Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I Tried VR and It Was Just OK

blog.codinghorror.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–139 of 139 posts

Re: I Tried VR and It Was Just OK

#131

Post by Nadya »

intrasight wrote: post #130

People fall into two camps: Camp 1: "Anyone that doesn't understand what a seminal change this is needs to take a history lesson" Camp 2: "Anyone that doesn't understand that this is mostly hype needs to take a history lesson" I'm gonna stake an opinion here and put myself solidly in Camp 1. I think this is going to be as impactful as the transition from radio/audio to tv/screen. Radio didn't go away, but it is a muc…

Playing DA here, but a lot of what you said could be said about 3D movies, which were a total flop for 15-20 years and even today face a lot of backlash and hatred.

While I have high hopes/beliefs in VR, I do fall under the "3D movies suck, I wish they'd stop making them. It's a failed technology and gives me headaches." camp.

So I can see where Camp 2 is coming from when they hate on AR/VR technologies.

Re: I Tried VR and It Was Just OK

#132

Post by tlb »

Nadya wrote: post #131
intrasight wrote: post #130

People fall into two camps: Camp 1: "Anyone that doesn't understand what a seminal change this is needs to take a history lesson" Camp 2: "Anyone that doesn't understand that this is mostly hype needs to take a history lesson" I'm gonna stake an opinion here and put myself solidly in Camp 1. I think this is going to be as impactful as the transition from radio/audio to tv/screen. Radio didn't go away, but it is a muc…

Playing DA here, but a lot of what you said could be said about 3D movies, which were a total flop for 15-20 years and even today face a lot of backlash and hatred. While I have high hopes/beliefs in VR, I do fall under the "3D movies suck, I wish they'd stop making them. It's a failed technology and gives me headaches." camp. So I can see where Camp 2 is coming from when they hate on AR/VR technologies.

What surprised me even more than not especially liking 3D movies, was actively disliking high-frame-rate movies.

Re: I Tried VR and It Was Just OK

#133

Post by intrasight »

Nadya wrote: post #131
intrasight wrote: post #130

People fall into two camps: Camp 1: "Anyone that doesn't understand what a seminal change this is needs to take a history lesson" Camp 2: "Anyone that doesn't understand that this is mostly hype needs to take a history lesson" I'm gonna stake an opinion here and put myself solidly in Camp 1. I think this is going to be as impactful as the transition from radio/audio to tv/screen. Radio didn't go away, but it is a muc…

Playing DA here, but a lot of what you said could be said about 3D movies, which were a total flop for 15-20 years and even today face a lot of backlash and hatred. While I have high hopes/beliefs in VR, I do fall under the "3D movies suck, I wish they'd stop making them. It's a failed technology and gives me headaches." camp. So I can see where Camp 2 is coming from when they hate on AR/VR technologies.

But follow my logic. Put a 13 year old in front of a TV with a collection of 2D and 3D movies - and see which ones she chooses to watch. My whole point is that the 13 year old's get to decide in the long run. Your "3D movies suck" sentiment is perhaps an adults opinion (one that I share), and perhaps also an opinion expressed about movie theaters - which is not the same as personal tech choices.

Re: I Tried VR and It Was Just OK

#134

Post by intrasight »

tlb wrote: post #132
Nadya wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Playing DA here, but a lot of what you said could be said about 3D movies, which were a total flop for 15-20 years and even today face a lot of backlash and hatred. While I have high hopes/beliefs in VR, I do fall under the "3D movies suck, I wish they'd stop making them. It's a failed technology and gives me headaches." camp. So I can see where Camp 2 is coming from when they hate on AR/VR technologies.

What surprised me even more than not especially liking 3D movies, was actively disliking high-frame-rate movies.

High frame rate movies will be fine once they get people who understand the psychophysics involved.

Re: I Tried VR and It Was Just OK

#135

Post by Nadya »

intrasight wrote: post #133
Nadya wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Playing DA here, but a lot of what you said could be said about 3D movies, which were a total flop for 15-20 years and even today face a lot of backlash and hatred. While I have high hopes/beliefs in VR, I do fall under the "3D movies suck, I wish they'd stop making them. It's a failed technology and gives me headaches." camp. So I can see where Camp 2 is coming from when they hate on AR/VR technologies.

But follow my logic. Put a 13 year old in front of a TV with a collection of 2D and 3D movies - and see which ones she chooses to watch. My whole point is that the 13 year old's get to decide in the long run. Your "3D movies suck" sentiment is perhaps an adults opinion (one that I share), and perhaps also an opinion expressed about movie theaters - which is not the same as personal tech choices.

I feel that will vary more from household-to-household based on the parents experienced with 3D movies. I've met teenagers who have never seen a 3D movie but claim to hate them!

There has also been some talk (not sure about actual studies) that many adults who claim to hate 3D haven't even seen a 3D movie in the past 5-8~ years; in which 3D technology (and using it properly) has improved. A bad experience years ago "tainted" the technology and they want nothing to do with it. This is discussed by a number of movie critics.

My biggest fear for AR/VR is that the first experiences might be like how 3D movies were... and it'll take over a decade to dig out of the hole that creates. Lack of R&D, slow improvements, niche media, etc.

Which is also why I feel the big players on the field currently are taking their time, working out the kinks, and trying to make the "first generation" [0] as good as possible for as many people as possible.

[0] I know AR/VR is years old and some products have been marketed as consumer-end. None entered mainstream was well as Oculus has AFAIK, so the hype for the product is a lot higher than it used to be. Kind of like how Windows had tablets long before the iPad but it took the iPad to make tablets "a thing".

Re: I Tried VR and It Was Just OK

#136

Post by pkroll »

I find the Oculus Rift DK2 with Vorpx (one of several competing pieces of software to play older or not-designed-for-VR games using the Rift) actually kind of spectacular. Elder Scrolls Online works well with it, and the game is an entirely different kind of experience when you're "actually" there. Atwood might be entirely correct about it being far from mainstream, but did anyone think the first consumer VR headsets from Oculus and Valve were going to hit the big time? I assume they'll do well enough to get to the next generation, and that content will improve over time. If you look at videos of people trying the available demos, they're already feeling it... but everything custom made is short, as no major game works directly with VR.

FWIW, the DK2 screen looks a lot better to my eyes with a screen protector on it: it just barely blurs the pixels so there's much less screen door effect than there is out of the box. I've not had the chance to try the newer, higher-res and framerate headsets.

Re: I Tried VR and It Was Just OK

#137

Post by intrasight »

Nadya wrote: post #135
intrasight wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But follow my logic. Put a 13 year old in front of a TV with a collection of 2D and 3D movies - and see which ones she chooses to watch. My whole point is that the 13 year old's get to decide in the long run. Your "3D movies suck" sentiment is perhaps an adults opinion (one that I share), and perhaps also an opinion expressed about movie theaters - which is not the same as personal tech choices.

I feel that will vary more from household-to-household based on the parents experienced with 3D movies. I've met teenagers who have never seen a 3D movie but claim to hate them! There has also been some talk (not sure about actual studies) that many adults who claim to hate 3D haven't even seen a 3D movie in the past 5-8~ years; in which 3D technology (and using it properly) has improved. A bad experience years ago "…

I believe the tech has great "mid-term" promise, and that it will avoid the issues which made 3D get rejected. However, I don't think that any of the specific VR products that we've been exposed to are going to go consumer commercial. They are way too weak and way too expensive. But we know the magic that Moore's Law can do in just a couple of years.

Oculus admits that their current tech can't/won't support natural Depth of Field, and is therefore unnatural to the point of making most users nauseated. They can't give a date for this problem to be solved - blame the bean counters not the engineers. But I've got no skin in the game so I'm going to stake another opinion. That is that it will take probably 5 years for the tech to support Depth of Field at a price point ($1000 in today's dollars) that consumers will accept.

Re: I Tried VR and It Was Just OK

#138

Post by intrasight »

j_s wrote: post #116
acous wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First person games as they exist today don't transfer well to VR. The issue is the locomotion problem: Moving the player in the virtual world but not the real world causes motion sickness, since they're not getting a matching input to their vestibular system. Oculus' system today is suited more for cockpit games or 3rd person games with gentle camera movement. Valve are also targetting room sized first person experie…

Cockpit simulators have a leg up in this department - not much movement expected in driving / flying / spaceships.

Not really. In the real world, you still moving and thus feeling acceleration. Problem therefore still exists.

Re: I Tried VR and It Was Just OK

#139

Post by intrasight »

acous wrote: post #108
golergka wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we still haven't addressed the bigger problem of coming up with something compelling to do with it For the most of the games that are developed today with first-person view in mind, adding support for VR isn't something that is very hard to add. And these games are already pretty compelling. The only question is convenience. The post mentioned 3d in televisions — but 3d did win in cinemas. I recently wanted to watc…

First person games as they exist today don't transfer well to VR. The issue is the locomotion problem: Moving the player in the virtual world but not the real world causes motion sickness, since they're not getting a matching input to their vestibular system. Oculus' system today is suited more for cockpit games or 3rd person games with gentle camera movement. Valve are also targetting room sized first person experie…

It is for this reason that I think that the first successful iteration of VR tech will be experienced in next generation video game arcades. That will solve both the cost problem and the space problem. You'll plan in a very big (100x100ft) room where everything physical is wrapped with three inches of foam. Things you climb on will have level drops of no more than four feet, but with a total height of perhaps twenty feet. Of course what you "see" through your helmet goggles won't be grey foam.

Will be a great place to play.

Post reply on HN