fer0n

fer0n, 1 day ago

I don’t know if letting everything into the store is ultimately good for anyone. Users won’t be able to distinguish between shovel ware and quality titles. And developers will see their games drown.

fer0n, 1 day ago

It’s a new product that has specific demos and tons of custom facial interfaces. I’m sure the logistics aren’t trivial and they tried to learn as much as they could from a more narrow launch before selling it everywhere. They also seem to be supply constrained.

fer0n, 1 day ago

Using a headset on the plane is one of these use cases that are blown way out of proportion. I get the appeal, but how often do you have to take the plane for something like this to be worth it. Also, you usually want to travel light, why waste all that space on a headset.

fer0n, 7 days ago

Idk. They’re paying for it and it‘s by far the biggest VR market, many games are only on Quest. PC VR hasn’t been the focus for a while, for many studios.

fer0n, 7 days ago (edited 7 days ago)

I‘m not sure if you’re arguing for Meta or against them.

Regardless, they‘ve been investing heavily into VR, the landscape would look very different without that. Ofc they’re only doing that to eventually turn it all into shit, but for now at least, they’re focusing on growing and improving it, even if they loose money every quarter.

fer0n, 7 days ago

I‘m guessing it’s mostly exclusive to the Quest 3 because of the hardware requirements. If a Quest 3 light is released I’m sure it’ll run on that as well. Third party headsets most likely won’t be released for a while, but I’m pretty sure if they have enough processing power they will run all games, not just some.

fer0n, 7 days ago

Probably depends on how the game will turn out. Big IPs often turn into shit VR games, because the studios don’t have VR experience. It’s a more experienced studio here, but who knows how it’ll turn out.

fer0n, 10 days ago (edited 8 days ago)

Tim Cook said that during an earnings call. I don’t know if it means much for the industry, but I don’t have any doubts that that fact is true.

fer0n, 6 days ago

Very possible. I don’t think there’s a general convincing use case for the Vision Pro currently. It’s probably very impressive, but too cumbersome to use regularly for things you can do elsewhere.

fer0n, 12 days ago

I think they’re reworking the Chromecast sharing as it was never working great. An alternative is to use the phone to share the screen and put that on the TV if I remember correctly (or use a laptop or just the phone).

There’s also a few asymmetrical games, where one player plays in VR and the other one flat (there’s probably more):

• Acron: Attack of the Squirrels
• Keep talking and nobody explodes
• Carly and the reaperman
• Demeo (can be played flat or VR)

Regarding isolation: that’s definitely true. But I’d argue most players (flat or VR) play games alone in a room anyways and VR multiplayer games have a bigger social component. But playing with friends and family is definitely more fun.

fer0n, 13 days ago

30% cut is the default for consoles, isn’t it? I hate meta just like the next guy, but the quest is the most attractive platform for VR games due, simply due to the user base and that stems from selling the hardware as cheaply as possible.

Most people don’t care about a platform being open or closed, what they care about is the experience, ease of use and the content. Meta bought a lot of studios, but they’re far from owning or paying for the majority of studios with games on Quest.

Imo VR‘s main problem is comfort, friction and people disliking having something stripped to their face.

fer0n, 13 days ago

Overall improvement is pretty much what I would want, but apart from that: software improvements. The 2D window management is quite bad on Quest.

Also, what I’d love to have is a custom home. Maybe just a horizon world map that I can make myself and use as a home environment, perhaps with friends being able to just stop by.

fer0n, 21 days ago

The Vision Pro targets a niche within a niche within a niche: people that can and want to afford it, that are interested in VR/AR, but are not interested in playing actual VR games and use it to mostly watch 2D videos on it.

Gaming is a proven use case for VR/AR (basically the only one), but Apple doesn’t seem to wanna go there. And I don’t think it would work at that price even if they wanted to.

I hope they stick with it though and make it cheaper, lighter, and get rid of that tethered battery. Excited to see what’s coming in that space.

fer0n, 20 days ago

I don’t think it’s a political fight what he’s doing here, he’s just saying what he thinks the advantages or disadvantages of this are.