3 ms·

I also think VR is overhyped, but not because it's a fad (though that's part of it). It's similar to 3D TV in that it presents content in a better way that nob

I also think VR is overhyped, but not because it's a fad (though that's part of it). It's similar to 3D TV in that it presents content in a better way that nobody asked for, and nobody ever found a way to massively leverage the tech that truly felt natural. 3D content ended up falling into two camps: - Films that are largely the same experience as their 2D counterparts. You barely notice that the 3D is there, and after the fact you'd be hard pressed to claim that the 3D made the experience substantially better in any way. A lot of VR tech demos fall into this category - things that are "well, that's very cool, but..." - Films that exploited the 3D technology by throwing baseballs at your face, having characters literally fly out of the screen, etc, to fully drive home the 3D effect - but ultimately all of them were gimmicky and done for the sake of showing off the tech. VR has a boatload of these, where the entire experience is about the spectacle of VR, rather than VR tech being the vehicle to some more substantial experience. 3D films never found a way to integrate the tech in a way that felt substantial, and VR is struggling with the same. Some niche VR categories (see: cockpit games like driving and flight sims) have certainly embraced VR, but more generally VR is dominated by tech demos and games that simply don't feel like a meaningful upgrade over their 2D counterparts. VR is a (very cool) solution looking for a problem, and IMO in that way it is similar to 3D TVs, and unless it finds its killer problem to solve, will suffer the same fate as 3D TVs.

mikeash 10y ago
I don't know if VR will take off, but I do think it has a lot of potential. 3D just doesn't add that much to videos. It can add a little bit to the immersion, but we're already good at picking up other depth cues. I can think of videos which could potentially be better with 3D, but I can't think of any video experience you fundamentally couldn't have without 3D. With VR, it's pretty easy to come up with things it can do which fundamentally can't be done without it. Flight sims, as you mention, are a big one that come to mind. Being able to freely look around is huge. I think this stuff is going to become a really useful tool in learning to fly. Simulation is already proving really useful even without VR, but seeing everything through a fixed monitor is severely limiting. Being able to look around to get the same visual cues you'd get in the real airplane will be a big improvement. Obviously, that's fairly niche, but a really useful technology that greatly appeals to a few is different, and much more interesting, than a not-very-useful technology that vaguely appeals to many. I'm skeptical about some of the wacky stuff people predict for VR, like using it to hang out with friends or watch movies together or whatever. But if you get away from areas where you just do the same old stuff a little bit better, there do seem to be some properly interesting things it can do.
moron4hire 10y ago
> It's similar to 3D TV in that it presents content in a better way that nobody asked for... No, that's where VR is so different from 3D TV. Nobody was making 3D TVs in their basement. But people have wanted VR for so long that they have been hacking together their own VR headsets. I had been experimenting with using smartphones in cardboard boxes for years before Google Cardboard came out. The significance of Google Cardboard is that it signaled a moment when smartphone hardware was finally "good enough" to do it. And while Google Cardboard is of course not a great experience, in a lot of ways it's still the basis of the core technology behind most of the other headsets. The Rift and the Vive wouldn't have their relatively high DPI display modules if it weren't for the advances in display module tech built for smartphones. The original Rift DK1 and the Gear VR wouldn't have their motion tracking tech if it weren't for the advancements in high-frequency, low-cost IMU technology built for smartphones. And the problem is not that VR does not have a cool solution for any problems. It has plenty of those. You just don't personally care about the problems that VR solves. And that's fine, we all have our different interests. But don't assume that means that nobody wants VR.
- potatolicious 10y ago
  > "You just don't personally care about the problems that VR solves." On the contrary, I do. I have the Oculus Rift and the Touch controllers, and I enjoy trying all the content there is. I also love VRs and flight sims - but I've been a flight sim nerd since I was a kid... The problem is that I don't think the vast majority of the world cares about the problems that VR solves, and that's precisely the similarity with 3D TVs. I still know some people who love their 3D TVs and watch as much content in 3D as they can get their hands on, but ultimately these people are a very small market, and manufacturers have decided this market isn't serviceable profitably. VR faces the same issue - the places where it's truly well integrated are very niche, and despite multiple attempts at broader appeal, has yet to break out. Heck, you say mostly the same: > "But people have wanted VR for so long that they have been hacking together their own VR headsets." "People" being a vanishingly small community of makers and tinkerers. VR has been a dream for a long time for many people - especially in the hacker community - but it was never a mainstream desire. In the same way people have been hacking stereoscopic tech together for a long time before 3D TVs, and yet 3D TVs still failed in the mainstream. VR will always have a place in some niches - the issue here is if major hardware manufacturers will be able to support this niche at the level they are doing right now. The Rift and the Vive are both incredible leaps in VR tech, but both are predicated on the expectation that VR goes mainstream in some major way. Both products will not be sustainable if VR continues to be a very small market like it is right now.
jsz0 10y ago
I think 360 degree video and other POV style video is going to be the killer app for VR. Even more so than gaming because passively watching video doesn't require complicated/gimmicky controls and half a dozen sensors. Coverage of sports in 360 video is going to be huge.
wtetzner 10y ago
I suspect once the tech is good enough, it could become quite useful for non-entertainment uses. E.g. viewing houses before buying them, or house designs before building one. Maybe integrate it with something like Google Maps street view, so you can get a feel for where something is, and where to park, before you arrive. I'm sure there are plenty of other uses, but it will probably be a while before the tech is good enough to be convenient for these uses.

mikeash 10y ago

I don't know if VR will take off, but I do think it has a lot of potential. 3D just doesn't add that much to videos. It can add a little bit to the immersion, but we're already good at picking up other depth cues. I can think of videos which could potentially be better with 3D, but I can't think of any video experience you fundamentally couldn't have without 3D. With VR, it's pretty easy to come up with things it can do which fundamentally can't be done without it. Flight sims, as you mention, are a big one that come to mind. Being able to freely look around is huge. I think this stuff is going to become a really useful tool in learning to fly. Simulation is already proving really useful even without VR, but seeing everything through a fixed monitor is severely limiting. Being able to look around to get the same visual cues you'd get in the real airplane will be a big improvement. Obviously, that's fairly niche, but a really useful technology that greatly appeals to a few is different, and much more interesting, than a not-very-useful technology that vaguely appeals to many. I'm skeptical about some of the wacky stuff people predict for VR, like using it to hang out with friends or watch movies together or whatever. But if you get away from areas where you just do the same old stuff a little bit better, there do seem to be some properly interesting things it can do.

moron4hire 10y ago

> It's similar to 3D TV in that it presents content in a better way that nobody asked for... No, that's where VR is so different from 3D TV. Nobody was making 3D TVs in their basement. But people have wanted VR for so long that they have been hacking together their own VR headsets. I had been experimenting with using smartphones in cardboard boxes for years before Google Cardboard came out. The significance of Google Cardboard is that it signaled a moment when smartphone hardware was finally "good enough" to do it. And while Google Cardboard is of course not a great experience, in a lot of ways it's still the basis of the core technology behind most of the other headsets. The Rift and the Vive wouldn't have their relatively high DPI display modules if it weren't for the advances in display module tech built for smartphones. The original Rift DK1 and the Gear VR wouldn't have their motion tracking tech if it weren't for the advancements in high-frequency, low-cost IMU technology built for smartphones. And the problem is not that VR does not have a cool solution for any problems. It has plenty of those. You just don't personally care about the problems that VR solves. And that's fine, we all have our different interests. But don't assume that means that nobody wants VR.

potatolicious 10y ago
> "You just don't personally care about the problems that VR solves." On the contrary, I do. I have the Oculus Rift and the Touch controllers, and I enjoy trying all the content there is. I also love VRs and flight sims - but I've been a flight sim nerd since I was a kid... The problem is that I don't think the vast majority of the world cares about the problems that VR solves, and that's precisely the similarity with 3D TVs. I still know some people who love their 3D TVs and watch as much content in 3D as they can get their hands on, but ultimately these people are a very small market, and manufacturers have decided this market isn't serviceable profitably. VR faces the same issue - the places where it's truly well integrated are very niche, and despite multiple attempts at broader appeal, has yet to break out. Heck, you say mostly the same: > "But people have wanted VR for so long that they have been hacking together their own VR headsets." "People" being a vanishingly small community of makers and tinkerers. VR has been a dream for a long time for many people - especially in the hacker community - but it was never a mainstream desire. In the same way people have been hacking stereoscopic tech together for a long time before 3D TVs, and yet 3D TVs still failed in the mainstream. VR will always have a place in some niches - the issue here is if major hardware manufacturers will be able to support this niche at the level they are doing right now. The Rift and the Vive are both incredible leaps in VR tech, but both are predicated on the expectation that VR goes mainstream in some major way. Both products will not be sustainable if VR continues to be a very small market like it is right now.

jsz0 10y ago

I think 360 degree video and other POV style video is going to be the killer app for VR. Even more so than gaming because passively watching video doesn't require complicated/gimmicky controls and half a dozen sensors. Coverage of sports in 360 video is going to be huge.

wtetzner 10y ago

I suspect once the tech is good enough, it could become quite useful for non-entertainment uses. E.g. viewing houses before buying them, or house designs before building one. Maybe integrate it with something like Google Maps street view, so you can get a feel for where something is, and where to park, before you arrive. I'm sure there are plenty of other uses, but it will probably be a while before the tech is good enough to be convenient for these uses.