Would never strap anything under Meta control to my face, but would love to see a deGoogled/deFacebooked Android rom for an affordable headset like this one.
It's extremely unlikely they would do this for the Quest ecosystem, but it would be the ultimate act of goodwill towards the community. Who knows though, I think they still officially support sideloading so technically anything is possible.
When they planned on restructuring around an entire new "metaverse" that would require hundreds of millions of these things in the wild (at minimum), a few million a year isn't anything amazing.
I’m sure I sound like an old man yelling at clouds but I don’t get why there’s such a push for these platforms.
I got an email from Apple about their event this month, and it said “Code New Worlds”, which in my mind seems to confirm they’re actually going ahead with an AR/VR device. Why?
Where is the market? How many of these things sell? What do people actually do with them?
I like the idea of an AR experience for enabling better work environments, even as a programmer, but my sense is that these technologies are very far in the future still. These will be toys for a while yet.
So what’s the motivation to get into this space? What is the opportunity that Apple sees, for example?
Part of me is optimistic that there’s some incredible application around the corner and it’ll be an exciting moment in the digital space. The other part of me feels like we’re really grasping here, and it’s just a toy (albeit a pretty cool one).
Personal computers were considered just toys with very little real-world value for a long time too. And you might be limiting your thinking with VR/AR. Do you or anyone you know use face filters? That's AR. Lots of the rising generation are already stoked in VR/AR. Also Meta Quest 2 has sold 15 million headsets, that's hardly something to scoff at.
Ah, 15 million is more than I would have guessed. I’m admittedly out of the loop on this stuff.
I had a feeling the rising generation is into this, though I would have been too. I suppose what I wonder is if something that appeases that enthusiasm and anticipation can actually be developed. But perhaps for kids and young adults it doesn’t need to be amazing — it just needs to be more immersive than a TV.
My son has a Quest 2 and never uses it, and we got it used in great condition for $250 CAD. That left me feeling like these things are failing to thrive, but it’s very anecdotal.
I think the tech is not there yet, but imagine you could do everything you can do with a smartphone, but without holding a physical device, except maybe for input. Your entire vision is the screen. Virtual objects are seamlessly embedded into the environment. It's unobtrusive and ubiquitous.
I think that is the endgame for AR. And I think it'll be the next major platform, replacing smartphones.
It won't replace smartphones for a long, long time because it just isn't feasible to pack enough battery power into a pair of glasses to run the screens plus do all the processing work without making the headset super heavy and/or dorky looking. What will most likely happen, is you will have your phone in your pocket doing all the work which will then relay the video to the glasses which just decode and display it, first via cable (already products available on the market that do this) and then in a few years it will be wireless.
It's been very interesting to discuss the potential future of VR/AR with software pros and hardware pros. Us software people seemingly tends to "ignore" the real limitations of current battery/power-delivery/power-draw(?) technology.
We've seen massive improvements over the years, but when talking about the size/weight of glasses it definitely seems like the next "frontier" for the battery challenges.
Yeah, according to google a pair of raybans weighs 40 grams and a pair of xreal air weight twice as much at 79g. I'm a massive fan of the latter but already that weight is noticeable on your face as being heavier than a standard pair of glasses and this is a device which has no battery. All the power comes from a cable connected to whatever device you're using. I can wear a pair all day but I don't think you could go too much heavier before it starts getting uncomfortable for prolonged use. I think it's going to be a massive struggle to get these down to a decent weight with battery. Viture's solution to this is a neckband containing the battery and the brains - I could definitely see this kind of solution becoming commonplace.
> I like the idea of an AR experience for enabling better work environments
Same here, but I don't think the ecosystem/market is ready for serious work, it's all too brittle and the UX isn't nearly there yet. So I'm waiting.
> Where is the market? How many of these things sell? What do people actually do with them?
But I do own a HP Reverb G2, mainly for playing simulation games like flight simulators, and racing simulators. Once you get used to having a spatial understanding of the environment because of virtual reality, it's near impossible to go back to using traditional monitors against. The immersion is 100x better and your skill increases as well, just with a VR headset (in the genres I play).
But outside of simulation gaming, I have 0 use cases for VR, it's basically a fun toy at this time. But I think probably in the future there will be more use cases, but remains to be seen.
Yep, for me its also just flight and race sim. Even though I don't really tend to use it very often anymore. It's cumbersome to wire up and especially in the summer the G2 gets very hot - plus the added heat of the PC driving this beast!
I guess the market isn't there because most of the devices kinda suck. They are bulky and ugly, glasses compatibility is not 100%, some people still get vertigo. Those devices are not attractive to the buyers at all IMO.
I'm kinda curious about the Apple VR headset - I expect it to be marketed more towards creative professional audience and less towards gamers. The few VR games I've tried have been unimpressive, but maybe there is some future for this tech in other areas?
I've heard that vertigo is mostly a solved problem, you just need to make sure the VR system is properly calibrated for your face, e.g. the distance of your eyes and such. That makes sharing such a system much harder than sharing other devices, which might explain why they haven't caught on nearly as fast as people expected. You can buy one PlayStation for the whole family but need to buy every member their own Quest.
With how quickly AI has taken over image creation, it will soon be able to create AR/VR in real time...
But if its able to "watch" a bunch of say, mechanics, do their work and learn from that - then it will be able to put pertinent AR info on screen for people to see.
I think whomever does a good job on an AI backed AR system is going to own a chunk of that space for a good amount of profit to come.
I'm super sceptical about VR for anything outside of "dock" games like car racing and spaceship simulators and still am. I have however, got a pair of Xreal "AR" glasses that are basically a pair of sunglasses that allow you to have a 120" projector monitor (or set of monitors) wherever you want and they are absolutely awesome and I can definitely see that kind of product becoming the new normal. The ergonomics, price ($399), flexibility to take wherever you want and productivity are just so much better than traditional monitors and televisions.
It is absolutely amazing to just plug in a pair to your phone/tablet/computer laid down in bed and watch a film projected on to your ceiling. People are hooking them up to Steam Decks and they also say it's amazing just being able to play whatever game they want, wherever they want, on a massive screen. Going to be a game changer for anyone who spends a lot of time travelling or commuting on public transport but will definitely filter into the general office and home spaces as well. Will save both companies and consumers a substantial amount of money.
These glasses have been such a game changer for me that I now have ordered a Steam Deck and, depending on how well I get on with SteamOS and Linux, may end up selling my Macbook Pro which would be the first time I've not had an Apple computer since around 2008/9 (save for a few years when I was super poor and couldn't afford one).
Depends where you're based I'm guessing, I'm from the UK and had to order them via the Amazon US website. For what it's worth I've never had any issues returning anything to Amazon, even stuff from the US (although the few times I've had to do that I've bought the US stuff via the UK website rather than the US one so don't know if it would be different).
Ironically, one of the reasons I want this is that I have (4) USB-based AOC monitors. Two of them showed up with broken screens, and this is the only problem I have ever had returning anything to Amazon - but thats because its AOC thats refusing to honor a replacement and amazon claims since its a 3rd party its out of their hands.
Once I canceled my PRIME account, and then amazon charged me the $99 after I canceled.
I called them, demanded a refund AND a $25 inconvenience fee for me having to go through the process to get my refund... and they paid it!
Monitors are a pain in the arse. I bought a 65 inch tv last year to use as a monitor that I'm now selling and it's difficult to shift. You can't really ship it because the risk of it being damaged is high so no-one will give you a reasonable quote with insurance. So I'm going to have to sell it to someone locally, probably at a super low price. Looking forward to never having this problem ever again with this new tech. Between projectors and these glasses I think TVs are going to become obsolete tech within the next two decades. It's only a matter of time until someone makes an app that allows you and all your mates to watch whatever you want on your own individual glasses but in sync with each other. And for the people who want a permanent glasses off experience at home I think laser projectors are going to come down in price and become commonplace. TVs are going to go the way of the dodo.
Imagine when you have a UX for large screen throws in glasses which can be synced/networked whereby you can throw up the "wife - yes! IA M COOKING channel to her to prove you're chopping what she asked! GEESH!?
vs - swiping back over to the gaming channel with your buddies and be like "Ill revive you in two seconds, bitch, GEESH - ill be there as soon as I am done with my status report on vegetable cuts Management is demanding!"
What kind of tasks do you feel the Xreal "monitor" is good for? I looked at this product recently, but it seems like the resolution is basically 2x1920x1080 for the space + the screen. If you're used to using 1-2 4k monitors to look at e.g. multiple panes of text + graphs, this seems like it would be a big step backwards, like using a 10 year-old TV as a monitor. But some people seem to love it so maybe I'm missing something.
Anything you want, but of course it's all subjective. You can have up to three monitors if you're using the Nebula app, so that's three 1080p monitors. You can't see them all simultaneously though, you have to tilt your head to reveal the left and right monitors similar to how you would with real life monitors except for you don't have them in your peripheral vision. It's definitely not as crisp as a 4k monitor but I think some of the lack of resolution can be made up for by the sheer size of the screen. I am also willing to trade the lack of crispness for complete elimination of neck and shoulder ache from hunching and also the ability to have this anywhere I want. I'm planning on backpacking and doing the digital nomad thing indefinitely so this is really ideal.
One thing that has been surprising is that I thought eye strain might be a problem but I've not really had any discomfort and I've actually gone back to using light mode in the day time and dark mode at night time which is something I thought I'd never do having been using dark mode for everything for years.
My teenager plays the Quest 2 daily. Sample size of one (sorta), but he plays with all of his friends. He's in our living-room for a few sessions each day. And, FWIW, it seems like an intense cardio workout for him each time, which I like.
Back in the mid 1980s I started my gaming journey... I would sit and play games for hours and my 2400 baud modem helped me dominate in Populous, got me connected to BBSs to play games, got me on PCLink (the precursor to AOL), and got me grounded for a month for running up a $926 long distance phone bill for calling into BBSs in San Jose from Tahoe...
My dad yelled at me and told me "I was wasting my life sitting in front of the computer all day"
Years later after I made a pretty cool career in computers, including doing game testing at intel, designing datacenters for NAMCO and Lucas etc... my dad apologized for saying that to me...
So its funny that your kid is getting his cardio in VR! We are living in the future!
I guess it helps that I too started computers early. My first being a Commodore 64 and basically every system in between then and now. So, I'm more inclined to let my kids use technology than my parents (who were very welcoming of tech) were. I still force them to go outside and eat dirt, like I had to as a kid (J/k on the dirt bit).
Ha! I ate dirt in the 70s as a toddler! and spiders!
Eating dirt actually helps build the gut-biome. and it helps kids stay healthy through fortifying the immune system (this is why all the 'hand-sanitizers' are actually worse for human health)
But I was lucky - I grew up within 500 feet of Lake Tahoe, and would just walk out the door, go up Ward Creeek to the backside of Alpine Meadows, setup booby traps for hikers (trip wires... it was the 1980s..)
But I coerced my dad to buy a machine for his "business" and then I took over the machine and played tons of games - but would also be 'kicked out of the house until dinner' at times and just explore the forest, swim in the lake, or steal boats.
Again, this was like 1986 and I stole a bunch of boats because my dad was a big general contractor who built and cared for a crap-load of lake front properties with boat-houses, and I knew where my dads clients were all the time, so I could steal their boats for joy rides... and for some of the houses I had the keys.
It was a common thing in Tahoe in the 1980s to break into vacation homes and throw "keggers"
I mean, have you ever tried one? That seems to be missing from your post.
Some people think stereoscopic depth in visual mediums is more entertaining or interesting than flat images. The same way some people preferred color television over black and white when it became available.
Adding a z-axis (depth) is a higher resolution, higher bandwidth signal.
Absolutely, and I do love the higher bandwidth signal. It seems to have a seriously limited practicality at this point, though. I watched a movie and that was neat, even though it’s flat it was kind of nice to have it be so… Immersive, I guess. Sound cancelling and vision cancelling at the same time is pretty cool.
The games are very novel but something like tears of the kingdom is far more engaging and gratifying for me. Maybe that’s because I grew up with flat games and it’s where my brain is most comfortable.
So, I don’t really watch tv or movies (maybe once every two months at most), I don’t game much unless with my kids (doesn’t work in VR/AR), and otherwise I’m not sure what kind of individual activities I could get up to where it would be useful in its current state. Or even a moderately more advanced state perhaps. A big snag for me is that you can’t really do it with people.
Watching a 2D film on a stereo 3D VR device sorta makes sense that it's not super interesting. Other than being able to resize the screen and reposition it, you're not getting much.
The games are crappy right now, I agree.
I think few die-hard VR or AR enthusiasts would argue that the content and use cases have a long way to go. Most games are either more akin to going to a paintball course or playing DDR than they are similar to sitting down to play a classic video game. Which is a fun experience but clearly isn't gaming.
And the blockbuster 2D game ports to VR are few and far between, and it's not fun playing Skyrim for the 50th time just because now it's stereo 3D.
For me, I've found that stereo video recorded on high end stereoscopic 180 degree camera setups is really compelling. For example video recorded using ZCam K2 Pro. The only studios really using that tech extensively currently are for adult video. For me the best of those experiences feels like the future, the next big medium. If it were possible to combine 6 degrees of freedom with stereo video, I am convinced it'd be immediately successful, but I still think 3 degree of freedom stereo video that's possible today is far superior to flat video.
I can envision future Hollywood or Netflix productions where you feel like you're watching from an invisible drone floating right there in the scene, with full depth and a sense of real scale. It will take new artistic direction, things like panning the camera become nausea-inducing for some viewers but incredibly presence-inducing for others (if moved slowly enough and with a gimbal). Cuts feel different, too many fast cuts too quickly are much more difficult to visually process in stereo than on a laptop screen. But on the other hand, some editing effects like a dissolve are incredibly trippy and a new type of experience in VR. Seeing double vision where both scenes have depth is really interesting. Anyway, it's closer to watching a play in a theater or being at Sleep No More than watching a TV show.
The bottleneck right now is content and production costs, that's about it.
> Watching a 2D film on a stereo 3D VR device sorta makes sense that it's not super interesting
Yeah it wasn’t life changing by any means, but pretty nice in a way. Like if I was single, I might actually skip the TV and just do that? I’m not certain. I liked that it forced me to be focused on it. I’ve got the ADHD pretty bad apparently, so sitting and watching a movie is kind of like trying to put a cat in a box. My brain insists on doing ANYTHING ELSE and grabs into virtually any other activity or thought or whatever, but in a VR headset or a theatre somehow that isn’t the case.
The idea of watching movies or shows as though you were actually there is spectacular. I think we’ll get there too, but I expect it’s a while away from where we are. AI will likely play a huge role in stitching multiple camera angles together and filling in the gaps, and that technology arrived a lot sooner than I expected, so… Maybe the integration of production and presentation technologies will follow suit. Frankly, I’m old enough that things simply move faster than I’m used to now. I have to reassess my priors for how quickly things can happen.
What you’re saying about stereo video sounds totally compelling. And not surprising it’s popular in the adult industry. Sort of a side note I guess, but when I see what’s possible with AI and imagine what’s around the corner with these technologies… Good luck to all the 20 year olds with raging hormones and a little disposable income. If porn addiction is a thing now, just wait. Maybe we’re what, 10 years away from generating personal porn with a personally designed digital partner?
I digress though. We’ll get there when we get there and deal with it when we do. I’m glad my boys might miss the worst of it in their most hormonal years.
There are already compelling VR games, but they are heavily outnumbered in fun but shallow arcade experiences and games which would be bargain-basement tier on any other platform. I highly recommend trying Echo Arena before it is taken offline in August. The player base is as awful as you would expect unmoderated 13-year-olds online to be, but if you mute everyone and just explore the mechanics it is mind-blowing and other-worldly. Unfortunately due to the weightlessness this is one that will definitely be off limits to those who struggle with nausea in VR.
Yeah it's just a matter of subjectivity. I got Rift CV1 at launch and played Echo Arena, it was more like going IRL paintball or bowling or playing laser tag to me than a video game. I felt like I was really doing an activity. Not just laying back on a couch moving my wrist in millimeter increments lazily to play Elden Ring. I like both but I prefer VR experiences that don't require full body movement.
If I'm going to do a full body experience I for the most part just prefer real life activities with the ability to feel and physically touch things. The one big exception I had was Windlands.
Absolutely it's different from a typical video game experience, I didn't mean to say that it was a replacement for a traditional video game. It's something that really does combine elements of video games and IRL activities into a wholly new kind of experience, and to me that's a more compelling argument for VR gaming than a regular video game but more immersive. Even if Echo Arena in particular doesn't tickle your fancy, I think it shows what category of experience is possible even with current VR technology.
Thanks for the Windlands recommendation, I will have to check it out.
It's an entirely new category. When you're an Apple or Facebook, there isn't much further you can go with mobile phones or violating users' privacy respectively, so you need to explore new markets to expand.
IMO AR is the truly useful application of the technology, but the hardware needs to be basically goggles that can stay on your head all day and we're nowhere near that. VR is primarily useful for videogames and porn. Lots of money in gaming and porn, but not widely applicable like a HUD visible at all times.
I’m with you on AR being truly useful. If that ball could be knocked out of the park, the implications for countless activities would be huge.
Imagine you wanted to build a geodesic greenhouse and your vision could be populated with the pieces you need next, where they go, hardware you need, where parts were last seen, etc. My brain would benefit so much from being kept on track like that.
> So what’s the motivation to get into this space? What is the opportunity that Apple sees, for example?
I think for Apple, it's just another new personal computing platform. Just like personal media devices, phones, tablets, TVs, smartwatches etc. They may not necessarily see a big opportunity. They simply cannot afford to ignore a new computing platform.
My fear of buying any of these is the lock in. I expect them to be like my TV. I plug in my streaming service, PS, xbox or any other input and it transforms my world. But now I have to choose if I want VR for my PS games or if I want to enter Meta's new game collection. By I already know what games I like, I don't want to adopt new ones because of my VR platform choice. If I want it all I need to pay $400 x 3? No. They can keep their ecosystems.
Eye tracking is hardly mentioned in this press release but I think is a Huge Deal. Will allow foveated rendering (huge optimization) as well as increased emotional connection in face to face experiences.
"The eyes are the window to the soul."
edit: My mistake, I misread the PR, quest 3 does not have eye tracking. Boo.
Apparently, Meta sold as many Quest 2s as Microsoft sold Xbox Series X/S consoles (~20 million).
The metaverse is nonsense, and the Quest Pro flopped. But apparently the main Quest devices are pretty compelling toys.
I wonder if this is a high point, or if they’ll maintain the momentum. Also interested to see if they can ever really build out + monetize their game library .
It's so strange to me - so many devices sold yet I don't hear much about them at all. I hear about Xboxes somewhat, but maybe that's because I got one mainly as a Blu-ray player.
The metaverse stuff (both the stuff directly attributable to meta and the way the NFT people grabbed onto the term) made it all mildly embarrassing to the masses and killed the pretty significant uptake they had.
Quest 2 had an extremely strong first few months. I'd be interested in seeing how spread out the sales have been
Software sales have taken a real beating. Saw a game launch post-mortem a week ago that had the Quest store beating the Steam release by ~2x. This is actually a lot worse than it sounds given VR’s niche status and the fact that devs were reporting a 10-20x multiplier a year or two ago.
The Quest game achievements leaderboard is semi-public and, doing some rough backwards math, it looks like some fairly high profile recent-ish releases (eg: Moss 2) sold atrociously.
Yeah the Quest 2 was amazing, my first VR headset. I got my wife one, and she enjoyed messing around with it so much I ended up getting one, and we often play games together in VR.
Honestly Beat Saber burns calories like nobody’s business.
Boxing games are great too. I literally need to pause and rest when I’m playing Thrill of the Fight, but it never feels like a “workout,” just like I’m doing a thing and it’s physically hard.
Heard good things about Fit XR, but I think it’s a subscription, which sucks.
I thought about getting a boxing game for VR, but I worry about injuring my elbow by punching forward and hitting nothing and having all the momentum get absorbed by the limit of my elbow joint.
Do you just avoid punching directly forward, or do you pull your punches, or what?
It is basically shadow boxing, which requires its own techniques to avoid injury, because ya, no bouncing off of something to stop or even return your energy:
Yep, keep your arms tight and stop your arm and bring it back after a punch. Lots of posts on reddit of shoulder injuries from playing these boxing games without being careful:
Can’t really understand why thrill of the fight (which has the best engine of the boxing games) only lets you play against realistic, male characters. It would be tons more fun if you could play against fantasy characters and even politically incorrect ones. Everyone i talked to seemed to agree. Once another studio fills this niche, and provided that their engine is just as good, i think TotF will be sidelined.
Besides what the other person said, I subscribed to Supernatural for a while, and I thought it was doing good things for me, but it just seems like too much money monthly for what they provide. But it could be right for some.
FitXR is only $10/month, and it has been my go to for a few years now. It was even cheaper when they just sold the app without a subscription, I have the option to revert to that as well if I stop buying the subscription (an option not available anymore).
It's my third headset, and yeah, it's amazing. My HTC Vive and Oculus Rift both just sit in a box somewhere. I just took the Vive lighthouses off my walls last week because it's obvious I'm not going to use it again.
If the Quest 3 can do every thing the 2 can do with better optics and controls, I'm 100% sold on it. They didn't mention linking it to the computer, but I have to assume that'll still be a thing.
Quest 2 + virtual desktop to wirelessly stream from the PC is perfection.
My son uses the quest 2 daily to play Blade & Sorcery.
Not being locked down by cables is basically a requirement to me now.. I was in from the very first DK1 but once I got a Quest2 the cable free reigns supreme, even though I'm giving up a little bit of tracking compromise (cameras on device vs the steam/vive room tracking).
The thing about the Quest is two things matter for VR:
- Ease of setup. Quest has always been great about this.
- Content / library. Again, Quest has typically had the most content and titles.
I am excited for the Quest 3, more than anything from Apple. I spent hundreds of hours with the Quest 2. Most people didn't spend that much time with it, but there is an audience for this and I am one of them.
When I watch a movie, I do enjoy it. But there are so much way more interesting and exciting things to do than to watch a movie. So I rarely watch one.
Books? Loooooove books. But they are usually about the real world. Science, biographies, theories ... I wouldn't call them "entertainment".
Never been much into dancing.
Doing sport is super awesome. But is that really counted as "entertainment"? Or do you mean watching sports? I find watching sports pretty boring.
Plays - whats that?
Museums? Hell yeah! But I never heard someone call museums part of the entertainment industry.
And then the people you talk to end up talking about movies and video games and you lose interest because you're only living interested in the real world.
> When I watch a movie, I do enjoy it. But there are so much way more interesting and exciting things to do than to watch a movie. So I rarely watch one.
I used to think this, turns out I was watching bad movies. Use time as a filter and watch old movies by directors that are still talked about (Kubrick, Tarkovsky, etc)
Every pursuit is a distraction until you die. There is no intrinsic meaning to life, you just do whatever you can to keep a steady release of dopamine in your brain. For some people that's watching television, for other people it's Family, for others it might be practicing musical instrument, the list goes on and on but it's purely subjective.
> Doing sport is super awesome. But is that really counted as "entertainment"? Or do you mean watching sports? I find watching sports pretty boring.
Well, there are some good fitness-oriented VR games around. Beat Saber is rad, that's the main one people know about, and there's a bunch of other ones too.
I feel the same way as the parent. Just about everything touted in the entertainment industry fails to hold my attention or generate any desire. I haven't felt the urge to watch a movie, play a game, or really engage with much marketed media in a while. Don't mistake me for being depressed too, I am quite happy.
I get a lot of fulfillment in life from fairly mundane things: work, socializing, exercise, reading about whatever niche I am interested in the moment. I don't think it's abnormal either.
The coolest thing I saw on the Quest was a 3D YouTube video - it was something educational ish about the universe maybe. Very immersive but they only had a few good ones
Not necessarily true. There are some "productivity" apps, as well as streaming (does anyone use that though?), and also exercise apps (admittedly probably falls under the game categeory). And, honestly, I don't see this changing until inputs change. Things like coding, spreadsheets, writing, all generally require a keyboard and mouse. At minimum a keyboard. Maybe GPT powered headset that can really understand you and has the ability manipulate things / OS level access might eventually come about.
They already do have enough resolution to do real work. The problem is that for a lot of folks it is physically straining and taxing to be in a VR headset for hours and hours straight. A small portion of people just physically cannot do anything in VR without getting violently sick.
On the quest there's also SLR. Google it, as I don't want to link directly to it here. They provide a player as well as a library of suitable content you can stream. They're basically the pornhub for VR.
Only issue is that only a small subset of content is streamable for free.
It's stupid. It's a huge market, one where VR tech adds huge value. There's a huge sprawling ecosystem with content and "peripherals" that are motion synced.
Pretending it doesn't exist doesn't help their metaverse ambitions nor their bottom line.
The urban legend is that Betamax eschewing NSFW content lead to their demise in favour of VHS and while that is not entirely true there is certainly some worth to that story.
Lots of people are complete shut ins and/or tech fanatics. People with a life outside of computers aren't really interested in VR, it's a nice gimmick for a dinner at a friend's place but that's about it. I'd go even as far as to say even full blown basement dwellers aren't so interested in VR
I was really into it ~10 years ago when I was a shut in nerd, back then they were announcing the revolution, fast forward 10 years and literally nothing changed, it's still a gimmick for 99.9% of people.
There are a lot of use cases in B2B with VR but they are not easy to sell.
I remember a long time ago Silicon Graphics used to build Reality Centers.
Their best sales pitch was some Oil company was building an Oil rig and using VR they could find - from blueprints - some valves were installed too high and that saved them a lot of money.
I worked for a company that had a software to scan train tunnels for inspection. It was cheaper and quicker than sending technicians there, but the interface -built on PowerBI was a pain. VR could be much better...
... but you need an easy way to build that App.
(btw if someone knows about it, just drop me message)
One day, there will be a VR desktop environment with floating windows that I can use.
People have been playing with it - but it's got a ways to go still. I would love working in VR with many, many floating windows all around, instead of contained within the 2 viewing panes in front of me IRL.
I bought the new HTC Vive XR Elite last month for just this use case. I had never tried VR before so I really didn't have a feel for whether it would work. It did not. There was so much glare and blurriness that I had to scale the font to huge headline size to read without strain. I returned the system. I'm more than willing to try again if there's a chance it might work.
In real life I do not have issues with motion sickness or claustrophobia. Both of these hit me when wearing the headset, particularly the claustrophobia. The nausea was mild but definite.
Even so it was an extraordinary experience, and I may be more excited about the potential of AR than before.
Floating windows are cool but VR operating systems will be much more interesting when they start integrating 3d tactile widgets and mixed reality. For example, to access your disk it could look like a shelf you pull down from above or something which renders each directory as nested boxes.
Or a collection of retro games could display in mixed reality as if it were real boxed games on a shelf along your real wall.
Or it could be integrated with a smart home control system so you could just point at a light to turn it on.
>> Or a collection of retro games could display in mixed reality as if it were real boxed games on a shelf along your real wall.
> I could see Microsoft making this.
The first quoted part is actually similar to part of the old Microsoft BOB concept. Indeed some Later version of Packard Bell Navigator (which was basically a Bob clone) literally had general programs presented as box software sitting on a shelf.
I'm honestly surprised there isn't already a VR frontend for Steam that works just like your second example. Valve love upselling on virtual items like profile pictures, backgrounds, trading cards, emotes, so a virtual bedroom full of virtual consoles and virtual doodads that you can show off to other users seems like it'd pay for itself. And they already have a VR team.
We need either VRC or something like VRC with in-world item management, avatar/world creation, and full support for adult content. Anything less is just wasting time.
My experience with trying to play flat games or watch movies in VR is that it shows up the imperfections in the system a lot more than tailored experiences. Until they have some eye-tracking mechanically adaptive optics, there'll always be some imperfections in the system, and a high-contrast perfectly flat rectangle full of text right in front of your face shows off those imperfections far more than a full 3D environment full of naturalistic objects.
Its hard to make other use cases work when text is barely readable. The resolution just isn't there for productivity apps.
I'd be surprised if Apple doesn't lean into that angle with their new headset. Pixel density on phones was a problem before the iPhone 4, and they sold the heck out of the retina display. If Apple can make small text readable in VR they'll enable a whole world of new VR applications.
I understand what you're saying, and I agree, but it's like saying a party is boring because there are no books.
The whole "meta" concept is that you're socializing in VR and it feels as if you're talking to your friend directly. I'm sure the resolution has improved in the new model, but even still, super sharp text isn't as important as you'd think to make the fundamental social use cases work
Socializing is one thing you do in the Metaverse. Working is probably the bigger one though.
Lots of people don’t grok this but the endgame for VR/AR is replacing every monitor in every office and home. Probably ditto TVs when every person owns a headset.
It’s going to be a massive game-changer (and a rapid transition) when VR gets good enough to work in.
The question is just whether this is a 5-year timeline or 50. Mark is obviously betting he can get traction in the 5-10 year timeframe.
Why would anyone want to work with a helmet on their head at all times like this? It's like saying the endgame for computers is all communications will be over video phones like on the jetsons. It sounds like a cool scifi concept until you realize even if the technology is there people would often rather not be seen on camera when they talk.
VR headsets are just more compact than laptops, let alone desktops. If you could just replace workstations with a headset, though it will not likely happen in near terms, that’ll be nice.
First, note I said VR/AR, so not everyone needs a headset. Many workloads will work in AR, though the black pixel problem means these will be much harder to crack and so will probably arrive later.
But I think once the VR headsets get miniaturized a bit more (give it a generation or three) people will laugh when they think about the current models, just like we do about cell phones vs. the first satellite phones that were bigger than your head. At some point these will be as light as a pair of plastic sunglasses or goggles.
There is nothing forcing you to use VR for something like a call, where you don’t currently need a monitor. But I think we’ll see a tipping point where the face tracking gets across the canny valley and people stop saying “you need to meet someone in person to really connect”. At that point VR calls substitute for in-person meetings, not VCs on a screen.
Consider the move to remote work; if we can get a virtual meeting room to feel like whiteboarding in person, including gaze and expression detection, then you could bounce between meeting room with your distributed team and perfect immersive dev setup without leaving your seat.
For the median worker using a monitor I think the requirements to beat monitors are just good enough resolution for spreadsheets/email (we may be there next gen?), comfort (currently the crux), and a decent story on input passthrough (your physical keyboard rendered in VR? Something else? Seems tractable, we just haven’t standardized any options.)
I see three assumptions in your paragraph that need to be true in order for the technology to work. I'm ordering them by how likely I think they are to come true in the next decade.
* Headsets will have good enough resolution and be generally comfortable enough to replace monitors for office space.
* There is a solution to the pass through input problem that is acceptable for the average office worker. I don't think there is a solution of the passthrough problem that beats a keyboard/mouse, or even a laptop in a cafe. I think it's more likely the average office worker will accept a worse form of text input given the right conditions.
* It's possible to project a 3d image of myself while wearing a headset that doesn't include the headset and passes the uncanny valley. The uncanny valley is wide, and even AAA video games haven't cleared it yet.
That seems like a good list. For 1, I expect to update substantially (either for or against) after seeing how much of a jump Apple’s headset is. I view this one as inevitable unless something crazy like a complete end to progress on SoC density.
For 2, there are demos already; Immersed (and maybe Meta natively?) has a mode where it recognizes your keyboard (like 2 specific models, prototype) and positions the keyboard in VR. Not good enough for hunt and peck but if you touchtype this works. The Quest 3 seems to have better passthrough so again, this generation will provide a good steer. This one seems pretty easy though.
For 3, if we can do deepfakes we can do 3d photorealistic avatars. Can’t be more than 5-10 years away to render a face in real-time. Unreal already has some crazy tech with MetaHuman that would work here already I suspect, given enough compute.
I find it helpful to invert the perspective; let’s assume we have perfect VR/AR; what would monitors be good for when you can call up arbitrary number of windows anywhere in your visual field?
There are maybe some information-radiator type use cases. Probably things like big screens at live events / shows.
But for individual users, I think anything a monitor can do, an endgame AR display can do, and more flexibly.
Why would you (personally, I’m interested in your viewpoint) want a monitor if you had a perfect AR display that you could dismiss into thin air when you didn’t need it, or conjure up a 6-screen dev environment when you did need it? You could put your keyboard and mouse down at any comfortable chair and be as productive as your current dev setup with your optimal monitor count.
(My claim was even stronger than yours, I don’t think they need to be perfect to be better, but since you volunteered it, let’s explore that extreme.)
I’m assuming “perfect” is something completely unnoticeable like lightweight glasses or contacts BTW, and I think there is a bunch of good stuff before perfect.
> I’m assuming “perfect” is something completely unnoticeable like lightweight glasses or contacts BTW, and I think there is a bunch of good stuff before perfect
If that's the case, and if your perception of your real environment is in no way hindered, then I agree -- monitors wouldn't have an advantage.
Short of that, though, I would strongly prefer monitors over VR.
> you can call up arbitrary number of windows anywhere in your visual field?
This is not something I personally would want to do. I want my computer/user interface to be constrained to a specific part of my visual field. Even if it's all in VR, that's how I would use it anyway.
I'll be interested to see if views on this have shifted this time next week after Apple's announcement.
For my part, I think the notion of putting down giant expensive phyiscal rectangles that are geolocked to one physical position just to use computers is going to seem like a quaint artefact of history in a few years.
I think the socializing part is a hard sell at this point. You'd have Rec Rooms and VR Chat, but both have image issues and are still peddling with content moderation and user interaction issues.
This aspect is way to early to be touted as something worth 500$ to a regular user.
SimulaVR markets themselves as a productivity VR headset. Essentially, have as many terminals and other windows as you want floating in the air around you while still having the pass through cameras to see around them. The review copies are just being made now, though. Not really out yet. It is supposed to fit my huge noggin unlike almost every other headset, though, so I certainly preordered.
Is it coming out at some point soon? They've been working on it for so long.
I wish they would focus more on software rather than making us all wait for their super expensive hardware. And yeah I know it's a whole PC you're buying. But I don't really buy expensive PCs in a form factor that has yet to prove its usability.
They're promising they'll ship by the end of the year at the latest. Again, I pre-ordered but I'm also thinking that if the PC thing sucks at least I'll finally have a plugin VR headset that actually fits my head. Go ahead and wait for the reviews to come in before making a decision if you're not in my boat.
I won't buy it either way. I simply can't afford it :) With wages as they are here in Southern Europe it's a non-starter. But I hope their paradigm works out so I can get it from another company or maybe someone ports it to the Oculus Quest. Freely placing windows in space instead of "desktops" or "screens" makes much more sense in VR.
During the pandemic I would hang out on calls with a few buddies that got the Q2 or had the Q1. We played some games, but by far my favourite was a cheap Google Streetview browser app called "Wander". We would get on a call (the audio was crystal clear on the Q2s, but not on the Q1s) and go as a group in the app. We would "walk" around different places and talk about a mix of the place and general chit chat. Sometimes a person would show others where they grew up, or spent some time living, share interesting tidbits about that places. Other times, we'd play a game where one person would select a place on the map and the others would try to guess where in the world they were.
Anyway, I didn't care much for VR games and I wouldn't be surprised if mainstream use of VR is not games. Meetings are way better than Zoom/Meet whatever, watching movies on planes and such is way better than on a phone or tablet, with better resolution working would be viable and passthrough would enable things like redesigning your home in a way that's simply not possible with any other screen. There's tons of great non-gaming use cases for VR that's significantly better than any other platform.
Agreed, the Oculus brand always felt great to me and seemed to have a lot of goodwill from early adopters. "Meta Quest" never parses right for me, neither do any other "Meta <brand>" names as I hear terms with "meta" at the beginning too much.
I wonder if "Quest, by Meta" would work better in branding.
I own both the Quest 2 and the Pico 4. The Pico is significantly better across the board. Better screens, much lighter, better controls, runs cooler. I can easily use it until the battery runs out whereas the Quest 2 would give me headaches because of the neck strain. It's too heavy!
Things I would love to know is:
- How does it compare to the Pico 4?
- Screen specs
- FOV specs
- Pass-through, is it better than the Pico 4's?
This looks like a great improvement over the Quest 2! It will be interesting to see Apple's headset in comparison. Beyond the obvious price difference, I'm guessing Apple will focus more on personal communication (FaceTime) and productivity (floating iPad apps). Will it be a hard sell when the Quest 3 is pretty good? Guess we'll find out…
The primary advantage of the Quest 2 was the price, so I hope they don't discontinue it given that the Quest 3 is apparently $200 more expensive. It is still likely to have the biggest disadvantage of the Quest 2, which was the mandatory Facebook/Meta/Horizon Worlds stuff and the absolute headache that came from their account migration/connection shenanigans.
> It is still likely to have the biggest disadvantage of the Quest 2, which was the mandatory Facebook/Meta/Horizon Worlds stuff and the absolute headache that came from their account migration/connection shenanigans.
Not entirely accurate. Facebook has locked me out of my pseudonym account and is requiring I upload a government ID to gain entry again.
Thankfully it was not used for anything other than chatting with people in certain communities and I have other Facebook accounts that are also pseudonyms, but Facebook can and will sometimes require verification of an account.
One of the nice things about the Quest is you can still tether it to your computer, and it does the tethering over Wifi so there are no pesky cables in the way. App support for Quest controllers on the PC side is sometimes spotty, but I've had pretty decent luck. This is where being cheap is a real advantage, lots of developers include Quest support because they are so popular. There are advantages to being on the most common system. I've gotten a bunch of VR games out of Humble Bundles that are installed on Steam and stream to the Quest 2 no problem.
The account management is still breathtakingly complex and confusing. The switchover in August '22 was a nightmare. I'm sure there are still people who are locked out of their headsets because they couldn't figure it out. And this is on top of the mess they created when they forced the Facebook account integration.
It's worse than the Mojang->Microsoft account mess, and that's saying something.
Announcing it now, with no specs and no release date, and only a promise of discussing it more in September...clearly meant to draw attention away from whatever Apple announces next week.
As far as VR goes in general, HN is extremely crotchety. I love VR. I love games in VR. I love sculpting in VR. I love hanging in VR. But what I'm really excited about, as someone with a tendency to change seating locations constantly throughout the day, is working in VR. I want a multi-monitor setup in bed. I want one on the couch. I want one on an airplane, in an Uber, etc.
I was hopeful with the Oculus Pro, but I've heard that the resolution just isn't there, for programming tasks it feels like you're reading text on a 720p CRT.
I have high hopes for this space, and am very excited to hear more about this, as well as what Apple announces. What I don't have high hopes for are the responses to my VR enthusiasm. I understand that you would never strap something Facebook makes to your head, or that you just don't like the one or two gimmick games you tried, that's okay.
I’m not sure how major of an upgrade this will be. From a gaming perspective, 2x the GPU will help. The Quest 2 graphics are pretty basic but they get the job done. The MR seems like it’s a solution searching for a problem.
I’m waiting for a headset that I can use during travel in place of an external monitor, but I don’t think this is it yet.
External monitors is more of the Quest Pro schtick. If you look at the marketing materials, Quest 2/3 is all games while Quest Pro is all work stuff.
I’m actually excited for the MR use cases - I love playing board games online+phone with friends. Would be super cool if I could see them/the board in a more real way.
How do they expect VR/Metaverse to ever take off with such expensive hardware? It is understandable that laptops, desktops, phones cost a lot since the demand is high and people will pay a premium. But, there is little to no demand for VR headsets. Maybe if somehow they ever made the metaverse a must have thing, they could charge $500 for a headset, but right now? They should be digging into their deep coffers and giving the things away.
Pretty wild that someone has the audacity to claim that $500 is expensive in this case. It's basically a high end tablet with a lot of low-volume custom parts. I wouldn't be surprised if they'd need to charge $1000 with no loss in sales to break even on just the headset's hardware+firmware (never mind the "metaverse" stuff they're dumping money into)
hmm, I didn't realize they'd sold around 20 million of these things
You aren't going to get iPhone/Samsung Galaxy-level scale effects out of that kind of volume, but it's enough that they might be able to break even within 50% over public BOM estimates
I assume they're trying to take the same approach most game consoles take (Nintendo is an exception here from what I understand) where they sell the hardware at a loss, and make their profit on licensing on game publishers. Here that'd be monetizing the "metaverse" to make their money. It's the razor and blades business model.
It's a whole other thing whether this will actually work out for them, because it depends on there being a captive market for the profitable half of the business model (the "metaverse" content).
> Nintendo is an exception here from what I understand
Tangential, but they're an exception because the only games worth a damn on their consoles are always just a few first-party releases and they keep it that way intentionally. Nintendo is a bully with few friends.
> It is understandable that laptops, desktops, phones cost a lot since the demand is high and people will pay a premium.
This is sort of historical revisionism. PCs and laptops were historically expensive, limited use devices and they've become relatively more inexpensive over time due to a huge increase in supply.
Yeah, the reality is literally the opposite. Low volume products have to cost a lot since fixed costs dominate. High volume consumer products have razor thin margins. They cost a lot because the processes to build them cost a lot, not because someone's making fat profit on each one. (Perhaps with the exception of Apple, who have enough of a software moat that they don't need to cut their margins so thin).
I'm surprised that more isn't done to sell these. I'm a tech enthusiast with disposable income, but the last headset I tried was an old Oculus one about a decade ago. I could see the promise of the tech but need convincing that it's come far enough for me to buy one.
And yet... trying these out just doesn't seem to be a thing anywhere. I can walk into any tech store and see a non-working unit in a glass case, or if I'm lucky pick up a slightly sticky broken controller, but I can't try one out for 5 minutes to see if I like it.
I'd bet that Apple's headset will be announced with a store experience to go along with it. I'm sure it'll be by appointment only to begin with as they'll have many more people wanting to try it than who will want to buy, but I'm sure there will be a way to experience them before buying. The Apple Watch was effectively a new product category where people needed a new level of persuasion, and Apple had fitting appointments that were very well done, and Apple Stores have always been known for being primarily focused on using the products, even letting you try AirPods, so I can't imagine these will be stuck in a glass case.
With most technology these days you know what you are getting, you don't have to go play with the new iPhone in the store to see how good it is, you just know. But with VR it's different in that it's still pretty new (in the context of everyday consumers) so being able to try it out before you buy is crucial.
Exactly, at the beginning of a tech cycle the public need convincing that it's even a product category they need. Currently I'm not seeing much from Meta or others to sell to the masses, only to those who are already convinced they need a headset.
I largely agree with you, however Superhot is the closest thing I've experienced to the "can't do it outside VR" games. I did previously play the browser version of the same game, and it was fantastic still, but there's something different about moving around in space like that.
HL:Alyx got close to the "only in VR" sort of mechanics, but change 2-3 big set pieces, and it could very much be done on a 2D screen.
Well, it doesn't only have to be "only in VR" mechanics, it also has to be a really really fun game compared to almost all the other games you could at the moment purchase and play on your normal PC with a normal monitor and no extra $1000 investment in hardware..
I've tested VR sporadically ever since the first Oculus Rift came out, and I just get a headache after 15 minutes and that kind of has ruined it for me forever I guess as I now associate VR with motion sickness, bad ergonomics etc. That's very personal of course, I know there are others who can run around in VR fine for a whole day without these reactions.
Anyway... the game has to be outrageously good for me at least to use a VR version instead of just sitting on my chair staring on the screen with a cup of tea next to me.
You can get back into it. I get motion sick too with some stupid games (like X-Plane that has this really annoying opposite movement when it's loading, GRR). But just do it slowly and don't keep going the moment you get even a hint of sickness. Soon you'll be running aroudn with no issue.
I tried Alyx and it was just not fun. Not for the game or anything, but I was really just uncomfortable being in a virtual reality environment where I was hunting/being-hunted by aliens. That's really not my idea of a good time - more like a nightmare.
VR needs some less intense and some more fun, low-stress gaming experiences to draw in the casuals like me.
> VR needs some less intense and some more fun, low-stress gaming experiences to draw in the casuals like me.
You’re in luck because those types of titles form the majority of VR titles today. The more common complaint is the lack of AAA content like Alyx which is due to the lack of users
Yes they exist, with laughably meager budgets compared to “mainstream” games.
I’ll concede animal crossing is a good exception to the rule, but this only serves to prove our original point that there’s room for AAA-grade games in this market segment.
If you have ever played D&D with miniatures, it's like that, only the miniatures are glowy and sparkling and animated, and the board is very detailed. You pick the pieces up with your VR controllers and move them around.
Except you can zoom in to stick your face super close-up to the action to see it going down.
When you zoom out, you are, indeed, in someone's basement. When it's not your turn you can enjoy all the geeky easter eggs sitting around the basement.
It sounds cool like this, but I can assure you it's cooler than that. I first played it non-VR and enjoyed the game, and then played a game the second time in VR and literally said aloud, "Holy Shit!".
I see your point but I think both need to happen. My guess is that the best VR games will only show their real appeal when played, because people don't have a great frame of reference otherwise.
I can look at a PS5 game and decide to buy a PS5, because I know what controller based consoles are like, I know the types of games, I know what I like. I can't do any of that with a VR game because I don't know what sort of headset I like, how it feels, what's important in a VR game that isn't in others and vice-versa.
For me Beat Saber is that game. With mods and community-made songs/beatmaps which can be quite intense and it's how I get in some cardio on a regular schedule (~1h30m on a two-days-on-one-day-off cycle).
Currently I do this with a Quest 2 attached to a Vive Deluxe Audio headstrap with 3D printed adapters and a counterweight on the back to take pressure off my face (a setup dubbed "frankenquest"). It works well enough but there's a lot of room for improvement.
I think the experience just isn't mainstream enough. I think there are a lot of people that would drop $200-$300 to get a beat sabre experience if they were aware of the option. Is there any reason it should be less compelling than the "Wii as exercise" craze, for example?
The Wii was heavily marketed as a family entertainment system. A 'Family Computer', if you will. It's even in the name. People were buying it because it's something your grandmother could play alongside your five year old son. VR is still marketed as ages 13 and up, gives some people nausea and can only be used by one person at a time. There's also extra hygiene concerns that make them awkward to use at parties as you have the extra step of wiping the headset down between users. The controllers are also pretty intimidating for new users because you can't see them. I was showing PSVR2 to my dad and told him "Push R2 to select" before realising that if you didn't know where the R2 button was already, you had no hope of finding it because you're physically incapable of seeing the controller.
It's a long way from the ultra-casual Wii experience.
People that are that level of germaphobe tend to avoid people that are obviously the opposite way. It’s easier than explaining and getting them to do it your way (because there’s no meeting in the middle in these scenarios, it’s either clean enough, or it’s not)
Fun fact about wiping the headset down —- there’s a study at Yale to determine whether the Oculus mask can be sufficiently sanitized for safe use in pediatric cancer wings (a high bar) because of it’s form factor and immersive experience. Turns out it absolutely cannot. Sanitizing that mask is practically impossible.
VR just seems too intense. I legitimately don't want to immerse myself in a new world. I'm perfectly fine sitting in front of the TV for an hour and mashing buttons from a distance and walking away after I'm done.
In case you didn't know, the PSVR2 has a button on the front right side that switches the display to that of a camera coming out the front face of the unit so you can see around. It's a huge improvement over the previous generation. However, the resolution isn't great. While you certainly can see the controller, you wouldn't be able to read the "R2" imprint on it.
I think some people set their expectations like it's a $60 + battlepasses live service game instead of a $40 game that got a complete release and had no plans for future content.
If you're looking for a long-lived multiplayer game, probably not. If you're just excited to sit in an X-Wing cockpit and blow up some TIE fighters then it's really great in VR.
If you ever wanted to feel like you're flying in an X-Wing, it's pretty incredible. I play for a couple hours at a time with a basic joystick, a Lenovo Explorer headset, and an Nvidia 1070. I'd like a bit stronger of a graphics card but it's still very clear and sharp. All the control screens in the cockpit are quite large and easy to understand, not a lot of tiny numbers to squint at.
I think the issue is that Beat Saber has been the answer for the last four years and if you are not into rhythm games then... It's kind of a hard sell.
One issue is that Beat Saber is a waste of money if you don't get the custom songs/mods/etc. This is easy if you're playing on a PC, it's a one-click thing which has wink-wink tacit endorsement from the devs. It can be done on Oculus devices too, but it involves a convoluted jailbreak that regular users won't bother with, and without that Beat Saber runs out of appeal pretty quick.
Yeah I agree. The first-party maps have been getting better since Beat Games started hiring from the community mapmaker talent pool, but prior to that the stock maps felt kinda clunky and lacked flow.
Also while the variety in stock maps is better than its ever been, it still doesn’t hold a candle to the thousands of community maps.
> which has wink-wink tacit endorsement from the devs.
Is that true? A kinda competitor to Beat Saber is Synth Riders, and it's not wink-wink, there is official support for custom songs (and mods I think? I'm not sure). And when I get back to Beat Saber (because I like both Beat Saber and Synth Riders' game play), I feel like I'm owning an iPhone: a beautiful object but I can't actually do what I want with it
Feels more like Half Life Alyx would be the killer app for VR instead, but I'm not sure what the replayability is. Maybe with a VR gmod based on it or something?
I played Alyx some and it was neat, but I didn't get terribly far into it as it wasn't very compelling for me. Maybe because I've never played the other Half Life games?
I wouldn't call it a killer app simply because these days, FPS is all about multiplayer, and a FPS multiplayer in VR is just...meh? It doesn't really work.
Really, any sort of action-packed combat is just not going to work in VR. Jumping behind cover works fine outside VR because the medium acknowledges the limitation. But in VR, trying to jump behind cover doesn't work when you have to worry about being next to the edge of your play space. VR tries to immerse you, but that immersion is limited when you can't touch your surroundings. Being crouched behind cover and peeking over it to shoot feels unnatural and immersion-breaking when you can't lean against the wall you're hiding behind.
Even as a VR supporter and owner of a Valve Index (And the HTC Vive before that), I don't know what the killer app for VR would be. To be honest, I'm not sure I'd even EXPECT there to be a true single "killer app" for VR, but rather, a collection of apps that work incredibly well in VR, or don't work without VR. Beat Saber comes up a lot, and it's fun, but I wouldn't call it the "killer app". It's just an example of something that only works in VR.
Super Hot manages to pull off immersive combat in VR like to other game, it’s absolutely fantastic - but it only works for this particular type of game mechanic.
Beat Saber is the most successful successor to DDR. DDR worked without VR obviously, but requires an expensive and easy to break input device. Also, downstairs neighbors are less likely to complain when you are playing BeatSaber vs DDR.
From having friends try different things in VR, Beat Saber has been far and away the biggest hit with the most people relative to any other type of game or experience.
Out of ~20 people, I think there has only been one who liked something else better (the X-wing mission in SW:Battlefront).
> For me Beat Saber is that game. With mods and community-made songs/beatmaps which can be quite intense
Some people seemed hesitant to trust Meta due to it's Facebook account requirement (now removed), but for me their behaviour with Beat Saber is one reason that I'm kinda hesitant to trust them going forward.
e.g. Beat Saber has an update appear and all your mods stop functioning for a bit until verified to work with the new release. (From what I recall on the Quest version trying to mod results in some warning messages that stuff like this might result in your account getting banned, though I've never heard of them actually doing this to Beat Saber players). i.e. it's annoying and cumbersome to do, needs to be repeated for each update, and you're threatened with having your account banned (though I suspect that they'll continue to not follow through with those threats).
They'd also previously promised they were gonna add custom level support on Quest (e.g. https://twitter.com/BeatSaber/status/1182645623683727360) but despite tweaking stuff like this multiple times in 2019 that support never materialized.
Net result is that I'm mostly a Synth Riders player and tend to advise people purchasing a headset to avoid Beat Saber when looking for rhythm games.
This is why even though I'm using a Quest 2, I don't bother with the Quest-native Beat Saber and instead play the Windows/Steam version through PC link. Well that, and the Quest version will chug on some maps that are a bit too much for the Quest 2's midrange smartphone SoC to handle, while my PC tower doesn't even break a sweat.
On Windows there's several utilities to keep your Beat Saber version and mods frozen. The utility I use, BSManager[0], also symlinks your beatmaps folder so it's shared between versions, making it easy to switch between arbitrary versions at will.
With that setup I play one version for extended periods and only upgrade when custom maps start using frills from newer versions. I'm currently playing on 1.27.0 even though the current version of Beat Saber is up to 1.30.0.
I'd agree, but Beat Saber with mods and community songs bumps the whole package to around 2000 bucks worth of material for someone who doesn't own a windows PC.
That's bummer, and it was worse when GPU were costing an arm and a leg, so I'd totally understand people being hesitant to jump in.
1. Thrill of the Fight. Boxing standing up throwing fists and blocking with precision just doesn’t exist with controllers.
2. Blaston believe it or not. I really enjoyed hiding behind barriers dodging shots and leaping out to grab power ups.
3. The table tennis game. Swinging my arm like a real paddle was so realistic and the shots are just not reproducible with such precision.
4. Golf with the cut down iron shaft. Again, the fidelity of the shots just isn’t possible otherwise. You can get the same thing at some sports bars but it costs way more :)
It's fun but it's also an intense workout, especially if you crank up the difficulty level. I've purchased fitness games for the Quest, and while I enjoy them, they don't give the same intensity of workout that Thrill of the Fight does.
They are making a v2! You can follow progress and add suggestions on their subreddit. I’m hoping that the apple headset is a target device for them as I think it would be an excellent pairing.
To be honest the way this is being eschewed is stupid. It's holding back the tech. Oculus bans it from its store, Sidequest had it for a while but caved in due to stupid pressure from payment providers and their deal with oculus.
Yet it's a perfectly valid usecase and one where VR adds value. Despite current tech not making perfect use of what VR offers (no 6DOF for example). There are also motion-synced peripherals available to add an extra factor to it. It's a booming industry.
Meta are shooting themselves in the foot by ignoring it. There's a big urban myth that VHS won over betamax because Betamax limited the types of movies available for its system. While I believe the story is BS, it was a component of betamax's failure and there is undeniably a huge market for it.
I’m still waiting for a good immersive VR game that I can just play while sitting on a couch… all those games that require me to move my entire body all the time get exhausting really fast.
More games have sit down modes now. Walking Dead Saints and Sinners, as well as I Expect you to Die (fun puzzler) are two examples off the top of my head.
Into the Radius is that game I think.. It is like Stalker Shadows of Chernobyl in VR .. I just think lots of people don't know about it. But its the game
Hygiene is a problem. These things are not really comfortable, so put one on and you will inevitably start sweating into the facial interface. Safety is another issue; casually putting a headset on a member of the public led to a lot of injuries when it was tried in the past.
The bigger value that Apple offers is a reason to use it outside of video games. At least that’s the hope.
Based on the rumored specs though, I’m not sure if it’s good enough for work since Apple Reality’s PPD is at 33 when the minimum for text is about 40. Retina is about 60.
I agree but I understand why it's not happening. It takes money and experts to set up and maintain headsets in dedicated test areas, resetting them, maintaining hygiene since these touch your hair so hair products seep into the strap and people's faces sweat into the goggle frames, etc.
Apple will be able to do that easily in its own stores. But it's a lot harder for Meta to get Best Buy and other retailers to do it -- not only will they have to pay them a lot of money, but they just won't be able to ensure the quality.
Absolutely, this is definitely hard, especially for Meta as they don't have an existing network of stores. But it still seems like a big miss that they've seemingly not even tried to make this a thing.
Maybe they should have partnered retailers, maybe they should have pop-up demo spaces, maybe they should be giving these things away to places like libraries or other public venues. They could also define what a good sales experience looks like, provide disposable or reusable pieces for contact, and so on. There is all sorts they could be doing!
What is funny is that Meta did go through all the expense of setting this up with Best Buy for the Meta Quest Pro, and nobody even realized it was an option because they advertised it so poorly[1].
Ha, thanks -- that article is a perfect example of how bad the experience was at Best Buy, basically exactly what you would expect:
> I had to search the aisles until I found a lonely Quest display in an unloved back corner of the store...
> There was no special room or specific area set aside for the Quest demo at the store. Instead, the demo staffer awkwardly guided me to a small section of bare carpet...
> To make matters worse, about 15 minutes into my demo... interrupted by an abrupt "powering down" message when the headset ran out of charge. The demo staffer apologized, saying the unit "was at zero percent when I got it" and hadn't been plugged in for very long before our demo.
> The staffer running my demo told me that the Quest Pro is "more for business"... Unfortunately, without a linked computer or any linked 2D apps in the headset, I was only able to try out the (very unresponsive) stock web browser. And without a Bluetooth mouse or keyboard, scrolling and typing was not a natural experience.
I have no idea how you’d do this at scale, but you’re not wrong. I bought a Quest 1 around when they were released after trying a friend’s headset, I’d been on the fence before that, but afterwards I was totally sold.
People with kids, I'd guess. I bought a Quest 2 a couple years ago as a toy, as much for myself as for the kids, but they've dominated usage of it. Which is fine, because I didn't find anything that was a huge draw for me. But they fight over the damn thing every day, and use it almost as much as they use the Xbox.
It's strange because somehow, all the kids I know don't even know what the Quest is, but can rattle off all the upcoming titles for PS5 and XBox and Switch.
That’s because meta’s marketing campaigns are both terrible and targeted towards adults. Children are the largest demographic who just get it. They don’t need to be coaxed into trying the Quest 2 and its isolating form factor doesn’t intimidate children as it does most adults. They’re also the most consistently active user group. It reminds me of who the NES was most popular with
Man, that's interesting.. maybe Graybeard Palmer Luckey will finally get the recognition he deserves once those kids are all powerful adults ~30 years from now
I could see that. I don't think any of the neighbor kids knew anything about VR until they came over to visit and got to see our Quest. But they get hooked, and it's becoming a regular thing for them to ask to come over and play on the VR while our kids play on the Xbox instead. I guess it's a failure of marketing.
Strange as they probably barely know or care that FB is behind these products. I think they just gotta make it cooler. The Quest 2 is a bit like having a Wii strapped to your head. Not saying that it is easy to make it awesome but I do think awesome is what is needed.
I've taken to calling them "VR Helmets" after reading a page on rutracker passed through google translate. Sounds just stupid and wrong enough to entertain me.
It's more impressive than many people think, but in context:
- The PS5 sales have been notoriously hampered by supply constraints
- The XBox numbers are considered to be a major disappointment [1]
- The Quest continues to be crushed by the Nintendo Switch, which counted selling 18m unites in a year to be a disappointing result of supply constraints [2]
quest just doesn't have a game library offering that compares to the switch. plus the switch is way less of an investment to get into a gaming session. (and I say this as a quest owner) to play my vr headset, I have to clear the room, calibrate my play space and the games just arent there. there's nothing in it that matches super mario galaxy or legend of zelda. I usually jsut play a few rounds of beat saber and call it a day
This sounds exactly like my experience. And speaking as a person who owned the Quest and now Quest 2, both of which barely ever saw/seen the day of light as most times I never had them charged up when I decided to clear a place to play.
My Q2 (mostly the kids) doesn't appear to sleep when turned off. If I leave it unplugged for a couple days, I'll get a message on my phone that the battery is getting low. That is crazy to me. It should be able to be "off" indefinitely unless it is a Facebook APT.
That is a well known issue, same with it not remembering the play area so you have to recalibrate every single time. The Quest software is just an absolute buggy mess
That's a fair point, but I still feel like the sales pitch is lackluster. I only know 1 person with one of these (or who talks about it), despite being surrounded by high earning tech workers.
On the other hand when I think back to the Apple Watch launch, despite early models not selling that well compared to other Apple devices I remember plenty of friends having them.
My guess as to why there aren’t more in-store demo units is because of the need for space and staff onsite for a smooth demo. Unlike Apple, meta only has one storefront. The issue of cleanliness also calls for the need for onsite staff
The best they could do is subsidize the cost which they have done multiple times in the past. The lowest price for a Quest 2 that I’ve seen is $229
> The issue of cleanliness also calls for the need for onsite staff
I'm not sure why this is being downvoted.
As anyone who actually tried to demo a quest 2/pro knows, this was absolutely true, and still is true [1].
During covid, there were no in-store demos that I could find for the Pro or Quest 2, in my city of millions. One large chain advertised demos, but it was by appointment, and not one within 100 miles actually went through with it.
Now, with COVID restrictions gone, the locations are far between, and require assisted demos, because you can't really leave a VR headset tethered to a counter and not have something break.
The only reliable way to try was to buy it and return it. See all of the subreddits for how widespread this behavior was.
I think the real issue is that HL: Alyx is an extreme outlier in quality, in VR gaming, which isn't good.
There aren’t just that many exciting games for the platform.
There are a hand full of impressive titles, but they tend to be short and eventually get boring.
There are just so much more constraints to get an immersive experience right.
Not parent, but I mostly stick to FitXR and BeatSaber. I wanted to give supernatural a try, but the whole give up a credit card in the app when the headset already has one is too shady. I haven’t tried as many as I wanted to (like the bullet one) since I’m pretty happy with my routine.
I use it for warm up and cool down. I get my main cardio from FitXR, but if I’m just not feeling it beatsaber is easy to get into for some sweat at least.
I was able to get a Quest Pro on eBay for $800. Honestly, a Quest 2 is more than good enough to start. You’ll probably be able to pick up one used for less than $200 with the quest 3 announcement
If you want more immersion though, you probably want a wheel set for about $300 and a VR ready PC which ranges from $1200 - $2000 depending on sales and assuming you’re going for midrange. It is game changing though.
You'll want a somewhat decent GPU (doesn't need to be a 4090 by any stretch, iRacing is pretty good at running on most things).
When it comes to wheel and pedals you can go cheap and all in one, like the Logitech ones, or push the boat out a bit more like I did with Fanatec gear. Then there's crazy expensive stuff like Heusinkveld.
Anytime I look, the game library is sub par. I am a pretty regular console gamer and own different platforms. I would love to have one but anytime I look at to games, the list is years old and looks like like a dead ecosystem.
Also, if you want to play games on Steam, you need a PC capable of running them so if I am dumping a few thousand into a PC as well, would rather get the higher rated Steam headset for a few hundred more than the Meta.
Lastly, I don’t trust Facebook at all. I think the recent update was the first you didn’t need an account but some people I talk to like me are sketched out of a device staring at your face and expressions and wasn’t rated too high for privacy.
In December 2016 I tried a demo of an HTC Vive at a Microsoft Store (remember those?), and a few days later did a demo of an Oculus Rift at a Best Buy. The demo at the Microsoft Store was well set up - they had an associate handling the demo, an area set aside to do the demo, a speaker, and a display to show observers what was being shown in the VR set. The Best Buy demo was not as put together but was still OK.
Not sure why they seemed to be demoing it more then than now.
I think there's significant fear that the first time experience can be a little jarring and will just scare people away. That said, given the right support from a retailer, this could be a huge boon.
Quest 2 has been fun for me, but only because a handful of game. My kid played beatsaber for a while. I played paintball - a mini game inside recroom. And I still play a team sport called Echo VR which is shutting down in August.
We've tried a few others but nothing else really stood out. If there is a compelling sequel to Echo I hope I don't need to upgrade hardware and will just quit.
Agree. I have a Quest 2, and two friends have since purchased them after trying mine out. If potential customers could just demo the damn thing, many of them would convert into sales. There is very much a "wow factor" after trying it out, even if many users do eventually get bored.
Here in Barcelona there is a display area at the local FNAC in the city center where you could try them out. The display area is still there (including huge marketing wallpaper) but the attendants are gone so perhaps it didn't work out. There was always a queue while they were doing it though.
I think part of the problem was it was during the end of the pandemic and perhaps people were feeling bad about sharing a headset, though they were rubbing it down with alcohol in between.
But considering the area is still there: Perhaps they are not doing demos all day. I'm not there very often.
That’s what I did. It’s cool but to own it I’ll wait one or two generations. Maybe I’m picky as a PC gamer but it was kind of a blurry, ghosting, unfocused experience no matter what I did.
Did you use it with a PC with ebough power? what you’ve described sounds like you didn’t adjust the lens well enough to match your IPD. Unfortunately, you need to know your IPD or else you will get a terrible experience. The headset matters too. VR headsets from HTC are notorious for having really poor lenses that cause these issue
It sounds like the IPD adjustment or the lens doesn’t agree with your eyes. That was actually my very first experience with the HTC Vive pro. I would get headaches and nausea within 15 min. I was only able to fix it with hardware mods which had some trade offs. Unfortunately, I am not aware of hardware fixes for any other models
The good news is that the new generation of VR headsets starting with the quest pro and Apple reality should fix your problem. The quest 3 might fix it too if it has better IPD config. The downside is that they are a lot more expensive than the entry level quest 2 with prices from two years ago
The PSVR2 is pretty decent hardware, with great controllers, but a lackluster game library at the moment. It's bulkier than the Quest 3 but it also has good haptic feedback (in the headset too) so I guess that evens it out.
They did a shy little experiment with Nintendo Labo VR, it has also a little integration with Zelda Breath of the Wild and Mario Odyssey. I would expect Nintendo to be the last player into VR because 1) the association with Virtual Boy 2) Nintendo's long history of only jumping into a technology after it is well established.
The VirtualBoy was famously a disaster for Nintendo. They slashed its price from $180 to $100 within a year of release, and I got one brand new from Toys R' Us later in the year for $30. I actually still have it, though I no longer have the stand or the eye shield.
594 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 331 ms ] threadIt's extremely unlikely they would do this for the Quest ecosystem, but it would be the ultimate act of goodwill towards the community. Who knows though, I think they still officially support sideloading so technically anything is possible.
https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/16/22785469/meta-oculus-que...
https://www.uploadvr.com/quest-2-sold-almost-15-million-idc/
https://www.uploadvr.com/meta-sold-20-million-quests/
- q4 2022: 1.13M
- q3 2022: 471k
- https://arinsider.co/2023/05/01/how-many-vr-headsets-did-met...
-https://arinsider.co/2023/02/06/how-many-vr-headsets-did---m...
-https://arinsider.co/2022/10/31/how-many-vr-headsets-did-met...
I got an email from Apple about their event this month, and it said “Code New Worlds”, which in my mind seems to confirm they’re actually going ahead with an AR/VR device. Why?
Where is the market? How many of these things sell? What do people actually do with them?
I like the idea of an AR experience for enabling better work environments, even as a programmer, but my sense is that these technologies are very far in the future still. These will be toys for a while yet.
So what’s the motivation to get into this space? What is the opportunity that Apple sees, for example?
Part of me is optimistic that there’s some incredible application around the corner and it’ll be an exciting moment in the digital space. The other part of me feels like we’re really grasping here, and it’s just a toy (albeit a pretty cool one).
I had a feeling the rising generation is into this, though I would have been too. I suppose what I wonder is if something that appeases that enthusiasm and anticipation can actually be developed. But perhaps for kids and young adults it doesn’t need to be amazing — it just needs to be more immersive than a TV.
My son has a Quest 2 and never uses it, and we got it used in great condition for $250 CAD. That left me feeling like these things are failing to thrive, but it’s very anecdotal.
I think that is the endgame for AR. And I think it'll be the next major platform, replacing smartphones.
We've seen massive improvements over the years, but when talking about the size/weight of glasses it definitely seems like the next "frontier" for the battery challenges.
https://xreal.com
https://www.viture.com/
Same here, but I don't think the ecosystem/market is ready for serious work, it's all too brittle and the UX isn't nearly there yet. So I'm waiting.
> Where is the market? How many of these things sell? What do people actually do with them?
But I do own a HP Reverb G2, mainly for playing simulation games like flight simulators, and racing simulators. Once you get used to having a spatial understanding of the environment because of virtual reality, it's near impossible to go back to using traditional monitors against. The immersion is 100x better and your skill increases as well, just with a VR headset (in the genres I play).
But outside of simulation gaming, I have 0 use cases for VR, it's basically a fun toy at this time. But I think probably in the future there will be more use cases, but remains to be seen.
I'm kinda curious about the Apple VR headset - I expect it to be marketed more towards creative professional audience and less towards gamers. The few VR games I've tried have been unimpressive, but maybe there is some future for this tech in other areas?
But if its able to "watch" a bunch of say, mechanics, do their work and learn from that - then it will be able to put pertinent AR info on screen for people to see.
I think whomever does a good job on an AI backed AR system is going to own a chunk of that space for a good amount of profit to come.
It is absolutely amazing to just plug in a pair to your phone/tablet/computer laid down in bed and watch a film projected on to your ceiling. People are hooking them up to Steam Decks and they also say it's amazing just being able to play whatever game they want, wherever they want, on a massive screen. Going to be a game changer for anyone who spends a lot of time travelling or commuting on public transport but will definitely filter into the general office and home spaces as well. Will save both companies and consumers a substantial amount of money.
These glasses have been such a game changer for me that I now have ordered a Steam Deck and, depending on how well I get on with SteamOS and Linux, may end up selling my Macbook Pro which would be the first time I've not had an Apple computer since around 2008/9 (save for a few years when I was super poor and couldn't afford one).
Once I canceled my PRIME account, and then amazon charged me the $99 after I canceled.
I called them, demanded a refund AND a $25 inconvenience fee for me having to go through the process to get my refund... and they paid it!
vs - swiping back over to the gaming channel with your buddies and be like "Ill revive you in two seconds, bitch, GEESH - ill be there as soon as I am done with my status report on vegetable cuts Management is demanding!"
One thing that has been surprising is that I thought eye strain might be a problem but I've not really had any discomfort and I've actually gone back to using light mode in the day time and dark mode at night time which is something I thought I'd never do having been using dark mode for everything for years.
Back in the mid 1980s I started my gaming journey... I would sit and play games for hours and my 2400 baud modem helped me dominate in Populous, got me connected to BBSs to play games, got me on PCLink (the precursor to AOL), and got me grounded for a month for running up a $926 long distance phone bill for calling into BBSs in San Jose from Tahoe...
My dad yelled at me and told me "I was wasting my life sitting in front of the computer all day"
Years later after I made a pretty cool career in computers, including doing game testing at intel, designing datacenters for NAMCO and Lucas etc... my dad apologized for saying that to me...
So its funny that your kid is getting his cardio in VR! We are living in the future!
Eating dirt actually helps build the gut-biome. and it helps kids stay healthy through fortifying the immune system (this is why all the 'hand-sanitizers' are actually worse for human health)
But I was lucky - I grew up within 500 feet of Lake Tahoe, and would just walk out the door, go up Ward Creeek to the backside of Alpine Meadows, setup booby traps for hikers (trip wires... it was the 1980s..)
But I coerced my dad to buy a machine for his "business" and then I took over the machine and played tons of games - but would also be 'kicked out of the house until dinner' at times and just explore the forest, swim in the lake, or steal boats.
Again, this was like 1986 and I stole a bunch of boats because my dad was a big general contractor who built and cared for a crap-load of lake front properties with boat-houses, and I knew where my dads clients were all the time, so I could steal their boats for joy rides... and for some of the houses I had the keys.
It was a common thing in Tahoe in the 1980s to break into vacation homes and throw "keggers"
Some people think stereoscopic depth in visual mediums is more entertaining or interesting than flat images. The same way some people preferred color television over black and white when it became available.
Adding a z-axis (depth) is a higher resolution, higher bandwidth signal.
The games are very novel but something like tears of the kingdom is far more engaging and gratifying for me. Maybe that’s because I grew up with flat games and it’s where my brain is most comfortable.
So, I don’t really watch tv or movies (maybe once every two months at most), I don’t game much unless with my kids (doesn’t work in VR/AR), and otherwise I’m not sure what kind of individual activities I could get up to where it would be useful in its current state. Or even a moderately more advanced state perhaps. A big snag for me is that you can’t really do it with people.
The games are crappy right now, I agree.
I think few die-hard VR or AR enthusiasts would argue that the content and use cases have a long way to go. Most games are either more akin to going to a paintball course or playing DDR than they are similar to sitting down to play a classic video game. Which is a fun experience but clearly isn't gaming.
And the blockbuster 2D game ports to VR are few and far between, and it's not fun playing Skyrim for the 50th time just because now it's stereo 3D.
For me, I've found that stereo video recorded on high end stereoscopic 180 degree camera setups is really compelling. For example video recorded using ZCam K2 Pro. The only studios really using that tech extensively currently are for adult video. For me the best of those experiences feels like the future, the next big medium. If it were possible to combine 6 degrees of freedom with stereo video, I am convinced it'd be immediately successful, but I still think 3 degree of freedom stereo video that's possible today is far superior to flat video.
I can envision future Hollywood or Netflix productions where you feel like you're watching from an invisible drone floating right there in the scene, with full depth and a sense of real scale. It will take new artistic direction, things like panning the camera become nausea-inducing for some viewers but incredibly presence-inducing for others (if moved slowly enough and with a gimbal). Cuts feel different, too many fast cuts too quickly are much more difficult to visually process in stereo than on a laptop screen. But on the other hand, some editing effects like a dissolve are incredibly trippy and a new type of experience in VR. Seeing double vision where both scenes have depth is really interesting. Anyway, it's closer to watching a play in a theater or being at Sleep No More than watching a TV show.
The bottleneck right now is content and production costs, that's about it.
Yeah it wasn’t life changing by any means, but pretty nice in a way. Like if I was single, I might actually skip the TV and just do that? I’m not certain. I liked that it forced me to be focused on it. I’ve got the ADHD pretty bad apparently, so sitting and watching a movie is kind of like trying to put a cat in a box. My brain insists on doing ANYTHING ELSE and grabs into virtually any other activity or thought or whatever, but in a VR headset or a theatre somehow that isn’t the case.
The idea of watching movies or shows as though you were actually there is spectacular. I think we’ll get there too, but I expect it’s a while away from where we are. AI will likely play a huge role in stitching multiple camera angles together and filling in the gaps, and that technology arrived a lot sooner than I expected, so… Maybe the integration of production and presentation technologies will follow suit. Frankly, I’m old enough that things simply move faster than I’m used to now. I have to reassess my priors for how quickly things can happen.
What you’re saying about stereo video sounds totally compelling. And not surprising it’s popular in the adult industry. Sort of a side note I guess, but when I see what’s possible with AI and imagine what’s around the corner with these technologies… Good luck to all the 20 year olds with raging hormones and a little disposable income. If porn addiction is a thing now, just wait. Maybe we’re what, 10 years away from generating personal porn with a personally designed digital partner?
I digress though. We’ll get there when we get there and deal with it when we do. I’m glad my boys might miss the worst of it in their most hormonal years.
If I'm going to do a full body experience I for the most part just prefer real life activities with the ability to feel and physically touch things. The one big exception I had was Windlands.
Thanks for the Windlands recommendation, I will have to check it out.
IMO AR is the truly useful application of the technology, but the hardware needs to be basically goggles that can stay on your head all day and we're nowhere near that. VR is primarily useful for videogames and porn. Lots of money in gaming and porn, but not widely applicable like a HUD visible at all times.
Imagine you wanted to build a geodesic greenhouse and your vision could be populated with the pieces you need next, where they go, hardware you need, where parts were last seen, etc. My brain would benefit so much from being kept on track like that.
I think for Apple, it's just another new personal computing platform. Just like personal media devices, phones, tablets, TVs, smartwatches etc. They may not necessarily see a big opportunity. They simply cannot afford to ignore a new computing platform.
"The eyes are the window to the soul."
edit: My mistake, I misread the PR, quest 3 does not have eye tracking. Boo.
The metaverse is nonsense, and the Quest Pro flopped. But apparently the main Quest devices are pretty compelling toys.
I wonder if this is a high point, or if they’ll maintain the momentum. Also interested to see if they can ever really build out + monetize their game library .
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_game_co...
Quest 2 had an extremely strong first few months. I'd be interested in seeing how spread out the sales have been
The Quest game achievements leaderboard is semi-public and, doing some rough backwards math, it looks like some fairly high profile recent-ish releases (eg: Moss 2) sold atrociously.
Mostly though we use it for various workout apps.
Boxing games are great too. I literally need to pause and rest when I’m playing Thrill of the Fight, but it never feels like a “workout,” just like I’m doing a thing and it’s physically hard.
Heard good things about Fit XR, but I think it’s a subscription, which sucks.
Do you just avoid punching directly forward, or do you pull your punches, or what?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadowboxing
https://www.google.com/search?q=reddit+quest+boxing+shoulder...
I’m hoping Apple comes through with better packaged with apple fitness.
If the Quest 3 can do every thing the 2 can do with better optics and controls, I'm 100% sold on it. They didn't mention linking it to the computer, but I have to assume that'll still be a thing.
My son uses the quest 2 daily to play Blade & Sorcery.
Not being locked down by cables is basically a requirement to me now.. I was in from the very first DK1 but once I got a Quest2 the cable free reigns supreme, even though I'm giving up a little bit of tracking compromise (cameras on device vs the steam/vive room tracking).
I am excited for the Quest 3, more than anything from Apple. I spent hundreds of hours with the Quest 2. Most people didn't spend that much time with it, but there is an audience for this and I am one of them.
I think that is the reason why I don't feel anything towards VR headsets. While I am totally into technology, I'm just not interested in games.
Actually, I am not interested in entertainment at all.
I wonder what makes people different, so that some are very much into entertainment and some are not?
But I wouldn't call Hacker News part of the entertainment industry.
I guess I'm one step closer to understand how the phrase "play-to-earn" was ever born without being stopped by an interlocuter.
This makes no sense to me. You don’t enjoy music? Movies? Books? Dance? Sports? Plays? Museums of any kind?
Have you always been that way? When I was very young I could entertain myself for hours in my backyard looking at shadows and insects.
Books? Loooooove books. But they are usually about the real world. Science, biographies, theories ... I wouldn't call them "entertainment".
Never been much into dancing.
Doing sport is super awesome. But is that really counted as "entertainment"? Or do you mean watching sports? I find watching sports pretty boring.
Plays - whats that?
Museums? Hell yeah! But I never heard someone call museums part of the entertainment industry.
it's like a movie but with real people in real time. you may have heard about something called 'theater'
But I like other things more. Like watching people in a cafe. Gives you more opportunity to join the action :)
The google definition of entertainment: the action of providing or being provided with amusement or enjoyment.
So reading, museums, and whatever you do for enjoyment is still entertainment.
I used to think this, turns out I was watching bad movies. Use time as a filter and watch old movies by directors that are still talked about (Kubrick, Tarkovsky, etc)
Well, there are some good fitness-oriented VR games around. Beat Saber is rad, that's the main one people know about, and there's a bunch of other ones too.
There are a lot of good VR sport apps. I am part of a VR cricket league which I play in every morning before breakfast. It's awesome!
I get a lot of fulfillment in life from fairly mundane things: work, socializing, exercise, reading about whatever niche I am interested in the moment. I don't think it's abnormal either.
1: https://www.dmm.com/digital/vr/-/howto/oculusquest/
For PCVR users, there's DeoVR.
Download the videos from PornHub/xvideos/etc., then play in DeoVR.
Only issue is that only a small subset of content is streamable for free.
Pretending it doesn't exist doesn't help their metaverse ambitions nor their bottom line.
The urban legend is that Betamax eschewing NSFW content lead to their demise in favour of VHS and while that is not entirely true there is certainly some worth to that story.
I was really into it ~10 years ago when I was a shut in nerd, back then they were announcing the revolution, fast forward 10 years and literally nothing changed, it's still a gimmick for 99.9% of people.
I remember a long time ago Silicon Graphics used to build Reality Centers. Their best sales pitch was some Oil company was building an Oil rig and using VR they could find - from blueprints - some valves were installed too high and that saved them a lot of money.
I worked for a company that had a software to scan train tunnels for inspection. It was cheaper and quicker than sending technicians there, but the interface -built on PowerBI was a pain. VR could be much better...
... but you need an easy way to build that App.
(btw if someone knows about it, just drop me message)
People have been playing with it - but it's got a ways to go still. I would love working in VR with many, many floating windows all around, instead of contained within the 2 viewing panes in front of me IRL.
In real life I do not have issues with motion sickness or claustrophobia. Both of these hit me when wearing the headset, particularly the claustrophobia. The nausea was mild but definite.
Even so it was an extraordinary experience, and I may be more excited about the potential of AR than before.
Or a collection of retro games could display in mixed reality as if it were real boxed games on a shelf along your real wall.
Or it could be integrated with a smart home control system so you could just point at a light to turn it on.
...And then mothballing it, because they couldn't figure out how to make mountains of money off it.
> I could see Microsoft making this.
The first quoted part is actually similar to part of the old Microsoft BOB concept. Indeed some Later version of Packard Bell Navigator (which was basically a Bob clone) literally had general programs presented as box software sitting on a shelf.
I'd be surprised if Apple doesn't lean into that angle with their new headset. Pixel density on phones was a problem before the iPhone 4, and they sold the heck out of the retina display. If Apple can make small text readable in VR they'll enable a whole world of new VR applications.
I understand what you're saying, and I agree, but it's like saying a party is boring because there are no books.
The whole "meta" concept is that you're socializing in VR and it feels as if you're talking to your friend directly. I'm sure the resolution has improved in the new model, but even still, super sharp text isn't as important as you'd think to make the fundamental social use cases work
Lots of people don’t grok this but the endgame for VR/AR is replacing every monitor in every office and home. Probably ditto TVs when every person owns a headset.
It’s going to be a massive game-changer (and a rapid transition) when VR gets good enough to work in.
The question is just whether this is a 5-year timeline or 50. Mark is obviously betting he can get traction in the 5-10 year timeframe.
But I think once the VR headsets get miniaturized a bit more (give it a generation or three) people will laugh when they think about the current models, just like we do about cell phones vs. the first satellite phones that were bigger than your head. At some point these will be as light as a pair of plastic sunglasses or goggles.
There is nothing forcing you to use VR for something like a call, where you don’t currently need a monitor. But I think we’ll see a tipping point where the face tracking gets across the canny valley and people stop saying “you need to meet someone in person to really connect”. At that point VR calls substitute for in-person meetings, not VCs on a screen.
Consider the move to remote work; if we can get a virtual meeting room to feel like whiteboarding in person, including gaze and expression detection, then you could bounce between meeting room with your distributed team and perfect immersive dev setup without leaving your seat.
For the median worker using a monitor I think the requirements to beat monitors are just good enough resolution for spreadsheets/email (we may be there next gen?), comfort (currently the crux), and a decent story on input passthrough (your physical keyboard rendered in VR? Something else? Seems tractable, we just haven’t standardized any options.)
* Headsets will have good enough resolution and be generally comfortable enough to replace monitors for office space.
* There is a solution to the pass through input problem that is acceptable for the average office worker. I don't think there is a solution of the passthrough problem that beats a keyboard/mouse, or even a laptop in a cafe. I think it's more likely the average office worker will accept a worse form of text input given the right conditions.
* It's possible to project a 3d image of myself while wearing a headset that doesn't include the headset and passes the uncanny valley. The uncanny valley is wide, and even AAA video games haven't cleared it yet.
For 2, there are demos already; Immersed (and maybe Meta natively?) has a mode where it recognizes your keyboard (like 2 specific models, prototype) and positions the keyboard in VR. Not good enough for hunt and peck but if you touchtype this works. The Quest 3 seems to have better passthrough so again, this generation will provide a good steer. This one seems pretty easy though.
For 3, if we can do deepfakes we can do 3d photorealistic avatars. Can’t be more than 5-10 years away to render a face in real-time. Unreal already has some crazy tech with MetaHuman that would work here already I suspect, given enough compute.
It's very, very hard to see how VR/AR would be a good replacement for monitors in general, even if it was perfect.
There are maybe some information-radiator type use cases. Probably things like big screens at live events / shows.
But for individual users, I think anything a monitor can do, an endgame AR display can do, and more flexibly.
Why would you (personally, I’m interested in your viewpoint) want a monitor if you had a perfect AR display that you could dismiss into thin air when you didn’t need it, or conjure up a 6-screen dev environment when you did need it? You could put your keyboard and mouse down at any comfortable chair and be as productive as your current dev setup with your optimal monitor count.
(My claim was even stronger than yours, I don’t think they need to be perfect to be better, but since you volunteered it, let’s explore that extreme.)
I’m assuming “perfect” is something completely unnoticeable like lightweight glasses or contacts BTW, and I think there is a bunch of good stuff before perfect.
If that's the case, and if your perception of your real environment is in no way hindered, then I agree -- monitors wouldn't have an advantage.
Short of that, though, I would strongly prefer monitors over VR.
> you can call up arbitrary number of windows anywhere in your visual field?
This is not something I personally would want to do. I want my computer/user interface to be constrained to a specific part of my visual field. Even if it's all in VR, that's how I would use it anyway.
For my part, I think the notion of putting down giant expensive phyiscal rectangles that are geolocked to one physical position just to use computers is going to seem like a quaint artefact of history in a few years.
This aspect is way to early to be touted as something worth 500$ to a regular user.
https://simulavr.com/
I wish they would focus more on software rather than making us all wait for their super expensive hardware. And yeah I know it's a whole PC you're buying. But I don't really buy expensive PCs in a form factor that has yet to prove its usability.
Dont get distracted by labels. Human talent gets expressed in many ways.
The important skill is to filter the crap.
Anyway, I didn't care much for VR games and I wouldn't be surprised if mainstream use of VR is not games. Meetings are way better than Zoom/Meet whatever, watching movies on planes and such is way better than on a phone or tablet, with better resolution working would be viable and passthrough would enable things like redesigning your home in a way that's simply not possible with any other screen. There's tons of great non-gaming use cases for VR that's significantly better than any other platform.
As a side note, I miss the Oculus branding. Meta Quest never sounds right to my ears.
I wonder if "Quest, by Meta" would work better in branding.
Things I would love to know is:
- How does it compare to the Pico 4? - Screen specs - FOV specs - Pass-through, is it better than the Pico 4's?
That seems like a massive oversight by Meta to not work on supporting Android apps. Since it's actually similar to Android under the hood I believe.
The Facebook account thing ended in August 2022. https://about.fb.com/news/2022/07/meta-accounts-and-horizon-...
Thankfully it was not used for anything other than chatting with people in certain communities and I have other Facebook accounts that are also pseudonyms, but Facebook can and will sometimes require verification of an account.
That’s not the case for Meta accounts which are a completely separate thing. I agree it’s confusing.
It's worse than the Mojang->Microsoft account mess, and that's saying something.
As far as VR goes in general, HN is extremely crotchety. I love VR. I love games in VR. I love sculpting in VR. I love hanging in VR. But what I'm really excited about, as someone with a tendency to change seating locations constantly throughout the day, is working in VR. I want a multi-monitor setup in bed. I want one on the couch. I want one on an airplane, in an Uber, etc.
I was hopeful with the Oculus Pro, but I've heard that the resolution just isn't there, for programming tasks it feels like you're reading text on a 720p CRT.
I have high hopes for this space, and am very excited to hear more about this, as well as what Apple announces. What I don't have high hopes for are the responses to my VR enthusiasm. I understand that you would never strap something Facebook makes to your head, or that you just don't like the one or two gimmick games you tried, that's okay.
I’m waiting for a headset that I can use during travel in place of an external monitor, but I don’t think this is it yet.
I’m actually excited for the MR use cases - I love playing board games online+phone with friends. Would be super cool if I could see them/the board in a more real way.
Economy of scale is definitely a thing here.
You aren't going to get iPhone/Samsung Galaxy-level scale effects out of that kind of volume, but it's enough that they might be able to break even within 50% over public BOM estimates
And it even makes it weirder to me that I never felt seeing or hearing much about those headsets. Are they all sleeping in some boxes put away?
> We continue to expect Reality Labs operating losses to increase year-over-year in 2023.
https://investor.fb.com/investor-news/press-release-details/...
It's a whole other thing whether this will actually work out for them, because it depends on there being a captive market for the profitable half of the business model (the "metaverse" content).
Tangential, but they're an exception because the only games worth a damn on their consoles are always just a few first-party releases and they keep it that way intentionally. Nintendo is a bully with few friends.
This is sort of historical revisionism. PCs and laptops were historically expensive, limited use devices and they've become relatively more inexpensive over time due to a huge increase in supply.
And yet... trying these out just doesn't seem to be a thing anywhere. I can walk into any tech store and see a non-working unit in a glass case, or if I'm lucky pick up a slightly sticky broken controller, but I can't try one out for 5 minutes to see if I like it.
I'd bet that Apple's headset will be announced with a store experience to go along with it. I'm sure it'll be by appointment only to begin with as they'll have many more people wanting to try it than who will want to buy, but I'm sure there will be a way to experience them before buying. The Apple Watch was effectively a new product category where people needed a new level of persuasion, and Apple had fitting appointments that were very well done, and Apple Stores have always been known for being primarily focused on using the products, even letting you try AirPods, so I can't imagine these will be stuck in a glass case.
When a sufficiently good experience is available for VR, which isn't usable without VR, then VR headsets will sell.
I've tried all the VR apps and games, and they all underwhelm.
HL:Alyx got close to the "only in VR" sort of mechanics, but change 2-3 big set pieces, and it could very much be done on a 2D screen.
I've tested VR sporadically ever since the first Oculus Rift came out, and I just get a headache after 15 minutes and that kind of has ruined it for me forever I guess as I now associate VR with motion sickness, bad ergonomics etc. That's very personal of course, I know there are others who can run around in VR fine for a whole day without these reactions.
Anyway... the game has to be outrageously good for me at least to use a VR version instead of just sitting on my chair staring on the screen with a cup of tea next to me.
Edit: and the Quest 2 will be reduced to $300 in a couple days from now
I will buy the Quest 3 as soon as it is released, but just for my stack of fitness games that are in my daily routine.
That usually means your IPD isn’t setup properly on your headset. It’s more common on HTC headsets or any others that have really fresnel lenses
VR needs some less intense and some more fun, low-stress gaming experiences to draw in the casuals like me.
You’re in luck because those types of titles form the majority of VR titles today. The more common complaint is the lack of AAA content like Alyx which is due to the lack of users
But I feel like there's a lot more for people like you. Moss, Beat Saber, Red Matter etc.
The industry is surprisingly conservative in terms of content/genre outside of indie studios. It’s basically Hollywood.
The only game my wife ever played was The Sims and was completely baffled when she learned there were no other games similar to it.
And yet they’ll spend $200M making yet another military FPS
I’ll concede animal crossing is a good exception to the rule, but this only serves to prove our original point that there’s room for AAA-grade games in this market segment.
What are these big studios even doing? Why didn't their customer research tell them that there's demand for games like Stardew Valley?
They have a Non-VR version now so people without headsets can get in on the fun, but it's just not the same.
Except you can zoom in to stick your face super close-up to the action to see it going down.
When you zoom out, you are, indeed, in someone's basement. When it's not your turn you can enjoy all the geeky easter eggs sitting around the basement.
It sounds cool like this, but I can assure you it's cooler than that. I first played it non-VR and enjoyed the game, and then played a game the second time in VR and literally said aloud, "Holy Shit!".
I can look at a PS5 game and decide to buy a PS5, because I know what controller based consoles are like, I know the types of games, I know what I like. I can't do any of that with a VR game because I don't know what sort of headset I like, how it feels, what's important in a VR game that isn't in others and vice-versa.
Currently I do this with a Quest 2 attached to a Vive Deluxe Audio headstrap with 3D printed adapters and a counterweight on the back to take pressure off my face (a setup dubbed "frankenquest"). It works well enough but there's a lot of room for improvement.
It's a long way from the ultra-casual Wii experience.
You wipe it down? Is that normal?
I'm old; I ate dirt, swam in lakes and drank from a garden hose! My immune system is superman.
Yeah, Star Wars Squadrons was what sold me a VR headset. No regrets.
If you're looking for a long-lived multiplayer game, probably not. If you're just excited to sit in an X-Wing cockpit and blow up some TIE fighters then it's really great in VR.
Also while the variety in stock maps is better than its ever been, it still doesn’t hold a candle to the thousands of community maps.
You're exaggerating.
Is that true? A kinda competitor to Beat Saber is Synth Riders, and it's not wink-wink, there is official support for custom songs (and mods I think? I'm not sure). And when I get back to Beat Saber (because I like both Beat Saber and Synth Riders' game play), I feel like I'm owning an iPhone: a beautiful object but I can't actually do what I want with it
I wouldn't call it a killer app simply because these days, FPS is all about multiplayer, and a FPS multiplayer in VR is just...meh? It doesn't really work.
Really, any sort of action-packed combat is just not going to work in VR. Jumping behind cover works fine outside VR because the medium acknowledges the limitation. But in VR, trying to jump behind cover doesn't work when you have to worry about being next to the edge of your play space. VR tries to immerse you, but that immersion is limited when you can't touch your surroundings. Being crouched behind cover and peeking over it to shoot feels unnatural and immersion-breaking when you can't lean against the wall you're hiding behind.
Even as a VR supporter and owner of a Valve Index (And the HTC Vive before that), I don't know what the killer app for VR would be. To be honest, I'm not sure I'd even EXPECT there to be a true single "killer app" for VR, but rather, a collection of apps that work incredibly well in VR, or don't work without VR. Beat Saber comes up a lot, and it's fun, but I wouldn't call it the "killer app". It's just an example of something that only works in VR.
HOT
SUPER
HOT
SUPER
HOT
Yeah, SUPER HOT VR was amazing. It really makes you feel like you're in a kick-ass slow-mo action scene.
Out of ~20 people, I think there has only been one who liked something else better (the X-wing mission in SW:Battlefront).
Some people seemed hesitant to trust Meta due to it's Facebook account requirement (now removed), but for me their behaviour with Beat Saber is one reason that I'm kinda hesitant to trust them going forward.
e.g. Beat Saber has an update appear and all your mods stop functioning for a bit until verified to work with the new release. (From what I recall on the Quest version trying to mod results in some warning messages that stuff like this might result in your account getting banned, though I've never heard of them actually doing this to Beat Saber players). i.e. it's annoying and cumbersome to do, needs to be repeated for each update, and you're threatened with having your account banned (though I suspect that they'll continue to not follow through with those threats).
They'd also previously promised they were gonna add custom level support on Quest (e.g. https://twitter.com/BeatSaber/status/1182645623683727360) but despite tweaking stuff like this multiple times in 2019 that support never materialized.
Net result is that I'm mostly a Synth Riders player and tend to advise people purchasing a headset to avoid Beat Saber when looking for rhythm games.
(Synth Riders, Audio Trip, Boombox all allow custom songs out of the box and Pistol Whip finally has that scheduled for release this month - https://twitter.com/PistolWhipVR/status/1664037754550771717)
On Windows there's several utilities to keep your Beat Saber version and mods frozen. The utility I use, BSManager[0], also symlinks your beatmaps folder so it's shared between versions, making it easy to switch between arbitrary versions at will.
With that setup I play one version for extended periods and only upgrade when custom maps start using frills from newer versions. I'm currently playing on 1.27.0 even though the current version of Beat Saber is up to 1.30.0.
[0]: https://github.com/Zagrios/bs-manager
That's bummer, and it was worse when GPU were costing an arm and a leg, so I'd totally understand people being hesitant to jump in.
1. Thrill of the Fight. Boxing standing up throwing fists and blocking with precision just doesn’t exist with controllers.
2. Blaston believe it or not. I really enjoyed hiding behind barriers dodging shots and leaping out to grab power ups.
3. The table tennis game. Swinging my arm like a real paddle was so realistic and the shots are just not reproducible with such precision.
4. Golf with the cut down iron shaft. Again, the fidelity of the shots just isn’t possible otherwise. You can get the same thing at some sports bars but it costs way more :)
It's fun but it's also an intense workout, especially if you crank up the difficulty level. I've purchased fitness games for the Quest, and while I enjoy them, they don't give the same intensity of workout that Thrill of the Fight does.
I hope they'll make a v2 of this excellent game.
Yet it's a perfectly valid usecase and one where VR adds value. Despite current tech not making perfect use of what VR offers (no 6DOF for example). There are also motion-synced peripherals available to add an extra factor to it. It's a booming industry.
Meta are shooting themselves in the foot by ignoring it. There's a big urban myth that VHS won over betamax because Betamax limited the types of movies available for its system. While I believe the story is BS, it was a component of betamax's failure and there is undeniably a huge market for it.
Yet even so, of course you can still use a monitor, and of course that's good enough.
It's hard to imagine what a vr exclusive that couldn't be enjoyable on a monitor or TV might actually look like.
It wasn't the most glorious solution for their allergy problem IMO. But it does have auxiliary benefits.
Based on the rumored specs though, I’m not sure if it’s good enough for work since Apple Reality’s PPD is at 33 when the minimum for text is about 40. Retina is about 60.
Apple will be able to do that easily in its own stores. But it's a lot harder for Meta to get Best Buy and other retailers to do it -- not only will they have to pay them a lot of money, but they just won't be able to ensure the quality.
Maybe they should have partnered retailers, maybe they should have pop-up demo spaces, maybe they should be giving these things away to places like libraries or other public venues. They could also define what a good sales experience looks like, provide disposable or reusable pieces for contact, and so on. There is all sorts they could be doing!
However with physical retail generally on the decline, who would be the partner now? Best Buy isn't doing that great.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2022/10/meta-quest-pro-hands-...
> I had to search the aisles until I found a lonely Quest display in an unloved back corner of the store...
> There was no special room or specific area set aside for the Quest demo at the store. Instead, the demo staffer awkwardly guided me to a small section of bare carpet...
> To make matters worse, about 15 minutes into my demo... interrupted by an abrupt "powering down" message when the headset ran out of charge. The demo staffer apologized, saying the unit "was at zero percent when I got it" and hadn't been plugged in for very long before our demo.
> The staffer running my demo told me that the Quest Pro is "more for business"... Unfortunately, without a linked computer or any linked 2D apps in the headset, I was only able to try out the (very unresponsive) stock web browser. And without a Bluetooth mouse or keyboard, scrolling and typing was not a natural experience.
That's multiple generations of headsets, but given they iterate quicker than consoles, that still seems a somewhat fair comparison.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_game_cons...
- The PS5 sales have been notoriously hampered by supply constraints
- The XBox numbers are considered to be a major disappointment [1]
- The Quest continues to be crushed by the Nintendo Switch, which counted selling 18m unites in a year to be a disappointing result of supply constraints [2]
[1] https://kotaku.com/xbox-series-x-s-sales-microsoft-next-gen-...
[2] https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/09/nintendo-full-year-earnings-...
On the other hand when I think back to the Apple Watch launch, despite early models not selling that well compared to other Apple devices I remember plenty of friends having them.
The best they could do is subsidize the cost which they have done multiple times in the past. The lowest price for a Quest 2 that I’ve seen is $229
I'm not sure why this is being downvoted.
As anyone who actually tried to demo a quest 2/pro knows, this was absolutely true, and still is true [1].
During covid, there were no in-store demos that I could find for the Pro or Quest 2, in my city of millions. One large chain advertised demos, but it was by appointment, and not one within 100 miles actually went through with it.
Now, with COVID restrictions gone, the locations are far between, and require assisted demos, because you can't really leave a VR headset tethered to a counter and not have something break.
The only reliable way to try was to buy it and return it. See all of the subreddits for how widespread this behavior was.
I think the real issue is that HL: Alyx is an extreme outlier in quality, in VR gaming, which isn't good.
There are just so much more constraints to get an immersive experience right.
For untethered, I tend to stick to fitness apps, which is a surprisingly fun way of staying in shape, and beats the boredom of the gym.
I tried Supernatural for a few months. It’s good if you want an instructor led workout and it looks great, but I could not justify the monthly sub
Other great workout apps are synth riders, punch fit, ninja legends, creed, until you fall, pistol whip, gorilla tag, and there’s more.
You’d be surprised to see what makes you sweat
If you want more immersion though, you probably want a wheel set for about $300 and a VR ready PC which ranges from $1200 - $2000 depending on sales and assuming you’re going for midrange. It is game changing though.
When it comes to wheel and pedals you can go cheap and all in one, like the Logitech ones, or push the boat out a bit more like I did with Fanatec gear. Then there's crazy expensive stuff like Heusinkveld.
Also, if you want to play games on Steam, you need a PC capable of running them so if I am dumping a few thousand into a PC as well, would rather get the higher rated Steam headset for a few hundred more than the Meta.
Lastly, I don’t trust Facebook at all. I think the recent update was the first you didn’t need an account but some people I talk to like me are sketched out of a device staring at your face and expressions and wasn’t rated too high for privacy.
Not sure why they seemed to be demoing it more then than now.
We've tried a few others but nothing else really stood out. If there is a compelling sequel to Echo I hope I don't need to upgrade hardware and will just quit.
If the experience of using them was actually marketable, it would be more of a thing.
I think part of the problem was it was during the end of the pandemic and perhaps people were feeling bad about sharing a headset, though they were rubbing it down with alcohol in between.
But considering the area is still there: Perhaps they are not doing demos all day. I'm not there very often.
In fact, that's a good way of actually telling Meta that you are not happy with it. Not buying doesn't tell them much.
The good news is that the new generation of VR headsets starting with the quest pro and Apple reality should fix your problem. The quest 3 might fix it too if it has better IPD config. The downside is that they are a lot more expensive than the entry level quest 2 with prices from two years ago
Do they still require a FB account?
The sweat is going to be disgusting.
No Apple Store in asia let’s you try AirPods…
then again, they tried something like this already. but it never took off.
virtual boy (iirc?) I was still a kid... the technology has come a long way, they should be already working on doing something in this space... again.
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/03/nintendos-first-vr-pr...