  That's a totally different game, and probably inferior to the original.
    Tetris Effect is a thing. I don't mean the psychological effect, I mean the game. It's in VR and it was built for VR predominantly. Professional Tetris players seem to prefer it in VR because it's easier to get in the zone and they find themselves performing better. This is a video based around that: 

    As for the more casual player, it's just a more meditative/relaxing/interesting experience in VR. Plenty of people consider this the best Tetris game.

    Europa Universalis is harder but at this point you're basically going through every genre. I don't think VR is better at literally every genre, I think it's better at most. RTS and 2.5D fighting games are two examples where it adds less.

    Age of Empires does make plenty of sense though. People like to feel like they are commanding an army as the overhead god of the world and VR can give them that sort of feeling in a way a monitor can't. The overhead view is fully intact in VR as you'd view the world from above like a god out of the clouds, giving you plenty of control over what you can see.

    Spiral Knights, I just had a quick look at, but it's a bit of a pointless debate. 99% of all VRMMOs will be in 1st person, I'm almost certain of that. It's very hard to do a 3rd person VRMMO because the interface will need to be abstracted and that's hard to do with the bazillions of hotkeys needed for MMOs. Spiral Knights doesn't seem too complex in that area from what I saw so maybe it wouldn't be too bad. Again though you can view the game as you do today as the overhead view, just in VR looking down at your character.

    Elsword as a side-scrolling VR game doesn't make that much sense because of it being an MMO. If it was a singleplayer sidescroller then VR would actually be pretty fun and additive because it would add extra depth which is a visual improvement and would help platforming sections. The first VR game I ever played was actually a sidescroller.




    Narug
  • LunoTrickster34LunoTrickster34 Member UncommonPosts: 105
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    That VR future will get here sometime after the ubiquitous flying cars that are a few decades overdue by now.  The future finds ways to laugh at your predictions about it.
    Kind of like how touchscreens were never going to happen throughout all the decades of sci-fi touch screens, right?

    Wait, nevermind touchscreens are everywhere.
    There's quite a difference between saying "I think VR MMORPGs will become common" and "VR is the objective future of MMORPGs and nothing can stop it."  The latter is what I object to.

    I think VR gaming has a future, and probably as a more widespread technology than the small niches where it is today.  I'm skeptical of any particular date that you want to put on it just because the future isn't very predictable.  It could easily be that some great game drives a ton of interest in VR, like how so many other genres of games were popularized or even created by a single, very successful game.  But I have no idea when such a game will show up.

    But non-VR gaming isn't going away, as there are too many situations where someone would like to play a game but needs to also be aware of the world around them.  If anything, the movement in recent years has been toward less immersive gaming that you can do on a cell phone now and then in small chunks of time.
    Sure non-VR will always be here, I'm not debating that. I'm just saying that VR is going to be at the core of MMOs in the future and what most MMOs will be built on. Monitor based MMOs will become a niche because it's an objectively inferior platform for the genre. Some people like retrogaming today, but most people move on to the current and MMOs will follow that suit.

    Don't forget that VR headsets will become MR headsets and let you see your surroundings very easily soon.
    Thus far, there are MMORPGs that are designed to work from a first-person perspective, but they're unusual.  Off-hand, I can't think of one that was popular.  There are some that are built to be played from a third-person perspective, and will let you play the game first-person, but you'll be fairly crippled because everyone else can see what is behind them and you can't.

    So if you were to take literally any MMORPG that I've ever liked, or any that was popular that I can think of even if I didn't like it, and try to make a VR version of it, it's not even clear what that would mean.  If you make it first-person, it's a totally different game, and probably inferior to the original--as there were compelling reasons to make the original from a third-person perspective.  You could try to make it a VR game in the naive way of letting you see how far away your character is by parallax in addition to the other cues that we use for depth perception, but that's much closer to being pointless than revolutionary.
    Not sure why you're comparing 1st person on a screen to VR? Completely different. 1st person has many issues on a monitor that are immediately solved by VR, like the lack of character involvement, low field of view, or less agency over your actions as it's hard to do a large variety of actions when your only reference point is canned animations from a 1st person perspective, but nothing in VR is a scripted animation of course.
    VR is never going to get better at displaying things from a first-person perspective than real-life.  VR technology will probably improve quite a lot in coming years, but real-life is a hard upper bound for how good it could possibly get.  And a third-person perspective gives me a lot more information about what is going on around my character than I have in real-life.  VR isn't going to be able to change that.

    I'm skeptical that VR will ever get to the point that I personally like it other than for a handful of niche things.  That's partially a statement about my own preferences.  The most recent first-person game that I played much was Faceball 2000--which dates to an era when "2000" sounded futuristic.
    You're constantly focused on 3rd person vs 1st person but you're still stuck in the monitor mindset. You need to completely drop the idea of 3rd person being so much better when comparing it to VR.

    I agree with you that I much prefer 3rd person for MMOs without VR and I bet most people agree and certainly the market has shown that. However most people agree that 1st person with VR is preferred over 3rd person. People expect different things from a monitor and VR. This is the important thing you need to take away.

    VR games will be designed in ways to account for your lack of 3rd person perspective. Many things will be easier due to a much wider field of view than a monitor, realistic 3D sound to easily react to surroundings, the ability to feel embodied in a 1st person avatar and have your clothing/limbs move realistically, and so on.

    People will be way, way, way more attached to their VR avatar than some 3rd person character. Studies have actually shown this.
    Sure, first-person in VR can give you a wider field of view than first-person with a monitor.  (Or three monitors, which is what I use.)  But it's never going to give you a wider field of view than real-life, unless you intentionally stretch it so as to make it look all wrong.  Third-person gave you a full 360 degree field of view 40 years ago.

    For an awful lot of games, that's essential to gameplay.  The difference between 90 degrees versus 180 versus 270 (which VR won't get you) doesn't matter much.  All that matters is that they're not 360, and therefore, not viable for many genres of games.
    Yes except 3rd person can't have natural 3D audio that you can properly react to as if the sound is entering your actual ears. 3rd person games are also designed differently than 1st person.

    This is like trying to compare FPS games in VR and non-VR and saying that non-VR players will stomp the VR players due to the quick mouse reactions. Yeah maybe so, but what discussion are you even trying to have here? No VR FPS will have mouse players in the equation, problem solved.

    Likewise, no VRMMO is going to design in the same way that 3rd person MMOs design. There will be no disadvantage because the game won't put you into a disadvantage. 
  • UngoodUngood Member LegendaryPosts: 7,287
    edited February 2020
    Ungood said:
    There's nothing more important to an MMORPG than the ability to feel like you are an unique character in an emergent and socially engaging game world. VR will always do this best.

    VR will improve the social aspects that people find lacking today because people will be much more inclined to seek others out.

    VR will improve the one dimensional gameplay style that many MMOs have today since you will have to pay more attention.

    VR will improve the escapism/immersion aspect and you'll be able to live basically a second life if you want to.

    VR will improve your character/individualism by allowing you to express yourself much more and give you much greater agency in the world.

    I expect that in the 2030s, VR will dominant MMOs and the idea of playing such games on a monitor will be laughably archaic and passed off as retrogaming. Obviously by that point all the current issues of VR will be fixed and no I'm not talking about some silly Matrix brain interface because that's fantasy, I'm talking about headsets like out of the movie Ready Player One.
    I fully believe the future of MMO's will be VR.

    They already have bidirectional walking platforms and the like, couple that with full body tracking, and no doubt, we will be looking at some kind of Ready Player One level of game experience coming up.
    Nah, Ready Player One is just a movie and it's totally impossible, at least someone here says.

    I agree but we probably won't need the treadmills to walk on. I think locomotion will still be driven the way it is today in most cases but with a much lower chance of sickness due to higher refresh rates, some extra headset calibrations for anti-sickness, and better comfort options.
    We are already building "treadmills" for VR, with various mechanics to make them work, this is a direction we are already going in, this is not something that might happen, but something that is already happening, some are still in development, while others are already on the market, 

    Here, Check this out:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvu5FxKuqdQ

    This is another Version

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEhwLRX4m2s



    We are building these already for MMO's, this is the future of the game.

    https://filmora.wondershare.com/virtual-reality/top-vr-treadmills.html

    Treadmills ARE the Future.

    Also, So are VR suits.

    Like this:
    https://teslasuit.io/

    As well as this, which while overall, it failed, it did get made, and it is was put into production, it is simply a matter of someone else making it become a more mainstream reality.

    http://hardlightvr.com/




    This is happening already.. this is not Sci-Fi.

    As far as the headsets go, yes, I believe we still need to work on that, and it will happen.

    But, we are well on the way for literally virtual worlds to unfold before us, where we will interact with our game environment in a way very similar to how Ready Player One set it up. And in fact that seems to be most believable (while maybe not to that level) future of MMO's and Online World design we are moving into. 
    Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.

Sign In or Register to comment.