Alright. I've tried. I've really, really tried to give Virtual Reality the benefit of the doubt, but the reality is this: it isn't happening for me.
Don't get me wrong; I've pre-ordered a PlayStation VR, and I hope to scrape together enough coins to bring you PC reviews later in the year. And maybe that'll even stretch to an Oculus and Vive.
I'm trying to remain optimistic that PSVR will represent some sort of tipping point for VR, in terms of it going mass market... but I just don't know. I really don't.
You hear this talk of the VR version of Resident Evil 7 making people want to throw up, and it all comes back to the reservations I wrote about a year or more ago.
VR just doesn't seem suited to extended play. When you add up all the negatives - the eyestrain, the sensory deprivation, the social awkwardness of thrashing around at thin air - and people aren't going to want to be locked into a virtual world for hours at a time, the way they currently are with regular games. You know: playing games while their senses can still detect reality. I know I don't want that.
Especially not if it my eyes are watering, and I have a headache, and there's vomit spurting from my mouth.
Many are suggesting that VR is best for short experiences. You know: like the sorts of games you get on smartphones. Which is fine, but - let's face it - that's a lot of money to pay just to play a stereoscopic version of Fruit Ninja. And currently, I'm unconvinced that there's a single VR experience which justifies the expense.
Don't get me wrong; I've pre-ordered a PlayStation VR, and I hope to scrape together enough coins to bring you PC reviews later in the year. And maybe that'll even stretch to an Oculus and Vive.
I'm trying to remain optimistic that PSVR will represent some sort of tipping point for VR, in terms of it going mass market... but I just don't know. I really don't.
You hear this talk of the VR version of Resident Evil 7 making people want to throw up, and it all comes back to the reservations I wrote about a year or more ago.
VR just doesn't seem suited to extended play. When you add up all the negatives - the eyestrain, the sensory deprivation, the social awkwardness of thrashing around at thin air - and people aren't going to want to be locked into a virtual world for hours at a time, the way they currently are with regular games. You know: playing games while their senses can still detect reality. I know I don't want that.
Especially not if it my eyes are watering, and I have a headache, and there's vomit spurting from my mouth.
Many are suggesting that VR is best for short experiences. You know: like the sorts of games you get on smartphones. Which is fine, but - let's face it - that's a lot of money to pay just to play a stereoscopic version of Fruit Ninja. And currently, I'm unconvinced that there's a single VR experience which justifies the expense.
WHAT ARE YOU NOT?
I'm not the only one who feels like this.
Denying that his company's next console will be some sort of VR machine, Nintendo's Reggie Fils-Aims spurted this: "In my judgment, I think VR is a bit further out there for mainstream, mass market applications and applications that consumers can invest a lot of time in, versus short snacks of entertainment."
He didn't rule out Nintendo going virtual one day, adding, in a funny whiny voice: "We've been looking at the VR space since the days of the Virtual Boy. With us, we want to make sure that our next content is going to be mainstream and mass market approachable, and when something like VR is at that point, you can expect Nintendo to be there."
And that's it, really: when VR is mass market and mainstream. It isn't there yet, and - given that the Oculus Rift and HTC Vive still seem to be a niche thing, for certain PC gamers - I see no sign yet of crossover happening any time soon. VR feels like something for tech nerds and games journalists to get excited about.
It has been projected that half of all VR headset sales this year will be from the Samsung Gear VR; just £100, and being given away free with preorders of the Samsung Galaxy S7 phone. However, few would argue that it offers the sort of VR experience we were told we'd all be buying into.
I'm not the only one who feels like this.
Denying that his company's next console will be some sort of VR machine, Nintendo's Reggie Fils-Aims spurted this: "In my judgment, I think VR is a bit further out there for mainstream, mass market applications and applications that consumers can invest a lot of time in, versus short snacks of entertainment."
He didn't rule out Nintendo going virtual one day, adding, in a funny whiny voice: "We've been looking at the VR space since the days of the Virtual Boy. With us, we want to make sure that our next content is going to be mainstream and mass market approachable, and when something like VR is at that point, you can expect Nintendo to be there."
And that's it, really: when VR is mass market and mainstream. It isn't there yet, and - given that the Oculus Rift and HTC Vive still seem to be a niche thing, for certain PC gamers - I see no sign yet of crossover happening any time soon. VR feels like something for tech nerds and games journalists to get excited about.
It has been projected that half of all VR headset sales this year will be from the Samsung Gear VR; just £100, and being given away free with preorders of the Samsung Galaxy S7 phone. However, few would argue that it offers the sort of VR experience we were told we'd all be buying into.
UNREASONABLE DEMANDS
It doesn't help that Oculus and Rift are already struggling to meet demand, and the PlayStation VR is likely to be similarly constrained when it ships in October.
I struggle to believe that this is down to the mass appeal of VR. I don't see that there.
Shortages are due to the cost and complexity of shipping a new hardware format; all consoles struggle to meet demand initially.
Virtual Reality still seems to be facing an uphill battle in terms of convincing most people that this technology is the future of entertainment. I'm not denying it's cool, and exciting, and futuristic. I get all that. But where is the one game, the one piece of software, that sells it as a must-have to the likes of me? Heck, I can't even name a single VR exclusive game.
Where is that something special that it offers, in the way that the iPhone did? I remember when I first played with an iPod Touch. It felt like something completely new, something exciting. VR is an old idea brought up to date with new technology... and boil it down to basics, and isn't it just a fancy screen?
For me it still feels like a hobbyists medium, something for elitists. Whether Sony can reverse that perception remains to be seen - and, frankly, they've got a better shot at it than anyone. For VR to become mass-market it needs to get into the hands of everyone. For one thing, it needs to be driven by kids, and it is thus far priced out of the hands of most younger gamers.
For most of the rest of us, who might have the disposable income - I know I can't just drop the best part of a grand on it - there's also the hurdle of shutting ourselves off from our family and the world.
It feels like all the predictions of VR are focused on the "Wooh! Cool!" factor, and not what it potentially does to us as people. It's like sports cars with a top speed of 200mph. All well and good, and a great status symbol, but most of us need a boring family car. Or can't even drive yet. Or are constrained by speed limits.
It doesn't help that Oculus and Rift are already struggling to meet demand, and the PlayStation VR is likely to be similarly constrained when it ships in October.
I struggle to believe that this is down to the mass appeal of VR. I don't see that there.
Shortages are due to the cost and complexity of shipping a new hardware format; all consoles struggle to meet demand initially.
Virtual Reality still seems to be facing an uphill battle in terms of convincing most people that this technology is the future of entertainment. I'm not denying it's cool, and exciting, and futuristic. I get all that. But where is the one game, the one piece of software, that sells it as a must-have to the likes of me? Heck, I can't even name a single VR exclusive game.
Where is that something special that it offers, in the way that the iPhone did? I remember when I first played with an iPod Touch. It felt like something completely new, something exciting. VR is an old idea brought up to date with new technology... and boil it down to basics, and isn't it just a fancy screen?
For me it still feels like a hobbyists medium, something for elitists. Whether Sony can reverse that perception remains to be seen - and, frankly, they've got a better shot at it than anyone. For VR to become mass-market it needs to get into the hands of everyone. For one thing, it needs to be driven by kids, and it is thus far priced out of the hands of most younger gamers.
For most of the rest of us, who might have the disposable income - I know I can't just drop the best part of a grand on it - there's also the hurdle of shutting ourselves off from our family and the world.
It feels like all the predictions of VR are focused on the "Wooh! Cool!" factor, and not what it potentially does to us as people. It's like sports cars with a top speed of 200mph. All well and good, and a great status symbol, but most of us need a boring family car. Or can't even drive yet. Or are constrained by speed limits.
RSS Feed
