What is the end goal for VR?

Started by Legend, Dec 11, 2019, 09:47 PM

previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Legend

AKA is VR inherently flawed?


Right now in VR sword combat is an unsolved problem. Your sword/lightsaber either just goes through everything and gameplay is broken, or your sword/lightsaber is stopped on impact and the VR simulation mismatches your body. It's not a super extreme problem at the moment because VR is still new and fun as a gimmick but how will it work going forward?

Once people are not entertained by the existence of VR itself, I think VR applications need to decide if they are games or if they are sports. Does the game determine the rules or does your physical body determine the rules?

Going back to the sword/lightsaber question, a future version of VR could physically stop your hands to keep them in line with the game. When this happens however, what happens if the player is strong and keeps pushing? Does the game ignore them since in game they have low strength stats, or does the game let them overpower the enemy? What about simple locomotion in VR? An omnidirectional treadmill is the dream but what happens when you tire faster than your character? How is that balanced?


Until VR becomes a chip in your brain, it kinda feels like this sport like nature of VR needs to be embraced. Games where you escape from the physical limitations of your body will be better played with a gamepad.


the-pi-guy

I'm not completely convinced that it's an issue.  
It might take you out of the experience a little bit, but I don't think it's a major problem.  

The way I see it:

Short term:
Not really an issue.  The only real short term fix is to design games smarter to make it less noticeable.

Moderate term:
Design hardware to stop the player from moving when they're not supposed to.

Long term:
Brain chip!  Full Sword Art Online kind of gameplay.
But I think in the reasonable moderate future, we'll get surprisingly close to being this convincing.  There will be some limitations before this of course, but it's going to be pretty convincing.  

Legend

I'm not completely convinced that it's an issue.  
It might take you out of the experience a little bit, but I don't think it's a major problem.  

The way I see it:

Short term:
Not really an issue.  The only real short term fix is to design games smarter to make it less noticeable.

Moderate term:
Design hardware to stop the player from moving when they're not supposed to.

Long term:
Brain chip!  Full Sword Art Online kind of gameplay.
But I think in the reasonable moderate future, we'll get surprisingly close to being this convincing.  There will be some limitations before this of course, but it's going to be pretty convincing.  
What's your solution for it?

I want to fully support VR gameplay in The Forged Kingdoms but how the heck do you make multiplayer sword fighting both feel good and respect game balance? If swords just float through everything then blocking can't be a thing. If swords just glue to your hands, then does it not fundamentally become more of a sport than a game? Attack speed would be determined by your body and not by your skill points.

Games get by with current VR swordplay so I can always just accept these limitations if it comes to it, but I'm genuinely starting to feel like VR gameplay is a paradox. The more advanced the hardware becomes, the worse it becomes for escapism gameplay. Only completely different approaches like brain chips will be able to re-merge video games and future VR games.

kitler53

Dec 12, 2019, 03:32 PM Last Edit: Dec 12, 2019, 03:34 PM by kitler53
i mean, we always knew this was a problem right?  this was always a known flaw.   hell,.. it wasn't even introduced by VR because sword play games on the wii had the same fundamental flaw so really it is a flaw in motion control and VR just makes it feel worse.

all i can say is this,.. there are things you can do really really well in 2d that doesn't work as well in 3D gameplay  (aka platformers).  as games transitioned from 2D to 3D new genres emerged and some old genres either died out or changed to accommodate what works well in the new technology.  there are no 3D twin stick shooters for example.  great genre in 2D,.. not possible in 3D.

VR will do the same.  sword gameplay will just never be that great.  driving games, however, massively better.   gun play transitions well enough,.. especially if the user is in a "mech" where the movement is not expected to come from moving your legs but rather working a "steering wheel".    I can't think of the right word but a really old genre came back from the dead in games like "moss" and "giant ghost" where you view the world one "room" at a time from top down view and control a different character and leverage perspective as a core gameplay mechanic.

VR has already invented one new genre imo.  The "stand in one spot and interact with objects in 360 degrees" genre such as job simulator and dead hungry.

i'm not entirely sure what i even mean as i write this but a VR game where you are supposed to be a "ghost" probably makes a lot of sense.  that would really turn VRs haptic feedback problem and turn it into a innovative feature if you can find some fun ways to interact with the world that isn't physical interactions specifically.



i dunno.  VR is not doomed but like the major technologies before it some things work and some things don't...
...and if you want to make a sword game in VR then just don't use motion controls.



Featured Artist: Vanessa Hudgens

the-pi-guy

Dec 12, 2019, 06:08 PM Last Edit: Dec 12, 2019, 11:49 PM by the-pi-guy
From a balancing point, it would take a bit of work, but you could have it set so that there was a maximum amount of damage per some time frame.  Or in a related fashion, you could have it so the amount of damage was dependent on how long a swing took. 


When talking about the immersion factor, there are limitations.  But if you design a game around them, you might be able to make them less noticeable.  One thing that you could do is for an AI enemy, you could design them so that they keep their distance.  It'd probably be a little janky, but you could do it with playable characters.  You'd basically limit the interactions to the ones that can be reasonably pulled off. 

There are some creative things that can be done.  One game bends the sword when you are swinging, depending on how heavy it is. You could mess around with stretchy weapons that bend on contact.

Unfortunately though, right now games that affect the character are best to do with controllers and a third person perspective. 
Games where the character affects the game, with no reverse actions work well with first person perspective.

Legend

From a balancing point, it would take a bit of work, but you could have it set so that there was a maximum amount of damage per some time frame.  Or in a related fashion, you could have it so the amount of damage was dependent on how long a swing took.  


When talking about the immersion factor, there are limitations.  But if you design a game around them, you might be able to make them less noticeable.  One thing that you could do is for an AI enemy, you could design them so that they keep their distance.  It'd probably be a little janky, but you could do it with playable characters.  You'd basically limit the interactions to the ones that can be reasonably pulled off.  

There are some creative things that can be done.  One game bends the sword when you are swinging, depending on how heavy it is. You could mess around with stretchy weapons that bend on contact.

Unfortunately though, right now games that affect the character are best to do with controllers and a third person perspective.  
Games where the character affects the game, with no reverse actions work well with first person perspective.
Limiting dps really only works for a casual experience. It's the same way a multiplayer Kinect game would work since making the motions and actions fun is the primary goal.

The 2D version of combat I'm working on has full sword motion instead of button executed attacks. I initially figured this would help the VR version since you could have full sword physics unlike say Skyrim VR, but it doesn't solve the underlying problem.

I'm not sure if I'd be able to change the game dynamics when playing in the VR mode. The enemy AI could include something like a bear which would full on charge you.


Maybe the solution is to really just make VR an optional experience that isn't optimal for all play styles? For example if a player is living in a massive city and mostly engaged with politics, first person VR gameplay is very straightforward and would have minimal discomfort. Meanwhile if a person is out adventuring and engaged in combat, regardless of the mechanics, it'll be a recipe for motion sickness. VR could dynamically switch to 3rd person and combat could use traditional controls, in a weird out of body experience that could be contextualized within the lore.