3 ms·

"it’s not really getting off the ground either" Actually it's off the ground and becoming commoditized in those fields where it makes sense - AEC, digital desi

by fsloth 7y ago

"it’s not really getting off the ground either" Actually it's off the ground and becoming commoditized in those fields where it makes sense - AEC, digital design, training. The reason they might not be familiar to you is that they are niches. There is no reason for everybody to use VR, but there are very good uses for some professionals. If phone is a hammer (everybody has use for it) then VR kit is an arc welding tool - extremely practical for some uses, but not for all. Or, pencil vs. oil paints. Oil paints are an essential product category, yet since the professionals who use them know them already and the market segment isn't that huge the non-artistically inclined consumer is likely not familiar with them due to lack of marketing dollars and hence media exposure.

hef19898 7y ago
Training is a serious thing for VR, as is development. I had chat last year with a guy running a VR event space / escpe room. Seemed to run rather well. What kind of stunned me was, when I asked whether or not he had thought about branching out into training, he said they re not interessted in that. I came from a stint at a company doing consulting and training for the defense sector mong other things. Considering the prices they asled, and got, from the government that is a big market. Adding some VR based training scenarios for the military, or emergency services, police, whatever, looks at frst glance interessting enough to at least dig deeper into. But no interesst. No idea why.
- KineticLensman 7y ago
  > Adding some VR based training scenarios for the military, or emergency services, police, whatever, looks at frst glance interessting enough to at least dig deeper into. But no interesst. No idea why Military acquisition cycles can last for years, which slows down tech intro. Interaction with the wider training tech ecosystem is also a factor. For example, course authors need good VR environment editors to create usable scenarios, scoring tools, etc. They would have to be able to import their large libraries of existing vehicle and weapon models. Anecdotally, it can take an hour of scenario editing to get a minute of usable scenario One route in would be if an existing vendor of military sims (e.g. [0]) added a VR plug-in to an existing COTS sim already used widely by the military, and the military users then got a funding opportunity (e.g. a new platform with a fresh training budget) to enhance their existing kit. [0] https://bisimulations.com/products/vbs3 https://bisimulations.com/products/vbs3
  - hef19898 7y ago
    Oh, the former employer of mine had these contracts already. So partnering with them, or someone similar, could have cut down the acquisition cycle a lot. But I do understand why people don't want to work with the military.
JohnJamesRambo 7y ago
The disconnect comes when VR companies want to get valuations and investment like they are making the next phone. Not sure they would be happy with that arc welding tool money, which is more reasonable.
- fsloth 7y ago
  Generally the VR offerings that are in a wider use are sane. Just because some companies peddle fake products it does not mean it's a market of lemons.

by fsloth 7y ago

hef19898 7y ago

Training is a serious thing for VR, as is development. I had chat last year with a guy running a VR event space / escpe room. Seemed to run rather well. What kind of stunned me was, when I asked whether or not he had thought about branching out into training, he said they re not interessted in that. I came from a stint at a company doing consulting and training for the defense sector mong other things. Considering the prices they asled, and got, from the government that is a big market. Adding some VR based training scenarios for the military, or emergency services, police, whatever, looks at frst glance interessting enough to at least dig deeper into. But no interesst. No idea why.

KineticLensman 7y ago
> Adding some VR based training scenarios for the military, or emergency services, police, whatever, looks at frst glance interessting enough to at least dig deeper into. But no interesst. No idea why Military acquisition cycles can last for years, which slows down tech intro. Interaction with the wider training tech ecosystem is also a factor. For example, course authors need good VR environment editors to create usable scenarios, scoring tools, etc. They would have to be able to import their large libraries of existing vehicle and weapon models. Anecdotally, it can take an hour of scenario editing to get a minute of usable scenario One route in would be if an existing vendor of military sims (e.g. [0]) added a VR plug-in to an existing COTS sim already used widely by the military, and the military users then got a funding opportunity (e.g. a new platform with a fresh training budget) to enhance their existing kit. [0] https://bisimulations.com/products/vbs3 https://bisimulations.com/products/vbs3
- hef19898 7y ago
  Oh, the former employer of mine had these contracts already. So partnering with them, or someone similar, could have cut down the acquisition cycle a lot. But I do understand why people don't want to work with the military.

JohnJamesRambo 7y ago

The disconnect comes when VR companies want to get valuations and investment like they are making the next phone. Not sure they would be happy with that arc welding tool money, which is more reasonable.

fsloth 7y ago
Generally the VR offerings that are in a wider use are sane. Just because some companies peddle fake products it does not mean it's a market of lemons.