Jun 15th, 2014


Virtual reality gaming is generating lots of buzz these days, with Oculus Rift and Sony’s Project Morpheus for the PS4 leading the way. While VR gaming has tried to get off the ground many times before, this time it looks like it will finally take off.

However, Nintendo’s Reggie Fils-Aime isn’t so sure. When asked about virtual reality gaming and whether Nintendo would support it. He said:

“Right now, the technology isn’t quite there yet, in our view. Certainly, it’s something we’re looking at. We look at a wide range of technologies. When it’s there and enables a fun experience, we’ll be there, too.”

It’s easy to understand Nintendo’s caution about VR gaming — they released the Virtual Boy headset in 1995, which was a huge failure. It was one of the many failed VR headsets released in the 1990s.

Having personally tried the Oculus Rift, I think the technology is definitely there. What we need are some great games that utilize the new tech. Even Shigeru Miyamoto seems to like the Oculus Rift, as he was spotted trying it out at E3 (photo via Twitter):


Source (AP)

local_offer    Nintendo  reggie fils-aime  virtual reality  wii u  
  • jjbredesen

    I guess that means we will get a Virtual Boy 2 😀 But i think i agree with Reggie, the rift, is more of a prototype thing, and i think that Nintendo should jump onboard in the next stage of this, so they can make something truly innovative, if someone can make an old concept great its Nintendo.

    Just look at the power glove and Wiimote, and then the virtual boy and the 3DS.

    Will be interesting to see what happens.


    • FutureFox

      I think you mean “Gameboy” and 3DS. Miyamoto has to be thinking at that moment how much better it’d be to use a headset for StarFox than what he currently is proposing gamers do with the gamepad.

      • jjbredesen

        Yeah, i do agree on the Miyamtoto part, but with the VB and 3DS i was talking about the 3D tech.

        • FutureFox

          Wow…I hadn’t considered that actually. I wonder how having true-depth of field would be (3DS tech) with the AMOLED tech in the VR headset?

          I think awhile back Google was experimenting with making phones have 3D depth; and actually I think some phones are coming out with a 3D depth tech. Yeah if Nintendo can figure that out how to work that into their headset that would be a game changer at least for the gaming industry.

          • jjbredesen

            If i got a full 4K 3D VR headset, i think i would never need real life again xD

          • Seth Lawrence

            That’s hilarious.. and I agree

          • Magnus Eriksson

            LOL! You are joking now are you not?

          • FutureFox

            About what exactly?

          • Magnus Eriksson

            Combination of 3DS and VR tech.

          • FutureFox

            Well….no, I’m not joking. If the Nintendo headset wants to continue to allow the user to adjust the illusion of depth I think that’s a hurdle.

            The praise people are showering the rift over for is that they use a curved display using AMOLED technology. Now that’s in every phone and I’m sure the 3DS as well. So what is the problem you might be thinking? The problem, I think, is the LCD component used to provide the depth of field experience. Whereas the AMOLED can be form-fitted to provide a greater and much more realistic viewing angle, the LCD layer cannot be form-fitted beyond a flat surface. That’s my understanding of the 3DS and Rift tech.

            So Nintendo would need to create some kind of form-fitting layer that replaces the LCD but carries it favorable characteristics to aid in producing the depth portion of the 3D experience.

          • Magnus Eriksson

            I might have misunderstood you and thought you were joking. But the difference between 3DS and VR on OR is that 3DS use eyetracking to create a 3D image while OR use stereoscopy to present one picture for each eye. Individually each eye gives only a 2D picture while in combination it gives the effect of 3D. That tech is very old, but effective. It wouldnt do any difference to use the 3DS tech on a single eye, as you wouldnt get the 3D effect at all.

          • CaptRodgers

            There have been phones with 3D depth, one of friends got one like three years ago.

          • FutureFox

            I hadn’t realized companies were actually selling them. But I heard about the push for it around three years ago. Doesn’t sound to be a big hit in the marketplace from what I’ve read.

      • Einscengi


        He said what he meant. The Virtual Boy was a failed attempt at VR gaming by Nintendo, more or less. Ah, the mid 90’s were such a quirky time.

        • FutureFox

          Yeah, message received.

          I looked at it as comparing old controller-scheme to new-controller-scheme and old-handheld to new-handheld, which I’ve been corrected as not being the case.

    • companyoflosers

      You DO know the power glove was a collasal failure right? If anything it sells better now as a cool piece of nintendo history than back in the day when it was new as an actual peripheral.

      • C.S. Bailey

        I think that was his point. Out of that failure they later made the Wiimote, VB begat 3DS.

      • jjbredesen

        As @c_s_bailey:disqus said, that was my point, that out of a failiure they made sucess, they learn from there mistakes.

      • Arthur Jarret

        As C.S. Bailey and jjbredesen said, that was the point – success out of failure and all that.

    • Arthur Jarret
  • Petri
    • leo

      so much R’n D

      • Petri

        Half way done.

    • Rinslowe

      Well it does have latency in it’s favour… (shrugs)

    • Magnus Eriksson

      You know what. This is not necessarly to far fetched. It could be done. Wii U have the potential to run two pads, although in 30 fps each. They could potentially build upon that together with the accelerometer tech for a working headset. Its quite obvious that they have thought in similar directions when creating the pad. But if they would do it is another question.

      • The problem Nintendo has with VR is the same problem they have with Online gaming. Both technologies aren’t really sporting the type of gameplay Nintendo is after as it always puts the player into an isolated bubble, VR more than anything else. I guess after the Virtual Boy, they are treating this issue far more carefully plus their whole target audience changed from the common mainstream videogamer to more casual and multiplayer/fun-focused, younger audiences. VR doesn’t really fit into that without looking ridiculous, as I don’t really want to play MP with friends who are in the same room.
        Another thing might be, that VR games are going to be very much about atmosphere, storytelling and so on. Predictions claim VR games might not even be about killing people anymore (OMG!) because that element just isn’t necessary anymore to keep a VR game going while a game you’ll play on the TV most of the time has to follow certain structures. I just don’t see Nintendo getting into these gameplay styles as their business model is based on completely different games, focusing on quite traditional and often a bit arcade-style gameplay elements.

        So of course they are trying stuff out and of course the WiiU is the result of the whole thinking-process about how to be able to create a VR experience without excluding other people in the room, still being able to share what happens on the gamepad. The result is quite far from VR, there are barely any games really pushing that technology in this direction, but I personally can see that concept’s heritage.

        • lonewolf

          So someone who doesnt works at nintendo knows what they are thinking? Nice one.

          • wow, great job in throwing a senseless oneliner into a discussion you apparently don’t really understand. you are very welcome to participate at this discussion without verbally farting in random directions. I really mean it, back to start and try again, there’s still a chance you could be a constructive part here.

          • Magnus Eriksson

            The guy doesnt need too know, he can think for himself.

          • Arthur Jarret

            That’s a rare skill.

        • Magnus Eriksson

          I think you are right in every aspect. My comment was just about the structure of the hardware. I think that these things you adress also concerns Wii Motion gaming and the pad. Its always been N.’s problem

          • just commented your comment, didn’t question it 🙂

        • Arthur Jarret

          I can’t wait to play purely exploration based games. Flower, journey, the unfinished swan (and shadow of the colossus, in some ways) paved the way here. There is some beauty in isolation with these games.

          As such, I do think sony is better equipped to take the first steps into VR – as they have offered more experiences that would fit the tech than any other publisher.

          • Gone home with Oculus Rift … I really do see a danger in getting stuck in these virtual worlds, the more creative and convincing these explorationgames get. Especially because I love them too. Damn.

          • by the way, let’s see what Sony does with this tech. if they decide to abandon it like they did with move, it’s a waste of time. sure, VR is a different story, but if they aren’t supporting it with the necessary empathy, it could lack acceptance as well.

          • Arthur Jarret

            I don’t feel Sony abadoned the move. It’s compatible with PS4 and multiple recent PS3 titles – I think over 110 titles are PS-move compatible? Many of those by free patches for existing games (such as Heavy Rain).

            The motion tech inside the Dual-shock 4 is based on Move as well. At last years E3 there was a mediamolecule-made sculpting demo that used the move.

            So, I’m not really counting it as ‘abandoned’.

            They should support Morpheus better, though – I agree with you there!

          • well ok there are some quality-versions of existing games, stuff like Resident Evil 5 Gold Edition (I think that was the name) true that, but hardly any real exciting production really using that tech. Sure it’s something different with the Wii where you had to support the Wiimote, but I think the only game sony tried to blow up here was sorcery, which didn’t work out if you’re asking me. But well OK maybe they didn’t abandon it, but just stopped pushing it at a point where it hasn’t had too much chances to prove itself.

    • Sdudyoy

      “Yep, this effectively makes it so… I can’t see a darn thing.”

  • Lusunup

    I rather stick with my controller in hand while looking at a screen when playing smash bros.

    • LevenThumps

      I would too. I think this could have potential in some areas of gaming, but Smash Bros. is certainly not one of them.

      • Nabeel Farooqui

        mostly FPS

    • 00EpicGamer00

      Maybe if Nintendo someday makes a survival horror type of game (I honestly don’t see Nintendo making this kind of game at all. But anything can happen) that could be a good VR game. 🙂

      • Arthur Jarret

        Because Nintendo had nothing to do with Eternal Darkness… which totally wasn’t a survival horror game.

        Luckily, on every other Nintendo platform 3rd party devs have picked up the slack for this genre, at least – there isn’t a single Nintendo system without a (timed) exclusive horror title.

        • lonewolf

          And dont forget fatal frame and the 10+ survival horros that came exclusively on the wii. And gamecube had some survival horrors even the n64 had a survival game (maybe not horror but survavile yes) even the nes had an adventure horror game and a rail shooter that was horror.

          • Arthur Jarret

            N64 had Resi 2 & 3 – amongst other things. SNES had clock tower, NES had nightmare on elm street and Friday the 13th. Gameboy color had Resident evil gaiden, DS has Dementium… the list goes on and on.

          • lonewolf

            Yeah I know I just couldnt recall the names of the games. Dont forget can crystalis for the nes it had really dark setting and beastbusters (or maybe it wasnt released for the nes). I know mechanized attack for the nes (but that was just “mature” game by today standards at least hehe).

        • 00EpicGamer00

          I’ve never played Eternal Darkness, so I wouldn’t know.

          • Arthur Jarret

            If you’re ever able to, play it! It didn’t age very well (mechanics or graphics), but it’s just filled with great ideas if you push past that

          • 00EpicGamer00

            I wish I could play it, but my GameStop, or any store here doesn’t sell GameCube games anymore. I’d have to buy it online, and that isn’t happening. My parents don’t like the idea of purchasing anything off of the internet (even if it’s a trustable site, like Amazon). *sigh* I wish I was old enough to live by myself. -.-

          • Arthur Jarret

            A matter of time! Don’t you ever have garage sales / flea markets / retro videogame fairs in your neighbourhood?

          • 00EpicGamer00

            We do have flea markets. We went there like..one time, lol. The video game related thing I found was a N64 stand…I wanted to look at it but my mom went, literally running past it to try and find a phone case…that’s why we went. I tried to call to my mom to stop but she couldn’t hear me…and I’d rather follow her than get lost/left behind. The flea market we have here is huge. It’s so big that they have these different colored lines on the floor that you have to follow in order to get out. You have to remember which colored line you came in on.You use the same color to leave.

        • J_Joestar

          IIRC they also co-own the Fatal Frame franchise.

          • Arthur Jarret

            Unfortunately not… they published the remake of 2 and 4 and the cursed memoire – but they don’t own the franchise – just the rights to those three games

  • Ieuan Darknell

    I really hope this isn’t so… I’m not trying to be rude, I’m just stating my opinion… Technology has already advanced enough, and being in a a Virtual Reality game would just be way too much for me… I’d never buy it, and what happens if that becomes the future? No more buying Mario games for me if this is what Nintendo intends to happen in them…

    I just don’t like how much technology is advancing… 3D is far enough, and that, I don’t even like. Lucky to all the people who like this sort of thing but what about the people like me who don’t like it? Will we just have to suck up and deal with it, huh?

    • jjbredesen

      Well i think it sort of is the future, and i don’t think it will stop. People are already experimenting with a combination of a treadmill, motion trackers and the rift so that you become the person in the game, and it works, so its only going to get worse.

      I like it, and i think it adds another dimension to gaming, and helps immerse you in the game, but there is of course a line.

      • Bob Charlie

        VR is just going to make it really easy for gamers to get robbed. 🙂

        • jjbredesen

          lol, can’t argue against that 😀

      • Arthur Jarret

        No, there’s not… as time moves on, that line also moves… there is no limit to what crazy stuff we will subject ourselves to. Wether it’s VR or genetically modified vegetables able to withstand the toxins we spray on it (incidentally killing every living creature nearby). And that’s our current state.

        Just a matter of time until farmers need radiation suits and we can plug our console directly in the back of our necks.

    • 00EpicGamer00

      I’m afraid technology will always be advancing. I mean, just look at how far games have come. They started out as pixelated sprites, but now are full 3D models. What’s next? Photographic images that literally make the game be as lifelike as possible? Will one day they figure out how to put in real life looking people into video games?

      I’m not a fan of VR either, I’ve never actually tried it for myself, but from watching video on them…it looks uncomfortable and nauseating. I really wouldn’t be surprised to see video games evolve to that. Heck, maybe one day we’ll control games not with controllers…but with our mind. Sorry that this is off topic, but did you know that there’s already being work on automated or “self driving” cars?

      Honestly, with the rate at how quickly our technology is advancing, I think that is how the world will possible end. You see it all the time in movies. One day, our technology will be so advanced to where it has a mind of it’s own. It’ll have thought and emotions. And the technology will be all like, “why do we have to listen to you?”

  • Wildman

    They have been looking at the technology for a while now. Virtual boy was just the beginning. They have something cool planned for their next console. It will be completely different from Wii and Wii U

    • xPhoenixMoon

      Pretty big assumption there when they haven’t talked about VR since the Virtual Boy.
      If Reggie feels VR isn’t ready now, he isn’t going to feel its ready by the time the next Nintendo console releases, be realistic. I honestly can’t see them making something similar to the Wii U with a VR device included, people know even with the price drop still complain about the Wii U being too expensive.
      Also I just don’t see them randomly dropping the gamepad for their next console, I think that would be a big mistake, I for one hate when companies try so hard to push something then just completely give up on instead of trying to make it better. So I would hope that their next system only bring improvements to what we already have.
      I also actually love the gamepad and the functions built around it, so I would be a little peeved if they just remove it altogether one day, that will be like their next handheld not having 3D or two screens.
      It would just seem weird. You don’t just give up on good ideas, you improve them and continue to work on them to make it better.

      • Wildman

        They’re not going to give up on the gamepad just yet. You’re right on that.
        VR will be ready when Nintendo releases their new console as the new console will likely have some VR functionality. That’s just a guess on my part, but you never know with Nintendo. They like to challenge minds and all gaming traditions.

    • oontz

      “They have been looking at the technology for a while now.”


      • Wildman

        I had read an article a while back (2008) that stated something similar.
        They were looking at companies with VR experience and their technologies.
        So, I am currently running with a baseless assumption right now. Still looking for the article.

        • oontz

          Cool, wouldn’t surprise me to be honest.

      • Wildman

        Alright. It was 2006 when Nintendo purchased a number of these VR visors. They have something going on over there. They don’t waste the technology that they look into.


        • oontz

          Well to be fair tech companies often work on things that never see an actual retail release. But it’d be cool to see Nintendo working on a vr headset. They have the motion controls already so they are half way there.

          • Wildman

            Yeah, that’s true. Like the glasses-free 3D GBA prototype and Gamecube proto.
            They have done 3D now, but they have so many secrets about. I like that about Nintendo.
            I think they will make VR a part of their next console. That’s just me though.

          • oontz

            The only thing is it the other consoles have it, they may not do it just to be different.

          • Wildman

            But they have it as an add on device. (a good idea right now too)
            If Nintendo were to do the VR thing, they would do it in a very Nintendo kind of way. I’m not getting my hopes up for that though.

          • oontz

            I am trying to picture a nintendo game that would work best with VR… Metroid would be EPIC!

  • Johny

    I bet its that misterious connector on the bottom of the gamepad, that noone knows what its for 😀 You’ll be able to attach the gamepad to some kind of accessory and put it on your head or something

    • YiyeUniverseMB

      #SoMysteriousItsKillingMe If their VR was some form of HUD or overlay like Google glass they could do awesome things with glasses, gamepad and TV.

    • *Cough -Bakemonogatari Ftw-*
      But yeah, It’ll be interesting to see what accessory Nintendo will use with that port.. Just a guess but it could be for the GameCube adapter.

      • Johny

        Gamecube adapter is confirmed to be hooked via USB ports 🙂
        Also… ahoy! always nice randomly meeting Bakemonogatari fans!

  • Mr Ninty

    next E3 they will announce virtualman

    • leo

      lol made me laugh

  • lonewolf

    Right now its too expensive for people to buy it and thats why its not there yet.

    • xPhoenixMoon

      Too expensive? When people are spending close to $700 dollars on phones that come out almost monthly now, not including their outrageous monthly cost to keep the phone on, I can’t see that. When people are having no trouble buying the PS4, Xbox One or Wii U which costs about as much as one of these VR devices, I just don’t see them being too expensive.

      It isn’t like it costs thousands of dollars.

      People have the money and obviously people are spending that kind of money regularly, yes it may be frivolous spending but they are spending it none the less.

      • Clel

        Most people don’t buy phones simply to play games. They use it for texting, calling, checking e-mails, using certain apps, play time-killing games, and even as alarm clocks. Also, they tend to be around the $500 range, it’s not that common for people to spend $700 on a phone.

      • Bob Charlie

        Who the hell are these people you speak of? Money IS tight right now for the average person. You must have a really, really good job, or you’re still being supported by your parents.

      • DESTOROYAH!!!

        This is one of the many reasons I dont use Cell phones and I hate people who spend lots of money on the same thing every year. Thats is a LOT OF MONEY. Just because there is some people that can spend that much on certain things don’t change that.

      • CaptRodgers

        Not that many people spend the much on cell phones, just the Apple, Samsung, and htc fanboys. Most people pay two hundred or less on phones when they renew Thier contacts. Also spending 300 dollars on a device that can play games and let’s you do other functions is a lot more post-rock than spending that much on a device that literally just lets you play your games differently. And if you want multiple people playing with it at the same time then that’s a real pretty penny. I’m not saying vr won’t do good, but comparing it to cell phones or game consoles is ridiculous

      • lonewolf

        You are talking about phones which people will use everyday a d it will be in their pocket all the time (my phone is samsung galaxy trend plus for 200 € and I got it for free trough postpaid so by everybody you mean rich people who are 10% of the population of this world) and last time I checked the vr is 500$ to 1000$ so yes if your daddy is a ceo in some bank you might even get 3 not one but it wont sell millions and these people want them to sell that much. And gaming by the non gamers is considered as a joke so ofcourse theyll spend more money on a pc (for work not gaming) or phones rather than on some Virtual reality which looks silly at best.

    • oontz

      The Oculus Rift is only $350usd. How is that too expensive?


      • Yen

        Oculus Rift is $350, meaning if it was to be used with one of the current consoles it’d be $350 on top of another $3-400 plus the cost of the games. Not everyone can shell out that kind of money. Nintendo had experimented with a 3D display for the Gamecube but it would cost too much at the time which is why they waited til now and used the technology in the 3DS.

        • oontz

          You don’t grasp the concept of a long term investment, do you. Even if you only used a VR headset for a few (lets say 3) years at an initial investment of $350usd… it works out to less than 10usd a month. If you can’t afford a $10 dollar a month luxury item then sorry, but it’s far from expensive.

          • Yen

            You’re right it’s an investment but you don’t seem to remember the point of this, to play games. Are games free? No, they are not free, each game you want would add to that $10 a month you mentioned. Considering that you see the headset as an investment, you must play a lot of games. Do you play about one game a month? Or two? Even if games are only $30-40 it’d add up. If you only saw the $10 a month as your spending for this investment then you just wasted money because you didn’t invest in the games that actually use the headset.

          • oontz

            I play on average 2 to 3 games a month, on multiple platforms. I have no issue investing $350usd on something I will use for a few years. I bought a wiiu day one and a ps4 day one. I use them both all the time. If it’s something you’re going to use for entertainment then it’s not a big investment.

          • Yen

            So taking your math, over 3 years, that’s $30 a month just for the systems. Why not get an Xbox One as well for another $15 a month? 2 to 3 games a month could cost up to $100, more if you get them new on release period. So your monthly spending is now up to $130. No, I can say with confidence that not everyone can justify that kind of spending on luxury every month. Good for you that you are well off enough to make these investments and not care, but there are people that can’t afford that and thinks $350 for a headset is expensive.

          • oontz

            I used 3 years as a starting point. Obviously the length of the investment is based on the amount of time the system is on the market. If you buy a PS4 day one for $399usd and keep it for 5 years… that’s only $6.65usd not including games.

            Bottom line is that an investment of $350usd may seem a lot up front, but broken down over time and length of ownership it’s not a lot of money.

            If someone can’t afford 100 a month on Luxury items then they shouldn’t even be part of the equation.

          • lonewolf

            What about a second controller vames psplus and lets say you want to get the ps camera and the vr headset youll spent more money that you think. But you are probably rich so you dont care which is fine by me everyone with their on life.

          • oontz

            I am in no way considered “rich” but at the same time I don’t have an issue with saving and paying upfront $10usd a month for 5 to 7 years of entertainment value. Keep in mind when Sony’s VR headset does drop the majority of people that DO buy it will already own a PS4, controllers, etc, etc.

          • Yen

            What I’m saying is, it’s not just $350. You’d have to take into account of the consoles you used them on and the games to play with the VR headset. So it’d be a lot more than just your initial starting point of $10 a month. Again, if you can afford putting out $100-200 a month on gaming, that’s great. I’m just saying that not everyone can do that so $350 for a headset is expensive for some people. Another way to look at it, let’s say Nintendo, or Sony, does bundle its system with a VR headset that’s of the same spec as the Oculus Rift. They’d probably have to sell it for $600-700 as it is now. You’re right, even at $700, it’d be only $10 a month if you use it for 5-7 years. But the reality is that has to be paid up front and it’d intimidate buyers.

          • oontz

            “You’re right, even at $700, it’d be only $10 a month if you use it for 5-7 years. But the reality is that has to be paid up front and it’d intimidate buyers.”

            No more than a $399usd PS4 already intimidates buyers though. There will always be a day one market for these types of devices, and for everyone else they will wait till the cost comes down a bit. I have friends who are just NOW buying a PS3.

          • Yen

            Are you not seeing that $700 almost doubles $400? Yea there will always be a day one market for these things. If you release a $2000 console there will still be day one buyers, and a lot less of them compared to a cheaper one. Just because there will be day one buyers doesn’t mean it’s not expensive. Big companies sell products that cost billions of dollars, and there are day one buyers, I guess those aren’t expensive either? The PS3 had a rough start because it was expensive for its time. People were intimidated by its price and it didn’t pick up until the games draw people back in, and like you said, some even waited until NOW to pick one up. If you want to sell a VR based console at $700, with few early adopters, and wait for things to pick back up a year or two later before making any profit, you can go ahead. It doesn’t change the fact that for most people $700 is expensive for a video game console right now.

          • oontz

            You’re still talking as if people will buy the game console WITH the VR headset. I am sure some people would but the majority of early adopters will already have the console needed to run the VR headset. Also it’s worth noting that only the developer kit is $350, both Oculus and Sony know they need to bring the VR tech in at an affordable price point to make sure it is wildly adopted by the gaming public. I see the VR headsets launching for around $199 to $299. Do you really think that amount of money is expensive? An imax movie costs almost $20usd, and it’s over after a few hours. This is a device you’ll likely enjoy for more than 5 years. Longer than most people keep the same car for. I don’t know, maybe you live at home still and don’t generate an income. But that amount of money isn’t expensive. I mean the wiiu is $299. Did you buy one of those?

          • Yen

            “The Oculus Rift is only $350usd. How is that too expensive?”

            This is your original statement. You said the Oculus Rift at $350 isn’t expensive. That’s why I did the math assuming $350 as the price on top of the existing consoles. At $700 that is actually $50 less than it would be if I just added the prices together so i did account for it being a retailed version. There is no doubt to me that for Sony, Oculus, or even if Nintendo wants to do a headset, that the retail version would need to be priced down. Hence why we kept saying that $350 for the headset is expensive.

            “both Oculus and Sony know they need to bring the VR tech in at an affordable price point to make sure it is wildly adopted by the gaming public”

            Affordable being the key word, because $350 is expensive for an add-on to an existing console that you already spent $300-400 on!

            As for the price of the headset, I don’t think it’d really be considered affordable at $299, $199 I can see doing well. That’s almost half of the dev kit at $350. Also, as it currently is, I honestly don’t think this will be a device that I’ll enjoy for as long as you say. The device is great, but without software it’s meaningless. It’d be like what people said about the PS3 and the Wii U. Looking at the game industry today I don’t feel like any company have the creativity to make a true VR experience even if they had the tech for it.

          • oontz

            “Looking at the game industry today I don’t feel like any company have the creativity to make a true VR experience even if they had the tech for it.”

            That’s a bit short sighted. It’s already been proven to be a viable next step for interactive entertainment. Wether you are up for it or not, VR headsets are coming. The majority of gamers will have no issue buying the headsets.

          • Yen

            You’re the short sighted one for not being able to see that there are gamers that might consider $350 expensive for it. I never even said they won’t buy it I just agreed with the original post that it is considered expensive and you shouldn’t assume everyone is willing to spend that much for a headset day one.

            You’re also short sighted in not actually understanding the other person’s argument. I was never arguing whether VR headsets are coming. They’ve been showing it at expos, Sony even ANNOUNCED theirs already. There’s no arguing that VR will be a thing and I’m glad it is. The only thing I questioned here is how affordable they would be right now, and whether developers today are creative enough to create the experience necessary to make it take off. No matter how good the headset is it means nothing if there’s no games for it.

          • oontz

            I understand you’re argument, you feel that $350 is too expensive. When it isn’t. That really is not a lot of money for most people.

          • Yen

            No, it’s not a lot of money for you and SOME people. Most people aren’t even thinking about spending ANY of their hard earned cash on things like video games. It’ll sell at $350, but to how many people? Yea there will be early adopters but is it enough to be profitable? If not then it’s too expensive for regular consumers. These are things to think about when considering if “it’s there yet”.

          • oontz

            I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.

          • lonewolf

            30$? games are 60$

          • Yen

            I used $100 for 2-3 games a month so games ranging from $30 to $50. That way it takes into account of used games and sales. My point was that $150 a month on luxury items is not affordable for some people.

          • lonewolf

            Thats true some people buy one game per three months atleast until they finish it not everybody has the money nor the time to play games.

    • jjbredesen

      Sure would love to have my NOA account unbanned now :/

  • anthony optimo

    Would rather Nintendo develop a hologram handheld or a hologram console.

  • Tra Allen

    The face I made when I heard this

    • ETMew2348

      your gif has FAILED

  • nf_zeta

    I like how they are looking at this and i totally agree Nintendo knows how far is innovation and how far is just stretching, because as the Kinect has shown the people nor the technology isn’t at the level for it to be actively useful in games.

    Tbh i’m just hoping that tech similar to what you would see in SAO isn’t impossible.

  • iamserious

    VR will suck for local multi-player gaming. It will probably suck for any party type gaming too. VR will probably be way too expensive for the average gamer. I think Nintendo is right on this one.

  • Mike

    I’m thinking of is a Xeno game or Zelda game where you have full body control…

  • Tra Allen
  • XzAeRo

    Probably when the VR tech gets more affordable (rather than state-of-the-art ready), maybe Nintendo will take a chance on the VR area.
    Anyway, Nintendo bets for group or family entertainment rather than first person entertainment (most of the time).

    But now that I think about it… Maybe a 4DS?

    • J_Joestar

      yeah, I remember critics used to complain about children fighting for the Gamepad to criticize that the system only uses one, now imagine that with a pricey headset.

  • Kevin

    I can’t even imagine how long it would take to make a quality VR game. It takes them long enough to just to make an HD game.

    • Arthur Jarret

      First person Journey – or a similar experience – would be all I need

  • Carlos Webster

    Hey guys! Long time no see! Sorry I haven’t been posting at all lately. It’s just that i got bored of this site for a while, but now I once again feel like posting here, and now I’m back.

  • xPhoenixMoon

    Why is this surprising? Just like “Online gaming is not the future”, just like HD graphics weren’t important to them when the Wii was at a disadvantage being the only console that didn’t have HD graphics yet, but then they finally make an HD system after that.

    I am really sick and tired of Reggie and all his dumb ass assumptions holding the company back.

    As usual Nintendo will be so far behind everyone else once they finally do feel VR is ready. If you asked me, I can’t see virtual reality headsets improving much further than this, so I have no idea why Reggie feels the need to make such stupid statements like this all the time, cocky and always arrogant.

    It surely didn’t stop Nintendo from making the Virtual Boy, when virtual reality was in no way shape or form ready then, this is as ready as VR will ever get with the Occulus Rift and Morpheous for a long time.

    Kind of tried of people calling the Rift a prototype or VR being a fad, people like facebook aren’t spending billions of dollars on fads. The Rift is far from a prototype either, it just doesn’t have developer support which just about every freaking new system has to go through at some point in time.

    What is even more stupid is they even are trying to do virtual reality type things with the Wii U’s gamepad, but apparently the gamepad is suited way better for VR means to them…

    I swear Nintendo, sometimes you guys are stubborn as mules. You let everyone else perfect things, then you half ass it because you dismissed them for so long even when it was popular then. You dismissed people wanting HD systems, completely underestimating your competitors, then you made a system that is so far behind your competitors in terms of power because of you being so damn stubborn in the first place.

    They dismissed online gaming, once again trailed behind everyone, then out of the blue they finally start making their games online but as always they were so far behind, their online infrastructure still is no where near as polished as Sony’s or Microsoft’s.. Why because they wanted to be stubborn again, thinking they know what’s best for their fans.

    I love Nintendo and I enjoy my Wii U and play it daily. I know many people just think I troll them but just because I love them doesn’t mean I can’t honestly criticize them. Some of the decisions they make a truly stupid and I honestly believe that is why Miyamoto has come out admitting Nintendo is struggling with all this mainly because they chose to ignore everything around them, always coming late to the party.

    • Jason

      VR isn’t ready yet. When I think of VR, I think of something like Sword Art Online, where your body is inside a virtual world. What Rift is, isn’t my idea of virtual reality.

      • Bob Charlie

        I think of the holodecks on Star Trek: TNG!

      • DESTOROYAH!!!

        Exactly, that would be virtual reality. What we have now is nothing like “virtual reality” its just tvs straped to your head.

      • abe

        VR is more than moving your head, you need one of those omnidirectional tredmils there currently 3,000 you need body tracking like kinect 2.0 and then a motion tracking “weapon”

        Point is a massive headset you strap to your face means nothing

        • DESTOROYAH!!!

          Plus, think of all the money you would have to pay to have all that shit just to get some kind of sense of being in a virtual reality. Then you would probably need to pay money for even more stuff if you want to play any other genre of game.

          • abe

            Then add on the cost off the beastly PC that can produce 1080p 3d, track you’re full body, your “weapon” inputs and movements and handle the tredmil, all without lag

      • Magnus Eriksson

        VR is more ready now than motion controll gaming was with the Wii.

        • Rinslowe

          Well ready to KO family members unaware, lol.

    • Joel

      Anyway, I don’t think that VR will be a real thing for at least another 3 or 4 years. Getting a real game (not a tech demo) to work on it is pretty difficult at the moment. Everyone wants HD graphics but if you actually use a rift you’ll notice that when playing the game the actual immersive thing is cool but everything is grainy as hell when it’s close to your eyes. Want VR with HD graphics? you’ll have to wait a while for that, or it will be a PC only viable platform for a long while.
      These current gen systems can barely output 1080p 60fps in the current cycle, when exactly do you think they’ll be capable of outputting the kind of resolutions that won’t make VR experiences grainy hell?
      The only thing I’ve tried on the rift and liked is that roller-coaster sim, and that’s not a game it’s an experience.

      In my opinion Facebook bought out rift for it’s potential in things like rehabilition and other experience-based platforms or uses. I think it’s in a great place to give terminal patients the ability to walk outside their houses when they are no longer able to go outside. Or experience places they never got to go to. For the next few years this is what it will be used for in my opinion.

    • Yen

      Look at it another way. You said “I can’t see virtual reality headsets improving much further than this”, maybe you’re not looking hard enough. By saying that you’re saying that it’s good enough, while Reggie’s opinion is that it could be better. That’s how I took it at least. I don’t think they meant they aren’t looking into the technology at all, in fact he said the opposite.

      Nintendo didn’t dismiss HD, at the time no one thought HD was going to sell. At the time, HD TVs were a new thing. Sony and Microsoft knew to invest in it because they’re the ones that make the TVs. Yea they were slow getting on the HD train but honestly Wii games looked amazing even without it.

      The Wii had online gaming, even if the systems weren’t as good. It happens when you’re comparing them to Sony and Microsoft who have been working with computers for decades.

      I don’t think Nintendo is behind at all, though their priorities might be a little questionable sometimes. Think about it, Nintendo has all the technologies needed for a Virtual Reality experience. Take the Gamepad and put it into a headset, put in a 3D display like the 3DS has, Wiimote and Nunchuck or even two Wiimotes, add the Wii Balance Board if you want, and you’d get a very simplistic style of Virtual Reality. Is that really Virtual Reality? There are demos where you’re holding a plain controller, just sitting still and pressing buttons. That’s not VR that’s Head Mounted Display that follows the movement of your head. I think that’s enough base to say that the technology isn’t ready. If you’re content with what is available now then fine but I agree with Reggie that it could be better.

  • Bob Charlie

    VR is not for me! The reason I love consoles is because I can play games with my friends and family. PC gaming isolates me from those shared experiences and, by the looks of things, VR is going to isolate gamers even further.

    • FutureFox

      We are all isolated on this very forum, yet still interacting with one another. We don’t all have to be in the same room to voice and opinion, tell or joke or share a story. As much as people on here want Nintendo to have better online capability, for online multiplayer action, how can they in turn shun VR and deem it divisive is kind of strange to me.

      There is room fro VR as long its a) comfortable b) gameplay is integrated well with the tech c) looks good (both in game and the hardware itself).

      • Bob Charlie

        Awesome response, and if the systems are integrated well and play well VR will probably take over mainstream gaming. Why I am not a fan of VR is for different reasons, though. I am not trying to condone VR, I just do not want to see great TV games go away.
        The type of isolation I was referring too was concerned with almost complete isolation from the world beyond the game. While we are interacting together from a distance right now, we are still within our real world; our surroundings. I can see and hear things other than my TV or my Gamepad. Put on the VR headset, strap on some headphones, and two of your five senses become completely controlled by the game.

  • Kyle

    I honestly would find Virtual Reality an annoyance. I’m sure there’s health concerns and inconveniences that would gamers. I’ll stick to the TV and controller.

  • Joseph Oliveira

    When Nintendo says it isn’t there yet for VR. I believe them. If any company wants to innovate a new technology, it’s Nintendo I trust.

    • Joseph Oliveira

      Mr. Miyamoto was probably trying the occulus rift to see if it can be innovated better.

    • Rinslowe

      I agree. It’s not always about being first. It’s about getting it right…
      I guess Nintendo should have learnt that one well from the Virtual Boy.

      And they haven’t made that same mistake since.
      Their product innovation is still at the forefront of mainstream gaming. But VR, really is a place they’ve been. Not at the same level obviously, it’s been a few years since they tested those waters. Still, I’m sure they’ll find a more social way to incorporate VR into their products down the line…

    • Kyle Zawacki

      Are you joking.

      Look at the Wii U.

  • leo

    Well lets hope Mr. Miyamoto liked it. Cool pic btw lol

  • discuss

    When the next generation of consoles get released and Nintendo if the only one without VR they will lose me as a customer. I always wanted VR gaming.


    All VR is right now is just a TV straped to your eyes. Thats it. Its not “Virtual Reality”. I have no intrest in it, why have a screen straped to your head when you can just look at the TV? I HATE seeing all the storys on gaming news sites about those VR headsets. Im with Nintendo, its just pointless. They learned there lesson with the Virtual Boy.

    • asdfg

      Have you tried it yet? It’s a little bit more than just “a TV straped to your eyes.”

    • oontz

      “All VR is right now is just a TV straped to your eyes. Thats it.”

      If it was just a TV strapped to your eyes then it wouldn’t be VR. It would be a TV strapped to your eyes.

      “They learned there lesson with the Virtual Boy.”

      Are you actually comparing the Virtual Boy with current VR tech? Really?

  • Rinslowe

    What a load of shyte. Typical JK article. They’re no more looking into virtual reality today, as monkeys are contemplating the nutritional value of their breakfast.

    Virtual Boy 2? lol nope.

    Watching it with interest. Well that’s not so much the news headline is it…

  • Jon

    I have the feeling this will be a niche market if anything

  • That guy who hates Spike

    If Nintendo made a Virtual Boy 2, would 3DS games work perfectly with it?

  • Fbt

    I have said this before but imagine if Nintendo has been working secretly on Virtual reality since the failure of the Virtual Boy! that would be crazy !Nintendo is really good at keeping secrets so there is a possible chance that really have been working on it for eighteen years now.

    • oontz

      “there is a possible chance that really have been working on it for eighteen years now”

      Yeah, no. Wishful thinking at best.

  • NintendoNoob

    I just hope they don’t use VR for twitch gaming. Knowing me I’d probably snap my neck from turning insanely fast in a game

  • Rich Garriques

    i hope people know nintendo came up with this idea along time ago and it failed., its called the virtual boy.

    • oontz

      “i hope people know nintendo came up with this idea along time ago and it failed”

      Nintendo didn’t come up with the idea of Virtual Reality.

  • Brandon

    The virtual boy was not true virtual reality. It was just a red screen that added no difference to playing on your tv. True virtual reality is feeling like your inside the game.

    • oontz

      “The virtual boy was not true virtual reality.”

      Exactly, it wasn’t even close.

  • Joseph

    They could re-release the virtual boy updated with the new technology. The virtual boy was horrible because it had bad battery, graphics, very little games, and it was very costly, but nintendo could increase graphics, make it 3D, make more games, and have a more reasonable price. The old virtual boy looked like this.

    • Rinslowe

      Well they do kinda have the only 3D device that deosn’t need to be strapped to your head…
      And it’s totally portable.
      I know VR is another step sideways to that experience. But still the technology should prove itself compelling enough in practice first. Not just in theory…
      As of today it looks nice, but still not convenient enough for decent play sessions.

    • J_Joestar

      Thinking about it, an ad that featured VB Mario Tennis and transitions to a modern day VR Mario Tennis would probably build a lot of hype.

  • Capt. Smoker

    If it ain’t sword art online, I ain’t buying!

  • WellWisher

    Haha how funny would it be if Nintendo bought Oculus. There would be some serious meltdowns.

  • linxz

    It’s funny how everyone bashes Nintendo and the WiiU, but when it comes to innovation we all know in the back of our heads that only Nintendo can pull it off. If Nintendo invests in VR gaming then we’ll see some cool VR games. and then everyone else will follow. otherwise it would just be a bunch of mediocre meaningless efforts

  • Des

    “Nintendo is looking into Virtual Reality gaming” … More like, seeing what the other guys are doing but having no interest in doing the same. They’re focused on the Wii U, 3DS and perhaps their successors. They’re not going to spend time and money on R&D for Virtual Reality. That’s just too costly at this point. Had the Wii U been as successful as the Wii and they had a mountain of cash to work with, maybe they would throw a few dollars to look into it. But I don’t see them throwing money at VR right now. It’s not worth it.

    • Yen

      But… Nintendo DOES have a mountain of cash to work with…

      • Des

        You’re right, they do have a lot of cash in their war chest. However, their latest console has been underperforming and they’re not yet getting a return on their investment. Nintendo, like every other company, is in the business to make money and right now they’re losing money. So it’s a little tough for them to convince their stockholders that throwing time, resources and more money into VR is worth the investment. Their focus is on making the Wii U (and to a lesser extent the 3DS) more profitable. That means more advertising and more 1st party software. Especially since 3rd party support is lacking.

  • kyuubikid213

    Virtual Reality at the moment is just the 3DS.

    No. Really. It’s the 3DS really close to your face.

    You still need a controller to play…it’s not really Virtual Reality.

    I won’t get into the VR fad until we have the Nerve Gear.

  • lonewolf

    It seems that they are looking down on him and whats that guy above is actually doing with his hands? (Talking about the picture in the article).

  • FutureFox

    I look at that picture and just think VR gaming is just not Nintendo’s style (anymore). It will work best for realistic shooters but that’s not a particularly strong category of Nintendo’s lately. Nintendo wants active gamer participation for its games and the VR just doesn’t seem to go with their current model. Its definitely a better fit for PS4.

  • Christian Schoff

    I can see it now “Dude, it’s Miyamoto, he’s coming to try out our stuff!”

  • Allvalve

    I think the biggest problem that VR needs to overcome is the clunky headset. When they can overcome that it will have a chance, but that won’t happen this generation, and perhaps not until the tail end of the next generation.
    Nintendo are correct that the tech isn’t ready yet, and are more than happy that Sony and (presumably) MS will spend a fortune trying to incorporate VR into PS5/XB2 while Nintendo can concentrate on making a console that handles 4K at 60FPS continuously and take 4 years to develop a game for.