Support NeoGAF

[rjinaz]

Why do so many keep bringing up the point about VR cutting people off from reality like it's some kind of deal breaker that everybody should agree with. I DO understand why somebody might not like that, but what I don't understand is why people seem to be against the idea that others might not mind that. It's like they think VR shouldn't even exist since it's something they want no part of.

If you have people around you at all times like family, children, SOs, and get no time alone, VR is not likely for you.
If you don't enjoy private time alone, VR is likely not for you.
If you fear the threat of random house fires or home invasions, VR is likely not for you.
If you refuse to use a device that makes you unaware of your surroundings, VR is likely not for you.
If you cannot watch a movie, play a video game, or read a book without others, VR is likely for you.

We get it, VR is likely not for you. I'm cool with that. I bet I can find a lot of things you like that I do not. VR is for me though since none of the above applies to me, and I'm sure for many others. Not sure who you are trying to convince. People live differently, I would guess more live a more "VR suited" life that play video games, than those that do not.

 

[KnockOneOff]

No. I view my body as a conduit for my mind. My physical self is nothing but a husk for input. One permanently wired to our brains, sure, but a conduit none the less.

This might tie into my religious beliefs, however. Which are to say I hold none. I don't think there is anything beyond our life. When I've told people this, I've had them take it to extremes and ask if I could place my brain into a robotic body that would live forever, would I? To which I answer: "Absolutely!"

I see no real difference speaking to someone in front of me as I do communicating through a computer beyond the amount of information I can transmit at once (with real life offering me far more forms of communication). I think the beauty in life comes from transmitting ideas and thoughts from one individual to another, regardless of medium. It's not the kind of interaction that matters to me, just the interaction at all.

Let me ask you this: Do you believe people can fall in love long distance? If so, what are they falling in love with? Physicality is just a small part of my existence.

I have no issue with your view, I'm just saying from my point of view

Everyone has there reasons, and maybe you will step outside too and see the "other" world

Boogie from YouTube gives a good explanation of this

 

[Vlade]

No. I view my body as a conduit for my mind. My physical self is nothing but a husk for input. One permanently wired to our brains, sure, but a conduit none the less.

This might tie into my religious beliefs, however. Which are to say I hold none. I don't think there is anything beyond our life. When I've told people this, I've had them take it to extremes and ask if I could place my brain into a robotic body that would live forever, would I? To which I answer: "Absolutely!"

I see no real difference speaking to someone in front of me as I do communicating through a computer beyond the amount of information I can transmit at once (with real life offering me far more forms of communication). I think the beauty in life comes from transmitting ideas and thoughts from one individual to another, regardless of medium. It's not the kind of interaction that matters to me, just the interaction at all.

Let me ask you this: Do you believe people can fall in love long distance? If so, what are they falling in love with? Physicality is just a small part of my existence.

Most people find purpose outside of their own mind; tho, yes, this does help explain how you are unable to relate to the complaint that the complete shunning of personal interaction that comes with only relating to people electronically is isolating.

 

[Minions]

Have to say I'm agreeing with this guy

For the past 15 years I have always pushed technology forward and I have always wanted to be in with the latest tech

Where we are going with the Internet and VR scares me

The social network seems to be killing socialism in the real world

It's everywhere in a cafe, in a bar, first dates etc etc everyone sits with there face in there phones

Even talking through Facebook rather than face to face

Me too am starting to push away from driving this technology forward and I'm starting to become resistant to it

I'm an IT contractor with a school that houses 50 children with autism and I'm so much more resistant now than ever about putting more tech and introducing more in to the school and there daily environment

Ahhhh where to head and in which direction.....

Services like Facebook and Skype, and even "text messages" are the sole reason we can better communicate with people all over the globe. Just because you are not in the same room does not mean you are not being "social". In the "good old days" all you had was a telephone. No facial expressions, no picture at all. You basically would lose contact with everyone as soon as they moved to another state... or even other towns in the same state in many cases. Technologies progression has allowed everyone to keep their contacts around the globe. Being social does not require face-to-face contact. Just because things are not longer "traditional" does not mean they are not good, or something to be feared.

Like they always say; Everyone fears change. Technology allows everyone to fit their friends into their schedule... even if it is an hour every couple days playing a game over the internet.

 

[Krejlooc]

Why do so many keep bringing up the point about VR cutting people off from reality like it's some kind of deal breaker that everybody should agree with. I DO understand why somebody might not like that, but what I don't understand is why people seem to be against the idea that others might not mind that. It's like they think VR shouldn't even exist since it's something they want no part of.

If you have people around you at all times like family, children, SOs, and get no time alone, VR is not likely for you.
If you don't enjoy private time alone, VR is likely not for you.
If you fear the threat of random house fires or home invasions, VR is likely not for you.
If you refuse to use a device that makes you unaware of your surroundings, VR is likely not for you.
If you cannot watch a movie, play a video game, or read a book without others, VR is likely for you.

We get it, VR is likely not for you. I'm cool with that. I bet I can find a lot of things you like that I do not. VR is for me though since none of the above applies to me, and I'm sure for many others. Not sure who you are trying to convince. People live differently, I would guess more live a more "VR suited" life that play video games, than those that do not.

When I think of VR and socialization, I think of relationship I had that ended due to distance. I think of my best friend in seattle, that I get to see maybe once every year if I'm lucky. I think of an old girlfriend I had, whose relationship ended because we wound up in different cities. I think of my getting to hang out with friends after they put their kids to sleep when they can't physically get outside of the house.

I think about us all donning headsets and instead of us just looking at each other through tiny windows in our homes, actually feeling like we're in the same room. Doing activities together, like we physically are in the same space. I think about how I live through telephone calls and text messages with people who mean very much to me, and how I'd love to just sit around with these people like the good old days and continue our fun ways.

I think about the future of AR as I described several pages back, where it'll actually appear that these hologram people are inhabiting our actual space. I think about what this sort of stuff will do for marginalized groups, like transgendered people, and the sort of reduced stress interactions they'll be able to engage with once they can occupy a space where their gender is defined by themselves alone.

I can come up with a million reasons why I think this will be a great tool for socialization. And at the same time, I still meet and hang out with people IRL. It's not like someone has to choose all of one way or another.

 

[Krejlooc]

Most people find purpose outside of their own mind; tho, yes, this does help explain how you are unable to relate to the complaint that the complete shunning of personal interaction that comes with only relating to people electronically is isolating.

That's such a loaded comment. It's not that I'm unable to relate some ignorant, fearful reaction about shutting off the world, it's that I believe those comments are not congruent with the reality of VR. Namely that you don't shut yourself off to the world to the degree you're pretending.

Also, I completely disagree that people find purpose outside their mind. Anything we do is for our minds.

Everyone has there reasons, and maybe you will step outside too and see the "other" world

My world view makes no implications about my nature as a human being. I promise you I socialize and get out.

 

[jcm]

Yes? This is already happening.

Since when? Last I heard Sony was doing their own SDK and wouldn't be compatible with Valve's stuff. Oculus has their own SDK and API. And I haven't heard anything about Samsung's, except that it won't be gaming focused at all. I know Valve wants to be the device-indepenedent standard, but I haven't seen any reason to think they will get their wish.

 

[Krejlooc]

Since when? Last I heard Sony was doing their own SDK and wouldn't be compatible with Valve's stuff. Oculus has their own SDK and API. And I haven't heard anything about Samsung's, except that it won't be gaming focused at all. I know Valve wants to be the device-indepenedent standard, but I haven't seen any reason to think they will get their wish.

Because Valve's VR API already exists and works with numerous headsets.

I'm thinking you don't understand how APIs work if you think the presence of a proprietary API prohibits a unifying API from emerging. Oculus' API is written in C, and has already been wrapped across a number of platforms.

 

[KnockOneOff]

Services like Facebook and Skype, and even "text messages" are the sole reason we can better communicate with people all over the globe. Just because you are not in the same room does not mean you are not being "social". In the "good old days" all you had was a telephone. No facial expressions, no picture at all. You basically would lose contact with everyone as soon as they moved to another state... or even other towns in the same state in many cases. Technologies progression has allowed everyone to keep their contacts around the globe. Being social does not require face-to-face contact. Just because things are not longer "traditional" does not mean they are not good, or something to be feared.

Like they always say; Everyone fears change. Technology allows everyone to fit their friends into their schedule... even if it is an hour every couple days playing a game over the internet.

I agree 100% Facebook Skype etc are amazing ways of communication

But people have become obsessed with those applications, what was once a form of social interaction has become a lifestyle

Ever noticed the panic you feel when your battery is low, or your signal is gone, or Facebook/xbox live/psn even neogaf is down

They have all formed part of our lives and detaching from them is almost impossible

But then there is the reverse effect, that person that can't socialise in the real world with strangers, finds from behind a screen he/she can find friends from all over the world and it brings them alive in a way

Me personally I have noticed if I "unplug" I struggle in real world situations with strangers etc for maybe a couple of days, when I used to be one of these who chat away happily to random folk, and If I have my phone etc I will quite happily avoid the real world situation and drop back in to the virtual world

Even my partner she is on the computer and the kid is asking her to play something like wii sports, or go on the trampoline but pulling her "out" I have to call her an addict or something to pull her back in the real world

If that makes sense.

I just think at some point the kids growing up now will push away from all this as it will be "uncool" to do the same thing as the parents etc

 

[keltickennedy]

 

[KnockOneOff]

 

[Krejlooc]

What makes any of these "15 years ago" suggestions any less or more social than the modern interpretations? Why is listening to music on a record superior to listening to music on a computer?

This is, of course, ignoring how disingenuous that image is.

EDIT: in fact, every single activity on that "15 years ago" side of the table has, at one point or another, been vilified as the cause of the fall of civilization and reduction of socialization. Every single one of them, from written text to radio to film to masturbation. Every single one.

 

[KnockOneOff]

What makes any of these "15 years ago" suggestions any less or more social than the modern interpretations? Why is listening to music on a record superior to listening to music on a computer?

This is, of course, ignoring how disingenuous that image is.

You never danced around the room or had it so loud the neighbours came banging on your door or your parents shouting to turn it down?

I don't think we will agree and that image is not aimed towards anyone

So sorry if you take offence to that

 

[rjinaz]

When I think of VR and socialization, I think of relationship I had that ended due to distance. I think of my best friend in seattle, that I get to see maybe once every year if I'm lucky. I think of an old girlfriend I had, whose relationship ended because we wound up in different cities. I think of my getting to hang out with friends after they put their kids to sleep when they can't physically get outside of the house.

I think about us all donning headsets and instead of us just looking at each other through tiny windows in our homes, actually feeling like we're in the same room. Doing activities together, like we physically are in the same space. I think about how I live through telephone calls and text messages with people who mean very much to me, and how I'd love to just sit around with these people like the good old days and continue our fun ways.

I think about the future of AR as I described several pages back, where it'll actually appear that these hologram people are inhabiting our actual space. I think about what this sort of stuff will do for marginalized groups, like transgendered people, and the sort of reduced stress interactions they'll be able to engage with once they can occupy a space where their gender is defined by themselves alone.

I can come up with a million reasons why I think this will be a great tool for socialization. And at the same time, I still meet and hang out with people IRL. It's not like someone has to choose all of one way or another.

I think you're right. It may take a while to get there, but I think VR has the potential to make society more social than ever before. The trend is that people are texting and calling as opposed to actually visiting people. This trend isn't likely to go away because it's quick, it's easy. With VR though, an environment can be created that is also quick and easy but enables the kind of social interaction that people experience face-to-face. Eventually things like accurate tracking of body language, and even going on virtual vacations with others, will be possible.

People are arguing that this takes an already bad trend and makes it worse. Well it does to a point, they are right, But what they don't seem to understand is that it's a trend for a reason, it's just the way us people are and it's a result of technology which VR is another example of. It's not likely to go away if VR doesn't exist; It would probably just get worst. At least VR gives the potential for better non face-to-face socialization. If that makes sense.

 

[Krejlooc]

You never danced around the room or had it so loud the neighbours came banging on your door or your parents shouting to turn it down?

Yeah I have, in fact. From playing music on my PC through my speakers.

Just last night, in fact. I had my down stairs neighbor come up and ask me to turn down the music from my PC.

EDIT: To clarify, I'm not offended by this course of conversation, sorry if my comments gave off that vibe. Text makes it easy to misinterpret tone.... which, hey, VR would actually solve by giving us more non-verbal communication cues to read from

 

[KnockOneOff]

Yeah I have, in fact. From playing music on my PC through my speakers.

Just last night, in fact. I had my down stairs neighbor come up and ask me to turn down the music from my PC.

I'm going to opt out of this conversation with yourself as there never will be an agreement here, and I don't want to fill this thread with a pointless argument

So I will say we are both right and thank you for your point of view

EDIT: agree with the tone thing - I'm often sarcastic in my head, just doesn't translate to text! Which I often forget!! DOH!

*bro fist*

- peace out

 

[Gorillaz]

I understand where Knock is coming from, he's talking about how the social networks sites of today, while they are useful and help greatly (I have made contacts with old friends I haven't seen in YEARS) they have also become part of our "DNA" so to speak, they went from being a side part of our lives to being fully melted into our lives to the point we can't live without connectivity without struggling for a bit.

 

[Krejlooc]

I'm going to opt out of this conversation with yourself as there never will be an agreement here, and I don't want to fill this thread with a pointless argument

So I will say we are both right and thank you for your point of view

EDIT: agree with the tone thing - I'm often sarcastic in my head, just doesn't translate to text! Which I often forget!! DOH!

*bro fist*

- peace out

Perfectly fine with agreeing to disagree

Just hope I explained my vantage point well enough that I don't look like I'm craving this:

I think most will agree socialization is a good thing for a number of people. To be succinct, just again, my argument is that I view VR as a tool to help me socialize even more.

 

[KnockOneOff]

I understand where Knock is coming from, he's talking about how the social networks sites of today, while they are useful and help greatly (I have made contacts with old friends I haven't seen in YEARS) they have also become part of our "DNA" so to speak, they went from being a side part of our lives to being fully melted into our lives to the point we can't live without connectivity without struggling for a bit.

You just read everything I wrote mate?

Exactly what I said

 

[Maebe]

I see his point. After social media dwindled physical contact this is the next step in making another generation more socially inept

 

[Gorillaz]

You just read everything I wrote mate?

Exactly what I said

lol yea I read through it for the most part I do agree with you, just wrote up the same in a small summary


not a fan of where it's all heading socially either but, agree to disagree, friends nothing wrong with different opinions

 

[Seanspeed]

Haha.

Its not totally true, but its still funny.

 

[rjinaz]

Haha.

Its not totally true, but its still funny.

It is funny because it's true. And who knows, in ten years or so that image may make sense to be applied in having somebody with a VR headset in place of a computer. I'm ok with this.

 

[Kris Pistofferson]

Not high. Married. My wife has no problem attracting my attention when I'm using my rift. I love it, but you are not completely isolated. There are ways to make it more isolating I guess, but I don't think those changes are going to be standard.

I'm thinking more about infants than wives. We hear enough about neglected MMO children starving as their parents get lost online and I think that's one statistic certain to go up. Children cries are supposed to create external stimulus while the point of VR is eliminating external stimulus.

It goes without saying that VR is not going to affect everyone equally because people differ in personality. Parents with mild autism might be more at risk of the above, for example.

 

[Lightning4Ever]

I want some VR device to support/be supported by Final Fantasy 14.

Would be amazing.

 

[Krejlooc]

I'm thinking more about infants than wives. We hear enough about neglected MMO children starving as their parents get lost online and I think that's one statistic certain to go up. Children cries are supposed to create external stimulus while the point of VR is eliminating external stimulus.

It goes without saying that VR is not going to affect everyone equally because people differ in personality. Parents with mild autism might be more at risk of the above, for example.

A child's cries alert the ears. VR is for the eyes. You're actually presenting an argument against headphones, not VR.

 

[Zabka]

It is funny because it's true. And who knows, in ten years or so that image may make sense to be applied in having somebody with a VR headset in place of a computer. I'm ok with this.

I was doing all those things on my computer 15 years ago.

 

[Turin Turambar]

I mean, dude worked for a PC developer. The only social interaction that platform has EVER had has been the "limited, abstracted, ultimately alienated" world of online gaming.

Why playing an MP game, with VR and voice chat, is any less social than playing with a controller and a headset, I can't fathom.

Funny you are discussing this in an online forum, with other people, on Internet.

I suppose you will say this isn't really "social interaction"??

 

[Kris Pistofferson]

A child's cries alert the ears. VR is for the eyes. You're actually presenting an argument against headphones, not VR.

Sure, but you're kind of ignoring the bigger point there.

I'm not arguing against Oculus Rift as a visual technology any more than headphones as an aural technology. I'm arguing that both combined will get some people so dissociated from their surroundings that these incidences will increase. It's hard to describe unless you have people with autism in your environment (or some other dissociative disorder) but the level of dissociation they can experience can be pretty intense. I have a mildly autistic friend and coworker who also happens to be a fantastic dad but as soon as he puts on headphones he's just plain gone from this world.

It may not sound like much but 1-2% of the population is a quite large number of actual people. They don't mean to forget their children, and it doesn't mean that people with autism are bad parents, but VR can be a very intense form of 'zoning out' for them.

 

[Krejlooc]

Sure, but you're kind of ignoring the bigger point there.

I'm not arguing against Oculus Rift as a visual technology any more than headphones as an aural technology. I'm arguing that both combined will get some people so dissociated from their surroundings that these incidences will increase. It's hard to describe unless you have people with autism in your environment (or some other dissociative disorder) but the level of dissociation they can experience can be pretty intense. I have a mildly autistic friend and coworker who also happens to be a fantastic dad but as soon as he puts on headphones he's just plain gone from this world.

It may not sound like much but 1-2% of the population is a quite large number of actual people. They don't mean to forget their children, and it doesn't mean that people with autism are bad parents, but VR can be a very intense form of 'zoning out' for them.

Oculus Rift is just a new outlet for these people to take unto, it doesn't make new "autistic" people or whatever. Those people who will shut themselves off with VR are already doing it right now, with other technologies. It's not as though this is the first and only disassociation technology on the planet.

You're describing a threat like it's upcoming when it's been here for decades already.

 

[Kris Pistofferson]

Oculus Rift is just a new outlet for these people to take unto, it doesn't make new "autistic" people or whatever. Those people who will shut themselves off with VR are already doing it right now, with other technologies. It's not as though this is the first and only disassociation technology on the planet.

You're describing a threat like it's upcoming when it's been here for decades already.

Eh, I don't see it as 'a threat'. I want a Rift as much as the next guy but I still think it's going to increase these incidences (assuming that it actually takes off).

Nobody expected text messaging to be a bigger killer than drunk driving 20 years ago but here we are now. It doesn't mean that SMS isn't a useful technology.

 

[jcm]

Because Valve's VR API already exists and works with numerous headsets.

I'm thinking you don't understand how APIs work if you think the presence of a proprietary API prohibits a unifying API from emerging. Oculus' API is written in C, and has already been wrapped across a number of platforms.

I know quite a bit about how APIs work. I doubt Valve's ability to encapsulate a bunch of varied, proprietary APIs without the help of the manufacturers. And I doubt the manufacturers desire to give that help. Sony doesn't want to sell you hardware so you can buy and play Steam games.

 

[mugwhump]

Stupid. Single-player games are single-player games, whether you're playing them on a monitor, a handheld, or a VR headset. I'm really not seeing how playing the same kind of game, but now using the player's entire peripheral vision, is crossing some kind of line.

 

[Krejlooc]

I know quite a bit about how APIs work. I doubt Valve's ability to encapsulate a bunch of varied, proprietary APIs without the help of the manufacturers. And I doubt the manufacturers desire to give that help. Sony doesn't want to sell you hardware so you can buy and play Steam games.

A) You seem awfully hung up on Sony, when you listed 3 companies

B) One of those companies, Oculus, has helped valve (and vice versa) and the other, Samsung, is being assisted by Oculus as well

C) Sony's chief professed a desire for synergy such that devs don't have to pick and choose which headsets to develop for.

Basically, you're describing the reality of what's occurring right now with "Psh, like that could happen."

EDIT: And D) There are more headsets supported by Valve's API, per Joe Ludwig, than just what's out there from Oculus and Sony.

 

[nded]

I dunno, I still listen to music out loud, watch movies on the couch with friends, make phone calls, read the news and play music on a guitar like those "15 years ago pictures' show. The only difference is now I use multi-functional devices like computers and tablets to do those things instead of a collection of devices that each do only one thing.

I am slightly nostalgic about print porn though.

 

[Durante]

I know quite a bit about how APIs work. I doubt Valve's ability to encapsulate a bunch of varied, proprietary APIs without the help of the manufacturers. And I doubt the manufacturers desire to give that help. Sony doesn't want to sell you hardware so you can buy and play Steam games.

Can you go into more detail there? Because as far as I can see, VR APIs are not particularly varied. It's basically "get position/orientation", "get FoV" and "distort framebuffer". I don't see much issue in abstracting that.

UE4 already does.

 

[Man]

You have more specific functionality like TimeWarp (Oculus) and Temporal re-projection every 2nd frame (Morpheus).

 

[Durante]

You have more specific functionality like TimeWarp (Oculus) and Temporal re-projection every 2nd frame (Morpheus).

Timewarp can be done as part of the distortion callback. The morpheus stuff seems like it could be done completely without the knowledge of the application.

 

[jcm]

Can you go into more detail there? Because as far as I can see, VR APIs are not particularly varied. It's basically "get position/orientation", "get FoV" and "distort framebuffer". I don't see much issue in abstracting that.

UE4 already does.

Isn't there much more to supporting VR devices than just drawing? Positional data, head and hand tracking data, audio output, pass through cameras and microphones, other device integration? It's hard to point at the cross-platform difficulties, just because there's little public information. This is a industry in its infancy, and most of the players haven't actually released anything yet.

 

[SystemUser]

That image is ... really, really sad, actually.

I hope that's the joke.



That's a really shitty comparison. One does not experience games the same way they do books. They're fundamentally different ways of consuming fiction.

EDIT: Reading is also fundamentally a social experience. Books are meant to be shared and talked about. They're how we come to understand language and interpretation.

You seem to be confusing literacy and books. Are you saying that all books are consumed in a social way? Trashy novels are somehow more social than all video games? Are we not on this very forum for the purpose of talking about and sharing our experiences with video games? Are our interactions antisocial here because they are physically and temporally disconnected and also text based?


While I am a reading my mind is much more consumed with the world of the book. When I am on the bus reading I am less aware of my surroundings than when I play a game. Yes, reading can be social behavior and literacy helps society, but the act of reading a book can also definitely be antisocial.