Give it to me straight /v/. Is VR going to a paradigm shift or will it be another failed gimmick?
>>322033069
Toss up. My guess is goes the way of Segway and Google glasses
>>322033069
Neither.
VR is going to start out slow. While the tech is there now, it's expensive. Once the price for a consumer headset is lower, and hence the barrier to entry, we'll see it become more and more prevalent. It's a good alternative to television unless you're several people, so as long as early adopters shill it properly, it might see decent market penetration after a couple years. So no quick changes, and the traditional devices will still be around.
Can they just tell us the price already goddamn.
Flop of the millennium
Most women will downright reject it because it'll ruin their hair.
>>322034139
maybe they shouldn't decide to play games before going to chase Chad's cock in the same night?
>>322033680
or it just goes to deathspiral and dies
>not many buy it as it's too expensive
>no one makes games as there's no market
>no one will buy it because there's no games
lot's of consoles and microcomputers have failed like that.
The bigger question is, will there be a paradigm shift in software engineering? Because ordinary ways of interacting with a program (of any sort) largely don't work out with motion tracking. Hence most of the things I've seen are pretty low-key tech demos, like riding a roller coaster or sitting in a movie theater, where wearing an HMD gives you better parallax than a screen but at this huge cost of not being able to do anything.
So I think this should really be seen as a UI problem. The transition from keyboards to mice largely worked out, but there was also a massive change in how programs were developed to accommodate it. (Technically speaking, mice only worked out in the long run because of the change to the "observer pattern.") Other things like motion-tracking controllers (Wiimote and Kinect) needed to have a similar design pattern change but didn't, so they failed. I haven't seen any evidence of a massive change to UI paradigms happening, which is why I'm pretty sure HMDs will turn out to be a gimmick.
>>322034925
can you at least say something nice about these headsets
I tried one out, it wasnt excatly mind blowing but ive seen the potential. Are we already give some info about using this potential or is everyone even the devs still toying without real promise
>>322035520
Motion tracking is very powerful for certain 3d design tasks, particularly those where you don't have good reference objects. So designing 3d structures out of building blocks in an open space is enormously easier with a motion-tracked display. I don't think HMDs are irrelevant per se, but I really don't think they're good for gaming.
I'm aware of two things HMDs are "good at" with current approaches: you need parallax (in the sense of different apparent motions of objects based on distance) to be important, which is the niche 3d design case, or you need a combination of low interactivity and a desire for sensory deprivation, which shows up in cases like showing people around a model of a building (e.g., replacing physical model homes with virtual ones). The problem with that first use case is that, if you're really serious about it, you're always better off with a "cave" if you can afford it. The second might gain some traction if the right people figure it out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_automatic_virtual_environment
