Oculus Rift Virtual Pinball Cabinet

[BadMouth]

I like the concept provided the VR experience is up to par.
This is just an early mock-up.  It would be cool if the final version has solenoids firing off when you hit the flipper buttons.
I'd probably want the table a bit longer or only have front legs and have the back attached to the wall with some type of coupling that allows it to move a bit.
The channel needs more Jeremy.

[pbj]

Lol dozens of virtual pinball cabinets just burned down in flames of obsolescence.  Dozens!

 

[Grasshopper]

I'm not particularly a Pinball fan. But that's pretty awesome.

Anyone who thinks that VR is just a passing fad (Howard I'm looking at you) needs to watch this video.

[dmckean]

I didn't get VR until my co-worker demo'd it for me. He put on this zombie game and the zombies are right in front of you and they're 6 foot tall, it's scary and insane.

[shponglefan]

That does look really cool.  With some haptic feedback that would be epic.

[markc74]

Just after I purchased a 42" LCD and real DMD for my pin build... 

It does look very cool though.

[Howard_Casto]

I'm not particularly a Pinball fan. But that's pretty awesome.

Anyone who thinks that VR is just a passing fad (Howard I'm looking at you) needs to watch this video.

You can look all you want, I'm still right.  VR isn't a passing fad, it's "the next great thing" that's been just around the horizon for the last few decades.  The tech isn't there, the cost isn't reasonable, it's doa. 

If you think VR pinball is enough to get anyone aside from nuts like us or pinheads (which probably prefer the real deal come to think of it) to spend 600 bucks on a glorified monitor that will become obsolete in a year or so you are kidding yourself. 

You've got to understand.. niche uses don't count because they aren't going to get the millions upon millions of units that need to be sold in order for developers to waste time supporting an optional accessory.  Optional accessories have NEVER been successful in THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF VIDEO GAMES.  You just have to accept that fact.  Here's the thing..... in terms of games support optional accessories typically get no more than 20 or 30 dedicated games in their lifecycle.  If you are picking up a 30 dollar lightgun or a 20 dollar gamepad that isn't a big deal because if you are into those games it's not unreasonable to pay a little more for a proper controller.  On the other hand buying a 600 dollar headset that needs a $1,500 pc to run the games at their minimum specs isn't. 

For the record though the vr pin thing is awesome and I was just about to post the video.  

[shponglefan]

You can look all you want, I'm still right.  VR isn't a passing fad, it's "the next great thing" that's been just around the horizon for the last few decades.  The tech isn't there, the cost isn't reasonable, it's doa.

The tech is there and the cost is less (inflation adjusted) than it's been in the past.  It's still in early adopter mode for the current hardware, but the technology has mostly caught up to the idea of VR.  There's also an support infrastructure (i.e. the Internet and loads of indie developers, plus backing from major corporations) that didn't exist in the same capacity back in the 90's.
 
People said the same thing about tablet computers a number of years back.  Those caught on.

You've got to understand.. niche uses don't count because they aren't going to get the millions upon millions of units that need to be sold in order for developers to waste time supporting an optional accessory.  Optional accessories have NEVER been successful in THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF VIDEO GAMES.

Sure they have.  In PC gaming specifically, sound cards and 3D graphics cards both started out as optional.  Eventually they became standard.

VR has the potential to do the same, provided it gets enough traction.  The big hurdle is going to be on the application side and support.

[BadMouth]

What I want is real time green screen, so I can see my own hands and controls merged with the virtual world.

Yeah not everyone is going to build a green screen bubble, but for those that do it would be spectacular.
It wouldn't be that difficult to make a pvc and green spandex canopy.

[Howard_Casto]

Indie games don't count.  They don't sell units because, to be frank, they aren't that good.  Without AAA studio support on a massive level any optional tech is doomed to fail.

I'm honestly unsure what you mean about tablets... do you mean in regards to them being used as a gaming device?  Because no, they never did catch on in that respect.  People buy them because you can do a lot of things on them, but I've yet to meet someone that bought a tablet for gaming.

Sound cards and video cards have never been optional in the entire history of modern computing.  Sure back in the pre-486 days.... put pcs weren't pcs until post- win95 and the invention of directx as a common hardware interface for programmers.  Onboard sound and video cards are still sound and video cards... they have the same architecture as their more expensive cousins and thus games are written for them... that's scale-able tech, not optional accessories.  Let's put it this way.... when you buy a new pc at the store it has sound and video right?  See, not optional.

You'd be surprised to find that the vast majority of computers do NOT have add-on sound and video cards.  The reason a brand new video card is crazy expensive, even today, is because only a slim margin of the computing world  buys high-end video cards. 

Even ignoring that, that's the pc.... the hardware platform and all of it's components have nothing to do with the I/O, which is what I'm referring to.  Not a single solitary optional accessory has ever caught on.... from the NES zapper to psmove and even more mundane ones like the genesis 6 button controller.  There were ~15 games made for the zapper over the nes's 10 year run.  The genesis 6 button controller was virtually un-used in the entire genesis library.... the handful of fighters excluded of course.  As for the move... forget about it.  Meanwhile the wiimote, which is basically a psmove, was used in virtually every game in the Wii's library.  Why?  Because it was mandatory.  The only thing that's ever came close is the 360 gamepad on the pc... that thing has certainly become fairly mainstream, but that's mostly because Microsoft released a library that allowed a programmer to read and write to it with a single line of code. 

Remember, games are made to make money.  This means by default developers, as a whole at least, do the least amount of work to get maximum profits.  That means they don't waste time (which equates to money) adding support for a controller or what have you unless virtually the entire consumer base has the accessory.  Sure some studios will take a chance at a game or two that use the new device and even more will add in half-assed, un-optimized support, but that's about it. 

[Howard_Casto]

What I want is real time green screen, so I can see my own hands and controls merged with the virtual world.

Yeah not everyone is going to build a green screen bubble, but for those that do it would be spectacular.
It wouldn't be that difficult to make a pvc and green spandex canopy.

Yup that's what I'm waiting on as well.  VR is only going to be useful in very limited situations until we can actually see our hands, bodies and controls.

That's the thing though.... if I like vr or not or if it will catch on has NOTHING to do with each other.  Knave kept arguing with me a couple of years back about how the Ouya would catch on.... he liked the thing that that's great, but it wasn't going to catch on because he liked it.  The industry is pretty rigid in how it works, unfortunately.  There are very few surprises if you've paid attention to videogame history.

If they can get the price down to under 300 bucks I might be interested in getting one for some special projects. 

[shponglefan]

Indie games don't count.  They don't sell units because, to be frank, they aren't that good.

This is categorically false.  Indie (in this case I'm using it to refer to games development not backed by AAA studios) have long been successful and responsible for innovation in the PC gaming world.  Go back to the days of shareware in the 1990's and companies like Apogee and id that helped create the most popular video game genre (first person shooters).

In modern times it's not uncommon for the more popular indie games to sell into the millions of units.  And there are dozens if not hundreds of high quality indie titles to be had (I could start rattling off titles if you'd like).  You even have cases like modern indie company Mojang getting sold to Microsoft for $2.5 billion dollars.  Or a game like Star Citizen becoming the most successful crowd-funding campaign in history at over $100 million dollars.

So no, the idea that indie titles either don't sell or are poor quality is a complete myth.

Without AAA studio support on a massive level any optional tech is doomed to fail.

Not really true.  There are niche peripherals that find a niche, occupy it and survive.  Look no further than PC flightsticks or driving wheels + pedals.

I'm honestly unsure what you mean about tablets...

I meant that people said they were too expensive and would never catch on.  And then people bought them and they caught on.

Sound cards and video cards have never been optional in the entire history of modern computing.  Sure back in the pre-486 days.... put pcs weren't pcs until post- win95 and the invention of directx as a common hardware interface for programmers.

PCs were PCs since 1981: the release of the IBM PC (and subsequent clones).   A lot of PC hardware we know consider standard started out as optional: sound cards, modems, network cards, 3D-accelerated graphics chips, heck, even mice.

Later they became standard, but it was a number of years before that happened.

You'd be surprised to find that the vast majority of computers do NOT have add-on sound and video cards.

But this wasn't always the case and that was my whole point.  What is now standard began as optional.

Even ignoring that, that's the pc.... the hardware platform and all of it's components have nothing to do with the I/O, which is what I'm referring to.  Not a single solitary optional accessory has ever caught on....
from the NES zapper to psmove and even more mundane ones like the genesis 6 button controller.  There were ~15 games made for the zapper over the nes's 10 year run.  The genesis 6 button controller was virtually un-used in the entire genesis library.... the handful of fighters excluded of course.  As for the move... forget about it.  Meanwhile the wiimote, which is basically a psmove, was used in virtually every game in the Wii's library.  Why?  Because it was mandatory.  The only thing that's ever came close is the 360 gamepad on the pc... that thing has certainly become fairly mainstream, but that's mostly because Microsoft released a library that allowed a programmer to read and write to it with a single line of code.

I think a lot of attempts a peripherals in the console world were either limited by design (i.e. light guns), the technology was awful (i.e. a lot of motion technology), or they were solutions to problems that didn't exist.

One difference at least for VR is it's not strictly an input peripheral, as most are.  It's a legitimate new way of experiencing a game world.  It's probably the first technology in a long time that can make a case for actually increasing immersion in video games.  For all of the advances in video game tech, we've been limited to 2D screens for a long time.  But to now have the opportunity to feel like you're in a different world with things represented in the proper scope and scale; this has the possibility to be revolutionary.

Just look what dmckean wrote a little earlier: "He put on this zombie game and the zombies are right in front of you and they're 6 foot tall, it's scary and insane."

Remember, games are made to make money.  This means by default developers, as a whole at least, do the least amount of work to get maximum profits.  That means they don't waste time (which equates to money) adding support for a controller or what have you unless virtually the entire consumer base has the accessory.  Sure some studios will take a chance at a game or two that use the new device and even more will add in half-assed, un-optimized support, but that's about it.

True, but this is where the modern support structures exist that haven't in the past.  The plethora of indie developers and crowd-funded projects allows for risk-tasking that most big publishers shy away from.  So there is an opportunity for the foundation to be built before the bigger studios come on board.  And don't forget that the current round of VR are being backed by some large companies (Valve, Sony, Facebook, HTC, Samsung) to begin with.

[ark_ader]

So will it work with my Samsung Oculus headset?

[RetroGreg]

This is really cool, but I'm old and set in my ways. I'd still rather have an actual pin or a mini pin cabinet.

[Howard_Casto]

Indie games don't count.  They don't sell units because, to be frank, they aren't that good.

This is categorically false.  Indie (in this case I'm using it to refer to games development not backed by AAA studios) have long been successful and responsible for innovation in the PC gaming world.  Go back to the days of shareware in the 1990's and companies like Apogee and id that helped create the most popular video game genre (first person shooters).

In modern times it's not uncommon for the more popular indie games to sell into the millions of units.  And there are dozens if not hundreds of high quality indie titles to be had (I could start rattling off titles if you'd like).  You even have cases like modern indie company Mojang getting sold to Microsoft for $2.5 billion dollars.  Or a game like Star Citizen becoming the most successful crowd-funding campaign in history at over $100 million dollars.

So no, the idea that indie titles either don't sell or are poor quality is a complete myth.

Not it's completely true.  Indie games can sell well, but developers only charge 1-5 dollars for the games.  So you have to sell exponentially more copies to equate to a best-selling AAA game that sells for 60 dollars.  Even when they do sell, that don't drive bleeding edge tech nor do they support it nor do people buy $600 headsets to play a cruddy 5 min flash game.  Let me know when you want to accept reality and we can continue this discussion.

I think the problem is you are thinking pc gaming is like it was in the early 90's.  Pay attention to the landscape.  With two or three exceptions like WOW or Minecraft, nearly every AAA game the pc gets is a console port.  Thanks to services like steam where the price of a title drops faster than a penny thrown off the empire state building, people don't create high end games just for the pc anymore because there isn't any money in it.  They go where the money is, namely consoles, and the pc gets the sloppy seconds. 

[pbj]

I'd like to be optimistic about VR but I feel like it'd already be widely available if people wanted it.

I'd like to be optimistic about Sony throwing their hat in, but they've got a pretty good list of abandoned hardware (PSP, Move, Playstation TV...)

Occulus Rift has been floating around a couple of years now and nobody really seems to give half a ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---.

[vwalbridge]

On one had: This is probably the best and most practical use of VR I've seen thus far. I'm not going to lie, I'd love to try it.

On the other had: I pretty much agree with pbj. I feel like we have already "been there, done that" with VR. And if it was going to succeed on a wide-scale basis, it already would have.

Time will tell, but unless every kid on the block has one (like the original Gameboy, an HDTV or a PS4 for example) then it will just become another "that was cool while it lasted" products.

[dmckean]

I'd like to be optimistic about VR but I feel like it'd already be widely available if people wanted it.

I'd like to be optimistic about Sony throwing their hat in, but they've got a pretty good list of abandoned hardware (PSP, Move, Playstation TV...)

Occulus Rift has been floating around a couple of years now and nobody really seems to give half a ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---.

There's more or less no software for it. Most everything is either a demo or a hack. Games need to be written from the ground up with VR in mind or it's just a big vomit-fest.

I have no doubt VR will succeed though, the immersion is unreal. It's like when we all went from playing Super Mario Bros to playing Doom.

[vwalbridge]

There's more or less no software for it. Most everything is either a demo or a hack.

Apply this same concept to a new game console release and it will epic-ally fail before it even hits the shelves.

But for some reason, John-Q-Public has all the patience in the world for content to be made availble for VR. 

[dmckean]

Apply this same concept to a new game console release and it will epic-ally fail before it even hits the shelves.

But for some reason, John-Q-Public has all the patience in the world for content to be made availble for VR. 

Valve will have a bunch of content for it soon. The first generation hardware might "fail" the same way my first 3D video card only had 10 games ported to it and second generation headsets might come along before first generation headsets gain traction. But VR in general will be here to stay.

[BorgDog]

I think he seems to be underselling the cost a bit in the video.. "for $100..."  sure for a piece of foam board and some buttons.  To make it really work it would need force feedback, and a full size cabinet to get the proper nudge feel of a full sized cabinet, or some springs or something to simulate that.  Doesn't seem to do much for multi-player, get 4 headsets hook them all up and you can all stand around and watch?  Now as an add-on to my vp cab it might be rather fun, assuming I have enough of a computer to run it.. so on oculus site they say GTX970 or R9-390 and an i5-4590 OR BETTER, which generally means you want better, and they have special pricing on computers, basically $1000.  Now a gtx970 and i5-6600k is what I plan on putting in my new vcab build so it may work, assuming I want to spend another $600.  Would I love to have one, sure I would, but I would also love some more real pinball machines too.

[shponglefan]

Not it's completely true.  Indie games can sell well, but developers only charge 1-5 dollars for the games.  So you have to sell exponentially more copies to equate to a best-selling AAA game that sells for 60 dollars.  Even when they do sell, that don't drive bleeding edge tech nor do they support it nor do people buy $600 headsets to play a cruddy 5 min flash game.  Let me know when you want to accept reality and we can continue this discussion.

I'm going to assume you are either working with private definition of "indie title", or you simply haven't paid any attention to the indie PC gaming scene.  Because it's the only way to explain what you are writing.

Most of my PC gaming has shifted to indie titles in the last 5+ years.  As a result, I consider myself reasonably informed with the quality of indie titles available.  As mentioned, I define "indie"  as a title funded and published independent of a major publisher.  That covers a wide gamut of games, most of which are well beyond the $1-5 price tag you seem to think these titles have.  You might want to visit the list of indies on Steam (http://store.steampowered.com/tag/en/Indie#p=1&tab=TopSellers) and acquaint yourself with the modern reality of that market.  Also check out sales numbers courtesy of Steamspy (http://steamspy.com/genre/Indie).  Lots of indie games with 6-7 figure sales numbers.  And finally, three of the top 10 best-selling PC titles are indie games (including the #1 and #3 spots; source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_PC_games).  Suffice to say, your characterizations of the indie market is objectively false.

I think the problem is you are thinking pc gaming is like it was in the early 90's.  Pay attention to the landscape.  With two or three exceptions like WOW or Minecraft, nearly every AAA game the pc gets is a console port.  Thanks to services like steam where the price of a title drops faster than a penny thrown off the empire state building, people don't create high end games just for the pc anymore because there isn't any money in it.  They go where the money is, namely consoles, and the pc gets the sloppy seconds.

This is true of major publishers, sure.  But as I said, most of my gaming has shifted to the indie scene.  And there you are starting to see the opposite: games developed for PC, but then ported to console after the fact.  I think a lot of that may be due to the rise of Early Access and crowdfunding as a funding model; something that's not really possible in a traditional console development cycle.

Anyway, the line between console and PC has been blurring over the last decade or so.  We're seeing console-based controls (i.e. Xbox gamepads) becoming ubiquitous on the PC thanks to Microsoft's push.  And consoles are gaining more PC-centric features over the years.  It's becoming less of a delineating factor when it comes to gaming.

Regardless, the idea that VR is initially being supported by indie developers shouldn't put you off.  It's not the development ghetto that you seem to think it is.

[shponglefan]

On the other had: I pretty much agree with pbj. I feel like we have already "been there, done that" with VR. And if it was going to succeed on a wide-scale basis, it already would have.

VR has long failed to succeed in the consumer marketplace because the technology just wasn't there to make it affordable.  If you wanted a premium experience, you'd have to pay for it (i.e. $10,000+).  Or you had consumer level hardware that was extremely gimped to the point of not being worth it.

We've finally reached a point where the technology is good enough and cheap enough to make the idea of VR a reality for consumers.

[fablog]

I agree with all you said Shponglefan. I tried the first generation of VR headset (VFX1) and it was very bad but in the next 3-5 years everybody could have an affordable quality headset. Early adopters will pay for the rest of us and I'm sure Facebook and Sony will put the money to be the first in the market when it will explode. Remember Amazon and the money they put in the e-business many years before to  make any profit. Now they are huge and make a lot of profit. It's my opinion but I don't have any crystal ball, all could fail because of bad business decision.

[dkersten]

VR has never "been" where it is now.. There was NEVER screens that were only a couple inches wide that could do over 1000 lines of resolution until just the past few years.  The popularity of smartphones has driven the technology to this point and opened the door for VR that actually looks as good or better than what you have in front of you right now.  And the public has never been more ready for this kind of technology.

As for "Indies", most of the top developers over the past few decades started as independent studios, pieced together from a couple young visionaries who saw things most others didn't see.  Indie titles have always been a major factor in the rise of the video game, and the market they influence is bigger than Hollywood. To say that Indie developers have no bearing on driving the market is like saying Indie authors have no bearing on the shift in book sales to ebooks or Indie films have no bearing on the shift in movie genres (or in the rise of youtube type video media).  It is patently untrue. 

Although most of this is old arguments not worth rehashing, I see a lot of potential in VR.  It doesn't mean I am going to rush out and be an early adopter any more than I rushed out to buy the first $20,000 plasma TV's or spent thousands of the first smartphones.  It does mean that after the first couple iterations have run their course and content creation is in full swing by the larger studios scrambling to get a piece of the pie and hardware is as cheap and common as a smartphone or flat screen tv is today, I will probably spend my money on it.  And I think there are hundreds of thousands of people just like me in that regard. 

[fallacy]

Vive looks 100% bad ass to me. I am like counting days until it gets here. It is like a holodeck in your room.

[danny_galaga]

I'm not particularly a Pinball fan. But that's pretty awesome.

Anyone who thinks that VR is just a passing fad (Howard I'm looking at you) needs to watch this video.

You can look all you want, I'm still right.  VR isn't a passing fad, it's "the next great thing" that's been just around the horizon for the last few decades.  The tech isn't there, the cost isn't reasonable, it's doa. 

If you think VR pinball is enough to get anyone aside from nuts like us or pinheads (which probably prefer the real deal come to think of it) to spend 600 bucks on a glorified monitor that will become obsolete in a year or so you are kidding yourself. 

You've got to understand.. niche uses don't count because they aren't going to get the millions upon millions of units that need to be sold in order for developers to waste time supporting an optional accessory.  Optional accessories have NEVER been successful in THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF VIDEO GAMES.  You just have to accept that fact.  Here's the thing..... in terms of games support optional accessories typically get no more than 20 or 30 dedicated games in their lifecycle.  If you are picking up a 30 dollar lightgun or a 20 dollar gamepad that isn't a big deal because if you are into those games it's not unreasonable to pay a little more for a proper controller.  On the other hand buying a 600 dollar headset that needs a $1,500 pc to run the games at their minimum specs isn't. 

For the record though the vr pin thing is awesome and I was just about to post the video.

Holy ---steaming pile of meadow muffin---, I totally agree with you!

"V.R- After 2 decades it's still just two really small tellies one inch away from your face"

 

[shponglefan]

Vive looks 100% bad ass to me. I am like counting days until it gets here. It is like a holodeck in your room.

Ditto.  C'mon HTC, take my money already!   

[fallacy]

Ditto.  C'mon HTC, take my money already!   

I have never been as happy to see $860 leave my account.

[fallacy]

.

[HanoiBoi]

I like the VR stuff.  Picked up an inexpensive headset on amazon and downloaded some apps for the phone and even viewed some nice youtube VR vids and enjoyed all.

I don't think I'd enjoy pinball as it was demonstrated in the video - definitely not those tables and not with the ball trail. 

Also, I dont know that VR would allow a player to better see and line up his shot by getting low and moving around.  Well, not any better than top down or anything else we've currently got in Visual Pinball.

[jennifer]

     Although interesting it would serve as impractical in coin op world and after all its about money right?, And regardless I can almost feel the germs jumping off that headset  GROSS!.... In your livingroom possibly a different story with interactive games, but again not so much with pins, really think some toilet tank mockup could withstand the tremendous pressures of a "real" game, which apparently just tilts to keep you from just pushing the thing over, or just throwing it in a fit of rage? Pinball lives in a highly competitive physical world, constituted with mechanical perfection, and this is merely just a fun toy. (IMO)

[knave]

VR has long failed to succeed in the consumer marketplace because the technology just wasn't there to make it affordable.  If you wanted a premium experience, you'd have to pay for it (i.e. $10,000+).  Or you had consumer level hardware that was extremely gimped to the point of not being worth it.

We've finally reached a point where the technology is good enough and cheap enough to make the idea of VR a reality for consumers.

The price will have to come down a lot more to gain any mainstream acceptance. I think ~$100 range would get me to buy a VR headset...I will supply my own gamepad, PC etc.

If it is a good enough experience folks might buy it for more...But I tend toward cheaper DIY to spending $$$ on early adopting.

[dmckean]

VR has long failed to succeed in the consumer marketplace because the technology just wasn't there to make it affordable.  If you wanted a premium experience, you'd have to pay for it (i.e. $10,000+).  Or you had consumer level hardware that was extremely gimped to the point of not being worth it.

We've finally reached a point where the technology is good enough and cheap enough to make the idea of VR a reality for consumers.

The price will have to come down a lot more to gain any mainstream acceptance. I think ~$100 range would get me to buy a VR headset...I will supply my own gamepad, PC etc.

If it is a good enough experience folks might buy it for more...But I tend toward cheaper DIY to spending $$$ on early adopting.

It will be like 3D graphics cards, by early 1997 most PC gamers were buying one but it would be another 5 years because there was a console with similar 3d performance (XBOX).