Why Oculus Rift Is Bound To Fail

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The Oculus Rift is bound to fail? Is this guy onto something or just on something?

Despite the soaring plaudits from professional technophiles, despite the growing support from the video game industry, the latest run at mainstreaming wearable virtual reality is doomed to be a commercial failure. Yes, the Oculus Rift has reignited an interest in virtual reality goggles not seen in decades. And yes, the company behind the technology was purchased by Facebook for billions.
 
Been saying this for a while now, the experience just doesn't live up to the hype. The more the supporters hype it, the harder it is going to fall. I've said it more times than I can count and this article just reinforces it. It really is a cool device and as for gaming a really amazing experience...for a a short period of time. That being the real crux of its problem. It is neat but it isn't something people are going to want to spend the kinds of hours they do at a console or PC with. So no, I just don't see it being commercially successful in a manner that revolutionizes anything. It will certainly do well it specific niches, but that is it.

Now talk to me about its potential applications in medical, aerospace and other fields as a tool and I will agree all day it has a bright future indeed.
 
It's sure to go the way of the Opti-Grab, leaving it's investors penniless.
 
Been saying this for a while now, the experience just doesn't live up to the hype. The more the supporters hype it, the harder it is going to fall. I've said it more times than I can count and this article just reinforces it. It really is a cool device and as for gaming a really amazing experience...for a a short period of time. That being the real crux of its problem. It is neat but it isn't something people are going to want to spend the kinds of hours they do at a console or PC with. So no, I just don't see it being commercially successful in a manner that revolutionizes anything. It will certainly do well it specific niches, but that is it.

Now talk to me about its potential applications in medical, aerospace and other fields as a tool and I will agree all day it has a bright future indeed.

You beat me to it, and I can't put it any better that you have so I'll just QFT.
 
It really needs to be a monitor/TV replacement before it can be really successful, and it's definitely not there yet.
 
Fail at what? Their goal isn't to sell a billion units. It's to make a door out of raw wood and put their foot firmly in it. Now that they have Facebook's money, they don't have to worry about short-term commoditization.
 
I cannot see the Rift as being a failure for enthusiast markets, although making it mainstream will be a big uphill battle. I could definitely see it hitting similar numbers as the same people who buy triple monitor or SLI setups, but for the average joe, maybe not.

Regardless, just saying this is going to fail as the headline is clickbait from Polygon of all places.
 
it appears to be more akin to the push the television industry made for 3D TVs just three or four years ago

For this to work it has to do what all great mass appeal tech devices have done in the past: Deliver a benefit that outweighs the inconvenience of its use and prove that benefit is unique.

Right now, that's not the case. But check back in a decade.

The dude is just another pessimistic bummer-rific boring adult. The Rift is already a success, and Oculus is more down-to-earth about its shortcomings than almost any other company doing something new can be. It may be a decade before all of the things get ironed out (like believable tactile interaction/movement, although I think that'll take longer) but the product is already providing an experience that pleases the target audience.

Some people are just too grown-up to enjoy anything these days...
 
I don't see them as failed or failing. I see them as hitting the jackpot. they got FB to buy them...and to me that is a win. Whether the actual product makes it...pfffff, that don't matter now.
 
Until we get in room holograms, it will serve its purpose.
But I can see a new health problem, Occulus or Rift face lol.
It will stretch/indent parts of the face, causing a skin sag and/or blood flow problem if worn too much.

It should succeed if cheap enough, for a few years at least.
I'm getting one for Elite :D
 
I still believe that no matter what it will still be a gimmick device.

I mean it will be a really cool gimmick. I've used one and it is a very high-quality experience, but it does get distracting compared to traditional monitor. Especially for multi-player games, you are just at too much of a disadvantage.

Maybe it just takes a few hundred hours of practice before you really get used to it.
 
Well considering all they were trying to do was use hype and other people's money to get bought out by someone for billions, I'd say it was a resounding success. As a consumer product, it will be a super niche product with a super short life-span.
 
Success with depend on the adoption for Porn. 'Mainstream' uses will be ported back from there.

Asia should keep it afloat for a while until some mainstream use is found here.
 
Success with depend on the adoption for Porn. 'Mainstream' uses will be ported back from there.

Asia should keep it afloat for a while until some mainstream use is found here.

There are already 2 mainstream uses, 3D gaming and 3D movies (3D being stereo vision).
 
my impression is the hardware is good & improving

just need to get the software support behind it
 
Another editorial on Polygon... It's just clickbait, move along.
 
Yeah, it's going to be a failure in the same way high end video cards, and projectors and propper home theater systems are a failure.

There are people that are fine with gaming with a GTX 460 years after it's release on a 19 inch monitor or listening to music on $20 headphones/computer speakers or watching a movie on a 10 inch screen and then there are the [H].

I've been using a mouse/keyboard or a controller to navigate through game worlds for almost 30 years and it still works why then all of a sudden would that need to change just because I'm playing a game in 3D? Yes, eventual we'll probably have a VR environment so detailed and motion control so precise that CoD matches will become an Olympic sport but until then I'm perfectly fine with gaming in 3D on a virtual 100+ft screen for less than the cost of a 24 inch 120hz monitor. Hell, it doesn't even have to be in 3D all the time, just playing something like The Witcher 3 on that large of a display would be worth the cost of entry.

The idea of being able to watch an Imax size screen in my projector incompatible living room for $350 (give or take) is awesome. I've got the sound system and now with the Oculus I'll have the screen.

If I'm sitting down with a controller in my hand or at a desk using a mouse and keyboard I couldn't care less that the Oculus needs to be plugged in. As long as the cable has enough slack then it's pretty much irrelevant.
 
But ultimately the thing that the Oculus Rift delivers to users doesn't yet overcome the inherent inconvenience and cost of using it. And it still isn't the virtual reality millions brought up watching the likes of Star Trek and reading books like Snow Crash or Ready Player One, would expect from the technology.

When the system is launched it won't be able to deliver the sort of holodeck experience the most mainstream of users might expect.

What he hell is this guy talking about??
He is comparing real world tech to SCIENCE FICTION tech and because it isn't as good it will fail???
NOBODY IS EXPECTING A HOLODECK!!!! That assertion that people are is ridiculous!

What potential buyers are expecting is a MUCH REFINED VR experience that previous failed iterations of VR. The long development time is because there are MANY technical hurtles to overcome to deliver the level of VR that adopters will expect. NOBODY IS EXPECTING Si-Fi come to life.
This PROVES what I always said about so called "tech writers" They are CLUELESS about the technical side of things and what is going on tech communities.
He better go back to reporting on "Hot looks for Fall".
 
What he hell is this guy talking about??
He is comparing real world tech to SCIENCE FICTION tech and because it isn't as good it will fail???
NOBODY IS EXPECTING A HOLODECK!!!! That assertion that people are is ridiculous!

What potential buyers are expecting is a MUCH REFINED VR experience that previous failed iterations of VR. The long development time is because there are MANY technical hurtles to overcome to deliver the level of VR that adopters will expect. NOBODY IS EXPECTING Si-Fi come to life.
This PROVES what I always said about so called "tech writers" They are CLUELESS about the technical side of things and what is going on tech communities.
He better go back to reporting on "Hot looks for Fall".

I get what you are saying, but that is exactly what people are expecting. My personal experience with the Rift is more of a, oh thats pretty cool, then forget about it. There are so many expectations from the masses on this technology that the author is correct in it being a 'failure'. It's nowhere close to what we really want when we slap a gizmo on our head. Its an extremely niche market at this point, and its still a gimmick more or less. They will get there eventually, but not for a long time. The potential buyers you are speaking of are very few and far between.
 
Yeah, it's going to be a failure in the same way high end video cards, and projectors and propper home theater systems are a failure.

There are people that are fine with gaming with a GTX 460 years after it's release on a 19 inch monitor or listening to music on $20 headphones/computer speakers or watching a movie on a 10 inch screen and then there are the [H].

I've been using a mouse/keyboard or a controller to navigate through game worlds for almost 30 years and it still works why then all of a sudden would that need to change just because I'm playing a game in 3D? Yes, eventual we'll probably have a VR environment so detailed and motion control so precise that CoD matches will become an Olympic sport but until then I'm perfectly fine with gaming in 3D on a virtual 100+ft screen for less than the cost of a 24 inch 120hz monitor. Hell, it doesn't even have to be in 3D all the time, just playing something like The Witcher 3 on that large of a display would be worth the cost of entry.

The idea of being able to watch an Imax size screen in my projector incompatible living room for $350 (give or take) is awesome. I've got the sound system and now with the Oculus I'll have the screen.

If I'm sitting down with a controller in my hand or at a desk using a mouse and keyboard I couldn't care less that the Oculus needs to be plugged in. As long as the cable has enough slack then it's pretty much irrelevant.

my thoughts here...

no, it may not be mainstream, but to say it will fail is stupid....
 
I get what you are saying, but that is exactly what people are expecting. My personal experience with the Rift is more of a, oh thats pretty cool, then forget about it. There are so many expectations from the masses on this technology that the author is correct in it being a 'failure'. It's nowhere close to what we really want when we slap a gizmo on our head. Its an extremely niche market at this point, and its still a gimmick more or less. They will get there eventually, but not for a long time. The potential buyers you are speaking of are very few and far between.

The potential market isn't EVERYONE and it never was. Just like the market for high end video cards; it is for those who understand the tech.

This device is for the PC and those who are technically savvy enough to use it.
THESE people DO NOT expect or think that science fiction=real world tech. They are NOT clueless to what VR is. There has been several "hack" iterations of it over the years that have fail because the technology was so underdeveloped. The excitement is because finally a device is being developed to tackle these shortcomings for those who would like to adopt it.

So really I find the article offensive because he is saying "you are all too stupid to appreciate this tech because you can't tell the difference between fantasy and reality"

The ones that cannot appreciate it won't be interested in buying it. Not because the tech does not deliver but because they don't care.
 
The potential market isn't EVERYONE and it never was. Just like the market for high end video cards; it is for those who understand the tech.

This device is for the PC and those who are technically savvy enough to use it.
THESE people DO NOT expect or think that science fiction=real world tech. They are NOT clueless to what VR is. There has been several "hack" iterations of it over the years that have fail because the technology was so underdeveloped. The excitement is because finally a device is being developed to tackle these shortcomings for those who would like to adopt it.

So really I find the article offensive because he is saying "you are all too stupid to appreciate this tech because you can't tell the difference between fantasy and reality"

The ones that cannot appreciate it won't be interested in buying it. Not because the tech does not deliver but because they don't care.

this.... i don't agree with 4saken at all....

just where are the people that think this is going to be a holodeck? show me one....

the type of people who honestly think that today's VR = holodeck have probably never heard of OR or care about the tech....

i think you'll be surprised at just how many uses the free market will come up with to use this thing... for nothing more than a head mounted display that allows you to turn your head to see more content.... just those two simple aspects of the tech can go a long way in entertainment and business...
 
There are already 2 mainstream uses, 3D gaming and 3D movies (3D being stereo vision).
Yeah, 3D TV and 3D gaming just took off like a rocket.

VR is a cut above, but those aren't hallmarks of a good future.
 
They got how many Billions? They won as far as I'm concerned. As for the device if anything comes of it cool.
 
I'll certainly get one, and I want it to succeed so that it sells many and is therefore worth the effort for devs to work on.

Ultimately though it's a peripheral, and making games is just too expensive to be spending time on niches. It's the same catch 22 conundrum that something like the XBox Kinect had, Devs won't make games for it unless they know loads of people have them and will buy games made for them, but people won't buy them unless there's devs making games worth playing (and paying far).

I have a hard time seeing many "AAA" games coming out with really strong support (except maybe a couple of "sponsored" ones at launch), and will many people pay the same price as a new GPU to play a few interesting indies or for some limited support in bigger games.

I don't know how many people have been following the technical development of the occulus, but for it to work properly at all, your System has to be able to stay over 90fps, at 1440 resolution, at all times. Otherwise the persistence of vision tech that prevents latency and smearing (which in turn cause motion sickness) doesn't work, so you can only wear it for short periods.

Even for enthusiasts that's a big ask, your basically looking at whatever is *after* the Geforce 980 to get the proper experience without ramping down the detail settings (which kind of defeats the point).

LIke I said, I *really* want this to work out. But being conceptually awesome, and highly promising, and even having the backing of FB doesn't guarantee that.

Basically there's a decent chance that the tech is just a whisper too early to really catch on right now.
 
I think this is a totally different platform than 3D tv. The author should not compare the two.

I think the Rift will be a success in the enthusiast circle. As others have pointed out, these are the people with the higher end video cards. It might trickle down to a broader base, but depends on final costs and available software.

I've used the DK1 and DK2. I think the technology is amazing. However, I get motion sickness from both devices. DK2 was supposed to make it better, but not sure I'm agreeing with this statement yet. (Also not sure how good the demos are that I have tried!)

I'm excited and think this is the start of a new platform (much like accelerated 3D from 15+ years ago).
 
Comparing Oculus to 3d movies, makes me wonder if they author is even a gamer.
 
A no-risk prediction. If this guy is proven right, five years from now he'll dig out this "prediction" and brag about how right he was, how he saw it coming all along, and how you should listen to him more often. If he's wrong, no one will remember this, except maybe himself, and he certainly won't bring it up.

This prediction has no value.
 
this.... i don't agree with 4saken at all....

just where are the people that think this is going to be a holodeck? show me one....

the type of people who honestly think that today's VR = holodeck have probably never heard of OR or care about the tech....

i think you'll be surprised at just how many uses the free market will come up with to use this thing... for nothing more than a head mounted display that allows you to turn your head to see more content.... just those two simple aspects of the tech can go a long way in entertainment and business...
This is pretty typical of online "journalists", posting an opinion they have, saying it's a majority view without backing things up, and give it a provocative headline.
 
The long term goal of the Rift isn't gaming. It is VR haptic societies. Might the product itself fail? Yes however this is the march towards societies that exist as much if not more online as they do in the real world.
 
Yeah, 3D TV and 3D gaming just took off like a rocket.

VR is a cut above, but those aren't hallmarks of a good future.

I wasnt limiting it to those, they are broad uses already available.
OR will provide better immersion so there is decent value for a lot of media already out there.
3D has been plagued by bad TVs and bad glasses, OR will remedy this.

Have you seen the video of a guy playing the new Elite on it?
 
my thoughts here...

no, it may not be mainstream, but to say it will fail is stupid....

Any thread with Oculus Rift in the title tends to really bring out the brain surgeons. Not even worth trying to explain to those people why its different than 3DTV's or Kinect, or doesnt need to be replace a monitor 8 hours a day to be a success.
 
I think this is a totally different platform than 3D tv. The author should not compare the two.

I think the Rift will be a success in the enthusiast circle. As others have pointed out, these are the people with the higher end video cards. It might trickle down to a broader base, but depends on final costs and available software.

I've used the DK1 and DK2. I think the technology is amazing. However, I get motion sickness from both devices. DK2 was supposed to make it better, but not sure I'm agreeing with this statement yet. (Also not sure how good the demos are that I have tried!)

I'm excited and think this is the start of a new platform (much like accelerated 3D from 15+ years ago).

Keep in mind It is not just Occulus towing the line on VR. Sony has it's version for the PS, and there are also other start ups with VR headsets.


But lets take a big picture look at the current state of gaming.
The trend has NOT been pushing photo realistic graphic rendering. Mainly because the developers will not produce something that is not beyond the scope of consoles. THIS TREND isn't going away. This is why the gaming on the graphics front has stagnated over the past few years; regardless of how breathtaking demos may look when the graphics engine is pushed to it's limits; expect a scaled down console port.
Unfortunately that is the state of the onion.
But this being the case this current environment does not exclude VR development because the machine crunching power to add this ins't that much more. Current gaming engines already support this, it just has to be more broadly implemented.
Upcoming I expect Microsoft to develop their own VR for the Xbox; or more likely buy out one of the systems in development now to have their own.

In the near future gaming will be a "goggles on" affair; and much of the development will be focused on delivering a higher quality experience.
 
Wow, the author doesn't have a clue what he is talking about.
He's basically describing VR as it was in The Lawnmower Man, which is highly romanticized cyberpunk style VR.

Reality is very different, and his expectations are far too great to even be realistic.
Fail article is fail.
 
Because the machine crunching power to add this ins't that much more.
The latest prototype aims for 75hz refresh rate at 1080. It sounds like the in-house prototype is even higher. Consoles aren't going to be able to handle 75fps at 1080 unless they backpedal the graphics or lower the resolution for a worse experience. Another article from polygon praising it ironically:

http://www.polygon.com/2014/9/22/6826491/oculus-retail-teaser-prototype

Upcoming I expect Microsoft to develop their own VR for the Xbox; or more likely buy out one of the systems in development now to have their own.
Again, it's improbable consoles would be able to handle the same technology unless it purposefully downgrades the game graphics. It being unrealistic would hardly stop MS however, but given their history, I would expect them to release their own VR 3 years AFTER Rift has become successful.
 
I cannot see the Rift as being a failure for enthusiast markets, although making it mainstream will be a big uphill battle. I could definitely see it hitting similar numbers as the same people who buy triple monitor or SLI setups, but for the average joe, maybe not.

This is my view, as well. It's not going to make a huge splash in the mainstream market for "everybody", but it will do well with gamers and the enthusiasts that are into the latest and greatest. Probably the 3D early adopters, too (those that rushed to buy a 3D TV).

I'm looking forward to it. I don't know too many others that really care much. I don't think they are marketing towards the everyone crowd right now, though (those that enjoy reality TV shows is the "everybody" crowd.).

Successful in getting into the gamer and enthusiasts? Yes. Getting a huge market penetration outside of that? Probably not. Depends on your viewpoint on the target market.
 
The Rift suffers the same problems the joystick/racing wheel have. It's extra equipment on top of an existing setup required to use effectively. If given the hardware, how many of you would actually clamp a racing wheel to your desk just to play Grid2 a couple of times per week? You would probably rather use keyboard steering than worry about that. Same thing with a joystick. I'd master keyboard/mouse aim in BF4 any day before I'd worry about sliding my devices around to make room for a stick. Even though clearly the stick/wheel are the best way to experience games like this.

For the Rift to really blow up it would have to be about the size of a pair of athletic swimmers goggles, last 8 hours on battery, and be completely wireless. That wont happen until smartwatches have 1080p displays. Otherwise Rift will succeed about as far as the aforementioned evices; never doomed to failure, but never becoming a mainstay either.
 
Back
Top