Good feedback to know. I suppose what I want to know (never having used VR) is how real does it feel. So if you stick the headset on and just walk/move around a look does it feel like theres an actual person in front of you? or is it obvious your playing a game.
My original plan for VR is beyond just a fap tool for VAM and for use in things like Flight Simulator. Having never tried it what I really want to know is how real or how "there"do you feel when using it. Its not a cheap thing to buy so want to make the right decision of course...
If you're talking specifically VAM, you can find yourself staring at a face and have moments where your mind/body responds like an actual person is staring back at you (especially depending on what facial/gaze scripts are running). That said, the limitations of VAM and VR in general includes many things that are immersion breaking (you move with the thumbsticks, not your body; 'possessing' characters and lining up with others can be tedious during scenes; scenes with multiple setups have loading times between them and then you have to reposition yourself in the scene; interaction with characters is limited even with the most advanced of animated scenes at this point, etc.)
For VR in general. OOf. That's hard to say. It's a legitimately different experience from desktop gaming and applications. Many games don't even try for the 'life' realism in the first place, so it's more about forgetting you're not there as opposed to feeling like you are there, if that makes sense. For example, as good as The Climb 1 & 2 can look, you don't really believe you're climbing an actual cliffside, until the first time you slip up and fall, and your heart skips a beat, and you realize your brain was so focused on that task it forgot for a split moment there was no danger of actually falling. You can certainly get sucked into the world of games, but you're not going to forget that's all they are. I haven't used flight simulator so I cannot say how impressive it is for 'believing' one is in a plane after the novelty of crisp views from real images and a realistic cockpit wear off. That is also a beast of a system demand itself, if I recall.
The fears of being chased in horror VR generate true terror for many, but so too can simple desktop/console horror. Actual physical feedback of any kind is still in its infancy, as mainstream haptic options are beginning to come to significant commercial market. If I'm being honest, I have over 150 VR titles, and I mostly use mine for VR workouts (VR Fit & Les Mills) on non-lifting days and video playback. That said, I've had some truly enjoyable experiences in Red Matter, The Room VR, I Expect You to Die, and Crisis VRigade, and many other games that I get a kick out of jumping in for a brief bit of entertainment. I'm sure the experience in many games could be boosted by indulging in multiplayer aspects, but I personally seldom do that.
I think the value of VR increases when you're looking at it as serving more than one purpose (entertainment, connecting with people, exercise, relaxation, creating in a new digital medium, watching media, etc.). If you go into it with just one experience as your focus (VAM or Flight Simulator), I think you're more likely to be disappointed with the flaws/shortcomings you come across when it doesn't match your expectations. If possible, I would suggest trying it before buying it, particularly the experience you are most interested in (like Flight Simulator) before jumping in if the expense is even questionably prohibitive for you.
As for your reply to treekicker, I'm sure the intent is to make VAM 2.0 more processor friendly. My understanding has always been that it's actually the CPU processing that is the bottleneck for VAM performance, more so than the GPU, at this point. I'm sure Krosos will correct me if I have that wrong.
