this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2023
210 points (97.7% liked)

Games

16723 readers
542 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] KoofNoof@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Apple will do the same I’m sure after they release their Vision Pro headset. People still aren’t totally sold on VR so there will need to be a race to the bottom before we can start climbing back up to high end headsets.

[–] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Apple's headset is a new thing, with a lot more features than VR. We'll have to give it time to really know if it will find a market.

VR's main issue is price I think, because most people don't want to spend a grand on a gaming peripheral system. So the VR market is a niche but seems to be going well from what I can see in the Steam store. I've been playing mostly VR games since I got an Index set, because it's a lot more interesting and fun overall than regular 2D games. The fighting games are good exercise too.

[–] substill@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

VR’s issue isn’t just price. It’s obtrusiveness. You can watch TV or play a game in a room with others and often with other things going on. With VR, you need more or less a total commitment to isolation. That inherently limits It to niche users.

My Quest has basically been picking up dust since the day I got it because my life isn’t conducive to shutting out the world.

[–] Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

One of the biggest issues I encountered with mine was simply needing space. Nobody wants to rearrange all the furniture in their living room every time they want to play a video game. It caters almost entirely to people with large houses or spare rooms, where they can dedicate an entire space to VR. Because if you need all the furniture up against the walls to play VR, that doesn’t necessarily work when you also want to use the space as a living room, office, or den. Because the alternative is constantly hitting walls, furniture, ceiling fans, etc…

And that’s a very tight demographic, because (on top of being very expensive) it automatically excludes pretty much anyone who lives in a city or small/mid-sized apartment/townhome.

[–] RaoulDook@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That sounds like a problem that you might have if you live in a war zone or something. But anyone else who has some downtime can easily jump into a VR game and have a blast.

I guess another situation that would make VR hard to use is if you have dozens of small creatures running around near your feet. If you're raising an army of cats or ferrets, something like that.

[–] substill@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My small kids almost qualify as an army of cats or ferrets, and they absolutely insist on being fed, watered, and interacted with.

[–] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Yep that's no problem to accomplish and still use VR if you wanted to. Nobody said you have to neglect your kids to use it, you just might have to wait until they're in bed or away.

[–] ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Regarding VR gaming:

I have a custom gaming rig and an index. I don’t play it. We used it a bit when we first got it. Then it got put away because it wasn’t being used much, and it’s not fun having sensors, a headset, wires, cord suspension rigging, gaming rig etc. strewn about a large spare room (which most people don’t have), and I don’t feel like getting it back out. It’s just a level of commitment that is too much for me to bother. I’m not suggesting I’m like other consumers, but I feel like people simply don’t care enough to deal with VR until it’s fully fleshed out, easy, wireless, lightweight, affordable with a plethora of games. Which might be quite a while from now.

[–] Cryst@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

You summed it up exactly. I had a vive and oculus. I barely used them. Only when people came over to try it. Eventually just sold them both as they were collecting dust.

[–] overzeetop@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Aside from the easy part, and a game selection that’s clearly less than pancake, wireless with the Q2 is cheap, wireless (even for PCVR), and stupid fun. Setup is still a bit onerous as nobody in the money chain has a reason to make it easy. OTOH, a $40 router, $10 for virtual desktop, and a balling game PC is all you really need.

I rarely have more than an hour or two for gaming at a times. So the weight of the headset and any battery life issues are moot.

[–] ApathyTree@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago

I picked up a used psvr pretty cheap as an intro to see if vr will hold my attention long-term before dropping a few grand on an index and pc to run it, only for the novelty to wear off the next year.. I wouldn’t be able to justify getting a nice setup without this intermediate step.

I know the psvr tracking is very imperfect, and the games are older/less refined, but I’m considering it an entry level model based on the price point ($120 for headset, controllers, camera, and cords/connectors, tho ofc that doesn’t include the console or games). For that, it’s pretty good.

[–] naeemthm@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Apple has infinite money to burn on failed projects. The Apple Watch sold very poorly the first few years it was out. Now they’re literally the most sold watch on the planet.

They called this headset “Pro” because they’re 100% going to release a cheaper model in two years and be like “We figured it out guys! Same shit, half the price!” And they’ll call it the Vision Plus or some bullshit.

[–] ndguardian@lemmy.studio 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] panachemidi@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Tagline: "Vision. Airy."

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Maybe, but sometimes Apple bucks trends. Apple fans are certainly happy to shell out for premium devices

[–] TenderfootGungi@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Apple is touting AR for its headset, but it drops into VR with the twist of a knob. It will never sell in volume at that price, but there are already people lining up to get one.

[–] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

I want it bad. It's not cheap and I absolutely respect the price tag, but there's a bunch of first/best in class features that change what it can do.

It's too big to just wear in your day to day, but the resolution and responsiveness in the passthrough combined with a very comfortably powered laptop chip allow for all kinds of cool stuff that you couldn't do on other headsets. Clearly seeing your environment while also being able to replace whatever and have sufficient resolution for at least intermediate sized clean text is a lot in that package.