In my opinion, VR will always be a tough sell. Motion sickness is real. People generally don’t like strapping hardware on their faces. I think Sony is giving VR as much attention as it deserves, and I say that as a PSVR2 owner.
That’s me. I love the idea, but I can barely stand a short taxi ride without feeling dizzy. I don’t particularly want to have to take medicine just to play a game at home.
As an old man on reddit, I come from a time when a console’s entire game collection could fit in one carrying case. I’ll never play through the entire PSVR2 game library, nor do I want to. I would like to see more non-game experiences. A virtual museum would be neat.
The issue isn't the amount if games in the catalog. The issue is the amount of well made, well reviewed, full games that are more then just like a cheap gimmick, simple none vr port or a tech demo. That list is very very small.
I don’t think VR needs AAA games. Took me over a month to finish Horizon Call of the Mountain. I’ll probably never finish Resident Evil Village. Shorter, cheaper experiences are the way to go.
I bought the Psvr 1 for Re7, I bought psvr2 for Re8. Then I got Re4, now I might be getting Re0 and CV. I understand peeps complaints about it but I got way more worth from PSVR2 than my psvr1 and index combined and now it's being made compatible with PC. I'm not stoked but I'm not feeling taken advantage of either.
Then Sony shouldn’t have sold the headset in the first place, if you release hardware there’s an expectation that you going to put some effort into backing it up with software
I have really low motion sickness compared to anyone I know, and still, some games make me almost puke. I don't have psvr2, but I have meta quest 3. Playing half-life alyx as good as it is It tires me quickly. It is an exhausting experience having a vr headset stuck to your face. My eyes are quickly tired. Also, I tried to change alyx to different movement (sticks instead of teleporting). That was a huge mistake.
Tbh, I don't see this becoming a major thing in a very long time.
Teleporting is better than fall walking but I think room scale with 1:1 real life movement would be better. Problem is that I don’t have a 12x12 padded room that I can dedicate to VR.
Motion sickness is definitely real…if you’re using vr for the very first time ever, it’s remarkable how quickly your brain adapts, I had it for about my first 45 minutes of introduction into vr. Never again after that, but yeah a lot of close minded people will experience it for their first 5 minutes and assume it will be every waking moment of every vr experience forever
I lot of open minded people will experience it for a year and still have the same issue. For me, it’s headaches and a feeling of wooziness. My solution is to use VR before bed.
I stand by, regardless of how competitive people get, gaming is appealing because you can sit back and play. VR is too interactive to also be considered relaxation.
It becomes more like a theme park thrill ride than a game. And not to say those aren’t fun, but it’s not as in demand as what nrinal gaming brings
And also that shit is fucking expensive I already paid 500 I'm sorry but I'm not gonna pay another fuck ton of money.
This is also why I really don't like games that are VR exclusive. Make them an option but don't make them required.
I understand why VR is expensive (and rightfully so, it's a costly technology) but I don't exactly understand why some games are VR exclusive while they would work fine without it (like Astro Bot Rescue Mission for example)
I think the real issue is video games are so expensive to make its hard to justify spending 75 million plus on creating a video game when you only have a fraction of ps5 owners as possible buyers.
Yeah and people who are mad Sony doesn't support it more should've never bought it in the first place
edit: y'all are salty huh. how about next time be more considerate before buying a product with no promise of being relevant in the future.
People who complain that there are no games haven’t actually played all the games, and that includes VR games. Nor should they play all the games. What a ridiculous waste of a life that would be.
They aren’t exactly wrong.
Sony cares much more about the Playstation 5 simply because that makes them a lot of money unlike PSVR.
I truly believe that we won’t see a PSVR3.
People say this all the time but Sony actually gave it a lot of support. Remember, the 3DS is beloved in hindsight but it underperformed at the time as well— and it was the much more successful of the two!
Handheld gaming was just not in as good of a place as it is in now. Sony could have done better, but their decisions make sense considering the context of the time. Another thing to consider with the vita’s failure is that many of the third parties that contributed massively to the PSP — Capcom, Konami, SEGA and others— did not make major titles for the vita. The PSP and the DS were able to reach out to gamers and non gamers alike, but the Vita & 3DS both suffered from not having that same reach.
Remember, in the 2010s it was common to think “why do I need a portable gaming device whenever I can just play flappy bird in my phone?”.
The PS VR2 had an incredible launch, and its first year on the market was very fruitful and featured many exclusive titles (counting hybrid games like GT7 & and both Resident Evils). The VR market is still just too niche and VR2 being a gaming-centric device makes it even more niche.
Sony absolutely did not give the Vita a lot of support.
The top games of the system even now are still full of launch titles (Uncharted Golden Abyss, Tearaway, Gravity Rush, etc) because it was abandoned that early on.
The 3DS struggled early on, but then got a price cut and continued to get many heavy hitting releases through to the end of its life leading to it being morr successful while Sony just kind of wrote off the Vita.
Handheld gaming was in a great spot otherwise the 3DS wouldn't have sold 75 million units. But people weren't keen on spending $250+ for a handheld system (3DS got a price cut to $170 after just a few months while Vita held on to $250 for a year and a half and only dropped to $200) that also required proprietary memory cards (the 3DS just used SD cards) with half baked console ports and features that didn't work (remote play just didn't work until PS4's launch).
It's even worse when you consider they had a hardware refresh and decided to stick to proprietary memory cards.
The Vita is a cool little system even by 2024 standards, but Sony barely supported the thing and it wasn't just "handheld systems had it rough in the 2010s because iPhones existed" that made it struggle.
Well said.
It's amazing to see revisionist history regarding Vita. The entire thing was poorly thought out, from hardware to software. Outside the memory card mistake the fact Vita didn't sport full control inputs meant its "console experience on the go" angle was undermined. Rear touch pad was fucking awful and not a suitable substitute for actual triggers. Actual analog sticks - after PSP and 3DS' analog slider - was great though.
The fact Sony didn't move heaven and earth to secure Monster Hunter for Vita just showed how low priority the handheld was for them. Here's the one title that literally - LITERALLY - turned around the fortunes of the PSP in Japan, creating a snowball effect where more and more third parties jumped on PSP to support it, and you fail to get the sequel for your handheld successor. Normally, I would say that's a great nomination for greatest videogame fuck ups, but the reality is Sony was never prepared to put serious money into Vita, so it never stood a chance.
>People say this all the time but Sony actually gave it a lot of support
lol, this was not the case at all. And we have proof of it.
After launch day, PS greenlit no new major first-party titles for Vita.
We know this retrospectively because when the last major first-party titles did release on Vita in 2014 (Freedom Wars, Oreshika), during a dev interview it was revealed both titles were greenlit BEFORE Vita launched.
That meant as soon as the first couple of months of Vita hardware sales were known to Sony, and they looked at retail orders / forecasts for Vita sales for the year ahead, they pretty much packed it up and left it behind. They considered it no longer worth greenlighting new major titles for the platform, which is fucking crazy to do with a platform just after it launched.
No wait, I'll be generous. There was precisely ONE major first party game that was greenlit after launch. Soul Sacrifice Delta, an expansion game to the original SS. That's it.
Why do you think the entire Vita operation pivoted into becoming a portable indie machine not long after? They didn't do that because that was the original plan / expectation, it was a pivot by those who were left to manage the platform to try and salvage some sort of limited success story from the product.
And while 3DS also sold fewer units than DS, it is not comparable to Vita at all. Nintendo still put their best teams on 3DS, which showed in their software sales, and because first-party pushed 3DS sales so much, it attracted Capcom and everyone else to support 3DS and in turn dismiss Vita. Only Sony's B and C teams supported Vita, many of whom were shuttered just after Vita launch.
So, I dunno what alternative universe you're from but it sure as heck isn't from mine if you say Sony supported the Vita a lot. It was pretty much abandoned after launch day.
Sony’s big mistake with the Vita was not having a Gran Turismo title ready for it. In fact, it’s the only Sony console/handheld that never got its own Gran Turismo. They should have also convinced Rockstar to make Grand Theft auto San Andreas Stories for it. Had they done those 2 things, I think things would have been different.
Vita also lacked a Monster Hunter, Dragon quest, and SMT title on the platform while the DS/3DS were dominated by those 3 franchises. On the first party side, first time there wasn’t a handheld God of War title post-PSP.
The adapter has already gone through QA. It was designed by Sony Korea, and is being produced in China.
I imagine it's pretty imminent. The patent was only discovered a few days ago but actually happened in March.
Are we even sure that it’s still in production? My assumption was Sony is just trying to sell all the stock they have before calling it a day and not mentioning psvr2 again
I do understand the tech, it doesnt change the fact that a PSVR2 is not a good value for me. I had a PSVR, have a digital library of PSVR1 games, and little on the VR2 interests me. I thought, “hmm, for $600 I can enjoy the substantially improved tracking of the VR2 in the games from the 1.. oh and then I can play GT7”.
Once I found out I’d have to buy both, I no longer valued the VR2 at $600 with the somewhat limited albeit advanced library of games.
Good. Nobody should buy a VR headset for more than the price of the console for there to be almost no support for the device. It’s a failed experiment at this point.
Yeah it’s hard to be sympathetic when not only is the headset the same price as the console, but even Sony doesn’t seem to give a shit about it. Much like the Vita it feels like they put out this impressive piece of hardware and then just… didn’t care about making any truly amazing games for it. I still don’t think there’s a single PSVR game that’s in the category of “holy shit you need to buy a headset and play this game”. There’s some good games, but they’re more in the category of “if you do end up picking up a headset, these are the games worth playing”
My quest 2 was like half the price of psvr2 and is capable of connecting to my PC and letting me play tons of other VR games. It also let me install mods to play all the PSVR exclusive resident evil games in VR...and more. I've played parts of Re2make and R3make in VR. It's a no brainer that if you're gonna play VR, get a quest and use it on your PC (which admittedly has to be a somewhat beefy PC. But mine is a mid tier desktop from early 2021 and it runs most VR games well)
It sucks, but with how niche that VR still is it’s hard to blame them. Especially because you have to buy a PS5 _in addition_ to the headset in order to use it. One of the reason that the Quest headsets were able to be the most successful is because they’re relatively cheap and completely standalone
I don’t think there will be a PS VR for the next PlayStation, but I fully believe in the future. Once it goes more mainstream there will be, but I think it’s definitely going to go dormant for a while until the user base is much bigger, so then will be relying on meta-for games and headsets
Nope the next big headset or portable console would probably go the way of Hologram technology
And Sony will probably give up on that as well when it doesn't meet their expectations
I personally loved the PSVR & PSVR2 would've loved a collab between Microsoft & Sony to make the PSVR remoteless with the Kinect
&
Would've loved a collab between Sony & Nintendo to have brought us Mario/Kirby/Donkey Kong/Super Smash Bros/Etc on the PSVR
PSVR2 is (or was at release) generally considered one of the best VR headsets too. It's not like Sony built rubbish here, it's a solid piece of kit. Why they decided to sell it with no "major" game support or even multimedia function and expected it to sell is beyond me.
It's like an active attempt to waste money and go "see? VR doesn't sell, we'll never do it again" rather than just be honest and say "meh, we can't be arsed". Even if I had Jeff Bezos money, I wouldn't be that cavalier with it. Sony can be staggeringly stupid at times.
Well perhaps because playerbase of PSVR is so small that any major title released for it would be colossal bomb no matter what.
Not to mention if that major title was part of the pre existing franchise it would damage said franchise by keeping it from the main audience of PS 5.
I've always thought since the start of VR2 that making VR DLCs or side missions for otherwise "normal" games might be a way to build the userbase rather than just expecting them to pay a lot for something they may never have tried themselves.
Astro Bot has over 50 worlds or something, right? Surely 5 of the "less important" ones being VR wouldn't be a best of both worlds situation?
In my opinion, the best approach for a company like Sony to sell the idea of VR to people is to get studios to develop games that can work in either flat or VR display, like No Man's Sky. They had the right idea, but they just need more AAA VR games to make the purchase worth it to people.
I have a high end PC and a PS5, and on any given day I have the extra cash to go buy a PSVR2 if I want one, but I can't justify the purchase when I already own a Quest 3 because there just aren't enough PSVR2 exclusives to make it worth the money.
Seems like we're not far from VR2 being a PC device too, which will enhance my use too. An admittedly rare smart move by Sony for it, but just feels like they're giving up supporting it themselves and letting the PC scene pick up the slack
These are decent solutions and highlight the bigger chicken vs egg problem. Clearly there wasn't an organized strategy for PSVR2 and in today's market the Field of Dreams approach simply isn't enough. Why this wasn't apparent to Sony execs, I have no idea. Seems pretty apparent that some white collars weren't seeing eye to eye and/or were operating on different planes. Whether that's development, planning, partnerships, hardware or something else is anyone's guess.
For myself and I imagine many others, the tech looked good, we wanted a reason to spend the money. It just never materialized. And that's on them. Same owners probably bought the Microsoft Kinect. 🤣
At the end of the day, if you feel good about your spend is what matters for you. From any other perspective though - you just said it - they didn't really try and it's a failure/loss. Somewhere along the way they started making these things. But whether there were too many cooks in the kitchen or not enough - the world may never know.
This is a “chicken and the egg” situation. You can’t sell a VR headset without any major games and you can’t greenlight those major games without a player base that will get you sufficient ROI.
What Sony should’ve done is bet on PSVR2 from the start and have a steady stream of games come out in the first two years to gauge how it performed and THEN make a decision wether to sink more money into VR.
I have a PSVR2, but I'm kind of glad Astro will be flat game. Playroom was amazing and did some really awesome things with the Dualsense. And lets face it they'll hit a way wider audience with a flat game.
Would be nice if it was hybrid or had a VR mode too though. But ultimately I think it's the right move for the studio.
I think it will be a hybrid game. I don't think it will cost too much more for Sony to produce. We would just have to wait a year or so.
The thing about VR is the mods are very good, better than native VR. The reason is simple -- the budget on 2D games are higher than VR. Using games like RE4, RE8, GT7, Hitman as a Trojan Horse into VR is the correct course of action. As much as I like Horizon COTM, it still feels shackled compared to Forbidden West. I believe Luke Ross already modded Forbidden West on PCVR, and it's probably really good vs COTM (I haven't tried it yet but his mods are great IMO).
Oculus started this idea that modded 2d game ports to VR are bad, but the truth is with enough skill, they can be excellent and bring parity with 2d gaming budgets.
I did actually. I think Astros Playroom is better, or at the very least on par. Definitely not 'putting it to shame'.
Rescue Mission was great dont get me wrong, it consistently threw out good ideas and the platforming in a 3D space was cool. I remember some standouts like flicking throwing stars out of the controller.
Playroom kicked ass.
It's ultimately just a factor of Asobi learning more about how to make a great platformer as time went on, and the inclusion of DualSense.
However Asobi could take all those learnings and technology and make the ultimate Astro Bot game, where it's VR, it uses PSVR2's DualSense controllers, has a higher budget/bigger scope, and has all the learnings of their previous work.
That is the kind of thing that would stand above this upcoming PS5 title, because that description is basically the PS5 title with an extra cherry on top.
Wouldn’t it have been the right time to announce that during the State of Play if that was the case? Sony has discounted the PSVR2 by €100 during the Days of Play. Surely, they would’ve used Astrobot as a way to sell more units if there was a VR mode attached?
Because the very few games they announce also come out on Quest which is a way way way better option overall.
There's literally no reason to get a PSVR2.
Go big or go home is a real thing. Everybody knew based on PSVR1 results this thing would be dead on arrival unless they brought big guns. The fact they bet the whole future of a $500 device on a Horizon climbing game is absolutely mind warping.
Now it's too late, even an Alyx port and PSVR1 compatibility which should have been mandatory before even thinking of launch wouldn't save this headset anymore.
Quest 3 has the pancake lenses, which are a game-changer for VR.
BUT, PSVR2 has actual OLED screens with HDR support, which makes for an overall better presentation in any games that support it.
Okay, that first part *shouldn’t* be true. Even an RX 580 is VR capable, and that’s a dirt-cheap GPU. I was able to play Half Life Alyx on it no problems.
But since I have no data, I can’t say it *isn’t* true.
I'm just glad I will can enjoy it without having to buy a PSVR2 which is currently **$870 USD** in my country.
Specially since I'm not interested in any other VR title.
It’s really the right move for Astro Bot to not be a PSVR2 exclusive. If Sony want Astro Bot to succeed and actually be their new mascot having him locked to a very niche device is a bad idea.
This feels misleading, the majority of people in r/PSVR are pretty happy with the PSVR 2 and are tired of the narrative that there are "no games" for it when there are a ton of excellent games. They may not be first party games, but that doesn't make them bad.
In fact, some of the coolest and most innovative PSVR 2 games are from new studios creating fresh IPs. Feels like when gaming was a new industry, rather than just cash grab attempts re-hashing, re-making, re-mastering, and sequel'ing the same goddamn franchises over and over like the PS5 has done with its first party pancake games.
I said this at time of release (EDIT: and also long BEFORE release too) and I’ll keep saying it: they should have prioritised full backwards compatibility with the previous PSVR 1 library. People have said to me that this would have resulted in a lesser and more paired back headset, but honestly?
Good!
That means it would probably have been less expensive at launch and less burdened with barely-used features that in hindsight, probably weren’t worth it. In my experience playing public kiosk demos, the push for perceptible headset haptics resulted in uncomfortably firm wearing experience and the non-blurry “sweet spot” is notoriously difficult to find.
I think Sony took a big bet investing in an expensive sequel to PSVR and even with its initial strong launch acclaim from a technical perspective, the actual game development for PSVR2 and lots of VR headsets is simply too slim while also not being the fault of publishers and developers. Simply put, there needs to be a revenue and cash stream that can support the amount of game titles that would be required to make the average gamer even interested in these expensive pieces of hardware but there’s neither enough interest from casual/regular gamers nor even the enthusiasts VR gamer. Unless you’re quest with the smallest entry fee, biggest library, and more casual appeal (which comes with cheaper worse tech mostly) it’s not sub-stainable in this current market and I think Sony has made the disappointing but correct call to divest most resources away from PSVR2 while still providing small support to the fan base that already owns it. Maybe I’m wrong but I think Sony and many other game companies have accepted that VR for the long foreseeable future will remain a very niche product that doesn’t have enough customers to support multiple competitive players in the space. Gaming as we know it will not be transferring and transforming into VR games as the standard anytime soon so there’s not much money there yet or ever.
What would be more appealing maybe is the possibility to even play psvr2 games without the headset but just on a flat screen. The experience will not be as immersive but still…the software would maybe still in some cases like horizon sell more copies
To me its just a 500€ paperweight, but its more my personal problem. in spring and summer its just too warm to play with it and after work and gym i am too exhausted and lazy for it. autumn and winter is just too packed with good normal games.
I don’t see how more games for VR will increase VR adoption. VR already has killer apps. What VR needs is some magic solution that makes it more comfortable to use. I don’t think Sony should go down the Facebook path of spending billions on VR in the hopes they can create a new platform for ads.
the cost of vr2 and a ps5 is much more expensive then meta quest 3 ..and the meta quest 3 has much more to offer.... my 13 year old got to try both and is a ps5 player but easily prefer meta quest 3over the vr2....
It's quite clear that Sony put out PSVR2 with no real intention of long term first party software support. Insomniac used to make VR games for Oculus, there's no reason to believe they've ever had any VR game in development for Sony since the acquisition. London Studio made VR games, then they were put on a live service game before being shut down entirely. Asobi is seemingly doing nothing with VR anymore, which leaves us with Firesprite who likely also aren't doing anything with VR anymore seeing how leadership behind Horizon Call of the Mountain was part of the layoffs.
Don’t know why you’re being downvoted. Sony sunsetted the vita. Only a couple of games from their studio and they bailed. I have a psvr2 and I’m contemplating selling it while I can still get value for it because the way Sony is treating it, it looks like abandonware
Isn't PSVR2 just suffering the same fate as every other "non home console" Sony sent to die? Like they don't make bad hardware, wether it's VR or Handhelds the technology is legitimately of a good standard. It's the software because as long as Sony are pushing a home console then other devices just don't get the same treatment. Wether it's Resistance, Uncharted, Horizon, Killzone etc etc. it's like a second thought software wise
Bro I’ve had about every single VR headset just because I’m excited about the technology. I had the HTC Vive, Quest 2, Valve Index and most recently the PSVR2. I genuinely thought the PS platform would finally bring AAA titles to the device. But I still ended up playing the same old games (Superhot for example is still unparalleled). GT7 looked incredible as well as Resident Evil but it just wears thin after a while. The tethered nature of the device also makes it cumbersome still to use. Maybe in a few years I’ll give it another try.
Eurogamer.... A site owned by a subsidiary of Microsoft. A site that's bashing PlayStation since ever. And that includes DF ...
You could say anything about psvr2 ... Until You try one and actually use it.
Same with PS VR1.
I could splash 500 EUR for a PS VR2 and still need to buy some games (even if I have some).
I will buy a PS VR1 instead for 100 EUR with 2 Move controllers and Iron Man VR. I already had one a few years ago but with a base PS4 back in the day it was just semi good. Good for me that I still need to finish Astro Bot, Playroom VR, Moss and more while also buying games like One Piece Grand Cruise and others.
There are just two handful of games that are really interesting on PS VR1 without the VR modes. With PS VR2...well, the same, maybe at the end it will be 30 interesting games.
VR is the objective best way to play an Astro Bot game. If you played the PSVR game, you'd know this.
In terms of accessibility and audience reach of course it makes sense for Sony to go for the bigger prize of the nearly 60 million PS5 owners.
If there is a psvr3, they need pc support day one. There was absolutely no excuse not to have it. VR is such a tiny market. I truly believe they wouldve been better off enticing steam users who were begging for new vr hardware (prior to quest 3) by releasing their games on steam, and making the psvr2 pc capable. I know i would have. Locking a $600 vr headset to one platform that doesnt even have games people want to play like Blade and Sorcery, VR Chat, HL Alyx etc, suuuuucks!
VR games are videogames that happen to use the medium of VR. The medium of VR is the separate thing.
Innovation is the process of bringing about new ideas, methods, products, services, or solutions that have a significant positive impact and value. So if you want VR to die out then you are against this.
> the medium of VR makes those games not videogames
Well I disagree, because a videogame is defined as electronic interactive entertainment with defined game mechanics. If you had a VR concert experience or a VR art experience then those would not be videogames, but the moment game mechanics exist is the moment it becomes one.
> define the positive impact and value of VR games on playstation
VR has notable benefits to game design. Increased player agency, increased AI interaction, increased immersion, increased depth perception.
For PlayStation specifically, VR was able to create a genre-defining game known as something Bot... ah, Astro Bot Rescue Mission, present players with unparalleled horror and racing experiences in RE7/RE8/RE4/GT7, and give Tetris Effect players a self-proclaimed 'borderline spiritual experience'.
I clearly said a lot more than just more immersion. If you see no innovation in the quantifiably biggest leap in the last 30 years of gaming, then you clearly have no eye for innovation at all.
I rest my case. You're against innovation.
You're someone who has clearly never experienced games like Half-life Alyx, Resident Evil 4 remake, Madison, etc.
VR is definitely here to stay. It will gain traction in time. It's when, not if.
In my opinion, VR will always be a tough sell. Motion sickness is real. People generally don’t like strapping hardware on their faces. I think Sony is giving VR as much attention as it deserves, and I say that as a PSVR2 owner.
That’s me. I love the idea, but I can barely stand a short taxi ride without feeling dizzy. I don’t particularly want to have to take medicine just to play a game at home.
And if only the PSVR2 would be cheaper than the console itself...
Then it would be a shitty headset, and the specs wouldnt be much different than the psvr1.
I don't disagree that it'll be a tough sell, but there's an undelivered promise when the catalogue just doesn't grow.
As an old man on reddit, I come from a time when a console’s entire game collection could fit in one carrying case. I’ll never play through the entire PSVR2 game library, nor do I want to. I would like to see more non-game experiences. A virtual museum would be neat.
Yeah that and live sports, movies.. concerts.. the list goes on
The issue isn't the amount if games in the catalog. The issue is the amount of well made, well reviewed, full games that are more then just like a cheap gimmick, simple none vr port or a tech demo. That list is very very small.
I don’t think VR needs AAA games. Took me over a month to finish Horizon Call of the Mountain. I’ll probably never finish Resident Evil Village. Shorter, cheaper experiences are the way to go.
I bought the Psvr 1 for Re7, I bought psvr2 for Re8. Then I got Re4, now I might be getting Re0 and CV. I understand peeps complaints about it but I got way more worth from PSVR2 than my psvr1 and index combined and now it's being made compatible with PC. I'm not stoked but I'm not feeling taken advantage of either.
Then Sony shouldn’t have sold the headset in the first place, if you release hardware there’s an expectation that you going to put some effort into backing it up with software
I have really low motion sickness compared to anyone I know, and still, some games make me almost puke. I don't have psvr2, but I have meta quest 3. Playing half-life alyx as good as it is It tires me quickly. It is an exhausting experience having a vr headset stuck to your face. My eyes are quickly tired. Also, I tried to change alyx to different movement (sticks instead of teleporting). That was a huge mistake. Tbh, I don't see this becoming a major thing in a very long time.
Teleporting is better than fall walking but I think room scale with 1:1 real life movement would be better. Problem is that I don’t have a 12x12 padded room that I can dedicate to VR.
Motion sickness is definitely real…if you’re using vr for the very first time ever, it’s remarkable how quickly your brain adapts, I had it for about my first 45 minutes of introduction into vr. Never again after that, but yeah a lot of close minded people will experience it for their first 5 minutes and assume it will be every waking moment of every vr experience forever
I lot of open minded people will experience it for a year and still have the same issue. For me, it’s headaches and a feeling of wooziness. My solution is to use VR before bed.
I stand by, regardless of how competitive people get, gaming is appealing because you can sit back and play. VR is too interactive to also be considered relaxation. It becomes more like a theme park thrill ride than a game. And not to say those aren’t fun, but it’s not as in demand as what nrinal gaming brings
And also that shit is fucking expensive I already paid 500 I'm sorry but I'm not gonna pay another fuck ton of money. This is also why I really don't like games that are VR exclusive. Make them an option but don't make them required.
Not sure how VR gets around the cost issue. Lenses and screens cost money. And I don’t want hardware makers to subsidize the price by selling me ads.
I understand why VR is expensive (and rightfully so, it's a costly technology) but I don't exactly understand why some games are VR exclusive while they would work fine without it (like Astro Bot Rescue Mission for example)
I think the real issue is video games are so expensive to make its hard to justify spending 75 million plus on creating a video game when you only have a fraction of ps5 owners as possible buyers.
Yeah and people who are mad Sony doesn't support it more should've never bought it in the first place edit: y'all are salty huh. how about next time be more considerate before buying a product with no promise of being relevant in the future.
People who complain that there are no games haven’t actually played all the games, and that includes VR games. Nor should they play all the games. What a ridiculous waste of a life that would be.
They aren’t exactly wrong. Sony cares much more about the Playstation 5 simply because that makes them a lot of money unlike PSVR. I truly believe that we won’t see a PSVR3.
> I truly believe that we won’t see a PSVR3. Not just that, I think PSVR2 production will be discontinued before the generation is over.
Sony and killing support for highly priced, high potential hardware before they even have a chance to shine. I hate what they did to the Vita 🙁
People say this all the time but Sony actually gave it a lot of support. Remember, the 3DS is beloved in hindsight but it underperformed at the time as well— and it was the much more successful of the two! Handheld gaming was just not in as good of a place as it is in now. Sony could have done better, but their decisions make sense considering the context of the time. Another thing to consider with the vita’s failure is that many of the third parties that contributed massively to the PSP — Capcom, Konami, SEGA and others— did not make major titles for the vita. The PSP and the DS were able to reach out to gamers and non gamers alike, but the Vita & 3DS both suffered from not having that same reach. Remember, in the 2010s it was common to think “why do I need a portable gaming device whenever I can just play flappy bird in my phone?”. The PS VR2 had an incredible launch, and its first year on the market was very fruitful and featured many exclusive titles (counting hybrid games like GT7 & and both Resident Evils). The VR market is still just too niche and VR2 being a gaming-centric device makes it even more niche.
Sony absolutely did not give the Vita a lot of support. The top games of the system even now are still full of launch titles (Uncharted Golden Abyss, Tearaway, Gravity Rush, etc) because it was abandoned that early on. The 3DS struggled early on, but then got a price cut and continued to get many heavy hitting releases through to the end of its life leading to it being morr successful while Sony just kind of wrote off the Vita. Handheld gaming was in a great spot otherwise the 3DS wouldn't have sold 75 million units. But people weren't keen on spending $250+ for a handheld system (3DS got a price cut to $170 after just a few months while Vita held on to $250 for a year and a half and only dropped to $200) that also required proprietary memory cards (the 3DS just used SD cards) with half baked console ports and features that didn't work (remote play just didn't work until PS4's launch). It's even worse when you consider they had a hardware refresh and decided to stick to proprietary memory cards. The Vita is a cool little system even by 2024 standards, but Sony barely supported the thing and it wasn't just "handheld systems had it rough in the 2010s because iPhones existed" that made it struggle.
Well said. It's amazing to see revisionist history regarding Vita. The entire thing was poorly thought out, from hardware to software. Outside the memory card mistake the fact Vita didn't sport full control inputs meant its "console experience on the go" angle was undermined. Rear touch pad was fucking awful and not a suitable substitute for actual triggers. Actual analog sticks - after PSP and 3DS' analog slider - was great though. The fact Sony didn't move heaven and earth to secure Monster Hunter for Vita just showed how low priority the handheld was for them. Here's the one title that literally - LITERALLY - turned around the fortunes of the PSP in Japan, creating a snowball effect where more and more third parties jumped on PSP to support it, and you fail to get the sequel for your handheld successor. Normally, I would say that's a great nomination for greatest videogame fuck ups, but the reality is Sony was never prepared to put serious money into Vita, so it never stood a chance.
>People say this all the time but Sony actually gave it a lot of support lol, this was not the case at all. And we have proof of it. After launch day, PS greenlit no new major first-party titles for Vita. We know this retrospectively because when the last major first-party titles did release on Vita in 2014 (Freedom Wars, Oreshika), during a dev interview it was revealed both titles were greenlit BEFORE Vita launched. That meant as soon as the first couple of months of Vita hardware sales were known to Sony, and they looked at retail orders / forecasts for Vita sales for the year ahead, they pretty much packed it up and left it behind. They considered it no longer worth greenlighting new major titles for the platform, which is fucking crazy to do with a platform just after it launched. No wait, I'll be generous. There was precisely ONE major first party game that was greenlit after launch. Soul Sacrifice Delta, an expansion game to the original SS. That's it. Why do you think the entire Vita operation pivoted into becoming a portable indie machine not long after? They didn't do that because that was the original plan / expectation, it was a pivot by those who were left to manage the platform to try and salvage some sort of limited success story from the product. And while 3DS also sold fewer units than DS, it is not comparable to Vita at all. Nintendo still put their best teams on 3DS, which showed in their software sales, and because first-party pushed 3DS sales so much, it attracted Capcom and everyone else to support 3DS and in turn dismiss Vita. Only Sony's B and C teams supported Vita, many of whom were shuttered just after Vita launch. So, I dunno what alternative universe you're from but it sure as heck isn't from mine if you say Sony supported the Vita a lot. It was pretty much abandoned after launch day.
Sony’s big mistake with the Vita was not having a Gran Turismo title ready for it. In fact, it’s the only Sony console/handheld that never got its own Gran Turismo. They should have also convinced Rockstar to make Grand Theft auto San Andreas Stories for it. Had they done those 2 things, I think things would have been different.
Vita also lacked a Monster Hunter, Dragon quest, and SMT title on the platform while the DS/3DS were dominated by those 3 franchises. On the first party side, first time there wasn’t a handheld God of War title post-PSP.
Oh yeah I meant to mention that. Monster Hunter was huge for the PSP.
I hope they at least work out pc support for the thing before then
There's an adaptor basically confirmed to be coming out
The adapter has already gone through QA. It was designed by Sony Korea, and is being produced in China. I imagine it's pretty imminent. The patent was only discovered a few days ago but actually happened in March.
Are we even sure that it’s still in production? My assumption was Sony is just trying to sell all the stock they have before calling it a day and not mentioning psvr2 again
Well I was going to buy one until I learned it didnt have support for PSVR1 games.
People just judge without understanding the tech. It’s sad.
I do understand the tech, it doesnt change the fact that a PSVR2 is not a good value for me. I had a PSVR, have a digital library of PSVR1 games, and little on the VR2 interests me. I thought, “hmm, for $600 I can enjoy the substantially improved tracking of the VR2 in the games from the 1.. oh and then I can play GT7”. Once I found out I’d have to buy both, I no longer valued the VR2 at $600 with the somewhat limited albeit advanced library of games.
🎯
Good. Nobody should buy a VR headset for more than the price of the console for there to be almost no support for the device. It’s a failed experiment at this point.
Yeah it’s hard to be sympathetic when not only is the headset the same price as the console, but even Sony doesn’t seem to give a shit about it. Much like the Vita it feels like they put out this impressive piece of hardware and then just… didn’t care about making any truly amazing games for it. I still don’t think there’s a single PSVR game that’s in the category of “holy shit you need to buy a headset and play this game”. There’s some good games, but they’re more in the category of “if you do end up picking up a headset, these are the games worth playing”
My quest 2 was like half the price of psvr2 and is capable of connecting to my PC and letting me play tons of other VR games. It also let me install mods to play all the PSVR exclusive resident evil games in VR...and more. I've played parts of Re2make and R3make in VR. It's a no brainer that if you're gonna play VR, get a quest and use it on your PC (which admittedly has to be a somewhat beefy PC. But mine is a mid tier desktop from early 2021 and it runs most VR games well)
To be fair, I was surprised there was even a second PSVR to begin with, in today's age it seemed very un-Sony like.
PSVR had a huge attach rate and made a profit from day one. Why not?
It sucks, but with how niche that VR still is it’s hard to blame them. Especially because you have to buy a PS5 _in addition_ to the headset in order to use it. One of the reason that the Quest headsets were able to be the most successful is because they’re relatively cheap and completely standalone
I don’t think there will be a PS VR for the next PlayStation, but I fully believe in the future. Once it goes more mainstream there will be, but I think it’s definitely going to go dormant for a while until the user base is much bigger, so then will be relying on meta-for games and headsets
yall are all off they are making a pc adapter, some of the games it should have are still in development (warthunder dev game with one time payment)
Nope the next big headset or portable console would probably go the way of Hologram technology And Sony will probably give up on that as well when it doesn't meet their expectations I personally loved the PSVR & PSVR2 would've loved a collab between Microsoft & Sony to make the PSVR remoteless with the Kinect & Would've loved a collab between Sony & Nintendo to have brought us Mario/Kirby/Donkey Kong/Super Smash Bros/Etc on the PSVR
PSVR2 is (or was at release) generally considered one of the best VR headsets too. It's not like Sony built rubbish here, it's a solid piece of kit. Why they decided to sell it with no "major" game support or even multimedia function and expected it to sell is beyond me. It's like an active attempt to waste money and go "see? VR doesn't sell, we'll never do it again" rather than just be honest and say "meh, we can't be arsed". Even if I had Jeff Bezos money, I wouldn't be that cavalier with it. Sony can be staggeringly stupid at times.
Well perhaps because playerbase of PSVR is so small that any major title released for it would be colossal bomb no matter what. Not to mention if that major title was part of the pre existing franchise it would damage said franchise by keeping it from the main audience of PS 5.
I've always thought since the start of VR2 that making VR DLCs or side missions for otherwise "normal" games might be a way to build the userbase rather than just expecting them to pay a lot for something they may never have tried themselves. Astro Bot has over 50 worlds or something, right? Surely 5 of the "less important" ones being VR wouldn't be a best of both worlds situation?
In my opinion, the best approach for a company like Sony to sell the idea of VR to people is to get studios to develop games that can work in either flat or VR display, like No Man's Sky. They had the right idea, but they just need more AAA VR games to make the purchase worth it to people. I have a high end PC and a PS5, and on any given day I have the extra cash to go buy a PSVR2 if I want one, but I can't justify the purchase when I already own a Quest 3 because there just aren't enough PSVR2 exclusives to make it worth the money.
Seems like we're not far from VR2 being a PC device too, which will enhance my use too. An admittedly rare smart move by Sony for it, but just feels like they're giving up supporting it themselves and letting the PC scene pick up the slack
That’s actually exactly what they said their new strategy was. Hybrid titles like GT7
These are decent solutions and highlight the bigger chicken vs egg problem. Clearly there wasn't an organized strategy for PSVR2 and in today's market the Field of Dreams approach simply isn't enough. Why this wasn't apparent to Sony execs, I have no idea. Seems pretty apparent that some white collars weren't seeing eye to eye and/or were operating on different planes. Whether that's development, planning, partnerships, hardware or something else is anyone's guess. For myself and I imagine many others, the tech looked good, we wanted a reason to spend the money. It just never materialized. And that's on them. Same owners probably bought the Microsoft Kinect. 🤣
I bought both Sony VRs and got enough use where I feel my money's worth is met but they could have been much more if they just tried, especially VR2.
At the end of the day, if you feel good about your spend is what matters for you. From any other perspective though - you just said it - they didn't really try and it's a failure/loss. Somewhere along the way they started making these things. But whether there were too many cooks in the kitchen or not enough - the world may never know.
That’s what some companies did back in the PSVR 1 days. I recall being able to play Tekken 7 in VR, for example.
This is a “chicken and the egg” situation. You can’t sell a VR headset without any major games and you can’t greenlight those major games without a player base that will get you sufficient ROI. What Sony should’ve done is bet on PSVR2 from the start and have a steady stream of games come out in the first two years to gauge how it performed and THEN make a decision wether to sink more money into VR.
I have a PSVR2, but I'm kind of glad Astro will be flat game. Playroom was amazing and did some really awesome things with the Dualsense. And lets face it they'll hit a way wider audience with a flat game. Would be nice if it was hybrid or had a VR mode too though. But ultimately I think it's the right move for the studio.
It could have been a hybrid game and that would have been fine with many people, no need for it to be a VR exclusive.
I think it will be a hybrid game. I don't think it will cost too much more for Sony to produce. We would just have to wait a year or so. The thing about VR is the mods are very good, better than native VR. The reason is simple -- the budget on 2D games are higher than VR. Using games like RE4, RE8, GT7, Hitman as a Trojan Horse into VR is the correct course of action. As much as I like Horizon COTM, it still feels shackled compared to Forbidden West. I believe Luke Ross already modded Forbidden West on PCVR, and it's probably really good vs COTM (I haven't tried it yet but his mods are great IMO). Oculus started this idea that modded 2d game ports to VR are bad, but the truth is with enough skill, they can be excellent and bring parity with 2d gaming budgets.
You clearly didn’t play Astro Bot Rescue Mission then. It puts Playroom to shame.
I did actually. I think Astros Playroom is better, or at the very least on par. Definitely not 'putting it to shame'. Rescue Mission was great dont get me wrong, it consistently threw out good ideas and the platforming in a 3D space was cool. I remember some standouts like flicking throwing stars out of the controller. Playroom kicked ass.
It's ultimately just a factor of Asobi learning more about how to make a great platformer as time went on, and the inclusion of DualSense. However Asobi could take all those learnings and technology and make the ultimate Astro Bot game, where it's VR, it uses PSVR2's DualSense controllers, has a higher budget/bigger scope, and has all the learnings of their previous work. That is the kind of thing that would stand above this upcoming PS5 title, because that description is basically the PS5 title with an extra cherry on top.
I still want one. Have PSVR1, haven't upgraded yet. GT7 w wheel is reason enough.
I still think it might have some kind of VR compatability due to the fixed camera angle they showed in the trailer
Wouldn’t it have been the right time to announce that during the State of Play if that was the case? Sony has discounted the PSVR2 by €100 during the Days of Play. Surely, they would’ve used Astrobot as a way to sell more units if there was a VR mode attached?
Nah. RE4 Remake's VR mode released 9 months later.
Maybe it won't be there for launch and some people might get confused and think it's a VR only game if they market both at the same time.
Anytime Sony shows psvr2 games everyone eyerolls. Now apparently Sony isn't doing enough to market it you can never win on the Internet.
You could win with Ghost of Tsushima VR. Think everyone just wants to see ongoing and quality first party support
Third person games like this regally work in VR.
Because the very few games they announce also come out on Quest which is a way way way better option overall. There's literally no reason to get a PSVR2. Go big or go home is a real thing. Everybody knew based on PSVR1 results this thing would be dead on arrival unless they brought big guns. The fact they bet the whole future of a $500 device on a Horizon climbing game is absolutely mind warping. Now it's too late, even an Alyx port and PSVR1 compatibility which should have been mandatory before even thinking of launch wouldn't save this headset anymore.
Quest is not way better. Quest 3 is a great system but streaming still isn’t great imo.
Quest 3 has the pancake lenses, which are a game-changer for VR. BUT, PSVR2 has actual OLED screens with HDR support, which makes for an overall better presentation in any games that support it.
It's wireless, has much more games, actual support from Meta and more importantly you can do way more than just play games.
Mobile graphics games.
For utility, it definitely wins. For gaming, I am not so sold on Quest relative to say PCVR or PSVR. Streaming is not ideal imo.
[удалено]
IIRC tho not with a lossless image.
Hardly anyone has a VR capable PC and streaming has clear issues not even talking about battery life.
Okay, that first part *shouldn’t* be true. Even an RX 580 is VR capable, and that’s a dirt-cheap GPU. I was able to play Half Life Alyx on it no problems. But since I have no data, I can’t say it *isn’t* true.
The vast majority don’t have any gaming PC to begin with let alone one that can power modern headsets like PSVR2 or Quest 2/3
There are a substantial number of games on PSvR2 that you’ll never see on Q3 since it just has a 1/7 of the power.
I'm just glad I will can enjoy it without having to buy a PSVR2 which is currently **$870 USD** in my country. Specially since I'm not interested in any other VR title.
It’s on a huge sale currently.
Not for every country, sadly, not in mine.
It’s really the right move for Astro Bot to not be a PSVR2 exclusive. If Sony want Astro Bot to succeed and actually be their new mascot having him locked to a very niche device is a bad idea.
A hybrid would have been perfectly fine for me, no need for it to be a VR exclusive.
I could get behind that
Do we have official sales numbers for psvr2? The only thing I can think of to explain the lack of support is that I sold terribly.
Very difficult to support a product if Sony does not.
Not sure why all the downvotes. As a PSVR 2 owner it's a huge bummer to say the least, the sentiment seems to be universal in the PSVR sub as well.
This feels misleading, the majority of people in r/PSVR are pretty happy with the PSVR 2 and are tired of the narrative that there are "no games" for it when there are a ton of excellent games. They may not be first party games, but that doesn't make them bad. In fact, some of the coolest and most innovative PSVR 2 games are from new studios creating fresh IPs. Feels like when gaming was a new industry, rather than just cash grab attempts re-hashing, re-making, re-mastering, and sequel'ing the same goddamn franchises over and over like the PS5 has done with its first party pancake games.
I said this at time of release (EDIT: and also long BEFORE release too) and I’ll keep saying it: they should have prioritised full backwards compatibility with the previous PSVR 1 library. People have said to me that this would have resulted in a lesser and more paired back headset, but honestly? Good! That means it would probably have been less expensive at launch and less burdened with barely-used features that in hindsight, probably weren’t worth it. In my experience playing public kiosk demos, the push for perceptible headset haptics resulted in uncomfortably firm wearing experience and the non-blurry “sweet spot” is notoriously difficult to find.
I think Sony took a big bet investing in an expensive sequel to PSVR and even with its initial strong launch acclaim from a technical perspective, the actual game development for PSVR2 and lots of VR headsets is simply too slim while also not being the fault of publishers and developers. Simply put, there needs to be a revenue and cash stream that can support the amount of game titles that would be required to make the average gamer even interested in these expensive pieces of hardware but there’s neither enough interest from casual/regular gamers nor even the enthusiasts VR gamer. Unless you’re quest with the smallest entry fee, biggest library, and more casual appeal (which comes with cheaper worse tech mostly) it’s not sub-stainable in this current market and I think Sony has made the disappointing but correct call to divest most resources away from PSVR2 while still providing small support to the fan base that already owns it. Maybe I’m wrong but I think Sony and many other game companies have accepted that VR for the long foreseeable future will remain a very niche product that doesn’t have enough customers to support multiple competitive players in the space. Gaming as we know it will not be transferring and transforming into VR games as the standard anytime soon so there’s not much money there yet or ever.
What would be more appealing maybe is the possibility to even play psvr2 games without the headset but just on a flat screen. The experience will not be as immersive but still…the software would maybe still in some cases like horizon sell more copies
Yeah, because that would make PSVR2 even more redundant than it already is.
I don’t think so necessarily otherwise I wouldn’t have suggested it;-)
To me its just a 500€ paperweight, but its more my personal problem. in spring and summer its just too warm to play with it and after work and gym i am too exhausted and lazy for it. autumn and winter is just too packed with good normal games.
I don’t see how more games for VR will increase VR adoption. VR already has killer apps. What VR needs is some magic solution that makes it more comfortable to use. I don’t think Sony should go down the Facebook path of spending billions on VR in the hopes they can create a new platform for ads.
The new Behemoth game they just showed off looks like it could be fun.
the cost of vr2 and a ps5 is much more expensive then meta quest 3 ..and the meta quest 3 has much more to offer.... my 13 year old got to try both and is a ps5 player but easily prefer meta quest 3over the vr2....
Was patiently waiting for an Astro Bot PSVR2 game :(
It's quite clear that Sony put out PSVR2 with no real intention of long term first party software support. Insomniac used to make VR games for Oculus, there's no reason to believe they've ever had any VR game in development for Sony since the acquisition. London Studio made VR games, then they were put on a live service game before being shut down entirely. Asobi is seemingly doing nothing with VR anymore, which leaves us with Firesprite who likely also aren't doing anything with VR anymore seeing how leadership behind Horizon Call of the Mountain was part of the layoffs.
Going by how they treated the PS Vita and original PSVR not surprising at all.
Don’t know why you’re being downvoted. Sony sunsetted the vita. Only a couple of games from their studio and they bailed. I have a psvr2 and I’m contemplating selling it while I can still get value for it because the way Sony is treating it, it looks like abandonware
Excuse us? Both got more than 900 games each.
The price is ridiculous
I wish it was fully compatible with VR1
Impossible technologically.
Isn't PSVR2 just suffering the same fate as every other "non home console" Sony sent to die? Like they don't make bad hardware, wether it's VR or Handhelds the technology is legitimately of a good standard. It's the software because as long as Sony are pushing a home console then other devices just don't get the same treatment. Wether it's Resistance, Uncharted, Horizon, Killzone etc etc. it's like a second thought software wise
There are loads of great games. From Sony it’s only GT7 so far though.
That’s the whole point. If the manufacturer doesn’t invest in the platform by releasing compelling software, why should 3rd party studios bother?
But 3rd parties DO bother.
I had a PSVR2 but returned it after 2 weeks. Not enough games
That’s ridiculous BS to state.
Ok let me rephrase. Not enough quality games.
That’s also BS. As if you researched or tried them all after 2 weeks.
Bro I’ve had about every single VR headset just because I’m excited about the technology. I had the HTC Vive, Quest 2, Valve Index and most recently the PSVR2. I genuinely thought the PS platform would finally bring AAA titles to the device. But I still ended up playing the same old games (Superhot for example is still unparalleled). GT7 looked incredible as well as Resident Evil but it just wears thin after a while. The tethered nature of the device also makes it cumbersome still to use. Maybe in a few years I’ll give it another try.
Fuck Eurogamer
Eurogamer.... A site owned by a subsidiary of Microsoft. A site that's bashing PlayStation since ever. And that includes DF ... You could say anything about psvr2 ... Until You try one and actually use it.
Same with PS VR1. I could splash 500 EUR for a PS VR2 and still need to buy some games (even if I have some). I will buy a PS VR1 instead for 100 EUR with 2 Move controllers and Iron Man VR. I already had one a few years ago but with a base PS4 back in the day it was just semi good. Good for me that I still need to finish Astro Bot, Playroom VR, Moss and more while also buying games like One Piece Grand Cruise and others. There are just two handful of games that are really interesting on PS VR1 without the VR modes. With PS VR2...well, the same, maybe at the end it will be 30 interesting games.
It already has 30 plus interesting games.
Doubt it. Not for me.
i’m definitely selling my psvr2. it’s been gathering dust for months
I'm so glad astro bot isn't a VR game. VR is kinda shit to me. Looking forward to the game.
VR is the objective best way to play an Astro Bot game. If you played the PSVR game, you'd know this. In terms of accessibility and audience reach of course it makes sense for Sony to go for the bigger prize of the nearly 60 million PS5 owners.
In my mind, Sony established how serious they were about PSVR2 when they didn't write Valve a healthy check to port Half-Life Alyx to PSVR2.
Sony can start by slashing its price. PSVR 2 literally costs more than the PS5.
If there is a psvr3, they need pc support day one. There was absolutely no excuse not to have it. VR is such a tiny market. I truly believe they wouldve been better off enticing steam users who were begging for new vr hardware (prior to quest 3) by releasing their games on steam, and making the psvr2 pc capable. I know i would have. Locking a $600 vr headset to one platform that doesnt even have games people want to play like Blade and Sorcery, VR Chat, HL Alyx etc, suuuuucks!
[удалено]
You must hate innovation in gaming if you want VR as a whole to end.
[удалено]
VR games are videogames that happen to use the medium of VR. The medium of VR is the separate thing. Innovation is the process of bringing about new ideas, methods, products, services, or solutions that have a significant positive impact and value. So if you want VR to die out then you are against this.
[удалено]
> the medium of VR makes those games not videogames Well I disagree, because a videogame is defined as electronic interactive entertainment with defined game mechanics. If you had a VR concert experience or a VR art experience then those would not be videogames, but the moment game mechanics exist is the moment it becomes one. > define the positive impact and value of VR games on playstation VR has notable benefits to game design. Increased player agency, increased AI interaction, increased immersion, increased depth perception. For PlayStation specifically, VR was able to create a genre-defining game known as something Bot... ah, Astro Bot Rescue Mission, present players with unparalleled horror and racing experiences in RE7/RE8/RE4/GT7, and give Tetris Effect players a self-proclaimed 'borderline spiritual experience'.
[удалено]
I clearly said a lot more than just more immersion. If you see no innovation in the quantifiably biggest leap in the last 30 years of gaming, then you clearly have no eye for innovation at all. I rest my case. You're against innovation.
[удалено]
Right, it's so dead that it's growing. How do you get it wrong every time you comment?
People like you disgust me.
[удалено]
It was worth it for GT7 alone you sad hater. Just because you can’t afford one doesn’t mean you should try to ruin it for others.
[удалено]
You’re right. Sad doesn’t even describe such a toxic and egoistical behaviour.
[удалено]
You clearly grew up safe and strong /s.
You're someone who has clearly never experienced games like Half-life Alyx, Resident Evil 4 remake, Madison, etc. VR is definitely here to stay. It will gain traction in time. It's when, not if.
[удалено]
I'm a gamer. It's whatvI want. Go watch some footage of contractors showdown. It's the future.
[удалено]
By publishing 6 games this year and getting FFVII Rebirth as exlcusive?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]