6 ms·

...because some people think that 6DOF HMD + Touch is the first real generation of VR, and now it's time to make THAT affordable. The other improvements to VR,

...because some people think that 6DOF HMD + Touch is the first real generation of VR, and now it's time to make THAT affordable. The other improvements to VR, at the high end, are less interesting to them. Sure, they're nice, but they essentially think 6DOF HMD + Touch is the Minimum Viable Product for VR. At least for the 80% Gaming / 20% Video market, as they said at Oculus Connect. That's what Oculus Quest is. If Oculus Quest feels "almost as good" as an Oculus Rift in many games, I don't know why you think that'll be "unattractive for users". Hell, I think Beat Saber alone is worth the price of admission on an Oculus Quest.

wmf 8y ago
I remember when 6DOF HMD + Touch + GTX 970 was the bare minimum... and then all these new headsets stated coming out with far weaker GPUs. I wonder if anything has changed or if they have just decided to sacrifice quality for adoption.
- lhl 8y ago
  GPU requirements were dropped because the software has gotten a lot better. Here's a presentation from OC5 that highlights some of the more recent improvements (ASW 2.0 is particularly impressive): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbLe7b2pUq0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbLe7b2pUq0
- mortenjorck 8y ago
  Two of these things are fundamentals of VR presence (being able to move your head, being able to interact with your hands ) and one is a specific piece of high-performance silicon. Sacrificing some mesh and texture resolution is a completely different thing from sacrificing spatial movement.
anjc 8y ago
> ...because some people think that 6DOF HMD + Touch is the first real generation of VR, and now it's time to make THAT affordable. Of course it should be made affordable. But (for example) advanced mobile phone development was not stopped by manufacturers so they could focus on making iPhones affordable. There were continual cutting edge developments which eventually trickled down to budget models as manufacturing processes improved and market demands increased. This same cycle happens in all industries and for all products. It would be ludicrous for people to say "Ok, the iPhone 1 is good enough, let's stop all development of the iPhone 2 - they're too expensive anyway guys - and start working on iPhone Budget Edition", yet that's what people are suggesting for VR.
- dyarosla 8y ago
  I think you’re focusing too much on the price aspect. What about the elephant in the room? Having to be tethered to a computer? That’s the real innovation IMO. Moreover, one of the other popular usages for VR is social (and def on facebook’s radar). You can’t have much of a social experience without enough users. Easiest way to get users? Lower barrier to entry. It’s not about making it affordable so much as it is investing in things that make VR more compelling. Making VR more realistic was clearly not the area with the most growth potential.

wmf 8y ago

I remember when 6DOF HMD + Touch + GTX 970 was the bare minimum... and then all these new headsets stated coming out with far weaker GPUs. I wonder if anything has changed or if they have just decided to sacrifice quality for adoption.

lhl 8y ago
GPU requirements were dropped because the software has gotten a lot better. Here's a presentation from OC5 that highlights some of the more recent improvements (ASW 2.0 is particularly impressive): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbLe7b2pUq0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbLe7b2pUq0
mortenjorck 8y ago
Two of these things are fundamentals of VR presence (being able to move your head, being able to interact with your hands ) and one is a specific piece of high-performance silicon. Sacrificing some mesh and texture resolution is a completely different thing from sacrificing spatial movement.

anjc 8y ago

> ...because some people think that 6DOF HMD + Touch is the first real generation of VR, and now it's time to make THAT affordable. Of course it should be made affordable. But (for example) advanced mobile phone development was not stopped by manufacturers so they could focus on making iPhones affordable. There were continual cutting edge developments which eventually trickled down to budget models as manufacturing processes improved and market demands increased. This same cycle happens in all industries and for all products. It would be ludicrous for people to say "Ok, the iPhone 1 is good enough, let's stop all development of the iPhone 2 - they're too expensive anyway guys - and start working on iPhone Budget Edition", yet that's what people are suggesting for VR.

dyarosla 8y ago
I think you’re focusing too much on the price aspect. What about the elephant in the room? Having to be tethered to a computer? That’s the real innovation IMO. Moreover, one of the other popular usages for VR is social (and def on facebook’s radar). You can’t have much of a social experience without enough users. Easiest way to get users? Lower barrier to entry. It’s not about making it affordable so much as it is investing in things that make VR more compelling. Making VR more realistic was clearly not the area with the most growth potential.