Poll: Virtual Reality - Fad or Innovation?

[Souplex]

I'm not sure "fad" is the right word, because no consumer base seems to care.

 

[RJ 17]

I think that much like Microsoft's Holo-Lens (or whatever that thing was at E3), VR support will end up seeing much more wide-spread use for "real world applications." I'd imagine there'd be quite a lot of applications for VR in the medical field, for instance.

Sure, there'll be some neat VR games that come around, but until they can solve the problem in which the player still knows they're sitting on a couch, holding a controller, and wearing a headset, I can't imagine it will be replacing standard console or PC gaming.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

Now VR headsets are emerging from the horizon, like a lone cowboys from an intro to a spegetti western. It made me think, what would virtual reality tech do that is impossible to accomplish with current means?

With current means it's fairly impossible due to the nature of human binocular vision and the inner ear's conflict with the screens. Basically current headsets work by putting two screens very close to your eyes. It makes individual focusing hard, 3D imaging technology has the same issue. For VR to work we'll either need to be able to override sensory input and send information direct to the brain, or immersion holographic technology that has positive feed back. The end result of the current tech is still nausea and disorientation after at most an hour using the headset.

-What are you planning to do with the system ones you get your hands on it and a computer powerful enough to support it?

Maybe get it to check out the novelty of the device, but again they're not good for use in anything more than short sessions.

-What kinds of games/simmulations you want to see be developed for the headsets?

I'd like to see compatibility for first person games and simulators that include cockpits like mecha, flight, driving, train, and space sims.

-Do you believe it's a passing fad, like motion controls, or something truly innovative?

It'll be a novelty, but because it makes people feel ill, it's also expensive both to develop for and to own. So I see the potential of it not lasting as anything more than a gimmick. It'll probably fade away and someone will attempt it again in the future.

-How do you see the wave of VR games interacting with established development intitutions and movements? Do you think AAA devs will risk millions developing for the new tech?

Not well, it'll be costly and complicated to develop for, so it'll get some support for the novelty, but that will fade away. AAA developers will take the risk initially, but when they find most aren't using it extensively, it'll fall to niche level if it manages to stick around at all.

 

[FirstNameLastName]

I'm rather glad to see that the majority of people recognize that VR will carve out its place in the market rather than being the Future of Gamingtm that will heal the blind, cure cancer and fix the broken wheel on every shopping trolley you pick.

While the technology is making major improvements all the time there are certain problems that can't be solved with any amount of software updates. The motion sickness issue, for example, doesn't seem like something that's even possible to solve without the use of motion controls and special design considerations since the issue of sensory conflict is the inevitable result of the device's own purpose (immersion).

Considering it is a properly functional peripheral unlike prior motion controls where they couldn't figure out what you were actually doing this will surely have it's place.
But it is very expensive for this market, as in new console expensive, so my best guess is the market for it will be the same as racing wheels/flight sticks. Some people will have them and they will be heaps of fun, but both their sales and usability will be limited. Especially tricky selling to people who never got to wear one because looking at a video of it just doesn't explain the functionality.

Once the displays get better this stuff could replace all monitors especially if the scan line laser tech can be brought to a high enough quality. Because it really is a lost cause to keep buying more monitors for every room and device you use just to get that tiny bit of extra view angle where VR can turn everything into a monitor.
Right now the low resolution makes fine details like text really problematic, but some day this will be fixed along with it's size.

That would be more along the lines of AR, which I kind of question the usefulness of it until they've managed to make the device smaller and more comfortable, and probably less isolating too. It seems like devices such as a more advanced Google Glass will be more likely to take that spot than large, bulky VR headsets.

 

[Level 7 Dragon]

I'm rather glad to see that the majority of people recognize that VR will carve out its place in the market rather than being the Future of Gamingtm that will heal the blind, cure cancer and fix the broken wheel on every shopping trolley you pick.

While the technology is making major improvements all the time there are certain problems that can't be solved with any amount of software updates. The motion sickness issue, for example, doesn't seem like something that's even possible to solve without the use of motion controls and special design considerations since the issue of sensory conflict is the inevitable result of the device's own purpose (immersion).

snip

That would be more along the lines of AR, which I kind of question the usefulness of it until they've managed to make the device smaller and more comfortable, and probably less isolating too. It seems like devices such as a more advanced Google Glass will be more likely to take that spot than large, bulky VR headsets.

Well, the general tech public seem to forget that VR doesn't only consist out of headsets, but also out of phone powered VR machines. Since most smartphones have an inbuild gyroscope as well as a decent ammount of computing power for a relatively cheap portable devise, they can be used for VR films and games that arn't too taxing on the processor. Though most of us arn't able to get a 1000$ 8 core gaming PC and an Oculus, most adults in first and second world countries do own a phone.

In my opinion, the reason why Oculus is partnering with Samsung is because phone VR is going to be the battering ram that will bring VR in to the mainstream.

Man, just imagine watching sports events in VR.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

Well, the general tech public seem to forget that VR doesn't only consist out of headsets, but also out of phone powered VR machines. Since most smartphones have an inbuild gyroscope as well as a decent ammount of computing power for a relatively cheap portable devise, they can be used for VR films and games that arn't too taxing on the processor. Though most of us arn't able to get a 1000$ 8 core gaming PC and an Oculus, most adults in first and second world countries do own a phone.

In my opinion, the reason why Oculus is partnering with Samsung is because phone VR is going to be the battering ram that will bring VR in to the mainstream.

Man, just imagine watching sports events in VR.

The technical limitation isn't the computer required to use the device, but the headset itself, which is what's currently required for any sort of VR experience. The technical limitations are the same as with 3D like in movies. It's an optical illusion that makes it hard for your eyes to find a focal point to work with. This leads to people feeling ill and disoriented, along with that it strains your eyes, which with long term use can cause damage to your eyes because of the strain. Also because of they eye strain VR tends to cause headaches when used for more than a short period.

 

[Linghu]

VR as it is right now is pretty much like a gimmick and useless IMO.

BUT when some company will develope a VR headset that can read your brainwaves,
can make you feel like your ingame as in experiencing all 5 senses and will be cheap to mass produce then we'll talk.

As for what games would be appropriate to use VR for? Well what kind of game wouldnt? Though RPG would be great.
Has no one read The legendary moonlight sculptor?

As for the companies most would not want to risk millions and wait for other companies to risk it first and then copy it if it works.

 

[Pyrian]

The technical limitation isn't the computer required to use the device, but the headset itself, which is what's currently required for any sort of VR experience.

Generally I agree with this, but it's worth noting that VR is quite a bit more stressful to graphics systems than just rendering to a TV. You're not going to push as many polys and effects with the same hardware.

The technical limitations are the same as with 3D like in movies.

That's not really true; VR headsets accomplish quite a lot that 3D movies do not. For example, tilting your head sideways ruins 3D movies, and even turning side-to-side effectively changes the IPD and makes the distance go wonky. The headsets never bleed images like 3D movies far too often do. With full head tracking like the Oculus Rift DK2, you can even lean and move around a bit without destroying the effect.

It's an optical illusion that makes it hard for your eyes to find a focal point to work with.

That's barely true at all. All VR devices use infinite-distance eye focus. It's not perfect, but it's not nearly as bad as you might guess. It's certainly not an eye-strain contributor (especially compared to "normal" squinting at little phone screens).

This leads to people feeling ill and disoriented...

The nausea effects are largely kinematic, not focal. Mostly it happens when you start "moving" in the virtual space (while still in life), which is why FPS may in fact be a terrible genre for VR.