660°

Microsoft Seems To Have No Interest In VR, Next Xbox May Not Have It, Says Dev

"No matter how much I ask, I never get any news on Microsoft VR," says Tessera Studios' Pablo Lafora.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
maybelovehate2316d ago

You mean on Xbox. They have VR built into Windows 10.

StormSnooper2316d ago

Honestly I find it IMPOSSIBLE that MS would go another generation without a VR headset. They will be doomed if they don’t at the very LEAST mention at reveal of Xbox Two that there will be a VR headset soon.

StormSnooper2316d ago (Edited 2316d ago )

How is it unproven? And does that mean MS doesn’t do anything unless somebody else proves it first?

AngelicIceDiamond2316d ago

Doomed? Really absolutely not MS needs to stay laser focused on 1st party for awhile. Venturing off spreading themselves thin on VR shouldn't be their focused.

darthv722316d ago

They dont have to support it. So why is that a problem for them if they dont? News flash but each company can pretty much do their own thing if they want to.

StormSnooper2316d ago (Edited 2316d ago )

@Angelic
Xbox Two will be DOA without an answer to PSVR.

Christopher2316d ago

I think it's fine. They should focus on perfecting their core business with their new investments and not the niche market of VR.They need fewer things to juggle right now. VR is still in its infancy and isn't a big money making element yet that their shareholders will mind anyway.

Goldby2316d ago

@Angelic

VR will allow their 1st party developers to have more opportunities for games,

Ninja theory has experience in VR from Hellblade, they could easily have a small team working on a vr on

DrumBeat2316d ago

"They will be doomed"

Lol.

Mystogan2316d ago

I wouldn't say doomed lol. VR is not that big. But it would be nice to have it on Xbox. They can literally flip a switch and support all Windows Mixed Reality headsets. Those apps/games are built on UWP.

maybelovehate2316d ago

I don't see a reason for them not to add support. Xbox does run Windows 10 which already supports it. My best guess is they are just worried about the Consumer Support aspect of VR. Some users love it, some users hate it and some users just get really sick.

StormSnooper2316d ago (Edited 2316d ago )

@mybelovedhate
I’m almost 100% sure they will announce a headset at reveal of Xbox Two. As to consumers, anyone who has actually tried it loves it. Convenience is an issue especially if people don’t have a stationary chair for gaming. But as to satisfaction, there will be no issues especially because next gen VR will be even better.

The Wood2316d ago

Yeah. Get the basics before you go for the extras ala Kinect and by basics I mean first party output from management of old franchises to the creation of new.

ABizzel12316d ago

They don’t need one, and they can simply make it VR compatible and use Oculus or Vive.

Godmars2902316d ago (Edited 2316d ago )

@DillyDilly:
Unproven in that PSVR seems to be the only minimal success. The only thing offering VR a foothold in the general consumer market.

@AngelicIceDiamond:
"MS needs to stay laser focused on 1st party for awhile."

...
...
...

When...when have they started...?

rainslacker2316d ago

@Maybe

I think you're right, it makes sense to expand their DXVR to X2 because the API's are pretty close to their PC counterparts.

However, unless MS is actually in it to support it with their own software, they'd be leaving support up to 3rd party developers, and if they don't get enough of it, then it makes VR a hard sell on the system, which can make it harder to get adoption to get said 3rd party support, and then MS ends up with the blame for having a lackluster implementation of VR on their system.

So, technically, it makes sense, but from a business stand point, they'd have to actually want to make VR a viable aspect of their next system, and promote it as something that's worthwhile on the system, which would require they do what they can in house to make it a worthwhile product for their system.

But, as others have said, MS needs to focus on the core and get that straightened out, and if they're going to push XCloud, that isn't going to work well with VR. VR may just end up being a distraction for them if they go into it with a half interested attitude.

Dom_Estos2316d ago

@DillyDilly

"VR is still unproven"

*Looks across room. Sees PSVR headset sitting there after recently using it and enjoying it for 2 years.*

Unproven? I must have been imaging myself using VR and having it working as well as I'd dreamed it would for two years, then. Maybe I'll wake up soon and have some Cornflakes?

Imalwaysright2316d ago

Why would it be doomed? What makes you say that?

The Wood2316d ago

Bit sensational there bro.

2316d ago
StormSnooper2316d ago

@Wood
Lol, it’s probably the caps. I’m just saying there is no way they would not announce a headset when the announce the next Xbox. It would be a very bad move. A lot of people are excited for VR. Personally I’m looking forward to see what can be done in VR with more powerful hardware.

thejigisup2316d ago

I think they'd be smarter to work in the AR space.

derek2316d ago

MS hasn't proven they can create enough great games to support XBOX in general let alone an added VR platform. Its probably more than they can bare or be responsible for. Doesn't matter to me I will be sticking with Playstation next generation.

AngelicIceDiamond2316d ago (Edited 2316d ago )

@Storm Really now you wanna bet money? MS is doing just fine with out it now. Nextbox will be DOA with out AAA games line up launching right the next the new console everybody and their unborn child knows this its basically universal law at this point. I dunno where tf you been but MS has been struggling with AAA output, since forever now so no, hell no VR another device won't save them, but hurt them, like allot. "half of MS studios are now doing VR for nextbox" you really think that would go over well With gamers?

@gold once MS has 1st party trust back and 1st party on lock. Then yeah they can venture off and do VR because MS is trustworthy and competent in delivering consistent high quality and rated exclusives.

IamTylerDurden12316d ago

Microsoft will take the easy road and simply make Xbox compatible with Oculus and/or Vive.

Christopher2316d ago

***Microsoft will take the easy road and simply make Xbox compatible with Oculus and/or Vive.***

Or both. And, honestly, I don't see that as a negative.

UltraNova2316d ago

"Microsoft will take the easy road and simply make Xbox compatible with Oculus and/or Vive."

Exactly, they only need to make the API compatible on xbox one x and XB2. Thing is they need not depend on 3rd party only. They have to show 1st party support.

sagapo2315d ago

Perhaps MS isn’t planning on creating a VR set of their own like Sony does, but add support for Oculus/HTC Vive on Xbox in the future? I dunno. I guess they wait it out a bit, to see if VR truly has a future in games.

+ Show (24) more repliesLast reply 2315d ago
darthv722316d ago

Not sure why you are getting disagrees. What you typed is factually correct. Windows 10 does have VR support while Xbox currently does not.

Fluttershy772316d ago

Yeah I think he meant on Xbox

maybelovehate2316d ago

The title reads, MS Seems To Have No Interest in VR, Next Xbox May Not Have it. So yeah, it isn't in the title. It is either clickbait or bs. I don't care either way, just pointing out that it is incorrect. Sorry if you don't like factual things pointed out.

NarutoFox2316d ago

A comment from the article:

"This is why Windows is Microsoft's best gaming platform. Every 1st party game, and you have Windows Mixed Reality, or if you choose, HTC Vive or Oculus Rift are options as well.

Next gen I will get PS5 + PSVR2, and PC + WMR.

In my opinion, Microsoft is doing what they should have done all along and making Windows an amazing Gaming Platform. I think Xbox would be a better platform, if it was just a custom Windows PC for the Media Center. Give Windows every feature of the XBO on the gaming side, and give XB4 full blown Windows 10, and Microsoft would have an extremely competitive gaming brand with Xbox+Windows."

IamTylerDurden12316d ago

I remember Phil saying XB1X would be the premier console for VR, then completely shutting down any talk of VR and basically avoidingg the subject altogether.

maybelovehate2315d ago

That is a fine argument. Phil runs Xbox, not Microsoft.

maybelovehate2315d ago

I didn't read the article, I was only arguing the Title. And he clearly says Microsoft. Again, don't care. Just pointing out the inaccuracy. But I know you love you some bias inaccuracy so have at it.

alb18992315d ago

They could led Xbox live be play on VR without utilize Xbox brand

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 2315d ago
2316d ago Replies(11)
DigitalRaptor2311d ago (Edited 2311d ago )

True.

This is the story of Microsoft's investments in gaming though. Late effort, maximum profits. Gaming was actually in a pretty immature state before Sony got involved with PlayStation and sold gaming as something more than a kid's toy. As big as a brand as Xbox is, it's not even close to synonymous with gaming as PlayStation is to a global audience. Already at this stage Sony (along with Samsung and others) has helped shift the perception of VR as being an expensive thing for enthusiasts only. The later MS leaves it the less chance they have to make an impact as strong as Sony did with the original PS and retain an audience as strong as they have. I'm also guessing a Game Pass and streaming focus makes it harder to focus on something like VR where latency is paramount.

CrimsonWing692316d ago

oh cool, well I guess I'll stick with Sony then.

glennhkboy2316d ago

Sony VR sales is not exactly flying off the shelf.....

CrimsonWing692315d ago

https://www.engadget.com/20...

Sold a million units in 8 months as of recent.

TheTony3162311d ago

Actually, it's the best selling VR hardware.

TheEnigma3132316d ago (Edited 2316d ago )

MS is too far behind to try it now. They will just waste money.

Mystogan2316d ago (Edited 2316d ago )

They're really not far behind at all. VR is still in its infancy. There hasn't been that big boom yet that solidifies a market leader.

We're in the stage that any newcomer can come in and take the market by storm. But it hasn't happened yet.

S2Killinit2316d ago

Dont fool yourself, it takes building relations in the VR community and getting experience making VR games. If MS doesnt respond with a VR headset, they will be infants compared to the competition.

rainslacker2316d ago

Maybe not a big boon, but if MS doesn't get its foot in the door early, they're not going to be prepared when that big boon hits. Although I think it will remain niche for next gen as well. But if they go too long without being seen as having an interest in VR, it's not going to help them if they rely on others to do all the leg work for them. MS can't be a follower all the time and gain respect in the market, because MS is finding out most people aren't going to wait on them to get into the game before they buy in.

ILostMyMind2316d ago

Yes, It will happen next generation... for those who have It. MS is out.

ABizzel12316d ago

@Mtstogan

There's a clear winner if we're talking about the "high-end" VR experience.

The problem is the "experience" part of VR. There simply isn't anything nor enough games that really show VR as a necessity for gamers at home. Until we're able to get immersive, AAA, high budget VR experiences across multiple genres VR won't be ready, and there's still improvements to be made with the technology such as in-game camera jerkiness by looking around too fast, controls / controllers, quality / resolution.

VR isn't where it needs to be on the PS4, don't get me wrong there is fun to be had, and it's an acceptable attempt, but the technology needs to evolve, and the PS5 will fix the quality aspect of VR, and hopefully a remodeled headset with better resolution, better controllers, and eventually better experiences.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2316d ago
glennhkboy2316d ago

They are too far behind now is because the XBox One was designed & focus on a "Cool & proven tech" of Kinect. MS is wise to avoid another such trap.

Show all comments (214)
120°

Playdead co-founder slammed with lawsuit as bitter row with co-founder escalates

Playdead co-founder Dino Patti is allegedly being sued by his former studio and business partner.
Patti was threatened with a lawsuit earlier this year after he posted a now-deleted LinkedIn post that shared an "unauthorized" picture of co-founder Arnt Jensen and discussed some of Limbo's development. Patti said Jensen demanded a little over $73,000 in "suitable compensation and reimbursement," adding that he had "repeatedly" had such letters over the last nine years.

Read Full Story >>
gamesindustry.biz
130°

Nintendo Switch 2 Pro Controller Review

A handful of small redesigns and a pair of back buttons make Nintendo’s Pro Controller for Switch 2 a worthy upgrade.

Read Full Story >>
cgmagonline.com
Neonridr4d ago

I love this controller. Feels so nice in the hand. Plus the battery lasts for days, it's crazy.

peppeaccardo4d ago

$100 ?????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????? ???????????????

1nsomniac4d ago

Yea the pricing for Nintendo peripherals is a bigger joke than the game prices. What the hell were they thinking!

peppeaccardo3d ago

i mean for a piece of slightly redesigned plastic with the same take of the last few years this has written GREED all over it ! Shame on Nintendo.

OMNlPOTENT3d ago

It's $85. The standard Dualsense is $75. The Dualsense Edge (Playstation Pro controller) is $200. The Xbox Elite (Xbox Pro controller) is also $200. How exactly is $85 so drastically insane compared to those prices?

Neonridr3d ago

the battery lasts like 10 times as long as a dualsense though.

Stevonidas3d ago

Not true; more like 20.

You may commence with your butthurt, ponies.

fsfsxii3d ago

It doesn't have analogue tho, sooo....

Tacoboto3d ago

$85 USD
or $75 at CostCo (same standard price as a DualSense)

Even at $85, you're getting 3-4x the battery life of a DualSense, and it is (by a HUGE margin) the cheapest first-party console controller with Back Paddles.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3d ago
Vits4d ago

The thing is, over the past decade, third-party controllers have really stepped up. You can often get better quality, more durability, and stronger performance for half the price of first-party options. Meanwhile, controllers from Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft have become increasingly mediocre, expensive, fragile, and not particularly impressive across the board. What makes this especially noticeable with Nintendo is that they’re surprisingly open to third-party hardware. That openness ends up highlighting just how much better the alternatives are.

Vits4d ago

Pretty much most things by half a dozen of chinese manufactures. Like, 8bitdo, Gamesir, Machenike, Gulikit, Flydigi, Manba, EasySMX, etc.

The exception would be really low tier stuff by those companies... those wouldn't be better, they would be about the same quality. But more durable.

Themba764d ago

Best controller I’ve ever used I even like more than my dual sense edge

UltimateOwnage3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Having used Dual Sense, Pro Controller 1, and 8BitDo Ultimate extensively, I am pretty much in love with Pro Controller 2. The easy reassignment on the grip buttons is such a big plus, but the soft edge joysticks are the best feeling sticks of any controller I’ve ever used. It’s really an awesome controller. The HD Rumble 2 also finally has some thud and the headphone jack is great with a pair of good phones. It’s worth the slight price increase IMO.

Profchaos3d ago

The pro controller 2 for me has the best weight and size it fits the hand perfect like the duelshock 4 did imo

I actually dislike the duelsense controller because of its size but the features are amazing on it.

Still as for the pro 2 no analog triggers is surprisingly something I dont actually miss

PRIMORDUS4d ago

I have the original pro controller and TBH, I don't use it as much. I'm mostly using the Switch in handheld mode with the Hori Split Pad Compact Controller. I also never use the back buttons to program anything so I will not be buying this one here, so that will be $85.00 in my pocket 😂

Show all comments (23)
80°

Techland Wants to Switch to a 3-4 Year Cycle Starting with Dying Light: The Beast

Techland wants to switch to a shorter development cycle of three to four year at the most for its games, starting with Dying Light: The Beast.

Read Full Story >>
wccftech.com
Goodguy015d ago

Very good dev length for a AAA/AA game I'd say. Companies need to set an aim for this range. 1-2 is too little, I believe 3-4 is perfect. Any more is too much. Games don't need to be these gigantic games full of a crazy amount of content. Just make a good game.

Skate-AK4d ago

Lol. Had no idea who that was, but I will admit they do look quite similar.