Virtual Reality Predictions For 2016 and Beyond (medium.com) 106
An anonymous reader writes: 2015 was an undeniably huge year in Virtual Reality, breaking down the doors and setting the stage for an all-out 2016 consumer VR frenzy. The adoption of VR is not simply like ‘just another’ new device, not like a new aspect ratio for display panels, not like just an upgraded generation of gaming console, but a fundamentally new kind of technology that enables a new kinds of experiences that haven’t before been possible or comparable to anything else we’ve had (in the consumer market at least). Here is an article of some of my predictions for the coming years. What are your predictions?
Rule 34 Will be Invoked for VR (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't even have to search google to confidently say someone has made a VR-tan and NSFW images of it.
You're probably 20 years late on that prediction.
Re: (Score:3)
That is already available and sounds like it could be fun(ny):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Media technology has seen quick adoption due to making porn accessible.
Look at the Betamax -v- VHS war which Sony lost due to their prudish stance towards porn.
Arguably the uptake of home internet may well have been driven by porn too.
Prediction. circa~2036.
She: Are you wearing vr-contacts?
You: Eh... Yeah... I forgot to take them out before we got into bed.
A whole new meaning to the term "beer goggles". ;)
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if VR stuff will wind up like quadrophonic sound, the Virtual Boy, Smellovision, or 3D TVs
No, VR is better than that, and the entry price ($20) is really low. My son got a Google Cardboard for Christmas, and it is pretty cool. I has been a week, and he is still playing with it. It will be even better when more apps are available. Rule 34 will also help: My wife will definitely want some VR goggles if they can make me look like Chris Hemsworth while we are having sex.
Re: (Score:2)
3D TV and Google Glass together are the tea leaves for VR's fate. VR combines all the hassle and baggage of both, but offers little the average consumer will remain hungry for in the long term.
2015 VR much better than 80s or 90s (Score:3)
Flash to 2015 SIGGRAPH. I tried tried models from Oculus and Sony. They were so fast and good that they made nauseous in another way. When I tried the Sony tightrope walk demo I was scared of falling because it seemed so real. Another company's demo put me on a skateboard at 50 mph and I was scared too.
Re: (Score:1)
Ah...
We had a half ounce of weed, an 8-track of "A Child's Garden of Grass." quadraphonic stereo, and a Dodge Dart.
And it was awesome.
Re: (Score:3)
It seems to come and go in waves, and just seems like a solution in search of a problem. Even back in the mid 1990s, there were 3D headsets which worked with Duke Nukem 3D, but other than at Egghead, I never saw one purchased and "in the wild."
Eventually we will get past the VR stage of the goggles and the PowerGlove, but until we get to where equipment worn is light to none and we have something similar to a holodeck, VR will be in the fringes with cool stuff happening here and there, but tending to be to
Re: (Score:2)
I can see how this time might be different.
Something like Google Cardbox is really cheap, so a lot of people end up having it, being able to use it and if they like it and see the possibilities they want more.
This will become easier with more and more content becoming available.
If it's any good, I think there are certain applications which can get adopted quickly when they are available:
- trying on clothes in online shops.
- if the emergence is good and better than video, online meetings might be adopted mor
Re: (Score:2)
You cannot try on a pair of shoes just using a VR headset to feel how they fit" Same with shirt collars (maybe too tight?), bras (shoulder straps cutting in, uncomfortable underwiring), underwear (chafing?), bathing suits (both sexes), etc. Fashion is about looks, clothing is about feel.
We already have so many ways to do group meetings at a distance in real time - phone, chat, skype - and none of these require you to look like a dork.
Re: (Score:2)
It's so easy to identify the people who haven't actually tried out a headset.
Re: (Score:3)
It's even easier to identify the people who don't actually have to wear eyeglasses.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Two fairly prominent traits around here that I do not understand:
1. I am unable to see a use for it and it is not a perfect match for my needs, it is useless.
2. I do like/want/have it and there's no reason for anyone to have a different opinion than mine.
I am not a psychologist. I do not understand.
Re: Virtual boy, part deux (Score:2)
Slashdot thought the iPod was a bad idea. Slashdot is terrible at predicting consumer tech trends.
Re: (Score:1)
You have a *very* valid point. Sometime within the past month, I was following someone's signature link. It took me to an old thread - one from back when I had my first account, I kinda, sorta, even remembered the thread.
It was about this new company called VMware. I'd say that maybe 1:20 comments actually understood the implications and thought it, "might catch on." The vast majority were certain that virtualization wouldn't catch on, that the price was too high, and that it was too complicated so it would
Re: (Score:2)
So how's that whole 3D TV thing working out for you? I don't know anyone who has one who uses the 3D feature. And those minority-report-like displays? Still useless except for glamming up TV shows. And then there's the fiasco of Ruby - a "hot", then "not" language which many of us said was garbage from the get-go.
Maybe we're like broken clocks, gotta be right at least twice a day, but the only "every day" use I can see for this is military/police being given a virtual view of what's in front of them instea
Re: (Score:1)
I don't even have a 3-D television. I don't even like 'em in the movies, for the most part. I not only don't keep up, I don't really watch much in the way of television.
I also am not sure that my post was clear, in reflection, and should make an attempt remedy that. Also, I could be misinterpreting your reply - that tone thing would come in handy at times. At any rate, this is probably going to end up longer than it should. Obviously, you needn't read or reply but I'll try to make it legible.
That post was n
Re: (Score:2)
It was more for the benefit of others who are all in on the whole VR thing. Maybe great minds think alike :-) I can see practical uses - especially in teaching medicine - but for the general public, it will probably be a niche thing, same as (trigger warning - I'm about to speak heresy now) how video gaming or going to the movies are things that are more attractive to certain groups than others. And how others cannot seem to put their phones down even while eating with others, but other people don't have t
Re: (Score:2)
You lose credibility by referencing Virtual Boy, which was not any kind of VR device. The only link it had to VR was the word "virtual" in its name. (Which itself was a turnoff, at least to me, because it seemed like Nintendo was trying to insult our intelligence.)
Re: (Score:2)
Virtual Boy wasn't VR. Virtual Boy had no connection with VR aside from the word "virtual". Nintendo: "Hey, let's slap the word virtual on this turkey, and these idiot kids will think it has actually something to do with virtual reality, and they'll buy it! Hahaha!" Yeah, how did that work out? Turns out the kids aren't so dumb.
Re: (Score:2)
But it's not just Oculus Rift. If FB manages to screw it all up, there will still be Playstation VR and HTC Vive and Razer OSVR and even (heaven help us!) Vrvana Totem. Personally, I'm holding out for the Vive. It has better tracking, it has Valve+Steam, and it's not FB. Seems like an easy choice.
And as for people wanting to get their hands dirty. . . I would direct your attention to Linden Labs and Project Sansar.
Linden Labs have been running Second Life for well over 10 years already. It didn't set
Re: (Score:2)
Linden Labs are making a successor to SL called Project Sansar, and compatibility with VR headsets is a design goal. They claim it will have the most accessible content creation tools ever. This is the number one thing on my wish list.
About time, hopefully they do it better this time. The current rendering engine is very old and outdated compared to what is the cutting edge in the gaming industry year 2015/2016. It's also built on DirectX so no Apple OSX or Linux support. Also lacking a physics engine that can render water, wind, grass, gravity, etc in real time.
Re: (Score:2)
Uhhh... I'm not sure what you mean about "no Apple OSX or Linux support". You're not talking about SL, are you? The viewers have run on Mac and Linux for well over ten years already. (It is partly responsible for my loyalty to SL, since many of the other virtual worlds -- such as There and Blue Mars -- never came out with Mac support, and I sure wasn't going to buy a new computer just to try them!)
Actually, now I find myself contemplating the purchase of a Windows PC for the first time in many years.
Re: (Score:2)
I predict that in 2016:
I'll continue to enjoy my Linux desktop, just I as have for the last decade.
I'll continue to enjoy having sex with my wife 3-4 nights a week, just as I have for the last decade.
I'll continue to poke fun at the VR-nutters, just as I have for the last de--er, twenty years. :)
the year of VR will happen... (Score:2)
the same year as the "year of the Linux desktop". ;)
Re: (Score:2)
The main trouble I see is that a high spec computer is needed for Oculus Rift (thus leaving most laptop users out). The headset even needs 3 or 4 USB plugs. Sony somehow thinks the PS4, with most games running at 30fps, is beefy enough for the task. I
VR will suck until Nintendo shows how to do it (Score:2)
When Mario VR comes out everyone will go "Oh yeah, that's how to do it". Nintendo's real strength is gameplay. Stories and graphics were never their focus. But they showed the world how to control a character in 3rd person, how to z-lock, and about every other thing that makes gaming work.
They are never the first. But there is just something about them that makes games respond how you think they should. VR will be no different.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Just like the did with the Virtuaboy, right?
Virtual Boy comes from a time when Japanese companies brought out weird shit. They still do, but now they keep it in Japan. (Whatever happens in Japan... winds up on the internet. But they still don't sell it outside. Boonga boonga!
Re: (Score:2)
Same answer I give to everybody who brings up the Virtual Boy. . . .
Virtual Boy wasn't VR. Virtual Boy had no connection with VR aside from the word "virtual". Nintendo: "Hey, let's slap the word virtual on this turkey, and these idiot kids will think it has actually something to do with virtual reality, and they'll buy it! Hahaha!" Yeah, how did that work out? Turns out the kids aren't so dumb.
(I've got the feeling I'll be cut-and-pasting this a lot.)
Re: (Score:2)
Allow me to set you straight on a few points of fact. . . You wrote that the Virtual Boy failed because of "the uncomfortable headset and being tied [to] one location with wires". Virtual Boy was not a headset (because it wasn't anything resembling VR, as I've already pointed out), and it didn't tie you to one location with wires any more than any other non-portable game console does. It was simply a tabletop videogame console that made you awkwardly shove your face into the display. And gave you 3D. B
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Anything old enough becomes new again!
FWIW, I remember playing Dactyl Nightmare in the arcade. I thought it was fun. I would have played more if I'd known it was going to be 20+ years before I'd have the opportunity to put on a VR headset again.
Mind-blowing VR is almost here (Score:2)
Really amazing, utterly astounding VR will arrive in all its glory when it's powered by nuclear fusion. ;-)
Until then, it's still chunk-blowing VR. (Score:2)
Maybe we'll eventually see tracking, framerates and latency good enough to avoid motion sickness. For many of us, 15 minutes in today's best VR gear is a quick ticket to a day's worth of virtual stomach flu (no fever, no contagion, just the sensations). It sucks, but it's physiological reality.
So, until that magical day, VR for me is a really unpleasant weight-loss tool, and not much else.
Re: (Score:2)
That's pretty much the size of it. And I wouldn't be surprised if, as they get closer to being nearly indistinguishable from the real world, the remaining small discrepancies will trigger nausea in more people.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's hope they get the problems solved. I would dearly love to spend a couple of hours in some totally immersive alternate reality.
What a hype.. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Google Cardboard is MADE OF CARDBOARD. I don't think this is a plot by the cardboard industry. And it really is pretty cool.
Re: (Score:1)
No, it's definitely Big Paper and the Pulp Industry looking to take over the world with mind-control. You just don't recognize the signs! You and the sheeple are destined to be ruled by those who would have you call them by no title other than Master.
Re: (Score:3)
The timeline in the article is really fast about some of the adoption of technologies.
But you know what they say about predictions:
most people are short term much to optimistic and long term to pessimistic.
If they can fix the sickness problems for basically everyone, which need very low latency hardware and probably some tricks, then maybe adoption is going to be high. Before that, I think it's not going to play out in the timeline the article mentioned.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
3D
- Star Wars TFA
- The Hunger Games Mockingjay 2
- Point Break
- In the heart of the sea
Non-3D
- Bon Bini Holland
- Mannenharten
- Spectre
- The Hateful Eight
- Bridge of spies
- Krampus
- Burnt
Pretty mainstream I'd say, especially in the big ticket action genre, which has a lot of potential benefit from 3D. Drama or comedy not so much.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm with you. I am having a room remodeled to become my virtual game room, specifically with the HTC Vive's lighthouse tracking system in mind.
What a nice lying propaganda pice (Score:1)
Seriously, VR, even if it eventually will work well (not in 2016, that is certain), is just a gradual change, and for many things not even an improvement. The thing is, VR takes a lot out of you with regards to concentration. Some "realistic" games have people tired out after 5 minutes. The other thing is that VR does not mitigate bad writing, boring content and non-engaging characters at all. Hailing it as the the second coming is just unmitigatedly stupid. Also, like for example 3D content, VR has failed
Shut up and take my money (Score:3)
I'm one of these that will grab the consumer model of Occulus Rift and build a brand new spanking rig to fit it. I figure Intel, nVidia, AMD and PC hardware vendors will be happy as it will drive hardware sales of new PC gear like crazy. VR will put good use of latest stuff like AVX-512, DDR4, etc.
Flying a drone with VR headset would be awesome, should feel like being superman flying around the city. Better get one of these gas powered ones running on ethanol RC engine that can stay up in the air for hours.
Horror games that will scare the shit out of you. Almost real LSD trips to wreck your brain. ;-) ;-)
Lots of uses in education, medical and mechanical engineering, etc. Social VR applications will be huge, app that allow one to hang out with your friends at a bar or nightclub. Watching 2D movies and TV series would rock, like going to a big screen teater but even better, should provide for a good movie experience as it shields the viewer from distractions. One can watch porn on the airplane, no one would ever know.
It will be as succesful... (Score:1)
... as 3D TVs.
Yaaaaawn.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The comparison of 3D TV and VR is indeed interesting. . .but complicated. (Or maybe interesting *because* it's complicated.)
The biggest factor in 3D TV's decline seems to be lack of content -- very few movies were actually shot in 3D, but instead we were given a lot of cheap conversions and no easy way to identify them as such before watching. Hollywood really dropped the ball on this. Also. . . Movies have been pretty well developed as an art form in 2D for many decades, and this seems a bit like an e
TFA is pretty good (Score:3)
The article presents the most optimistic possible scenario, in which VR catches on like wildfire (or like smartphones did!), followed by massive investment and rapid technological progress. It's a scenario at one end of the spectrum of possible outcomes -- but it's not implausible, it's not crazy. We've seen this kind of shift before.
At the other end of the spectrum, it's possible that the awkwardness and expense of VR headsets (especially the high-spec ones for PCs) may hold things back, and VR may not explode into the mainstream. Even if this happens, though, I can't see it flopping completely. VR technology is simply too useful, and useful for too many things (beyond games), to just go away.
Interesting mention in TFA of Second Life. . . QUOTE: "In 2017 a clear leader will emerge in the field of social VR platforms, and it will look something like Secondlife but in VR. If it’s not facebook itself as the platform, then facebook will try to acquire whoever makes such a platform stably with good adoption during the 2017 year."
Of course, Linden Labs are still running Second Life (after all these years!) and are making steady money from it. They are adapting it to work with VR headsets, and they are also developing a successor world, called Project Sansar, which is designed with a focus on VR. I am very eager to see how this turns out.
Re: (Score:2)
"Social VR platforms"? Are you kidding me? The whole idea behind social platforms is to actually avoid more realistic contact with others. You get to filter out everything you don't want others to see - like that you're sitting around in your pjs pigging out on ice cream while pretending that life is great and the diet is working out fine, you look like crap today because you have a "man-cold" and haven't showered all week, and you'll take 100 selfies so you can find the best (or least worst) one to post.
I'm still waiting for a breakthrough in (Score:2)
... photogrammetry (aka conversion of 2d images to 3d data). That would allow any recorded imagery (photos, film, etc) to be experienced in VR from any angle as well as the easy digitization of any object. There exists photogrammetry software today, of course, but it's weak sauce - some variants fundamentally require knowledge of positioning and/or orientation, all have trouble with reflection (including specular reflection), translucency/transparency, shadows, any form of movement, etc, and even in perfe
Re: (Score:1)
Digitization of small objects doesn't really seem all that problematic. I think taking multiple pictures with different colors and intensities of light could help correct for many surface types.
On the other hand, 2026 seems optimistic for capturing the real world. So much of the human brain is focused on figuring out what we're seeing that I don't think we'll be able to reduce it to a few clever algorithms.
Re: (Score:2)
It really depends on the "small object", my experience has been in general less than stellar - ~60 perfectly positioned all-angles images of objects in ideal lighting with the object and nothing in the area (except for me and the camera) moving to get a model with holes in it, and only that if the scene is ideal - nothing too shiny, nothing clear not too complicated, the camera shadow not messing anything up, no inadvertent breezes, no objects that for some reason or another don't happen to meet the softwar
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't posting speculation about VR kind of second level VR and therefore redundant?
It's only second level virtual reality if you're raving about it. If you're saying how dorky it is, it's just plain old reality :-)
D.O.A. (Score:1)
I agree with the other negative posters, recall Google Glass et. al. to "see" through the hype. This already died once in the late 1990s. At that time, my friend commented, 'Virtual reality is just video games really close to your face.'
Well, I for one am hyped... (Score:1)
Article Author Here (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for joining us, and thanks for writing the piece!
I am one of those who hasn't yet tried on a current headset. I'm eager, I'm chomping at the bit! I did play a VR game in the arcade 20 years ago -- Dactyl Nightmare -- and it was what I might call a "Pong experience": obviously crude and limited, yet there was the thrill of doing something entirely new and seeing that it worked at all. It was fun.
I have to shake my head over all the comparisons with 3D TV or with various gimmicky controllers for gam
coming true (Score:1)
I predict that most of these predictions will not come true. Possibly including this prediction.
Bender (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)