Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Google

Google Discontinues Daydream VR (venturebeat.com) 52

Posted by msmash from the dream-is-over dept.
Google's Daydream, Android's built-in virtual reality platform, is as good as dead. From a report: Following the company's annual hardware event today, Google confirmed to VentureBeat that the Pixel 4 and Pixel 4 XL do not support the VR platform. Furthermore, Google stopped selling the Daydream View headset today. There are also no plans to support Daydream in future Android devices, Pixel or otherwise. "We are no longer certifying new devices," a Google spokesperson confirmed. The Daydream app and store will continue to function for now. Further reading: It's Becoming Increasingly Unlikely that We'll See a Major Shift To Virtual Reality Any Time Soon.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Discontinues Daydream VR More

Google Discontinues Daydream VR

Comments Filter:

  • In favor of AR I guess (Score:4, Insightful)

    by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Tuesday October 15, 2019 @12:30PM (#59310300)

    I think it's pretty clear that the future is AR, not VR... VR is kind of neat, but just not nearly so versatile as AR so it doesn't make sense to duplicate effort to support a subset of something much more useful.

    That said I'm a bit surprised Google would not keep around the VR community efforts as a nice feature to be usable in a future AR headset.

    • I hate the "all or nothing" attitude that companies are taking with VR right now.

      The main problem is they're trying to have people play in a 3D environment, i.e. moving and walking around in the virtual space, instead of just having a "sit-down" setup for: first person shooters with a keyboard+mouse or gamepad, driving/racing games, roller coasters, etc. The same games we play today but using a VR headset with head tracking instead of a regular display, giving you a more immersive and natural view of the ga

      • Re:In favor of AR I guess (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Immerman ( 2627577 ) on Tuesday October 15, 2019 @01:23PM (#59310624)

        One of the big problems with "stationary VR" is nausea - either the world is motionless, or your eyes and inner ear are disagreeing violently about your motion.

        As I understand it, high-end room-scale VR has largely eliminated nausea - given fast enough refresh rates and low enough lag your eyes are seeing (close enough) to what they expect given your movement. As soon as you start adding virtual movement to the equation though, that goes out the window. Then you have to rely on "neurohacking" tricks to try to trick your brain into accepting the disconnect. Cockpits, virtual noses, etc. all help, but you're still fundamentally trying to convince your brain that the disagreement between your eyes and inner ear isn't the result of a poison that needs to be purged from your system.

        • Did any of those researches split people into two groups: gamers and non-gamers? Do the people who have problems with VR ever play games? I know I can't watch someone else play a first-person shooter, for example, since I'm not the one controlling the camera and I get sort of dizzy.

          Some people will never get used to VR the same way that I've often read that most Japanese people get nausea when playing first-person games (non-VR).

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by AuMatar ( 183847 )

            I'm a gamer. VR makes me out of sorts. So did 3D when it first came out (I puked after watching 5 minutes of Doom 1). It took several generations of 3d hardware to get to where I could play 3d games instead of just 2d.

          • When I younger, I had intermittent problems with motion sickness while playing or watching FPS games. I'm 42 now, and I don't know if it's my age or maybe because I have been playing them for so long (20+) years, I have simply gotten used to it.

              I don't know if I would get sick with a VR headset, since I've only used conventional monitors to play FPSes

          • I have been a gamer for as long as I remember, and a player of first-person games since Quake. I never get motion sickness from watching a screen. I never get dizzy from riding a car or an airplane, and rarely from a boat or a rollercoaster, yet VR is a mixed bag for me. Walking VR is amazing, but stationary VR can make me dizzy if the movement is too fast, and a VR rollercoaster gave me one of the worst headaches I had in my life.

        • Not always. Many people play VR games like Pavlov VR where the world moves around you but you stand still. Doesn't make me sick at all, I play for hours at a time. It's just like playing a regular shooter but on a huge screen and with better and more realistic inputs.

    • VR has it's niche. But that niche is in entertainment. Right now mostly games but I can see it potentially catching on in other ways. Still it will primarily be a consumption device.

      AR on the other hand has a lot more potential for getting real work done. The sky is the limit for the kinds of things you can include in a ubiquitous an general purpose HUD.

      • Ummm, there is the ever present- PORN!!!

        • With AR that $50 hooker can look like a $500 escort.

          • I was going to say the new blade runner had it about right, super imposing another image over the person...but then if you consider having a vastly different frame (i.e. a giant fatbody) then it might nor work...

    • I think it's pretty clear that the future is AR, not VR... VR is kind of neat, but just not nearly so versatile as AR so it doesn't make sense to duplicate effort to support a subset of something much more useful.

      It depends on the application. VR is much more subversive, and better for some things like games. I have a PSVR, and it's great in small doses. The biggest problem is the hardware. The goggles are comfortable for a little while, but after an hour or so it gets heavy, your face is sweating and the lenses get foggy. Plus it has to be plugged in and you have to sit at a certain distance from the camera. If they can figure those problems out, it will gain wider adoption.

    • By now we should realize other than their core services, Ads, Search, Maps, Email, Android, Chrome and Docs. A service made by Google is already a dead project when it is released. Often a lot of good ideas, and interesting proof of concepts. However because Google will drop an idea if it isn't initially super popular, will often feed back on itself and give people pause before using a google product.

      The Microsoft Surface has been a long term project. It was originally demo's back in the early 00's. As a

      • If you run youtube vr on PSVR, they removed all content
        from the VR tab. All gone.

        You can still search 360 and view stuff tho, but damn google, your a bunch of old fart idiots, like MS in 1999. Cant you afford ONE single programmer on 4 days a week rate to support DayDream? Then release it open sourced, let it free.

    • Both have their places. But VR is about devices and content of the kind that Google isn't interested in. It's the kind that is hard to mine for data and eyeballs. AR is different. Many applications are data driven, which is where Google's strengths and interests lie. It's a natural fit for several of their existing applications, and offers opportunities to mine suckers for more data.

      Google dropping VR does not mean that VR is dead or that there's no market for it.

    • I think it's pretty clear that the future is AR, not VR>...

      Different tools for different jobs. AR and VR have radically different strengths and weaknesses, and will be suitable for radically different purposes.

      Until the Oculus Quest, I was of the opinion that VR/AR was going to the way of the dodo. But I have completely changed my outlook after having the Quest for a few weeks. I absolutely despise the tethered VR (and the outrageous PC requirements), but I absolutely love untethered, self-contained VR. That one thing makes all the difference in the world.

      • Nobody likes goofy huge goggles, or even not so goofy sun glasses-like head wear when all they want to do is enjoy a nice, long immersive game. This is why 3D (actually stereoscopic) TV failed because almost every set needed the special glasses.

          I don't think we will see VR catch on until they start building holodeck-like rooms, and even then they will only be found in specialized arcades or some very rich people's homes.

    • Well, VR is 'just' AR with 100% coverage of the real world with virtual items. The problem with (3D) AR is that it is physically way more complicated to partially let the real world through the display, and cover other parts with virtual things. Hence, we got VR first.
      I'm a huge fan of VR, and once the hype will die down. it will find it's niche.
      What worries me is that AFAIK there have not really been too many breakthroughs in tech on how to project stuff on our retinas without clunky lenses and headsets.

      • "breakthroughs in tech on how to project stuff on our retinas without clunky lenses and headsets."

        I think there will be a big scare factor which will hold back adoption of this tech. People don't want to risk the danger, either perceived or real, of having their eyeballs fried because the device malfunctioned.

        The more conspiracy oriented people will believe that these devices can be used to 'hack' directly into somebody's mind (Remember the Star Trek TNG episode: The Game?).

        If this t

  • I am kinda fed up with having to consume news about Google's discontinued products.

    My question though is whether anyone gets fired for having made a decision to acquire them in the first place.

    For those who may interested, there's a website that tracks [killedbygoogle.com] all these.

    • I can't wait for Google to buy Facebook...

      and then close it a few months later.

    • Why would a company that makes money selling features that has a history of capitalising on unchecked innovation fire the employees. We often accuse management of being dumb, but holy crap would you make a dumb manager.

      While you're busy making sure that anyone is afraid to come up with an innovative idea do you have any other demotivational things you want to share? Maybe punish those who speak up when they see something against company policy. How about chastising those who follow rules, or supporting back

    • Why would anyone be fired? Google suffers no real loss (economic losses are deducted from their taxes), in fact it's money saved.

      The problem is that too many people depend on Google, and they get all emotional about the loss of convenience.

  • Smartphone VR = shit quality puke fest.

  • No surprise, doesn't make sense anymore (Score:3)

    by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Tuesday October 15, 2019 @12:50PM (#59310422)

    VR on mobiles was a toe dipping experience more intended to entice the world to move beyond. Samsung has killed off the GearVR as well, and it makes sense too. With the launch of dedicated portable VR headsets, and an ever increasing choice of actual PCVR or PSVR based HMDs, it doesn't really make sense anymore to play with silly toys for a substandard experience.

    God these things almost turned me off VR completely until I tried an actual well designed headset.

  • I was hoping for this to become something, but the biggest name in VR is Facebook, VR needs a lot of horsepower to run, and about $500 worth of extra equipment.

    • I was hoping for this to become something, but the biggest name in VR is Facebook

      Biggest name in VR hardware currently is HP.
      Biggest name in software Kronos - OpenXR

      VR needs a lot of horsepower to run, and about $500 worth of extra equipment.

      You get what you pay for.

      • >Biggest name in VR hardware currently is HP.
        I think you mispelled Sony.

        As low as they set the bar - they're still the single most popular VR headset by a large margin, accounting for almost half of all sales in 2017 and 2018, and over a third in 2019. They're followed by Occulus, with HTC being edged out by "all others"

        HP is doing some interesting things, but they're a "big name" in VR the the way McLaren is a big name in cars - largely irrelevant aside from a few enthusiasts at the high end.

    • VR does not need a lot of horse power to run. The vast majority of VR games require an entry level video card with a 1060 being more than sufficient. Low quality all in one headsets further amplify that fact with the likes of the Oculus Quest.

      Sure if you want to play the latest blockbuster with supersampling cranked to 140% and everything else on epic graphics you'll want a 2070 Super or higher at least, but then the same can be said for PC gaming too.

  • Smartphone based VR was a fad (Score:3)

    by bettodavis ( 1782302 ) on Tuesday October 15, 2019 @12:54PM (#59310446)
    Samsung also discontinued their Gear VR devices in the latest versions of the Galaxy phones.

    Soon all that will remain in that space will be Google Cardboard and those are just gimmicks for getting 3D images and low quality VR from an Android phone, and it remains alive only because it costs basically nothing for Google to keep it working.

    VR innovation overall is still going on, mostly in Oculus' camp with the latest 6DOF wireless HMDs (namely the Quest). The other PC players seem to be stuck in 2014, with heavy, complex tethered HMDs that seems as if they will remain a niche market for the foreseeable future.

    • No. Fad is something that comes and goes. It wasn't a fad as much as it was a gateway drug to kickstart an industry. ... which it has. The end game was never for people to have smartphones strapped to their face in cheap plastic houses. GearVR partnering with Oculus was an effort to get people to buy Rift headsets, and that worked quite well.

      With the industry well under way mobile phones simply have no purpose anymore, especially considering they offer a truly horrible experience in comparison to a real hea

      • It wasn't a fad as much as it was a gateway drug to kickstart an industry. ... which it has.

        There is a VR industry? Where?

        • There is a VR industry? Where?

          I don't know. Ask the 4 major AAA studios releasing or which have released VR games this year, or the 700000 people just on Steam which have VR HMDs according to their hardware survey, both figures which don't include the PSVR, or any standalone units. For a followup question you can go to Steam, Lenovo, HTC, Oculus, Sony, and Microsoft as just some of the major players sinking huge amounts of money into the VR industry.

          Just being ignorant of something doesn't magically make it go away (though I realise tha

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Kwirl ( 877607 )
      i think those other 'niche market' pc players are still important - keeping the cost of entry low allows more exposure to people who want to get in and see what they can contribute without busting their bank
  • This is the last google "Project" I'm going to buy into. I had their original TV, and boy that was craptastic for the few years it existed. I should have known they were going to halfass their VR. Screw their new gaming platform, I bet it dies in 3 - 5 years. Not sure why they keep launching experiments, when they just shutter them after a couple years.

  • Goggles-style VR is awful. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by blcamp ( 211756 ) on Tuesday October 15, 2019 @01:53PM (#59310808) Homepage

    Near where I live is a place which rents out VR time on Oculus goggles. It was a chance for me to try it out without having to buy the gear. I tried several games, including Fruit Ninja (kinda lame), Rec Room (really lame) and Richie's Plank. The latter one was kinda interesting and kinda OK... for about 10 minutes of flying around this VR city of skyscrapers, a space port and whatnot. Then all of a sudden, I got sick to my stomach... like worse than any really bad carnival ride I had ever been on. I almost collapsed. I was sick for all the rest of the day and read up on "VR Sickness" which I found out was really a thing.

    I don't know whether my experience plays into this, but I have to tell you, I will never do VR headsets again; and I get the impression that, between the ridiculous price for the gear, the limited experience the software provides as well, enough people have been turned off by it to substantially impair the business viability of VR as a mainstream technology.

  • Google discontinuing a product - this must be a first. I suspect that this one does not impact a big crowd though.
  • I have a VIVE PRO and a GEAR VR. Use them both. VIVE PRO I use as a calorie-burn machine. So much more interesting than jogging on a treadmill or lifting weights. There's a whole ecosystem dedicated to working the top calorie burn vs VR "Game". As IT nerds, we all need this. GEAR VR has software that allows you to stream your pc games or movies into VR (using Nvidia MOONLIGHT for example) . So it's the exact opposite. Totally no calorie burn at all. We all need our down-time ;) It means you can

    • Just because YOU don't get motion sickness doesn't imply no one doesn't. (I never do but I felt nauseous on the 1st gen Oculus Rift.)

      Latency, not to mention resolution, have typically been crap.

      Putting on a bulky headset is fucking lame for some people.

      People who wear glasses now have one more thing to worry about.

      Being tethered sucks.

      The price for *good* VR is also a waste. You could buy ~5 games for the price of a good VR system. Or just wait 2 years and pick up hardware that won't be obsolete in 3 years.

  • I think if it were 1817 and the bicycle were invented, slashdotters would say:
    "I tried it once and fell off. No one can balance on it. Three wheels would obviously be better. It'll never be popular. Too expensive!"

Slashdot Top Deals

Sigmund Freud is alleged to have said that in the last analysis the entire field of psychology may reduce to biological electrochemistry.

Close