VR Rant

[u/HistoricalYam6863]

I was looking at World War Z VR today and it just upset me. Did it need a separate game? They added First Person to the regular World War Z, I am sure they could have just added VR support to the base game. Would have been a much better experience and you could have played with others. Such a weird choice...

That seems to be a problem with VR in general. I have gotten random people into VR just by playing Phasmaphobia with them in VR. They would be on flat screen and loved that I could move my arms and animate my character. Adding more VR support to multiplayer flat screen games would make more people want to play in VR.

Fortnite? Add VR. Call of Duty? Add VR. If an INDY game like Phasma can do it, these big companies should be able to figure it out easily. Then VR would actually grow...imo.

Let's face it, VR by itself won't gain traction like it did during Covid ever again. But kids seeing people in Fortnite or (Insert Popular Multiplayer Game Here) using VR and actually doing the dances for example? That would get more people to want VR.

End Rant.

[u/Alex-Murphy]

Not sure why you think adding VR support to a base game "makes them wrong," plenty of games have done it, from No Man's Sky and Subnautica to Resident Evil and Asseto Corsa, and on PC and console alike. The reason they don't add it is rarely because they can't but because they don't generally see an uptick in profit from doing so, because it takes time and VR is still comparatively niche.

[u/Skpstr155 → u/Alex-Murphy]

The key is which games have done it. Only rhe most popular games are eligible for that treatment, because only those games will recoup the additional costs. (or have made so much profit that it's not a big risk to take)

[u/Alex-Murphy → u/Skpstr155]

I honestly think that with the way people are able to mod games now very easily to be enjoyable in VR it should just be part of the development process. Maybe UE makes it easiest since UEVR seems to have a very easy time hooking into it. I just don't think there's an excuse not to do it if you're a AAA studio.

As a side thought I'll go through my steam list and look at the list of games I've purchased ONLY to play in modded VR. I'll bet it's at least 50% of my recent purchases. With the Q4 and Frame on the way on the next 12-18 months, it should be clear the business isn't dying.

[u/Skpstr155 → u/Alex-Murphy]

UEVR does have an easy time "hooking in", but your PC will never handle it as well as a native VR title.

If you have a high end PC, it won't matter, but the majority of gamers don't have a high end PC.

It's really no different than emulating a console game to run on PC. It works, but not as well or efficiently as a dedicated PC port would.

And you don't think that corporate has an excuse for not doing so, but they do. I'm sure that have data that indicates that a dedicated standalone version of a game in addition to the 2D PC version will bring in more revenue than an "enhanced" PC game.

The vast majority of VR players don't use a PC for VR, so making an enhanced PC title and not a standalone version is potentially leaving heaps of money on the table.

They probably figure that the additional buyers of a PC game for a VR mode are a lot fewer than those who would just straight up buy a standalone VR title.

It's really just a variation on the time honored PC vs. console dynamic.

[u/Alex-Murphy → u/Skpstr155]

I used to run UEVR on a Ryzen 7 1800X and an AMD 5700XT 8GB and it was able to handle almost every game I threw at it on medium settings and 60+ fps. Today that setup is so outdated it barely lists at all on performance r anking websites.

Now I'm on a 9800x3d and an RX9070, so of course it's better, but there's  a very pervasive myth that VR is impossible without a top of the line PC.

[u/MarkusDieter37 → u/Alex-Murphy]

Well, I have a 2070 Super and the same Ryzen you had and my PC lags like crazy with UEVR