2016 : A Pivotal Year For AMD, Nvidia, PC Gaming And VR

[varkanoid]

Here's a prediction for 2016, VR will go the same way as Nvidia 3D.

It will never be immersive enough till you have a gaming environment that allows you to walk around your room and seeing as most people have their PC in a bedroom it aint gonna happen.

VR, dont give a *&^%

 

[AlamoX]

Here's a prediction for 2016, VR will go the same way as Nvidia 3D.

It will never be immersive enough till you have a gaming environment that allows you to walk around your room and seeing as most people have their PC in a bedroom it aint gonna happen.

VR, dont give a *&^%

when you have most of the multi-billion companies, invest heavily on something, you can be sure it wont fail, they see the value for applications you most likely never thought off yet, facebook, microsoft, intel, samsung, google, valve, sony...and they didnt invest in it untill most of the issues with VR were resolved, like immersion, motion sickness, processing power, resolution of the screen, etc.
i am quiet excited about it, you just can't compare it to 3DD, that nobody cared about.

 

[Mei]

this is the year AMD need to punch NVIDIA in the boobies!

i do think a lot of people will buy into VR

id buy one just for rocket league so i can see where the ball is lol
there's going to be a lot games and uses for it that dont involve walking around accidently kicking your pets

 

[AlamoX]

this is the year AMD need to punch NVIDIA in the boobies!

i do think a lot of people will buy into VR

id buy one just for rocket league so i can see where the ball is lol
there's going to be a lot games and uses for it that dont involve walking around accidently kicking your pets

hahaha so true about rocket league

 

[StriderX]

For VR to be truly worthwhile, you'd need dozens of graphics cards to run at useful resolutions.

I think there's likely a long-term danger (psychological mostly) in having your eyes look at something so low res with no peripheral vision looking at the real world.

 

[andybird123]

when you have most of the multi-billion companies, invest heavily on something, you can be sure it wont fail, they see the value for applications you most likely never thought off yet, facebook, microsoft, intel, samsung, google, valve, sony...and they didnt invest in it untill most of the issues with VR were resolved, like immersion, motion sickness, processing power, resolution of the screen, etc.
i am quiet excited about it, you just can't compare it to 3DD, that nobody cared about.

because virtually no multibillion dollar companies supported 3D?
you know, like nearly all of the same ones you just listed

 

[Seanspeed]

the vr stuff and next gen hardware sounds great and all but I would be happy if in 2016 pc games actually run and look better than the console equivelant when released. What a terrible year 2015 was for pc gaming. First time in a while that I opted for console version of many multiplat games.... End rant

Arkham Knight is the ONLY game that applies to what you said.

If you bought other multiplats on console thinking they would look and run better, you were probably making a mistake.

 

[Seanspeed]

I

For VR to be truly worthwhile, you'd need dozens of graphics cards to run at useful resolutions.

I think there's likely a long-term danger (psychological mostly) in having your eyes look at something so low res with no peripheral vision looking at the real world.

What a bizarre set of statements.

 

[Jarrastafari]

VR matters because it's not just about games or entertainment. There's actually useful commercial, medical and military applications. Games are just a bonus and companies know this. Video games bring a lot of cool tech into the world but some of it turns out to be more useful elsewhere in society.

 

[Howling]

Here's a prediction for 2016, VR will go the same way as Nvidia 3D.

It will never be immersive enough till you have a gaming environment that allows you to walk around your room and seeing as most people have their PC in a bedroom it aint gonna happen.

VR, dont give a *&^%

The difference being, the only thing in 3d that I've heard anything good about was Avatar. I don't think I heard about anyone having a positive experience with 3d anywhere else.
Yet with VR, and I can only speak for the rift at the minute 'cause that's the only one I've been following, everyone's experience seems to be positive. Watching videos of people using them and reacting to the world is some of the funniest **** I've ever seen (especially playing horror) - you don't get those kinds of reactions from a standard screen, and the general consensus is that it's a pretty awesome experience. I don't see how this could flop tbh.

 

[andybird123]

The difference being, the only thing in 3d that I've heard anything good about was Avatar. I don't think I heard about anyone having a positive experience with 3d anywhere else.
Yet with VR, and I can only speak for the rift at the minute 'cause that's the only one I've been following, everyone's experience seems to be positive. Watching videos of people using them and reacting to the world is some of the funniest **** I've ever seen (especially playing horror) - you don't get those kinds of reactions from a standard screen, and the general consensus is that it's a pretty awesome experience. I don't see how this could flop tbh.

By comparison, I've tried both DK1 and 2, and people online all said the DK2 was a massive improvement and that you could hardly notice the screen door effect... It was the only thing I could see, completely unusable. They are saying the same about the CV1 but I cant see how going from 1080p to 1200p is going to make a big difference if going from 720 to 1080 didnt.

Whilst there are a few people who seem positively evangelical about VR, it needs much more than that to become successful.

It will be interesting to see what this "major breakthrough" HTC have made, but if it isn't at least a 1440p screen then I can see me skipping the first gen (or buying and almost instantly reselling as happened with the last two).

 

[Howling]

Interesting. You're the first person I've spoken to who's had a poor experience on it. Is it that you were LOOKING for the screen door effect or could you genuinely not focus on the images because of it?
God I hope I'm one of those people that can filter it out - I'll be very disappointed if I can't get my VR porn on ;D

 

[andybird123]

I had brief moments where I could tune it out, but it was for a few seconds at best, and anything with text was completely unreadable, even if you could tune out the screen door, everything was so pixelated that it was like playing original wolfenstein - don't get me wrong, I can see the potential, but the screens need to be at least 4K to have any kind of mass appeal

so you are so positive for VR, but you've not even tried it yourself yet? that is pretty funny

 

[Dirk Diggler]

Is VR bespoke in that existing games would have to be "ported" for use with it? Similarly, would games require a normal and VR version like we get 2D and 3D movies?

I know pretty much nothing about VR, and I am wondering if my next move is 4K or VR.

 

[andybird123]

Is VR bespoke in that existing games would have to be "ported" for use with it? Similarly, would games require a normal and VR version like we get 2D and 3D movies?

I know pretty much nothing about VR, and I am wondering if my next move is 4K or VR.

there are some cludges to get VR to work on most DX games, however the experience is severely sub-par, really a game needs to be developed specifically with VR in mind (a VR game will still work on a flat screen, but lots of things developers do for flat screens would make you want to hurl in VR)

For the vast majority of people, VR isn't going to be a thing in 2016, so if its a choice between the two I would do 4K (or even 1440p if you are still on 1080p now)

 

[Dirk Diggler]

there are some cludges to get VR to work on most DX games, however the experience is severely sub-par, really a game needs to be developed specifically with VR in mind (a VR game will still work on a flat screen, but lots of things developers do for flat screens would make you want to hurl in VR)

For the vast majority of people, VR isn't going to be a thing in 2016, so if its a choice between the two I would do 4K (or even 1440p if you are still on 1080p now)

I'm on 1440 right now, and to be honest I might settle for higher frame rates from Pascal, or even stick with what I have if Pascal can't give me a 35% minimum increase.

I've been debating 4K for a wee while, but it's the lower fps that puts me off.

As for VR, I keep thinking it's doomed like 3D (I have a 3D TV and never use it, and I never pick 3D versions of movies at the cinema). However, there is an awful lot of money being pumped into VR so maybe I'm completely off the mark.

 

[nashathedog]

I'm on 1440 right now, and to be honest I might settle for higher frame rates from Pascal, or even stick with what I have if Pascal can't give me a 35% minimum increase.

I've been debating 4K for a wee while, but it's the lower fps that puts me off.

As for VR, I keep thinking it's doomed like 3D (I have a 3D TV and never use it, and I never pick 3D versions of movies at the cinema). However, there is an awful lot of money being pumped into VR so maybe I'm completely off the mark.

I think it has got a future if they get it right, For example they need to get the headset right, Too heavy or too bulky and it'll be a negative, If it's too demanding it'll be another as the majority of gamers won't want to by an expensive headset and an expensive card,
I hear the Playstation has one coming, It'll be interesting to see how nerfed the titles for that are if at all.

I think it'll be great for games like Project cars, Imagine sitting there with a seat, wheel and pedal set and a headset and being sat at the start line in an Ariel Atom, Buttkickers in place and your missus stood there with a 16" house fan simulating the wind as you race
The future of Sim
Very niche though...

 

[Gregster]

For VR to be truly worthwhile, you'd need dozens of graphics cards to run at useful resolutions.

I think there's likely a long-term danger (psychological mostly) in having your eyes look at something so low res with no peripheral vision looking at the real world.

VR now is worthwhile now and we don't even have the CV1 or Vive released yet and no, you won't need dozens of GPUs to run it. I also play for hours on Elite Dangerous with the DK2 and I don't feel I want to go mental lol.

Terrible baseless post lol

By comparison, I've tried both DK1 and 2, and people online all said the DK2 was a massive improvement and that you could hardly notice the screen door effect... It was the only thing I could see, completely unusable. They are saying the same about the CV1 but I cant see how going from 1080p to 1200p is going to make a big difference if going from 720 to 1080 didnt.

Whilst there are a few people who seem positively evangelical about VR, it needs much more than that to become successful.

It will be interesting to see what this "major breakthrough" HTC have made, but if it isn't at least a 1440p screen then I can see me skipping the first gen (or buying and almost instantly reselling as happened with the last two).

The screen door effect (I had to look it up) was my biggest thing but I blocked it out quite easily and from what I am reading, the CV1 makes this so much better as well. I have good vision thankfully and glad I could get past it.

 

[StriderX]

VR now is worthwhile now and we don't even have the CV1 or Vive released yet and no, you won't need dozens of GPUs to run it. I also play for hours on Elite Dangerous with the DK2 and I don't feel I want to go mental lol.

Terrible baseless post lol.

How can anyone enjoy such low resolution literally a few cm from your eye?

I'm not saying it's impossible and exaggerated a tad with gpu power a tad, but still.

 

[varkanoid]

when you have most of the multi-billion companies, invest heavily on something, you can be sure it wont fail, they see the value for applications you most likely never thought off yet, facebook, microsoft, intel, samsung, google, valve, sony...and they didnt invest in it untill most of the issues with VR were resolved, like immersion, motion sickness, processing power, resolution of the screen, etc.
i am quiet excited about it, you just can't compare it to 3DD, that nobody cared about.

If billions went into this its money well spent.

GOOGLE CARDBOARD

3D is still in the cinema shared by couple hundred people. As been said lot of those companies invested heavily in it. I dont see VR being the same in my lifetime.

3D gaming is still about (Dirt Showdown in 3D is amazing) but its not financially enticing. So in the same way VR Gaming is going to live and die by you purchasing it at home. I just think its going to be a gimmick that will gather dust next to the 3d Specs gathering dust.

Also find it funny someone said VR is now yet people say 4k is not yet there but probably more 4k screens sold than VR headsets.

Serious question - does VR headsets allow you for wearing glasses ? Does it work ok for people who do ?