Ask HN: When will VR reach mass adoption? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: When will VR reach mass adoption?

11 pointsblunte11 comments

Virtual reality has been publicly available since the mid 1990s, where eager players (and highly amused viewers) would wait in long lines to play basic low-poly multiplayer VR games in arcades.

Now, 30 years later, VR is used in scientific, industrial, medical, and gaming domains. But it doesn't seem to be anywhere near early mass adoption phase.

Why not? When will it? And what will be the "killer app"?

View on HN

Never.

VR will always be a niche platform - simulation immersion simply isn't as useful in the general case as external monitors, and even if issues with vertigo are solved, the VR gear will always be less convenient than the utility and ergonomics of a cellphone and laptop.

Most applications and games aren't significantly improved with the addition of VR. This can be improved but until it's as easy to use a PS controller in VR as out, it will by definition be more limited in terms of mechanics. Hand tracking is a nice gimmick, but a controller has a higher bandwidth. Also, the need for physical space to interact with the virtual environment makes VR a toy for elites.

The immersivity of VR will never be what it is in sci-fi. No matter how good the resolution is, that virtual walking tour through Tokyo or the Louvre will never be "like being there." It can maybe kind of sometimes be good enough, but there needs to be a lot more high quality free content available, like a social media platform just for VR video. Yes, this would just be 3DOF, but unlike a lot of people, I think 3DOF video has a lot of untapped potential and it's likely to remain the dominant form of VR simply because you can experience it while sitting in one place.

I think there is potential particularly in virtual social spaces like VR Chat (a VR MMO like FFXIV and VR driven V-Tubing might be fun) but the ergonomic issues would have to be worked out first. As a consumer (I have an Oculus Go, and a Rift) the size and cost of the gear need to come down a lot to be worth it for most consumers, and the quality of hand and eye tracking need to go up by orders of magnitude. As a developer who wants to work with VR, the development and deployment workflow needs to be easier.

Maybe it is easy if you know what you're doing. I don't know what I'm doing and I'm wondering where the Unity for VR is.

I’m just some guy, but I have been in tech long enough (40 years) to learn that just because a technology exists doesn’t mean that it will be popular. So it’s no surprise to me that it hasn’t yet reached mass adoption. I have seen some really great technology cast aside. And usually for valid reasons from the market’s point of view.

I personally don’t see where VR is going to provide enough value—-and by that I mean in saving labor, money, resources or providing pure pleasure—-for mass adoption in legitimate markets. It is cumbersome, it looks silly, it’s unsettling and uncomfortable and it’s not really that great of an experience in my opinion.

However—-and I hesitate to say it—-it may become a bona fide substitute for certain kinds of “friendship”. That would seem to be the killer app, in more ways than one.

I simply think the company that is going to increase mass adoption is Facebook, through Oculus and The Vision Lab, Facebook has positioned Oculus such that you can only log in with FB Auth, this is kind of intentional, and perhaps we can think of the Metaverse as the next killer app. Since the AR glasses are coming from Apple soon that is going to make AR a house-hold product like the smart-speakers and thus increase appetite for VR. VR needs to be reduced in hardware and portability to be relevant to everyday users. I think this question is interesting but not easy to answer, if you asked in 2018, when will NFT's reach mass adoption, people might have said, not until crypto itself reaches that scale, however we saw this year, they became a household name, whether bubble or not. I think once people find utility of VR except gaming, then they will take it seriously, if you could make money in VR as a remote worker for example. It's not so predictable, I think network effects can play interesting roles, and they are often black swans. If I were to stretch my imagination, it would be something like 2025, purporting that hardware would have been reduced and developed further.

Most people replying here seem to be strictly thinking about tethered PCVR, and haven't kept up with things like the Quest 2 which is a $300 usd headset that addresses a lot of concerns like price, the screen door effect and the development flow. Unity has a very seemless workflow for the Quest 2 and honestly it only took me a few hours to set up my dev environment in unreal engine. The adoption trend in the last year has been steadily up as well.

https://www.kitguru.net/desktop-pc/mustafa-mahmoud/the-oculu...

In less than one year the quest 2 became the most used VR headset on steam.

It has only taken 5 months to sell over 5 million units with adoption still going strong.

https://www.androidcentral.com/facebook-q1-earnings-show-que...

Looking at all of these things I expect parity with mainstream consoles inside of a decade.

I am of the opinion it wont be "mainstream" anytime soon. But it will have a place in Gaming. I still think VR is sort of the wrong abstraction for many things. In Gaming it sort of brings a new dimension but I dont see it replacing traditional gaming given its space requirement and limitation. Think of it like console / TV gaming with controller never replaced PC gaming with Keyboard and mouse. VR being a third option. But it wont ever be dominant.

There is one thing I look forward most for VR is the requirement or interest in reducing latency in all part of computing. For VR to work we need to reduce all latency down to single digit ms. This is a tall order especially when you realise even keyboard input add double digit ms latency before it is even processed.

I thought Corona would have given it more of a boost than it has. I did a big trial at work with VR meeting software (3 different ones) this year and it was surprisingly great. It really felt like meeting people, much more so than regular cam meetings.

The problem is convincing people. One cannot be told what VR is, one has to experience it for themself. But Google cardboard has given it a bad name. I often hear 'Yeah already tried that, those rollercoaster videos. Meh.'. People equate that to real 6dof VR with hand tracking when it's in fact a difference of night and day.

Nevertheless Facebook is doing good work with the Quest 2. It really made high quality standalone VR accessible.

As for when it'll be early mainstream.. I guess in a year or 2.

Not within 5 years. The number of games available is extremely low, that of quality/immersive ones even lower. Watching through a headset still feels like watching through a mosquito net. Tracking is becoming better, but full body tracking should become standard, low-fidelity grabbing things is just not enough. Prices have to lower, too.

The oculus quest 2 is only $300 USD and is the majority of headsets sold. I don't think tethered PCVR is the future but FB sure seems to be making a lot of progress here with mobile VR.

It won't. VR is depressing. I don't want to be sitting in a chair in a room at my place when I can do real life activities.

What about room scale VR where there are a number of physically taxing apps or workplace training where you can simulate dangerous situations without consequence?

I don't think I've ever sat in a chair using VR, in fact boxing and HIIT training are two things I use my headset for most often.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com