Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Personally I believe if it uses a controller, its not true VR. I value VR games that can be played sitting with a controller differently to those that use full roomscale movement. After all, physically moving is certianly closer to reality than using a controller to move yourself.
One is full roomscale, the other is closer to a camera change (albeit a good one)
Although I am not saying I wouldn't appreciate those games that should work with a controller to have more options.
Maybe what you want is to play seated with full motion controls that allow you to smoothly rotate.
To me they are easy controls to master.
However I can see many people taking a lazier/relaxed route and sitting down with a controller and still wanting to enjoy the full 360 camera, but as I said, it is not really VR to me at that point.
There will be cheaper headsets with little to no motion control or sensor reliance, along the lines of how mobile VR does it, specifically for them so the audience exists. Games that can work as seated experiences should give an option. But there are a lot of VR actions and experiences that cannot be replicated well with a controller.
Should be called SVR for 'seated' or 'semi'
Not that they arnt good in their own right. I love elite dangerous with my HOTAS for example.
But no I used the terms lazier and relaxed to describe a less active control scheme rather than a trait. You don't have to be lazy to want to use a controller.
But VR doesn't need to erase or beat vanilla gaming or anything inbetween anyway. It's simply a different way to play. If your way is to use the HMD but not the controllers then that is your choice. As I said, for games that can use a controller, I think they should have the option for you. But not every game can do that. And it certainly is not killing VR.
I don't assume that everyone in my household likes strawberry yogurt just because it is my personal favourite, thats why I buy the assorted pack (variety), that way everyone has a choice
If a game is playable with a controller add the option, FO4 VR is easily playable with a joypad or K/M.
Some of my best VR experiences have been in driving simulators, VR should not be limited to any one control method, but should have (use) as many control options as possible to reach the widest audience possible, using a wheel in VR is obviously more immersive than any tracked controller, the experience for Players who use VR not as a game but as a simulation is as VR as it gets, they would obviously disagree with your reasoning. I would also add that Elite Dangerous is best played with a HOTAS which is more immersive and is one of the most popular VR games on PC.
VR is not one dimensional, restricting yourself by holding a narrow minded belief that VR is only VR when using roomscale or tracked controllers is outdated and frankly quite ludicrous. VR should be for everyone and everyone has their own idea of what they want and that is choice.
I'm not trying to be confrontational either , I'm just pointing out a fact, VR is not just about roomscale or tracked controllers or FPS shooters , I was simply pointing out your obviously speaking from your own perspective and that's fine (but wrong) Lol :P
VR must appeal to everybody, therefor I would disagree with your statement about not being VR unless its with the wands.
VR ....