Are you excited about VR or do you think it's a flop.
I tried out the Samsung gear, and I'm considering it. If it wasn't for the phone limitations, I would buy it just for VR porn.
They still need to git rid of the screendoor effect. Probably in 5 years or so they'll have it figured out. I'd still probably prefer a TV. The picture is just one small part of the immersion. VR does nothing about the sound stage. I'd rather be in a comfy, open room with my speakers I can really feel than with a heavy bowl on my head.
I also don't care about turning my head to look in a game. The whole point of a game is to relax and not have to move. Its like wii tenis, I can just look around in real life, don't need a $1000 VR headset to do that. Immersion is still mostly about the content.
>>52203429
People who have tried oculus CV1 have reported the screen door effect no longer an issue. Pretty convinced it's worth getting into, would rather not sit around waiting 5 years cause its not good enough now.
>>52203429
What's the screen door effect? Seeing pixels?
Samsung Gear VR is pretty nifty and has potential to be a great consumer-grade VR product...the only issue is the things made for VR are just a little much like the Wii when it first came out.
Wii was fun as fuck for all of three months...then I found myself playing golf sitting down, bowling sitting down, etc. VR-media producers really want the user to be active...when the user just wants to sit there and jack off to whatever is in their face.
Still looking forward to Oculus though, as it seems more grounded...figuratively and literally...
>>52203528
I can't lay on my back and watch Netflix? Fuck.
>>52203528
That may be true for the first year or so of VR (at least for gaming), but I believe it may shift later. The thing I'm most excited about VR is that people will need to get creative and come up with new ways to do things, and if it really takes off, the first few years are going to be really interesting and experimental. If you follow any VR developer, you can see how they are already coming up with new ways to do stuff like movement and interaction, and the possibility for new experiences, not just 'same thing but in first person' is pretty exciting.
>>52203363
Yep. I used one of the older Rifts once. It was displaying basically a movie, still it was pretty cool.
The technology is there, it just needs to be refined and perfected. The first release of these products might not be shit hot, but in 10 years I can see it becoming quite common. Gotta start somewhere.
It is somewhat discouraging that many people do not know that Facebook is in charge of Oculus. A buddy of mine was pretty much ready to pay anything for it... until I told him about the whole Facebook deal. He wanted nothing to do with Facebook for years! I didn't particularly enjoy bursting his bubble.
Supposedly there are other VR sets coming out, and even more a year or two from now, so there will be more choice at least.
I'm tempted to buy the gear VR, but I feel like within a year it will be outdated.
>>52203605
All fun to see in play, and I'm hoping those newer means of doing things are nice; just gotta get over that slightly annoying "Technologyyyyyyyyyyy" phase before we can get to the more practical way. Until then, I guess I'll just have to stand when a VR movie insists on moving the entire scene to precisely behind me.
>>52203687
Valve's vive looks like a good competitor that isn't controlled by an social advertising company
>>52203714
It will be. Never buy Version 1 of anything.
>>52203769
Also looks superior, specially considering they announced a delay recently due to a 'major VR technology breakthrough'.
>>52203363
I think it has crazy potential, even "basic" VR, as in 3D headset + head tracking.
I really, really hope that we'll get proper games for VR. I don't want shitty gimmicks where you waggle around 2 inappropriate controllers while pretending they're your character's hands, just regular games, but in immersive 3D, full-FoV 3D.
>>52203363
I'lll most likely be preordering an Oculus Rift. I've tried the DK1 with a friend, I tried Crescent Bay at CES last year and it was fucking fantastic, and I'll be trying out CV1 this year at CES.
>>52203487
More like seeing the black lines between the pixels.
>>52203687
Most of the community is over the facebook deal now. The knee-jerk reaction is that they'll fuck it up and push push push social media and advertising into the device, but that's just not what's happening at all and they know it would be retarded. All we've seen so far from that deal is Oculus getting more funding, and substantially more polish on later revisions, plus they'll be able to sell at-cost due to the buffer facebook money provides. CV1 looks great, they'll be opening pre-orders soon, and it will be delivered Q1 (The latest we know is they delayed Touch to H2 but have re-affirmed that CV1 is on track for Q1)
>>52203795
>they'll be opening pre-orders soon, and it will be delivered Q1
What about games, though? How many games will there be within that timeframe that provide actual depth and complexity in their world/mechanics, things above gimmicks and glorified tech demos?
>>52203687
I have a feeling that Oculus will set the tone for the general consensus, succeeding manufacturers will then fill their own appropriate niches.
Your friend still has the HTC/Valve VR set that should be coming out soon as a secondary contender.
>>52203714
Given there really isn't much like this technology, and that much of what we have is kinda grounded, it seems like first-run devices will be good for at least two or three years...which is pretty standard for tech nowadays.
>>52203830
Probably not many in the first year. It's all going to be gimmicky and experimental, like every technology is in its infancy.
>>52203830
It's going to be Day-1 for consumer VR, so there's not a TON of content and a lot of general mechanics and comfort problems need to be figured out on the software end. That said, there's like 25 Oculus exclusive and around 50 games that are platform agnostic that should be release at or near launch. Plus it comes with Eve: Valkyrie and Lucky's Tale, and it should already work with Elite: Dangerous which I already have. Vive won't have quite as much content, at least initially, from what I've seen so far, maybe they'll surprise me at CES... but then again, SteamVR works on the Rift and will probably work fine with Oculus Touch once its out, so I'm not very worried about being locked out of content if I get a Rift, but I would be worried about being locked out of content if I got a Vive.
>>52203869
This is what it's been for the past 2 years of development VR, so yeah, first year will be somewhat lacking in massive games and experiences. I'm fine with that. More full-fledged games will come, but only if adoption is high enough.
>>52203869
I think shit like that is dangerous as fuck. If people buy it and feel that it's useless beyond the initial experience, it will probably fuck up the adoption rate and may have a negative effect on VR in general.
I'm not saying that VR-exclusive games are required, but I sure as fuck hope that some major titles will at least have VR support in addition to working on traditional displays.
I think the Gear VR should be considered something different from the Rift. I could probably take the Gear with me and show it off to friends and coworkers, while the Rift will always be at home.
>>52203991
Social VR (janusVR, among many others) will probably be the "killer app" for VR, and will drive adoption.
>>52203991
>I sure as fuck hope that some major titles will at least have VR support in addition to working on traditional displays
The problem with this thinking is that almost all games made for traditional displays do a shit-ton of trickery to make things seem normal and look nice but do not work for VR at all.
Skyrim, for instance, has the scale of most in-game items fucked to hell and the mountains that look massive on a normal monitor seem tiny in VR. Messing with the world-scale/IPD doesn't really fix it because the scales of so many things are off in the first place.
The best VR experiences are those made for VR. Of course there will be some games that work great for both, but they'll be the exception, no the rule. Also in multiplayer games, VR players often have a strong advantage due to having depth perception, as anyone playing racing games with a DK2 can attest.
>>52204074
Well, Skyrim has not been made with VR in mind at all as far as I'm aware. Although I never got to try them, I was under the impression that some games like Alien Isolation and Elite: Dangerous which have VR support work decently.
I'd rather have a decently working Alien Isolation than 5 amazing tech demos where I pretend I'm on a rollercoaster, is all I'm saying.
>>52204069
>implying low-persistence isn't in every kit since at least last year
>>52204198
Alien Isolation in VR has bad bugs, specifically it had troublesome UI and the terminals are way way too fucking close to your face. Elite: Dangerous was designed to work fine in VR and it works now on Vive and DK2, should work fine on CV1, and it's one of the few experiences that works very well on both monitors and in VR. I expect cockpit games to usually work fine on both VR and monitors, but again, most likely going to be the exception, not the rule.
Hi, Reddit cancer here. Someone compiled a list of currently confirmed CV1 near/launch games (so it excludes stuff like Henry (cinematic experiences), Medium (not a game), Rockband VR (Touch title), Alien Isolation (no official confirmation), etc).
>https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/3z6iyi/list_of_full_oculus_rift_games_available_in_q1q2/
>>52204348
Also excludes titles which haven't been announced/confirmed as of yet, obviously. Also not a list for games which simply tag on "VR supported!" but actually have shit VR support or has it on the sideline.
>>52203869
>>52203830
PSVR is getting games from known IPs like Ace Combat, Tekken, Dead or Alive, and Gran Turismo. The Rift is more centered around new IPs.
>>52204808
It's going to be quite a way out for most of those, I assure you.
>nerds getting excited by a dead In the water technology that normies will avoid
stop projecting your escapist fantasies onto a technology that will neither deliver nor have any market survivability
the only good thing is that VR flopping will both crash the tech bubble and the gaming industry simultaneously so the golden age will come back
In pretty excited
I did a be teaching aid at my last internship and I was thinking about trying to get a job with VR/AR when I graduate
>>52203429
Screen door on the HTC Vive and Oculus CV1 are at a point where you don't notice it after 10 seconds. I think the next gen will get rid of it for good.
>>52205206
You're projecting previous failures of VR onto the current tech. It won't fail. Will the adoption be a little slow? Sure, like any new tech.
I'll say this forever, but you need to try it to understand it. Everyone who has tried VR knows this, because the medium has such incredible potential that most people just can't understand until they put it on and try it out.
Once one of you friends gets a Rift CV1 or a Vive, ask for a demo. You won't be disappointed.
>>52205206
So you haven't tried it have you.
>>52205333
>>52205334
>my positive anecdotal experience guarantees a market future for a product
VR idiots everyone
>>52205083
Tekken and DoA are pretty much confirmed for this year.
>>52205393
No seriously this is the rebuttal that every single fucking person who tries it says. This isn't some anecdotal bullshit, this is nearly everyone's experience.
worth reading
cv1 announcement imminent aswell
https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/3ynsim/i_got_to_try_the_consumer_beta_ecv7_and_here_is/
i have zero interest in it.
i hope it takes off so i can laugh at all the kids with meme-goggles strapped to their faces. only later to discover a fatal flaw like the opti-grab in the jerk. then i'll laugh again
>>52205434
How are those two going to work? Is there any info about that? Ace Combat and Gran Turismo are pretty much no brainers since they're seated cockpit experiences, but I don't really see how fighting games would work unless it's just the same thing but on VR, which would just be a useless gimmick.
>>52203687
>it is somewhat discouraging that many people do not know that Nestle is in charge of food.
just continue from there
>>52205448
>this is nearly everyone's experience
i seriously hope you never become a researcher
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-selection_bias
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro-innovation_bias
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participation_bias
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthy_user_bias
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_bias
>>52203787
if it isn't eye tracking, it's shit
>>52205448
>>52205498
It's not like we have scientific surveys and studies about the popularity and experience of VR. Literally all of the information about the experiences is anecdote. Just like game and movie reviews. It's all subjective anecdotes, but in this case, they create a bigger picture that happens to be positive. If we have professional research to work with here, show it. Right now all we have is anecdotes.
The only criticism I've seen of DK2 are all problems that have been dealt with in CV1 (SDE, minor software problems in earlier SDKs before 0.7, etc), and some people just saying "VR will never take off, it's shit, don't buy it" which is practically only people who haven't tried it. Everyone else who has one or has tried one has given glowing reviews.
>>52205475
Just replace the in-game camera with a VR headset, move it back a little bit. It's most likely just going to be third person, not first person. VR will probably provide nothing worthwhile to a vanilla tekken game.
>>52205475
Tekken VR will just be front row spectator mode, but I wouldn't be surprised if that included social support. I'm not sure what DoA is going to do though.
I used the Samsung vr set that you clip your phone into and watched some videos. I think it's cool to look around and see all these neat things but hardware isn't quite there
>>52205584
>Using GearVR as a benchmark
GearVR is cool and all but it doesn't have positional tracking or the horsepower of a modest gaming PC. Oculus Rift and Vive have both of those.
>>52205563
>but in this case, they create a bigger picture that happens to be positive
No, it's utterly worthless due to self-selection bias.
If I developed a new technology for squatting toilets and created a conference for it, it too would create the impression that this will revolutionize sanitation across the world instead of just for those who are already interested in squatting toilets.
>>52205648
stop shitting autism buckets anon. vr will come and hit hard, just sit back a few more days until CES
>>52205563
>someone actually typed this
still not buying one scrub. put that in your literally everyone glowing review list and smoke it
>>52205648
Then stop being so cynical and wait until a year after launch when there are VR headsets and more content. Let the rest of us deal with the pains of day 1.
Would you review a movie before seeing it? Would you review a game before playing it? This is the same thing. It's not selection bias when you have to try it to know whether you'll like it or not in the first place.
>>52205697
Have you tried it? This VR stuff is going to be similar to the iPad and tablet launches. "It's just a big phone" they say, until everyone has one.
>>52203561
You can, I do
Just need to start the vr in that position
>>52205744
This literal version of netflix and chill sounds nice.
I'm excited for the Vive.
>>52205735
yea, i thought it was dumb. i see no functional use for it outside of porn, gaming or maybe 3D modeling applications.
>iPad
>tablets
in the sense that its a meme? i agree. it is. hyped up by people like you.
>>52203363
I'm looking forward to it. CES will be exicting next week.
I'd like to get a Vive but the Rift currently still looks a bit more promising game and controller-wise. I'm not too keen on giving money to Facebook though.
>HUH! somebody is critical of muh precious VR
>have u tried it
>ahve u TRied It!?
>AHAVE U TRAIED IETT???
This reminds me of when that video game Journey came out on PS3 and when people said it wasn't any good the fanboys would come up with this EVERY SINGLE TIME
>u just didnt get it
>U DJUJST DIdnt geditT
>U DJDJUST DIDNT GUIGURGIT
Hi.
>>52205835
>implying Journey isn't one of the best gaming experiences ever
actually a pretty good comparison anon, props to you
>>52205771
>>52205801
Oculus Touch looks more comfortable. Though I'm curious if the Vive's tracking is actually any more robust than the Rift/Touch's tracking.
>>52205697
You can't review something you haven't tried.
>>52205795
In the sense that most people think it's stupid (hint: there's a much bigger following for VR before it even has a consumer release than any tablet ever has had), but then tons of people start buying one once they see potential. A better comparison probably would have been touch screen phones before the iPhone came out. Except VR actually works today.
> i see no functional use for it outside of porn, gaming or maybe 3D modeling applications
Your point? Gaming is exactly what it's marketed for, and porn will most likely drive at least some sales anyways considering there's already a considerable amount of VR porn.
>>52205835
This isn't a single game like Journey (it was a nice game, but the hype it really was too much), it's a new entertainment medium, an entirely new way of playing games and experiencing things. The comparison doesn't seem valid.
>>52205913
>You can't review something you haven't tried.
>>52205930
Where's the evidence that it will be shit though?
I know shit will come out of your butt because I've observed shit coming out of my own butt, and everyone has that experience.
This isn't Ass Creed or Call of Duty where the new games are mostly just minor iteration on the previous.
You can't review a completely new device (with not relevant predecessors), IP, or medium before trying it.
>>52205459
seconded for no bullshit
>>52205971
but they tried to do VR 20 years ago and it failed!
obviously the same is going to happen again, right??
>>52205913
>comparison doesn't seem valid.
The comparison is in the mindless identical responses from the fanboys that seek to end the discussion through un-falsifiable personal assumptions about other posters (they don't like VR? they mustn't have tried it. they don't like journey? they must have been too stupid to understand it).
>>52205995
"no relevent predecessors"
I know you're joking, but people actually spout this like 20 years ago's VR is relevant. 3d rendering capabilities were shit, the FOV was utter shit, latency was shit, etc etc. Basically all of the problems with early VR have been dealt with.
>>52205459
Very detailed and informative. Can't wait to try CV1 at CES.
>>52205995
>>52206038
VR was tried not even a full 10 years ago you ignorants
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2007/11/virtual-reality-headset-review/
>>52205913
>You can't review something you haven't tried.
see >>52205795 - thats me also
>In the sense that most people think it's stupid
right. i like watching my porn the normal way and im not a gaymur. outside of that, i have no use for it and never will. a lot of other people will fall into that same category. this isnt >>>/v/ ya know
>A better comparison probably would have been touch screen phones before the iPhone came out.
not even close. a touch screen phone has many, many uses. VR meme-goggles have limited utility as you yourself admitted. apples to oranges. such is the life of a fanboi i guess. shill on friend
>>52206048
Damn I want to go there. Wish I had a contact on the inside or something.
Anyone who does not see that 2016 is VR's first year is fucking retarded.
The CV1/Vive are the proverbial iPhone of this technology that was previously limited to millionaires and companies.
I've tried them both and I thought DK1/DK2 was shit because of the latency, the screen door, the lack of input, the FPS, comfort was too low blah blah, but I was finally convinced after a Vive demo, then re-affirmed by using the CV1, both at PAX Prime.
This isn't a dev kit, for sure. The headsets work. The immersion is real. The CV1 is light like a baseball cap and has speakers like my Sennheisers but the sound is true 3D sound. The controllers on the Vive are fucking insanely precise, dunno' about the Rift controllers. The games are fun and there are more than just 5 or 6 of them that are fun, to where I would buy them. The systems have a library comparable to console launches, hell even PS3 had half the games the Vive, Rift or PSVR will have on launch individually.
You dipshits can not buy the VR and look the other way when an internet-tier freight train is a-coming, but I will see your goofy-ass trap furry avatars polluting my social VR spaces in about 2 years, watch.
Apple is making VR shit and they don't need you to tell them its going to blow up. Tell the Plebians it sucks then.
>>52206069
>320x240
oh i wonder why it never took off...
>>52206097
>I've tried them both and I thought DK1/DK2 was shit because of the latency, the screen door, the lack of input, the FPS, comfort was too low blah blah
But just a few years ago VR fanboys were telling us that VR in the form of DK2 was P E R F E C T just the way it was.
If ONLY we had TRIED it...if ONLY...then...WE TOO would become true believers
>>52206097
>I thought DK1/DK2 was shit because of the latency... the FPS
You got bad demos, in the case of the DK2. Under optimal conditions, DK2 demos should cross the threshold where you don't notice latency, and don't notice flicker from low FPS low persistence visuals.
>>52206080
>VR meme-goggles have limited utility
>VR meme-goggles have limited utilit
y>VR meme-goggles have limited utility
>VR meme-goggles have limited utility
>VR meme-goggles have limited utility
Education, Medical Therapies, Art, Gaming, Communication, New ways of media consumption etc etc.. clearly no utility at all
>>52206173
>Education, Medical Therapies, Art, Gaming, Communication, New ways of media consumption etc etc.. clearly no utility at all
they said the same thing about the Kinect
>>52203363
>gear vr
You saw all those pixels right? All that fucking grain on a 1440p panel. I've tried it myself and vr isn't going to be visually pleasing till they got 4k. Still I would like to try the vive or OR for the higher refresh rate as long as the price
>>52206149
Not him but according to my memory, there were not that many people who hyped it to that level. If there was then it was a vocal minority. The point about those old demos and hardware is that they were the best we had for the time, and they showed the potential, not the reality, of VR. Many articles were talking about how cool the experience was, but that there were still many problems like resolution holding it back from consumer success. Whoever tried it and swore off VR just didn't have any foresight or imagination.
>>52206184
balmer or who?
>>52206069
It had most of the same problems as ALL of the problems of old expensive VR. VERY low resolution, low FOV, bad motion tracking, no positional tracking (without TrackIR anyways), high latency, no good software support (especially from driver manufacturers), less R&D by far...
Current VR fixed all of that.
>>52206081
You only have to be tangentially related to consumer electronics. If your company has sold anything to a consumer electronics company, make up some bullshit about what you sell/sold them is used to help make or effect consumer electronics.
>>52206184
In fairness, the Kinect had lots of problems. The resolution was shit, the latency was abslute utter shit, and no devs except for fucking Rare and the Let's Dance guys wanted to work on it. VR has lots of devs (quite a few big companies at this point, and tons of indies).
>>52206149
Yeah but I am not saying they're perfect either. I am saying they are ready for mass consumption. The CV3 will obviously make the CV1 look like child's play just like you look at the iPhones of yesteryear and go "how basic.."
Would I use a plastic pressure-touch touchscreen and pretend it was the greatest shit ever when I knew it was not and saw technology that was greater, within reach? Fuck no. I would wait for a glass screen capacitive device I thought felt and worked well enough to transfer from an OLD medium. This is that transfer point from my traditional monitor to a headset.
Example: VR desktop in DK2 was slightly too pixelated, but immediately after wearing the "consumer" headset from Oculus I was convinced the screen door would not be an issue.
>>52206155
Non 144hz detected. Nah, when I put on DK2 I immediately noticed the lower FPS and when you've seen frames like I see daily when I game, halving that shit is a big difference. The 90hz in CV1/Vive is comfortable enough (and light enough) for me to "forget" I am wearing screens on my face. My DK2 demo was on 4770k/ GTX980.
>>52206187
you probably think aswell that a camera sensor alone does good images and optics are just there for fun hm?
>>52206218
>Non 144hz detected. Nah, when I put on DK2 I immediately noticed the lower FPS and when you've seen frames like I see daily when I game, halving that shit is a big difference. The 90hz in CV1/Vive is comfortable enough (and light enough) for me to "forget" I am wearing screens on my face. My DK2 demo was on 4770k/ GTX980.
I suppose your brain has been conditioned then. I wonder, are you usually bothered when you enter environments lit by 60 Hz light bulbs in real life?
>>52206211
>It had most of the same problems as ALL of the problems of old expensive VR. VERY low resolution, low FOV, bad motion tracking, no positional tracking (without TrackIR anyways), high latency, no good software support (especially from driver manufacturers), less R&D by far...
This makes the dangerous assumption that VR failed due to the technology
I tried a Sony vr that is used exclusively with ps4 because I'm interested in the tech and it was by far the best vr unit ive tried Thusfar, it had the best headtracking, colour and depth of field out of what ive tried (oculus 1, Samsung head gear)
Its a shame theyre only kitting it with the ps4 from what I understand
>>52206211
>You only have to be tangentially related to consumer electronics. If your company has sold anything to a consumer electronics company, make up some bullshit about what you sell/sold them is used to help make or effect consumer electronics.
I got nothing. Still attending university.
>>52206173
speculation = reality
yeah, no
>>52206300
you don't want me to list down everything via youtube videos i listed there, don`t you?
>>52206257
Light flicker is obvious to me but an expected thing. Putting on a reality that has only 75fps when I move my head left to right, especially quickly killed the illusion. When I put on the Vive/CV1 first thing I did was a headshake test. Not only did the world stay solid, in the CV1's case the headset didn't move. As in, its weight did not cause a shift over my eyes at all and I couldn't tell it was hanging off of my face. That was impressive.
>>52206327
i can totally relate to that even if i didn't try the CV1 but own a DK1 and this are all the issues they were supposed to fix with the final consumer rift
>>52206259
But it actually did fail due to the technology.
It literally made you sick and there was no way around it. That is actually the core of the resurgence of VR, better technology. The content was always going to be there. Its just jim dipshit wasn't going to keep a vomit bucket nearby so he could play 3D Draw on his 10,000 dollar headset with 20fps.
>>52206257
>>52206327
Not him but 60/75Hz light bulbs are annoying, always flickering in my peripheries. Same as most CRTs when i was in highschool. Ugh. Still in VR that would be much more of an issue. 90Hz CV1 is apparently good enough, and make no mistake, Oculus never said that 75Hz was good enough for any normal person, just that it was good enough for development. Also the DK1 didn't have low persistence, so it didn't flicker to lower perceived latency.
>>52206259
No it did fail because of technical limitations (it makes you sick as fuck because of multiple problems like low refresh rate, low FOV, laggy head tracking, etc etc), price, and lack of marketing.
This time, the price is at least somewhat decent (around $450-550 for Rift, we'll find out the actual price in a few days), limitations are far far less than anything previous and are far less likely to make you sick (unless devs do something stupid like spin your around constantly or pull your head cam around without your input), and we have Facebook, Valve, and Sony behind the main headsets so marketing will be fine.
Anyone hyped for The Climb? I've tried some of Crytek's VR and it was brilliant.
>>52206396
>That is actually the core of the resurgence of VR, better technology
No, it's the core of an unproven assumption - that VR failed due to the technology not being good enough, and that if we improve the technology it will succeed.
It couldn't possibly have failed because it overshot the market's requirements right? Or that it's the most anti-social piece of equipment ever made? Or that maybe most people don't want to enter a different reality?
>>52206457
I'll just let you believe what you want to believe. VR will be the most social technology of humanity's history. Remember those words.
>>52206314
porn and gaymes with limited success.
it flops outside of that.
im picturing...
>classrooms full of kids wearing these things to learn
nope.
>doctors and hospitals adopting this technology en-mass outside of niche applications
nah dont see it
>people preferring to look at art thru meme-goggles instead of with their own eyes
doubtful
>someone being able to virtually creep around your bedroom from a few thousand miles away
likely. u got me there.
>>52206513
>Remember those words.
I won't, because it would only be true after both you and me are dead.
>>52206457
>Or that it's the most anti-social piece of equipment ever made?
Interaction with other people in VR is far from anti-social.
>Or that maybe most people don't want to enter a different reality?
You obviously haven't met this generation of nerds. It's also not like this concept hasn't been handled in sci-fi for fucking ever.
>It couldn't possibly have failed because it overshot the market's requirements right?
If you mean it was too expensive for what it did, yeah, that's precisely why it failed before.
>>52206523
>classrooms full of kids wearing these things to learn
More like people learning from home in a common virtual setting.
>doctors and hospitals adopting this technology en-mass outside of niche applications
Niche is the keyword. It could be good for those tiny remotely-controlled surgery robot hands. But yeah, not entirely sure where medical will use this.
>people preferring to look at art thru meme-goggles instead of with their own eyes
Depends if you definition of art includes immersive 360-3D movies and video games.
>someone being able to virtually creep around your bedroom from a few thousand miles away
I await the day someone gets a rotating and/or articulating camera onto a drone or rc car and hook it all up to a VR headset. This will be the next level of creep cams.
Create new apps and content for VR. We need to entice more people to buy it. Naysayers will be naysayers, what we need to focus are those who are open to anything that catches their interests and those who want the next best thing. Because the more people buying/using VR, the more people will create VR related content, be it stereoscopic photos, videos, or VR apps themselves. Also this incentivizes entrepreneurs to develop products related to VR and improve VR technology. For example, there's a reason now to improve SLI/CrossFire support and games being able to utilize more than one GPUs, because they could render graphics for each of the lenses (left and right) in a VR headset.
>>52206523
im picturing...
>classrooms full of kids wearing these things to learn
now picture developers from all over the globe, discussing a product in a more immersive way than ever before and even you could take part in it. it could be basically CES without the need to be there physically.
>doctors and hospitals adopting this technology en-mass outside of niche applications
surgeons already use vr as a technique to operate with for more precise tasks.
>people preferring to look at art thru meme-goggles instead of with their own eyes
that's like asking people if they like to prefer to look out the window or watch tv... make a good guess
>someone being able to virtually creep around your bedroom from a few thousand miles away
you could hire someone from china to play your daily waifu.. in vr you can look like anything you want
Facebook sees 'Facebook Life' A second life clone but in VR where you interact with your friends and such.
>>52206457
Not any of the people that were responding to you, but holy shit that logic.
>>52206631
>now picture developers from all over the globe, discussing a product
You can already do this more cheaply with a regular screen and a video camera.
>more immersive way
Yeah, this is what it really boils down to. VR offers no advantage over existing technology except immersion.
The entire crux of the technology is improved immersion, there are no other advantages.
Classic case of overshooting the market.
>>52206595
>More like people learning from home in a common virtual setting.
a generation home schooled. lmao and we thought the world was dumb now.. just wait. VR goes nuclear with retardation.
>Depends if you definition of art includes immersive 360-3D movies and video games.
oh yeah? the way 3d tvs were such a massive success with their glasses?
>b-but - now its 360noscope!111
still a failure. DOA. screencap this, print it and use it to dry your tears in 10 years when im right.
>>52206665
>You can already do this more cheaply with a regular screen and a video camera.
but does this include people interaction? like talking with your seat neighbour?
the experience changes completely into something that feels like, embracing it as a crowd and not simply alone in front of a monitor
>>52203363
It's garbage. The only improvement over the last big attempt in the 90s is that the graphics look much better now. Same basic flaws and limits still need to be overcome.
Give it another 20 years for the sensing tech and mechanical aspects to improve and we can take another crack at cross porting 3d 'game' engine tech into 3d again.
>>52206443
>sit in a chair like a fat fuck while pretending to climb
costanza dot jaypeg
>>52206678
in 3 days, chinese manufacteurers will force glass-free 3d TV's on the market which work from any angles in 4k and HDR
atleast that's what the CES page states
The OR is headphones for the eyes.
Do you wear headphones, or do you use speakers all the time?
>>52206693
>but does this include people interaction? like talking with your seat neighbour?
Literally anything you can do in VR you can also do without VR.
What you're describing can be done, and has been done in Second Life for more than 10 years.
>the experience changes completely into something that feels like, embracing it as a crowd and not simply alone in front of a monitor
So it's basically extra immersion...
and that's it.
>>52206665
>The entire crux of the technology is improved immersion, there are no other advantages.
It's not just "improved immersion", but for lack of a better word, it's more like "presence" to throw a buzz word around. You don't just feel like you're looking at a screen. You feel like you're there. Consciously you know you're playing a game, but the primal parts of your brain don't get that. You seem to majorly underestimate the capability of VR to make you feel like you're literally there. Even better once we have tracked controllers in our hands. It's hard to thoroughly explain the experience.
Again, this is exactly why everyone says to try it. Don't try a DK2 or anything worse. Try a Vive or CV1. Try it at CES, try it from a friend who gets it once its out, etc.
>>52206730
Speakers and monitors can't track where you head is. Monitors don't provide a massive FOV.
>>52206730
headphones for binaural gaymen
speakers for either wall shaking or breathtaking representations of good mixed sources
>Second Life for more than 10 years.
but it's different if you put on a VR headset.
second life just feels like an mmo. in vr you look people in the eyes and feel sorry if you leave without saying good bye.
>>52206734
Not him, but when was the last time I could open up a program on my computer, use my real head to look to my left, and see an actual hologram of a person sitting next time?
And then a different question I'd like to know your opinion on is why you think people would prefer to have meetings in real life, when it can all be done on a computer, according to your logic?
>>52206751
>I'd like to know your opinion on is why you think people would prefer to have meetings in real life
Because when you have meetings in real life you don't have to rely on technology. After business you can go with that person to the pub and get pissed.
>>52206734
so you finally got it.. the immersion part i mean.
but it's not extra immersion. it's dominant immersion which absorbs you off reality
>>52206744
>Speakers and monitors can't track where you head is. Monitors don't provide a massive FOV.
Read my post again. You read it wrong.
>>52206744
>It's not just "improved immersion"
>more like "presence" to throw a buzz word around. You don't just feel like you're looking at a screen. You feel like you're there
>>52206750
>second life just feels like an mmo. in vr you look people in the eyes and feel sorry if you leave without saying good bye.
>>52206751
>I could open up a program on my computer, use my real head to look to my left, and see an actual hologram of a person sitting next time?
>>52206765
>but it's not extra immersion. it's dominant immersion which absorbs you off reality
YOU GUYS ARE SO FUCKING INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST HOLY SHIT
>it's not immersion, but here's this fucking euphemism for immersion that I claim is not immersion because reasons
>>52206779
watch sword art online for full immersion
:^)
>>52206779
Which is why we all say to fucking try it. We're trying to share an experience and revelation here. Calling what we experience through VR "immersion" in the same way that Skyrim was heralded for "immersion" is the real dishonesty.
>>52206800
>We're trying to share an experience and revelation here
Just call yourselves VR evangelicals.
At least Apple was being honest about it, goddamn.
>30 posters
>119 replies
I just wanted to talk about technology. Why can't you guys just stop shitposting.
>>52206826
we are as much vr evangelicals like we are real life evangelicals :)
>>52206847
kek
>>52206847
>>52206826
We never said we weren't evangelising VR, but pretty much nothing anything we said was lies. VR if fucking great. If you don't believe us, try it.
I will eat my hat if it doesn't take off. There will be enough early adopters to push it forward.
>>52206917
I'll eat my shoe if VR doesn't take off desu. It's just the natural progression of technology.
>>52206917
>openly admitting to shilling VR
i hope there is decent monetary compensation anon
>>52203363
I'm definitely looking forward to it and can't really imagine a future without it
But the first consumer versions are still half a year away and still lacking a lot of important features (like penis / silicone doll vagina - tracking)
So VR won't really start this year
>>52206962
Not him but I'll shill whatever has to be shilled. Were the people at the start of the internet who were arguing to skeptics that it would be the future shills? Being a shill is great desu. Better than living under a rock like an closed off luddite.
>>52206962
not this guy but the subsidisation will save enough money for anyone who plans to get cv1
>>52206977
you're wrong, google teledildonics
>>52207013
>>52207014
>00:13:47
ayy
>>52206977
>the first consumer versions are still half a year away
Oculus Rift will release Q1.
>>52207047
>getting a vr headset without motion controllers
>>52207014
They're selling it at cost since they plan to make money from software and can take the immediate hit due to Facebook money buffer.
>>52207063
>Not getting the better supported headset and planning to pick up the controllers asap
>>52207076
yup, which is a plus for early adopters like me
>>52207076
they are delayed until q3/q4
>>52207098
So? Rift still releases earlier, and with HTC's track record on Vive, I don't expect them to stick to their current release window.
>>52207063
>not playing based flight and cockpit simulators earlier than everyone else and then picking up superior hand controllers later on
>not being rich enough to just get all the headsets anyway
so if you cant force people to like wearing goofy looking technology on their face you pay an army of shills 2 rupees per to hype it up and lie their balls off.
got it. what a great thread.
>in vr you look people in the eyes and feel sorry if you leave without saying good bye.
>>52207267
i was expecting that response on 4chan
>>52207147
Palmer's interviews are great.
https://youtu.be/smLUsONW7GU
>>52207288
obligatory
>>52207301
i was on 4chan before reddit existed
>>52207267
I'm not paid anything and I legitimately very very much enjoyed my experiences in VR. We weren't lying about anything.
Try it. Don't buy it until you've tried it.
>>52207310
i was on the internet before you existed
>>52207313
>We
gahneesh pls.
>>52207363
>i'm old and deserve respect from internet hobos
please kill yourself cuckold
>>52207363
There were like at least 3 of us defending VR. Less than half of the replies were (You) for me. I certainly was not the only one.
http://www.theverge.com/2015/10/20/9573165/nyt-vr-new-york-times-cardboard-app
looks like history repeats itself
>>52207611
>new cancer times
>>52207611
Fuck the Cardboard. If VR doesn't take off fast enough, Cardboard will kill VR entirely for the general public. Shitty phones without dedicated VR-specific hardware are terrible for VR. It's nothing like a Rift, or hell even GearVR.
I would have gotten a VR just to tide me over, but fuck it being tied to 4 specific phones.
