Main Restorations Software Audio/Jukebox/MP3 Everything Else Buy/Sell/Trade
Project Announcements Monitor/Video GroovyMAME Merit/JVL Touchscreen Meet Up Retail Vendors
Driving & Racing Woodworking Software Support Forums Consoles Project Arcade Reviews
Automated Projects Artwork Frontend Support Forums Pinball Forum Discussion Old Boards
Raspberry Pi & Dev Board controls.dat Linux Miscellaneous Arcade Wiki Discussion Old Archives
Lightguns Arcade1Up Try the site in https mode Site News

Unread posts | New Replies | Recent posts | Rules | Chatroom | Wiki | File Repository | RSS | Submit news

  

Author Topic: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing  (Read 230171 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

shponglefan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1600
  • Last login:December 15, 2022, 07:22:35 am
  • Correct horse battery staple
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #240 on: May 08, 2017, 12:02:03 am »
The fact that most people haven't tried it is one of the biggest barriers to at least understanding it (regardless if one jumps on the bandwagon or not).  I can respect that there are imperfections and downsides to current gaming VR tech, but most haven't even given it a shot.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2017, 12:05:32 am by shponglefan »

RandyT

  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6882
  • Last login:March 26, 2024, 03:33:28 pm
  • Friends don't let friends hack keyboards.
    • GroovyGameGear.com
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #241 on: May 08, 2017, 12:34:46 am »
...but believe it is the next 3D graphics card (a multi-billion dollar industry that BTW is a "gaming peripheral" that proves Howard's comments wrong, lol).

High-end graphics cards are no more a "gaming peripheral" than are high-end processors.  The benefits they provide are useful for a large chunk of productivity applications as well.  I.e.  if you use your PC for more than web browsing and text-based applications, and have a junk graphics card, you'll probably notice it.

Quote
In my opinion, when companies are dumping truckloads of money with no immediate return, they are seeing something that a consumer who got sick using a cardboard VR hasn't seen.

Investors invest to make money.  It's no more complicated than that.  Whether they are doing it due to the belief that they are getting in on the ground level of the thing which will replace the stagnating technology of traditional gaming, or the hopes of quickly cashing in on industry created hype, is something we won't know until we start seeing winners and losers.


TBH, I think that marketing that "killer app" for VR is going to be challenging given how different VR is.  If one hasn't tried it, it's really difficult to know what will be good in VR and what won't.  I see this all the time with people that expect they can just plop on a VR headset and play Call of Duty or something.  But that's not an ideal VR experience by a long shot.


I agree with you, and unfortunately, I think that illustrates a major problem.  Not so much that people can't imagine something good, rather that what they imagine the tech to be (or in some cases promised), is something which it is unable to deliver.

Quote
What I didn't appreciate until getting the Vive was how much room-scale and motion controllers impact the experience and immersion.  The latter accounts for a good 50% of the experience in my opinion and can be the difference between just looking at something cool versus truly feeling like are somewhere else.

I won't discount that.  But given the cost, and by that I mean not just monetary, but complexity and space requirements, the push for those things might actually be harming the adoption rate of the technology.  Based on what I have been reading, even when given  the opportunity to try both, the uninitiated tend to be happy with the lower cost, less complex stereoscopic and head tracking offerings.  By making those individuals believe that they aren't getting the "full experience", rather than paying more and dealing with the extra requirements, they will likely just forego it altogether.     

Quote
TBH, motion controllers do a pretty good job especially with the inclusion of haptics.  A lot of the time, you're usually holding physical objects in VR (well, gaming VR anyway).  So holding a controller feels very natural, especially when the visual representation in VR is mapped 1:1 with its movements

I'm really not trying to be flippant, but always holding onto something is not really reflective of reality in most circumstances.  Sure, we currently play games in just that manner, but when part of the gameplay becomes being able to reliably perform normally mundane tasks with a motion controller (like pushing a button on a panel, picking up and placing objects, etc.) then I'm not sure it's delivering on expectations.  I'm also curious as to how much of the typical motion controller gameplay "fudging" is used, to make the player feel like they are in better control than they actually are. I'd be interested to hear if you've noticed any of this.

Quote
This type of comment I don't get at all.  To me, VR is something that can do enough to trick my brain into accepting whatever I am seeing or hearing as real.  And it has done that repeatedly over the past year.

While I am skeptical of the "feeling raindrops" thing, and would sooner write it off as your outstretched arm starting to spasm from holding onto the controllers (mosly j/k ;) ), I will say that different individuals have different thresholds for this kind of thing.  I remember sitting in a dark room two decades ago playing Half-Life, and almost jumping out of my skin a few times, without surround sound, 3D or even a very large screen and old-school graphics.  I get the same feeling from playing those types of creepy games on my projection screen. But I don't get queasy or feel the dips and drops of a VR rollercoaster.  Suspension of disbelief is something which has to be given in to, and is much more likely when one wants to believe, or already has some deep seated feelings about being in those situations, real or not.  Case in point, I don't like sharks, or the general vulnerable sensation of being in the ocean.  When I played the 3D 360 shark video, and turned my head to see  the massive great-white right in my face, my brain produced a response.  First, momentary fear, mostly because it was unexpected, and second, the sensation that the beast had physically brushed against my body as it passed.  I.e. it filled in the blanks, and that effect was with just a good cell phone and a well done video. 

It's just an opinion, but I think that if the industry didn't dive in with both feet, the whole VR thing might have been better served (and maybe it shouldn't even have been called VR).  Focusing on the highest visual quality stereoscopic HMD and good head tracking, along with games and experiences suited to those capabilities, is probably the ticket to hook most gamers.  I'd rather pay for a better visual experience, thereby more easily suspending disbelief, while also simplifying use.  But the technology to do even this, isn't yet within reach. Thus the importance of the motion controllers to add to the experience.  I just can't help but feel that it's going to be a while before the experience I'm looking for will be available, and I'm really not excited to help fund every step along the way.

This has gone from slightly amusing to kind of disturbing.

Yet you are still reading  :lol

« Last Edit: May 08, 2017, 11:21:47 am by RandyT »

RandyT

  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6882
  • Last login:March 26, 2024, 03:33:28 pm
  • Friends don't let friends hack keyboards.
    • GroovyGameGear.com
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #242 on: May 08, 2017, 12:53:46 am »
Dudes need to chill and accept that some people like VR and some people don't care about VR.

At this point it's not about caring about VR or not, it's about people that proclaim themselves as gamers (I would think if you're on these boards, it's because of your love for games? Or is it more about nostalgia and tinkering with things?) Outright dismissing a new medium or form of gaming that even in its current, imperfect form beats ANY gaming I have done in my life, be it console, arcade or PC, without even giving it a single try! All the arguments, comparisons, stats, all those rivers of justifications and words and they have NOT EVEN TRIED IT!
This whole thread started with shponglefan expressing his enthusiasm for new medium and somewhere at some point it turned into toxic rhetorics about how it's not going to succeed (insert reason) from the "know-it-alls" WITHOUT EVEN trying the damn thing!
I have no clue if it will succeed or not, none of us do, but I am here to spread the VR gospel, because I tried it and at this very early imperfect stage, once again, it beats ANYTHING I have experienced in video gaming. 

As a matter of fact I watched today (not a game, experience as 'they' call it, so I watched not played it) "Alumette". Words cannot describe it how cool it is to be inside of the story and be able to look at it from every angle, and see inside of the closed objects additional hidden features. Sure you could zoom in with mouse and see it inside, but it just not the same.


I've seen no-one outright "dismiss" it.  I've only see them dismiss it based on what it requires of them.  The distinction is important.

As for it being cool to look at things from every angle, I won't dispute that at all.  But tell me how cool it is the 1000th time you do it.  Hell, look at any FPS or hybrid adventure/shooter.  Gamers don't look through every drawer and closet, because most of the time, the only ones which can be opened are ones with something inside.  So if it's not glowing, or showing some difference to it's surrounding (like an obvious controller button icon) there's no point in looking.  Somehow I can't imagine that developers are going add that type of detail to every bit of scenery.  The games would never get done/cost too much to produce, or be very small/short.

But religion and gospel are tough to argue with, so you have that going for you ;)

Mike A

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5884
  • Last login:Today at 01:33:13 pm
  • This plan is foolproof
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #243 on: May 08, 2017, 01:05:24 am »
I stopped reading about 4 pages ago.

mimic

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 801
  • Last login:February 10, 2024, 02:58:45 pm
  • ...
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #244 on: May 08, 2017, 01:13:33 am »
I stopped reading about 4 pages ago.

Why waste time posting?

Mike A

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5884
  • Last login:Today at 01:33:13 pm
  • This plan is foolproof
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #245 on: May 08, 2017, 01:19:40 am »
Maybe if you write 20 more paragraphs about VR I will care about it more. See that is the whole problem. The past 100 paragraphs just haven't convinced me. I am pretty confident that if you keep explaining it over and over again I will change my mind.

mimic

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 801
  • Last login:February 10, 2024, 02:58:45 pm
  • ...
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #246 on: May 08, 2017, 01:38:05 am »

I've seen no-one outright "dismiss" it.  I've only see them dismiss it based on what it requires of them.  The distinction is important.

As for it being cool to look at things from every angle, I won't dispute that at all.  But tell me how cool it is the 1000th time you do it.  Hell, look at any FPS or hybrid adventure/shooter.  Gamers don't look through every drawer and closet, because most of the time, the only ones which can be opened are ones with something inside.  So if it's not glowing, or showing some difference to it's surrounding (like an obvious controller button icon) there's no point in looking.  Somehow I can't imagine that developers are going add that type of detail to every bit of scenery.  The games would never get done/cost too much to produce, or be very small/short.

But religion and gospel are tough to argue with, so you have that going for you ;)

I don't know, it got very negative, very fast. First page matter of fact, and I'm gonna name names this time.

This is what shponglefan originally posted:

Quote

I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing

« on: April 29, 2016, 10:32:09 pm »



Took delivery of an HTC Vive a couple days ago.  After playing for about 8+ hours now, I can safely say that this is the most impressive piece of technology I've ever tried.  And it's easily the single most revolutionary gaming device I've ever used.

It impossible to put into words what it feels like to be inside a video game.  Because that's exactly what it's like: you're inside the video game.  Everything I've tried in the past--stereoscopic glasses, triple monitor setups, 100 inch high def projector screens--nothing comes close to how completely immersive this is.

Case in point, I was playing a virtual mini-golf game.  I hit the ball causing it to bounce back to where I was standing.  I instinctively jumped out of the way to avoid the ball hitting me; the virtual ball that isn't even real.  My brain had been completely tricked.

The motion control in particular is exceptional.  It lends a level of intuition to gaming that I've never experienced outside of specialized controllers (i.e. driving wheels, etc).  For example, playing a zombie shooter, I found myself aiming down the pistol sight and closing one eye to aim.  In a regular video game this would require some button/mouse combo to execute.  In VR, I literally just aimed down the sights.  To not even have to think about how to do something like that is a revelation.  And the haptic feedback in the controllers add to the immersion even further.  Being able to physically feel virtual interactions is just bonkers.

The sense of scale and distance in VR is incredible.  To actually see characters and environments as life-sized... I can't even begin to describe what it's like.  In the aforementioned zombie game, both times I attempted to play it, it left me shaking in fear.  Being attacked by life-sized zombies and monsters is the most terrifying experience I've ever had in a game.  I can legitimately say this is the first time a game has made me fear for my personal safety.

The biggest drawback thus far is how exhausting this experience has been.  Playing the more action oriented games, I find myself sweating after a good half-hour or so.  I couldn't even imagine trying to do a marathon gaming session for several hours in a row.  But it's been worth it; so incredibly worth it.

I really hope this catches on; no other gaming experience comes close to this.

and instead of posts continue in pleasant: "cool", "maybe I'll check it out one day", "I don't think its for me, I don't have time/money",

very quickly it went to this:

Quote
pbj
Virtual mini golf?  You'd have to put a gun to my head to get me to play the real thing. 

And you paid $2k for the privilege?

Whatever floats your boat.

 :dunno

But that's 'ok', it's his style, thread sniping with poo-poo, but then:

Quote
Howard_Casto

I think you are going to have to admit that there is a lot of novelty going on there man.  You are excited about it now, but let's see how much you enjoy it in a few months time.

Really? Based on what exactly?

Quote
I've messed with the phone adaptors because ..... well .....  they are only 20 bucks and while stuff is certainly impressive, it isn't $2000 impressive.

oki-doki. shponglefan is talking about the entire setup and 'he' "messed" with the phones!

Quote
There's the VR experience and then there is gaming.  VR is good for experiences, but it's a crap method of gaming for the reasons I've mentioned countless times in other threads

And again, he dismissed it as "gaming" it's "crap" "experience" without actually knowing what he is talking about, citing some video of middle aged guy with 10 years experience.
I am not saying VR will survive, but y'all can't say for sure that it won't and yet you have said that it already went the 3dTVs way.


Of course no one can watch anything 1000 times, but you can play it. I watched it, I enjoyed it, I'll show it to others, and then I'll play in ADDITION to being able to also watch it if there is good content made.


I think this whole thread deserves a reboot and should just continue as follow:

"cool", "maybe I'll check it out one day", "I don't think its for me, I don't have time/money".... etc
« Last Edit: May 08, 2017, 01:45:14 am by mimic »

mimic

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 801
  • Last login:February 10, 2024, 02:58:45 pm
  • ...
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #247 on: May 08, 2017, 01:40:50 am »
Maybe if you write 20 more paragraphs about VR I will care about it more. See that is the whole problem. The past 100 paragraphs just haven't convinced me. I am pretty confident that if you keep explaining it over and over again I will change my mind.

Ok, i'll try my 'best'. Keep on reading. You clearly belong to this group of people that clearly have nothing better to do at the moment.

RandyT

  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6882
  • Last login:March 26, 2024, 03:33:28 pm
  • Friends don't let friends hack keyboards.
    • GroovyGameGear.com
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #248 on: May 08, 2017, 02:16:53 am »
I don't know, it got very negative, very fast. First page matter of fact, and I'm gonna name names this time.

Ok, pbj's gonna be pbj.  If BYOAC was a bridge, he'd be living under it.  If your VR unit had a big "N" printed on it, Howard would probably have one already :), but the points he has raised are actually valid with regard to the novelty factor.  And there's no disputing that the stereoscopic stuff can make some folks physically ill, and some can't see the effect properly at all, due to vision issues,  Obviously, they would have good reason to dismiss it outright.  But none of the above is a reason to call gamer cred (if such a thing existed or mattered) into question.  It only weakens your arguments.

I think most find it interesting, if only as a curiosity.  But I think at some point you should probably accept that not everyone is going to be as impressed with it as you seem to be.  The proof can be seen as simply as visiting ebay, where there never seems to be a shortage of folks selling their units while they can still recoup a good chunk of their investment.  I think it's safe to assume that they've tried it :)

Titchgamer

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4222
  • Last login:December 17, 2023, 08:05:48 am
  • I have a gaming addiction.....
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #249 on: May 08, 2017, 06:00:55 am »
 
I'm really not trying to be flippant, but always holding onto something is not really reflective of reality in most circumstances.  Sure, we currently play games in just that manner, but when part of the gameplay becomes being able to reliably perform normally mundane tasks with a motion controller (like pushing a button on a panel, picking up and placing objects, etc.) then I'm not sure it's delivering on expectations.  I'm also curious as to how much of the typical motion controller gameplay "fudging" is used, to make the player feel like they are in better control than they actually are. I'd be interested to hear if you've noticed any of this.

I think you may be underestimating the mental power of holding a controller Randy.
Just to give an example I have been playing rush of blood with PSVR which is a lightgun type game where you hold 2 motion controllers in hand and dual wield pistols shooting evil zombie type dudes.
Now the games fun but I was sort of thinking the other day while playing how accurately it tracked my movements with the gun. I have both move controllers inside a gun attatchement which is basicly a plastic gun shell and allthough is far to light and springy triggered to be a real gun they feel right while playing.
I am pretty good with pistols (not blowing my own horn or anything, I just am) So I decided to see if I could play the game "for real" by not aiming the guns on screen but my pointing them where I wanted to shoot like you would for real.
And I was pleasantly surpised to find it was fairly accurate.
I was not hitting head shots each time not by a long way but considering I could not see "the guns" only imagining in my head where they should be I was getting pretty damn close which when you consider its tracking based on a camera and pretty light is pretty damn good and all the time I felt in control.

On a slight angle I have just pre-ordered this:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/qvf/Sony-Farpoint-PSVR/B01GVQV2FI?th=1

Looks interesting I think...



While I am skeptical of the "feeling raindrops" thing, and would sooner right it off as your outstretched arm starting to spasm from holding onto the controllers (mosly j/k ;) ), I will say that different individuals have different thresholds for this kind of thing.  I remember sitting in a dark room two decades ago playing Half-Life, and almost jumping out of my skin a few times, without surround sound, 3D or even a very large screen and old-school graphics.  I get the same feeling from playing those types of creepy games on my projection screen. But I don't get queasy or feel the dips and drops of a VR rollercoaster.  Suspension of disbelief is something which has to be given in to, and is much more likely when one wants to believe, or already has some deep seated feelings about being in those situations, real or not.  Case in point, I don't like sharks, or the general vulnerable sensation of being in the ocean.  When I played the 3D 360 shark video, and turned my head to see  the massive great-white right in my face, my brain produced a response.  First, momentary fear, mostly because it was unexpected, and second, the sensation that the beast had physically brushed against my body as it passed.  I.e. it filled in the blanks, and that effect was with just a good cell phone and a well done video. 

Cant say I have ever felt rain drops or anything like that, But I have heard of people getting these types of sensations.
I guess its similar to ghost limbs and the like where your brain fools you into feeling something that is not there.

But really Half life was an amazing game, And would be even better in VR but much like RE and other games it rellys on jump tactics and sound effects to give you that scare.

Its a hell of allow easier to scare someone though when you cant recoil away from the TV and quickly look away.
Its defo scarier when the thing is right there infront of you.

Should of seen the frantic way my Ms was shooting when a huge spider confronted her on Rush of Blood!
Also lots of bad language which i could not repeat without being banned  :lol

ChadTower

  • Chief Kicker - Nobody's perfect, including me. Fantastic body.
  • Trade Count: (+12)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 38211
  • Last login:October 19, 2022, 12:01:54 pm
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #250 on: May 08, 2017, 08:57:04 am »
Dudes need to chill and accept that some people like VR and some people don't care about VR.

At this point it's not about caring about VR or not, it's about people that proclaim themselves as gamers (I would think if you're on these boards, it's because of your love for games? Or is it more about nostalgia and tinkering with things?)




Well, that idea ticked people off, if I'm honest.  Neither you nor I get to decide who is or is not a gamer.  Randy could proclaim himself King Pickle and we wouldn't have a reason to dispute it.  Who even cares?  Anyone here has been playing video games for 30+ years and has devoted a substantial part of their life to it.  It doesn't matter which segment of the market's history they prefer. 

dkersten

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1472
  • Last login:March 12, 2024, 11:47:30 am
  • If you are gonna do it, do it right..
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #251 on: May 08, 2017, 10:57:43 am »
...but believe it is the next 3D graphics card (a multi-billion dollar industry that BTW is a "gaming peripheral" that proves Howard's comments wrong, lol).
High-end graphics cards are no more a "gaming peripheral" than are high-end processors.  The benefits they provide are useful for a large chunk of productivity applications as well.  I.e.  if you use your PC for more than web browsing and text-based applications, and have a junk graphics card, you'll probably notice it.
High end graphics card research and production is driven primarily by the gaming market, with processing and productivity applications being a nice secondary application but well behind in terms of driving revenues.  And yes, a component bought purely to gain an edge or enhance a gaming experience that is not a necessity to play the game is a peripheral.  Not all peripherals are devices you use to control games.  Today you CAN play a game with the built in graphics processing of most CPU's, or even with a low end graphics card.  You don't buy a $700 card to surf the web or to use Excel or Word.  Yet the development and sale of these cards generate hundreds of millions in revenue each year and keep a multi billion dollar industry alive.
Quote
Quote
In my opinion, when companies are dumping truckloads of money with no immediate return, they are seeing something that a consumer who got sick using a cardboard VR hasn't seen.
Investors invest to make money.  It's no more complicated than that.  Whether they are doing it due to the belief that they are getting in on the ground level of the thing which will replace the stagnating technology of traditional gaming, or the hopes of quickly cashing in on industry created hype, is something we won't know until we start seeing winners and losers.
The key being that they are investing to make money.  If VR is already dead like half the people in this thread are 100% sure of, then those investors are wasting their money.  They aren't just dipping their toes in it, they are going in big, hundreds of millions is being thrown at developers, and the companies that started at the ground floor already got bought for big money by big incubator companies.

At the absolute very least, VR technology will evolve into something even greater and will become a part of daily life at some point.  Obviously not in its current form, and it will probably take a couple decades to go totally mainstream, but the concept has been sought after for too long for this to just fizzle out. 

RayB

  • I'm not wearing pants! HA!
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11279
  • Last login:February 24, 2024, 12:00:13 am
  • There's my post
    • RayB.com
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #252 on: May 08, 2017, 02:00:04 pm »
Obviously not in its current form, and it will probably take a couple decades to go totally mainstream, but the concept has been sought after for too long for this to just fizzle out.
5 to 10 years.
And people citing cost are forgetting that an HD TV used to cost over $10,000 when they first came out.

In 5 to 10 years, all you'll need to power VR is the computer in your pocket and a light-weight headset. Even the motion sickness issue has been solved (just not applied into a consumer product yet).
NO MORE!!

dkersten

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1472
  • Last login:March 12, 2024, 11:47:30 am
  • If you are gonna do it, do it right..
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #253 on: May 08, 2017, 04:57:17 pm »
Obviously not in its current form, and it will probably take a couple decades to go totally mainstream, but the concept has been sought after for too long for this to just fizzle out.
5 to 10 years.
And people citing cost are forgetting that an HD TV used to cost over $10,000 when they first came out.
That's what I was saying in my longer post above... The first plasma's hit the showroom floor at $50,000 for something like a 50" flat screen TV.  You can get a superior set today that is thinner by 20x, weighs 10x less, has a higher pixel resolution, doesn't burn in, and doesn't require a separate box for power and processing, all for around $2500 in the equivalent size, and something with a slightly inferior picture for as little as $350.  That's after 20ish years. 

Few consumer technologies have gotten this much R&D money thrown at them like VR is getting.  Early adopters always pay a premium and it always takes years before mainstream consumer pricing and high performance meet.

RandyT

  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6882
  • Last login:March 26, 2024, 03:33:28 pm
  • Friends don't let friends hack keyboards.
    • GroovyGameGear.com
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #254 on: May 08, 2017, 10:38:46 pm »
High end graphics card research and production is driven primarily by the gaming market, with processing and productivity applications being a nice secondary application but well behind in terms of driving revenues.  And yes, a component bought purely to gain an edge or enhance a gaming experience that is not a necessity to play the game is a peripheral.  Not all peripherals are devices you use to control games.  Today you CAN play a game with the built in graphics processing of most CPU's, or even with a low end graphics card.  You don't buy a $700 card to surf the web or to use Excel or Word.  Yet the development and sale of these cards generate hundreds of millions in revenue each year and keep a multi billion dollar industry alive.

We're going to have to go back a long way for this one, but the very first desktop machines were dumb terminals, made smart by the inclusion of on-board processing.  So in the sense of a desktop "terminal", the cpu is a peripheral item to the display ;).

I won't gamble on that argument.  But I will present this excerpt from a report published a few years ago (emphasis mine):

Quote
Enthusiast segment
Compared to the overall PC market, the Enthusiast segment accounts for only a relatively small number of unit shipments. However, those systems are among the most expensive and deliver very healthy margins. Enthusiast-class AIBs deliver the highest possible performance and offer the enthusiast or hobbyist the ability to tweak the AIB (e.g. with special cooling and clock manipulation) to exceed the published specifications.  Enthusiasts pay very little attention to price tags. If the PC or AIB promises the best gaming experience they will be bought, and MSRPs in the category aren’t declining. In fact, recent topend PCs and AIBs on the market have been gaining in price. In our analysis we use Enthusiast AIB’s as the cornerstone but also account for Enthusiast systems as a pricing segment with averages of $2,232 for desktops and $2,067 for notebooks. The minimum ASP to be included in the Enthusiast class is $1800 and this includes a display factor adjusted for gaming motivation and purchasing frequency. The Enthusiast segment is also referred to as the Extreme segment by some suppliers.

Performance segment
The Performance computer segment isn’t so clear-cut. Some like JPR treat it separately from the higher end Enthusiast category, and others include the Enthusiast category within the Performance segment.
There is overlap between the two, but one of the major points of distinction is that performance machines are sold into the broader markets, advertised as machines for entertainment or high-end professional use. In addition, they are equipped with newer, high-performance graphics chips, but typically not the most powerful. Often, the performance sector AIBs are the previous generation’s Enthusiast AIB, but they are also built up on lower-cost GPU derivatives of the current top-end GPU part. In our analysis we use Performance AIB’s as the cornerstone but also account for Performance systems as a pricing segment with averages of $1,349 for desktops and $1,244 for notebooks. The minimum ASP to be included in the Performance class is $1000 and this includes a display factor adjusted for gaming motivation and purchasing frequency.

Mainstream segment
The mainstream category is the largest unit volume and the lowest performance segment. The AIBs used in these systems can be either specially designed (to reduce cost), older generation models, or special versions with GPUs that are higher end but have not passed all the tests to be in the higher classifications (this is one way GPU suppliers manage fab yields and inventory costs.) Mainstream systems and AIBs offer solid capabilities for Internet, gaming, and office productivity applications. We include Value PC’s and GPU’s in the Mainstream segment.  Regardless of their budget people of all economic levels love video games and they serve to influence PC purchases even at the lowest level.  In our analysis we use Mainstream and Value AIB’s as the cornerstone but also account for Mainstream systems as a pricing segment with averages of $775 for desktops and $579 for notebooks. The maximum ASP to be included in the Mainstream class is $1000 and this includes a display factor adjusted for gaming motivation and purchasing frequency. The Mainstream segment is also referred to as Entry Level or Value segment by some suppliers.

High-end gaming doesn't drive the graphics card industry, competition does.  If they rest on their laurels, other players will develop higher spec parts, and those will be selected for Performance machines, which account for more sales.  Eventually, those designs end up in the even more competitive Mainstream market segment, which is where companies make their real bread and butter.  What the Enthusiast crowd does is pay dearly for the R&D, as it is bleeding edge technology, thereby diffusing costs which in the past, were borne solely by the Performance market ($15,000 graphics card anyone?.)  Gamers are also usually the "guinea pigs", often dealing with less than perfect drivers, something the professional market is unwilling to do. 

Even if I were willing to accept that a graphics card is a "gaming peripheral" (which I am reluctant to do), at which point is it no longer such?  I purchased my first 3D graphics card decades ago, at a time when you still needed an additional normal card for everything but 3D.  At that time, very few professional applications even supported it's use, as they used much higher end and much more costly solutions.  Now, my phone has about 10x the power of that card, as does the chipset found on most modern motherboards, and graphics cards are complete solutions which work across the gamut of applications.

You don't pay $700 to do word processing and surf the web, but at one point, the technology you are using now to do those things, commanded that much.  And productivity users pay that and much more, as increased performance equates to increased efficiency and revenue.

Quote
The key being that they are investing to make money.  If VR is already dead like half the people in this thread are 100% sure of, then those investors are wasting their money.  They aren't just dipping their toes in it, they are going in big, hundreds of millions is being thrown at developers, and the companies that started at the ground floor already got bought for big money by big incubator companies.

At the absolute very least, VR technology will evolve into something even greater and will become a part of daily life at some point.  Obviously not in its current form, and it will probably take a couple decades to go totally mainstream, but the concept has been sought after for too long for this to just fizzle out.

Again, that means nothing when uptake depends entirely on the consumer's willingness to play along.  It's estimated that 45% of companies fail and disappear within the first 5 years, with some data showing that number to be much higher.  When a company starts losing money, the venture capitalists bail, and either sell it off or liquidate it to recover any remaining value.  It's just part of the investment game.  That's why you can put your personal investments in low, medium or high risk pools.  The higher the risk, the higher the possible return...but you could go broke.

People making comparisons to the TV market should stop and consider that TV was a looooong established product.  These flatter and larger screens were a natural evolution in an existing market.  Manufacturers knew they would fly off the shelves when the price and quality met market demand, and no expense was spared in getting there.  The VR market, on the other hand, is a completely new bird.  But one thing they did learn is that the average consumer wouldn't even put up with wearing lightweight glasses to watch their TV in 3D.  How is that going to affect mass adoption of VR, which is what will be required for all of these improvements to be made?
« Last Edit: May 09, 2017, 12:40:33 am by RandyT »

Mike A

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5884
  • Last login:Today at 01:33:13 pm
  • This plan is foolproof
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #255 on: May 08, 2017, 11:14:00 pm »
I am pretty sure there isn't actually an award for the longest post.

RayB

  • I'm not wearing pants! HA!
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11279
  • Last login:February 24, 2024, 12:00:13 am
  • There's my post
    • RayB.com
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #256 on: May 09, 2017, 10:12:35 am »
The VR market, on the other hand, is a completely new bird.  But one thing they did learn is that the average consumer wouldn't even put up with wearing lightweight glasses to watch their TV in 3D.  How is that going to affect mass adoption of VR, which is what will be required for all of these improvements to be made?
I know I've jumped into this thread late but ... whatever, my 2 cents : You have to consider incremental improvements versus paradigm-changing improvements. For example, a portable "PDA" with slightly better screen res than the previous offerings and still requiring a stylus for input VS a multi-touch capacitive screen that not only accurately detects a finger tough, but multiple of them (along with the paradigm changing user interactivity that enabled). Minor incremental improvments VS paradigm-shifting.

Other examples in the past:
  • CD vs tape. - The difference was enough to motivate people to ditch entire collections and re-buy things they already technically owned in order to get the much improved experience.
  • DVD vs VHS tapes - See above. Again, massive quality difference.
  • Bluray vs DVD - Only an incremental difference here. I know many people who were happy with their upscaling DVD players and some say they can't even tell the difference. Only people who wanted to get full 1080p bothered to upgrade. It's why they still sell movies with BOTH the DVD and the Bluray in one package.
  • Wii VS extablish console gaming - "Joe and Jill Mainstream", some of which had never owned a gaming console before, bought into the Wii experience because it was something really different.

So back to 3DTV: If a large majority of people aren't willing to go for the incremental difference of Bluray over DVD, then they sure as hell won't go for the minor improvement of "3D". And "3D" wasn't a new concept. Why was it pushed? Because companies WANT us continually upgrading. There comes a point though where the changes/improvements are too minor to care about (Apple is stuck in this stage with their phones).

VR though? This isn't incremental. It's going to be a new paradigm for gaming as well as open entire new categories of entertainment and "experiences".
NO MORE!!

dkersten

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1472
  • Last login:March 12, 2024, 11:47:30 am
  • If you are gonna do it, do it right..
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #257 on: May 09, 2017, 10:41:20 am »
I am pretty sure there isn't actually an award for the longest post.
Let me help you and the other ADHD members here:
www.twitter.com

There, go there and stick to your 140 character posts.  This is a forum, a place to discuss ideas, and any idea worth discussing takes more than a couple words unless you are in the second grade.  Why in God's name anyone would come to a forum (an off topic forum to boot) and complain that there are too many words to read is beyond me.

Mike A

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5884
  • Last login:Today at 01:33:13 pm
  • This plan is foolproof
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #258 on: May 09, 2017, 10:42:25 am »
 :'(

dkersten

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1472
  • Last login:March 12, 2024, 11:47:30 am
  • If you are gonna do it, do it right..
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #259 on: May 09, 2017, 11:48:18 am »
High-end gaming doesn't drive the graphics card industry, competition does. 
Yet without PC gaming, there would be no demand for it and other productivity applications would still be using $10,000 fireGL cards.  The demand is what drives sales, the competition is what drives the price down and the technology up.  Take away the demand and the competition goes away and the price starts to go back up and the tech flattens out and stops evolving.  Everyone here would pay dearly for a "Star Trek Holodeck" type experience, or pay a reasonable amount for something close to it, and as long as that demand is there, there will be R&D and competition driving the cost down and the technology up to meet what consumers want.  Obviously it isn't there yet, but give it time, it will be.
Quote
What the Enthusiast crowd does is pay dearly for the R&D, as it is bleeding edge technology
Exactly, and that is what the Vive and Rift are.. bleeding edge technology that is designed for the enthusiast market.  Nobody is expecting to make money off this right now, they are just trying to fund further R&D.  Why else would hundreds of millions of dollars of private equity be invested in a product that hasn't cracked more than a few dozen million in sales?

I looked into possibly upgrading the Vive with DIY fixes, like better displays, better lenses, etc.  There isn't anything because what the Vive has is already utilizing the fastest display processing chips that are made.  There is no upgrade path right now because it is so bleeding edge that anything that comes out from here forward still has to be invented.  The money is going into content, video compression, solutions for motion sickness, and of course into better displays, better optics, and faster processors.  There is a reason the best experience relies on the most expensive graphics cards, and even in those cases it is insufficient.  I upgraded my 980Ti to a 1080 just to get that extra 10-12% of performance, and I was tempted to upgrade to a 1080Ti recently when it came out.  Even so, I wish we could go to SLI so I could process even higher resolutions as supersampling improves the quality of the experience.  Until you can process 90+ fps at 4k resolutions (2k x 2) with a single card, the rest of the tech is not even going to help, and we aren't there yet.  Ideally we want to hit 120fps at over 4k resolutions with a device that fits in a smartphone chassis so we can have completely wireless solutions that are light and affordable, but we are a long way from that.  It is coming though, not only because VR will need it, but because there is a race in allied industries to create higher density displays and the peripherals and media that support it.  No sense in having an 8k tv if you can't deliver content to it without an SSD hard drive.  So 48Gbps HDMI cables are coming, as are chips that can transmit that much data.  Trust me, if I could buy a 4k x2 headset with high quality glass lenses (preferably in my prescription), I would even if it cost several thousand dollars.  I can't because it can't be done with current technology.  There is hope in the near future though, with compression to deliver the video through slower chips or even over wifi, higher density displays that are now available, and a better understanding of optics and other factors following thousands of units in consumers hands, the next generation of headset could be a revolutionary jump.  And that is just the beginning.  Wait until the R&D starts bearing fruit.
Quote
Again, that means nothing when uptake depends entirely on the consumer's willingness to play along.  It's estimated that 45% of companies fail and disappear within the first 5 years, with some data showing that number to be much higher.  When a company starts losing money, the venture capitalists bail, and either sell it off or liquidate it to recover any remaining value.  It's just part of the investment game.  That's why you can put your personal investments in low, medium or high risk pools.  The higher the risk, the higher the possible return...but you could go broke.
90/10 rule, 90 percent of businesses fail in the first 5 years and only 10% survive that long.  But that's splitting hairs, the point isn't that businesses fail, it is that when incubators are investing heavily in a technology and then private equity jumps on board with hundreds of millions of dollars to throw around at anything having to do with the technology, it is because they have done their research.  This isn't Vegas, and people with that kind of money aren't gambling on the roll of the dice.  My specific point is that a bunch of arcade enthusiasts who are unwilling to drop more than a few hundred on building a cabinet are not the ones those investors are relying on for their market analysis.  If I were going to invest my money, I would be looking to do what the big boys are doing, not the ones who have little to nothing to invest. 

Quote
People making comparisons to the TV market should stop and consider that TV was a looooong established product.  These flatter and larger screens were a natural evolution in an existing market.  Manufacturers knew they would fly off the shelves when the price and quality met market demand, and no expense was spared in getting there.  The VR market, on the other hand, is a completely new bird.  But one thing they did learn is that the average consumer wouldn't even put up with wearing lightweight glasses to watch their TV in 3D.  How is that going to affect mass adoption of VR, which is what will be required for all of these improvements to be made?
But it isn't completely new.  First off, it has been around as a concept that people have shown intense desire to have for decades.  Second, it is a natural evolution of a monitor.  This isn't watching TV in 3D with a pair of shutter glasses, this is the most realistic 3D effect outside of true reality and you don't have to wear glasses to look at something, the glasses ARE the display.  When the technology evolves to an ultralight pair of glasses, and it will given some time, this will replace TV's, movie projectors, computer monitors, and everything else that displays output.  Everything that has come before this point in terms of visual media devices could potentially be replaced with a VR headset.  Nothing in the past has had this big of an establishment.  It is merely a question of getting the tech to a price point and comfort level where consumers will adopt it.  No small task, but anything can be accomplished with enough money.

RandyT

  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6882
  • Last login:March 26, 2024, 03:33:28 pm
  • Friends don't let friends hack keyboards.
    • GroovyGameGear.com
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #260 on: May 09, 2017, 12:15:50 pm »
So back to 3DTV: If a large majority of people aren't willing to go for the incremental difference of Bluray over DVD, then they sure as hell won't go for the minor improvement of "3D". And "3D" wasn't a new concept. Why was it pushed? Because companies WANT us continually upgrading. There comes a point though where the changes/improvements are too minor to care about (Apple is stuck in this stage with their phones).

VR though? This isn't incremental. It's going to be a new paradigm for gaming as well as open entire new categories of entertainment and "experiences".

Let's also not forget that the Wii soured the mass market (and the Kinect did to some extent as well).  There was an incredible amount of hype around these technologies as well, and while they did deliver some new and fun experiences, it was ultimately their limitations which gave them novelty status in the grand scheme of gaming. 

The other technologies supplanted previous ones in those genres, because they could do everything the old one did, and do it better.  In the case of cassettes VS CD VS digital media, each was a monumental step in convenience, quality and durability.  And eventually, cost.

BluRay VS DVD is a bit of a different situation, and may actually be relevant to the VR dilemma.  BluRay, at it's introduction, was aimed at the high-end enthusiasts.  Folks with the biggest screens, and full audiophile surround setups, who could afford a $400 BD player.  This was a time when those big screens and amplifiers could easily set one back 4 to 5k.  The technology has now caught up to BluRay, and DVDs look like crap on those $400 55" TV's and $50 BD players you can walk into any Wal-mart and purchase.  It's still one of the few ways to take advantage of real 1080P quality.  If DVD's continue to exist at this point, it's for smaller/portable devices, and the industry is looking to kill that application off with digital.  And we haven't even touched on what it's going to take to get people to 4k.

And that's kind of where VR sits currently, except that it doesn't supplant traditional video gaming, and if it tried, the experience would be worse.  It's also not really new.  Like 3DTV, technology has advanced enough to get us much closer to realizing the potential, but also like 3D, technology hasn't advanced far enough to do it extremely well.  At some point in the future, all of our TV's might be 16k with with glasses-free 3D and wide fields of view, and we might never play a game on it.  But given how long it has taken just to get to this point, from previous iterations of both technologies, it could quite conceivably be another decade before we see another run at it.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2017, 01:41:24 pm by RandyT »

RandyT

  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6882
  • Last login:March 26, 2024, 03:33:28 pm
  • Friends don't let friends hack keyboards.
    • GroovyGameGear.com
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #261 on: May 09, 2017, 12:53:27 pm »
High-end gaming doesn't drive the graphics card industry, competition does. 
Yet without PC gaming, there would be no demand for it and other productivity applications would still be using $10,000 fireGL cards

There was, is, and always will be a demand for the high end graphics cards.  Long before mainstream gaming, business and military paid for all of that R&D, from which mainstream consumers eventually received benefits.  If the gaming market evaporated, those new designs would still exist, and the professional market would pay those high costs, just as they always did in the past.  They are a business investment and have a return for those entities.  A far different impetus than that of gamers.

Quote
Nobody is expecting to make money off this right now, they are just trying to fund further R&D.  Why else would hundreds of millions of dollars of private equity be invested in a product that hasn't cracked more than a few dozen million in sales?

That's a bit over-generalized.  Samsung is doing it to help sell phones (profit).  Zuckerberg wants in on the ground floor of the VR software repository (profit). And then there is the military, who have already stated that current VR technology is pushing up against what they use, which costs much more.  Instant customer with deep pockets and an actual application (profit).  There are many motivations for dumping money into something, and it's usually with some shorter term goal in mind, with perhaps a reduced but possible chance of an outcome of much more.  There were sales projections and all of them fell far short of expectations.  I'm sure these were considered.

Quote
There is no upgrade path right now because it is so bleeding edge that anything that comes out from here forward still has to be invented.

That's the "chicken and egg" dilemma which could be it's downfall.

Quote
If I were going to invest my money, I would be looking to do what the big boys are doing, not the ones who have little to nothing to invest.

If the 90/10 rule is accurate, the "big boys" tend to get it wrong....a lot.  I'd be looking at how much of their own money they are risking, as opposed to that of others.  In the grand scheme of things, however, 100 million to them is like $100 to one of us.  If the entire industry is dropping a billion, cumulatively that's a drop in the bucket.

Quote
...but anything can be accomplished with enough money.

No, it can't.  It can get farther, faster, but it's never a guarantee something will make it to the finish line.  Pesky things like physics, the "human element", etc. tend to get in the way.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2017, 01:22:51 pm by RandyT »

pbj

  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 10871
  • Last login:Today at 03:47:56 pm
  • Obey.
    • The Chris Burke Band
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #262 on: May 09, 2017, 12:57:04 pm »

pixel

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 102
  • Last login:December 24, 2019, 05:33:55 pm
  • I want to build my own arcade controls!
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #263 on: May 09, 2017, 02:12:08 pm »
I barely have time to post these days,  let alone read all of this...

 All Im going to say is:

1)  If people did not want / like  3D,   Imax 3D  would long since been dead.   Instead,  I just came from the new Guradians of the Galaxy in Imax 3d,  and every seat was sold out.

2)  If dual stereoscopic cameras with a 3d display were part of the big name mobile phone mfg.s ,   Stereoscopic support would soar through the roof.


 Even VR would have a heavier impact,  with 3d photos being viewable on them.   Though,  as stated... the price,   and requirements,  are still way too high.

 What they Should have done,  was left the tech at a mid-grade level,   rather than aiming for the top-tier experience.   
 Especially since the top-tier they came up with,  is stiff extremely lackluster...  AND  has an the  "rich-kid"   pricetag.

 The mobile phones acting as the low to mid grade as a vr offering,  is just not good enough.    Partially due to lack of processing power,  but more so,  due to poor lack
of controller support across the board.   Not to mention,  that many whom have phone,  may have older models that have limited compatibility.   But either way,  without
good solid unified non-laggy controller support... you can pretty much write VR off on the phone market.

 In fact, poor controller support,  will probably cause the whole phone-game ecosystem to eventually implode.


I am pretty sure there isn't actually an award for the longest post.
Let me help you and the other ADHD members here:
www.twitter.com

There, go there and stick to your 140 character posts.  This is a forum, a place to discuss ideas, and any idea worth discussing takes more than a couple words unless you are in the second grade.  Why in God's name anyone would come to a forum (an off topic forum to boot) and complain that there are too many words to read is beyond me.

 I agree.   Got a good chuckle out of it too.   I was always blown away by the few posters whom constantly tried to attack me over post length.  It was pure insanity.


 If I may offer a suggestion:   Fidget spinners / Fidget cubes.    Supposedly, they are all the rage now,  for ADHD sufferers.

Mike A

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5884
  • Last login:Today at 01:33:13 pm
  • This plan is foolproof
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #264 on: May 09, 2017, 02:57:01 pm »
Now you guys did it. You woke Pixel up. Strap on your tinfoil helmet. The ride is about to get bumpy.

Howard_Casto

  • Idiot Police
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19399
  • Last login:March 16, 2024, 05:59:16 pm
  • Your Post's Soul is MINE!!! .......Again??
    • The Dragon King
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #265 on: May 09, 2017, 03:42:42 pm »
Heh... I love how paying 2 extra bucks for your ticket to an imax movie is compared to buying hundreds of dollars of equipment for a home setup.  People absolutely want 3D as a novelty in public forums, I already expressed that if he would bother to read the posts, but that isn't the same as wanting to invest the time, money and effort into  doing a home setup.  Hell even now that 3d tvs cost basically the same as a regular tv, nobody is buying them... thus the lackluster 3d tv sales. 

yotsuya

  • Trade Count: (+21)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19955
  • Last login:Today at 01:02:22 pm
  • 2014 UCA Winner, 2014, 2015, 2016 ZapCon Winner
    • forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php/topic,137636.msg1420628.html
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #266 on: May 09, 2017, 07:50:53 pm »
I'm  just glad to see Xiaou2 is still alive. Truly.

Someone at work gave me this today. I should have probably punched her in the face and screamed "J'accuse!" at her, huh?

***Build what you dig, bro. Build what you dig.***

jtslade

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 746
  • Last login:January 11, 2023, 11:34:45 am
  • Keep it looking originallish!
I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #267 on: May 09, 2017, 08:41:03 pm »
Old school classics and new school VR. Fun video games is what it's all about.

Let's be cool and play some games.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ms. Pacman Original Cocktail with Non destructive mod to Groovy Arcade Linux with All 4way Vertical Cocktail capable 2 button or less games.


Neo Geo MVS Mame Cab Running Hyperspin, 25" Nanao Arcade Monitor, Mini-pac, ATI Radeon HD 4850 (ATOM-15), IL 8 Way Euro-Sticks from Paradise Arcade, Win XP 64bit, and tons of other junk.


shponglefan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1600
  • Last login:December 15, 2022, 07:22:35 am
  • Correct horse battery staple
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #268 on: May 09, 2017, 09:16:01 pm »
What they Should have done,  was left the tech at a mid-grade level,   rather than aiming for the top-tier experience.

The challenge with that is there is a minimum threshold to have an acceptable experience.  This is why the current headsets (Vive/Rift) target 90 FPS, 1080x1200 resolution (per eye), sub 20ms latency...

At any rate, it's early adopter tech so in time we should see both improvements to the existing technology and cutting of costs as economies of scale are realized.

shponglefan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1600
  • Last login:December 15, 2022, 07:22:35 am
  • Correct horse battery staple
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #269 on: May 09, 2017, 09:42:37 pm »
I won't discount that.  But given the cost, and by that I mean not just monetary, but complexity and space requirements, the push for those things might actually be harming the adoption rate of the technology.  Based on what I have been reading, even when given  the opportunity to try both, the uninitiated tend to be happy with the lower cost, less complex stereoscopic and head tracking offerings.  By making those individuals believe that they aren't getting the "full experience", rather than paying more and dealing with the extra requirements, they will likely just forego it altogether.

Oh, I agree.  It's an unfortunate paradox: to really have the best experience also has some of the highest barriers to entry just by virtue of physical space.  Eventually this could be solved by self-contained, wireless systems that don't require dedicated spaces.  But we're aways away from that yet.

Quote
I'm really not trying to be flippant, but always holding onto something is not really reflective of reality in most circumstances.  Sure, we currently play games in just that manner, but when part of the gameplay becomes being able to reliably perform normally mundane tasks with a motion controller (like pushing a button on a panel, picking up and placing objects, etc.) then I'm not sure it's delivering on expectations.  I'm also curious as to how much of the typical motion controller gameplay "fudging" is used, to make the player feel like they are in better control than they actually are. I'd be interested to hear if you've noticed any of this.

The Vive controllers are somewhat large so a lot of game design tends to cater towards that; for example, making things like levers or buttons or whatever a bit over-sized compared to what they might be in real life.  When there are issues, I find it tends to be more a problem of in-game physics than the controllers themselves.  There are games with really good interactivity and physics, so I know what the controllers are capable of.

And in most cases using motion controllers in place of hands is quite natural.  If you think about it, we use hand-held tools for manipulating objects all the time.  Just think about every time you eat a meal, for example.  We don't stop and think about whether it's natural to use a fork or spoon; we just do.

The times where I do find there is a disconnect is when I'm holding an object that blatantly doesn't line up with real life.  For example, in Vanishing Realms you use a sword, but because of how light the controllers are, it feels like you're holding a foam sword.  This could be compensated in real-life with attachments; and indeed some people have been coming up with things to better simulate VR objects.  I suspect that in time we'll see an evolution of motion controllers for VR and we likely won't be limited to a single controller type.  Sort of like how we now use driving wheels versus joysticks versus flightsticks, etc.

Quote
Case in point, I don't like sharks, or the general vulnerable sensation of being in the ocean.  When I played the 3D 360 shark video, and turned my head to see  the massive great-white right in my face, my brain produced a response.  First, momentary fear, mostly because it was unexpected, and second, the sensation that the beast had physically brushed against my body as it passed.  I.e. it filled in the blanks, and that effect was with just a good cell phone and a well done video. 

If that's the level of experience you had just from a 360 video, then you really ought to try a proper VR setup one of these days. ;)

Quote
Focusing on the highest visual quality stereoscopic HMD and good head tracking, along with games and experiences suited to those capabilities, is probably the ticket to hook most gamers.  I'd rather pay for a better visual experience, thereby more easily suspending disbelief, while also simplifying use.  But the technology to do even this, isn't yet within reach. Thus the importance of the motion controllers to add to the experience.  I just can't help but feel that it's going to be a while before the experience I'm looking for will be available, and I'm really not excited to help fund every step along the way.

Oculus initially took the seated w/ HMD approach, until the Vive blew expectations out of the water.  As I said, room-scale and motion controllers add considerably to the experience; wlking around and physically interacting with a virtual world improves the experience moreso than simply improving visuals.

Eventually we'll have the best of both, but for visuals it will take some time for graphics processing power and better screens to become more affordable.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2017, 10:40:15 pm by shponglefan »

Samson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10
  • Last login:March 23, 2022, 04:18:46 pm
  • I want to build my own arcade controls!
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #270 on: May 09, 2017, 10:28:53 pm »

I'll also state that those who think that a high-end phone is unable to provide a "taste" of the technology, simply doesn't know what they are talking about.  My phone has virtually every possible sensor, a high-quality 5.7" IPS screen with resolution that is 1.75 times that of the PSVR.   With good apps, the head movement tracking is fast and feels very natural.  What it can't provide, is movement within 3D space, which is the sketchiest part of being visually isolated from real-world objects.  It also can't provide user interaction without a Bluetooth controller (which I have).  I played with it some more last night.  One app stood out for me, and that was a ride in a flying car over a "BladeRunner-esque" cityscape.  The effect of looking out the windows at objects as they passed by, and seeing the driver and car internals in convincing 3D was definitely cool.  I almost expected to see my hands in view as I stretched them out in front of me.  And then something else struck me:  Even with the best technology currently available, I would never be able to naturally interact with the environment with only my hands. This is another level of disconnect, which is yet to be fully addressed.  Even with the best of what is available, the user is no more inside the virtual world, than a laparoscopic surgeon is inside a patient's chest cavity.  While better controllers than the PSMOVE are available, they are still controllers, and still motion controllers.  Motion controllers lack the precision of analog switches and levers, but those lack the freedom of movement and interaction.  The result is a mash-up of the two, which does not in any way mimic a human's natural interaction with a physical world.


Not to get into any other points of why VR will or won't succeed, but there are some real reasons why phones currently can't provide a 'taste' of what VR is really like. 

There's been a lot of research (  look at NASA as well as Valve ) into what it takes to make someones visual system think it's in a valid space at a subconscious level.  For 95% of people, the image needs to be updated at a minimum of 90hz,  you need  motion to photon ( the time from when you move your head to when an updated image hits your eye ) latency of <20ms, and you need positional  motion tracking with about mm resolution.  Resolution is less important than positional tracking and latency for actual immersion. 
  Your phone display doesn't run at 90hz, lacks positional tracking completely, and doesn't have IMUs fast or accurate enough to provide adequate rotational tracking - even if the phones refresh rate were 90hz.  The best mobile platform, the gearvr, includes additional IMUs to help with IMU accuracy and sample rate, but you're still limited by screen refresh rate and latency.  If your 'VR' experience is standing at the edge of the grand canyon, hitting these minimum targets is the difference between feeling like you're using a fancy 3d viewmaster to view a scene, and your subconscious believing you're someplace else one step away from plummeting and kicking in your fight or flight response. ( Even when you consciously know you're safely in front of your PC ).  The difference is pretty dramatic.   Bad analogy - you can only 'taste' that kind of experience with a phone in the same way you can 'see' a color you've never seen by having someone describe it.

In regards to motion controllers, you're right, you can't do everything you can with your actual hands - but this can be addressed surprisingly well by limiting the experience itself.  If you're character is always supposed to have a gun or flashlight or tool in his hand, and you're always holding a controller, it feels right. Consistency works pretty well.   And although you can't get the tactile feel of flipping an actual toggle switch, you can naturally and believably interact with 'holographic' touch screen guis with fingertip ( finger singular ) precision. 

tl;dr with a phone you'll see it, but not 'believe' it.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2017, 10:59:19 pm by Samson »

pixel

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 102
  • Last login:December 24, 2019, 05:33:55 pm
  • I want to build my own arcade controls!
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #271 on: May 10, 2017, 10:26:32 am »
Heh... I love how paying 2 extra bucks for your ticket to an imax movie is compared to buying hundreds of dollars of equipment for a home setup.  People absolutely want 3D as a novelty in public forums, I already expressed that if he would bother to read the posts, but that isn't the same as wanting to invest the time, money and effort into  doing a home setup.  Hell even now that 3d tvs cost basically the same as a regular tv, nobody is buying them... thus the lackluster 3d tv sales.

 Sorry,  but Ive seen so many posts about how people hate glasses / 3d...  as well as how 3d movies are garbage...etc...  that it boggles the mind.   Everywhere you go, theres always some loud mouth,  that had to trash something that they are not enamored with...  and they try to project their own feelings and assumptions onto pretty much everyone else.

 Ive already stated,  just as you,  that cost is a huge problem with VR.   That cost would have stayed low,  had the rift chose to stay at a reachable early prototype level.  Something that peoples current gen PCs could have been fine with,  so that the investment was only a mere $200 at most for the ride.   In fact,  it was doing very well,  and gaining in sales and popularity... at those early stages.

 Its when they decided to push to the higher end... that they lost the core  'poor'   mass audience.    Its one thing to have or get a spare $200... and quite another,  to fork over $1000+  for a new PC, video card,  accessories...  and to end up with a very expensive hunk of hardware... that has very little offering in software,  and those games which it does have... are still very far from the goal of what people expect...  especially for that price point.


 As for your quip on 3dtv sales... I do not think you can easily get hold of a 3dtv that does both 4k and 3d today.   And thats the issues... (along with the horrible idea to have multiple incompatible glasses / hardware standards).     People would love the 3d on their large flatscreens... but to give up on 4k?   A cheap +45"  4k  tv at walmart is like 700 or less now,  I think.   3d incorporation, would have been fairly easy for these tvs... even if it was kept at the lower resolution / framerate.   But, the companies chose a few more dollars in profit,  rather than keep the 3d tech.

 It does not help,  that the content,  just is not available for 3d,  and what little is available,  is WAY too overpriced.  (Bad enough that many bluray / dvd released are still crazy expensive... and most will just wait till they hit the $10 marker to buy them.   And thats a fair price point... considering many films are pretty pathetic,  and are not worthy of much beyond a few watches,  let alone must-haves).

 Initially the LCD glasses were like 100$ a pop... and that did not help a family of like 4... whom wanted to watch a movie together.   The competition drive down the price to a mere $40 a pair... and so that became less of an issue too.  (the problem then,  was a mindfeild of incompatible / different standards to try to figure out)

 

 All of this leads to data that figureheads try to interpret as "people dont want 3dtv".    Or   "People dont want to wear the glasses".   Both of which are not really true, for the majority of the masses.   The reason is content lackings,  price point on that content,  as well as some of these having very poor standards of quality.

 Fix all of that,  and 3dtv,  ..  would easily start to gain mass acceptance and greater sales.


 And as for PC 3d,  many have tried,  but,  its always been a standards issue.   Dedicated lock into a hardware vendors video card and special drivers... that the companies do not keep updated / active / functional.    Drop the price to like $75,  (not 150+)   drop the dedicated hardware vendor crap,   and get Microsoft to actually play-ball with their OS...  and Bam... you will get Millions of 3d users,  enjoying and creating 3d content on their PCs.    And M$,  should already have been working on / implementing a 3d desktop / windows environment.  Even if its simply floating icons, windows.    Let alone,  3d Painting programs, (get with it already  Adobe / Corel ..etc)

 But hey,  at Least we FINALLY are starting to get more color depth support.  As as artist, its been sickening,  to see how my art and photos,  are butchered when working with a PC and a typical PC monitor.  (let alone the Poor drawing interface options)


Quote
Not to get into any other points of why VR will or won't succeed, but there are some real reasons why phones currently can't provide a 'taste' of what VR is really like.

 Well, IMO,  3d is 3d.   If it is done well,  you do get a taste.   Certainly not anything like the real deal,  at a high level.  But it does provide some interesting and fun experiences.   And really, at the end of the day,  thats what people want.   An interesting and fun experience,  that does not break the bank.   Not everyone has a boatload of expendable cash.


 A few of the games Ive played,  were poor..  and some were quite cool.  Problem for me,  has always been the lack of a controller,  and or lack of much interaction at all.
Not to mention,  my phone heating up to  auto-reboot   point.   heh


 Worst discovery for me,  re-mobile processing power,  was getting a Galaxy Note 2 some years ago,  thinking I could use it for art at times... and finding out that mobile drawing apps are cut down and crippled so badly,  that it makes using these programs painfully impossible to deal with.  I found an ancient fujitsu laptop with xp and a wacom digitizer built in,  and called it a day.


 IMO,  the biggest problem I have with every argument high-end VR made today ... is the use of a tall aspect ratio,  in a  'high end'  device.    If anything is going to ruin your VR experience... to me... it would be that feeling that you were wearing blinders on.   Looking through binoculars... rather than seeing a wide expanse.   It also ruins the whole nature of the game format,  that it is supposed to help Fix...  3d fps.   In most FPS games,  they cant have many enemies attack from behind... due to limited field of vision,  and lack of quick turn controlling mechanisms.   Free that up, and one should be able to do a Robotron like 3d game.  However,   that cant really be done,   in a narrow feild of view...  if at all on current hardware,  due to speed of interactions,  and lack of 3d positional tracking accuracy.


IMO
 Phones will gather and keep some interest...  but nothing huge.
VR will eventually take hold... but,  not till its around or under $200 price point in total.

pbj

  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 10871
  • Last login:Today at 03:47:56 pm
  • Obey.
    • The Chris Burke Band
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #272 on: May 10, 2017, 11:32:32 am »
When exactly did he transition from joysticks to VR? 

If I recall correctly, wasn't he homeless and living out of a van, and then fired from his job for sneaking in after-hours to shower and sleep?

How did we go from that to dropping $3,000 on a VR setup and criticizing those that don't?



Samson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10
  • Last login:March 23, 2022, 04:18:46 pm
  • I want to build my own arcade controls!
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #273 on: May 10, 2017, 12:27:21 pm »

 Well, IMO,  3d is 3d.   If it is done well,  you do get a taste.   Certainly not anything like the real deal,  at a high level.  But it does provide some interesting and fun experiences.   And really, at the end of the day,  thats what people want.   An interesting and fun experience,  that does not break the bank.   Not everyone has a boatload of expendable cash.

Well, that was half of my point. 3d is 3d, but 3d isn't VR - it's just one component. 

A magiceye autostereogram != stereoscope image != IMAX3D != 360deg 3d != VR.

You can have some cool 3d experiences on current smartphones - but its just well done 3d.  You're looking at a 3d space,  but it's nothing at all like when your subconscious consistently believes it's a real space. ( And even the high end hardware available today can't do this for everyone. )


 

RandyT

  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6882
  • Last login:March 26, 2024, 03:33:28 pm
  • Friends don't let friends hack keyboards.
    • GroovyGameGear.com
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #274 on: May 10, 2017, 12:36:33 pm »
. . . and doesn't have IMUs fast or accurate enough to provide adequate rotational tracking - even if the phones refresh rate were 90hz.  The best mobile platform, the gearvr, includes additional IMUs to help with IMU accuracy and sample rate, but you're still limited by screen refresh rate and latency.

I won't dispute that there isn't enough horsepower in a phone to drive a 1440p display at 90hz.  But you can perform head movements slower to reduce the negative effects.  As for it not having adequate tracking, I think you should do a bit of research on the Snapdragon 820.  IIRC, there is some pipeline technology built in to reduces IMU sensor latency to the 2ms range, and supposedly with Nougat and Googles VR service, it can run on par with the Gear, without additional IMU's.  I say supposedly, because my phone does not yet have Daydream support.  But even without it, I do not find the head tracking to be lacking at all.  It feels very fast and accurate.

Regardless, it's plenty to demonstrate what VR is, and it's a very short leap to imagine what the higher cost units would (hopefully) deliver.  If you can identify it as a flaw, you can definitely imagine it being fixed.  But you might still question the extent to which it is on better units.  For instance, going from a 1440p image to a 1080p image might simply be trading blurry motion for imagery with less detail.

Quote
Bad analogy - you can only 'taste' that kind of experience with a phone in the same way you can 'see' a color you've never seen by having someone describe it.

Yeah, that's pretty bad ;).  I've seen a lot of colors, and if someone showed me a card which was substantially "red" and told me it was the same shade, but a little "warmer", I could envision that color pretty closely.  Much in the same way I can experience variable perspective stereoscopic imagery with motion blurring and wish the blurring didn't occur :)

Quote
In regards to motion controllers, you're right, you can't do everything you can with your actual hands - but this can be addressed surprisingly well by limiting the experience itself.  If you're character is always supposed to have a gun or flashlight or tool in his hand, and you're always holding a controller, it feels right. Consistency works pretty well.   And although you can't get the tactile feel of flipping an actual toggle switch, you can naturally and believably interact with 'holographic' touch screen guis with fingertip ( finger singular ) precision. 

If you don't mind pushing buttons with the business end of a Glock, then I guess it would seem natural.  But there's a difference between an action with a "believable" reaction, and natural interaction. 

Samson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10
  • Last login:March 23, 2022, 04:18:46 pm
  • I want to build my own arcade controls!
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #275 on: May 10, 2017, 02:30:05 pm »

I won't dispute that there isn't enough horsepower in a phone to drive a 1440p display at 90hz.  But you can perform head movements slower to reduce the negative effects.

Reducing negative effects is not the same as adding positive ones, or meeting minimum performance.   Moving your head more slowly has no effect on the latency between when your head turns and when an updated image hits your eye.  Again, the important targets to hit for VR are sub 20ms latency from when you move your head to newly rendered accurately motion tracked stereo images hitting your eye, and being able to strobe those updated images at 90fps.

Quote
As for it not having adequate tracking, I think you should do a bit of research on the Snapdragon 820.  IIRC, there is some pipeline technology built in to reduces IMU sensor latency to the 2ms range, and supposedly with Nougat and Googles VR service, it can run on par with the Gear, without additional IMU's.  I say supposedly, because my phone does not yet have Daydream support.  But even without it, I do not find the head tracking to be lacking at all.  It feels very fast and accurate.

No need to research it - my work phone is an S7.  There are a few phones now with better IMUs - but it still doesn't matter if the phone can't hit a 90hz refresh rate  - effective latency is still too high.  You need accurate tracking,  90fps, and < 20ms latency.  And again - you still have absolutely no positional tracking.  And the penalty for this is not just being unable to move around  - the small movements your head makes, even when standing still, are completely absent - and these are used to a surprising degree by your visual system.

Again - when I say VR - I'm talking about performance good enough so your subconscious believes the 3d space is real.

Quote
Regardless, it's plenty to demonstrate what VR is, and it's a very short leap to imagine what the higher cost units would (hopefully) deliver. 
Well, we're going to have to agree to disagree here.  Please just bear in mind I do have experience with most of the VR devices available today.  ( I have most of them ), so I am speaking from experience.   Also, my thoughts about current phone based VR have no bearing on what I think the future of VR may or may not hold.  Love my phone - it just can't do VR.

Quote
Yeah, that's pretty bad ;).  I've seen a lot of colors, and if someone showed me a card which was substantially "red" and told me it was the same shade, but a little "warmer", I could envision that color pretty closely. 
Oh, cmon - now you're just being disingenuous - and you're smarter than that :)  Shades of the same color?  ( I at least said 'new' color  ) 
I guess I asked for it, it was a bad analogy.
Obviously the answer is... an even worse analogy! ;) ...  Now explain your new color to someone who has always been blind.

Quote
If you don't mind pushing buttons with the business end of a Glock, then I guess it would seem natural.  But there's a difference between an action with a "believable" reaction, and natural interaction.

I ported Doom 3 BFG to VR.  In the game, your character has a PDA you use to read emails and video/audio logs etc.  There are also crates with touch screen keypads you use to enter a three digit code to open.   I modified the PDA so when you open it, it projects it's display holographically from the device in your hand into the 3d world.  When you're using real motion controls ( touch or vive, PSVR isn't really accurate enough ), using the PDA or keypads is as natural as sticking out your index finger and touching the holograph.  Your weapon disappears, the hand model changes to a fist with your index finger sticking out,  and you're scrolling through emails, selecting audio logs, and entering combinations naturally with your index finger.  My fingertip is perfectly aligned.  And this by far isn't the best VR UI example available.  Again - you can't do everything your hands can do, but you can make an experience that is completely natural, believable, and intuitave when you tailor it to the capabilities of the hardware you have.

You should really try some of the higher end experiences - until you have, you just won't know what you don't know.   
And VR is absolutely not for everyone.

dkersten

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1472
  • Last login:March 12, 2024, 11:47:30 am
  • If you are gonna do it, do it right..
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #276 on: May 10, 2017, 03:08:52 pm »
There was, is, and always will be a demand for the high end graphics cards.
Just like there is demand for arcade parts.  Yet I don't see you making hundreds of millions of dollars from it.  The CAD and Computing markets aren't significant enough to drive GPU development and still provide enough demand to keep production high and costs low.  There is a reason graphics cards used to cost $10k or more in that segment.

Quote
That's a bit over-generalized.  Samsung is doing it to help sell phones (profit).  Zuckerberg wants in on the ground floor of the VR software repository (profit). And then there is the military, who have already stated that current VR technology is pushing up against what they use, which costs much more.  Instant customer with deep pockets and an actual application (profit).  There are many motivations for dumping money into something, and it's usually with some shorter term goal in mind, with perhaps a reduced but possible chance of an outcome of much more.  There were sales projections and all of them fell far short of expectations.  I'm sure these were considered.
Despite sales projections falling short, more money has been dumped into development, so again I don't see where the industry as a whole is profitable right now.  That isn't to say that there are no short term profits to be had, or that companies like HTC aren't doing what they can to build the market and sell units.  There just isn't enough coming in to justify what is going out unless they are looking at the long term.  Wherever there is money being thrown around, there is room to make a few bucks.  Samsung is cashing in on it, sure.  And I bet they are also spending a bucket load of money in the background hoping to make their display technology and controller chips be a part of future VR headsets.

As for military, sure, they may well buy some units, but unless they plan to outfit every troop with a VR headset, they aren't digging very deep into those pockets.  In its current form, the military is probably looking at it as training hardware or perhaps for UAV control, in which they might buy a few thousand units.  That's not much more than a blip in overall sales, and probably at even lower margins than normal.  More likely, the military is interested in using VR for some kind of augmented reality, in which case it wouldn't surprise me if they were dumping millions into R&D behind the scenes, or even doing their own development.
Quote
That's the "chicken and egg" dilemma which could be it's downfall.
Yet no technology comes about without passing this dilemma.  You can always make short term profits on making a consumer product with existing technology, but VR is currently falling just short of the mark even with the latest tech, so it is going to take more development to make this take off. 

Quote
If the 90/10 rule is accurate, the "big boys" tend to get it wrong....a lot. 
Most businesses that fail are small businesses.  And it is usually because while they had a great idea, they didn't know a damn thing about business.  You don't get really big without getting a hell of a lot of stuff very right. 

Quote
I'd be looking at how much of their own money they are risking, as opposed to that of others.  In the grand scheme of things, however, 100 million to them is like $100 to one of us.  If the entire industry is dropping a billion, cumulatively that's a drop in the bucket.
I feel this reflects your view of big business and/or rich people being casual about throwing around millions of dollars and nobody cares because there is a nearly endless supply.  Not true in the slightest.  If anything, the opposite is true, the more money you have, the tighter you have controlled it to get there.

And VR is just dabbling in a multi billion dollar industry, it isn't that big on its own (at least not yet).  If 100 million is being invested in a business that has only shown a few dozen million in revenues at a low margin, that says that people are very serious about investing in this technology.  And if you have millions of dollars to invest, you aren't going to shrug and toss it down a hole and speculate for a moment that it would be nice to see it again someday then turn and walk away.  Anyone who invests in stuff with a low chance of returning big dollars is a fool, and it is rare for a fool to become rich enough to be able to invest in long term technology, even rarer for that fool to be the one in charge of investing other people's money.  I know and have met a lot of very rich individuals, and they all have two things in common:  they are usually smarter than me and are never fools. 

And don't confuse my statements about long term investment in the technology with the desire for any company to profit from their investment.  HTC still has shareholders to appease, and it is never good to fall short of projections for the quarter.  They and others are doing all they can to reap profits from this right now.  Ultimately though, they are investing more into the future of VR than they are making, and that tells me that they know something that the average Arcade enthusiast doesn't.

I can see where you might get the idea that a company with billions of dollars doesn't care about investing 100 million and losing it.  Companies like Google and Amazon seem to throw away millions on dumb ideas all the time.  But in each and every case, they weigh the risks and are prepared to take a hit if it fails.  And yes, sometimes those ideas fail and they lose money.  For every one of those crazy investments that fail, there are dozens of ideas like it that worked out.  That is what makes companies like that so big.  We might laugh at Amazon for investing in drones to deliver packages, but if Target and WalMart both start investing in drones, I would argue that the idea is going to be bigger than anyone here imagined.  It isn't just one company investing in VR, it is several, and they are all big players.  In case you haven't figured it out, when I see a bunch of people making a bunch of money, I will be more inclined to believe they know what they are doing.

Quote
Quote
...but anything can be accomplished with enough money.
No, it can't.  It can get farther, faster, but it's never a guarantee something will make it to the finish line.  Pesky things like physics, the "human element", etc. tend to get in the way.
Yes, I am exaggerating, but let's be honest, 20 years ago the dream of a 5" display with over 8 million pixels and a wide color gamut and high dynamic range of brightness was the stuff of the most outrageous science fiction.  Yet I can hold one in my hand today.  There is a contact lens out with a display built in to it.  The technology exists to print a video screen on fabric.  And scientists are figuring out ways to integrate electronics with nerve cells in the brain and actually inject sound and vision into people's heads.  You can't tell me that it is unrealistic to see an ultra light headset with high resolution screens in front of each eye that can augment or replace what a person is capable of seeing with their own eyes.  I wouldn't be surprised if it reached that state in a decade, let alone 2 or 3.  All it is going to take is a lot of money and some time.  And a lot of money is being invested.

Titchgamer

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4222
  • Last login:December 17, 2023, 08:05:48 am
  • I have a gaming addiction.....
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #277 on: May 10, 2017, 03:29:34 pm »
There was, is, and always will be a demand for the high end graphics cards.
Just like there is demand for arcade parts.  Yet I don't see you making hundreds of millions of dollars from it.  The CAD and Computing markets aren't significant enough to drive GPU development and still provide enough demand to keep production high and costs low.  There is a reason graphics cards used to cost $10k or more in that segment.

Quote
That's a bit over-generalized.  Samsung is doing it to help sell phones (profit).  Zuckerberg wants in on the ground floor of the VR software repository (profit). And then there is the military, who have already stated that current VR technology is pushing up against what they use, which costs much more.  Instant customer with deep pockets and an actual application (profit).  There are many motivations for dumping money into something, and it's usually with some shorter term goal in mind, with perhaps a reduced but possible chance of an outcome of much more.  There were sales projections and all of them fell far short of expectations.  I'm sure these were considered.
Despite sales projections falling short, more money has been dumped into development, so again I don't see where the industry as a whole is profitable right now.  That isn't to say that there are no short term profits to be had, or that companies like HTC aren't doing what they can to build the market and sell units.  There just isn't enough coming in to justify what is going out unless they are looking at the long term.  Wherever there is money being thrown around, there is room to make a few bucks.  Samsung is cashing in on it, sure.  And I bet they are also spending a bucket load of money in the background hoping to make their display technology and controller chips be a part of future VR headsets.

As for military, sure, they may well buy some units, but unless they plan to outfit every troop with a VR headset, they aren't digging very deep into those pockets.  In its current form, the military is probably looking at it as training hardware or perhaps for UAV control, in which they might buy a few thousand units.  That's not much more than a blip in overall sales, and probably at even lower margins than normal.  More likely, the military is interested in using VR for some kind of augmented reality, in which case it wouldn't surprise me if they were dumping millions into R&D behind the scenes, or even doing their own development.
Quote
That's the "chicken and egg" dilemma which could be it's downfall.
Yet no technology comes about without passing this dilemma.  You can always make short term profits on making a consumer product with existing technology, but VR is currently falling just short of the mark even with the latest tech, so it is going to take more development to make this take off. 

Quote
If the 90/10 rule is accurate, the "big boys" tend to get it wrong....a lot. 
Most businesses that fail are small businesses.  And it is usually because while they had a great idea, they didn't know a damn thing about business.  You don't get really big without getting a hell of a lot of stuff very right. 

Quote
I'd be looking at how much of their own money they are risking, as opposed to that of others.  In the grand scheme of things, however, 100 million to them is like $100 to one of us.  If the entire industry is dropping a billion, cumulatively that's a drop in the bucket.
I feel this reflects your view of big business and/or rich people being casual about throwing around millions of dollars and nobody cares because there is a nearly endless supply.  Not true in the slightest.  If anything, the opposite is true, the more money you have, the tighter you have controlled it to get there.

And VR is just dabbling in a multi billion dollar industry, it isn't that big on its own (at least not yet).  If 100 million is being invested in a business that has only shown a few dozen million in revenues at a low margin, that says that people are very serious about investing in this technology.  And if you have millions of dollars to invest, you aren't going to shrug and toss it down a hole and speculate for a moment that it would be nice to see it again someday then turn and walk away.  Anyone who invests in stuff with a low chance of returning big dollars is a fool, and it is rare for a fool to become rich enough to be able to invest in long term technology, even rarer for that fool to be the one in charge of investing other people's money.  I know and have met a lot of very rich individuals, and they all have two things in common:  they are usually smarter than me and are never fools. 

And don't confuse my statements about long term investment in the technology with the desire for any company to profit from their investment.  HTC still has shareholders to appease, and it is never good to fall short of projections for the quarter.  They and others are doing all they can to reap profits from this right now.  Ultimately though, they are investing more into the future of VR than they are making, and that tells me that they know something that the average Arcade enthusiast doesn't.

I can see where you might get the idea that a company with billions of dollars doesn't care about investing 100 million and losing it.  Companies like Google and Amazon seem to throw away millions on dumb ideas all the time.  But in each and every case, they weigh the risks and are prepared to take a hit if it fails.  And yes, sometimes those ideas fail and they lose money.  For every one of those crazy investments that fail, there are dozens of ideas like it that worked out.  That is what makes companies like that so big.  We might laugh at Amazon for investing in drones to deliver packages, but if Target and WalMart both start investing in drones, I would argue that the idea is going to be bigger than anyone here imagined.  It isn't just one company investing in VR, it is several, and they are all big players.  In case you haven't figured it out, when I see a bunch of people making a bunch of money, I will be more inclined to believe they know what they are doing.

Quote
Quote
...but anything can be accomplished with enough money.
No, it can't.  It can get farther, faster, but it's never a guarantee something will make it to the finish line.  Pesky things like physics, the "human element", etc. tend to get in the way.
Yes, I am exaggerating, but let's be honest, 20 years ago the dream of a 5" display with over 8 million pixels and a wide color gamut and high dynamic range of brightness was the stuff of the most outrageous science fiction.  Yet I can hold one in my hand today.  There is a contact lens out with a display built in to it.  The technology exists to print a video screen on fabric.  And scientists are figuring out ways to integrate electronics with nerve cells in the brain and actually inject sound and vision into people's heads.  You can't tell me that it is unrealistic to see an ultra light headset with high resolution screens in front of each eye that can augment or replace what a person is capable of seeing with their own eyes.  I wouldn't be surprised if it reached that state in a decade, let alone 2 or 3.  All it is going to take is a lot of money and some time.  And a lot of money is being invested.

Just reminded me with your comment about contact lenses, Has anyone seen the TV series called black mirror?
Its a uk series but very good and raises lots of hypothetical questions but there was a few episodes which would scarily relate to this in terms of where this kind of tech could go one day:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playtest_(Black_Mirror)

Its worth a look for anyone interested :p

dkersten

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1472
  • Last login:March 12, 2024, 11:47:30 am
  • If you are gonna do it, do it right..
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #278 on: May 10, 2017, 03:50:43 pm »
Heh... I love how paying 2 extra bucks for your ticket to an imax movie is compared to buying hundreds of dollars of equipment for a home setup.  People absolutely want 3D as a novelty in public forums, I already expressed that if he would bother to read the posts, but that isn't the same as wanting to invest the time, money and effort into  doing a home setup.  Hell even now that 3d tvs cost basically the same as a regular tv, nobody is buying them... thus the lackluster 3d tv sales.
You are comparing media to hardware.  It costs over a million dollars to put true IMAX technology in your living room.  To run a dual projector setup so you can use simple polarized glasses to watch 3D at home still costs in the range of about $60-100k.  Or you can rent it for $2 more per movie. 

You can compare the 3D tv with shutter glasses to cardboard VR (or a samsungVR) and be a little closer.  In both cases you have to have the display device that supports it, which will start at a few hundred dollars and go up from there.  For 3D TV you have to spend another $30-50 per set of shutter glasses.  You have to pay $25-$40 for a movie in 3D blu ray.  Then you have to put up with the higher frame rate and lower brightness.  Cardboard VR costs you another $5 above and beyond the phone, and content is free if you don't care about quality, cheap if you do, albeit very limited.  So if you have to compare 3D to VR, there you go, 3D is more expensive to get into, if all you want is to be able to say you have tried it and don't like it.

3D TV is a poor comparison to VR in any respect though.  It was never really developed much because all it really takes is 120hz and some fancy shutter glasses.  Most of it is software and media dependent, which means very very low cost of development.  Compare that to the cost to develop the tracking systems, write new game engines, develop controllers, come up with the designs for the headset, etc.  I bet they have already spent more on VR than was ever spent on 3D tv's in the last decade.  And TV manufacturers abandoned supporting 3D last year, and while some still have the support built in, it is only because the tech already exists so it was practically free to include it.

So recap:
Tech that sucked from day 1 but has a marginal cool factor if experienced in the best possible environment, cost very little to develop, has almost no media available to utilize at home, is already a dead technology in the home, a basic experience can be done for fairly cheap at home unless you want more media, and requires hundreds of thousands in hardware to "do right" in your home.
compared to
Tech that is amazing when done right and still pretty cool when done on the cheap, has a ton of content available after only a year, has had years to develop to this point, has even more money invested in future R&D and accessory development, can be had for practically free in a severely limited experience including hundreds of hours of free media, and costs about a thousand dollars to "do right" in any environment.

I'm still not seeing where these technologies have much in common.  I suppose they both add to the visual experience, but then again so does going to a strip joint.  Are you going to start comparing the cost of a stripper in your home to VR too?  I can tell you that the up front cost for that is about the same, but the experience will probably leave you about the same place as watching 3D TV. 

ark_ader

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5645
  • Last login:March 02, 2019, 07:35:34 pm
  • I glow in the dark.
Re: I have now tried Virtual Reality and it is amazing
« Reply #279 on: May 10, 2017, 04:05:46 pm »
I have found out with the Samsung VR headset and my Note5, that the capability is there with PC connectivity, but the environment isn't.  Its freaking hot after a while and if you wear glasses or contacts, it adds to the discomfort. I thought with the updated release of the Samsung VR headset, a fan would be incorporated into the design to stop the fogging.  I have tried all the anti fogging solutions to no avail.  Maybe it is a blessing, and people should not be wearing the VR headset for too long a period, due to complications of eye strain, headaches, going cross eyed  etc.

We all know what happened to the OPti-Grab.  :lol
If I had only one wish, it would be for three more wishes.