Support NeoGAF

[Keratay]

You can't really represent human proper FoV on a camera like that. Cropping the camera view and saying that it looks like this through the users eyes is misleading as well, isn't it? If we stood further back we'd be able to see everything the camera did, but if we went up close it wouldn't look the same.

If you wanted to demo the user's experience you'd have to have the user's hololens communicate what part of the geometry its rendering, and only show that part of the geometry on the camera.

 

[Dr. Black Jack]

If your product is a display device and you fake what it can display then you're lying about your product. There's no grey area to this.

 

[Kibbles]

Kudo said in the giantbomb interview that the FOV is final

 

[Neuromancer]

You know it's not designed or marketed as a gaming device right? It's a device that can run games but that's not its primary use.

If it's being shown at a Microsoft/Xbox press event, demoing Minecraft, then it is being marketed as a gaming device.

 

[Kolx]

Yes it's, and I'm surprised it didn't backfire on them.

 

[JaggedSac]

All Im saying is that there is a physical limitation and that limit is nearly 50 degrees. I doubt the glass they use currently (in the consumer product they showed off) is of the same quality to hit that limit.

What I dont understand is how you are inferring that tethered equals higher FOV. Just seems a logical fallacy without some form of source or understanding.

ps3ud0 8)

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/05/hololens-still-magical-but-with-the-ugly-taint-of-reality/

Everything about the HoloLens experience is nailed. Except for one thing. The field of view was narrow. Very narrow. In both the horizontal and the vertical directions. You have this glorious 3D augmented reality experience... but only with your eyes looking straight ahead.

And it's not just me; I talked to other journalists who'd been at the January preview, and they had the same experience. The January prototypes didn't fill your entire field of view. The edges of the "screen" were visible. But they weren't this tight. I could look around a bit and still see the holograms. This time around, I couldn't.

You are correct. I don't know the reason for the fov reduction. But it seems to me like the big difference is untethered vs tethered. Wider field of view means more stuff to display at once which means more power is needed to do that. Which means lower battery life.

 

[Tevious]

It wouldn't surprise me that MS would be deceptive about its new tech. They did the same thing with Kinect and that Milo presentation.

 

[Soi-Fong]

Kudo said in the giantbomb interview that the FOV is final

Physics is hard to overcome...

 

[Anton Sugar]

If it's being shown at a Microsoft/Xbox press event, demoing Minecraft, then it is being marketed as a gaming device.

It was also shown at BUILD the other month and they demoed a 3D modelling program on-stage, as well as video players.

NASA is sending two HoloLens units to the ISS in a few days, as well.

I'm not saying you're 100% wrong, but I don't think MS is looking at this as a strict gaming device, at all. It would be unwise to do so.

 

[StealthGoblin]

As Kudo has said that FOV is final, I'm out. I don't want things clipping in and out of existence. Impressive tech but not good enough.

Especially given the price is going to be eye-watering.

 

[Raistlin]

You guys are looking at this way too simplistically. FOV is not the end all be all. I explained it before in the other thread.

Optics is constantly about balancing different factors whether with weight, FOV, distortion, etc

You have to give and go.

Except those other things were balanced just fine other than weight. There are people that have used both.


Some combination of costs, weight, size, power consumption led to the change. Which in and of itself is understandable. The problem is what was known about the prior version got a ton of press, and then they set up their E3 presentation in a manner that hides the FOV change entirely.

Unless the change gets a lot of press (and in many cases even if it does), there will be plenty of people going out on launch day with unrealistic expectations. Obviously this will sort itself out eventually, but it's going to be bad PR for MS. Was a stupid move. And worse, they've been really ambiguous about it during interviews. They should have been up front. Seems some things never change at MS though.

 

[BibiMaghoo]

The precision way in which they placed their hands so as to line up with a projection, but never actually cover it, was certainly deceptive. They actively and deliberately hid its biggest and most obvious flaw. It doesn't get much more sketchy than that.

 

[Synth]

If it's being shown at a Microsoft/Xbox press event, demoing Minecraft, then it is being marketed as a gaming device.

The vast majority of the marketing and presentation of the HoloLens has been for non-gaming purposes. If you mean it's being marketed as a gaming device simply because it's being marketed as something that can optionally be used for gaming, then sure... but that's very different something like Kinect or Move. It's not an Xbox perhiperal, it's a device of it's own, and is being marketed as such.

 

[fred]

If your product is a display device and you fake what it can display then you're lying about your product. There's no grey area to this.

Should have been the first post and the end of the thread, hit the proverbial nail on the head there lol

 

[timlot]

I wouldn't even call it deceptive. It would seem common sense to me that a camera standing 10 feet back from the hologram and guy demoing the device stand a few feet from the hologram would have different views. Not saying to FOV isn't limited, because it clearly is, but the over all "hololens" technology is legit.

 

[krang]

https://youtu.be/xgakdcEzVwg

Watch the vid around the 3 minute mark when he's pinched it to scroll the world. You'll see it change direction then his hand follows where's it going.

Now it could be they just didn't trust it to work right cos it's in development, or it could be milo bullshit again...

In its defence as a possible explanation, who knows what the latency was like to the camera compared with what he was seeing on the device. Was the image and the AR processed independently in putting them on the screen, causing a delay in the video feed compared to the AR?

I dunno...just speculating.

 

[ps3ud0]

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/05/hololens-still-magical-but-with-the-ugly-taint-of-reality/



You are correct. I don't know the reason for the fov reduction. But it seems to me like the big difference is untethered vs tethered. Wider field of view means more stuff to display at once which means more power is needed to do that. Which means lower battery life.

Cheers perhaps they are(were?) investigating a different technology - it seems that the way MS has discussed it since E3 is what people saw backstage is largely what the final product will be.

Perhaps like some other things MS research has looked at (IllumiRoom comes to mind) its just not financially feasible as a consumer product - pure conjecture on my part. All Ive read about the tech on Hololens myself revolves around that patent I linked to.

If it was computation power I cant see why they would comment as they have done. Im sure we will find out eventually...

ps3ud0 8)

 

[Neuromancer]

No matter, it deflected talk from VR to them, so it did its job and will be quietly shelved in the near future.
Maybe if Google Glass was still coming out they would continue, but its not so ita not a viable product.

That's what the Oculus and Vive partnerships are for too, to distract people from realizing that MS has no real VR presence in the foreseeable future. Mission accomplished, it's actually pretty smart and I think it's working so far.

The vast majority of the marketing and presentation of the HoloLens has been for non-gaming purposes. If you mean it's being marketed as a gaming device simply because it's being marketed as something that can optionally be used for gaming, then sure... but that's very different something like Kinect or Move. It's not an Xbox perhiperal, it's a device of it's own, and is being marketed as such.

So why was it being demo'd at the Xbox E3 conference?

It was also shown at BUILD the other month and they demoed a 3D modelling program on-stage, as well as video players.

NASA is sending two HoloLens units to the ISS in a few days, as well.

I'm not saying you're 100% wrong, but I don't think MS is looking at this as a strict gaming device, at all. It would be unwise to do so.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it's being positioned as SOLELY a gaming device. That would be silly.

I would consider an iPhone or an iPad gaming devices in addition to the other things they do, and they are at times marketed as gaming devices.

 

[justsomeguy]

Yes it was : Hololens is described by people who tried as : low visibility angle, laggy, shuttering, not as responsive.

http://www.theverge.com/2015/5/1/8527645/microsoft-hololens-build-2015-augmented-reality-headset:

When I passed my hand through it, I could dimly see the outline through the hologram, but that didn't make it feel any less solid. At one point, with a larger projection, I didn't notice someone standing right in front of me.

There were so many pieces to the illusion that I could almost imagine they were real, especially because there's absolutely no lag.


Some gaffers:

Just got back from E3 and the Warzone game type was interesting in a good new way. But holy shit that Hololens. I can't even describe how incredible that experience was before Halo 5. I'm pretty blind and couldn't do a few VR experiences but Hololens worked perfectly. I never thought Hololens would ever interest me or even be remotely cool but wow it just changed my mind immediately when the objective marker came up.

Yep, I was there for that also. Hololens is the real fucking deal. Waypoints popping up, looking through imaginary hangar doors to see dropships and troops preparing for war, and getting a full on mission briefing mass effect style. Just outrageously immersive.

As for branding:

of course it's NOT for the Xbox One as well, but Microsoft like to keep the confusion around their thing, just like Kinect

I haven't seen a *single* place where Microsoft has tried to suggest it's an Xbox One accessory. One of its huge selling points is that it's a completely stand-alone untethered device with no dependency on any other hardware. I'm not sure where you got that impression at all?

IMO most the Hololens talk should be in Off Topic - only when it's specific discussion of gaming + hololens should it be in this forum.

 

[mrklaw]

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/05/hololens-still-magical-but-with-the-ugly-taint-of-reality/



You are correct. I don't know the reason for the fov reduction. But it seems to me like the big difference is untethered vs tethered. Wider field of view means more stuff to display at once which means more power is needed to do that. Which means lower battery life.

I'd totally take a wider FoV model that required the use of a host computer and streamed video to the hololens - and then used local processing for timewarping to mitigate any latency

 

[Two Words]

In its defence as a possible explanation, who knows what the latency was like to the camera compared with what he was seeing on the device.

Umm, latency would cause for the motion of the hologram to be delayed, not occur before he even gave it the motion gesture to move....

 

[imfinnegan]

It's important to keep in mind that what Microsoft was showing of Hololens during the conference and on the show floor is prototype technology and that any practical application of the tech or consumer facing products are years away. What they showed is likely even years behind where they are in R&D.

 

[Mushroomer25]

It's the only way of really displaying the content. The camera angle wasn't suggesting a first-person view point- there's no reason to assume you'd be seeing that content fully in your peripheral. It's no more "deceptive" than showcasing a game's content in full screen.

 

[Dreamwriter]

It's important to keep in mind that what Microsoft was showing of Hololens during the conference and on the show floor is prototype technology and that any practical application of the tech or consumer facing products are years away. What they showed is likely even years behind where they are in R&D.

...or, it'll be coming out for consumers during the Windows 10 launch window like Microsoft announced.

 

[krang]

Umm, latency would cause for the motion of the hologram to be delayed, not occur before he even gave it the motion gesture to move....

Yeah, see my edit.

 

[kazinova]

How was the first post not:

"Yes, those mincraft blocks weren't actually there, it was a visual trick."

???

 

[mattp]

why do people keep pointing out that the hololens is being marketed for non-gaming stuff? we know
that's completely irrelevant

we're discussing it on a videogame forum. it was demo'd at E3.
it's implied that we are talking about it within the context of videogames

 

[Neuromancer]

It's important to keep in mind that what Microsoft was showing of Hololens during the conference and on the show floor is prototype technology and that any practical application of the tech or consumer facing products are years away. What they showed is likely even years behind where they are in R&D.

...or, it'll be coming out for consumers during the Windows 10 launch window like Microsoft announced.

Also Kudo Tsunoda said the FOV is basically final.

 

[JaggedSac]

Cheers perhaps they are(were?) investigating a different technology - it seems that the way MS has discussed it since E3 is what people saw backstage is largely what the final product will be.

Perhaps like some other things MS research has looked at (IllumiRoom comes to mind) its just not financially feasible as a consumer product - pure conjecture on my part. All Ive read about the tech on Hololens myself revolves around that patent I linked to.

If it was computation power I cant see why they would comment as they have done. Im sure we will find out eventually...

ps3ud0 8)

v1 is certainly going to have this very limited fov. It will also be an extremely expensive device that not many people will buy.

 

[Mushroomer25]

It's important to keep in mind that what Microsoft was showing of Hololens during the conference and on the show floor is prototype technology and that any practical application of the tech or consumer facing products are years away. What they showed is likely even years behind where they are in R&D.

For the record, MS has stated that the hardware will be hitting retail "sooner than you think", and that the FOV won't have a large difference in the first retail version.

That said, I think it's inevitable that the visual display for HoloLens would grow with each iteration - and I doubt Microsoft is going to be selling this as a consumer entertainment product all that soon. (Currently, it seems more logical for professional applications)

 

[Soi-Fong]

Except those other things were balanced just fine other than weight. There are people that have used both.


Some combination of costs, weight, size, power consumption led to the change. Which in and of itself is understandable. The problem is what was known about the prior version got a ton of press, and then they set up their E3 presentation in a manner that hides the FOV change entirely.

Unless the change gets a lot of press (and in many cases even if it does), there will be plenty of people going out on launch day with unrealistic expectations. Obviously this will sort itself out eventually, but it's going to be bad PR for MS. Was a stupid move. And worse, they've been really ambiguous about it during interviews. They should have been up front. Seems some things never change at MS though.

I was more responding to the people who are thinking that the FOV will improve 50+ degrees.

An extreme and hypothetical example is you want FOV at 100+ degrees? Sure. But the headset is gonna weigh 5 pounds. Not sure that'd be comfortable to wear.

 

[Synth]

So why was it being demo'd at the Xbox E3 conference?

Because why not? It CAN do games, and even then not everything at E3 has to be a gaming device or service. Xbox Originals was discussed at E3, so was PlayStation Vue. They also did that whole Windows Mobile Forza demonstration some years back, and I certainly wouldn't have classified Windows Mobile (or Zune) devices as gaming devices.

How was the first post not:

"Yes, those mincraft blocks weren't actually there, it was a visual trick."

???

Because you're late?

 

[KillerSloth]

Of course it is, it won't work near as well as they showed on stage.

 

[MaDKaT]

While the tech is promising, the stage demo and every other official showing has been highly misleading. Granted if they actually showed what you, the consumer, would see, the device would be dead in the water. I dont want it to die, the tech has amazing potential. It just isnt there yet and until they fix the FOV and occlusion(both are fixable with better hardware/software) they should maybe hold off.

 

[Darksol]

Gimme one. Can I do what they did? Can I have the same experience? If not, then it's deceptive.

 

[watership]

Welp. Someone better tell NASA that Microsoft is lying. They just sent two Hololens devices into to the ISS.

http://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-microsoft-collaborate-to-bring-science-fiction-to-science-fact

 

[Neuromancer]

Because why not? It CAN do games, and even then not everything at E3 has to be a gaming device or service. Xbox Originals was discussed at E3, so was PlayStation Vue. They also did that whole Windows Mobile Forza demonstration some years back, and I certainly wouldn't have classified Windows Mobile (or Zune) devices as gaming devices.

OK well then we have different definitions for what a gaming device is I guess. ¯\_(&#12484_/¯

 

[Bsigg12]

Physics is hard to overcome...

Yep. Until there is some crazy breakthrough in transparent screens, it'll be stuck with that field of view unfortunately.

 

[ps3ud0]

v1 is certainly going to have this very limited fov. It will also be an extremely expensive device that not many people will buy.

Matches my original expectations, but when I read about the tech behind it and the limitations on optics it seems a dead-end if it is as per the patents. Its not something at all logical for people on a gaming forum to consider...

Obviously their might be some breakthroughs. Anyway thats my reasoning why Ive answered as I have

TBH I think its more interesting to talk about why MS decided to even showcase it at E3, seems far more something you would see at CES

ps3ud0 8)

 

[mattp]

Yep. Until there is some crazy breakthrough in transparent screens, it'll be stuck with that field of view unfortunately.

didnt some sites say that the old prototype model had a full field of view, though?

 

[dumbo]

There's some recent tested videos on Hololens:

Just hololens @E3
Long video covering all AR/VR @E3, hololens starts @28:40 ish

The second one mentions that to see the table from the demo within the hololens FoV you would need to stand ~10 feet away from the table.

 

[yazanov]

Yup it's deceptive and shady as hell similar to the kinect demonstration that will not represent the final consumer product.

Why don't they show the demo with the actual FOV?

 

[MaDKaT]

didnt some sites say that the old prototype model had a full field of view, though?

It had a wider but still limted FOV.

 

[Anton Sugar]

Yes it was : Hololens is described by people who tried as : low visibility angle, laggy, shuttering, not as responsive.

Who are these people? Narrow FOV is documented, but all the impressions I've read praise the clarity/opacity of projected images as well as being almost lag-free.

 

[NoMoChokeSJ]

I'm trying to figure out the conspiracy here. MS never stated a timeline for release, a price, or even a true life application.

They stated the camera being used was for demo purposes. A realistic representation of the FOV was demoed at the wall at a considerable distance from the device wearer, while using a controller. His FOV was limited and only centered around the player, not the entire hologram.

Personnally, I took it as a tech demo. I don't know how else you could demo the technology. Also, how could they be considered being deceptive when they allowed the media to demo the actual units?

Seems like a witch hunt to me.

 

[Neuromancer]

didnt some sites say that the old prototype model had a full field of view, though?

Not full, but better.

Everything about the HoloLens experience is nailed. Except for one thing. The field of view was narrow. Very narrow. In both the horizontal and the vertical directions. You have this glorious 3D augmented reality experience... but only with your eyes looking straight ahead.

And it's not just me; I talked to other journalists who'd been at the January preview, and they had the same experience. The January prototypes didn't fill your entire field of view. The edges of the "screen" were visible. But they weren't this tight. I could look around a bit and still see the holograms. This time around, I couldn't.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/05/hololens-still-magical-but-with-the-ugly-taint-of-reality/

I'm trying to figure out the conspiracy here. MS never stated a timeline for release

HoloLens doesn’t have a firm release date, but Microsoft said the device will go on sale sometime around when Windows 10 will be released this summer.

http://bgr.com/2015/05/01/microsoft-hololens-release-date-and-price/

 

[Chaos17]

It is deceptive, which may backfire on them if they keep doing this.

.

 

[Dreamwriter]

french press talking about it, sorry in french :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-N_82Xc2mg

He says it's very heavy and not confortable (all weight on the forehead or worst, the nose), you think of the huge glass cover you will have a wide FoV but actually there are the actuall glasses inside, that are very narrow " gameboy size " whatever he meant by that and you obviously only see the hologram through the two glasses (one for each eyes) and it's narrow. He praises the quality of the illusion of the demo (walking over, looking through the windows opening to a level " the illusion is pretty impressive " but he says that during the briefing demo around the table with the hologram character talking, it was " perfectly calibrated for the distance of the user, if you would come a bit closer with your head, you would loose the character of sight. Reactivity is not very good, if you shake your head you notice lag. Same when tilt up or down, your head you see color decomposition (green, blue, red) running out of the hologram. It's also very passive, we only looked at stuff. One moment there was a ship and there was some eye tracking because it poped information were the eye would look at. Then they took off the helms of our heads and we moved to another room to play Halo 5. "

the other guy asked about " But Minecraft ? the demo ? Where was it ? "
" well, in everyone collective imagination. Because they didn't show it to us and were insanely precautious about how they present the tech. "

I think you just found a bad egg who was pissed that he wasn't allowed to try the Minecraft demo, so talked bad about the device There were press that got to play with the Minecraft demo at E3, and none of them complained about lag or anything other than the Field of View. And most of those people said even with the Field of View it was amazing, and they were able to do everything shown in the demo, and some things not (like putting the hologram on the floor rather than the table).

 

[Man-is-Obsolete]

I am still trying to understand the home application for Hololens. It sounds fantastic for some professional uses and could be great at a theme park, but at home I don't think it is practical.

 

[Bsigg12]

didnt some sites say that the old prototype model had a full field of view, though?

The old prototype that required it to be strung on the ceiling and have a computer around your neck had a better field of view but nowhere near full. The ones they used at E3 are as close to the consumer version as we'll see so there must have been some technical issues that ultimately reduced the field of view.

For being a standalone product (integrated sensors, battery, and cpu systems), it's looking to be a decent first generation device. The field of view is unfortunately something they seem to have come up against the wall on so maybe by the 2nd or 3rd generations of the device they'll have made it significantly larger.