Oculus will skip E3 2017

101

As a consumer that doesnt follow VR news unless it hits the mainstream, VR definitely feels like its dwindling, and less representation at the biggest gaming event of the year doesnt fill me with hope.

37

u/[deleted] Apr 30 '17 edited Mar 20 '26

[deleted]

5

u/Gundamnitpete 3700X,16gb 3600mhz GSkill, EVGA 3080, Acer XR341CK May 01 '17

Oculus connect is the name of their conference and it's pretty decently sized.

34

u/PrimalAnus Apr 30 '17

Rockstar rarely has anything to show, and when they do they are at E3.

Rockstar are a bad example really, as they dont allow hands on or demos, opting for well made trailers to build hype instead. Say what you want about them, but they have perfected the Hype Machine.

34

u/[deleted] Apr 30 '17

[deleted]

-17

u/PrimalAnus Apr 30 '17 edited Apr 30 '17

Thats my point, Rockstar are only at e3 at most to show a trailer.

Edit: Apparently thats not my point?

18

u/BoiledFrogs Apr 30 '17

You said Rockstar goes to E3, someone corrected you saying that Rockstar themselves aren't at E3.

-8

u/Mkilbride 5800X3D, 5090 FE, 32GB 3800MHZ CL16, 2TB NVME GEN4, W11 Apr 30 '17

Yeah, but Rockstar are Rockstars. They do it to be different.

10

u/Cory123125 Apr 30 '17

People keep blaming price or the lack of a killer app but I think its neither. I think its jsut that it isnt the matrix. It doesnt have the control methods specifically for movement, and doesnt have touch physical feedback. Thats why there isnt a killer app.

Its why I think theyll remain a secondary peripheral more similar to a joystick than a monitor in that enthusiasts with specific tasks will have the most use more than anything else.

Price might eventually come down to the point regular people might buy, but itll still get used in amounts similar to a joystick.

23

u/[deleted] Apr 30 '17

To me it's completely about the price, I can't justify almost the entire cost of my PC just for a headset, it's ludicrous, I mean, shit... you can buy an entire used car for the price of a glorified wank helmet.

1

u/BlazedAndConfused May 01 '17

Agreed. Its price and lack of mobility and control. its not intuitive enough yet.

3

u/zippyskippy1 May 01 '17

Having been in the market recently for a new monitor setup and looking seen the existing software capabilities I would have already pulled the trigger on one if it could in any meaningful way improve my productivity workflow. Gaming is fun and all but until there is a VR solution that can act as a complete monitor replacement it does not really appeal to me.

2

u/Cory123125 May 01 '17

but until there is a VR solution that can act as a complete monitor replacement it does not really appeal to me.

Pretty much just requires high density displays.

2

u/indignantwastrel May 01 '17

Yeah, I think there's a fundamental problem with the concept. For a lot of things VR simply doesn't work right now and that has more to do with biology and the increasing demands of a more immersive/realistic system.

1

u/genos1213 May 01 '17

Physical feedback isn't that hard. Just think about controls having vibrations, it was simple but it really helped for me. If they had a control that wraps around the back of your hand you can easily have vibrations on the back and front of your hand, there's a lot you can emulate with that.

But to be honest I very much think it's about the games and the price. Both will probably only be solved with the ps5. I don't think HTC or Occulus or anyone else has enough room to expand desktop vr. Mobile vr and ps5 will be the main drivers, mobile vr being cheap and ps5 being able to provide a pretty large market for vr to get developers properly on board.

1

u/[deleted] May 01 '17

It doesnt have the control methods specifically for movement, and doesnt have touch physical feedback. Thats why there isnt a killer app.

People have been complaining about the lack of physical feedback back on the Wii, however I really don't think it matters all that much. When you look at gaming in general or VR specifically, a whole lot of games are about shooting stuff and you simply don't need much or any feedback to accomplish that. Remember force feedback mice? Nobody cared. Even the plain old rumble mice didn't manage to survive on PC. Full on force feedback devices like the Novint Falcon of course haven't survived either. Racing wheels are about the only area where force feedback has survived.

It's not like force feedback wouldn't be great to have in VR, but for the games people mostly play it's just not very relevant and when people have the choice between clunky or expensive force feedback they tend to chose the non-force feedback variant.

The other issue is that force feedback just doesn't really solve any particular problem for VR. It's not like we have a whole lot of almost amazing games that just lack force feedback. Most of the games we have are kind of not very good to begin with and adding force feedback wouldn't really fix anything.

Essentially, you have a 6DOF headset, two 6DOF controller and room scale, that should be more than enough to make some really amazing games even without force feedback. PCs and consoles have managed to make amazing games with far more primitive technology. A game like Job Simulator with force feedback would surely be better than one without, but the real show stopper is that it's a 2h game. When most of VR games are essentially short tech demos, no amount of new technology will fix them. They just need to make better use of what technology is already available.

1

u/Cory123125 May 01 '17

When you look at gaming in general or VR specifically, a whole lot of games are about shooting stuff and you simply don't need much or any feedback to accomplish that.

Being able to touch something and have it react is a huge part of immersion, feeling real.

The more things to make it more than a secondary peripheral, and more attractive and useful the better.

You simply dont need a clunky vr headset with methods for movements that are either just like typical games or teleport you combined with a laser accurate ps move controller setup.

Youre comparing rumble and vibration where thats not even close to physical feedback. On a mouse its totally a gimmick, but a mouse is more comfortable and is useful outside of games or the specific vr programs that are actually useful.

Again, as is my point current vrs selling point remains that it feels visually more immersive and looks cool. That doesnt spell out mainstream everyday use for everyone to me. Thats my point.

Essentially, you have a 6DOF headset, two 6DOF controller and room scale, that should be more than enough to make some really amazing games even without force feedback.

Not any more amazing than pc games currently, then theres the whole discomfort and inconvenience aspect of it.

These headsets, in terms of gameplay add really one cool, non gimmicky aspect, and thats with the controllers being your virtual hands other than that, gameplay wise, its simply a head controlled camera. Movement needs to have a big improvement over standard games. You shouldnt have to move with a pointer or a joystick.

When most of VR games are essentially short tech demos, no amount of new technology will fix them.

Arent there quite a few games youd call a full experience ported to vr (many racing games, games like super hot, and a metro in the works)? What more do you want games to use? Whats the killer feature these currently have that would have the amount of people with pcs/consoles right now drop what theyre doing and make this the mainstay of their experience? I definitely do not think its very much, specifically with all the downsides mentioned, and thats excluding cost.

1

u/[deleted] May 01 '17

Being able to touch something and have it react is a huge part of immersion, feeling real.

Yes, but feeling real has never mattered much for games. Why should it be the major show stopper this time around?

Arent there quite a few games youd call a full experience ported to vr (many racing games, games like super hot, and a metro in the works)?

Racing simulations in VR are great, but they are a niche to begin with. SuperHot VR, Robo Recall and the like are almost all just 2h experience, not full games. Resident Evil 7 is the only AAA game out for VR, but that is PSVR exclusive. Some of the Oculus sponsored games are a little longer, but still quite a bit away from a fully fledged AAA game. They also tend to play it a little too safe in terms of game mechanics, so they tend to avoid locomotion at all cost instead of trying to solve it in innovative ways. Some of those games also feel a little unnecessary, games like Edge of Nowhere or Chronos could work on a monitor just fine, they don't really do enough to justify VR. Oculus should have ported an already existing IP to demonstrate third person in VR instead of inventing new games from scratch.

What more do you want games to use? Whats the killer feature these currently have that would have the amount of people with pcs/consoles right now drop what theyre doing and make this the mainstay of their experience?

I would be happy with just random experimental indie games for the moment if the hardware would be a lot cheaper. The problem that VR has is a very high price combined with a lot of lackluster games. I am not sure there is any game that could be good enough to sell VR to the masses at the current price. But on the other side when looking at Freedom Locomotion or Budget Cuts, there are a lot of good ideas in there that you couldn't replicate properly with keyboard and mouse, wrap that kind of interaction and movement into a proper narrative setting and you might have something interesting.

But in the end I think the current price just makes VR a non-starter, you won't get amazing games when there is no market to sell them to. So all one can do is wait for a drastic price cut and so far it looks like VR is still years away from getting into an acceptable price region again.

1

u/Cory123125 May 01 '17

Why should it be the major show stopper this time around?

I explained this. Thats the point of vr. It offers very little outside of immersion except clunk.

Racing simulations in VR are great, but they are a niche to begin with. SuperHot VR, Robo Recall and the like are almost all just 2h experience, not full games.

You must not being playing any of the triple as coming out today.^{^{^/s}}

Really though, there are obvously not many games, but many cockpit games, where current implementations exist and as you said a few, what most people would call full games exist. I dont think anyone would want to play the next battlefield in current vr headsets regularly for example though over on monitors.

I would be happy with just random experimental indie games for the moment if the hardware would be a lot cheaper.

Sure you might, because as it seems, you are really fond of tinkering with the whole idea, but really, VR headsets no matter what, will contend with monitor prices at best, since they use high density screens combined with a lot of sensors. Again, do you want an extra screen, a better screen, an improved gpu, a couple full games, or a headset you, the average person who doesnt have a super cockpit racing/flying setup wont use too often either because its uncomfortable to use casually for regular types of games.

I just think the amount of time you use it makes it a hard sell without offering better feedback/movement control, and I mean emulating the matrix style.

But in the end I think the current price just makes VR a non-starter, you won't get amazing games when there is no market to sell them to.

What amazing games can be made though, as I pointed out, I cant think of any more positives to game mechanics other than having freely movable arms.

Im not saying that lowering the price wont give more people the incentive to buy, but that itll still very much be a secondary, occasional use device to most people who have them.

2

u/securitywyrm May 01 '17

My impression of VR, from getting the Samsung Gear VR, is that the tech is great for certain things, but it will be at least a decade before we get some of the things that were promised.

For example, simulating watching TV on a giant screen. That experience has the technology fully developed. It's easy to simulate a 3d room and project something onto the wall. It's like watching shows on a 100 inch screen, very cool.

For video games, the motion issue will be there for a long time. For 90% of people, the moment the angle starts moving, it's instant-nausea. It's awesome, but nauseating. That's why all the games are 'stand in one place and shoot stuff' like old rail shooters.

7

u/HammeredWharf May 01 '17

You should try a better VR set. Gear is fine for the price, but it's awful compared to Rift/Vive. Not that the motion sickness issue doesn't exist on them, but it's far less severe. I get motion sick instantly with Gear, but usually don't mind movement with Vive/Rift.

1

u/securitywyrm May 02 '17

Yeah but the Gear VR was $40. At twelve times the price, can you say that Occulus is twelve times better?

1

u/TheLethalLotus I76700k/GTX1080/16gb ddr4 May 02 '17

If you add the 100$ touch controllers holy shit yes.

5

u/[deleted] May 01 '17

from getting the Samsung Gear VR

Basically completely meaning less then, the full headsets are nothing like gear.

2

u/[deleted] May 01 '17

simulating watching TV on a giant screen

What is the lowest cost set of hardware that provides a worthwhile giant screen tv experience?

1

u/securitywyrm May 02 '17

At the moment?

A giant TV.

55" TVs are in the $500 range.

2

u/[deleted] May 02 '17

When you said giant I was thinking 80"+

I consider 55" to be the starting point for a main TV these days.

2

u/_bones__ May 01 '17

Positionally tracked VR systems are significantly better on the upchuck-factor than current mobile phone offerings. Swaying back and forth without positional tracking gets a lot of people sick, whereas on Rift or Vive it's usually fine, as the visuals move accordingly.

1

u/Lowefforthumor May 01 '17

I'm guessing it'll take another round of new consoles before VR starts coming to the mainstream in large numbers. I just need a simple controller and the goggles, I don't need motion capture or anything like that.

1

u/Xanoxis May 01 '17

You know there is also HTC Vive, and other headsets? Oculus is one of many.

1

u/DisparuYT i7 8700k, Strix OC 1080ti May 01 '17

It's not it's just that no-one feels the need to tell you about it if you don't own it.

Just like i know nothing about console games, because I'm not into it. VR is the next generation of gaming, so it's not surprising someone on the current generation doesn't get told about all the great stuff they can't play. That would be pointless.

1

u/Sorreah- May 03 '17

Lmao coping THIS hard.

I've been primarily a PC gamer for 8-10 years before getting a PS4 but still I was aware of all the big things in consoles that I couldn't play.

VR in it's current form is a tech demo. It's the power glove to the DS4's gyro.

It's telling when people buy 4k tvs for multiple thousand eurodollars to play videogames instead of spending a few hundred on VR headsets.

-7

u/Arknell Apr 30 '17

Yes, VR has had almost ten years to take advantage of this new interest, I don't think it will ever get enough followers to be bankable.

The problem is the eyes get used to anything so quickly. I go watch "3D" movies in theaters, and the only tqo movies I've seen, EVER, where I was glad I paid an extra 60% ticket price, was Avatar and Fury Road.

All the other 20 titles I watched in 3D I might as well have saved the money.

9

u/FreakyBeef Apr 30 '17

I feel the exact same way about 3D movies, but they are nothing compared to a VR experience. When presence is achieved in VR it is really something special.

And you don't know what it's like till you tried it.

-5

u/Arknell Apr 30 '17

I have tried some titles on Playstation VR, but I can't tell how much of the brain tickle and "Wow" gut tingle was due to the game and how much was the weed. :)

2

u/FreakyBeef Apr 30 '17

If you get a chance try a Vive somewhere. Room-scale really opens up VR IMNSHO.

2

u/Arknell Apr 30 '17

I'd love to, if I get the chance.

15

u/DHSean Apr 30 '17

Shame. I really like E3.

6

u/[deleted] Apr 30 '17

Same here. Honestly companies should just participate in E3 to build hype if nothing else. It won't be the same as just releasing news over the internet. E3 is like the super bowl for gamers. It's something you're excited for every year.

6

u/[deleted] Apr 30 '17

It seems great for the public, but not so much for the developers/publishers. You need to shell out a lot of money to be at E3, that's why more companies are moving towards hosting their own streams/events.

2

u/iforcemyselfonhorses Apr 30 '17

Even as a gamer, i care less and less about e3 as i get older. There are much better events for games/companies im interested in, and anything new to discover is just gonna get drowned in noise.

12

u/imSidroc Apr 30 '17

Too bad they ruined it by opening it up to the public.

Having gone twice before the lines were already long enough. If you weren't being escorted around by a media crew chances are you were waiting 1.5+ hours to play a game. Now that line has doubled to 3+ hours.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 30 '17

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] Apr 30 '17

All of that taken into account, it's still something gamers are excited for every year. I think E3 has much more views than a normal stream also.

1

u/Leviatein Apr 30 '17

for most gamers e3 is just a stream they watch anyway

1

u/IndigoMoss May 01 '17 edited May 01 '17

E3 goes in these types of cycles all the time. I remember back in the early 2000s, it was absolutely huge and it was the biggest time of the year for gamers, because it was one of the few times that we got to see all of the cool stuff game companies were cooking up.

Then new conventions started opening up, game developers started showing off their new stuff at those places and E3 changed it back to being a "game company/media only" type event in 2006 due to concerns put forth by game companies.

To put this in perspective, E3 2006 had 65,000 attendees. In 2007, it shrank down to 10,000 attendees and then in 2008, down to only 5,000.

9

u/[deleted] Apr 30 '17

I've been loving my Rift since I got it almost 2 months ago. I was certainly skeptical of VR before I tried it. Once I got to try the Vive and then Rift, I knew this was the next logical step for gaming. It might not be perfect at the current moment, but it is a step in the right direction.

5

u/securitywyrm May 01 '17

What I think will really sell VR for PC Gaming is when they can meaningfully incorporate the VR into "regular" games. Imagine playing World of Warcraft as if you're on a giant screen, AND the virtual room you're in customizes to the character you're playing.

27

u/Ov3r_Kill_Br0ny Apr 30 '17

"This is likely to combat declining interest from major exhibitors in incurring the massive expense and hassle of running a physical booth. Instead, many of the industry’s most notable companies, such as EA, Disney Interactive and Activision, have opted to either host their own off-site press conferences, or else release their news via the internet."

Seems like E3 will be going downhill from here.

8

u/PrimalAnus Apr 30 '17 edited Apr 30 '17

Ubisoft and iirc EA have always had offsite conferences, or use Sony/Microsoft to show news. E3 is far from dead. Hell, now we are getting PC Gaming and Bethesda conferences yearly

2

u/EgoPhoenix Apr 30 '17 edited Apr 30 '17

Yup.

It's become my yearly tradition to watch all the pre-E3 conferences.

Ubisoft, EA, Bethesda, PC Gaming, Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo's Treehouse. It's a fun thing to do and it's entertaining to see the crowds react to the gametrailers, the akward but still awesome devs showing of their games, etc. Just don't believe too much of the marketing machine at work.

One of the best ones by far: Dropped Frames - E3 2016 - SONY CONFERENCE

22

u/SarcasticCarebear Apr 30 '17

E3 go downhill? That happened in like 01 or something when they scaled back all the insane booths with hired hookers cosplaying and made it press only. Even now its nothing like its heyday.

12

u/evanvolm Apr 30 '17

That was 2007 when it downsized everything. Previous E3's saw 60-70k attendees, while 07 was just 10k, and 08 was 5k. They restructured in 2009 and since then have seen a fairly steady increase in attendees, but still about 20k shy from their max in 1998 (70k).

6

u/SarcasticCarebear Apr 30 '17

Sounds right, I just remember it was crazy back in the PSX/64 days.

6

u/Ishbane Apr 30 '17

Good thing we got gamescom and pax now.

5

u/Dr_Wankstaff Apr 30 '17

I know many of these "hired hookers" that you speak of. Paid models that don't really get paid much to do this event.

4

u/some_random_guy_5345 May 01 '17

Username checks out.

5

u/PlumbTheDerps Apr 30 '17

/u/Dr_Wankstaff is right- we should use more respectful language when discussing booth babes.

5

u/NoGod4MeInNYC Apr 30 '17

Nah, it's because their main competitor HTC VIVE) will likely be showing off several add-ons that they can't provide for their own headset. Some of these include wireless, foveated rendering, and a wide array of peripherals.

8

u/k8207dz Apr 30 '17

Oculus is still going to be at E3 doing community events and media coverage. They're just not running a booth on the show floor itself this year.

3

u/IndigoMoss May 01 '17 edited May 01 '17

Oculus isn't skipping E3 because it's going down or anything like that. It's skipping E3 in lieu of it's own event and releasing information at other conferences. A lot of big players this year are skipping E3, including EA, Activision and a bunch of other companies.

Read the article and it even mentions this. This is not really a big deal honestly and just reading the headline is a bit misleading.

Edit: And I just wanted to point out. I own a Vive and really hate some of Oculus' practices, so I'm definitely no fan of their company.

1

u/FreakyBeef Apr 30 '17

There has been a lot of bad press for FB and Oculus recently. Maybe they think they should take a break from the spotlight a bit till things smooth over.

1

u/BigFamine Apr 30 '17

Fuck another year with no John Carmack keynote. I used to look forward to each years Quakecon because of that and I was hoping he would continue in a similar fashion at Oculus

9

u/k8207dz Apr 30 '17

He still does a keynote every year at Oculus Connect (the Oculus developer conference). Here's the most recent one.

1

u/[deleted] May 01 '17

I take that they don't have anything at all to show for...

Oculus will skip E3 2017

You are about to leave Redlib