PlayStation VR Update: 100 Games and Counting

PlayStation Blog: "Nearly one year after the launch of PS4's virtual reality headset, we list its full catalog of over 100 games... and highlight a few of our favorites."

[Neonridr]

"games" is a stretch for a bunch of them :P

Many VR titles out there (for both PSVR and Rift/Vive) would be hard pressed to be called anything more than a demo or an "experience".

[Neonridr]

@seniyah - yep, if you feel the need to be *that* guy to bring MS into a PS article.

I am merely referring to the fact that a lot of these so called games are one and done experiences that you are unlikely to return to. People love to disagree with me, but I own an Oculus Rift and a PSVR, so I sort of know exactly what I am talking about. I have spent a small fortune on VR to this point. And while there are some awesome games for both platforms, there is still a large chunk of stuff that falls under the demo/experimental phase. Probably more so with the Rift/Vive but that's only because there are many more titles available there.

[Neonridr]

@seniyah - I am specifically talking about games with little to no replay value. Batman Arkham VR is not made by a low budget studio. But the game is a sort of "one and done". You are very unlikely to return to play it again because the gameplay is exactly the same no matter what you do.

Games like Farpoint, Resident Evil 7, EVE Valkyrie are completely different in that they provide you with different experiences every time you play if you change things up.

That was my only point. Believe me, I have sunk hundreds of hours into VR, I love it. I am not trying to downplay it or blame it on one studio. Yes, VR is in its infancy, I don't deny that. I was simply pointing out that a list of 100 games is pushing it a little when a good chunk are games that you might only ever play once.

[welly300]

Vr in its current form wont survive. Until its as easy as putting on a pair of glasses and wirelless. it will only appeal to a small number of hardcore vr fans.

[subtenko]

Yes he is that guy, get over it, its true. Xbox doesnt have VR....oh and if/when they do, sony will still be ahead of the game since they continue R&D over it. Deal with it, and enjoy your xbox 4k stuff....

[Neonridr]

@subtenko - but I have a PSVR.. do you even read the comments you reply to?

[ApocalypseShadow]

Neonridr, my question would be to you is:

"What is your definition of a game?"

Is Tetris, Dr Mario, Pac Man, Galaga, Defender, Magical Drop, etc... GAMES to you? These games don't have length, don't have stories, don't have 100 hours of gameplay and don't have amazing graphics. What do all these games have in common then? Yes. Fun factor. Obviously, someone found these GAMES fun. Yes you have VR headsets. But you seem to have forgotten what makes a game fun or who it's fun to. And, those games started off what you get to play today.

It's like you're a person from today, judging an Atari of yesterday. When to this day, there are still fun games on Atari. And forgetting that some games today in flat screen gaming, are poorly made, buggy, need patches and may not be graphically impressive.

If you're judging first gen VR games based on where current flat screen gaming is today, you pretty much missed something. You're perfectly fine in how flat screen gaming was given time to prosper. But aren't giving VR it's time to grow.

Even if games like fallout or skyrim turn out OK, doesn't mean there won't be gamers out there who find these games long, boring and repetitive. Or cash ins that should have been built from the ground up for VR. Not shoehorned for VR.

Point being? Subjective. Maybe a game like Danger Ball is a demo to you. To others, Danger Ball is crazy fun with fun factor that makes them play it over and over like gamers played Tetris.

[TankCrossing]

I don't disagree with you, but during the Atari era those games were the best thing available.

VR has a harder time, because you can directly compare the AI/Story/Production values and many other aspects and features with screen based gaming on a like-for-like basis, so it doesn't take any imagination to see how much better things could be. It may be a harsh lens to view VR through, but also totally inevitable. Everyone is like "a person from today, judging an Atari of yesterday" because this Atari is out today, right alongside Uncharted 4, Horizon ZD, Destiny 2 and so on.

I say that as a massive fan of VR. I've got somewhere in the region of 100 VR games myself. I know Neondir is a fellow VR-head too, and I don't think what he is saying about the games is at all unreasonable.

[Neonridr]

well Tetris, Pacman, etc were the pinnacle of achievement back in the 70s. Sure they might look silly now when compared to Uncharted or The Legend of Zelda, but those are still games with crazy replay value. Batman: Arkham VR is an "experience" in that it never changes. If I play it a second time, it will be identical to my first playthrough. I don't really consider that to be a game, more like a demo or experience (as they call it). It's still cool, don't get me wrong, but having beaten it, I have zero desire to go back to try it.

That was my only point here, that there are several titles that offer very little replayability. Doesn't mean they suck, just that I wouldn't necessarily define them as a game. That is just my personal opinion though, so take that with a grain of salt.

I still love VR and believe in the platform to death.

[andibandit]

"If you're judging first gen VR games based on where current flat screen gaming is today, you pretty much missed something."

Thats pretty much how the human mind is wired, we judge things by our past experiences, I dont think he didn't missed anything.
You can argue all day why how things should be different, but it's a battle you can't win.
This is one of the battles VR needs to win by it's own merit.

[ApocalypseShadow]

And I understand what you're saying neon. But it needs time to grow. No company is going to spend millions of dollars on a title until more headsets are sold. So, just like the early days of gaming, or even launch titles for every platform, smaller games are created until more hardware is on the market.

I do agree that Batman is more an experience than game. But it's still a game. Just a short one. I would have loved a section of punching bad guys or throwing batarangs at enemies. But, the game is more detective than fighting crime.

Bigger games are coming. We're just at the beginning of it all. Also, I seem to remember buying Batman at launch for $19.99. And not $30 dollars. Unless you got it on PC and it's more expensive than console. I don't know.

[freshslicepizza]

@Apocalypse Shadow
"And I understand what you're saying neon. But it needs time to grow."

It's an expensive device for something that came out midcycle on a console. It also uses old technology which limits its tracking ability. So already it's at a disadvanatge to other VR devices out there now. The other problem which effects all VR is it's splitting the userbase. Why do you think games like GT Sport have limited VR function? It's because the general PS4 owner doesn't have PSVR, so they will cater to the larger audience. So instead of growing it becomes a trickle in comparison to how well the PS4 will sell.

People often say we need generation leaps and don't like the idea of half step measures the PS4 Pro and XB1X offer. Lots want to see a PS5 to leapfrog into a whole new generation. Some say this also helps PC development to get that leap moving forward for publishers because they won't invest in PC only titles. Yet your argument towards VR is the opposite saying it needs time to grow. It's not going to grow if Sony will never allow it's AAA developers to make VR only titles. You will never have a VR userbase that will grow to the standard audience that way. Not unless they took dramatic efforts and built VR into every PS5 and that will never happen.

Sony is the leader in VR sales and look at the lack of commitment. A one versus one A.I. opponent for GT Sport. That's growth? Project Cars 2 has full VR support on the PC and they don't have nearly the same funding as Sony does to push VR. I don't know what your expectations are but mine are pretty low from Sony.

[yeahokwhatever]

..and they're priced accordingly. What point are you making? Some of them include more fun than many "AAA" games I've played.

[Neonridr]

some of them do. Absolutely. I have had a blast with Until Dawn, Farpoint, Resident Evil 7, EVE, Project Cars, Superhot..

I am not talking about pricing here, and Batman was still pretty expensive when it first came out. $30 for something that you really might only play once or if you needed to demo it to someone else. But I have paid $5 for a a game and it has given me hours upon hours of enjoyment. Price means nothing when it comes to quality.

[DigitalRaptor]

This is a cool timeline of releases.

Hope to see more announced at both Paris Games Week and PSX.

[XiNatsuDragnel]

That's great

[smolinsk]

But only one or two of them are worth talking about.

[GrimDragon]

Needs a few hentai games.

[GamesMaster1982]

Yes but out of all of them there is about 5 worth playing. Sorry to say but i think the PSVR will go the same way as the Vita. Just glad i sold my VR while it is still worth something.