Virtual Reality? Anyone else interested, or just me?

[Donkbaca]

The focus on 3d is a direct reaction to the home movie experience, there has to be some reason to go to a movie and see it in the theater.  Some will go just to be the first people to see something (these people, I find strange). Some will go for the experience of watching a film with a bunch of people.  Increasingly though, more and more people are just waiting for the dvd and watching it at home to bypass the annoying people who talk, the over priced concessions and the sticky floor.  I don't know about where you all are, but about 15 years ago there were 5 theaters in town and one second run, cheapo dollar theater.  Now, there are only three theaters in town and 2 cheapo ones.  There has to be something that theaters offer that you can't get anywhere else.  Big screens and good sound don't cut it anymore.

[newmanfamilyvlogs]

Big screens and good sound don't work anymore.

fixed that for you. (:

It seems like the staff running theatres has suffered considerably too. The last few times I've gone to our ONE! theatre the picture has been dim and the sound muffled. There is simply no compelling reason to go anymore.

[fallacy]

The focus on 3d is a direct reaction to the home movie experience, there has to be some reason to go to a movie and see it in the theater.  Some will go just to be the first people to see something (these people, I find strange). Some will go for the experience of watching a film with a bunch of people.  Increasingly though, more and more people are just waiting for the dvd and watching it at home to bypass the annoying people who talk, the over priced concessions and the sticky floor.  I don't know about where you all are, but about 15 years ago there were 5 theaters in town and one second run, cheapo dollar theater.  Now, there are only three theaters in town and 2 cheapo ones.  There has to be something that theaters offer that you can't get anywhere else.  Big screens and good sound don't cut it anymore.

Ya it defiantly has changed. It is probably because you can get a lot of the same experience at home now with HD. On top of that it is really easy now to just download HD movies for free.

Not so long ago maybe 5, 6 years ago you would first have to wait 3 to 5 months before the movie would be released on Tape or DVD. Then you would still have to pay to rent it at a blockbuster which was like half the price of a movie ticket anyway, bring it home and watch it on a inferior device, most people had 27’ to 36’ tub TV’s. If it was an action movie you would lose out on any of the experience.

[scofthe7seas]

I wish we had a cheapo theatre here :/
I used to go alll the time, by myself. Just to see the movie though, because I love movies. There is only one in town, and it is in a rather large mall, but they are not hurting for business. Best Buy is the king of local electronics despite online shopping being superior (plus you don't have to deal with the poo-head morlocks that work there (take that language filter!!)), tech types will travel a bit to goto more specialty stores (I don't think you guys have Fry's electronics out there?) but Best Buy beat out the competition because there will always be people who go out to go out. People get bored, they have cash burning a hole in there pocket, they will always pay to go to movies.
That said, you are correct for the select amount that have an actual home theatre. But it has to emulate the movie experience properly. I've upgraded my setup... 4 times. From regular TV. to a backlit HD monster, to a smaller footprint LCD, to a projector, and now to a 3d projector. The first upgrade I ever got was surround sound. I would say this is exactly why -I- personally don't go to the movies.
But my brother for instance. He isn't want for money, and he has an HD TV... because I gave him my old one. He still goes to the movies with friends, and he comes to my house for 3D movies. People go to what is available to them. I think you'd be surprised at how few actually go all the way to get those experiences on their own. The typical consumer isn't aware, or is unwilling to believe that a home theater is an actual option.

I think that animated movies should have a 3d option. It might be cheaper to make them 3d, but they become full on stereo 3d, which is much better than post process. Of course the ones made to be 3d are obviously better (How to Train Your Dragon) But it's nice to have the option. Remember, you don't have to go see the 3d version. I agree that the novelty has worn off, but I still want the option to be there. Perhaps people mistake this as 3d being a waning fad, because individuals who don't want the experience have stopped going?

[scofthe7seas]

* Also, don't forget that the same people who make the theatre movies get your monies when you watch it at home.

[danny_galaga]

Everything you just wrote sounds more in aggreement with me than not 

So long as it's presently solely in front of you, on a flat screen, it's always going to be merely a window to a 3d world...

If not Existenz, how about a holo-deck?

Well, the thing is, what are movies at all but 2d windows into another world?

That's right. So I'm already looking through the window. Do I really need to wear goofy glasses to look at it?

 I love 3d tech. Loved it since I first heard of it. Not that red/cyan crap, but genuine different view per eye 3d. Magic eye, viewmaster, polarized, LCD shutter; love it all. It bothers me that so many people seem to be against 3d. I worry it will discourage the progress in the field. I think if people don't like 3d in its current state, don't watch it that way... but don't tear it down for others that do (this is not directed at you, just a frustration in general..)

The OP asked the question "Virtual Reality? Anyone else interested, or just me?" so within this thread, I wouldn't take what people are saying to heart. There's plenny people willing to pay for new 3D stuff, paving the way for my 'Existenz' experience when it finally comes (",)

[Corbo]

I think people are confusing virtual reality with 3D movies.  Either that or my definition of VR is wrong.

To me, 3D movie involves sitting in front of a screen and watching a movie with depth (of field, usually not content).

A good Virtual Reality experience involves stereoscopic glasses to give depth of field, but also a wide field of view to fill your peripheral vision, and 6 degrees movement within the virtual environment.

The experience of playing a flight sim such as Lock On Modern Air Combat, or FSX with a VR headset is awesome, and one that makes me with the tech would progress faster.  3D movies on the other hand don't excite me, and apart from the stereoscopic part is completely different.

[scofthe7seas]

I really don't understand what's so hard about vr.  All I need is a vacuum cleaner with a wig on it.
 

Silly PinballJim, Everybody knows pool-vacs are superior.

@corbo
The conversation did devolve a bit, but only because 3d TV and movies are the closest we have to virtual reality. It started out by talking about shutter glasses and how that was abandoned in the early 2000s, and how things are progressing towards something more comfortable, but not necessarily in a true VR direction.

[Donkbaca]

So you are just saying steroscopic glasses and a kinect that tracks head movement is all we need?

[Vigo]

So you are just saying steroscopic glasses and a kinect that tracks head movement is all we need?

Dang, I am so close to achieveing all those lawnmower man powers!

[scofthe7seas]

So you are just saying steroscopic glasses and a kinect that tracks head movement is all we need?

Dang, I am so close to achieveing all those lawnmower man powers!

Just make sure you don't virtually rape your lady friend.

"Come on Cybo-Man!"


Honestly though, kinect and stereo is absolutely in the right direction. Have you guys seen Kinect with IR goggles? It's creepy (kreepy). Thousands of little light pins covering everything. Little IR rangefinders.