We Want Full VR!

[DmAnd]

VR please

If you do not want VR for this game then there is no need to comment here

UPDATE!
Possible title and word change to not hurt anyones feelings below.

"We" (the aforementioned referring to an unreferenced multitude - as evidenced by the number of VR players that have requesting it - of VR players - who don't necessarily include everyone) "want" (referring to the English verb "desire" and not in reference to the imagined usage "demand") "VR" (by which we mean hardware support).

Thank you DAN-di-WARhol for your input

[r3np]

I DONT WANT VR !!!

[The Chocobo Racer]

引用自 Pain Elemental R6S：

How has this thread reached 500 replies

users dogpiling on a biased person.

[Bo]

@ DAN-di-WARhol Thanks a lot! Already had some titles in mind, but this list helps a lot. Already the PSVR was and still is absolutely impressive for me, so i'm looking forward for mid next week, when i setup my room.

I've been jumping into this discussion because i really enjoyed Doom VFR. Didn't struggle with any motion sickness. Not even a bit. Therefore i would buy a Doom Eternal VR immediately. So just as an information for Bethesda:
Doom Eternal VR = Money (at least from me :) )

About the motion sickness arguing here ... i somehow don't understand why people are complaining about such a wish (Doom Eternal VR Update). Just to point out: I know some people can get sick in VR rather fast, and i fully admit the fact that this might be impossible to handle. But besides all the medical studies and other materials brought up here ... why obligating Bethesda to withheld such an update. I can't imagine it would be a cost intensive addition. Just don't use the VR mode if you don't want to. Because there's no disadvantage about the existence of such a VR version, such complains seem to be rather resentments.

[Salamand3r-]

引用自 bojuix：

@ DAN-di-WARhol Thanks a lot! Already had some titles in mind, but this list helps a lot. Already the PSVR was and still is absolutely impressive for me, so i'm looking forward for mid next week, when i setup my room.

I've been jumping into this discussion because i really enjoyed Doom VFR. Didn't struggle with any motion sickness. Not even a bit. Therefore i would buy a Doom Eternal VR immediately. So just as an information for Bethesda:
Doom Eternal VR = Money (at least from me :) )

About the motion sickness arguing here ... i somehow don't understand why people are complaining about such a wish (Doom Eternal VR Update). Just to point out: I know some people can get sick in VR rather fast, and i fully admit the fact that this might be impossible to handle. But besides all the medical studies and other materials brought up here ... why obligating Bethesda to withheld such an update. I can't imagine it would be a cost intensive addition. Just don't use the VR mode if you don't want to. Because there's no disadvantage about the existence of such a VR version, such complains seem to be rather resentments.

Look at the massive difference in design, mechanics, speed, movement, content, and maps in Doom VFR versus the game it's based off of, Doom (2016). Every single aspect, from large to small, was changed for Doom VFR.

The reason they entirely rebuilt the game is because the base game wouldn't have worked in VR.

It was actually a quality release, one of Bethesda's only quality VR games. Because it was COMPLETELY rebuilt to work in VR,

Simply dropping in support in Eternal would not result in a VR experience worth playing.

The changes would have to be on the level of what was done for Doom VFR, and based on how well that game has sold and reviewed, it's not likely that investment paid off.

Doom VFR is a prime example of what I was talking about - in order to end up with a GOOD VR game based on a pancake game, you need to completely rebuild it for VR. Basically creating an entire new game. That's expensive. Literally millions of dollars.

For about 12 people who claim they'd buy it in this thread.

If you pony up a million bucks for each of your copies, I'm sure they'll get right on it.

[Bo]

引用自 Salamand3r-：

Doom VFR is a prime example of what I was talking about - in order to end up with a GOOD VR game based on a pancake game, you need to completely rebuild it for VR. Basically creating an entire new game. That's expensive. Literally millions of dollars.

For about 12 people who claim they'd buy it in this thread.

If you pony up a million bucks for each of your copies, I'm sure they'll get right on it.

Ah ok. That's a point for sure. I've played both versions Doom and Doom VFR. Content wise they are complete distinct games, thus an almost own budget had to be invested. But honestly, as far as i remember, both versions weren't that much different in terms of "play style" (of cource that's complete subjective). You are absolutely correct about this:

引用自 Salamand3r-：

Simply dropping in support in Eternal would not result in a VR experience worth playing.

But would the effort for a VR port (not the creation of a whole new game) be such an expensive or unrealistic project? Personally some "dual" titles like Skyrim or RE 7 worked perfectly. May the whole reason for this discussion (which i won't read :) ), are distinct opinions what's a successful port. Anyway thanks for your arguments. Always looking forward for some informative points.

[The Chocobo Racer]

引用自 bojuix：

引用自 Salamand3r-：

Doom VFR is a prime example of what I was talking about - in order to end up with a GOOD VR game based on a pancake game, you need to completely rebuild it for VR. Basically creating an entire new game. That's expensive. Literally millions of dollars.

For about 12 people who claim they'd buy it in this thread.

If you pony up a million bucks for each of your copies, I'm sure they'll get right on it.

Ah ok. That's a point for sure. I've played both versions Doom and Doom VFR. Content wise they are complete distinct games, thus an almost own budget had to be invested. But honestly, as far as i remember, both versions weren't that much different in terms of "play style" (of cource that's complete subjective). You are absolutely correct about this:

引用自 Salamand3r-：

Simply dropping in support in Eternal would not result in a VR experience worth playing.

But would the effort for a VR port (not the creation of a whole new game) be such an expensive or unrealistic project? Personally some "dual" titles like Skyrim or RE 7 worked perfectly. May the whole reason for this discussion (which i won't read :) ), are distinct opinions what's a successful port. Anyway thanks for your arguments. Always looking forward for some informative points.

More players would prefer and buy Ancient Gods 2, over a VR port. So

[Kerv]

引用自 Pain Elemental R6S：

How has this thread reached 500 replies

Surprised it isn't locked yet

[The Chocobo Racer]

引用自 Kervvy：

引用自 Pain Elemental R6S：

How has this thread reached 500 replies

Surprised it isn't locked yet

it should be. Utilizing resources for a VR port that no one can play, that can be better spent on DLC and the master levels for base game and DLC, is stupid and ID won't do that. Nor do the overwhelming majority of players want them to. Useless discussion

[DmAnd]

引用自 The Geneva Suggestion：

引用自 Kervvy：

Surprised it isn't locked yet

it should be. Utilizing resources for a VR port that no one can play, that can be better spent on DLC and the master levels for base game and DLC, is stupid and ID won't do that. Nor do the overwhelming majority of players want them to. Useless discussion

So, anything you don't agree with needs to be locked and there opinion be dammed

[The Chocobo Racer]

引用自 Kain：

引用自 The Geneva Suggestion：

it should be. Utilizing resources for a VR port that no one can play, that can be better spent on DLC and the master levels for base game and DLC, is stupid and ID won't do that. Nor do the overwhelming majority of players want them to. Useless discussion

So, anything you don't agree with needs to be locked and there opinion be dammed

no, anything that isn't well thought out/is a reasonable addition shouldn't be posted, and discussions that go nowhere because of the lack of thought involved should be locked. This discussion started because of a poorly thought out demand. It should be locked because nothing of substance is/will be shared here. But go on thinking everyone who doesn't agree with you/understands the basics of game development are biased critics

[⚡Snake⚡Plissken⚡]

引用自 The Geneva Suggestion：

引用自 Kain：

So, anything you don't agree with needs to be locked and there opinion be dammed

no, anything that isn't well thought out/is a reasonable addition shouldn't be posted, and discussions that go nowhere because of the lack of thought involved should be locked. This discussion started because of a poorly thought out demand. It should be locked because nothing of substance is/will be shared here. But go on thinking everyone who doesn't agree with you/understands the basics of game development are biased critics

It's a hard pill for some to swallow, making a demand from a pub that knows it is not financially viable to make this a VR game due to lack of interest or just plain resources.
People cite how easy it is to make this into VR, maybe they should start a GoFund me campaign and have this done as a 3rd party mod.
Pretty sure either way it would not be successful and that is the nature of the beast, companies do take note, but this unfortunately is nothing note worthy of. The interest is just not there tbh.

[Bo]

引用自 The Geneva Suggestion：

More players would prefer and buy Ancient Gods 2, over a VR port. So

Well. I'm sure that's true. But 'So', as a plain reasoning? Does the the production of these two things exclude each other? I don't think a 'either this or that' argumentation is valid here. It's more about 'would a VR version profitable enough for its effort'. As Salamand3r explained, there's presumably too low interest for such a version to be profitable or it just can NOT be ported that easily without being just BAD.

引用自 The Geneva Suggestion：

it should be ... Useless discussion

Useless. Hm. It seems kind like a 'censorship' to me, taking any ones posibility making an (positive/upvoting in my case) opinion in this thread. Are threads, which are 'too long' somehow impairing this board? Or what are the general for closing a topic here? I'm too lazy to investigate this my self ;)

But well .. as i can see, there are two sides debating eagerly (for me too harsh). It seems all i can do is just to wait (there are plenty of other titles) or play the non vr version later, when i get the time.

EDIT:

引用自 The Geneva Suggestion：

anything that isn't well thought out/is a reasonable addition shouldn't be posted

Hm. So isn't it possible to close such discussion with a 'final reason', thus people won't continue to ask or start even new topics? This way i would have seen something like 'unreasonable, unprofitable, ...', or just some short sentences explaining that this is an unrealistic thing before posting here anything.

[⚡Snake⚡Plissken⚡]

引用自 bojuix：

引用自 The Geneva Suggestion：

More players would prefer and buy Ancient Gods 2, over a VR port. So

Well. I'm sure that's true. But 'So', as a plain reasoning? Does the the production of these two things exclude each other? I don't think a 'either this or that' argumentation is valid here. It's more about 'would a VR version profitable enough for its effort'. As Salamand3r explained, there's presumably too low interest for such a version to be profitable or it just can NOT be ported that easily without being just BAD.

引用自 The Geneva Suggestion：

it should be ... Useless discussion

Useless. Hm. It seems kind like a 'censorship' to me, taking any ones posibility making an (positive/upvoting in my case) opinion in this thread. Are threads, which are 'too long' somehow impairing this board? Or what are the general for closing a topic here? I'm too lazy to investigate this my self ;)

But well .. as i can see, there are two sides debating eagerly (for me too harsh). It seems all i can do is just to wait (there are plenty of other titles) or play the non vr version later, when i get the time.

There is no debate, just one person continually attacking others saying they are "hating" VR.
I see no evidence of hate other than people posting facts.

[The Chocobo Racer]

引用自 bojuix：

引用自 The Geneva Suggestion：

More players would prefer and buy Ancient Gods 2, over a VR port. So

Well. I'm sure that's true. But 'So', as a plain reasoning? Does the the production of these two things exclude each other? I don't think a 'either this or that' argumentation is valid here. It's more about 'would a VR version profitable enough for its effort'. As Salamand3r explained, there's presumably too low interest for such a version to be profitable or it just can NOT be ported that easily without being just BAD.

引用自 The Geneva Suggestion：

it should be ... Useless discussion

Useless. Hm. It seems kind like a 'censorship' to me, taking any ones posibility making an (positive/upvoting in my case) opinion in this thread. Are threads, which are 'too long' somehow impairing this board? Or what are the general for closing a topic here? I'm too lazy to investigate this my self ;)

But well .. as i can see, there are two sides debating eagerly (for me too harsh). It seems all i can do is just to wait (there are plenty of other titles) or play the non vr version later, when i get the time.

The tech isn't there to make a fast paced VR game in the vein of doom eternal. It would have to be watered down to ♥♥♥♥ and remade like Doom VFR. as I also said above, very few people would buy it/ give a damn about it, and more people would rather tell you to shove it where the sun don't shine than let the devs work on a port barely anyone will enjoy over a DLC and master levels that will benefit everyone

[The Chocobo Racer]

seriously, it aint gonna happen, nor do actual fans of this game want it to happen if it's gonna take away from the devs time and resources put forwards to developing the dlcs and master levels.