Why is Meta's VR software so bad? | Hacker News Reader

Why is Meta's VR software so bad?

33 pointssp33235 comments

The environments look awful, the demo areas are badly laid out, they're apparently throwing basic ergonomics out the window. https://mobile.twitter.com/GalaxyKate/status/1548280749664903169 How did they spend so much money to get something so uncool?

View on HN

So, this is an ad for a specific experience, but they're generally actually high-quality experiences as other commenters pointed out. There is a limit to what will run on the quest 2 - a sub-$500 all-in-one VR platform that runs on a multi-hour battery. A beefy 3090 based system could render something better, but you couldn't wear that on your face and run it from a battery.

I'm sure you didn't click through the details of the tweet you shared (is it still a re-tweet if it's off twitter?) but the demo actually runs in browser and the location is algorithmically generated based on your stated interests.

The environment in the example looks like it was made in Horizon, their VR sandbox world-building game. They surely could have made it look fancier by using actual 3D modeling tools that games actually would, but this "VR Mainstreet" has the potential to be re-created by anyone using simple (IMO) tools they provide. If the goal of "VR Mainsteet" is that brands can make their own storefront in VR, showing what they can do with "non professional" seems like a good ad for the brands building things. The injection of insta-posts is because its trying to share the insta-profiles of small businesses. Its a weird demo, but its a web-rendered demo so it seems fine to me.

It's just an ad, they only have so many resources to dedicate to it. Marketing teams do what they have budget for, this "quality" seems more an MBA issue than a technical issue.

Ps: It sure is fun to shit on meta lately :)

PPS: It would be really cool, and an exciting development if they got Horizon to run in browser, it could make it easier for people to develop 3D rendered worlds and share them.

> they're generally actually high-quality experiences as other commenters pointed out

they are not competitive with 20 year old Playstation 2 software

> they are not competitive with 20 year old Playstation 2 software

Have you tried one? Nowadays they certainly are. Sure, you may encounter mobile-class graphics in some games, however these headsets can also leverage a gaming PC to stream higher quality titles as well.

Not to mention immersion. The PS2 simply cannot offer an immersive experience even close to what a VR headset can these days, not for most of today’s youth anyways. This is especially true when you factor in online gaming and other social aspects.

To suggest otherwise requires some strong nostalgia glasses I think.

I can't tell if you just mean because the newer screens are nicer, or if you didn't know the PS2 had a VR headset

Yes the quality has greatly increased since that headset ~20 years ago, and not only the screen. There is also game quality, software quality, features, “connectivity” (online gaming, social hubs). Overall the experience today is entirely different.

cool story

anyway, the ps2 stuff was more fun and had more players. good luck

Clicking through this ad, I really disagree with your contention that it's anything other than total garbage. It's an on-rails walk through a series of screenshotted instagram ads, the idea being that users will be... really excited to learn about the ads they can see in the metaverse?

There's no other pitch here. It's literally just some instagram screenshots floating in a near-featureless room you can slowly click around. This seems like the sorta thing you'd make if you've completely lost touch with your users and are just throwing spaghetti the wall as your PM directs you.

This is definitely not aimed at end users but aimed at advertising teams at companies that want to sell to end users.

Either way it’s totally something that came from a marketing budget not an engineering/ product budget… which is much smaller.

The software in question seems to be a simple VR ad for the magazine?

If you’ve used the Quest, their software is actually miles ahead of the competition. It’s a pleasure to use in comparison to all the Windows Mixed Reality crap.

Same. Regardless of your feelings towards Meta (which I'm not fond of), as a Quest 2 owner, their VR gear, ecosystem and most apps are absolutely top notch, immersive, fun and polished. Especially the ones developed in house, which this clearly isn't, as stated.

Feels like OP is fishing for some karma farming based on the community's well deserved hate for Meta.

Looks like leetcode style interviews are not bringing the right people on board.

Maybe crashing stock, low morale and threats of PIPs aren't bringing the right people on board.

software is not created overnight, what we are seeing now is the result of a few years of mindless leetcode style interviewing and not hiring people with years of experience in specific specializations.

For the most part software direction is set by product top down so blaming leetcode is plain misguided as developers have no say in product and you can't see the code from video

my point is that leetcode filters out experienced people and optimizes for mostly unexperienced younger people willing to prepare for 3 months, memorizing optimal solutions, and producing them on the spot in under a few minutes. to build great products you need master craftsmen, with experience. and product managers or marketing people are useless for that.

IMHO it's a classic innovator's dilemma. They get something so uncool because they spend so much money on it.

Reality Labs employs what, 17,000 people? The organization is large enough to be hidebound and risk-averse, but too small to effectively moderate an advertiser-friendly VR social network.

To quote the novel which coined the term (Snow Crash): "You can look like a gorilla or a dragon or a giant talking penis in the Metaverse."

Because they are fundamentally an advertising company masquerading as a social media company. They are trying to focus group their way to “what the kids want these days” and it shows.

Until Apple shows its cards it is the best available.

I think it is comparable to mobile phones in the 00's hardware/software wise.

I'm not a fan of Meta/Facebook, but this clearly states it was sponsored by Meta, not created by.

It looks to be created by the Atlantic (https://www.theatlantic.com/rethink/)

True, although they at least approved this monstrosity. It looks to be nothing to do with Oculus though.

Oculus software is by and large well done in my experience, from the hand tracking to mapping out the layout of your room and its furniture.

I mean their actual new core product that they are apparently betting the company on is absolute dogshit as well to be fair. Take a look at this and the replies

https://twitter.com/metaquestvr/status/1551943338038726657

That doesn't look... awful? For realtime graphics on a 120hz screen, that's not any worse than Memojis and leagues better than whatever Samsung's ill-fated AR garbage was.

I get a kick out of watching companies take the piss for bad art direction, but I really struggle to imagine a better solution here. Would people prefer photo-scanned faces mapped onto a low-res mesh? Methinks it would be even further into the uncanny valley...

You are kidding me right?

Nobody looks at that and feels like that’s even remotely in the ballpark of something anyone is ever going to be excited to use.

I hate Facebook. I'm excited for more VR/Metaverse.

It would be different if they just wanted VR to be a success. But to replace Facebook's once-in-a-economy golden goose money ultra-printer with it? Thats so much to ask as to be comical.

How would you design it differently?

In fairness to them, VRChat is/was the dominant VR social avenue and it doesn't exactly have cutting edge visuals. But there is something quite bland about that meta video. Like you have all this creative freedom and you choose a desk and some bobble heads.

I may not have picked the most charitable example, although I don't know why Meta would sponsor something that shows the platform in a bad light. But I've never seen anything that looks good from Meta. Starting around 1:00:00 in this John Carmack interview, you can see an environment made for talking about VR to the press, and it looks like crap. https://www.facebook.com/RealityLabs/videos/1264023127446649

I think Facebook has just chosen a graphical style for their "metaverse" which makes it really hard to make anything beautiful or interesting. To me it's reminiscent of Corporate Memphis (which FB arguably invented) - an extremely safe and bland visual language which is chosen to avoid drawing attention or making a statement.

https://www.hov.co/blog/post/the-rise-of-the-globohomo-art-s...

Meta is a web development company not a gaming company like Epic

They want it to run at 120 fps on unplugged devs. What do you expect?

Textures. Doom and Quake were way more visually interesting than this while running on worse hardware because the meshes were actually textured.

Basically once Zuck had kids it was over.

interesting take, can you elaborate? I am not baiting / trolling, genuinely curious.

Because the hardware sucks.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com