Was this mobile VR? Because that is horrible and nauseating and likely won't ever be a thing in the next decade.
As long as you're using solid VR game design principles, the biggest being: don't move the player using artificial locomotion, people do not feel sick. The hardware is ready in that regard - motion sickness is a solved problem.
Many games ignore that and have you moving with a joystick - you can get used to it, but it should always be optional imo.
My bias is simply from people I've showed my own hardware to, family and friends, not tech people who have a vested interest. The excitement is there, just not as a mass-market consumer product yet.
I admit the hardware is immature in every other respect: comfort, weight, audio, cables and display quality.
> Was this mobile VR? Because that is horrible and nauseating and likely won't ever be a thing in the next decade.
It wasn't mobile VR - it was a dedicated space with external sensors and (usually) a complete Oculus headset.
Your experience differs from mine. As someone who used to love VR and considered moving across the country at one point to work on it, I've since fallen out of love. Ultimately I look at sales as my grounding data, and I don't think VR is going to take off for years.
Of course as I type this, Valve is announcing Half Life for VR - which is huge news. So maybe I'm wrong?
As long as you're using solid VR game design principles, the biggest being: don't move the player using artificial locomotion, people do not feel sick. The hardware is ready in that regard - motion sickness is a solved problem.
Many games ignore that and have you moving with a joystick - you can get used to it, but it should always be optional imo.
My bias is simply from people I've showed my own hardware to, family and friends, not tech people who have a vested interest. The excitement is there, just not as a mass-market consumer product yet.
I admit the hardware is immature in every other respect: comfort, weight, audio, cables and display quality.