Let me explain more precisely what I mean. Because I’m not arguing steering wheels and HOTAS are useless, or no good for VR, or anything like that. Far from it! They are excellent and even arguably required equipment for simulators. But I argue that they are not actually VR accessories.
I have a full race seat, steering wheel, pedals, gated shifter, etc. It strongly increases my immersion in the simulation. But that’s not actually the same thing as immersion in the VR environment.
In fact I would argue that they actually tend to detract from VR immersion. Why? Because they do not match up with what’s being presented in VR. The steering wheel I feel with my real hands is not in the same position as I see the steering wheel in VR. The design of the steering wheel is different than I see in VR. My hands in VR aren’t doing what my real world hands are. Etc etc. These aspects tend to break VR immersion to some degree.
I’ve been using this gear since long before VR. It doesn’t need VR. It’s not actually related to VR. It’s related to the simulation. VR also gets related to the simulation by way of trying to present it. And by that association, it’s being called a VR accessory.
But if we call that a VR accessory, then the power cable for your PC is also a VR accessory. The power cable enables your PC to work. And you need the PC for your Pimax 8KX to work. Ergo the power cable is a VR accessory by that definition.
I think the definition of an actual VR accessory is that it is designed and intended explicitly for VR in some capacity. Full body tracking pucks, facial gasket covers, tactile vests… these are VR accessories.
Now if you had a steering wheel that included some sort of tracking method so that it would be displayed and positioned accurately within the VR environment… and say the steering wheel could track where my hands were touching it so that my VR hands would move to the same positions… that would be a VR accessory. Those would be features explicitly for VR which don’t work without VR.
Maybe my argument here is just semantics. But I think there’s more of a point to it than just that. Because it’s recognizing that where we are today in simulators is that VR is just something that has been grafted on to the pre-existing hardware and software. We’re still just at a level where people argue (vehemently) over whether VR or triple monitors is better. And MSFS can’t be bothered to support canted VR displays. And you usually have to set up whatever simulation you’re doing via the desktop before dropping into VR, and you frequently need to return to the desktop during the VR session because you can’t do those operations within VR. Etc etc.
We’re using simulation accessories that were never designed or intended for VR.
I feel that calling them VR accessories is giving them too much credit. It suggests that the companies that make these products can go on ignoring VR rather than building versions of their products which are specifically for VR.
This is why I think it’s worthwhile to distinguish what is actually a VR accessory and what isn’t.