4 ms·

Anyone with little kids who like to play outside who also happened to own an Oculus already "knew" this (maybe it's just my family): my kids' favorite game on t

Anyone with little kids who like to play outside who also happened to own an Oculus already "knew" this (maybe it's just my family): my kids' favorite game on the Oculus is to spray paint the "play area" in the combined B&W 'outside' rendering. They've always demanded to be able to play beat sabers but also to be able to "see the room", so they can see their friends when they play. They don't even care that it's crappy, low-quality B&W; actually, that's kind of a charming feature! I think what's stopped other companies is that it was too damn hard; not that it wasn't the obviously superior way of doing things. (Obviously superior: render AR onto VR.)

WorldMaker 3y ago
Not just too hard, but also maybe too expensive. Vision is using 12 cameras, LIDAR, and a lot of processing power to deliver it. People thought it was crazy when Apple started trying to get 6+ cameras and using 3+ at once for single photos/videos on a single phone (before they started to emulate them after they achieved that). (In some respects the early critiques of, for instance, the iPhone 13 in retrospect maybe start to look like hints of some of Vision's early planning/testing stages.) Apple seems to have prioritized AR in a way that Meta didn't and that led them to exploring all the costs to do it right. (You can argue that Microsoft was also paying attention as their Mixed Reality-focused playbook resembles what Apple seems to be playing at. Microsoft just saw the costs as a reason to focus first on Enterprise customers. Apple seems to have the gumption to try to make this a potentially accessible to consumers play from Day One, including involving Disney to signal that. That's an interesting bet that will be curious to watch play out.)