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

Virtual Reality is going to change the world

notch.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 221 posts

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#41

Post by meowface »

mjfl wrote: post #8

This seems to be an unpopular opinion, but I don't believe all the hype about VR. You are never going to be able to get sufficiently passable virtual reality to make up for the hardware hassle. If I want to have a conversation with a friend, I just want to see his/her face, I don't need the whole room simulated for me. Oculus will be a flash in the pan, and it's purchase by Facebook is just another example of the com…

I agree regarding the every day activities thing: FaceTime and Skype are sufficient and will probably remain dominant (maybe in different forms) for decades.

But I could see a serious paradigm shift for video games, especially future massively multiplayer games.

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#42

Post by smacktoward »

arasmussen wrote: post #33
smacktoward wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And I did not chip in ten grand to seed a first investment round to build value for a Facebook acquisition He really puts his finger on one of the reasons why this deal feels so weird here, I think. Nobody who contributed to the Oculus Kickstarter did so because they were hoping Oculus would get flipped to a mega-corp. They didn't do so because they wanted the Oculus team to have a big, splashy VC-style exit. They…

Who ever said those people aren't going to get the product? Why do you think the product will get swallowed up? > "Oculus will continue operating independently within Facebook" --Mark Zuckerberg

Yes, just as every CEO of every big company that has just acquired a smaller company has ever said, back unto the dawning of the world.

Nothing is ever going to change, until suddenly it all does.

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#43

Post by fennecfoxen »

smacktoward wrote: post #32
kissickas wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. People are hating on social VR here, I think, just because they are upset to see the facebook acquisition and don't know how else to disparage the deal. Don't get me wrong- I'm extremely upset about it due to facebook's clearly evil history - I don't know how anyone could deny this, given user exploitation and tracking[0] - and the fact that Oculus Rim values the combined ideas of virtual reality and augment…

I don't even think they're hating on "social VR" as a concept, so much as they are on the specific involvement of Facebook. Facebook has accumulated enough ill will over the years -- with its cavalier attitude towards users' privacy, with the multiple times it's screwed over developers who bet the farm on their platform, and so forth -- that people just automatically assume now that if you lie down with Facebook you…

I can't speak for everyone else, but I'm going to hate on both.

Coming soon to an immersive 3D VR headset near you: a lame Facebook-branded knockoff of Second Life.

Filed under: #metaverse

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#44

Post by lnanek2 »

interpol_p wrote: post #35

From Notch: > Don’t get me wrong, VR is not bad for social. In fact, I think social could become one of the biggest applications of VR. Being able to sit in a virtual living room and see your friend’s avatar? Business meetings? Virtual cinemas where you feel like you’re actually watching the movie with your friend who is seven time zones away? Do people really see this as the mainstream use of VR? Do people really se…

Social seems like a more mainstream use, honestly. 73% of adults are on a social network. Only 49% of homes have a game console. Owning a game console is a choice. Owning something like a webcam and a way to browse Facebook is almost a default by now. While what happened is bad for the gaming focus, it is much more likely to end up with broad stream VR adoption just like how webcams are built into most phones and laptops nowadays.

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#45

Post by smacktoward »

mjfl wrote: post #8

This seems to be an unpopular opinion, but I don't believe all the hype about VR. You are never going to be able to get sufficiently passable virtual reality to make up for the hardware hassle. If I want to have a conversation with a friend, I just want to see his/her face, I don't need the whole room simulated for me. Oculus will be a flash in the pan, and it's purchase by Facebook is just another example of the com…

I would tend to agree. The "now strap this big, heavy thing to your head" part, especially, seems like a big hurdle standing in the way of VR becoming an everyday kind of thing.

Of course, technology gets smaller, so I wouldn't say "never."

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#46

Post by interpol_p »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #40
interpol_p wrote: post #35

From Notch: > Don’t get me wrong, VR is not bad for social. In fact, I think social could become one of the biggest applications of VR. Being able to sit in a virtual living room and see your friend’s avatar? Business meetings? Virtual cinemas where you feel like you’re actually watching the movie with your friend who is seven time zones away? Do people really see this as the mainstream use of VR? Do people really se…

The thing about the future is that it has a funny way of proving you wrong. I think the vision outlined above is entirely possible. An integrated microphone with surround sound headphones was going to change gamedev forever. Who knows how that would bleed into other types of scenarios than gaming? I'd watch a movie with someone using an Oculus. It'd be a fun experience.

Yes, I think we'll have to see how the next few decades pan out to see whether the future holds more overt computing (VR, stuff stuck to your face) or more subtle computing (in your pocket, information when you need it). My money is on the latter for mainstream, with the former being reserved for a subset entertainment and niche uses.

I'd watch a movie with someone using an Oculus, sounds fun. But I can't see it beating the experience I have now: once a month I invite family and friends, we cook food, sit around and use the projector to watch a good movie on a large screen. If VR can beat that experience, I could see it going mainstream for entertainment.

My argument isn't that VR has no use, it most definitely does. It's that I can't see VR fundamentally changing how we use computers (like mobile has done).

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#47

Post by mehwoot »

mingmecca wrote: post #6

Even though Notch writes that he wants to utilize VR for games and not 'social', I'm open to all the experiences that VR can provide, gaming or otherwise. But I think the bigger issue here is I just don't want Facebook involved at all. Because all roads for Facebook lead to ads, and that is the last thing I want tagged to my eyeballs when I'm trying to enjoy my VR experience. Even on the desktop/mobile side, I'd glad…

Even on the desktop/mobile side, I'd gladly pay the $1.05 (or whatever my LTV as a customer is) to Facebook so that I'd never have to seen another ad from them ever again.

Since their market cap is roughly $100 billion, that figure would probably be closer to $100. Would you pay that much? It's an interesting thought.

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#48

Post by smacktoward »

mambodog wrote: post #12

VR will be like the web. Eventually it will belong to all of us. Once it gets off the ground, no single company will be able to ruin it. Just like touchscreen smartphones, initially we had the iPhone which is relatively locked down and controlled by a single vendor, but now we have cheap, commoditised hardware of acceptable quality. More importantly, the real 'platform' for smartphones is the web, which is as open as…

The Web belongs to all of us because the people who invented it made the incredibly generous decision to set it free. (I've written a little about how that decision was made here: http://jasonlefkowitz.net/2013/05/the-act-of-generosity-that...)

I don't see anybody rushing to put their VR IP into the public domain.

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#49

Post by interpol_p »

lnanek2 wrote: post #44
interpol_p wrote: post #35

From Notch: > Don’t get me wrong, VR is not bad for social. In fact, I think social could become one of the biggest applications of VR. Being able to sit in a virtual living room and see your friend’s avatar? Business meetings? Virtual cinemas where you feel like you’re actually watching the movie with your friend who is seven time zones away? Do people really see this as the mainstream use of VR? Do people really se…

Social seems like a more mainstream use, honestly. 73% of adults are on a social network. Only 49% of homes have a game console. Owning a game console is a choice. Owning something like a webcam and a way to browse Facebook is almost a default by now. While what happened is bad for the gaming focus, it is much more likely to end up with broad stream VR adoption just like how webcams are built into most phones and lap…

So you are suggesting that most people will strap on a headset to consume social information of the type they currently consume on Facebook? (Photos of real life events, the thoughts and feelings of others, commentary on recent news, memes.)

Edit: just because social is a bigger area than gaming, does not mean VR is more likely to take off in that area. It entirely depends on how you actually use it and what experience it gives you.

You could argue that video calls would kill voice calls because video calls are "more immersive". Obviously that didn't happen. You could also argue that voice calls would kill text communication, because obviously talking with your voice is more natural. Again, it didn't happen - text communication is bigger than ever, look at WhatsApp. In the space of social, ease and speed of consumption trumps immersion.

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#50

Post by batoure »

GBond wrote: post #30
skore wrote: post #4

For a guy who is otherwise rather easy going, Notch can be incredibly pragmatic and strident. Here, he has cut to heart of the issue. > And I did not chip in ten grand to seed a first investment round to build value for a Facebook acquisition. > Don’t get me wrong, VR is not bad for social. He is right - "social", especially in the way Facebook is doing it at the moment, is terrible for VR. Terrible for any technolog…

> And I did not chip in ten grand to seed a first investment round to build value for a Facebook acquisition. The Kickstarter angle is interesting. I'd be peeved as well if I was a supporter and this happened. Aren't KS Projects by implication a "Project for the People" first and foremost? Should KS Backers at least get a small return for making a $2 Billion exit possible?

I feel like 2014 will be the year of the big Kick Starter lawsuits where funders who feel betrayed by the projects they kicked in on turn angry. There have been number of movies funded that promised "downloadable versions" only to put those behind really awful drm websites on requirement of deals made with big companies to get the movies into theaters.
Post reply on HN