Jump to content
rllmuk
Sign in to follow this  
Broker

Guess the next thing that will be “THE FUTURE”

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Siri said:

 

The cynic in me thinks that it's less about what the market wants, though, and more what the publisher wants.

 

Companies try a lot of things in their power to ensure players keep spending money on them - Online Passes, DLC, Yearly releases, implementation of third party DRM, and/or microtransactions.

 

The ultimately logical endgame would be to limit access to a videogame unless it's through a service that doesn't provide a tangible product for you to keep unless you give them more money - streaming offers that benefit.

 

It's a very nightmarish scenario (and one that can cause a lot of publishers to fall over), but I absolutely wouldn't put it past the likes of Ubisoft and Bethesda. I'm very certain EA mentioned such an ideal when rolling out Origin for the PC, thinking about it.


tbh, anyone outright buying Microsoft first or second party content at this point is putting their principles about ownership well ahead of their wallet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VR has been around for ages. I remember my dad buying me voucher to use the VR kit at Electronics Boutique back in the 90's and i was soooo disappointed with it.

 

Its definitely progressed massively, but it still has the cumbersome headset, wires, and its quite expensive for a half decent bit of kit.

 

As others have mentioned, once its available in a smaller, less cumbersome form, then it will probably take off, and do Gangbusters.... I just can never see it replacing the ol' control pad in front of the tv gaming that has been going on for decades.

 

Dont get me wrong, i think the idea of VR is amazing. I just find the execution painful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes we are obviously a way away from total immersion Holodecks. However the technology is still pretty nascent, let's remember that Oculus CV1 was only released in March 2016. In reality that is the start point of consumer VR as we know it at the moment. So in less time than the PS4 has been available we've gone from that to the Quest which is a standalone wireless unit that costs only slight more than a launch PS4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Quest is a very good example that VR can go mainstream as it has pretty much none of the issues that Cohen mentions. No wires, it’s light and it’s a piece of piss to use.

 

Granted, the graphics are comparably shit to a current gen TV game but unless graphics technology and mobile cpu development grinds to a halt (it won’t) that will be overcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly... theres always an 'if' or a 'but'

 

It will take a long long time for it to be cheap enough, light enough, wireless and have a decent screen and battery. 

 

Not in our lifetime....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, cohen205 said:

Exactly... theres always an 'if' or a 'but'

 

It will take a long long time for it to be cheap enough, light enough, wireless and have a decent screen and battery. 

 

Not in our lifetime....

 

I'm not sure there was an if or a but there. It may never take off but I find it hard to believe someone who has no doubt lived through the incredible progress that electronics has undergone in just the last 20 years can honestly believe that in another 30 years we wouldn't be able to make VR tech extremely cheaply with incredible battery life. I mean we already have a wireless standalone unit so wireless is a moot point, also the Quest, Rift S and Index already have decent screens

 

In less time than that we've gone from the Gameboy to the Switch. At the time the gameboy came out I doubt many people could even have imagined having something like a Switch in their hands in their lifetime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I predict that the next thing hyped as THE FUTURE will be the application of Deepfake machine learning/AI techniques to game rendering, like this tech demo:

 

https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/3/18121198/ai-generated-video-game-graphics-nvidia-driving-demo-neurips

 

 

The promise will be that it'll let developers achieve the photorealism of real-life FMV while still having the flexibility of 3D polygon engines. (The two competing dreams of the early '90s: united at last!)

 

At first it'll be used as a way of rapidly generating many different character conversations, in games that are heavily dialogue based, like Her Story or LA Noire. I pick those examples because dialogue-driven adventures are probably the games that most resemble current deepfake videos - at least the SFW ones!

 

Then eventually people will find ways to make it feasible to use it in fast action games.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The next big thing to affect the future of videogames will be ...

 

The law.

 

Worldwide.

 

There will come a point where VR tech and photo-realism will crossover so easily that "murder simulator" will actually be a scarily accurate term. I predict serious consideration by the world's respective legislative bodies to enact laws that limit the realism of interactive entertainment. 

 

I've used murder there, but you can insert all sorts of illegal/immoral acts into the above and just add "simulator" after it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Thor said:

The next big thing to affect the future of videogames will be ...

 

The law.

 

Worldwide.

 

There will come a point where VR tech and photo-realism will crossover so easily that "murder simulator" will actually be a scarily accurate term. I predict serious consideration by the world's respective legislative bodies to enact laws that limit the realism of interactive entertainment. 

 

I've used murder there, but you can insert all sorts of illegal/immoral acts into the above and just add "simulator" after it.


This is a really good call. But I imagine it will be a relatively passive rating system coupled with instructing developers to censor extreme content, however due to the PC modding community hard to actively enforce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Strafe said:

The Quest is a very good example that VR can go mainstream as it has pretty much none of the issues that Cohen mentions. No wires, it’s light and it’s a piece of piss to use.

 

Granted, the graphics are comparably shit to a current gen TV game but unless graphics technology and mobile cpu development grinds to a halt (it won’t) that will be overcome.


Won’t the technology always be behind for graphics though? It will always be twice as hard to render a VR game so no matter how much better rendering gets, won’t VR always look shit compared to a TV games?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Broker said:


Won’t the technology always be behind for graphics though? It will always be twice as hard to render a VR game so no matter how much better rendering gets, won’t VR always look shit compared to a TV games?


doesn’t a TV game look much less immersive than a VR game already?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, grindmouse said:


But if everyone else in the room is also wearing VR and you’re in the same game or experience - that won’t matter. Maybe they’ll invent arm and leg straps for full body tracking. Total immersion.

 

spacer.png

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not from my experience. Most of the VR games I’ve played are super Low Poly and look more like a section where someone gets sucked into a computer in a 90’s TV show. They also generally have jerky motion, especially on the hands, and a few have had issues with massive graphical glitches that would never get into a TV based game. 
 

I get that all that stuff will improve, but at the moment I can’t ever imagine the blurry, jerky stuff I’ve seen comparing to the immersion of Bloodborne or something. I find the out of date graphics running on the low res screen and all the other visual issues much more immersion breaking than a flat screen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Broker said:

Not from my experience. Most of the VR games I’ve played are super Low Poly and look more like a section where someone gets sucked into a computer in a 90’s TV show. They also generally have jerky motion, especially on the hands, and a few have had issues with massive graphical glitches that would never get into a TV based game. 
 

I get that all that stuff will improve, but at the moment I can’t ever imagine the blurry, jerky stuff I’ve seen comparing to the immersion of Bloodborne or something. I find the out of date graphics running on the low res screen and all the other visual issues much more immersion breaking than a flat screen. 

 

The stuff I played in VR on a PS4 Pro already looked a million times better than a traditional tv screen even with jaggies thanks to the 120hz refresh rate and being inside the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Broker said:

Not from my experience. Most of the VR games I’ve played are super Low Poly and look more like a section where someone gets sucked into a computer in a 90’s TV show. They also generally have jerky motion, especially on the hands, and a few have had issues with massive graphical glitches that would never get into a TV based game. 
 

I get that all that stuff will improve, but at the moment I can’t ever imagine the blurry, jerky stuff I’ve seen comparing to the immersion of Bloodborne or something. I find the out of date graphics running on the low res screen and all the other visual issues much more immersion breaking than a flat screen. 


Eh? Wipeout looks the same as it does on the telly, except you’re IN THE TELLY!!! :omg:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Broker said:

Won’t the technology always be behind for graphics though? It will always be twice as hard to render a VR game so no matter how much better rendering gets, won’t VR always look shit compared to a TV games?

No. You lack imagination and foresight. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, metallicfrodo said:

I'm not sure there was an if or a but there. It may never take off but I find it hard to believe someone who has no doubt lived through the incredible progress that electronics has undergone in the just the last 20 years can honestly believe that in another 30 years we wouldn't be able to make VR tech extremely cheaply with incredible battery life. I mean we already have a wireless standalone unit.

I do wonder though what the general consensus would be on VR. At present it’s only really us nerds who’ve tried it and even then, not all of us are that bothered by it. I know I’m not fussed with it once the initial wow factor has worn off and I’d much rather go back to gaming on my TV. Things that take off are generally filling a gap, but currently gaming is better served the way it is. VR is too bulky, too expensive, requires too much room, doesn’t look as good and is too technical an ask for most people at the moment. It needs to be as convenient as standard gaming. Then there’s also the problem that most people play games to relax, slumped on the couch with only your thumbs getting any exercise. VR feels a lot more involved.

 

I’m not doubting that the technical problems will be overcome in time, but I seriously doubt it’ll ever replace or even overtake regular gaming. It’ll be a secondary experience that people bust out at Christmas and birthdays. I just can’t see it ever being THE FUTURE of gaming. I really hope not anyway.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Broker said:

Not from my experience. Most of the VR games I’ve played are super Low Poly and look more like a section where someone gets sucked into a computer in a 90’s TV show. They also generally have jerky motion, especially on the hands, and a few have had issues with massive graphical glitches that would never get into a TV based game. 
 

I get that all that stuff will improve, but at the moment I can’t ever imagine the blurry, jerky stuff I’ve seen comparing to the immersion of Bloodborne or something. I find the out of date graphics running on the low res screen and all the other visual issues much more immersion breaking than a flat screen. 

What have you played on?

 

Regardless of that, does it matter if it lags behind graphically. Stuff like Asgard’s Wrath already looks much better in VR (on a beefy PC) than games from a generation ago. The immersion is real even in low poly games, proven by the videos of people on the internet falling over because they go to lean on something that isn’t really there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, JPL said:

I do wonder though what the general consensus would be on VR. At present it’s only really us nerds who’ve tried it and even then, not all of us are that bothered by it. I know I’m not fussed with it once the initial wow factor has worn off and I’d much rather go back to gaming on my TV. Things that take off are generally filling a gap, but currently gaming is better served the way it is. VR is too bulky, too expensive, requires too much room, doesn’t look as good and is too technical an ask for most people at the moment. It needs to be as convenient as standard gaming. Then there’s also the problem that most people play games to relax, slumped on the couch with only your thumbs getting any exercise. VR feels a lot more involved.

 

I’m not doubting that the technical problems will be overcome in time, but I seriously doubt it’ll ever replace or even overtake regular gaming. It’ll be a secondary experience that people bust out at Christmas and birthdays. I just can’t see it ever being THE FUTURE of gaming. I really hope not anyway.

 

Again there is this weird idea that seemingly because it's VR you have to be jumping all over the place and it's not relaxing. Games like Moss, Astro Bot, Ghost Giant, Tetris, Rez, Wipeout, Star Trek etc... are all seated experiences that are as relaxing to play as any 2D game game. (Okay wipeout probably isn't exactly relaxing).  Also arguably the ones that are on the Quest actually take up less room than a traditional 'TV' game as I don't need the TV and the space between me and said TV.

 

Obviously there are other games that do require movement but then it's nice to have that choice. 

 

I also don't think I play games to relax, I watch TV to relax and generally switch off. I play games to be engaged and challenged (although I appreciate in general not physically).

 

I don't think we will ever get to a point where VR is the only type of gaming people are playing, but then 15 years ago I couldn't have imagined a situation where you could sit in a pub and 90% of the people in there would be staring at a fucking phone!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, metallicfrodo said:

 

Again there is this weird idea that seemingly because it's VR you have to be jumping all over the place and it's not relaxing. Games like Moss, Astro Bot, Ghost Giant, Tetris, Rez, Wipeout, Star Trek etc... are all seated experiences that are as relaxing to play as any 2D game game. (Okay wipeout probably isn't exactly relaxing).  Also arguably the ones that are on the Quest actually take up less room than a traditional 'TV' game as I don't need the TV and the space between me and said TV.

 

Obviously there are other games that do require movement but then it's nice to have that choice. 

 

I also don't think I play games to relax, I watch TV to relax and generally switch off. I play games to be engaged and challenged (although I appreciate in general not physically).

 

I don't think we will ever get to a point where VR is the only type of gaming people are playing, but then 15 years ago I couldn't have imagined a situation where you could sit in a pub and 90% of the people in there would be staring at a fucking phone!

Moving my head is too much exercise when I’m gaming though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people just don’t want things on their head all the time.

 

Look at the  3D glasses that worked with 3D tvs. Excellent idea, relatively cheap, but it never took off.

 

To me, VR is a peripheral, just another way to play a game. I can’t see it ever truly replacing traditional gaming.

 

And the game boy - switch idea doesn’t hold much weight either. Yes they have progressed in regards to graphics, but at the end of the day you are still looking at a screen and pressing buttons. The actual ‘act’ of gaming hasn’t changed since gaming began. It’s just pressing buttons and making stuff move on a screen when you boil it down.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, cohen205 said:

And the game boy - switch idea doesn’t hold much weight either. Yes they have progressed in regards to graphics, but at the end of the day you are still looking at a screen and pressing buttons. The actual ‘act’ of gaming hasn’t changed since gaming began. It’s just pressing buttons and making stuff move on a screen when you boil it down.


That was a rebuttal to your comment that it’s a long long way off to it being cheap, wireless, etc, and not in our lifetime. I was just pointing out how fast tech moves on. Also there is a reasonably priced (if not cheap) and wireless solution already on the market.
 

I don’t disagree that people don’t like having things on their head, or more specifically been locked away from the outside world, but that wasn’t your original reasoning.

 

Also 3D glasses may have been cheap but the TV that worked with them wasn’t so that argument doesn’t really hold weight.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After playing games in VR, regular gaming does seem pretty neolithic.

 

It’s also the immersive nature and total sensory isolation that makes it hard to play all the time or become a true mass market product (yet), just because you are literally shutting out the entire World and entering a new one.

 

Once the gubbins shrinks and the cabling’s reduced in years to come, god knows what it’ll be like. It’s already the most amazing gaming development that’s happened since the introduction of 3D, and I don’t mean Ant Attack.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Qazimod said:

 

Similarly: watching 30 second Doritos commercials to gain in-game currency, in a full-price home console game.

 

Or reading in-game magazines filled with ads for experience points...

 

This brings Wipeout HD to mind, a decade ago when they put ads on the loading screens. Shudder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, womblingfree said:

After playing games in VR, regular gaming does seem pretty neolithic.

 

It’s also the immersive nature and total sensory isolation that makes it hard to play all the time or become a true mass market product (yet), just because you are literally shutting out the entire World and entering a new one.

 

Once the gubbins shrinks and the cabling’s reduced in years to come, god knows what it’ll be like. It’s already the most amazing gaming development that’s happened since the introduction of 3D, and I don’t mean Ant Attack.

 

 

There seems to be a real blind spot with VR. All the people who love it, like yourself (and there’s nothing wrong with that, of course), can’t seem to comprehend that others don’t really care for it. For it to be THE FUTURE, it really has to be completely mainstream, but I just don’t think that’ll ever happen. Maybe I’m wrong, I dunno, but I just can’t see the majority of people wanting it. No matter how streamlined it becomes, it’s got that complete disconnect from reality, that I think is what puts people off.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, metallicfrodo said:


That was a rebuttal to your comment that it’s a long long way off to it being cheap, wireless, etc, and not in our lifetime. I was just pointing out how fast tech moves on. Also there is a reasonably priced (if not cheap) and wireless solution already on the market.
 

I don’t disagree that people don’t like having things on their head, or more specifically been locked away from the outside world, but that wasn’t your original reasoning.

 

Also 3D glasses may have been cheap but the TV that worked with them wasn’t so that argument doesn’t really hold weight.


I do actually hope I’m wrong and it does take off, as what I’ve played ( not a lot, I admit, Mainly psvr) did seem unique and fun. I just can’t see it happening for some reason. 
 

I can’t seem to shake the gimmicky feeing of it all. VR, to me, is just another version of eye toy, or Kinect, or labo, or going further back, the virtual boy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think current VR hardware setup hassle ,headset size and nausea etc are factors in VR adoption but as someone who was aboard the hype train, got PSVR at release etc, I think even if you overcome those things there's a bigger hurdle. As lazy as this sounds, it's just a bit too much like effort..

 

Playing a tennis style vr game or farpoint or even skyrim with motion controls is really on a different level from playing those same games on a tv, but the truth is that the lack of effort involved in plonking down on the sofa in front of the tv with a controller in your hands after a day at work makes it a more likely occurance than jumping around the room doing actual physical activity in vr games regularly.

 

I'm not sure how much long term crossover is likely between fans of the very sedentary activity of traditional gaming and people who want to do vr stuff regularly. They should probably market it more as a sports/exercise type thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.