Print

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

[nenjin]

Kinda like 4k gaming. No one actually needs 4k gaming. They may want it, but want and need are not the same thing. Yet some people talk about hardware like 4k is a requirement, which is stupid for the majority of PC users who would be happy just to get 60FPS at standard.

[Retropunch]

From what I understand, one of the main reasons you need the high frame rate with VR is that it helps stop motion sickness/detrimental effects - it's of course possible to enjoy and play games without it hitting that, but variable frame rate is a big one for those sensitive to VR.

Still, I think we've turned the corner now - I do feel Oculus/VR was just a few years too early tech wise - couldn't do wireless, res was just a bit too low, screen door issues, text unreadable etc. Whilst I've not had a go with it, the Vive Pro has apparently gotten rid of absolutely all the issues that were left with VR (resolution is upped so everything is super sharp/no screen door, OLED makes text easily readable and less eyestrain, wireless etc. etc.).

I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out like smart phones, there were tons of rubbish smart-phones before the iphone that no one really bothered with, but as soon as the iphone 'just worked' then the flood gates opened.

[SalmonGod]

From what I understand, one of the main reasons you need the high frame rate with VR is that it helps stop motion sickness/detrimental effects - it's of course possible to enjoy and play games without it hitting that, but variable frame rate is a big one for those sensitive to VR.

Yeah... my point was that I think the talk about hardware requirements for VR assume the most demanding applications at the highest settings, though.  And they're not upfront about that being the standard of measurement.  And people aren't realizing that the majority of VR content can be enjoyed without a beastly rig.

I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out like smart phones, there were tons of rubbish smart-phones before the iphone that no one really bothered with, but as soon as the iphone 'just worked' then the flood gates opened.

Agreed.  Although I think nailing down immersive modes of movement and interactivity are a greater obstacle than display or wireless issues.  I think the floodgates will really open when those get sorted out.  And they're a much more difficult problem.

[Retropunch]

Agreed.  Although I think nailing down immersive modes of movement and interactivity are a greater obstacle than display or wireless issues.  I think the floodgates will really open when those get sorted out.  And they're a much more difficult problem.

Very much agree - I really believe it's the treadmill thing that'll make it happen; I'd buy the latest and greatest whatever if I could do an FPS with full walk/run motion and I'm sure many others would. Even if you weren't that into gaming, I doubt there would be many people around who wouldn't be interested in something like that.

It'd need to be relatively reasonably priced of course - I'd pay a lot, but the attempts so far have been very expensive and from what I understand, not particularly great. It needs someone like Google (or Valve) to come along and make it in my opinion, and I'm not sure how likely that is.

[SalmonGod]

Locomotion isn't as bad as the problem with kinetic feedback.  Like everybody wants to swordfight in vr.  But it just doesn't work when your sword stops against your opponent's, but your real arm continues through its swing.

[Cruxador]

I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out like smart phones, there were tons of rubbish smart-phones before the iphone that no one really bothered with, but as soon as the iphone 'just worked' then the flood gates opened.

I would be very surprised. Smart phones satisfied an important infrastructure need. Internet was becoming universal in developed countries as an important part of both business and social life, but because of its inconvenience, people necessarily had to either be out or be online. They are necessary for a societal change that was already well on the way to happening. There is no "internet" for VR, and it reduces, rather than increases, convenience. For the foreseeable future (which is only like a decade in the world of tech, but still) VR can only be a hardcore market product, not something with universal appeal.

[Retropunch]

I would be very surprised. Smart phones satisfied an important infrastructure need. Internet was becoming universal in developed countries as an important part of both business and social life, but because of its inconvenience, people necessarily had to either be out or be online.

I agree to a point, and it's slightly chicken-or-the-egg, but I think that there was at least an equal amount of push from the smartphone as there was from society.

Looking back on it now, we can't imagine why you wouldn't want internet in your pocket, but at the time (when the iphone first released) there wasn't a whole lot you could do on it. Maps wasn't really a thing (it was there, but rubbish), email was mostly for business (or at least certainly not for fast time comms) and there was no social media really. I remember when they first came out I just didn't really see the need - the need came after, driven by the addition of services due to the iphone becoming so pervasive. It was similarly expensive to VR, and before it came out smartphones were seen very much  as niche.
Just the same way as currently VR seems a bit needless currently for the average consumer, a 'just works' product may well change it to 'well of course you need VR, how are you going to do VR meetings/SkypeVR/TripAdvisorVR etc without it?'.

They are necessary for a societal change that was already well on the way to happening.

I think there's a similar societal change as a use case for VR - so many people are connecting connecting virtually and internationally, and we've about reached the bounds of how 'connected' we can get via just video and voice. So many people work/live away from their families, and so many people have friends internationally in a way that wasn't a thing before. People will want to connect with these people better, and the only way to really do that is VR.

It's not a perfect analogy, and I doubt we'll ever get the same perfect storm as the iphone (with the hordes of adoring apple fans ready to buy it) but I think we may get a smaller version of that revolution if a really good product comes out that 'just works'.

[Cruxador]

I would be very surprised. Smart phones satisfied an important infrastructure need. Internet was becoming universal in developed countries as an important part of both business and social life, but because of its inconvenience, people necessarily had to either be out or be online.

I agree to a point, and it's slightly chicken-or-the-egg, but I think that there was at least an equal amount of push from the smartphone as there was from society.

Looking back on it now, we can't imagine why you wouldn't want internet in your pocket, but at the time (when the iphone first released) there wasn't a whole lot you could do on it. Maps wasn't really a thing (it was there, but rubbish), email was mostly for business (or at least certainly not for fast time comms) and there was no social media really. I remember when they first came out I just didn't really see the need - the need came after, driven by the addition of services due to the iphone becoming so pervasive. It was similarly expensive to VR, and before it came out smartphones were seen very much  as niche.
Just the same way as currently VR seems a bit needless currently for the average consumer, a 'just works' product may well change it to 'well of course you need VR, how are you going to do VR meetings/SkypeVR/TripAdvisorVR etc without it?'.

That may be your experience with it, but lots of people were already using the internet heavily. As I said, social media use wasn't universal, but loads of people were already using things like forums and message boards, and AOL Instant Messenger was incredibly popular among young people for aa decade before the iPhone existed, as were online games (remeber NeoPets?) or even fusions of the two (like Gaia Online). Indeed, the convenience of smartphones allowed it to grow, as I already said, but it was already big with young people, even though many specific companies didn't survive the transition. Although the big names in information, like Google and Wikipedia, did fine. Of course, these things exist for VR too, but VR makes them less convenient, not more.

They are necessary for a societal change that was already well on the way to happening.

I think there's a similar societal change as a use case for VR - so many people are connecting connecting virtually and internationally, and we've about reached the bounds of how 'connected' we can get via just video and voice. So many people work/live away from their families, and so many people have friends internationally in a way that wasn't a thing before. People will want to connect with these people better, and the only way to really do that is VR.

So you think a whole industry will thrive on the back of super-skype functionality, despite the fact that the most prolific users now text far more than they call and don't use current Skype (and competitor) software?

It's not a perfect analogy, and I doubt we'll ever get the same perfect storm as the iphone (with the hordes of adoring apple fans ready to buy it) but I think we may get a smaller version of that revolution if a really good product comes out that 'just works'.

The revolution you're describing could at its very most be the hot gift item one Christmas, like hover boards. The fact is, VR trades in convenience for luxury, and that's inherent. Even the perfect "just works" VR occupies your whole face and restricts your vision artificially. That means even if there were some reason most people would want it (VRchat and video games aren't going to cut it as anything beyond a niche market) it's going to be a hard sell. And there is no reason most people would want it.

As cool as cyberpunk images of everyone being VR junkies may be, it's not reality, not now and not tomorrow. Why not enjoy that for the hardcore market, there are good products that keep getting better?

[Persus13]

Also, there were a whole bunch of single use devices that were being sold that the smartphone was able to replace. There's not a ton of folks using digital cameras or iPods or GPS devices or eReaders these days because smart phones can be all of those and more. There isn't really anything comparable to that for VR.

And Apple/iPhone didn't really start the whole smartphone thing, Blackberry did.

[E. Albright]

Aye, Blackberry was not as general-purpose or sexy-sleek as iPhones, but it was definitely the vanguard smartphone. My memory of it was "omg, phone + PDA!!!", which at the time was sooooo cool... It did seem more of a businessperson/luxury/avant-geek gadget, but it was still reasonably widespread.

[Cruxador]

Also, there were a whole bunch of single use devices that were being sold that the smartphone was able to replace. There's not a ton of folks using digital cameras or iPods or GPS devices or eReaders these days because smart phones can be all of those and more. There isn't really anything comparable to that for VR.

And Apple/iPhone didn't really start the whole smartphone thing, Blackberry did.

I don't think eReaders are being used less. Kindles are very popular, they weren't exactly something everyone had in the first place.

Blackberry is maybe equivalent to the Vive in this case, a top of the line product used by people who really want that sort of thing. But it was never a mass market thing. It wasn't a device you could pair with uggs and a pumpkin spice latte.

[Persus13]

Actually, eReader sales have been in decline for awhile now. And sure, they weren't crazy popular to begin with, but my larger point was that there were  bunch of single-use devices being sold, and then smartphones came along and said "Hey, we can be all of these things."

The Blackberry got overtaken by the iPhone, but it still started the whole smartphone craze, which was my initial point. Claiming that the iPhone is for the everyman while Blackberrys were for elites seems like the wrong way around here.

[Folly]

I just hope that in a few years cyborg-eyes come along and render all of the visors obsolete.

[Cruxador]

I just hope that in a few years cyborg-eyes come along and render all of the visors obsolete.

They sort of are coming along. They're just nowhere near as good as the stock option, so there's still not a big market. Turns out normal human body parts are already pretty good for being human body parts.

[Retropunch]

That may be your experience with it, but lots of people were already using the internet heavily. As I said, social media use wasn't universal, but loads of people were already using things like forums and message boards, and AOL Instant Messenger was incredibly popular among young people for aa decade before the iPhone existed, as were online games (remeber NeoPets?) or even fusions of the two (like Gaia Online). Indeed, the convenience of smartphones allowed it to grow, as I already said, but it was already big with young people, even though many specific companies didn't survive the transition. Although the big names in information, like Google and Wikipedia, did fine. Of course, these things exist for VR too, but VR makes them less convenient, not more.

Certainly agree the internet was very popular at the time, but I don't remember at the time that people were wishing for it to be portable - there wasn't a drive for it inherently, as the internet was set up to be 'stationary' (as in, used by desktops) by it's very design at the time. As soon as smartphones came along everyone saw there were all these awesome things you could do with it, and then it just exploded. Don't get me wrong, I don't think that it that the iphone created the demand all by itself, it's just that the iphone being so good made it much, much more available - without it I think there would have been a much slower take up until something similar came along. Blackberry was a big driver too, but that really drove the messaging/business side more than general apps/commercial internet.

So you think a whole industry will thrive on the back of super-skype functionality, despite the fact that the most prolific users now text far more than they call and don't use current Skype (and competitor) software?

I personally believe it could be a huge part of it. I have friends and family all over the world, the best we can do at major events is skype or play a few games with each other for the most part, and it sucks we can't do more. I know a lot of people in a similar situation, and being able to interact much more personally with them would really sell. Combine that with things like virtual shops, events etc. and there's enough of a market.

The revolution you're describing could at its very most be the hot gift item one Christmas, like hover boards. The fact is, VR trades in convenience for luxury, and that's inherent. Even the perfect "just works" VR occupies your whole face and restricts your vision artificially. That means even if there were some reason most people would want it (VRchat and video games aren't going to cut it as anything beyond a niche market) it's going to be a hard sell. And there is no reason most people would want it.
As cool as cyberpunk images of everyone being VR junkies may be, it's not reality, not now and not tomorrow. Why not enjoy that for the hardcore market, there are good products that keep getting better?

Again, I never meant it'd be as big as smartphones - the rise of the market was phenomenal. It's more in the way the market may work -  I think that given a product that worked really well out of the box (no wires, either standalone or with medium system reqs for the time, comfortable, lightweight etc.) that it'd go from being a luxury item no one was really that interested in other than tech-heads and businesses (like the early smart phones) to something that had a lot bigger mass market appeal, which gradually becomes more of a part of everday life.

Whether or not that device will come along is another matter, but I wouldn't be surprised.