Revolution controller

yawnstretch

Anyone here ever use a VR headset?

I remember playing a multiplayer, voice-coms, arcade V.R. game in the Atari Expo about 10 years ago. It was fantastic.

I dont care if some of the population are susceptible to dizzyness - SCREW THEM, the machines we have today would eat up VR, I wish they hadn't tried it as early as they did - now people think it sucks and makes you sick

Ever hear of D.I.M.S? Its not something you hear very often these days but people used to mention doom-induced motion sickness back in the day. My point here is that we're missing out! If Nintendo's new controller was an eyepiece headset (there were some fake videos showing a helmet going around a week back) I would pay anything.

Imagine Metroid Immersion or something - I know most people have never tried V.R. but today's games machines would do a much better job than the very highest spec VR equipment back in the 90s.

But Nintendo's revolution is probably just downloading roms legally. Whoop-de-doo.

Stompbox

Metroid Immersion would be unbelievably sweet

Retr0gamer

Would be a great idea especially with how well the visor view worked in the metoid games. However i have severe doubts about the V.R. headset.

Wertz

So what's the difference between a VR set and an Olympus Eyetrek (apart from the motion sensors)?
Always wondered why VR didn't come of age especially since the graphics power needed to drive a VR system came on in leaps and bounds in the decade since it was heralded...motion sickness? bah...so why not ban ferries and fairground rides?

dearg_doom

Wertz wrote:

So what's the difference between a VR set and an Olympus Eyetrek (apart from the motion sensors)?
Always wondered why VR didn't come of age especially since the graphics power needed to drive a VR system came on in leaps and bounds in the decade since it was heralded...motion sickness? bah...so why not ban ferries and fairground rides?

I think it had something to do with psychologists:)

I remember thay were up in arms back in the day! Also when I tried VR, I played some Virtuality flight sim, I found it impossible, purely because it was so different to 'normal' games, having to think in 3-d was a huge shock to the system! (but I was young too:D)

Seriously though I remember reading about the phsychs arguments against proper VR games went something like:

if you play a game like Manhunt or GTA on the PS2, you are doing bad things, but you know it isn't real, because you're controling the guns/cars etc with just your thumbs and you can only see the badness on a (relatively) tiny TV screen.

But if your are controling all this with glove-like-peripherals, such that it seems to be your hands actually holding the guns and throttleing the bad-guys necks; and you are seeing this in your whole field of vision so that it's almost as if you're seeing it with your own eyes for real, then it would be a fairly ****ed up experience for some people. Especially the younger kids whose parents buy the the likes of GTA as 'it's only a game'!

Obviously that's only valid for violent games, but most games are violent I guess.

Syth

dearg_doom wrote:

if you play a game like Manhunt or GTA on the PS2, you are doing bad things, but you know it isn't real, because you're controling the guns/cars etc with just your thumbs and you can only see the badness on a (relatively) tiny TV screen.

And yet there are people who say that playing it ona small screen is bad for you. Never can agree on anything, can they? It's not like I've ever seen any proof about game violence anyway....

Gilgamesh

wouldn't it be great playing a Starwars Lightsaber duell with high spec Graphics in VR

would do it straight away

grimloch

Gilgamesh wrote:

wouldn't it be great playing a Starwars Lightsaber duell with high spec Graphics in VR

would do it straight away

Playing jedi knight or something would be the coolest thing ever

Games like 'The Punisher' would be fairly odd on VR though, what with the violence and so forth

segadreamcast

dearg_doom wrote:

I think it had something to do with psychologists:)

I remember thay were up in arms back in the day! Also when I tried VR, I played some Virtuality flight sim, I found it impossible, purely because it was so different to 'normal' games, having to think in 3-d was a huge shock to the system! (but I was young too:D)

Seriously though I remember reading about the phsychs arguments against proper VR games went something like:

if you play a game like Manhunt or GTA on the PS2, you are doing bad things, but you know it isn't real, because you're controling the guns/cars etc with just your thumbs and you can only see the badness on a (relatively) tiny TV screen.

But if your are controling all this with glove-like-peripherals, such that it seems to be your hands actually holding the guns and throttleing the bad-guys necks; and you are seeing this in your whole field of vision so that it's almost as if you're seeing it with your own eyes for real, then it would be a fairly ****ed up experience for some people. Especially the younger kids whose parents buy the the likes of GTA as 'it's only a game'!

Obviously that's only valid for violent games, but most games are violent I guess.

Absolutely - you would become desensitised to bodily motions such as punching, and it may simply (as laughable as it seems) become instinct to swing at somebody for no apparent reason, as you would have done in a game. This would be inherent in the same way as people feel the need to ruffle their hair when they're nervous in order to reassure themselves perhaps - the motions of throttling somebody would become mere reflexes, as they had been achieved before in a game with no negative connotations.

It does pose a real danger methinks if it was used with violent games.

Gileadi

god,imagine manhunt or GTA with a headset

now that would be something for the do-gooders parents groups to whine about

grimloch

I can only imagine the uproar over anything like that