>Mfw the initial high pricepoint killed all of these new technologies at the time
>Video game consoles
>attaching a screen to your face is VR
That's like calling headphones audio VR.
Also, fresh meme for you guys.
All of these products had a clear purpose to mainstream consumers.
VR doesn't. "More immersion". That's pretty much it. The price alone doesn't matter - it just makes the situation worse. The real problem is that the device seems pointless.
Name a single game that would be IMPOSSIBLE to *play* without VR. I'm not talking about games that would be less immersive or whatever without VR, I'm talking literally unplayable without VR.
Name just one.
I forgot current displays have sophisticated head and motion tracking, allowing you to feel like you're actually inside the world in front of you.
Classic case of "haven't tried VR but is ready to criticize it at any opportunity"
>I forgot current displays have sophisticated head and motion tracking, allowing you to feel like you're actually inside the world in front of you.
If I mount a camera on top of a regular computer monitor it'll track my head movement too.
Stop trying to sugar coat what is nothing more than a more advanced and immersive type of display.
>Classic case of "haven't tried VR but is ready to criticize it at any opportunity"
Classic accusation from a VR shill.
>You're freely admitting to not having tried it
This never happened.
I tried Oculus at CES. The technology is nice, but the business model is and always will be untenable.
I just don't buy into this collective delusion from VR shills and hacks that this will catch on with normies significantly more than 3D television.
>If you'd actually experienced VR you'd never compare it to something like mounting a camera on top of a computer monitor
I never compared it. All I said was that head tracking would theoretically be possible if you mounted a camera on a monitor because head tracking alone is not that amazing.
>Maybe next time Rajeet.
I don't think it will fail, but unless they learn how to make compact self contained units, Sony will be the market leader. Whether or not that will be a bad thing is something we can't tell right now, but it will absolutely happen if VR gains any sort of momentum.
VR will never be more than an enthusiast technology.
More than that, it's niche within the enthusiast community.
It's a disruptive experience that separates you from your environment. This is a mall-kiosk experience. And beyond that, it has no mechanical benefit (and in many cases, brings distraction/detriment) with most genres. It's all "experience and immersion" at a high price point, with cumbersome tech.
I'm not shitting on anyone who's excited. This can bring a lot of interesting new shit, a new type of experience for some genres, and might even end up with a few great, exclusive games. But, if you think VR is the next thing, the next major platform or standard or even something that's going to maintain a major presence in the game market long term, I think that sounds pretty foolish.
>u dont kno if u haven't paid $600, wait three months, and have a $1200 PC to play it
Well not in a crowded city street or something, but I live in a suburb so if we're the only two people on the street and can see each other for five minutes before we pass then it's weird to not make eye contact when we do.
I know you're trolling, but all of those technologies you listed greatly improved upon the experience of the one before it. You could CLEARLY see the advantages of using one.
It's like if people had flat screen televisions back in 2002 and Samsung released a handheld television for like 1.2k. People would say "Why would I buy that when I can just use a regular TV? Too rich for my blood."
More importantly, those technologies can be used by literally anybody. Even the fucking Apple Watch can be used by literally anybody, no strings attached. The Oculus Rift requires you to have a goddamn GTX 970 or higher. That's a fraction of a percent of all people who own PCs.
If you're passing someone on a sidewalk or something it's just awkward to pretend not to see them and look straight forward (assuming it's not a busy area of course, in which case that's fine). So I usually end up spilling my spaghetti, not sure whether to look at them or not, and one of us will usually end up either saying Hi as we pass and/or nodding.
>along with talking to people you don't know
Yep. Well, it depends. It's common in the South, and I think it's somewhat common in places like New York or California where there are a lot of weird people (thus conditioning the population to not give a fuck about anything). You don't typically give people your life story or anything, but small talk and the like is fine.
In the sense that they aren't a brand new form of entertainment, yes.
Also, all of those are more or less standalone, whereas VR is an accessory requiring other more expensive equipment.
this is how black people smile at you when you pass them on the street
>I see you weren't around for the "DVDs look no different" phase, kid.
DVDs had other benefits besides better picture quality.
-No more fragile tapes that get jammed.
-No more fragile tape reading heads that deteriorate more every time you run a tape.
-And most importantly, absolutely no disadvantages compared to VHS - it wasn't a whole new paradigm anyway, it was just upgrading to the latest format - VHS was literally from the fucking 70s, people knew it was time for an upgrade.
the extra dimension of films over books its equal to VR over screens. Maybe not today, but that tech is able to remove the difference between play a game and be in one. I assume you have used the VR right?
I have, but you didn't answer my question.
How did I make the implication you claim I did? I likened books to a kindle in reference to that claim that vr is a totally new type of entertainment. I never likened it to film, and all you are doing is showing that you made a crazy mental leap all on your own.
>VR will never be more than an enthusiast technology.
To be fair, isn't that what people have said about every change in technology since the beginning of time? It's hard not to look back on History and go "Pft, of course I know better than them" but people keep making the same mistakes.
The argument that it's DoA because of the requirements is silly too. Plasmas were expensive as fuck (10K+) on release before quickly dropping in price, becoming incredibly popular, and later being replaced by LED / LCD TVs. I got a ~52" Plasma a few months ago for $300. We're seeing the same thing with 4K right now. My point is that the power-equivalent of these requirements will quickly become cheap as even more powerful technology arrives.
Technologies fail because of lack of consumer interest, and with all the competition in the VR Market already that shouldn't be a concern. PSVR will presumably be cheaper than the OR, so that alone will keep the market afloat while technology improves. And you can bet your ass that even if VR as we now know it never takes off, other applications of the technology will eventually spring up. This is something people have been dreaming of for decades, if not centuries.
So I'm going to sit back and HOPE it takes off, but I'm not going to make a claim one way or another like a retard.
My freind got one of the oculus dev kits like ~2 years ago
He even had the razor hydra things that were lik wii motes
Everyone but him thought it was a dumb gimmick
I still stand by that decision
He could fucking cheat in TF2 with the hydra though by dragging them above his head and crouching he could shoot while covered
>It's a valid thing to say. Why would you criticize an experience you haven't tried?
because you are assuming that they haven't tried it without evidence, it's basically an ad hominium
not to mention you haven't actually addressed his point
or the very valid fact that if people need to try VR in order to understand the benefit then the product doesn't have much of a commercial future
also every single fucking VR shill says it,. it's like a goddamn clockwork
When do you expect VR headsets to advance to the point that they will contain all the necessary computing power onboard to run then future games at expected graphical settings of that then future time?
The dumbest shit? Releasing a product that requires a PC powerful enough to run games at 1440p/90fps on TWO screens months before new GPU's come out that would make that a lot easier and probably more affordable for people.
VR is just consuming video games with a depth and immersion variance. Were the 3ds and virtual boy new forms of entertainment, or were they just video games?
Are 3d movies or e books new forms of entertainment, or just variance on an old one?
It's odd that people only criticize the gaming aspects of it. VR has so many uses in medicine, business and even military applications, that's why so many businesses were tripping over themselves to fund it. It may not be the most popular gaming peripheral, but it can't "fail."
I've never tried VR, I'm not retarded enough to think that it's going to die instantly because it starts at a high price point, but I do think it's just a fad and will probably be treated more like the wiimote than the analog stick in the future.
So in ten years they will sell VR headsets with significantly better pc hardware than the configurations being recommended for VR today, and they will be small enough to fit on your head?
It's what I asked you before. I asked you when VR would have onboard hardware to run all their games natively at industry standard graphics and you claim this will be ten years.
I asked you again because I don't think you understand what you said and what that would mean to have that sort of hardware in a device strapped to your head.
Name one movie that's impossible to watch without 3d.
Name one song that's impossible to listen to without CD
Name one movie that's impossible tow atch on dvd
Name one movie that's impossible to watch wtihout color
Name one movie that's impossible to watch without a TV
See my point?
Just cause it's an improvement and not something completely new doesn't mean it'll fail.
Oculus rift allready changes almost everything when it comes to flightsims and likes.
>that's why so many businesses were tripping over themselves to fund it. It may not be the most popular gaming peripheral, but it can't "fail."
businesses were tripping over themselves to fund 3D television too
most people buy things without having tried them first
did you play all of your consoles at least once before buying it?
did you play on a PC with your graphic card before buying that graphic card?
for people to buy something they need to see the clear benefit BEFORE they try it
most people don't actually trust reviews, the research has proven it time and time again
Oh no fuck I realized I smile to people like that.
>It's odd that people only criticize the gaming aspects of it.
Gee, I wonder why people would focus on the gaming aspects of a device that was originally marketed primarily for usage with videogames, developed in part by a renowned game programmer, with help from a popular game development studio, on the videogame board of 4chan instead of discussing the business applications of said device.
What a mystery.
Smart phones in ten years won't be as powerful as PCs now that are required for solid VR at 2015 visual standards. How will they compress hardware that will run vr games properly at 2025 visual standards to fit in a headset?
I'm not the same guy as the one you were talking to before, but it just seemed like an obvious "yes, technology will be better in 10 years" sort of deal, which is why I asked.
But explain what you mean, I guess.
>Oculus rift allready changes almost everything when it comes to flightsims
Haha no. When you descend in a virtual VR airplane can you actually feel the g-forces on your body?
Enjoy your glorified monitor.
Immersion makes no since to me, at all.
I play shit because its fun not for whatever reason someone could provide for being immersed.
Like shit it is obviously not fucking real, I couldnt even do this when I was 7 like I mentioned about playing pretend, all the other kids were fucking stupid.
Doesnt stop at vidya, movies, books, whatever I just dont understand these people.
It changes basically nothing when it comes to flight sims, it simply means you don't need a full cockpit sim around you and can instead more comfortably rely upon what is in the program.
>businesses were tripping over themselves to fund 3D television too
3DTV is solely used for entertainment, while VR can be appropriated for other purposes. The businesses funding it probably don't care if you use it as a virtual waifu sim or Scam Citizen box, gaming isn't its only function.
Also, your comparison is silly because 3DTV had a severe lack of content. TV shows would only occasionally have 3D airings, usually for special events. Meanwhile Occulus already has a ton of content and it's not even officially out yet. There's really no comparison between the two.
>Haha no. When you descend in a virtual VR airplane can you actually feel the g-forces on your body?
Well of course you don't actually feel G-Force (that's some future shit), but I remember someone saying that they felt g-force when they were testing a VR Rollercoaster sim. I can't say for sure since I haven't used VR, but then, neither can you.
Don't even feel bad. I guess some black guy thought white people only smile at nogs like that, but if it's someone you're just passing on the street, that kind of slightly curt formality smile is all you need to give.
You do know that Moore's Law is absolutely dead right?
By 2020 we will have reached the limits to how thin silicon can be fabbed without breaking the laws of physics.
Unless a newer material is ready by then, there will be stagnation in improving computer processing speeds and/or miniaturizing.
how? arent it usually the autist that get wrapped in fiction?
My best friends kid is super autistic and has pretended to be a velociraptor for like the last 5 years for 80% of the time
Maybe not, smartphones and tablets exist purely for the portability but since you only really need a room for VR it doesn't really need to be standalone.
I predict AR goggles will be standalone while VR will always be a peripheral, wires are not a problem since wireless VR is perfectly possible even today.
>VR will never be more than an enthusiast technology.
>To be fair, isn't that what people have said about every change in technology since the beginning of time?
>appeal to history
>It changes basically nothing when it comes to flight sims, it simply means you don't need a full cockpit sim around you and can instead more comfortably rely upon what is in the program.
>you can now do without building an 20,000 dollar aircraft cocpit around you
>instead you need this 600 dollar face mounted dual monitor and sensor system to get similiar effect, an effect much greater and way more immersive than Track IR
>not changing everything
Oh come on, that's just like the people who say PC/Xbone/PS4/WiiU is shit because they have no good games, it's a lazy criticism. VR already has a fuckload more content than 3D ever did, anyone could find something to use it for.
>Oculus rift allready changes almost everything when it comes to flightsims and likes.
Not at all.
TrackIR already does great for flight sims, arguably even better because one can still look at your flight plan
No I enjoy it because I find it good/interesting.
When Im playing DMC I dont think Im a fucking demon hunter whos diet consist of pizza
When I watch jurassic park I dont feel fear for the TV dinosaurs
When I read the hobbit Im not afraid the ogres are going to eat me
none of this has any impact on me in the real world
>phone, any works really.
>DSLR/any camera with a decent lens
>cd players. Until music stops being sold on a CD, CD players and readers will never fall out of fashion.
>high definition media players
For general dr beats by mr dre/apple/foxnews user, the laymen, a smartphone can fill all these requirements, hell even do what a computer does - social media.
But if you are even moderately serious in any of these, you need a real tool.
You can find hundreds of quotes by famous scientists and engineers saying technology or science will stagnate, and they're always wrong. It's never a good idea to bet against technological progress.
I have tried the development kit playing some exploration based pseudo games, as I like to call it. I'm not impressed in the least though I've heard about a guy managing to get it to work with HL2. I'm not giving a damn at least until I get to try that.
not him, but you can't say standalone cd players aren't already out of fashion.
Very very few people use them outside of cars, which is the holdout that's really keeping these things around, and with more new cars adding mp3 player connectivity that's going to only keep decreasing.
Hell the cd section at my best buy is 10% of what it was 12 years ago.
You know it hasn't been demonstrated to work any faster than a traditional computer right?
>argument from history
True but will it be ready in time? And will it be able to work faster?
Actually, it kinda did, it was nothing but glorified calculator with office type of programs on it.
Only until price was dropped to sane levels did computers start to be relevant in every day use.
as VR is consumer electronic from the get go, this is a huge problem for VR.
You feel like you are placed in the world because of the combination of technologies, not just viewing the world on a monitor. If you use a roller coaster demo on Oculus for example you get butterflies.
Except I didnt, my friend had an oculus and the hydra and had all sorts of little things like that for it
Not once did the fact I had a monitor attatched to my face get past me.
He's not insulting you here, he's using the word in a literal sense. If you really don't understand, there's a good chance you're autistic (assuming it's not a semantic issue).
I don't have to say anything because your assertion was based on faulty logic (If some people in the past said X about Y and X about Y was wrong, then a person in the present saying X about Z means that they are wrong too).
It's not a matter of "pretending", when you sense something, even if you know it's fake, your body and mind will react accordingly.
Your body gearing up to adrenaline mode because of jump scares is a very primitive form of this for example.
Jump scares havent phased me since I was like 13
And the whole point is that I know its fake and have no reaction to it because it is fake.
Ive dealt with real scary shit like getting tossed into an alligator infested lake and getting shot at by niggers while I didnt have my gun on me.
>VR will never be more than an enthusiast technology.
Possibly, but I doubt it won't eventually see mainstream use once it reaches a certain leve. Though the same technology will be used for AR, which will guaranteed never remain an enthusiast technology.
They'll be very niche though, like cassette tapes. Unlike vinyl, which can be superior to digital sometimes because of compression/loudness issues, CD's don't really offer any advantage to digital.
Wow you sound like a real stone-cold badass anon. Remind me not to mess with you.
Lack of emotion and reduced reactions to events is a classic symptom of depression, your body's reflexive responses get dulled - even basic stuff like sweating.
Also people that had previous traumatic experiences are far more sensitive to jump scares so your "real scary shit" isn't really relevant.
You probably can't understand with your unstoppable force of will and penis that has been inside many ladies.
If I say that an Apple will fall down because it has always fallen down before, I would also technically be wrong. But if I say that I think the apple will fall down based on previous experience and knowledge, it's a completely fair assumption. One that will generally hold true due to the Law of Gravity.
So while I can't truthfully say that a way to get past the future limitations of Transistors WILL be discovered, it's an incredibly reasonable conclusion for someone to reach. You even make that clear in your post when you say the technology will stagnate IF no newer material is ready by then, and since we already know about a few different incredibly promising potential technologies on the horizon, I'll say again that it's a fair stance to take.
My post (>>323565805) makes this clear too.
>So I'm going to sit back and HOPE it takes off, but I'm not going to make a claim one way or another like a retard.
I think you misread my post. I wasn't calling tapes digital. i was saying CDs had no advantage over things like phones or streaming. Vinyl does, objectively in certain cases. Cds will become extremely niche as cassette tapes have become.
I tried the Gear VR at Best Buy, and for a hundred dollars, that's worth it if only to watch 360 Youtube videos.
I think the lower priced VR like Gear and Cardboard will take off, because even normies are okay paying that much for novelties.
>the same technology will be used for AR
What, the same technology they're using right nor for VR? There is literally zero chance of that happening. You can't see shit through lenses like those.
I think most of the hype for VR will die down as soon as people actually use one outside of trade shows and so can mess around with them for more than 15 minutes.
Most of the Oculus development kit units are already collecting dust in people's homes.
No because the two are not comparable at all, speed of sound is just a matter of getting faster while speed of light is a physical impossibility.
Using new materials for transistors is not physically impossible and actually a very doable thing that many companies are working.
>i was saying CDs had no advantage over things like phones or streaming
But they have, phones and streaming are not storage devices while CD is.
>Vinyl does, objectively in certain cases
No, all vinyl does is introduces distortion to recording, it's not lossless or great quality, it's analog storage device, with is always shit quality when it comes to audio.
My brothers got one for Christmas and it came with the Nintendoland disc. Asymmetrical multiplayer was interesting, but it didn't seem like Nintendo had a killer idea of what to do with the gamepad and were throwing ideas at the wall to see what might stick. Even the first-party releases after launch became 'regular non-waggle games you can play on a tablet' or 'regular non-waggle games you can see the map/inventory for on your tablet' - forcing a square peg into a round hole. The games people cite for the Wii U even now - Mario Kart, Smash, Bayonetta 2, Wonderful 101 - are games that use the gamepad itself as an afterthought at best. And to me that's the same scenario 3D and virtual reality are stuck in. Nice additions or afterthoughts but they don't change the market, like the DVD or the NES or the Wii did.
VR will not really catch on because normies don't want to have something strapped to their face while playing. How to reach your drink and snacks? You are blind to everything but the game.
I'm not saying VR is bad. In fact it's pretty darn wild. But I have no faith. It's for hardcore gamers only and casuals is where the money is.
I've already seen the View-Master VR on Target shelves for 30 dollars. It's literally just a plastic google cardboard viewer for kids, so it's not great, but that's a highly accessible price to anyone who has a smartphone. This sort of thing will sell.
because why read books when you have PDF and ebook reades. They are obsolete technically speaking as one ebook reader can contain an entire library and still weigh 150 grams, while visually being close to actual paper.
But people still buy books despite them being obsolete and inferior and unecological because the ebook doesn't feel as good as a book.
I just want to escape my shitty reality as thoroughly as I can short of committing suicide. Why do some anons think that's so wrong? I can't even afford to upgrade my computer for a VR headset, let alone buy one of the things, but I thought most of /v/ would share my need for the most intense escapism possible.
I feel like all I've seen is people talking about how overpriced the headsets are, and how it's a trending phase meme technology that will die off like 3D televisions. I won't claim these are wrong, since everyone is entitled to their feelings on the matter of changing media landscapes, but I really thought I would see more positivity from /v/ about niche tech aimed at nerds for the sole purpose of maximizing escapism.
Because they require no batteries and they are portable, they do not have backlight and they don't strain your eyes.
books have million of cons when comparing to electronic counterparts, they will never fucking die.
And if they sell, phone companies will start thinking about giving their phones better IMUs, allowing apps low-level OS access to reduce latency, maybe even adding low-persistence screens. Something like google cardboard, for a phone designed with VR in mind, could very well be as good as a Gear VR.
I'll only jump on the VR bandwagon when its some legitimate VR room / chamber. Spy Kids shit.
Not interested in having a 10 ton glorified viewmaster hanging off my face so I can play indie jumpscare fests and first party 'experiences' where I walk through a field of daisies and contemplate my sexuality.
Fact is, I think a lot of people are just upset they don't have the disposable income to be able to spend it on things like VR if they so choose. Plus, opinions.
I can't honestly say I've never told someone not to play a game, or that the game they like is shit.
I do it all the time.
>That's like calling headphones audio VR.
>people in this very thread are putting VR on the same level as DVD's or phones
Could you shill a little quieter please? I heard the same shit about the Wiimote, the same shit about touch controls, the same shit about camera vidya, the same shit about the fucking Steam console and pad, and ALL of them either flopped, or were reduced to gimmicks. VR isn't the future, it's the latest spicy meme and anyone thinking otherwise needs to pull their head out of their ass and re-join the real world.
Fuck you dude.
I don't WANT to give it a try. Everyone doesn't have to like what you like. Am I an informed consumer that has extensively tried the product and can review its pros and cons fairly? No, because I think it's fucking dumb.
Welcome to the real world, where people don't like things.
Chill out. All that was asked of you is to not run your fucking mouth about something you haven't even tried, not to go out right this moment and put down hundreds of dollars on it.
You're like the SJWs trying to censor games they don't play AKA you have no business in this conversation and would be better off just ignoring it.
Look up loudness wars. While I don't care about analog recording and don't own a record player, there are reasons to own vinyl besides being a hipster. Many digital songs are compressed way too much, however due to the physical limitations of records the sound can only be compressed so much. This means vinyl can sound "better" at normal volumes than something you hear digitally.
At this point VR is a meme with how much /v/ is throwing it around and acting like it's the second coming of high def. It's a gimmick that will die out in a few years just like every other gimmick forced by faggots.
Ebin. Does that thought make it easier for you? Would it upset you if I said I'm an idort with a rig that's probably far more powerful than yours.
Whoops, there goes that comment.
If you don't want to try it, you don't have to try it.
That doesn't change the fact that talking about something when you're not informed about it, as you stated, is silly. Just ignore it and move on, as you seem to want to do. It's best for both parties, is it not?
That's how white people smile at me in downtown LA. When I lived in the South I usually got something more genuine or even a greeting, even by the cops. LA cops are racist as fuck.
Proof that /v/ is full of millennials now.
It's not hard to smile, whether or not you're genuine.
But maybe I just smile too much.
Yeah it's 90 for both. I've heard that it doesn't even use a system like interlaced or progressive for rendering to the screen, it does everything in sync.
I guess some part of me just thought this one would be different. Sure, I expected some people to be against it, but I expected those people to be seen as contrarians who refuse to try impressive new options for gaming. I didn't think they would make up what seems to be the majority opinion.
It's not even that I'm bothered by the negative comments about the technology. No, I understand where most of these people are coming from, but I figured there would be a fair few more enthusiasts trying to talk about the possibilities of the technology. There are some here and there, of course, but the negativity is simply everywhere.
Well if you're smart enough to know that vinyl introduces distortion, you're smart enough to know that vinyl often loses frequencies that the human ear may perceive as unpleasant.
Which means that even though you're not experiencing the music as it was produced, you may very well be happier with what you're getting out of a vinyl. It's subjective and can often be described as warmer.
Yeah, CD is Objectively better. I still like listening to vinyl instead sometimes. Oh well.
I'll probably get one. I liked Nvidia 3d Vision despite all the hoops I had to jump through.
Is the Vive the way to go? I don't have interest in walking around, at least I don't think I do.
I really hope you're twelve or something. The possible reality that you're just a 20-40 year old man desperately clinging to decade old console war meemees is far too depressing to accept.
I can't speak for anyone else but I just have no interest in a gimmick like this. It's not that I don't have money for it, I don't have interest in it. I feel the same way about this as I do about the Wii's waggling gimmick, or the Wii U's second screen gimmick, or the kinect or any other thing like that
That's retarded, muting unpleasant frequencies is the engineer's job, it's not something that is overlooked easily.
Also all vinyl records today come from digital masters so there is absolutely no mastering difference.
>Everyone is excited for VR
Speak for yourself. Some of us have been around long enough to recognize exciting but unviable overhyped technology that will disappear from view in a few years time.
They way to go is to wait until the end of the year or so and then see if Vive is significantly more expensive than Rift and which has the better library. Because hardware-wise, they'll be roughly the same thing.
Depends on a few factors, so nobody can say for sure right now.
1) The price is unknown, but if it's $700 or less I'd go for the Vive. Or, you know, wait.
2) The Vive isn't ready for release yet. The one they're been showing off at CES is still in development, so for now people say that while both are good, the Rift is a bit better.
My rift arrived yesterday and I pretty much went insane and pulled an all-nighter of diving into the rift, about 5 straight hours from the evening into late midnight. Just couldn't stop. So, it's about 3 in the morning and I'm inside Titans of Space. Floating through the universe, with that relaxing music they have playing in the background, made me start to drift off into sleep. I rested my eyes and I fell asleep with the rift still attached to my face.
Hours and hours later, I finally woke up. My brain couldn't process shit; I just awoke sitting in a spaceship looking at Saturn and I didn't know what was going on. My body melted into the avatar in-game. I felt this weird feeling wash over me and everything in-game felt 10000x more real like a heightened reality. I felt like I could feel the cold space, or the heat of the sun, or the zero gravity lifting me up. My brain started to finally process and I began realizing I still had the rift attached to me and this was a game.
The feeling lasted for another minute or so until I began realizing everything. Even without that "feeling" the game still felt amazing because of how good the rift is, but for that brief moment of waking up in the rift, I could feel the actual reality of the virtual world.
Nope, I haven't because I don't care about it. If I have the opportunity to try one, I will, but I'm not going to blow hundreds of dollars on some gimmick that I have no interest in
Is much expected to be proprietary or too early to tell?
I'm nervous about Zhuckerberg being involved and steering away from games but at least he could money hat shit.
How does rift feel anyway? Is it actually like you are "in" the game. Or is it very obvious that you have a screen in front of your face and that it's like watching a tv glued to your face?
>Tfw used to be a cute kid and smiled at everyone if you caught their face
>Tfw people always said nice things about your smile
>Tfw you grew up and no longer have a pretty smile
I can't speak for anyone else but you certainly have me, Michael, convinced. Is there some sort of Kickstarter™ I might be able to donate to to help this new, innovative technology hit the shelves at peek performance?
More importantly, can you inform me of the multiple rewards offered to consumers like myself?
I've not played a game with Rift, but the Gear VR video demo at Best Buy felt more like I was center stage at Cirque Du Soleil than like I had a phone strapped to my face. It didn't blow me away or anything, but I think there's potential there and I would love to try Rift or Vive.
My girlfriend arrived yesterday and I pretty much went insane and pulled an all-nighter of nonstop sex, about 5 straight hours from the evening into late midnight. Just couldn't stop. So, it's about 3 in the morning and I'm inside her. Floating through the universe, with some relaxing music I had playing in the background, made me start to drift off into sleep. I rested my eyes and I fell asleep with my fave on her chest.
Hours and hours later, I finally woke up. My brain couldn't process shit; I just awoke between two ample breasts and I didn't know what was going on. My body melted into the flesh. I felt this weird feeling wash over me and everything in life felt 10000x more real like a heightened reality. I felt like I could feel the warmth of her body, or the softness of her skin, or the heavyness of her breast in my hand. My brain started to finally process and I began realizing I still had a girlfriend and this was reality.
The feeling lasted for another minute or so until I began realizing everything. Even without that "feeling" life still felt amazing because of how good my girlfriend is, but for that brief moment of waking up in her arms, I could feel the actual reality of the real world.
Depends on what you mean. Developers have to implement support for the Rift and Vive separately, but it shouldn't be too difficulty after you've got one down to add more. Plus, engines like UE4 have native support.
As for the games, I would expect ones funded by Oculus to be exclusive (if not just time-exclusives, which is unlikely) but for most to be for all supported platforms. I don't know which games they're funded, but I don't think they're huge AAA games or anything too important.
It's something that you can easily get lost and immersed in, but if you constantly remind yourself that you have a screen in front of your face, the effect will be lessened considerably.
All of these things serve a legitimate, unique function or are straight upgrades over their predecessors.
VR is neither of those things.
It's not going to be a thing that catches on when (if) it becomes cheap. It's something that costs a lot more to produce for a starter, plus people just don't care. Hell, I don't care. If I got it free would I try it? Once or twice maybe, but that's it.
It was a little pixely, because you're essentially dividing your phone resolution in half, but unless you literally have to have 4k video to enjoy stuff, it's not a huge issue for 100 dollars.
Remember how people used to laugh that VR will just be strapping a phone screen to your face?
Well, that's what it LITERALLY is now.
>Q: No doubt built-in headphones are good. But I wonder If using my own headphones (open back with wide soundstage) paired with my own DAC+AMP would influence in any negative way spatial 3D sound or any of the Audio SDK benefits?
>A: Most VR developers are tuning their audio for the including DAC+amp+driver system, and that is also what we optimize our Audio SDK around. You won't get the benefits of that if you use your own, but you can do it. The answer honestly depends on the coloring and soundstage of your exact setup, I can't give you a general answer on how well they will align.
So yes, you can take the headphones off and use your own, but they're designing the audio for their stuff.
My keyboard arrived yesterday and I pretty much went insane and pulled an all-nighter of shitposting on 4chan, about 5 straight hours from the evening into late midnight. Just couldn't stop. So, it's about 3 in the morning and I'm inside the VR thread. Shitposting through the thread, with that relaxing blue they have in the background, made me start to drift off into sleep. I rested my eyes and I fell asleep with the keyboard still under my fingers.
Hours and hours later, I finally woke up. My brain couldn't process shit; I just awoke sitting in a basement looking at 4chan and I didn't know what was going on. My body melted into the posts in the thread. I felt this weird feeling wash over me and everything in-thread felt 10000x more terrible like a heightened shitpost. I felt like I could feel the angry nerds, or the heat of their basements, or the horrid smell choking me. My brain started to finally process and I began realizing I still had the keyboard in my hands and this was 4chan.
The feeling lasted for another minute or so until I began realizing everything. Even without that "feeling" the thread still felt shit because of how good the keyboard is, but for that brief moment of waking up with the keyboard, I could feel the actual reality of the shitpost.
Fair enough. I guess I can only be upset with myself for wanting more positive anons to chat about this tech with right here and now.
I really would like to imagine that's true, but I've talked to enough people (both on and off of 4chan) about VR to get the feeling the majority of the populace is waiting to be impressed if they aren't outright annoyed by the idea of what they see as more gimmicky garbage. Still, I appreciate your reassurance, anon.
That's fine, anon, and what you do with your money is entirely your business. I'm not interested in shilling for VR, so it doesn't impact me one way or the other. No, I've merely been trying to say that I wish I didn't feel so alone in being excited for this technology, since I really thought this was the sort of thing more people would be excited for alongside me. If you don't share that enthusiasm then I have no interest in trying to change your mind, and I appreciate the neutral, non-combative tone you used. Also, since it seems relevant, I never owned a Wii because I didn't like the idea of an entire console being based around motion controls, so I can understand where you're coming from, even if some part of me did want to buy one at one point simply because I adore railshooters and the Wiimote has some pretty good gun grips.
Nigga you're dumb as shit, that's just being high on pheromones and chemical release because you were getting your rocks off. Stop seeking deeper meaning in the evolutionary equivalent of feeding your dick some food. You deserve whatever that woman does to you when she decides she's done with you.
How the fuck can anyone legitimately argue that citing historical trends is a logical fallacy?
Are you thinking of "appeal to tradition"? Because that's not the same fucking thing at all, you stupid buttwipe.
10/10, I'm baited and mad.
How is that a bad thing? That's the cheapest/most accessible version of VR. You're going to sell a lot more people on a headset that's just 99 bucks and works with the phone they already have than the 599 one requiring a beefier PC than what they have.
A lot of people forget that VR isn't going to get cheaper in a bubble.
VR can't get cheaper and better without the technology that shares its display resources, like computer monitors, also getting cheaper and better.
>VR can't get cheaper and better without the technology that shares its display resources, like computer monitors, also getting cheaper and better.
Good thing that's exactly what's been happening to phones for years now.
That's what I meant. Granted VR is a notch above the other shit but I still don't see a grand future for it. Who is really going to develop good games for a gimmick device and a niche audience.
I remember this exact kind of hype back when consumer 3D was the big upcoming thing.
"Wow, it's amazing! Nothing will ever be the same! You have to see it to understand!". To the letter.
I've used the 3D function of my display about 2-3 times, the last one being 4 years ago.
>How the fuck can anyone legitimately argue that citing historical trends is a logical fallacy?
I don't think you know what a logical fallacy is.
A logical fallacy means that you are trying to make an argument without using *direct* logic. Looking at the past may provide a good guide, but it doesn't provide an actual basis for an argument.
Just because you rolled a loaded die and got a six 99 times doesn't mean on the 100th time you'll get a six again, although it is probable. Arguing you'll get definitely six may be probable but not logical since loaded dies don't always deliver.
Television is not more "convenient" than radio, and neither are video games more than television. Both require you to commit more of your attention to them, and you're willing to do that because you get a more stimulating experience out of it.
Absolutely could! It would be relatively easy to create a vinyl-sounding EQ setting. You'd need some compression, too.
You're a bit off. If you go to a reputable mastering studio, not a single one will tell you they can master for both CD and vinyl at the same time. Vinyl has limits, mostly on dynamic range. Because the sound wave is literally being drawn on a disk, that wave takes up space, and therefore vinyl mastering is an art, and ten different engineers will have ten different methods. It's pretty cool actually if you read about it. I'm certainly not an audio snob, I have a 200 dollar Panasonic table from the 70's that a friend's dad gave me and a 78' tecnics amp I got on craigslist for 75 bucks, into some 90's Sony floor-standing speakers. Nothing special, but this stuff still fascinates me.
No. The oculus devs have said they have challenges getting it to work with mobile cards. Also in vr , fps drops will cause nausea , so you do need a powerful card to not get sick.
Well it sort of has to do with the fact that Nintendo euthanized motion controls (pretty much for no reason since the Wii sold very well up to and including Christmas 2010 after which it stopped being the company's lead development platform). Sony's Move was a half-hearted rip-off and Kinect was only ever a fancy gimmick.
>needs a beefy PC
>You have to wear shitty goggles to play games
It's not even real VR. If i get hit in the arm with a sword in a game im not going to feel it. If its snowing in the game i won't feel cold or if i sprint in the game i wont get tired. Fuck your shitty goggle "vr".
Wait are there seriously people who don't smile at others on the street? What are you, some kind of creep?
>shelling 599US DOLLARS on a 90's fad that didnt even took off.
>precedents are logical fallacies now
Good job with your example, no shit studying the past of a non-deterministic variable is useless to predict its evolution, fucking retard.
why is it that none of you dweebs spend even a second thinking about audio in VR
I mean yeah, there's the saying that good audio design is supposed to not be consciously noticed, but this is ridiculous
> shelling out £10 GBP on an 1810s fad that didn't even take off
The problem is that there isn't even the faintest idea on how to do full-body physical feedback.
How would you simulate the feeling of sitting on a chair? Or walking up a flight of stairs? Or falling upside down? Or swimming?
There isn't a possible solution, unless you get matrix style stuff, but that's just absurd.
>To be fair, isn't that what people have said about every change in technology since the beginning of time?
Yeah but most of the time they have been proven right, you dont see us driving nuclear cars now, do you?
You can probably do some things with skintight suits and frickin robot arms, but yeah, haptics are a really hard problem and not going to be solved to anywhere near the standards for audiovisual VR anytime soon. And smell is probably even harder than that.
You're omittting the fact that moving pictures was already made popular by cinema by the time TV was developed.
>implying all technology was meant to be sucessful
Kaks were had.
>if you actually experienced VR
Holy shit, this VR shilling is unreal. Its like everyone who has tried VR has some form of higher understanding than anyone else and automatically makes their opinion correct even though it is still just an opinion. Because I am a "free" man able to buy and please myself with whatever I want with the money I EARNED I choose with my money to not support VR because my TV does just a good as job as such devices like occulus and is a much cheaper and room friendly environment. If I invited my friends over to watch a movie but all I had was 1 occulus and no TV(which is what VR is trying to replace) how will my friends watch it. TV and Video games promote social activities which cannot be achieved by something that costs $599. Which is a month of rent for well over half of america.
VR was the point of Disclosure back in the early 90s. Some people thought it would be the next internet, back when CDs were new. VR is shit, son. What we need is holographic shit, or implants to see holographic shit superimposed over the real world. Entoptics, nigger.
Rambling opinion discarded.
For real though, VR is not going to replace TVs nor is it aiming to. And VR can be pretty social if the people you want to socialize with live in another state, country or continent.
And VR will fail because well, it's already failed in the past.
>in before the aircraft example
People just didnt know how to pull it off, VR holds no secret; it's a zombie from the 90's and should go back there along with the Lawnmower Man .
VR < holographic tv.
Rent is more than $600 in the cities though. My rent is $1200 for a 2 bedroom apartment and that is cause I've been living in the same place for 13 years. I remember rent being $1100 for a 1 bedroom apartment in Anaheim (Disneyland a mile off) in 2002 and a little over $600 for the same type of apartment in a bad neighborhood of a shittier city 5 years earlier (1997). $600 is standard for renting a room nowadays.
The reason VR is going to remain niche is because it doesn't replace any current technology. People bought HD TVs and the like because they were a straight upgrade yet VR isn't distinct enough that it's just another way to experience media.
Much like the PS4 pushed blu-ray into mainstream, VR porn will push VR headsets into the mainstream.
Video games becoming VR-optimized will just be a nice side effect for us all. You can thank the jizz-junkie dopamine-addicted masses who can't stop touching themselves on a daily basis for needing this "next level of love" so bad that they're plunking down hundreds.
>If I mount a camera on top of a regular computer monitor it'll track my head movement too.
If you look away from the screen you wont be able to see it so it won't matter. The screen also doesn't fill your vision when you are looking at it
Everyone here shitting on current VR saying its another gimmick, or all its done is fail for the past 40 years clearly havent actually messed with the technology
The tech is finally here to back up the concept, it works great
im not saying its going to revolutionize the entire world overnight, but its definitely going to gain a shit load of popularity across a wide audience
VR failed as a consumer product before simply because the technology sucked and was too expensive, it didn't give you a sense of presence like the current gen does.
>I know about things I never used just as well as people who own these things!
Haven't been on /v/ for awhile because of all the new forms of cancer cropping up
>over the top nintendo shilling
>speed runs becoming a big deal
I seriously cannot believe that there are people actually retarded enough to think that a $600 price point is prohibitive for a new and highly anticipated technology. Are you people all on neetbux such that you cannot grasp economics anymore?
>inb4 hurr vr has been tried before
This board has gotten significantly worse and is apparently too semen slurping for me
>Name one movie that's impossible to watch wtihout color
Hero, and probably any wuxia film.
Inside out, never seen it but looks pretty colour dependant.
And of course, you are being a shithead, but here is a more reasonable response, at wich you will have several answers.
>Name one VIDEOGAME that's impossible to play without 3d.
>Name one VIDEOGAME that's impossible to play to without CD
>Name one VIDEOGAME that's impossible to play without dvd
>Name one VIDEOGAME that's impossible to play wtihout color
>Name one VIDEOGAME that's impossible to play without a TV
Wii was just a new console by a established company that happened to have a novel kind of control that was very easy to convey with simple video ads.
VR is not easy to understand without trying it first.
Why: 'for what reasons is it better?'
How: 'in what way is it possible for it to be better?
If you think how is a worthy question then maybe you should get back to your 2016 meme elections
I don't live in bumfuck nowhere where gas is $1/gallon, I live in orange county, california. Not even downtown, either. Do you live in mexico or something? My brother pays $200 rent on a 1-bedroom in tijuana, downtown.
I'm just gonna buy both and I'll give you guys an unbiased comparison once they've both released. I'm against tripcoding so when that comparison comes I'll use the code word "FISH" somewhere in my post to let you guys know it's me and not some marketer trying to trick you all.
You are right, it uses and refines technology popularized mostly by smartphones.
While the concepts are nothing new they still had to research and develop their own variants of screens and tracking methods.
How is putting on a headset too much effort?
If you are talking about physical exertion from room scale then I should remind you that DDR used to be super popular and sports used to be a real thing that most people used to do.
>Nintendo Wii. don't tell me all 100 million people tried it before they bought it
Nintendo Wii was affordable, was incredibly simple to set up and motion control by itself was intuitive and very easy to understand, you don't need a helmet. It was easier for someone to play games with motion control than with a regular controller, its fun in a group/family setting and Wii Sports was the perfect title to showcase it with.
VR is the exact opposite. It's expensive, it isn't easy to set up, it isn't easy to understand or even set it up.(Most people here don't understand just how powerful a computer they'll need to run it, what chance does random Grandma have?) and there isn't a single piece of software that is a compelling "must have" for VR unless you think playing Summer Lesson while your family watch on the TV is the next Wii Sports.
I think VR will have a lot more use outside gaming than inside. In its current state it just isn't suitable/ready for gaming.
What if VR became the new arcades? Arcade machines were popular because it wasn't feasible to play games at home because of the size and price needed. They remained popular after consoles because consoles were so underpowered, they could only play a simplified port of the arcade machine game. Instead of buying a $600 VR, what if they adopted the arcade model and let people pay for time, while adding to the social experience?
>Yeah, because the tech literally wasn't there. Now it's here.
Well it cost less than $2,000 now.
VR in arcades always existed since the 90's.
The breakthrough here is making a portable and affordable home device that isn't complete shit.
You could get a DVD player for $40 in 2002
>The best we can do for tactile feedback is vibrators in a chestpeice.
Assuming you're using a closed in area with good audio or headphones, you wind up with two of your most prominent sensory inputs taken over by the machine. Pic related is enough to completely throw you off balance, and you can see where the screens start/end.
What are game ideas you want to see implemented with VR?
I would love a Time Crisis game where I take cover by ducking
From the patient's POV
Some components drop in price faster than others because different technologies advances at different rates. Processing technologies advance a lot faster than display technologies.
The reason DVD dropped in price so much over the years was only because MPEG-2 decoding processors eventually could be fabbed smaller and cheaper.
>you shouldn't decide whether you love it or not without trying it first
I like VR simply because a small step forward in tech is still a step forward. I want a holo deck and anything that takes us 1 inch closer to that dream is good.
>not reserving your best smiles for fellow white people
>not giving negros grudging "im disgusted that you're allowed to breathe the same air as me but I'll pretend to be friendly" smiles
What are you even doing? Are you sure you're white? This is instinctual stuff m8.
People who don't try VR ASAP are better off either way. It's a win-win situation. Either the whole thing turns out to be a fad and you've just wasted $600 on it or it becomes like those items, dramatically reduces in price and you still lose a lot of money and have nothing to show for it except showing off that you were ahead of the curve.
Ok, how are you gonna physically flip the switches? If you're not building a cockpit mockup. In vr with a tracked controller? That's gonna be really slow and I'm guessing not precise enough.
Well out of us two, I've actually flown one of the newer f18 sims within the past 5 years, similar to the one in the pic. The screen completely surrounds you like pic related, with one screen that acts as the door.
It's not uncommon for the new trainees to fall over or take a minute or two to adjust to the base airfield view before starting up. I was off balance for my first 30 seconds in after they closed the door.
Ever seen a cockpit? With many switches, you need a tactile feel to find the right one. You know, they've been designed to differ. You don't get that sort of a feedback as of yet. And there can be hundreds of circuit breakers right next to each other, it's hard to press or pull the right one without resting one's hand on the frame.
These things are partly why that anon said people have been building cockpits in their garages, and why I said that it can't yet replace those setups.
I know that tracked controllers are in best cases sub-mm accurate this generation. But they can't replace everything for now.
You realize many black-on-white crimes on the street are prompted by dumbasses being shit to negroes, right? You're talking shit and you get robbed cause you talked shit. Doesn't need actual talking, mind you. Even walking accross the street is enough to get a thug to rob your ass. Treat others as you would treat yourself and you'll be fine. You sound like a feminist who tells a random male not to rape them, thus making the male want to fuck the bitch up just on principle. Goddam suburbanites are such pussies and idiots, you deserve to be robbed in the hood. L
Not even black either, just live in a high-crime area. Respect and not talking shit can save your life. Also, if you have a gun you're just asking to be shot or killed. Again, that's just principle. Be a man and stab a bitch, even a baby can kill with a gun.
>>It's not uncommon for the new trainees to fall over or take a minute or two to adjust to the base airfield view before starting up. I was off balance for my first 30 seconds in after they closed the door.
Partly likely because of getting blasted with new information on a level they're not witnessed before and pressures from teacher monitoring everything a trainee does. Not only because of the simulation being so immersive, but the situation being stressfull, too.
With Rift/Vive, I'm expecting different level of immersion which I've never witnessed in simulators before.
VR won't become mainstream until Apple does it,calling it now. Tablets were available for almost over a decade before the ipad came out and now look,everyone's trying to play catch up.
I'm telling you once apple releases iVR it's gonna take off. until then it'll be a steep climb
These shills are fucking hilarious.
VR is dead on arrival.
nigger please. new technologies will ALWAYS be expensive at their initial development. Just wait some time till they make more efficient production and the prizes will lower by itself.
And also i don't get why you say that those technologies were "killed" if they are in use these days.. just give it some time.
yeah but for VR to become a thing it's gonna need to be applicable to more things than gaming.
a few devices might come out in the next few years but without a solid brand to carry them I don't think they'll fly.
I mean now that I think about it PSVR and windows hololens could have a chance, and honestly I hope they do because the technology seems pretty interesting to me.
>Blurry as fuck
Whenever I see antiVR shills I just look at this picture and laugh
I want to make a screenshot compilation of all the retards who are saying VR won't/will take off but I honestly don't know which side is going to win
Except nuclear cars were never a product, save for maybe testing purposes (for all I know). That wasn't really relevant. The line I used was very specific.
>To be fair, isn't that what people have said about every change in technology since the beginning of time?
It's what people often said AFTER the introduction of new technology, not "Oh man wouldn't it be cool if we had flying cars?"