
Virtual reality flopped in the 1990s – This time it’s different, apparently - phodo
http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21662481-virtual-reality-flopped-1990s-time-its-differentapparently-grand
======
madaxe_again
It may flop in the mass market, but as one who has had 18 hour goggle sessions
in elite, there _is_ a market, it may just be more niche for the time being
than vr firms are betting on.

So - I don't think it will ultimately flop, but it may be a slower start than
the hype hopes for.

------
kristopolous
can't wait for VRML to come back. It was _included_ in browsers back then.

It's always great to remember that we had realtime chat and 3d worlds running
in the browser in 1997,
[http://www.digitalspace.com/avatars/book/fullbook/chch/ch1f....](http://www.digitalspace.com/avatars/book/fullbook/chch/ch1f.jpg)
... on systems with 0.1% the ram, 0.05% the disk space on 0.2% the bandwidth
of our modern systems.

~~~
fulafel
Which browser included VRML support? I just remember the plugins.

Edit: It was Netscape -
[http://docs.tpu.ru/docs/html/html32/ch28.htm#NetscapesLive3D](http://docs.tpu.ru/docs/html/html32/ch28.htm#NetscapesLive3D)

~~~
kristopolous
netscape struck a deal with SGI in the day. Here's the press release of the
shipment: [http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/cosmo-player-
ships-a...](http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/cosmo-player-ships-as-an-
integral-component-of-netscape-communicator-40-75892222.html)

And here's the press release of the deal:
[https://books.google.com/books?id=aToEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA8&lpg=PA...](https://books.google.com/books?id=aToEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA8&lpg=PA8&dq=netscape+navigator+cosmo+player&source=bl&ots=yAv2lxh18U&sig=Xqw7_SNIG89IUnLhdXyfIBKTOG0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CDQQ6AEwBGoVChMIjsfT6ojYxwIVEFmICh2k8Q6m#v=onepage&q=netscape%20navigator%20cosmo%20player&f=false)

for IE: "Microsoft integrated the Intervista VRML 2.0 viewer in Microsoft(R)
Internet Explorer 4.0." [http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/microsoft-
releases-v...](http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/microsoft-releases-
vrml-20-authoring-tools-cd-74871142.html)

edit: I can't find an actual build with it. I did find a version bundled with
AIM, WinAmp, RealPlayer G2, and PalmPilot utilities though. Here's the glory
screen shot, in an appropriately old window manager
[http://i.imgur.com/nacQMCX.png](http://i.imgur.com/nacQMCX.png)

------
zamalek
A counterargument: [http://blog.codinghorror.com/i-tried-vr-and-it-was-just-
ok/](http://blog.codinghorror.com/i-tried-vr-and-it-was-just-ok/)

TDLR; it seems as though people are excited about VR being exciting, instead
of being excited about VR itself.

~~~
nakedrobot2
In actual real-world user tests, I've found that 95-95% of people say "Holy
OMFG this is one of the coolest things I have EVER SEEN!!!1"

There are "always a few" who shrug their shoulders and say "so what is the
use-case for this anyway?"

~~~
christoph
We developed a piece of software for use at a pharmaceutical trade show and
had nearly 1000 people use it over three days.

This was exactly our experience. There was certainly a 10% who were absolutely
blown away and we almost had to rip the headset off them after 20 minutes.
Around 80% who were quite amazed and engrossed in the whole thing and
certainly a 5 to 10% who were just meh, or felt a bit queasy very early on.

We deliberately programmed in an early section that would separate out people
likely to feel sick early on. Our thought here was to get them out early on,
rather than let sickness creep up on them.

I think the 5 to 10% will shrink quite quickly with new hardware. We couldn't
calibrate IPD for everyone - new headsets make this much quicker and easier to
do. Reduced latency, etc. is all going to help here as well.

~~~
duncanawoods
Its almost a given that a tech gizmo gathers healthy interest today. The real
question is whether the general population want to integrate it into their
life when the novelty wears off.

Do you you have any reason to think your experience differs from say, doing a
trade show with force-feedback sticks in 2000, wiimotes in 2006 or kinect in
2011?

~~~
christoph
That's a very good question and one I may struggle to answer properly.

I think with the other technologies there was always a feeling of using
technology for the sake of technology. My experience with VR was that once
somebody put the headset and noise cancelling headphones on, they were
immersed. That is, they couldn't talk to a friend, fiddle with their phone or
anything else that would distract them. Seeing people move their head for the
first time and look shocked/awed that there was a feeling of presence is like
nothing I saw with the other technologies listed. People would say "oh that's
neat" or "that's cool". With VR, some people take the headset off and just sit
there in a kind of daze at what they've just experienced. Seeing people try
and reach out and touch stuff is always funny as well.

Funnily enough, the three technologies you list I see being used in
conjunction with VR in some form or another as it grows - Valve's lighthouse
tech is broadly similar to Kinect, the new Oculus/Steam controllers are
somewhat in-line with Wiimote technology. It's starting to feel like all of
the pieces of the puzzle are beginning to align for the very first time.

The real challenge to make the technology shine is going to be content
creators adapting their thought processes to a new medium. They won't be able
to apply the tricks that grew up out of cinema. The toolbox needs rebuilding.
I'm eagerly awaiting trying what Oculus have been doing in this area with
their Story Studio.

------
aaron695
Biggest issue - It takes work to use. People are lazy, standing and moving is
not fun.

One of the reasons the minority report interface sucks. It's way to much
effort to use compared to a mouse.

But it'll take off thanks to the internet, it allows a lot of old tech to
start working, just it'll be narrower than people think.

~~~
rayalez
Technically you can just swivel chair and a gamepad. That could be enough for
like 80% of use cases.

You can watch tv in a virtual theater from a couch, you can observe 360
videos/panoramas and play most of the games from swivel chair.

------
KuhlMensch
I played with the Oculus for about 1.25 hours while drunk, and felt sick for
about 20 minutes afterwards.

My guess:

When good headsets hit with 4k and ~20ms latency (2017?), with great cross
platform support (2018?), at a reasonable pricepoint, comfort level and UX
(2019)? we will _all_ be using them to code.

In a few years when you are pair programming with someone remotely, I'd be
surprised if you didn't point to line 12 with your hand.

~~~
JustSomeNobody
Kind of like here in the Post PC world where we are all coding on tablets
while sitting on the beach.

Sorry, but no. I just don't see this happening. People don't want things on
their face for that long. Even eyeglasses bug me and I've been wearing them
most my life.

------
hayksaakian
personal anecdote:

\- the resolution on the Oculus DK2 is painfully low -- it's like sticking
your face 1 inch from a 640x400 CRT monitor. This made me car-sick after a few
minutes.

\- the sense of "presence" and natural neck movement is very good and it feels
natural.

\- the notion of a headset is a bit clunky but i don't know of a better
solution.

------
EngineerBetter
A handful of games developers I know that have used Oculus Rift complained of
sickness after 20 minutes or so. Apparently it's better with recent revisions
of the hardware, but to put it in perspective the prior revision had one chap
needing to lie down in a dark room he felt so awful!

~~~
hrnnnnnn
I played Valkyrie on the DK1, it was awful, I felt sick for about two hours
afterwards.

I played it on the DK2 about a year later. I felt a slight twinge, especially
when the head-tracking hitched, but afterwards I felt fine.

Also played a racing game on the DK2 around the same time with no ill effect.
I think the head-tracking really helps here.

~~~
Rapzid
When my mate finally got in DK1(and we finally got HL2 working with it) I
found the load a terrible user experience. Going from head tracking and
immersion to a sudden frozen image that is fixed in your view while your head
moves.. Crazy vertigo. I didn't really get sick from it, but it definitely was
not the most fun I have had playing a game.

These things will get sorted out relatively quickly though I imagine.

~~~
azernik
I imagine that's the kind of thing that can be solved with more design
experience - some kind of low-computing-load "loading room" that at least
gives you control of the camera, for example.

------
chjohasbrouck
I just don't think putting screens in front of a person's eyes is going to be
the solution for VR.

The technology needs more direct access to our biology to truly deliver on the
expectations it creates.

~~~
jimhefferon
Can a patch on the skin induce currents in the nerves below the skin?

~~~
geon
Yes.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPNXUfOkt2A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPNXUfOkt2A)

You would probably want more fidelity, though.

------
hacker_9
It's a step in the right direction, but I personally don't think the tech is
there yet - just look at the millions that go into creating 3d games for a 2d
surface, how does that scale to 360deg of motion?

Additionally, you have M$ marketing campaign which does videos like this:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aThCr0PsyuA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aThCr0PsyuA)
(even though it's AR, the point still stands that VR/AR are being marketed as
more than they actually are).

~~~
hrnnnnnn
I don't understand the question. You've already got a 3D environment, all you
have to do is implement camera control for the headset. For simulation games
where the user is stationary (planes, cars) you can pretty much stop there.

Other games will need to be designed with VR in mind, but it's not going to
balloon art budgets or anything. On the contrary, what a lot of developers
find is that they can get away with less sophisticated graphics while
maintaining a sense of presence. See Superhot for a good example.

[https://superhotgame.com/](https://superhotgame.com/)

~~~
hacker_9
Yes you have a 3d world, but now everything in it needs to be interact able.
Knock your fist against a wall for example, it makes subtlety different noises
everytime - how do you program for that? Everything in the environment should
have physics too. In a survival game if I pick up cello-tape and a gun and
flashlight I'd expect to be able to attach it all together myself with my
hands.

All this stuff you can hide behind a button press on a gamepad+tv, but in VR
it's so much more jarring when the world you are walking around can only be
somewhat interacted with - the techniques we use to fake stuff today just
don't stand up when you can look at them from a mm away. The idea of
VR+gamepad just doesn't make sense to me - If I can't see/control my
hands/feet as I'd expect then all these reports of VR induced sickness come as
no surprise.

~~~
hrnnnnnn
Good point. I thought you were just referring to graphics, but yeah, the bar
for interaction is definitely going to go up once our hands are involved.

------
nakedrobot2
Nothing about VR Cinema?

Shameless self promotion: [http://www.Sphericam.com](http://www.Sphericam.com)
is the ONLY spherical camera with 4K resolution and 60FPS, providing the
nateve resolution needed for VR cinema in today's and next year's VR headsets.
We are now taking preorders after raising nearly half a million dollars on
Kickstarter in july.

~~~
azernik
RTFA

"That the new generation of VR’s first software products will mostly be games,
then, seems in little doubt. But the industry’s boosters point out that it
could have plenty of other uses as well. One is film. All of the proposed
headsets will come with cinema apps that put the user inside a virtual picture
palace with an ordinary flat screen. But immersive films that place the viewer
at the centre of the action, and which are made with special panoramic
cameras, are possible too. One, called “Clouds over Sidra”, which chronicles
life inside a refugee camp in Jordan, has already proved a hit online."

------
mozumder
No, it's still going to flop. The kind of people that think VR is a good idea
also thought Ouya is a good idea, so yah, it's doomed.

Didn't personal injury lawsuit concerns kill VR back in the 90's?

And then there's the limited field-of-view..

