4 ms·

Interesting experiment. > started to understand VR and use it more regularly, namely the fitness and social apps This is the interesting thing that I observe

by zmmmmm 5y ago

Interesting experiment. > started to understand VR and use it more regularly, namely the fitness and social apps This is the interesting thing that I observe : beyond the hype there are some genuinely valuable quite mainstream applications. Fitness, e-sports, and virtual monitors being some of the key ones. I regularly use VR for 1-3 hours a day doing these. The problem is that the hype actually gets in the way of people experiencing those. They all require some skill acquisition or semi-non-trivial setup. So instead of someone getting introduced to VR in the form of one of these more sustainable ways, they are shown a glitzy experience that dazzles them with 3d effects that is interesting for a few minutes but has no longer term value. It's like a sugar hit that lasts a short time but actually leaves you feeling worse afterwards. I think Facebook et al need to work out how to bridge people between these experiences to make it get more mainstream uptake.

chaostheory 5y ago
Meta’s Quest 2 doesn’t require either “skill acquisition or semi-non-trivial setup” which was why I found the results of my adhoc experiment interesting.
- zmmmmm 5y ago
  Yes most gaming doesn't require much, but I think the more sustainable valuable applications do. For example there are table tennis apps so realistic that pros use them to train. I will never ever be able to own a table tennis / ping pong table due to lack of space in my house but I can have it with VR. Not only that I don't need to find a comparably skilled player and line up schedules every time I want to play. And just the price of a real a table alone is more than buying a Quest! So what's the issue? Well these apps intrinsically take a bit of getting used to. There's a specific technique for serving that relies on some use of the controllers that is not hard but not obvious to someone who started using VR 5 minutes ago. So nearly 100% of people fail at using this app first time they play. Very few people can do this well until they've spent a bit of time in VR, getting used to how you can open and close your grip in the right way to pick things up and put them down etc. We may eventually get there with hand tracking etc where this is not such a problem, but its far from that point now. So this is what I mean when I say, the "cheap" experiences that are easy for people to experience actually work against - in some ways - VR fulfilling its potential, because typically that is all they get shown and they never get a chance to learn to do the more "high value" activities.
  - chaostheory 5y ago
    The cost of learning these apps is minimal because the UI relies on UX that’s very well established. Putting them in 3D doesn’t drastically change them. Even people from the boomer generation have little issues with navigation. The only exception would be the G2 and other WMR headsets with terrible tracking. That’s less of an issue with people and more to do with MS’s poor WMR specification. Imo the main friction is still mainly the social perception of VR.

by zmmmmm 5y ago

chaostheory 5y ago

Meta’s Quest 2 doesn’t require either “skill acquisition or semi-non-trivial setup” which was why I found the results of my adhoc experiment interesting.

zmmmmm 5y ago
Yes most gaming doesn't require much, but I think the more sustainable valuable applications do. For example there are table tennis apps so realistic that pros use them to train. I will never ever be able to own a table tennis / ping pong table due to lack of space in my house but I can have it with VR. Not only that I don't need to find a comparably skilled player and line up schedules every time I want to play. And just the price of a real a table alone is more than buying a Quest! So what's the issue? Well these apps intrinsically take a bit of getting used to. There's a specific technique for serving that relies on some use of the controllers that is not hard but not obvious to someone who started using VR 5 minutes ago. So nearly 100% of people fail at using this app first time they play. Very few people can do this well until they've spent a bit of time in VR, getting used to how you can open and close your grip in the right way to pick things up and put them down etc. We may eventually get there with hand tracking etc where this is not such a problem, but its far from that point now. So this is what I mean when I say, the "cheap" experiences that are easy for people to experience actually work against - in some ways - VR fulfilling its potential, because typically that is all they get shown and they never get a chance to learn to do the more "high value" activities.
- chaostheory 5y ago
  The cost of learning these apps is minimal because the UI relies on UX that’s very well established. Putting them in 3D doesn’t drastically change them. Even people from the boomer generation have little issues with navigation. The only exception would be the G2 and other WMR headsets with terrible tracking. That’s less of an issue with people and more to do with MS’s poor WMR specification. Imo the main friction is still mainly the social perception of VR.