Project Morpheus 4 Hour Event at GDC

[XorpiZ]

Move coupled with VR, not move on it's own. 

 

These are real life experiences though, a lot of Kinect was smoke and mirrors which didn't live up to expectations

 

Everything he wrote; "i can reach out", "i can reload with my hands", "i can point and shoot" etc. has to do with Move. You can do the exact same thing without Morpheus.

 

The link I posted was real life experience as well. Not sure why you're posting PR-videoes, which are inherently unreliable.

 

Fact of the matter is, that until Morpheus gets into the hands of consumers the jury is still out. Praising Morpheus (or any other set of VR/AR-glasses) based on a short hands-on is dangerous.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Everything he wrote; "i can reach out", "i can reload with my hands", "i can point and shoot" etc. has to do with Move. You can do the exact same thing without Morpheus.

 

The link I posted was real life experience as well. Not sure why you're posting PR-videoes, which are inherently unreliable.

 

Fact of the matter is, that until Morpheus gets into the hands of consumers the jury is still out. Praising Morpheus (or any other set of VR/AR-glasses) based on a short hands-on is dangerous.

 

Move in a non-VR setting is quite clearly nowhere near as impressive. That's the point.

 

I posted those videos as that's what people believed they were getting in the run up to Kinect being released. No such smoke and mirrors is surrounding VR pre-release as there are multiple companies all demoing the tech hands-on.

 

When people first bought into Kinect there was a load of just wait, the hype will become real, the tech needs more time to mature, etc. However, what was shown prior to release never really materialised itself lending the motion camera devices to fall flat on their faces under expectations vs reality.

[XorpiZ]

Move in a non-VR setting is quite clearly nowhere near as impressive. That's the point.

 

I posted those videos as that's what people believed they were getting in the run up to Kinect being released. No such smoke and mirrors is surrounding VR pre-release as there are multiple companies all demoing the tech hands-on.

 

He spent the entire article talking about how impressive it is to be able to reload a gun with your hands.

 

The Kinect was getting a lot of praise before hand. It had nothing to do with silly videos, which you should know. After it got out to consumers it turned out to be just another fad.

 

I'm not saying Morpheus/Oculus etc. won't be succesful. I'm just saying it's poor judgment praising them based on VERY early hands-on demos.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

He spent the entire article talking about how impressive it is to be able to reload a gun with your hands.

 

The Kinect was getting a lot of praise before hand. It had nothing to do with silly videos, which you should know. After it got out to consumers it turned out to be just another fad.

 

I'm not saying Morpheus/Oculus etc. won't be succesful. I'm just saying it's poor judgment praising them based on VERY early hands-on demos.

 

I would class very early as last year, or the year before. The Occulus has even been out in various development kits for years, and average consumers have the kits, it's not all trade show demos. The demos now are reflecting the final product pretty closely. I would argue it's a reasonable time to now be saying this is what you should expect as a consumer come 2016. 

 

The early demos didn't reflect the final product with Kinect, that is the difference. The internet understandably lit up when Milo was demoed and sites were very favourable, but that's not how the final product panned out. That's the difference here, as far as I see it.

 

Anything demoed exclusively at a trade show, or through videos/trailers should have skepticism surrounding it, but VR is far further forward than that.

[XorpiZ]

I would class very early as last year, or the year before. The Occulus has even been out in various development kits for years, and average consumers have the kits, it's not all trade show demos. The demos now are reflecting the final product pretty closely. I would argue it's a reasonable time to now be saying this is what you should expect as a consumer come 2016. 

 

The early demos didn't reflect the final product with Kinect, that is the difference. The internet understandably lit up when Milo was demoed and sites were very favourable, but that's not how the final product panned out. That's the difference here, as far as I see it.

 

There's still no consumer kit out there. It's still only tech-demos and small proof-of-concept games that we get to see.

 

Wake me up, when/if we see a large title actually running great in VR. Dying Light tried, but failed, as far as I know.

 

You keep forgettting, for some reason, that what I posted was not based on anything PR-videos or hands-off demos. It was hands-on. (Edit: MOST PEOPLE, not all) People loved the Kinect early on. Claiming otherwise is going against the facts.

 

The love was short-lasted and it's now as dead as my grandparents. VR will most likely go the same way, unless they somehow, magically, can reduce the price.. and have lots of games.. and make all the headsets work with the games.. and convince enough people to buy them to make developers actually care.

 

No doubt there'll be some interesting applications (just like the Kinect). But a massive, dogma changing succes? Unlikely.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

There's still no consumer kit out there. It's still only tech-demos and small proof-of-concept games that we get to see.

 

Wake me up, when/if we see a large title actually running great in VR. Dying Light tried, but failed, as far as I know.

 

You keep forgettting, for some reason, that what I posted was not based on anything PR-videos or hands-off demos. It was hands-on. (Edit: MOST PEOPLE, not all) People loved the Kinect early on. Claiming otherwise is going against the facts.

 

The love was short-lasted and it's now as dead as my grandparents. VR will most likely go the same way, unless they somehow, magically, can reduce the price.. and have lots of games.. and make all the headsets work with the games.. and convince enough people to buy them to make developers actually care.

 

No doubt there'll be some interesting applications (just like the Kinect). But a massive, dogma changing succes? Unlikely.

 

I'm sure Minecraft VR will cause a ruckus... If MS allows it officially on competitors devices or joins in with VR pretty soon themselves Motion gaming tried to do horror and some other interesting genres but failed. VR has shown it can do cool things with games that stay traditional in their genre (like horror and racing), and do not need to be created as a subset genre for the tech (likes of all the motion games we got).

 

If Kojima wants to cause a trend, he'll patch in VR support to PT first if Silent Hills isn't due to be out when VR first launches to consumers. I mean you can't deny playing PT with VR would have horror fans frothing at the thought, but patching in move/Kinect support to PT? Ehhh

[XorpiZ]

I'm sure Minecraft VR will cause a ruckus... If MS allows it officially on competitors devices or joins in with VR pretty soon themselves Motion gaming tried to do horror and some other interesting genres but failed. VR has shown it can do cool things with games that are traditional in their genre, and do not need to be created as a subset genre for the tech (likes of all the motion games we got).

 

I doubt VR, at least in its current form where it requires hilarilously large glasses, will ever make it past the "heh, this is kinda fun"-stage.

 

Not many sane people will sit down in their couch, put on VR-glasses and play for 3 hours.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

I doubt VR, at least in its current form where it requires hilarilously large glasses, will ever make it past the "heh, this is kinda fun"-stage.

 

Not many sane people will sit down in their couch, put on VR-glasses and play for 3 hours.

 

Why not if it is comfortable? In the comfort of your own home playing alone experience > how you look. Morpheus has confirmed support for people who need to wear ordinary glasses as well. The difference with motion controls is it's not just how you look, but if you have space and quite honestly are "fit enough" to be bothered moving around.

 

If playing something in the horror genre was 100x scarier with VR, and the headset comfortable, I'm sure a lot of people will happily play through a 8-12 hour game in stints of a few hours here and there. We'll see though.

[XorpiZ]

Why not if it is comfortable? In the comfort of your own home playing alone experience > how you look. Morpheus has confirmed support for people who need to wear ordinary glasses as well. The difference with motion controls is it's not just how you look, but if you have space and quite honestly are "fit enough" to be bothered moving around.

 

If playing something in the horror genre was 100x scarier with VR, and the headset comfortable, I'm sure a lot of people will happily play through a 8-12 hour game in stints of a few hours here and there. We'll see though.

 

It's not about how you look. It's about how you disconnect from the real world even more. You can't share the experience with friends or family.

 

There are definitely use-cases where VR will shine though. Horror-games, as you mention, and to some extent FPS-games. But paying a premium to do so? It'll be a tough sell, even to the hardcore gamers.

[+Asmodai MVC]

I personally think VR is going to be big and not just to gaming.

 

I'm beginning to doubt Oculus/Facebook is ever going to release a commercial product themselves though.  They have a VR API and store and the do R&D and then let other companies make the actual shipping hardware (like the Samsung Gear VR which they're now on the second version of and Oculus still hasn't shipped a single retail product).  Even if they do ship a product it will be expensive and require a high spec PC to run it putting it's total cost out of reach for most people.  They may sell expensive hardware to other developers and for corporate use but I don't see their stuff ever hitting the mainstream.  I do give them props though for reigniting the whole VR scene though.

 

I don't think VR will be as big as motion gaming was as it's peak but I think it will last and not die out after one generation like motion gaming has.  I would say it will likely sell better than the PS Vita lets say (though that may not be saying much, rofl) but not anywhere near Wii level.  It will likely also outsell console steering wheels and flight sticks and other similar accessories that there wasn't a huge fad behind.

 

I really don't think the genre of games that VR is good at includes FPS games though even though that seems to be what most of the hype is about.  The BEST current genres for VR are the ones where you don't move around.  Games like driving games, flight simulators, etc.  EVE Valkyrie for example seems like an amazing game.  VR will be awesome in a future Gran Turismo game (or Forza if MS makes a VR product for Xbox).  Hawken is the right style of game for VR.  Moving around your living room when you can't see your actual surroundings is NOT a good idea.  Coupling VR with Kinect would be a HORRIBLE idea (though AR might work) for example.  There will no doubt be entirely new genres of games that open up because of VR though as well.

 

Beyond actually playing games the VR headset gives you a second screen.  So if your child, roommate, significant other is watching the TV the PS4 is attached to you can put on the headset and watch a different movie or play a game on the headset sitting on the couch beside them.

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

I am mainly most interested in Oculus as a VR solution as it will require a PC to use and thus the technical power behind it will somewhat be dependent on just how much the end user is willing to spend on their computer components, which for myself my plan is to build a new PC strictly to support it fully, however I am still interested in seeing what everyone else can do with their solutions, especially Sony since I do own a PS4, a PS4 Camera, and Move controllers already.

 

To me VR is the culmination of everything video games has tried to achieve thus far. Instead of being a passive observer in a virtual environment, you are an active one. That right there is downright amazing, and I am all for it myself, especially if they can pull it off.

 

For the life of me I can no longer find the game, but there was a space game being developed for Oculus in which you are floating in space in zero gravity and all hell breaks loose. It looks like a sequence from the movie Gravity itself. It looked utterly amazing, and all I could do was try to imagine what it would be like to actually be in that environment in an immersive fashion. I cannot wait until it is an actually reality, virtual or otherwise.

[+Asmodai MVC]

I am mainly most interested in Oculus as a VR solution as it will require a PC to use and thus the technical power behind it will somewhat be dependent on just how much the end user is willing to spend on their computer components, which for myself my plan is to build a new PC strictly to support it fully

You're backing the wrong company then. If you want it PC centric then HTC and Valve are your best bets. Oculus WANTS to make a stand-alone device that has the CPU/GPU, memory, etc. built into the headset instead of being teathered to a PC or Console. It uses a PC now only because the mobile hardware just isn't up to snuff yet. They WERE focusing on PC before Facebook bought them and at that time they were working together with Valve but clearly that's changed since Valve is releasing a competing product.

[spenser.d]

This should be a post to revisit in a few years

If you don't think Zuckerberg and Facebook will make it popular then I think you underestimate what is to come. VR is far more advanced and mature than Kinect. What can be seen and done with games is much more interesting than waving your arms about. It's a visual experience more than a physical.

Digital Foundrys opinion

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-hands-on-with-the-near-final-project-morpheus

And ARS

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/03/one-year-later-sonys-morpheus-prototype-is-still-vr-done-right/

Feel free to do so, I'm not concerned. And I don't see Facebook popularizing it either.

[nosense]

I hope Morpheus doesnt go the way of Sixaxis, PS eye, PS move, PlayStation Wonderbook....

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

I hope Morpheus doesnt go the way of Sixaxis, PS eye, PS move, PlayStation Wonderbook....

 

You do realize that all 3 of them are still in use today, right? And Wonderbook is a game which made use of Move & Eye, not a platform or accessory in itself...

[nosense]

You do realize that all 3 of them are still in use today, right? And Wonderbook is a game which made use of Move & Eye, not a platform or accessory in itself...

Wonder book was a peripheral not a game. http://wonderbook.eu.playstation.com/ . You can buy different books\games for it.

 

If Morpheus doesn't plan out, its another huge money sink added to a failing company.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

Wonder book was a peripheral not a game. http://wonderbook.eu.playstation.com/ . You can buy different books for it.

 

The Wonderbook is just an AR card. It uses the Eye and Move. Which is the same for non-Wonderbook titles such as Eyepet.

 

A printed out sheet of paper will perform the same task as the real thing. And afaik, there wasn't "books", just a handful of games.

 

Either way, whether we call it a full accessory or not, it is still used on both Vita and PS4 and can easily be included with Sony's VR plans

[+Asmodai MVC]

I hope Morpheus doesnt go the way of Sixaxis, PS eye, PS move, PlayStation Wonderbook....

 

This makes no sense.  Sixaxis was just a DualShock 3 that they stipped the rumble from because of a patent lawsuit over the rumble tech at the time of launch.  It was replaced when the lawsuit was over with the real DualShock 3 but if you didn't care about rumble you didn't have to upgrade.  I still use my Sixaxis controller that came with my PS3 today when playing my PS3 it never became incompatible or anything.

 

PS eye was the PS3 camera/mic.  It was the successor to the PS2 EyeToy and the predecessor to the PlayStation Camera for the PS4 (which is selling quite well).  So in no way was it a dead end either.

 

PS Move is a combination of technologies that includes the camera/mic mentioned above as well as the "wands".  As I've already covered the camera/mic is still very much alive (but there IS one per generation, they don't just keep moving the same old one from generation to generation just like there is at least one gamepad per generation) and the "wands" as I understand it are the controllers for Project Morpheus.  So Morpheus is in a way the evolution of the PS Move and it's actually pretty good (for people who have PS Move) that it appears they won't need to buy new "wands" for Morpheus even though there was a generation change in the console.  Usually you DO have to buy new peripherals when you move from one generation to the next (as you do with the camera/mic)

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

You're backing the wrong company then. If you want it PC centric then HTC and Valve are your best bets. Oculus WANTS to make a stand-alone device that has the CPU/GPU, memory, etc. built into the headset instead of being teathered to a PC or Console. It uses a PC now only because the mobile hardware just isn't up to snuff yet. They WERE focusing on PC before Facebook bought them and at that time they were working together with Valve but clearly that's changed since Valve is releasing a competing product.

I think you may be placing too much weight on the fact that it is a Valve backed device and not keeping in mind the practicality of it. Meaning I am pretty damn positive the first Oculus that will be released will still be PC dependent, there has just been so much development up to this point with that setup. They are not going to just throw away years of development. Is mobile perhaps their end goal eventually? Sure I guess so, this is the first I am hearing about it myself. If you have some articles about how this is clearly their vision, by all means share them, I am definitely interested in learning more.

I have read up on the Valve/HTC Vive device and personally although it sounds great, what I do not currently like about it is the fact it needs a full room with sensors in the room and proprietary motion controls to work in its current iteration. IF they make a version that can be used in a smaller environment like the Rift, then my interest will change, but right now the Vive sounds a bit to high concept for practical use. Obviously I too like that it is Valve backed, they are a games company and a games company should have gaming as the main goal, and just the Portal demo I read about had me wanting to learn more about it as well, but having a whole damn room to dedicate to VR seems a bit crazy to me. At least until it is a proven technology. I can just see the conversation with my wife now.... "So yeah, I need to take over an entire room upstairs to dedicate to Virtual Reality."

 

So for now I am sticking with Oculus as they seem to have the most practical approach,. Morpheus second as I have the PS4 Camera and Move Controllers, and Vive is in third place for me right now because of the previously mentioned practicality issues with the space. If they figure that out and make it more self contained, then it very well could easily jump right into what I am most interested in.

[+Asmodai MVC]

I think you may be placing too much weight on the fact that it is a Valve backed device and not keeping in mind the practicality of it. Meaning I am pretty damn positive the first Oculus that will be released will still be PC dependent, there has just been so much development up to this point with that setup.

I'm not sure why you're saying that like it's different from what I said. As I stated "It uses a PC now only because the mobile hardware just isn't up to snuff yet." and that isn't going to change before the first retail version comes out. I'm petty damn positive the first Oculus that will be released will still be PC dependent too but again it's just a necessary evil for them while they wait for the mobile hardware to improve. They don't WANT to be bound to a PC, the WILL because they NEED to on the short term but they WANT to be untethered. Valve WANTS VR to be bound to a PC (running Steam). I'm not saying one way is better or worse I'm just saying that if what you wants is a VR headset that's PC centric then Valve is a better fit and Oculus.

They are not going to just throw away years of development.

What would they be throwing away? Most of their development is hardware related not software.

Is mobile perhaps their end goal eventually? Sure I guess so, this is the first I am hearing about it myself. If you have some articles about how this is clearly their vision, by all means share them, I am definitely interested in learning more.

Follow John Carmack on Twitter. That's what he does. Read some interviews from Palmer Luckey, I think they've been pretty clear about it if this is the first you've heard of it you must not be following Oculus very closely. You must be mostly reading reviews of what they're currently offering instead of talks of where they're trying to go.

So for now I am sticking with Oculus as they seem to have the most practical approach,. Morpheus second as I have the PS4 Camera and Move Controllers, and Vive is in third place for me right now because of the previously mentioned practicality issues with the space. If they figure that out and make it more self contained, then it very well could easily jump right into what I am most interested in.

All I'm saying is if you want to play VR games on a PC that Valve is most likely the one to follow. If you're a game developer and you have to choose between releasing your game on Steam or through the Oculus store which do you think is going to have a greater audience. Maybe the vive sucks, it's just the first, the big thing is SteamVR and I suspect there will be a lot of hardware companies making headsets that run Valves SteamVR while Oculus won't likely want to make their stuff depend on Steam so will be separate and have a MUCH smaller PC audience. Steam is a HUGE advantage for Valve. Maybe LG and Lenovo and Asus will make SteamVR headsets as well. Samsung is working with Oculus but again that's on a mobile version. They're already on version 2 of the Gear VR and Carmack claims they'll be ALL IN (whatever that means) with a version 3 later this year. I really don't know how you can be unaware of Oculus's mobile focus with the Samsung mobile products being the only Oculus devices that have shipped to consumers and the huge hire of Carmack where his entire focus is mobile. It's really not a secret.

[Jarrichvdv]

If the price of the PS4 can come down by 2016, launching a bundle with VR at $599 will be the same price MS launched the One at with Kinect.

I think Microsoft launched Xbox + Kinect for $499, not $599

;-)

 

[MikeChipshop Member]

The more competition in the VR space, the better.

This is actually starting to look a lot better than i imagined it would do, and that's a great thing.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

I think Microsoft launched Xbox + Kinect for $499, not $599

;-)

 

 

My bad. It was the PS3 that launched at that price    Ridiculous price..

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

 

 

http://www.famitsu.com/news/201503/06073336.html

 

Pretty cool that other people in the room can see what you're looking at on the TV.

[Melfster]

One of problems with Morpheus is you all ways have to face camera with the move controllers you can never turn 360 degrees.  HTC/valve solution is much better.