[stephengillie]

> Making a game with a really solid experience, to my knowledge, usually takes a few years to make. And that's true even when you're not trying to build entirely novel modes of interaction from the ground up.

Fair point, but don't developers usually have significant lead time, so games are released soon after a new console or other hardware? Or is VR simply that much more complicated to develop for?

> Like local co-op? Probably waiting for the release of hardware that has more robust tracking because with multiple individuals in the same tracking space, the problem of occlusion crops up a lot more. Those improvements are planned, at least for the Vive, but they're not available yet to my knowledge.

So essentially, the technology isn't ready yet, and we're all using the Early Access version of the hardware?

> I'd guess licensing the imagery and data, although there are a handful of things like this for singleplayer (Including Google Earth VR), so it might have to do with the complexity of building a networked experience over a purely singleplayer one.

How much more network data is needed to coordinate a VR experience over another type of 3D game - is there usually more collision data, from all of the extra motion tracking? Will VR require gamers have 1 Gbps home internet connections?

[talmand]

>> So essentially, the technology isn't ready yet, and we're all using the Early Access version of the hardware?

I would say this is really close to being a stupid comment. The technology does exactly what it's supposed to do, and does it quite well. Just because it doesn't support features you want doesn't mean the tech isn't "ready".

[exergy]

So, you would say smart watches are "ready"? Despite the abominable battery life the Apple Watch gets, even though it isn't Always On? Would you say the Internet Of Shit is ready? Even though you can't get a decent cup of coffee before a firmware upgrade? After all, "the technology does exactly what it's supposed to"?

In the same vein, the low-resolution, headache and nausea inspiring VR headsets of modern day aren't really ready, even though engineers are making the best of what they have.

[talmand]

I would say yes to every question you just posed. Again, just because the tech doesn't work to your expectations doesn't mean it is not ready for market. You're just being stupidly picky.

>> Even though you can't get a decent cup of coffee before a firmware upgrade?

I don't even know what this means.

[dkonofalski]

I easily get two days worth of battery from my Apple Watch and I'm completely satisfied with the experience of the HTC Vive. I dunno what you're on about.

[psyc]

Big developers are mostly taking a wait and see approach. Indies are piling on like it's a gold rush. If VR turns out to have staying power, it will take a while for the AAA sector to get in gear.

[monkmartinez]

Are indies piling on because there is so little money to be made else where in gaming, at present?

[psyc]

As someone peripherally involved with certain VR indie communities, I'd say it's simply that indies do what they want, and there are a lot of people who are extremely passionate about VR. As far as money goes, VR users are very hungry for apps right now, so it's a small but vigorous market.

[Tiktaalik]

Platform launches are always a good opportunity for niche games and new IPs because early adopters want to justify their purchase and with a limited library are more open to buying games they wouldn't buy otherwise.

[jkaunisv1]

It's not any more complicated to develop for than an equivalent 3d-space game, but almost none of the tropes and techniques that work for a flat experience like playing Counter Strike translate. People are figuring out basics like how to make picking something up feel good/right, really basic gestures and actions take on a lot more importance when you're supposed to feel them as a natural part of yourself. It used to be "press A to open door", now you actually have to open the door, and getting that right takes a lot of trial and error.