🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 21:40:17 GMT, john...@frontier.com (John Lewis)
wrote:

>On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 10:25:48 -0500, Rin Stowleigh
><rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 14:43:00 +0100, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:
>>
>>>I personally see VR at the moment as a fad in the hype phase.
>>>
>>>The problem is. The current generation of consoles is to underpowered to 
>>>deliver a decent VR experience at enough framerate.
>>>On the PC side you really need a powerhouse to drive those things.
>>
>>This was part of my point, though.  We are back to the point where the
>>next generation of 3D immersiveness simply is not doable on console
>>hardware.  The size and cost to manufacture/price point of a console
>>are obstacles, and the one benefit (playing on a big TV) is no longer
>>present.
>>
>>>Secondly, there still is the input problem unsolved.
>>>Third, I am not sure how good it is for the eyes in the long run if you 
>>>plug a screen straight in front of your eyes at 3-5cm distance.
>>>Then there is the problem that you basically have to wear a helmet to play.
>>
>>Yes and this is a big limitation.  I don't want to wear an apparatus
>>to play games.  However, if the experience is immersive enough, it can
>>still be a cool hobby.  A lot of things can be done with VR that are
>>very cool beyond just gaming.  It will take time before the technology
>>gets to the point where we are only wearing a pair of very comfortable
>>sunglass-sized goggles, but just like with the early gigantic mobile
>>phones we have to start somewhere.
>>
>>>VR will go the way of television 3d, at the moment there is lots of 
>>>press behind it. A load of early adopters will be burned and in the end
>>>it will be there but relegated to its nieche for another 10 years with 
>>>2-3 games per year supporting it in the long run.
>>
>>I agree VR won't replace PC gaming as we know it any time soon, but
>>with all the potential uses I don't think it's quite the same as 3D
>>televisions.
>
>What kind of game-player needs a rapid-response '360 degree'
>smooth-rotation spherical view -- the pilot in a combat flight-sim.

That and a lot of other things could be made worthwhile with decent
VR.  Combat aside, something as simple as a wingsuit simulator could
be over-the-top fun, if well done.  

>The non-professional flight-sim market has stagnated in technology for
>many years, particularly in the area of graphics. VR may be the
>technology to give developer and customer interest a renewed boost...
>on a capable PC of course.

The only flying fun I've had in a PC game in many years would be
something like choppers/planes in the Battlefield series, or
gliding/wingsuit in the Farcry series.  Certainly not simulators or
anything close, but looking back at some of the fun I used to have
with Gunship 2000 (Atari ST), Red Baron, SWOTL, Aces of the Pacific,
etc., I can't understand why the genre seems so woefully behind
driving simulators for example.  I don't know if I have time or
interest in hardcore sims anymore, but games with the right mix of
sim+fun factor like remakes of the above would be welcomed.

The idea of a remake of Red Baron was bounced around on Kickstarter a
few years back but I guess it didn't go anywhere.