Support NeoGAF

[Synth]

Well surely most average Joe's wouldn't be here, and certainly wouldn't be arguing this point for hours on end... just a thought.

Fixed.

Simpleton that I am, when I see a device prominently showcased at "the greatest gaming lineup in Xbox history" stage show at E3, I am going to infer that it might have something to do with the console called "Xbox One" or at the very least the brand called "Xbox" on display.

So when the game releases, branded something like this...

... whilst being playable with an Xbox joypad, cross-play with people playing on an Xbox One, whilst being able to join their parties and chat with them, whilst gaining Xbox achievements etc... you'll be happy to return to this thread and apologise for sending it off the rails with stupid bullshit, because somehow you couldn't see how it may be related to the Xbox brand, without actually being an Xbox One game?

Yes?

I didn't see Windows 10 at the Xbox show with games running on it

Huh... weird. I must have imagined all the titles that they noted would be releasing on Xbox One and Windows 10 PCs, even going so far as to detail the crossplay nature between the platforms.

 

[vin-buc]

You ain't blocking shit. If HoloLens shouldn't be E3, and should only be showed at somewhere like CES, in now universe does PlayStation TV then belong at E3.

You really need to take it easy man - you sound pretty worked up.

I know what Hololens is but they don't really have AAA games supporting it and it's geared for the enterprise side now - so yes I blocked the shot and actually with authority. When Pathfinder posted that example I don't really he think he thought about the fact that it a) Playstation is a display (like vr are displays), b) that triple AAA games supported it and c) it was completely geared towards gamers. Should've thought what they were comparing before high-fiving each other. Now - they have their feet in their mouths.

As for Hololens - it should definitely be at E3 when it has game support and is being treated like a gaming platform. It isn't E3 2015 though (at least not now).

And the largest platform of them all (Windows) actually has numerous VR solutions

True - but the Xbox one doesn't have a VR solution (unless you stream to pc and use the OR as a "virtual cinema". As much as MS was touting (xbox one and Windows 10) it's pretty much a xbox venue.

The argument that this is all simply because they need something to combat VR, relies on the idea that their AR device is reactionary, and wouldn't exist (and consequently debut at E3) on a similar timeframe otherwise... or that somehow VR was something that they've not actually given any real consideration to, despite all their world leading research. That they somehow couldn't see why the average NeoGAF member could, and as a result came up towards E3 2015, before realizing that they were naked.

How realistic does all this sound?

We all know Hololens wasnt created overnight and the creation of Hololens isn't reactionary to any VR announcement. But the fact that Microsoft is getting beat in the console space - they need to keep up with every point the competition one ups them with. Bullet point by bullet point. MS needs to bring the device to E3 when it's ready for gaming not other applications.

EDIT: It's all not that ridiculous of an idea especially when Phil has come and said "I want to win". It actually makes it more reasonable.

 

[Synth]

True - but the Xbox one doesn't have a VR solution (unless you stream to pc and use the OR as a "virtual cinema". As much as MS was touting (xbox one and Windows 10) it's pretty much a xbox venue.

Yea, and if that was actually such a pressing issue for them, they likely would have a VR headset for the Xbox One. This is one of those cases where the only real reason for not having one, is pretty much the assumption they don't need one. They'd have just bought some shit up Facebook style otherwise.

We all know Hololens wasnt created overnight and the creation of Hololens isn't reactionary to any VR announcement. But the fact that Microsoft is getting beat in the console space - they need to keep up with every point the competition one ups them with. Bullet point by bullet point. MS needs to bring the device to E3 when it's ready for gaming not other applications.

So you agree that they essentially would be showing it anyway, even in the absence of VR devices? It's being a useful counterpoint to drive discussion doesn't mean much considering it was something they were creating anyway, and would have been ready to demonstrate this year. If Sony was running slightly behind, and revealed Morpheus after MS revealed HoloLens, would you be saying they're only showing it at E3 because they reaslised they didn't have an AR device? Sounds ridiculous right?

 

[Pathfinder]

You really need to take it easy man - you sound pretty worked up.

Oh dude, don't do that...

Don't come into a thread, get people worked up, and then point out how they're getting worked up.

Just don't...

 

[vin-buc]

Yea, and if that was actually such a pressing issue for them, they likely would have a VR headset for the Xbox One. This is one of those cases where the only real reason for not having one, is pretty much the assumption they don't need one. They'd have just bought some shit up Facebook style otherwise.

I disagree with you here. Those Fortaleza docs (if Hololens stems from it) was a road they chose to go down a while ago and I believe they may have been trying to tell which way that "virtual" tech was going - I don't think they knew how much support VR was going to have. Also saying (I think in your last post) what extensive research showed them - that argument is not a good one. Their research failed them in the direction they were going to launch xbox one with. I actually don't think they've been doing good research at all.

So you agree that they essentially would be showing it anyway, even in the absence of VR devices? It's being a useful counterpoint to drive discussion doesn't mean much considering it was something they were creating anyway, and would have been ready to demonstrate this year. If Sony was running slightly behind, and revealed Morpheus after MS revealed HoloLens, would you be saying they're only showing it at E3 because they reaslised they didn't have an AR device? Sounds ridiculous right?

I disagree with you here as well. Even if Sony was running slightly behind - I wouldn't think that Morpheus would be a response to Hololens just in sheer focus and priority. Morpheus IS a gaming platform first unlike Hololens. I really don't see how you can put that together. It's just doesn't make any sense in scope.

 

[Synth]

Was this edited in after?

You really need to take it easy man - you sound pretty worked up.

I know what Hololens is but they don't really have AAA games supporting it and it's geared for the enterprise side now - so yes I blocked the shot and actually with authority. When Pathfinder posted that example I don't really he think he thought about the fact that it a) Playstation is a display (like vr are displays), b) that triple AAA games supported it and c) it was completely geared towards gamers. Should've thought what they were comparing before high-fiving each other. Now - they have their feet in their mouths.

As for Hololens - it should definitely be at E3 when it has game support and is being treated like a gaming platform. It isn't E3 2015 though (at least not now).

I'm not worked up. I've just stopped trying to frame my responses as if I believe your argument deserves much respect. You're grasping at straws majorly in order to paint something Microsoft displayed as not fit for the gaming stage (despite, actually being a game), whilst defending a TV screen... I don't care if that TV has an extra mode that's supported by some PS3 games... every 3D TV supports those games! By that logic the HoloLens would support every Xbox One game so long as you just use it as the display. No games whatsoever were created specifically for the PlayStation TV. The HoloLens already has one over in that regards.

E3 2015 was when the HoloLens had game support, as evidenced by the game they showed being played on it... c'mon man.

 

[vin-buc]

Oh dude, don't do that...

Don't come into a thread, get people worked up, and then point out how they're getting worked up.

Just don't...

You know something - I haven't used any curse words AT ALL. I'm not getting anyone worked up - I'm replying respectfully to everyone. Just because I don't agree with your opinions does mean I'm getting anyone worked up.

In fact after your "Playstation TV" comment you should be the last one here telling me "don't do it..."

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aThCr0PsyuA

Hololens reveal, 10-15 seconds of the 2:12 video showing the headset used for Minecraft. Really pushing that gaming device angle hard eh?

Average Joe? Since when does the average joe browse GAF, watch E3, know the name "Project Natal" ever existed, cry about "FUD" or "bait-and-switch" tactics?

Also:

Gone from a seasoned gamer to Average Joe in little over 90 minutes. With some luck, at the rate you're regressing you'll have forgotten how the interwebs works by the morning and we will be free of your shitposting.

Do you cry "shitposting" when you don't like what you're reading? I am saying that Microsoft's display of Hololens at E3 and its gaming utility was misleading. I don't understand how linking a video from January has any effect on what they showed at E3.

I use "Average Joe" tongue-in-cheek, lemme just answer that for you now, since it seems to be throwing you off. Every response to me in this thread so far has been "what? You were misled by the showing at E3? Didn't you watch such-and-such video and read such-and-such article?"

I did not. I am not as in-tune with Microsoft's branding as some of you seem to be, and for someone like me the E3 showing led me to believe that gaming was going to be a big part of the system. Hence, "Average Joe" sice I am implying that I have an average working knowledge of this device, based on (what could be argued) the biggest showing of the device thus far. Those are the chain of events, which should be very easy to understand. If you have a hard time understanding why someone would jump to those conclusions, well, please refer to the articles and impressions that also assumed it would be for gaming based on the E3 showing.

That's exactly what Windows 10 is. What do you think they've been doing with Windows insiders for the past nine months?

Nothing about HoloLens' marketing should lead you to believe that about it either.

We're going in circles here. E3's showing for Hololens led me (and others) to believe it is a device used for gaming. That isn't "nothing".

I'll turn the question around and ask you: what about Hololens' marketing up to this point - including E3 - would lead you to believe that Hololens is "aimed at [...] not gamers". Objectively, it is impossible to prove that they haven't aimed it at gamers since they have - in fact - pitched the thing to gamers.

Fixed.

So when the game releases, branded something like this...

... whilst being playable with an Xbox joypad, cross-play with people playing on an Xbox One, whilst being able to join their parties and chat with them, whilst gaining Xbox achievements etc... you'll be happy to return to this thread and apologise for sending it off the rails with stupid bullshit, because somehow you couldn't see how it may be related to the Xbox brand, without actually being an Xbox One game?

Yes?

Huh... weird. I must have imagined all the titles that they noted would be releasing on Xbox One and Windows 10 PCs, even going so far as to detail the crossplay nature between the platforms.

False equivalence, but good try. ilomilo was not shown off at a gaming conference as a "game" and then later clarified as "not actually a game when it comes out; more focused on fans of Music".

This might shock you, but I am fully aware that there are things carrying the Xbox brand that aren't explicitly game-related. If you think that's what I am failing to understand, then you are mistaken.

I'll repeat myself again: the device was shown off at a game conference, using a videogame, showcasing how the device can be used for gaming. With that being the case, it is perfectly reasonable for someone to think "hey, this device is for gaming". Then, when Microsoft comes back a month later and clarifies: "actually, no, that device is not aimed at gamers" it might seem contradictory?

I can understand where YOU are coming from. You are clearly more knowledgable about the device, its history, its functionality, and even all the youtube videos and trade shows where it has been shown off. I defer to your superior knowledge on the topic.

That being said, can you understand where I am coming from, me and the other gamers and journalists who wrote articles about the gaming potential of Hololens, only to find out later that it's not actually aimed at gamers? Within the context that I don't know as much about Hololens as you do, are you able to see the logical progression of why someone might come to this conclusion?

Or is it all just "bullshit" to you?

 

[Synth]

I disagree with you here. Those Fortaleza docs (if Hololens stems from it) was a road they chose to go down a while ago and I believe they may have been trying to tell which way that "virtual" tech was going - I don't think they knew how much support VR was going to have. Also saying (I think in your last post) what extensive research showed them - that argument is not a good one. Their research failed them in the direction they were going to launch xbox one with. I actually don't think they've been doing good research at all.

I meant Microsoft Research, as in the division that experiments with all sorts of technology concepts, before deciding to bring certain ones to market. VR is not such a complex concept that MS would be unable to create one of their own, or at least partner with someone (like Valve.HTC have) to produce a model for the Xbox. They could even have gone the Samsung route, and had one of the existing players simply create an XB1 specced verision of their headset (a DK2 for example is quite similar to the hardware requirements of Morpheus).

I disagree with you here as well. Even if Sony was running slightly behind - I wouldn't think that Morpheus would be a response to Hololens just in sheer focus and priority. Morpheus IS a gaming platform first unlike Hololens. I really don't see how you can put that together. It's just doesn't make any sense in scope.

So gaming focused = non-response debut wherever and whenever you like.
Gaming + tons of other stuff = you're just jealous. Stay away from our E3's.

Gotcha.

False equivalence, but good try. ilomilo was not shown off at a gaming conference as a "game" and then later clarified as "not actually a game when it comes out; more focused on fans of Music".

This might shock you, but I am fully aware that there are things carrying the Xbox brand that aren't explicitly game-related. If you think that's what I am failing to understand, then you are mistaken.

Minecraft on HoloLens isn't being retroactively classed as "not actually a game when it comes out" either. It's simply on a device that isn't specifically targeted towards gamers. Much like the Surface, which game like ilomilo, Project Spark and Hydro Thunder were promoted for. There's no false equivalence here. There's two different PC form-factors, that can both play games, but are sold primarily to business. Same shit.

And since you're aware of how things can be directly related to Xbox, whilst not being limited to the console. The part of your post I quoted, simply shouldn't have existed for me to quote... much like most of your posts in this thread.

 

[Pathfinder]

You know something - I haven't used any curse words AT ALL. I'm not getting anyone worked up - I'm replying respectfully to everyone. Just because I don't agree with your opinions does mean I'm getting anyone worked up.

In fact after your "Playstation TV" comment you should be the last one here telling me "don't do it..."

 

[Zvonimir Boban]

Do you cry "shitposting" when you don't like what you're reading? I am saying that Microsoft's display of Hololens at E3 and its gaming utility was misleading. I don't understand how linking a video from January has any effect on what they showed at E3.

I use "Average Joe" tongue-in-cheek, lemme just answer that for you now, since it seems to be throwing you off. Every response to me in this thread so far has been "what? You were misled by the showing at E3? Didn't you watch such-and-such video and read such-and-such article?"

I did not. I am not as in-tune with Microsoft's branding as some of you seem to be, and for someone like me the E3 showing led me to believe that gaming was going to be a big part of the system. Those are the chain of events, which should be very easy to understand. If you have a hard time understanding why someone would jump to those conclusions, well, please refer to the articles and impressions that also assumed it would be for gaming based on the E3 showing.

So instead of taking 10 minutes googling Hololens and educating yourself you spend hours in this thread spouting ill-informed bullshit, even after multiple people have set you straight?

Yeah that qualifies as shitposting.

We're going in circles here. E3's showing for Hololens led me (and others) to believe it is a device used for gaming. That isn't "nothing".

I'll turn the question around and ask you: what about Hololens' marketing up to this point - including E3 - would lead you to believe that Hololens is "aimed at [...] not gamers".

I dunno, maybe the five months of conferences, videos and news articles explaining what Hololens is and what it can do?

 

[ugh_the_boot]

I'll be exremely surprised if this ever become a consumer device for gaming, it is just too niche and by the time the technology catches up VR will be in full swing or there might be something better. Personally any device that I have to cover my face/head with has no place in my home lol. They need to figure out how to do this as regular holograms where the image is projected in 3d anywhere in the room, then I will definately bite.

 

[vin-buc]

Was this edited in after?



I'm not worked up. I've just stopped trying to frame my responses as if I believe your argument deserves much respect. You're grasping at straws majorly in order to paint something Microsoft displayed as not fit for the gaming stage (despite, actually being a game), whilst defending a TV screen... I don't care if that TV has an extra mode that's supported by some PS3 games... every 3D TV supports those games! By that logic the HoloLens would support every Xbox One game so long as you just use it as the display. No games whatsoever were created specifically for the PlayStation TV. The HoloLens already has one over in that regards.

E3 2015 was when the HoloLens had game support, as evidenced by the game they showed being played on it... c'mon man.

First of all - thanks for saying my argument deserves respect - yours as well and you have great points.

Hugs aside - while yes - any 3d TV plays those games the point is they created it for games and didn't treat it like a platform of any sort and reneg (because you really can't right - it's a display). Also - I think some posters here misunderstood my position why Hololens shouldn't have been shown at this year's e3. It's not because it's new tech but rather because it's just not fit for that prime time gaming venue - not yet. One game on stage (a tech demo) just doesn't cut it in my opinion. I think this is a really bad comparsion. Honestly your first point was way better - old games with new functionality have a place (not the BC games) at e3. But again - I don't think it's ready to be there yet.

And if you check some of my other posts - I have openly declared that the best announcement at e3 was the elite controller - they knocked it out of the park with that. There were some accusations against me which were a bit annoying and even though I don't have to prove myself to anyone - I feel the need to throw it out there.

 

[SPDIF]

We're going in circles here. E3's showing for Hololens led me (and others) to believe it is a device used for gaming. That isn't "nothing".

I'll turn the question around and ask you: what about Hololens' marketing up to this point - including E3 - would lead you to believe that Hololens is "aimed at [...] not gamers".

The event in January when it was first unveiled and Build 2015 come to mind. And let's not forget about WPC 2015 which has been ongoing this week. As far as I'm concerned it's always been shown to be a general purpose computing device that can be used to do a bit of everything. You know, just like a typical computer running Windows, which is what HoloLens is. It's something they've actually been quite clear about ever since it was unveiled.

 

[Synth]

You know something - I haven't used any curse words AT ALL. I'm not getting anyone worked up - I'm replying respectfully to everyone. Just because I don't agree with your opinions does mean I'm getting anyone worked up.

In fact after your "Playstation TV" comment you should be the last one here telling me "don't do it..."

If my use of certain words troubles you, then sorry I guess. I tend to use them quite casually even when describing things positively. Such as this recent post about a game I really like (Street Racer on Saturn)

Fucking loved this game. Well, the Saturn version at least.

Just pretend I said "You ain't blocking nothing". If that makes you feel better. If I actually insult you directly, then it would be appropriate to play the "don't get worked up" card... assuming the mods don't play it first.

First of all - thanks for saying my argument deserves respect - yours as well and you have great points.

Oh dear... legitimately don't know what to say now... actually feeling kinda bad.

 

[vin-buc]

So gaming focused = non-response debut wherever and whenever you like.
Gaming + tons of other stuff = you're just jealous. Stay away from our E3's.

Gotcha.

C'mon... You are comparing a straight gaming VR platform against a platform that can presently only play one or two demo style games. All this at a gaming convention? There's no comparison. And honestly, by you twisting it otherwise just throws out any of your valid points.

For your other comment about how there really isn't anything from my posts to quote - OK.

 

[Synth]

C'mon... You are comparing a straight gaming VR platform against a platform that can presently only play one or two demo style games. All this at a gaming convention? There's no comparison. And honestly, by you twisting it otherwise just throws out any of your valid points.

For your other comment about how there really isn't anything from my posts to quote - OK.

Morpheus was at E3 last year too. Wanna guess how many games were ready for show that year? As I said before, the HoloLens demonstration was atypically advanced for the sort of reveal it was at E3. It's not uncommon for new hardware to turn up at E3 with nothing more to show than a few CG approximations of what games may look like, and a novelty Unreal Engine demonstration.

Why are you classifying Minecraft as a demo style game anyway? The first thing shown was the player playing standard, full Minecraft through the projected viewport. It was the full game of Minecraft, which is why it interfaced well with the full game running on the Surface.

 

[Revengineer]

What is the use case for enterprise implementation of AR?

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

Minecraft on HoloLens isn't being retroactively classed as "not actually a game when it comes out" either. It's simply on a device that isn't specifically targeted towards gamers.

Then why was the device specifically targeted towards gamers, the audience of E3, during their E3 presentation?

Based on what I have read in this thread, I have learned much more about the device. That doesn't change my feelings that Microsoft's messaging on this device is a confused at best, contradictory at worst. When I read "aimed at Enterprise Users, not gaming" I do not translate that as "It's simply on a device that isn't specifically targeted towards gamers." like you do. Maybe that's the disconnect here?

Much like the Surface, which game like ilomilo, Project Spark and Hydro Thunder were promoted for. There's no false equivalence here. There's two different PC form-factors, that can both play games, but are sold primarily to business. Same shit.

And since you're aware of how things can be directly related to Xbox, whilst not being limited to the console. The part of your post I quoted, simply shouldn't have existed for me to quote... much like most of your posts in this thread.

Surface is a tablet. Of course it can play games and of course it isn't aimed at gaming, specifically. Hololens is a...what? A platform? An AR tech device? In either case, we are still in the formative months of defining of what exactly this thing is.

Maybe I will state my feelings another way: based on what I saw at E3, this device struck me as something that can be used for gaming and it seemed like Microsoft's answer to Valve's and Sony's and Nintendo's VR offerings. When I read the article in the OP and discovered that it is not - in fact - aimed at gaming and instead the device will be focused on enterprise users and developers, this surprised me.

Does the bolded statement make sense to you? And no, "well, you should've read all this knowledge about it before having any impressions" is an invalid response.

So instead of taking 10 minutes googling Hololens and educating yourself you spend hours in this thread spouting ill-informed bullshit, even after multiple people have set you straight?

How are my impressions ill-informed? You're saying I lack self-awareness? Nah, I'm pretty sure I watched E3 and saw gaming stuff shown off for the device. And I'm pretty sure that now we're being told the device isn't aimed at gaming.

I'm not claiming the device is compatible with Xbox One. Yeah, that'd be ill-informed. I'm not claiming that Microsoft announced a price or a list of games for it. Yeah, that'd be ill-informed.

I'm claiming that Microsoft's choice to show this off at E3 and Microsoft's choice to later say "this isn't actually aimed at gaming" is contradictory. And it certainly isn't ill-informed, since plenty of other posters and journalists came to the exact conclusion that I did: Hololens can do gaming stuff.

Yeah that qualifies as shitposting.

PM a mod then and let them sort it out.

I dunno, maybe the five months of conferences, videos and news articles explaining what Hololens is and what it can do?

I've already acknowledged that I don't know as much about this as some posters do. That has no bearing on the fact that Microsoft displayed this device at a gaming conference and implied that it'd be used for gaming, which apparently is no longer the case, at least for V.1.

I guess since you're so keen on using past articles and videos, please, enlighten me: prior to this article, I'd like you to show me where Microsoft stated "Hololens V.1 won't be aimed at gamers". It won't really change my impressions. Those have already happened. But at least we can put that part of the conversation to rest, since you seem to believe that ANYONE who'd read all those articles would automatically know that it wasn't aimed at gaming.

 

[etta]

What is the use case for enterprise implementation of AR?

Multitasking and productivity, concepts and models in 3D?

 

[Synth]

What is the use case for enterprise implementation of AR?

Almost all of their promotional videos are based around potential enterprise use cases.

Pretty much anything that can be viewed/edited by multiple people, or seen from a multitude of angles is a good candidate. You can share your view with someone, and they can basically "draw" instructions out into the world around you.

 

[MrXavier]

Here's a pretty good video simulating what the current Hololens FoV is able to show, from a 3rd person perspective. The 3rd person perspectives shown in all of the current public demos are a bit misleading since they are rendering the entire FoV of the camera to the viewer.

This video better deomonstrates the actual FoV of the Hololens, based on Hands-on impressions from the actual device.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syFRdNs68s4

 

[Mr. Nice_Guy]

Good thing they aren't showing it at E3 or anything

My man haha

 

[Pathfinder]

My man haha

You haven't read through the rest of the thread, have you?

 

[Zedox]

What has come clear is that there are people who look at technology news and those that mainly look at gaming news. As such, certain people have certain opinions on things based off of the knowledge that they possess in those areas.

 

[vin-buc]

You haven't read through the rest of the thread, have you?

LOL.

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

You haven't read through the rest of the thread, have you?

Doesn't it kind of prove what I'm saying, actually? That there really are people who thought Hololens would have some gaming utility (GASP!) based on what they saw at E3?

 

[Pathfinder]

Doesn't it kind of prove what I'm saying, actually? That there really are people who thought Hololens would have some gaming utility (GASP!) based on what they saw at E3?

Actually, the comment proves people are more than willing to take a cheap shot at something without bothering to understand it.

 

[Synth]

Then why was the device specifically targeted towards gamers, the audience of E3, during their E3 presentation?

At E3, everything is about games, regardless of what other purposes the device serves.

PlayStation TV... a few hundred bucks, to see a handful of game in 3d with comprosed IQ and/or framerates? This ignores that the PlayStation TV also does everything that a normal TV does.

Surface? $700 to play Project Spark, and view second screen content on Ryse? This ignores that it's a full computer in its own right, and as such can do other things a computer can.

See that description for the Surface?... Apply it to the HoloLens too. It's a full Windows 10 computer. The main different is a new type of display, and a new form of input. It can however use traditional forms of input, and as such can do other things a WIndows 10 PC does. It IS a PC.

Surface is a tablet. Of course it can play games and of course it isn't aimed at gaming, specifically. Hololens is a...what? A platform? An AR tech device? In either case, we are still in the formative months of defining of what exactly this thing is.

Maybe I will state my feelings another way: based on what I saw at E3, this device struck me as something that can be used for gaming and it seemed like Microsoft's answer to Valve's and Sony's and Nintendo's VR offerings. When I read the article in the OP and discovered that it is not - in fact - aimed at gaming and instead the device will be focused on enterprise users and developers, this surprised me.

As mentioned above, the device is a PC. The Surface is easy to describe. It's a PC like you're used to. It can used traditional input methods (mouse and keyboard) or new input methods specific to this form of device (touchscreen). The HoloLens is similar. Use a mouse and keyboard for traditional PC stuff (avoided using the other s word specifically for you there), or use the new input method specific to the device (motion sensing). Instead of a screen it projects images in front of you, contextualised to your current surrounding. Other than that... it's just a PC, and has the same application potential that a PC does. So the fact that it can play games, and the fact that games aren't what the device limits itself to, should be very clear, and there really shouldn't be much to question.

Questioning the HoloLens, is like questioning the Surface, or questioning a desktop computer. The HoloLens is to computers what Morpheus is to TVs somewhat (ignoring the overlaps between the technologies).

Doesn't it kind of prove what I'm saying, actually? That there really are people who thought Hololens would have some gaming utility (GASP!) based on what they saw at E3?

Umm... holy shit?... It DOES have some gaming utility. It just doesn't ONLY really have gaming utility in the way that a device that literally only works whilst connected to a games console does.

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

Actually, the comment proves people are more than willing to take a cheap shot at something without bothering to understand it.

That'd be an assumption on the motives of the poster, now wouldn't it?

That post - and the subsequent replies to it - shows evidence that Microsoft's showing of Hololens hasn't had the most consistent messaging.

 

[Pathfinder]

That'd be an assumption on the motives of the poster, now wouldn't it?

That post - and the subsequent replies to it - shows evidence that Microsoft's showing of Hololens hasn't had the most consistent messaging.

Nope, I don't buy that.

This is NeoGAF, not IGN. People who find there way here and wait patiently for account activation should be involved enough to know what's up. There are people who just like taking cheap shots.

 

[Synth]

That'd be an assumption on the motives of the poster, now wouldn't it?

That post - and the subsequent replies to it - shows evidence that Microsoft's showing of Hololens hasn't had the most consistent messaging.

The messaging has been very consistent. Different people's interpretations of that messaging vary wildly however... usually because they operate under the binary thought pattern of something either being "This is for the players!" or "Why the fuck is it at E3 then?".

 

[SPDIF]

That post - and the subsequent replies to it - shows evidence that Microsoft's showing of Hololens hasn't had the most consistent messaging.

Except that it has. Just because you've only watched a gaming oriented showing of the device doesn't mean that they haven't been consistent. And considering you've admitted that you haven't even watched the other HoloLens events I'm not really sure how you can say such a thing.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I dunno, maybe the five months of conferences, videos and news articles explaining what Hololens is and what it can do?

Your average gamer on the street, casual, whatever the hell you want to call them doesn't know anything about those articles like us, the core, passionate, insane, or whatever you want to call us.

They are saying, and I whiteness them saying this since E3, "yo, you see that cool Minecraft VR thing that Microsoft shown for the XBox!" "My friend told me about it and the video was hot fyah, Ima get an Xbox."

And it stopped there. They did not "research" like us hardcore do. They were marketed to with some can argue vaporware, and it worked. If you think MSFT did not have part of this as their intent, you are either lying to yourself or being obtuse. As others pointed out there were even hundreds of people in here that were led to think that as well. And anyone on here is far from the casual base.

Most gamers won't even see this article if it doesn't pop up on mainstream gaming sites. They will still think HoloLens = gaming on XBox because of E3

Morpheus was at E3 last year too. Wanna guess how many games were ready for show that year? As I said before, the HoloLens demonstration was atypically advanced for the sort of reveal it was at E3.

You are comparing a device (Oculus and Vive included, let's not make this a console warz now like most attempted with the Shenmue and PSTV pull in now) that is build for games first and foremost on the PS4 (and may work on the PC) and PC, shown at a games show, that is coming out next year...

to a platform that MSFT just "clarified" it was enterprise focused not games, a month after the "game show" showing, that may or may never come out for practical gaming use in the XBox One's life cycle with any substantial meaning if VR takes off?

Come on man.

They planned to show it at E3 as a "defense measure" because I bet you they assumed Sony would show Morpheus on stage. And they did not spill it was "enterprises focused" there because it takes the wind out of the sales of the gaming marketing that is E3. Especially a device that is much further away, (again if ever), in gaming applications in the home console arena than Morpheus/Occults last year.

Their gaming message on that worldwide stage is what is being scrutinized, not the device. And they deserve it. Because without this thread, I even thought this was some shit XBox gamers would be buying around or a little after Morpheus hits.

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

Before I reply to your post below, I want to make it clear that when I read "HoloLens V.1 aimed at Enterprise users not gaming" that translates in my head as "not usable for gaming". I'm going to type it that way. [Not used for gaming]. I'd like to avoid arguing over semantics because at this point I know that you aren't going to think that Microsoft was being "shady" and you know that I'm not going to think that Microsoft was straightforward in their messaging. But at the least we can aim to understand where the other person is coming from.

At E3, everything is about games, regardless of what other purposes the device serves.

PlayStation TV... a few hundred bucks, to see a handful of game in 3d with comprosed IQ and/or framerates? This ignores that the PlayStation TV also does everything that a normal TV does.

Surface? $700 to play Project Spark, and view second screen content on Ryse? This ignores that it's a full computer in its own right, and as such can do other things a computer can.

Yes I understand.

See that description for the Surface?... Apply it to the HoloLens too. It's a full Windows 10 computer. The main different is a new type of display, and a new form of input. It can however use traditional forms of input, and as such can do other things a WIndows 10 PC does. It IS a PC.

As mentioned above, the device is a PC. The Surface is easy to describe. It's a PC like you're used to. It can used traditional input methods (mouse and keyboard) or new input methods specific to this form of device (touchscreen). The HoloLens is similar. Use a mouse and keyboard for traditional PC stuff (avoided using the other s word specifically for you there), or use the new input method specific to the device (motion sensing). Instead of a screen it projects images in front of you, contextualised to your current surrounding. Other than that... it's just a PC, and has the same application potential that a PC does. So the fact that it can play games, and the fact that games aren't what the device limits itself to, should be very clear, and there really shouldn't be much to question.

To the bolded: to me, no, it is not clear. Please refer to my statement at the top. When a company says something is "not aimed at gaming" that translates as "Version 1 won't likely be able to play many - if any - games". Microsoft doesn't have a habit of saying such-and-such isn't aimed to do this and then turning around and making such-and-such do that thing.

Questioning the HoloLens, is like questioning the Surface, or questioning a desktop computer. The HoloLens is to computers what Morpheus is to TVs somewhat (ignoring the overlaps between the technologies).

I'm not really questioning its capabilities. However, your description is excellent and I appreciate you writing it out. That does help me understand the device better.

This all boils down to a single question: why was it showed off playign a game at a gaming conference if it is aimed at Enterprise users and [Not used for gaming]*

*per my clarification at the top, just so you know how that sounds in my head.

Umm... holy shit?... It DOES have some gaming utility. It just doesn't ONLY really have gaming utility in the way that a device that literally only works whilst connected to a games console does.

Once again, when I read that the first version isn't [used for gaming], then it wipes away all the articles and impressions and ideas that were formed with the understanding that it was [used for gaming].

I understand that Hololens has utility beyond gaming. That isn't being questioned here. The point is still simple: what gaming utility DOES V.1 have? Based on the article's statement, I'm led to believe the answer is "none"

Except that it has. Just because you've only watched a gaming oriented showing of the device doesn't mean that they haven't been consistent. And considering you've admitted that you haven't even watched the other HoloLens events I'm not really sure how you can say such a thing.

Based on their E3 showing, I am fully qualified to say their E3 showing gave the impression that the device is used for gaming. As a sanity check, I can also look at the countless articles and posts made about the device discussing its gaming application. I'm not making sweeping statements about the device's capabilities. I am simply stating that E3 gave the impression that Hololens can be used for gaming. The statement in the OP makes it sound like V.1 cannot be used for gaming.

 

[Pathfinder]

They planned to show it at E3 as a "defense measure" because I bet you they assumed Sony would show Morpheus on stage. And they did not spill it was "enterprises focused" there because it takes the wind out of the sales of the gaming marketing that is E3. Especially a device that is much further away, (again if ever), in gaming applications in the home console arena than Morpheus/Occults last year.

It certainly couldn't be because they were excited to show off their new tech.

 

[Crayon]

This comes down to personal belief. I believe both the occulous and the hololens are being deliberately conflated with the xbox and windows 10/everything. But It's not like I can prove anything. And you can't prove otherwise either.

 

[Zvonimir Boban]

Your average gamer on the street, casual, whatever the hell you want to call them doesn't know anything about those articles like us, the core, passionate, insane, or whatever you want to call us.

They are saying, and I whiteness them saying this since E3, "yo, you see that cool Minecraft VR thing that Microsoft shown for the XBox!" "My friend told me about it and the video was hot fyah, Ima get an Xbox."

And it stopped there. They did not "research" like us hardcore do. They were marketed to with some can argue vaporware, and it worked. If you think MSFT did not have part of this as their intent, you are either lying to yourself or being obtuse. As others pointed out there were even hundreds of people in here that were led to think that as well. And anyone on here is far from the casual base.

Most gamers won't even see this article if it doesn't pop up on mainstream gaming sites. They will still think HoloLens = gaming on XBox because of E3

The average gamer doesn't watch E3 and certainly doesn't realise that Hololens even exists.

 

[Fat4all]

I think one of the reasons they showed that E3 Minecraft demo was because they knew The New York Times and Bloomberg were reporting on the event. Maybe they were hoping for a 'Wii effect' in the media? Mainstream audience, and all that?

While Gaf was talking about how it might of been deceptive, major news outlets were posting positives impressions like crazy.

The average gamer doesn't watch E3 and certainly doesn't realise that Hololens even exists.

Which is where the business reporters come in. It happened with the Wii as well, it was all over tech and business sites and articles.

You have successfully summarized this entire board in one sentence.

I try.

 

[Pathfinder]

While Gaf was talking about how it might of been deceptive, major news outlets were posting positives impressions like crazy.

You have successfully summarized this entire board in one sentence.

 

[Synth]

You are comparing a device (Oculus and Vive included, let's not make this a console warz now like most attempted with the Shenmue and PSTV pull in now) that is build for games first and foremost on the PS4 (and may work on the PC) and PC, shown at a games show, that is coming out next year...

to a platform that MSFT just "clarified" it was enterprise focused not games, a month after the "game show" showing, that may or may never come out for practical gaming use in the XBox One's life cycle with any substantial meaning if VR takes off?

Come on man.

They planned to show it at E3 as a "defense measure" because I bet you they assumed Sony would show Morpheus on stage. And they did not spill it was "enterprises focused" there because it takes the wind out of the sales of the gaming marketing that is E3. Especially a device that is much further away, (again if ever), in gaming applications in the home console arena than Morpheus/Occults last year.

Their gaming message on that worldwide stage is what is being scrutinized, not the device. And they deserve it. Because without this thread, I even thought this was some shit XBox gamers would be buying around or a little after Morpheus hits.

No shit they didn't talk about it being enterprise focused at a gaming show. I mean WTF sort of expectation is that?

"And now check out Project Spark on the new Microsoft Surface, playing seamless with someone on the Xbox One. We'd just like to stress however, that gamers aren't the core market for the Surface, and we expect it to mostly sell to enterprise".

Really?

If someone wants to pick up a HoloLens to play some Minecraft with their friends on Xbox, then they can... it'll work. They're probably going to get a sticker shock if they didn't heed the part (at E3 2015) where it was stated that the device is a complete untethered computer of its own... but that kinda their fault, seeing as that was actually clarified.

And if VR (or at least Sony's version of it) doesn't take off (much like the Move didn't)? Does that make the Morpheus a bad thing to show for PS4, because it may end up with only a handful of games that utilise it? The HoloLens can at least fall back on the fact that it's a PC in it's own right... if a VR headset doesn't see much support, then it's useless.

MS have been clear that the device is a standalone, that it doesn't require an Xbox, and that it has applications beyond gaming. There's not really much more that can be expected from them at this point, short of blacklisting them showing and games for it at E3 simply because some people won't pay attention to what is stated.

 

[Zvonimir Boban]

I think one of the reasons they showed that E3 Minecraft demo was because they knew The New York Times and Bloomberg were reporting on the event. Maybe they were hoping for a 'Wii effect' in the media? Mainstream audience, and all that?

While Gaf was talking about how it might of been deceptive, major news outlets were posting positives impressions like crazy.



Which is where the business reporters come in. It happened with the Wii as well, it was all over tech and business sites and articles.

I doubt they hoped for a 'Wii effect' seeing as the thing will be pricey as shit. Nobody's going to buy a Hololens on a whim or as a Christmas present for their kid.

The only reason this thread is still on the first page is because some people are being deliberately obtuse and acting like they can't operate google or type "Hololens" into the youtube search bar. All so they can shit on Microsoft while pretending that they're concerned for the casual gamer.

 

[SPDIF]

Based on their E3 showing, I am fully qualified to say their E3 showing gave the impression that the device is used for gaming. As a sanity check, I can also look at the countless articles and posts made about the device discussing its gaming application. I'm not making sweeping statements about the device's capabilities. I am simply stating that E3 gave the impression that Hololens can be used for gaming. The statement in the OP makes it sound like V.1 cannot be used for gaming.

Well that's because it can be used for gaming, just like it can be used for a lot of things. The statement in the OP never explicitly says that it can't be used for gaming, just that they're not focussing too much on it right now. I really don't know what the big deal is.

 

[Crayon]

Here's some data you guys can bat around in a super fun infographic.

From the thread last week: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=171692284

 

[Fat4all]

I doubt they hoped for a 'Wii effect' seeing as the thing will be pricey as shit. Nobody's going to buy a Hololens on a whim or as a Christmas present for their kid.

To be honest, I don't think tech and business guys were looking into its gaming prowess.

They were probably just impressed to see it working so well.

 

[Zedox]

I have a HoloLens question. I've heard that when you first saw HoloLens -- back when it was Project Fortaleza -- you said we need to expand this beyond just gaming. Where do you think the initial demand for HoloLens is going to be? Is it going to be more in gaming, or is it going to be more in business and research?

For sure in the first version, it's going to be more about developers and enterprise scenarios [...] Gaming will always be a scenario and there will be other entertainment broadly. But, with the V.1 of HoloLens, I want us to push a lot more of the enterprise usage.

In general Microsoft's approach will be always this dual-use focus, or this multi-focus. What we can uniquely do is bridge consumer to enterprise. That's in our DNA. That's why it's even in our mission statement of empowering people and organizations. I want every technology of ours to seek that out. In the HoloLens case, when I look at the interest, it's amazing how many are in hospitals, healthcare, retail. That's where I'm seeing the interest and we'll definitely go after it.

So to clarify as many people mistake things what is said. The question that was asked...WHERE DO YOU SEE INITIAL DEMAND? He answers where he thinks initial demand is going to be. He states that gaming is going to be a scenario (in which they proved it to be with their E3 demonstration) that the Hololens will support. There will also be other entertainment scenarios as he stated that weren't mentioned. Hololens as other devices, Satya states that they are multi-focus devices. Gaming is a focus of Hololens. But where he sees it taking off first is somewhere else.

There is no backtracking on the messaging, there's no "no focus on games", he answered where he thinks, especially with version 1 where the DEMAND will be. Jesus.

 

[Azih]

A Hololens Viva Pinata game would be glorious with Pinatas running around your room climbing on shit.

 

[Fat4all]

A Hololens Viva Pinata game would be glorious with Pinatas running around your room climbing on shit.

As long as the gameplay is still solid, that'd be baller as fuck.

 

[etta]

Well that's because it can be used for gaming, just like it can be used for a lot of things. The statement in the OP never explicitly says that it can't be used for gaming, just that they're not focussing too much on it right now. I really don't know what the big deal is.

Exactly, they are not focusing on gaming just as Windows isn't focusing on gaming, but that doesn't mean it's not capable of doing gaming well.

 

[Three]

I'm just going to say I do not think this is going to get much game support if at all in the near future if they mean what I think they mean by enterprise. Still remember the MS touch table at around the 360s launch, the touch table you could play games on. We had the E3 Ruse demo. We had D&D. We had MS trying to say it's a consumer entrainment device. We had comments of a consumer version releasing as early as 2010. We only got an enterprise product. If this is the case again then hololens had no real place being at E3 as much as some would disagree. That's a big if though.