Did Valve drop the ball with VR?

[nova]

The playerbase of PCVR has dipped significantly and I think that Valve missed a lot of opportunities to keep people hyped and interested. Here's a few things that they could have done to avoid this scenario:

Half-Life Alyx hasn't had any expansion content or sequels and the game was released March 23, 2020. In 3 years they could have done at least one spinoff to retain interest in the IP and VR like they did with Half-Life 1.

Half-Life Alyx could have at the very least had an official Co-op / Deathmatch mode. Modders have found a way to play Co-op, showing its technically possible, but they are just floating hands. This could have served as a way of solidifying a Half-Life playerbase around VR and Source 2.

Counter-Strike 2 VR seems inevitable and I imagine they are building themselves up to it. But Pavlov and Contractors have beaten them to the punch (They both have a lot of CS maps and Contractors has Team Fortress 2 VR mods)

The Valve Index is vastly falling behind in all areas and as far as I can tell has never received a price reduction, let alone an upgrade. People don't want to use base stations and wires anymore. The headset lacks eye and face tracking and they don't even sell their own full-body tracking equipment, relying upon Vive and random third parties still for some reason which causes brand confusion. Not to mention the resolution and other technical specifications that other companies like Meta are beating them on as they seem to do nothing.

Valve has stated that they wanted to create a wireless option for the Index. I had a wireless setup for my old Vive and while it was awful and 3rd party, there isnt a way to do this with the Index, especially officially.

To end on a positive note however, I think that this is due to the upcoming release of the Deckard but with Meta having at least 5 standalone headset releases already, its safe to Valve has catching up to do. But its obvious that that would be the next logical step after creating the Steam Deck. But I feel like this will just put us back at square one, with an underpowered, albeit standalone headset competing with Meta, which might actually do more damage to PCVR then it helps, leading more people away from some of the more intensive games like VRChat. Would the Deckard play Quest VRChat maps? It seems confusing. You could end up with a piece of hardware that can barely play any Steam library games at all without a PC. At which point, why upgrade? Just for wireless? When a lot of us already own a Quest?

What do you think? I feel like Valve needs to release something soon or the VR playerbase will collapse but obviously its not entirely their fault. But they do hold the most influence on this platform.

[Malice In Wonderland]

i just got the quest 2 last month and convinced 3 of my friends to get the vr headset for vrchat idk what you mean its dying however i meet new people just trying the quest for the first time.

[nova]

https://vrlfg.net/Charts Usually theres a boost right around Christmas in total users using SteamVR games but its sitting at numbers around where it was back in 2019.

I guess thats expected when their flagship Index is getting old and the market is now divided between SteamVR, Quest and PSVR.

[buttmunch]

I think valve failed, but not because of hardware. Yes the index is old but its still the best headset in some ways. Also, many VR users don't care about FBT, eye/face tracking etc... Sim users don't even care about the wire. I'd love wirelesss but only if it dosen't compromise visual quality or framerate.

Its the software however where they failed.

1) They released 1 "game" Alyx which is an great tech demo showing off source2 engine. While it was VERY impressive visually it was rather boring and too short. They never released anymore source2 games nor have we gotten 3rd party source2 games. Nor have they released the mod SDK.

2) They have a library of source1 games that are still very popular. L4D2 alone has more daily users than the majority of VR games combined. These games perform very well on older hardware while still looking decent. They could have been ported to VR and increased the userbase. They would not have required high end hardware to run increasing content for users with older or midrange hardware. HL2VR mod has proven this was possible.

3) They own source1 and 2 engines. They could have made deals with other dev studios making these the preferred VR game engines instead of unity/unreal.

Valve is the first company to make their own PCVR headset, store, game engine, games, and OS. They had all these pieces in place before their competition but seem to have done little with it. Instead they seem to have abandoned most of the market to meta.

Now they either play catch-up or just (eventually) release another headset and hope there is still enough market for it.

[nova]

They don't seem very interested in selling headsets. The index is still launch price when you can find an old quest for 150 - 200 and hook it to PC. And at this point there's tons of older models of mixed reality headsets floating around.

By now if just to keep pace I'd expect a wireless adapter, a budget model to compete with the quest and a fully wireless pro model with all the eye, face tracking and augmented reality stuff. They clearly don't want to enter into an arms race with Meta.

I'm thinking PCVR is not the future. Which concerns me because it means the technology will stagnate due to lack of power, battery and graphic fidelity. The only thing that can save it then is wifi cloud streaming and cell tower cloud streaming once people use the tech outside more with augmented reality. If my tests with xbox cloud streaming is anything to go, lag is inevitable and would be ten times worse in VR.

[NuLife]

just hoping valve make a standalone headset like how the deck is for steam, at an affordable price then you will see alot buy it!

[DAS LEQUER]

Dying? I dunno. Quest 3 will eventually drop in price to reach demand. Assassin's Creed VR launched yesterday BTW. The best experience by far is the PCVR on it and Virtual Desktop is already here doing what you describe at home. The largest consulting companies expect a big bump in VR demand next year; AR/VR Another Slow Year Expected for AR/VR Headsets Before 2024 Rebound, According to IDC https://www.idc.com/promo/arvr .

On the other hand, changes with tencent and Pico point really scream out no killer apps or VR e-sport adoption, which is why majority of headsets start collecting dust right now. I like iPhone 15 now has built in spatial (3D) video recording in camera... that may make things interesting soon too. Social Media bets are big in VR, Meta poured in 10 bil loss I believe to fund Quest hardware/software so far.

If you think Steam doesn't care too much about selling headsets, well... you might be right right now. But they obviously are investing the lessons into things like Steam Deck, which really gave a big clue why no Deckard I believe when they explained in interviews why no Steam Deck 2 right now, which was basically anything right now would feel incremental more than a true successor.

Sure, pancake lenses and higher res would be nice! Others are doing that. Bigscreen Beyond and Pico are selling high end stuff, as well as many other competition in hardware. Steam... is selling games. That's kind of their thing for profit honestly, and if Deckard doesn't push that needle, probably don't care about hardware sales a ton!

It's going to take some patience basically for the tech to mature IMO. The AR+VR angle is just barely here to consumers under $1k, don't like hold your breath, but prepare to eat words if you think it's really going to die off I think.

[TimmyP]

No. Valve did not kill VR. Facebook killed VR by making their headset standalone. Did you not notice PCVR, especially indies, stopped right after the Q2 came out?

Go ahead and deny. Most of you use a Q2 so you are biased. Did you know that up until launch, Q2 was to have NATIVE PCVR support via tether? Facebook conveniently killed this right after it came out... because it was never true.

[Ember]

1: They should've yes aleast a expansion, but I haven't play end Alyx yet. Though their resources for games are focused elsewhere from I remember after the toll Alyx took on them.

2: I'm not sure how co-op would fit into the game lore wise, but deathmatch could work, but Is there demand for It?

³: Valve time, I'll believe when I see It even with the Source 2 engine being used as the base

4: There a thread on here If the index needs a pricecut. I say yes If not the headset, but the base stations & controllers for use with a verjo aero & Big screen beyond. Time will tell with Deckard for pricecuts.

The audio/mic quality is standard everyone should still aim for. We'll see with Bigscreen's extra over ear audio solution. Their mic though Is pretty darn good too.
Might out of touch here, but It's less about base stations & more about HMD weight, DFR, wire mess, heat/airflow control
Eye tracking Is getting there with app support ex: VRchat, PSVR2 so yeah I would be down for it. If not vocial* lens t spelling It wrong here that Facebook's oclulus company been working on to work naturally with your eyes to get the same results as eye tracking.

Yes, their FBT is outsourced to third parties, but you got choice over who to go with.
In terms of specs I agree, but disagree with them waiting for the tech to mature before use. Bigscreen has micro oleds, but the display isn't perfect with 90hz going down in resolution, but 75hz hitting that vibe of 90hz. Now Valve has to meet aleast 120, or 144hz to the eyes be an upgrade. The lens I hope are a step above pancake, or Is a more evolved version of Facebook's one.

5: If you got the money then Nofio Is your best bet. Valve has them listed on their store page, but never updated it for sale. Even with them doing made to order pre orders on their website. https://nofio.co/
Although with datemines the deckard has one in mind & the wireless add-on is expansive.

6: Vrchat Is a unlimited polygon/special effects dream to creators game with limits in options to help keep fps stable.

I do worry the pcvr users will grow old of It, but flat games to vr seems to be the blend to hold people over for games. Instead of hardware/innovative games to push people to stay, or invest. Price always plays a factor with PCVR so hopeful Valve addresses this.

[SiEgE]

Originally posted by nova:

The playerbase of PCVR has dipped significantly ...

Welcome to "Valve way of dealing with things".
1. Valve never chases hype. They create it.
2. Valve never chases after "fast expansions or dlcs" just to keep the interest high. They can afford to release them YEARS after the game's original release, and still create enough hype. Most "hype riding" mechanics many popular companies practice just don't work for Valve. To be honest, it feels like they are evading them intentionally.
3. Keeping PCVR's popularity and people's interest is a game for many players, not just Valve. IMO Valve already overdid their part by pairing their forces together with HTC to bring us Vive, then made their own Index AND made an entire, and the most popular VR game HL:A, AND made an entire system to make VR work for PCVR(SteamVR). Not to mention that the only reason we can VR on Linux right now is mostly Valve's hard work.
4. VR content is popping left and right, and you need to learn to search for it: Valheim VR, RoR2 VR, HL2:VR, HL:VR, Garrysmod VRMod, S&Box and many, many, many other VR mods and apps to improve on your experience. There are many non-Steam sold/built VR games and apps you can try.
5. Adding multiplayer to a singleplayer game is often quite impossible, unless the engine was made with it in mind. Both deathmatch and coop would look quite silly and out of place for HL:A.
6. Most online multiplayer games with quick movement and "tricks", like CS2, are incompatible with VR. You cannot run, drive, shoot quickly or jump in VR without feeling a bit of nausea, and I honestly think, making an entire game, based on it would be a bad idea. VR hates fast games.
7. Valve Index is literally one of the few viable headsets on the market, that don't rock many negative sides.
(if you say that "inside-out tracking is better than outside-in tracking" or "camera hand tracking is better than Valve Knuckles", or that "standalone hmds are better than PC hmds" - I'll just ignore any of your further opinions on the VR hardware.) And despite that, I'm fairly sure Index is already at the brink of being quite cheap. JSYK Meta is selling their hmds underpriced. They lose money on selling their hmds, because they hope to win over people and pull them into their Meta store. Meta hmds do not(!) show production cost accurate pricing. If you think Index should go Meta way - you're undermining the very basics of capitalism.
8. As for Deckard.. If it goes Quest approach, I don't feel like Valve could win too much this way.

[SiEgE]

I'll be a devil's advocate here, and say a "very controversial thing":
I root for technologies that everyone seems to hate: basestations(outside-in tracking), non-standalone wired, OLED, controller tracking(opposed to camera handtracking).
Is that because I'm a malicious oogabooga who wants technology to stay in one spot? or is that because I hate new things and my little brain cannot learn to leave them behind? No.

- If you remove basestations - you'll get an objectively worse tracking. Basestations don't have a half the blind zones inside-out tracking has(not to mention fbt support). If you double down on inside-out tracking, you'll just join a long, exhausting race of trying to make it as good as basestation tracking, that has all chances to never reach it, for many years. All that just so you.. don't have to install a pair of screws into your wall, and believe that "playing VR in a different room at whim" would somehow make it up for you? I don't think so.

- Wired hmds - wire is absolutely not comfortable to have and I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU ON THIS ONE. But, there are so many little things the wire gives you: your hmd will never run out of power. You literally don't need to charge your hmd. Your hmd will be lighter because wire is much lighter than a pack of batteries. You don't have to "repackage" your video data on your hmd, so it won't produce as much heat, too. Wireless is still too slow to play at high resolution with high framerate and no input lag. Only the wired VR can guarantee you that.

- Everybody loves LCD, because of how cheap they are. I'd gladly pay a 2x price, just to have a well crafted OLED. True black is too much to give up for me. Not to mention lower power consumption = lower heating.

- Standalone is good.. until you really think about it: You'll get a heavy headset with much less hardware features, cut down in many aspects just to reduce power consumption, strongly limited by the battery time. All that so you can bring it to your friend once a month? or play in a different room? Or go outside once in a while, when your cameras won't break the tracking because of sunlight? I'm not going to judge or assume your use cases, but please think at least more than once if those "positives" even worth worsening your hmd in literally every direction. Wireless, no basestation tracking is good, but it is also a very poor version of what you could easily have, by not buying into a gimmick.. if you really value VR and immersion, it is.

- There are reasons why controllers are better than handtracking, and that boils down to the oldest issue people faced since invention of sensor pads - clicky, tactile buttons are always better than sensor pads. Also sensor pads are much more prone to malfunction than buttons, and are much, much harder at repair. Not to mention that most handtracking we have right now is mostly inside-out, which has blind areas, only reading your hands infront of you, or right at your face. Also, this tracking is still highly error prone and has a laggy input, where it is trying to suggest what you're trying to do. Not to mention having to remember all the gestures. They are never as easy as you see them in the movies/toothpaste ads.

All those technologies sound awesome on paper, but the marketing sold them to you as underdeveloped technologies. You gave away so much for those little conveniences, which are still not even that useful, and many of them are time limited(batteries and etc.).

[nova]

I was going to get a Quest 3 but you are right, Index and PCVR are still superior in many ways just not as convenient and consumer friendly. I don't think the Index "needs" an upgrade yet and standalone has the potential to set us back in game play length (battery), fidelity, and tracking quality. Which is why I hope Valves next headset is best of both worlds.

My dream headset would have over the ear headphones, inside out tracking with base station support, wifi cloud game streaming, standalone that can run any storefront, with trackerless full body, finger, eye and face tracking. That would probably make it prohibitively expensive.

So while I'd agree Valve doesn't need to upgrade the Index, I think it needs halved in price to stay competitive. The only feature it needs imo is a wireless solution that isn't 4-500 dollars.

Originally posted by SiEgE:

Originally posted by nova:

The playerbase of PCVR has dipped significantly ...

Welcome to "Valve way of dealing with things".
1. Valve never chases hype. They create it.
2. Valve never chases after "fast expansions or dlcs" just to keep the interest high. They can afford to release them YEARS after the game's original release, and still create enough hype. Most "hype riding" mechanics many popular companies practice just don't work for Valve. To be honest, it feels like they are evading them intentionally.
3. Keeping PCVR's popularity and people's interest is a game for many players, not just Valve. IMO Valve already overdid their part by pairing their forces together with HTC to bring us Vive, then made their own Index AND made an entire, and the most popular VR game HL:A, AND made an entire system to make VR work for PCVR(SteamVR). Not to mention that the only reason we can VR on Linux right now is mostly Valve's hard work.
4. VR content is popping left and right, and you need to learn to search for it: Valheim VR, RoR2 VR, HL2:VR, HL:VR, Garrysmod VRMod, S&Box and many, many, many other VR mods and apps to improve on your experience. There are many non-Steam sold/built VR games and apps you can try.
5. Adding multiplayer to a singleplayer game is often quite impossible, unless the engine was made with it in mind. Both deathmatch and coop would look quite silly and out of place for HL:A.
6. Most online multiplayer games with quick movement and "tricks", like CS2, are incompatible with VR. You cannot run, drive, shoot quickly or jump in VR without feeling a bit of nausea, and I honestly think, making an entire game, based on it would be a bad idea. VR hates fast games.
7. Valve Index is literally one of the few viable headsets on the market, that don't rock many negative sides.
(if you say that "inside-out tracking is better than outside-in tracking" or "camera hand tracking is better than Valve Knuckles", or that "standalone hmds are better than PC hmds" - I'll just ignore any of your further opinions on the VR hardware.) And despite that, I'm fairly sure Index is already at the brink of being quite cheap. JSYK Meta is selling their hmds underpriced. They lose money on selling their hmds, because they hope to win over people and pull them into their Meta store. Meta hmds do not(!) show production cost accurate pricing. If you think Index should go Meta way - you're undermining the very basics of capitalism.
8. As for Deckard.. If it goes Quest approach, I don't feel like Valve could win too much this way.

Valve doesn't chase after dlc or expansions? Every major game they have released had a sequel or expansion in a few years of release. Half Life, Half Life 2, Left 4 Dead and Portal. Opposing Force was only one year after HL. Every one had a sequel or expansion within the length of time Alyx has been out.

What they may be doing is waiting for each jump in hardware to release software.

[SiEgE]

Originally posted by buttmunch:

1) ... Nor have they released the mod SDK.

Oh well, then, I guess all those HL:A maps and mods at Steam Workshop are just a figment of my imagination.

Originally posted by buttmunch:

2) They have a library of source1 games that are still very popular. L4D2 alone has more daily users than the majority of VR games combined. These games perform very well on older hardware while still looking decent. They could have been ported to VR and increased the userbase. They would not have required high end hardware to run increasing content for users with older or midrange hardware. HL2VR mod has proven this was possible.

For technical reasons, VR doubles GPU usage, even for older titles, and introduces a slight overhead for CPU. Since many people have a hardware that is only comfortable to play at 60fps single screen, going VR would mean not just doubling, but tripling your current performance requirements. Also VR requires an up-to-date CPU for new instructions to prevent it from stuttering and stalling.

[SiEgE]

Originally posted by nova:

Valve doesn't chase after dlc or expansions? Every major game they have released had a sequel or expansion in a few years of release. Half Life, Half Life 2, Left 4 Dead and Portal. Opposing Force was only one year after HL. Every one had a sequel or expansion within the length of time Alyx has been out.

You got me with L4D/L4D2. That was the only franchise that seemingly followed it, but nobody actually expected Valve to release L4D2, and for it to overshoot L4D1's popularity as hard as it did. Nobody waited for it, but Valve surprised everyone with it, anyway.

Opposing force and Blue shift weren't Valve projects. They were made by Gearbox(Borderlands 1 and 2), without much of Valve's control, more like with a "final review and tech advisory".

HL1->HL2 doesn't work. Not only HL2 was postponed and redone from scratch at least once, it took them 5-6 years to actually finish it. HL2 is a much, much different game, compared to HL1. The only thing that connects them is similar lore. I say that as long time HL1 fan, who was HL1 fan before I even heard that HL2 is going to be released.

Portal 1 and Portal 2 are not really Valve's home-grown projects. Portal was made by a group of talents Valve hired, and helped them finish their ideas. Anyway, Portal 2 was only released 4 years later, which also would easily kill all the "hype chasing".

Releases of HL2 episode one and episode two were the moments where Valve ACTUALLY tried to "chase hype", but failed miserably, and stopped doing that ever since. They even admitted that themselves - they couldn't "force themselves hard enough to lay golden eggs in limited time frames". They don't want to "just create expansions" Assassin Creed/Battlefield/Bethesda horse armor style. They only want to do things that bring at least something to the table, not just cute little stories to expand on their own lore.

Heck.. Even HL:A is not really "old Valve's" project. The entire cast, all the programmers and scenario writers are NOT the same people who worked on HL1 or HL2 and episodes.(Ever heard of the Firewatch game? Yep, those guys.)

[SiEgE]

Originally posted by nova:

I was going to get a Quest 3 but you are right, Index and PCVR are still superior in many ways just not as convenient and consumer friendly. I don't think the Index "needs" an upgrade yet and standalone has the potential to set us back in game play length (battery), fidelity, and tracking quality. Which is why I hope Valves next headset is best of both worlds.

My dream headset would have over the ear headphones, inside out tracking with base station support, wifi cloud game streaming, standalone that can run any storefront, with trackerless full body, finger, eye and face tracking. That would probably make it prohibitively expensive.

So while I'd agree Valve doesn't need to upgrade the Index, I think it needs halved in price to stay competitive. The only feature it needs imo is a wireless solution that isn't 4-500 dollars.

Man.. your dream headset sounds so sweet, but I'm afraid we're like 10 years behind such tech, especially the no tracker fbt part. I'd settle just fine with a no direct vision, wifi trackers(just like SlimeVR). They are still a tad janky, but I believe they are the next best thing, compared to basestation tracking. The best part about them - they don't need the direct vision from basestations to work. They even work where the new self-tracked HTC trackers fail. This, or a solution that would remove batteries off trackers whatsoever, to pin/clamp them on my clothes, something like radio tags.
Making them not as frail would be literally groundbreaking for VRChat and many active games. Imagine Zero Caliber where you can roll on the ground, without being afraid of smashing your feet trackers against the ground

Originally posted by nova:

What they may be doing is waiting for each jump in hardware to release software.

Yep. And they openly admitted it, like several times.

[nova]

I am thankful Valve doesn't churn out games like Assassins Creed. So there is an upside to their model. At least we dont have to deal with series burnout. So what do you predict is their next move?