2 ms·

I agree. I also think that the mass appeal of VR is much lower than most tech enthusiasts believe. It's a novelty that everyone probably wants to try once just

I agree. I also think that the mass appeal of VR is much lower than most tech enthusiasts believe. It's a novelty that everyone probably wants to try once just to see what it's like, but I don't think many people really want to play games or regularly immerse in experiences that way. It decreases your environmental awareness far too much imo, and I think that long-term, many people will believe it's creepy to be that sucked into a device, and walking around with a huge block attached to your head. I've heard some people say that AR is really where VR can make mass-market appeal and I'd certainly agree that prospects for something like an environmental HUD a la Glass are much better than an "immersive" experience that leaves you blind to the real-world.

tudorw 10y ago
I agree, this is certainly not a demand driven product, I've played around with VR since the 90's and for some use cases it is unimaginably useful, yet for daily consumer entertainment the experience is not physically comfortable enough, interactive TV was not popular, people generally fill their time with lay back viewing, even when given more 'exciting' alternatives. Look at videogames, despite the potential we are still mostly stuck in realistic looking scenarios that permit us to play out violent fantasies, their are scant few titles that explore the deeper side of human experience, the indie scene is much richer in this regard, there is so much growing up to do in the 2d medium I am sceptical that adding a dimension will resolve these entrenched issues.