-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
The main barrier to VR at the moment is the hardware cost. A legit headset is $500-1000, which is almost as much as the PC. It’s a catch 22... You don’t want to spend money developing a game only a few people will play, but people won’t throw down the amount needed for a VR headset until there’s flagship VR titles to motivate them to spend on it.
It was 350 to get a Rift S on Black Friday, 230 to a get a Samsung. The flagship game is half life Alyx which comes out in March, and Medal of Honor comes out a little after that, with a fair number of large games already out and on the way. Paradox would also be the first on the genre which would boost sales.
As i've said for previous titles in this very same forum: can you at least wait until it is out and that you have played it at least 300 hours before saying that it is the future and the best of the best? For now i can only say that valve managed to use a decade old hype to push one of their hardware products and for this they are very smart but nevertheless i still want to see the results before saying to everyone else "go vr" which especially on strategy games for me is meaningless, watching a map in vr.. lol
I don’t know what you mean. Who plays any AAA non strategy/sandbox game for 300 hours? If you mean VR then I have three times that down.
The Index is a small fraction of VR headsets on SteamVR, Valve knows and is fine with that, it’s mot meant to be a mass product.
Have you played RUSE? Final Assault? Radio Commander? Star Blazer? What about a first person EndWar? Airmech command? Cosmic Trip? Or an Xcom game where you played the turn of each soldier in first person? Or a war game where you use an actual war map like in real war? Any space strategy combat is better in VR, it’s the only way to get three dimensions working correctly. VR can also turn UIs into comprehensible scenes. It’s not just a map, although games like storm land are showing how naturally interacting with a map is actually a big step forward.
People play GS games for hours at a time. Try that with VR -- the headset will run out of battery power and/or you'll puke your guts out from VR-induced nausea well before a typical GS strategy would end.
They don’t run on battery, they’re wired, and people watch movies and football games on them. I played a shooter for five hours in my index the other day. If you don’t believe a paradox game could ever be good in VR because it privileges tactility and first person, then fine, but these criticisms don’t make much sense.
I don't see how you'd get motion sickness from looking at a map, though. Also I don't see the appeal of looking at a map in VR, but each to his own.
A VR map-starer wouldn't be something for me (yet). But I really enjoy mixing different playstyles and a bit of VR here and there could be cool.
Like HOI4 peace-deals for instance. Imagine getting to go to Yalta, smoke some virtual cigars with Churchill and then decide how to redraw Europe after the war.
It should only be used for key moments though, nothing would be more annoying than having to put on your VR-headset every five minutes.
This would however mean Paradox has to make a VR budget which I fear could detract a lot from more important things, both for us and them.
Could be an idea for user-made add-ons though.
Like HOI4 peace-deals for instance. Imagine getting to go to Yalta, smoke some virtual cigars with Churchill and then decide how to redraw Europe after the war.
It should only be used for key moments though, nothing would be more annoying than having to put on your VR-headset every five minutes.
This would however mean Paradox has to make a VR budget which I fear could detract a lot from more important things, both for us and them.
Could be an idea for user-made add-ons though.
Paradox could make some big breakthrough in UI and interaction that moved beyond being centered around a map, but I think a good place to start would be a Total War style game set in the stellaris universe with a smaller scar and combat being something you handle in 3D dimensions. You would always wear a headset but there would be less to manage. They could bring on an outside time to make it and advise them.
What? A good many run on battery power and VR-induced nausea has been well-documented for decades (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_reality_sickness). John Carmack, when he was working on Oculus Rift, even pointed it out as one of the design issues facing VR at large.
I don't think traditional PDS games can be properly represented on, or even need any VR. It goes for almost all GSGs and RTS games.
The only exception would be if VR consisted of a large room with period-accurate architecture, with a large table on which a big game map is placed, and you are allowed to pick armies and items and move them around by hand (kinda like that great little game called Tabletop Simulator)...And even in that scenario, keyboard and mouse are far, far better options.
The only exception would be if VR consisted of a large room with period-accurate architecture, with a large table on which a big game map is placed, and you are allowed to pick armies and items and move them around by hand (kinda like that great little game called Tabletop Simulator)...And even in that scenario, keyboard and mouse are far, far better options.
I'm a VR user, £350 Rift S.
I absolutely love it.
For simulators or space games like Elite Dangerous, VR is unmatched. Triple screens are gathering dust.
For first person games like Skyrim or the Oculus exclusive Asgards Wrath or military sims like Pavlov or Onward, VR can be superb too, especially when they play on VR's strength (ranged weapons, magic and dagger play) and avoid obvious issues (sword play unnaturally clipping through opponents).
I honestly don't know what VR will add to GS games. I think flat screens are better here. And you can see your keyboard and mouse at a glance!
Sure you could do this in VR, but unlike sims, where you are either sitting in the car (VR) or viewing the cockpit of the car (triple screen), VR just gives you a cinema sized screen.
Do you have any ideas how you could implement VR for GS games?
I absolutely love it.
For simulators or space games like Elite Dangerous, VR is unmatched. Triple screens are gathering dust.
For first person games like Skyrim or the Oculus exclusive Asgards Wrath or military sims like Pavlov or Onward, VR can be superb too, especially when they play on VR's strength (ranged weapons, magic and dagger play) and avoid obvious issues (sword play unnaturally clipping through opponents).
I honestly don't know what VR will add to GS games. I think flat screens are better here. And you can see your keyboard and mouse at a glance!
Sure you could do this in VR, but unlike sims, where you are either sitting in the car (VR) or viewing the cockpit of the car (triple screen), VR just gives you a cinema sized screen.
Do you have any ideas how you could implement VR for GS games?
The Go/Gear isn't a virtual reality headset and when the Quest is plugged into a PC, it uses the cord for power like all PC headsets. As for naseau, that goes away and this game would likely be seated.
Imagine a board game version of a paradox GS game, but able to do more and go further than any actual board game because a PC would handle all math, you could automate certain loops at will, combat could work like on PC, etc. This, to me, would offer a great multiplayer experience and tactile gameplay that could really pay off. If it's set in space you could have 3D space combat too, immersive peace conferences or battles, or even asymmetric gameplay where one player runs the government and the other runs the army with detailed combat.
There are a lot of options.