Inspiring

Question

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

168 replies
22734 views

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.

Show previous replies

JED44

Up and Coming

Zenbane said:

The truth is that you are very strongly arguing against the notion that AAA games will continue to have a huge impact in the VR world. Whereas I argue that they will not only continue, but increase in demand. I have offered evidence such as the tracked controller user base (HTC Vive) who went on a global tirade to ensure that Revive works with Oculus firmware so that they can play AAA games released by Oculus Studios. Your counter argument is to ask me to type up a definition.

Can we stop with the revive crap already? First off Revive was down for maybe two days before the guy figured out how to get it working again. So saying that people wanted revive to work with Oculus firmware is flat out wrong. Its never been down completely for more than a few days. Meanwhile the DRM fiasco lasted the better part of a month, and wasn't as focused on people wanting to play the games as much as them wanting to have access to them (Either with equivalent hardware or with future generations of hardware), and disliking the precedent Oculus was setting for PC VR gaming.

Those are two very different things.

Unless you have solid evidence for the length of time and amount of games people actually used revive to play versus the amount of Steam VR games they played, Your arguments about people wanting Oculus games over Steam VR or Vive games is at best an assumption.

Zenbane

Honored Contributor

JED44 said:

Can we stop with the revive crap already? First off Revive was down for maybe two days before the guy figured out how to get it working again. So saying that people wanted revive to work with Oculus firmware is flat out wrong.

Between this forum and reddit, the number of threads popping up demanding that Oculus reverse their update that prevented Revive from working was impressive. The battle continued in comment sections of every VR news article. Some gal from Oculus had to come out with a public interview that people hated and only fueled the fight even more. Finally, Palmer addressed it publicly on July 1st, with the problem hitting online mediums as early as 3 months ago...

1) Early April 2016
https://www.reddit.com/r/Vive/comments/4g13kh/warning_luckys_tale_103_breaks_revive/
[WARNING] Lucky's Tale 1.0.3 breaks Revive compatibility
NO EXCLUSIVES! will not buy a exclusive. Open VR or die.

2) May 2016
https://www.reddit.com/r/Vive/comments/4k8fmm/new_oculus_update_breaks_revive/
New Oculus update breaks Revive
Don't feed that Facebook monster it's big enough

3) June 2016
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160624/10114434814/oculus-reverses-drm-course-after-public-backlash.shtml
Oculus Reverses DRM Course After Public Backlash

4) July 1 - Palmer interview
https://www.twitch.tv/roosterteeth/v/75611893?t=04h15m19s

Jed, you are caught in an infinite loop of "opposite day," and your obsession with typing up the exact opposite of observable facts is causing you to contradict not only logic, but even your own pinwheel reasoning. Remember, not too long ago you didn't deny that this really occurred, in fact, you tried to explain it (or at least, Blue Jed did),

https://forums.oculus.com/community/discussion/38889/oculus-quietly-removes-hardware-drm-with-1-5-thoughts
"Oculus Quietly Removes Hardware DRM with 1.5 - Thoughts?"

Not to mention Blue Jed's comment where I bring up the very same issue in this thread which you (Red Jed) are now denying exists:
https://forums.oculus.com/community/discussion/comment/407675/#Comment_407675

I love when Blue Jed and Red Jed fight.

Zenbane

Honored Contributor

jayhawk said:

What I keep trying to say: Immersion happens in the HMD, and there is a huge difference between standing/motion control short burst experiences vs. seated gaming.

It's as if the VR noobs that try VR for the first time using motion controls are instantly ready to give up what they've always known as gaming for short burst toy like experiences with no depth or replay value all for the sake of being able to grab things and throw them.

Couldn't agree more. Even playing 2D games in a VR room (e.g., Virtual Desktop) is completely enthralling. I love having my mind immersed in some outer space theater while I enjoy lengthy epic titles like Skyrim. I'm about to replay a puzzle adventure game, "The Longest Journey," followed by the sequel, "Dreamfall." Complete 2D experiences within a VR theatre.

The mouse n' keyboard usage is not breaking my immersion. The HMD and the brain will always be the key to immersive VR.

ManeVr

Up and Coming

CrashFu said:

ThreeDeeVision said:

The more your in-game avatar is a believable representation of your physical body, and the more haptic feedback you get through the VR input device, the closer we will be to actual immersion.

What if I'm bored of my physical body, with all its averageness and physical limitations, and I want to be or witness something better and more interesting? That's supposed to be the whole point of virtual reality, isn't it? If I wanted to continue being my boring old self with my regular human abilities and just make the space around me look more interesting, I'd be into Augmented Reality instead.

Motion controls do a very limited number of things exceptionally well, namely simulating the natural use of hands, or hand-held tools, or just as a simple means to indicate a point in physical space nearby and relative to the user, or point in a particular direction from that space. That's pretty much it, and there's only so much that can conceivably be done with it. You can be a face with one or two hands, tools, or digital cursors.

But if you give someone enough raw digital inputs (IE buttons, triggers, and analog sticks) arranged in a way that is intuitive and comfortable to use (IE a gamepad), that interface serves as a direct link to the conscious mind THROUGH the hands, and the player can be pretty much anything.

So why do you have to be yourself to feel immersed in something? Don't you ever play role-playing games and step into the shoes of a character that isn't you? Don't you ever have dreams where you're different from your waking self? When you read a book, do you need the protagonist to be a blank-slate mary-sue, because you can't get engrossed in the story unless you can imagine the main character is you?

This isn't meant as a personal criticism, I'm genuinely curious why having a world that seems real isn't enough for some people to feel immersed unless they can get their real-world limbs involved in the process. Maybe some people are just more attached to their body, while others think of themselves as their consciousness and it doesn't matter to them whether they're in their body or placing that consciousness inside a vehicle or the shell of a virtual character (or disembodied frame of reference).

this is just how I feel. motion control to me feels limiting cause it held back by what I can do. but I play games to feel like I can do more i can't jump as high as master chief but if i'm just pushing "A" then I don't need to. I want to feel super human playing games I use vr to block out the world and the gamepad to do things I can't do so I will truly feel like I am a superhuman but if I am giving motion controls and not can only jump as high as I can jump in real life and move the way I can in real life then to me there is no point of vr I am better off going back to my 2d video games

it's all about the games... https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClB-X7Pp9kEirCJpRvMc3cg

ManeVr

Up and Coming

ThreeDeeVision said:

@Zenbane, that was obviously a reply to CrashFu's statement "VR will be appreciated by true VR enthusiasts even without motion controls."

I am not putting any labels on anything, only trying to put a little common sense into this thread. Obviously hand tracking in some form is a big part of VR immersion, that cannot be argued, it is documented fact.

If you spent more time in VR than you did on these forums, maybe you would realize that. I am off to eat and then do some VR, like any enthusiast would.

this is BS it's a big part of immersion for YOU. which is cool for YOU. he never said it was a bad thing just that it's limiting to VR to say a game isn't a true VR game if it doesn't have ur hands in it.

it's all about the games... https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClB-X7Pp9kEirCJpRvMc3cg

nalex66

Honored Contributor

Zenbane said:

You realize that I'm the king of baiting people...

Nobody will argue with you on that point; you've proven yourself to be a master baiter. ;)

Personally, I'm very much looking forward to Touch releasing. Not all games need tracked controllers, but for a lot of VR experiences, having your hands in the virtual world will go a long way to enhancing a feeling of presence. It's just the nature of how we interact with the world around us--we look, and we touch. You see it just about every time someone tries VR for the first
time--they look around, and they reach out and try to touch the virtual
objects they see. The Rift nails the visual aspect of being in a virtual space--now we just need the Touch part.

If the control scheme matching physical actions didn't matter at all, then we could just use a game pad for everything, and there would be no need for steering wheels and HOTAS. People use alternate control types when they suit the experience--it feels more like you're driving a car if you have a wheel and pedals, rather than abstracting those motions with an analogue stick and a few buttons or triggers.

For many of the types of experiences we want to have in VR, the ability to use natural hand motions will be a game-changer. Imagine going through Technolust and being able to reach out and pick up objects for closer examination, turning them over in your hands like you would do in real life? I think, especially for first-person experiences, having hands does take it to the next level.

I'm also really looking forward to trying Medium--content creation is another area where having 1:1 tracked hand motion will be a huge improvement. It's the equivalent of using a Wacom tablet for digital sketching rather than trying to draw with a mouse--when you can use your hands like you would normally do, everything is so much easier. I do a lot of 3D modelling, and the idea of doing it in real (virtual) space in front of me using my hands is very intriguing.

Other game types like third-person platformers--sure, the game pad
remains the most appropriate control method. Tracked controllers aren't the be-all end-all of VR interaction, but there's no denying that they will bring a lot of new possibilities to the table. There are many challenges to overcome (like how to impose the limits of the virtual world over the freedom of movement in the real world), but already we're seeing devs come up with clever solutions as they tackle this new form of input.

Just like wheels for racing games, HOTAS for flying, and gamepads for platformers, I think tracked controllers will prove to be the best tool for the job in a lot of (but not all) future VR content.

DK2, CV1, Go, Quest, Quest 2, Quest 3. Try my game: Cyclops Island Demo

Zenbane

Honored Contributor

Just like wheels for racing games, HOTAS for flying, and gamepads for
platformers, I think tracked controllers will prove to be the best tool
for the job in a lot of (but not all) future VR content.

Very well stated, @nalex66

And I think in the end, that is what @CrashFu was trying to say in this thread. To which I concur, if a lot of future VR content will be made specifically for Touch (a tracked controller), then yes, Oculus Touch will be the best tool for the job. It's a supply/demand type of thing. But as you said, Tracked Controllers are not the best tool for everything. I take it one step further to say that up til now, Tracked Controllers have not been the deciding factor for "true VR immersion."

Simple examples include racing wheels and HOTAS for simulation, and the global demand for Vive users to play non-track controller games by Oculus Studio via Revive.

I feel good about where this debate has landed o:)

CrashFuAuthor

Inspiring

@JED44 - If Budget Cuts is playable on Rift once Touch comes out, I do intend to play it, I admit, I've only seen a fairly small amount of Budget Cuts gameplay, so maybe it has some depth beyond just shooting teleport-balls around and pegging robots in the back of the head with throwing knives and I'll end up pleasantly surprised. I'll have to keep an eye on that Raw Data thing, too.

@ All - I think we've more or less come to a group understanding, even if some of our opinions differ.

I just wanted people to stop taking a verbal dump on VR games that don't use motion controls, since it's just not fair to those games, especially the ones that were in development (or still are!) since before motion controls were available to developers, or the games where Motion Controls couldn't possibly add anything to the specific game experience anyways.

And also because that kind of "motion controls are crucial to have a good VR experience" reasoning has been the go-to catch-phrase of Vive fanboys trying to scare people away from the Rift, ever since all the "scandals" blew over. :confused:

And also because, well... in the end, Virtual Reality and Motion Controls are two separate technologies. They go really well together, yes, but so far I think the industry has done TOO good a job convincing the general public that Motion Controls are awesome while completely failing to convince them that Virtual Reality is equally awesome. People saying things like "VR isn't worth it unless you have motion controls" reaaaaally doesn't help that. At this rate, the general public is going to start concluding that they'd be better off just ditching VR headsets altogether and playing motion-control games on their 4k monitors. And you KNOW that Valve wouldn't have any qualms selling vive-wand-and-lighthouse-only bundles, once their full-vive-package sales have peaked. :fearful:

It's hard being the voice of reason when you're surrounded by unreasonable people.

JED44

Up and Coming

Zenbane said:

JED44 said:

Can we stop with the revive crap already? First off Revive was down for maybe two days before the guy figured out how to get it working again. So saying that people wanted revive to work with Oculus firmware is flat out wrong.

Between this forum and reddit, the number of threads popping up demanding that Oculus reverse their update that prevented Revive from working was impressive. The battle continued in comment sections of every VR news article. Some gal from Oculus had to come out with a public interview that people hated and only fueled the fight even more. Finally, Palmer addressed it publicly on July 1st, with the problem hitting online mediums as early as 3 months ago...

1) Early April 2016
https://www.reddit.com/r/Vive/comments/4g13kh/warning_luckys_tale_103_breaks_revive/
[WARNING] Lucky's Tale 1.0.3 breaks Revive compatibility
NO EXCLUSIVES! will not buy a exclusive. Open VR or die.

2) May 2016
https://www.reddit.com/r/Vive/comments/4k8fmm/new_oculus_update_breaks_revive/
New Oculus update breaks Revive
Don't feed that Facebook monster it's big enough

3) June 2016
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160624/10114434814/oculus-reverses-drm-course-after-public-backlash.shtml
Oculus Reverses DRM Course After Public Backlash

4) July 1 - Palmer interview
https://www.twitch.tv/roosterteeth/v/75611893?t=04h15m19s

Jed, you are caught in an infinite loop of "opposite day," and your obsession with typing up the exact opposite of observable facts is causing you to contradict not only logic, but even your own pinwheel reasoning. Remember, not too long ago you didn't deny that this really occurred, in fact, you tried to explain it (or at least, Blue Jed did),

https://forums.oculus.com/community/discussion/38889/oculus-quietly-removes-hardware-drm-with-1-5-thoughts
"Oculus Quietly Removes Hardware DRM with 1.5 - Thoughts?"

Not to mention Blue Jed's comment where I bring up the very same issue in this thread which you (Red Jed) are now denying exists:
https://forums.oculus.com/community/discussion/comment/407675/#Comment_407675

I love when Blue Jed and Red Jed fight.

So @Zenbane....you showed that the revive and DRM issue existed...which is what I said. My argument was that your reasoning that it was all about people wanting Oculus' specific content over Steam VR or Vive games is merely an assumption. Your statement that people went on a "global tirade" to ensure REVIVE WORKED is also flat out wrong. It has never worked for all titles, and within days of the DRM policy it was working again, albeit having to strip through all of the DRM blocks to do so. Here's some links to give you dates in case you didn't actually research them:

https://forums.oculus.com/vip/discussion/36575/oculus-app-1-4-release-notes/p1 - Dated May 19th

https://github.com/LibreVR/Revive/releases/tag/0.5.2 -Dated May 21st

https://github.com/LibreVR/Revive/releases/tag/0.6 -Dated May 27th

People were mad that Oculus targeted it, obviously, but the larger issue was not getting it to work as you said, (because it was already working again) it was that people did not support Oculus' DRM and hardware exclusive policies and wanted to see them reversed. (actually the reddit sources you post all confirm this, if you read them)

I am not denying anything exists. Merely pointing out where your statements are flawed or incorrect. Having no actual experience with a Vive or Revive however, I can understand that you would not know better.

Also in case you need help here is the rest of that quote you took from me and probably didn't read

Its never been down completely for more than a few days. Meanwhile the DRM fiasco lasted the better part of a month, and wasn't as focused on people wanting to play the games as much as them wanting to have access to them (Either with equivalent hardware or with future generations of hardware), and disliking the precedent Oculus was setting for PC VR gaming. (JED here, the reddit links you posted also confirm this, did you read them? :o )

Those are two very different things.

PS - Zenbane should really learn how to read and stop blaming his imaginary red and blue JEDs for all his comprehension issues. ;)

Zenbane

Honored Contributor

JED44 said:
So @Zenbane....you
showed that the revive and DRM issue existed...which is what I said. My
argument was that your reasoning that it was all about people wanting
Oculus' specific content over Steam VR or Vive games is merely an
assumption.

The argument here is that if tracked controllers is the true defining factor for VR immersion then there is no reason that the Revive outcry should have been so global and lengthy. The actions during the 3-month long crusade removes any need for assumption.

The only reason those same folks try to say that it was more about "access to the games" is because their pride prevents them from admitting that the catalyst for their outrage originated from the over-whelming desire to cure their Vive boredom. Their actions were more than just about the idea of access to games; it was about actually accessing them.

Show more replies

Get Help

Sign up

Login with SSO

Login to the community

Login with SSO