3 ms·

I think you have it exactly backwards. VR might not catch on as readily among affluent folks who can afford to have all these great experiences in real life, bu

I think you have it exactly backwards. VR might not catch on as readily among affluent folks who can afford to have all these great experiences in real life, but will be a great escape for others (yes, I'm aware some will see that as dystopian, but to me it's just a better TV). The Oculus Quest isn't like 5.1 sound at all. I kickstarted the original Oculus and would agree with your characterization there, but the Quest is entirely different. It's self contained, not needing to be tethered to a computer, and the boundary configuration is a snap. You do it from within the VR, observing your own room with its cameras, and just draw the boundary walls. Many games you can even do seated but "room scale" ones only need about 6ft x 6ft, which most people even in tiny apartments can put together.

andrewstuart2 7y ago
Even if you're very affluent, VR can give you some experiences at much lower risk. E.g. flight simulators and racing simulators let you learn planes, cars, airports, tracks, etc. much more cost effectively and without the risk that missing the takeoff or missing a turn will end your life or career. I don't know if they use VR, but all Formula 1 racing teams have simulators set up, not only for learning the cars and tracks, but also for working on car setups before the race weekends. Same with flight schools -- they're all throwing you in a simulator before the real deal. I can say from experience the crummy "simulator" I got as part of my $150 Groupon "flight experience" package paled in comparison to the realism of $300 worth of Oculus, a $100 joystick, and $100 worth of simulator software. Especially for helicopters, I'd say, you really need the sense of depth.
warp 7y ago
I have an Oculus Quest. I like beat saber, but my office doesn't have enough room for it. The kids like Job/Vacation simulator, which sort of works seated, but is much better if you give it some room. We have enough space if we move a table in the living room, but we have to do that every time we want to play. So to me it seems worse than the 5.1 setup, because you only have to do that once. (Additionally, I don't want the lenses to get dusty, so I keep the Quest in a travel case -- so I have to remember to take it out of its case and charge it during the day if I plan to use it in the evening. The whole thing feels like a bunch of hassle)

andrewstuart2 7y ago

Even if you're very affluent, VR can give you some experiences at much lower risk. E.g. flight simulators and racing simulators let you learn planes, cars, airports, tracks, etc. much more cost effectively and without the risk that missing the takeoff or missing a turn will end your life or career. I don't know if they use VR, but all Formula 1 racing teams have simulators set up, not only for learning the cars and tracks, but also for working on car setups before the race weekends. Same with flight schools -- they're all throwing you in a simulator before the real deal. I can say from experience the crummy "simulator" I got as part of my $150 Groupon "flight experience" package paled in comparison to the realism of $300 worth of Oculus, a $100 joystick, and $100 worth of simulator software. Especially for helicopters, I'd say, you really need the sense of depth.

warp 7y ago

I have an Oculus Quest. I like beat saber, but my office doesn't have enough room for it. The kids like Job/Vacation simulator, which sort of works seated, but is much better if you give it some room. We have enough space if we move a table in the living room, but we have to do that every time we want to play. So to me it seems worse than the 5.1 setup, because you only have to do that once. (Additionally, I don't want the lenses to get dusty, so I keep the Quest in a travel case -- so I have to remember to take it out of its case and charge it during the day if I plan to use it in the evening. The whole thing feels like a bunch of hassle)