-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
How many years until VR is "Mainstream Ready" ?
- Thread starter Croatoan
- Start date
fastest finger
Member
5 months, when PSVR hits?
I get what the OP is saying about the quality of the visuals. I was hit with a wave of disappointment when I first put on a PSVR and saw the screen door* and the aliasing.
But 5 seconds later, I started playing and didn't give a damn anymore. Presence trumps visuals and I was totally immersed, totally involved, totally at ease and loved every second of it.
* I "think" it was an old LCD headset, not the newer OLED version, so potentially improved now.
I get what the OP is saying about the quality of the visuals. I was hit with a wave of disappointment when I first put on a PSVR and saw the screen door* and the aliasing.
But 5 seconds later, I started playing and didn't give a damn anymore. Presence trumps visuals and I was totally immersed, totally involved, totally at ease and loved every second of it.
* I "think" it was an old LCD headset, not the newer OLED version, so potentially improved now.
I'm going to take a stance that in order to hit mainstream appeal, it needs to be way cheaper and it needs to be wireless (especially for room scale VR).
How many years that will take (whilst still maintaining a level of quality at least on par with the occulus or PSVR), I don't know.
How many years that will take (whilst still maintaining a level of quality at least on par with the occulus or PSVR), I don't know.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
Sure, it has existed. That isn't the point of this thread. Existing isn't enough. Wider spread usage is what the discussion is about. Google intends to push a VR platform and people are dismissing it because it's mobile based and they've seen that. But Google is pushing a very different agenda this time, higher specs, more engaging apps, and more.
Whatever the cost of the expensive VR headsets are, you simply cannot compete with a device people are going to own without VR even in mind (adoption rates of course). Sure, it'll take time for the average phone to hit that spec and they've acknowledged that too. But its way more likely to hit mainstream via phones before VR is mainstream for PCs or consoles, where we're talking about expensive PCs/devices on top of expensive headsets. On the other hand, the install base potential on smart phones is infinitely higher.
mugurumakensei
Member
I'd say more along the lines of 4-7 years given the pace of technology.
GamerMax73
Member
Damn you for crushing my dreams!
jellies_two
Member
I have to wonder if the market for VR headsets is the initial wave of early adopters and hardcore tech heads, and after that is saturated the installed base won't increase much.
Can that installed base support all the R&D needed to get it to a more mass market device? Or will VR be approached via weaker but easier cardboard type devices, and cheap to make fixed POV experiences. Why would a company be willing to throw hundreds of millions at gen2 if mass market is gen3 or gen4. Unless they are obstinate like Facebook.
Can that installed base support all the R&D needed to get it to a more mass market device? Or will VR be approached via weaker but easier cardboard type devices, and cheap to make fixed POV experiences. Why would a company be willing to throw hundreds of millions at gen2 if mass market is gen3 or gen4. Unless they are obstinate like Facebook.
darkinstinct
...lacks reading comprehension.
Probably never. Headset plus PC/console have to be $400 or less combined to reach the mass market, I don't see that happening. VR will always improve and always require more power. Price will stay high. On the other hand people don't like to wear headsets (at least not for longer periods) or goggles. They feel unnatural. There's a reason why home 3D failed (and in cinemas we only watch 3D because they basically force us to do so). Space requirements are the next factor. And nobody likes to step on their pet or baby while gaming. I can see VR getting maybe 5 % of the overall gaming market (that is stationary device revenue, mobile excluded) over the next five years but that's about it. I think PSVR sales will be hurt considerably when they announce Neo. The amount of people that have $500 for PSVR is already low, having to pay $900 for Neo plus PSVR is far away from mass market. And if you are interested in PSVR you will want to buy a Neo. Question is which one will you buy first.
VR is awesome, don't get me wrong. But it's nothing the mass market understands or wants like say an iPhone. It's one thing to pay $800 for a device you use on a daily basis, you don't do the same for what is a cool gadget. Let the hardware mature, let them iron out the annoyances. Then we can talk mainstream appeal. 10 years.
VR is awesome, don't get me wrong. But it's nothing the mass market understands or wants like say an iPhone. It's one thing to pay $800 for a device you use on a daily basis, you don't do the same for what is a cool gadget. Let the hardware mature, let them iron out the annoyances. Then we can talk mainstream appeal. 10 years.
Majukun
Member
do you still need to order it online and it's impossible to find it in stores?
well then first thing is that
second is price,but everyone knows that
the resolution and all the graphical problems will be a non-issueto "the mass",and games will come when a good enough install base will be there for them
well then first thing is that
second is price,but everyone knows that
the resolution and all the graphical problems will be a non-issueto "the mass",and games will come when a good enough install base will be there for them
No and no
If they get foveated rendering working and I think they're getting there, then it might be possible, 8K screens but only rendering in detail the parts you're directly looking at.
I think someone has a system that can register the eye at 200Hz, so in theory it could report back in time to tell the GPU where you're looking so what to render in the next frame. Even at 120fps this eye tracking should be able to work one step ahead. I think. I'm probably wrong lol. Still the cost of that in the headset may or may not be sizeable but I think it needs to happen. Rendering a ton of wasted detail every frame is really wasteful and power consuming when. A blurry mess would do!
I think someone has a system that can register the eye at 200Hz, so in theory it could report back in time to tell the GPU where you're looking so what to render in the next frame. Even at 120fps this eye tracking should be able to work one step ahead. I think. I'm probably wrong lol. Still the cost of that in the headset may or may not be sizeable but I think it needs to happen. Rendering a ton of wasted detail every frame is really wasteful and power consuming when. A blurry mess would do!
Aztechnology
Member
If they get foveated rendering working and I think they're getting there, then it might be possible, 8K screens but only rendering in detail the parts you're directly looking at.
I think someone has a system that can register the eye at 200Hz, so in theory it could report back in time to tell the GPU where you're looking so what to render in the next frame. Even at 120fps this eye tracking should be able to work one step ahead. I think. I'm probably wrong lol. Still the cost of that in the headset may or may not be sizeable but I think it needs to happen. Rendering a ton of wasted detail every frame is really wasteful and power consuming when. A blurry mess would do!
Definitely agree (getting to be a habit with your posts lol). I think it's when you bring the noticeable performance increase to the market is when even people who aren't sold on VR gaming will jump on board. But it requires a better display and eye tracking/foveated rendering. I honestly don't think you even need to get it much below the current cost if it brings as much performance as we think it does. That will bring in a huge amount of the high end market at the very least which is enough for make some huge progress.
Pretty much, until all you have to do is pull it out the box and connect it to wifi, it will always be kind of niche
Melon Husk
Member
4.
7DollarHagane
Banned
200 years? Idk. Whenever it's as simple as slipping on a pair of sunglasses and doesn't have any wires or external processing.
I don't think it will ever take off in a serious way because anything that isolates you in the physical space like that is inherently stigmatized or limited in appeal.
I don't think it will ever take off in a serious way because anything that isolates you in the physical space like that is inherently stigmatized or limited in appeal.
OfTheOverflow
Member
Really? That's cool, I go there
Had to check I wasn't in AusGAF for a sec. Have seen some of that researched mentioned but not lately.Corronchilejano
Member
Not in your lifetime.
Dee Dah Dave
Member
When its a relatively cheap, wireless and self contained product. Until then it will continue to steadily gain recognition in the enthusiast market, but not make any huge sudden dents within the mainsteam audience.
Why is this formulated as if it is news? Where was first gen consumer VR ever presented as being mainstream ready?
I don't know about Sony, but both Valve and Oculus has always indicated that this will be a enthusiast generation, and that we're not in the place in the timeline where graphics capabilities are anywhere close to being able to drive the resolution needed to resemble a fixed display at a distance. 12-16K resolution is what's needed for that with current tech, and foveated rendering may mitigate this to a more digestible number.. That's the harsh reality. In the meantime, enthusiasts like myself will have a ton of fun with it.
I don't really feel the need for mainstream acceptance in the first place..
Disorientator
Member
I wonder what would be the answer to the same question, if a VR "preacher" was asked back in the 80s/90s when would this tech would go mainstream - wouldn't he say 10-20 years?
What I mean is maybe VR not becoming mainstream is not only just a matter of tech/price but also other factors.
"Mainstream" as in smartphones-mainstream could probably never happen.
We all have an image of the future were everyone is wearing VR headsets - outside of gamers and maybe other fields were VR would make sense, the future will probably not look like this.
What I mean is maybe VR not becoming mainstream is not only just a matter of tech/price but also other factors.
"Mainstream" as in smartphones-mainstream could probably never happen.
We all have an image of the future were everyone is wearing VR headsets - outside of gamers and maybe other fields were VR would make sense, the future will probably not look like this.
As a group of people who loves videogames I don't get why we are so obsessed with the "mainstream".
Some of the best stuff out of gaming is totally not mainstream and it took gaming years before it hit its current state in our culture.. hell many countries videogames are still not mainstream.
Not all videogames need to be something that is for everyone and their mom.
Some of the best stuff out of gaming is totally not mainstream and it took gaming years before it hit its current state in our culture.. hell many countries videogames are still not mainstream.
Not all videogames need to be something that is for everyone and their mom.
Aztechnology
Member
Not even close. The amount of PSVR units being solid is tiny in the grand scheme of things. I think we're talking in the low ten's of thousands for pre orders.
There's no way to know how it will sell after that.
1. It's still fairly cost prohibitive from many console users standpoint as they are often all about value/low cost.
2. People will wait for early feedback and if it isn't stellar will likely result in tepid sales.
If they had just made it work for PC as well and created their own storefront they would have guaranteed insane sales.
Arkam
Member
While I agree with all four. It really only takes #3. A single piece of software could light the whole thing in fire and have them be in demand for years to come.
For most mainstream refers to business to success/accptance. If games were not mainstream in the west you would have just about zero AAA multimillion dollar titles. THAT is why mainstream success matters. So if you want software for VR that is more than a indie level you NEED mainstream success.
Raven77
Member
1. The general public will get its first taste this year.
2. By late next year / mid next year it will be a hot "got to try it" thing.
3. Within 3-4 years from now you will start hearing about the business side of this technology, where it is going for NON game applications.
4. In 5 years the first batch of "VR Experiences" and "VRcations" or VR Vacations" will come out and this is when you will start to hear about classroom applications. I fully expect (and would love to do this if I had the money) that PPE - Pay Per Experience events will become extremely popular. NASA is launching a new rocket into space? For $10 dollars you can VR onto several external cameras to experience blasting off into space. I could also see VR Streaming tech hitting the masses. Rock Climbers could strap on a 360 degree VR streaming device and charge 50 cents per person to join their stream while they climb some big beautiful cliff, etc. Maybe a surfer charges 10 cents per person to catch some waves with him.
5. In 10 years, going on a VR Vacation will be more popular than actually going to the destinations in question. Go visit the pyramids for $50 per person for an all day pass. Go walk under the ocean at the Great Barrier Reef for only $5 an hour. Or go visit The Louvre in Paris for free. Future kids will see the world in VR without ever leaving their classrooms. It's around this time that I also expect the business world to have fully adopted VR. Visit your clients, etc. all without leaving the office.
Just my predictions. The times may be off but all of the above is going to happen eventually.
2. By late next year / mid next year it will be a hot "got to try it" thing.
3. Within 3-4 years from now you will start hearing about the business side of this technology, where it is going for NON game applications.
4. In 5 years the first batch of "VR Experiences" and "VRcations" or VR Vacations" will come out and this is when you will start to hear about classroom applications. I fully expect (and would love to do this if I had the money) that PPE - Pay Per Experience events will become extremely popular. NASA is launching a new rocket into space? For $10 dollars you can VR onto several external cameras to experience blasting off into space. I could also see VR Streaming tech hitting the masses. Rock Climbers could strap on a 360 degree VR streaming device and charge 50 cents per person to join their stream while they climb some big beautiful cliff, etc. Maybe a surfer charges 10 cents per person to catch some waves with him.
5. In 10 years, going on a VR Vacation will be more popular than actually going to the destinations in question. Go visit the pyramids for $50 per person for an all day pass. Go walk under the ocean at the Great Barrier Reef for only $5 an hour. Or go visit The Louvre in Paris for free. Future kids will see the world in VR without ever leaving their classrooms. It's around this time that I also expect the business world to have fully adopted VR. Visit your clients, etc. all without leaving the office.
Just my predictions. The times may be off but all of the above is going to happen eventually.
Aztechnology
Member
OMG... I want a kerbel space program type game with co-op and you can launch/operate the rocket in first person.
You've ruined me.
Arkam
Member
Were you alive for the rise of the internet? DId you recently take your family to Mexico via youtube only? Come on mate lets not get sold that easily.
Memorabilia
Member
This. Sort of.
The real answer is porn.
As for *gaming* becoming mainstream... OP seems to be in the ballpark. My initial feeling before reading a single word of the OP past the heading was "probably 5 yrs minimum".
What will possibly keep it viable until that happens? Porn. And, uh, all those other uses too I guess. But mostly porn. Lol
Wowfunhappy
Member
I agree that wireless would help a lot, but is that EVER going to be feasible, at the levels of latency and resolution that VR requires? I mean, there's a limit to how much bandwidth you can physically transfer over consumer-licensed airwaves.
I think the only way to get rid of wires is to put all of the computing power inside the headset itself.
Dreamwriter
Member
You've been able to buy Gear VR in Best Buy for over a year, for $99. And it's wireless.
dead souls
Member
Damn, how's that kool-aid taste?
Croatoan
They/Them A-10 Warthog
He is right. Nice shit posting though...
I'm with Feep.
There was no functional consumer VR in the 80s and 90s in the first place. That's the important difference between now and then.
Disorientator
Member
True, but -finally- having consumer VR doesn't necessarily equal to eventually going "mainstream".
Of course it all depends on our definition of "mainstream" I guess.
I'm of the same opinion, but I'm confident we'll reach that a lot sooner. 20 years maybe.
As an HTC Vive owner, I agree with this. People who say 5-10 years must be young or naive, technology progresses much quicker than that.
I don't think the room scale issues are that big of a deal, a lot of people will just need to move a coffee table out of the way. There will be plenty of standing and sitting experiences that will be worth the cost.
Non-gaming uses of VR is what will drive it mainstream. Virtual class rooms, conferences, pod casts (ie The FOO Show), VR viewings of movies and TV shows, and of course the sex industry will eventually make heavy use of VR. For instance, I'd probably pay a few bucks to watch E3 in a cool virtual room with other gamers, or watch Game of Thrones with friends in another state.
People will probably laugh at me ITT, but I wouldn't be surprised if in 10-20 years it's not uncommon for people to have a dedicated area or room for VR.
There kinda was in the 90s. I remember trying to convince my mother to buy me a VFX1.
shawnbuddy
Member
In October, when PSVR releases. So less than one.
The Faceless Master
Member
have you not been paying attention to technology?
the pace is not just predictable now, but also decelerating.
Zalusithix
Member
It's arguable whether there was "functional" VR at all back then, let alone consumer VR. I guess it would depend on the definition of functional. The 80s and 90s computational power and general electronics technology were positively rudimentary compared to today.
There were large, heavy VR sets and prototypes, but their capabilities were extremely limited. Even if you made them cheap enough for the general consumer, they would have failed. They certainly didn't meet the current baseline for a full functional VR experience. (Tracked view & controllers in an arbitrary space, rendering with minimal motion to photon latency and above 75Hz.) The stuff back then needed another decade or two (depending on whether we're talking 80s or 90s) for technology to advance far enough to make VR truly viable at virtually any scale. Then another decade to bring it to consumers. Now we'll need at least a decade more to be anything close to mainstream.
Croatoan
They/Them A-10 Warthog
In what field? graphics? Yes.
Self driving cars, space travel, solar energy, health-technologies, and computers no.
I mean we haven't even started with the next generation of computer science nor have we really begun to breach biological computing. Yes silicone is dying but its going to be replaced by stuff that will be 30 - 1000 times better than it.
A "computer" in 30 years is going to be unrecognizable next to the dinosaur machines we have now. Hell they might be the size of our phones or smaller and 1000x faster.
Near lightfield will be available within the next 20 years but by then we might just be using lasers to draw directly on our retinas.
Maybe you should try looking to the future instead of thinking what we have in the short term is all we will ever have.
I would start by looking up Michio Kaku and listening to some of his talks on the progress of technology.
Dreamwriter
Member
My theory is that VR may not ever go mainstream, until it is replaced by AR/MR. Because all AR devices currently are ready self-contained (thus, "wireless"), they have more functionality in real life, and are smaller/lighter, and can even do full VR (though not as nice as something plugged into a modern gaming computer). There are three major MR devices on the horizon, HoloLens, Magic Leap, and Meta, and they all have potential to become big; HoloLens is already being used by businesses.
Wowfunhappy
Member
The PSVR is going to help push VR a lot, but it's still $400 and comes with a complicated mess of cables and adapters.
The thing about AR is that it's just much, MUCH harder to do than VR, and I don't see that substantially changing in the near future. Rendering objects properly within the real world requires a ton of processing power. HoloLens is super expensive and has a tiny field of view. Useful for certain businesses, but not really for even dedicated consumers.
Could that change as technology advances? Sure—but so will VR, and VR will always be easier/cheaper by comparison.
If we find something other than silicon, perhaps. As things stand though, we may well be reaching the end of Moore's law. Software will continue to improve, and we will continue finding new ways to make use of the tech we have, but VR inherently requires (or, at least, is greatly benefited by) a great deal of technical grunt.
When the price becomes accessible to the general public and there are killer apps for it, then we will see a huge adoption of VR.
Also, don't be surprised to see Apple releasing a headset and "revolutionizing the industry." We already have the Gear VR and the new Google VR headset that comes with a motion remote soon to be released.
Also, don't be surprised to see Apple releasing a headset and "revolutionizing the industry." We already have the Gear VR and the new Google VR headset that comes with a motion remote soon to be released.
Dreamwriter
Member
3D TV was killed by greed - people were *very* interested in buying it because of the movie Avatar, but then when they made 3DTVs, guess what, only people who bought Panasonic TVs could get Avatar on Blu-Ray. And if you wanted to watch 3D Pixar movies, that's another brand. Dreamworks, buy something else. There was a limited time to get the people excited by theater 3D movies to keep the interest up, and the greedy manufacturers and studios wasted that time making it so no matter what you bought you couldn't get much content. Not to mention they were charging $200 for a pair of plastic 3D shutter glasses.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
And now you have the Oculus store trying to DRM block the vive.