Public Space VR

SEANMCAD

I didnt know which of the many VR related thread to make this observation.

We all have been looking at this technology as a personal purchase one thing I think we havent considered is Public Spaces for VR experiences.

Example:
https://www.iflyworld.com/

a place you go to experience first hand sky diving. You could not afford a multi-million dollar facility for this but you could afford to go visit.

Imagine what the current VR technology could do at a million dollar per setup level. This is where I think the R&D around the Vive is going to play more of a possible roll

Vrika

You're attaching the buzzword VR to already existing technology and claiming it's something new.

Driving simulators, golf simulators, flying simulators, simulated roller coasters, and several other simulators already exists. They do not need VR headsets that much because there's enough money to surround the user with multiple huge screens.

EDIT: Augmented reality in public spaces might be different matter. It could potentially benefit a lot from current headset technology /EDIT

SEANMCAD

Vrika said:

You're attaching the buzzword VR to already existing technology and claiming it's something new.

Driving simulators, golf simulators, flying simulators, simulated roller coasters, and several other simulators already exists. They do not need VR headsets that much because there's enough money to surround the user with multiple huge screens.

where are these VR studios I want to go I havent seen one.

Golf Simulators I have seen and that is NOT by ANY stretch a VR experience. That is a movie projected on one wall.

Ridelynn

I went to Universal Studios a year ago, and most of the "rides" were simulators. 

Anyone remember Battletech Centers? They came out in 1990. I think there are still several out there being used.

And I don't think I've been to a John's Incredible or Dave & Busters where they didn't have some sort of either flight or driving simulator - some fully enclosed, some just several big screens up in the front.

These are pretty impressive too - not that I have the motivation to build one, but wow.
http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/5-mind-blowing-homemade-flight-simulators

SEANMCAD

Ridelynn said:

I went to Universal Studios a year ago, and most of the "rides" were simulators. 

Anyone remember Battletech Centers? They came out in 1990. I think there are still several out there being used.

And I don't think I've been to a John's Incredible or Dave & Busters where they didn't have some sort of either flight or driving simulator - some fully enclosed, some just several big screens up in the front.

These are pretty impressive too - not that I have the motivation to build one, but wow.
http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/5-mind-blowing-homemade-flight-simulators

however I started to think, all the images are at least 3 feet away so in 'oculus vr' I can reach out one foot from my face and 'pick up' an item and I can walk around it as well. I dont think that is going to be possible without a headset or a hologram. So what I am talking about is that level of VR but many times better because its not a personal setup costing only $600

Gruug

I think this discussion is already showing that most people really don't appreciate OR understand what the upcoming VR experiences will be like. This includes me. Since very few of us (if any) have had a VR experience yet, it is going to be pretty hard to either say how it will be or how it will ultimately be applied. Many people have high expectations. Some, expectations that may even be far beyond what the current VR tech is going to be able to deliver. I think it is great to speculate. I also think that that speculation needs to be tempered with a little bit of doubt. Only when VR has been around for some time are we going to know for sure how it turns out.

Iselin

A lot of the dedicated simulations in theme parks, exhibits and other places use what's called "4D" with many things other than the visuals to give you a much better simulation than the visual VR alone could ever do.

Heck even my one and only experience with the Oculus in a GOT exhibit about climbing the wall had motion simulating the ride up the elevator and cold air blowing on you to enhance the "wall" experience very effectively. 

SEANMCAD

Iselin said:

A lot of the dedicated simulations in theme parks, exhibits and other places use what's called "4D" with many things other than the visuals to give you a much better simulation than the visual VR alone could ever do.

Heck even my one and only experience with the Oculus in a GOT exhibit about climbing the wall had motion simulating the ride up the elevator and cold air blowing on you to enhance the "wall" experience very effectively. 

intresting I wonder though how they solve the 'pick up a box and look under it' problem without a head mount or holograms. The geometry just doesnt seem possible otherwise

Iselin

SEANMCAD said:

Iselin said:

A lot of the dedicated simulations in theme parks, exhibits and other places use what's called "4D" with many things other than the visuals to give you a much better simulation than the visual VR alone could ever do.

Heck even my one and only experience with the Oculus in a GOT exhibit about climbing the wall had motion simulating the ride up the elevator and cold air blowing on you to enhance the "wall" experience very effectively. 

intresting I wonder though how they solve the 'pick up a box and look under it' problem without a head mount or holograms. The geometry just doesnt seem possible otherwise

I don't know. But I do know that for the Oculus to become a big hit in public space events the thing they have to overcome is a bunch of people lined up for hours to get at the one or two "rides." This was a problem with the wall experience in the GOT exhibit. A lot of people just looked at the line and kept walking. Screens for the visual part of the experience is just more practical until they come up with some room installations where you can have 50 or 100 ORs for a crowd to experience it at the same time.

A different wireless VR headset would have a much better shot at becoming the public space VR of choice.

SEANMCAD

Iselin said:

SEANMCAD said:

Iselin said:

A lot of the dedicated simulations in theme parks, exhibits and other places use what's called "4D" with many things other than the visuals to give you a much better simulation than the visual VR alone could ever do.

Heck even my one and only experience with the Oculus in a GOT exhibit about climbing the wall had motion simulating the ride up the elevator and cold air blowing on you to enhance the "wall" experience very effectively. 

intresting I wonder though how they solve the 'pick up a box and look under it' problem without a head mount or holograms. The geometry just doesnt seem possible otherwise

I don't know. But I do know that for the Oculus to become a big hit in public space events the thing they have to overcome is a bunch of people lined up for hours to get at the one or two "rides." This was a problem with the wall experience in the GOT exhibit. A lot of people just looked at the line and kept walking. Screens for the visual part of the experience is just more practical until they come up with some room installations where you can have 50 or 100 ORs for a crowd to experience it at the same time.

A different wireless VR headset would have a much better shot at becoming the public space VR of choice.

well to be clear I am not even suggesting Oculus specifically. I am just saying for it to be a VR experience like we are talking about I do not think there is any way possible for one to not have some kind of head mounted display or glasses or something, other than maybe Holographic.

Regarding lines what I see is Mall level VR rooms rather than Dinsey mega rides in which case if its in every mall you wouldnt have people flying in from out of state to use it, such rooms would be as common place as movie theaters.

SEANMCAD

zymurgeist said:

Public space simulators used to be a thing. The quality was poor, the equipment was expensive, and it didn't catch on except in dedicated venues like theme parks that could spend vast amounts to custom design the experience. It was also very expensive and time consuming to change the programs. I suspect you'll be able to get a superior experience in your home before it comes back to public spaces.

The Vive is PERFECT for a public VR solution. Its almost seemingly designed specifically for it its so perfect

filmoret

Vrika said:

You're attaching the buzzword VR to already existing technology and claiming it's something new.

Driving simulators, golf simulators, flying simulators, simulated roller coasters, and several other simulators already exists. They do not need VR headsets that much because there's enough money to surround the user with multiple huge screens.

EDIT: Augmented reality in public spaces might be different matter. It could potentially benefit a lot from current headset technology /EDIT

Calling VR a buzzword is like calling a bucket of water the ocean.  VR and AR are the future not some buzzword.  Simulators are a form of VR just open your mind a little here.  The headsets are trying to enhance the simulation experience.  The goal is a 100% simulation experience like in surrogates or star trek's holodeck.