vr and the future of vidya gaems

[valiums]

mfw the thing I can't afford is now owned by people who make products I don't use



[spoiler]there's no way someone else hasn't already said it somewhere[spoiler]Oculus Rekt[/spoiler][/spoiler]

[rtil]

if the community pulls support I doubt it'll end well for the consumer version (whenever it comes out).

people who are actually developing for the rift don't care about the acquisition. most people who knee-jerk cancelled their dev kits are impatient individuals who don't actually need a rift and can't wait for the consumer version.

hypothetically even nobody bought a DK2 they'd still have plenty of cash on hand to develop it.

at the end of the day this is very good news and the inevitable outcome of VR going mainstream. if not facebook, some other big bad corporation would have acquired the technology.

best possible outcome: oculus rift retail version is cheaper and has better parts than the team could have originally hoped for.

worst possible outcome: facebook shareholders force their hand and change the vision of what the retail version of the product should do, and it comes out trying to be two different things and fails at both.

[Bamyasi]

I can sum up the general reaction to the acquisition in two words:
[spoiler]Populace Miffed[/spoiler]

[valiums]

[spoiler]Populace Miffed[/spoiler]

This is a crime.

[Bamyasi]

You might even say the company experienced a
[spoiler]Paradigm Shift.[/spoiler]

[naturally]

i'm not too concerned.

[rtil]

[regret intensifies]

[Sinitron]

I was like "maybe", now I'm all "nah". Zuckerberg is an asshole tech faggot and everyone knows it already, but Virtual Reality is a gimmick which will never become completely mainstream, even though it will more than likely be a staple of sexually confused furries jerking off to inflation-vore in Second Life. Maybe I'll give it another chance ten years down the line when it doesn't suck so much and isn't a huge brick stuck on your forehead with a giant strap. Until then, it's probably cheaper and cooler to just make a cockpit or something. Less chance of knocking over your refreshments that way, need to stay hydrated while FIGHTING.

[rtil]

Virtual Reality is a gimmick which will never become completely mainstream

i sincerely doubt this

i think, at the very least, augmented reality will become a part of most people's lives at some point in the future

[naturally]

Virtual Reality is a gimmick which will never become completely mainstream

this discredits your whole argument.

also i don't mean to come off as pretentious, although i know i will, but i've done more than enough research to know that a lot of the speculation in this thread, notably after that facebook news, is silly and uneducated.

the facebook acquisition is only going to make the consumer version even more affordable and impressive than it was already going to be, and gives them way more financial backing in general to do a lot of things they only dreamed of before. i myself was a bit skeptical as to whether vr would become mainstream very soon, although i never doubted it would, but the facebook buyout completely changed my view on that. zuckerberg has already stated that they don't plan to make money off the hardware anytime soon. when they do end up bringing the social side to it it will most likely be around 4 or 5 years down the road when it becomes incredibly affordable, and if at that point they manage to mess something up it doesn't matter even a little bit. there will be an alternative, but this pushes the first wave of vr forward at a pace that wasn't even realistic before.

you can start being worried if john carmack leaves oculus, but michael abrash just joined them and the last time they worked together on something, as far as i know, was quake in 1994. that means my entire life span has pretty much been them hoping for this moment where they could work on 'the metaverse' together. if anyone can make the best vr experience in the world, it will be this team, and as soon as the consumer version comes out all this speculation will disappear.

people don't really seem to understand the implications of vr, which is perfectly reasonable because i don't expect everyone i know to have investigated into it, but i don't think i have any doubts in saying: it's a pretty big deal. people don't make the kind of commitment these two companies just did for no reason. i don't know anyone who doesn't have a facebook page, (or used to) and i couldn't be happier that facebook is not a hardware company, like apple, microsoft, or google because that would have been horrendous. they have their own projects to attend to, and relating to what rtil said, microsoft just recently spent $150 million on ar patents, so take from that what you will.

my brother and i are going 50/50 on the dk2 now, so that's something i'm looking forward to until the day this launches.

[rtil]

thinking about hypotheticals now, a microsoft or apple acquisition would both be equally horrible in their own ways. i think if microsoft acquired them, we'd probably never see the rift again as it would get lost in red tape and mismanaged executive powergrabs - that or it would somehow be a product tied into the xbox one. if apple got their hands on it we'd get a yearly release of a slightly modified Rift that would be way overpriced. and they'd change the peripherals on us every year so we couldn't use the same cables. hell i bet they'd develop some kind of proprietary plug-in just for the Rift.

[naturally]

i agree with those, especially the microsoft one as it would just limit their reach immensely. i think that if google bought them and somehow oculus didn't work out for a day, they'd just trash it because they have room for endless disposable projects.

also to amplify my point, this has been my background for a few weeks and it's actually from the front desk at oculus hq before any of this happened.

[Sinitron]

Virtual Reality is a gimmick which will never become completely mainstream

this discredits your whole argument.

Really now?

VR is escapism, like most other forms of entertainment media, but to be functional it needs to be strapped on top of pre-existing hardware/software, or additional resources have to be pooled in to make something from the ground up for it to be actually good.

It's like 3D cinemas, it's annoying to watch, more expensive, and is usually just half-assed. Is the technology cool? Sure, but it's redundant and doesn't add anything.

OR has up until now been riding on the mobile technology industry, "feeding off the scraps" or however that guy put it, and it's true. It isn't a tool, it isn't convenient, it's a luxury on top of other luxuries. Can it float? Sure it can, just like how people who produce dragon dildos can stay in business just fine, by appealing to a niché which most established companies would stay away from.

Anyway, here's the problem as I see it: video games are expensive to develop, and expensive to stay up to date with (hardware, online requirements, additional software licensing, subscription fees etc...), which is why almost everything with a large budget is multi-platform, to reach as broad a market as possible. But as far as I'm concerned, this has really only led to a decline in entertainment quality, the only fun game to come out this year is probably Goat Simulator or some other dumb shit, which was essentially a joke.

So sure, let's say the Oculus Rift comes out, and it doesn't require a facebook account, and maybe it's actually a pretty decent piece of tech at an affordable price. So far, we've seen a few tech demos and things cobbled together to show the potential, right? Maybe there will be one or two big titles with built-in support for it, and some funny little indie things that let you, i don't know, jerk off your friends in minecraft or whatever. Afterwards? You won't see shit. It's not going to be compatible with any of the major consoles, which will have their own sub-par VR sets more than likely, it isn't compatible with mobile gaming ("guys i can play angry birds in VR on my iphone this is the best ever!"), it most certainly isn't going to be worthwhile for the sake of movies, and TV series won't spit in any more money to let a couple nerds with dumb headgear get FULLY IMMERSED in whatever crap show is going to be big next.

What that leaves is a tiny demographic of people who can throw money at dumb shit. Off the top of my head, the OR in its current form will probably work best for military aircraft simulators without the need to build a full cockpit, where graphics aren't necessarily the most important thing so whoever is developing it can focus more on making it work with the appropriate systems rather than full-blown expenditure on making it look fancy... both for the simulators itself, and the peripherals.

Other than that? First-person shooters, maybe? Some kind of sex simulator? What the fuck else are you supposed to use it for? It's pointless for 2D games, and doesn't work with most genres of 3D games, you can't invite friends over to share it either making it anti-social in an already anti-social culture.

For VR to work, it has to be part of the process from the ground up, and right now I seriously doubt that's feasible. Like I said, it will take decades before you can expect to get both reasonable creative output supporting it as well as technology that is reliable and compact enough to not make you look like an idiot with a turd taped to your eyeballs. By that point, we might as well have holographic projectors - that's something I could get behind.

i sincerely doubt this

i think, at the very least, augmented reality will become a part of most people's lives at some point in the future

Google Glass has a much greater chance of success than the Oculus Rift, because it's essentially a natural evolution from current handheld devices, and has a wide range of potentially useful applications, like causing cancer in Glassholes worldwide. Lawsuits re: "Glasscancer" are an inevitability, calling it now.

AR =/= VR

Keep in mind 3D-printing ties into AR quite nicely too, suddenly you can play World of Warcraft in your back yard as the computer spits out your loot for the day, while also 3D-printing your hot pockets, as nanomachines break down atmospheric waste and organic matter down and restructures it to seperate the different components and uses it to stock up the 3D-printer. That's sci-fi as fuck, but its more likely to be a thing than VR simply because of the wide range of uses.

[BluPhoenix]

can't wait for zuckerberg to take the helm as substantial antagonist in SAO season 2

[rtil]

i sincerely doubt this

i think, at the very least, augmented reality will become a part of most people's lives at some point in the future

Google Glass has a much greater chance of success than the Oculus Rift, because it's essentially a natural evolution from current handheld devices, and has a wide range of potentially useful applications, like causing cancer in Glassholes worldwide. Lawsuits re: "Glasscancer" are an inevitability, calling it now.

AR =/= VR

Keep in mind 3D-printing ties into AR quite nicely too, suddenly you can play World of Warcraft in your back yard as the computer spits out your loot for the day, while also 3D-printing your hot pockets, as nanomachines break down atmospheric waste and organic matter down and restructures it to seperate the different components and uses it to stock up the 3D-printer. That's sci-fi as fuck, but its more likely to be a thing than VR simply because of the wide range of uses.

i know AR isn't VR, but they are in the same "metaverse", as Carmack likes to describe it. also, VR is kind of already a "thing" - the Rift and VR devices are huge press magnets, and development kits are in extremely high demand. When it comes out, the devices are going to sell well, and many popular games are already implementing support for it.

once a technology becomes feasible and economical, you can't really stop it from happening. the technology for VR is there - it's going to be a thing, if it isn't already.

can't wait for zuckerberg to take the helm as substantial antagonist in SAO season 2

if it's s2, it will be gender-bent zuckerberg

[naturally]

VR is escapism, like most other forms of entertainment media, but to be functional it needs to be strapped on top of pre-existing hardware/software, or additional resources have to be pooled in to make something from the ground up for it to be actually good.

sure

It's like 3D cinemas

no

it's annoying to watch, more expensive, and is usually just half-assed. Is the technology cool? Sure, but it's redundant and doesn't add anything.

this is all just simply untrue. you might have had a case here about a decade ago but like most people you seem to be under the assumption that technology is still operating at an intuitively linear rate.

OR has up until now been riding on the mobile technology industry, "feeding off the scraps" or however that guy put it, and it's true. It isn't a tool, it isn't convenient, it's a luxury on top of other luxuries. Can it float? Sure it can, just like how people who produce dragon dildos can stay in business just fine, by appealing to a niché which most established companies would stay away from.

i'd like to point out that literally everything is a niche before it becomes popular enough. the internet was an idea, cell phones were an idea, and people were equally as skeptical towards both. vr has been a gimmick and a concept since the early 90s, based on various ideas by surrounding companies, and for a very long time it was a topic of interest among people who had a lot of money to spend on things that aren't realistically feasible to sell as a consumer product. nintendo tried this regardless and as everyone knows it turned out terribly. the difference now is that, well, it is very achievable to produce a quality sense of presence for, especially with facebook's support, for an incredibly affordable price. i obviously can not predict the price with complete certainty but i expect it to be under or exactly $300 at the time of release.

instead of me having to explain all the reasons this is achievable now to you, i'll just let michael abrash do it.

What VR Could, Should, and Almost Certainly Will Be within Two Years

Anyway, here's the problem as I see it: video games are expensive to develop, and expensive to stay up to date with (hardware, online requirements, additional software licensing, subscription fees etc...), which is why almost everything with a large budget is multi-platform, to reach as broad a market as possible. But as far as I'm concerned, this has really only led to a decline in entertainment quality, the only fun game to come out this year is probably Goat Simulator or some other dumb shit, which was essentially a joke.

So sure, let's say the Oculus Rift comes out, and it doesn't require a facebook account, and maybe it's actually a pretty decent piece of tech at an affordable price. So far, we've seen a few tech demos and things cobbled together to show the potential, right? Maybe there will be one or two big titles with built-in support for it, and some funny little indie things that let you, i don't know, jerk off your friends in minecraft or whatever. Afterwards? You won't see shit.

ok

It's not going to be compatible with any of the major consoles, which will have their own sub-par VR sets more than likely, it isn't compatible with mobile gaming ("guys i can play angry birds in VR on my iphone this is the best ever!"), it most certainly isn't going to be worthwhile for the sake of movies, and TV series won't spit in any more money to let a couple nerds with dumb headgear get FULLY IMMERSED in whatever crap show is going to be big next.

all of these things have already happened (including vr for mobile devices) so i don't know what to say here except that this is just more baseless speculation

What that leaves is a tiny demographic of people who can throw money at dumb shit. Off the top of my head, the OR in its current form will probably work best for military aircraft simulators without the need to build a full cockpit, where graphics aren't necessarily the most important thing so whoever is developing it can focus more on making it work with the appropriate systems rather than full-blown expenditure on making it look fancy... both for the simulators itself, and the peripherals.

Other than that? First-person shooters, maybe? Some kind of sex simulator? What the fuck else are you supposed to use it for? It's pointless for 2D games, and doesn't work with most genres of 3D games, you can't invite friends over to share it either making it anti-social in an already anti-social culture.

the medium is inherently limitless. oculus has stated several times that there are already several triple A games in the making by big game companies that have yet to be announced because they're waiting on the consumer launch.

did it ever even cross your mind that this kind of technology has infinite implications for things other than entertainment even? education? military? medicine? psychology?

what about the social impact of being able to feel you're in the same room with a person, and by using this device it might create a stronger sense of familiarity? wouldn't the same idea help people with social anxiety? what about someone getting over their fear of heights by being exposed to a situation where they really feel like they're going to fall? what about the burn victim that had help dealing with her pain by being put into a virtual environment that was surrounded by ice that comforted and distracted her? what about the ability to experience the implications of a historical first hand, rather than reading about it?

did you not even consider that your view point on this might be a little two-dimensional?

For VR to work, it has to be part of the process from the ground up, and right now I seriously doubt that's feasible. Like I said, it will take decades before you can expect to get both reasonable creative output supporting it as well as technology that is reliable and compact enough to not make you look like an idiot with a turd taped to your eyeballs. By that point, we might as well have holographic projectors - that's something I could get behind.

the entire oculus team has stressed how much of a difference it makes that your game is built from the ground up for vr themselves multiple times. there are more than a few projects being started recently that are throwing in oculus support to jump on the bandwagon of this, and are only going to find themselves getting very negative feedback based on scale, latency issues, or otherwise. this is only an issue for people who are going to half-ass a port and the developers alone will suffer from those consequences.

the consumer version will not look anything like a brick on your face. it will not take decades for any of this to happen. it's already happened.

Keep in mind 3D-printing ties into AR quite nicely too, suddenly you can play World of Warcraft in your back yard as the computer spits out your loot for the day, while also 3D-printing your hot pockets, as nanomachines break down atmospheric waste and organic matter down and restructures it to seperate the different components and uses it to stock up the 3D-printer. That's sci-fi as fuck, but its more likely to be a thing than VR simply because of the wide range of uses.

for a bit of this post i thought you were genuinely trying to start a debate with some foundation

anyway let me just give an example: based on the recent rates of technology, we experienced about 20 years of technology in 14, from 2000 to 2014. so that means in 7 years now, in 2021, that will be another 20 years of technology. then 3.5, 1.75, 0.875, and so on. in one decade from now i doubt you will have the same view that any of this could take decades.

when measured by earlier rates in progress, from 2000-2100 we will experience about 20,000 years worth of technology. even the idea of having holograms you mentioned probably won't be that big of a deal compared to what we'll see eventually.

[Kött]

How the fuck do you measure a rate of technological progress?

I think the ironic thing about our current day and age is that we are still lagging way behind the predictions of nearly every single science fiction novel/film from the last century despite our rapid advances (not that it really matters, though).

[naturally]

i'm basing that off of ray kurzweil's forecasts which he cites michael kanellos for. not that i completely agree with all of his futurist theories. it's not like recent exponential rates in technology are unheard of and obviously the numbers i'm using are exemplary, we're just supposed to be at around the knee-curve which is the main reason i mention it because this kind of technology will, from my view, be notable.

it makes a lot of sense for us to lag behind for a bit of time until some real sort of expansion is noticeable, and from that point on we couldn't really speculate anyway because of the shift. i have no idea if things are going to get scifi or how fast, i just assume it will be faster than most people intuitively assume.

[rtil]

How the fuck do you measure a rate of technological progress?

by the rate at which something becomes obsolete, easily reproducible or affordable. look at computer hardware. 20 years ago a computer with a 2gb hard drive, 8mb of ram and a 4mb video card would run you about $5,000. capacities slowly began to double, and what you can build with that money today would have been incomprehensible by most people back then. these days, when you buy a top of the line video card or processor, it becomes obsolete in about 8 months or less.

I think the ironic thing about our current day and age is that we are still lagging way behind the predictions of nearly every single science fiction novel/film from the last century despite our rapid advances (not that it really matters, though).

if it doesn't matter, there is no irony in it

[Bamyasi]

people don't really seem to understand the implications of vr, which is perfectly reasonable because i don't expect everyone i know to have investigated into it, but i don't think i have any doubts in saying: it's a pretty big deal.

You can chalk me up as someone who does. It just seems like an incredibly slippery slope to me. I mean what's next, neural implants that simulate pain, pleasure, etc.? Intravenous injections for the purpose of sustaining the user? I've read Gibson and Stephenson, and I can't really see how their books support VR being a positive influence, especially not enough for that Michael Abrash guy to cop the portmanteau.

Plus I mean just look at it:

It's a motherfuckin' fashion disaster.

anyway let me just give an example: based on the recent rates of technology, we experienced about 20 years of technology in 14, from 2000 to 2014. so that means in 7 years now, in 2021, that will be another 20 years of technology. then 3.5, 1.75, 0.875, and so on. in one decade from now i doubt you will have the same view that any of this could take decades.

i.e. Moore's law, Singularity, etc. etc. ̅e̅t̅c̅.