4 ms·

Meta is betting on the long term. They're the leader of a very niche market _now_, but as XR technology improves, that market will only grow, and Meta will be r

by imiric 4y ago

Meta is betting on the long term. They're the leader of a very niche market _now_, but as XR technology improves, that market will only grow, and Meta will be ready for it, with years ahead of the competition at that point. That's their bet, anyway, and we can speculate whether it will come to pass or not. I'm inclined to think that the tech will eventually become mainstream, when headsets are as comfortable to wear as glasses. It's a prime opportunity for Apple to jump in near the tipping point, and claim to be the innovator, once again. It would be the mainstream push the industry needs, at least. I'm less confident that Meta's verse will succeed, though. They've shown to be incapable of delivering an appealing product people want to spend hours in. And the Meta brand is tarnished beyond repair, no matter how many rebrandings they go through.

wpietri 4y ago
I agree with you that Meta ads another set of ways to fail. But this is the thing I want to question: > that market will only grow I too have read science fiction, so I get the theory. You know what else is in science fiction? 3D movies and 3D TV. But we've had 3 waves of 3D films (1950s, 1980s, 2000s) and it turns out nobody cares. And 3D TV fared even worse. And let's not forget the 1990 wave of actual VR, which also cratered. So the question is: will facehugger VR go the way of other stereoscopic 3D entertainment? I think it's an open question, but my point is that it's very plausible that VR and the Metaverse will, like the jetpack, remain in the realm of sci-fi long after you and I are in the ground. And as far as I can tell, nobody is releasing data that shows it on a different arc. The Brewster Stereoscope sold a lot of units too, as did the Viewmaster. But ultimately people seem fine inferring 3D from 2D images without stereoscopic effects to help them along.
- BlueTemplar 4y ago
  I think you mean 2010s, with the release of Avatar in 2009 ? 3D movies are still around, though sadly "real" 3D is pretty rare (remove the "Filmed in 2D" from the list, and of course the Digital 3D animations have different constraints : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_3D_films_(2005%E2%80%93present) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_3D_films_(2005%E2%80%9.... But it's kind of weird that you would say this, with 3D now being an option in cinemas everywhere now (if not in homes any more, though my own TV is still compatible), especially with Avatar 2 that just released ? https://news.yahoo.com/james-cameron-avatar-way-of-water-3d-high-frame-rate-104938634.html https://news.yahoo.com/james-cameron-avatar-way-of-water-3d-...
  - wpietri 4y ago
    > I think you mean 2010s, with the release of Avatar in 2009 ? I in fact don't. The wave starts earlier. > 3D now being an option in cinemas everywhere It's an option that not many people pick. Even before the pandemic, 3D ticket sales were declining: https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1554281023 https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=... And it has rebounded less well than 2D: https://www.statista.com/statistics/259987/global-box-office-revenue/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/259987/global-box-office... Compare that with the introduction of color or sound, and it's pretty obvious that 3D films are at best a niche. I haven't heard of any 3D film that's offered only in 3D. Even Avatar 2 is available in 2D, suggesting that even James Cameron, one of 3D's biggest proponents, considers it optional. Will theaters keep offering it? Probably, but theaters are a business in decline and so are desperate for anything that gets people coming in. Just looking at some theaters selling Avatar tickets, 3D is treated as an amenity like Dolby sound or reclining seats or "plush rockers", whatever those are. Perfectly nice, but hardly the stuff of societal transformation like Zuckerberg is hoping for.
    - BlueTemplar 4y ago
      Wasn't Avatar 1 also available in 2D ? When 3D was NOT an amenity ? Anyway, yeah, arguably even color wasn't "transformational" (sound probably was ?) But then 3D films and TVs are pretty much offtopic anyway - unlike VR/AR compared to 2D (or even 3D) monitors, they don't radically change the mode of interaction compared to 2D films and TV... (not to say that VR/AR will be successful)
      - wpietri 4y ago
        3D films are relevant in that they are an example where something that was technically better was not transformational. And where there was a lot of hype but it turned out that people didn't really care. Which is important, because Meta is betting tens to hundreds of billions that facehugger VR will be transformational. If you go back to the Brewster stereoscope, I count 6 waves of people expecting that stereoscopic 3D would change the world. Each time, there was lots of investment and lots of hype. Each time, it turned out that people were fine mentally reconstructing 3D from 2D without stereoscopic assistance. My point here is that Meta's efforts could well be failed wave number 7.
- imiric 4y ago
  Sure, but you can say the same thing about electric cars and smartphones. Both have had several "failed" attempts, and it wasn't until the technology was mature, cheap and accessible enough that they reached mainstream adoption. There's nothing to say that the same thing won't happen with XR. If we consider transhumanism as something that's likely to happen, then XR can be viewed as a stepping stone towards that goal. In that sense, it could eventually become as ubiquitous as smartphones are today.
  - wpietri 4y ago
    Yes, in the future anything is possible. But for any given chunk of the future, most possible things don't happen. The interesting question is which bucket a given thing falls into. I think electric cars cut against your case here. The reason electric cars are becoming popular is that we're finally doing something about global warming. Governments are heavily using both carrot and stick via billions in subsidies and drastically tighter regulation on ICE vehicles. Unless you expect governments to try to end use of monitors, electric cars are an example of why we should be suspicious of facehugger VR.
RajT88 4y ago
Indeed, the big tech companies do not seem to understand what users want out of a VR experience. They want "Ready Player One", warts and all. Big Tech wants all the rough edges filed off, and for there to be little user control. This is why VRChat is so amazing and AltspaceVR is dull and uninteresting. Curated experiences with moderation and controls to prevent copyright infringement don't have broad appeal. A few of these events sound mildly cool: https://account.altvr.com/events/all https://account.altvr.com/events/all But something like VRChat always has something weird and interesting going on. Like, maybe I find a virtual theater where a bad sci-fi movie is playing and I sit down next to a group of Kermit the Frog / Booby Anime girl avatars who are trash talking the movie ala MST3K. Every day of the week you get this!
- wpietri 4y ago
  Thanks! I really appreciate a comment from an actual VR user describing actual VR use. I find the "but in theory it works great so let's ignore the problems" replies tiresome after a while. How often would you say you use VRChat? I'm especially interested in things that people use in the same way they'd use Facebook or Twitter: multiple times per week and as a default activity when they're bored.
  - RajT88 4y ago
    I don't use my VR headset all that often, unfortunately. The last time I was using it a few times a week was trying to figure out if I could get a good working environment set up using my WMR headset. (It's OK with one of the virtual desktop apps you can get on Steam - but not so good I could do more than an hour in it. I haven't even gotten to the point of trying a Teams call to see how the audio and screen sharing works) Nor do I use social media much these days. I think if I was 15 years younger (less demanding job, no wife, no dog, few other responsibilities), I'd probably be in VRChat 3-4 times a week though. It's a dicking around kind of place not unlike the online games I used to play back then. I would use my headset more for watching movies virtually if: 1. Any of my friends had a VRHeadset and did the same (none do; barely any of my friends online game anymore due to family commitments). I used to regularly watch movies using the Xbox Netflix party feature back in the day. 2. My VR setup was more comfortable. Eyestrain is real - as my eyes aren't as great as they used to be. The headset chafes, I am still trying to work out how to consistently make it comfy. All told - middle age prevents me from spending more time in VR, and thus VRChat.

by imiric 4y ago

wpietri 4y ago

I agree with you that Meta ads another set of ways to fail. But this is the thing I want to question: > that market will only grow I too have read science fiction, so I get the theory. You know what else is in science fiction? 3D movies and 3D TV. But we've had 3 waves of 3D films (1950s, 1980s, 2000s) and it turns out nobody cares. And 3D TV fared even worse. And let's not forget the 1990 wave of actual VR, which also cratered. So the question is: will facehugger VR go the way of other stereoscopic 3D entertainment? I think it's an open question, but my point is that it's very plausible that VR and the Metaverse will, like the jetpack, remain in the realm of sci-fi long after you and I are in the ground. And as far as I can tell, nobody is releasing data that shows it on a different arc. The Brewster Stereoscope sold a lot of units too, as did the Viewmaster. But ultimately people seem fine inferring 3D from 2D images without stereoscopic effects to help them along.

BlueTemplar 4y ago
I think you mean 2010s, with the release of Avatar in 2009 ? 3D movies are still around, though sadly "real" 3D is pretty rare (remove the "Filmed in 2D" from the list, and of course the Digital 3D animations have different constraints : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_3D_films_(2005%E2%80%93present) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_3D_films_(2005%E2%80%9.... But it's kind of weird that you would say this, with 3D now being an option in cinemas everywhere now (if not in homes any more, though my own TV is still compatible), especially with Avatar 2 that just released ? https://news.yahoo.com/james-cameron-avatar-way-of-water-3d-high-frame-rate-104938634.html https://news.yahoo.com/james-cameron-avatar-way-of-water-3d-...
- wpietri 4y ago
  > I think you mean 2010s, with the release of Avatar in 2009 ? I in fact don't. The wave starts earlier. > 3D now being an option in cinemas everywhere It's an option that not many people pick. Even before the pandemic, 3D ticket sales were declining: https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1554281023 https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=... And it has rebounded less well than 2D: https://www.statista.com/statistics/259987/global-box-office-revenue/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/259987/global-box-office... Compare that with the introduction of color or sound, and it's pretty obvious that 3D films are at best a niche. I haven't heard of any 3D film that's offered only in 3D. Even Avatar 2 is available in 2D, suggesting that even James Cameron, one of 3D's biggest proponents, considers it optional. Will theaters keep offering it? Probably, but theaters are a business in decline and so are desperate for anything that gets people coming in. Just looking at some theaters selling Avatar tickets, 3D is treated as an amenity like Dolby sound or reclining seats or "plush rockers", whatever those are. Perfectly nice, but hardly the stuff of societal transformation like Zuckerberg is hoping for.
  - BlueTemplar 4y ago
    Wasn't Avatar 1 also available in 2D ? When 3D was NOT an amenity ? Anyway, yeah, arguably even color wasn't "transformational" (sound probably was ?) But then 3D films and TVs are pretty much offtopic anyway - unlike VR/AR compared to 2D (or even 3D) monitors, they don't radically change the mode of interaction compared to 2D films and TV... (not to say that VR/AR will be successful)
    - wpietri 4y ago
      3D films are relevant in that they are an example where something that was technically better was not transformational. And where there was a lot of hype but it turned out that people didn't really care. Which is important, because Meta is betting tens to hundreds of billions that facehugger VR will be transformational. If you go back to the Brewster stereoscope, I count 6 waves of people expecting that stereoscopic 3D would change the world. Each time, there was lots of investment and lots of hype. Each time, it turned out that people were fine mentally reconstructing 3D from 2D without stereoscopic assistance. My point here is that Meta's efforts could well be failed wave number 7.
imiric 4y ago
Sure, but you can say the same thing about electric cars and smartphones. Both have had several "failed" attempts, and it wasn't until the technology was mature, cheap and accessible enough that they reached mainstream adoption. There's nothing to say that the same thing won't happen with XR. If we consider transhumanism as something that's likely to happen, then XR can be viewed as a stepping stone towards that goal. In that sense, it could eventually become as ubiquitous as smartphones are today.
- wpietri 4y ago
  Yes, in the future anything is possible. But for any given chunk of the future, most possible things don't happen. The interesting question is which bucket a given thing falls into. I think electric cars cut against your case here. The reason electric cars are becoming popular is that we're finally doing something about global warming. Governments are heavily using both carrot and stick via billions in subsidies and drastically tighter regulation on ICE vehicles. Unless you expect governments to try to end use of monitors, electric cars are an example of why we should be suspicious of facehugger VR.

RajT88 4y ago

Indeed, the big tech companies do not seem to understand what users want out of a VR experience. They want "Ready Player One", warts and all. Big Tech wants all the rough edges filed off, and for there to be little user control. This is why VRChat is so amazing and AltspaceVR is dull and uninteresting. Curated experiences with moderation and controls to prevent copyright infringement don't have broad appeal. A few of these events sound mildly cool: https://account.altvr.com/events/all https://account.altvr.com/events/all But something like VRChat always has something weird and interesting going on. Like, maybe I find a virtual theater where a bad sci-fi movie is playing and I sit down next to a group of Kermit the Frog / Booby Anime girl avatars who are trash talking the movie ala MST3K. Every day of the week you get this!

wpietri 4y ago
Thanks! I really appreciate a comment from an actual VR user describing actual VR use. I find the "but in theory it works great so let's ignore the problems" replies tiresome after a while. How often would you say you use VRChat? I'm especially interested in things that people use in the same way they'd use Facebook or Twitter: multiple times per week and as a default activity when they're bored.
- RajT88 4y ago
  I don't use my VR headset all that often, unfortunately. The last time I was using it a few times a week was trying to figure out if I could get a good working environment set up using my WMR headset. (It's OK with one of the virtual desktop apps you can get on Steam - but not so good I could do more than an hour in it. I haven't even gotten to the point of trying a Teams call to see how the audio and screen sharing works) Nor do I use social media much these days. I think if I was 15 years younger (less demanding job, no wife, no dog, few other responsibilities), I'd probably be in VRChat 3-4 times a week though. It's a dicking around kind of place not unlike the online games I used to play back then. I would use my headset more for watching movies virtually if: 1. Any of my friends had a VRHeadset and did the same (none do; barely any of my friends online game anymore due to family commitments). I used to regularly watch movies using the Xbox Netflix party feature back in the day. 2. My VR setup was more comfortable. Eyestrain is real - as my eyes aren't as great as they used to be. The headset chafes, I am still trying to work out how to consistently make it comfy. All told - middle age prevents me from spending more time in VR, and thus VRChat.