-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Giant Bomb: HoloLens' final version will keep limited field of view, says Microsoft
- Thread starter Pathfinder
- Start date
Are you fucking serious? An iPad at arms length!!?? I wasn't expecting FOV to be THAT narrow...
Jesus.. That's practically useless. And that's massively misleading then. What the camera showed seemed so wide.
I wish they will sit on this until they can perfect it more, they are going to release a very limited product in hope it sells, it doesn't because it hardly works. Microsoft will think people won't want a product like this, and then we never see it again.
And I wish Microsoft can realize that if your product doesn't work it doesn't sell.
Look at the Wii as a prime example of a new concept that actually works well being released and selling well.
And I wish Microsoft can realize that if your product doesn't work it doesn't sell.
Look at the Wii as a prime example of a new concept that actually works well being released and selling well.
Zvonimir Boban
Banned
I honestly expected it to be a lot worse than that. Not that I'll be buying one any time soon but I reckon I could live with that.
Alx
Member
Those impressions were at Build last month, with hardware they started to produce in large amounts for demos. I doubt the models they brought at E3 were different.
I wonder if the fact that the user is wearing glasses or not can impact the fov. At that short a distance, a small change of depth can translate to major angle differences.
Yes that looks usable. You also have to consider that you'd move your head around to scan the scene, while when watching the full static picture you can make your central vision focus on the hidden parts.
I think an important issue will be to handle the borders, where the holograms are cut. If the frontier isn't softened, it can be jarring.
Pie and Beans
Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
.
This was one of the worst offenders in the Lie Olympics because you'd only be able to see like 20% if not less of that movie window at any time from that distance.
It may be a bit worse as that was a super basic approximation Verge slung up. I had heard it was a bit thinner for instance.
You can play a fun game of "follow Tom Cruise"
i heard they are revamping the hololens unit so that its not as bad as it sounds
I agree. And the initial demo backed that up - they were showing it building things and then 3D printing them; using CAD tools and simulating them in 3D space at life size; providing 3D realtime assistance to people. All good uses, all would work ok with a limited fov
It's when they got to BUILD and started showing minecraft all around the room, or massive movie screens projecting onto walls that they lost track. I think they got tempted by the idea it could be a big consumer thing, or they just wanted the halo from showing cool tech.
E3 was also a mistake to demo - it sets expectations they cannot match
Journey
Banned
Why does it start AFTER his impressions on Hololens. I rewound back to 3:12 to hear what the tail end of his "Crazy" comment was about and it was actually a very positive impression.
Honestly dude, I think the guy on reddit is either misremembering or exaggerating. Multiple people at E3 have given similar descriptions as ipad at arm's length/credit card at half an arm's length.
He says it's like a credit card 2 inches from your face - try it yourself now. If that was accurate it would be a very good FOV for a gen 1 product.
That was the link Polygon/The Verge used because it's the part that's relevant. Jeff's impressions aren't the story. Just like Jeff saying "they can't ship it at that FOV" isn't the story.
Delusibeta
Banned
Tech Buying Law: Never buy the first iteration of new tech, it will suck.
Pathfinder
Member
That's a lesson everyone can stand to learn, as its usually true.
Doctor_Thomas
Member
Surely, for the illusion to work, this needs to have a wide FOV. Otherwise, what's the point?
Am I missing something?
Am I missing something?
ElectricBlanketFire
Member
Demoing product law: Fake it to make a crowd say WOOOOOOOOOOO!!! and work out the kinks later.
So the demo was BS and this will never become something truly worth getting. Surely in time the field of view will be expansive and match VR etc..? If the tech used to create the holograms won't improve to that level anytime soon then yeah this thing is pretty pointless. It's like creating an 8K display but telling people it can only be manufactured no bigger than 20inches so pretty much fails to be of any use to anyone.
This is definitely a problem, it's literally what VR is trying to solve. This isn't VR, but immersion and presence is just as important.
How can anyone expect worse than that? Any smaller and it would be unusable.
How can anyone expect worse than that? Any smaller and it would be unusable.
unholyrevenger72
Banned
Laaaaame.
Pathfinder
Member
I'm sure plenty of tech enthusiasts and sectors outside of gaming will find a use for HoloLens in its current form.
It just kind of sucks for gaming at the moment.
QuickSilverD
Member
I wonder who is responsible for setting such expectations in the first place
TipsyArchmage
Neo Member
Well it looks bigger than an ipad held at arm's length for a start which everyone in this thread seems to be repeating over and over again
unless everyone here has tiny arms I guess
Ha, I had a thread about this and a lot of people were going "nah, it will be fixed, no need to worry"- crow time?
I'm not even surprised that a tech demo for a Microsoft product is grossly misleading about the limitations of the device anymore. A lot of their PR is based on misleading, see original Kinect reveal, and most recently TR "exclusivity" and now this.
Shame they feel the need to do this and not let the products stand on their own strengths. Then again I feel like, just like Kinect, Hololens is 5-10 years too early to be a consumer product and should only be at an alpha dev kit level as it is right now (same with how I think Kinect 1 should have been on release, and I say this as a person who has developed several pieces of software for Kinect).
.
I'm not even surprised that a tech demo for a Microsoft product is grossly misleading about the limitations of the device anymore. A lot of their PR is based on misleading, see original Kinect reveal, and most recently TR "exclusivity" and now this.
Shame they feel the need to do this and not let the products stand on their own strengths. Then again I feel like, just like Kinect, Hololens is 5-10 years too early to be a consumer product and should only be at an alpha dev kit level as it is right now (same with how I think Kinect 1 should have been on release, and I say this as a person who has developed several pieces of software for Kinect).
For those saying version 2 you guys do know that first impressions are everything right?
There's a reason why Oculus took so long on the CV1 since they wanted to get it past the threshold of being good. You only have one chance to make a first impression. People won't give a product a second look if it disappoints them the first time.
This is all on MS really for misrepresenting the hardware and software.
Better to underpromise and over deliver than vice versa.
There's a reason why Oculus took so long on the CV1 since they wanted to get it past the threshold of being good. You only have one chance to make a first impression. People won't give a product a second look if it disappoints them the first time.
This is all on MS really for misrepresenting the hardware and software.
Better to underpromise and over deliver than vice versa.
ElectricBlanketFire
Member
Indeed. They made a first impression. And it was a lie.
Pathfinder
Member
Not necessarily true.
The first iPhone sucked, and that didn't seem to hurt consumer's impressions.
Here is a picture from build when Alex Kipman was doing an interview. You can see the viewable area on the lens. Kind of hard to say what its like sitting an inch from your eyes.
Nah, that's just the lens on which an image can be projected - remember, it's a projector, not a screen producing the image. It's not an indication of the FOV.
This is completely true. With any sort of product like AR or VR, they're always in danger of being labeled a gimmick. Hell there's many in GAF who are like this.
That's why it's important to get it good enough and right the first time. There are no second chances.
There's a reason why Kinect 2 wasn't given the time of day by anybody and MS doesn't talk about it anymore. It's because Kinect 1 underdelivered that they didn't give it's brother any thought.
Pathfinder
Member
Disagree. Full-screen touchscreen phones with no hardware keyboard could easily have become a gimmick. And the first iteration was horrible. It was dreadfully slow, low-res, slow EDGE network, no 3rd party apps. Hell, half the home screen was blank.
Did that hurt future models? Hell no. Apple improved on the design, learned from their mistakes, and... well, now look.
First impressions are not everything to people with open minds.
.
The only thing misleading about that is he isn't able to see the entire screen from where he is standing. The core technology of the "holograms" is real. Thats what I'm excited about.
SlickShoesRUCrazy
Member
Gen 2 = curved transparent display(s) instead of flat projection surface.
Well, hopefully lol.
Anywho, even with the limited FOV, impressions still seem fairly positive.
Well, hopefully lol.
Anywho, even with the limited FOV, impressions still seem fairly positive.
Zvonimir Boban
Banned
The way some people on here are shitting on it you'd think it was totally unusable.
People seem to be reacting as though they expected it to be some sort of Holodeck type thing projecting stuff all over the place and they're pissed off because it's not. From those images it seems to be fine for productivity tasks which will probably be the main focus. When it comes to games I envision it as replacing some of the second screen bullshit we've had recently, so you look down at your screen to view the map or some overhead topography of the battlefield on your desk, glance to the side of your screen to see Madden play-calling tendencies, that kind of thing.
Those things are possible with the tech as it stands right now and that's pretty fucking cool tbh.
The misleading part is the camera apparantly showing us what the hololens wearer can see. Then he makes a giant screen. Leading us into believing that he can see the entire screen because we can, and we were told we were seeing what he sees.
And why would you make a giant screen if you can only see a bit of it?
It is entirely misleading.
It seems like you're forgetting there's a big difference in how Apple and how MS are perceived in consumer minds.
One is the public's darling while the other is not. A good example is the Surface v the iPad.
And most consumers won't have an open mind about, like I said VR or AR which most perceive to be a gimmick.
It has to be done well and well enough the first time. The first iPhone did just that. And last I remember the iPhone wasn't as grossly misleading as MS was in the E3 conference.
MS made it seem like you were getting a wide FOV way beyond a 100 degrees when in reality you're getting something way way less than that.
People are gonna have in their heads what they saw in the E3 conference and once they try it out they will be massively disappointed.
Like I said there's a reason why many loved Oculus for being completely honest when first revealing the hardware. They didn't sugarcoat anything and declare the FOV was greater than 200 degrees or anything like that.
I'm the end, this is on MS for putting unrealistic expectations in people's heads.
Beer Monkey
Member
Like Kinect.
maquiladora
Member
This is party why VR is much more interesting to me, though AR does have a lot of potential outside of gaming uses.
3, 2, 1 cue the hate and downplaying from those who hope it will fail and have yet to or never will try it for themselves.
From the various impressions I have read about the Halo demo, its actually a pretty awesome experience. Yes the FOV could be bigger but I'm sure if they don't improve it there will be a good reason.
Remember this tech is aimed at a much broader audience than just gamers.
From the various impressions I have read about the Halo demo, its actually a pretty awesome experience. Yes the FOV could be bigger but I'm sure if they don't improve it there will be a good reason.
Remember this tech is aimed at a much broader audience than just gamers.
That doesn't sound like a lot. Especially if you consider that Microsoft has currently released 6 phones and 1 new tablet this year. You could also throw in different software they've released so far this year and the percentage of misleading PR would go even further down.
Misleading PR is wrong, but so is saying "A lot of their PR is based on misleading".
"Some of their PR..." would be fair to say.
How should they demo HoloLens for people that don't have HoloLens?
Which is why it needs to be a lot better.
Look at the broken shit gamers put up with - consumers at large are far less forgiving.
By doing point-of-view HoloLens angles only (none of this wide room view shit) and crop the AR to only what you actually see.
Sticky&Sweet
Banned
I don't understand how the source is Polygon when this happened on the Giant Bomb stream two days ago.
Pathfinder
Member
Thread title was changed to reflect the correct source.
Sorry, some of us have day jobs and can't keep up with exactly who broke a story first, especially on E3 week when data is coming at us at rapid pace.