Many of you guys have been excited to see Bethesda bring Fallout to the Vive. While this was a huge announcement at E3, there could be even bigger things coming to the Vive from Bethesda and other developers.

HTC's VP of VR Content Development Joel Breton, seems to have leaked out some info that the next Skyrim is currently in development for the Vive right now! On top of this he said that it generally takes AAA game developers at least a full year to develop a VR game, so in a few months from now we may see a ton of great AAA content.

In the article from Techradar here are some things that they touched on, regarding Skyrim and other content.



When asked what he's been doing to bring better titles to the store, Breton pointed to the announcement that Bethesda, makers of Fallout and the Elder Scrolls series, are making one of the highest-acclaimed games of last year, Fallout 4, completely playable in VR.

He said that it takes AAA developers at least a year to have a tangible product, and even longer to create something as immersive as Fallout.

But here's the other bombshell Breton dropped: The next Skyrim is in development for the HTC Vive as we speak.

HTC Vive
Well ... OK, not exactly the next game in the Elder Scrolls series per se, but according to Breton there are a few of those really big, open-world games in development as we speak.

"The games that you want to come back to time and time again – the ones with 100 hours of gameplay and hundreds of side-quests – are in the oven baking right now," Breton said. So there you have it. Skyrim on Vive! I can't wait!

Can you post a link t o this?


Also the next The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim is in development? Um there will not be a The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim 2 or the next The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. It will be The Elder Scrolls VI.

So far I don't believe this I don't even think the CEO of the HTC Vive would talk like that.

http://www.techradar.com/us/news/gaming/five-things-you-didn-t-know-about-the-htc-vive-1323843

In one paragraph of that story, we get this -

But in the paragraphs right after that picture of a dragon we get -

I hope he didn't hurt himself too badly with that walkback.

This makes me very happy. I very much hope he is not mistaken.


Edit - Oh, I read that wrong. "The next Skyrim"? I was thinking they were making a Vive version of Skyrim. Darn. And then he admits he just basically lied. What the holy hell?

Haha you beat me to this one.

Are you guys excited for VR? I'm a bit worried its going to ruin everybody's eyesight...

I have zero interest in it.

Not one bit unless you consider to being sick and have headaches within minutes of use fun.

@Pseron Wyrd and @Erzherzoghans

Yep, looks like we agree. I'm just waiting for the day that will never come -- when we can get digitized into a video game like Tron haha.

VR is awesome... For some things. For a game like Fallout and TES, it definately has some potential... But as a visual peripheral. Physical endurance is too much of an issue for the Vive. Melee-driven games like TES are going to be especially problematic with systems like that, because you're going to end up winded after a single dungeon.


In a shooter environment, the Vive may be able to excel, but for a main series TES game, it would crash and burn. Nintendo already tried the fitness thing, and it was less than sensational.

Same.


I liked Wii Sports and Mario Kart. That was about the extent of my enjoyment for physical movement based games. VR would be even worse. Especially for an Elder Scrolls Game.

Well that's the point, isn't it? I can't wait until there's the tech to resurrect people from the dead, so we get stabbed to death from some VR device every time we lose a fight only to be raised immediately to go on with it

How can you not be! We've all enjoyed watching the world of Tamriel on a little screen in this forum. VR allows you to go there.

though i like first person, i also like the option of third person since i often play with female characters with cbbe bodies, HDT physics, 360 run, etc.. so yea.. playing in first person would deprive me of all that "plot".. you know what i'm saying? hahaha.. so i'd only support this if they still maintain the option for 3rd person view.

how can we not be? at its current inception it can induce migraines in many individuals, the hardware is overpriced atm, you need a large empty space as people in small apartments would knock into stuff, and such a heavy physical experience would be far to tiring for many to having any attempt at a prolonged play session..


VR still has a long way to go and while its an interesting proof-of-concept atm, until it is able to bypass many of the issues it currently has its not suited for a heavily melee combat oriented game like TES.. A driving game or flight sim could take great advantage of the tech as it exists atm making an imazing immersive experience.. if you look at the current VR lineup on steam, there is a reason most of the games are small centeric simulators or or brief environmental visualizations.. as the tech stands at this moment, its not suited for a large action/exploration based RPG..

Same here. Zilch. Nada.

Ah, my favorite bunny! I think you answered most of this yourself with all your "current", "atm", etc. The question wasn't whether we're content with the first gen of headsets, but whether we're excited for VR. Already the next iteration of the headsets are likely to have eye tracking, which gives you a discount in the orders of magnitude on increasing resolution, FOV, framerate, and/or visuals - which is one part of solving the migraine issue (which for what it's worth I haven't heard much about in the final consumer version of the sets) - and the reason most of the games are "small centeric simulators or brief environmental visualizations" is that the very first generation of headsets didn't begin shipping until just weeks ago. Fallout, Skyrim - apparently - and other more ambitious stuff will appear if you only give this some time. Also interesting is that your punchline at the end is the direct opposite of what Howard said at E3.

Look, really - I've noticed your reactions in the past at this forum as soon as VR is brought up, and at risk of having you feel offended my impression is that don't even know what you're talking about. I think you simply want the world to stop spinning, and you pile up everything negative you've ever read about tech which would invoke change as fatal drawbacks and insurmountable problems. If VR truly is as awful as you make it out to be and it never gets any better - don't worry. It'll never be adopted. And even if it does live up to its hype I think you can continue playing games on a regular monitor for quite some time yet. I definitely think there's reason to be excited for VR however, since it has potential to revolutionize both society and the arts. The only reason I see to be as violently opposed to it as you are is if that's exactly what you're afraid of.

I don't know what I am talking about? I have actually used the HTCVive (tried that job simulator game, and gave that "virtual ikea" app a try just to see what its like because my friend told me it was interesting), my friend has one, and while i found it an interesting experience, after 15 minutes I had to take a couple of Tylenol because my head was pounding so hard..


and I have no idea why you would think i am afraid of it or directly opposed to it at all.. I am a major tech geek at heart (and make my living as such, even before i got my computer science degree (im formerly a software dev, now work in PC service and repair)), and as many of the older more active users on these forums will tell you I am more in favor of innovation in gaming than most of the longtime regular posters on these forums (everytime someone says "we should get more of the same in , i like it as is", I am ALWAYS the one arguing that no we shouldn't, and the devs should push the envelope forward.. I am the one who, when a game tries to do something new, and it fails drastically, I still praise the developer for giving it a shot while others on these forums shout "ohh no, game svcks, this dev can't make good games anymore")..



as things currently stand, what VR is capable of is limited in what will make an enjoyable effective experience gamewise.. there are many issues that need to be overcome before a game like TES will realistically work (the biggest of which is combat.. the average user would become physically fatigued after a one or two encounters and have to take a break.. this is a major issue in RPG's for obvious reasons).. but, then we get people who think just because its "new" or "futuristic" that it is automatically the future and every dev should adopt it, while ignoring the countless issues that that would entail because the tech is "cool"..


gotta remember "the future" can still be many years away.. many technologies we use daily, didn't reach a level of commonplace until several years after the tech was first unveiled to consumers, because people were waiting till those early issues were fixed



sure, VR may take off in gaming and I will be happy if it does, but there was once a time where people similarly thought the Wii's motion controllers were the future and that in 4 years regular controllers as well as keyboards and mice would be completely obsolete..



before certain types of games will work in a VR environment, they need to overcome countless issues, and the tech still needs further advancement than what it has now.. if that happens, hey thats great, at that point a game like TES may actually work and I would likely enjoy it, but at the moment it just won't..


when VR is capable of overcoming these issues, I will be very happy, but it still has a long way to come..




I was actually talking to my buddy yesterday on the subject (same guy who owns the Vive), and told him one thing I think would go great with VR gear in the near future, is attaching something similar to one of those gaming ballistic vests (a failed peripheral from several years back.. you wore it while playing certain FPS's, and when shot the vest would react causing a small sensation where ever the bullet landed) in order to further immerse the senses.. but while I think that would be a great addition to the gear, we still both agreed they have to overcome its current issues before adding such a thing would be a good idea..



VR already has several very effective practical uses outside gaming, Car Dealers are using the tech to show the user cars they don't have in stock (like sports cars you would have to order in), an ATV company is using it show the customers what riding in a sand dune would be like, and many interior designers are using it to show what your house may look like far better than conventional concept drawings can.. but none of those require extensive and prolonged physical movement like a combat oriented RPG would..





in short (aka "TL;DR"), I am not opposed to VR, heck the people I hired to renovate my camp used it to give me an idea of what the living room would look like post-reno not long ago and it was extremely helpful as I was more easily able to say "i like the trim around the bay window, but I think the kitchen will need more space, maybe move that wall back?".. what I am opposed to, is people thinking devs should adopt it before it gets to the point that that is a good idea for that developers type of game..


I have been gaming for well over 20 years at this point, and I have seen plenty of equally promising peripherals come and go.. I have seen many die off entirely because devs were to quick to adopt them, before its technology was at the point where that it would work for their type of game, which caused the developers to abandon the hardware entirely despite its untapped potential..


heck, you could say I am even pro-VR as i find advancements in technology fascinating (its partially why i work in the field i do), but for the good of the technology (any technology), the technology has to advance further before it should be to to widely accepted.. as things stand, it just won't work for certain types of gameplay, and RPGs are one of them.. meanwhile, as the tech stands, there are some genres that are absolutely perfect for it (I would love to try an indpeth flight sim on it based on the current capabilities of the tech, if i ever see one come out, you can bet I am dropping by my buddys house that evening), RPGs just aren't one of them


what we have now is an amazing "consumer grade proof of concept", but as with any technologies proof of concept, it still needs further development before providing a more extensive list of experience types will be a good idea for it.

Agreed. I've been excited for VR since the mid 90s, and have followd several generations of supposedly 'Revolutionary' advancements in the technology. Probably the biggest jump was with the Kinect, which was frankly an amazing piece of hardware that desperately deserves further refinement, since its essentially a motion-capture system in your living room...


Anyway current VR systems arent new. They're just more affordable than earlier types. And even then, they still arent affordable enough to become a mainstay, particularly not in this economy. They still haven't figured out the disorientation issues, they still have cords to trip over, and they still suffer from mobility issues (only the Virtua Sphere has solved the last 2, and it's like $35,000 a unit).


This is a first-generation consumer product, like the TV's of the 40s. It's too expensive, too clunky and has too many issues to become a true mainstay of the industry. A decade or two down the road, I have little doubt we will all be using VR for everything from Games to Movies (which has some amazing potential in its self...) But right now... It's just not ready.

That paragraph is so poorly written, and so lacking in any verbatim quote from this Breton guy on the topic itself, that I'm going to hold off from believing it for now. Sure, it probably will be true, but I can't take that article as proof, because the writer seemed utterly confused as to what this Joel Breton guy was trying to say.

For all we actually know, he might've said, "Bethesda, the guys behind Fallout 4 and Skyrim, are using it" or he could've meant TES VI is, and simply called it 'the next Skyrim' out of ignorance (TES VI is likely to be on VR anyway if F4 is). But again, without a single actual quote from the guy, we just the writer's poorly worded assertion.

I just detest the sort of journalism that doesn't understand when to insert a verbatim quote, because so often the writer's interpretation of what the interviewee is trying to say is speculative or flat-out wrong.