Yeah, the point is indeed, with the current prices they are setting for VR accessories, it'll be quite a slow push, and even then, the hardware has to match up to deliver the experience. We're talking a lot just for the screens that we plaster on our eyes. What about the equipment that will make us run keyboard-less? After all, VR isn't complete when my eyes are living a virtual reality but my hands are living in another reality, along with my legs, and all of these are costy hardware.

I certainly don't see the big deal with VR. Thank you for the immersive experience, but I prefer being able to play for far longer times without being tired. I need fun gaming, not immersive gaming too.

I spent over $3500 on a brand new plasma flat screen right when they first came out. Early adopter... I used to call myself one. Had to have the first of everything. After wasting my time trying to out nerd my nerd friends for years, you know what I learned? Early adopter is code word for SUCKER.

Never again. Never again.

Damn humans... ;(

Actually the witcher sold about equal on each platform. Xbone, PS4 & PC each taking about an equal share of the pie.

Not entirely correct -- There are already various VR games in development. Yes, "real games", not just some tech demos. Some will be VR-optional, some are specifically ( exclusively? ) being developed for the new tech. Many of the current major AAA studios are simply making "VR compatibility" a part of their feature list for new games. So it's not even necessary to spend a fortune on some risky VR-exclusive production, the publishers merely spend some extra money to also make their regular games VR compatible. But of course giants like Valve/HTC, Sony and MS will be spending a sizable amount of money on VR exclusives, in order to push their new technology and make it attractive to the customers.

It's also not necessarily true that VR productions will be more expensive than traditional game projects. You have to keep in mind that true, exclusive VR games will be a completely different experience. They don't have to be huge open-world games like the Witcher in order to be successful. Something as relatively "simple" as the Silent Hills teaser could be a mind-blowing experience in full VR. I expect most new games tailored specifically to the technology will be relatively simple and short, more like interactive movies. It will probably take a while until they've figured out what works and what doesn't in terms of gameplay, game pacing etc.

Last but not least: VR porn. If all else fails, that's all it takes to ensure the success of VR hardware. XD
Is that really true? I'd expect it to do better on PC, and not so well on the Xbone, for various reasons.

How well did the game do anyway? Was it a great commercial success for CDPR? Been wondering about that.

Another reason CastAR i cast my vote for, is that the hardware specs needed to run it and use it i think i read could be running off of a tablet. Of course the results could be much better with higher spec hardware, but what wouldn't be? Regardless you aren't plastering headgear 3 inches from your eyes and enclosing yourself to be immersed.

Like 3D TV's, i don't see VR really taking off. In some cases it will always be useful or interesting, or innovative, but other than a gimmick i don't see it being much of anything.

Somehow, when you write like this, regardless of the content, I expect some poetry or lyrics of a song :o)

Good for people who have a lot of $... :-|

Not convinced about VR, and that's coming from somebody who nearly bought a 1000$ VR headset 16 years ago.

I tried the several "card box" VR set, the Oculus and there isn't a single one that hasn't been for me an eyes killer puke inducing experience, heck I cannot watch a 3D movie in theater without having to remove the glasses from time to time to rest my eyes, so I am not convinced about having long play session with a VR set.

But even without that, it would be nice to have VR for some games (e.g. flight sim), but for a lot of other games the interest is limited to non existent (e.g. third persons, JPRG, etc...) heck even for FPS moving the head freely while having to use the mouse/pad to aim/walk is far from ideal.

Also there is the health concern, more and more scientist start worrying about the long term damaging effects of led lighting on your macula, not sure if putting what is basically two led light source mere centimeters from your eyes for extended period of times is really a good idea.

Making it compatible....mmmh, let see.
Excuse me, but I don't think thats working for most titles.
Action titles, with gamepad control...possible. But what about a FPS? Playing one without keyboard is possible, but not the same fun.
Possible that VR is the next big hit? Sure...that or its only a hype we are laughing about in 10 years.

Hey hey hey, At least a Laptop was a revolutionary new thing.

Think about it, now I can take a computer where ever I want, say for work or studying etc.

If anything early adopters of Laptops had a best when used correctly.

Well, point is, some sucker (like emob and his plasma TV, and me and my first-gen HDTV) is going to pay that early-adopter premium for the cool new gee-whiz shiny object, and if it works out to be a good product then we all get to take a stab at it for a much lower price a couple years later.

It IS a revolution, a new thing.
It's way bigger than 3D monitors, it's probably bigger than color monitors were.

Looking at a monitor, you see a flat 2D image through a tiny window (that is the screen).
Looking at a big huge TV, you see a flat 2D image through a slightly larger window.
Looking at a big glasses free 3D screen, you see through a window with something like depth perception.

With VR glasses, you don't look through a window, you're there, surrounded.
Turn your head and it's not the pile of laundry in your sofa but a new view to the different world.

Now are there any games that make full use of this? I don't know.
How much eye/brain-strain will it cause to focus at an image that's actually 2 cm from your eyes? I don't know.
Will it catch in a big way? I don't know.

But it's big.

Before the 3D TV fad left, i gave some glasses a try at walmart. The effect felt like the TV was 4 inches deep or so for depth. Overall underwhelming.

Another reason I liked CastAR, because it displays the image on a reflective surface that you set up, that's probably at least 2-3 feet away (and distance shouldn't affect the image as you'll focus on it anyways regardless how close/far it is).