Oculus And Epic Team Up On VR Content

Will VR enable a perfect blending of games and movies, or usher in a whole new form of story-telling and content creation? We interviewed execs from Oculus and Epic to gain some insight.

Introduction

Last month I wrote a story about the premier of a short animated VR film, Henry, produced by Oculus Story Studio, which is an internal content division of Oculus started by former Pixar and Dreamworks animators and producers. In that story, I gave some of my impressions of this VR “movie” experience, and wondered aloud whether we were heading toward a new creative outcome that was difficult for us mere mortals to predict or imagine, given years of ingrained notions about movie-going, story telling, and game playing.

The article sparked a delightfully erudite discussion among Tom’s Hardware community members who seemed to push each other to think about how VR story telling might veer off the beaten path.

Coincidentally, a couple new developments arose the following week around VR content; and simultaneously, I conducted some quick email interviews with Ray Davis, GM of Epic Unreal Engine (which was used in the making of Henry), and Edward Saatchi, producer of Oculus Story Studio. I want to call out (tease?) in particular a comment that Saatchi made in response to a question about whether immersion will remove some of the community nature of watching films on a big screen. I find his answer, which you can read further into this piece, eye-opening and further proof that VR film making will take us in a much different direction than 3D filmmaking has.

I will tick off some of the news around VR content in a bullet list below, and finish this up with a verbatim replay of my interviews. First, though, I wanted to cherry-pick a few of the more interesting insights from our readers, because I think this sets the stage well for the ensuing conversations:

Now onto a few of the tidbits I found of interest:

  • A VR agency called Kaleidoscope announced that it was kicking off a traveling VR film festival from August 22 - October 14. It will visit 10 cities: Portland, Seattle, Vancouver, San Francisco, LA, Denver, Montreal, Toronto, New York City and Austin. Kaleidoscope is newly formed, by Rene Pinnell and former Industrial Light & Magic technical director Michael Breymann. The LA event on September 23 seems to coincide with the annual Oculus Connect developer conference, which is also in LA.
  • On the virtual eve of the expected release of the HTC-Valve project, Vive, Lionsgate announced it would launch a virtual reality game based on the film John Wick. The first person shooter is being developed by game developer and publisher Starbreeze, which will also be working with WEVR, which created theBlue: Encounter, a title that HTC used to introduce Vive, and Grab, another VR studio.

Before we begin the interviews, some readers may wonder why I've chosen to write about this on Tom's Hardware, and aside from the obvious VR tie-in (a platform upon which the next evolution of gaming has undoubtedly started to form, and one which demands some pretty serious hardware), one of the main things all of this points to, if you couldn't tell, is the potential convergence of game and film, albeit in a way that will have to play out over the next few years.

Interview: Epic Unreal Engine GM, Ray Davis

Tom's Hardware: Specifically what role does Epic play in Henry? When you say that it was built on the Unreal Engine, how much of it, what parts, and why?

Epic's Ray Davis: In the case of Henry, we've been fairly hands-off -- the team at Oculus has done all the hard work of creating the experience. We've always intended to make sure Unreal Engine 4 has all the ingredients and tools readily available so that anyone can pick it up and immediately make something without having to reach out to us for support. The team they've built at Oculus Story Studio has an incredible mix of talent and it's humbling to see what they've been able to create while using our technology as a foundation. That being said, we've always been close partners with Oculus and have worked hard to ensure that UE supports their latest hardware while also integrating their production feedback back into the engine for future development. 

Tom's Hardware: Does Epic’s Unreal Engine always play a role in animation like this, and if so, can you give some other examples?

Epic's Ray Davis: It's true that in the past, UE was primarily known as a tool for games development, but these days it's really morphed into a tool for anyone looking to create real-time digital content. Virtual reality has been a huge driver of convergence across multiple industries, and we're seeing both game and film developers alike flock to the same toolsets to create these innovative new experiences. UE4 has all the tools and features to support high fidelity rendering for VR and all the other modern platforms, so in some respects it's not too surprising that we're seeing more and more teams outside of traditional games development adopt the technology.

Tom's Hardware: How different is an immersive VR experience from a development/gaming engine standpoint than a typical 3D game that you’d play on a PC? Where do those differences emerge, what sort of processing power is required to do all of the work?

Epic's Ray Davis: From a raw technical perspective there's not a huge difference in building digital content for a game versus building an immersive VR experience. Probably the biggest challenge to speak of is in regards to performance as there are steep requirements for building modern VR. Fortunately that's one area we focus on specifically with UE so that developers are able to squeeze as much content as possible into their experience.

Naively, almost every VR experience tackles the stereo rendering requirement of VR by using brute force and simply rendering the scene twice, but there's actually a tremendous amount of optimizations you can take advantage of to reduce that overhead and squeeze even more into your experience.

With UE, we're continuing to solve those hard engineering problems so that creatives can leverage while being almost entirely oblivious to them - they're just focusing on making their crazy idea become reality.

Tom's Hardware: Is this a different team involved? Were different aspects needed for UE4, or was it just using the standard engine?

Epic's Ray Davis: There are no special versions of UE4 to provide different sets of functionality so everything you need to make a VR short film like Henry is in the same engine everyone can download for free. It's critical to keep the fundamental tools and features tightly integrated under a single package, otherwise developers end up wasting their time trying to hunt down add-ons and other tools to help them build their experience.

This approach also means anything you build for any platform is immediately usable for any other project and platform, which in turns generates a ton of value for the UE development community. Building compelling content for VR is a tough challenge and we work hard to equip developers with every advantage we can!

Tom's Hardware: Why do you think Oculus chose Epic?

Epic's Ray Davis: To truly tell a compelling story, I believe there is a high requirement when it comes to the visual fidelity, and with UE that is one of the clear advantages to teams looking at using the technology. Also, with every creative endeavor you often need to work through many iterations to finally realize the vision and create a magical experience, and that's an area we've specifically focused on when it comes to Unreal Engine. 

Throughout my career as a programmer I always stuck with the mantra of "what can I do to enable the creatives on the team" knowing that anything I do to improve their productivity means that they'll be that much more empowered to build something truly innovative. UE takes this idea to heart with the emphasis on systems like Blueprints, which enables anyone to create an entire experience within the engine without writing a single line of code. This level of productivity is a huge win for any team, and I imagine this factored heavily into Oculus' decision to use UE4 for their project. 

Tom's Hardware: Broader level, then, do you see VR as a more potent intersection point for gaming and movie/story creation than what we’ve traditionally seen? I know there have been attempts to bridge these worlds, but honestly those have not been terribly successful. Watching Henry I could see that being a series of short films/stories for kids, and then also turn into a VR game with that character.

Epic's Ray Davis: Modern VR is absolutely creating a convergence between movie/story creation and gaming for a myriad of reasons. From the film side I believe there is an eagerness to find new mediums to tell new stories while also looking for new types of stories that can only be told with a new platform such as VR. The games industry has always been hungry to adopt interesting new technology, and while it's not clear the VR is just about games, it is clear that there will be some fantastic new gaming experiences exclusive to VR.

The cross-over really comes down to the requirements of building VR, whether it's a game or something else, and I think this is a case where all the features and systems we've been building for games over the last decade really start to shine. Complex systems such as physical interactions, artificial intelligence, and advanced audio processing are all areas that have mostly been driven by games development over the last decade, but which are all integral to building a compelling VR experience.

Interview: Oculus Story Studio Producer, Edward Saatchi

Tom's Hardware: What is the progress so far of getting the big studios involved in creating content? What are their barriers, and what is Oculus doing to make the barriers lower?

Oculus' Edward Saatchi: With Story Studio, we’re looking at original new made-for-VR cinematic content that we hope inspires other to take the leap into this exciting new medium for storytelling. We’re already seeing major studios starting to get involved in the space and producing excellent content 360-degree content like Wild with Reese Witherspoon and the Jurassic World VR experience by Universal Pictures and Felix and Paul [Studios]. This is just the beginning. 

Tom's Hardware: When does the content get longer? [Note: Henry is only about 15 minutes.]

Oculus' Edward Saatchi: Given how new the medium of VR is, we feel that we can learn more by creating more short pieces rather than investing in one large film, is the most effective way to learn as much as possible. Moreover, shorter content is less expensive to produce and overall less risky, especially when everyone’s still learning.

Tom's Hardware: When did Oculus create Studios? How many people? Where is that part of the company located? What are the company’s expectations of this division? How much has the company invested in this aspect?

Oculus' Edward Saatchi: Oculus Story Studio has been around for about a year. The team’s still relatively small - roughly 15 engineers, artists, designers, and storytellers - but with an incredible amount of talent and experience. Our mission is to inspire through the creation of VR films and to educate by sharing everything we learn with the community.

Tom's Hardware: I understand Unreal Engine was used for this. Why was UE 4 used?

Oculus' Edward Saatchi: We chose Unreal Engine 4 by Epic Games as the engine for both Lost and Henry. It’s an incredible toolset for real-time graphics and storytelling, and we’re working with Epic on building more cinematic tools on top of it. The real-time nature of the engine and film is key, as it allows us to walk around and explore Henry’s house, as well as enabling Henry to react to the audience and their movement.

Tom's Hardware: To run Henry are we talking the same level of hardware for the PC as will be required to run a video game on Oculus?

Oculus' Edward Saatchi: Yes, it is roughly equivalent to what’s required to run a high-quality video game on the Rift. You can learn more about the Rift’s recommended spec on the oculus.com.

Tom's Hardware: Going to the movies (and yes, I know plenty of us watch them alone on an airplane with headphones on or at home or on iPads) is a community and family event. The Oculus movie event kind of changes that. That’s a big cultural shift. What does Oculus studios think will become of the future of movies in light of the immersive aspect of this experience? Will it hurt the family/community nature of movie going?

Oculus' Edward Saatchi: We don’t think so; rather, film and storytelling can be more social than ever with virtual reality. At Tribeca, we debuted a new version of our first short film, Lost, in which two audience members could watch the film together at the same time. Each audience member was embodied as a firefly in the forest, and you can see the other audience member moving about the scene as well as where they’re looking. Sharing the experience with someone else is just as powerful as it is in real life, and when you imagine the story being able to interact with you, we expect VR films in the future to achieve some remarkable things. 

Tom's Hardware: Does Oculus see this kind of content beyond animation? The VR movie experience with real characters?

Oculus' Edward Saatchi: We are excited by the opportunities of live action. Having real life actors looking right at you in a film adds a level of presence that traditional 2D and 3D films can’t offer without breaking 4th wall and in VR, there are no walls. We have experienced exciting experiments in live action already, and although there is a lack of positional tracking in live action, we think it presents powerful possibilities for the future of storytelling.

Tom's Hardware: It seems to me that there’s a much more real intersection of movies and games possible here. How is the movie/entertainment group working with the game creation group at Oculus, or aren’t they yet?

Oculus' Edward Saatchi: Oculus Story Studio is actively experimenting and researching how to tell a story using virtual reality. We, along with the entire VR community, are literally inventing the language of VR right now. And we are sharing our best practices with the community at large, including film, gaming, etc. Games convey a story to the user, whether very complex, or very simple, and with VR, we need to be able to use this emerging medium to its maximum potential. And its potential is vast. So we are sharing best practices, both successes and failures, that we hope will help developers in the story telling process as they continue developing games. We are inspired by the genre of narrative games, such as Gone Home, Stanley Parable and Dear Esther.

Fritz Nelson is the Editor-In-Chief of Tom's Hardware. Follow him on Twitter, Facebook and Google+.

Follow Tom's Hardware on Twitter, Facebook and Google+.

This thread is closed for comments
27 comments
    Your comment
  • Eggz
    Can't wait to try Oculus next week! Buddy has one at work. This article makes me super stoked about it :)
  • loki1944
    No thank you. Surround is way better imo.
  • hixbot
    I'd like to hear how developers plan on making first person shooters. How they'll dissociate the aim of your gun from the head tracking view. I don't want to aim the gun with my head.
  • jkflipflop98
    Quote:
    I'd like to hear how developers plan on making first person shooters. How they'll dissociate the aim of your gun from the head tracking view. I don't want to aim the gun with my head.


    You ever played ARMA? There's your answer. You can turn your head and look around independent of where your gun is firing. In TF2 in VR, you can lock down a hallway with the heavy weapons guy and while still firing you can look back over your shoulder to make sure there's no spies coming up on you.

    Quote:
    No thank you. Surround is way better imo.

    In no universe will that ever be true. You should try out an HMD once before making up your mind.
  • loki1944
    48056 said:
    Quote:
    I'd like to hear how developers plan on making first person shooters. How they'll dissociate the aim of your gun from the head tracking view. I don't want to aim the gun with my head.
    You ever played ARMA? There's your answer. You can turn your head and look around independent of where your gun is firing. In TF2 in VR, you can lock down a hallway with the heavy weapons guy and while still firing you can look back over your shoulder to make sure there's no spies coming up on you.
    Quote:
    No thank you. Surround is way better imo.
    In no universe will that ever be true. You should try out an HMD once before making up your mind.


    I had a DK2 and I have surround with 3xROG Swift monitors; surround wins imo.
  • mr2shim
    Quote:
    48056 said:
    Quote:
    I'd like to hear how developers plan on making first person shooters. How they'll dissociate the aim of your gun from the head tracking view. I don't want to aim the gun with my head.
    You ever played ARMA? There's your answer. You can turn your head and look around independent of where your gun is firing. In TF2 in VR, you can lock down a hallway with the heavy weapons guy and while still firing you can look back over your shoulder to make sure there's no spies coming up on you.
    Quote:
    No thank you. Surround is way better imo.
    In no universe will that ever be true. You should try out an HMD once before making up your mind.
    I had a DK2 and I have surround with 3xROG Swift monitors; surround wins imo.


    If you're being realistic you'd realize most people don't have the space, funds or care to have triple monitor setups. Besides, why are you comparing development hardware to consumer hardware? Save your doubts for consumer VR.
  • loki1944
    334648 said:
    Quote:
    48056 said:
    Quote:
    I'd like to hear how developers plan on making first person shooters. How they'll dissociate the aim of your gun from the head tracking view. I don't want to aim the gun with my head.
    You ever played ARMA? There's your answer. You can turn your head and look around independent of where your gun is firing. In TF2 in VR, you can lock down a hallway with the heavy weapons guy and while still firing you can look back over your shoulder to make sure there's no spies coming up on you.
    Quote:
    No thank you. Surround is way better imo.
    In no universe will that ever be true. You should try out an HMD once before making up your mind.
    I had a DK2 and I have surround with 3xROG Swift monitors; surround wins imo.
    If you're being realistic you'd realize most people don't have the space, funds or care to have triple monitor setups. Besides, why are you comparing development hardware to consumer hardware? Save your doubts for consumer VR.


    Yes, I have played the series since Operation Flashpoint came out in 2001, the severe FPS drops of the Arma 2/Arma 3 and DayZ engines make them some of the worst games to use with VR. Consumer version will not overcome the nausea/de-realization/dizziness issues already found in DK1 and DK2; better tracking, higher refresh and resolution can only do so much and cannot eliminate the problem completely from FPS games. If you were realistic you'd realize that most people don't have the hardware to even drive a VR unit (take a look at the steam hardware survey).
  • mr2shim
    1464708 said:
    Yes, I have played the series since Operation Flashpoint came out in 2001, the severe FPS drops of the Arma 2/Arma 3 and DayZ engines make them some of the worst games to use with VR. Consumer version will not overcome the nausea/de-realization/dizziness issues already found in DK1 and DK2; better tracking, higher refresh and resolution can only do so much and cannot eliminate the problem completely from FPS games. If you were realistic you'd realize that most people don't have the hardware to even drive a VR unit (take a look at the steam hardware survey).


    Most people don't have the hardware right now today. Will that change over time? Obviously it will. Most people have computers that can run Crysis maxed out. When the game was released did most people have computers with that kind of computing power? No. You're being illogical. DK2 was a massive improvement over DK1 in terms of motion sickness. There will always be naysayers, so your opinion really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

    In 3 years when you and your buddies are fapping to VR porn. Remember this..

    told ya so
  • loki1944
    48056 said:
    Quote:
    I had a DK2 and I have surround with 3xROG Swift monitors; surround wins imo.
    I doubt you've ever tried an HMD. Even with three monitors you're still only taking up a small amount of your field of view and they're fixed. Wearing an HMD is like having a big monitor all around you in 1:1 3D. You have to try one before you understand what is going on.


    Here's evidence: http://s1068.photobucket.com/user/loki1944/media/DK2_zpsdostn9ue.jpg.html Try again.
  • loki1944
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    Yes, I have played the series since Operation Flashpoint came out in 2001, the severe FPS drops of the Arma 2/Arma 3 and DayZ engines make them some of the worst games to use with VR. Consumer version will not overcome the nausea/de-realization/dizziness issues already found in DK1 and DK2; better tracking, higher refresh and resolution can only do so much and cannot eliminate the problem completely from FPS games. If you were realistic you'd realize that most people don't have the hardware to even drive a VR unit (take a look at the steam hardware survey).
    Most people don't have the hardware right now today. Will that change over time? Obviously it will. Most people have computers that can run Crysis maxed out. When the game was released did most people have computers with that kind of computing power? No. You're being illogical. DK2 was a massive improvement over DK1 in terms of motion sickness. There will always be naysayers, so your opinion really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. In 3 years when you and your buddies are fapping to VR porn. Remember this.. told ya so


    DK2 is still pretty terrible, resolution is not great, honeycomb effect still there, PITA to get working with games; still causes dizziness/nausea/de-realization depending on the person etc. I'm not arguing there will be a niche as with 3D Vision, but that will be it. Also your porn comment is crass and unwarranted.
  • mr2shim
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    Yes, I have played the series since Operation Flashpoint came out in 2001, the severe FPS drops of the Arma 2/Arma 3 and DayZ engines make them some of the worst games to use with VR. Consumer version will not overcome the nausea/de-realization/dizziness issues already found in DK1 and DK2; better tracking, higher refresh and resolution can only do so much and cannot eliminate the problem completely from FPS games. If you were realistic you'd realize that most people don't have the hardware to even drive a VR unit (take a look at the steam hardware survey).
    Most people don't have the hardware right now today. Will that change over time? Obviously it will. Most people have computers that can run Crysis maxed out. When the game was released did most people have computers with that kind of computing power? No. You're being illogical. DK2 was a massive improvement over DK1 in terms of motion sickness. There will always be naysayers, so your opinion really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. In 3 years when you and your buddies are fapping to VR porn. Remember this.. told ya so
    DK2 is still pretty terrible, resolution is not great, honeycomb effect still there, PITA to get working with games; still causes dizziness/nausea/de-realization depending on the person etc. I'm not arguing there will be a niche as with 3D Vision, but that will be it. Also your porn comment is crass and unwarranted.


    The DK2 uses a screen from a note 3, it's not a purpose built proprietary screen. None of the hardware was designed for the purpose of VR. It was pieced together. Again, you're being illogical. Wait until consumer versions are released before you start criticizing. It's completely normal to be skeptical, but it's just foolish to think DK2 is in any way similar to what the consumer HMD will be. DK stands for Development Kit. It is a PITA to get working, why? Because it's a development kit, it isn't consumer hardware. It causes nausea/dizziness because it's a development kit. It's developmental hardware. Do you know what that means? It means it's not refined, it's not finished, it's not ready for consumer use.

    You are criticizing VR like it's been available for years and it hasn't at all improved. There isn't one consumer HMD on earth, and you are here acting like VR is only going to be a niche. You don't know what it will be, only time will tell. Since you can see into the future, can you give me the lotto numbers for Friday's drawing?

    I know your type, you will respond with more of the same. That's great, but my point still remains, it's not consumer hardware. There's no point in assuming it will fail or it will be a niche or it will still make you feel sick until you've tried consumer hardware.. Have you tried consumer hardware?

    BTW, that honeycomb effect, those are pixels. The reason you see them is because the display is ~1" away from your face. Higher resolution screens will solve that issue and it's been reported that CV1 has solved that issue and every other issue you have listed, so your point is actually null.

    And the comment about porn is valid, because in that time frame you will be jerking off to VR porn.
  • loki1944
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    Yes, I have played the series since Operation Flashpoint came out in 2001, the severe FPS drops of the Arma 2/Arma 3 and DayZ engines make them some of the worst games to use with VR. Consumer version will not overcome the nausea/de-realization/dizziness issues already found in DK1 and DK2; better tracking, higher refresh and resolution can only do so much and cannot eliminate the problem completely from FPS games. If you were realistic you'd realize that most people don't have the hardware to even drive a VR unit (take a look at the steam hardware survey).
    Most people don't have the hardware right now today. Will that change over time? Obviously it will. Most people have computers that can run Crysis maxed out. When the game was released did most people have computers with that kind of computing power? No. You're being illogical. DK2 was a massive improvement over DK1 in terms of motion sickness. There will always be naysayers, so your opinion really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. In 3 years when you and your buddies are fapping to VR porn. Remember this.. told ya so
    DK2 is still pretty terrible, resolution is not great, honeycomb effect still there, PITA to get working with games; still causes dizziness/nausea/de-realization depending on the person etc. I'm not arguing there will be a niche as with 3D Vision, but that will be it. Also your porn comment is crass and unwarranted.
    The DK2 uses a screen from a note 3, it's not a purpose built proprietary screen. None of the hardware was designed for the purpose of VR. It was pieced together. Again, you're being illogical. Wait until consumer versions are released before you start criticizing. It's completely normal to be skeptical, but it's just foolish to think DK2 is in any way similar to what the consumer HMD will be. DK stands for Development Kit. It is a PITA to get working, why? Because it's a development kit, it isn't consumer hardware. It causes nausea/dizziness because it's a development kit. It's developmental hardware. Do you know what that means? It means it's not refined, it's not finished, it's not ready for consumer use. You are criticizing VR like it's been available for years and it hasn't at all improved. There isn't one consumer HMD on earth, and you are here acting like VR is only going to be a niche. You don't know what it will be, only time will tell. Since you can see into the future, can you give me the lotto numbers for Friday's drawing? I know your type, you will respond with more of the same. That's great, but my point still remains, it's not consumer hardware. There's no point in assuming it will fail or it will be a niche or it will still make you feel sick until you've tried consumer hardware.. Have you tried consumer hardware? BTW, that honeycomb effect, those are pixels. The reason you see them is because the display is ~1" away from your face. Higher resolution screens will solve that issue and it's been reported that CV1 has solved that issue and every other issue you have listed, so your point is actually null. And the comment about porn is valid, because in that time frame you will be jerking off to VR porn.


    No your comment is crass and unwarranted and indicates a person of poor manners. The DK2 gives an informed insight into how the consumer version will be and some of the problems it will face and while it may have improved, eradicating nausea/dizziness/derealization are insurmountable problems for VR which higher refresh/resolution have been unable and will be unable to completely deal with when it comes to moving in first person because it has to due with how the brain interprets what is going on. It will be popular for a bit with a niche and then be done http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/06/17/editorial-why-vr-is-going-to-be-an-enormous-flop/.
  • mr2shim
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    Yes, I have played the series since Operation Flashpoint came out in 2001, the severe FPS drops of the Arma 2/Arma 3 and DayZ engines make them some of the worst games to use with VR. Consumer version will not overcome the nausea/de-realization/dizziness issues already found in DK1 and DK2; better tracking, higher refresh and resolution can only do so much and cannot eliminate the problem completely from FPS games. If you were realistic you'd realize that most people don't have the hardware to even drive a VR unit (take a look at the steam hardware survey).
    Most people don't have the hardware right now today. Will that change over time? Obviously it will. Most people have computers that can run Crysis maxed out. When the game was released did most people have computers with that kind of computing power? No. You're being illogical. DK2 was a massive improvement over DK1 in terms of motion sickness. There will always be naysayers, so your opinion really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. In 3 years when you and your buddies are fapping to VR porn. Remember this.. told ya so
    DK2 is still pretty terrible, resolution is not great, honeycomb effect still there, PITA to get working with games; still causes dizziness/nausea/de-realization depending on the person etc. I'm not arguing there will be a niche as with 3D Vision, but that will be it. Also your porn comment is crass and unwarranted.
    The DK2 uses a screen from a note 3, it's not a purpose built proprietary screen. None of the hardware was designed for the purpose of VR. It was pieced together. Again, you're being illogical. Wait until consumer versions are released before you start criticizing. It's completely normal to be skeptical, but it's just foolish to think DK2 is in any way similar to what the consumer HMD will be. DK stands for Development Kit. It is a PITA to get working, why? Because it's a development kit, it isn't consumer hardware. It causes nausea/dizziness because it's a development kit. It's developmental hardware. Do you know what that means? It means it's not refined, it's not finished, it's not ready for consumer use. You are criticizing VR like it's been available for years and it hasn't at all improved. There isn't one consumer HMD on earth, and you are here acting like VR is only going to be a niche. You don't know what it will be, only time will tell. Since you can see into the future, can you give me the lotto numbers for Friday's drawing? I know your type, you will respond with more of the same. That's great, but my point still remains, it's not consumer hardware. There's no point in assuming it will fail or it will be a niche or it will still make you feel sick until you've tried consumer hardware.. Have you tried consumer hardware? BTW, that honeycomb effect, those are pixels. The reason you see them is because the display is ~1" away from your face. Higher resolution screens will solve that issue and it's been reported that CV1 has solved that issue and every other issue you have listed, so your point is actually null. And the comment about porn is valid, because in that time frame you will be jerking off to VR porn.
    No your comment is crass and unwarranted and indicates a person of poor manners. The DK2 gives an informed insight into how the consumer version will be and some of the problems it will face and while it may have improved, eradicating nausea/dizziness/derealization are insurmountable problems for VR which higher refresh/resolution have been unable and will be unable to completely deal with when it comes to moving in first person because it has to due with how the brain interprets what is going on. It will be popular for a bit with a niche and then be done http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/06/17/editorial-why-vr-is-going-to-be-an-enormous-flop/.


    That article is pretty hilarious. It starts with comparing VR to 3D TV. 3D TV isn't removing you from your environment and placing you into another. There are no comparisons to current HMD technology. Never in the history of humanity have we been able to transport ourselves to another world visually. It has literally never happened successfully. Current VR tech actually does that. Like I said, you can have your opinion. There are naysayers, there were naysayers when the iPhone first showed up, there were naysayers when PC's first came to market. There will always, literally always be naysayers and that's fine. They at the end of the day, always end up eating their words, as will you. It's been nice talking to you. It's a shame you couldn't cite a better source than that inflammatory garbage.

    I'll come back this time next year and remind you of how wrong you are, is that ok?

    Quote:
    you’re head’s exhausted from carrying the gear


    The CV1 is said to be so light it feels weightless. That article is wrong so many times it isn't even funny. Using images from 20+ years ago as justification for why VR is impractical. Not one image of CV1.. What a joke of a source.
  • loki1944
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    Yes, I have played the series since Operation Flashpoint came out in 2001, the severe FPS drops of the Arma 2/Arma 3 and DayZ engines make them some of the worst games to use with VR. Consumer version will not overcome the nausea/de-realization/dizziness issues already found in DK1 and DK2; better tracking, higher refresh and resolution can only do so much and cannot eliminate the problem completely from FPS games. If you were realistic you'd realize that most people don't have the hardware to even drive a VR unit (take a look at the steam hardware survey).
    Most people don't have the hardware right now today. Will that change over time? Obviously it will. Most people have computers that can run Crysis maxed out. When the game was released did most people have computers with that kind of computing power? No. You're being illogical. DK2 was a massive improvement over DK1 in terms of motion sickness. There will always be naysayers, so your opinion really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. In 3 years when you and your buddies are fapping to VR porn. Remember this.. told ya so
    DK2 is still pretty terrible, resolution is not great, honeycomb effect still there, PITA to get working with games; still causes dizziness/nausea/de-realization depending on the person etc. I'm not arguing there will be a niche as with 3D Vision, but that will be it. Also your porn comment is crass and unwarranted.
    The DK2 uses a screen from a note 3, it's not a purpose built proprietary screen. None of the hardware was designed for the purpose of VR. It was pieced together. Again, you're being illogical. Wait until consumer versions are released before you start criticizing. It's completely normal to be skeptical, but it's just foolish to think DK2 is in any way similar to what the consumer HMD will be. DK stands for Development Kit. It is a PITA to get working, why? Because it's a development kit, it isn't consumer hardware. It causes nausea/dizziness because it's a development kit. It's developmental hardware. Do you know what that means? It means it's not refined, it's not finished, it's not ready for consumer use. You are criticizing VR like it's been available for years and it hasn't at all improved. There isn't one consumer HMD on earth, and you are here acting like VR is only going to be a niche. You don't know what it will be, only time will tell. Since you can see into the future, can you give me the lotto numbers for Friday's drawing? I know your type, you will respond with more of the same. That's great, but my point still remains, it's not consumer hardware. There's no point in assuming it will fail or it will be a niche or it will still make you feel sick until you've tried consumer hardware.. Have you tried consumer hardware? BTW, that honeycomb effect, those are pixels. The reason you see them is because the display is ~1" away from your face. Higher resolution screens will solve that issue and it's been reported that CV1 has solved that issue and every other issue you have listed, so your point is actually null. And the comment about porn is valid, because in that time frame you will be jerking off to VR porn.
    No your comment is crass and unwarranted and indicates a person of poor manners. The DK2 gives an informed insight into how the consumer version will be and some of the problems it will face and while it may have improved, eradicating nausea/dizziness/derealization are insurmountable problems for VR which higher refresh/resolution have been unable and will be unable to completely deal with when it comes to moving in first person because it has to due with how the brain interprets what is going on. It will be popular for a bit with a niche and then be done http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/06/17/editorial-why-vr-is-going-to-be-an-enormous-flop/.
    That article is pretty hilarious. It starts with comparing VR to 3D TV. 3D TV isn't removing you from your environment and placing you into another. There are no comparisons to current HMD technology. Never in the history of humanity have we been able to transport ourselves to another world visually. It has literally never happened successfully. Current VR tech actually does that. Like I said, you can have your opinion. There are naysayers, there were naysayers when the iPhone first showed up, there were naysayers when PC's first came to market. There will always, literally always be naysayers and that's fine. They at the end of the day, always end up eating their words, as will you. It's been nice talking to you. It's a shame you couldn't cite a better source than that inflammatory garbage. I'll come back this time next year and remind you of how wrong you are, is that ok?
    Quote:
    you’re head’s exhausted from carrying the gear
    The CV1 is said to be so light it feels weightless. That article is wrong so many times it isn't even funny. Using images from 20+ years ago as justification for why VR is impractical. Not one image of CV1.. What a joke of a source.


    Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.
  • mr2shim
    1464708 said:
    Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.


    I am, as you are yours. All signs point to VR not being a niche, regardless of what one poor article says. If it does end up being a niche, I'll gladly admit I was wrong, somehow though I don't think that will happen. We will see in due time.

    BTW, 3D TV is literally nothing like HMD VR, given you have a DK2 you should know that. Full immersed in a completely different world vs images popping out of a 2D screen because you're wearing 5 dollar red and blue glasses in your living room, hmmmm
  • loki1944
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.
    I am, as you are yours. All signs point to VR not being a niche, regardless of what one shitty article says. If it does end up being a niche, I'll gladly admit I was wrong, somehow though I don't think that will happen. We will see in due time. BTW, 3D TV is literally nothing like HMD VR, given you have a DK2 you should know that. Full immersed in a completely different world vs images popping out of a 2D screen because you're wearing 5 dollar red and blue glasses in your living room, hmmmm


    It's not about exactly the same, it's about the limited appeal to a mass market.
  • mr2shim
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.
    I am, as you are yours. All signs point to VR not being a niche, regardless of what one shitty article says. If it does end up being a niche, I'll gladly admit I was wrong, somehow though I don't think that will happen. We will see in due time. BTW, 3D TV is literally nothing like HMD VR, given you have a DK2 you should know that. Full immersed in a completely different world vs images popping out of a 2D screen because you're wearing 5 dollar red and blue glasses in your living room, hmmmm
    It's not about exactly the same, it's about the limited appeal to a mass market.


    True,

    VR can be useful in news reporting, as it already has been used. There are VR "news" videos that depict the Syrian crisis, they are said to be very compelling and will bring you to tears.

    VR can be useful in the medical field, where you can VR video with your doctor for simple visits, a few practitioners are already doing this and see the great benefit.

    VR of course can be used in the gaming world

    VR can be used in the film industry, obviously not in a movie theater setting. VR can open up entire new ways movies are created, (if you're imaginative you'll understand this)

    VR has so many more uses than just FPS games. With the hardware sorted out and the proper setup, VR can literally transport you to another world. Can you name any other technological advancement that has that capability?

    To be honest, it's comical to hear people write off VR as a niche, just shows how shortsighted those people really are, and I feel bad for them.
  • loki1944
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.
    I am, as you are yours. All signs point to VR not being a niche, regardless of what one shitty article says. If it does end up being a niche, I'll gladly admit I was wrong, somehow though I don't think that will happen. We will see in due time. BTW, 3D TV is literally nothing like HMD VR, given you have a DK2 you should know that. Full immersed in a completely different world vs images popping out of a 2D screen because you're wearing 5 dollar red and blue glasses in your living room, hmmmm
    It's not about exactly the same, it's about the limited appeal to a mass market.
    True, VR can be useful in news reporting, as it already has been used. There are VR "news" videos that depict the Syrian crisis, they are said to be very compelling and will bring you to tears. VR can be useful in the medical field, where you can VR video with your doctor for simple visits, a few practitioners are already doing this and see the great benefit. VR of course can be used in the gaming world VR can be used in the film industry, obviously not in a movie theater setting. VR can open up entire new ways movies are created, (if you're imaginative you'll understand this) VR has so many more uses than just FPS games. With the hardware sorted out and the proper setup, VR can literally transport you to another world. Can you name any other technological advancement that has that capability? To be honest, it's comical to hear people write off VR as a niche, just shows how shortsighted those people really are, and I feel bad for them.


    What's comical is the 'Emperor's New Clothes' attitude with which people will defend a new niche product. Kinect was also touted to have uses beyond the living room and we saw how that turned out. VR is not that impressive and as I said I enjoy surround gaming much more, plus it doesn't make me dizzy. The solitary nature of VR also does not increase the likelihood that it would be a success with the families as a media experience (aside from no serious medical studies into the long term effects of VR). I can say with 100% certainty that my immediate family has 0 interest in this. VR Movies would go the way of 3D movies; just interest in it and who wants to be unable to see their popcorn. No need to feel sorry for anybody, this is very similar to how the previous wave of VR went, maximum hype followed by maximum disappointment, at least this time it will achieve niche status.

    This author raises some great points: http://blog.codinghorror.com/i-tried-vr-and-it-was-just-ok/.
  • WyomingKnott
    Each member is entitled to her or his own preferences. Enough with "You like A, B is better, you are dumb." I couldn't play Quake because I got nauseated. Other people loved it. All of us were "right."
  • inraiz
    I think VR is just what it is. Just as it adds another perspective, an additional experience, it's just that.
  • mr2shim
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.
    I am, as you are yours. All signs point to VR not being a niche, regardless of what one shitty article says. If it does end up being a niche, I'll gladly admit I was wrong, somehow though I don't think that will happen. We will see in due time. BTW, 3D TV is literally nothing like HMD VR, given you have a DK2 you should know that. Full immersed in a completely different world vs images popping out of a 2D screen because you're wearing 5 dollar red and blue glasses in your living room, hmmmm
    It's not about exactly the same, it's about the limited appeal to a mass market.
    True, VR can be useful in news reporting, as it already has been used. There are VR "news" videos that depict the Syrian crisis, they are said to be very compelling and will bring you to tears. VR can be useful in the medical field, where you can VR video with your doctor for simple visits, a few practitioners are already doing this and see the great benefit. VR of course can be used in the gaming world VR can be used in the film industry, obviously not in a movie theater setting. VR can open up entire new ways movies are created, (if you're imaginative you'll understand this) VR has so many more uses than just FPS games. With the hardware sorted out and the proper setup, VR can literally transport you to another world. Can you name any other technological advancement that has that capability? To be honest, it's comical to hear people write off VR as a niche, just shows how shortsighted those people really are, and I feel bad for them.
    What's comical is the 'Emperor's New Clothes' attitude with which people will defend a new niche product. Kinect was also touted to have uses beyond the living room and we saw how that turned out. VR is not that impressive and as I said I enjoy surround gaming much more, plus it doesn't make me dizzy. The solitary nature of VR also does not increase the likelihood that it would be a success with the families as a media experience (aside from no serious medical studies into the long term effects of VR). I can say with 100% certainty that my immediate family has 0 interest in this. VR Movies would go the way of 3D movies; just interest in it and who wants to be unable to see their popcorn. No need to feel sorry for anybody, this is very similar to how the previous wave of VR went, maximum hype followed by maximum disappointment, at least this time it will achieve niche status. This author raises some great points: http://blog.codinghorror.com/i-tried-vr-and-it-was-just-ok/.


    http://www.roadtovr.com/virtual-reality-to-be-worth-7-billion-by-2020-report-suggests/
  • loki1944
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.
    I am, as you are yours. All signs point to VR not being a niche, regardless of what one shitty article says. If it does end up being a niche, I'll gladly admit I was wrong, somehow though I don't think that will happen. We will see in due time. BTW, 3D TV is literally nothing like HMD VR, given you have a DK2 you should know that. Full immersed in a completely different world vs images popping out of a 2D screen because you're wearing 5 dollar red and blue glasses in your living room, hmmmm
    It's not about exactly the same, it's about the limited appeal to a mass market.
    True, VR can be useful in news reporting, as it already has been used. There are VR "news" videos that depict the Syrian crisis, they are said to be very compelling and will bring you to tears. VR can be useful in the medical field, where you can VR video with your doctor for simple visits, a few practitioners are already doing this and see the great benefit. VR of course can be used in the gaming world VR can be used in the film industry, obviously not in a movie theater setting. VR can open up entire new ways movies are created, (if you're imaginative you'll understand this) VR has so many more uses than just FPS games. With the hardware sorted out and the proper setup, VR can literally transport you to another world. Can you name any other technological advancement that has that capability? To be honest, it's comical to hear people write off VR as a niche, just shows how shortsighted those people really are, and I feel bad for them.
    What's comical is the 'Emperor's New Clothes' attitude with which people will defend a new niche product. Kinect was also touted to have uses beyond the living room and we saw how that turned out. VR is not that impressive and as I said I enjoy surround gaming much more, plus it doesn't make me dizzy. The solitary nature of VR also does not increase the likelihood that it would be a success with the families as a media experience (aside from no serious medical studies into the long term effects of VR). I can say with 100% certainty that my immediate family has 0 interest in this. VR Movies would go the way of 3D movies; just interest in it and who wants to be unable to see their popcorn. No need to feel sorry for anybody, this is very similar to how the previous wave of VR went, maximum hype followed by maximum disappointment, at least this time it will achieve niche status. This author raises some great points: http://blog.codinghorror.com/i-tried-vr-and-it-was-just-ok/.
    http://www.roadtovr.com/virtual-reality-to-be-worth-7-billion-by-2020-report-suggests/


    We'll see. Even the author says it seems optimistic.
  • mr2shim
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.
    I am, as you are yours. All signs point to VR not being a niche, regardless of what one shitty article says. If it does end up being a niche, I'll gladly admit I was wrong, somehow though I don't think that will happen. We will see in due time. BTW, 3D TV is literally nothing like HMD VR, given you have a DK2 you should know that. Full immersed in a completely different world vs images popping out of a 2D screen because you're wearing 5 dollar red and blue glasses in your living room, hmmmm
    It's not about exactly the same, it's about the limited appeal to a mass market.
    True, VR can be useful in news reporting, as it already has been used. There are VR "news" videos that depict the Syrian crisis, they are said to be very compelling and will bring you to tears. VR can be useful in the medical field, where you can VR video with your doctor for simple visits, a few practitioners are already doing this and see the great benefit. VR of course can be used in the gaming world VR can be used in the film industry, obviously not in a movie theater setting. VR can open up entire new ways movies are created, (if you're imaginative you'll understand this) VR has so many more uses than just FPS games. With the hardware sorted out and the proper setup, VR can literally transport you to another world. Can you name any other technological advancement that has that capability? To be honest, it's comical to hear people write off VR as a niche, just shows how shortsighted those people really are, and I feel bad for them.
    What's comical is the 'Emperor's New Clothes' attitude with which people will defend a new niche product. Kinect was also touted to have uses beyond the living room and we saw how that turned out. VR is not that impressive and as I said I enjoy surround gaming much more, plus it doesn't make me dizzy. The solitary nature of VR also does not increase the likelihood that it would be a success with the families as a media experience (aside from no serious medical studies into the long term effects of VR). I can say with 100% certainty that my immediate family has 0 interest in this. VR Movies would go the way of 3D movies; just interest in it and who wants to be unable to see their popcorn. No need to feel sorry for anybody, this is very similar to how the previous wave of VR went, maximum hype followed by maximum disappointment, at least this time it will achieve niche status. This author raises some great points: http://blog.codinghorror.com/i-tried-vr-and-it-was-just-ok/.
    http://www.roadtovr.com/virtual-reality-to-be-worth-7-billion-by-2020-report-suggests/
    We'll see. Even the author says it seems optimistic.


    https://i.imgur.com/TDYr6xa.jpg

    They were impressed.
  • loki1944
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    334648 said:
    1464708 said:
    Well you're entitled to your opinion, even if this will turn out like 3D did in other forms; a niche product.
    I am, as you are yours. All signs point to VR not being a niche, regardless of what one shitty article says. If it does end up being a niche, I'll gladly admit I was wrong, somehow though I don't think that will happen. We will see in due time. BTW, 3D TV is literally nothing like HMD VR, given you have a DK2 you should know that. Full immersed in a completely different world vs images popping out of a 2D screen because you're wearing 5 dollar red and blue glasses in your living room, hmmmm
    It's not about exactly the same, it's about the limited appeal to a mass market.
    True, VR can be useful in news reporting, as it already has been used. There are VR "news" videos that depict the Syrian crisis, they are said to be very compelling and will bring you to tears. VR can be useful in the medical field, where you can VR video with your doctor for simple visits, a few practitioners are already doing this and see the great benefit. VR of course can be used in the gaming world VR can be used in the film industry, obviously not in a movie theater setting. VR can open up entire new ways movies are created, (if you're imaginative you'll understand this) VR has so many more uses than just FPS games. With the hardware sorted out and the proper setup, VR can literally transport you to another world. Can you name any other technological advancement that has that capability? To be honest, it's comical to hear people write off VR as a niche, just shows how shortsighted those people really are, and I feel bad for them.
    What's comical is the 'Emperor's New Clothes' attitude with which people will defend a new niche product. Kinect was also touted to have uses beyond the living room and we saw how that turned out. VR is not that impressive and as I said I enjoy surround gaming much more, plus it doesn't make me dizzy. The solitary nature of VR also does not increase the likelihood that it would be a success with the families as a media experience (aside from no serious medical studies into the long term effects of VR). I can say with 100% certainty that my immediate family has 0 interest in this. VR Movies would go the way of 3D movies; just interest in it and who wants to be unable to see their popcorn. No need to feel sorry for anybody, this is very similar to how the previous wave of VR went, maximum hype followed by maximum disappointment, at least this time it will achieve niche status. This author raises some great points: http://blog.codinghorror.com/i-tried-vr-and-it-was-just-ok/.
    http://www.roadtovr.com/virtual-reality-to-be-worth-7-billion-by-2020-report-suggests/
    We'll see. Even the author says it seems optimistic.
    https://i.imgur.com/TDYr6xa.jpg They were impressed.


    Still means nothing that journalists are impressed, mass consumer is the issue.