VR gets reality check with decline in investment

[Brenda Archer]

It is true that using a VR headset is more akin to watching a movie in a theater. While you can do other things while watching a movie in a theater, it is discouraged and you generally focus on the movie. VR is an experience - it's not something you partially pay attention to because you are actually immersed in the environment. Comparing it to situations where you multitask what you are doing isn't a valid equivalent. Both serve different purposes.

Saying it’s a device “for gamers” or for hours of immersion, is the same as saying that it’s not for most people. Even casual gamers are not so fully immersed.

So it’s for middle class males with privacy and large blocks of disposable time, and some percentage of children and retirees. That’s not a mass market device.

Gaming is cursed with a degree of the same problem. People are still struggling to imagine ways to get it out of the box that the typical marketing of the nineties and aughts put it in.

But that leaves money on the table and precludes social, rather than game oriented use.

I suppose that’s okay if the investors are content?

A lot of people don’t do things like go to movies - until a price point emerges that won’t make cash-strapped average people wince, it’s still not time yet.

Even a person on a budget can get something like an iPhone if they will accept a refurb.

But marketing only to the same people who are now hardcore gamers seems self-limiting after a point.

 

[Cristiano]

I didn't say it was a device specifically for gamers, I said VR is an immersive experience, whether you are playing a game, exploring in Google Earth, painting in Tilt Brush, or whatever you are doing. You seem to want to conflate it with something it is not. Those types of experiences require complete focus, and that is what VR is for. Not for distracting yourself while watching a kid or doing multitasking work.

I'm not sure why you are ranting about middle age white men, it has nothing to do with what I said.

Also, they are not marketing to hardcore gamers - not sure where you got that from at all. Look at this promo and tell me it is being targeted at hardcore gamers (or white men):



As far as social experiences, yes, VR is not for socializing with a bunch of people in the same room with you. Having a computer strapped to your face obviously limits your socialization. However, you can have fantastic social experiences in VR. Last night I spent several hours with Allison in both Rec Room and VRChat and had a wonderful time with her. We are not in the same place, yet it gave us the ability to spend time together in a way that is quite different and more immersive than just being at my desk on a computer.



One of my favorite things to do in VR is to use the Wander app, which uses Google's street view data in amazing ways to let you pretty much explore anywhere on earth just by dropping in on it. I can spend hours exploring different places.


None of this is specifically about gamers, hardcore or otherwise. Yes, the Quest is being marketed toward the same gaming market that the Wii and Switch appeal to, which is hardly the hardcore game, and not the vr enthusiasts who would go for higher end options. This is a mass market consumer device. It doesn't mean it will appeal to everyone, but it has a much broader appeal than previous entries and really represents a new start for VR.

 

[Soen Eber]

Can we have "Minority Report" interfaces in VR/AR? Wait ... I think I already asked that. Sorry, 2 hours of sleep.

 

[Brenda Archer]

I’m not against VR, I want it to work.

But I think total immersion is a really limited market, and I’m trying to explain why.

A lot of people have to be available to others 24-7 and most of adult women fit that description before retirement. It’s not an indictment of the tech, but ignoring this factor would preclude mass acceptance and leave money on the table.

The marketing of games in the nineties set the stage for “who is a gamer” and for who is allowed to check out socially at home. Possibly this is generational - I’m on the cusp of Gen X and the Boomers. Most women my age did not go online until we got it at work, and buy game consoles for our sons if we have them, but not for ourselves. Since Gen X women are often computer savvy at work this is completely an artifact of marketing and social expectations. For us to do differently, and some of us do, is to swim against the cultural currents.

VR for gaming and VW’s only would be an unfortunate niche.

I want to see apps like a 3D world in a Google Maps, or 3D social teleconferencing, or a 3D SL or Sims with as much simultaneous access to RL as I now have using a laptop. I believe multitasking and so me are what will bring Gen X women on board.

 

[Beebo Brink]

But I think total immersion is a really limited market, and I’m trying to explain why....A lot of people have to be available to others 24-7 and most of adult women fit that description before retirement.

There are certain segments of the population who are free to check-out from distractions for an hour or more, but there are other major segments who can't do that and are not going to spend $400 on a device -- even when they can afford it -- for a few stray entertainment minutes here and there.

Alone time is a luxury in today's society, especially for women. I'm child-free and I still have serious reservations about being able to use VR long enough to warrant buying the device. It's not really feasible now. It may be in a few years when I'm retired and have a lot more time.

 

[Cristiano]

I’m not against VR, I want it to work.

But I think total immersion is a really limited market, and I’m trying to explain why.

A lot of people have to be available to others 24-7 and most of adult women fit that description before retirement. It’s not an indictment of the tech, but ignoring this factor would preclude mass acceptance and leave money on the table.

The marketing of games in the nineties set the stage for “who is a gamer” and for who is allowed to check out socially at home. Possibly this is generational - I’m on the cusp of Gen X and the Boomers. Most women my age did not go online until we got it at work, and buy game consoles for our sons if we have them, but not for ourselves. Since Gen X women are often computer savvy at work this is completely an artifact of marketing and social expectations. For us to do differently, and some of us do, is to swim against the cultural currents.

VR for gaming and VW’s only would be an unfortunate niche.

I want to see apps like a 3D world in a Google Maps, or 3D social teleconferencing, or a 3D SL or Sims with as much simultaneous access to RL as I now have using a laptop. I believe multitasking and so me are what will bring Gen X women on board.

You are contradicting yourself in some ways. You can't have something that has you fully immersed in it that also gives you as much access to RL as your laptop. You are thinking of augmented reality, not virtual reality. These are devices that are designed for fully immersing you in what you are doing, whether it is exploring, playing a game, or watching Netflix on the equivalent of a 200 ft screen. You aren't popping in and out of apps, multitasking, checking facebook while you watch the news. Different use case, and that's fine - and not an indictment of the technology.

You are actually making the argument for the Quest in some ways as well. One of the barriers of previous headsets is that it required a lot of setup (sensors placed around the room, multiple usb ports on a computer for the headset and trackers) and roomscale (ie..being able to move around a physical space while in vr) was even more complex. When you finally do get it set up and put on the headset, it's generally not a quick pop in/pop out type thing. You tend to spend some time in the headset, though VR is a bit more taxing mentally so people tend to max out around an hour at a time without a break.

Being able to plop down in a chair and put on the Quest for a few minutes to explore something or play a quick game has very little barrier to entry. I've found myself throughout the day spending a little time sitting in a chair relaxing for a bit during my work day to try out more things on the Quest. I can easily put it on and take it off and go back to whatever I was doing, and it's waiting for me when I come back. I have used it in my office and my bedroom today just by moving from one room the the next with the headset and the controllers. No wires tethering me, nothing to worry about. I laid on my bed and tried out an incredible new relaxation app that had various environments you could teleport to. It relieved some stress I was having, and then I took it off and went back to what I was doing.

Again, VR is not for everyone. Honestly, nothing is for everyone (well, I suppose eating and breathing are). There is not going to be a vr device that simulatenously immerses you in a virtual world while also engaging you in the real one around you. That is what augmented reality is for, a tech that is still pretty new and quite different from VR.

 

[Brenda Archer]

You are contradicting yourself in some ways. You can't have something that has you fully immersed in it that also gives you as much access to RL as your laptop. You are thinking of augmented reality, not virtual reality. These are devices that are designed for fully immersing you in what you are doing, whether it is exploring, playing a game, or watching Netflix on the equivalent of a 200 ft screen. You aren't popping in and out of apps, multitasking, checking facebook while you watch the news. Different use case, and that's fine - and not an indictment of the technology.

You are actually making the argument for the Quest in some ways as well. One of the barriers of previous headsets is that it required a lot of setup (sensors placed around the room, multiple usb ports on a computer for the headset and trackers) and roomscale (ie..being able to move around a physical space while in vr) was even more complex. When you finally do get it set up and put on the headset, it's generally not a quick pop in/pop out type thing. You tend to spend some time in the headset, though VR is a bit more taxing mentally so people tend to max out around an hour at a time without a break.

Being able to plop down in a chair and put on the Quest for a few minutes to explore something or play a quick game has very little barrier to entry. I've found myself throughout the day spending a little time sitting in a chair relaxing for a bit during my work day to try out more things on the Quest. I can easily put it on and take it off and go back to whatever I was doing, and it's waiting for me when I come back. I have used it in my office and my bedroom today just by moving from one room the the next with the headset and the controllers. No wires tethering me, nothing to worry about. I laid on my bed and tried out an incredible new relaxation app that had various environments you could teleport to. It relieved some stress I was having, and then I took it off and went back to what I was doing.

Again, VR is not for everyone. Honestly, nothing is for everyone (well, I suppose eating and breathing are). There is not going to be a vr device that simulatenously immerses you in a virtual world while also engaging you in the real one around you. That is what augmented reality is for, a tech that is still pretty new and quite different from VR.

I know augmented reality is a different beast.

And it's very helpful that there's much more ease of use for VR.

But I don't see why VR has to always cut someone off from the outside world. Pass through of vision and/or sound would allow someone to check the RL world while still engaging with a VW. That still wouldn't make it augmented reality, but it would allow someone to, for example, answer a door knock without having to log out.

Low commitment uses of the tech could even be training wheels that allow more cultural acceptance of really checking out socially in favor of the device. And mass acceptance makes a fall in price come faster, so the tech doesn't get bypassed because it didn't make it big in time.

 

[Cristiano]

I know augmented reality is a different beast.

And it's very helpful that there's much more ease of use for VR.

But I don't see why VR has to always cut someone off from the outside world. Pass through of vision and/or sound would allow someone to check the RL world while still engaging with a VW. That still wouldn't make it augmented reality, but it would allow someone to, for example, answer a door knock without having to log out.

Low commitment uses of the tech could even be training wheels that allow more cultural acceptance of really checking out socially in favor of the device. And mass acceptance makes a fall in price come faster, so the tech doesn't get bypassed because it didn't make it big in time.

Well, sound is easy - the Quest does not cover your ears (you can use headphones with it, but it has integrated sound directed at your ears). As far as pass through, the Quest doesn't have a true camera system, it has tracking sensor camera, so they don't provide a particularly clear view (grayscale and a bit static-y), so it's useful when you are drawing the room outline or when it is warning you that you are getting close to something, but not to view what's around you with clarity. However, I flip the headset up onto my head a lot to look temporarily without taking it off, and even taking it off doesn't log you out of what you're doing (depending on your power settings it may go to sleep after a certain number of minutes).

You can't really get around the fact that you have a screen covering your face, so I don't think you'd want to answer the door with it still covering your face. To each their own, but I would think that would freak out your visitor However, as I said, it's quite simple to take it off and put it right back on, so it's not as limiting as you think.

 

[Brenda Archer]

Well, sound is easy - the Quest does not cover your ears (you can use headphones with it, but it has integrated sound directed at your ears). As far as pass through, the Quest doesn't have a true camera system, it has tracking sensor camera, so they don't provide a particularly clear view (grayscale and a bit static-y), so it's useful when you are drawing the room outline or when it is warning you that you are getting close to something, but not to view what's around you with clarity. However, I flip the headset up onto my head a lot to look temporarily without taking it off, and even taking it off doesn't log you out of what you're doing (depending on your power settings it may go to sleep after a certain number of minutes).

You can't really get around the fact that you have a screen covering your face, so I don't think you'd want to answer the door with it still covering your face. To each their own, but I would think that would freak out your visitor However, as I said, it's quite simple to take it off and put it right back on, so it's not as limiting as you think.

Thanks, this is helpful.

Of course I'd be VERY tempted to answer the door and say in a robotic voice: "Resistance is futile!"

 

[Argent Stonecutter]

Alone time is a luxury in today's society, especially for women. I'm child-free and I still have serious reservations about being able to use VR long enough to warrant buying the device. It's not really feasible now. It may be in a few years when I'm retired and have a lot more time.

Sunday morning is the only day I get extended time I can do stuff, with the door closed. And not every Sunday.

And of course there's not many people online Sunday morning.

 

[Adeon Writer]

As the biggest introvert in the world, all you guys scare me, I feel like I’ve been extremely lucky making sure I have oodles of hours to myself every single evening. I’d go insane.

 

[Argent Stonecutter]

Between family and dogs and cats and repairing the fence and patio and general yardwork and helping put away wash and .... you might, fox, you might.

 

[PandoraB]

I love films, and I can watch Tarkovsky or Bergman marathons 3 to 4 films back to back continuously, without a second screen, just me, and this film, in the dark. I do this every week.

For me games work on another level, its maybe also because I mostly play strategy games lately. If I look at my recently played steam list I only see Eurotruck simulator and No Mans Sky as first person games I played recently, and those games are just a small subset of what I play totally. So if I then look at a lets say a Occolus Quest, wich costs 550 eu, that expense for such a small % of what I normally play, I rather spend that money on a new UHD screen.

 

[Han Held]

VR won’t be for the kind of people who, for example, can’t sit down to watch a movie for 1.5 hour without pausing it to check their Emails.

Roomie has a laptop, so he's always got something on the TV because he can blender and watch at the same time. I don't -I do my computing/net/whatever in my room. I'm always telling him that I don't want to sit with my thumb up my ass watching some totally stupid show/movie or whatever. In that same amount of time I could be playing SL and flipping between stories and news articles or whatever.

By that same logic, I don't want to be locked into doing one thing (when I could be doing several) and paying ~$400 for the privilege.

Then again, I don't vidya much either (probably related).

 

[Beebo Brink]

Oh yes, I remember this thread... my skepticism was strong back then. Do we have an emoji for eating crow?

I LOVE VR!!

Yes, the total focus/immersion can be challenge, but it is so worth it to find the time to put on the headset. For me, it's become part of my morning routine. Get up, feed the dogs and cats, go back upstairs and spend about a 1/2 hour playing Beat Saber as my daily exercise routine. Shower, get dressed, go to work.

Time in the evenings is a bit harder to find, but VR is a great way to watch a movie in the comfort of my bedroom recliner. Can't do that every day, but there's usually some leisure time somewhere in the week for that. I'm itching to find new VR pursuits because it's just so magical... difficult to describe.... (insert smirking Cris face). I'm debating whether to buy TiltBrush. I'm a lousy artist, but it looks like so much fun....

 

[GoblinCampFollower]

Oh yes, I remember this thread... my skepticism was strong back then. Do we have an emoji for eating crow?

I LOVE VR!!

Yes, the total focus/immersion can be challenge, but it is so worth it to find the time to put on the headset. For me, it's become part of my morning routine. Get up, feed the dogs and cats, go back upstairs and spend about a 1/2 hour playing Beat Saber as my daily exercise routine. Shower, get dressed, go to work.

Time in the evenings is a bit harder to find, but VR is a great way to watch a movie in the comfort of my bedroom recliner. Can't do that every day, but there's usually some leisure time somewhere in the week for that. I'm itching to find new VR pursuits because it's just so magical... difficult to describe.... (insert smirking Cris face). I'm debating whether to buy TiltBrush. I'm a lousy artist, but it looks like so much fun....

What 9is your exact VR setup?

 

[Noodles]

So, that I kept forgetting, is that you also will need to buy games/apps for the VR headset, on top of the $400.

I have no idea why, but I kept thinking of it like a phone, with free/cheap apps, not like a console, with $30+ games and apps.

I have a small bonus at work coming in a few weeks and I was considering getting a VR set up or a 3D printer when I realized this.

 

[Beebo Brink]

What 9is your exact VR setup?

I bought the Oculus Quest VR headset in a true leap of faith since I'd never tried any VR before and I was half-expecting to be disappointed. Instead, within MINUTES I was entranced. No buyer's remorse -- it's been worth every penny for me, just for the exercise I'm getting playing Beat Saber.

But yeah, it's not cheap. I'd say that a minimum budget would be around $500. On the other hand, it does not require a PC to set up and run. And the one-time setup on Android/IOS took less than hour. I already had an iPhone, so no extra expense there.

Here's how the budget broke down for me:
$425 - Quest headset purchase price + tax
$25 - Rechargeable batteries/charger pack (for feeding the hand controllers)
$30 - Beat Saber game
$20 - Wander exploration app (based on Google maps)
$20 - TiltBrush graphics app (haven't bought this yet, but I'll bite eventually)
$0 - Netflix (free app)
$0 - Bait (free game)
$0 - Bogo (free game)

The more games you buy, the higher the price goes up. I'm not much of a gamer so there's limited content for me, so far, but I expect that to change pretty quickly. The Quest is selling really really well, which will encourage creators to provide content. I'll be ready!

 

[Argent Stonecutter]

Have you tried High Fidelity yet?

 

[Beebo Brink]

Have you tried High Fidelity yet?

I didn't know I could with the Quest. Do I just browse there, or is there an app of some kind?