Wait, a VR exclusive game in 2024? Do they want to sell this to 10 people? That's aside from the fact that the loud colors and bloom made me feel feel a bit unsettled from the screenshots alone.

And in spite of what amok says, translating a game across VR platforms or back into 2D isn't an easy, "Push the whopper button" moment. If it was, the PSVR2 would have been backwards compatible with the PSVR1, but there's a myraid of issues.

• The need to translate games across multiple specific resolutions attuned to specific dot pitches, FOV, and color calibrations.
• The need to translate games across multiple specific ways of displaying VR, because you have to deal with proprietary executable formats too.
• Licensing the game for release across multiple specific helmets if you're not sideloading. Hope you're ready to pay 1000$ just for that alone.
• In spite of open standards existing, that implies compliance to said standard, when many companies want to be the boot instead.
• Certain artstyles and game types just won't work on VR, no matter how you try to slice them into dioramas. Traditional desktop computing for example.

There are many things I am ignorant about; football, cars, fishing, knitting, but then i also do not make any comments about them specificly becuase i know that my knowledge is very limited on the subjects. At best, all I can say is that I cant comment, becuase I dont know enough - not start saying something about cars not working becuasing I heard someone somewhere said something about carburetors being botched and unstandardised.

Indeed, OpenXR has rapedily become the standard that you just doubted existed. Most major hardware and firmware supports (and is build around) OpenXR, such as Microsoft, Meta, HTC, Valve (SteamVR and Index) and Varjo. The only expection I know about is Apple, but then they always do. Almost all game engines and tools, such as Unrea Engine, Blender, Unity or even smaller ones like Godot support OpenXR. Developers who do not use an engine also build around OpenXR, as it is a free and open frameork. And since it is open source, backwards compatability is also not an issue.

Where did I say that?

i understand perfectly well that this is not something that is eaisliy done, or should not be done if you want it well. Things just dont automatcially translates between flascreen and VR environments. Just to mention things that most people dont think about, such as stage controll - how do you make people look where you want them to look - works very different on a flatscreen and in a VR setting, and many other issues

I always belive that a good flatscreen game works best on a flatscreen, and a good VR game works best in VR, you should design you game to take advantage of the format you want it to be played in.

When it comes to "VR Platforms" I assume you talk about for example PSVR or Meta. There is no difference between these platforms than there are between XBox, Switch or PS5. Same thing. But games like this here is PCVR, and you know what? they run on peoples PC's so they have the same limitations and strenghts as all other PC games. Most VR headsets can be connected to a PC, and then the PC uses them just like any other (fancy) monitor (with tracking and controllers and what-nots). .

FInally, there is perhaps some limitations to style. Now we have almost all styles of games in VR, the only that are not that representatice is 2D games - but that is becuase it is no point having a 2D game in VR, they are designed for flatscreens. (However, I must say that Tetris Effect: Connected works very well in VR, so again it is down to good design). I do not see the point of using a VR headset just as a monitor for a flatscreen game (though you can do that as well).

But you have 1st person games, and 3d person games. You have RPG's, Roguelikes, Shooters, Metroidvanias, Boomer shooters, Action platformers all genere now have very good VR games. You have all art styles as well, shell shading, voxel, hand-drawn, abstract, pixelated, realistic, minimalistic - all work well in VR. It all boils down to good design and implementation

Very important point, that one.

I remember from a few years back (when VR was still the talk of the town), somebody here in the forum dreaming about VR-cinemas, where everyone in the audience is wearing a headset, and then gets immersed into the movie like never before.

And it sounds nice, right?

However: like you say - if there's not something drawing the viewers attention to certain focus points in the movie - every audience member will experience a (more or less) different film.

When I bought my PSVR, it came with a "demo" disc, and one of the "demos" had you siiting in a basement, tied to a chair.
Then - out of the blue - someone would pop up in front of you.
Classical jump scare, right?

Only - when that someone popped up "in front" of me, I was looking aside, on the lookout for something to continue the scene.
So, that jump scare happened without me noticing.

Now imagine a movie in cinema, where only half of the audience looks straight ahead, to where the (important) action takes place, while the other half of the audience is looking left, right, up or down.
And the same goes for different parts of the audience and for every single scene in the movie.

If you asked that audience afterwards, what they think of the movie, you'll get answers that range from "absolutely amazing" (from those looking at ALL the right places) to "absolute boring shit" (from those who missed (some/many/most of the) important bits, because they looked elsewhere in those moments).

And while the same may be true (to some extent) for every movie that exists...here it would be a much higher percentage of disappointed viewers - but not necessarily due to actual flaws of the movie itself - but simply due to people, who are looking at different directions, than the director intended.

Sure, one might say: "well, simply make it crystal clear, to everyone, where to put their focus, at these key moments!"
Or even go one massive step further and make it technically so, that these scenes are automatically in the audience's focus (no matter where the individual person turns their head to).

But...where would that leave VR's USP?

This quote clearly shows your very limited knowledge about cars, carburattors aren't a thing in cars in 40 years.
Everyone and his dog knows that cars run on flux capacitors.

Q.E.D.

Knitting, on the other hand, does not work as it lacks a standard framework for the size of the needle thingies they use. Which means that the knitting patterns i get today stop working in 5-10 years when someone develops a different size needle thingy. This is why I never took up needle point... sorry knitting... same thing, really

Noone is claiming that it is, but it has a year on year growth. It is not drastic, but it is growwing.

I also hope you are not a Linux users, as the latests Steam Hardware survey gives more gamers with VR headsets than there are Linux users.

edit - that also only shows the VR users that connect the headsets to Steam, many Meta users do not, and you cannot do it with a PSVR

The game looks cute, but it's too bad that it's VR so pass.

Talking about things you don't know a great deal about is a great way to learn more about them.

For example, if I hadn't written about my opinion here, you might never have informed us about what you know and we might have remained ignorant on the subject matter for a while longer.

It really depends on how you frame things. If you don't know something well and you state your opinions as facts, that is misleading.

But if you state very clearly that those are your opinions based on limited knowledge, then its fine. Then you can compare notes with other people and hopefully, assuming everything gets done with a modicum of respect, get more informed.

There is a difference between "I don't know much about this, do they even have some kind of standard?" and replying to timpuus lunacy with an agreement and "I doubt it has been standardised"

And yet, this was my opinion. Based on what I've seen in other hardware trends, I doubted it was standardized (when inovating in a greenfield area and even not so greenfield areas sometimes, they tend to be more interested in creating walled gardens than playing well together, we see this all the time).

This was a very honest statement about my stance on the matter. I never claimed it was the objective truth, just my educated guess.

You might not have liked my initial bias here, but truth be told, as human beings, we do that all the time. We make educated guesses based on incomplete information. We don't have much of a choice.

As long as we are honest about it and willing to change course if more information surfaces, its fine.

And that's fine, I never said you are not allowed to have your bias and preconceptsions. Just that you then come off as judgemental and close minded about a topic you admited you don't know. So that then informes opinion of you when replying to it, it is an attitude that I personaly do not think is good for much.

edit - the whole point about a bias is not to embrace them, but be aware that you have them and work against them as you know that they will colour your judgement.

Well, for one, I embrace my bias rather than self-flagellate over them, especially when nobody is harmed by them. I will never be all-knowing and perfect and I'm quite at peace with that. I will be horribly wrong about some things and as long as those things are not too important (and getting a VR headset sits nice and cozy in the middle of that list), that's fine.

On the things I know, I inform with charity, patience and civility. On the things I don't know that I don't need to make an opinion on, I keep an open mind. On the things have to make an opinion about (like getting a VR headset or not because I see that a few games seem to require them), but don't have the time to research in depth, I make an opinion as best I can with what I know. And when I learn I've been wrong, I adjust, I don't self-flagellate. I also extent to others a similar courtesy. It's only fair.

Anyways, I'm done. Here's a thought for you:

If you had replied to Timppu' post by saying "Actually, there is a standard called...". I wouldn't have written my post and we would both have thought "Nice, amok is knowledgeable about VR headsets. So glad he could illuminate that conversation".

Instead, you lord it over us like we're terrible people for daring to have an uninformed opinion about something really not that important and we both end up thinking "Wow, when amok knows something, he's really an ... about it isn't he?".

Doesn't look nearly as good. Food for thought.

timpuu did not ask for a standard. he just compared VR headsets to novelty controllers.

And emracing your biases just means you will not learn, but just stay narrow minded. embracing your biases only means you will only confirm your biases. if you want to grow as a human being, you need to step outside your biases. If you are a person that embraces and work with your biases, it laso just mean that I was right in the way I interacted with you, as you will not change.

Just to confirm Godwin's la - embracing your bias a as a racists... just means you stay a racist. Having a bias is a bad thing, somtehing to overcome, not something to be embraced