Why You are Wrong that VR is Going to Fail

FrgMstr

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
56,053
The crew over at Road to VR have taken up several arguments that I have heard every since we first started covering GPU performance in VR last year. Ben Lang writes about, "The 3 Most Common Arguments Against VR and Why They’re Wrong." I am not going to burst his bubble here and quote out the main points of his article, but he makes has some solid reasoning to counter-point the poo-poo arguments that I hear most often.

Since beginning my journey learning and writing about VR in 2011, I’ve talked with hordes of believers and critics alike. Through it all, I’ve found three common arguments touted by skeptics of the adoption of VR in the consumer market. Having immersed myself in this new era of VR for years now, I feel confident in responding to these concerns.

That said, let me leave you with a video trailer from a new company I am working with to show you what is Inside VR.
 
Bring it on. Looking forward to fully immersive game play and pr0ns.
 
VR will be great, when we have it. What we have now is not VR, not even close to VR, it's just a small tv screen 6 inches from your eyeballs, this is not VR. Simply creating a FoV screen is not VR. I repeat NOT VR.

I also don't think it will happen during anyone over 30's life time.
 
bos said:
VR will be great, when we have it. What we have now is not VR, not even close to VR, it's just a small tv screen 6 inches from your eyeballs, this is not VR. Simply creating a FoV screen is not VR. I repeat NOT VR.

I also don't think it will happen during anyone over 30's life time.
Click to expand...
Says another person that does not own a system.
 
What we have now is just smaller than the same shit you could play at the boardwalk in Santa Cruz 20 years ago. Hell even some of the stuff they try to pass of as games on it look nearly the same lol.
 
There is definitely some public interest in VR, even in my locality where prices usually dictates interest.

I'd say that VR itself will be popular once it's widely available. Prices, hardware setup/form factor and software are the biggest hurdles right now, not everyone can spend $1500 or so on a VR system.
 
NickJames said:
You have got to be trolling. To compare an Oculus or Vive to 20 year old tech is a load of shit.
Click to expand...

Admittedly a lot of it looks better, though not all of it, some of it is that kiddy block minecraft looking crap. But no, it's really not much different from the user end, other than the form factor doesn't take up the floor space of a geo metro, so of course it's much more accessible.
 
bos said:
What we have now is just smaller than the same shit you could play at the boardwalk in Santa Cruz 20 years ago. Hell even some of the stuff they try to pass of as games on it look nearly the same lol.
Click to expand...
What? First of all what do you think virtual reality means? A virtual representation of reality (something you see that looks like reality). The smaller screen in front of your face with tracking is literally just a device for a virtual representation of reality. The stuff we had 30 years ago was also virtual reality. The only difference today is that is affordable for consumers and it performs much better than it did back then. VR is not something new. It will only get better, it will not fail simply because there is a need for it, a need that existed 30 years ago but the technology was too expensive to satisfy that need so people used alternatives until now.
 
Rysen said:
What? First of all what do you think virtual reality means? A virtual representation of reality (something you see that looks like reality). The smaller screen in front of your face with tracking is literally just a device for a virtual representation of reality. The stuff we had 30 years ago was also virtual reality. The only difference today is that is affordable for consumers and it performs much better than it did back then. VR is not something new. It will only get better, it will not fail simply because there is a need for it, a need that existed 30 years ago but the technology was too expensive to satisfy that need so people used alternatives until now.
Click to expand...


By that definition literally every form of entertainment is VR. Which is basically my point. We're not there yet, we shouldn't be calling it VR.
 
bos said:
By that definition literally every form of entertainment is VR. Which is basically my point. We're not there yet, we shouldn't be calling it VR.
Click to expand...
Then your point is wrong because we are there already. And not everything qualifies. All forms of entertainment are not virtual and all virtual media is not experienced the way you see in reality. Only VR headsets or 360 surround screen systems can achieve that. If you look at a computer screen or a cellphone screen you are still seeing the surrounding reality which is not virtual. The key difference between VR and all other media is the fact that everything you see looks like reality not just a small portion of what you are looking at like I said in my comment. So no its not your point at all. We have been there for quite some time now and yes we should call it VR because that is the definition.
 
Rysen said:
Then your point is wrong because we are there already. And not everything qualifies. All forms of entertainment are not virtual and all virtual media is not experienced the way you see in reality. Only VR headsets or 360 surround screen systems can achieve that. If you look at a computer screen or a cellphone screen you are still seeing the surrounding reality which is not virtual. The key difference between VR and all other media is the fact that everything you see looks like reality not just a small portion of what you are looking at like I said in my comment. So no its not your point at all. We have been there for quite some time now and yes we should call it VR because that is the definition.
Click to expand...

lol, except no, it's not just what you see, it's the reality you experience, which includes all senses, not just vision. Sorry good try.
 
I considered buying a headset as part of my recent upgrade but I bought a chair instead.

I'm interested in VR but I have two main concerns:

1. Since I don't have it, I don't know what I'm missing and it's easier to wait. I'd rather wait one more generation before I drop cash.

2. The least appealing thing about VR is the physicality. I know that sounds super couch-potato but if I'm going to be moving around, I'd rather just be getting normal exercise.
There are a lot of things wrapped up in that opinion but it's mostly an issue of living space and the fact that to me, I think of a video gaming experience as something that is more mental and neurological than physical or corporeal. I don't want to wave guns and crow bars at things in VR - I'd rather use it as a HMD where I can look around in a driving/space/flight simulator or RPG and not be constrained by monitors. When I see those "you're in the game world" demos, I just picture things getting broken and people getting hurt or tired...
 
I think he's got it about right. It's natural to compare previous technologies to new ones as a way to predict how the new ones will fare. But this gen of VR is simply well beyond anything in the consumer space, especially on the PC. Sure there's many things to improve and the cost needs to come down but current VR is simply well beyond anything prior to it.
 
DoubleTap said:
2. The least appealing thing about VR is the physicality. I know that sounds super couch-potato but if I'm going to be moving around, I'd rather just be getting normal exercise.
There are a lot of things wrapped up in that opinion but it's mostly an issue of living space and the fact that to me, I think of a video gaming experience as something that is more mental and neurological than physical or corporeal. I don't want to wave guns and crow bars at things in VR - I'd rather use it as a HMD where I can look around in a driving/space/flight simulator or RPG and not be constrained by monitors. When I see those "you're in the game world" demos, I just picture things getting broken and people getting hurt or tired...
Click to expand...

You don't need tons of room, I have about a 7' x 7' space and don't have a problem with most games. If one does recommend more than that I might stay away from it, the selection is getting so large that there's plenty of options. I'm really in shooting shit. There's just so much visceral pleasure to it in VR and those games tend work in my space well.
 
heatlesssun said:
You don't need tons of room, I have about a 7' x 7' space and don't have a problem with most games. If one does recommend more than that I might stay away from it, the selection is getting so large that there's plenty of options. I'm really in shooting shit. There's just so much visceral pleasure to it in VR and those games tend work in my space well.
Click to expand...

I'm keeping an open mind, but this is what I'm picturing:

 
I wasn't aware Blu-Ray succeeded. I thought streaming, or "pirating" as the industry likes to call it, was pretty much killing packaged media.
 
Brian_B said:
I wasn't aware Blu-Ray succeeded. I thought streaming, or "pirating" as the industry likes to call it, was pretty much killing packaged media.
Click to expand...

I think BD is the option you turn to for the best definition. 4k streaming is still iffy and while 3D TV didn't do so great, 3D BD for some reason seems to be humming along, at least it's easy enough to get 3D BD content for any 3D movie, with exceptions like Star Wars where you have to wait a damned year.
 
VR might be a big success or it might fade away again. Realistically thinking it could go either way, it is far too soon to make a call right now. If VR succeeds it will be years from now when the tech has improved, come down in price, and has actually got some real mainstream attention outside of the gaming space. No matter what happens to VR it will be years before anyone can really make a reasonably educated guess.
 
I don't disagree with any of the points Ben lang made in the blog. Those are weak arguments.

The only one I may still agree with partly in theory is his first point. He isn't wrong the tech has continued in many industries since it was deemed the next big thing coming soon to your basement in movies like the Lawnmower man. :) lol However I would argue it still has the same issue to a much smaller degree it had at that time. The PC gear is still far to expensive for mass market consumption. Don't get me wrong it doesn't sound insane to us around here who don't bat an eye at Video card prices of $600 a pop... but to the average person the idea of spending double-triple what their non-vr computer costs them to get in on the fun isn't exactly mass market yet. Although it could be in a few year... or the mobile versions of VR may end up being the true Main stream version of VR if mobile hardware and software keeps improving at the rate it has been.

The other issue ... which I believe seems to be resolving itself now is the issue with standards. Having the first 2 big booster companies compete ala Sony V MS over developers ect didn't do VR in general any favours as I see it. A lot of people including myself have been turned off by the whole VHS / BETA of it all. Stil now that the OpenXR standard seems to be getting wide spreed support from all the players I am hopeful that the next few years we will see lots of more hardware options both expensive and inexpensive... as well as more games that follow a standard that ends the issue.

IMO right now and perhaps for the next year or two at least VR is at the stage the Early CD players where in the 80s. The tech is exciting and fantastic... but the hardware is still first gen, and the software format is still in flux. Same issues that effected the Compact Disc. I mean the Red Book Audio standard was published in 1980 and not really adopted by the industry till 87. Although I believe the VR industry has made a few of the same mistakes... It does seem like they are correcting a lot faster then it took the Audio industry. I'm looking forward to the next few years... when it becomes clear to me that the software end and the hardware end are all on board with OpenXR, I will be taking a very serious look at the second generation of headsets. ( they kind MS has been yaking about ect... I believe 2017 may be a good year for VR hardware announcements )
 
Last edited:
I think crappy VR could cause VR to succeed over time. I don't think the fragmented market of higher quality VR would of made it happen. But Samsung etc.. when they get those phones a few more generations forward and actually strong enough to drive VR properly... it could really happen like in the mainstream.
High cost power system VR for PC truly succeeding? Depends on what definition that takes? I don't see AAA titles coming out due to limited sales volume.
If the prices come down and warranties go up then maybe. Playstation VR taking off? Lots of options for one to bite but the biggest seller has been ... Samsung with one of the crappiest experiences but people like it and its cheap. I am the biggest doubter of VR and I was the 1st to say 3D gaming would not take off etc and it has all crashed to the ground. However the stupid phone VR may save the industry.
 
Brian_B said:
I wasn't aware Blu-Ray succeeded. I thought streaming, or "pirating" as the industry likes to call it, was pretty much killing packaged media.
Click to expand...

Well they have been selling Blu discs for 15 years... and they likely delayed the rise of the digital streaming stuff by a few years. Even now the audio/videophile types will tell you blu and other physical media will always be better. :) lol
 
Vader1975 said:
when they get those phones a few more generations forward and actually strong enough to drive VR properly... it could really happen like in the mainstream.
Click to expand...
Turning them into streaming devices for gaming makes more sense IMO. And people forget, gaming on VR doesn't have to be "inside" the game, as not all games lend themselves to that.

Say you want to play Civ 6, well, that's something you really want to be looking at a screen, but you can be doing that on a virtual huge screen in a virtual environment of your choosing with VR.

Whats the advantage?

Well, you might be in a guest room where you don't have a 100" projector screen available, but you can play on a virtual one with your headset. Or you may have three kids and they want to watch Mickey Mouse Muff Crusaders or whatever it is kids are into, and are being super annoying, well, you can immerse yourself into the captain's chair of the USS Enterprise and play Doom on the viewscreen with noise isolating headphones, or perhaps you're on a long claustrophobic flight in coach class and find that stiffling well no problem put the headset on and you can feel like you're in a huge iMAX movie theater to watch a 3D movie. Heck, maybe you are just bored in your ocean of cubicles and want to use part of your lunch break to watch an episode of Archer.

For a young bachelor, you might even wonder does your room even need to be all that big when you can entertain yourself in a huge virtual room that looks like a million bucks and perhaps one setting is even on a tropical beach for relaxation watching some extra jiggly volleyball girls play a match around sunset? Then all of a sudden a tiny dorm room isn't so bad as long as you have a comfy chair.
 
Why will VR fail in the mainstream? The main reason is cost. If you can't bring the hardware costs down, fewer people will buy it. That means lower game sales which would cause many game publishers to exit the market.

Have I ever used VR? Not since the 90's. I am just not interested in having something strapped to my head for hours on end. If you could just plug me into the matrix, then I would be all for trying it but as it stands, I have 0 interest. Plus I don't have the cash to buy one anyway.

I don't care if VR is successful or not. I just don't think it will ever take off. BTW I also prefer 2D movies over 3D (disregarding the fact that 3D movies cost more) as I actually find 3D less lifelike than 2D so I imagine that I would feel the same way after trying VR.
 
[21CW]killerofall said:
Why will VR fail in the mainstream? The main reason is cost. If you can't bring the hardware costs down, fewer people will buy it. That means lower game sales which would cause many game publishers to exit the market.

Have I ever used VR? Not since the 90's. I am just not interested in having something strapped to my head for hours on end. If you could just plug me into the matrix, then I would be all for trying it but as it stands, I have 0 interest. Plus I don't have the cash to buy one anyway.

I don't care if VR is successful or not. I just don't think it will ever take off. BTW I also prefer 2D movies over 3D (disregarding the fact that 3D movies cost more) as I actually find 3D less lifelike than 2D so I imagine that I would feel the same way after trying VR.
Click to expand...

See there you are wrong. Did PC gaming fail back in the 90's because the cost was too high? Obviously not, and yes the cost was very high. Systems were far more expensive back then, that what we can put together now for an entry level gaming system. Yet PC gaming somehow managed to thrive.

The total cost of VR isn't even high anymore. You can get a Rift Bundle (PC included) for $1300.

https://uploadvr.com/oculus-bundle-1300-rift-touch-pc-games/

Sure, it's bare minimum spec. But everything for $1300 man! Fuck off with it's too expensive..
 
bos said:
lol, except no, it's not just what you see, it's the reality you experience, which includes all senses, not just vision. Sorry good try.
Click to expand...

So you are basically saying that the term "Virtual reality" must be kept reserve for the eventual creation of the NerveGear? And that a virtual experience cannot be called virtual "reality" unless it covers all 5 senses?

What are we supposed to call the thing we have now? "TV strapped to your face" just isn't as catchy, and the term "head mounted display" is already taken by a different category of product

chenw said:
Flight sims are one of the first thing I'd DEFINITELY want to try VR for.
Click to expand...

Elite Dangerous is a completely different experience in VR compared to a regular monitor. It's like the difference between looking at a fish tank, and actually scuba diving with the fish.

When you look around the cockpit, you FEEL like you are inside a space ship (even if you can't smell it).

Plus, the ability to just look where you want to look makes flying and combat a lot easier.
 
sboucher said:
Sure, it's bare minimum spec. But everything for $1300 man! Fuck off with it's too expensive..
Click to expand...

It is to expensive for mass market sales yes.

We live in a world now where a lot of people are questioning why they even own a desktop. They are choosing to not replace their 6-8 year old machines when they die. They are happy with their phones and cheapo laptops. To the masses gaming is mobile / facebook... heck at this point more then half the people using steam are using integrated GPUs. So in a world where almost 60% of steams users are on integrated Intel cards... and another 35% aren't using cards that wouldn't need to be replaced first. Yes its too expensive. Never mind getting into the CPUs most of those people are using.

For the masses right now that game mostly in a browser, or play a handful of games on steam that run fine on their 5 year old machine they paid $500-700 dollars for back then. It doesn't matter how great VR may sound to them (or even look if you give them a demo). They are not running out in droves to spend $1300 on a rift deal that includes a bare min VR machine. Anyone that really looks into is going to realise that unless they are willing to spend 2 grand they may as well not bother right now.

I want VR to take off I really don't hate it... I just don't think deals like rifts $1300 package is going to move the needle.
 
bos said:
What we have now is just smaller than the same shit you could play at the boardwalk in Santa Cruz 20 years ago. Hell even some of the stuff they try to pass of as games on it look nearly the same lol.
Click to expand...
There is one major difference between then and now: you can't masturbate at the boardwalk (well, technically you could, but it would end badly)

The same argument could be used against early home game consoles: you could already play the games in the arcade, and the NES version usually looked worse than the arcade version (1942 is a perfect example of this). Yet here we are now, with vanishing arcades and a game console in nearly every home
 
VR will fail! If enthusiasts like me get sick from playing games in VR than I don't see this vomit fest to succeed. Unless they figure out way how to decouple brain movement detection with visual clues. Maybe holo chambers (room scale VR). But i want to play space and flight simulators so VR wont cut it.
 
Pretty much the comment above me. I don't think I have to worry about whether or not VR succeeds or fails, either way I won't be using it because of the nausea it will cause.
 
ChadD said:
It is to expensive for mass market sales yes.

We live in a world now where a lot of people are questioning why they even own a desktop. They are choosing to not replace their 6-8 year old machines when they die. They are happy with their phones and cheapo laptops. To the masses gaming is mobile / facebook... heck at this point more then half the people using steam are using integrated GPUs. So in a world where almost 60% of steams users are on integrated Intel cards... and another 35% aren't using cards that wouldn't need to be replaced first. Yes its too expensive. Never mind getting into the CPUs most of those people are using.

For the masses right now that game mostly in a browser, or play a handful of games on steam that run fine on their 5 year old machine they paid $500-700 dollars for back then. It doesn't matter how great VR may sound to them (or even look if you give them a demo). They are not running out in droves to spend $1300 on a rift deal that includes a bare min VR machine. Anyone that really looks into is going to realise that unless they are willing to spend 2 grand they may as well not bother right now.

I want VR to take off I really don't hate it... I just don't think deals like rifts $1300 package is going to move the needle.
Click to expand...

Ok so by your accounts, PC gaming is going to / has failed as well then? Because mainstream people can't find a use for their desktops anymore? Cool story bro.

In fact you've actually laid down the rather ripe reality of mobile VR, which by all accounts will end up being the "mainstream" version. Millions of Gear VR headsets are in peoples hands. Google Daydream is a cheap addon for a number of Android devices. Sony has VR, Microsoft will have VR. Everywhere you look, there will be VR. PC tethered VR, mobil VR, standalone VR with inside-out tracking. At all price points, depending on where you want the experience to take you. How far down that rabbit hole do you want to go?

Outside of PC gaming there are plenty of VR applications as well.

The needle has already been moved. We are at the point now where content is what is going to continue pushing that needle forward. There is already plenty of compelling content, and not just gaming.

I never thought it would be the PC enthusiast community that would be the most vocal against it, that is what has shocked me the most as this new medium has come forward. I expected it would be places like this which would have had the most amount of excitement for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
cpy2 said:
VR will fail! If enthusiasts like me get sick from playing games in VR than I don't see this vomit fest to succeed. Unless they figure out way how to decouple brain movement detection with visual clues. Maybe holo chambers (room scale VR). But i want to play space and flight simulators so VR wont cut it.
Click to expand...

You've got to ease yourself into it man. Start with the more comfortable stuff, then go up from there. I couldn't stomach a lot of that stuff at first either, but after awhile I gained my VR legs.
 
cpy2 said:
VR will fail! If enthusiasts like me get sick from playing games in VR than I don't see this vomit fest to succeed. Unless they figure out way how to decouple brain movement detection with visual clues. Maybe holo chambers (room scale VR). But i want to play space and flight simulators so VR wont cut it.
Click to expand...

Some people will always get motion sick from VR no matter what. However, you can't take your anecdotal experiences and say "VR will fail". Until the Rift or Vive are big enough for me to stuff my glasses inside of the headset or until someone figures out a way to do custom lenses for specific eye sights I will always get motion sick with VR. I'm not going to take issues with FIRST GENERATION tech and say its automatically going to fail. Things can and will improve. They can improve FOV to better trick the brain and games will also improve over time. This is the first time VR has ever truly been at a point where it has a chance. The technology is there now and given time it will only improve. That doesn't mean it will work for everyone, though. Some people get ill just seeing a fan move or seeing a light breeze ripple water. There is nothing that can be done about that outside of what help motion sickness pills offer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top