Oculus And Epic Team Up On VR Content

[FritzEiv]

Will VR enable a perfect blending of games and movies, or usher in a whole new form of story-telling and content creation? We interviewed execs from Oculus and Epic to gain some insight.

Oculus And Epic Team Up On VR Content : Read more

 

[Eggz]

Can't wait to try Oculus next week! Buddy has one at work. This article makes me super stoked about it

 

[loki1944]

No thank you. Surround is way better imo.

 

[hixbot]

I'd like to hear how developers plan on making first person shooters. How they'll dissociate the aim of your gun from the head tracking view. I don't want to aim the gun with my head.

 

[jkflipflop98]

I'd like to hear how developers plan on making first person shooters. How they'll dissociate the aim of your gun from the head tracking view. I don't want to aim the gun with my head.

You ever played ARMA? There's your answer. You can turn your head and look around independent of where your gun is firing. In TF2 in VR, you can lock down a hallway with the heavy weapons guy and while still firing you can look back over your shoulder to make sure there's no spies coming up on you.

No thank you. Surround is way better imo.

In no universe will that ever be true. You should try out an HMD once before making up your mind.

 

[loki1944]

I'd like to hear how developers plan on making first person shooters. How they'll dissociate the aim of your gun from the head tracking view. I don't want to aim the gun with my head.

You ever played ARMA? There's your answer. You can turn your head and look around independent of where your gun is firing. In TF2 in VR, you can lock down a hallway with the heavy weapons guy and while still firing you can look back over your shoulder to make sure there's no spies coming up on you.

No thank you. Surround is way better imo.

In no universe will that ever be true. You should try out an HMD once before making up your mind.

I had a DK2 and I have surround with 3xROG Swift monitors; surround wins imo.

 

[mr2shim]

I'd like to hear how developers plan on making first person shooters. How they'll dissociate the aim of your gun from the head tracking view. I don't want to aim the gun with my head.

You ever played ARMA? There's your answer. You can turn your head and look around independent of where your gun is firing. In TF2 in VR, you can lock down a hallway with the heavy weapons guy and while still firing you can look back over your shoulder to make sure there's no spies coming up on you.

No thank you. Surround is way better imo.

In no universe will that ever be true. You should try out an HMD once before making up your mind.

I had a DK2 and I have surround with 3xROG Swift monitors; surround wins imo.

If you're being realistic you'd realize most people don't have the space, funds or care to have triple monitor setups. Besides, why are you comparing development hardware to consumer hardware? Save your doubts for consumer VR.

 

[loki1944]

I'd like to hear how developers plan on making first person shooters. How they'll dissociate the aim of your gun from the head tracking view. I don't want to aim the gun with my head.

You ever played ARMA? There's your answer. You can turn your head and look around independent of where your gun is firing. In TF2 in VR, you can lock down a hallway with the heavy weapons guy and while still firing you can look back over your shoulder to make sure there's no spies coming up on you.

No thank you. Surround is way better imo.

In no universe will that ever be true. You should try out an HMD once before making up your mind.

I had a DK2 and I have surround with 3xROG Swift monitors; surround wins imo.

If you're being realistic you'd realize most people don't have the space, funds or care to have triple monitor setups. Besides, why are you comparing development hardware to consumer hardware? Save your doubts for consumer VR.

Yes, I have played the series since Operation Flashpoint came out in 2001, the severe FPS drops of the Arma 2/Arma 3 and DayZ engines make them some of the worst games to use with VR. Consumer version will not overcome the nausea/de-realization/dizziness issues already found in DK1 and DK2; better tracking, higher refresh and resolution can only do so much and cannot eliminate the problem completely from FPS games. If you were realistic you'd realize that most people don't have the hardware to even drive a VR unit (take a look at the steam hardware survey).

 

[mr2shim]

Yes, I have played the series since Operation Flashpoint came out in 2001, the severe FPS drops of the Arma 2/Arma 3 and DayZ engines make them some of the worst games to use with VR. Consumer version will not overcome the nausea/de-realization/dizziness issues already found in DK1 and DK2; better tracking, higher refresh and resolution can only do so much and cannot eliminate the problem completely from FPS games. If you were realistic you'd realize that most people don't have the hardware to even drive a VR unit (take a look at the steam hardware survey).

Most people don't have the hardware right now today. Will that change over time? Obviously it will. Most people have computers that can run Crysis maxed out. When the game was released did most people have computers with that kind of computing power? No. You're being illogical. DK2 was a massive improvement over DK1 in terms of motion sickness. There will always be naysayers, so your opinion really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

In 3 years when you and your buddies are fapping to VR porn. Remember this..

told ya so

 

[loki1944]

I had a DK2 and I have surround with 3xROG Swift monitors; surround wins imo.

I doubt you've ever tried an HMD. Even with three monitors you're still only taking up a small amount of your field of view and they're fixed. Wearing an HMD is like having a big monitor all around you in 1:1 3D. You have to try one before you understand what is going on.

Here's evidence: http://s1068.photobucket.com/user/loki1944/media/DK2_zpsdostn9ue.jpg.html Try again.

 

[loki1944]

Yes, I have played the series since Operation Flashpoint came out in 2001, the severe FPS drops of the Arma 2/Arma 3 and DayZ engines make them some of the worst games to use with VR. Consumer version will not overcome the nausea/de-realization/dizziness issues already found in DK1 and DK2; better tracking, higher refresh and resolution can only do so much and cannot eliminate the problem completely from FPS games. If you were realistic you'd realize that most people don't have the hardware to even drive a VR unit (take a look at the steam hardware survey).

Most people don't have the hardware right now today. Will that change over time? Obviously it will. Most people have computers that can run Crysis maxed out. When the game was released did most people have computers with that kind of computing power? No. You're being illogical. DK2 was a massive improvement over DK1 in terms of motion sickness. There will always be naysayers, so your opinion really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

In 3 years when you and your buddies are fapping to VR porn. Remember this..

told ya so

DK2 is still pretty terrible, resolution is not great, honeycomb effect still there, PITA to get working with games; still causes dizziness/nausea/de-realization depending on the person etc. I'm not arguing there will be a niche as with 3D Vision, but that will be it. Also your porn comment is crass and unwarranted.

 

[mr2shim]

Yes, I have played the series since Operation Flashpoint came out in 2001, the severe FPS drops of the Arma 2/Arma 3 and DayZ engines make them some of the worst games to use with VR. Consumer version will not overcome the nausea/de-realization/dizziness issues already found in DK1 and DK2; better tracking, higher refresh and resolution can only do so much and cannot eliminate the problem completely from FPS games. If you were realistic you'd realize that most people don't have the hardware to even drive a VR unit (take a look at the steam hardware survey).

Most people don't have the hardware right now today. Will that change over time? Obviously it will. Most people have computers that can run Crysis maxed out. When the game was released did most people have computers with that kind of computing power? No. You're being illogical. DK2 was a massive improvement over DK1 in terms of motion sickness. There will always be naysayers, so your opinion really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

In 3 years when you and your buddies are fapping to VR porn. Remember this..

told ya so

DK2 is still pretty terrible, resolution is not great, honeycomb effect still there, PITA to get working with games; still causes dizziness/nausea/de-realization depending on the person etc. I'm not arguing there will be a niche as with 3D Vision, but that will be it. Also your porn comment is crass and unwarranted.

The DK2 uses a screen from a note 3, it's not a purpose built proprietary screen. None of the hardware was designed for the purpose of VR. It was pieced together. Again, you're being illogical. Wait until consumer versions are released before you start criticizing. It's completely normal to be skeptical, but it's just foolish to think DK2 is in any way similar to what the consumer HMD will be. DK stands for Development Kit. It is a PITA to get working, why? Because it's a development kit, it isn't consumer hardware. It causes nausea/dizziness because it's a development kit. It's developmental hardware. Do you know what that means? It means it's not refined, it's not finished, it's not ready for consumer use.

You are criticizing VR like it's been available for years and it hasn't at all improved. There isn't one consumer HMD on earth, and you are here acting like VR is only going to be a niche. You don't know what it will be, only time will tell. Since you can see into the future, can you give me the lotto numbers for Friday's drawing?

I know your type, you will respond with more of the same. That's great, but my point still remains, it's not consumer hardware. There's no point in assuming it will fail or it will be a niche or it will still make you feel sick until you've tried consumer hardware.. Have you tried consumer hardware?

BTW, that honeycomb effect, those are pixels. The reason you see them is because the display is ~1" away from your face. Higher resolution screens will solve that issue and it's been reported that CV1 has solved that issue and every other issue you have listed, so your point is actually null.

And the comment about porn is valid, because in that time frame you will be jerking off to VR porn.

 

[loki1944]

Yes, I have played the series since Operation Flashpoint came out in 2001, the severe FPS drops of the Arma 2/Arma 3 and DayZ engines make them some of the worst games to use with VR. Consumer version will not overcome the nausea/de-realization/dizziness issues already found in DK1 and DK2; better tracking, higher refresh and resolution can only do so much and cannot eliminate the problem completely from FPS games. If you were realistic you'd realize that most people don't have the hardware to even drive a VR unit (take a look at the steam hardware survey).

Most people don't have the hardware right now today. Will that change over time? Obviously it will. Most people have computers that can run Crysis maxed out. When the game was released did most people have computers with that kind of computing power? No. You're being illogical. DK2 was a massive improvement over DK1 in terms of motion sickness. There will always be naysayers, so your opinion really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

In 3 years when you and your buddies are fapping to VR porn. Remember this..

told ya so

DK2 is still pretty terrible, resolution is not great, honeycomb effect still there, PITA to get working with games; still causes dizziness/nausea/de-realization depending on the person etc. I'm not arguing there will be a niche as with 3D Vision, but that will be it. Also your porn comment is crass and unwarranted.

The DK2 uses a screen from a note 3, it's not a purpose built proprietary screen. None of the hardware was designed for the purpose of VR. It was pieced together. Again, you're being illogical. Wait until consumer versions are released before you start criticizing. It's completely normal to be skeptical, but it's just foolish to think DK2 is in any way similar to what the consumer HMD will be. DK stands for Development Kit. It is a PITA to get working, why? Because it's a development kit, it isn't consumer hardware. It causes nausea/dizziness because it's a development kit. It's developmental hardware. Do you know what that means? It means it's not refined, it's not finished, it's not ready for consumer use.

You are criticizing VR like it's been available for years and it hasn't at all improved. There isn't one consumer HMD on earth, and you are here acting like VR is only going to be a niche. You don't know what it will be, only time will tell. Since you can see into the future, can you give me the lotto numbers for Friday's drawing?

I know your type, you will respond with more of the same. That's great, but my point still remains, it's not consumer hardware. There's no point in assuming it will fail or it will be a niche or it will still make you feel sick until you've tried consumer hardware.. Have you tried consumer hardware?

BTW, that honeycomb effect, those are pixels. The reason you see them is because the display is ~1" away from your face. Higher resolution screens will solve that issue and it's been reported that CV1 has solved that issue and every other issue you have listed, so your point is actually null.

And the comment about porn is valid, because in that time frame you will be jerking off to VR porn.

No your comment is crass and unwarranted and indicates a person of poor manners. The DK2 gives an informed insight into how the consumer version will be and some of the problems it will face and while it may have improved, eradicating nausea/dizziness/derealization are insurmountable problems for VR which higher refresh/resolution have been unable and will be unable to completely deal with when it comes to moving in first person because it has to due with how the brain interprets what is going on. It will be popular for a bit with a niche and then be done http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/06/17/editorial-why-vr-is-going-to-be-an-enormous-flop/.

 

[mr2shim]

Yes, I have played the series since Operation Flashpoint came out in 2001, the severe FPS drops of the Arma 2/Arma 3 and DayZ engines make them some of the worst games to use with VR. Consumer version will not overcome the nausea/de-realization/dizziness issues already found in DK1 and DK2; better tracking, higher refresh and resolution can only do so much and cannot eliminate the problem completely from FPS games. If you were realistic you'd realize that most people don't have the hardware to even drive a VR unit (take a look at the steam hardware survey).

Most people don't have the hardware right now today. Will that change over time? Obviously it will. Most people have computers that can run Crysis maxed out. When the game was released did most people have computers with that kind of computing power? No. You're being illogical. DK2 was a massive improvement over DK1 in terms of motion sickness. There will always be naysayers, so your opinion really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

In 3 years when you and your buddies are fapping to VR porn. Remember this..

told ya so

DK2 is still pretty terrible, resolution is not great, honeycomb effect still there, PITA to get working with games; still causes dizziness/nausea/de-realization depending on the person etc. I'm not arguing there will be a niche as with 3D Vision, but that will be it. Also your porn comment is crass and unwarranted.

The DK2 uses a screen from a note 3, it's not a purpose built proprietary screen. None of the hardware was designed for the purpose of VR. It was pieced together. Again, you're being illogical. Wait until consumer versions are released before you start criticizing. It's completely normal to be skeptical, but it's just foolish to think DK2 is in any way similar to what the consumer HMD will be. DK stands for Development Kit. It is a PITA to get working, why? Because it's a development kit, it isn't consumer hardware. It causes nausea/dizziness because it's a development kit. It's developmental hardware. Do you know what that means? It means it's not refined, it's not finished, it's not ready for consumer use.

You are criticizing VR like it's been available for years and it hasn't at all improved. There isn't one consumer HMD on earth, and you are here acting like VR is only going to be a niche. You don't know what it will be, only time will tell. Since you can see into the future, can you give me the lotto numbers for Friday's drawing?

I know your type, you will respond with more of the same. That's great, but my point still remains, it's not consumer hardware. There's no point in assuming it will fail or it will be a niche or it will still make you feel sick until you've tried consumer hardware.. Have you tried consumer hardware?

BTW, that honeycomb effect, those are pixels. The reason you see them is because the display is ~1" away from your face. Higher resolution screens will solve that issue and it's been reported that CV1 has solved that issue and every other issue you have listed, so your point is actually null.

And the comment about porn is valid, because in that time frame you will be jerking off to VR porn.

No your comment is crass and unwarranted and indicates a person of poor manners. The DK2 gives an informed insight into how the consumer version will be and some of the problems it will face and while it may have improved, eradicating nausea/dizziness/derealization are insurmountable problems for VR which higher refresh/resolution have been unable and will be unable to completely deal with when it comes to moving in first person because it has to due with how the brain interprets what is going on. It will be popular for a bit with a niche and then be done http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/06/17/editorial-why-vr-is-going-to-be-an-enormous-flop/.

That article is pretty hilarious. It starts with comparing VR to 3D TV. 3D TV isn't removing you from your environment and placing you into another. There are no comparisons to current HMD technology. Never in the history of humanity have we been able to transport ourselves to another world visually. It has literally never happened successfully. Current VR tech actually does that. Like I said, you can have your opinion. There are naysayers, there were naysayers when the iPhone first showed up, there were naysayers when PC's first came to market. There will always, literally always be naysayers and that's fine. They at the end of the day, always end up eating their words, as will you. It's been nice talking to you. It's a shame you couldn't cite a better source than that inflammatory garbage.

I'll come back this time next year and remind you of how wrong you are, is that ok?

you’re head’s exhausted from carrying the gear

The CV1 is said to be so light it feels weightless. That article is wrong so many times it isn't even funny. Using images from 20+ years ago as justification for why VR is impractical. Not one image of CV1.. What a joke of a source.

 

[loki1944]

Yes, I have played the series since Operation Flashpoint came out in 2001, the severe FPS drops of the Arma 2/Arma 3 and DayZ engines make them some of the worst games to use with VR. Consumer version will not overcome the nausea/de-realization/dizziness issues already found in DK1 and DK2; better tracking, higher refresh and resolution can only do so much and cannot eliminate the problem completely from FPS games. If you were realistic you'd realize that most people don't have the hardware to even drive a VR unit (take a look at the steam hardware survey).

Most people don't have the hardware right now today. Will that change over time? Obviously it will. Most people have computers that can run Crysis maxed out. When the game was released did most people have computers with that kind of computing power? No. You're being illogical. DK2 was a massive improvement over DK1 in terms of motion sickness. There will always be naysayers, so your opinion really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

In 3 years when you and your buddies are fapping to VR porn. Remember this..

told ya so

DK2 is still pretty terrible, resolution is not great, honeycomb effect still there, PITA to get working with games; still causes dizziness/nausea/de-realization depending on the person etc. I'm not arguing there will be a niche as with 3D Vision, but that will be it. Also your porn comment is crass and unwarranted.

The DK2 uses a screen from a note 3, it's not a purpose built proprietary screen. None of the hardware was designed for the purpose of VR. It was pieced together. Again, you're being illogical. Wait until consumer versions are released before you start criticizing. It's completely normal to be skeptical, but it's just foolish to think DK2 is in any way similar to what the consumer HMD will be. DK stands for Development Kit. It is a PITA to get working, why? Because it's a development kit, it isn't consumer hardware. It causes nausea/dizziness because it's a development kit. It's developmental hardware. Do you know what that means? It means it's not refined, it's not finished, it's not ready for consumer use.

You are criticizing VR like it's been available for years and it hasn't at all improved. There isn't one consumer HMD on earth, and you are here acting like VR is only going to be a niche. You don't know what it will be, only time will tell. Since you can see into the future, can you give me the lotto numbers for Friday's drawing?

I know your type, you will respond with more of the same. That's great, but my point still remains, it's not consumer hardware. There's no point in assuming it will fail or it will be a niche or it will still make you feel sick until you've tried consumer hardware.. Have you tried consumer hardware?

BTW, that honeycomb effect, those are pixels. The reason you see them is because the display is ~1" away from your face. Higher resolution screens will solve that issue and it's been reported that CV1 has solved that issue and every other issue you have listed, so your point is actually null.

And the comment about porn is valid, because in that time frame you will be jerking off to VR porn.

No your comment is crass and unwarranted and indicates a person of poor manners. The DK2 gives an informed insight into how the consumer version will be and some of the problems it will face and while it may have improved, eradicating nausea/dizziness/derealization are insurmountable problems for VR which higher refresh/resolution have been unable and will be unable to completely deal with when it comes to moving in first person because it has to due with how the brain interprets what is going on. It will be popular for a bit with a niche and then be done http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/06/17/editorial-why-vr-is-going-to-be-an-enormous-flop/.

That article is pretty hilarious. It starts with comparing VR to 3D TV. 3D TV isn't removing you from your environment and placing you into another. There are no comparisons to current HMD technology. Never in the history of humanity have we been able to transport ourselves to another world visually. It has literally never happened successfully. Current VR tech actually does that. Like I said, you can have your opinion. There are naysayers, there were naysayers when the iPhone first showed up, there were naysayers when PC's first came to market. There will always, literally always be naysayers and that's fine. They at the end of the day, always end up eating their words, as will you. It's been nice talking to you. It's a shame you couldn't cite a better source than that inflammatory garbage.

I'll come back this time next year and remind you of how wrong you are, is that ok?

you’re head’s exhausted from carrying the gear

The CV1 is said to be so light it feels weightless. That article is wrong so many times it isn't even funny. Using images from 20+ years ago as justification for why VR is impractical. Not one image of CV1.. What a joke of a source.

Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.

 

[mr2shim]

Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.

I am, as you are yours. All signs point to VR not being a niche, regardless of what one poor article says. If it does end up being a niche, I'll gladly admit I was wrong, somehow though I don't think that will happen. We will see in due time.

BTW, 3D TV is literally nothing like HMD VR, given you have a DK2 you should know that. Full immersed in a completely different world vs images popping out of a 2D screen because you're wearing 5 dollar red and blue glasses in your living room, hmmmm

 

[loki1944]

Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.

I am, as you are yours. All signs point to VR not being a niche, regardless of what one shitty article says. If it does end up being a niche, I'll gladly admit I was wrong, somehow though I don't think that will happen. We will see in due time.

BTW, 3D TV is literally nothing like HMD VR, given you have a DK2 you should know that. Full immersed in a completely different world vs images popping out of a 2D screen because you're wearing 5 dollar red and blue glasses in your living room, hmmmm

It's not about exactly the same, it's about the limited appeal to a mass market.

 

[mr2shim]

Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.

I am, as you are yours. All signs point to VR not being a niche, regardless of what one shitty article says. If it does end up being a niche, I'll gladly admit I was wrong, somehow though I don't think that will happen. We will see in due time.

BTW, 3D TV is literally nothing like HMD VR, given you have a DK2 you should know that. Full immersed in a completely different world vs images popping out of a 2D screen because you're wearing 5 dollar red and blue glasses in your living room, hmmmm

It's not about exactly the same, it's about the limited appeal to a mass market.

True,

VR can be useful in news reporting, as it already has been used. There are VR "news" videos that depict the Syrian crisis, they are said to be very compelling and will bring you to tears.

VR can be useful in the medical field, where you can VR video with your doctor for simple visits, a few practitioners are already doing this and see the great benefit.

VR of course can be used in the gaming world

VR can be used in the film industry, obviously not in a movie theater setting. VR can open up entire new ways movies are created, (if you're imaginative you'll understand this)

VR has so many more uses than just FPS games. With the hardware sorted out and the proper setup, VR can literally transport you to another world. Can you name any other technological advancement that has that capability?

To be honest, it's comical to hear people write off VR as a niche, just shows how shortsighted those people really are, and I feel bad for them.

 

[loki1944]

Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.

I am, as you are yours. All signs point to VR not being a niche, regardless of what one shitty article says. If it does end up being a niche, I'll gladly admit I was wrong, somehow though I don't think that will happen. We will see in due time.

BTW, 3D TV is literally nothing like HMD VR, given you have a DK2 you should know that. Full immersed in a completely different world vs images popping out of a 2D screen because you're wearing 5 dollar red and blue glasses in your living room, hmmmm

It's not about exactly the same, it's about the limited appeal to a mass market.

True,

VR can be useful in news reporting, as it already has been used. There are VR "news" videos that depict the Syrian crisis, they are said to be very compelling and will bring you to tears.

VR can be useful in the medical field, where you can VR video with your doctor for simple visits, a few practitioners are already doing this and see the great benefit.

VR of course can be used in the gaming world

VR can be used in the film industry, obviously not in a movie theater setting. VR can open up entire new ways movies are created, (if you're imaginative you'll understand this)

VR has so many more uses than just FPS games. With the hardware sorted out and the proper setup, VR can literally transport you to another world. Can you name any other technological advancement that has that capability?

To be honest, it's comical to hear people write off VR as a niche, just shows how shortsighted those people really are, and I feel bad for them.

What's comical is the 'Emperor's New Clothes' attitude with which people will defend a new niche product. Kinect was also touted to have uses beyond the living room and we saw how that turned out. VR is not that impressive and as I said I enjoy surround gaming much more, plus it doesn't make me dizzy. The solitary nature of VR also does not increase the likelihood that it would be a success with the families as a media experience (aside from no serious medical studies into the long term effects of VR). I can say with 100% certainty that my immediate family has 0 interest in this. VR Movies would go the way of 3D movies; just interest in it and who wants to be unable to see their popcorn. No need to feel sorry for anybody, this is very similar to how the previous wave of VR went, maximum hype followed by maximum disappointment, at least this time it will achieve niche status.

This author raises some great points: http://blog.codinghorror.com/i-tried-vr-and-it-was-just-ok/.

 

[WyomingKnott]

Each member is entitled to her or his own preferences. Enough with "You like A, B is better, you are dumb." I couldn't play Quake because I got nauseated. Other people loved it. All of us were "right."

 

[inraiz]

I think VR is just what it is. Just as it adds another perspective, an additional experience, it's just that.

 

[mr2shim]

Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.

I am, as you are yours. All signs point to VR not being a niche, regardless of what one shitty article says. If it does end up being a niche, I'll gladly admit I was wrong, somehow though I don't think that will happen. We will see in due time.

BTW, 3D TV is literally nothing like HMD VR, given you have a DK2 you should know that. Full immersed in a completely different world vs images popping out of a 2D screen because you're wearing 5 dollar red and blue glasses in your living room, hmmmm

It's not about exactly the same, it's about the limited appeal to a mass market.

True,

VR can be useful in news reporting, as it already has been used. There are VR "news" videos that depict the Syrian crisis, they are said to be very compelling and will bring you to tears.

VR can be useful in the medical field, where you can VR video with your doctor for simple visits, a few practitioners are already doing this and see the great benefit.

VR of course can be used in the gaming world

VR can be used in the film industry, obviously not in a movie theater setting. VR can open up entire new ways movies are created, (if you're imaginative you'll understand this)

VR has so many more uses than just FPS games. With the hardware sorted out and the proper setup, VR can literally transport you to another world. Can you name any other technological advancement that has that capability?

To be honest, it's comical to hear people write off VR as a niche, just shows how shortsighted those people really are, and I feel bad for them.

What's comical is the 'Emperor's New Clothes' attitude with which people will defend a new niche product. Kinect was also touted to have uses beyond the living room and we saw how that turned out. VR is not that impressive and as I said I enjoy surround gaming much more, plus it doesn't make me dizzy. The solitary nature of VR also does not increase the likelihood that it would be a success with the families as a media experience (aside from no serious medical studies into the long term effects of VR). I can say with 100% certainty that my immediate family has 0 interest in this. VR Movies would go the way of 3D movies; just interest in it and who wants to be unable to see their popcorn. No need to feel sorry for anybody, this is very similar to how the previous wave of VR went, maximum hype followed by maximum disappointment, at least this time it will achieve niche status.

This author raises some great points: http://blog.codinghorror.com/i-tried-vr-and-it-was-just-ok/.

http://www.roadtovr.com/virtual-reality-to-be-worth-7-billion-by-2020-report-suggests/

 

[loki1944]

Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.

I am, as you are yours. All signs point to VR not being a niche, regardless of what one shitty article says. If it does end up being a niche, I'll gladly admit I was wrong, somehow though I don't think that will happen. We will see in due time.

BTW, 3D TV is literally nothing like HMD VR, given you have a DK2 you should know that. Full immersed in a completely different world vs images popping out of a 2D screen because you're wearing 5 dollar red and blue glasses in your living room, hmmmm

It's not about exactly the same, it's about the limited appeal to a mass market.

True,

VR can be useful in news reporting, as it already has been used. There are VR "news" videos that depict the Syrian crisis, they are said to be very compelling and will bring you to tears.

VR can be useful in the medical field, where you can VR video with your doctor for simple visits, a few practitioners are already doing this and see the great benefit.

VR of course can be used in the gaming world

VR can be used in the film industry, obviously not in a movie theater setting. VR can open up entire new ways movies are created, (if you're imaginative you'll understand this)

VR has so many more uses than just FPS games. With the hardware sorted out and the proper setup, VR can literally transport you to another world. Can you name any other technological advancement that has that capability?

To be honest, it's comical to hear people write off VR as a niche, just shows how shortsighted those people really are, and I feel bad for them.

What's comical is the 'Emperor's New Clothes' attitude with which people will defend a new niche product. Kinect was also touted to have uses beyond the living room and we saw how that turned out. VR is not that impressive and as I said I enjoy surround gaming much more, plus it doesn't make me dizzy. The solitary nature of VR also does not increase the likelihood that it would be a success with the families as a media experience (aside from no serious medical studies into the long term effects of VR). I can say with 100% certainty that my immediate family has 0 interest in this. VR Movies would go the way of 3D movies; just interest in it and who wants to be unable to see their popcorn. No need to feel sorry for anybody, this is very similar to how the previous wave of VR went, maximum hype followed by maximum disappointment, at least this time it will achieve niche status.

This author raises some great points: http://blog.codinghorror.com/i-tried-vr-and-it-was-just-ok/.

http://www.roadtovr.com/virtual-reality-to-be-worth-7-billion-by-2020-report-suggests/

We'll see. Even the author says it seems optimistic.

 

[mr2shim]

Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.

I am, as you are yours. All signs point to VR not being a niche, regardless of what one shitty article says. If it does end up being a niche, I'll gladly admit I was wrong, somehow though I don't think that will happen. We will see in due time.

BTW, 3D TV is literally nothing like HMD VR, given you have a DK2 you should know that. Full immersed in a completely different world vs images popping out of a 2D screen because you're wearing 5 dollar red and blue glasses in your living room, hmmmm

It's not about exactly the same, it's about the limited appeal to a mass market.

True,

VR can be useful in news reporting, as it already has been used. There are VR "news" videos that depict the Syrian crisis, they are said to be very compelling and will bring you to tears.

VR can be useful in the medical field, where you can VR video with your doctor for simple visits, a few practitioners are already doing this and see the great benefit.

VR of course can be used in the gaming world

VR can be used in the film industry, obviously not in a movie theater setting. VR can open up entire new ways movies are created, (if you're imaginative you'll understand this)

VR has so many more uses than just FPS games. With the hardware sorted out and the proper setup, VR can literally transport you to another world. Can you name any other technological advancement that has that capability?

To be honest, it's comical to hear people write off VR as a niche, just shows how shortsighted those people really are, and I feel bad for them.

What's comical is the 'Emperor's New Clothes' attitude with which people will defend a new niche product. Kinect was also touted to have uses beyond the living room and we saw how that turned out. VR is not that impressive and as I said I enjoy surround gaming much more, plus it doesn't make me dizzy. The solitary nature of VR also does not increase the likelihood that it would be a success with the families as a media experience (aside from no serious medical studies into the long term effects of VR). I can say with 100% certainty that my immediate family has 0 interest in this. VR Movies would go the way of 3D movies; just interest in it and who wants to be unable to see their popcorn. No need to feel sorry for anybody, this is very similar to how the previous wave of VR went, maximum hype followed by maximum disappointment, at least this time it will achieve niche status.

This author raises some great points: http://blog.codinghorror.com/i-tried-vr-and-it-was-just-ok/.

http://www.roadtovr.com/virtual-reality-to-be-worth-7-billion-by-2020-report-suggests/

We'll see. Even the author says it seems optimistic.

https://i.imgur.com/TDYr6xa.jpg

They were impressed.

 

[loki1944]

Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.

I am, as you are yours. All signs point to VR not being a niche, regardless of what one shitty article says. If it does end up being a niche, I'll gladly admit I was wrong, somehow though I don't think that will happen. We will see in due time.

BTW, 3D TV is literally nothing like HMD VR, given you have a DK2 you should know that. Full immersed in a completely different world vs images popping out of a 2D screen because you're wearing 5 dollar red and blue glasses in your living room, hmmmm

It's not about exactly the same, it's about the limited appeal to a mass market.

True,

VR can be useful in news reporting, as it already has been used. There are VR "news" videos that depict the Syrian crisis, they are said to be very compelling and will bring you to tears.

VR can be useful in the medical field, where you can VR video with your doctor for simple visits, a few practitioners are already doing this and see the great benefit.

VR of course can be used in the gaming world

VR can be used in the film industry, obviously not in a movie theater setting. VR can open up entire new ways movies are created, (if you're imaginative you'll understand this)

VR has so many more uses than just FPS games. With the hardware sorted out and the proper setup, VR can literally transport you to another world. Can you name any other technological advancement that has that capability?

To be honest, it's comical to hear people write off VR as a niche, just shows how shortsighted those people really are, and I feel bad for them.

What's comical is the 'Emperor's New Clothes' attitude with which people will defend a new niche product. Kinect was also touted to have uses beyond the living room and we saw how that turned out. VR is not that impressive and as I said I enjoy surround gaming much more, plus it doesn't make me dizzy. The solitary nature of VR also does not increase the likelihood that it would be a success with the families as a media experience (aside from no serious medical studies into the long term effects of VR). I can say with 100% certainty that my immediate family has 0 interest in this. VR Movies would go the way of 3D movies; just interest in it and who wants to be unable to see their popcorn. No need to feel sorry for anybody, this is very similar to how the previous wave of VR went, maximum hype followed by maximum disappointment, at least this time it will achieve niche status.

This author raises some great points: http://blog.codinghorror.com/i-tried-vr-and-it-was-just-ok/.

http://www.roadtovr.com/virtual-reality-to-be-worth-7-billion-by-2020-report-suggests/

We'll see. Even the author says it seems optimistic.

https://i.imgur.com/TDYr6xa.jpg

They were impressed.

Still means nothing that journalists are impressed, mass consumer is the issue.