Valve have three new VR games in development

Interesting choice of engines, well, Source 2 was a given, but Unity? Wonder why...

Unity? Most likely to show the capability of the engine to make other studios release VR games.


There's almost nothing related with gaming on Linux that I might be interested less then VR.

I'm still not sold on VR. Generally, it seems like it's interesting to people as a tech demo gimmick, but when it comes to actually playing a full length game, people would rather not use it. That's just going by the last twenty-five years or so. It's plausible that improving technology could change this, but I've learned not to be convinced by "the next big VR release" ahead of time. I have a wait and see attitude about VR at this point (especially since I'm not at all sure there are any cases in which I would prefer it over a normal PC gaming experience myself).

As far as Steam Machines go, it's possible that exclusive titles would boost sales and help make it more successful. That's the way it works in the console world, and Steam Machines are intended to be like consoles.

However, for Linux in general, exclusive titles don't really make any difference. In the computer world, the game market follows the general use market. If general use followed the game market, Amigas (or maybe Atari STs) would be on top right now instead of Windows based machines.

nvm.


Last edited by bubexel on 10 February 2017 at 2:31 pm UTC

Quoting: bubexelI don't see it as "gimmick", for me gimmick is like Wii from nintendo, that your movements do something in the game. In real virtualty are you in game, you have a gun in your hand, you touch the things. Is like say, football is gimmick, have no sense.

I get the impression you are not a native English speaker, so I can understand that you might not be clear on exactly what a gimmick is. Or perhaps there is some other reason you don't have the same idea of the word "gimmick" as I do. The first definition from Dictionary.com is, "an ingenious or novel device, scheme, or stratagem, especially one designed to attract attention or increase appeal." A gimmick is basically anything that catches people's attention based on novelty and/or "the cool factor." It doesn't matter whether it has legitimate benefits or not (that is, the benefits of something being legitimate don't make it not a gimmick).

Really, though, I don't see your point. Virtual reality being more like reality doesn't make it any less of a gimmick. If anything, it makes it more of a gimmick since it's not actual reality. Also, we are not nearly at the level of virtual reality that you imply in your comment. You can't actually touch things in VR. In many cases, you are expected to use a controller. The most convincing VR environments give you controls that offer only indirect interaction with the environment like shooting a gun from a stationary position or controlling a car or another vehicle with physical controls very similar to the controls presented in the game.

Regardless, my point was that if someone puts on a VR headset and watches an environmental demo that imitates an exciting experience*, it grabs their attention. That makes it one hundred percent a gimmick. However, in the past most people have found that a game environment is more comfortably enjoyed through a monitor than "immersed" in virtual reality.

(* It should be noted that this technique and some elements of virtual reality have been around since the invention of the original three camera movie making process called Cinerama, originally demonstrated to the public in 1952, which ended up being too cumbersome to really catch on, though some movies like How the West Was Won were originally shot with this technique and can still be viewed that way (along with some of the VR demo movies) in one of the few remaining Cinerama theaters.)

VR is definitely not a gimmick. There are some really compelling use cases beyond gaming, and a small handful of games that are just awesome.

Having said that we need 2nd gen hardware IMO. The resolution is just a little to low, if they can bump the resolution to eliminate the screen door effect VR will truly be awesome. I sold my Vive and will wait for the resolution bump before getting back into VR.

Quoting: CFWhitman

Quoting: bubexelI don't see it as "gimmick", for me gimmick is like Wii from nintendo, that your movements do something in the game. In real virtualty are you in game, you have a gun in your hand, you touch the things. Is like say, football is gimmick, have no sense.

I get the impression you are not a native English speaker, so I can understand that you might not be clear on exactly what a gimmick is. Or perhaps there is some other reason you don't have the same idea of the word "gimmick" as I do. The first definition from Dictionary.com is, "an ingenious or novel device, scheme, or stratagem, especially one designed to attract attention or increase appeal." A gimmick is basically anything that catches people's attention based on novelty and/or "the cool factor." It doesn't matter whether it has legitimate benefits or not (that is, the benefits of something being legitimate don't make it not a gimmick).

Really, though, I don't see your point. Virtual reality being more like reality doesn't make it any less of a gimmick. If anything, it makes it more of a gimmick since it's not actual reality. Also, we are not nearly at the level of virtual reality that you imply in your comment. You can't actually touch things in VR. In many cases, you are expected to use a controller. The most convincing VR environments give you controls that offer only indirect interaction with the environment like shooting a gun from a stationary position or controlling a car or another vehicle with physical controls very similar to the controls presented in the game.

Regardless, my point was that if someone puts on a VR headset and watches an environmental demo that imitates an exciting experience*, it grabs their attention. That makes it one hundred percent a gimmick. However, in the past most people have found that a game environment is more comfortably enjoyed through a monitor than "immersed" in virtual reality.

(* It should be noted that this technique and some elements of virtual reality have been around since the invention of the original three camera movie making process called Cinerama, originally demonstrated to the public in 1952, which ended up being too cumbersome to really catch on, though some movies like How the West Was Won were originally shot with this technique and can still be viewed that way (along with some of the VR demo movies) in one of the few remaining Cinerama theaters.)

For that reason i edited my comment, after check dictonary i found that i missunderstod the word gimmick. Btw, when you talk about past? you mean 90's VR? it's ridicolous compare it with 90's and more with 50's. I doubt they had any tracking or the led screens we have nowdays. It's just stupid. Btw, i have vive, and the time i play games i use to play on it. I almost not playing screen games anymore. I havent much time to play, that time i use to pay it on VR. Comparing those things from the "past" make me guess you didn't tested any of those modern VR head sets. (i'm not talking about mobile phone VR that is ridicolous).

Quoting: TeodosioNow if these games were SteamOS, GNU/Linux exclusives that would be good. Yes I know this comment is not politically correct but we need to start some serious pushing if we want to get somewhere.

I wonder how big is the intersection of Linux players and early VR adopters, and how much would each buyer need to pay to for the game to break even?

Quoting: bubexelFor that reason i edited my comment, after check dictonary i found that i missunderstod the word gimmick. Btw, when you talk about past? you mean 90's VR? it's ridicolous compare it with 90's and more with 50's. I doubt they had any tracking or the led screens we have nowdays. It's just stupid. Btw, i have vive, and the time i play games i use to play on it. I almost not playing screen games anymore. I havent much time to play, that time i use to pay it on VR. Comparing those things from the "past" make me guess you didn't tested any of those modern VR head sets. (i'm not talking about mobile phone VR that is ridicolous).

I had already written and posted the reply before I saw your comment was edited. I have no wish to offend.

You may notice that I said in my first post, "It's plausible that improving technology could change this." I didn't rule out that VR could still become wildly popular because of improvements in the technology. However, improvements in the technology don't guarantee that it will become popular. The most likely point for improvement to actually make a difference is when virtual reality actually looks and feels like reality, and I'm still not sure that would make it catch on.

My point was that VR has been impressive for a long time. Even the Cinerama first person perspective demo films from the fifties, which certainly have their flaws, are still impressive to experience in a Cinerama theater. Virtual reality being impressive doesn't mean that it will actually become popular. It's been around for a long time, and it's been applied to games for a significant amount of time. There hasn't been one particular breakthrough, but especially as applied to gaming it has been steadily improving for years. That hasn't made it popular yet. I'm not sure that it's something that will ever have more than a limited audience because I'm not sure it's something that most people really want, regardless of how well done it is.

Incidentally, tracking has been around in the headsets for a while. I'm not sure exactly how long, but it seems like they had it in the nineties. I'm sure it must be more accurate now than back then. I think the new screens help combat some of the issues like headaches and motion sickness better than the old display technologies. I think the graphics capabilities of newer GPUs are probably the most effective improvement for making the experience more enjoyable for games rather than just impressive tech demos.


Last edited by CFWhitman on 12 February 2017 at 8:04 am UTC

what if one of those games is an exciting continuation of the portal story, but 99% of the gamers cant play it since they does not own a VR device?