Top
170°

Virtual Reality For Gaming is Going to be a Fad - Michael Pachter

"Managing Director of Equity Research at Wedbush Securities Michael Pachter is a man of many opinions, many based in analytic reasoning but controversial for some all the same."

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
The story is too old to be commented.
THC CELL767d ago

Mp should retire looking a little old for gaming

Rashid Sayed767d ago

I know am probably going to receive a few disagrees but I have to agree with him on this one. I don't think there is enough ground work for VR at the moment. May be after 5 years but definitely not now.

PCGamingNoobs767d ago (Edited 767d ago )

have you tried it?

*EDIT* apparently people disagree with me asking a simple question out of interest... i asked as he stated he doesn't think there is enough ground work for VR at the moment. i was simply wondering if his opinion was from experience or blind opinion.

Baka-akaB767d ago (Edited 767d ago )

I'm not yet a fan of any kind of VR , but the simple facts so many people funded so "easily" something like the Rift , and made it noticeable enough to be immediately purchased by a bigger company tell a different story imo .

Some people just keep having unrealistic expectations . No one said anything yet about it being such a mainstream success it would be the new king in gaming world . It's just there to fulfill a demand for a particuliar audience .

We heard the same crap about 3d , and people still act as if it disappeared , when it's the opposite . It's now such a default feature in a few modern devices , that's there is no need to pretend it's hype . It's silently there and still growing , so who cares about the rest and making headlines ?

stuna1767d ago

As much as I wasn't for the whole Oculus buyout hoopla, upon futher thought, I can't help but think that Facebook is perhaps the greatest boon for Virtual Reality! Simply put, a full scale marketing blitz through a social media venue such as Facebook could definitely help with market penetration.

darx767d ago

As long as you have to wear those douchey head sets I will be taking a pass.

FriedGoat767d ago

I think he is right if he is talking about occulous rift alone. The problem with Occulous is that the mainstream don't like fiddling with crap to get it working. Installing drivers and tweaking secondary applications to get Occulous running correctly is going to be too much for the people who make the big sales.

Morpheus on the other hand is a different story, if it's plug and play etc it will be alot more accessible for the casuals etc = big sales.

AceBlazer13767d ago

I think it'll be nothing more than a stepping stone toward full game integration SAO style just like Motion Control and 3D. Only difference is this step is gonna be enjoyable, unlike the other 2.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 767d ago
caseh767d ago

To be honest, if you listen to his reasoning as to why it's a fad it sounds about right:

- physically demanding
- niche approach, wider application beyond gaming
- hard to develop for
- high price tag

Can anyone say 'Kinect'...

Mr Pumblechook767d ago

Pachter is always against any Sony product. I remember around E3 last year he was talking about how he was 'blown away' by Kinect on Xbone! I find him entertaining but bias and often wrong. He knows how to read current video game company financial stats well but he doesnt know what will be big in the future and doesn't really know games.

AgentSmithPS4767d ago

None are so blind as those who will not see. You can't help but think "What's wrong with these people?"

When we finally get VR all these strange anti-future rants will become an old joke.

Boody-Bandit767d ago

"MP should retire looking a little old for gaming"

You're never too old for gamming. I plan to still be gaming until I drop.

Funantic1767d ago

Patcher is right this time. People are in denial if they disagree. Not many developers are going to create games dedicated to virtual headsets. The headsets are not ideal if you want to play with multiple people. Forget co-op. Big screens are always going to be more preferred. I wouldn't want to share headsets either and get someone else acne oil and bacteria on my face. And all people can't use the virtual headsets because it causes motion sickness. I wouldn't be surprised if the headsets caused more cases of epileptic seizures from the direct light flashing. Can you say fad?

spartanlemur767d ago

Really? Splitscreen co-op is dead anyway, and with a Rift/Morpheus, people can just bring their headsets over for offline play (no screen-watching for FPS fans). Also, you're probably willing to share controllers, and I assure you that someone's face is generally cleaner than the part of their body they wipe their ass with (you can never be sure people wash their hands well enough); not to mention the perpetual issue of greasy controllers from the hands of "crisp-eaters". I doubt a Rift would be hard to clean anyway.

As for the epilepsy, only 0.97% people have it, which isn't a huge market loss (and I'm sure the problems will go away as the tech gets better).

And Sony will be creating a few exclusives, as we'd expect, as will Oculus (twice the support of Kinect). And then, consider that unlike the Kinect, VR has a PC-focused product (the Rift), which already has considerable indie support. If you look at the power of indie games on the PC, you'll see how big a deal that is (oh, and EA seem to be excited about VR too).

Once many PC indie games come with VR (and PC gamers will mostly adopt it, given a Rift will cost about half to three quarters the price of a good GPU), we'll see these flooding through to PS4, and consequently increasing the attractiveness of the Morpheus.

And once two of the three major hardcore gaming platforms have a strong VR integration, we can expect Microsoft to follow suit.

This has way too much financial and community backing to be "just a fad". Pachter is wrong.

DigitalRaptor767d ago

"Not many developers are going to create games dedicated to virtual headsets."

You're not basing this on anything. It still depends on how much market penetration and attention it gets, but with Facebook and Sony now backing the technology, your assessment is a bit weak.
-------

"The headsets are not ideal if you want to play with multiple people. Forget co-op. Big screens are always going to be more preferred"

Incorrect. http://www.techradar.com/ne...

See this is where research gets you. from the article:
"There's an HDMI output and USB port, which gives wearers the ability to mirror what they're seeing to a TV screen and opens the door to multiplayer with people who don't have a headset of their own. "
--------

"I wouldn't want to share headsets either and get someone else acne oil and bacteria on my face."

Ever kissed a girl? More bacteria in someone's mouth than on their face, you can be sure of that.
---------

"And all people can't use the virtual headsets because it causes motion sickness"

And all people can't ride in vehicles cause they get travel sickness. I'm sure that's caused issues to the automotive industry.
----------

"I wouldn't be surprised if the headsets caused more cases of epileptic seizures from the direct light flashing."

You only get epileptic seizures if you have epilepsy, genius.
---------

"Can you say fad?"

You, Pachter and the Xbox fanboys can. Meanwhile, I'll be reaping the benefits of increased immersion, which is where the gaming industry has always been moving towards. There's no better solution for increased engagement in games than VR.

Muzikguy767d ago

I have to admit, I'm not sold on the VR idea. I usually don't agree with Pachter at ALL, but this time I do. All his reasons do make sense. I also think that as soon as VR is out and games are released that people were cry "been there done that" with following games. Games will have to always be original and always be different or they won't sell. PF course, this is just my opinion. Of course originality and being different is good, but how many different times can you do it? I hope to see some interesting VR games though that's for sure!!

spartanlemur767d ago

True, but going back to gaming on a flat screen will be like returning to black and white TV.

Indeed, the novelty value will wear off, but it will then just become standard, as colour TV is today (once, colour TV was seen as a fad, but after an initial novelty period, it just became the norm).

Muzikguy767d ago

I understand all that. I can see where going back to black and white after having color doesn't work just like going back to "subHD" after experiencing HD is hard to do. I don't like anything that isn't HD or in color myself, I just believe this VR thing falls into a different category. It will sell I'm sure, but I do believe it's a fad for all the reasons stated including my own

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 767d ago
The_Infected767d ago (Edited 767d ago )

Michael Pachter you're a fad. You've been wrong so many times it's not even funny.

DigitalRaptor767d ago (Edited 767d ago )

Michael Pachter says this, yet he can't have read any of the positive hands-on impressions from both Oculus and Morpheus over the past few months, talking of the amazing immersion and sense of presence you get from wearing these headsets.

This is not like the Kinect, where people like Pacther follows the hype, the early sales numbers, and then sh*ts on it later when it fails to live up to the hype and promises 4 years later.

There are already immersive VR experiences out there, and that is the whole point of VR. To be more immersed. It would be a fad if it didn't achieve that, but it already has. The even better consideration, is that this doesn't end with only gaming.

Go home Pachter, you're drunk.

S2Killinit767d ago

If it was MS exclusive, it wouldnt be a fad.

Baka-akaB767d ago

is there anything that wasnt a fad for Pachter ?

Ares84HU767d ago

I never agree with this guy but I think he is right this time. People didn't like 3D because they had to wear glasses. Now imagine this big bulky thing on your head.

The_Infected767d ago (Edited 767d ago )

@Ares84HU

"I never agree with this guy but I think he is right this time. People didn't like 3D because they had to wear glasses. Now imagine this big bulky thing on your head."

That's because 3D sucks. With 3D you just put on glasses and look at the TV with a little added 3D depth and still see everything around you. With VR you're truly immersed in a game that's specifically built for the tech. Sorry but I highly disagree with you. I'd love to have VR.

Ares84HU767d ago

3D doesn't suck. It's pretty awesome in fact. But in my opinion it's great for movies, not so much for games.

Dfooster767d ago (Edited 767d ago )

To be fair cinema will always cater to a broader demographic than gaming. Trying to convince old people to adapt to wearing 3D glasses is a harder sell than saying to anyone who's ever played a first person shooter, "here's a devise that puts you inside the game for only £250".

I think Sony studios have to release maybe three or four killer Morpheus only titles to move this into mainstream territory and they have to be ready to go as soon as this thing goes on sale. If they bring out a shit your pants horror game, a shooter or role player like skyrim and maybe a space sim and racing game like GT7 (Morpheus edition) and really encourage third party studios to develop for it I can see it doing quite well.

If it follows the move and kinect formula of lazy development then it will fail, but I think the technology is way cooler than the above mentioned peripherals and developers brain storming sessions will be overloading with great ways to use VR.

joeorc767d ago

@Dfooster

100% agreement, before this even went public key note speakers hat at siggraph for the past decade talked about VR being able to increase the depth of interactive graphics media not like it has been in the past but Now with the technology being enough to really make a go at it, why do you think Move work by design with the ps3 the way Dr marks talked in his key note demo back in 2000 about this kind of interactive optical isage for in depth motion gaming to not see move+VR = one of the most praticle grounded designs, not just for proof of concept but to really show a true ready or close for market release of such interactive computer entertainment with a low wnough price point to make it feasable add in move an you have a real close active feeling for a VR simulator that 25 years ago would cost way more with less accurate results to boot.

Oculus rift like project morpheus just shows that even if VR concepts are nothing new they can infact be completely improved in and maybe at a consumer friendly price point..wink

jhoward585767d ago (Edited 767d ago )

@Ares84HU

I don't agree because any wearable device will feel uncomfortable at first, but you eventually get use to it after a while.

I remember when I first put a Bluetooth ear piece in my ear. It felt uncomfortable at first. but I got use it didn't hurt anymore ,and now I wear it all the time with out any discomfort.

EDIT:
Don't let the size of the oculus fool you...there not much component inside the VR casing. So it won't be heavy.

Ares84HU767d ago

You can disagree all you want but any time I talked to anyone who didn't like 3D, one of their points was always that they have to wear glasses. This fact is conviniently forgotten now. I also find this very funny and laughable. When VR gaming will take off, you will recognize people who use it by their huge neck muscles. Hahahahaha

jhoward585767d ago

@Ares84HU

I'm not going to get too technical. But VR are not the same as wearing 3d glasses at the movies.

Our eyes are very depended on light to see. 3d Glasses block some of the light and most viewers won't experience the movie to the fullest.

In VR world the screen are directly in front of your eyes, with out any lost of light. The gray tint from 3d glasses alone are annoying.

user5669510767d ago (Edited 767d ago )

what he says still stand tho. its going to be a lot of people that are going to get turned off by wearing these no matter what the experiences is. people seem to think all games are like them, especially since you posting on a gaming website mean your more of a hardcore gamer than most. most people dont want to wear extra thing to get a better experience. buying extra hardware for over $250 to experience it is going to be another tough sell.

i wonder if sony didnt announce their vr how many people would be saying the same thing. people started hopping on the vr bandwagon when the sony vr rumors started coming out. now everyone for it and half the site has tested it(funny seeing how console only gamers say they dont know any pc gamers). pc gamers had to defended ORift on every article before.

jhoward585767d ago (Edited 767d ago )

@Consoleslateagain

First of all,I believe Sony got in to the VR business because the oculus was doing well. Plus, I'm pretty sure Sony did some research on how people felt about the oculus.
And, Those who've already brought/tried the oculus dev kit say it's good. Young and old.

That alone is enough of a reason to say there a market for VR.
But on the flip side, People reject things they don't fully understand. now Don't get me wrong, I'm Not saying people don't understand VR technology. I'm saying people don't fully know what VR experiences brings to the table. So, its practically normal that people reject VR if they haven't tried before. The same thing happened with the internet/computers when it was first introduced back in the 80's.

I think VR will excel faster than the internet because there no other know technology that I know can give us the experience as close to the real thing. I would never get a chance to walk on the moon simply because to too expensive or too dangerous. It cost apox 10 thousand dollar a pound to left man in to orbit.

So I turn to VR and I'm sure there many people out there who wants to experience walking on the moon like I do.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 767d ago
Show all comments...
The story is too old to be commented.