Is VR (Virtual Reality) the start of something massive.

Yes, I think it will be big.

But, I would not call 'it' Virtual Reality any more than anything like a book or a normal computer game, or music. They all take you to a virtual place.

It is only covering one sense. True virtual reality (to me) would be much, much more than this.
 
Even if you could "learn kung fu" or the piano this way, the problem is that just because the brain knows how the body doesn't.

I know how to do a roundhouse kick, I even used to be able to but if I try it now I'm going to tear a muscle. Piano etc requires muscle memory as well as just knowing how to do it :)

Physical muscle memory / strength is essential for most physical activites. You could learn how to do Balet, but I bet 99% of people wouldn't have the physical ability because it takes years of training to develop.

I suppose then the technology would have to be developed to artificially build the physical requirements into the user. I guess it may be possible, but probably not for a long time.
 
Have you got a basis as for why you think it surely must be damaging?

Plus, lenses are used, so it's a bit more complicated than simple physical proximity.

Just basing this guess on the fact that sitting too close to a computer screen will eventually shorten ones eyesight, just curious
 
Just basing this guess on the fact that sitting too close to a computer screen will eventually shorten ones eyesight, just curious

Which isn't actually true... Find me one study that confirms this, as everything I've seen debunks this myth.

EDIT: That isn't to say that VR in it's current state is perfect.

While using a VR headset your eye focus to infinity, so near focus eye strain is reduced - but it does cause other types of eye strain!

In fact, in the current generation of publicly accessible VR it's the exact opposite problem as the resolution 'causes your eyes to continually change focus, which causes fatigue.

Basic example is if you look at a bird in VR that's a medium distance away and it's represented by 1 pixel (due to the current lack of resolution)- your brain tries to bring it into focus by focusing on the pixel structure. But then, just as it's done that it realises this isn't quite in focus so again relaxes your eyes to infinity, but that's "blurry" also because, again, it's just a single dot with no definition - so the processes starts again. Part of the reason it can make people sick so fast.
 
Last edited:
To those saying it still wont take off this time. This stuff never works. It will be like 3DTV..

I will point out that tablets and touch screen smart phones were around on and off for years. It just took a break through to sell to the masses for it to take off - the original iPhone and the iPad.

Some of us had been using various similar (and more feature rich) devices for years. It often just takes simplifying a concept and marketing to break through to success.

Having tested the original Oculus rift in the comfort of my home (and completed HL2 in the process) I can honestly tell you that this iteration of "VR" is here right now. With the Microsoft version, the Oculus version and the HTC/Valve version now vying - we have leading manufacturers producing top notch tech.

Once it is perfected and slimmed down Apple will come out with a slick looking device, half the features and claim they invented it. iVR.

And, yes, there are porn sites that work with the Rift.
 
seen to many VR attempts in my lifetime to assume the new generation will succeed

but I guess it's more about convincing people to buy them

I don't know I was never sold on 3D and saw it for the gimmick it always was but VR IMO has the potential something truly revolutionary (OLED) will be a big part of that as it solves one of the biggest complaints (motion sickness) users have experienced when using VR.
 
and yet it helped pave the way for VR

Please keep saying this, but from a technical standpoint I don't really think it did. Not a single piece of technology used with 3D TV is utilized in this new generation of VR headsets.

If anything, it's mobile phones (small, lightweight screens), amateur rockets (high precision and high frequency IMU's) and some out the box thinking to resolve the lens problem (pre-distorted graphics) that brought about this recent resurgence.

Actually, that's a lie, 3D TV only took off once we got 120hz panels sorted, and we're only just seeing the first demos of devices using that panel speed (the Morpheus) but Oculus DK1, DK2 and latest protype don't touch that yet as it doesn't appear to be stickily necessary.
 
I don't know I was never sold on 3D and saw it for the gimmick it always was but VR IMO has the potential something truly revolutionary (OLED) will be a big part of that as it solves one of the biggest complaints (motion sickness) users have experienced when using VR.

OLED does not solve motion sickness.

An OLED screen will give deeper blacks and may provide a hardware solution to help prevent motion blur, but that's something that's already been mitigated with software.
 
Yes, I believe so. Once there is a VR 'operating system', and the majority of applications have a real advantage to using them in VR, we'll see much more widespread use of head-mounted displays. Why buy multiple monitors when you can have virtually unlimited screenspace inside a HMD?

3D modelling, cinema, gaming and education can all benefit massively from VR, we just need a unified interface and input, which will admittedly take a good while to be decided upon, but I think it will happen, most likely within the next 5 years.

I own a DK2, so I may be a little biased, but everyone I've demoed it to has been blown away. The one complaint is resolution, which I can completely agree with, but that is simply a matter of waiting for the hardware to mature.

High street/online shopping will likely see a good shakeup as well, when any product you could view in a shop can be seen in VR, possibly even held (see the Dextro, rudimentary but demonstrative for sure). Even things like house viewing, you could go to a real estate agent and view a number of houses in one sitting.

Advances in pixel density and computing power will only serve to make VR more realistic, and pave the way for things like virtual tourism, and social VR (it's a little hard to take seriously without eye-tracking and at least semi-realistic faces).

I can see there being problems such as VR addiction, but this certainly won't, and shouldn't, be a reason for VR advancement to stop. It may be that VR doesn't take off much further than media consumption for a long time, but it certainly won't fizzle out like it did in the 90s.
 
As much as people say they think it will fail and go the same way as 3DTV, I very much doubt Facebook would have invested $2 billion with the intention of letting it fail. They will do anything and everything to make it work.

I'll also add this to the debate. Chances of Facebook creating a "The Oasis" type social networking system for VR. Very highly likely.
 
I'll also add this to the debate. Chances of Facebook creating a "The Oasis" type social networking system for VR. Very highly likely.

Already being done: http://altvr.com/learn/. Not to say Facebook won't do it themselves but from their F8 talk on VR at the moment it looks like they're doing more remote presence at events rather than a strictly social ,entirely VR, thing.

Obviously could be any combination of those things though.
 
I think it will go as far as 3D cinema in the 80s, VR in the early 90s, 3D tv in the last few years, and 4K last year.
Not as far as expected.
 
I'm fairly sure the answer is no.

It does look interesting though but I think the cost will inhibit mainstream vr adoption.
 
People who are interested in buying them will more than likely have a decently capable PC, and as Nexus said, they're not that expensive.

They're not as expensive as things like ROG Swifts, and that hasn't stopped people buying in.
 
In my opinion VR has been massively damaged by the terrible '3D' experience gimmick thrown incessantly at Consumers by the mess that is 3DTV/Cinema, it just doesn't work. I think it's made Consumers wary of 'The Next Best Thing'. If the 'Big' VR Corporations start messing around making their own proprietary Systems that only work with 'X' or 'Y' then that's the ultimate sign of impending VR doom ahead in my opinion. It'll also be interesting to see Health implications further down the line considering the amount of warnings we already receive about the dangers of 'Looking at Screens too long/too closely/without correct lighting etc.'.
 
VR has absolutely nothing to do with that process, the ability to control brain functions has no basis in virtual reality, that is actual reality and would install real knowledge into a brain to be used in the real world.

VR is a joke, we've been told through science fiction that VR means getting to play out the life of say Bond, in complete safety, or being a race car driver, doing everything you have never done but wanted to do but with no risk, no danger.

The reality is, it's an image in front of your face. Sit in a literally pitch black room 2 ft in front of a huge tv... that's VR. It's like motion control games, moving a controller in air isn't the same as punching a real person, there is no physical feedback, there is no touch, no taste, no smell, no reality in VR.

What sets the Matrix or the holodeck apart is they provide for each and every sense, either creating a real object and letting you touch it(holodeck) or generating the same electrical impulses in the brain that would make you feel exactly the same thing. VR, as it currently stands, provides a screen, nothing more or less, no touch, no real movement, no interaction.

VR has come and gone, along with 3d screens, for what 40-50 years time and time again. A helmet mounted screen is still a screen, it's no different to a tv just much more convenient to have a smaller screen on a helmet and block out the space around it that actually have a giant room completely blacked out with a monumentally large screen and sitting incredibly close, aside from that there is no difference.

VR is playing off the concept that a helmet screen somehow is a step closer from a existing screen to a holodeck or Matrix like simulation of life.

Until we can control brain impulses or generate a real world experience, VR as we call it, is a gimmick and almost entirely pointless.

Thanks dm, now I don't have to write the same thing :p

VR is a billion, billion miles away from the Matrix. That is pure sci-fi, and will remain so for the foreseeable future.

Remember that in the 70s they all thought we'd be driving flying cars and living on other worlds by now. The tendency to over-estimate progress is an easy trap to fall in.

Even things like driverless cars are much, much farther away than some think. Decades away.
 
Back
Top Bottom