Slashdot Mirror
'We Expected VR To Be Two To Three Times as Big', Says CCP Games CEO (roadtovr.com)
CCP Games, the Icelandic studio known for their long-running MMO Eve: Online (2003), shuttered their VR production studios in a surprise move last year, selling off their Newcastle-based branch behind their multiplayer space dogfighter EVE: Valkyrie (2016), and completely shutting down their Atlanta studio behind sports game Sparc (2017). Now, CEO Hilmar Veigar Petursson speaks out in an interview with Destructoid about the studio's return to traditional desktop gaming, and his thoughts about the VR landscape. From a report: In short, he thought VR would be bigger by now, and more capable of supporting a healthy multiplayer userbase. EVE: Valkyrie, the company's flagship VR game, was the result of over three years of development before becoming a day-one launch title on Oculus Rift and PSVR, arriving shortly afterwards on HTC Vive via Steam in 2016 -- a seemingly best-case scenario for any multiplayer-only game.
Under CCP direction, EVE: Valkyrie saw a number of updates designed to entice players back, including new ships, maps, and weekly events; CCP even pushed a major update to the game last year that brought support for desktop and console players, a move to help boost sales and revive the ailing VR-only playerbase. Still, the multiplayer game just didn't perform as CCP ultimately expected, and the company officially stepped back from VR shortly thereafter. "We expected VR to be two to three times as big as it was, period," Petursson tells Destructoid. "You can't build a business on that."
Under CCP direction, EVE: Valkyrie saw a number of updates designed to entice players back, including new ships, maps, and weekly events; CCP even pushed a major update to the game last year that brought support for desktop and console players, a move to help boost sales and revive the ailing VR-only playerbase. Still, the multiplayer game just didn't perform as CCP ultimately expected, and the company officially stepped back from VR shortly thereafter. "We expected VR to be two to three times as big as it was, period," Petursson tells Destructoid. "You can't build a business on that."
I never expected VR to be bigger.
It always seemed like a no-go for me. At least for now. Most people play games to relax and de-stress. When playing VR is as simple as sitting on the settee and wearing something as light and simple as a pair of sunglasses, people will play VR in numbers. When the sights looks lifelike and not uncanny valley, and don't leave you nauseous... people will like it.
VR probably will rebound in the future but for now it's a dying fad for a niche market. As long as you have to wear bulky contraptions with head straps and fit into awkward devices I'd much rather just have a keyboard, mouse and a monitor- you can keep your VR.
Someday in the future VR will take off- but today's generation is not good enough to warrant a big market. All the best gaming experience is still to be found on a flat screen. VR is a curiosity for those willing to spend money on unproven tech but not what most people want.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
None of the big VR headset makers want pron on their store so noone buys $400 headsets and $1000 rigs when there is no content.
I lost interest in VR once Oculus was bought by Facebook.
http://progressquest.com/spoltog.php?name=Son+Of+Son+Of+DarkRookie
Unlike other techs, VR pretty much has to be more or less "perfect" or most people aren't interested.
I don't agree. What it has to be is either perfect, or cheap. Since it is neither of these things, it's a non-starter suitable only for tech demos.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
As someone who's tried most VR tech since the early 90s, all my experience with the current generation suggests that the tech is indeed good enough.
In particular, I get lost in the Steam/HTC Vive setup my friend has every time I use it. Google Earth alone is a killer app, if you know where to go (I'm a climber: try Yosemite or Eldorado Canyon in Boulder, they've imaged the cliffs in both places to the point where you can actually see the handholds and make out routes). The paint programs are surreal as well.
I get motion sick easily. This is the first generation of VR gear that I've been able to spend 30+ minutes with the headset on and feel fine afterwards.
So, why don't I have my own VR setup? Two reasons: (1) cost and (2) I have half of it. For the latter, I purchased an X-Box One X for my son specifically because MS was setting it up as a VR platform. $500 for a game console was steep, but the hardware was right for good VR. Unfortunately, MS has now signaled that VR is not coming to the platform and I've overpaid for a gaming console. (yes, I should have just bought a PS4)
Cost, and to a lesser extent the hassle associated with that cost, is what I think is the real issue. Without a consumer friendly setup in the $500-700 range all-in that supports all VR content (PS4's problem is content), it's just too expensive to get started. I don't want to drop a few grand on a high end gaming PC, then the hundreds on the VR gear, plus the time it will take to setup and maintain the PC. It's just too expensive in money and time commitment.
The tech is there. There are compelling apps. It's just still too expensive to get started.
-Chris
I think you meant it's biological. In any case, I had no problems until I put a car through a wall and didn't feel the expected deceleration. I became instantly more nauseous than I can recall ever having felt and I was left with a 24hour migraine; that was a first as well.