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

Why we've never fallen in love with virtual reality

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 285 posts

Re: Why we've never fallen in love with virtual reality

#251

Post by teunispeters »

oblio wrote: post #142
ekianjo wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "We've never fallen in love"? Really? Yes, really, You are the exception. By now there is quite a few people who have tried VR in some place or another and the market has clearly shown sales are not skyrocketing at all. It's a very slow growth, we are talking about a few millions headsets per year, which is just pocket money market wise compared to smartphones or even PCs at large. Also, most of the software is utt…

The Altair 8080 is considered the first PC and it was released in 1974. The IBM PC was released in 1981 and PCs became widespread only in the 1990's, when they started adding multimedia features. So about 20 years for mass adoption. The first touchscreen phone was introduced in 1994, the IBM Simon. Yet the first true modern smartphone to get mass adoption was the iPhone, 2007. And truly massive adoption worldwide hap…

Early VR is 1960s ... it's been around longer than personal computers. (oh sure, for military and experimental applications for the most part for a long time - and with a really high price tag - but it existed!)

Re: Why we've never fallen in love with virtual reality

#252

Post by codingmess »

deskamess wrote: post #227
codingmess wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That'S not an issue with the Occulus Quest anymore. You need a little space, but setup is very easy and requires no extra arrangements.

Can you project what you see on the headset only Oculus Quest to another screen? For example, if I am playing Beat Saber, can I project my view to TV so that family can watch? Or to a Chromecast/Alex/similar tech?

Yes and no - unfortunately the individual apps have to allow it, and Beat Saber doesn't allow it yet. It works for other apps, though (with Chromecast).

I really don't know why Beat Saber doesn't allow it, it would make so much sense.

Re: Why we've never fallen in love with virtual reality

#253

Post by falcor84 »

skizm wrote: post #79
falcor84 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>there is no way to fake tactile feedback or motion Why not? There are quite a few companies working on these with some success. Virtuix for example (disclosure: I'm an investor) are seeing some steady commercial success in regards to addressing motion[0]. And in terms of feedback, there's a lot of interesting work done Fl around gloves in particular, including by Apple [1]. [0] https://www.virtuix.com/ [1] https://w…

I meant more like swinging a sword will never meet another sword. Punching someone in the face will never hurt your hand, etc. and then when you swing through air as your in-game hand stops, it feels kinda lame.

I don't quite understand what you mean. I can come up with several different engineering approaches to make a sword controlle suddenly stop. And I can come up with even more ways to inflict mild pain (e.g. electrical stimulation).

What makes you say "never"? If there are people willing to pay for better immersion, I believe the technology won't be that far behind.

Re: Why we've never fallen in love with virtual reality

#254

Post by kipchak »

cybwraith wrote: post #191
skizm wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haptic feedback might have been the wrong phrase. I meant that there is a lack of literally anything physical to interact with despite your eyes constantly telling you otherwise. You can’t rest your arm on a table, put your hand on a wall, lock swords with an enemy, etc. You have to constantly remind yourself that what you see isn’t real so that you can stop your hand from swinging wildly in real life while your in g…

This would actually be pretty solvable in a well-done VR arcade, but I agree that in-home true haptics are a big barrier for certain game genres and interaction types. Any direct-contact/resistance based interaction is going to feel weird and need some form of workaround that can hurt immersion. However anything with indirect interaction is generally very good (shooting arrows/guns, throwing/catching objects, etc)

Designing around it is possible in some cases too. In Gorn your weapons are floppy so it makes sense when they bend when hitting an enemy, and in Superhot VR you punch through or shatter enemies when hitting them giving more of a sense of being really powerful than hitting air.

Re: Why we've never fallen in love with virtual reality

#255

Post by warp »

codingmess wrote: post #252
deskamess wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you project what you see on the headset only Oculus Quest to another screen? For example, if I am playing Beat Saber, can I project my view to TV so that family can watch? Or to a Chromecast/Alex/similar tech?

Yes and no - unfortunately the individual apps have to allow it, and Beat Saber doesn't allow it yet. It works for other apps, though (with Chromecast). I really don't know why Beat Saber doesn't allow it, it would make so much sense.

Casting has been enabled in Beat Saber since june: https://uploadvr.com/beat-saber-oculus-quest-casting/

Re: Why we've never fallen in love with virtual reality

#256

Post by zmmmmm »

codingmess wrote: post #122
gwbas1c wrote: post #106

I find that playing a game in VR is like listing to music in 5.1: It requires a lot of physical space and setup, which then limits the audience to a dedicated niche. The limitation, in this case, is being affluent enough to have a large empty indoor space to dedicate to VR so you don't bump into things as you walk around; and the desire to calibrate the thing correctly. It's like setting up a really good sound system…

That'S not an issue with the Occulus Quest anymore. You need a little space, but setup is very easy and requires no extra arrangements.

This. One of the many misconceptions people have is that you need a lot of space. No longer true with Quest. For those who have not experienced it, initial setup shows you the room you are in through the headset cam and you draw a boundary around the available space which can be as little as 2m x 2m. Then in use if you approach the edge of the space it gives you excellent visible cues (a wireframe wall around the play area) to show you are infringing on the boundary. It's very well implemented and makes playing in a small, non-dedicated VR space completely viable now.

Furthermore, it remembers setup for each space very accurately so setup is a one-time operation for each new space.

Re: Why we've never fallen in love with virtual reality

#257

Post by bronco21016 »

saganus wrote: post #243
iguanayou wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't get any of the "seat of the pants" feeling of course, and the graphics, while super impressive, don't compare to real-life low and slow VFR flying (although hopefully MS Flight Sim 2020 changes that). It doesn't replace the real thing. BUT I enjoy flying VFR in busy airspace with the PilotEdge network, and also IFR flying. For the communications and IFR flying, the mental tasks you do in the sim are identic…

What is VFR and IFR?? I know nothing about flying but it's something that I am always thinking about learning, but if VR is good enough to scratch that itch, I'm up for it.

As iguanayou already pointed out it’s the type of rules a flight is flown under. As you might imagine it’s far easier to simulate IFR flying because it’s largely technical and about animating gauges as there’s little to look at outside when you’re in the clouds or even just high altitude.

VFR on the other hand is all about visual reference to what’s outside. To truly have a VFR experience in a sim you would need incredibly detailed rendering of the outside world which is very graphics and memory intensive. FSX from Microsoft came close but at the time it brought most hardware to a crawl with the settings dialed up and then MS abandoned the franchise.

If MS pulls off their new sim well we might finally be there where a decent VFR flying experience can be simulated when combined with a head mounted display that lets you easily look around out the windows. Time will tell though. I just read something today saying 40 FPS at 4K on a GTX2080. That’s pretty intense.

Re: Why we've never fallen in love with virtual reality

#258

Post by zmmmmm »

epaga wrote: post #218

I agree with everyone here who is praising the Quest. How they’d write an article like this and not mention the Oculus Quest even once is beyond me. It is a game changer and two of my friends have bought one after trying it out once. No cables, no PC, minimal setup, and incredibly immersive.

Yep. I have a friend who simply mocked my Gear VR who was looking up the price on Amazon minutes after trying out the Quest. Anybody trashing VR needs to try the Quest. Trash it afterwards if you like, but don't trash it based on the previous gen (either high end or low end) because they are not comparable.

Re: Why we've never fallen in love with virtual reality

#259

Post by zmmmmm »

kstenerud wrote: post #30

Another issue is motion sickness. For a significant portion of us this is a huge problem.

I'm curious if this is

(a) even with latest gen headsets (eg: Occulus Quest) (b) even with applications where you are completely stationary?

I ask because I've shown my quest to probably 15 people now and nobody has had a problem with it in any of the applications where there is no motion of the external frame.

Re: Why we've never fallen in love with virtual reality

#260

Post by codingmess »

warp wrote: post #255
codingmess wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes and no - unfortunately the individual apps have to allow it, and Beat Saber doesn't allow it yet. It works for other apps, though (with Chromecast). I really don't know why Beat Saber doesn't allow it, it would make so much sense.

Casting has been enabled in Beat Saber since june: https://uploadvr.com/beat-saber-oculus-quest-casting/

Hm OK I didn't know, I was under the impression I tried it later than that, though.
Post reply on HN