What Are You Playing?

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
It can't be said to be a side game honestly. It's a full fledged Half-Life game.

Yes, but is it THE full fledged Half-Life game!? I'm just vetting it thoroughly; after all, how can I be confident in this assertion when even the developers didn't deign to legitimize its name!? :troll:

Kidding aside, if they just said they didn't want to fall in the Doom 3 trap, that'd be fine, but they've potentially set themselves up to either, sort of pathetically, hold on to their HL2 glory forever, "4 touchdowns in one game!" or disappoint everyone by taking longer than DNF and releasing a mere game someday instead of the second coming, of which they seem way too self-aware. As I've disclosed before, part of my recreational incredulity is actually aimed at their coy self-importance/mythologizing; just call/make it Half-Life 3. Nobody cares! Worst case is we bitch about it online and then they can make Half-Life 4 and life will go on. That's why I need you to swoop in, set me straight and tell me that it actually is the best game ever like I secretly wish in my heart! :idea:

Be patient! I'll PM you once I've finished it!

Why can't you update us as you go? WHAT ARE YOU HIDING!? Oh, I'll get to the bottom of this, Aazman.
Looking forward to it. =)

Yeah I don't know why they piss-colored everything...

To make the sepia-toned nostalgia you're supposed to feel literal?

The difference between the third and second game is not that jarring, it still holds up pretty well.

It looks worthwhile indeed, and from what I've gathered of the plot it actually sounds more interesting than W3.

The first one is the roughest around the edges and hasn't aged terribly well. It's more of a classic computer RPG and less of an action game like the other two. Give it a try when the time comes and see if you can tolerate it.

Sounds like my kind of poorly aged game, actually! We'll see, especially once all these new releases come and go in the next month. After The Last of Us Part Deux I'm pretty much done for the year unless Elden Ring drops or I spring for Cyberpunk 2077, which is more likely now.

Yep, pretty much. It's not that hard to guess based on the crime scene, but the real interesting choice comes when you meet him and hear his side of the story. I'm tempted to give you a clue about which outcome is more satisfying, but letting you decide for yourself is gotta be more fun.

That's always the best part actually, they do a great job presenting you morally gray decisions, but even though it was pretty cut and dry that they started it, he should have ended it a lot sooner. Anyway, I cheated to see if there was a follow up quest with this dude, but since it was basically to see his hideout and get the same sword he has on him, I dispensed justice! :azan: Seeing as how they drew first blood and I'm the Butcher of Blaviken I was going to let him off with a warning, but it was Geralt's questioning and how he demurred that sealed his fate, "It wasn't the first time, was it?" Should have kept it in the barn, buddy, and not killed Millie's mom and brother, or was it Annie... whatever, he had it comin! Good fight too since he blinded me instead of healing, proving he was a dick, and actually got my life down until I popped my superior swallow and it was over. Chopped his head off, execution style. :badbone:
 
Last edited:

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
Well, maybe I don't need to save money for a VR headset:

Take it from me: it would be a pretty shitty experience without VR. Meaning the headset and the controllers. The entire game is built around fine-grained interactions that are only possible with controllers that can be moved around in space. If you're not playing it that way, you might as well just watch a playthrough on YouTube. Seriously. It's like playing Portal without the portals. Could it be achieved by deeply modifying the game? Sure. But that defeats the point of the game and would make it into nothing special. Anyone playing HL:A that way will invariably be disappointed. So if you're the kind of guy who won't watch trailers because he wants to experience the full thing, don't even think about it, or you'll ruin the game for yourself.

Kidding aside, if they just said they didn't want to fall in the Doom 3 trap, that'd be fine, but they've potentially set themselves up to either, sort of pathetically, hold on to their HL2 glory forever, "4 touchdowns in one game!" or disappoint everyone by taking longer than DNF and releasing a mere game someday instead of the second coming, of which they seem way too self-aware.

From a couple interviews I've seen, I think internal politics meant that team couldn't have possibly said "hey we're going to make HL3". They started making a game, and it was good enough and suitable enough for the game design they were going for that at some point they got the green light to make it a Half-Life game. Also you've got to keep in mind that the folks who made this game are mostly people who grew up playing Half-Life, it's not the original HL2 devs. And more simply, they called it Alyx because you play as Alyx and not Gordon Freeman.

Now you know I'm not a "best ever!!!" kinda guy, but I'm having a great time with the game. Enough so that I haven't touched Doom Eternal since HL:A was released, despite the fact the Doom franchise is definitely more dear to my heart than the Half-Life one. And beyond just this one game, there's a good amount of great VR titles out there today that justify buying the gear.
 

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
From a couple interviews I've seen, I think internal politics meant that team couldn't have possibly said "hey we're going to make HL3". They started making a game, and it was good enough and suitable enough for the game design they were going for that at some point they got the green light to make it a Half-Life game. Also you've got to keep in mind that the folks who made this game are mostly people who grew up playing Half-Life, it's not the original HL2 devs.

I realize I'm imposing my arbitrary point of view on a big, multi-faceted company that isn't a monolith, and... Fuck it, I'm right, they should just step up and make numerical Half-Life games if they're gonna make them. If it's made by people that aren't trapped in amber from their mid-2000's glory days, even better. I'm sure Alyx is basically the equivalent of that though, or just a great, innovative(? you tell me) game by any name, but as some of us suspect, or maybe hope is the word, it may yet be a stalking horse for Half-Life 3 VR; which is fine if it works under the same hardware one would have invested in fir Alyx, a little dicier if it's like Index-exclusive or something (or maybe their interest in a non-VR mod is their olive branch to the masses). But now I'm being completely divergent and theoretical, so let me get back to Alyx, and put my money where my mouth is, but first...

And more simply, they called it Alyx because you play as Alyx and not Gordon Freeman.

Well, unless Gordon was unavailable at this time, that was all a deliberate choice, and a weak one unless they feel the Freeman protagonist is played out (this would be fair depending on the kind of story they want to tell) and/or they had a really killer Alyx story they just had to get out. I mean, look at this:


Just say it's Gordon Freeman! They act like it'd be taking the Lord's name in vein or depicting Mohammad or like they believe their own in-game mythology, "The Freeman!? He's a legend!" The bottom line is nobody wants Mario Is Missing.

Now you know I'm not a "best ever!!!" kinda guy, but I'm having a great time with the game. Enough so that I haven't touched Doom Eternal since HL:A was released, despite the fact the Doom franchise is definitely more dear to my heart than the Half-Life one.

I was gonna springboard off this to do more, "Who do they think they are, Doom is WAY bigger and they're still churning out blah blah blah" ranting but I'm tired and the point is now moot...

Take it from me: it would be a pretty shitty experience without VR. Meaning the headset and the controllers. The entire game is built around fine-grained interactions that are only possible with controllers that can be moved around in space. If you're not playing it that way, you might as well just watch a playthrough on YouTube.
And beyond just this one game, there's a good amount of great VR titles out there today that justify buying the gear.

Well, fine, that's just what I DID! It should be here by April, probably sooner because I got it in town (barring any pandemic related hangups). Unfortunately, it's not an Aaz approved brand, :farnese: but what are you gonna do in this marketplace? =) Anyway, I got 30 days to return if the gear or the game on my PC are a bust. Looking forward to joining the club! :badbone:
 

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
I realize I'm imposing my arbitrary point of view on a big, multi-faceted company that isn't a monolith, and... Fuck it, I'm right, they should just step up and make numerical Half-Life games if they're gonna make them.

:shrug: I'm just playing the game, you should tell gaben@valve.com.

Well, fine, that's just what I DID! It should be here by April, probably sooner because I got it in town (barring any pandemic related hangups). Unfortunately, it's not an Aaz approved brand, :farnese: but what are you gonna do in this marketplace? =) Anyway, I got 30 days to return if the gear or the game on my PC are a bust. Looking forward to joining the club! :badbone:

Haha nice, which HMD did you get?
 
It looks worthwhile indeed, and from what I've gathered of the plot it actually sounds more interesting than W3.
The Witcher 3's plot is more exciting when you're coming from the second game, but as a standalone story, it's true Assassins of Kings is a bit more tightly-knit and uniformly interesting due to the way it prioritized narrative flow and pacing over everything else. Side quests don't diverge as much and most of them involve story-relevant characters.

Anyway, I cheated to see if there was a follow up quest with this dude, but since it was basically to see his hideout and get the same sword he has on him, I dispensed justice! :azan: Seeing as how they drew first blood and I'm the Butcher of Blaviken I was going to let him off with a warning, but it was Geralt's questioning and how he demurred that sealed his fate, "It wasn't the first time, was it?" Should have kept it in the barn, buddy, and not killed Millie's mom and brother, or was it Annie... whatever, he had it comin! Good fight too since he blinded me instead of healing, proving he was a dick, and actually got my life down until I popped my superior swallow and it was over. Chopped his head off, execution style. :badbone:
My first time around I had also chosen to kill him, and didn't dwell on it too much until a subsequent run when I decided to let him go just out of curiosity and was surprised by how much more appropriate that outcome felt to me. The guy is a dick for sure, but his affiliation with the School of the Cat which holds quite a lot of notoriety doesn't help his situation either, and that's a reason why people treat him so unfairly all the time, on top of just being a witcher. If you let him go, Geralt does mention his Butcher of Blaviken past and how these kinds of things get out of control fast. Truth is, they're both killers and outcasts in some capacity even if their circumstances differ; neither is fit to deliver justice on the other.

Anyway, it's a really good quest and it comes through with that moral ambiguity you mentioned and which the series is known for particularly well. You also get a unique sword out of it no matter what you choose, which is sweet.
 

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
:shrug: I'm just playing the game, you should tell gaben@valve.com.

I will subscribe his email to my newsletter. :griffnotevil:

Haha nice, which HMD did you get?

The stupid sounding/looking Dell Visor (the "Fannypack" must've been taken =)! Because it was the best I could get along with the game without busting through my $300 ceiling. My other option was a "cheap", since I waited for the worst time to buy, Acer AH101, but it had some issues; very apparently used, no CD, drivers, instructions or returns, etc, whereas the Dell was unused in the box with warranty intact and 30 day return window (actually really important in case it sucks, won't work with Alyx or if Alyx won't run properly on my rig anyway). Plus, hey, I already have a Dell, it's like they go together and I meant to do that! BRAND SYNERGY (even though I have an AOC monitor precisely because it has higher end features and specs at a lower price)! There's actually a certain logic to it being a Dell and "going with the computer" when I inevitably have to pass this off as a reasonable purchase to my wife, "Oh, this cheap peripheral? It's just a 'visor.'" :ganishka:

Aaz: "They're both shit, but you shoulda got the Acer!"

:judo:

The Witcher 3's plot is more exciting when you're coming from the second game

Yeah, I probably would have been way more into this one from the get go if I knew who the Wild Hunt even were before the third act of the game. All the history there sounds interesting, particularly Geralt and Yen's personal association with them, and of course the assassination plot. Speaking of which, I should mention I finished the main game last night, and my biggest regret, made even bigger by the ending, was that the side quest I broke off to "rush" to the finish was the Radovid assassination. Now I don't know how much of a difference I would have made, but my heart sank when the first segment of the ending was dedicated to the genocide of anybody non-human or even magic adjacent... uh, my bad? Actually, I blame you for not including it on your list of must-play quests. =)

The guy is a dick for sure, but his affiliation with the School of the Cat which holds quite a lot of notoriety doesn't help his situation either, and that's a reason why people treat him so unfairly all the time, on top of just being a witcher. If you let him go, Geralt does mention his Butcher of Blaviken past and how these kinds of things get out of control fast. Truth is, they're both killers and outcasts in some capacity even if their circumstances differ; neither is fit to deliver justice on the other.

Well, that was sort of where I was leaning, but really I was just going to favor a fellow witcher over a bunch of miserable asshole townies, but yeah, he kept going beyond objective reason and had some serious psycho vibes. But of course, that's all confirmation bias from my actions...

Anyway, it's a really good quest and it comes through with that moral ambiguity you mentioned and which the series is known for particularly well. You also get a unique sword out of it no matter what you choose, which is sweet.

I'll definitely go back to that save and check out the alternative. My Geralt is actually quite chivalrous though, a fact for which he's been mocked on more than one occasion. I basically treat trolls and succubi like bad teens that just need some guidance. Add mass-murdering witchers to the list of troubled youth I'm fostering.

Anyway, looking forward to the DLC campaigns, and messing around upgrading my bear gear. I ended up slappin' around the Wild Hunt with whatever stock silver sword the quartermaster had before the final mission. After some early game struggles there was really no challenging boss fight except the Griffin I had to kill for its acid, and that was before I realized I could just use Quen to make myself invincible to his bleed effect. I kept waiting for that unforgiving, even unfair, Souls-like boss fight at the end and it never came. As a matter of fact, the Wild Hunt aren't any harder than any enemy: dodge, attack, repeat. Also, despite the fact I best anyone that stands in my path, man, beast or elf, everyone still treats Geralt like he's some common thug that could be easily dispatched if they wished, rather than the most formidable sword on the continent.

Finally, I'm sure it's been brought up before, but we really need to discuss the main villain:

poster.jpg
 
Last edited:

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
The stupid sounding/looking Dell Visor (the "Fannypack" must've been taken =)! Because it was the best I could get along with the game without busting through my $300 ceiling. My other option was a "cheap", since I waited for the worst time to buy, Acer AH101, but it had some issues; very apparently used, no CD, drivers, instructions or returns, etc, whereas the Dell was unused in the box with warranty intact and 30 day return window (actually really important in case it sucks, won't work with Alyx or if Alyx won't run properly on my rig anyway). Plus, hey, I already have a Dell, it's like they go together and I meant to do that! BRAND SYNERGY (even though I have an AOC monitor precisely because it has higher end features and specs at a lower price)! There's actually a certain logic to it being a Dell and "going with the computer" when I inevitably have to pass this off as a reasonable purchase to my wife, "Oh, this cheap peripheral? It's just a 'visor.'" :ganishka:

Aaz: "They're both shit, but you shoulda got the Acer!"

:judo:

The Acer one is the worst among the Windows MR ecosystem so don't feel bad about that. It was released first, as a dev kit, and it shows. BUT... I'm sorry to say, but the Dell Visor isn't very good either. It doesn't have integrated sound so you'll need earbuds (headphones won't fit), it doesn't have IPD adjustement (can be either unimportant or a real bother depending on your morphology), and its field of view is actually significantly smaller than on a Rift S. That means you'll feel more like you're looking through binoculars, which lessens immersion. And it's also not comfortable to use while wearing glasses from what I remember (none of them really hard but Rift/Quest/Index are at least decent).

Lastly, the tracking and the controllers are subpar, meaning your hands will only be tracked as long as they're directly in front of you. If you move them to the side, they'll lose tracking. Not great at all for gaming unfortunately. And the controllers just plain suck too. Good move to get a return policy because while I think it'll allow you to get a taste of what VR can be, it's really not what I'd recommend getting in 2020. Buuuuttt I get that there are other parameters to consider, i.e. not registering on the missus' radar. I hope you'll enjoy it, lemme know!
 

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
The Acer one is the worst among the Windows MR ecosystem so don't feel bad about that. It was released first, as a dev kit, and it shows.

Whew...

BUT... I'm sorry to say, but the Dell Visor isn't very good either.

Doh!

It doesn't have integrated sound so you'll need earbuds (headphones won't fit)

This might actually be a feature for me because I usually have to keep one ear in reality even when normal gaming in case the wife or kid need immediate help, except for daddy after dark time, which is one I'll go for full immersion. I also like the dumb lift up goggles for that. You're not talking to a guy looking to taste all the notes of a fine wine, I just need to get drunk and hope the hangover isn't too bad. =)

it doesn't have IPD adjustement (can be either unimportant or a real bother depending on your morphology)

Isn't this the same for the Quest? My long-term goal if all works out is still to get a Quest or Rift S or whatever their future equivalent is. It just hasn't worked out the last six months and it's kind of now or never for me.

its field of view is actually significantly smaller than on a Rift S. That means you'll feel more like you're looking through binoculars, which lessens immersion.

Well, that indeed sounds bad, I believe it's only 90 degrees, but we'll see how it looks, or feels, to me. My advantage here is my only prior modern VR experience is PSVR, so I don't know what I'm missing when it comes to how much better my experience could be. It'll either work and be fun or it won't and then I'll know I need to go back to the drawing board, but figured I'd give it a shot and get my feet wet, even if it's going to be more of a learning experience than anything else. I hope not though. My hope is this will be the equivalent of all the AAA games I've played on my PC below the minimum requirements and enjoyed just fine. :ganishka:

Lastly, the tracking and the controllers are subpar, meaning your hands will only be tracked as long as they're directly in front of you. If you move them to the side, they'll lose tracking. Not great at all for gaming unfortunately. And the controllers just plain suck too.

Again, I'll probably just have to learn where to hold them so it's not guessing too much when my hands do go out of sight, but again, it won't be any more awkward than the whole setup to me at this point.

Good move to get a return policy because while I think it'll allow you to get a taste of what VR can be, it's really not what I'd recommend getting in 2020. Buuuuttt I get that there are other parameters to consider, i.e. not registering on the missus' radar. I hope you'll enjoy it, lemme know!

Yeah, it's mostly a matter of not breaking the bank just to "try it out" because there's too many unknown variables for me still. I can foresee this going sideways five different ways before I even concern myself with how comfortably it fits over my glasses, etc. If it works at all, it'll either blow me away despite my HMD's shortcomings to the point I become a VR convert, or be such a pain in the ass for the reasons you mentioned I'll realize I need to keep waiting until I find the right deal on an Oculus or comparable HMD. What I can't do is spend $600 to find out it doesn't work or I don't like it.
 
Last edited:

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
This might actually be a feature for me because I usually have to keep one ear in reality even when normal gaming in case the wife or kid need immediate help, except for daddy after dark time, which is one I'll go for full immersion. I also like the dumb lift up goggles for that. You're not talking to a guy looking to taste all the notes of a fine wine, I just need to get drunk and hope the hangover isn't too bad. =)

Well Rift S and Quest both support earbuds too, but they also have integrated speakers. The lift up design is nice though, I agree.

Isn't this the same for the Quest? My long-term goal if all works out is still to get a Quest or Rift S or whatever their future equivalent is. It just hasn't worked out the last six months and it's kind of now or never for me.

Quest has IPD adjustement but Rift S does not. This can be either a nothing burger or a real dealbreaker because some people get headaches and dizziness from incorrectly set IPDs.

Well, that indeed sounds bad, I believe it's only 90 degrees, but we'll see how it looks, or feels, to me. My advantage here is my only prior modern VR experience is PSVR, so I don't know what I'm missing when it comes to how much better my experience could be. It'll either work and be fun or it won't and then I'll know I need to go back to the drawing board, but figured I'd give it a shot and get my feet wet, even if it's going to be more of a learning experience than anything else. I hope not though. My hope is this will be the equivalent of all the AAA games I've played on my PC below the minimum requirements and enjoyed just fine. :ganishka:

Yeah it's not going to be horrible, just not as good as it could be. FOV and tracking are definitely the real hurdles here. Quality of the lenses too actually, because the "sweet spot" where the image is sharpest is much smaller on WMR headsets. That means you'll have to make it sit just right on your face to avoid blurriness.

Yeah, it's mostly a matter of not breaking the bank just to "try it out" because there's too many unknown variables for me still. I can foresee this going sideways five different ways before I even concern myself with how comfortably it fits over my glasses, etc. If it works at all, it'll either blow me away despite my HMD's shortcomings to the point I become a VR convert, or be such a pain in the ass for the reasons you mentioned I'll realize I need to keep waiting until I find the right deal on an Oculus or comparable HMD. What I can't do is spend $600 to find out it doesn't work or I don't like it.

Yeah I get it. Although you should probably stick to "daddy after dark" gaming for this stuff, because playing half-in half-out isn't going to be very fun. Either way I'm curious to know what you'll think.
 
I'm playing a few things right now. Animal Crossing: New Horizons, Resident Evil 2, Wargroove, Super Smash Brothers Ultimate and Melee (Netplay). I look forward to playing Exit the Gungeon when I'm done with Wargroove. I wanna play through RE:2 a couple of times before RE:3 comes out. Also, I wonder if Capcom will do a RE:4 remake like they did RE:2 and 3.
 
I should mention I finished the main game last night
Nice, what character endings did you get? You already said you went with Yennefer for the happily ever after but what about Ciri and that baron bastard? On Skellige I'll go ahead and guess you sided with Cerys, because Hjalmar is just too much of a dolt to take seriously (although his quest does feature a pretty cool berserker transformation ritual which you should definitely check out at some point if my guess was correct).

... my biggest regret, made even bigger by the ending, was that the side quest I broke off to "rush" to the finish was the Radovid assassination. Now I don't know how much of a difference I would have made, but my heart sank when the first segment of the ending was dedicated to the genocide of anybody non-human or even magic adjacent... uh, my bad? Actually, I blame you for not including it on your list of must-play quests. =)
Oh boy, I completely forgot about that prick. The assassination questline does in fact decide who ultimately wins and loses the war, but rest assured that neither Emhyr nor Djikstra turn out any less despotic if they get to rule. Basically, the devs keep true to their perpetual "fuck you, there are no right choices" method to the very end.

My Geralt is actually quite chivalrous though, a fact for which he's been mocked on more than one occasion.
Wait till you get to Blood and Wine for all the meta chivalry jokes.

Anyway, looking forward to the DLC campaigns, and messing around upgrading my bear gear.
The Ursine gear is probably my favourite too. Although not very book-friendly, it's the only one that looks like proper armour out of the bunch. The Griffin set is right behind, but only when fully upgraded. Speaking of which, Blood and Wine unlocks the last and highest tier for the witcher gear upgrades (grandmaster) and you also get an additional Manticore set which is a throwback to Geralt's armor from the first game. Plenty of stuff to hold you over in that regard—in fact—there's a sizable amount of content ahead yet, counting both expansions. Blood and Wine is particular is pretty much its own game.

I kept waiting for that unforgiving, even unfair, Souls-like boss fight at the end and it never came. As a matter of fact, the Wild Hunt aren't any harder than any enemy: dodge, attack, repeat.
Design-wise, I thought the boss fights were pretty cool and creative, especially the last confrontation where you get pulled through another dimension mid-battle and have to adjust on the fly. They even wanted to have an ice-skating feature but decided that adding new mechanics so late in the game wasn't a good idea. The combat is the main bottleneck unfortunately. Plenty of games have tried their hand at Souls combat and some came pretty close, but none has been able to perfectly recreate that holistic FromSoftware feel yet. For a story-driven game with action-RPG elements I would say the Witcher 3 is more than passable though.

Also, despite the fact I best anyone that stands in my path, man, beast or elf, everyone still treats Geralt like he's some common thug that could be easily dispatched if they wished, rather than the most formidable sword on the continent.

Finally, I'm sure it's been brought up before, but we really need to discuss the main villain:
Oh man, do we really? It's a slippery slope...

ozNxDWZ.png


Honestly, Berserk is such an influential series at this point that stuff like this, real or not, doesn't even surprise me anymore.



Cool thing about the Wild Hunt's design though is that it used to look different. Eredin in particular:

x8byPjI.jpg
 
Last edited:

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
Well Rift S and Quest both support earbuds too, but they also have integrated speakers. The lift up design is nice though, I agree.

I can't wait to disconnect and run out of the room yelling, "What's going on out here!?" with my goggles turned up like a mad scientist! Speaking of speakers though, I do have surround sound speakers setup in the room; is that a viable way to play absent other ambient noise or is it critical to keep it all "in your head?"

Quest has IPD adjustement but Rift S does not. This can be either a nothing burger or a real dealbreaker because some people get headaches and dizziness from incorrectly set IPDs.

I remember it was one or the other but I always got them mixed up. Anyway, here's hoping I'm not one of those sensitive to it. I'd ask if there were DIY workarounds by altering how it rests on your head, but based on what you say just below it doesn't sound feasible without screwing up your focus.

Yeah it's not going to be horrible, just not as good as it could be. FOV and tracking are definitely the real hurdles here. Quality of the lenses too actually, because the "sweet spot" where the image is sharpest is much smaller on WMR headsets. That means you'll have to make it sit just right on your face to avoid blurriness.

Well, I'll definitely keep all that in mind and try to mitigate any tracking and or focus issues. Not much I could do about the FOV, but the Dell Visor's is 110 degrees, so it shouldn't be an issue.

Yeah I get it. Although you should probably stick to "daddy after dark" gaming for this stuff, because playing half-in half-out isn't going to be very fun. Either way I'm curious to know what you'll think.

Yeah, it's not fun with some regular gaming either, like Witcher 3 where there's a lot of talking and no pausing during it. :puck:

DOOM Eternal, on the other hand, is perfect stop-n-go action. Anyway, I'll certainly be letting you know how it goes if not bugging you for advice.

I wonder if Capcom will do a RE:4 remake like they did RE:2 and 3.

Sure, it's called RE5, RE6, RE Revelations, RE Revelations 2, RE2 and now RE3. If anything I think they'd commission another graphical remaster of it, maybe with some modern control tweaks and enhancements. I feel like they'd need a more dramatic overhaul of the entire gameplay style to justify remaking a game that's been released on practically every platform since its inception and of which they're still making games in the same style today. How about RE4: VR to follow up on their RE7 experiment? (someone check on Aaz that he hasn't fainted =)

Nice, what character endings did you get? You already said you went with Yennefer for the happily ever after but what about Ciri and that baron bastard? On Skellige I'll go ahead and guess you sided with Cerys, because Hjalmar is just too much of a dolt to take seriously (although his quest does feature a pretty cool berserker transformation ritual which you should definitely check out at some point if my guess was correct).

It's like this game reveals your true character. =) I indeed went with Cerys because she seemed fit to rule and Hjalmar was a dumbass, and frankly kind of a fake, blustery loser, but then all those island tough guys fit that description (I could see the other side though where they NEEDED an idiot to respond to, and the ending kind of hinted that they lost something in the wider world despite her peaceful rule - I'll load up his Berserker quest too). The Baron was never heard from again after he left to take care of his wife, somewhat questionably but I wasn't doing it, and Ciri became a witcher, which was fitting if a bit on the nose and an odd choice for a demi-god. I wonder how I might have changed that, probably if I'd been nicer to the Emperor and actually took Ciri to see him.:shrug:

Oh boy, I completely forgot about that prick. The assassination questline does in fact decide who ultimately wins and loses the war, but rest assured that neither Emhyr nor Djikstra turn out any less despotic if they get to rule. Basically, the devs keep true to their perpetual "fuck you, there are no right choices" method to the very end.

Feels kinda true to life right now. If they do a Witcher 4 they should just state that whatever happened politically was inconsequential because everyone was wiped out by a plague. :magni:

Plenty of stuff to hold you over in that regard—in fact—there's a sizable amount of content ahead yet, counting both expansions. Blood and Wine is particular is pretty much its own game.

Hoo boy, don't know if I'm ready to jump into that right away, but we'll see. The irony is I'll indeed waste time farting around scavenger hunting weapon and armor upgrades I don't really need.

Design-wise, I thought the boss fights were pretty cool and creative, especially the last confrontation where you get pulled through another dimension mid-battle and have to adjust on the fly.

It was cool, and a proper spectacle, there was just never any tension because Eredin couldn't even hit me and if he did it didn't matter because he just broke my quen and I could put it right back up. By the end it felt more like I was the boss in this game a weird way.

The combat is the main bottleneck unfortunately. Plenty of games have tried their hand at Souls combat and some came pretty close, but none has been able to perfectly recreate that holistic FromSoftware feel yet. For a story-driven game with action-RPG elements I would say the Witcher 3 is more than passable though.

Yeah, it's fun enough dodging around slicing guys up, but really it's more of a strict RPG numbers game. Whether you dramatically outrank your opponent or vice versa is vastly more important than the combat mechanics, which can be almost inconsequential in such cases.


Glad it's addressed, but really, Yen thought even with the deck in their favor that the Wild Hunt would likely finish them, but Geralt walks up to Eredin and stabs him through the eye and nobody cares. Geralt should be a legend that every King is trying to recruit to their side.

Oh man, do we really? It's a slippery slope...

Honestly, Berserk is such an influential series at this point that stuff like this, real or not, doesn't even surprise me anymore.

This reminds me of an illustration in The Real Frank Zappa Book, which someone manually made into a webpage(!), that shows a drawing of Sicily with arrows pointing outward in every direction saying things like "ART" "CULTURE" "CUISINE." The joke was that's how Frank Zappa's dad felt about Sicily, but we should basically make the equivalent for Berserk. =)

zappa-84.jpg

Cool thing about the Wild Hunt's design though is that it used to look different. Eredin in particular:


Whoa, he looks like Skull Knight crossed with Super Shredder there.
 
Last edited:

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
Speaking of speakers though, I do have surround sound speakers setup in the room; is that a viable way to play absent other ambient noise or is it critical to keep it all "in your head?"

Nah speakers aren't an option. You need spatial audio and that requires an on-ear solution that remains consistent no matter how you move around.

I remember it was one or the other but I always got them mixed up. Anyway, here's hoping I'm not one of those sensitive to it. I'd ask if there were DIY workarounds by altering how it rests on your head, but based on what you say just below it doesn't sound feasible without screwing up your focus.

Best way to know is to look at the prescription you have for your glasses. IPD is basically how much space there is between your pupils in millimeters. If you're in the average it's all good.

Yeah, it's not fun with some regular gaming either, like Witcher 3 where there's a lot of talking and no pausing during it. :puck:

Haha, I bet. HL:A can be paused, it's just that immersion is a big part of it.

How about RE4: VR to follow up on their RE7 experiment? (someone check on Aaz that he hasn't fainted =)

You know what I think would be great? The abandoned RE4 haunted manor prototype made into a full fledged VR game.

 

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
Nah speakers aren't an option. You need spatial audio and that requires an on-ear solution that remains consistent no matter how you move around.

Yeah, I was thinking in "regular" audio terms, of course it would change based on your movement in and out of the game and then what you hear in the room would over-compensate.

Best way to know is to look at the prescription you have for your glasses. IPD is basically how much space there is between your pupils in millimeters. If you're in the average it's all good.

Hopefully, wouldn't it be fitting if I HAD to get a Quest after all; I don't suppose there's cheap seat options with adjustable IPD? =)

You know what I think would be great? The abandoned RE4 haunted manor prototype made into a full fledged VR game.


That was actually my first thought as well, but I feel like they sort of fulfilled the haunted house scenario in RE7, albeit more viscerally. They just need to think of some pseudo-science explanation for ghosts. =)

Bloodborne.

:zodd:
 
Last edited:

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
Hopefully, wouldn't it be fitting if I HAD to get a Quest after all; I don't suppose there's cheap seat options with adjustable IPD? =)

Some other HMDs have adjustable IPD, in fact the Rift S is an expectation in not having one for an otherwise good device. Either way, for sure the Quest has got a lot of things going for it. Oculus' software ecosystem is above and beyond the rest and many of their exclusives are among the best VR games around.
 

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
Either way, for sure the Quest has got a lot of things going for it.

BTW, is the Quest worth it at 64gb or is the 128 model a must?

Oculus' software ecosystem is above and beyond the rest and many of their exclusives are among the best VR games around.

I'm kind of sad I won't get to play Vader Immortal, feels more like a Dell Visor exclusive to me too. :guts:


I beat DOOM Eternal on a somewhat annoyed note because I unlocked the Unmakr only to have it not save it so when I came back and started the final series of missions it wasn't there, and I didn't realize until halfway through the first big ass one. That would have been more fun. :shrug:

ANYWAY, overall, if this game is going to be faulted for anything it's that it's all a bit much, from the story, to the combat, to the platforming with all the double jumping and double dashing. Doom 2016 kept it simpler and focused on the killing, same with the story, etc. That one was also a little more grounded in horror whereas this is more cartoony. I've gotten pretty used to it though, I wasn't accustomed to using a keyboard and mouse anymore and was getting cramps in my left middle and ring fingers! I had to put a piece of cut up foam under my wrist as a DIY wrist rest. That takes me back. =)

The weird thing with the game from beginning to end it goes so far beyond the bounds of what you expect from DOOM it almost doesn't feel like it anymore. Lots of elements of Quake, Wolfenstein, and unrelated games like Diablo or even Dark Souls. I think they were better off doing the story the week before release like Aaz said of the last game. That said, I can't go back either, it's that thing where a new game does just enough new stuff to make the last one obsolete but doesn't quite replace it because it's maybe not as impactful overall. I would still miss too many features like the visible damage on the demons, dashing, etc. There's also lots of cool "whoa" moments every level, but other times I'm also like "WTF?" At something silly. Like how Doomguy went from being this avenging badass, The Doom Slayer, a nice twist, to... well, kind of an invincible superhero that can literally get shot through a canon through space.

So, it's gotta a lot going for it, all the combat enhancements and features, monster damage, more classic enemies or enemy styles, cyberdemons, etc, but maybe TOO MUCH else going on. It's really good and a lot of fun though, but not quite a revelation like the last one, and has more typical game bloat with the story and overlong levels. On the other hand, it feels like a more complete game too, if lacking the previous one's focus. Actually, it seems like it's trying to be something bigger, and I wouldn't be surprised to see them pushing a lot of extra content and bonus levels, especially online multiplayer content. The "Eternal" might have more meaning than simply referring to Heaven and Hell. I think they're trying to establish this iteration of DOOM like Doom II, Master Levels, Final Doom, Etc. It even feels like Quake III.

If this were the previous game, the one to relaunch Doom, it would have hit even better, the last one felt so pitch perfect and this one seems kinda jarring by comparison, but it's actually trying to double down on the old-school Doom action, which is why so many of the demons from 2016 have been redesigned to match even better with their original counterparts.

I'm still collecting my thoughts but it's a really fun game overall, I'm not as into all the new aesthetics and story elements this time, though they have grown on me so I just accept them. Maybe it's just exposing how little all that mattered last time because DOOM was good again, and this one definitely has more of its own identity for better or worse.

Anyway, the last levels are crazy, and though the last regular group battle is really a pain, the final boss isn't too bad because you basically have unlimited power-ups to combat the unlimited demon spawns, so like the rest of it, all in good fun. I just wish I liked the over-the-top presentation and pageantry a bit more; in it's own way Eternal trying even more to bring truly classic Doom back, but it's just not as much my style as the previous game, which I think had a better balance of DOOM's intended action and horror elements (Eternal and Doom 3 are like the opposite extremes). In the end though, like I said, it would be hard to go back to a game without dashing or Archviles and Pain Elementals, so we'll see if this one really has legs to truly reestablish classic DOOM, or if its just rehashing it, for modern players.

DOOM Rankings:

DOOM - The one, the only, the world infamous original classic that was the transcendently influential gold standard of the genre for over a decade. 'Nuff said.

DOOM II/Master Levels/Final Doom - If Doom is Caesar, Doom II and it's expansions/spinoffs are Augustus. For many Doom is synonymous with the weapons, monsters and level design that came with Doom II.

DOOM (2016) - A great modern take on the original that made the franchise, and old-school FPSes, relevant again; it's what Doom 3 should have been. I thought it was a little bit cartoony at first, but then Doom Eternal said, "Hold my beer." Now the aesthetics seem downright Doom 3-like by comparison, but with classic gameplay and monster designs, which probably means it's "just right." Overall it has a great balance of action and horror elements with a retro mindset in a slick, state-of-the-art package. If OG Doom is Sean Connery, this one's Daniel Craig.

DOOM Eternal - More like Id Eternal; tries to recapture the classic craziness of the expansive Doom II architecture mixed with high flying Quake III action in an upgraded Doom (2016) engine. It's trying to be Skyfall for the Doom franchise, but might have a little Spectre in it. Probably objectively the best playing Doom game ever, and a great FPS, with potential to move up this list. Like I said, while a little over-the-top in its reach for greatness, this game is equal to the sum of its disembodied parts.

DOOM 3 - Life-like demonic torture simulator designed to prove the hypothesis you can't hold a gun and a flashlight at the same time, or move very fast with either. Doom as immersive survival horror with lighting and graphics ahead of its time. I think I was more hyped for the leaked beta than what the final game turned out to be. Probably better than I remember, especially the improved BFG edition, but this was a disappointing slog at the time. For all it's top-of-the-line technological advancements, it just wasn't that fun.

DOOM 64 - Never really liked this dark, as in you can't see, and dour mutant incarnation. It's like a retro Doom 3 before its time, and was unavailable for 25 years for a reason.
 
Last edited:
The Baron was never heard from again after he left to take care of his wife, somewhat questionably but I wasn't doing it, and Ciri became a witcher, which was fitting if a bit on the nose and an odd choice for a demi-god. I wonder how I might have changed that, probably if I'd been nicer to the Emperor and actually took Ciri to see him.:shrug:
Seems like you got good endings all around; not that I expected any different since you've mentioned playing chivalrously and being reasonable. The Baron's fate can turn out pretty sour if you don't manage to save his wife but I'll leave that for you to discover. If you had gone to see Emhyr and picked the obvious non-massive-dick choice of refusing the money for finding Ciri, she would've come to terms with eventually succeeding him as the next empress, which in foresight is probably the most hopeful political development, but it's also kind of bittersweet for the characters.

It was cool, and a proper spectacle, there was just never any tension because Eredin couldn't even hit me and if he did it didn't matter because he just broke my quen and I could put it right back up. By the end it felt more like I was the boss in this game a weird way.
Yeah, the Quen sign really highlights the combat's shortcomings. After my first playthrough I stopped using it altogether. It might be more annoying than anything since it won't increase the difficulty in a meaningful way, but in some instances it can improve the dynamic of the fight and keep you on your toes a little more.

Geralt should be a legend that every King is trying to recruit to their side.
I haven't read the books where this is probably explored in much more detail, but the games do make him out as kind of a legend among witchers, "the White Wolf" and all that. On the other hand, he's also been involved with ignoble stuff like butchering a village, and the assassination of kings which the second game focuses on, so his good reputation keeps counteracting itself. When you get to Blood and Wine you'll see a clear instance where his fame is properly recognized, and depending on how you play it out you might tip that balance towards infamy pretty fast. It's very easy to get a bad ending in B&W for some reason, so heads up BTW.

The joke was that's how Frank Zappa's dad felt about Sicily, but we should basically make the equivalent for Berserk. =)
:guts:
 

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
64 GB is fine, 128 is a luxury if you want to have many games installed at once.

Good to know longterm since that does help the affordability. Just out of curiousity, what do you think the long-term effect of Alyx will be on the HMD market, and VR overall? They're obviously scarce and expensive now, but a few months ago you could get a lot of these WMR models for a song. Think there will be another push by manufacturers like WMR to take advantage of the increased interest created by Alyx (it got me to finally take the plunge =)? People buying up old HMDs secondhand doesn't help hardware sellers though, and you'd think they'd also want it to be as accessible as possible while demand is high to broaden their player base as much as possible, but that doesn't mean there's a logistically viable way to really take advantage other than hoping people try it and keep buying software and eventually new hardware. Now that Valve has thrown their hat in the ring in multiple significant ways, do you think they'll eventually bring out a more affordable model to compete with Oculus et al, or will they leave the mid and low end market competition to others? Please answer in full sentences and complete paragraphs in your test booklet, thank you. =)

If you had gone to see Emhyr and picked the obvious non-massive-dick choice of refusing the money for finding Ciri, she would've come to terms with eventually succeeding him as the next empress, which in foresight is probably the most hopeful political development, but it's also kind of bittersweet for the characters.

That would definitely fix the issues with my ending as I see them; it's not like Ciri stayed with Geralt and Yen like a big happy family, she eventually goes off on her own to... kill drowners? That seems below Geralt at this point, let alone the demi-god that existentially saved the multiverse, only to let her own country be oppressed by despots when she happens to be the rightful heir (what is it with big pop culture fantasy stories fucking this very particular thing up? =).

Also, she had that hurtful line about how Geralt wouldn't know about saving the world because he's merely a witcher. I went through it twice and it didn't seem ironic even though it struck me as out of character for her beliefs, and I still think it was a jest despite the delivery. I mean, shes did become one after that in my game. Just added to the weirdness of how Ciri's story resolved itself for me.

When you get to Blood and Wine you'll see a clear instance where his fame is properly recognized, and depending on how you play it out you might tip that balance towards infamy pretty fast. It's very easy to get a bad ending in B&W for some reason, so heads up BTW.

Good to know, and definitely sounds like an interesting follow up and capper for the story, though I've been taking a break while I play and replay the Doom series (as one can tell by my insane ramblings I keep updating =). I'm not particularly itching to jump right back into Hearts of Stone, but figure when I am it'll be a good warmup before Blood and Wine, which I guess I'll be extra mindful of my choices. I have actually grown to really like the timed critical dialogue responses because that's sort of how it works in life and it gets that in-the-moment reaction out of you where you might even surprise yourself. That's easier with me to live with, right or wrong. I actually wish I'd adhered more to a "whatever happens, happens" approach, which would have meant the death of Keira for one thing, but sometimes shit is supposed to go sideways, and in a game like this with so many various possible outcomes that's the most interesting way to carve a unique path through.
 
Last edited:

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
Good to know longterm since that does help the affordability. Just out of curiousity, what do you think the long-term effect of Alyx will be on the HMD market, and VR overall? They're obviously scarce and expensive now, but a few months ago you could get a lot of these WMR models for a song. Think there will be another push by manufacturers like WMR to take advantage of the increased interest created by Alyx (it got me to finally take the plunge =)? People buying up old HMDs secondhand doesn't help hardware sellers though, and you'd think they'd also want it to be as accessible as possible while demand is high to broaden their player base as much as possible, but that doesn't mean there's a logistically viable way to really take advantage other than hoping people try it and keep buying software and eventually new hardware.

So this is actually several questions in one. HL: Alyx is a landmark for VR and to a lesser extent for gaming in general. It will still be talked about 10 years from now for a myriad of reasons.

That said, Oculus Quest was out of stock independent of the game's release and remains so simply because it's just a great product and a great deal. It's out of stock because demand outweighs manufacturing capacity (and the current COVID-19 crisis halted manufacturing for almost 2 months). I have had no doubt that VR would be a big deal for the past 5+ years, but you can't just birth something like that by snapping your fingers, it takes a while. Oculus Quest is basically the turning point where VR got seriously interesting for the mainstream market. The next iteration will be even better, like the SNES to the NES.

Generally-speaking, the popular VR headsets all have supply constraints that have been going on for almost a year, and it's mostly because these devices are difficult to produce. Valve's Index HMD, for example, has also been difficult to get ever since its "release" (in very limited numbers). Rift S, which is manufactured by Lenovo (a deal that was made in part because of Lenovo's manufacturing capacity), has been more widely available, but still was constrained, and Half-Life: Alyx's announcement participated in pushing it to "out of stock" status.

So it's kind of a triple whammy. Supply is naturally limited for these devices at present, Quest's success soared higher than Oculus had anticipated, and Half-Life: Alyx definitely did increase overall demand. If supply wasn't an issue, I expect most people would get a Quest+Link or a Rift S (these own most of the market anyway, aside from PSVR), while the Valve super fans with unlimited budgets would spring for the Index. Since all three of these devices are unavailable, the other HMDs that people normally wouldn't bother with are getting new demand.

Just to be clear though, few of the original Windows MR hardware partners are still in the game. Lenovo does a lot of partnerships and on the PC side right now they've partnered with Oculus. Dell, Asus and Acer have paused their efforts. HP is still going and recently announced a new device, the HP Reverb G2. The first Reverb was pretty high quality, despite some flaws. We'll see what the Reverb G2 brings to the table. It's mostly aimed at the enterprise market though. The last one worth mentioning is Samsung. Obviously Samsung isn't anyone to fuck with when it comes to consumer electronics. I don't think they're all that interested in the PCVR market though, but are rather waiting for the right time to launch into standalones (like Quest).

Then there's HTC. Former Valve key partner, they've got the Cosmos, a decent but expensive HMD. Too expensive. Its pricepoint-to-quality ratio makes it a non-starter.

Now that Valve has thrown their hat in the ring in multiple significant ways, do you think they'll eventually bring out a more affordable model to compete with Oculus et al, or will they leave the mid and low end market competition to others?

Here's the thing: no one can really compete with Oculus currently. Oculus is owned by Facebook, and for all his mistakes and failures on the social networking side, Zuckerberg is a real believer in virtual and augmented reality. I guess he's got that and smoking meats going for him. Facebook is investing enormous amounts of money in R&D and they're more advanced than anyone else in those fields. They're also funding content creation to a higher extent than any other company with maybe the exception of Sony for PSVR. And here's the last thing: Oculus Quest is being sold at a loss, and Rift S probably at cost. So these aren't really "mid-end" devices at all, and that's why they're such a good deal. More importantly, the gap between what Oculus releases and the rest is going to get wider over time. They've got thousands of top notch scientists working under Michael Abrash (pioneer of 3D graphics, worked on Quake), John Carmack working as CTO (now part time), and so on. Abrash used to work on AR/VR at Valve BTW, he left along with other key staff because he was tired of nothing ever getting done, true story. =) Anwyay, at some point there's going to be a jump in technological capacity, probably in four or five years. That'll be a big moment and I guarantee it'll be Oculus that pushes it forward.

Now, other giant companies are also investing in the field. Apple is a big one. Tim Cook knows that if the iPhone gets disrupted the company will crash, so he's been on a hiring frenzy for a few years and they've got prototypes and a release plan. But they're interesting in AR more than VR. Microsoft, Samsung, Google, Amazon are also working on these things, and also mostly focusing on AR. They're trying to get at a billion users, while VR is seen as having less market potential. Facebook's doing both, which I think is smart. Anyways, to get back to the VR market.... I think Sony's PlayStation VR 2 is going to be a important moment. PSVR was limited technologically, but Sony's content ecosystem is just too good to be ignored. They sold over 5 million PSVRs, which is more than anyone else can say in VR. As for Valve, they've done an OK job with SteamVR (recently got much better). I don't think they can go head to head with Oculus on the hardware side, so they won't. For what it's worth, Oculus was also developing a "high end" device, something that would have been priced $1200 or so. It got canceled because it was deemed that the market for it was too small. Which, like, yeah it is. Valve remains interested in hardware, and I think they'll probably stick to high end, "demonstrating what can be achieved" stuff. For what it's worth, these days Gabe Newell says he's absorbed in brain-computer interfaces. I should be working instead of writing down all this shit BTW. =)
 

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
So this is actually several questions in one.

I thought I deftly snuck those in there. :griffnotevil:

HL: Alyx is a landmark for VR and to a lesser extent for gaming in general. It will still be talked about 10 years from now for a myriad of reasons.

For one thing that's how long it will be before another Half-Life game is announced! :troll:

So it's kind of a triple whammy. Supply is naturally limited for these devices at present, Quest's success soared higher than Oculus had anticipated, and Half-Life: Alyx definitely did increase overall demand. If supply wasn't an issue, I expect most people would get a Quest+Link or a Rift S (these own most of the market anyway, aside from PSVR), while the Valve super fans with unlimited budgets would spring for the Index. Since all three of these devices are unavailable, the other HMDs that people normally wouldn't bother with are getting new demand.

That's pretty much my story. Here's hoping the Visor can get me most of the way there before I have to think about potentially upgrading to a Quest or it's future SNES equivalent (I like the sound of that, as always).

Abrash used to work on AR/VR at Valve BTW, he left along with other key staff because he was tired of nothing ever getting done, true story. =)

Hook it to my veins. :guts:

Microsoft, Samsung, Google, Amazon are also working on these things, and also mostly focusing on AR. They're trying to get at a billion users, while VR is seen as having less market potential. Facebook's doing both, which I think is smart.

That all sounds very promising for VR regardless of those company's focus on AR, as it's bound to benefit from crossover advances. Like PSVR the more high end but smaller scale VR technology can benefit from a connection to a larger popular market.

Anyways, to get back to the VR market.... I think Sony's PlayStation VR 2 is going to be a important moment. PSVR was limited technologically, but Sony's content ecosystem is just too good to be ignored. They sold over 5 million PSVRs, which is more than anyone else can say in VR.

I didn't realize they were technically #1 in the VR space, though it makes sense since it's siphoning off a gaming behemoth, if not the one. I shouldn't minimize that my first real exposure that let me see the potential was PSVR. Otherwise, I might never have given it a real chance.

As for Valve, they've done an OK job with SteamVR (recently got much better).

Glad to hear it since that's going to be my launchpad. After I'm done with Alyx I'm looking forward giving other VR games and experiences a try, even some popular portsn as we've discussed, to sort of see the differences between them and their regular editions as well as how they play compared to native VR games. Not very well from what you've told me. Maybe playing Alyx first is a mistake that will ruin me for such things.

Valve remains interested in hardware, and I think they'll probably stick to high end, "demonstrating what can be achieved" stuff.

"Demonstrating what won't be achieved." :ganishka:

For what it's worth, these days Gabe Newell says he's absorbed in brain-computer interfaces.

I hear they've already got a working prototype. :carcus:

half-life-headcrab-hat_0.jpg

I should be working instead of writing down all this shit BTW. =)

On the bright side for you, I'm giving you an A+ and two gold stars for writing this custom article for us. That sort of genuine recognition is much better than a filthy financial transaction.
 

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
I didn't realize they were technically #1 in the VR space, though it makes sense since it's siphoning off a gaming behemoth, if not the one. I shouldn't minimize that my first real exposure that let me see the potential was PSVR. Otherwise, I might never have given it a real chance.

Yeah, they've done a great job with getting exclusives, porting what PC games could be ported, and keeping things moving with aggressive deals and sales. And because Microsoft fucked up badly with exclusives on the Xbox One and had so much ground to catch up on, VR isn't on their radar at all, so Sony will be able to flex that muscle hard with the PS5.

Glad to hear it since that's going to be my launchpad. After I'm done with Alyx I'm looking forward giving other VR games and experiences a try, even some popular portsn as we've discussed, to sort of see the differences between them and their regular editions as well as how they play compared to native VR games. Not very well from what you've told me. Maybe playing Alyx first is a mistake that will ruin me for such things.

I'll make you a list, but certainly nothing will be of quite the same caliber.
 
Top Bottom