Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Four Factors That Will Push VR Forward in 2016 (technologyreview.com)

Posted by timothy on from the in-my-day-we-had-pieces-of-cardboard dept.

At MIT Technology Review, Rachel Metz lists four factors she believes will mean great advancements for virtual reality in the next year. More and better games; wider adoption of specialized cameras for capturing the deep imagery that immersive worlds require; specialized presentation techniques that supplement VR with physical cues like temperature or direction; and availability of better viewing hardware. That better hardware seems poised to take off. According to the article, Facebook-owned Oculus’s first consumer headset, Rift, is slated for release in the first quarter of the year, while the HTC Vive—a headset created by smartphone maker HTC and video-game company Valve—is set to be available to consumers in April. Sony, meanwhile, is building its own headset, called PlayStation VR, which the company says will be released in the first half of the year.

64 comments

  1. Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There was a real chance to garner interest in VR for the second time. Too bad it was overhyped without anything to show for it and now everybody is tired of hearing about it.

    Maybe someone will get it right in another 10 or 15 years.

    1. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VR like VD then? They said it was for everyone - not just for a few - but then no one likes VD at all, now do they?

    2. Re: Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google Cardboard is getting more common and Samsung Gear is 'affordable'

    3. Re:Too late by jandersen · · Score: 1

      - also, apart from entertainment, is there a compelling reason that we need VR? Will business be better, more efficient, ... than what we have now? I can't see it myself; it might look cool, but that's about it.

    4. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, like 3D printing and colonizing the universe?

    5. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Cheap accelerometers are too slow, this creates a nauseating lag, rendering it useless for many types of games. Presumably there are high grade sensors used in aviation and precision fabrication plants that will eventually come down to consumer level pricing.

      I would like to see VR done without the gamer in mind, just tech for the sake of it project to see what can be done had money not been a factor, like hypercars.

    6. Re:Too late by rasmusbr · · Score: 2

      Cheap accelerometers are too slow, this creates a nauseating lag, rendering it useless for many types of games. Presumably there are high grade sensors used in aviation and precision fabrication plants that will eventually come down to consumer level pricing.

      I would like to see VR done without the gamer in mind, just tech for the sake of it project to see what can be done had money not been a factor, like hypercars.

      This is true, but a little misleading. It's not the analog part of the accelerometer that is slow, it's the digital part and the ADC.

      Cheap accelerometers often deliver sample rates of about 50-100 Hz, which means you get something like 20-10 Ms of latency right off the bat. Filters that you attach will add another 20 Ms or more depending on what sort of filters you use. If the signal runs through a software layer (Android, iOS, etc) you get additional latency on the order of 20 Ms. In the end you might end up with 100 Ms or more of latency on a smartphone.

      Now, the underlying analog system inside the chip (the MEMS accelerometer itself) that functions as a sensor has latency lower than 1 Ms.

      Occulus has designed their own accelerometer that runs at 1000Hz. I would guess that they have designed filters and a simple software layer so that the total latency of the accelerometer samples that a game gets on the Occulus is below 10 Ms, with a smooth enough signal that the movement isn't too jerky... I guess we'll find out when the final product launches.

    7. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've used the Oculus (still have mates working for EA), it's awful. If that's only 10ms lag, I'll eat my eat a hat with doggy doodoos on the top. 1ms is clearly good enough, I had no idea they were doing that at the low-end. Perhaps their inputdev + rendering = 50+ms?

    8. Re:Too late by rasmusbr · · Score: 1

      Well, it's the whole loop that accumulates to a delay...

      analog sensor -> digital electronics / filtering -> wire connection -> computer -> wire connection -> display filter -> display panel

      All of these delays need to get well below 10 ms in order for the whole loop to approach 10 ms. I don't know what the specific problems they have are, but you can tell that it's not just one problem that you have to solve.

    9. Re:Too late by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      It'll always be "overhyped" because VR is, ultimately, never going to live up to expectations.

      VR is supposed to be about an immersive environment that feels like RL. It takes about ten seconds with anything hyped as VR, be it 3D TV/movies, Doom/Quake/successors to the latter, a 3D headset, or whatever, to realize that you're nowhere near being in this immersive environment. All that's happened is someone has found a way to add depth perception and perhaps create a more innovative control system for how you view a moving picture.

      Add to this the fact that virtually all forms of VR save for the basic "FPS on a big-ass monitor" cause physical discomfort to most users (be it motion sickness or just the discomfort of wearing some device on your body), and you're essentially looking at a technology that seems initially popular and then ends up going no where fast.

      In order to work, "VR" has to not be labelled VR in the first place (FPSes weren't, for example), and anything that causes discomfort needs to be removed before sale. It'll be a long time before we get a substantial jump that people actually find worth adopting.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    10. Re:Too late by bigpat · · Score: 1

      Well, it's the whole loop that accumulates to a delay...

      analog sensor -> digital electronics / filtering -> wire connection -> computer -> wire connection -> display filter -> display panel

      All of these delays need to get well below 10 ms in order for the whole loop to approach 10 ms. I don't know what the specific problems they have are, but you can tell that it's not just one problem that you have to solve.

      10 ms isn't an insurmountable goal, just hard to do off the shelf.

    11. Re:Too late by blue9steel · · Score: 1

      There are tons of actual use cases if they can get it working well enough. Here are two obvious ones: Virtual Home Tours, Tank Drivers.

    12. Re:Too late by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Each one is worth 1000lbs.
      While there may be a few useful features, for the most part I don't see too much good usage. VR Programming, where we build a 3d model of our code? Seems rather clumsy to me, Sure we can visualize a 3d Array a little cleaner, but so what. VR accounting?
      Also there is stuff that 3d visualized on a 2d screen that will do just as well. Unless you need a real 3d perspective and needs to know that the device is actually just small and levitating, vs a large object in the background, It isn't so helpful.

      It is a case where we have the technology and trying to find what solution it will fit. vs. what happens with more successful products of having a need and building a technology to use it.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    13. Re:Too late by Zobeid · · Score: 2

      Your attitude won't stop headsets from shipping in a few months, and your attitude won't stop people like me from buying one.

    14. Re:Too late by Zobeid · · Score: 1

      - also, apart from tasting good, is there a compelling reason that we need ice cream? Will business be better, more efficient, ... than what we have now? I can't see it myself; it might be delicious, but that's about it. I guess ice cream is doomed to fail in the marketplace rather than become -- hypothetically -- a $14.5 billion per year industry in the USA alone.

      Seriously now. . . I don't understand the hand-wringing that I've seen in the blogosphere, repeatedly, over whether VR can "grow beyond the gaming niche to find a mass market". Last I checked, games are a mass market, bigger than the movie industry and bigger than the music industry. I'm sure VR will find some uses beyond games too, and it will find more and more productivity uses as time goes by. However, VR games will pave the way, and VR games will be huge, and there's nothing wrong with that.

    15. Re: Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People like you are our beta testers. Thank you for your service citizen. Pay to beta test is the new fad. Just see the gaming industry for recent examples.

    16. Re:Too late by Zobeid · · Score: 1

      I don't believe it. I have to wonder if you've even played a VR game in your life?

      To date, the only one I've played was Dactyl Nightmare in the arcade, back in the 1990s. Man, that was crude. . . Black void in the background, low-rez pixellated objects. . . It was like the Pong of VR. And to me, it was fun. However rough and limited it was, I was able to mentally put myself into that space. I was standing on my feet, and I had a gun (not a mouse) in my hand, and I was able to aim and shoot at the pixel critters in all directions in a very natural way, and it was like nothing else I'd experienced. I wanted to do it again. But it cost $4 a play, so I didn't. If I'd known VR was going to vanish from the Earth for the next 20+ years, I would have coughed up the money and played that game more when I had the chance!

      It irks me that VR languished for so long. It could have evolved from there.

      Immersiveness. . . You make it sound like an unattainable goal. Immersiveness, you seem to be saying, is something possible only in theory but not in practice, therefore we shouldn't foolishly strive for it! Well, there are too many examples of highly immersive video and computers games already around for me to swallow that. I thought the original Everquest game was startlingly immersive. So. . . Unless you think that VR technology is somehow going to detract from that effect rather than boost it, I don't see a valid argument.

    17. Re:Too late by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      I didn't just say immersive, no. I said it has to be so immersive it feels like RL. There's plenty of immersive media - including books* - out there, but little or nothing that's so good you could think you're actually in the world being described.

      VR is sold as a level of immersion so good you could think it's real. That's an unattainable goal (at least, right now), which means it'll always disappoint as long as it's sold as VR. What's not unattainable is good immersion. Like I said, FPSes are pretty much the only technology that's made strides in that direction, and they've worked specifically because they weren't sold as VR (so not setting false expectations) and because they don't cause physical discomfort to the user.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    18. Re:Too late by ProfBooty · · Score: 1

      Iracing+occuus+force feedback felt pretty darn real, since I've done trackdays on some of the same tracks that are present in i-racing (and I-racing laser scans the tracks they model so you feel all the same bumps).

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      You got the sense of speed that you don't get when viewing the track on the display which made it way easier to judge turn in/apex/exits.

      --
      Bring back the old version of slashdot.
    19. Re: Too late by Zobeid · · Score: 1

      At first your response seemed a bit insulting, but I thought about it a bit more and realized you're exactly right. . . and I'm fine with that.

      I'll be getting one of the first headsets commercially released, one of the first production runs of that model, v1.00 with all that implies. It won't be cheap, especially factoring in the computer and the space I'm preparing for it. If the product flops (or if VR somehow flops altogether!) and the company goes out of business, and there's no support and no more content. . . or the headset I chose loses the "standards war" and becomes the new Betamax. . . or it's simply obsolete after two years because the technology advanced so quickly. . . That would be unfortunate, but I won't be bitter. It happens. I knew the job was dangerous when I took it.

      There's a thrill I get from being in on something new right at the beginning.

    20. Re:Too late by KGIII · · Score: 2

      I am not a gamer but I'd like something somewhere between Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality. It occurred to me when I was back at the early part of my current wanderlust. I was in Buffalo and headed up the Skyway to Niagara. I realized that I'd like to have something that lets me look at the highway, find out when it was built, learn what the structural ratings are, see the typical throughput, learn about the construction workers, and see the construction process. I'd like to be able to look at a building and find the layout, the history, and things like that. I'd like to take a virtual tour of the building and be able to explore it, empty or full. I'd like to redecorate a home, just an empty one, and see if it can be filled with things I find interesting. I don't want pre-created plans for that, I want it to adapt to the existing structure and then allow me to work within it.

      Now, of course, I was driving at the time and I realize that this augmented reality would not work well as a driver but it'd be neat to have points of interested flash up on the HUD and readable when it is safe. It'd be interesting to be able to dig down into those points of interest but that probably shouldn't be done while one is trying to pilot an automobile. I guess it would be okay if you were a passenger.

      At any rate, my real goal would be to be truly jacked into the 'net via some sort of cortex interface. I'd even let 'em attach a wireless antenna to my skull for that. Barring that, some sort of wearable might be nice for something like what I'm envisioning.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    21. Re:Too late by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I watched your video and I've actually taken a number of on-track driving lessons and done some course work (driving is a passion of mine). I'm not sure how immersed one can become in things like that if they're familiar with the real thing. Can you sense the RPMs? Can you feel the difference in track conditions in the shade vs. where the Sun has been beating for hours? Can you place the sounds of traffic in the appropriate places? Can you hear the difference in tire noise to know when you're nearing the point where your LA is great enough that you're on the threshold of breaking grip?

      I'd think it would require a whole entire setup, perhaps including specific clothing, to be able to be what I'd really want. When you clutch (assuming a clutched vehicle) can you depress it enough to cause slippage and keep the pressure just above that? Can the input from a heel-toe be interpreted correctly? Can those be adjusted to give feedback properly? Can you tension your restraint harness to the same level - as there's a lot of feedback there? Have the physics engines improved to the point of being accurate and taking into account a variety of externalities such as differing handling characteristics dependent on fuel level? How are damage characteristics envisioned/implemented?

      As an aside: They mention Skip Barber. They're not a bad outfit but you can get more private lessons for about the same expense. They'll usually want you to have some experience (you're driving a *very* expensive piece of equipment) so the Barber schools are not a bad place to start out.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    22. Re:Too late by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I've got the DK2, a G29 wheel, AssetoCorsa and an old M3 seat (no harness though, I chould put one in, knowing where there are a couple gathering dust as they are over NHRA's belt age limit. But that seems pointless to me.)

      It heel and toes well, not heel and toeing (if you turn off 'auto-blip') upsets the car's virtual suspension. It has a 'slushbox driver' mode for those who can't drive, so it all depends on how many 'assists' you turn off (I like to leave the ones on that are in the actual cars, use paddle shift for cars that have them, use the H shifter for the old ones). Fully assisted it's pretty gamey, but not down to console level.

      It can't be truly real, but it is as close as I will ever be allowed to a Formula car. You can sense the RPM in the sense that it makes good engine noise and has a good physics model of the tires etc. But obviously no Gs or vibration. You can feel the car drift through the wheel, not unrealistic. But obviously no seat of the pants feeling.

      The sim includes a 427 AC cobra, I once drove a kit car version of it. They both felt like they were trying to kill me. I never got to hot lap 'old Monza' in one so that's as far as that comparison goes.

      I'm liking it. Now if they can just update the software to use DK2's direct mode and not be half broken.

      I also had a VFX1 back in the 90s. Frankly that old POS wasn't any pukeyer than the DK2 once I got it running on GHz machines. It was scanning a 60 Hz, but rendering 3 frames per scan at that point.

      One final note: Short tracks and 'hill climb' are still pukey as hell. Too much rapid yaw motion without inner ear synch.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    23. Re: Too late by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The VFX1 was released in 1995. It wasn't first.

      If you build a time machine you can be there 'right at the beginning'. I'd buy Apple stock instead.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    24. Re: Too late by Zobeid · · Score: 1

      I've never heard of the VFX1 before. (looks it up. . .) Why haven't I heard of this before? If I'd known about it, I probably would have been all over it.

      Then again, it wouldn't have worked on my Amiga 2500. >.

      And there weren't really any MMOGs then like there are today. . . So maybe it's just as well that I was ignorant.

    25. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Architecture and design my friend. VR will be huge for that.

    26. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And your attitude won't stop the likes of Oculus Rift and Vive from being utter failures _IF_ they even get consumer releases like they were supposed to have already.

      Your naivete is adorable. Go ahead and waste your money.

    27. Re: Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a plastic version of "Cardboard" and it's neat, but that's all it is: a novelty, a gimmick, a fad.

      I played with it for a couple of days and then tossed it into a drawer where it has been sitting and collecting dust for the past year.

    28. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it won't. There is nothing that stereoscopy adds to those. In fact, they would detract from the ability to properly design due to the eye strain.

      Proper X, Y, Z views are all that are needed. I am not a real life architect, but I have been designing 3D models and objects for games professionally for decades and a VR interface for modeling and mapping would be a fucking nightmare.

    29. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that games don't benefit from it at all so there needs to be some other use for it.

  2. billions in push for for return of real reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that's us,,, hand in hand we stand... truth + mercy = justice,, in the moms we trust...

  3. "Four Factors" by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All four of the factors are porn.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:"Four Factors" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holo-Wine may rescue VR. Porn alone won't do it.

    2. Re:"Four Factors" by rasmusbr · · Score: 1

      Well, I'd say sports, sports, games and porn are the four factors. Maybe in that order.

    3. Re:"Four Factors" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, gay porn?

  4. Neat. by will_die · · Score: 2

    So I can use this along with the Kinect to play a hand full of games and demos after which it will sit gathering dust.

  5. The most important factor will be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    p0rn of course...

    Because damn, did you try that? Even with only Cardboard its quite the experience. Not that i tried it ofc *cough**cough*

  6. VR will never take off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem with VR is physiological: the difference between what the eye sees and the inner ear senses causes motion sickness in almost all people (of course the special snowflakes on here aren't affected). This will prevent VR from ever being used widely. Now, AR has a real future, but VR doesn't.

    1. Re: VR will never take off by unami · · Score: 1

      yup - i can ride rollercoasters reading a book in one hand, eatng ice cream with the other. but 1 minute of occulus had me going: "wow, easy"

    2. Re: VR will never take off by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      You build tolerance. Kids that grow up with it will be fine.

      But building tolerance also means whatever you work on to improve the puke factor will seam to work to you.

      It's all about content, games that leave up up are much better. Heli sims are better then fixed wing, driving better than Descent, etc.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  7. Controller support on PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    • Steam is barely scraping by with games that natively support controllers on the PC. That's an established technology with cheap, easy access to hardware
    • PlayStation Eye Toy, Xbox Kinect for 360, and PlayStation Move all failed for the same reason: market size. Why build a game to support this hardware which targets 40% of the userbase, when you could have an easier time leaving it out and reach 100% of the userbase?
    • To compensate for the above, Microsoft released every Xbox One with a Kinect. Has this seen an uptick in apps/games that support it? Not really. Games still cater to play the same on different consoles, so the 50% vs 100% of the user base still applies.

    2016 will be the year of the gaming crash. The bubble has distended enough, and this mad craze into VR research is going to leave a lot of companies broke and investors licking their wounds.

    1. Re:Controller support on PC by malditaenvidia · · Score: 4, Insightful

      PlayStation Eye Toy, Xbox Kinect for 360, and PlayStation Move all failed for the same reason: market size. Why build a game to support this hardware which targets 40% of the userbase, when you could have an easier time leaving it out and reach 100% of the userbase?

      Gotta love how you conveniently omitted the Wii, one of the most successful consoles of all time.

    2. Re:Controller support on PC by will_die · · Score: 1

      It has been a long time since I have played with a Wii but from what I remember they did not have a camera/motion detection interface. They had controllers with motion detection, which came with every device.
      As such they are not in the same category as the Kinect, playstation move or Oculus rift in being optional devices.

    3. Re:Controller support on PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In sales*

      The wii is nicknamed "the expensive dust collector" for a reason.

    4. Re:Controller support on PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do so enjoy how you are implying the wii was at all successful. It was marketed to kids and stupid parents who aren't real gamers. This doesn't count in the grand scheme of things. Nintendo gets to skate on by for no reason when they contribute nothing to the industry.

    5. Re:Controller support on PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a camera in every Wiimote..

    6. Re:Controller support on PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And saying that the PS Move or Kinect failed while they managed to sell 15 million and 24 millions respectively is a bit of a stretch. They were probably not as successful as expected, but they didn't fail.

    7. Re:Controller support on PC by malditaenvidia · · Score: 1

      So let's see: it was Nintendo's best selling console, it brought the market to new demographics like elderly people, fitness advocates and the unemployable. It generated unprecedented amounts of landfill material or "peripherals" as they were marketed and brought motion controls to the mainstream. It utterly dominated that generation of consoles in terms of sales. So yes, the wii was a very successful console, the rest boils down to personal preference and brand wars mentality.

  8. Not yet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Once Apple "invents" VR with "iGlasses" after a year or 2 of commercial availability from other vendors, it'll make VR happen.

    1. Re:Not yet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I agree, Apple's pretty cool.

    2. Re:Not yet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While marginally clever, I think the truth is closer to the fact that the form factor of VR - wearing ANYTHING on your eyes - kills the appeal.

      Once we have ubiquitous wall fixtures, tabletops, projectors(?), etc, the display can simply adapt to what's around us, rather than forcing us to adapt to the display.

    3. Re:Not yet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why MS halo lenses and CMU's virtual retina displays will be the go-to tech once the hype around standard HMDs like the Rift disappoint everyone.

    4. Re:Not yet... by swb · · Score: 1

      And this will happen, not for your snarky reasons, but because Apple will figure out where the intersection is between functionality, cost and ease of use and people will buy it because it just works.

      Occulus and everyone else will be so busy making it perfect, with insane system requirements and high costs, that they will miss the everyman kind of user. I'm sure their system will tick off more technical achievements, but as we've seen time and again, that kind of accounting doesn't work.

    5. Re:Not yet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't even see the post you're responding to OFFER ANY reasons, but you sure had a list of snarky ones yourself. That sounded like you lifted them straight out of an Apple press release. Good job!

  9. viewing angle insufficient by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The one thing that makes VR headsets in development useless is the narrow (~ 100 degrees) viewing angle. To look behind, that means having to turn the head by >180-50/2 = 125 degrees. Instead of turning the head 90 degrees, in combination with an eye-movement of another 90 degrees.

    Of all the many different types being developed, only StarVR seems to care. Likely, others will sell more, and rule the market. Like VHS and Video2000.

  10. Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It'll be 5-10+ more years

  11. We don't need or want this. by Xac · · Score: 0

    Games aren't gimmicky and shallow enough without fully supporting a shallow and pointless gimmick that will just further reduce the development time of new and interesting gameplay?

  12. Suffering from perfect is the enemy of the good? by swb · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I always assumed VR needed the absolute best hardware and software technology could make -- and I suppose it does, if re-creating insane framerate high end games is the goal.

    But when I got a free cardboard viewer with my NY Times I was blown away with how good even the most ghetto VR setup could be. The NY Times' video content was meh, but the quickie Google Cardboard app museum tours were immersive and I can't tell you how much time I wasted on the streetview cardboard view.

    I'm starting to think they could be doing decent if flawed VR *now*, and building up content, even if it is fairly tame still imagery. As a potential consumer, I could give a shit about gaming but I could easily see spending hours as a virtual tourist.

    I worry basically that they're making the perfect the enemy of the good, which means it arrives late, with high cost and a ton of flaws because they've baked too much into it.

  13. View Master VR by SpiceWare · · Score: 2

    I received a new View Master VR for Xmas. It's impressed the hell out of everybody I've shown it to, a number of friends plan to pick one up soon.

    It uses your smart phone for the display so it's rather inexpensive - while the starter pack (viewer and a demo disk) has a list price of $29.99, Amazon has it for $20.95. It's compatible with apps written for Google Cardboard.

    I've written a blog entry about it for anyone interested in more detail.

  14. Re:Suffering from perfect is the enemy of the good by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

    The Samsung GearVR with it's additional IMUs is an order of magnitude better the Cardboard, the Rift and Vive with positional tracking and room scale is another order over that.

    VR has a very bright future in 2016.

    --
    Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
  15. Re:Suffering from perfect is the enemy of the good by swb · · Score: 1

    Everything is potentially better than the cardboard, but the point is, the cardboard works now and is pretty cool for what it is.

    And I'm not saying it should be the focus of anything in terms of development, but it's an example of how crude and simple actually working (with wide hardware support) beats "orders of magnitude better" with limited hardware support and much higher costs.

  16. TV replacement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I suspect that vr headsets, even if they are only so-so at vr, will be fantastic replacements for large screen TVs. Multiple people in the same room can watch different content at the same time without interfering with each other.

    1. Re:TV replacement by Zobeid · · Score: 1

      And I suspect the exact opposite. . . That VR headsets will be awesome for games and simulations, but that watching movies on them is a novelty experience that will get old very quickly.

      You can't interact freely with a movie. You can't move around freely. The only thing it offers is 3D and the ability to look in different directions. 3D is something we already have with big-screen TVs, and it hasn't set the world on fire. Being able to look in different directions is nothing but a distraction and an opportunity to miss seeing whatever is important at any given moment.

  17. Hype next wave will be the one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hype, this VR wave is hype.
    The problem with the current VR technology is lack of light field to go along with the stereoscopic view.
    This can (and for most people will) cause serious eye/sight issues.

    When the patents for basic light field technology have expired (~20 years from now), then there will be a new wave of VR.
    And the light field VR wave will be the most awesome wave in mainstream display technology of the current century!
    Light field VR will be as awesome as VR will ever be able to get!