Literally everyone was on top of it including the giants known as Steam and Gabe Newell. It looked like this time VR would be the real thing but it collapsed in less than a year. Is it still too early for it? Can it be improved, come back in 20 years and finally nail it?
I wonder how many people in this board fell for it and how much they regret it.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
''Nimble America said in its description that "we've proven that s---posting is powerful and meme magic is real." Luckey told The Daily Beast that Nimble America's work was "something that no campaign is going to run." One such example was an enlarged image of Clinton's face with the phrase "Too big to jail" alongside it.''
Is Palmer a Sup Forumsirgin or a Sup Forumsack?
normies dont care about it
Headsets are expensive. A PC needed to run it properly is expensive. You need a big room to use it. You're always tethered to the PC with it.
As Carmack admitted recently, they need to remove the tether aspect by having the hardware built into the headset, but that'll be years before we have that kind of processing power being able to fit comfortably into a headset.
Also VR is a meme and AR is the real future of tech.
It's a gimmick in every sense of the word. Specialized hardware for a marginally different experience. Expensive hardware too. Very few titles that actually require VR as a display. None of them are really worth the money investment.
>and AR is the real future of tech.
What makes AR more likely to succeed? I was watching the Microsoft hololens videos and you still need a headset and space.
'VR' is doing fine though, it reached a fairly decent level of success, a level which was about what could be expected for the technology. The only failing here was zuckerburg's corporate management and falling for hype.
Anyways, VR headsets as they are are just way too limited, the real technology that is going to transform everything is going to be AR. That, unlike current gen 'VR' has realworld applications. The companies that develop AR today are going to be the apple's and microsofts of tomorrow. AR is poised to be the new mobile phone. Consumer ready, and market viable stuff is gonna hit the market in a decade or two, that's the real innovation to be on the lookout for.
AR is practical, even outside of gaming. Take this pic where it can be used to land a plane in 0 visibility and not kill everyone.
Plus as already seen in primative examples like Pokemon Go, it's easy to understand, pretty cheap to implement, actually creates a new kind of gameplay and normies are already behind it.
they decided to split the market, so the already small install base is divided into 3 and now devs cant make Money and vr dies
Remember all the hype for VR porn? Sad times.
No must-play exclusives.
You know what? I'm happy for Palmer.
He tricked a terrible corporation into paying him 2 billion dollars for a fad, and now they have to deal with it while he gets to retire at 24.
It's a beautiful middle finger to big business.
Not him, and I'm only a layman on the subject but I'd say AR is going to succeed for a few reasons.
Firstly, unlike VR, AR's reliance on augmenting rather than supplanting reality just makes things all the much easier. Unlike VR which requires a lot of tweaking and tuning and a specific range of performance and will still ultimately limit the data coming in to you, AR acts only as an overlay on the already data rich environments we interact with. That means that it can be used in practical ways (more on that in a bit). Another benefit is that for the most part the technology that is used in AR is usually lighter and thinner than the technology required for VR, which means it's ripe for miniaturization or at least some degree of weight optimization which VR is simply not ready for given current iterations of technology.
Back to the whole "practical" uses. The way that AR works as an overlay is something that is obviously desirable, it doesn't (or ought not to) impair skills that require visual senses and interaction with the world, while this overlay can add data on top of the base reality.
To give an example, I recall reading about one company that was using the hololense (at least I think it was that, it may have been a competitor), anyways they were using this AR device to overlay CAD and architectural models onto a building site in real life. This allowed the foreman who was overseeing the construction/repairs to make sure in real time with just a visual inspection if anything was out of place or if there needed to be any changes. Apparently there are actually often mistakes in plans, or missed features in the building which can conflict with computer models, mistakes which often end up costing real money. They found that by using AR in this way they were able to reduce such mistakes to the point where the technology would pay for itself several times over.
I was actually going to buy one of those acme ones for phones that go for 20 bucks
Should I? I just want to test the meme and have some fun
It's just too expensive for the average consumer to get into it. You need a high-end PC typically costing over $1000, and then the VR kits themselves are another $800 or whatever. The vast majority of people simply don't have $1800 to blow on a toy. PSVR is at least in a more affordable price range, but then the tech isn't nearly good enough for a proper VR experience.
VR won't take off in any meaningful way until the hardware is stand-alone and at a much more reasonable price. $500, maybe $600 for an HMD that contains all the necessary hardware for VR to function, it's the only way it'll be adopted by the masses.
Well anyways I'm not an expert, but the point is that AR will succeed where VR fails simple because it has many real world applications, where as VR doesn't, and although VR could be adapted to do many of the things AR can do, it would all come with drawbacks that are inherent to the type of HMD used in VR today. The tech will bleed into the consumer market from the corporate one, sort of like how the computer and desktop environment did. That's why unlike current VR, which will stay in it's niche with some video game enthusiasts for a while yet, AR will break out.
At least, that's how I see it, who really knows how the winds of fortune shall blow.
It was a gimmick a bunch of wealthy old nerds peddled to the newfag generation who have missed out on the previous VR fads.
Real VR would include tactile feedback. Right now it's just strapping an overpriced pair of goggles on - which take a $2000 PC to run - and playing a few slideshow tech demos.
Because vr was not meant to be an affordable thing for everyone. All these shitty cheap ass google cardboard knockoffs came out and have a half assed experience which gave the general public that it was nothing but a gimmick
I think it's funny that Luckey used memes for such dubious things, but at the same time he made such a strong case for companies to shill their shit online. Not only that but proved it's more effective the more candid the shilling seems. "Opinion" is going to be a meme soon.
This is the problem. Your average consumer shouldn't be getting into it. It's something that only enthusiasts could afford. If you want the big toys be prepared to shell out the big dollars.
The overarching problem with VR is that computers will never be powerful enough to create a 100% true reality.
They're better off focusing their efforts on finding a way to harness natural brain functions like dreaming to do so.
It was just too expensive.
NO
FUCKING
GAMES
Why does no one seem to understand this simple fuckkng concept.
>Literally everyone was on top of it
>It looked like this time VR would be the real thing
Nobody was on top of it.
VR was a shitty fad, and it died like one.
It's just a worthless gimmick.
There's a laundry list of reasons for why it failed and still is failing.
As a mass market consumer entertainment product, that is.
It's still doing a pretty bang-up job as specialty equipment for medical purposes, and is slowly becoming a useful tool for artists.
So give it another 10-15 years, and it will reach a form where it makes sense to the average media consumer.
It's too fucking expensive. That's literally the only issue.
>You need a big room to use it.
This is one of the biggest ones, at least on par with the "makes people dizzy" issue if not even worse. The fact that you need to devote a whole fucking room for VR will permanently put it out of the reach of majority of users. It's one thing to have a spare $2000 for the equipment, an another completely to have the spare $500000 for a bigger apartment.
Oculus failed because they had the inferior hardware, on top of the terrible business practices. It is a perfect mirror for the Xbone's reveal and launch really.
And the few games it has all control like shit. I cant stand how the movement works. You point a spawn circle, hit a button and teleport yourself there. Is lame and all the shooters are target practice garbage. Shooting galleries.
OH BOY I CAN'T WAIT TO PUT A GIANT FUCKING CAMERA ON MY HEAD IN FRONT OF THE TV, BE THE ONLY ONE TO SEE IT SO THAT I CAN GET MY SUPER EXCLUSIVE FUCKING NOTHING THAT'S OUT ON VR
It shares exactly the same issues as 3d but to even greater extents.
this. it only changes camera perspective and that aspect of games been always bad
Fuck that, better off just researching better methods to have better and more consistent lucid dreams
Lucid dreams > VR
Its free too, unlike VR.
Honestly I'm glad the VR gimmick is coming to an end and not reaching mainstream, the amount of neat looking games I've seen and wanted to play but were VR only really pissed me off, and some are exclusive to Vive, and some to Oculus and more than anything I think that exclusivity shit really helped kill VR.
Good riddance
>So give it another 10-15 years, and it will reach a form where it makes sense to the average media consumer.
I only wanted it so that I could create my virtual waifus and fap to them. That's all I wanted. But noooooo, fuck this gay earth.
Well, that and the lack of killer app.
People shit and talk shit about Wiimote but Wiimote actually had a killer app for motion control. Even if it were half arsed till Wiimote+.
But nowdays motion controls are pretty much standard, dualshock on ps4 uses, Switch uses on both controllers, well as 3ds.
VR just need something big to make impact.
well maybe don't try to push AGAIN for fucking motion controls as the only control scheme for your new hot thing, because that came and died with the Wii, and it should stay dead as long as there's no force feedback on movements on those fucking gay plastic things
Job posts for vr and ar increased 400% since 2014
Production takes time
>The companies that develop AR today are going to be the apple's and microsofts of tomorrow.
Actually, AR is completely retarded. Nobody will wear that shit.
>Buh muh real world applications
OH yeah, like, uh, beaming ads into your environment. And uh, uh, uh, uh, oh thats it.
No one wanted to buy VR because no games.
No one wanted to make good VR games because no one bought VR.
It's a circular problem.
$800+$900+ PC+big ass room for 10 minute $40 experiences
The problem with VR is it can't come out the way it is and be successful. No one wants to strap shit onto their head to play some shitty indie games in 180 degree mode essentially.
You'd need some .Hack tier polished shit to get it off the ground but that requires a shit ton of money since you won't be making any sales before then.
He looks like the lazy town dude
It's too early. Too expensive, too clunky, not enough application for it yet. The problem is not if VR could be produced, but if it is viable - and really, it isn't.
There are probably a few steps that still need to be done before VR will reasonably because the "next big thing", but you'd better believe that it will get revived once again before its ready and will flop once again.
>What makes AR more likely to succeed?
Because it is functional, for one.
>be young
>become rich overnight
>high on success and fame
>fuck everything up
Palmer reminds me of a certain someone.
AR is not retarded. It has unbelievably useful potential.
>AR is not retarded. It has unbelievably useful potential.
Yeah like beaming ads into your face and uh uh uh uh, oh shit that's it.
>t. AR shills
Imagine being Palmer, he got into the Kickstarter 'business' at it's peak, sold a shitty idea that wouldn't even make 10% of it's itended goal nowadays then SOMEHOW managed to sell his shitty non-idea to Facebook for 1 billion dollars, he is literally my idol and proof that being in the right place at the right time can completely change your life.
Palmer is still a billionaire though.
Just like glowing ad rectangles everyone keeps in their pocket was retarded and would never catch on, right?
Except that Palmer won't have to work at gas stations to pay his bills.
Lucky man now has FUCK OFF money like Notch
>throw party
>people discover my rift
>try it out
>women don't
>will ruin my hair they say
It's the clunky headset. It will be successful once it's just a pair of glasses.
Read the thread, there's already examples posted.
Don't confuse usefulness with your own ignorance.
Actually it was a naturally development from brick phones, to smart phones.
The entire idea of AR is a retarded wet dream for advertisers with no natural progression, which is why it is dead in the water.
>Why did VR fail?
Because it was way too fucking expensive. It cost as much as the console or building a brand new PC.
People don't want to pay 1000 dollars to wear something stupid on their heads.
Actually the Irish government is paying him to make Irish games. True story.
The technology just isn't there yet.
Consoles (the reasonable entry into widespread VR) just can't do high enough framerates for VR, and the headsets aren't cheap enough.
>buy this $800 headset
>oh and you need a $3000 rig to run it at the recommended framrate
>oh and there aren't any games that aren't just tech demos and parlor tricks, whoops lol
>wtf how did VR fail it was the future
Anons were already speculating way prior to any of the releases that VR would fail in the mainstream. There's still a chance it will pick up with the virgin nerds who just want waifus and porn.
>being this much of an unimaginative dumbass
Please try not to reproduce
>Examples
>Beaming Ads
>Placing a virtual cat on a table
Damn, the possibilities are endless! I was wrong about AR!
Then who was phone?
The problem is all the "giants" controlling VR are staunchly anti porn. Since VR needs new hardware that is simply not a sustainable approach. Porn has a long standing history of dictating hardware sales and even choosing which hardware formats win out. To ignore them is to spell death.
Past that they wanted to lock down the platforms to create a closed economy that they controlled and to "win" the "VR war" with exclusives. This again is fucking retarded when new hardware must be bought that is this expensive. It relied on a PC or a console on TOP of the headset itself.
Thirdly they acted to quickly. New hardware of this magnitude needs years of product testing. The "screen door effect" and the motion sickness are prime examples of this. They were able to fix these problems and others like them quickly but the damage was already done. The tech should of circulated for a year or two in semi public semi private beta programs to iron that stuff out first.
Lastly FUCKING ADS. Literally go fuck yourself. If the consumer buys the hardware at that price point fuck off.
Its one giant cluster fuck of people who have no idea how the fuck the industry works making horrible choices and ruining it for everyone.
Read the thread you cocksucker faggot.
But if you want a good example beside those ones, think about AR YUGIOH game.
that 120 FPS was a lot harder to hit. No killer app that made the set a must have. So only stream monsters and people that buy tech too early bought it.
A Childrens Card game is your killer app?
AR is fucking dead.
How fucking stupid do you have to be to not see it coming that VR would fail miserably? The price tag was way too high and there were no fucking games that required it.
Anthy
>give it another 10-15 years
I don't see what people think that's going to solve. We're not going to get black mirror-grade brain augmentation in that time period so the movement thing is still going to be a problem, and that's what people say is holding back the games.
Either a dev figures out how to make a good game that utilizes it properly or it's going to be a lot longer than 15 years before it takes off.
"People aren't probably going to want to buy a bunch of crap that requires a specific room layout to play some shovelware." never really crossed any of the advocates' minds.
It looked promising. Devs were getting ready to support Oculus, codes were already written. Then Facebook bought Oculus, bundled Rift with its spyware, killed Linux support promises, went on anti-porn crusade, bound developers to their draconian SDK agreements, and jacked up the price. A lot of early adopters are tech geeks who are put off by Facebook's shenanigans.
Vive showed up too late, their headsets are more high end, but more expensive, and requires full room setup. Not to mention cable woes. Codes were already written for Rift, so having to support Vive means writing another set of code. Most devs already saw what happened to Rift, and decided to wait and see.
Sony showed up with psvr. More affordable, but locked down to ps4 only. Also, porn will never happen on their platform.
That's some seriously idiotic logic, I hope you are merely pretending to be retarded to not see the trend of increasing the data available to us through more and more dynamic and omnipresent sources.
Who even wanted VR? Why are they trying to force this meme on us? I'll be happy playing on a screen until I die.
But computers will be much faster and even low-end normie rigs will be powerful enough to run VR at perfect fps
The big selling point of VR was immersion. Head mounted displays had finally reached the point where you could believe you were seeing something else. But you can't move or touch anything. You ignore that fact and simply use a HMD to display a normal first person game but at that point the immersion is lost and you're just using a new, expensive, more uncomfortable monitor. People act like game companies can just find a way to make an interesting, non-shallow game that uses the strengths of VR. But shooting galleries and physics goof-offs are as far as it goes. You can't move outside the empty room you've set up and you can't touch anything outside of your janky hand controllers. No matter how much they iterate over the technology that isn't going to change. You can use treadmills but nothing short of an actual neural interface will give you full physical immersion. You just cant make an interesting, first person game where you're confined to a single room
>Palmer Luckey
fitting name
he sure lucked out big time getting 2 billion at age 21
if he is competent and didnt just luck out he could turn that into >100 billion easily
probably the games
the hardware delivers but the software offering is complete trash. absolute trash. vr games are fucking trash. shooting gallery trash after shooting gallery trash. it's also all overpriced as fuck - software and hardware.
AR will be the exact same garbage. to make matters worse tho, tracking on AR is hell on earth because it's kinect. not a lot of people know this but the microsoft AR headset is literally a kinect strapped to your head.
People didn't buy DVD players when they cost over $500 and only had a few movies. Hell, people use to rent VHS decks in the 80's because they were too expensive to own. Give it some time for the price to come down.
And the games?
>It looked like this time VR would be the real thing but it collapsed in less than a year.
Really? where and when did that happen? Because the article you poster had nothing to do with that.
people want holodeck vr, not this 2 screens strapped to your eyes garbage
No games to justify buying it, especially at that price.
Infact, I can't think of anything VR has right now that is good or makes it worth buying a VR headset.
I remember all those articles about feminist groups and other faggots saying they want to block and obstruct any porn VR developments and that big VR companies wanted that too.
Knew then and there that it wouldn't take off, porn industry has been insanely influential in widescale adoption of new technologies for new ways to view and interact with porn.
Cracked wrote a good article about this back before it turned into a complete shithole.
>That's some seriously idiotic logic, I hope you are merely pretending to be retarded to not see the trend of increasing the data available to us through more and more dynamic and omnipresent sources.
If by "increasing the data" you mean beaming more advertisements and "dynamic and omnipresent sources" meaning big companies then yes I'd agree with you. And that's why its a fucking stupid technoretard pipe dream like universal basic income and the singularity.
VR has two problems. One, it's too expensive. Two, 95 percent of the games for it are low quality cash grabs.
>Resident Evil 7
>Robo Recall
>DiRT Rally
>Superhot
>The Unspoken
>Elite Dangerous
>no games
They're there, but they're limited right now.
Ah yes democracy is only as good as the citizens that vote.
An example of how far a country that seemingly had everything going for it can fall. It's kinda scary to be honest.
It was pretty easy to see why it is failing.
1. The cost
2. The games
3. Social isolation
4. It's uncomfortable
5. It gives you a headache
Honestly, who thought this was gonna be the wave of the future? It's dumb.
Sounds more like a redditor
Games move consoles IMO. you've got to have someone willing to take a plunge and make a must-have title on it which isn't going to happen without some financial push from hardware devs.
if VR succeeds, who's the first waifu you're going to love in it?
You aren't ever getting holodeck VR, so you are going to sit down, shut up and beam lasers into your eyes while a super conductor array manipulates the firing of your nerves with magnetic fields.
they don't even need games. they needed eroge. the idea of VR porn games was the driving force behind the Oculus kickstarter.
What sounds more fun, after all?
>You can play this VR game where you ride a rollercoaster
>You can play this VR game where your waifu rides you like a rollercoaster
>other than creating Facebook, Zuckerberg is actually a flake and a mediocre businessman
What a shock.
Would AR porn be better than VR porn?
I watched a documentary recently about Compaq and how in the 80s they got huge because they made a PC that was compatible with lots of software.
One part of it was about how IBM released a new super advanced PC that flopped because it wasn't compatible with any of their old software. It basically had no software and there was no reason to really own one.
VR is the same. People clearly knew 20-30 years ago that hardware wont sell if it has no software, so why are they still making these kinds of fucking mistakes?
Of course VR games will become more sophisticated and demanding as time goes by, but there will be simpler games that will be considered good enough for everyone like today's farmvilles.
it wasn't apparent to investors and potential customers how limited the VR experience fundamentally is.
you can't just slap a AAA FPS into a VR system and have it be an immersive experience when at least half the population just can't handle disparities between displayed and felt motion. that's why most VR titles rely on standing in place and teleporting to different locations or limit player avatar to -very- slow movement.
add kikes trying to strangle the golden goose with $600 kits for early adapters, and there you go.
Why do you hate legitimate free enterprise so much?