Talk about VR

[Seishisha]

VR is a subject i have often seen much praise of but very little discussion on. I was curious what other peoples opinion's are about VR.

So firstly let me start, i feel about VR the same way i do about 3D, i see it as a bone for the enthusiast and im not too likley to change my mind on this. I think that even now with the latest tech from oculus and valve-htc the execution is still far too limited to be actualy enjoyable or truely immersive.

Basicly what im saying is that until i can get a holo deck then my interest in VR is non existant.

So with that in mind, what are your opinions on VR, what is your personal experiance with it, do you see it as a legitimate form of entertainment or not?

Do you own or plan to buy into VR tech, what do you use it for, do you use it often, do you feel your purchase has been justified or not?

All this an more hopfully discuss away.

*Edit* That is ofcourse if anyone actualy wants to contribute... you know for fun and discussion and free cookies or somthing. Ah well it was worth a shot i guess, but this dishonor can not stand, i need to go find my self a second now so i can commit seppuku to atone for this thread.

 

[SoreWristed]

I have a pain in my wrist[footnote]obviously[/footnote]. This pain is partly video game related.

Recently I've been having the same pain in my neck. This pain is not video game related. But, oh boy, would I be in serious shit if I played using an oculus rift.

I don't want to use the omnitrix or I'd be having chest pains and leg spasms on top of that.

Don't think of me as some sickly, weelchairbound, glass man, because I'm not. But what I want to say is I feel the VR stuff, right now, is something you should only be able to play in an arcade for a price of $50. Here's why.

Firstly, all of these devices, except for the Oculus Rift, are large and clunky and take up dedicated space. The omnitrix or the virtusphere for instance, I won't see me fitting those in my living room anytime soon. If you don't know what the virtusphere is, here's Markiplier trying to play a simple game with it => https://youtu.be/2e5Qvac3BB8
I don't want that thing in my house unless I somehow turn into Scrooge McDuck, because that's the only way I'll have the space and money for it. More realistically, neither do I want to dedicate space in my living room for the Omnitrix. I could move it into my garage, but then it'll turn into a new year's resolution gimmick along with the stairmaster and the ABtastic 2000.

Secondly, I do not want to exert myself when I'm playing video games. In the case of the omnitrix and the Virtusphere this is obvious. In the case of the Oculus, this is different. As I mentioned earlier, I have a pain in my neck from my work. If I were to use the Oculus, I'd actually have to listen to those warnings on nintendo games and take a 15 minute break every hour. It's a large, weighty thing on your head, which your neck muscles must now support aswell, all the while you are flailing your head around wildly. Watch any video of people using the oculus rift and look at their neck, it just doesn't seem very ergonomical to me. And everyone who owns a Wii has experienced how tired your arms get

Thirdly, The oculus takes you, as it says on the box, completely into the game's world. Think about that for a second. In this video, Markiplier devotes about 10% of his video screaming about cables => https://youtu.be/weLT59w-zVs
That is just the obvious drawback. Now imagine the house across your street catching fire at 3 in the morning. You're completely deprived of all your senses. Not only will you be knocking stuff of your desk, but a mugger might just make off with everything besides your computer while you just sit there smiling and going 'whoooo!'. That might seem like an extreme example, but just look around your immediate surroundings and think what you might smash your head into or against while playing an intense game.

Fourth, it's nowhere near perfect. In this video, you can see Jackscepticeye becoming sick simply by using the rift. =https://youtu.be/pMrhaLb6UeQ?t=5m23s At three points in that video he has to take a break and eventually he gives up on a game he was super into, because it made him sick. Let's keep immersion to a level where I don't puke, please. And even if they fix that, people who are susceptible to motion sickness or epilepsy can still experience severe symptoms.
To quote Jackscepticeye here "I don't know what was scarier, the rollercoaster or the frame rate." or another quote "Loopedy loopy twisty turny loopedy sick"

If someone gifted me an Oculus or I was otherwise forced to use one, I'd probably end up using it as a wearable screen. My limits to immersion are a big screen and a good headphone.

Looking at that all, I really don't think VR technology should be used without supervision. The people using it are invariably smiling, so I do understand that the experience is incredibly fun and ofcourse I'd want a twirl on it. But no more than maybe an afternoon.

And here's a free business idea, take it and do as you will. Indoor rollercoaster park. All you need is 20 VR sets and a doctor on standby.

 

[Saetha]

Thirdly, The oculus takes you, as it says on the box, completely into the game's world. Think about that for a second. In this video, Markiplier devotes about 10% of his video screaming about cables => https://youtu.be/weLT59w-zVs
That is just the obvious drawback. Now imagine the house across your street catching fire at 3 in the morning. You're completely deprived of all your senses. Not only will you be knocking stuff of your desk, but a mugger might just make off with everything besides your computer while you just sit there smiling and going 'whoooo!'. That might seem like an extreme example, but just look around your immediate surroundings and think what you might smash your head into or against while playing an intense game.

This. Of all the issues listed here, my biggest problem with VR is this. Worse yet, it's not really an issue that can be solved. The point of VR is complete immersion, but I've never been someone who cared very much for "getting immersed" in my games. VR's best selling point (and greatest drawback) offers very little to me. If it works and blows everyone's mind and becomes the way we experience video games, then cool, great, I'm happy for everyone who wants that. But I'm skeptical that it will, and even if it does, I'll be sticking with an old-fashioned monitor and controller anyways.

I just... I get the feeling that VR's kind of like that hoverboard someone premiered a few months back. It's one of those ideas that everyone gets excited for because "The future is here, man!" but in reality, the hoverboard's a slow, clunky monster that can only levitate an inch or so and can only be used on extremely specific surfaces, all for the cost of tens of thousands of dollars. VR might not be quite as bad as that, but it's in the same boat. It's a sci-fi staple and will make for a neat gimmick, but I can't see anything more than that.

 

[Phasmal]

VR technology just seems not quite there yet. It's too expensive and clunky at the moment.

And for myself, I'm not sure I'll ever be able to use it. I have vertigo which makes me dizzy if I move my head too fast, so I'm not sure strapping a screen to my face would help that at all.

Plus it's kind of like the Kinect. Without feedback it's just waving around and you're likely to knock stuff over.

 

[Smooth Operator]

I would normally go into some technical details about VR (what can or can not work), but this thread is too precious.
Somehow you all sound like old man grumpy pants condemning some scary new invention that is corrupting the children, excellent amusement.

 

[mrdeclandeadly]

Well I'm blind in one eye, so playing any game in VR puts me at a disadvantage straight away. The old school VR machines when I was younger gave me terrible eye strain, and I'd be worried going out and buying a new one would end up a waste of money because of that same reason. It might be nice for a technical demo but I'd never buy a VR machine for gaming. Maybe when they do more with it outside of gaming, then it might pique my interest, but as it stands now I believe it is just a gimmick.

Also with the Steam VR thingamabob, who the hell has 15 square foot of space where they won't be banging into walls and things.

 

[Maximum Bert]

I take it you mean VR as in the oculus rather than true VR i.e the holodeck sorta thing.

I am sceptical of it but to be honest im gettin pretty tired of hearing about it. They have been going on about it for a very long time and yet at the moment nothing has come of it im just curious if much will be made of it outside a few tech demos and if it is how well it will work in games that dont have a first person view.

So far im not convinced it will be anything more than an expensive attachment useful on only a small handful of games. But really theres not much to talk about at the moment as it has not even been properly released and I would not be surprised if it doesnt stay that way until 2016.

 

[Danbo Jambo]

Here's an old vid.......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVn3H93Ysag

......I played the Nightmare game at 7:05 back in the early 90's and I totally agree with the reporter, it really sucked me in to the environment, and when I removed the headset it took me a fair few seconds to come round. you wouldn't think it looking at the graphics, but how my senses of sight and sound were manipulated really made me feel "in" the game.

Am I interested in it as a daily gaming device? 50/50, part of the reason I play is to unwind and relax, so it actually seems like a bit too much effort at times. That said, I bet it could be superb if done right.

My own personal hope is that this pushes the way forward for VR arcades like the old days. I miss the social aspect of arcades, and if it was setup right it would be far more fun than doing it at home alone. Tournaments, prizes, etc. there's a whole world of fun potentially there.

 

[JayRPG]

I picked the Samsung Gear VR because I already had a Note 4 (love that phone) and while I had fun, and actually use it semi-often for the VR Cinema, there are a few things that really make me worry for the future of VR, especially the other announced devices.

The biggest thing is that you can quite visibly see individual pixels, the problem is that the screen used on the note 4 (that works with the gear VR) is a higher resolution with a higher pixel density than almost all the other devices announced - and what's worse, the one that beats it (Valve/HTC vive with twin 1080x1200 screens) apparently still has a problem with visible pixels.

It really takes away from the whole experience, or at least, takes away from the experience they are trying to create.

It is a good bit of fun, and the VR cinema makes this one of my favourite purchases in quite a while, it does actually look and feel like you are watching a movie, in a cinema, on a massive screen.

 

[Fonejackerjon]

I picked the Samsung Gear VR because I already had a Note 4 (love that phone) and while I had fun, and actually use it semi-often for the VR Cinema, there are a few things that really make me worry for the future of VR, especially the other announced devices.

The biggest thing is that you can quite visibly see individual pixels, the problem is that the screen used on the note 4 (that works with the gear VR) is a higher resolution with a higher pixel density than almost all the other devices announced - and what's worse, the one that beats it (Valve/HTC vive with twin 1080x1200 screens) apparently still has a problem with visible pixels.

It really takes away from the whole experience, or at least, takes away from the experience they are trying to create.

It is a good bit of fun, and the VR cinema makes this one of my favourite purchases in quite a while, it does actually look and feel like you are watching a movie, in a cinema, on a massive screen.

This. I have the Gear VR and the killer app is the cinema, why I think this might go mainstream is because many people might not be able to afford/can/want to buy a massive TV for their house, even if they could you cannot match the perceived size of the Gear VR cinema screen NO-ONE can fit a 50 foot cinema screen in their house but this can be recreated with a mobile phone, its mind blowing.

When you use the gear VR it literally DOES feel like you are watching a 50 foot cinema screen, it actually feels like its BIGGER than my local cinema's screen, that alone it enough to make it have potential success for the mainstream.

Yes, the pixels are a big problem, but this is why mobile VR is so much better than console/PC VR, in two years we will be getting mobiles with 4K or higher resolution which will improve the pixel problem. Mobile phones screen are consistently evolving while the PC and console VR will be stuck with poor screens.

 

[CrystalShadow]

I have a rift DK1, and it impressed me a lot as a concept, but, I get incredibly sick using it.

To be fair this is a technical issue to some extent. You MUST track head movements reliably, and ensure the screen updates with as little latency as possible.
Anything else is a recipe for disaster, though some people (such as me) are far more vulnerable to the effect than others.
(This, incidentally also means you need 60 or 90+ fps or more at all times, no exceptions, which is a bit awkward given how games are typically designed to run)

Now, as to the practical, we still have a huge gap in input devices. I have a razer hydra, and that's an impressive addition, but still... No sense of touch makes it very fiddly.

Not to mention that using your body directly to control a virtual body is just plain inconvenient.

I love VR as an idea, and I might even have a lot of fun with what is coming up in the next few years, but I have to admit it's limitations annoy me.

Problem is, I'm a dreamer, and a bit unhappy with reality most of the time, so the prospect of 'being' in a different reality really excites me...

But, the limitations and the issues surrounding how it works make it somewhat less than what I would hope for.

I dream of stuff like the matrix (ignoring scary robot takeover implications) and Sword Art Online.

This gets us some of the way, but you do hit up against the limits of it pretty quickly.
And the biggest limit to me, is the lack of any sense of touch.

A second limit is even the best input devices we have still amount to having to use your own body as the control of a virtual one, and that's awkward unless you are really fit and healthy, and have a huge amount of space you can specifically dedicate to it.

I don't really compare VR to current gaming.
It's not a gimmick in the sense that motion controls are, rather it's a new medium with superficial resemblance to gaming.
Many, many things about VR programs have to be done differently to games.

I think it has at least some future, but I am very aware of the kind of limits it has...

 

[Vigormortis]

I'm not sure which saddens me more. The breadth of ignorance on how far ahead VR tech actually is now as compared to just a few short years ago, or that so many think dev-kit and early test-build versions of these HMDs and input devices are somehow indicative of the final, consumer versions. (I.E. loads of wires and such everywhere.)

And just to clarify, I don't give a toss whether or not anyone personally wants to use this tech. What difference does it make to me whether one likes it or not? But, that said, I'd like to clear up a few points:

Also with the Steam VR thingamabob, who the hell has 15 square foot of space where they won't be banging into walls and things.

Multiple Lighthouse units can be synced together, allowing for multiple, over-layed 15ft-by-15ft spaces. In essence, you could turn your entire home into a VR space if you wanted to. Even an entire stadium could, in theory, be turned into a VR space.

Firstly, all of these devices, except for the Oculus Rift, are large and clunky and take up dedicated space. The omnitrix or the virtusphere for instance, I won't see me fitting those in my living room anytime soon. If you don't know what the virtusphere is, here's Markiplier trying to play a simple game with it => https://youtu.be/2e5Qvac3BB8
I don't want that thing in my house unless I somehow turn into Scrooge McDuck, because that's the only way I'll have the space and money for it. More realistically, neither do I want to dedicate space in my living room for the Omnitrix. I could move it into my garage, but then it'll turn into a new year's resolution gimmick along with the stairmaster and the ABtastic 2000.

You've skipped over the progress of Morpheus and Vive, both of which are currently smaller than the DK2 version of Rift.

Also: Valve's Lighthouse removes the need for absurd devices like the Virtusphere entirely. You can turn any space; obstacles and all; into your VR space.

Secondly, I do not want to exert myself when I'm playing video games. In the case of the omnitrix and the Virtusphere this is obvious. In the case of the Oculus, this is different. As I mentioned earlier, I have a pain in my neck from my work. If I were to use the Oculus, I'd actually have to listen to those warnings on nintendo games and take a 15 minute break every hour. It's a large, weighty thing on your head, which your neck muscles must now support aswell, all the while you are flailing your head around wildly. Watch any video of people using the oculus rift and look at their neck, it just doesn't seem very ergonomical to me. And everyone who owns a Wii has experienced how tired your arms get

But again, the current and planned final consumer models are all generally light in weight. One of the key comments I heard out of GDC, for example, is how light the Vive was. Many commented that they barely noticed that it was strapped to their heads after a time - the same sort that complained about the weight of HMDs.

As for movement, it is entirely possible to use an HMD with slow head movements. You do not need to flail around like a lunatic when using one. They're not Wii-motes.

Thirdly, The oculus takes you, as it says on the box, completely into the game's world. Think about that for a second. In this video, Markiplier devotes about 10% of his video screaming about cables => https://youtu.be/weLT59w-zVs
That is just the obvious drawback. Now imagine the house across your street catching fire at 3 in the morning. You're completely deprived of all your senses. Not only will you be knocking stuff of your desk, but a mugger might just make off with everything besides your computer while you just sit there smiling and going 'whoooo!'. That might seem like an extreme example, but just look around your immediate surroundings and think what you might smash your head into or against while playing an intense game.

On cables: As I've told others, the final builds for most of the key HMDs coming to market are intended to be wireless. HTC plans to make their HMD and the accompanying handheld input devices wireless.

Your mugger scenario is extreme and a bit absurd, but your latter point has merit. However, I urge you to look into Lighthouse. One of the key features Valve built into the device is one where the HMD you're wearing will flash up a grid within the VR space to display where a boundary, barrier, or obstacle are located near you. This way, as you approach a wall or object in your path, the VR space will literally display a warning overlay over what it is you're about to bump into.

Is it a perfect solution? Probably not, but from all accounts out of GDC it works amazingly well in helping to quantify one's real world surroundings within the VR space.

Fourth, it's nowhere near perfect. In this video, you can see Jackscepticeye becoming sick simply by using the rift. =https://youtu.be/pMrhaLb6UeQ?t=5m23s At three points in that video he has to take a break and eventually he gives up on a game he was super into, because it made him sick. Let's keep immersion to a level where I don't puke, please. And even if they fix that, people who are susceptible to motion sickness or epilepsy can still experience severe symptoms.
To quote Jackscepticeye here "I don't know what was scarier, the rollercoaster or the frame rate." or another quote "Loopedy loopy twisty turny loopedy sick"

Well of course the tech isn't perfect. What tech is? But the improvements that have been made just in the past three years are astounding. Many of the people I know who always got motion sickness from VR HMDs reported no feeling of queasiness from using the Vive or Morpheus at GDC this year. Many of the issues with the tech that caused motion sickness and disorientation have been addressed with the current builds.

Those who are susceptible to motion sickness and epilepsy are at risk just using a regular display, so I don't see how that's a mark against VR HMDs.

If someone gifted me an Oculus or I was otherwise forced to use one, I'd probably end up using it as a wearable screen. My limits to immersion are a big screen and a good headphone.

Looking at that all, I really don't think VR technology should be used without supervision. The people using it are invariably smiling, so I do understand that the experience is incredibly fun and ofcourse I'd want a twirl on it. But no more than maybe an afternoon.

And here's a free business idea, take it and do as you will. Indoor rollercoaster park. All you need is 20 VR sets and a doctor on standby.

A wearable screen is one of the primary uses for the technology. You don't have to be standing up flailing about to use an HMD.

Still, I understand your trepidation towards using or experiencing the technology. I shared that feeling for years. But I have to tell you, the tech is progressing at breakneck speeds, and the stuff coming out of GDC this year is leagues ahead of where even the Rift was last year. It's truly amazing, especially Valve's Lighthouse technology.

[sub]And for the record: An indoors VR roller coaster ride sounds fantastic.[/sub]