12 ms·

It was pretty clear to me back in 2015-2016 that VR was going absolutely no where. All you had to do was try on any headset and evaluate it honestly. The graph

It was pretty clear to me back in 2015-2016 that VR was going absolutely no where. All you had to do was try on any headset and evaluate it honestly. The graphics sucked, the lag sucked, it gave some people nausea and others an unwanted sense of vertigo. Prices for high-end equipment were (and still are) ridiculous and unattainable for the mass market. Even if you could afford it, do you also own a space big enough to set it up? And if you did, was it convenient to have to be in that space to use it? The premise of VR as a foundational technology is totally flawed. VR is for experiences that take you out of reality, but most people aren't looking for that on a daily basis. Entering VR is comparable to going to the movies: it's something to do once you've exhausted better options. To those who say the technology can never get there, I disagree. The market will explode once the first real AR/MR device arrives. People won't care what it looks like or that it has a pervy camera if it's the most amazing piece of technology they've ever used. It will be like the first iPhone - an "Aha!" moment in amongst a sea of products that just don't get it. It won't require lighthouses or setup or spatial mapping or wires or the social isolation of being at home, it will just implicitly understand the world wherever you are and will be available to you when you need to use it. Like a phone in your pocket. And I'm sure with the equivalent of a sleeping mask such a device would be VR capable as well. It's coming, but it won't be a product from a startup (anyone remember Magic Leap?) and not for maybe 5-10 years.

edmundsauto 6y ago
The Quest line has been a major step up. You should consider updating your 5 year old opinion in a product category that is nascent. Also, I believe a lot of hype around VR is that it is a necessary first step before VR. Finally, while I agree that AR is the “mobile phone” type of revolutionary product, I still think VR is going to be wildly successful. To me, the limiting factor is the builders tools - it’s so expensive to put together good interactive VR content.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- lwansbrough 6y ago
  > You should consider updating your 5 year old opinion in a product category that is nascent. I no longer have a Facebook account, so this is impossible for me, right? But let me check Google. Bulky, isolating, still requires controllers. Yep, nothing has changed, as expected. People who have staked their livelihoods on this technology are mad about my initial comment but the fact remains: nobody is buying these things, and the product hasn't changed meaningfully since the last iteration.
  - edmundsauto 6y ago
    Counterpoint: you have entrenched your opinion and are unwilling or unable to update it, despite acknowledging that your inputs are 5 years out of date. To point to specifically inaccurate or misleading statements of yours: 1. "still requires controllers" - incorrect, hand tracking is a thing, and on its way to a user friendly input. It's not clear why controllers are a negative - do you similarly criticize the PS5 for having a controller and not meaningfully changed? 2. "The product hasn't changed meaningfully" - here, 'meaningfully' is a weasel word. 50% more pixels, for a device where pixel density is important for usability. A 25% ($100) price drop, in a device that is now significantly cheaper than gaming consoles. The ability to drive better graphics with a tether to a video card. (BTW, this is a < 2 year product cycle for a bleeding edge device.) What do you consider meaningful? 3. "nobody is buying these things" appears to be incorrect, literally and directionally. Expectations are for 3M units sold in 2020. Pre-orders were 5x for Quest 2 versus Quest 1. Perhaps you meant to say "me and my friends haven't bought one"?
    - lwansbrough 6y ago
      > hand tracking is a thing, and on its way to a user friendly input Which is about where it was last time I checked in. Most VR games require use of controllers do they not? As long as you have cumbersome interfaces like handheld controllers or hand tracking that doesn't handle occlusion you can't maintain a suspension of disbelief. If it's not clear why controllers are a negative, you're not really getting what VR should be. I don't criticize the PS5 for having a controller because the main focus of game consoles isn't the display technology. The screen has succeeded as a timeless medium for bringing people into another world. It's less awkward and cumbersome than VR, so it's actually better at creating a virtual reality than an HMD. > 50% more pixels, for a device where pixel density is important for usability. A 25% ($100) price drop, in a device that is now significantly cheaper than gaming consoles. Resolution is actually one of the least important aspects of VR (unless of course, the rest of the experience is so mediocre that it's all people can focus on.) The breakthroughs in VR will come in the form of human interfacing improvements. Only once a device can truly understand your intent can it become believable. For as long as you have to hold a controller or think about how you interact with the device, VR will continue to be a gimmick. It's a UX problem as much as it is a hardware problem, but the UX will be obvious once the hardware is solved. > "nobody is buying these things" appears to be incorrect, literally and directionally. I guess it took the entire world sitting at home to get 3M people interested enough to buy the latest VR system. Cool. If it was actually what people wanted, everybody would be scrambling to get one. 3M says to me that it's more of the same. I feel like I've taken a time machine to 2005, being told how great the latest Palm phone is while knowing the iPhone is just around the corner. Can't you see that the technology just sucks compared to what it should be? Only once it is what it should be will it be what you want to believe it is today. > me and my friends haven't bought one Again, why would I buy a device I can't use?

edmundsauto 6y ago

The Quest line has been a major step up. You should consider updating your 5 year old opinion in a product category that is nascent. Also, I believe a lot of hype around VR is that it is a necessary first step before VR. Finally, while I agree that AR is the “mobile phone” type of revolutionary product, I still think VR is going to be wildly successful. To me, the limiting factor is the builders tools - it’s so expensive to put together good interactive VR content.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
lwansbrough 6y ago
> You should consider updating your 5 year old opinion in a product category that is nascent. I no longer have a Facebook account, so this is impossible for me, right? But let me check Google. Bulky, isolating, still requires controllers. Yep, nothing has changed, as expected. People who have staked their livelihoods on this technology are mad about my initial comment but the fact remains: nobody is buying these things, and the product hasn't changed meaningfully since the last iteration.
- edmundsauto 6y ago
  Counterpoint: you have entrenched your opinion and are unwilling or unable to update it, despite acknowledging that your inputs are 5 years out of date. To point to specifically inaccurate or misleading statements of yours: 1. "still requires controllers" - incorrect, hand tracking is a thing, and on its way to a user friendly input. It's not clear why controllers are a negative - do you similarly criticize the PS5 for having a controller and not meaningfully changed? 2. "The product hasn't changed meaningfully" - here, 'meaningfully' is a weasel word. 50% more pixels, for a device where pixel density is important for usability. A 25% ($100) price drop, in a device that is now significantly cheaper than gaming consoles. The ability to drive better graphics with a tether to a video card. (BTW, this is a < 2 year product cycle for a bleeding edge device.) What do you consider meaningful? 3. "nobody is buying these things" appears to be incorrect, literally and directionally. Expectations are for 3M units sold in 2020. Pre-orders were 5x for Quest 2 versus Quest 1. Perhaps you meant to say "me and my friends haven't bought one"?
  - lwansbrough 6y ago
    > hand tracking is a thing, and on its way to a user friendly input Which is about where it was last time I checked in. Most VR games require use of controllers do they not? As long as you have cumbersome interfaces like handheld controllers or hand tracking that doesn't handle occlusion you can't maintain a suspension of disbelief. If it's not clear why controllers are a negative, you're not really getting what VR should be. I don't criticize the PS5 for having a controller because the main focus of game consoles isn't the display technology. The screen has succeeded as a timeless medium for bringing people into another world. It's less awkward and cumbersome than VR, so it's actually better at creating a virtual reality than an HMD. > 50% more pixels, for a device where pixel density is important for usability. A 25% ($100) price drop, in a device that is now significantly cheaper than gaming consoles. Resolution is actually one of the least important aspects of VR (unless of course, the rest of the experience is so mediocre that it's all people can focus on.) The breakthroughs in VR will come in the form of human interfacing improvements. Only once a device can truly understand your intent can it become believable. For as long as you have to hold a controller or think about how you interact with the device, VR will continue to be a gimmick. It's a UX problem as much as it is a hardware problem, but the UX will be obvious once the hardware is solved. > "nobody is buying these things" appears to be incorrect, literally and directionally. I guess it took the entire world sitting at home to get 3M people interested enough to buy the latest VR system. Cool. If it was actually what people wanted, everybody would be scrambling to get one. 3M says to me that it's more of the same. I feel like I've taken a time machine to 2005, being told how great the latest Palm phone is while knowing the iPhone is just around the corner. Can't you see that the technology just sucks compared to what it should be? Only once it is what it should be will it be what you want to believe it is today. > me and my friends haven't bought one Again, why would I buy a device I can't use?