I've had a q3 for some months now, and while VR has interesting experiences, at the end of the day, the time I spend gaming, if at all, is much higher in flatscreen games than VR. For example, if I played Palworld or Enshrouded, I would spend many more hours than I would otherwise want to for a VR title. To me, VR gaming is kind of exhausting and just demands you set aside a pretty dedicated amount of time and attention to really go at it.
There are a few VR games that I've actually enjoyed and played quite a bit of like "The light brigade" or "in death unchained" but man sometimes each complete run feels exhausting. Good for younger people, but probably not great for people with stressful jobs wanting to unwind at the end of the day. Most VR games seem very action oriented too, like requiring lots of movement and shooting. I like a particular game called "Until you fall" but man, that game is tiring too lol. Pistol whip is hella fun too, but again, relatively high physical demands, especially on higher difficulties.
Neuralink aside, do you guys think VR gaming will ever become more popular than flatscreen gaming?
That said, even Full body dive VR gaming like Sword art online seems pretty hard to juggle with normal life. Although the player doesn't move physically, the amount of mental effort to execute complex moves in VR can't be underestimated, especially if the action is intense and requires concentration. A lot of the calories the brain burns naturally is for processing sensory input and coordinating movements. Seems like it would actually take as much effort as a job to play Sword Art Online seriously.
It depends on the game genre for me. Simulators (flying, driving, space) are ones I much prefer in VR. I tried playing Euro Truck Sim 2 once without VR (the way they originally intended), I couldn't stand it.
But also all of these are games where I sit down. Mostly at my desk with either HOTAS joystick/throttle or a force feedback steering wheel. But I play No Man's Sky and Subnautica in a cinema recliner, due to the controls (NMS uses touch controllers, Subnautica uses xbox controller).
But I still love flat games too.
The HOTAS thing is a good analogy for it. I bought an expensive joystick and throttle specifically for certain games. I don't see it as an all purpose replacement for an xbox controller. Dark Souls: definitely xbox controller. Elite Dangerous: definitely HOTAS. I feel the same about VR, it's not a replacement for flat gaming, its just a good peripheral for some games.
I do know people on here though that find it hard to go back to flat gaming after VR.
I think the preference can be varied by what your current setup is, too. Some people may not have a very good desktop setup—leaving them staring at their headset thinking "Hm. Maybe this game would be better if I played it on a massive virtual screen instead."
Pair that with the ability to lay down in your bed while playing something casual, and you've got a pretty good recipe for a comfortable gaming session. For competitive games though, I can see the want for playing on a higher refresh rate, lower latency display. For simulators, I can assume it varies on the setup, too. I'd imagine with a nice triple TV setup—along with some extra panels and button boxes, the experience might just carry over better with the flat screen setup. It'd be pretty hard to memorize all of those button boxes while in VR.
I think @kojack gave a great example. It's not replacing flat screen gaming (at least, not yet). It's simply just another medium for enjoying the games you've already come to love in a different way. With time, I think the technology will get better, and will do away with some of the current nuances of VR. Comparing current VR games with flat screen games, each platform offers something that you just can't really get from the other.
I love gaming in VR, but flat screen gaming will always have its time and place in my day-to-day too.
Technology, at a certain level of sophistication, is indistinguishable from magic. - some wise guy or something probably
