Hacker News Reader

Comment by adwf | Hacker News Reader

Not to be too much of a downer, but I still think the main problem with VR isn't the technicality, but the practicality.

We had the exact same problems with motion controls. They might momentarily enjoy the novelty of a motion game, but it's just a gimmick. When you get down to it, a lot of people enjoy just sitting on the couch twiddling their thumbs to get the character to do all the work.

They play games to relax, not get a workout. If you force them to stand up and move, you've already failed.

Where I do see VR having some interesting applications is in the workplace. Replacing all your monitors and work environment with a virtual space of unlimited scope.

Imagine remote working - where one moment you could be typing away on a sunny beach, the next you're in a scheduled meeting room with all your colleagues, without having to move an inch.

View on HN

> Imagine remote working - where one moment you could be typing away on a sunny beach, the next you're in a scheduled meeting room with all your colleagues, without having to move an inch.

I'm actually eagerly looking forward to what I guess would be called Fantasy Tourism.

VR apps that let you explore or even live in fully fleshed-out fictional locales. Of course it would probably just start off as Virtual Tourism, where you can remotely visit real-world cities and landmarks and interact with other visitors there, before adding beautiful, bizarre or surreal places that don't exist (or can't exist) out there.

I grew up and live in a fairly squalid corner of the world, and seeing pictures like [1] [2] [3] [4] fills me with a wistful longing. I'd totally spend most of my waking hours in these if I could.

[1]: http://i.imgur.com/F13RGuh.jpg (courtesy of 防人 on pixiv)

[2]: http://i.imgur.com/AKV5QkR.jpg (Raphael Lacoste from DeviantArt)

[3]: http://i.imgur.com/jlbAXdq.png (三登 on pixiv)

[4]: http://i.imgur.com/I6psL2j.jpg (by Ford Nostalgia)

No doubt popular brands will jump in sooner or later and start offering tickets to say Tatooine or the Shire.

They don't need to have any "gameplay" per se, but they should still have realistic physics (more than most proper games), be "staffed" by real people (running the in-world shops etc.) and of course offer lots of character/cosmetic customization features.

Whoever makes the first killer application of that idea will probably become THE social hangout for the kids of tomorrow to spend their time in, maybe killing Facebook and the like. That is, if Facebook doesn't come up with something like that themselves.

Now that's a cool idea! Not sure I'd want real people in it though, might end up a bit Second Life-ish. But if you could each get sharded into your own version of the world, that would be a cool experience.

You should try InWorldz. It doesn't use a HMD yet (though there has been some work done on a true VR client), and the graphics quality and physics may or may not be as perfect as you want, but it fits what you are looking for exactly in the social aspects. There is no 'game' per se, other than whatever contests, roleplay etc. that users might choose. Some people do spend most of their waking hours socializing there, or running real businesses there, etc. All the content is created by users.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4KvpOrSNLU

Agreed. I would invite VR developers to consider whether or not home is the best setting for VR gaming. The developers of Killer Queen [1] were smart in developing their game for arcades; had it merely been a Steam release, it may have been looked at as just another quirky indie game with pixel art.

Come to think of it, VR in arcades could actually take off. Think of a physical enclosure designed to contribute to the presence of the VR experience. Arcade rail shooters have been accomplishing this for years through the use of a chassis that moves based on events within the game.

[1] http://killerqueenarcade.com/

I've come to the same conclusion: VR belongs in an arcade. The tough part is coming up with a game worthy of a VR arcade... Batman Beyond-style.

If you want to do arcade VR you'll need to solve the Pink Eye problem before I get anywhere near it.

There's a pink eye problem with HMDs? This is the first I've heard of it, but I suppose it makes sense.

Yep. A local company in OC is currently developing a VR headset condom that will solve the hygiene problem. Going to a bunch of meetups and trying out VR can get disgusting.

I'm all up for anything that ushers in a revival of coin-op arcades outside of Japan.

I like the idea of taking old laser tag arenas, kitting them out with lighthouses, and then having vives hooked up to backpack pcs. Battery life is only an hour or so, but I'd like to see you last an hour of running around a jungle/glacier/moon/starship/wartorn village. You map the physical space into a variety of play arenas built in your engine of choice, so that snowdrift corresponds with that pile of foam, this bridge is that ice bridge, that room is this room, etc.

The tech is already here - the hurdles are pretty minimal, it's just a question of setup.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream_Park

Sorry, I don't agree. It's a gimmick only if you don't appreciate the immersion.

I can't imagine playing Xortex (a game in Valve's 'The Lab') on a 2D monitor. It just wouldn't be possible to even come close to replicating the experience.

Valve also has a new product called "Destinations" which is basically creation tools and a viewer for photogrammetry scenes. One of their examples is Mars, with a realistically rendered model of Curiosity on the surface (which itself is based on photos from Curiosity). It's the closest I'll ever get to walking on Mars. And being able to walk around an actual-sized Curiosity is quite something in itself.

Yep. TV's are not great at conveying radio plays. But, that's all people could think of to do with them initially. Turns out they are better for content like Game of Thrones. Phones and tablets are not great at playing deeply engaging games like Quake III, but people tried to make that work initially. Turns out they are better for shallow games to fill in spare moments of boredom where ever you are. VR is not good for a lot of games we are used to. This is the experimentation period where we get to learn what it can do differently and discover new styles of games that didn't make sense to attempt before.

> Yep. TV's are not great at conveying radio plays. But, that's all people could think of to do with them initially. Turns out they are better for content like Game of Thrones.

I get what you're saying, but I think that's a rather terrible way to contrast radioplays and content made for TV. The experience of watching "Game of Thrones" isn't that different from listening to the BBC radioplay of "Lord of the Rings"[r]. I think "The Wire" or "Generation Kill" might be better examples of things that I think work better on TV, than I can imagine them doing on the radio. Or maybe "The Expanse" or even "Firefly".

Doesn't mean I don't like "Game of Thrones", I love the adaptation - but with its many characters and demanding storyline (even for those of us that have read the books) - I don't know. Somehow, while it is a beautiful production, I think it could've worked with a similar script for radio.

[l] Apparently the original series, in its 13 episode format isn't available to download/buy - if I understand it correctly the following Amazon link is to the remaster: https://www.amazon.com/Lord-Rings-Fellowship-Ring-Dramatised... See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings_%281981_...

A search did turn up this: https://soundcloud.com/inkmore/sets/lord-of-the-rings-radio

Which I assume should probably be taken down due to copyright infringement.

I am really only willing to continue a conversation with someone that says VR is a gimmick if they have actually played through a number of room-scale titles. Mostly Budget-Cuts, The Gallery, Minecraft in VR, Audioshield, or something like that.

There is still a large sentiment that compares this technology to the Wii style motion controls, and they really aren't even close... at all.

There's the problem though. I don't think all that many people are ever going to get to play a room-scale title.

First there's the expense of the headset. Granted, it might come down a bit, but it's still a large expense on top of a console.

Second, there's the space that you need to play a Motion + VR game. It's not trivial for people to get that. A simple console + TV setup can fit in any tiny apartment around the world. Dedicating a whole room just to play a game? That's like asking people to move house just to play VR...

Even in my house which is fairly spacious, I'd still need to move around furniture everytime I want to play. It's just not going to happen.

Motionless VR, or at least, seated + arm movement VR, has a fair amount of potential however.

Eventually mobile phones will gain the power to provide compelling experiences, and tracking technology like Lighthouse (or low-latency SLAM tracking done by the phone) will allow for room-scale.

The headset itself will basically be a plastic holder with lenses.

Google is already preparing for this future with Daydream (https://vr.google.com/daydream/).

Yeah, that solves the price issue maybe, but it doesn't solve the space issue for Motion VR. Even in quite expensive houses, you're still going to be moving furniture to play a game. It just doesn't have the same ease of use of sitting back on a couch playing with a controller. I just can't see Motion VR growing beyond a niche market anytime soon.

The best idea I've heard so far is VR arcades, that would be fun.

I do it in a fairly small apartment without moving any furniture.

Just because you're not able to do it, or unwilling to adjust a few things, doesn't mean others won't. HTC & Valve have sold nearly 100,000 Vives, Oculus probably similar.

> The best idea I've heard so far is VR arcades, that would be fun.

I'm waiting for laser tag arenas that are fully mapped in VR. Walking up real stairs while seeing them in VR... What do you call it when it's past room-scale? Building-scale?

Even with the initial bugs with Elite:Dangerous and the DK2, I have a hard time engaging with the game in 2d - even now that I have a 30" monitor. Being able to look "up" through the roof windows of the cockpit and admire the huge yellow sun (or whatever) hanging there, makes a world (universe?) of difference. As for the "gameplay" that they focus on (dogfights and the like), I couldn't care less. I'm happy to be a glorified trucker, if I get to do it in space :-)

How much will it cost to be able to view this Mars experience through the VR and how many times can you do it before it get's boring?

The Oculus and its ilk happen to work great for certain classes of games - just about any vehicle-based simulator (racing, flying, etc.) where your immediate reference frame is static is perfectly suited to a 3D headset. I hesitate to call it VR in that case, as I feel like freedom of movement in the real world is wrapped up in some definitions of VR. For the things I care about, I essentially see 3D headsets as an evolution of the TrackIR concept (https://naturalpoint.com/trackir/)

Yeah I just saw this snippet on reddit:

https://imgur.com/topic/Gaming/swpjI58

That does actually look like a great use for VR in gaming. Stationary character, mobile viewpoint.

They might momentarily enjoy the novelty of a motion game, but it's just a gimmick. When you get down to it, a lot of people enjoy just sitting on the couch twiddling their thumbs to get the character to do all the work.

It's not at all like a Wii style motion control. Gestures aren't merely mapped to button presses. You have precise control, so you can do something like swing a sword between a monster's shield and helmet.

That said, if the game is reducing the motion controllers to something like the Wii motion controls, then it is a gimmick, and you might as well be sitting on your couch.

I'm curious. Have you actually tried the HTC Vive? Because my experience with it is entirely the inverse: I get bored playing flat games now. I just want to go back into that VR world.

This, if you haven't tried the HTC Vive (or the Oculus with the Touch controllers, but mostly the Vive), then you haven't tried VR.

There is no doubt in my mind this is no gimmick, it's the next step.

Exactly this. The only "flat" games I can now bear to play are the likes of civ. Playing something like fallout 4 on the TV now feels like I'm looking at the world through a squashed little tableau. It's dull.

It seems most who are calling it a gimmick either haven't tried it, or tried the dk2, or tried it at a trade show and haven't tried living with it.

I use it daily, for everything from a workout in holopoint to racing in project cars (all non vr driving games are now ruined for me, I of course picked up a wheel etc.), from minecraft to playing table tennis. I never thought I'd one day be in the minecraft world I started many years ago.

Playing greenwater at the moment and having to put it down frequently, as code has never made me jump and scream before.

Anyway. It's not a wiimote type gimmick. It's the future of human interfaces.

I hope modelling/engineering/architectural/etc software gets a hell of a lot of VR integration, that's always seemed to me the perfect application - it allows for an environment that close as possible the real thing without losing the technical tools that allow for rapid prototyping. Thinking of stuff like Autodesk Inventor, where in 2D it feels almost like you're milling physical items, with the ability to morph or clone or whatever at will. With VR, the development experience could be phenomenal.

I also see interesting applications as a passive device. It allows you to attend a concert or a sports match, and view things from the best possible spot in the audience. This alone, I think, could be a multi-billion dollar market, if only the device (and the content) was cheap enough for the average person.

Yeah that's the way I see it going too. Anything where you can just kinda sit there and not worry about moving much other than your head and arms is probably a great match. So virtual work apps, VR tourism, VR concerts and sport, racing games, etc.

It's just the whole movement thing I don't buy.

They've really got to think about the size of their market as well. Time and time again, any gadget or gizmo with limited hardware penetration has failed in the past. Motion + VR not only requires some fairly expensive hardware, but also requires a large clear space in your house somewhere. They're heavily limiting their market with that. No big publisher will seriously risk making a AAA game with such a small market.

Motionless VR has some serious potential though.

Oh my god I love this idea. We have 3 monitors where I work and it STILL doesn't feel like enough. Having an infinite area to place a Visual Studio window, SSMS, etc etc would be amazing!

Keep an eye on Envelop: http://uploadvr.com/unlocking-mystery-envelop-vr.

I'm not involved with them, at all. Just a fellow enthusiast waiting for this technology!

What do you mean when you say we had problems with motion control though? Because Nintendo certainly made a killing on it. It's not so popular now, but it was hardly a failure

In my limited experience with it, and not being a gamer, I think it has great potential for mindfulness and quasi-psychedelic experiences. I tried a simulation of scuba diving and after a minute felt my whole body and mind relax into a peaceful state.

It would be nice to have something like that by my desk when I'm getting stressed out from work. Take 15 minutes and visit the tropics, Antarctica or the Andromeda galaxy.

This is sort of true, but also not.

Besides, I really enjoy playing 2D games in VR through Steam in that giant theatre room.

> Replacing all your monitors and work environment with a virtual space of unlimited scope.

I don't even like wearing ear buds or headphones all day. There's no way I would last all day wearing a visor. I think for specific tasks it's pretty useful, but not for all day everyday.

You also lose the social interaction that gave motion controls their (limited) success. Wii Sports is fun because it's a light social activity like card games or horseshoes. VR is currently an anti-social activity, even moreso that normal video games.

VR is as anti-social as a telephone.

If you are hanging out with friends, pull a little box out of your pocket, press it against the side of your face and start talking to some invisible people and acting as if the people right in front of you don't exist... then you are being a jerk.

But, what if you were physically separated from your friends and wanted to hang out with them. Imagine if you could pull out a little box, press it against your face, start talking to them and suddenly it was as if they were right there with you no matter where they were on Earth. That would be a tremendous social enabler.

VR is like the telephone, but more so.

That's my rant anyway. On a lighter side: You are right that hanging around someone who is playing a game in VR is no fun. And, currently most VR games are still single-player because there currently isn't enough market to support the budgets required for many good networked multiplayer experiences. But, social VR is so awesome that there is no doubt that it will be a major use, if not the majority of use of consumer VR.

Not sure if you've experienced watching somebody play in VR but I personally find it really fun. This video gives you a good idea of it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYfNzhLXYGc

The networked social interaction is more social than any previous networking technology. And in person, the Vive usually does about as good at wii sports for keeping everyone engaged, even those who aren't playing.

This is just plain wrong. Please see Rec Room.

Even if you're not playing a multiplayer VR game, the people around you are having a blast watching and playing along with you. See the thousands of YouTube videos where people play VR with friends recording.

  > This is just plain wrong. Please see Rec Room.

no it's not wrong. I bought the GearVR in anticipation of getting the Vive when it launched. Wearing goggles is far more anti-social than regular gaming. It totally cuts you off from family.

I have a 2 year old and wife at home. During regular gaming, if my son or wife want my attention I am aware of it and it's trivial to pause and give them the attention they deserve. Goggles on the other hand are fundamentally isolating. It's hard to describe, but others that aren't sharing the experience with you feel cut off and almost hurt. Maybe that's not the best way to describe it but it's close.

The experience has put me off getting VR at this stage.

When used appropriately, I really liked motion controls.

Lag needed to be improved a bit, but I think Metroid Prime and Resident Evil 4 on Wii had the best FPS type controls ever. Even with lag it was really fluid. Headshots in RE4 Wii were so easy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com