What else does the Rift or Vive do that the phone doesn't, apart from those same basic functions only in higher fidelity, because it's tethered by a mess of wires to a PC?
Well the Vive comes with full body tracking... That a cellphone can´t do.
But beyond that it is as you say... just a matter of fidelity (and by extension quality of software) but hey... who has ever cared about higher fidelity... *looks at blu-ray and the GPU wars*
But me personally think that there is a slight difference between a mobile app and Valves new VR demo... But that is just my opinion.
Big difference. You won't be able to run Elite Dangerous on you cell phone VR goggles. Just like the gaming world today. Cell phones can't run the games that PC's can as they don't have enough processing power.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
The numbers on my U/N means more than just that, I was born that year. I was laughing at the happygoggles and didn't have anything to do with a debate on the tech. Sort of brought back memories when I saw the video.
I know, it wasn't directed at you, I understood your context even found it amusing. The response though.. makes me wonder if I had the wrong understanding of the true purpose of this topic.
The numbers on my U/N means more than just that, I was born that year. I was laughing at the happygoggles and didn't have anything to do with a debate on the tech. Sort of brought back memories when I saw the video.
people actually think VR is static images on a viewmaster.
Swear to god I met a person yesterday who thought exactly that. No friggin clue at all whatsoever, which is why these cardboard devices need to be out there
Really now? Hmm let me see if you check the wiki on the view finder you would have known that it is exactly a 3D image. And I quote:View-Master is the trademark name of a line of special-format stereoscopes and corresponding View-Master "reels", which are thin cardboard disks containing seven stereoscopic 3-D pairs of small color photographs on film.
By your logic the car made in 1672 in China isn't a car because it's not made in 2016.
Virtual Reality is taking the original viewmaster to the next level. Instead of looking at a 3d image that a camera took, you are now in control of a 3d camera and can look at whatever you want.
Cars have not advanced enough from their inception to have a logical comparison. Not even close.
edit: If I were going to use something like your comparison I would say that the original view-master is to VR as someones drawing of a wagon is to an actual car.
Honestly though, if you think about it for a second, someone could put all these overpriced fad devices out of business in a heartbeat. You just need something comfortable to mount your phone to your ugly mug, and something else to bridge the connection between your game and your phone. Bam, instant VR headset for your (supported) game.
Yes, I called VR a fad. Who can really sit there with that thing hanging off your face for any extended period of time. It's gonna go the same place 3D TV went. Guaranteed!
Disney is going to go out of business? along with Facebook, Google, Apple, Samsung and other all of which are investing large sums of money into this.
they best have you on the board of directors!
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
What else does the Rift or Vive do that the phone doesn't, apart from those same basic functions only in higher fidelity, because it's tethered by a mess of wires to a PC?
Well the Vive comes with full body tracking... That a cellphone can´t do.
But beyond that it is as you say... just a matter of fidelity (and by extension quality of software) but hey... who has ever cared about higher fidelity... *looks at blu-ray and the GPU wars*
But me personally think that there is a slight difference between a mobile app and Valves new VR demo... But that is just my opinion.
Big difference. You won't be able to run Elite Dangerous on you cell phone VR goggles. Just like the gaming world today. Cell phones can't run the games that PC's can as they don't have enough processing power.
However you can stream your pc to your phone and run VR that way. It's not up to par FPS wise at the moment, but it can be done and is playable. Remember the Vive and Oculus are essentially screens that display what the computer generates. If phones had an HDMI input it would be pretty fantastic. Other peripherals like body tracking is possible if someone invested the time into it.
I fail to understand how @psypoison is mistaken. And @seanmcad hasn't explained the difference well enough to educate us poor unwashed masses.
Phone provides the screen, audio, and tracking, and CPU power, and is wireless to boot. What else does the Rift or Vive do that the phone doesn't, apart from those same basic functions only in higher fidelity, because it's tethered by a mess of wires to a PC?
I think it's really going to come down to software; in other words, will there be enough of a software base to support the hardware? Rift and Vive will be able to run experiences that Cardboard and... whatever this thread's topic is called, cannot, simply due to processing power and minimum system requirements.
There's another aspect to this that has gone pretty well ignored in this thread, and that's the 'middle of the road' solution (if you want to call it that) in Oculus GearVR which also uses smartphone technology. However, as I understand it, the smartphones that will run GearVR are significantly more powerful than smartphones that can go in Cardboard or... this.
Other than processing power, I think the biggest difference between smartphone-based VR and Rift or Vive is positional tracking. Same concept, otherwise... sort of like a B&W CRT TV is the same concept as a full-scale premier movie theatre.
The more hardware solutions there are, hopefully the more integrative software experiences we'll see. That stated, I don't think you'll be seeing the same experiences for Rift and Vive, or even GearVR, that you will for Cardboard, McD's, or view master.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
Honestly though, if you think about it for a second, someone could put all these overpriced fad devices out of business in a heartbeat. You just need something comfortable to mount your phone to your ugly mug, and something else to bridge the connection between your game and your phone. Bam, instant VR headset for your (supported) game.
Yes, I called VR a fad. Who can really sit there with that thing hanging off your face for any extended period of time. It's gonna go the same place 3D TV went. Guaranteed!
Disney is going to go out of business? along with Facebook, Google, Apple, Samsung and other all of which are investing large sums of money into this.
they best have you on the board of directors!
You're a special kind of guy i take it. Maybe I should have been more specific for people like you. Obviously I was speaking about VR products specifically and not the big companies like google and such. GEEEEZZZZZ
Honestly though, if you think about it for a second, someone could put all these overpriced fad devices out of business in a heartbeat. You just need something comfortable to mount your phone to your ugly mug, and something else to bridge the connection between your game and your phone. Bam, instant VR headset for your (supported) game.
Yes, I called VR a fad. Who can really sit there with that thing hanging off your face for any extended period of time. It's gonna go the same place 3D TV went. Guaranteed!
Disney is going to go out of business? along with Facebook, Google, Apple, Samsung and other all of which are investing large sums of money into this.
they best have you on the board of directors!
You're a special kind of guy i take it. Maybe I should have been more specific for people like you. Obviously I was speaking about VR products specifically and not the big companies like google and such. GEEEEZZZZZ
VR is going nowhere...
Well, as long as you guarantee it... I guess we can all just move on with our lives. Glad that's settled!
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
Not to be like that @Deathenger but i think i´l stick with established facts over the modern day version of a Beta-MAX enthusiast... Because VHS is never going to take off.
The matter of the fact is that this new generation of VR is changing how we look at visualization as a medium... Not just gaming but everything from movies to museums. From art to architecture.
It is a fair bit bigger than just being a gaming accessory.
I fail to understand how @psypoison is mistaken. And @seanmcad hasn't explained the difference well enough to educate us poor unwashed masses.
Phone provides the screen, audio, and tracking, and CPU power, and is wireless to boot. What else does the Rift or Vive do that the phone doesn't, apart from those same basic functions only in higher fidelity, because it's tethered by a mess of wires to a PC?
I think it's really going to come down to software; in other words, will there be enough of a software base to support the hardware? Rift and Vive will be able to run experiences that Cardboard and... whatever this thread's topic is called, cannot, simply due to processing power and minimum system requirements.
There's another aspect to this that has gone pretty well ignored in this thread, and that's the 'middle of the road' solution (if you want to call it that) in Oculus GearVR which also uses smartphone technology. However, as I understand it, the smartphones that will run GearVR are significantly more powerful than smartphones that can go in Cardboard or... this.
Other than processing power, I think the biggest difference between smartphone-based VR and Rift or Vive is positional tracking. Same concept, otherwise... sort of like a B&W CRT TV is the same concept as a full-scale premier movie theatre.
The more hardware solutions there are, hopefully the more integrative software experiences we'll see. That stated, I don't think you'll be seeing the same experiences for Rift and Vive, or even GearVR, that you will for Cardboard, McD's, or view master.
Just a small correction, GearVR doesn't use "smartphones that are significantly more powerful than smartphones that can go in Cardboard or... this", it uses Samsung smartphones. Period. The original uses a Note 4, there's one for the Note 5, Galaxy S6 and now S7. Game makers are now experiencing difficulties making games for the newer GearVR with backward compatibility of hte Note 4 version because the Note 4 just doesn't compete with the others anymore.
There are many smartphones that are as powerful if not more than each of these. Just saying. I have yet to find a reason to get the Gear VR (unless you already own a qualifying Samsung phone) over something like the Homodo that has even greater (120 deg) viewing angles.
I don't think Cardboard games themself will be much more than a VR version of novelty smartphone games like flappybird that you mess with once in a while for kicks. The real deal comes with stuff like Trinus VR and others that will connect to your PC for VR Experience on the cheap.
There is also OSVR, Open Source Virtual Reality, development kit. You can download and 3d print your own HMD (head mounted display) or purchase it from Razer for $299. OSVR will play SteamVR games.
Not to be like that @Deathenger but i think i´l stick with established facts over the modern day version of a Beta-MAX enthusiast... Because VHS is never going to take off.
The matter of the fact is that this new generation of VR is changing how we look at visualization as a medium... Not just gaming but everything from movies to museums. From art to architecture.
It is a fair bit bigger than just being a gaming accessory.
Most of my visions of VR and AR are not in gaming at all to be honest. I like the idea of both of them for watching movies, especially 3D movies. Getting multiple HMD's that could sync up with the same movie would be one awesome experience, especially AR.
Being able to view museums, get up close and personal to amazing artifacts. Robots with real time streaming 360 degree cameras moving through the Savannah, jungles, in the ocean. Hell, just using them with a personal quad copter is amazing. The possibilities are nearly endless.
Not to be like that @Deathenger but i think i´l stick with established facts over the modern day version of a Beta-MAX enthusiast... Because VHS is never going to take off.
The matter of the fact is that this new generation of VR is changing how we look at visualization as a medium... Not just gaming but everything from movies to museums. From art to architecture.
It is a fair bit bigger than just being a gaming accessory.
Most of my visions of VR and AR are not in gaming at all to be honest. I like the idea of both of them for watching movies, especially 3D movies. Getting multiple HMD's that could sync up with the same movie would be one awesome experience, especially AR.
Being able to view museums, get up close and personal to amazing artifacts. Robots with real time streaming 360 degree cameras moving through the Savannah, jungles, in the ocean. Hell, just using them with a personal quad copter is amazing. The possibilities are nearly endless.
to be fair I dont think AR would work well for movies.
People are currently hunting for TVs with the most blacklight as possible and putting in rooms that have the least amount of uncontrolled light coming in and you want to AR a screen that looks like its on my dirty wall? No I am thinking developer control of 100% of what you see is going to work better for movies and for games for that matter but movies for sure.
Now if you want to watch TV while cooking then AR for the win
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
oculus and McDonalds headset are in basic same but oculus is way more high tec and was billed from ground up to do what mcDonalds and google cardboard needs phone to do
this!
this is what the threads reads as the understanding of many people here, which is the REAL joke
and I am sooooooo going to run with it. VR critics think this...that is what I am going with
Well, I can tell you that I work in the the display technologies industry and we do everything from VR to immersive environments to simulation, and this REALLY isn't that far off. The basic principles are the same. The primary difference is the optical hardware. Obviously you're not going to get high quality lenses through McDonald's. You're probably going to get some sort of cheap polymer lens instead. HOWEVER!!!! It's quite possible to create extremely inexpensive, reasonable-quality polymer lenses. It in no way measures up to something like a VR headset. However, you didn't go to McDonald's to buy a VR Headset, you went there to buy a Happy Meal. So the optical quality is VERY trivial, so they can probably go super cheap and approach an acceptable level of quality, since they don't need to worry about longevity.
Even if we compare it to, say, the GearVR headset. So do you REALLY believe that the optical hardware you get in the GearVR is substantial when you pay, what, $100 for it at BestBuy? That's likely been through some distribution chains, marked up along the way, including the pricing of the headset itself, so what's the price of a lens in the Samsung GearVR? From the manufacturer? We're talking about mass-produced, low-cost hardware (even in the Oculus Rift). So, in the end, a child probably gives fewer shits about quality than anyone else in the market. Even at that, I'd be VERY surprised if the majority of the population noticed a significant difference between the two (not having seen the McDonald's VR at all), based on what I have witnessed with consumer televisions and quality.
oculus and McDonalds headset are in basic same but oculus is way more high tec and was billed from ground up to do what mcDonalds and google cardboard needs phone to do
this!
this is what the threads reads as the understanding of many people here, which is the REAL joke
and I am sooooooo going to run with it. VR critics think this...that is what I am going with
Well, I can tell you that I work in the the display technologies industry and we do everything from VR to immersive environments to simulation, and this REALLY isn't that far off. The basic principles are the same. The primary difference is the optical hardware. Obviously you're not going to get high quality lenses through McDonald's. You're probably going to get some sort of cheap polymer lens instead. HOWEVER!!!! It's quite possible to create extremely inexpensive, reasonable-quality polymer lenses. It in no way measures up to something like a VR headset. However, you didn't go to McDonald's to buy a VR Headset, you went there to buy a Happy Meal. So the optical quality is VERY trivial, so they can probably go super cheap and approach an acceptable level of quality, since they don't need to worry about longevity.
Even if we compare it to, say, the GearVR headset. So do you REALLY believe that the optical hardware you get in the GearVR is substantial when you pay, what, $100 for it at BestBuy? That's likely been through some distribution chains, marked up along the way, including the pricing of the headset itself, so what's the price of a lens in the Samsung GearVR? From the manufacturer? We're talking about mass-produced, low-cost hardware (even in the Oculus Rift). So, in the end, a child probably gives fewer shits about quality than anyone else in the market. Even at that, I'd be VERY surprised if the majority of the population noticed a significant difference between the two (not having seen the McDonald's VR at all), based on what I have witnessed with consumer televisions and quality.
like I said.
I am going with 'critics of VR think that the Cardboard headset and an Oculus Headset are basically the same and will give you basically the same experience'
thanks
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I bet i could go to my local mall and ask people about google cardboard and 90% ( pure guess ) are not going to know about it at all.
This brings VR to the masses in a very simple format, people will stumble onto it by accident when they get their child a happy meal, they'll have a quick glance to make sure It's safe for their child to use, and then realize "Hey! this is kind of cool!" and maybe spread the word, or even purchase a more expensive VR solution now that they've had their first taste.
I honestly hope this goes worldwide, It's very clever marketing.
As much as we'd like to think so, not everyone is on their computer daily reading about the latest in gaming / tech news.
I bet i could go to my local mall and ask people about google cardboard and 90% ( pure guess ) are not going to know about it at all.
This brings VR to the masses in a very simple format, people will stumble onto it by accident when they get their child a happy meal, they'll have a quick glance to make sure It's safe for their child to use, and then realize "Hey! this is kind of cool!" and maybe spread the word, or even purchase a more expensive VR solution now that they've had their first taste.
I honestly hope this goes worldwide, It's very clever marketing.
As much as we'd like to think so, not everyone is on their computer daily reading about the latest in gaming / tech news.
I think those same people would think that the graphics power of a Galaxy Note 5 is the same as a GTX980....ha! actually to be fair they wouldnt know what a GTX980 is
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
oculus and McDonalds headset are in basic same but oculus is way more high tec and was billed from ground up to do what mcDonalds and google cardboard needs phone to do
this!
this is what the threads reads as the understanding of many people here, which is the REAL joke
and I am sooooooo going to run with it. VR critics think this...that is what I am going with
Well, I can tell you that I work in the the display technologies industry and we do everything from VR to immersive environments to simulation, and this REALLY isn't that far off. The basic principles are the same. The primary difference is the optical hardware. Obviously you're not going to get high quality lenses through McDonald's. You're probably going to get some sort of cheap polymer lens instead. HOWEVER!!!! It's quite possible to create extremely inexpensive, reasonable-quality polymer lenses. It in no way measures up to something like a VR headset. However, you didn't go to McDonald's to buy a VR Headset, you went there to buy a Happy Meal. So the optical quality is VERY trivial, so they can probably go super cheap and approach an acceptable level of quality, since they don't need to worry about longevity.
Even if we compare it to, say, the GearVR headset. So do you REALLY believe that the optical hardware you get in the GearVR is substantial when you pay, what, $100 for it at BestBuy? That's likely been through some distribution chains, marked up along the way, including the pricing of the headset itself, so what's the price of a lens in the Samsung GearVR? From the manufacturer? We're talking about mass-produced, low-cost hardware (even in the Oculus Rift). So, in the end, a child probably gives fewer shits about quality than anyone else in the market. Even at that, I'd be VERY surprised if the majority of the population noticed a significant difference between the two (not having seen the McDonald's VR at all), based on what I have witnessed with consumer televisions and quality.
like I said.
I am going with 'critics of VR think that the Cardboard headset and an Oculus Headset are basically the same and will give you basically the same experience'
thanks
I'm not sure whether to take that as you labelling me as a critic or whether you're saying that the over simplification of the comparison presents a problem to people who aren't knowledgeable in the technology. That being, "Why would I pay $100 for this when I could just buy a happy meal" I'm not debating the viability of a VR headset versus a cardboard box. I, actually, expressly mentioned that there are distinct advantages to it. There's also distinct advantages to having dedicated hardware versus adapting your phone to project the image.
So explain to me how you would explain to a 3 year-old what the difference is between dedicated VR hardware and the McDonald's box. Why can your son crush up the box and throw it away, but you get so pissed when he drops your VR headset?
I mean if we wanted to get into serious technical discussions about virtual environments, I could probably give you a length list of areas where VR is simply inappropriate because the technology isn't good enough yet. There's actually a great article I came across which looks at it from the developer perspective, too. So I mean it isn't that cut and dry, really.
However, TLDR, yes, you're right the technology is better in Rift than in a McDonald's Happy Meal.
oculus and McDonalds headset are in basic same but oculus is way more high tec and was billed from ground up to do what mcDonalds and google cardboard needs phone to do
this!
this is what the threads reads as the understanding of many people here, which is the REAL joke
and I am sooooooo going to run with it. VR critics think this...that is what I am going with
Well, I can tell you that I work in the the display technologies industry and we do everything from VR to immersive environments to simulation, and this REALLY isn't that far off. The basic principles are the same. The primary difference is the optical hardware. Obviously you're not going to get high quality lenses through McDonald's. You're probably going to get some sort of cheap polymer lens instead. HOWEVER!!!! It's quite possible to create extremely inexpensive, reasonable-quality polymer lenses. It in no way measures up to something like a VR headset. However, you didn't go to McDonald's to buy a VR Headset, you went there to buy a Happy Meal. So the optical quality is VERY trivial, so they can probably go super cheap and approach an acceptable level of quality, since they don't need to worry about longevity.
Even if we compare it to, say, the GearVR headset. So do you REALLY believe that the optical hardware you get in the GearVR is substantial when you pay, what, $100 for it at BestBuy? That's likely been through some distribution chains, marked up along the way, including the pricing of the headset itself, so what's the price of a lens in the Samsung GearVR? From the manufacturer? We're talking about mass-produced, low-cost hardware (even in the Oculus Rift). So, in the end, a child probably gives fewer shits about quality than anyone else in the market. Even at that, I'd be VERY surprised if the majority of the population noticed a significant difference between the two (not having seen the McDonald's VR at all), based on what I have witnessed with consumer televisions and quality.
like I said.
I am going with 'critics of VR think that the Cardboard headset and an Oculus Headset are basically the same and will give you basically the same experience'
thanks
They do the same thing the same way as in follow the same principle.
The quality of the experience is what's different.
oculus and McDonalds headset are in basic same but oculus is way more high tec and was billed from ground up to do what mcDonalds and google cardboard needs phone to do
this!
this is what the threads reads as the understanding of many people here, which is the REAL joke
and I am sooooooo going to run with it. VR critics think this...that is what I am going with
Well, I can tell you that I work in the the display technologies industry and we do everything from VR to immersive environments to simulation, and this REALLY isn't that far off. The basic principles are the same. The primary difference is the optical hardware. Obviously you're not going to get high quality lenses through McDonald's. You're probably going to get some sort of cheap polymer lens instead. HOWEVER!!!! It's quite possible to create extremely inexpensive, reasonable-quality polymer lenses. It in no way measures up to something like a VR headset. However, you didn't go to McDonald's to buy a VR Headset, you went there to buy a Happy Meal. So the optical quality is VERY trivial, so they can probably go super cheap and approach an acceptable level of quality, since they don't need to worry about longevity.
Even if we compare it to, say, the GearVR headset. So do you REALLY believe that the optical hardware you get in the GearVR is substantial when you pay, what, $100 for it at BestBuy? That's likely been through some distribution chains, marked up along the way, including the pricing of the headset itself, so what's the price of a lens in the Samsung GearVR? From the manufacturer? We're talking about mass-produced, low-cost hardware (even in the Oculus Rift). So, in the end, a child probably gives fewer shits about quality than anyone else in the market. Even at that, I'd be VERY surprised if the majority of the population noticed a significant difference between the two (not having seen the McDonald's VR at all), based on what I have witnessed with consumer televisions and quality.
like I said.
I am going with 'critics of VR think that the Cardboard headset and an Oculus Headset are basically the same and will give you basically the same experience'
thanks
So explain to me how you would explain to a 3 year-old what the difference is between dedicated VR hardware and the McDonald's box.
I think my answer to this question should solve everything in your post.
I would let them experience both.
as I said many here are suggesting the experience of a Cardboard is going to be the same as the experience as an Oculus headset and I am going with it. If you feel you are not one of those people then fine do not include yourself in my abstractly speaking 'list'
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Comments
Big difference. You won't be able to run Elite Dangerous on you cell phone VR goggles. Just like the gaming world today. Cell phones can't run the games that PC's can as they don't have enough processing power.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Virtual Reality is taking the original viewmaster to the next level. Instead of looking at a 3d image that a camera took, you are now in control of a 3d camera and can look at whatever you want.
Cars have not advanced enough from their inception to have a logical comparison. Not even close.
edit: If I were going to use something like your comparison I would say that the original view-master is to VR as someones drawing of a wagon is to an actual car.
they best have you on the board of directors!
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
There's another aspect to this that has gone pretty well ignored in this thread, and that's the 'middle of the road' solution (if you want to call it that) in Oculus GearVR which also uses smartphone technology. However, as I understand it, the smartphones that will run GearVR are significantly more powerful than smartphones that can go in Cardboard or... this.
Other than processing power, I think the biggest difference between smartphone-based VR and Rift or Vive is positional tracking. Same concept, otherwise... sort of like a B&W CRT TV is the same concept as a full-scale premier movie theatre.
The more hardware solutions there are, hopefully the more integrative software experiences we'll see. That stated, I don't think you'll be seeing the same experiences for Rift and Vive, or even GearVR, that you will for Cardboard, McD's, or view master.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
VR is going nowhere...
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
The matter of the fact is that this new generation of VR is changing how we look at visualization as a medium... Not just gaming but everything from movies to museums. From art to architecture.
It is a fair bit bigger than just being a gaming accessory.
This have been a good conversation
There are many smartphones that are as powerful if not more than each of these. Just saying. I have yet to find a reason to get the Gear VR (unless you already own a qualifying Samsung phone) over something like the Homodo that has even greater (120 deg) viewing angles.
I don't think Cardboard games themself will be much more than a VR version of novelty smartphone games like flappybird that you mess with once in a while for kicks. The real deal comes with stuff like Trinus VR and others that will connect to your PC for VR Experience on the cheap.
There is also OSVR, Open Source Virtual Reality, development kit. You can download and 3d print your own HMD (head mounted display) or purchase it from Razer for $299. OSVR will play SteamVR games.
Being able to view museums, get up close and personal to amazing artifacts. Robots with real time streaming 360 degree cameras moving through the Savannah, jungles, in the ocean. Hell, just using them with a personal quad copter is amazing. The possibilities are nearly endless.
People are currently hunting for TVs with the most blacklight as possible and putting in rooms that have the least amount of uncontrolled light coming in and you want to AR a screen that looks like its on my dirty wall? No I am thinking developer control of 100% of what you see is going to work better for movies and for games for that matter but movies for sure.
Now if you want to watch TV while cooking then AR for the win
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Well, I can tell you that I work in the the display technologies industry and we do everything from VR to immersive environments to simulation, and this REALLY isn't that far off. The basic principles are the same. The primary difference is the optical hardware. Obviously you're not going to get high quality lenses through McDonald's. You're probably going to get some sort of cheap polymer lens instead. HOWEVER!!!! It's quite possible to create extremely inexpensive, reasonable-quality polymer lenses. It in no way measures up to something like a VR headset. However, you didn't go to McDonald's to buy a VR Headset, you went there to buy a Happy Meal. So the optical quality is VERY trivial, so they can probably go super cheap and approach an acceptable level of quality, since they don't need to worry about longevity.
Even if we compare it to, say, the GearVR headset. So do you REALLY believe that the optical hardware you get in the GearVR is substantial when you pay, what, $100 for it at BestBuy? That's likely been through some distribution chains, marked up along the way, including the pricing of the headset itself, so what's the price of a lens in the Samsung GearVR? From the manufacturer? We're talking about mass-produced, low-cost hardware (even in the Oculus Rift). So, in the end, a child probably gives fewer shits about quality than anyone else in the market. Even at that, I'd be VERY surprised if the majority of the population noticed a significant difference between the two (not having seen the McDonald's VR at all), based on what I have witnessed with consumer televisions and quality.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
I am going with 'critics of VR think that the Cardboard headset and an Oculus Headset are basically the same and will give you basically the same experience'
thanks
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
"The Society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting by fools."
Currently: Games Audio Engineer, you didn't hear what I heard, you heard what I wanted you to hear.
This brings VR to the masses in a very simple format, people will stumble onto it by accident when they get their child a happy meal, they'll have a quick glance to make sure It's safe for their child to use, and then realize "Hey! this is kind of cool!" and maybe spread the word, or even purchase a more expensive VR solution now that they've had their first taste.
I honestly hope this goes worldwide, It's very clever marketing.
As much as we'd like to think so, not everyone is on their computer daily reading about the latest in gaming / tech news.
This have been a good conversation
watching the news while cooking, make an awesome board game experience etc.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I think those same people would think that the graphics power of a Galaxy Note 5 is the same as a GTX980....ha! actually to be fair they wouldnt know what a GTX980 is
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I'm not sure whether to take that as you labelling me as a critic or whether you're saying that the over simplification of the comparison presents a problem to people who aren't knowledgeable in the technology. That being, "Why would I pay $100 for this when I could just buy a happy meal" I'm not debating the viability of a VR headset versus a cardboard box. I, actually, expressly mentioned that there are distinct advantages to it. There's also distinct advantages to having dedicated hardware versus adapting your phone to project the image.
So explain to me how you would explain to a 3 year-old what the difference is between dedicated VR hardware and the McDonald's box. Why can your son crush up the box and throw it away, but you get so pissed when he drops your VR headset?
I mean if we wanted to get into serious technical discussions about virtual environments, I could probably give you a length list of areas where VR is simply inappropriate because the technology isn't good enough yet. There's actually a great article I came across which looks at it from the developer perspective, too. So I mean it isn't that cut and dry, really.
However, TLDR, yes, you're right the technology is better in Rift than in a McDonald's Happy Meal.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
The quality of the experience is what's different.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
I would let them experience both.
as I said many here are suggesting the experience of a Cardboard is going to be the same as the experience as an Oculus headset and I am going with it. If you feel you are not one of those people then fine do not include yourself in my abstractly speaking 'list'
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me