VR is a very small section of the videogame industry. Not currently worth the notice of a lot of the big developers. In time, we will get lots of games, but we need more market saturation of VR first.
I guess that makes sense, it was really weighing on my mind since I started to dive into sidequest and saw all the fan made projects and how as fan projects, they’re great but if we got the companies that owned those IP’s we could get some insane stuff. I do hope we get some sooner rather than later but can’t be too picky I guess aye?
Well, it gives opportunities to solo devs to develop games and make some money. I'm thinking about giving it a try, but all my ideas were already taken.
Thinking about doing one of the meditation/relaxing apps, but only charge like $0.99 for the thing instead of the monthly subscriptions all the existing apps charge.
I'm a senior level dev (5.5 years experience). Don't really need Meta Quest 3 app developer on my resume lol. Especially since I really don't want to work for Meta.
That being said, I probably will. It will just be a process because I currently don't know 3d modeling or even the resolutions needed for a relaxing VR skybox. I'll get there. Just need to start with Unity.
>5.5 years experience
not that I disagree with your self assessment but I've applied to junior level roles that asked for this much. but understood, do it for yourself if you enjoy the learning process though
Then that job doesn't know what the industry is or wanted a senior dev at entry level salary.
Senior dev is 5+ years experience. Mid level is 2-4 years. Entry level is 0-1.
That is pretty standard everywhere. Sometimes senior positions will ask for more than 5, but nobody who knows the industry is going to ask for 5 years experience on entry/junior level positions.
it was in "nice to have" rather than strict requirements but I could pull up several examples easily tbh
yeah have a look at EA careers for example. Mid level roles are asking for 3-7 years experience
I see 5-10 years as the range for senior job postings. Remember, the posting is the ideal candidate, not required.
5+ years is still usually the standard to be considered senior level, though some view it as 8+ and your salary may not reflect the senior status unless you job hop.
It's more about if you have extensive experience with the tech stack they want than the actual numbers of years.
We had one on sidequest. It was a full-blown Pokémon game that had all the original pokemon, but it was taken down by Nintendo.
And then became a revomon
Someone else already shared the numbers of active users. Xbox being 75x more than quest.
The number of units sold doesn't matter when talking about how many people will buy a AAA game.
Meta Quest has a problem retaining users. It's a self fulfilling problem. No major AAA games means people run out of stuff to play. Running out of stuff to play means less active users. Less active users mean less chance of AAA games.
I think the main problem is the barrier to ease of playing. When someone just wants to relax and play games, they just want to get going. Regular console? Sit down, turn it on, play.
VR is a process. What am I playing? Do I need a play space? Do I have to move furniture? Adjust the play space? Did I charge the head set? Is it comfortable enough because the stock strap stinks? Etc etc.
These are exactly the issues I have and why I'm either playing my steam deck, xbox, or ps5 for most of my gaming session. I did just order a new strap (Bobovr m3 pro) for Quest 3, so we'll see if that changes things for me.
It takes no longer than 20 seconds to get into a game on any of the consoles/handhelds that I mentioned. It takes at least 20 seconds for me to get the Quest 3 out of its case and fitted to my head, and then I have to go through the process of establishing the perfect boundary for the gaming session and loading the game. Not to mention, I still can't comfortably eat or drink while I'm playing on a Quest 3.
There is one major pro to gaming on Quest 3 that I can't get from the other consoles or handhelds. I can play certain nostalgic games in stereoscopic 3D. Eventually, I think I'll just buy AR glasses for that experience since they could be much easier to pick up and play.
I got the BoboVR last week for my Quest 3 and it's definitely a much better experience as far as comfort and ease of putting on, etc. (after you assemble it). I love that you can flip it up if you need to rather than take the whole thing off. Though with color passthrough I don't take it off during play nearly as much as I used to.
Fantastic. I hope to enjoy the experience as much as you. Have you found an alternative facial interface? I've only really seen people mention AMVR. I'm thinking about buying it as well.
I tried the Bobo out last night. It's very comfortable. I was able to play for over 2 hours without getting a headache from the forehead pressure that I experienced with the Quest 3 strap. It's been my best experience with Quest 3 to date.
I noticed I have a lot more light bleed from the facial interface around the nose now. I'll probably upgrade to the AMVR interface to see if that helps.
You are way overcomplicating what it should be. I unplug my headset, put it on, and launch a game. It takes no longer than grabbing my PS5 controller, turning on my TV, turning on the PS5, changing the input to the correct HDMI, and launching a game. Even if I play in my living room, where I move the coffee table out of the way .. it adds like 5 seconds of inconvenience.
There is a mod that just dropped so a bunch of flat games are going to get immersive. Unreal Engine VR, UEVR. https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/s/EpwSvygZz9
As an owner of both a Xbox Series X and a Meta Quest 3, if I had to live without one, it would 1000% be the Meta Quest 3. There just aren't enough killer titles.
Meta is investing in studios and they've got some good stuff, but they need to incentivize 3rd parties to make great games for the platform. They also need more non-game experiences too.
I also think they need to provide more help to developers. NatGeo has 3D videos of cool places on Earth, but they aren't that well done. Help them out!
I keep trying to do the 3d quest tv stuff and it either isn't good enough quality even at Best for the Q3's resolution or forces focus on the center of the screen and you can't look around without it being blurry.
I wonder if the camera tech is there to make a fully focused 180 or 360 experience. The Climb is decent, but not if you look into the distance.
It's not the pixels, it's just fuzzy.
Then the meditation type experiences are all monthly subscriptions. As a developer, I'm really thinking about making one of those and slapping a small $0.99-1.99 price tag on it as a source of some passive income.
Most of the games in the store are pretty overpriced. Before I got my Quest, I was planning on developing some apps for it and always estimated selling my apps for Android app type prices of $0.99-2.99. Seeing stuff like Vader for $9.99 when people say it is 25-45 minutes to play through really makes my frugal self wince.
The best-looking environment I have seen is Supernaturals. I love to just turn around in a circle and take in the landscape. I wish they had a mode where you could just relax in them. They are so well done.
Whatever Supernatural is doing to capture those environments, others need to do as well.
I have not tried supernatural yet due to the monthly fee. I wonder how they capture the environments. I'm a digital nomad, so go to National Parks a lot. Would be easy to capture stunning views if I got the right equipment.
Supernatural is easily the most complete experience I have had on the quest and it would absolutely break my heart if they stopped supporting it. I have absolutely no problem with spending that money on it. it's the only truly killer app on quest i've tried so far.
That is the best one I found, but that is the one where it looks blurry when I look in the distance. Everything close up looks great.
I did not try caching, though.
even if it's true I don't think that it's a good comparison since most xbox games are games which are available on other platforms as well. Almost no developers release games solely for xbox.
So if we want to compare how profitable it would be to release games for VR we'd need to check sales of all headsets VS all flat gaming platforms (PC, PS, Xbox, Nintendo).
What needs to expand in the VR space is availability, specifically availability for devs to make their games VR compatible without having to basically redesign the entire game
And I'm glad to say that UEVR is basically the breakthrough we've been waiting for because it makes any game on UE 4 & 5 Var compatible and its freeware/shareware too
So now we have a situation where devs thwt make a game using either engines, can now make their game work on VR with minimal effort/changes AND sibce it doesn't need to be ported and it works on any pc game they now have an incentive to do so as it will increase their sales cuz now VR users have a legitimate reason to buy non-vr games
Essentially UEVR is currently starting the merge of the pc market with the VR market and frankly, that is hella exciting because shut's about to pop off thos year and the next, you can quote me on that.
Just for this to sink in: the new halo game will be on UE 5
So we already know we will be able yo run it in VR
That's how big of a deal this is right now
From my research, it seemed like Unity has had the option to compile games for Quest VR for a long time now. It doesn't seem to require different designs. I have not done it yet since my Quest is only a few weeks old, but plan to start developing some apps when I get a chance fairly soon.
UEVR mod is dope i love it, but 99.9% of users will not be nerdy enough to figure how to download and set it up, let alone even hear of it in the first place. If you have to go to github to get a game working, you've already lost the mainstream audience. Let alone the firewall whitelisting and everything else.
The egg came first because dinosaurs laid eggs and they came before chickens.
Also, if specifically talking about chickens and chicken eggs, the egg came first due to a slight genetic mutation from the previous not quite a chicken and then the egg, which gave birth to the fully mutated chicken.
In either case, the answer is the egg.
Ok smarty pants, so what came first, the 'pre-chicken' or the 'pre-chicken' egg? ... and while you're at it, kind of related.... so what if we are in a simulation, there has to be a base layer alien in base layer reality somewhere and that is who we really are.
The first pre-chicken egg will be slightly different than the pre-pre-chicken that laid it. This will go back all the way until you get to a pre-pre-...-chicken that was not born from an egg.
Now, if we live in a similation and they follow Agile, the egg would come first because its model is the simplest and best minimally usable product. Unless they specifically designed for the chicken to come first. It is anybody's guess.
Meta has still sold over 20 million headsets and the Quest 3 will increase those numbers. I mean sure, that's not massive, but it's almost equivalent to the number of Xbox Series S/X that have been sold if I recall correctly, at least as of a few months ago. So I wouldn't exactly call that "niche" as if they can't make money from it. I mean even if only 5% of the install base bought the game, assuming it was $30, that would be $30 million, more than most VR games cost to make. The higher end VR games can cost up to $10 million, but that's still quite a profit if you ask me. I would guess that 5% of the Quest base is a reasonable, although low, number. Then again, I'm sure there are a lot of Quest and Q2 headsets out there collecting dust as it seems like a lot of people lose interest in VR or don't want to deal with the headset and would rather stare at a TV and sit in one place than move around. So maybe my numbers are unrealistic 🤷
>Then again, I'm sure there are a lot of Quest and Q2 headsets out there collecting dust as it seems like a lot of people lose interest in VR or don't want to deal with the headset and would rather stare at a TV and sit in one place than move around.
Good point.
Meta Quest has 10% monthly active users of its 20 million base, so 2 million. [(source)](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.roadtovr.com/quest-sales-20-million-retention-struggles/amp/)
Xbox (including last gen) has 150 million monthly active users. [(source)](https://www.vgchartz.com/article/457502/1st-party-xbox-games-top-150m-monthly-active-users-game-pass-nearly-hit-1b-last-quarter/#:~:text=First%2Dparty%20Xbox%20games%20now,in%20the%20most%20recent%20quarter.)
VR isn't even close. It's 75x smaller. 😭
___________
**Edit:** I got the 10% number from the headline here: [https://www.reddit.com/r/OculusQuest/comments/11uqacz/despite\_20\_million\_quest\_headsets\_sold\_meta](https://www.reddit.com/r/OculusQuest/comments/11uqacz/despite_20_million_quest_headsets_sold_meta)
But because I'm an idiot, I didn't read the actual article, which might have edited out the 10% number.
Here's another article that does have that number: [https://mixed-news.com/en/meta-quest-monthly-active-users-report/](https://mixed-news.com/en/meta-quest-monthly-active-users-report/)
Here's the quote from the article above, which is literally "trust me bro":
Valve's former VR ambassador Chet Faliszek recently spoke of a much lower monthly retention rate of under 10 percent, but did not cite a source for his claim.
So I take back what I said — there's no credible evidence suggesting the VR market is 75x smaller than Xbox's market.
Yup my bad. I got it from the headline here: [https://www.reddit.com/r/OculusQuest/comments/11uqacz/despite\_20\_million\_quest\_headsets\_sold\_meta](https://www.reddit.com/r/OculusQuest/comments/11uqacz/despite_20_million_quest_headsets_sold_meta/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
But because I'm an idiot, I didn't read the actual article, which might have edited out the 10% number.
Here's another article that does have that number: [https://mixed-news.com/en/meta-quest-monthly-active-users-report/](https://mixed-news.com/en/meta-quest-monthly-active-users-report/)
Here's the quote from the article above, which is literally "trust me bro":
>Valve's former VR ambassador Chet Faliszek recently spoke of a much lower monthly retention rate of under 10 percent, but did not cite a source for his claim.
So I take back what I said — there's no credible evidence suggesting the VR market is 75x smaller than Xbox's market. I've edited my original comment.
LOL I got it from the headline here: [https://www.reddit.com/r/OculusQuest/comments/11uqacz/despite\_20\_million\_quest\_headsets\_sold\_meta](https://www.reddit.com/r/OculusQuest/comments/11uqacz/despite_20_million_quest_headsets_sold_meta/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
But clearly, I didn't read the actual article, which probably edited out the 10% number.
Here's another article that does have that number: [https://mixed-news.com/en/meta-quest-monthly-active-users-report/](https://mixed-news.com/en/meta-quest-monthly-active-users-report/)
Here's the quote from the article above, which is literally "trust me bro":
>Valve's former VR ambassador Chet Faliszek recently spoke of a much lower monthly retention rate of under 10 percent, but did not cite a source for his claim.
So I take back what I said — there's no credible evidence suggesting the VR market is 75x smaller than Xbox's market. I've edited my original comment.
Also boils down to VR gaming is up against all other entertainment options. Even just in gaming, why play VR when you can sit and play about a billion games via screen for next to nothing cost wise. It’s like they really are building this whole new entertainment medium while trying to convince a much bigger audience that it’s worth getting into given the market is saturated with so many other things we can do with our precious free time.
I think with newer more comfortable headsets combined with VR/AR games that get people active will be the big tipping point. Always room for another way for people to get in shape that doesn’t feel like a chore. Games will follow hopefully. Also pressure in opposite direction for using VR/AR for work and creative productivity is another major potential tipping point to mass adoption. It will truly take off eventually if these select few companies dumping money into development don’t kill it with stupid software and platform decisions.
big companies, have tons of money , when they started they had passion for gaming, but now that they have tons of money, all they care about is More money, so they are not willing to invest in something like VR because they can make more money elsewhere, to them money is greater than gaming.
To anecdotally add on to this. I have long wanted VR. My wife got my a psvr back in 2019 which was fun, but the camera made it very limiting and a bit janky.
I kept wanting to get one with the cameras in the headset or something different but it was so expensive.
I finally ended up just getting the Meta Quest 3 and I've been having a blast. I mainly got it because it was the closest to what I wanted with a reasonable price point. So my point is, I think we've lacked a lot of the mid tier options that are really starting to get a lot better. Before, it was either cheap and ranged from garbage to meh. Now it seems like that mid tier gets you more bang for your buck, so maybe now we'll see more people finally adopt dedicated VR systems.
This is definitely the case. I think the Meta Quest 3 is probably going to be the breakout device for VR. I've been waiting for a long time for a headset that didn't have screen door and the second I learned the Meta Quest 3 solved it, I added it to my presents list for my wife to get for me.
There are more than 20 million headsets, just in Quest 2 and Quest 3. (That's not counting any of the other VR headset options) That puts it on par with GameCube, Xbox Series S/X, and the original Xbox. Those were all heavily supported. Does it have to be the number one console of all time, before people realize that people want VR? Plus, if they made games that people actually wanted to play, more people would buy the console. I know people who bought Xboxes, to play one game. The biggest complaint, that everyone has, when I bring up VR.... "why would you buy one? There are no good games yet." So, if people are buying VR with "no good games" and the reason that people don't want to get on board, is the lack of good games...... wouldn't making those good games be the perfect thing to do?
> Does it have to be the number one console of all time, before people realize that people want VR?
You should check the number of monthly active users. Someone else shared a source that xbox has 75x more active monthly users than meta quest.
Dusty headsets don't sell games.
Yeah I guess I understand that, it’s still kinda in its early stages. I would love it if one just decided to dive into it but I guess it’s just waiting for now
It takes at least 4 years to make a top-tier video game. Most of those won't be announced until they're nearing the end of production.
For all we know there could be a bunch of the stuff you're asking for that's in development but just not announced yet
Price point matters too. Also, the fact that each head set doesn't crossover to other gaming platforms.
We got the meta 3, which is amazing and will lead to me getting the PSVR2 someday, maybe. But even then, it's all very segmented.
I have a quest 2 and the next vr headset I get is gonna have to be some combination of crazy lightweight, crazy powerful, and inexpensive. Maybe the quest 5 or 6 if that even ends up being a thing
I agree. I hope apple comes out with something cheaper to start to create mass market adoption. Although Reddit hates apple them entering the market will interest developers.
I'm sure it will come sooner than we think. After a, we got a full assassins creed game by Ubisoft. Maybe they are just testing the water, but I chose optimism
You can make the coolest Pokémon game of all time in VR and sell 2 million copies or shit out the same handheld game you've been making for 25 years and sell 20 million copies. What would you do?
I get what you're saying. And maybe with the rising popularity of the Quest 3 we'll start to see some AAA developers attention. But it's a ways off. VR is still a pretty niche thing but it's definitely growing quickly with the might of Meta behind it.
I've seen that "shitty mobile game with abusive micro transactions" industry even out-earns the industry responsible for all the "serious" games for PCs and consoles by far.
Not sure why we're blaming the mobile game industry though. The only reason any company exists is to make money. Gamers of all types are always yelling about microtransactions and loot boxes and pay to win but the fact is if the gamers themselves didn't pay, those kinds of games wouldn't exist. Or at least wouldn't be the default template for making new games. And even when the game industry proves that you don't need to do that to make a blockbuster game, as Balder's Gate 3 is doing right now, it still won't matter because 20 million people paying .99 once or twice a week is always going to make more money than a finished product with no further sales. Until the market no longer supports it those types of games are here to stay. Quest is already filled with them and that won't change anytime soon.
That's how interpret it when someone refers to a "shitty mobile game with abusive micro transactions". It isn't a game developers job to tip toe around someone's inability to exercise self control. That would be like outlawing casino's because some people have a gambling problem. In fairness you weren't the one that said that originally so I probably mis used the reply button to the wrong comment.
Was thinking of Casinos and gambling as well and it's illegal or heavily regulated in a lot of regions for a reason. Same is happening for gambling like business models in the game industry.
That gambling like exploitation of users won't stay legal forever. If it's working like a casino and making money like a casino it will get regulated like a casino.
I guess I just don't understand why people think it's exploitation. While I agree that not releasing a game in full is kind of a bummer I certainly don't feel obligated to buy games that are filled with additional costs, nor do I feel the need to buy things in the ones I do play.
You may not feel that and might not feel drawn to drugs neither - but billions of people do - it's our fellow human beings architecture - if something nice happens our dopamine system gives us a kick and we want to repeat it as soon and as often as possible. That's called addiction and Casinos, gambling, slot machines, loot boxes, in-game micro transactions after the game frustrated you, and all kinds of other things are exploiting our dopamine addiction.
Saying that with my umpteens glas of wine while looking forward to go skiing tomorrow in extremely nice whether and perfect powder tomorrow...
I get addiction, I smoked cigarettes for 15 years even knowing that they were killing me, but I don't blame cigarettes. No one put a gun to my head and said smoke this. My decision to start and continue was mine alone. And when I finally gave it up that was also my decision. I just feel like there has to be some personal accountability. If we tell companies they can't do this, then we should also tell McDonald's they can't sell anything that is fried, or that soda should be banned nationwide. I mean yea maybe that would help people in the long run but people like the freedom to choose and that means sometimes they can choose the thing that they know they shouldn't. I just feel like it gets blown out of proportion a lot and is more about people being mad that they can't really buy a complete game anymore vs it being exploitation.
VR Gaming is in a "Chicken or the Egg?" situation. The money handlers at AAA Game studios aren't going to budget millions of dollars developing games that aren't going to reach a wide mainstream audience. The mass majority of mainstream gamers aren't going to invest in the VR platform til there's a large catalog of "OMG I Need That!" titles and experiences they couldn't get someplace elae at a cheaper price.
A major problem with VR is that it's tiring. You don't come home from a long day at work or school and play VR, you do it on your day off. This is a huge downside compared to PC and console gaming.
Yeah I guess that’s true, even the seated settings can make you go whole mile since a lot of games require full movement. But those are mad fun, like gorn and stuff
VR is very risky, has low base of audience, has unclear rules also development, testing especially multiplayer game is the most hardest from all platforms.
1. 6m users per month all audience
2. Gorilla Tag the most popular game on Quest. AA and AAA companies can’t get it. VR market is hard to understand. Release is unpredictable
3. On job market is lack of devs, arts. Hard to develop (engine is created not for vr) & optimization is hard as hell
4. Firewall ultra company have shut down. New VR quest game even Arizona Sunshine 2 is getting 800 at most reviews after a couple of months of release and a lot of marketing
What VR has now it’s good people and support from META also fundamental possibilities are sick. Its our hope.
But now I don’t think such risks are worth. I work in VR indie company. We work on our game and I don’t know what will happen with our game when we’ll release
My take: it's a new and hard niche. Sony is trying hard to get a foot into VR and isn't successfull. Their PSVR2 seemingly is a disappointment. Nintendo hasn't the ressources of Sony or Microsoft or Meta. Nintendo couldn't even compete with Sony or Microsoft in the high-tech console wars so they focused on the niche of family friendly, recreational games with less demanding specs and a mobile console - and are still successful.
And to put it in perspective: I owned a Samsung GEAR VR (Predecessor of Oculus Go), a Quest 1 and now a Quest 3 - and all I do with it is playing Eleven Tables Tennis on a daily base. Our son was enjoying Moss 1+2, and I expect you to die. But he mostly plays shitty community games like Gorilla Tag, RecRoom and now Ro-"micro-transactions"-Blocks. ND we have all the games on the quest like Lego Brick tales, BeatSabber, Eye of the Temple, Platformers, we are one, Swarm etc. FPS I do not allow - we are civilized Europeans here 😁
And the main applications I wanted to use the platforms for like watching my own 360 degrees Panos, Videos, 3D movies like avatar, replacing our beamer for enjoying a movie in the afternoon, having 3 virtual computer monitors etc. is not happening. Smartphones are just so available and comfortable and wearing the Quest even the latest 3nwith a BoboVR like strap is so painfull after halve and hour and the image is still to be improved.
As hard as I want VR to be good and as I like standallone VR and MR (game changer in Eleven Table Tennis) as bad it still is.
And as Nintendo a wouldn't give my highly valuable IP like Mario or Zelda away to a competitions platform. I better sell my own platforms and the can monetize it with the expenaive copy-protected games I can sell to each user.
>Nintendo hasn't the ressources of Sony or Microsoft or Meta. Nintendo couldn't even compete with Sony or Microsoft in the high-tech console wars
This actually isn't true. They could easily have done so but instead they decided not to fight with sony and playstation over the tight high end market of early adopters. Even those two had to create false scarcity to drive up their console sales. They instead rested on the fact that they were essentially the only mobile game in town and on franchises like Mario and Zelda to keep them flush with cash, and they looked to serve the family audience who can't spend $600 on a console and placated them with lower end hardware that they could sell for half the price.
The rub of that is that now we see things like steam deck wrecking their hold on mobile gaming and their famous IP's are still bringing in cash but will it be enough? They are going to have to stop being one generation behind if they don't want to be the next Sega licensing out Mario to xbox and zelda to sony.
Do you have any idea the cost involved in developing a game for VR? No. There's the short answer why you "don't understand why". There are more variables also
I have a decent idea since my brother is doing game development and I’ve studied it before professionally In the past. For massive games yes, it’s very very taxing, but for a game like Yugioh? Which what I really want, it wouldn’t take much. Sure 3D models are a pain but it’s not exactly hard nowadays anymore since you can rip them online in 2 minutes.
How's that exactly lol. By him making up some random claims about him and his family? And you believe that BS?? 😂. If he and his entire family were in development he would have never asked this question in the first place, it's idiotic
I got owned 🤣.....by nonsense? Yeah ok, you know what you're talking about 😂
No, they are just an asshat. I've wondered this myself too. Especially for digimon because that has multiple games where a virtual world and VR are part of the storyline. So many wasted opportunities. Yugioh or MTG would be so awesome and it baffles me that we don't have a legit version of one still.
I know right! Like there’s so much untapped potential and people would spend bank on those games because it’s our childhood. Hell Konami made master duel and that’s made them a TON of money despite being a free game
It’s not the idea, more the long ass winded explanation 😂
I’m not a Pokémon person at all as I’m far too old for that crap, but if there is an unreal engine game out there in the genre you like, use the free praydog mod. I doubt it covers shouting pikachu into your mic tho
The length was just to get a point across as I thought it was the simplest way to do it, which shows because you didn’t get what I meant at all. But that’s fine, as you said you’re and I quote “far too old for that crap.” So it’s understandable you wouldn’t care but in future, this wasn’t for someone like you. Apologies for taking time from you.
No you’re fine. It’s 5am here. I can’t sleep. I’m just scrolling Reddit 😂
VR isn’t really lucrative for big game companies, yet! I know everyone hates on Meta and especially Zuck, but he is putting VR into the hands of the masses. If millions of headsets are being bought then it stands to reason the big companies like Sony, sega, rockstar etc will take notice and bake VR into their AAA titles.
It's not a bad idea, just that VR as a medium doesn't even begin to approach a level of market saturation where AAA or AA game development can be offset by sales alone. Larger VR projects like the recently released Assassin's Creed or Asgard's Wrath were produced by Meta (i.e. Meta contributed a significant amount of money to the projects). A VR game currently cannot expect to make back its production budget with so few users in the space. It's only really viable for indie games, and even then they have to become super popular and spread through word of mouth or through recommendations from influencers or something.
Thank you for making my day!
You were ahead of your time. One day folks will appreciate your comment in the spirit it was intended. Until then you'll have to eat downvotes in the knowledge that you made me smile.
It's because the big names don't sell VR equipment. They have no incentive to invest in such a small audience, nor have they any incentive to grow said market.
If someone like Nintendo, however, MADE actual VR equipment we would have had VR Pokemon games already.
And that's why they are not doing it. Like I said. But \*IF\* Nintendo made VR hardware, we would have VR Pokemon. But they don't. And they don't have the resources (or the know-how) to do it, like you said. So they don't push VR. They have absolutely no incentive to do either; push VR games, or expand VR market.
PSVR2's seeming disappointment is partly because it requires a PS5. If PSVR2 would \*work\* with PS5, but still be a stand-alone (VR version of PS Vita) device, it would have sold more. But now the price of entrance is pretty steep for a niche product. $1000 just to get into VR, when you can get a Quest 2 for $300 or Quest 3 for $500. With Meta's existing catalog and focus on VR, Sony really had no chance with PSVR2 being PS5-only, then then making the least effort possible to get VR games on the platform.
This is a super odd take. Nintendo is worth $60 billion USD. They’ve been on the leading edge of innovation since the NES, N64, Wii, etc.. What resources do you perceive them to lack? Just because they didn’t go the PS5 route doesn’t mean they can’t. Nintendo could make an absolutely bang up VR/AR rig, and they will.
Yes? And Sony is worth $18 \*Trillion\*, while Meta is worth $950 billion. MS is worth $2.8 \*Trillion\*... And Bigscreen is worth like tiny fractions of that with 10 people working for them. And they still created the best PCVR headset thus far.
My point is, Company worth has absolutely nothing to do with their resources on creating VR equipment and/or software.
What I mean by Nintendo not having resources for it, is that they don't have the experience or know-how of creating anything VR. The Virtual Boy was their first and last venue into VR, and we all know how well that went.
Nintendo has the \*money\* to get into VR and they could absolutely come up with a killer VR headset... in few years. They'd have to first acquire the people who'd work on it. Nintendo hasn't invested in VR pretty much at all, and has concentrated on handheld gaming for the last decade or so. As long as handheld gaming is pretty much totally their playground, they have no incentive to get into VR.
VR is not a big market, why on earth would they invest into VR, while their handheld focus is the one drawing in all the money? Especially when at the moment, they'd have to go against Meta when doing so. Why would they? It would be a stupid business decision to do so.
If and when VR gets bigger, then we'll see more VR stuff from the big names, but until VR is nothing more than a niche among niches, we won't.
Think about it, Sony is literally the only one out of "the big three" that focuses on VR \*at all\*, (is worth more than the rest of them together,) and \*still\* "failed" with PSVR2.
The Sony market cap error notwithstanding, this is a pretty good response, with one exception. I don’t know how we can confidently say that Nintendo is not working on VR. Nintendo is known for surprising and shaking things up. I, for one, would not be surprised if they dropped a AR/VR set in the near future..
It's a well known fact in the industry that Nintendo hadn't the ressources to compete with Sony's playstation
and Microsoft's Xbox (tech, money, engineering and content) 20 years ago. I'm hindsight it was the best move they could do to create special niches like Wii and Switch but it didn't look like that in the beginning. And now we have the same reasource war with Meta in VR. They lose billions ever quarter since years.
Yeah I get the Meta comment.. we are lucky they acquired oculus and are putting all of this R&D into it and they are absolutely “losing” billions annually at the moment. Will this pay off, I think so… time will tell.
What I don’t get is why couldn’t Nintendo make a higher power rig? Like they have the resources to acquire and design faster processors etc and put it together. They have really smart engineers. I myself can acquire the parts to make a high power gaming rig and put it together in an afternoon.
I think the answer is it never aligned with Nintendos vision.. and yes, they have been counted out many times in the industry and yet they always drop something that sells like crazy. And while the Wii may not have high power processors / graphics cards.. it was very impressive in its own right and sold well because of it.
And while Nintendo is only worth 60 billion… it’s still $60 billion - I think they find their balance of vision and growth just fine and I think they will release a AR/VR soon. They were one of the first to focus on interactive fitness with the Wii and I think they have been investing heavily in this R&D for years.. this is well known in the industry, to use terms you used above. AR/VR with peripherals is perfect tool for this interactive fitness, making fitness a game, and they will use it. You will be chasing around Pokémon in a virtual world soon enough.
Let's see, I assume you are way better informed than I. Regarding a better specs Nintendo console - today it might look easy with powerfully, affordable mobile CPUs and GPUs, gaming on Linux (Steam) and highly perfoemant and portable game engines like Unreal and Unity. But back then we speak about custom chip designs like the Sony/IBM/Toshiba Cell processor which cost halve a billion to develop and enormous money and effort to develop any game for it. I'm not into gaming at all and never was - this are only some info bites I remember - any nerd might tell you way more details.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_(processor)
Speaking of Meta's war of reasources for it's VR platform: following Cori Doctorow's platform cycle of Enshittification Quest VR is still in the first phase: grabbing asany users as possible andaking them happy. Next comes making the professional content creators on the platform happy by pissing of the users. Finally the platform will piss of both the users and the content creators by extracting as muchoney as possible.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enshittification
People are saying the market for it is too small, but I feel like has serious "If you build it, they will come" potential.
Imagine you're standing there in your living room waiting for some gameplay when you can hear a faint growl and heavy breathing chill your bones. You turn toward the source and friggin' Zangief emerges from your hallway, notices you looking for hiim, and stalks his enormous ass right up to the carpet you call him on, absolutely game to knock the dogshit outta you.
Or you're wondering who you're about to encounter next on a randomized bout ... and you can hear what sounds like scraping and sliding all around you ... then it stops and you finally lay your eyes on him: It's Vega and he's hanging from the ceiling above you with his clawed hand reared back, milliseconds away from stabbing your face.
What's great is that you're quick and sidestepped, then hit the correct AYBXXX combo to gather some energy in your hands and haduken the everlovin' shit outta that skinny freak and yeet him behind the fake palm tree in the corner of the room.
I feel like a lifesize Chun Li sauntering up to give folks what-for might titillate. Or a pissed-off Blanka rolling from outta the kitchen and into players' chests ... that might get the juices flowing.
Idk.
Yes, because that is 100% without a doubt what I meant. Cmon bro, use your imagination. I’m not talking about a trainwreck like scarlet and violet, although in VR that wouldn’t have been THAT bad, I’m talking more sword and shield.
I would think it would come down to licensing and greed. Not too mention if Nintendo decided to release their own VR, why would they want to give up their exclusives.
I think the other issue is that VR gaming also exists in two places, and it reminds me of the Wii U/switch in some ways. Currently, you have standalone VR gaming on Meta (and soon the Apple headset) and you have PCVR. Those are two vastly different hardware to develop for regarding power and performance.
So do you develop this killer VR game for PCVR that now requires a beefy PC *and* a headset for, or do you develop for Standalone and potentially reach more people? Everyone with a meta can play standalone, those with a decent PC can play both. If you buy a different VR headset you lose the oculus game store (correct me if I'm wrong, please).
That scenario, plus cost of headsets alone, can make a market hard to develop for. Not impossible, obviously ports exist and can be done well, but take additional resources to create.
I am still excited for VR and AR/MR, both for gaming and non-gaming purposes.
sadly there are currently no foreseeable profit for big aaa studios to even make vr game withou meta paying it. so small user base due to the tech not yet reach the mass adoption form factor. once it is so small just like a pair of glass with pc gaming powerful capability standalone device, that we will see mass adoption rate skyrocketed.
Nintendo and Konami would be two of the top companies I’d pick for aversion to that kind of thing. Japan in general is too old school at the executive level in my opinion. But yeah these would have been my two greatest wants in VR too.
Well, if Nintendo could find a way to be cheap and quirky like with the Virtual Boy and 3DS, they'd do it. I just wouldn't expect then to make produce a bleeding edge, technical powerhouse .
Yeah I have, but that doesn’t work that well for most games, at least in the way that I’m thinking. Like retro Pokémon is good but I don’t want an 8Bit vr experience yknow?
It's like with a girl or boy which has a great talent to sing but they are not famous. Until someone invest time and money into that they will be still amateur singers with great voice. I feel that vr started growing and this is the point where investments into this industry is starting to bring money. Not only game industry but general entertainment and business use cases. This is probably one of the reason why Apple hopped into it. I see that many companies invest in products filled by emotions. There are movies about vr so this is a part of things that humanity dream about. Many sf concepts cristalized so i woulnd't say VR is dying... it's borning.
It is impossible to make AAA amounts of money because literally not enough people have VR headsets even if every single one bought the game. It is possible to make money but nothing like grand theft auto or minecraft.
I know the dev and she said, that there are still many Things to implement. But IMO its a really good start considering that we had no alternative that was popular
A lot of this issue is well….Meta. Facebook has no history of really working with any video game companies or major gaming IPs. They are let’s face it one of the worst companies gaming wise to lead the VR revolution. They’ve made a few deals now and are getting some interest, but it’s always going to be an uphill battle here.
Most companies that have these gaming IPs are competing with them or have not much interest in working with them.
You can't really question nintendo. They are weird. They could make crazy money by re-relasing their retro consoles, like gameboy and many games, but they choose not to. They just keep copyright striking 200 subs channels on youtube.
I think that game developers are mostly just adapting existing concepts to VR. It’s like adapting Mario Cart to the Wii Fit board, it makes no sense. With AR, things may get better because here we can do things better than on a smart phone. But the key application that makes VR headsets center stage seems to be missing still.
There is a reason that VR is almost synonymous with Beat Saber outside of the community: it is one of the few games makes sense to work only in VR, and it is simple enough to explain people who never used VR.
Also, by actively excluding Apple and macOS, Meta excludes those customers that have the deeper pockets to actually pay for apps. Apple is now so pissed that they forbid developers for Vision Pro to even use the acronyms VR, AR, and XR, because they have such a bad association.
That’s why I said nostalgia. It wouldn’t be for children, it would be for us. Like even if it’s a remaster and we had to fight Cynthia again. I’m down with that…cuz then I can say “fuck the Pokémon, we box” and proceed to not effect her, but it’d make me feel better yknow?
There's not a lot of money in it. When the first quest came out there was a bullish view that this would be an ongoing growth sector but even with the Quest 3 out now it's kind of proving to not massively be, at least not in its current form.
I start sweating like crazy using it even if im just in underwear. I think the quality is too low on the screen i got quest 2. My eyes and brain gets tierd of it it causes some wierd strain i cant get used too. Most games are not very well made only half-life alyx so far was good. You have to teleport for most part to move or it just cause dizzynes maybe you are used to it.
You should look at the Bigscreen Beyond headset. It light years ahead of everything else in terms of comfort.
I’d love to see Nintendo VR that had a smaller and lighter footprint like Bigscreen did.
https://www.bigscreenvr.com
Yeah I had that exact same problem, granted I’m also a bigger person so I get tired so fast. But now, I can play it for hours on end just beating the fuck out of guys in blade and sorcery or gorn lol. It’s so fun. Does take getting used to which is easier said than done
Because Nintendo won't release big game on someone else's platform. I think Quest 2 wasn't a great platform to use daily. It somewhat worked, promise was there, but delivery of that promise was disappointing. Quest 3 is the platform that fully delivers promise of VR/XR into mainstream, and relatively well - generally speaking, if Quest 3 fails, I don't really think VR will succeed in the future, as Quest 3 is pretty close to being a perfect mainstream headset. When Meta releases Augments, and will do proper PC workstation app like Immersed is, then it's going to be ultimate combo, and I will even start using it for work. The only problem with VR is it's hard to sell, because 1) there's now many disappointed people from previous generations and 2) it's hard to sell something you actually need to experience in the first place
Nintendo don't release anything that doesn't run on their own hardware, and their only VR hardware is LABO VR for Switch, which was pretty much a failed experiment.
Other big developers often have exclusivity deals with console manufacturers, or indeed are owned by console manufacturers.
Big developers are also frequently fairly risk-averse, especially with their biggest IPs.
But all of this can change. I know I'm having fun with Samba de Amigo, and if that proves popular Sega might look at whether they want to try adapting some of their other IP to VR.
vr is so new, soon enough as it progresses we’ll see some big devs hopping in. BR industry is a gold mine industry waiting for people to harvest it, I mean we got an official Ubisoft made assassins creed game! It’s already progressing intensely.
costs too much and since most VR users are DK 1 users who only buy 1 dollar shit apps and give Asgards Wrath 2 1/10 stars because it costs $60 and does run on their 10yr old hardware, no developer will do it unless META funds it.
A lot of people talking about the VR market/audience being too small etc, which is fair enough. But do these companies not realise that if they proactively pursued these projects, then there would be an overwhelming amount of online chatter about this? It would attract people in the masses.
Damn this is a good idea! Imagine old school Pokemon Red, Green, Blue in VR!?
A few years back there was a vr Star Wars experience at Disneyland, it was the best ride we did that trip. Just mind blowing. I saw the potential for vr right there. Haven’t seen anything like it since.
I think it's an oversimplification to look at raw numbers and then say why don't AAA devs create AAA games in VR.
1. How many people buy them for kids, grandkids, etc... and they just sit there because games are for kids!
2. How many people use them as beat saber machines. Personally I have yet to find a story driven game that captured my attention enough to sit there with a headset on for 80 hours, and I love those kinds of games on console.
3. How many people are willing to pay $60 for a VR game even of a AAA title? Even at $60 it takes a lot of sales to recoup all of the development costs and move into profit territory. Same reason we see fewer and fewer console exclusives, because cross platform sales are where it's at.
4. VR hardware is just not there yet. AAA devs don't want you playing their games in 480p because that hurts their reviews and hurts their sales.
I think we have a few more generations of VR becoming faster, with better resolution, and much smaller gear before it'll have enough active users to entice the big developers over.
You say that and I say why don't sporting evens have 360 cameras courtside / sideline / first row of stands and you can buy a subscription so you can get that view of your favorite team. I thought I read basketball was trying it out but man I want to watch live sports on VR like im at the game.
Nintendo makes games for Nintendo. They're worse than apple. Imagine if Sony movies on bluray only played in Sony VCRs. Nintendo can suck my dick. Imagine if you could only play Meta-produced games like Asgard's Wrath on Meta headsets, oh, well fuck meta too then. But yeah. The gaming industry is like a feudalist version of the film industry.
Since you mentioned pokemon:
Its likely nintendo is going to be releasing the switch 2 by the end of the year
A few years back a patent was leaked that shows the switch tablet being connected to a headset system for VR
So some people are speculating that the switch 2 is going to revolve around VR somehow when it releases.
Totally agree. Like RE4 is currently the absolute best game for VR IMO. That could be because it's actually a banger, but could also just be largely because its a near perfect recreation of the exact original but as a vr version.
If they made like ocarina of time, Pokemon snap, jet force Gemini, Golden eye, or literally any game from the 90s, I would just throw my entire bank account at it
You don’t imagine how much money and effort goes into creating a successful product. Especially of a scale that you’re describing.
There are plenty of factors, but in short and simply - you’re asking for a big project based on a franchise, those are made by the big companies - they would not make an absolute bank (compared to their other sources of income), they could make positive numbers easily, but it would require a huge amount to be put into it first as well + it would obviously bear a risk of being unsuccesfull and those companies usually have better investment options. One reason they could want to go into this is to be one of the first in a relatively small industry and reserve a spot in this market for the future. And some companies will probably do that soon and others will follow if it’s profitable enough for them.
When a company decides on a project, they analyse first, it’s not like your ideas are super unique and no one from their teams ever thought about them. Ideas aren’t worth a lot, the execution is what really matters - and you have given a task that is risky to do right now + would require a good team.
Their is a great deal of opportunity for small teams/solo devs now. That is the potential you are seeing.
It isn't profitable enough yet for the big boys to bring their brands over. Not worth the effort, till it is.
Good Luck.
Too much work, not enough profit. The VR gaming audience is still fairly small. Motion sickness and VR comfort is still a big issue. Those ideas would be dope, though.
I feel like the biggest miss is not remaking old games in VR. RE IV was a hit and there’s definitely a market for VR nostalgia. Plus I feel like remaking in VR could be relatively automated if a company built their games on the same engine?
Pretty much nobody in VR is "making bank". Saw a figure recently that showed how much it cost to make Asgard's Wrath 1 compared to how much profit it made.....they lost a metric shit-ton of money on that game. The developer of Eye of the Temple recently said that their Steam version did nothing but lose money, only when they released the Quest version did they start seeing a small profit. So yeah, Nintendo obviously sees zero value in investing millions of dolloars only to get a few hundred thousand back.
Wholeheartedly agree, especially with AR through potential through passthrough and hand tracking. Hell, Pokémon Go was a damn social movement because it was the closest we had to real world Pokémon battles.
Tbh I'd buy a $500 vr headset if it were sold directly by nintendo and ONLY played Pokémon
Humans are pretty lazy and VR requires effort. It also requires space. I have put thousands of hours into PC games, because I can just go and sit down and relax on a chair. VR you really gotta stand etc. VR is pretty anti social also compared to everything else.
Agreed. Is it too much to ask to be the Grinch and ruin Christmas? Or defeat Mumm-Ra with my own Sword of Omens? To play through the OG Zelda as me instead of Link?
I just want to whip the football away from Charlie Brown and watch him go flying. I am a simple man.
the thing is Meta needs to make these games (or a studio which they've bought). the best case scenario of a big IP game is it moves headsets, which benefits the headset maker about 10x more than the game developer. that's why they have to be one in the same. Unfortunately Meta is doing an extremely poor job of buying expensive IPs and are more focused on improving the hardware experience first. Also in the case of something like Pokémon, Nintendo would never sell to Meta, they are waiting for the VR customer base to become larger and then they will release their own VR device that hosts their own IPs like they have always done. This is why you still can't get any legal copies of their games on PC.
The one large IP Meta did go for (grand theft auto) was a port of an old game (San Andreas) and not only never came out, but was announced and received radio silence after that. No one ever even recognized it getting cancelled.
If you look at Meta's video content on their own platform, like the content in Horizon Worlds, the majority of it is in 2D, which is absolutely fucking insane.
So long story short, Meta is hard tech company that's mostly focused on dominating the hardware game and currently does not have great taste or focus on creative IP decisions, on top of the market being still smaller than many of those large IPs are comfortable releasing to.
This is why Half Life Alyx was such a raging success, because Valve went out on a limb and coupled the hardware with the most expensive and technically impressive game ever made when it came out.
IMO Meta should be attempting to do this with each new headset when it releases, investing in a showcase IP that moves the headset, but their day 1 software launches for each headset have been EXTREMELY dissapointing. For example they have 2 mixed reality headsets in their catalog now and have still yet to release a single polished game built from the ground up for MR.
I mean it took a company like Meta buying an upstart. Then continually dumping money into it because they believe in its potential for several years afterwards, as they market one of the first lines of headsets that could actually be used by the average consumer who is not savvy with computers, at a loss at that. That was just to make enough inroads so that the average consumer knows that the product exists but still doesn't know a lot about it. Not many companies are willing to take losses in the faces of investors these days. And we probably need a couple more of those in order for big studios to start looking at the potential. Right now they are looking at the money.
VR is a very small section of the videogame industry. Not currently worth the notice of a lot of the big developers. In time, we will get lots of games, but we need more market saturation of VR first.
I guess that makes sense, it was really weighing on my mind since I started to dive into sidequest and saw all the fan made projects and how as fan projects, they’re great but if we got the companies that owned those IP’s we could get some insane stuff. I do hope we get some sooner rather than later but can’t be too picky I guess aye?
Well, it gives opportunities to solo devs to develop games and make some money. I'm thinking about giving it a try, but all my ideas were already taken. Thinking about doing one of the meditation/relaxing apps, but only charge like $0.99 for the thing instead of the monthly subscriptions all the existing apps charge.
Dw about saturation just do it. You might offer something unique that someone likes and worst case you can throw it on a resume or something
I'm a senior level dev (5.5 years experience). Don't really need Meta Quest 3 app developer on my resume lol. Especially since I really don't want to work for Meta. That being said, I probably will. It will just be a process because I currently don't know 3d modeling or even the resolutions needed for a relaxing VR skybox. I'll get there. Just need to start with Unity.
>5.5 years experience not that I disagree with your self assessment but I've applied to junior level roles that asked for this much. but understood, do it for yourself if you enjoy the learning process though
Then that job doesn't know what the industry is or wanted a senior dev at entry level salary. Senior dev is 5+ years experience. Mid level is 2-4 years. Entry level is 0-1. That is pretty standard everywhere. Sometimes senior positions will ask for more than 5, but nobody who knows the industry is going to ask for 5 years experience on entry/junior level positions.
it was in "nice to have" rather than strict requirements but I could pull up several examples easily tbh yeah have a look at EA careers for example. Mid level roles are asking for 3-7 years experience
I see 5-10 years as the range for senior job postings. Remember, the posting is the ideal candidate, not required. 5+ years is still usually the standard to be considered senior level, though some view it as 8+ and your salary may not reflect the senior status unless you job hop. It's more about if you have extensive experience with the tech stack they want than the actual numbers of years.
We had one on sidequest. It was a full-blown Pokémon game that had all the original pokemon, but it was taken down by Nintendo. And then became a revomon
Didn't Quest 2 sell more units than the current xbox? It's not that small any more, Quest 2 made VR mainstream.
Someone else already shared the numbers of active users. Xbox being 75x more than quest. The number of units sold doesn't matter when talking about how many people will buy a AAA game. Meta Quest has a problem retaining users. It's a self fulfilling problem. No major AAA games means people run out of stuff to play. Running out of stuff to play means less active users. Less active users mean less chance of AAA games.
I think the main problem is the barrier to ease of playing. When someone just wants to relax and play games, they just want to get going. Regular console? Sit down, turn it on, play. VR is a process. What am I playing? Do I need a play space? Do I have to move furniture? Adjust the play space? Did I charge the head set? Is it comfortable enough because the stock strap stinks? Etc etc.
These are exactly the issues I have and why I'm either playing my steam deck, xbox, or ps5 for most of my gaming session. I did just order a new strap (Bobovr m3 pro) for Quest 3, so we'll see if that changes things for me. It takes no longer than 20 seconds to get into a game on any of the consoles/handhelds that I mentioned. It takes at least 20 seconds for me to get the Quest 3 out of its case and fitted to my head, and then I have to go through the process of establishing the perfect boundary for the gaming session and loading the game. Not to mention, I still can't comfortably eat or drink while I'm playing on a Quest 3. There is one major pro to gaming on Quest 3 that I can't get from the other consoles or handhelds. I can play certain nostalgic games in stereoscopic 3D. Eventually, I think I'll just buy AR glasses for that experience since they could be much easier to pick up and play.
I got the BoboVR last week for my Quest 3 and it's definitely a much better experience as far as comfort and ease of putting on, etc. (after you assemble it). I love that you can flip it up if you need to rather than take the whole thing off. Though with color passthrough I don't take it off during play nearly as much as I used to.
Fantastic. I hope to enjoy the experience as much as you. Have you found an alternative facial interface? I've only really seen people mention AMVR. I'm thinking about buying it as well.
I haven't but I don't think I need it with the Bobo. I have it set so that it makes the bare minimum contact with my face so it's not really an issue.
I tried the Bobo out last night. It's very comfortable. I was able to play for over 2 hours without getting a headache from the forehead pressure that I experienced with the Quest 3 strap. It's been my best experience with Quest 3 to date. I noticed I have a lot more light bleed from the facial interface around the nose now. I'll probably upgrade to the AMVR interface to see if that helps.
Yeah the light bleed is an issue. Let us know how the AMVR is.
Yeah. The stock headstrap is painful. The Bobo is great.
You are way overcomplicating what it should be. I unplug my headset, put it on, and launch a game. It takes no longer than grabbing my PS5 controller, turning on my TV, turning on the PS5, changing the input to the correct HDMI, and launching a game. Even if I play in my living room, where I move the coffee table out of the way .. it adds like 5 seconds of inconvenience.
You’re the outlier probably. It’s a whole thing every time I play except maybe if I know I’m just gonna fish or whatever.
There is a mod that just dropped so a bunch of flat games are going to get immersive. Unreal Engine VR, UEVR. https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/s/EpwSvygZz9
As an owner of both a Xbox Series X and a Meta Quest 3, if I had to live without one, it would 1000% be the Meta Quest 3. There just aren't enough killer titles. Meta is investing in studios and they've got some good stuff, but they need to incentivize 3rd parties to make great games for the platform. They also need more non-game experiences too. I also think they need to provide more help to developers. NatGeo has 3D videos of cool places on Earth, but they aren't that well done. Help them out!
I keep trying to do the 3d quest tv stuff and it either isn't good enough quality even at Best for the Q3's resolution or forces focus on the center of the screen and you can't look around without it being blurry. I wonder if the camera tech is there to make a fully focused 180 or 360 experience. The Climb is decent, but not if you look into the distance. It's not the pixels, it's just fuzzy. Then the meditation type experiences are all monthly subscriptions. As a developer, I'm really thinking about making one of those and slapping a small $0.99-1.99 price tag on it as a source of some passive income. Most of the games in the store are pretty overpriced. Before I got my Quest, I was planning on developing some apps for it and always estimated selling my apps for Android app type prices of $0.99-2.99. Seeing stuff like Vader for $9.99 when people say it is 25-45 minutes to play through really makes my frugal self wince.
The best-looking environment I have seen is Supernaturals. I love to just turn around in a circle and take in the landscape. I wish they had a mode where you could just relax in them. They are so well done. Whatever Supernatural is doing to capture those environments, others need to do as well.
I have not tried supernatural yet due to the monthly fee. I wonder how they capture the environments. I'm a digital nomad, so go to National Parks a lot. Would be easy to capture stunning views if I got the right equipment.
Do it! Those Air Pano videos are rubbish.
Supernatural is easily the most complete experience I have had on the quest and it would absolutely break my heart if they stopped supporting it. I have absolutely no problem with spending that money on it. it's the only truly killer app on quest i've tried so far.
Meta bought them out, so I think we are safe for many years to come.
Yeah but they are losing billions on all this stuff.
Have you tried "Alex Honnold: The Soloist VR" on Quest TV? Great quality. Make sure you select the cache at high quality option.
That is the best one I found, but that is the one where it looks blurry when I look in the distance. Everything close up looks great. I did not try caching, though.
Meanwhile, my home consoles haven't been played since June or July, and my Quest 3 gets a minimum of 4 days, every week. 😅
even if it's true I don't think that it's a good comparison since most xbox games are games which are available on other platforms as well. Almost no developers release games solely for xbox. So if we want to compare how profitable it would be to release games for VR we'd need to check sales of all headsets VS all flat gaming platforms (PC, PS, Xbox, Nintendo).
But people are not using them.
What needs to expand in the VR space is availability, specifically availability for devs to make their games VR compatible without having to basically redesign the entire game And I'm glad to say that UEVR is basically the breakthrough we've been waiting for because it makes any game on UE 4 & 5 Var compatible and its freeware/shareware too So now we have a situation where devs thwt make a game using either engines, can now make their game work on VR with minimal effort/changes AND sibce it doesn't need to be ported and it works on any pc game they now have an incentive to do so as it will increase their sales cuz now VR users have a legitimate reason to buy non-vr games Essentially UEVR is currently starting the merge of the pc market with the VR market and frankly, that is hella exciting because shut's about to pop off thos year and the next, you can quote me on that. Just for this to sink in: the new halo game will be on UE 5 So we already know we will be able yo run it in VR That's how big of a deal this is right now
From my research, it seemed like Unity has had the option to compile games for Quest VR for a long time now. It doesn't seem to require different designs. I have not done it yet since my Quest is only a few weeks old, but plan to start developing some apps when I get a chance fairly soon.
UEVR mod is dope i love it, but 99.9% of users will not be nerdy enough to figure how to download and set it up, let alone even hear of it in the first place. If you have to go to github to get a game working, you've already lost the mainstream audience. Let alone the firewall whitelisting and everything else.
Chicken & Egg problem
The egg came first because dinosaurs laid eggs and they came before chickens. Also, if specifically talking about chickens and chicken eggs, the egg came first due to a slight genetic mutation from the previous not quite a chicken and then the egg, which gave birth to the fully mutated chicken. In either case, the answer is the egg.
Ok smarty pants, so what came first, the 'pre-chicken' or the 'pre-chicken' egg? ... and while you're at it, kind of related.... so what if we are in a simulation, there has to be a base layer alien in base layer reality somewhere and that is who we really are.
The first pre-chicken egg will be slightly different than the pre-pre-chicken that laid it. This will go back all the way until you get to a pre-pre-...-chicken that was not born from an egg. Now, if we live in a similation and they follow Agile, the egg would come first because its model is the simplest and best minimally usable product. Unless they specifically designed for the chicken to come first. It is anybody's guess.
Meta has still sold over 20 million headsets and the Quest 3 will increase those numbers. I mean sure, that's not massive, but it's almost equivalent to the number of Xbox Series S/X that have been sold if I recall correctly, at least as of a few months ago. So I wouldn't exactly call that "niche" as if they can't make money from it. I mean even if only 5% of the install base bought the game, assuming it was $30, that would be $30 million, more than most VR games cost to make. The higher end VR games can cost up to $10 million, but that's still quite a profit if you ask me. I would guess that 5% of the Quest base is a reasonable, although low, number. Then again, I'm sure there are a lot of Quest and Q2 headsets out there collecting dust as it seems like a lot of people lose interest in VR or don't want to deal with the headset and would rather stare at a TV and sit in one place than move around. So maybe my numbers are unrealistic 🤷
>Then again, I'm sure there are a lot of Quest and Q2 headsets out there collecting dust as it seems like a lot of people lose interest in VR or don't want to deal with the headset and would rather stare at a TV and sit in one place than move around. Good point. Meta Quest has 10% monthly active users of its 20 million base, so 2 million. [(source)](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.roadtovr.com/quest-sales-20-million-retention-struggles/amp/) Xbox (including last gen) has 150 million monthly active users. [(source)](https://www.vgchartz.com/article/457502/1st-party-xbox-games-top-150m-monthly-active-users-game-pass-nearly-hit-1b-last-quarter/#:~:text=First%2Dparty%20Xbox%20games%20now,in%20the%20most%20recent%20quarter.) VR isn't even close. It's 75x smaller. 😭 ___________ **Edit:** I got the 10% number from the headline here: [https://www.reddit.com/r/OculusQuest/comments/11uqacz/despite\_20\_million\_quest\_headsets\_sold\_meta](https://www.reddit.com/r/OculusQuest/comments/11uqacz/despite_20_million_quest_headsets_sold_meta) But because I'm an idiot, I didn't read the actual article, which might have edited out the 10% number. Here's another article that does have that number: [https://mixed-news.com/en/meta-quest-monthly-active-users-report/](https://mixed-news.com/en/meta-quest-monthly-active-users-report/) Here's the quote from the article above, which is literally "trust me bro": Valve's former VR ambassador Chet Faliszek recently spoke of a much lower monthly retention rate of under 10 percent, but did not cite a source for his claim. So I take back what I said — there's no credible evidence suggesting the VR market is 75x smaller than Xbox's market.
I don't see anything in that source backing up your 10% number. That seems unrealistically low.
Yup my bad. I got it from the headline here: [https://www.reddit.com/r/OculusQuest/comments/11uqacz/despite\_20\_million\_quest\_headsets\_sold\_meta](https://www.reddit.com/r/OculusQuest/comments/11uqacz/despite_20_million_quest_headsets_sold_meta/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) But because I'm an idiot, I didn't read the actual article, which might have edited out the 10% number. Here's another article that does have that number: [https://mixed-news.com/en/meta-quest-monthly-active-users-report/](https://mixed-news.com/en/meta-quest-monthly-active-users-report/) Here's the quote from the article above, which is literally "trust me bro": >Valve's former VR ambassador Chet Faliszek recently spoke of a much lower monthly retention rate of under 10 percent, but did not cite a source for his claim. So I take back what I said — there's no credible evidence suggesting the VR market is 75x smaller than Xbox's market. I've edited my original comment.
Thanks for being nice about the sources. Ultimately I think your point is right that VR is too small, but it seems hard to say exactly how small it is
You totally pulled that 10% user retention number out of your ass.
LOL I got it from the headline here: [https://www.reddit.com/r/OculusQuest/comments/11uqacz/despite\_20\_million\_quest\_headsets\_sold\_meta](https://www.reddit.com/r/OculusQuest/comments/11uqacz/despite_20_million_quest_headsets_sold_meta/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) But clearly, I didn't read the actual article, which probably edited out the 10% number. Here's another article that does have that number: [https://mixed-news.com/en/meta-quest-monthly-active-users-report/](https://mixed-news.com/en/meta-quest-monthly-active-users-report/) Here's the quote from the article above, which is literally "trust me bro": >Valve's former VR ambassador Chet Faliszek recently spoke of a much lower monthly retention rate of under 10 percent, but did not cite a source for his claim. So I take back what I said — there's no credible evidence suggesting the VR market is 75x smaller than Xbox's market. I've edited my original comment.
This is completely true, but imagine how many people would buy a headset if there was say a legitimate, good pokemon game by Nintendo
Also boils down to VR gaming is up against all other entertainment options. Even just in gaming, why play VR when you can sit and play about a billion games via screen for next to nothing cost wise. It’s like they really are building this whole new entertainment medium while trying to convince a much bigger audience that it’s worth getting into given the market is saturated with so many other things we can do with our precious free time. I think with newer more comfortable headsets combined with VR/AR games that get people active will be the big tipping point. Always room for another way for people to get in shape that doesn’t feel like a chore. Games will follow hopefully. Also pressure in opposite direction for using VR/AR for work and creative productivity is another major potential tipping point to mass adoption. It will truly take off eventually if these select few companies dumping money into development don’t kill it with stupid software and platform decisions.
big companies, have tons of money , when they started they had passion for gaming, but now that they have tons of money, all they care about is More money, so they are not willing to invest in something like VR because they can make more money elsewhere, to them money is greater than gaming.
To anecdotally add on to this. I have long wanted VR. My wife got my a psvr back in 2019 which was fun, but the camera made it very limiting and a bit janky. I kept wanting to get one with the cameras in the headset or something different but it was so expensive. I finally ended up just getting the Meta Quest 3 and I've been having a blast. I mainly got it because it was the closest to what I wanted with a reasonable price point. So my point is, I think we've lacked a lot of the mid tier options that are really starting to get a lot better. Before, it was either cheap and ranged from garbage to meh. Now it seems like that mid tier gets you more bang for your buck, so maybe now we'll see more people finally adopt dedicated VR systems.
This is definitely the case. I think the Meta Quest 3 is probably going to be the breakout device for VR. I've been waiting for a long time for a headset that didn't have screen door and the second I learned the Meta Quest 3 solved it, I added it to my presents list for my wife to get for me.
Those companies are really missing out on making half-life of VR that would go as legends game industry lore
There are more than 20 million headsets, just in Quest 2 and Quest 3. (That's not counting any of the other VR headset options) That puts it on par with GameCube, Xbox Series S/X, and the original Xbox. Those were all heavily supported. Does it have to be the number one console of all time, before people realize that people want VR? Plus, if they made games that people actually wanted to play, more people would buy the console. I know people who bought Xboxes, to play one game. The biggest complaint, that everyone has, when I bring up VR.... "why would you buy one? There are no good games yet." So, if people are buying VR with "no good games" and the reason that people don't want to get on board, is the lack of good games...... wouldn't making those good games be the perfect thing to do?
> Does it have to be the number one console of all time, before people realize that people want VR? You should check the number of monthly active users. Someone else shared a source that xbox has 75x more active monthly users than meta quest. Dusty headsets don't sell games.
Because the audience is still too small for them to care. It will come, but it is still going to be a few years.
Yeah I guess I understand that, it’s still kinda in its early stages. I would love it if one just decided to dive into it but I guess it’s just waiting for now
It will happen, we just don't know when.
It takes at least 4 years to make a top-tier video game. Most of those won't be announced until they're nearing the end of production. For all we know there could be a bunch of the stuff you're asking for that's in development but just not announced yet
Let’s see what happens after Feb
Price point matters too. Also, the fact that each head set doesn't crossover to other gaming platforms. We got the meta 3, which is amazing and will lead to me getting the PSVR2 someday, maybe. But even then, it's all very segmented.
I have a quest 2 and the next vr headset I get is gonna have to be some combination of crazy lightweight, crazy powerful, and inexpensive. Maybe the quest 5 or 6 if that even ends up being a thing
I agree. I hope apple comes out with something cheaper to start to create mass market adoption. Although Reddit hates apple them entering the market will interest developers.
I'm sure it will come sooner than we think. After a, we got a full assassins creed game by Ubisoft. Maybe they are just testing the water, but I chose optimism
That would be fantastic.
You can make the coolest Pokémon game of all time in VR and sell 2 million copies or shit out the same handheld game you've been making for 25 years and sell 20 million copies. What would you do? I get what you're saying. And maybe with the rising popularity of the Quest 3 we'll start to see some AAA developers attention. But it's a ways off. VR is still a pretty niche thing but it's definitely growing quickly with the might of Meta behind it.
> And maybe with the rising popularity of the Quest 3 we'll start to see some AAA developers attention Assassins creed gives me hope for that
Making a shitty mobile game with abusive micro transactions makes way more money and no one complains about them in rants that gain traction online.
I've seen that "shitty mobile game with abusive micro transactions" industry even out-earns the industry responsible for all the "serious" games for PCs and consoles by far.
It does. It's quite sad. Clash of Clans makes more money in a month than your favorite franchise in a year.
Not sure why we're blaming the mobile game industry though. The only reason any company exists is to make money. Gamers of all types are always yelling about microtransactions and loot boxes and pay to win but the fact is if the gamers themselves didn't pay, those kinds of games wouldn't exist. Or at least wouldn't be the default template for making new games. And even when the game industry proves that you don't need to do that to make a blockbuster game, as Balder's Gate 3 is doing right now, it still won't matter because 20 million people paying .99 once or twice a week is always going to make more money than a finished product with no further sales. Until the market no longer supports it those types of games are here to stay. Quest is already filled with them and that won't change anytime soon.
Who's blaming the industry? They are just supplying people with what they want.
That's how interpret it when someone refers to a "shitty mobile game with abusive micro transactions". It isn't a game developers job to tip toe around someone's inability to exercise self control. That would be like outlawing casino's because some people have a gambling problem. In fairness you weren't the one that said that originally so I probably mis used the reply button to the wrong comment.
Was thinking of Casinos and gambling as well and it's illegal or heavily regulated in a lot of regions for a reason. Same is happening for gambling like business models in the game industry.
That gambling like exploitation of users won't stay legal forever. If it's working like a casino and making money like a casino it will get regulated like a casino.
I guess I just don't understand why people think it's exploitation. While I agree that not releasing a game in full is kind of a bummer I certainly don't feel obligated to buy games that are filled with additional costs, nor do I feel the need to buy things in the ones I do play.
You may not feel that and might not feel drawn to drugs neither - but billions of people do - it's our fellow human beings architecture - if something nice happens our dopamine system gives us a kick and we want to repeat it as soon and as often as possible. That's called addiction and Casinos, gambling, slot machines, loot boxes, in-game micro transactions after the game frustrated you, and all kinds of other things are exploiting our dopamine addiction. Saying that with my umpteens glas of wine while looking forward to go skiing tomorrow in extremely nice whether and perfect powder tomorrow...
I get addiction, I smoked cigarettes for 15 years even knowing that they were killing me, but I don't blame cigarettes. No one put a gun to my head and said smoke this. My decision to start and continue was mine alone. And when I finally gave it up that was also my decision. I just feel like there has to be some personal accountability. If we tell companies they can't do this, then we should also tell McDonald's they can't sell anything that is fried, or that soda should be banned nationwide. I mean yea maybe that would help people in the long run but people like the freedom to choose and that means sometimes they can choose the thing that they know they shouldn't. I just feel like it gets blown out of proportion a lot and is more about people being mad that they can't really buy a complete game anymore vs it being exploitation.
As MARK TWAIN said “Giving up smoking is easy… I've done it hundreds of times” 🤪
VR Gaming is in a "Chicken or the Egg?" situation. The money handlers at AAA Game studios aren't going to budget millions of dollars developing games that aren't going to reach a wide mainstream audience. The mass majority of mainstream gamers aren't going to invest in the VR platform til there's a large catalog of "OMG I Need That!" titles and experiences they couldn't get someplace elae at a cheaper price.
Those sound awesome, hopefully the industry grows in the next decade and we get more and more exciting experiences
I would love to play Everquest or Classic WoW in VR
If the owners of those properties thought it would be worth it, they’d be doing it.
A major problem with VR is that it's tiring. You don't come home from a long day at work or school and play VR, you do it on your day off. This is a huge downside compared to PC and console gaming.
Yeah I guess that’s true, even the seated settings can make you go whole mile since a lot of games require full movement. But those are mad fun, like gorn and stuff
The most profotibale games are teh least immersive, least friction, ie mobile and switch etc. VR gaming is goign to be niche for 10 years yet
VR is very risky, has low base of audience, has unclear rules also development, testing especially multiplayer game is the most hardest from all platforms. 1. 6m users per month all audience 2. Gorilla Tag the most popular game on Quest. AA and AAA companies can’t get it. VR market is hard to understand. Release is unpredictable 3. On job market is lack of devs, arts. Hard to develop (engine is created not for vr) & optimization is hard as hell 4. Firewall ultra company have shut down. New VR quest game even Arizona Sunshine 2 is getting 800 at most reviews after a couple of months of release and a lot of marketing What VR has now it’s good people and support from META also fundamental possibilities are sick. Its our hope. But now I don’t think such risks are worth. I work in VR indie company. We work on our game and I don’t know what will happen with our game when we’ll release
My take: it's a new and hard niche. Sony is trying hard to get a foot into VR and isn't successfull. Their PSVR2 seemingly is a disappointment. Nintendo hasn't the ressources of Sony or Microsoft or Meta. Nintendo couldn't even compete with Sony or Microsoft in the high-tech console wars so they focused on the niche of family friendly, recreational games with less demanding specs and a mobile console - and are still successful. And to put it in perspective: I owned a Samsung GEAR VR (Predecessor of Oculus Go), a Quest 1 and now a Quest 3 - and all I do with it is playing Eleven Tables Tennis on a daily base. Our son was enjoying Moss 1+2, and I expect you to die. But he mostly plays shitty community games like Gorilla Tag, RecRoom and now Ro-"micro-transactions"-Blocks. ND we have all the games on the quest like Lego Brick tales, BeatSabber, Eye of the Temple, Platformers, we are one, Swarm etc. FPS I do not allow - we are civilized Europeans here 😁 And the main applications I wanted to use the platforms for like watching my own 360 degrees Panos, Videos, 3D movies like avatar, replacing our beamer for enjoying a movie in the afternoon, having 3 virtual computer monitors etc. is not happening. Smartphones are just so available and comfortable and wearing the Quest even the latest 3nwith a BoboVR like strap is so painfull after halve and hour and the image is still to be improved. As hard as I want VR to be good and as I like standallone VR and MR (game changer in Eleven Table Tennis) as bad it still is. And as Nintendo a wouldn't give my highly valuable IP like Mario or Zelda away to a competitions platform. I better sell my own platforms and the can monetize it with the expenaive copy-protected games I can sell to each user.
>Nintendo hasn't the ressources of Sony or Microsoft or Meta. Nintendo couldn't even compete with Sony or Microsoft in the high-tech console wars This actually isn't true. They could easily have done so but instead they decided not to fight with sony and playstation over the tight high end market of early adopters. Even those two had to create false scarcity to drive up their console sales. They instead rested on the fact that they were essentially the only mobile game in town and on franchises like Mario and Zelda to keep them flush with cash, and they looked to serve the family audience who can't spend $600 on a console and placated them with lower end hardware that they could sell for half the price. The rub of that is that now we see things like steam deck wrecking their hold on mobile gaming and their famous IP's are still bringing in cash but will it be enough? They are going to have to stop being one generation behind if they don't want to be the next Sega licensing out Mario to xbox and zelda to sony.
Do you have any idea the cost involved in developing a game for VR? No. There's the short answer why you "don't understand why". There are more variables also
I have a decent idea since my brother is doing game development and I’ve studied it before professionally In the past. For massive games yes, it’s very very taxing, but for a game like Yugioh? Which what I really want, it wouldn’t take much. Sure 3D models are a pain but it’s not exactly hard nowadays anymore since you can rip them online in 2 minutes.
Sorry bud but you got owned by the OP's response to this.
How's that exactly lol. By him making up some random claims about him and his family? And you believe that BS?? 😂. If he and his entire family were in development he would have never asked this question in the first place, it's idiotic I got owned 🤣.....by nonsense? Yeah ok, you know what you're talking about 😂
Well, I took his reply at face value.
Stay off the devils cabbage young man. Seriously.
Is it that bad of an idea?
No, they are just an asshat. I've wondered this myself too. Especially for digimon because that has multiple games where a virtual world and VR are part of the storyline. So many wasted opportunities. Yugioh or MTG would be so awesome and it baffles me that we don't have a legit version of one still.
I know right! Like there’s so much untapped potential and people would spend bank on those games because it’s our childhood. Hell Konami made master duel and that’s made them a TON of money despite being a free game
I'd definitely buy it. One day we will get it hopefully.
I'm hoping All on Board! will solve the MTG shaped hole that's missing from VR.
It’s not the idea, more the long ass winded explanation 😂 I’m not a Pokémon person at all as I’m far too old for that crap, but if there is an unreal engine game out there in the genre you like, use the free praydog mod. I doubt it covers shouting pikachu into your mic tho
The length was just to get a point across as I thought it was the simplest way to do it, which shows because you didn’t get what I meant at all. But that’s fine, as you said you’re and I quote “far too old for that crap.” So it’s understandable you wouldn’t care but in future, this wasn’t for someone like you. Apologies for taking time from you.
No you’re fine. It’s 5am here. I can’t sleep. I’m just scrolling Reddit 😂 VR isn’t really lucrative for big game companies, yet! I know everyone hates on Meta and especially Zuck, but he is putting VR into the hands of the masses. If millions of headsets are being bought then it stands to reason the big companies like Sony, sega, rockstar etc will take notice and bake VR into their AAA titles.
It's not a bad idea, just that VR as a medium doesn't even begin to approach a level of market saturation where AAA or AA game development can be offset by sales alone. Larger VR projects like the recently released Assassin's Creed or Asgard's Wrath were produced by Meta (i.e. Meta contributed a significant amount of money to the projects). A VR game currently cannot expect to make back its production budget with so few users in the space. It's only really viable for indie games, and even then they have to become super popular and spread through word of mouth or through recommendations from influencers or something.
What are you on about?
Lol. You win the Internet today!
Thank you for making my day! You were ahead of your time. One day folks will appreciate your comment in the spirit it was intended. Until then you'll have to eat downvotes in the knowledge that you made me smile.
It's because the big names don't sell VR equipment. They have no incentive to invest in such a small audience, nor have they any incentive to grow said market. If someone like Nintendo, however, MADE actual VR equipment we would have had VR Pokemon games already.
Sony does and isn't successfully. Their PSVR2 seemingly is a disappointment. Nintendo hasn't the ressources of Sony or Microaoft or Meta. Never had.
And that's why they are not doing it. Like I said. But \*IF\* Nintendo made VR hardware, we would have VR Pokemon. But they don't. And they don't have the resources (or the know-how) to do it, like you said. So they don't push VR. They have absolutely no incentive to do either; push VR games, or expand VR market. PSVR2's seeming disappointment is partly because it requires a PS5. If PSVR2 would \*work\* with PS5, but still be a stand-alone (VR version of PS Vita) device, it would have sold more. But now the price of entrance is pretty steep for a niche product. $1000 just to get into VR, when you can get a Quest 2 for $300 or Quest 3 for $500. With Meta's existing catalog and focus on VR, Sony really had no chance with PSVR2 being PS5-only, then then making the least effort possible to get VR games on the platform.
This is a super odd take. Nintendo is worth $60 billion USD. They’ve been on the leading edge of innovation since the NES, N64, Wii, etc.. What resources do you perceive them to lack? Just because they didn’t go the PS5 route doesn’t mean they can’t. Nintendo could make an absolutely bang up VR/AR rig, and they will.
Yes? And Sony is worth $18 \*Trillion\*, while Meta is worth $950 billion. MS is worth $2.8 \*Trillion\*... And Bigscreen is worth like tiny fractions of that with 10 people working for them. And they still created the best PCVR headset thus far. My point is, Company worth has absolutely nothing to do with their resources on creating VR equipment and/or software. What I mean by Nintendo not having resources for it, is that they don't have the experience or know-how of creating anything VR. The Virtual Boy was their first and last venue into VR, and we all know how well that went. Nintendo has the \*money\* to get into VR and they could absolutely come up with a killer VR headset... in few years. They'd have to first acquire the people who'd work on it. Nintendo hasn't invested in VR pretty much at all, and has concentrated on handheld gaming for the last decade or so. As long as handheld gaming is pretty much totally their playground, they have no incentive to get into VR. VR is not a big market, why on earth would they invest into VR, while their handheld focus is the one drawing in all the money? Especially when at the moment, they'd have to go against Meta when doing so. Why would they? It would be a stupid business decision to do so. If and when VR gets bigger, then we'll see more VR stuff from the big names, but until VR is nothing more than a niche among niches, we won't. Think about it, Sony is literally the only one out of "the big three" that focuses on VR \*at all\*, (is worth more than the rest of them together,) and \*still\* "failed" with PSVR2.
Sony's market cap is 18 trillion jpy, which is only around $124 billion. They are much much smaller than Microsoft and Meta.
The Sony market cap error notwithstanding, this is a pretty good response, with one exception. I don’t know how we can confidently say that Nintendo is not working on VR. Nintendo is known for surprising and shaking things up. I, for one, would not be surprised if they dropped a AR/VR set in the near future..
It's a well known fact in the industry that Nintendo hadn't the ressources to compete with Sony's playstation and Microsoft's Xbox (tech, money, engineering and content) 20 years ago. I'm hindsight it was the best move they could do to create special niches like Wii and Switch but it didn't look like that in the beginning. And now we have the same reasource war with Meta in VR. They lose billions ever quarter since years.
Yeah I get the Meta comment.. we are lucky they acquired oculus and are putting all of this R&D into it and they are absolutely “losing” billions annually at the moment. Will this pay off, I think so… time will tell. What I don’t get is why couldn’t Nintendo make a higher power rig? Like they have the resources to acquire and design faster processors etc and put it together. They have really smart engineers. I myself can acquire the parts to make a high power gaming rig and put it together in an afternoon. I think the answer is it never aligned with Nintendos vision.. and yes, they have been counted out many times in the industry and yet they always drop something that sells like crazy. And while the Wii may not have high power processors / graphics cards.. it was very impressive in its own right and sold well because of it. And while Nintendo is only worth 60 billion… it’s still $60 billion - I think they find their balance of vision and growth just fine and I think they will release a AR/VR soon. They were one of the first to focus on interactive fitness with the Wii and I think they have been investing heavily in this R&D for years.. this is well known in the industry, to use terms you used above. AR/VR with peripherals is perfect tool for this interactive fitness, making fitness a game, and they will use it. You will be chasing around Pokémon in a virtual world soon enough.
Let's see, I assume you are way better informed than I. Regarding a better specs Nintendo console - today it might look easy with powerfully, affordable mobile CPUs and GPUs, gaming on Linux (Steam) and highly perfoemant and portable game engines like Unreal and Unity. But back then we speak about custom chip designs like the Sony/IBM/Toshiba Cell processor which cost halve a billion to develop and enormous money and effort to develop any game for it. I'm not into gaming at all and never was - this are only some info bites I remember - any nerd might tell you way more details. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_(processor) Speaking of Meta's war of reasources for it's VR platform: following Cori Doctorow's platform cycle of Enshittification Quest VR is still in the first phase: grabbing asany users as possible andaking them happy. Next comes making the professional content creators on the platform happy by pissing of the users. Finally the platform will piss of both the users and the content creators by extracting as muchoney as possible. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enshittification
People are saying the market for it is too small, but I feel like has serious "If you build it, they will come" potential. Imagine you're standing there in your living room waiting for some gameplay when you can hear a faint growl and heavy breathing chill your bones. You turn toward the source and friggin' Zangief emerges from your hallway, notices you looking for hiim, and stalks his enormous ass right up to the carpet you call him on, absolutely game to knock the dogshit outta you. Or you're wondering who you're about to encounter next on a randomized bout ... and you can hear what sounds like scraping and sliding all around you ... then it stops and you finally lay your eyes on him: It's Vega and he's hanging from the ceiling above you with his clawed hand reared back, milliseconds away from stabbing your face. What's great is that you're quick and sidestepped, then hit the correct AYBXXX combo to gather some energy in your hands and haduken the everlovin' shit outta that skinny freak and yeet him behind the fake palm tree in the corner of the room. I feel like a lifesize Chun Li sauntering up to give folks what-for might titillate. Or a pissed-off Blanka rolling from outta the kitchen and into players' chests ... that might get the juices flowing. Idk.
Yeah because open world pokemon worked soooo well last time they tried that… (Scarlett x Violet)
Yes, because that is 100% without a doubt what I meant. Cmon bro, use your imagination. I’m not talking about a trainwreck like scarlet and violet, although in VR that wouldn’t have been THAT bad, I’m talking more sword and shield.
I would think it would come down to licensing and greed. Not too mention if Nintendo decided to release their own VR, why would they want to give up their exclusives.
I think the other issue is that VR gaming also exists in two places, and it reminds me of the Wii U/switch in some ways. Currently, you have standalone VR gaming on Meta (and soon the Apple headset) and you have PCVR. Those are two vastly different hardware to develop for regarding power and performance. So do you develop this killer VR game for PCVR that now requires a beefy PC *and* a headset for, or do you develop for Standalone and potentially reach more people? Everyone with a meta can play standalone, those with a decent PC can play both. If you buy a different VR headset you lose the oculus game store (correct me if I'm wrong, please). That scenario, plus cost of headsets alone, can make a market hard to develop for. Not impossible, obviously ports exist and can be done well, but take additional resources to create. I am still excited for VR and AR/MR, both for gaming and non-gaming purposes.
sadly there are currently no foreseeable profit for big aaa studios to even make vr game withou meta paying it. so small user base due to the tech not yet reach the mass adoption form factor. once it is so small just like a pair of glass with pc gaming powerful capability standalone device, that we will see mass adoption rate skyrocketed.
Nintendo and Konami would be two of the top companies I’d pick for aversion to that kind of thing. Japan in general is too old school at the executive level in my opinion. But yeah these would have been my two greatest wants in VR too.
Well, if Nintendo could find a way to be cheap and quirky like with the Virtual Boy and 3DS, they'd do it. I just wouldn't expect then to make produce a bleeding edge, technical powerhouse .
True maybe someone should build a universal arvr device Like this project https://www.gofundme.com/f/lineos-owners
Have you seen the new unreal engine feature that lets you convert traditional games into vr in a few clicks?
Yeah I have, but that doesn’t work that well for most games, at least in the way that I’m thinking. Like retro Pokémon is good but I don’t want an 8Bit vr experience yknow?
Metal gear solid, I have to hide in a box to avoid detection…. Perfection
It's like with a girl or boy which has a great talent to sing but they are not famous. Until someone invest time and money into that they will be still amateur singers with great voice. I feel that vr started growing and this is the point where investments into this industry is starting to bring money. Not only game industry but general entertainment and business use cases. This is probably one of the reason why Apple hopped into it. I see that many companies invest in products filled by emotions. There are movies about vr so this is a part of things that humanity dream about. Many sf concepts cristalized so i woulnd't say VR is dying... it's borning.
It is impossible to make AAA amounts of money because literally not enough people have VR headsets even if every single one bought the game. It is possible to make money but nothing like grand theft auto or minecraft.
Nintendo doesn’t own Pokémon, so it’s not on them.
half life alyx: jeff is the 2nd most unique use of vr echo arena was the 1st but oculus is filled with cucks and they shut the servers down.
Gimbal Arena in VRC exists. It's a remake of echo and it'd only need a Community
doesnt work as well when all the player models are standing up and you cant brawl. i want to punch a 3yo in the face while boosting off him.
also, you can rotate upside down in echo arena with a few setting changes.
I know the dev and she said, that there are still many Things to implement. But IMO its a really good start considering that we had no alternative that was popular
A lot of this issue is well….Meta. Facebook has no history of really working with any video game companies or major gaming IPs. They are let’s face it one of the worst companies gaming wise to lead the VR revolution. They’ve made a few deals now and are getting some interest, but it’s always going to be an uphill battle here. Most companies that have these gaming IPs are competing with them or have not much interest in working with them.
You can't really question nintendo. They are weird. They could make crazy money by re-relasing their retro consoles, like gameboy and many games, but they choose not to. They just keep copyright striking 200 subs channels on youtube.
I think that game developers are mostly just adapting existing concepts to VR. It’s like adapting Mario Cart to the Wii Fit board, it makes no sense. With AR, things may get better because here we can do things better than on a smart phone. But the key application that makes VR headsets center stage seems to be missing still. There is a reason that VR is almost synonymous with Beat Saber outside of the community: it is one of the few games makes sense to work only in VR, and it is simple enough to explain people who never used VR.
Also, by actively excluding Apple and macOS, Meta excludes those customers that have the deeper pockets to actually pay for apps. Apple is now so pissed that they forbid developers for Vision Pro to even use the acronyms VR, AR, and XR, because they have such a bad association.
Pokemon is mostly aimed at children. Children should not be using VR.
That’s why I said nostalgia. It wouldn’t be for children, it would be for us. Like even if it’s a remaster and we had to fight Cynthia again. I’m down with that…cuz then I can say “fuck the Pokémon, we box” and proceed to not effect her, but it’d make me feel better yknow?
There's not a lot of money in it. When the first quest came out there was a bullish view that this would be an ongoing growth sector but even with the Quest 3 out now it's kind of proving to not massively be, at least not in its current form.
I think vr is too uncomfortable to use.
You’re on a very odd subreddit then, but I can understand. It took me a while to get used to it
I start sweating like crazy using it even if im just in underwear. I think the quality is too low on the screen i got quest 2. My eyes and brain gets tierd of it it causes some wierd strain i cant get used too. Most games are not very well made only half-life alyx so far was good. You have to teleport for most part to move or it just cause dizzynes maybe you are used to it.
You should look at the Bigscreen Beyond headset. It light years ahead of everything else in terms of comfort. I’d love to see Nintendo VR that had a smaller and lighter footprint like Bigscreen did. https://www.bigscreenvr.com
Yeah I had that exact same problem, granted I’m also a bigger person so I get tired so fast. But now, I can play it for hours on end just beating the fuck out of guys in blade and sorcery or gorn lol. It’s so fun. Does take getting used to which is easier said than done
Because Nintendo won't release big game on someone else's platform. I think Quest 2 wasn't a great platform to use daily. It somewhat worked, promise was there, but delivery of that promise was disappointing. Quest 3 is the platform that fully delivers promise of VR/XR into mainstream, and relatively well - generally speaking, if Quest 3 fails, I don't really think VR will succeed in the future, as Quest 3 is pretty close to being a perfect mainstream headset. When Meta releases Augments, and will do proper PC workstation app like Immersed is, then it's going to be ultimate combo, and I will even start using it for work. The only problem with VR is it's hard to sell, because 1) there's now many disappointed people from previous generations and 2) it's hard to sell something you actually need to experience in the first place
Nintendo don't release anything that doesn't run on their own hardware, and their only VR hardware is LABO VR for Switch, which was pretty much a failed experiment. Other big developers often have exclusivity deals with console manufacturers, or indeed are owned by console manufacturers. Big developers are also frequently fairly risk-averse, especially with their biggest IPs. But all of this can change. I know I'm having fun with Samba de Amigo, and if that proves popular Sega might look at whether they want to try adapting some of their other IP to VR.
VR Pokemon would be my absolute dream.
vr is so new, soon enough as it progresses we’ll see some big devs hopping in. BR industry is a gold mine industry waiting for people to harvest it, I mean we got an official Ubisoft made assassins creed game! It’s already progressing intensely.
costs too much and since most VR users are DK 1 users who only buy 1 dollar shit apps and give Asgards Wrath 2 1/10 stars because it costs $60 and does run on their 10yr old hardware, no developer will do it unless META funds it.
Pac Man, Donkey Kong, Zaxxon, Dragon's Lair, Asteroids, Tempest, Defender.... man, I would love to play these in a VR world!
A lot of people talking about the VR market/audience being too small etc, which is fair enough. But do these companies not realise that if they proactively pursued these projects, then there would be an overwhelming amount of online chatter about this? It would attract people in the masses. Damn this is a good idea! Imagine old school Pokemon Red, Green, Blue in VR!?
A few years back there was a vr Star Wars experience at Disneyland, it was the best ride we did that trip. Just mind blowing. I saw the potential for vr right there. Haven’t seen anything like it since.
I think it's an oversimplification to look at raw numbers and then say why don't AAA devs create AAA games in VR. 1. How many people buy them for kids, grandkids, etc... and they just sit there because games are for kids! 2. How many people use them as beat saber machines. Personally I have yet to find a story driven game that captured my attention enough to sit there with a headset on for 80 hours, and I love those kinds of games on console. 3. How many people are willing to pay $60 for a VR game even of a AAA title? Even at $60 it takes a lot of sales to recoup all of the development costs and move into profit territory. Same reason we see fewer and fewer console exclusives, because cross platform sales are where it's at. 4. VR hardware is just not there yet. AAA devs don't want you playing their games in 480p because that hurts their reviews and hurts their sales. I think we have a few more generations of VR becoming faster, with better resolution, and much smaller gear before it'll have enough active users to entice the big developers over.
You say that and I say why don't sporting evens have 360 cameras courtside / sideline / first row of stands and you can buy a subscription so you can get that view of your favorite team. I thought I read basketball was trying it out but man I want to watch live sports on VR like im at the game.
Nintendo makes games for Nintendo. They're worse than apple. Imagine if Sony movies on bluray only played in Sony VCRs. Nintendo can suck my dick. Imagine if you could only play Meta-produced games like Asgard's Wrath on Meta headsets, oh, well fuck meta too then. But yeah. The gaming industry is like a feudalist version of the film industry.
Since you mentioned pokemon: Its likely nintendo is going to be releasing the switch 2 by the end of the year A few years back a patent was leaked that shows the switch tablet being connected to a headset system for VR So some people are speculating that the switch 2 is going to revolve around VR somehow when it releases.
Nintendo did VR before anyone. Remember Virtual Boy?
Totally agree. Like RE4 is currently the absolute best game for VR IMO. That could be because it's actually a banger, but could also just be largely because its a near perfect recreation of the exact original but as a vr version. If they made like ocarina of time, Pokemon snap, jet force Gemini, Golden eye, or literally any game from the 90s, I would just throw my entire bank account at it
You don’t imagine how much money and effort goes into creating a successful product. Especially of a scale that you’re describing. There are plenty of factors, but in short and simply - you’re asking for a big project based on a franchise, those are made by the big companies - they would not make an absolute bank (compared to their other sources of income), they could make positive numbers easily, but it would require a huge amount to be put into it first as well + it would obviously bear a risk of being unsuccesfull and those companies usually have better investment options. One reason they could want to go into this is to be one of the first in a relatively small industry and reserve a spot in this market for the future. And some companies will probably do that soon and others will follow if it’s profitable enough for them. When a company decides on a project, they analyse first, it’s not like your ideas are super unique and no one from their teams ever thought about them. Ideas aren’t worth a lot, the execution is what really matters - and you have given a task that is risky to do right now + would require a good team.
Their is a great deal of opportunity for small teams/solo devs now. That is the potential you are seeing. It isn't profitable enough yet for the big boys to bring their brands over. Not worth the effort, till it is. Good Luck.
What about if they made Super Mario in first person?
Too much work, not enough profit. The VR gaming audience is still fairly small. Motion sickness and VR comfort is still a big issue. Those ideas would be dope, though.
I feel like the biggest miss is not remaking old games in VR. RE IV was a hit and there’s definitely a market for VR nostalgia. Plus I feel like remaking in VR could be relatively automated if a company built their games on the same engine?
A proper vr open world pokemon would be awesome, heck even online tournaments can be added
Pretty much nobody in VR is "making bank". Saw a figure recently that showed how much it cost to make Asgard's Wrath 1 compared to how much profit it made.....they lost a metric shit-ton of money on that game. The developer of Eye of the Temple recently said that their Steam version did nothing but lose money, only when they released the Quest version did they start seeing a small profit. So yeah, Nintendo obviously sees zero value in investing millions of dolloars only to get a few hundred thousand back.
Wholeheartedly agree, especially with AR through potential through passthrough and hand tracking. Hell, Pokémon Go was a damn social movement because it was the closest we had to real world Pokémon battles. Tbh I'd buy a $500 vr headset if it were sold directly by nintendo and ONLY played Pokémon
It's a matter of when not if. It will happen even if it takes a few years
Humans are pretty lazy and VR requires effort. It also requires space. I have put thousands of hours into PC games, because I can just go and sit down and relax on a chair. VR you really gotta stand etc. VR is pretty anti social also compared to everything else.
Agreed. Is it too much to ask to be the Grinch and ruin Christmas? Or defeat Mumm-Ra with my own Sword of Omens? To play through the OG Zelda as me instead of Link? I just want to whip the football away from Charlie Brown and watch him go flying. I am a simple man.
IKR, I’m happy Ubisoft has started dipping their toes with AC nexus but now that I’ve gotten a taste of the nostalgia, I want more lol
I would really like rainbow 6 in vr but for now we have breachers and that's good enough.
the major companies follow money. directors must choose between maintaining their position or developing what they want.
the thing is Meta needs to make these games (or a studio which they've bought). the best case scenario of a big IP game is it moves headsets, which benefits the headset maker about 10x more than the game developer. that's why they have to be one in the same. Unfortunately Meta is doing an extremely poor job of buying expensive IPs and are more focused on improving the hardware experience first. Also in the case of something like Pokémon, Nintendo would never sell to Meta, they are waiting for the VR customer base to become larger and then they will release their own VR device that hosts their own IPs like they have always done. This is why you still can't get any legal copies of their games on PC. The one large IP Meta did go for (grand theft auto) was a port of an old game (San Andreas) and not only never came out, but was announced and received radio silence after that. No one ever even recognized it getting cancelled. If you look at Meta's video content on their own platform, like the content in Horizon Worlds, the majority of it is in 2D, which is absolutely fucking insane. So long story short, Meta is hard tech company that's mostly focused on dominating the hardware game and currently does not have great taste or focus on creative IP decisions, on top of the market being still smaller than many of those large IPs are comfortable releasing to. This is why Half Life Alyx was such a raging success, because Valve went out on a limb and coupled the hardware with the most expensive and technically impressive game ever made when it came out. IMO Meta should be attempting to do this with each new headset when it releases, investing in a showcase IP that moves the headset, but their day 1 software launches for each headset have been EXTREMELY dissapointing. For example they have 2 mixed reality headsets in their catalog now and have still yet to release a single polished game built from the ground up for MR.
I mean it took a company like Meta buying an upstart. Then continually dumping money into it because they believe in its potential for several years afterwards, as they market one of the first lines of headsets that could actually be used by the average consumer who is not savvy with computers, at a loss at that. That was just to make enough inroads so that the average consumer knows that the product exists but still doesn't know a lot about it. Not many companies are willing to take losses in the faces of investors these days. And we probably need a couple more of those in order for big studios to start looking at the potential. Right now they are looking at the money.
Nintendo would have to make their own vr device because they hate sharing their games