PC or Quest 2/3 Port?

[SolKutTeR]

That looks interesting, very reminiscent of HLA.
Is the lead platform PC or Quest 2/3?

[CastelloInc]

The game was made with both platforms in account during development:

PCVR version:
Dynamic shadows
Dynamic lighting
Complex particle systems
4k Textures
Refraction effects
Volumetric fog
around 30 gb~ish

Standalone:
Static lighting
Static shadows
Less particles
1k textures
No refraction effects
No fog
around 10 gb~ish

These are the main differences between the 2 versions.

Gameplay wise is the same game.

[SolKutTeR]

As a PCVR gamer, you've got me.
I was worried it would be another MobileVR port for PCVR.

[Abyss]

Originally posted by SolKutTeR:

As a PCVR gamer, you've got me. :cupup:
I was worried it would be another MobileVR port for PCVR.

"I deserve better than this." ... blah. For the VR game market to continue to exist and the games to evolve they have to be profitable. The PCVR market is elitist and generally irrelevant. UEVR has shown very clearly that thousands of PC games could have very easily has a VR mode with just a tiny bit of coding on the devs part, but the PCVR market is too worthless to have bothered doing that.

The only way we're going to get amazing PCVR games is letting the market evolve naturally, and that means waiting for standalone to catch up. No game is entirely written for PCVR any more. Sure, some things will be implemented extra, but every VR game *has* to be build with the standalone market in mine to have any chance at being profitable. At this stage the PCVR market is an add on that devs can do a little extra work to make their game a bit shinier on, but after a fairly quick point the more time and effort they dedicate to doing that the less profitable they're going to be.