Skip to main content
Inspiring
July 21, 2016
Question

We have to stop associating all VR with motion controls...

Things I see Vive-owners saying on social media on a near-daily basis:

"The Vive  is the only real VR because it has motion controls!"

"Without motion controls, VR is just a monitor on your face"

"Why would I play this game if it doesn't have motion controls in it?"

"This game is incredible because motion controls! (no other reason given)"

"You can't get immersion without motion controls."

"I'll buy anything with motion controls in it!"

Things I see my fellow Rifters saying here:

"Oh yeah well the Rift WILL be the best AFTER we get motion controls!"

"These games are fun I guess but they'd be better if they used Touch"

"Every game I want to see in the future involves motion controls."

Things I remember Wii-owners saying:

"I can't wait until the Wii comes out, motion controls are going to revolutionize gaming!"

"Oh wow, Wii Sports is the most incredible game I've ever played! Motion controls, yay!"

"Huh... motion controls sure got old fast. All these developers just shoe-horned them in unnecessarily thinking we'd buy anything involving the wii-mote, instead of actually making the games good."

"All these motion-control games are the same. I'm not buying any more."

"How much store credit can I get for this Wii?  You say you're already overstocked?"


This pattern worries me.  Thanks to the Vive craze, a LOT of people are now looking at VR headsets as just an accessory TO motion control gaming, rather than the other way around.  So what's going to happen to VR after everyone inevitably gets bored of motion controls again?  Will the VR platforms thrive even after people become jaded with motion controls?  Wil people jump ship from the Vive to the Rift, because we have content that doesn't rely entirely on motion controls to be fun?  Or will they just conclude that all VR was a fad?

Or will motion controls actually survive past the "novelty" stage this time around?  Will developers have learned from the Wii's short time in the lime-light (and the utter failure of Kinect) and actually go to the effort of making GOOD games that just happen to involve motion controls,  or will they flood the VR platforms with glorified tech demos and half-assed shovelware that rely entirely on the novelty of motion controls, after seeing how easily impressed consumers are with such content on the Vive?

Believe me, I'm as eager as the rest of you to get my hands on Touch, but much like the people raving about the Vive now, and everyone hyped for the Wii when it first came out, this excitement is based on what could potentially be rather than anything we know for sure.  The future of the entire VR industry shouldn't rely on whether our expectations for motion controls are met, because then if motion controls prove to be a short-lived novelty, VR would die with them. People need to see that VR is amazing with OR without motion controls, so that it will survive even if that proves to be a fad.

168 replies

Inspiring
July 21, 2016
Exactly the point.  In a first person game, you could be anything, but limiting your input to your head tracking or a gamepad does not seem logical in any sense to me.
i7 5960X @ 3.8 GHz | Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 PC2800 | GTX Titan X Pascal | Win 10 64 bit | Asus ROG PG348Q | EVGA X99 Classified
Inspiring
July 21, 2016
You obviously LOVE third person VR with a gamepad, I get it.  But I would argue that true VR enthusiasts are looking for more realistic forms of interaction when playing VR games.  They want input that matches what is happening in game.  Gamepads work great for third person VR platformers.  HOTAS works great for VR flying games, wheels work great for VR driving, and first person VR works great with matching input devices.
i7 5960X @ 3.8 GHz | Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 PC2800 | GTX Titan X Pascal | Win 10 64 bit | Asus ROG PG348Q | EVGA X99 Classified
Inspiring
July 22, 2016
You bought an exercise bike for VR did you not?
i7 5960X @ 3.8 GHz | Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 PC2800 | GTX Titan X Pascal | Win 10 64 bit | Asus ROG PG348Q | EVGA X99 Classified
Inspiring
July 22, 2016
And nothing is more intuitive than tracked controllers or hand tracking because you aren't worried about what button does what command, you just reach out and naturally interact with things.
i7 5960X @ 3.8 GHz | Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 PC2800 | GTX Titan X Pascal | Win 10 64 bit | Asus ROG PG348Q | EVGA X99 Classified
Inspiring
July 22, 2016
ugh, do I have to exercise in VR now too? damn it ...
Core i7-7700k @ 4.9 Ghz | 32 GB DDR4 Corsair Vengeance @ 3000Mhz | 2x 1TB Samsung Evo | 2x 4GB WD Black ASUS MAXIMUS IX HERO | MSI AERO GTX 1080 OC @ 2000Mhz | Corsair Carbide Series 400C White (RGB FTW!) Be kind to one another :)
Inspiring
July 22, 2016
The crazy thing is you are actually fooled into exercise by having physical fun.
i7 5960X @ 3.8 GHz | Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 PC2800 | GTX Titan X Pascal | Win 10 64 bit | Asus ROG PG348Q | EVGA X99 Classified
CrashFuAuthor
Inspiring
July 22, 2016


Exactly the point.  In a first person game, you could be anything, but limiting your input to your head tracking or a gamepad does not seem logical in any sense to me.


Head-tracking means you can be something with a working neck.  Motion controls mean you can be something with one or two hands, tools, or have control of other position-varying objects.  Room-scale positional tracking means you can be something on a leash that walks at very very restrained speeds and can't turn around or jump without fear of tripping on a cord and smashing your face into some furniture.

I can think of a lot of things I've been via gamepad that don't fall under the above limitations.  A car, for example. Or a fighter or athlete whose physical capabilities and skill far surpass my real-world hand coordination.  Or the disembodied companion of a miniature orange fox.   NONE of those things would be possible with motion controls, or at least not nearly as intuitive. 
It's hard being the voice of reason when you're surrounded by unreasonable people.
Inspiring
July 22, 2016
Damn it .. I am but a sheeeeeep

On a serious note: anyone seen this article that claimed a research experiment that by just thinking and visualising a work out it improved muscle tone? As a gym rat myself I wonder how something like that would work in VR.
Core i7-7700k @ 4.9 Ghz | 32 GB DDR4 Corsair Vengeance @ 3000Mhz | 2x 1TB Samsung Evo | 2x 4GB WD Black ASUS MAXIMUS IX HERO | MSI AERO GTX 1080 OC @ 2000Mhz | Corsair Carbide Series 400C White (RGB FTW!) Be kind to one another :)
CrashFuAuthor
Inspiring
July 22, 2016


You obviously LOVE third person VR with a gamepad, I get it.  But I would argue that true VR enthusiasts are looking for more realistic forms of interaction when playing VR games.  They want input that matches what is happening in game.  


What you're describing is people who don't have the imaginative capacity to be immersed in anything unless it's completely familiar to their existing experiences.  

"What's the point of VR if it isn't first person? What's the point of VR if I can't use my hands? What's the point of VR if I can't walk around in it?"

These are the things said in youtube and facebook comments by people who think ALL VR is a dumb fad, not people who believe in the medium.
It's hard being the voice of reason when you're surrounded by unreasonable people.
Zenbane
Honored Contributor
July 22, 2016


ugh, do I have to exercise in VR now too? damn it ...


I doubt that VR progression will be the result of some full body motion demand. Some people think that this is the ultimate way to get immersed...






... I definitely do not agree.

VR immersion is all about the "brain," not the body. The moment we are forced to use our bodies to create VR experiences, that is the moment we just limited VR to the barriers created by the human form. VR is supposed to allow us to transcend our bodies.

The brain is limitless, the body is limited.