Reports: Valve making their own VR HMD and apparently a new VR Half-Life

No, exactly not. You deny to understand what I actually wrote about gaming, software, hardware, the industrie working mechanism. And that I see also, by you not getting the meaningless of being a HL3 or a Pre-HL2 VR or both or whatever. So please stop trolling now, I made the points very clear. My sparetime is too expensive to me for talking in circles about things everyone should get by their own.

In the end, believe that you want. I explained the whole thing more than once. Get it or not. Troll or not. Do a bit sports outdoors for fresh air.
I accept your appologies in 3 years, after you saw what valve will be really doing in the end.

h.a.n.d.

I'm not trolling. It's not meaningless. It's important.

Take Star Wars. Everybody gets to watch Episode 9 next year. Nobody gets excluded, because everybody just has to watch the movie. People just want to see how the story goes on. (Star Wars haters not included).

But there are exclusive canon Star Wars experiences in other formats. Some are VR only. That's fine. They expand the universe and it's not required to understand the main storyline.

Releasing HL3 only in VR would be the same as releasing Star Wars episode 9 not in cinemas, but only as a VR experience. That would be a huge "fuck you" to the audience.

You're derailing my argument, because you speak so much about the hardware. I'm speaking about HL3. That was the only thing I brought up.

If you want to look at the software independent of the hardware, all half-life titles would have to run on 1998 hardware.

Or as an analogy: you liked the Legend of Zelda game? Well, then you have to adopt new base hardware for every other title. If you owned a NES, there are only two titles the box is able to run. Want to play A Link to the Past or Link's Awakening? Either buy the newer consoles or miss out.

You're derailing my argument, because you speak so much about the hardware. I'm speaking about HL3. That was the only thing I brought up.

If you want to look at the software independent of the hardware, all half-life titles would have to run on 1998 hardware.

Or as an analogy: you liked the Legend of Zelda game? Well, then you have to adopt new base hardware for every other title. If you owned a NES, there are only two titles the box is able to run. Want to play A Link to the Past or Link's Awakening? Either buy the newer consoles or miss out.

A VR headset is not a new console. A new console is the natural evolution.

Your analogy doesn't fit.

It would be like... you liked Uncharted 1-3 on the PS3? Great. Now we have the PS4 and Uncharted 4 will be on that, because the PS3 is too old. Natural evolution of hardware. Oh, you want to play Uncharted 5? Sorry, that's only on PSVR. Spend another couple of hundred bucks, so you will see where the story goes.

You are derailing the whole discussion, the article clearly states that this is not about HL3.

And even your newest "argument" is pointless. HL2 dates back more than a decade, of course players are expected to bring new hardware to run a new title in the series. You are contradicting yourself.

You are derailing the whole discussion, the article clearly states that this is not about HL3.

I never said it's about HL3. I literally said I'm baffled by people who think that HL3 will be a VR title. That's what people (like you) argued against.

And even your newest "argument" is pointless. HL2 dates back more than a decade, of course players are expected to bring new hardware to run a new title in the series. You are contradicting yourself.

You can't compare an accessoire to a new basis. Sony didn't release God of War 3 exclusively for the Playstation Move controller.

Even aside from the cost, it's a simple fact that a lot of people physically can't use VR headsets even if they can afford the hardware and a current enough machine to use it with. There's the motion sickness thing of course, and the space issue already mentioned. Plus a hell of a lot of people wear glasses and from what I've been told from numerous sources they still don't have a good answer to that with current headsets.

I can't see any way VR won't always be a niche gadget.

I'm still baffled how many people think that HL3 would be a VR game. That makes no sense and would be a very very dumb idea.

No, it wouldn't. Obviously Valve is waiting for the right time - VR is affordable for everyone in the future like it was for smartphones (2007) at some point, and the internet and computers in the past and so on ....

So? That's still dumb. That's like making 2 movies and then releasing the third part of the story as a card game.

No, it's like releasing the third part for IMAX-theatres, but not for normal ones.

Every first-person perspective game would be basically better with VR, unless it needs a lot of GUI. The Problem is that some people don't realize that most games want to be played from the couch, and not while standing up and walking around the room.

Why the heck print the Logo on the PCB of a pre-series device? To me that seems to be quite negligent. The project code name and the hw revision should be well enough as only the project team and suppliers need to know.

Fair point, although that's probably better for copyright protection. I know I always write it, or the name of the company. Plys, who knows? That could be a near-final run?

I'm thrilled about this. I've been waiting for the next generation of VR experience to jump in, that sounds more like it. And I always thought a game set in the seven hours war (other wiki of the Half-Life universe would be extremely interesting. I'd like to see Dr. Breen as the good guy, also, somehow.

Edit: about glasses, I am pretty sure most vision defects could be accounted for by the headset itself, by adjusting the focal point of the lenses, and the transform algorithm.


Last edited by MayeulC on 11 Nov 2018 at 4:50 pm UTC

No, it's like releasing the third part for IMAX-theatres, but not for normal ones.

The only problem is that IMAX theatres are kinda rare, but the experience is still pretty much the same. Otherwise there are no other hurdles. You don't need to buy a 500$ accessoire to enter an IMAX theatre.

Every first-person perspective game would be basically better with VR, unless it needs a lot of GUI.

That is far from the truth. Imagine Quake 3 in VR. How are you supposed to move? That just doesn't work. VR is its own thing.

On a more positive note, in the niche market of flight simulators, i have seen people excited by VR.

That's the one area where VR has a chance to shine. Otherwise, they have no mass market appeal. I anticipate that VR will always be a high-dollar niche product for the "hardcore" crowd.

Why the heck print the Logo on the PCB of a pre-series device? To me that seems to be quite negligent. The project code name and the hw revision should be well enough as only the project team and suppliers need to know.

Fair point, although that's probably better for copyright protection. I know I always write it, or the name of the company. Plys, who knows? That could be a near-final run?

There are videos about the automated assembly line Valve put together to fabricate the Steam Controller, so I guess they will be able to produce some PCBs in-house. Plus there are NDAs to help with leaks. Help with, not prevent all possible leaks.

Edit: about glasses, I am pretty sure most vision defects could be accounted for by the headset itself, by adjusting the focal point of the lenses, and the transform algorithm.

Current HMDs are OK to use with glasses. If your specs are to huge to fit the visor, most folks will be able to use contacts instead.

On the other hand, there are vision defects like Amblyopia (lazy eye), where your eyeballs are not aligned within certain limits, so your brain is unable to compute both 2D inputs to 3D vision. People with Ambliopia will therefore be able to see images displayed on the screens, but lack the 3D sensation.

So yes, there are biological barriers of entry to this tech.


Last edited by Gobo on 11 Nov 2018 at 7:50 pm UTC

VR was basically DOA, and until we get proper peripherals for it instead of roomscale and motion controller trash, it will remain DOA.

Absolutely.
A tech gadget for those with enough money. And space, maybe space is even more important for those games with actual motion controls.
Every time a new VR gadget comes out, the "big future" of VR is announced, and yet, it just doesn't spread. I don't know how many more attempts it will take until even the most diehard fans realize VR is not "the future".
There are just too many games that would never work with VR (or gain absolutely no benefit from it), so that there's just no good reason to reach that deep into one's pockets. Not even beginning to talk about all the other downsides (discomfort, clunkiness, etc.).
It will have its niche, and that niche might even grow a bit (certainly enough to house a few VR-exclusive devs), but that's about it.

Personally I think VR can work out, for most games even, we need a middle step, where both keyboard and mouse are fully replaced by some superior peripheral (maybe something like EEG+speech recognition) and then that needs to be further improved to also be the replacement and successor of the (currently shoddy) motion control gimmick.

Yeah, maybe, some day, but I honestly doubt it will happen within the foreseeable future.

Even eye tracking doesn't really do it, because with kb&m I can do multiple things quickly without even looking.
Speech wouldn't help, either, as speaking a command would take longer than doing a few clicks.

I really couldn't think of anything that would be able to reach or improve on the precision offered by mouse & keyboard - short of "reading" one's mind and translating that into input commands.
And that just sounds like extreme scifi to me. Though if that ever happens, count me in ;)


Last edited by TheSHEEEP on 11 Nov 2018 at 8:24 pm UTC

Even aside from the cost, it's a simple fact that a lot of people physically can't use VR headsets even if they can afford the hardware and a current enough machine to use it with. There's the motion sickness thing of course, and the space issue already mentioned. Plus a hell of a lot of people wear glasses and from what I've been told from numerous sources they still don't have a good answer to that with current headsets.

I can't see any way VR won't always be a niche gadget.

Space isn't an issue. It never has been and never will be since you can always use VR seated. Motion sickness isn't as relevant as you think as it only affects certain design philosophies set by developers and many people are able to overcome issues if they do get them. It's not the perfect ideal solution, but it's still not going to affect long lasting success.

Several headsets have managed to solve vergence accommodation which means glasses are no longer needed. These aren't available for consumers yet but will be in a few years.

People expecting VR to always be a niche are in for a rude awakening. It's a surefire guarantee to be ubiquitous in our civilization let alone just for gaming.

Space isn't an issue. It never has been and never will be since you can always use VR seated.

Games like Unseen Diplomacy or Budget Cuts need some space. You can't play those seated.

Space isn't an issue. It never has been and never will be since you can always use VR seated.

Games like Unseen Diplomacy or Budget Cuts need some space. You can't play those seated.

Space isn't an issue. It never has been and never will be since you can always use VR seated.

Games like Unseen Diplomacy or Budget Cuts need some space. You can't play those seated.

Games like Unseen Diplomacy are extremely rare. Budget Cuts is still playable in a space no bigger than 4x4 feet which a lot of people will have room for. Maybe they might not have that room where their PC is but once standalones start to really get going, you'll just find the most convenient spot in your house.

But even if you aren't able to play some of these games, you can still experience plenty of what VR has to offer.

Every first-person perspective game would be basically better with VR, unless it needs a lot of GUI.

That is far from the truth. Imagine Quake 3 in VR. How are you supposed to move? That just doesn't work. VR is its own thing.

How am I moving when using a normal screen? Exactly.

Yes, there's a problem because you don't know where your fingers on the keyboard are, thus some kind of controller would help; but otherwise this works as expected.

If their going to continue down this VR path I hope they at least have the commonsense to go large FOV like 150 or more.

VR is still pretty expensive, people must first afford the PC capable of doing VR at decent framerates, most VR enthusiasts consider the 1080ti as a base minimal.. so it could be a very long time before VR picks up.

If PC hardware and LCD tech didn't jump in price over the past couple years then things would be smooth sailing. It's ironic now that CONSOLES are the savior of VR moving forward with PS5, I don't think MS want VR.

If their going to continue down this VR path I hope they at least have the commonsense to go large FOV like 150 or more.

VR is still pretty expensive, people must first afford the PC capable of doing VR at decent framerates, most VR enthusiasts consider the 1080ti as a base minimal.. so it could be a very long time before VR picks up.

If PC hardware and LCD tech didn't jump in price over the past couple years then things would be smooth sailing. It's ironic now that CONSOLES are the savior of VR moving forward with PS5, I don't think MS want VR.

Check for Microsoft Mixed Reality.

VR and AR is the future of gaming. I remember when appeared the flat monitors that people was saying that never was going to work for gaming... there is no one with CRT monitors nowdays. Technology evolve and solve the problems, those high prices, resolution, weight, etc... will be solve with next years as in other kind of technology. About motion sickness, seems no one remember the first FPS games that was making motion sickness like doom , etc... But nowdays nobody get motion sickness because your brain is used to it. If you play some days in a row with VR you wont get motion sickness anymore. I understand those people that can not afford that technology and they want autoconvince that it wont be the future. But the reality is that in 10 years all of you will be talking about with hmd you bought like now you do about wich video card you or monitor you get.

Every first-person perspective game would be basically better with VR, unless it needs a lot of GUI.

That is far from the truth. Imagine Quake 3 in VR. How are you supposed to move? That just doesn't work. VR is its own thing.

How am I moving when using a normal screen? Exactly.

Yes, there's a problem because you don't know where your fingers on the keyboard are, thus some kind of controller would help; but otherwise this works as expected.

It seems like you've never experienced VR. Correct me if I'm wrong... but playing VR games with keyboard and mouse aren't really good. Just explain to me how you're supposed to aim, view and turn around with a VR headset and keyboard mouse.

It seems like you've never experienced VR. Correct me if I'm wrong... but playing VR games with keyboard and mouse aren't really good. Just explain to me how you're supposed to aim, view and turn around with a VR headset and keyboard mouse.

I guess you could turn around with your head (games needs to make sure enemies don't come from behind, or have some 180° turning key) and aim with the mouse. You're shown some crosshair. I'm not sure it would feel natural, though, having something in your hand that feels like (parts of) an actual gun would be better.