• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

HoloLens - Xbox One streaming AR

Just wanted to point this out; from my personal experience, judging what they showed on stage, versus what I actually saw with Hololens on, the stage demo actually does the unit a great disservice in that is shows everything looking a bit choppy. With the actual unit, everything going on was at a decent frame/update rate where it looked really smooth.

So likewise, that Halo video, showing the recorded version of the experience probably isn't very representative of the smoothness you will see with the unit on.
 
Raist said:
They didn't come up with the term. To be honest I'm still not entirely sure what the difference with AR is. Perhaps interactivity, I don't know.
Click to expand...
Microsoft and Magic Leap are using terms other than AR to try and differentiate their experiences from the type of AR experience that things like the Google Glass gives - 2 dimensional words and images written over the 3 dimensional world, like a built-in HUD. Technically HoloLens and Magic Leap are still AR devices, but it's an entirely different level of AR, making the viewer think virtual objects are actually in the world with them. Magic Leap calls it Cinematic Reality, Microsoft calls it Mixed Reality (and calls the images holograms).
 
Well, there is the fov which has been discussed to death in this thread already. That's the only complication I see. Even that is temporary and will improve in time. Microsoft should stick to this and not let it drop off.
 
Just_myles said:
Well, there is the fov which has been discussed to death in this thread already. That's the only complication I see. Even that is temporary and will improve in time. Microsoft should stick to this and not let it drop off.
Click to expand...

There are many potential complications including FOV, latency, occlusion, transparency (seeing through projected image).
 
Alx said:
It's semantics, but it seems that mixed reality is a wider definition of anything that involves both virtual and real objects. It includes augmented reality (adding virtual objects in a real scene, like most Hololens demos) and augmented virtuality (adding real objects in a virtual scene, like in an eyetoy game)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I guess... I mean basically AR can be summarized as "adding virtual objects to a real scene", which does describe things like Hololens just fine, and as opposed to VR which is an entirely virtual scene. Any further subcategories etc just makes the whole thing confusing IMO.
 
NoPiece said:
There are many potential complications including FOV, latency, occlusion, transparency (seeing through projected image).
Click to expand...

Why would latency be any worse than XBO to Win 10?

Many find that to be pretty excellent. Transparency would be the only potential negative, but I don't think anyone would be doing this expecting a 100% perfect experience, though I wonder if the headset is capable of producing images to be more solid for these specific instances like Game Streaming and Netflix/Chill.
 
Head.spawn said:
Why would latency be any worse than XBO to Win 10?

Many find that to be pretty excellent. Transparency would be the only potential negative, but I don't think anyone would be doing this expecting a 100% perfect experience, though I wonder if the headset is capable of producing images to be more solid for these specific instances like Game Streaming and Netflix/Chill.
Click to expand...

I assume he means display latency, not network.
 
http://www.theverge.com/2015/12/1/9...lens-game-streaming-halo-5-guardians-xbox-one

Microsoft's HoloLens can stream Halo 5: Guardians from an Xbox One


On a virtual screen floating in a living room
Microsoft is letting its own HoloLens developers loosen their lips this week by asking them to publish short demonstration clips on Twitter with the hashtag #MadeWithHoloLens. Made up of mostly seven- or eight-second videos, the collection of employee demos posted so far each show off new applications for Microsoft's augmented reality headset. One such demo, from HoloLens program manager Varun Mani, features Xbox One game streaming to a HoloLens headset, with Mani playing Halo 5: Guardians on a virtual screen floating in his living room. Microsoft is also taking app ideas from the public starting today, with the winning idea to get its own HoloLens development team within Microsoft.

The Halo 5 video is janky, but it's a solid indication of what a virtual screen displaying something as complex as a 2015 first-person shooter looks like. As it's been noted in the past, the field of view with HoloLens prototypes is notoriously slim, with virtual images only appearing within a small rectangle of space sitting in front of the wearer's eyes. It's unclear how Mani or any of the other #MadeWithHoloLens participants captured what appears to be a full field of view, and what camera technology Microsoft has its employees using to do so. The company has stressed during live HoloLens demos that it must use a large and expensive-looking camera rig to show viewers what a HoloLens wearer sees.


Gaming is one of the linchpins of augmented and virtual reality

That said, gaming is one of the linchpins of both augmented and virtual reality. Xbox head Phil Spencer said back in January that Microsoft was thinking about the gaming possibilities for HoloLens, both for custom designed software and game streaming from Xbox One consoles like Mani demonstrates here. And in press demos following the HoloLens unveiling that same month, Microsoft showed a Minecraft-inspired game that would allow you to build and explore elaborate pixel cities around a room. The company also designed a HoloLens experience for Halo 5 at this year's E3, though it didn't involve any actual gameplay or game streaming.

While a game custom-built for augmented reality may be a more exciting use of HoloLens' technology, Xbox One game streaming is certainly an expected and anticipated use of AR. Imagine never having to use a physical screen for gaming again, and being able to play games that could stretch to fit your entire living room wall? An Xbox-HoloLens tie-in would also complement Microsoft's partnership with virtual reality leader Oculus VR. The two companies announced in June that Oculus' commercial Rift headset shipping next year would come packaged with an Xbox One controller, and the headset would be able to play Xbox One games on a virtual home theater thanks to Windows 10 integration.
 
Bear Force One said:
Most people are not over fakes of any kind. Let's not pretend. Some don't care what companies do, true or false. They are fans and let most things slide. That's what I understand.
Click to expand...

Look, let's face it. You can either spend all your time griping and complaining about "faked" Microsoft demos, or you can adjust your expectations accordingly based on their past demos and see the potential in what they're showing.

Doesn't matter if its made by Microsoft or another company, AR tech is going places.
 
Head.spawn said:
Why would latency be any worse than XBO to Win 10?

Many find that to be pretty excellent. Transparency would be the only potential negative, but I don't think anyone would be doing this expecting a 100% perfect experience, though I wonder if the headset is capable of producing images to be more solid for these specific instances like Game Streaming and Netflix/Chill.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you are right, the streaming latency should be fine, I was thinking more of latency in the 3d mapping of the world in order to understand depth and occlusion (the kinect piece of the technology).
 
Fliesen said:
Nope. They're just feeds of what HoloLens outputs to the screens inside the visor.

i think some people who call it "fake" don't mean "this video isn't technically feasible by the camera / holographc processing unit (i made that term up!) on the device itself, but rather mean that it's not a meaningful representation of what it'll look like to the user.
Click to expand...
To be fair I thought it wasn't legit. As in this video was made by a regular joe and wasn't realtime. So I guess I was one of the doubters they're talking about. Didn't know that was an MS employees upload. Still would be cool to know how these videos are made though and how "proof of concept" they are.
 
No one caught the on point YouTube comments?

jAxBiyh.jpg


This would be a great way to watch movies.
 
Bsigg12 said:
Well, initially. They're targeting enterprise because it's where they make the majority of their money.
Click to expand...
I suspect that there's no intention for HoloLens to be a consumer product because there are no prospects of significantly reducing the BOM of the hardware. Unlike the VR products coming on the market which are largely LED lenses on a headset, the HoloLens also has an integrated computer.

At this rate the HoloLens feels more like a proof of concept looking for an application than it does a real product. AR is going to be pretty cool 15-20 years from now, but I think that they're just playing with the technology right now.
 
Jesus... every HoloLens thread just has to go back into the FOV stuff. Jesus, we all know but it ain't out for regular consumers, so let it go. Jeez. The applications are awesome.
 
Zedox said:
Jesus... every HoloLens thread just has to go back into the FOV stuff. Jesus, we all know but it ain't out for regular consumers, so let it go. Jeez. The applications are awesome.
Click to expand...

If the argument for letting anything "go" is that it's not out for regular customers, we shouldn't discuss the thing altogether.
 
Zedox said:
Jesus... every HoloLens thread just has to go back into the FOV stuff. Jesus, we all know but it ain't out for regular consumers, so let it go. Jeez. The applications are awesome.
Click to expand...

Honestly I wonder why nobody wonders about the battery life instead, which is usually a bigger issue with embedded systems. Because playing a game on a virtual screen following you is cool, whatever the image size and quality, but if you can only do it during 30 minutes then it's not that interesting.
 
hawk2025 said:
If the argument for letting anything "go" is that it's not out for regular customers, we shouldn't discuss the thing altogether.
Click to expand...

at a certain point the argument is kind of diluted because everybody knows it's a drawback. microsoft even admitted it. we also all know it'll be improved. it's kind of a dead argument, imo.

it's also annoying seeing people ignore the multiple hands on demos to only focus on the videos microsoft has made.
 
Rembrandt said:
at a certain point the argument is kind of diluted because everybody knows it's a drawback. microsoft even admitted it. we also all know it'll be improved. it's kind of a dead argument, imo.

it's also annoying seeing people ignore the multiple hands on demos to only focus on the videos microsoft has made.
Click to expand...

No it is not since they use a full view of vision for marketing. 1% of user is aware that that isn't what we get. 99% do not know.
 
hawk2025 said:
If the argument for letting anything "go" is that it's not out for regular customers, we shouldn't discuss the thing altogether.
Click to expand...
But it also shouldn't be discussed in every thread and be the main point of discussion.

Everyone knows the FOV is an issue, MS have acknowledged it. Move on. Lets talk applications and what it can be used for.

Since these are standalone devices, I can imagine some sort of virtual FPS which places a gun in your hands, and you play with friends anywhere who also have the same game. That would be, fucking amazing. Virtual laser quest.
 
dose said:
It most definitely should be discussed in every thread whilst MS continues to show misleading videos.
Click to expand...
Direct captures from the device are misleading? I understand about FOV, but they can't replicate that in videos and you have to respect it isn't a final device, more so a prototype.
 
Thrakier said:
No it is not since they use a full view of vision for marketing. 1% of user is aware that that isn't what we get. 99% do not know.
Click to expand...

Let's be real, the general public doesn't even know what this is. It's been mainly shown off at conferences for tech enthusiasts and a little bit at E3. Most people that watch or go to those things have other ways of obtaining info that's not from the creators.

It definitely doesn't have to be brought up in every thread here as a way to dismiss the product as fake.


dose said:
It most definitely should be discussed in every thread whilst MS continues to show misleading videos.
Click to expand...

Maybe if there were no hands on reports from numerous sites that report it and we could only go off Microsoft's videos.
 
I think it's also worth mentioning that Hololens isn't a standalone, closed device, for MS it is also and especially a software environment for AR standardization. The FOV issues are just a limitation of a specific implementation of the technology, but even the "fake" full-screen rendering is done in real-time by a camera moving around.
The fact that it can run that way and synchronizes with the experience of the helmet-wearer should be seen as a plus of the environment, not a minus. (also worth mentioning that in the concept illustrations of the reveal last January, you could see AR rendering of the same scene seen from a Hololens user, a tablet, and a regular TV.

MicrosoftHMD_1.png


I'm sure as a software company, MS wants it to be the common toolkit to make AR in the future. I doubt they're betting on selling millions of headsets in the near future, but they'll clearly want to occupy the middleware market to keep developers in their ecosystem.
 
I wonder what price point they'll target when it does get released for businesses

I'm curious to see where it will really get its killer app
 
They have already shown that Hololens can project video player window inside AR enviroment.

This is the same, except video is streaming live feed from Xbox One. I would be more impressed if this was not done in home environment. Streaming via internet would make it more interesting.

And of course, FOV needs to be bigger than postage stamp.
 
Alx said:
I think it's also worth mentioning that Hololens isn't a standalone, closed device, for MS it is also and especially a software environment for AR standardization. The FOV issues are just a limitation of a specific implementation of the technology, but even the "fake" full-screen rendering is done in real-time by a camera moving around.
The fact that it can run that way and synchronizes with the experience of the helmet-wearer should be seen as a plus of the environment, not a minus. (also worth mentioning that in the concept illustrations of the reveal last January, you could see AR rendering of the same scene seen from a Hololens user, a tablet, and a regular TV.

MicrosoftHMD_1.png


I'm sure as a software company, MS wants it to be the common toolkit to make AR in the future. I doubt they're betting on selling millions of headsets in the near future, but they'll clearly want to occupy the middleware market to keep developers in their ecosystem.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think that's pretty big considering its one of the drawbacks of VR. It could make AR a multiuser experience and opens up new doors for development.
 
hawk2025 said:
If the argument for letting anything "go" is that it's not out for regular customers, we shouldn't discuss the thing altogether.
Click to expand...

Letting go means that we know it as fact (FOV issue). It's no different than threads about Rise of the Tomb Raider/SFV/Shenmue/etc.. talks about the exclusivity or coming to different platforms. We know it as fact, no need to talk about something we can't change until it actually changes. The FOV will be the same until noted otherwise. So let it go until it changes or when the thing is released, it's in development, not going out to regular consumers or anything like that (developers aren't your average consumers) for a while. It's a broken record.

How beneficial for discussion would it be if we derailed every Oculus or VR thread with saying "but it's still tethered to my computer, it should be wireless"? We don't. Why? Because we know it's a limitation right now but accept it and look at what can be used in the confines of the technology.

So let go, and have fun discussing things that can be applied to the tech instead of being a damn debby downer.
 
until this completely covers your vision, i don't see the point yet. it's really no different to walking around with your phones AR...only it's hands free. plus i see even fewer uses within gaming then i do VR. i think, much like kinect, MS has created something that benefits other things and fields more then what they maybe intended it to.

by version 2 or 3 it should be what i'm after though tech wise. but i still think it's not a device for gaming.
 
Thrakier said:
No it is not since they use a full view of vision for marketing. 1% of user is aware that that isn't what we get. 99% do not know.
Click to expand...
Only 1% of GAFfers know? I seriously doubt that. And the only thing misleading about this video is how close he is to the holographic tv, what he's doing would work perfectly for a real person wearing the HoloLens, just further away like a normal tv viewing distance. He was excited to show how he uses his dev kit, he wasn't making statements of functionality, FOV, or specs, and his video isn't a statement by the Microsoft corporation.
 
Zedox said:
How beneficial for discussion would it be if we derailed every Oculus or VR thread with saying "but it's still tethered to my computer, it should be wireless"? We don't. Why? Because we know it's a limitation right now but accept it and look at what can be used in the confines of the technology.

So let go, and have fun discussing things that can be applied to the tech instead of being a damn debby downer.
Click to expand...
That's the key difference-- people are looking at what AR CAN'T do. You don't see solid black menu bars, because it can't draw blacks, it can only illuminate, like a projector afaik. And you don't get a 65" inch viewport just out of arm's reach- you get an iPad-sized screen.

People are being Debbie Uppers when it comes to AR.

What makes VR so beautiful is how aware the companies and engineers are of the limitations, and how determined they are to overcome them, and only show things that are possible with it now.

MS, like with Kinect, are promising the Back to the Future hoverboard when it's really just a magnetic skateboard scraping along special magnetic stips just under the surface.

Dreamwriter said:
Only 1% of GAFfers know? I seriously doubt that. And the only thing misleading about this video is how close he is to the holographic tv, what he's doing would work perfectly for a real person wearing the HoloLens, just further away like a normal tv viewing distance. He was excited to show how he uses his dev kit, he wasn't making statements of functionality, FOV, or specs, and his video isn't a statement by the Microsoft corporation.
Click to expand...
With the limited field of view, you can do a 42 inch monitor from 7 feet away but the edges are going to keep fading in and out because you're not keeping your head still. Also, it can't render black afaik, so the image is going to look like crap unless you're playing in the dark.
 
Mr. Giggles said:
I wonder what price point they'll target when it does get released for businesses
Click to expand...
I imagine that it'll be in the $1000-2000 price range. I don't think that it'll be a consumer product before the occlusion problem can be fixed cheaply.

Zedox said:
How beneficial for discussion would it be if we derailed every Oculus or VR thread with saying "but it's still tethered to my computer, it should be wireless"? We don't. Why? Because we know it's a limitation right now but accept it and look at what can be used in the confines of the technology.
Click to expand...
I don't care about the FOV argument, but VR technology being tethered is a legitimate limitation and it's one worth discussing if one cares to do so. Likewise with HoloLens' FOV issue.
 
KORNdoggy said:
until this completely covers your vision, i don't see the point yet. it's really no different to walking around with your phones AR...only it's hands free. plus i see even fewer uses within gaming then i do VR. i think, much like kinect, MS has created something that benefits other things and fields more then what they maybe intended it to.

by version 2 or 3 it should be what i'm after though tech wise. but i still think it's not a device for gaming.
Click to expand...

For me, I see the best gaming usage as peripheral to the game rather than integral to it.

Once the FoV is big enough I'd love to play games with the HUD and damage indicators moved from the screen onto HoloLens, for example.
 
KORNdoggy said:
until this completely covers your vision, i don't see the point yet. it's really no different to walking around with your phones AR...only it's hands free. plus i see even fewer uses within gaming then i do VR. i think, much like kinect, MS has created something that benefits other things and fields more then what they maybe intended it to.

by version 2 or 3 it should be what i'm after though tech wise. but i still think it's not a device for gaming.
Click to expand...

It's still rendering the view in 3D on top of the actual environment you're looking at with the naked eye instead of looking through your phone which is rendering both the environment and virtual objects in 2D. I think that's significantly different. Widening the FOV isn't going to change the experience any more than immersing you more completely.

cakefoo said:
That's the key difference-- people are looking at what AR CAN'T do. You don't see solid black menu bars, because it can't draw blacks, it can only illuminate, like a projector afaik. And you don't get a 65" inch viewport just out of arm's reach- you get an iPad-sized screen.

People are being Debbie Uppers when it comes to AR.

What makes VR so beautiful is how aware the companies and engineers are of the limitations, and how determined they are to overcome them, and only show things that are possible with it now.

MS, like with Kinect, are promising the Back to the Future hoverboard when it's really just a magnetic skateboard scraping along special magnetic stips just under the surface.

With the limited field of view, you can do a 42 inch monitor from 7 feet away but the edges are going to keep fading in and out because you're not keeping your head still. Also, it can't render black afaik, so the image is going to look like crap unless you're playing in the dark.
Click to expand...
Isn't it rendering black in the very first video streaming Halo?

4Tran said:
I suspect that there's no intention for HoloLens to be a consumer product because there are no prospects of significantly reducing the BOM of the hardware. Unlike the VR products coming on the market which are largely LED lenses on a headset, the HoloLens also has an integrated computer.

At this rate the HoloLens feels more like a proof of concept looking for an application than it does a real product. AR is going to be pretty cool 15-20 years from now, but I think that they're just playing with the technology right now.
Click to expand...

You're crazy if you think they're not considering it. I think they just realize it will be a while before it's realistic for that market but, as the tech improves, it will become more so. Even if that's a version or two down the line.
 
cakefoo said:
With the limited field of view, you can do a 42 inch monitor from 7 feet away but the edges are going to keep fading in and out because you're not keeping your head still. Also, it can't render black afaik, so the image is going to look like crap unless you're playing in the dark.
Click to expand...

Oh wow, so you are a developer? Sweet, can you make the monitor 65" and tell us how far away you have to be for it to completely fill the FOV? You're the first person I've heard to give solid exact numbers for the size of the FOV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The Xbox One has been hacked
12
538
Bry0 replied
Considering trading Switch for ROG Xbox ally (white one)
2
69
778
Ebrietas replied
Marathon rated for PS4 and Xbox One
2
94
2K
Redneckerz replied
Warzone Is Leaving Xbox One and PS4 This Year
News Platform 
2
111
Fake replied
Why are Collections of older games skipping PS4 & Xbox One ( sometimes even Xbox Series) lately?
21
596
Shtof replied
Top Bottom