4 ms·

Based on that hour-long talk, I'd say Carmack just had a fundamentally different set of priorities. He seemed to be focused on latency and scale, where Meta see

Based on that hour-long talk, I'd say Carmack just had a fundamentally different set of priorities. He seemed to be focused on latency and scale, where Meta seems to be pivoting to fidelity and graphics.

coffeebeqn 4y ago
He’s probably the best graphics programmer in the world so I would trust his read on the priorities over whatever Meta manager handles that project
- Gigachad 4y ago
  Given the fact that the metaverse is widely mocked for looking like a Wii game, they probably do need to spend more time on graphics.
  - nomel 4y ago
    It's not a "time" thing. Current stand alone headsets are still severely hardware limited, and extremely budget constrained. You have two independent ~ 1920x1800 displays, running at 90Hz. That's hard for a mobile chipset to do. Quest 3 is supposed to have 2.5 to 3x graphics performance, so things will improve with new hardware, but you can only take it so far. Another big problem is that things look much different/better in person, in VR, compared to a 2d video. I don't see a solution for that.
- Philip-J-Fry 4y ago
  John Carmack says himself he wasn't even the best graphics programmer at Id. He was very good at the problem of game development in general and very good at optimising for performance specifically.
this_user 4y ago
> He seemed to be focused on latency and scale, where Meta seems to be pivoting to fidelity and graphics. Which makes sense, you want your users to be able to really take in the graphical glory of the Metaverse.
- 3836293648 4y ago
  Sure, but it's VR. Not making people sick (= low latency) needs to come first
  - gregw2 4y ago
    Agreed. I liked Quest2. It gave me noticeable mental fatigue/wore me out the first couple half hours I used it but it’s bothered me less since. I think the graphics qualify and UI is ‘good enough’ for the platform/tech to maintain and grow traction. But some family members found it disorienting on first try and never wanted to mess with it again. That does limit the market. And it probably is the biggest issue as you say. I noticed three other constraints that were inhibiting success: 1) Not a lot of free fun mindless apps. The platform seems to really steer you to $30 apps as its business model. I respect that, would rather pay up front than be the product, but it limits adoption/addiction/stickiness. (Of course with Meta you might end up being both.) Never had patience to venture into the side loading world. 2) Kids under 13 are not supposed to use it. Not sure why but I believe it may have interfere with visual development (and I believe it), and I limited my kids use significantly. This limits the kid adoption/addiction/stickiness dynamic seen with, say, YouTube. 3) Creep factor. Your every move is tied to your real Facebook name. I was always conscious my every move and sight was visible to Facebook. It’s true you are tracked/with the web/internet but in a less direct way. I suspect, but don’t know that this inhibits people using it for porn, which also limits adoption/addictiveness/stickiness. Beyond those three, two more thoughts… As many have discussed, I’m not sure what the killer app is, but a bit to my surprise I’m not sure it is critical… There were a number of fun different unique experiences (Beat Saber, etc) so I think it may work out without one big one. I also found that casting the screen to Chrome didn’t work a lot of the time which limited my family’s ability to enjoy it together and help each other.
CursedUrn 4y ago
Meta definitely isn't focused on fidelity and graphics. Their mobile VR push degraded VR graphics significantly.
- nomel 4y ago
  Or, you could say that Meta is focused on an audience that doesn't have a highish end gaming PC, and have a relatively small budget (say $400), which is probably most. For realistic hardware spread, see: https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Softw... But, they do still support that type of user with AirLink/USB. Problem is, there's not enough of those users, so many of the developers target Quest users, which where the eyes are. I think a step function in VR quality, which requires a step function in the number of eyes behind a powerful system, will come with PSVR 2.
- MikusR 4y ago
  Carmack was the one who was pushing for mobile.
  - 1auralynn 4y ago
    Yeah in my opinion him pushing so hard for GearVR seriously negatively impacted the industry. Tons of people had their first intro to VR be some crappy 360 video on mobile VR and it did lasting damage to society's perception of VR
    - MikusR 4y ago
      Crappy 360 video on mobile had nothing to do with gearvr.
      - 1auralynn 4y ago
        Ok then crappy 3dof VR on mobile, of which GearVR was a variety. Bottom line, Facebook/Carmack pushed mobile vr prematurely in order to get the most users possible, but the experience sucked and users lost interest. Meta just made the same mistake with horizon

coffeebeqn 4y ago

He’s probably the best graphics programmer in the world so I would trust his read on the priorities over whatever Meta manager handles that project

Gigachad 4y ago
Given the fact that the metaverse is widely mocked for looking like a Wii game, they probably do need to spend more time on graphics.
- nomel 4y ago
  It's not a "time" thing. Current stand alone headsets are still severely hardware limited, and extremely budget constrained. You have two independent ~ 1920x1800 displays, running at 90Hz. That's hard for a mobile chipset to do. Quest 3 is supposed to have 2.5 to 3x graphics performance, so things will improve with new hardware, but you can only take it so far. Another big problem is that things look much different/better in person, in VR, compared to a 2d video. I don't see a solution for that.
Philip-J-Fry 4y ago
John Carmack says himself he wasn't even the best graphics programmer at Id. He was very good at the problem of game development in general and very good at optimising for performance specifically.

this_user 4y ago

> He seemed to be focused on latency and scale, where Meta seems to be pivoting to fidelity and graphics. Which makes sense, you want your users to be able to really take in the graphical glory of the Metaverse.

3836293648 4y ago
Sure, but it's VR. Not making people sick (= low latency) needs to come first
- gregw2 4y ago
  Agreed. I liked Quest2. It gave me noticeable mental fatigue/wore me out the first couple half hours I used it but it’s bothered me less since. I think the graphics qualify and UI is ‘good enough’ for the platform/tech to maintain and grow traction. But some family members found it disorienting on first try and never wanted to mess with it again. That does limit the market. And it probably is the biggest issue as you say. I noticed three other constraints that were inhibiting success: 1) Not a lot of free fun mindless apps. The platform seems to really steer you to $30 apps as its business model. I respect that, would rather pay up front than be the product, but it limits adoption/addiction/stickiness. (Of course with Meta you might end up being both.) Never had patience to venture into the side loading world. 2) Kids under 13 are not supposed to use it. Not sure why but I believe it may have interfere with visual development (and I believe it), and I limited my kids use significantly. This limits the kid adoption/addiction/stickiness dynamic seen with, say, YouTube. 3) Creep factor. Your every move is tied to your real Facebook name. I was always conscious my every move and sight was visible to Facebook. It’s true you are tracked/with the web/internet but in a less direct way. I suspect, but don’t know that this inhibits people using it for porn, which also limits adoption/addictiveness/stickiness. Beyond those three, two more thoughts… As many have discussed, I’m not sure what the killer app is, but a bit to my surprise I’m not sure it is critical… There were a number of fun different unique experiences (Beat Saber, etc) so I think it may work out without one big one. I also found that casting the screen to Chrome didn’t work a lot of the time which limited my family’s ability to enjoy it together and help each other.

CursedUrn 4y ago

Meta definitely isn't focused on fidelity and graphics. Their mobile VR push degraded VR graphics significantly.

nomel 4y ago
Or, you could say that Meta is focused on an audience that doesn't have a highish end gaming PC, and have a relatively small budget (say $400), which is probably most. For realistic hardware spread, see: https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Softw... But, they do still support that type of user with AirLink/USB. Problem is, there's not enough of those users, so many of the developers target Quest users, which where the eyes are. I think a step function in VR quality, which requires a step function in the number of eyes behind a powerful system, will come with PSVR 2.
MikusR 4y ago
Carmack was the one who was pushing for mobile.
- 1auralynn 4y ago
  Yeah in my opinion him pushing so hard for GearVR seriously negatively impacted the industry. Tons of people had their first intro to VR be some crappy 360 video on mobile VR and it did lasting damage to society's perception of VR
  - MikusR 4y ago
    Crappy 360 video on mobile had nothing to do with gearvr.
    - 1auralynn 4y ago
      Ok then crappy 3dof VR on mobile, of which GearVR was a variety. Bottom line, Facebook/Carmack pushed mobile vr prematurely in order to get the most users possible, but the experience sucked and users lost interest. Meta just made the same mistake with horizon