Tried Vision Pro. Here's what I thought
old.reddit.com
old.reddit.com
And for the last two weeks it has been hanging there untouched. I think it's my tummy's fault. I had mild but definite nausea that improved but didn't go away. The prospect of even a little more of that is enough for my subconscious to overrule my intention to use it.
The review says that the Q3 gives 80% of the capability of the Apple. But it would be worth a lot to me if that final 20% is enough to convince my tummy.
In that front, it seems like the Vision Pro has just no option for that and all the reviews point at a fairly low immersion, even for 3D movies.
For better or worse it really feels like a glorified TV/computer monitor on so many aspects. (BTW limiting what to do with a Quest3 isn't difficult either. There's now a windowed mode with a prompt when an app wants to go immersive. Dismissing the prompt lets you stay in windowed mode as long as you want)
I think that's a big part of why Apple is doing their best to pretend that any VR experiences that also involve moving your viewpoint around don't exist. Static or 'grab and drag the world around' styles work much better for avoiding nausea in general.
First of all, you should always stop the moment you feel any motion sickness. You more you try to power through, the worse it gets.
Don’t do anything with artificial locomotion. (Where your VR movement does not match up to your real life movement.) Many games have teleport options and snap turning instead of smooth. There are also some great roomscale games such as Superhot, elevent table tennis or Walkabout mini golf. You will eventually acclimate and be able to do smooth locomotion.
Some games have framerate options, put it to 90 or 120hz
Set up a fan and have it blow on you.
For me, I took about a month to acclimate, but after that can you play any kind of game and not get sick.
I have heard reports that Vision Pro also causes motion sickness for new VR users.
So maybe, just a speculation, people prone to being VR sick might also have potential to experience more / better immersion? I don't know. With how VR tricks my brain, I can't imagine why I'd get sick from what I experience, or how I would mistake what happens in VR to real life. It still is an amazing experience nonetheless - but after trying everything you need to create fun using it yourself because good content runs out fast. Developing experiences with it / tinkering with experimental stuff is where I'm at, or else it will collect dust. Without PCVR, I would not get any good use out of it for sure.
A ProVision doesn't really satisfy my use case (like 70% of what I expect from the Quest 2), but I wonder how it compared display wise.
My main use case is watching the 360º spherical panoramas I take with my Ricoh Theta Z1 camera, and possibly some light gaming, although Call of Duty Above and Beyond’s dogged insistence on realistic weapons handling is more of a drag than fun.
I’m still working on getting a WebXR-enabled photo gallery generator using Three.js to be able to share those immersive panoramas with friends & family.
Don't play any of the games where you can move yourself/camera without walking or teleporting.
Eg. Don't ride a roller coaster.
Horizon World with teleport on is pretty tolerable.
That’s a century away absent a mass market vr/ar product to act as driver for competition and innovation
My guess would be anywhere between 20-50 years, a century just feels too long.
That is what we all want, after all: a Holodeck. Real life without the danger or expense. It would be amazing, and I truly hope we get there, but pale imitations just don't work.
Speak for yourself.
>Real life without the danger or expense. It would be amazing
No thank you.
Literally anything can be an addiction. You can get addicted to getting slapped in the nuts if you’re motivated enough.
The ease with which one can become addicted to digital consumption is the problem, not the digital media itself.
It's not just "ease" though, it's that some of the smartest, highest paid people in the world get paid to specifically push the set of content that is the most addicting.
It’s way more active than a game console. You stand, kneel, punch, swing your arms and break a sweat. It may not be a gym workout, but it’s not half bad if you were otherwise going to be on the couch.
Social experiences are person to person instead of broadcast. You talk with real embodied individuals instead of massive threads with thousands. It’s way more human than even a group chat. I can see it eventually surpassing FaceTime.
I am generally annoyed by this common advice. Nature and trees don't mean the same thing to everyone. Nature is just boring to me TBH. When using VR (or tech in general) I am not looking to replicate or improve the feeling of being "outside". It is a different thing altogether.
And to the people who are going to say, "then dont use it," I counteroffer the fact that--at least where I live--there is a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't aspect to phone use. You will be socially isolated if you don't conform, especially if you are a teenager. Tech evolves faster than our minds, morals and laws can handle. I dont think humanity is ready to jump into fully immersive screenlife quite yet, and I fear Apple makes things sexy enough to be the ones to kick us down that well.
Now, I'm not stupid. The moment people saw AI generated art as art, something fundenmentally changed: no longer were these impregnable objects that infinitely aroused our aesthetic sensibilities containing something within them we might call "human." It was just machines, machines that could appear confusing and scary to us, in a way that has started to feel overwhelming.
The world is turning, but what will end first, the concept of humanity, or humanity itself?
I think that's more of Meta's approach. Apple seems to be aiming for something a bit more like Dennou Coil, where the virtual coexists with real things rather than being an either/or.