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

J

JED44

Up and Coming

@CrashFu I think the threads about run its course, and everyone has said what they wanted to say about the actual topic. I think there is a reason people are so excited for motion controls, but just like how VR didn't make traditional gaming get up and go anywhere, I don't think motion control gaming will make seated VR up and move either. I think the idea of decoupling motion controls from VR doesn't really work, because it's a complimentary technology...an incredibly complimentary technology.but it wont make other experiences moot in the long run.

Also when you get Touch I would like to play a game of Raw Data with you, (it is built for coop play) and see what you think.

J

JED44

Up and Coming

Zenbane said:

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.

Whether tracked controls are the true defining factor for VR immersion is a moot point though. I don't see people arguing that even around here. It is mostly people who own both headsets countering statements like yours that motion controls are useless or don't add immersion by saying that they definitely do - for the right first person experiences. No one is going to play Luckys or Chronos with motion controls and say wow this is 10x better. If people are not interested in such experiences because something else offers more immersion as a result of peripherals (Racing sims, Pilot Sims, Or Motion controller games) then that is logical.

VR didn't come along and remove everyone's reason for playing traditional games. (Despite it being more immersive for a huge amount of people) so why would motion controls come along and do the same for regular VR (Despite it being more immersive for a sizable amount of people)?

In any case that point is also ignoring that:

1) the VR market is small enough that people want access to any and all content because there is so little to consume and they paid so much to be able to play VR games.

2) By splitting the market for PC gamers, they upset gamer's who have had all of their PC available games accessible regardless of what hardware they are using (provided that hardware is good enough to run the game)

3) the hardware, spec wise, are both so similar that for most games there is no issue running it smoothly and comfortably.

4) by that system at the time, Oculus Home users would lose their content if they decided to upgrade to another manufacturers headset for gen 2

All much better and more prevalent reasons for people to continue an outcry against hardware based DRM policies and the intentional targeting of revive on PC. (and the reasons a majority of those posting about the issue gave)

Your statement that all those people are lying because they need to "cure their vive boredom" is you shoving your own agenda down other peoples throats. Saying it was about actually accessing them (well DUH) is not magically equivalent to the vive content being inferior or boring. That is quite a biased logical jump. Not surprising that it is from someone who has literally not stopped bashing the vive or motion controls since they became a topic on this forum, despite having severely limited or no actual experience with them.

I am sure that if touch was suddenly bared from using Vive motion controller games once it releases, there would be an outcry as well, and then by your logic it would be solely because the touch content is boring.

Zenbane

Honored Contributor

JED44 said:

Whether tracked controls are the true defining factor for VR immersion
is a moot point though. I don't see people arguing that even around
here.

That is what this thread is exactly about... did you not read the very first post?

Thread title:
We have to stop associating all VR with motion controls...

First quote in the first post:
"The Vive is the only real VR because it has motion controls!"

It's no surprise that you can't the thing you are standing it.

J

JED44

Up and Coming

@Zenbane

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 argument about motion controls and VR immersion has almost nothing to do with the revive DRM issue you reference it to. Hence Moot Point.

I also have not seen anyone, particularly in this forum and this thread. Argue that motion controllers are the "True defining factor for VR immersion" as you put it. They say it is more immersive or closer to true VR than seated game pad VR, but never have I seen someone argue its an end all be all like you suggest.

Additionally, if you could get me a source on that quote then I will concede that I have seen someone actually try to argue it.

Zenbane

Honored Contributor

The argument about motion controls and VR immersion has almost nothing
to do with the revive DRM issue you reference it to. Hence Moot Point.

The point you invented is moot, I agree. The point I am making about how the Revive crusade proves that tracked controllers are not the sole defining factor of VR is the opposite of moot: relevant, valid, etc.

True defining factor for VR immersion
vs
more immersive or closer to true VR than seated game pad VR

Do you really believe you typed up two opposing viewpoints? lol

All you did was pronounce "tomato" with 2 pronunciations.

W

w1dg3t

Inspiring

I like to think this is the beginning of something really quite special. The fact you are debating
and asking theese questions can only bring progression.

Zenbane said:
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.

This is the forward thinking that can change the game.
I can see where he wants this to go-full on holodeck. At the moment the natural progression
has to be motion controls. It would be a little like running before you could walk. He obviously has ideas on how things should be progressing. It would be cool to hear a few. full room and body tracking must be in the pipe line.

Before i read the post i was coming in here to ask about VR books.How emersive you could make a learning experience. I am currently a few chapters into a book called The Invention of Nature by Andrea Wulf. This is the life story of Alexander Von Humboldt a great aventurer
who's work pathed the way for Darwins, natural selection.

There is alot of places and people in this book that i have no idea what they look like and situations and places left to your imagination. Yet i can if this book was in Vr you would be stood in the middle of it and as you read or had it narated.The images of people's faces that you read about would apear. The mountain ranges and plants come to life in front of you.
The towns of that time and villages, jungles and ships and seas crossed all apearing briefly as you read.

The whole experience could be brought to life almost as if you were there.

Are there examples of this kind of story telling?

Thanks

J

jjkrogs

Up and Coming

Until a truly effective hand simulator (VR glove) is developed, I'll agree with the OP.

T

ThreeDeeVision

Inspiring

mane43 said:

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.

@mane43 The title of this OP is "We have to stop associating all VR with motion controls". That blanket statement is why I posted, because I disagree with that point of view completely. It isn't just "ME" that wants VR to be more than just a third-person gamepad device. The Vive wouldn't have sold as well as it did and Oculus wouldn't be spending time developing the Touch and the games for it, if that was the case.

And in regards to statements like this: "with a gamepad my avatar jumps higher, so I can feel superhuman". What is limiting your avatar from jumping high with motion controls? I have jumped and flew all over the place in Windlands with motion controls and felt pretty superhuman, so why would it be any different on a gamepad, if not less immersive because I couldn't freely aim my grappling hooks?

The gamepad works great for a lot of VR applications, but that doesn't mean we should completely disregard what hand tracking and hand presence can bring to the table.

J

JohnMaddux

Participant

@ThreeDeeVision - When you jump in Windlands, do you physically jump? Or is it a button on the motion controller? It's been a while since I last played Windlands, and never with motion controls, so I'm curious how it works. Could someone in a wheel chair or on crutches still play with motion controls? I'm supposing not, but since I have no experience with it, I have no idea.

T

ThreeDeeVision

Inspiring

@JohnMaddux Since your HMD is tracking your POV, you could physically jump if you wanted to (would only be a shift in POV, not the same as the in-game jump that allows for wall-jumping), but the squeeze buttons on the Vive controller make your avatar jump just like hitting a button on a gamepad (not sure what the jump input will be on Touch yet, but it will most likely be a button). Crutches might be a bit tough in any situation, because you would need your hands free to hold the gamepad or tracked controllers. A person in a wheelchair could play with motion controls just fine though. It might give them a little taste of flight :)

Show more replies

Get Help

Sign up

Login with SSO

Login to the community

Login with SSO