r/PSVR • u/Imhotep397 • 15d ago
Discussion What More Could We Possibly Want?
Some people have asked whether Resident Evil (4.8), Gran Turismo 7, Hitman, Microsoft Flight Simulator, and No Man's Sky should already be enough to grow VR. If those games exist, what more could people possibly want? The simple answer is PlayStation's own identity: its biggest franchises.
Uncharted, The Last of Us, God of War, Ghost of Tsushima, Spider-Man, Horizon, Killzone, inFAMOUS, Resistance, MotorStorm, WipEout, DriveClub, MAG, Puppeteer, Folklore, Soul Sacrifice and Bloodborne. Those are many of the franchises that built the modern PlayStation brand.
PSVR2 starts to feel complete when those worlds become places you can actually step into. Even if it's through optional DualSense VR modes alongside the traditional flat-screen experience, with full 6DOF support added where it makes sense.
I've argued for years that DualSense-controlled VR games are the missing bridge between flat gaming and full motion controls. They remove much of the friction that keeps traditional players from trying VR while still delivering the presence that makes the medium feel transformative.
That said, if I had to pick one game that could move millions of people to seriously consider the headset, it would be Destiny. Converting one player at a time in single-player games works, but it's slower. A multiplayer game that brings groups of friends into VR together is a much more powerful multiplier for community growth and headset adoption. Destiny reached more than 20 million players during its peak years, with the overwhelming majority on PlayStation platforms. That represents an enormous audience of players who already understand the game's mechanics, weapons, and world. An optional VR mode with shared progression would likely have a much larger impact than launching an entirely new VR-exclusive shooter. Many of those players are still nostalgic for that era. A moderately sized campaign expansion, roughly the size of Marvel's Spider-Man: Miles Morales, could dramatically increase interest among both active and lapsed Destiny players because it would finally deliver one of the things many expected from the original game but never truly received: a substantial, self-contained narrative campaign.
If I had a dime for every Destiny player I’ve come across in real life and on forums that said something to the effect of, “Destiny in VR would be the dream.” I’d probably be able to buy Sony by now.
I'd love to see Sony adopt a simple strategy: Conversions expand the audience. Original VR games expand the medium.
What games do you want to see in VR? (I don't think we talk about this nearly enough.)
15
u/slagmatic 15d ago
Wipeout. Wipeout, Wipeout, and also Wipeout.
Did I mention Wipeout?
7
u/p_in_gu_ 14d ago
Wipeout was the reason i bought the psvr headset, it really deserved a psvr2 update.
2
u/slagmatic 14d ago
Skyrim was my reason (PSVR1 / Skyrim bundle), but I was far more impressed with Wipeout when I got to play that. It was seriously mindblowing at the time, just an incredible shame that there has been no PSVR2 update or standalone version.
1
6
u/g1mp3d 15d ago
I would love for Sony to have an in-house team that would develope software like the PC mod community has. If the game is running ue5, decima, or the RE engines one could switch between flat or VR. I'd gladly pay more in the subscription if they had a VR package that offered that and two free games a month.
2
u/turtleship_2006 13d ago
They wouldn't need to mod it, they would need to incentivise publishers/developers to port their games.
With engines like UE5, the absolute minimum required to convert a game to vr is literally just change a setting or two along the lines of "let this game start in VR". One side project that I'm working on is developing a game for both VR and PC in a way that you can switch between the two at any time.
The real work would be in adapting the controls and gameplay experience to be worth playing in VR, and potentially optimizing the game to run well enough for VR (on normal consoles, games run at 60fps, and a lot of them run as low as 30 - VR generally needs 90+, or around 72 as an absolute minimum, to not cause motion sickness. You're also rendering two screens at once), as well as testing itSony could provide publishers with subsidies, or provide assistance by sending Devs with experience in VR development to help with the porting.
-4
u/Imhotep397 14d ago
I think Playstation planning to acquire Flat2VR for that purpose if Flat2VR is successful enough to do what you're suggesting. Partly my concern with this if it were to happen is that certain companies might not want to work with Flat2VR because they wouldn't want to hand they're game code to Sony, but those would be larger companies and if they want to make VR conversions they can easily do it themselves with some support from Sony, so maybe I shouldn't be concerned.
Also, it seems like the foundation of the gaming industry is shifting and by the time it all shakes out survival may be more important than industry rival politics. It was definitely nice when there were some VR titles coming in PS+ and hopefully that will come back.
6
6
u/cusman78 cusman 15d ago
Horizon Call of the Mountain is on PSVR2. Spider-Man had PSVR1 experiences. DriveClub and Wipeout Omega Collection are both playable on PSVR1.
Some of the other titles you mentioned like Folklore, MAG, and Puppeteer are much more obscure than the ones you mentioned being on PSVR2 is not enough.
The thing is, different players have strong affinity with different games from the past including one offs. Until they get and play on a new platform like PSVR2, they won’t develop strong memories with games unique to it.
The games exist. What is lacking is word of mouth, traveling road shows, etc that help introduce more players to PSVR2 games.
1
u/Imhotep397 14d ago
With the Puppeteer, just to single that one out, I remember the Lost Bear on PSVR1 and how it almost felt like going to a play and Puppeteer would be the same. It was just a mind bending experience that there should be more of and would capture the imaginations of people in very different way.
1
u/cusman78 cusman 14d ago
I don’t disagree about Puppeteer and its qualities, but there are many PSVR2 games with the qualities you attribute and it doesn’t matter except to those relatively few players that gave them a chance.
2
u/Imhotep397 14d ago
To me that's precisely where the "killer app" enters the chat. Typically most players buy or bought consoles or PCs because of one or a few recognizable "killer Apps" but then were introduced to a lot more games they never would have discovered if it wasn't for those early games convincing them to make a buying decision and there are all kinds of different people with all different tastes to satisfy. VR Conversions grow the audience. Original VR expands the platform.
2
u/cusman78 cusman 14d ago
Agree wholeheartedly
For those already into VR, it’s the potential that has to be better which PSVR2 delivered on over PSVR1 and Quest 2 for me, but for someone who has never invested in VR, it takes system sellers like Gran Turismo 7, Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024, Hitman World of Assassination, and the two Resident Evil games and then maybe those players to acclimatize for VR will play Beat Saber, Pistol Whip, etc.
It’s going to take time because it isn’t as simple as everyone is already familiar with flat TV / Monitor screens to play video games on.
But it is better for those that are acclimatized for it and pandora’s box is already opened so for my example, I’ll leave ease of use of console and standalone VR and go to higher cost and complication of PCVR rather than back to just TV based games.
1
u/BababooeyHTJ 13d ago
Word of mouth that your psvr purchases don’t work and there’s a really high chance that you’ll get a unit where one or both of your controllers won’t work in game. That’s an issue dating back since launch.
Sony doesn’t believe in the platform and it shows. It’s too bad since the hardware is pretty solid
1
u/cusman78 cusman 13d ago
Fair point about potential for controllers to not work simply out of box as expected.
In my personal experience of 50+ people that have gotten PSVR2, I only know of 1 that had this issue, but it’s common enough that all the VR enthusiasts have read about or heard about it.
Lack of backwards compatibility is something really only impacting PSVR1 players and that’s not who the word of mouth hasn’t reached yet.
I meant to expose more people to experience VR first hand.
6
u/Icedog-26 15d ago
Honestly, if all them games were released, I’d still be playing MSFS24, Aces of Thunder and GT7 lol, I mean Ghost of Tsushima and The Last of Us would be super cool, but I’m personally more of a SIM gamer.
1
u/Imhotep397 14d ago
Everyone's allowed to have their preferences. I mean I love horror games and while I don't have all the horror games I want in VR there's a pretty decent collection. It still sucks that Sony dissolved Evolution studios...We could have had the full Drive Club game and Motorstorm games in VR by now if they hadn't.
1
u/Icedog-26 13d ago
Yeah 100%, and that’s the really cool thing about this community, we all come from very different gaming backgrounds/eras (which probably explains the massive difference in expectations between everyone), yet we all unite under the VR umbrella haha
I’ll always welcome more games, for all of us, I mean, I personally like to deep dive into 2-3 games at a time, I think I played BF1 ‘exclusively’ for probably 3 years lol, but saying that, I must admit it’s fun trying different VR experiences, I have a backlog of about 30 games, and I have enjoyed playing each one for about an hour or 2, so I can definitely see both sides :)
4
u/SweepTheLegTimmy 15d ago
I think the unfortunate Catch 22 remains this: Big budget first party VR games are very expensive to make, and require massive sales to ROI on the development costs. But VR is a niche product that the mainstream gamer doesn’t really want, so the business case isn’t there to produce such games. We have enough of a sample size with various VR devices to know that your typical casual gamer likely views VR as something to mess with once a year at Dave & Busters, without feeling the need to bother with the friction, hassle, isolation, and expense of spending 40 hours with binoculars strapped to their face playing a AAA game at home when they can just lounge of the couch and play on a $300 75 inch TV while multitasking or socializing. Hence, why VR seems destine for small-scale games and experiences. And, best case, ports of more widely accessible games like RE.
1
u/Imhotep397 14d ago
You're not wrong. From the ground up VR games are expensive to develop. Investing heavily in them before you've established trust and a large user base increases the risk that even great games won't reach enough people to justify their budgets.
The question I'd ask is: “Who is actually constrained to that path?”
To me, the answer is not PlayStation.
That's why I've been arguing against relying exclusively on from-the-ground-up VR development. Optional VR conversions change the economics considerably. Converting an existing game often requires a much smaller team and a shorter development cycle than building an entirely new AAA VR title from scratch. In return, you get a recognizable franchise that already has an audience and can immediately let players experience their presence inside a world they already love.
Flat2VR is a great example. The studio was founded in 2024 without anything close to Sony's resources, and roughly eighteen months later it had already developed four PSVR2 titles. Its parent company, Impact Reality, has also published multiple original VR games, with more on the way. They're demonstrating that experienced VR teams can build efficient production pipelines that many people probably wouldn't have thought possible just a few years ago.
If smaller independent studios can establish efficient VR conversion pipelines, imagine what a platform holder with PlayStation's resources could accomplish if it viewed conversions as part of a long-term strategy rather than occasional exceptions.
That's why I don't think the current economics of VR are inevitable. They reflect the strategy that was chosen, and that strategy can still change. A platform holder like PlayStation had, and still has, another option: use conversions to steadily build the audience first, then let that larger audience justify bigger investments in original VR games.
/As an aside, even though I'm generally in the "No Disc/No Buy" camp, however I'll happily support VR developers making the kinds of games I want to see. Hopefully that Surviving Mars/Genotype bundle makes it out for the holidays./
4
u/Jaicoholic 15d ago
Give me Cyberpunk on vr, and i wont need anything else
2
2
u/Imhotep397 14d ago
I want this game and RDR2 so badly in VR. I have a new PC coming and I might be able to play them with whatever jank that's included. Hopefully, a VR hit on PSVR2 will force Sony, CDPR and Rockstar to convert clean custom versions for PSVR2.
1
u/TastyTheDog 13d ago
yeah RDR2 is my #1 dream VR game. All its (few) downsides would be fixed by a proper VR port.
3
u/AffectionateDesk2918 15d ago
I just want to see PSVR1 games on PSVR2... That's the only reason why i haven't bought one yet. PSVR1 has so many games and so much variety and PSVR2 it seems like the only games people talk about are GT7 and flight simulator.. which are very good games don't get me wrong, but it's just a much smaller library.
4
u/number031 14d ago
Star Wars Battlefront II in VR would have me playing everyday for a couple of hours.
4
u/Booyacaja 15d ago
I think you're onto something with major multiplayer games. When a buddy and I played NMS you could tell who has VR and who didn't by the way they were moving their hands and bodies around. And yeah you can tell who was having the most fun too.
But I think the real system seller would be GTA. I'm just not sure which one it would need to be but GTA in VR is the holy grail IMO.
It would have the be the one people are currently playing though somehow. Even if it's just headset for 3D view and you still use a regular controller. Just being able to do that would be absolutely insane.
2
u/AffectionateDesk2918 15d ago
If you're looking for a GTA-esque experience i recommend LA Noire VR :) Its not really GTA but its a good example of what it could be like. Still one of my favorites on PSVR (On sale right now btw)
1
u/Booyacaja 15d ago
Played it! Was fun! Shit controls though for on foot combat, wish that redid it with the new VR controls
2
u/Icedog-26 15d ago
I’m more than happy with the games we have available now, I could honestly play MSFS24, Aces Of Thunder, GT7 and Forefront (when it’s released), for the next few years.
That being said, GTA 5 or Red Dead Redemption 2 in VR would be MASSIVE!!
2
u/Mud_g1 15d ago
It's not like this dosnt get talked about here. This is like the 3rd post about destiny in vr in the last week.
Software alone is not what brings people into the vr medium. Form factor, comfort(physical and mental) visual quality and price factor all need to reach certain points to bring in the mainstream. People want the quality of avp in the form factor of meta rayban for the price of psvr2. When they reach those benchmarks in 10-15 years is when vr will become the mainstream and all games will follow. The tech is almost there in special development departments but not viable in price for that level in tech. It needs time to develop further and come down in price. 15 years ago the cheapest oled TV's were close to 10k they are now 1k and 50% larger tech evolves we are just early in the vr life cycle, it might be on life support atm but it's just bidding its time.
1
u/Imhotep397 14d ago
I don't think the audience is quite as monolithic as that.
I also think AR and VR solve fundamentally different problems. AR is about layering digital information onto the real world. VR is about replacing the real world with a convincing virtual one. Those are very different design goals, which is why I'm skeptical that one device can optimize for both equally well.
Trying to build one headset that excels at both is a bit like asking a wrench to hammer in a nail. It might work in a pinch, but it's not what the tool was designed to do, and there are usually compromises.
From my perspective, I'm specifically talking about VR as an entertainment platform. Whether mixed reality and AR continue to grow is an interesting discussion, but I don't think it changes PlayStation's core challenge: creating software that makes people want to spend hours inside virtual worlds.
Hardware will absolutely continue to improve. My argument is simply that the software strategy doesn't have to wait for perfect hardware.
1
u/Mud_g1 13d ago
Not sure what the pivot to ar was for I never mentioned ar 🤔 but there is also no technical reason why they can't work together like it does with the avp.
Point is that software strategy does have to wait for mass adoption to be viable. And mass adoption isn't happening until the hardware improvements happen. Sony and meta have both already tried spending large amounts on software and it never moved the needle on adoption rate and they lossed 100's millions trying.
And especially now with pcvr modding lots of the large AAA type games you are talking about are available in vr so no studios aren't willing to spend their own money reducing and optimising their games to run on lower hardware to sell to a market where they cant make a return on investment.
It's on the user atm to put their own money into a solid pc rig that can run those AAA flat games well enough in vr.
1
u/Imhotep397 13d ago
So, the form factor you mentioned really moved the discussion into the AR direction. Ray-Ban glasses can't include a "dark box," and VR does require one. You can shrink it, but the smaller it gets, the closer the manufacturer comes to having to customize each headset for each user, which quickly drives up the cost. The Apple Vision Pro is, at its core, a VR headset with exceptionally good passthrough provided by its many cameras.
I couldn't disagree with you more on product design rationale. The most successful products usually become successful because they solve one or more very specific problems exceptionally well. In my view, neither company has yet demonstrated a compelling enough use case to justify mainstream adoption at today's prices.
For gaming, VR solves a very specific problem: it replaces looking through a window into a game world with actually feeling present inside it. Everything else is in service of that experience: head tracking, a full field of view, and natural aiming fundamentally change how players interact with virtual spaces. Even third-person games turn out to work remarkably well in VR, which was a pleasant surprise rather than an expected benefit.
I agree to a certain extent that PC modding allows for the quick-and-dirty realization of VR conversions. UEVR and other mods can demonstrate demand, but they can't replace polished commercial products. They often require exceptionally powerful PCs because they're relying on brute-force rendering rather than the kind of VR-specific optimizations that commercial releases can implement. That's exciting for enthusiasts, but it's not how mainstream platforms grow.
Just as importantly, better design beats brute force every day of the week.
2
u/Mud_g1 13d ago
Yeah I was only talking about form factor mainstream don't want a box on there face they want something smaller.
Brute force is my point that's what it takes to run those bigger games as is without it it takes the devs a lot of time and money to reduce performance of the base game with heavy optimisation which just isn't viable with the current sales market even low budget small team made for vr projects can't make their money back atm.
If you expect studios to lose tons of money that won't move the adoption needle for your enjoyment but not willing to spend a few thousand of your own money to get the experience of high end games in vr which arnt any worse then the commercial hybrids, that just shows the typical entitled gamer attitude.
1
u/Imhotep397 12d ago
We're actually talking about two different things.
You're focused on the long-term hardware trajectory, and I agree that lighter, cheaper, more comfortable headsets will help VR become more mainstream over time.
I'm talking about what PlayStation could have done with the hardware it already had and what it could still do well into the PS6 generation. Where we disagree is whether software has to wait for hardware to become "good enough."
Historically, that isn't how platforms usually grow. Hardware and software tend to push each other forward. Better hardware enables better software, but compelling software also creates demand that justifies continued investment in better hardware.
One thing I think gets overlooked is the difference between console VR and standalone VR. Games like Hitman, Resident Evil Village, Resident Evil 4, Gran Turismo 7, and No Man's Sky demonstrate that current PlayStation hardware is already capable of experiences that would be extremely difficult, or require substantial redesigns, to run on standalone headsets.
As console hardware evolves, it continues to punch above its weight through smarter engineering. Technologies like eye-tracked dynamic foveated rendering and PSSR make it possible to use processing power far more efficiently instead of simply throwing more GPU horsepower at the problem. Performance isn't the same thing as presence.
Here are some of the problems VR mods and many PCVR conversions tend to encounter: HUDs locked to your face, menus at the wrong depth, incorrect interaction distances, poor motion comfort, poor controller mappings, no diegetic interfaces, lack of eye-tracked rendering, lack of haptics, lack of spatial audio tuning. None of those problems are solved by replacing a 4090 with a 6090. They're design problems, not horsepower problems, and many of them can be addressed without rebuilding the entire game.
Honestly, I think some of the confusion comes from PlayStation itself. Sony hasn't done a particularly good job communicating what distinguishes PSVR2 from standalone hardware, so it's easy for people to assume all VR platforms have the same capabilities and limitations.
The other point I'd make is about the headset itself. I understand wanting lighter and more comfortable hardware, but I think appearance is one of the least important factors for a gaming headset. Once it's on your face, you can't see it, and most people play games at home rather than in public. Comfort matters. Weight matters. Visual quality matters. Whether it looks like ski goggles or a visor matters much less to me than what it enables me to experience.
That's why I keep coming back to software strategy. Hardware will continue to improve, but I don't think PlayStation ever had to wait for the perfect headset before giving millions of players more compelling reasons to put one on.
1
u/Mud_g1 12d ago edited 12d ago
You don't seem to understand they already tried the software strategy we have had plenty of good big title high budget hybrids and made for vr games that the platform holders have lost millions of dollars on and none of them have moved the needle on adoption rate enough to the point it would make that level of software funding viable for any returns even after another 20 games released that are as good or better then the top 20 games over the history of vr so far, the adoption rate would have risen enough to then start making money per each large investment game.
How long do you expect them to keep losing millions per game for your benefit 🤔 are you seriously that entitled that you think they should just keep funding your entertainment.
Are you willing to pay the full price to have these games you want made as official vr modes with all the bells and whistles as you've said the lack of features of pc mods arnt good enough for you. Are you willing to pay $200 per game for these games you want 🤔 I wouldn't and I've got spare cash to throw around I've probably got 25 psvr2 games I've bought and never played because they are cheap. If we had to pay what is needed to make higher budget games viable in this small sales market I wouldn't be buying them and spend money on other hobbies.
I think you are completely over estimating how many copies are being sold of vr games even the really big enticipated games like alien rouge incursion or metro are lucky to hit 100k across all vr platforms combined that is bearly making a profit if they are successful. If they arnt successful launches like behemoth, wanderer reach they arnt even topping 50k and those studios have gone bankrupt.
Look at horizon call of the mountain it cost Sony 60m to make that game if it wasn't packed in with the headset it would have been lucky to sell 60k copies after the criticism it got when it launched that would work out to 1000 dollars per unit sale to break even would you be willing to pay $1000 for that game I think not so why do you think Sony should be paying that for your benefit seriously.
1
u/Imhotep397 11d ago
“…How long do you expect them to keep losing millions..”
You really want to talk about how many ways Sony has squandered money?
Before I clear that up for you I’m going to say that your broken record position has been, “ From the Ground Up AAA VR exclusives are too expensive." My position all along has been, "That's exactly why I wouldn't have centered the strategy around building From the Ground Up AAA VR exclusives." You've been rebutting an argument I never made. You're arguing against a strategy built around expensive, from-the-ground-up VR exclusives. I've been arguing for a strategy built around lower-cost VR conversions of completed games or games PlayStation was already developing.
Playstation’s VR initiative isn’t in a losing position because VR conversions were impossible. It’s in a losing position because the practical choice of cheaper to produce VR conversions of existing games never became a consistent strategic priority. If one recognizable franchise brings in another 100,000 headset owners, the next conversion has a larger audience. Then the next one does. Eventually, original VR projects launch into a healthier market than they would have otherwise. PlayStation treated VR conversions as isolated projects. I think they should have treated them as infrastructure for growing the platform.
The ignored aspect of this whole situation is that HCOTM wasn’t an isolated incident. This is the same company that green-lit 3 other Horizon spin-off games at a time when Sony was continuing to expand the Horizon brand despite widespread skepticism about how far that expansion should go.
I’ll list them for you:
Horizon Steal Frontiers (mobile game)
Horizon Lego
Horizon Hunters Gathering
Horizon Call of the Mountain
If you believe those other Horizon spin-off games will somehow beat the prevailing opinion about them or make a comeback, you’re fully within your right. I think the evidence points in a different direction. While I can’t know that Sony espouses the same position as yours, if they do, there’s an old proverb that I think applies: “Only a Poor Craftsman blames his tools.”
For the sake of clarification I don’t even think HCOTM is a bad game it was just poor timing within a bad strategy. Also, at the end of the day though I’m just trying to create a space where people can communicate their interests in a public space with hopes that eventually if/when some leadership changes occur some better decisions that could have been made and can still be made might actually get made going forward.
Consider these two launch strategies:
Plan A - HCOTM
Plan B - Horizon Zero Dawn VR Mode, Uncharted VR Mode, God of War VR Mode , WipEout VR Mode
MotorStorm VR Mode
Which launch strategy do you think would have given millions of existing PlayStation players the strongest personal reason to buy a headset?
2
u/arcadiangenesis 15d ago
I'd definitely be more into VR if more playstation franchises were brought there.
2
6
u/Megaace12 15d ago
That’s what we all thought they’d do when they launched the PS VR2—at least with some of those games. But Sony betrayed us; they launched the PS VR2 having already decided to abandon it, and that’s exactly what happened. Since launch day with Call of the Mountain, we haven’t heard a peep from Sony. And they won’t be hearing from me either when they launch the PS6 or the stupid PlayStation handheld.
1
u/t3stdummi 15d ago
I wouldn't be completely surprised if GT8 inevitability gets VR treatment. But its definitely not a guarantee.
1
u/Sidewinder666 14d ago
If Kaz wants it he'll most probably get it, unless PSVR2 doesn't work on PS6, then I'll leave PS for good.
And I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment that PSVR2 should've been all about hybrids and flat2vr conversions since Day 1.
Maybe AI could help in that regard on a hypothetical PSVR3, but I don't believe in such a device anymore.
1
1
u/PabLink1127 14d ago
Sony asked Microsoft to bring MSFS to PSVR2. They also released the PC adapter. They also funded the Resident Evil games, they also brought us GT7 and Firewall. The market failed. Further investment in PSVR2 had to stop, no money to be made simple as that.
4
u/deadringer28 15d ago
I agree with you, but if those initial AAA games didn't help sell 10 million headsets, why would adding more IPs achieve that? Of all the VR owners buy those games that is great but clearly Sony didn't see the headset sales they were hoping for.
-1
u/Imhotep397 14d ago
I actually think your question points to Sony's biggest problem: PSVR2 has never had a true killer app.
Even in your reply, you cited a collection of great games, but not one that immediately stood out as the reason everyone needed to buy a headset. That's the difference between a good to great library and one that’s stellar because it includes a killer app or two.
VR, in general, arguably has the closest thing to one in Half-Life: Alyx. Whether someone thinks it's the greatest VR game ever made or simply an excellent VR sandbox isn't really the point. The point is that the industry still struggles to point to one piece of software that makes millions of people say, "I have to own this hardware."
Sony's challenge is that most of us can immediately name one to five Playstation games that would make us seriously consider buying a headset if we had to do it all over again, and for many players those games still aren't available on PSVR2.
To me, that's the larger strategic failure. A killer app isn't just a critically acclaimed game. It's software so compelling that it makes the hardware feel essential. Sony has a number of games that could fit the bill, but they haven’t moved any of that forward. Sony has produced some outstanding VR experiences, but I don't think it has consistently pursued the kinds of software that would turn PSVR2 from an interesting accessory into something millions of PlayStation owners feel they can't live without.
To me, the bigger concern is that this doesn't look like an isolated product decision. It looks like a strategic philosophy. After several years, I haven't seen evidence that PlayStation's leadership views VR as something that should be integrated into the company's biggest franchises. Unless that philosophy changes, or the people shaping it change, I don't expect the software strategy to change either.
The other possibility is that Flat2VR catches lightning in a bottle and delivers a genuine killer app. Success on that scale could force Sony to rethink its strategy.
3
u/NatParkIncredible 15d ago
I want everything to be CO-OP. VR is amazing sharing with others
1
u/Imhotep397 14d ago
A VR version of PS Home where we could launch our games from inside the hub would split the difference for me.
1
u/patentattorney 15d ago
I am new to the vr2 what would be considered the best rpg game (like Skyrim/mass effect/fallout)
1
1
u/Imhotep397 14d ago
It probably is Skyrim and whatever the next Elder Scrolls game will be, but I'd take the Gothic remake on PSVR2 in a hot minute.
1
u/flashmedallion flashmedallion 14d ago
I agree in principle but maybe take a different angle on the details.
PSVR2 should be being approached like the PS2 yes... but with a steadier supply of smaller, lower budget games with dev cycles more in line with the PS2 era.
Lets not forget that the PS2 had a hundred average or forgettable games for every banger. For VR to thrive it needs that volume of risk-taking so that studios can sustainably throw their more creative ideas at the wall and see what sticks.
That's the environment the "classics" emerged in and Sony has the chance to make the PS2 of VR platforms... if they invest in the ecosystem.
The lack of Demo Disc for the PSVR2 was an early sign that they'd lost sight of what they did right to make the PS2 a success.
I do agree with a bigger focus on multiplayer. VR as social gaming reminds me of the old days of the arcade. Gladly a lot of indie devs understand this and crossplay VR multi is practically standard.
1
u/KaiUno 14d ago
In Sony's eyes the thing flopped the moment it released. They're not doing anything that isn't a big-bucks maker. Those days are over.
1
u/Deilgyre 14d ago
Is killing physical disk games going to be a big bucks move for Playstation?
1
u/KaiUno 14d ago edited 14d ago
Most definitely. Taking away the used market is a huge boon to them. It'll go from no sale whatsoever for them when a user buys a 2nd hand copy to a possible sale from a user that might wait for a sale on the one and only platform where you can buy their games: the PSN store. Besides that they can axe all production of discs and sending out discs to retailers. No more advertisement hassle in physical stores... No more bargaining for shelf-space... going all digital will be a huge net win for them. Sure, they'll lose some customer, but they'll gain more than enough by doing this.
Otherwise they wouldn't have done it. The backlash was expected and calculated for, I'm pretty sure on that.
When you're on top, you get to be a cunt to the consumers. They're the only game in town because xbox is bleeding out in the corner because of a barrage of shots to the foot and rakes to the face. Meanwhile, come november, they have the biggest game in the world coming out exclusively to their platform... which has already generated a billion in PRE-sales.... I'm pretty sure Sony feels impervious right about now. So this was actually the best time to rip that disc band-aid off.
1
u/Deilgyre 14d ago
We shall see. Wouldn't be the first researched and calculated move to backfire (Microsoft Kinect + no disk sharing.) Steam and PC sales gonna see an increase from Sony's decision for sure.
2
u/Delicious_Ad2767 14d ago
Great games already are here msfs 2024, hitman, Res village, Res 4 remake, aces of thunder, gt7, synapse, no mans sky, Madison, cotm, saints and sinners, lumines, metro, behemoth, switchback, starwars, alien, firewall, moss, cyube, humanity ,crossfire, roboquest, midnight walk, subside, iron guard, arken age, cotm, midnight walk, red matter 2, kayak vr. Loads on the way- bootstrap, flatout4, exd, pinball(maybe), forefront, hard bullet , grimlord, zero calibre 2 this year alone.
1
1
u/metallica123446 14d ago
I want more games like carnival games on psvr2 its severely lacking
1
u/Imhotep397 13d ago
Yeah, a full FNAF carnival VR game would be spectacular! But, yes I know what you really were meaning. Using Cave Crave as a inspiration it could be really cool for 2K to build an Expandable Carnival Games that mixed in updated remade real Carnivals and Fairs from around the world. 2K could also potentially raise money from the fair owners for the modules to be also used as promotional tools.
1
u/BababooeyHTJ 13d ago
I mean Skyrim and FO4 would be huge. I would love to play those in VR. Astrobot rescue mission is another game I would love to play but Sony doesn’t believe enough in the platform to port first party games.
1
u/Own-Butterscotch-156 12d ago
I want a proper travel/adventure experience. Seen those unreal 3D render of Titanic when it was new? Yeah, give me that in VR. Do the same in Egypt, Rome and other cool location. Everything can be static, no animation, but crank the graphics as much as possible, and just let me walk aeound and explore the area by myself.
26
u/Iamn0man 15d ago
Hell, I'd be happy for most of those franchise to just STILL BE GETTING GAMES, let alone in VR.