I agree with Cook on this one. I think AR is where it's at and maybe they should try VR only when the dust has settled and the market has become more mature.
VR is the new 3D TV. Just another faddish gimmick that may or may not ever become mainstream.
And that Samsung (?) commercial doesn't help one bit. You've seen it. It shows a guy pawing at the air while wearing a headset. If you don't even attempt to show the wondrous vista he sees, you've completely failed to sell the product. You're just making it look like vaporware.
Weird, Samsung did something crappy?
Sony's done a pretty decent job on some of their ads, considering how difficult it is to convey the sense of immersion of an interactive 3D space on a 2D screen:
^ yes, it is like someone actually in your face like that.
Also, you definitely sound like someone who hasn't used one.
The PS4 is cool, because you HAVE the hardware. Telling guys they need to buy a whole new desktop is a LAUGH! I am pissed because I want Facebook to keep dumping as much money into Oculus as possible, such a FAIL. I hope they (Facebook) don't quit... I laugh at companies who try to do technology that's not ready yet, cause in this case it's like 10 years off maybe more. I also am loving autonomous cars, I hope companies keep dumping money into that, that's like 20 years or even MORE like 50 years off. I may sound like a jerk but these companies doing this are trying so hard to do the NeXT big thing...I like the pace that Apple is on, calm, cool, collected. Slow and steady wins the race...
No doubt VR will become a ubiquitous platform, for industry and fun. But to become a mass market consumer hit, it's not there yet.
And then it's about the application. It needs hit tittle. That's the hard part. It's one thing making a gadget/platform, it's another creating that certain zeitgeist game no one can predict that will take it to the next level. When and who will the masses gravitate to? Who the hell knows.
Apple is doing right by staying on the sidelines. As long as their devices can play the hit software titles when and if there is one.
That's obvious because a tethered headset and joystick are ridiculous things. If it is joystick then I already do that in my 2D flat sreen why would I wear the whole display assembly on my head?
There is no VR unless you introduce your very self into the scene. That requires an untethered headset and a body kit.
You have obviously not used this technology. The reason you wear the headset is so you can move and look around in a fully three dimensional environment. This is not the same as moving a controller and watching your view pan around on a TV in front of your eyes. A good example is an interactive "film" type thing on a miniature stage with claymation type characters I was watching, where you could literally peer around a corner to see another character walking down a street that you couldn't see before. Or walking toward an object and looking down into an opening in the top of a ship to see the characters doing stuff inside of it, as if the object is right in front of your chest. By moving your head, and your feet (to a limited degree). Or in a 3D world where you're standing in an alley, and you can look up and crane your head to peer around a fire escape, or around a corner to spot an enemy. It "feels" like you can reach out and literally touch things in front of you. As I said in my previous posts, trying to describe it is difficult. Trust me, it's nothing like your 2D flat screen.
Edit: maybe you're focusing on the tethered aspect of it, but it's not that big of a deal. Nobody is going to set up a full walk-around multi-camera setup in their living room. The PSVR limits you to probably the average amount of space that most people have in front of their TV/living room area. Move controllers give you wireless dual hand controllers, some software just uses the DualShock controllers which is better suited to some types of games, etc.
Yes it works exactly as you describe and that is the easiest way to break your neck in a game. If you have to turn your head left right fast enough to fight bandits you'll get a neck injury before even completing level one. This is why they include a game controller, thanks to the game controller you don't have to shift left right so fast, the game controller shifts the view before your eyes. And that makes both game controller and the VR pointless, because since I need a game controller to shift the view, I already do that in my 2D flat screen, why would I wear the whole display assembly on my head?
One of the common complaints about 3D (whether in the cinema or on home TVs) is that you have to wear glasses. Personally, I never had a problem with this, because I have to wear glasses to see the real world, but look where 3DTV is now...
Given that common complaint, it seemed to me that VR, with their bulky goggles, were going suffer the same fate. I don't know how much of a factor the goggles really are, but I have to say, it is not a good look.
I think both 3D and VR are cool, however, I am in total agreement that AR holds way more promise, for both consumer and perhaps more importantly, for commercial applications. Regarding glasses, I would say that they should be acceptable for commercial AR applications, but because of social acceptance issues, consumer AR may be better on handheld or personal vehicle (HUD) applications rather than glasses (with possible exception of gaming apps).
PS: The recent announcement of Bluetooth 5 seems like it might facilitate an AR device that could pair to a phone.
VR has way more potential than 3D TV. Reserve judgment until you try it. That said, the need to get complete solutions for sale at reasonable prices, and with detached headgear. I suspect that day will eventually come, but it's a ways off. I'm looking at a VR system for Xmas, but am put off by the "Wild West-ness" of it all. Monstrous/hideous PCs, driver issues, Windows issues, hardware incompatibilities, etc. I pause at the prospect of blowing $2000 or so for a decent VR rig only to have massive headaches with it. They need more store demos, with complete systems you can purchase right on the spot (and return if you don't like it). My experiences so far have been Rift demo at Best Buy, yet nothing for sale. Tried to go to GameStop for a Vive demo but it was broken due to a recent Windows 10 update - with no idea when it'd be fixed and no enthusiasm for the product whatsoever. No wonder the sales are lacking.
I'm hoping Apple does something great with AR. At this stage the technology fits Apple's MO in general by coming in "late to the game", but with something innovative and "obvious" as it concerns how people actually use, or are comfortable using the technology. Also, it would be cool to have another contributor in developing the technology overall.
At this stage the best we can say is the problems with VR/AR have been well explored.
This reminds me of highly hyped 3D TV. All those so called experts complained about Apple not getting into VR and if Apple had they would have complained that Apple failed in VR. Damn if you do and damn if you don't. Well, I am happy Apple waited. and decided to go with AR. I think AR is certainly the right answer!
These analysts are (as usual idiots). Personally I don't believe in AR. Why the hell would I walk around in the real world with a headset over my regular glasses to see Pokemons jumping around or see immediately where my destination is. You play games to be immersed in another reality.
I own a PSVR. I agree the game makers are still looking for the killer app. However, two games / demos stood out for me in the past months:
- The Batham Arkham VR game, where you solve as Batman some crime. You actually feel being Batman, specially with the Move controllers. - Last night, I played the SW Rogue mission from Battlefield SW. You are in an X-wing cockpit and it's totally awesome to navigate through an asteroid field, attack a Star cruiser and pull up the targetting computer. This 15 min experience/demo screams for more.
"Apple has repeatedly arrived to market with offerings that were years behind the unfinished, inferior products of its competitors"
Really? You mean years after the competitors, don't you?
Well duh. First of all has NOTHING to do with Apple. Just cause apple didn't do it. VR is doomed until they can pack it to a contact lens or smaller. Nobody i mean nobody will wear those huge ass goofy ass goggles. Same problem with the lame google glasses or goggles or whatever that failure was called. Stupid tech like this is what I call the Radio-Shack days, or digital dark ages. Just doing tech for sake of it, or forcing it when its not even close is embarrassing. Making Tech just work, and therefore helpful, and therefore sorta cool, is what made Apple so great. Unfortunately Apple has been stumbling, losing its way. Confusing cool with celebrity and fashion. Farthest thing from cool.
Anyone calling VR a gimmick is out of touch with reality and clearly hasn't ever tried it. It's were gaming was always headed, for most forms of games at least. It's just the beginning and it's amazing already.
That's obvious because a tethered headset and joystick are ridiculous things. If it is joystick then I already do that in my 2D flat sreen why would I wear the whole display assembly on my head?
There is no VR unless you introduce your very self into the scene. That requires an untethered headset and a body kit.
Not at all. It already works great for driving and space simulation.
VR has hardly been a failure for Sony. How on earth could they sell 2.6 million VR headsets in less than 2 months? Playstation VR has only been on the market since October. Every retailer has been saying they fly off the shelves when they are in stock. Even Sony has said sales have been great and are on track to meet sales expectations. Sony is expanding VR production to meet demand. Playstation VR is sold out just about everywhere. Whoever estimated Sony to sell 2.6 million VR units in less than 3 months is a complete idiot.
Can you not READ? Sony's $399 PSVR offering fell far short of its estimated forecast of 2.6 million units.
SuperData said that only 750 thousand PSVR units have shipped, explaining that "notably fewer units sold than expected due to a relatively fragmented title line-up and modest marketing effort." The research firm stated that VR is "the biggest loser" of the season.
Sony HAD a estimated forecast of 2.6 million that they were going to sell. You can estimate anything you want, doesn't mean it's going to happen and in this case fell way short to only 750 thousand. That falls way short of the Estimate!!!
Add on's for consoles pretty much always FAILS. As soon as MS pulled out the Kinect from the Xbox One and made it optional,. that pretty much killed the Kinect from what it could have been. I can go down a long list of Console Add-On's that have failed. You get a few games that take advantage of it and then it's over with. It's the whole Chicken and the Egg and what came first!!! Company's aren't going to write the games that make use of it if people don't own it and people won't buy it if there's no games using it. If it's not a part of every console, it's going to fail. It's kind of like why didn't MS release a Xbox 360 with a HD DVD drive built in, instead of sticking with a Add-On. Well at that point it could only ever be used to play movies and games were on DVD and you can't split the market place. You can't release a game on a HD DVD when only a tiny fraction of users would have a Xbox 360 with that in it. Why things like the PS2 HDD add-on failed and the port disappeared on the slim version. Or the Sega CD add-On, or the N64 Memory expansion pack, and so on and so on.
Of course I can read. Can you? The 2.6 million number isn't from Sony. It's just a terrible guess. Look on the internet. People are estimating a million to this crazy 2.6 million number. Playstation VR has been a success. Kinect failed because Microsoft hardly supported it. Playstation VR won't fail with close to 100 games coming out by the end of 2017.
The PS4 is cool, because you HAVE the hardware. Telling guys they need to buy a whole new desktop is a LAUGH! I am pissed because I want Facebook to keep dumping as much money into Oculus as possible, such a FAIL. I hope they (Facebook) don't quit... I laugh at companies who try to do technology that's not ready yet, cause in this case it's like 10 years off maybe more. I also am loving autonomous cars, I hope companies keep dumping money into that, that's like 20 years or even MORE like 50 years off. I may sound like a jerk but these companies doing this are trying so hard to do the NeXT big thing...I like the pace that Apple is on, calm, cool, collected. Slow and steady wins the race...
Well you do have to spend the $ equivalent of the PS4 on the VR hardware... but it's far cheaper than the PC options out there and really easy to use.
That's obvious because a tethered headset and joystick are ridiculous things. If it is joystick then I already do that in my 2D flat sreen why would I wear the whole display assembly on my head?
There is no VR unless you introduce your very self into the scene. That requires an untethered headset and a body kit.
You have obviously not used this technology. The reason you wear the headset is so you can move and look around in a fully three dimensional environment. This is not the same as moving a controller and watching your view pan around on a TV in front of your eyes. A good example is an interactive "film" type thing on a miniature stage with claymation type characters I was watching, where you could literally peer around a corner to see another character walking down a street that you couldn't see before. Or walking toward an object and looking down into an opening in the top of a ship to see the characters doing stuff inside of it, as if the object is right in front of your chest. By moving your head, and your feet (to a limited degree). Or in a 3D world where you're standing in an alley, and you can look up and crane your head to peer around a fire escape, or around a corner to spot an enemy. It "feels" like you can reach out and literally touch things in front of you. As I said in my previous posts, trying to describe it is difficult. Trust me, it's nothing like your 2D flat screen.
Edit: maybe you're focusing on the tethered aspect of it, but it's not that big of a deal. Nobody is going to set up a full walk-around multi-camera setup in their living room. The PSVR limits you to probably the average amount of space that most people have in front of their TV/living room area. Move controllers give you wireless dual hand controllers, some software just uses the DualShock controllers which is better suited to some types of games, etc.
Yes it works exactly as you describe and that is the easiest way to break your neck in a game. If you have to turn your head left right fast enough to fight bandits you'll get a neck injury before even completing level one. This is why they include a game controller, thanks to the game controller you don't have to shift left right so fast, the game controller shifts the view before your eyes. And that makes both game controller and the VR pointless, because since I need a game controller to shift the view, I already do that in my 2D flat screen, why would I wear the whole display assembly on my head?
Break your neck? Are you joking?
That's not how it works — head tracking changes your view, not the controller. That's the whole point! Nothing is made pointless by a controller to any degree whatsoever.
Again, you've obviously not used VR in any capacity. Go pick up a Google Cardboard, it'll give you a decent experience for a few bucks and you'll quickly understand why you're so completely wrong about how it works.
As an owner of the PSVR, let me just say that I'm completely blown away by it, especially considering that it's a first-gen product. I've had several experiences where my jaw was figuratively on the floor with what I was seeing. Not all the software out there is equally impressive, there are definitely some duds and half-baked demos, but the ones that work well are really, truly amazing.
That's great and all, and I don't doubt its "wow factor" - but what is it for? What is its utility? Is it just for games? If so, then this gift that I see Samsung promoting all over the place will be a "play with for a day and shove it in a closet" gift this year.
VR has hardly been a failure for Sony. How on earth could they sell 2.6 million VR headsets in less than 2 months? Playstation VR has only been on the market since October. Every retailer has been saying they fly off the shelves when they are in stock. Even Sony has said sales have been great and are on track to meet sales expectations. Sony is expanding VR production to meet demand. Playstation VR is sold out just about everywhere. Whoever estimated Sony to sell 2.6 million VR units in less than 3 months is a complete idiot.
Can you not READ? Sony's $399 PSVR offering fell far short of its estimated forecast of 2.6 million units.
SuperData said that only 750 thousand PSVR units have shipped, explaining that "notably fewer units sold than expected due to a relatively fragmented title line-up and modest marketing effort." The research firm stated that VR is "the biggest loser" of the season.
Sony HAD a estimated forecast of 2.6 million that they were going to sell. You can estimate anything you want, doesn't mean it's going to happen and in this case fell way short to only 750 thousand. That falls way short of the Estimate!!!
Add on's for consoles pretty much always FAILS. As soon as MS pulled out the Kinect from the Xbox One and made it optional,. that pretty much killed the Kinect from what it could have been. I can go down a long list of Console Add-On's that have failed. You get a few games that take advantage of it and then it's over with. It's the whole Chicken and the Egg and what came first!!! Company's aren't going to write the games that make use of it if people don't own it and people won't buy it if there's no games using it. If it's not a part of every console, it's going to fail. It's kind of like why didn't MS release a Xbox 360 with a HD DVD drive built in, instead of sticking with a Add-On. Well at that point it could only ever be used to play movies and games were on DVD and you can't split the market place. You can't release a game on a HD DVD when only a tiny fraction of users would have a Xbox 360 with that in it. Why things like the PS2 HDD add-on failed and the port disappeared on the slim version. Or the Sega CD add-On, or the N64 Memory expansion pack, and so on and so on.
Of course I can read. Can you? The 2.6 million number isn't from Sony. It's just a terrible guess. Look on the internet. People are estimating a million to this crazy 2.6 million number. Playstation VR has been a success. Kinect failed because Microsoft hardly supported it. Playstation VR won't fail with close to 100 games coming out by the end of 2017.
MS supported the hell out of Kinect and I remember them spending half a billion on YouTube advertising alone. The revealed fake games and the fans were going nuts!
Comments
Sony's done a pretty decent job on some of their ads, considering how difficult it is to convey the sense of immersion of an interactive 3D space on a 2D screen:
^ yes, it is like someone actually in your face like that.
Also, you definitely sound like someone who hasn't used one.
And then it's about the application. It needs hit tittle. That's the hard part. It's one thing making a gadget/platform, it's another creating that certain zeitgeist game no one can predict that will take it to the next level.
When and who will the masses gravitate to? Who the hell knows.
Apple is doing right by staying on the sidelines. As long as their devices can play the hit software titles when and if there is one.
Given that common complaint, it seemed to me that VR, with their bulky goggles, were going suffer the same fate. I don't know how much of a factor the goggles really are, but I have to say, it is not a good look.
I think both 3D and VR are cool, however, I am in total agreement that AR holds way more promise, for both consumer and perhaps more importantly, for commercial applications. Regarding glasses, I would say that they should be acceptable for commercial AR applications, but because of social acceptance issues, consumer AR may be better on handheld or personal vehicle (HUD) applications rather than glasses (with possible exception of gaming apps).
PS: The recent announcement of Bluetooth 5 seems like it might facilitate an AR device that could pair to a phone.
At this stage the best we can say is the problems with VR/AR have been well explored.
I own a PSVR. I agree the game makers are still looking for the killer app. However, two games / demos stood out for me in the past months:
- The Batham Arkham VR game, where you solve as Batman some crime. You actually feel being Batman, specially with the Move controllers.
- Last night, I played the SW Rogue mission from Battlefield SW. You are in an X-wing cockpit and it's totally awesome to navigate through an asteroid field, attack a Star cruiser and pull up the targetting computer. This 15 min experience/demo screams for more.
It's were gaming was always headed, for most forms of games at least. It's just the beginning and it's amazing already.
Break your neck? Are you joking?
That's not how it works — head tracking changes your view, not the controller. That's the whole point! Nothing is made pointless by a controller to any degree whatsoever.
Again, you've obviously not used VR in any capacity. Go pick up a Google Cardboard, it'll give you a decent experience for a few bucks and you'll quickly understand why you're so completely wrong about how it works.