Slashdot Mirror


Intel's Big Bet On Baseball (axios.com)

Ina Fried, reporting for Axios: Intel has been traveling the country this year, broadcasting one major league game a week in virtual reality. On Tuesday, the company's crew was close to home as the San Francisco Giants defeated the Cleveland Indians 2-1 in extra innings. How it works: The games are free to watch, but require the person to have a Samsung phone and Gear VR headset. To broadcast a game in VR, Intel has camera rigs on the first and third base side, as well as the traditional "deep home" shot. It also aims to have an additional camera or two in a spot unique to each stadium. In Arizona, for example, it has one near the stadium's swimming pool. Each camera setup has six pairs of cameras to capture high-definition footage in 180 degrees. In the parking lot, meanwhile, separate teams work in two adjoining vans. One group works on the sound and stitches the images together, while a second van houses a more traditional broadcast setup, including play-by-play announcer J.B. Long. Tweaking the product: Still new at this, Intel is constantly adding new tricks to its arsenal. Last night's game, for example, was the first time the company added real-time VR graphics to the mix, showing baseball cards with stats above the players. Intel CEO has said he wants VR sports to be a billion dollar business for the company.

9 of 57 comments (clear)

  1. You're wasting your time in India unless... by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 3

    You're wasting your time in India unless it's 3D cricket. Never seen an Indian in the parking lot with a baseball bat, and the "out of the park" highlight clips most likely shown in my neck of the woods aren't from US footage.

    1. Re:You're wasting your time in India unless... by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You can bring VR to baseball and it will still be boring. Not as boring as cricket mind-you, but still boring.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:You're wasting your time in India unless... by RotateLeftByte · · Score: 2

      Twenty-Twenty Cricket is far from boring. Baseball is definietly snooze fest material.
      I'd like them to try to do VR Rugby Union.... People would see what really goes on in a Scrum (and not that poncy IT version)

      --
      I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
  2. Big bet on VR, not Baseball by captaindomon · · Score: 4, Informative

    The title is way off. This doesn't have anything to do with Intel betting on baseball, unless they are buying a team or something we don't know about. They're betting on VR, and refining their approach, and baseball is an easy, cheap, repeatable way to do that, and provides a "cool" experience in surround. They can move their setup within minutes to any other venue I'm sure.

    --
    Just because I can hook a shark from a boat, I do no offer to wrestle it in the water.
  3. 360 VR is a Silly Gimmick by DatbeDank · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Much like 3D glasses, 360 VR is a silly gimmick that appeals to a very small hardcore group of early adopters.

    360 VR does not have a future outside of a small niche. To the average non-video game player/early tech adopter, the headsets are big, bulky, and dorky (sis said it not me).

    Have you seen your average TV baseball demographic? Do you really think they're going to spend money on something like this? This is a silly fad that will be replaced with the next silly entertainment gimmick designed to encourage consumers to keep buying new equipment every 1 to 2 years.

    The only way this would be successful is if Intel gave away its 360 VR headsets for free to thousands of fans in those cities.

    The sooner 360VR dies for Immersive VR, the better.

  4. Who would buy this? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 3, Funny

    Who in the hell would pay to watch other people play sports?

    1. Re:Who would buy this? by show+me+altoids · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hundreds of millions of people throughout the world. Have you ever been outside of your cave?

      --
      I feel sorry for people that don't drink, because when they get up in the morning, that's as good as they're gonna feel
  5. Re:Virtual World by enjar · · Score: 2
    I'm a NFL fan. I can carve out three hours to plop down on the couch and watch my team in a week. During that three hours, I can do other things like fold laundry, cook a meal, keep an eye on my kids. To attend a game requires me spending a non-trivial amount of money for tickets, an hour or two each way to get to the stadium and return, plus spending other non-trivial amounts on parking and food at the stadium. Not to mention the fact I live in a northern city where the weather can suck. If I wanted to take all four members of my family to a game we'd likely spend at least $600 a game, probably more. If I wanted to see the whole season with the family in tow I'd probably be out (very conservatively) $10K a year. Or I can sit at home, watch the game for free on the antenna, and feed my family for about $20-30.

    I also love live music, but even cheap tickets for a small venue end up getting to $60/each pretty easily. If it's a big name, well established band, the tickets very easily break $100, and commonly head on up to $150 or $200 a head. I can do that a couple times a year but not nearly the number of times I'd actually like to see a band -- I'd be broke.

  6. Re:Watching Baseball Online by chipschap · · Score: 3, Interesting

    About those mlb.tv blackouts ... I'm in Hawai`i and MLB blacks out all California teams as being "local market." Right, I'm going to travel 2,400 miles to see a "local" game.