Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[cochramd]

It doesn't do what they want yet.

What makes you an authority on what universities want out of their medical training dummies? Sure, everyone always wants something better, but universities are buying these dummies now so they must be satisfying their expectations and demands.

I expect better, more expensive dummies in the future.

And what of it? Universities will keep buying these dummies until VR becomes the superior technology, and the dummies have a big lead right now. VR won't surpass them until they hit a plateau.

Project Tango development tablet demo video. Walk around and point it at stuff and it will 3d map the space. You can buy them for $512

Alternately, if all you need is a panoramic 360 degree stationary view, there's a free app that allows you to twirl in circles with your phone to create them.

There are also these that allow you to capture 360 degree video like the ones you see on the youtube 360 channel.

Can I look at every individual brick and see every grain and bit of texture? I doubt it, and then there's the fact that a camera isn't going to let you reach out and actually touch the wall itself.

[mainiac]

What makes you an authority on what universities want out of their medical training dummies? Sure, everyone always wants something better, but universities are buying these dummies now so they must be satisfying their expectations and demands.

I'm not claiming to be an expert, nor am I claiming that the dummies they have now dont do things.

[LordBucket]

Can I look at every individual brick and see every grain and bit of texture? I doubt it, and then there's the fact that a camera isn't going to let you reach out and actually touch the wall itself.

Come to think of it, I think it doesn't cure cancer or go pick up pizza for me either, so you're right it's pretty worthless.

[cochramd]

Come to think of it, I think it doesn't cure cancer or go pick up pizza for me either, so you're right it's pretty worthless.

Anyone can type "Great Wall of China" into Google images if they just want to look at pictures of it. If you can't make me think I'm there then you don't have virtual tourism, you have a cheap novelty barely worthy of being a child's plaything. That's the problem with VR; if it's not extraordinary, then it's worthless.

[anzki4]

Anyone can type "Great Wall of China" into Google images if they just want to look at pictures of it. If you can't make me think I'm there then you don't have virtual tourism, you have a cheap novelty barely worthy of being a child's plaything. That's the problem with VR; if it's not extraordinary, then it's worthless.

So this one specific thing (VR) has the bar set higher than anything else? For movies or games, they just need to be good enough. Sure the medical dummies or driving simulators only need to be passable, but when it's done in VR it needs to be on perfect - and even if it was, it probably wouldn't stop you from trolling complaining. 

[cochramd]

So this one specific thing (VR) has the bar set higher than anything else?

VR dug itself into this hole; decades of hype have raised everyone's standards beyond what is currently achievable and competing technologies have kept advancing. Imagine if Henry Ford had promised the modern automobile and then delivered the Model T in an era where genetically engineered super-horses existed that could pull a carriage at highway speeds.

For movies or games, they just need to be good enough. Sure the medical dummies or driving simulators only need to be passable

It's actually quite impressive what manikins can simulate nowadays (Google it some time), while VR can't even provide tactile feedback.

but when it's done in VR it needs to be on perfect - and even if it was, it probably wouldn't stop you from trolling complaining. 

I'll take that as an admission of defeat.

[mainiac]

VR dug itself into this hole; decades of hype have raised everyone's standards

Correction: hype has raised some peoples standards.  It is in a hole with some people.

[cochramd]

Correction: hype has raised some peoples standards.  It is in a hole with some people.

Hey, if you think $100 to spend a day looking around a low-resolution model isn't a waste of money, it's no skin off my back. If I got upset every time a fool and his money were parted, I'd have jumped off a bridge by now. However, even if you had a perfect model, you'd still miss a few things you'd only get by going there for real, so I'll be waiting for that perfect model before considering virtual tourism. Ancedote: my grandfather is a very heavy and not exactly fit man. When he went to the Great Wall of China, he struggled to reach the top of the stairs and when he finally did it, people applauded him. Travelling throughout China, people thought he resembled the Buddha and because of that he got a lot of pictures and bellyrubs. None of that would've happened if he had just looked around a model.

[i2amroy]

It's a $30k dummy and you're not factoring in the cost of software, which is thousands or even tens of thousands every year. Training dummy technology would need to hit a plateau before VR stands a chance at replacing it.

Maybe if you're talking about the software cost over the whole state for a decade. Most software licensing costs are measured in the low hundreds of dollars, and generally those licenses last forever for that particular version, as well as including all major updates until the next version comes out (which usually happens every few years, at which point you generally get a very large discount on an upgraded license.

We're talking thousands of dollars per decade here, not tens of thousands per year.

[jaked122]

Hey if you want to spend a large amount of money travelling to China instead of virtually visiting the great wall at admittedly lower resolution, then go ahead. The casual tourists might actually just spend time in VR, you might have the great wall all to yourself.

In any case, I'd say that a trip to the Great Wall of China in VR is still more convenient than a trip to china as a whole.

You certainly would be spared the "Realistic" effects of landing in Beijing and donning a mask because of horrible, horrible smog. But hey, if you want to gasp for breath in the highest resolution available, then be my guest.

VR Tours suck btw. But that's not really the point, is it? It isn't about being "completely" realistic, it just needs to be immersive enough to fulfill certain needs.

We can't make it realistic enough for you right now, but hey, in twenty-five years, maybe your expectations might be met; that is, so long as your complaining about the current state doesn't ruin the industry.

In any case, VR probably won't compete with travel. Travelling is a special sort of experience that would probably require bringing all of the people in the location into the simulation. This brings up other problems.

[mainiac]

In any case, VR probably won't compete with travel.

VR is pretty much "what if I dont want to travel?".  What if instead of spending all day going to a sportsgame, I could watch a livecast from upclose?  What if instead of spending a couple million becoming a space tourist, I could view it from home.

It's particularly intriguing because VR technology is something that will be affordable in the third world very quickly.  Just like a few african countries have more cellphones per capita then the US, I imagine there will be third world nations that cant afford cars but can afford decent VR technology.  Education seems like an obvious application.  It's really difficult to get students and teachers in the same room in the third world on a consistent basis.  When you can, teachers have a tendency to write off the worse performing students as hopeless and not teach them, creating a cycle of dropouts as students below an increasing average keep getting pushed out.  What if you could offer the students a virtual classroom instead?  Instead of hoping the teacher decides to teach them, you can match them with students of equivalent talents from throughout the country.  You could even match them with volunteer tutors from outside their country.  We dont need this in the first world because we have school buses that bring students from all over a school zone to a school large enough that there is a class for them.  For somewhere that is an unobtainable expense, VR could bridge the gap.

[Urist McScoopbeard]

For somewhere that is an unobtainable expense, VR could bridge the gap.

Because Virtual Reality technology is an obtainable expense.

[TheBiggerFish]

Google Cardboard?  Or something?
I'm painfully out of the loop here.

[mainiac]

Because Virtual Reality technology is an obtainable expense.

Not yet but it will be in a matter of years.

[cochramd]

Hey if you want to spend a large amount of money travelling to China instead of virtually visiting the great wall at admittedly lower resolution, then go ahead. The casual tourists might actually just spend time in VR, you might have the great wall all to yourself.

In any case, I'd say that a trip to the Great Wall of China in VR is still more convenient than a trip to china as a whole.

You certainly would be spared the "Realistic" effects of landing in Beijing and donning a mask because of horrible, horrible smog. But hey, if you want to gasp for breath in the highest resolution available, then be my guest.

VR Tours suck btw. But that's not really the point, is it? It isn't about being "completely" realistic, it just needs to be immersive enough to fulfill certain needs.

Fair points, all. I suppose there are applications that current VR technology is suited for; I recall a special dinosaur exhibit at the ROM where if you pointed your tablet (or one of the ones they so generously provided) at select dinosaur skeletons the tablet would let you see them in the flesh. I just don't see much incentive to make VR anything more than the novelty that it is now.

It's particularly intriguing because VR technology is something that will be affordable in the third world very quickly.  Just like a few african countries have more cellphones per capita then the US, I imagine there will be third world nations that cant afford cars but can afford decent VR technology.  Education seems like an obvious application.  It's really difficult to get students and teachers in the same room in the third world on a consistent basis.  When you can, teachers have a tendency to write off the worse performing students as hopeless and not teach them, creating a cycle of dropouts as students below an increasing average keep getting pushed out.  What if you could offer the students a virtual classroom instead?  Instead of hoping the teacher decides to teach them, you can match them with students of equivalent talents from throughout the country.  You could even match them with volunteer tutors from outside their country.  We dont need this in the first world because we have school buses that bring students from all over a school zone to a school large enough that there is a class for them.  For somewhere that is an unobtainable expense, VR could bridge the gap.

That could be achieved with webcams right now and for a lot less money. VR would be entirely unnecessary.