Submitted by BlueLightStruct t3_114m47x in gadgets
Comments
hey_you_too_buckaroo t1_j8yomhj wrote
Lmao, the part that has me confused is why anyone would want to hold corporate meetings or do real work in the metaverse. Is there some killer feature here no one understands about the metaverse?
GMaster7 t1_j8zm0iz wrote
No. There's not. It's a lot of corporate FOMO - businesspeople making decisions because they want to be pioneers and find the "next big thing," and this technology lends itself well to meaningless buzzwords and pie-in-the-sky fledgling economic "opportunity." But there's nothing interesting or convenient or exciting about it. We've had online communities for decades, and it's not the mere fact that they're virtual that makes them popular. It's because of the fun and interesting stuff you can do with them. MMOs, chat rooms and forums, online games, e-commerce, etc.
illuminati1556 t1_j8zsgsr wrote
I dunno, I think if the software was better it could be a really cool opportunity to keep a WFH environment, but providing a space that feels more personal and connected to do collaborative work
amishbill t1_j91xaoj wrote
If it’s not good enough for porn, it’s not good enough for business.
Vanman04 t1_j906krr wrote
I think you are right. People are laughing now but as the tech matures I think they will laugh less and less
Vr controlled by zuck is terrifying butt he is laying the foundation when the tech gets to where it works for your average person he is going to have a huge head start.
It's coming eventually regardless of how much people make fun of it now.
Quartziferous t1_j90t3yf wrote
Haha vr sickness go brrr
illuminati1556 t1_j90yt9v wrote
I really hope the higher refresh and resolution makes it easier when psvr2 comes out next week😅
[deleted] t1_j9080qs wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j91wfet wrote
[deleted]
[deleted] t1_j92m2a4 wrote
[deleted]
hzfan t1_j9ws13p wrote
As someone with motion sickness if we ever get to a point where for my job I’m required to be in VR for hours a day I will burn Utica to the ground
illuminati1556 t1_j9wtmj6 wrote
Don't mess with Scranton!
DestroidMind t1_j90my0s wrote
That would be cool. Have a really nice office where all your co workers could virtually be in. If you need to ask a question or work as a team you can just move your character over to the conference room or walk to the person you need.
RooneyBallooney6000 t1_j90piw3 wrote
That sounds not cool at all. Maybe blackjack and hookers, in fact.. forget the work
DestroidMind t1_j90po8b wrote
I’d rather do it on the metaverse than drive to work and work on things I could literally do at home.
RooneyBallooney6000 t1_j90q68j wrote
Howabout working and skip the metaverse? Wearing that bullshit will give people headaches. How much better does the tech have to be than half life Alyx for it to not suck? Idk i could see the techmology being cool but not for working.
DestroidMind t1_j90qg0a wrote
Huh??? I’m still working, just from home and not wasting an extra hour and a half getting ready for work, the commute there and back. I think the point has completely whooshed over your head there.
RooneyBallooney6000 t1_j90qk55 wrote
I meant just WFH like regular no need the metaverse
DestroidMind t1_j90qvkm wrote
The ability to recreate an office space rather than just constant zoom meetings is almost un comparable. The amount of zoom calls I would need just between my co workers is the main reason we don’t work from home. Having a cyber office space where I can walk into anyone’s office and get the information I need is huge. It’s like being in a MMORPG but for work.
RandomOverwatcher t1_j92kukz wrote
I don't think you understand or I'm missing something. Everything you think you can do in vr can already be done right now. You say you can walk into a virtual office but what if the same employee doesn't want to talk? What if they disable their avatar or office or whatever. Normally outside of VR you would message the person and ask to meet and talk. VR isn't going to make a difference. If you want to walk into their virtual office, you can do the same by messaging them and/or even direct call them. And with the right permissions, you can see their status and calendar events.
So again, what are unique things that VR bring that we can't do? And let's assume employees may not have their "door" open whether through zoom or VR all the time (regardless of the reasoning). I hope to see your reply because I might be missing something.
casino_r0yale t1_j982qyd wrote
You trying to tell me a Kingsman glasses-style meeting wouldn’t be a better experience than a 6 person zoom call with lag and people tripping over themselves constantly?
RandomOverwatcher t1_j98mbm6 wrote
Yes because the glasses aren't going to fix the lag or people tripping on themselves. The software or hardware is just a topl that still rely on the same internet Itemconnection (laggy or not) and the person (tripping over or not).
anothermatt1 t1_j91sdkc wrote
You are describing hell.
RooneyBallooney6000 t1_j922yov wrote
Absolutely wrong. You are describing the Matrix not a VR headset
Coolfatman t1_j908zqr wrote
Can you imagine if meta spent a couple hundred million on a vr mmo to accompany the meta verse.
Brittainicus t1_j90ar4o wrote
The only thing I can think of would be augmented reality headsets to do
-
holograms of people in meetings, which is a pretty bland feature but I could see corporate world loving it.
-
being able to create hologram monitors such that you could have a head set rather than screens which would really then be can it do 3d well making it useful for 3d visualisation of data or designing/visualisation of 3d models and spaces. Or can it be very ergonomic and cheaper than monitors. This could in theory connect to an extremely powerful smart phone or tablet and replace office computers.
weekapaugrooove t1_j90cj2s wrote
You know what I want at work? AR with my computer in it that projects a massive screen/workspace and a fucking killer app that makes configurable screens and windows, layouts as flow centric for what I'm doing as possible,
Something I could take anywhere and have the power of my laptop and ultrawide workspace on-demand and anywhere in the world.
Once we get there, knock yourself out and come up with some cool video chat stuff, but build it on top of a well-done OS.
Do you know what I don't want? To be forced to go to a meeting in FB (or any other corp) hellscape. But, I'm only counting down the days I need to make mindless small talk in front of some bullshit fake auditorium while waiting for my All hands Workplace meeting to start.
lexshotit t1_j90ho1p wrote
You're talking about a VR app called Immersed that already exists. It uses the passthru cameras from the headset.
BezniaAtWork t1_j9grihm wrote
The cameras still need to be improved. I used the Meta Quest Pro for a month and definitely liked the progress that has been made, but it's still got a long way to go before it's something I'd use on a daily basis for work.
lexshotit t1_j9gteb1 wrote
I've been using it on the Pico 4 and it works just fine. The camera is good enough to see what I need to see, which is only my keyboard.
Caffeine_Monster t1_j90ts7s wrote
>some killer feature here no one understands about the metaverse?
Yes and no. Theres a lot of confusion and misdirection when it comes to the Metaverse. And there are still lots of technology shortcomings.
The best description I have seen is that the Metaverse is the internet, but designed for new human interfaces: namely augmented reality and virtual reality. Much like the internet this is more about a set of widely adopted protocols, technologies and standards.
Also it still doesn't exist yet. Things like VRchat do not provide open standards or interoperability.
lexshotit t1_j90hgol wrote
I have actually tried working in VR, and being able to have 5 resizable monitors definitely has its merits, but it's probably not for everyone.
galacticwonderer t1_j8zz9y5 wrote
Who here remembers the fire phone!?
I read an engineer’s perspective about it. They were all thoroughly confused thinking what they were making would NOT sell but bezos was making personal declarations on what to put into it and how well it would sell. They felt like betting against the guy that built amazon .com from scratch was a bad idea and that he knew what he was doing. It was an abysmal embarrassment. And now we have this meta verse thing everyone agrees is pointless.
Just another example of billionaires doing one thing and thinking they can do everything after the megalomania is reinforced with the big bank account and yes men everywhere.
Vanman04 t1_j9074vj wrote
Pointless?
People lack vision. It will happen. It's just a matter of time. I seriously hope zuck doesn't control it when it does but he might.
The tech will get there. If he is the only one with a backend built.out to support it when it does it is going to be hard for someone else to step in.
I am holding out hope his shareholders put a leash on him or he runs out of money before it works.
MyBiased t1_j90poov wrote
It's pointless because VR and the Metaverse will never be more important than the real world, it simply cannot be. Real life isn't like Ready Player One; if the world goes to shit VR ain't the answer. Improving upon the world, that's important, not making a false sense of reality.
The only growth a VR headset gives is an aneurysm.
AR is far more important to real world applications anyways; instead of building upon an escapist's addiction, it actually builds upon what really exists.
Vanman04 t1_j92fsyw wrote
The fact you don't recognize that will all be combined is exactly the lack of vision I am talking about.
Work and play in one space controlled by zuck.
It is going to happen just like the internet happened. It took the internet a while to be accepted by the general public as well but here we are with it now being depended upon by almost everything we do.
People thinking adding 3d visuals to the internet is not going to work are fooling themselves. It is going to happen. Maybe not in the timeframe before zuck runs out of money but it will happen. You can see the potential yourself since you mention AR.
Maybe zuck doesn't have the right approach and someone sneaks in and does it right before him but some company is going to and right now the only one really going hard at it is him.
MyBiased t1_j92pu2a wrote
The internet and the world-wide-web were actually revolutionary and an original inventions of communication; Facebook is just the same con as Myspace but sold to advertisers. The Metaverse is the same play as any VRChat, but poorly executed and sold to advertisers. Zuck doesn't have an original bone in his body, or the vision needed to revolutionize his hairdo much less the world.
You gotta stop riding dick of billionaires dicks because they sell you something you don't really need...
Vanman04 t1_j92rbpl wrote
LOL riding dick?
Zuck is a scumbag and I desperately do not want him to control VR.
I am however not foolish enough to think it will never be popular or useful. The only thing really holding it back right now is the hardware. Those issues will be solved.
I was using the internet long before the general public came on board. I remember all the folks saying back then exactly what you are saying now. No one wants it blah blah it's just for nerds blah blah.
This is the same thing all over. Sure no one wants it now while it is cumbersome and difficult to get a decent experience but those issues will be solved eventually. Just like they were with the internet mostly.
People will flock to it the second it becomes comfortable to work with. You are fooling yourself if you think they won't.
BigMax t1_j95knpa wrote
Exactly. I feel like the first successful “metaverse” is going to be some small company that builds something that they just think is fun/cool/useful/whatever.
It can’t start off as a massive corporate soulless thing that comes out of a boardroom and jumps to massive success. It will be something like vr chat, simple, basic, with a subset of interesting uses, that then grows from there.
I think facebook screwed up in their approach. Why spend billions when they could have spent millions? Create one (or maybe a bunch) of SMALL apps, see what takes off, iterate, build from there.
[deleted] t1_j907cyf wrote
[removed]
corequmb t1_j90s7xm wrote
I told my friends the future of metaverse lies in virtual porn/sex, just like all these sci-fi movies described.
Fryceratops t1_j927gx7 wrote
I dont see how metaverse is any different from something like Playstation Home.
EVOSexyBeast t1_j937iof wrote
They don’t even have legs in the metaverse
nova9001 t1_j98qs9w wrote
>They keep pushing the Metaverse as some kind of alternative or new social media, but it’s flatly not.
It could if the Metaverse was designed nicely. Instead what you get is a virtual world that looks like its 10+ years outdated graphically. Avatars float in the middle of the air with with everything under their waist empty.
Its really just shit design and they spent 10b ++ on this crap. You have 10 year old MMOs that give better experience.
Caughtnow t1_j8xaq4l wrote
I dont think VR has gone how many predicted. I suppose it depends on whose metric you use as to whether you would deem it a flop or something else. Tbh I think analysts were full of crap and way off the mark, as they often are.
It’s a platform that is doing ok, but it’s far from taking over and probably pointless predicting when that might be - many many years(/decades). I dont think Zuck standing in front of the Eiffel Tower is selling anything to anyone either! Looks worse than the wii era, and the guy is creepy af.
If they want to sell the thing, gamers are sold on games. And the amount of stand out titles are slim. Companies dont want to develop on a platform with lower sales. Thats the catch 22 right there.
Im sure Alyx was responsible for plenty of people taking the dive into VR. And Valve has said many times it was working on 3 titles for VR (in its own very slow pace.) I wouldnt be surprised if the next title comes around the launch of its next HMD. But beyond the bump that’ll bring, I see VR ticking along as it is now for some time.
Silly_Ad_2913 t1_j8ynzpk wrote
I stepped out of the world of VR when Zuckerberg stepped in...
Sub_pup t1_j8yhlrw wrote
Zuck should stay away from any marketing. He is completely unlikeable and anything he says comes off flat no matter how much "enthusiasm" he attempts to inject. The only people I know that use VR regularly are kids younger than 16ish. None of them want anything to do with Facebook/Meta/Metaverse. I had an original Oculus DK1, so I've had some skin in the game for some time now. I knew when Palmer sold to Zuck it was over.
Ziatora t1_j8xlwza wrote
I don’t understand how anyone thinks achieving a $450 capable VR headset is a flop at all. We use a Quest 2 for our home gym, and the thing is outstanding.
Xylotophone t1_j8xvt6y wrote
It's a matter of perspective. If Meta had been marketing their device as a family game console, then yeah, the Quest 2 would have been a success. The problem is that Meta was banking on VR and their particular take on the 'Metaverse' concept blasting the doors wide-open to a revolutionary new market segment in VR social media technology -- They wanted to be the kingpins running the lion's share of VR-centric social infrastructure, the way Microsoft dominates in OSes and Google dominates in web searches. To that extent, they planned for their technology to achieve widespread adoption in multiple key areas in society, such as home productivity and the work place, rather than remaining primarily leisure/recreational.
So, yeah, from the perspective of Meta's absurdly high goals of 'invent what is functionally an entirely new form of internet', the Quest 2 is a failure.
DarthBuzzard t1_j8y2p6o wrote
The Quest 2 is a success. It outperformed every expectation put onto it, even internally by Meta.
Of course it's still a niche device, but Meta wasn't expecting different until Quest 4 or 5 and beyond.
alternate_me t1_j91ky65 wrote
I don’t really agree with this take. They explained a really long term vision, and people are upset it hasn’t happened yet, even if they were talking about 10 years into the future.
sesor33 t1_j8xnd2r wrote
Quest 2 has sold 20 million units in about 2.5 years, I'd call that pretty successful for gen 1.5 hardware. PSVR2 is about to release and I'd say is the first mainstream gen 2 headset. And that's so popular in preorders that they limited it to one per household.
Ziatora t1_j90lyzt wrote
Also, fuck capitalism. Success isn’t always about “profits”. You and I don’t get jack shit for that. You know what we do get something for? Accessible tech. I call this one a fucking win, especially with how shockingly open the Quest is.
PrivateEyesWatch t1_j8xup3i wrote
Well the Quest 2 is 450$ because it has been heavily subsidized. Iirc a version without any data gathering by facebook would've cost 800$
WOTDisLanguish t1_j8y44r8 wrote
It's not data that's valuable this time. A facebook account's worth $16 in cash, and you'll never make that back with advertising alone.
The true value here's the OS which allows Facebook to have a monopoly over what games are allowed on their market dominant platform.
tim0901 t1_j8z7ug4 wrote
You can get a lot more data from a Quest headset than you can from a Facebook account. Some highlights of what's collected according to the Quest's privacy policy:
- Physical details of the user eg height, head and hand dimensions
- Fitness data
- Eye tracking data (not "raw" data - only processed...)
- User facial expressions (again only "processed")
- Environmental information & dimensions (aka. details of the room you use it in)
And it's not about an individual's data being valuable - it's not like Facebook lets you buy access to an individual's data set anyway - it's about what you can do when you have access to millions of individuals' data. Facebook made $113B in advertising income in 2022, or ~$39 per user they have on their platform. Having access to more data like that collected by the Quest means they can more accurately target ads to these users, which of course they can then offer to advertisers for even more money.
alternate_me t1_j91ldg9 wrote
These things the quest 2 “collects” are just used to run VR, you’re not getting targeted ads based on it.
tim0901 t1_j92ru1a wrote
They state that they use this information for marketing purposes in that same privacy policy. You are definitely getting targeted ads based on it.
alternate_me t1_j93nmus wrote
Try making a Facebook ad and tell me what setting let’s you target based on face tracking data
_WhatchaDoin_ t1_j9565pz wrote
People have no idea what ad tracking means. lol
​
To be comfortable, and feel that VR looks real you need actual measurement, and then people think that if you are 5ft you will get an ad for a pasta maker, and if you are 6ft you will get an ad for a vacuum cleaner.
So much lack of critical thinking. Reddit is not better than other social networks (audience think they are somehow smarter).
​
And yes, you are right, there is no private information as targeting for an ad. Overall, it is pretty generic and based on interests, locations, people with similar behaviors.
alternate_me t1_j963g1k wrote
Thank you for backing me up here. I go insane on Reddit trying to explain the ad world. People are convinced of the most crazy conspiracies
tim0901 t1_j96plj8 wrote
Face tracking and eye tracking allows them to determine your point of focus on screen (known as "gaze tracking") as well as how you are reacting to what you're seeing via mood/emotion etc. In the context of the Quest, this gives them a metric of how much you're enjoying certain games, which would allow them to give you more accurate recommendations (ads) for new ones that you might like to buy. Height data can be used to target kids with a very high degree of accuracy, even if they aren't using their own account. It's not about selling these individual pieces of data, it's about more accurately sorting you into the demographics that they allow advertisers to choose from (and potentially open up new ones). Because accuracy sells - if your ad company gets the reputation of being inaccurate, you will lose customers.
It also gives them information on how much you're paying attention to the advertisements you're being shown. One of the big questions in advertising is always "how do consumers respond to our adverts" - how long are they looking at the ad etc. Gaze tracking gives them that information, and has been an area of research in the advertising field for many years. If you're someone who pays more attention to adverts, then you're a more valuable target for advertisers, especially if they are able to make the link between you seeing an advert and a purchase being made. Or if you're someone who doesn't particularly pay attention to static ads, but will pay attention to a video ad, Meta can use that information to tailor what ads you get served. Conversely, if more people than normal are not paying attention to a particular ad, then Meta can more accurately report to the advertiser that their ad is performing poorly, likely far sooner than with other metrics.
So by doing this, Facebook/Meta has improved on two of the core parts of advertising: accuracy and retention. If you are able to boast to advertisers that you can target certain demographics with a higher degree of accuracy, then not only will more advertisers be interested in your services, but you are also able to charge them more money for that luxury. Similarly, being able to boast a higher viewer retention is of great value to advertisers, especially if this can be linked to higher sales, as is more accurate information on how ad campaigns are being recieved.
Ziatora t1_j90m2ni wrote
The Quest runs Android. Facebook doesn’t have a monopoly. The hardware platform can actually be fully reinstalled without issue.
Truffle_Shuffle_85 t1_j8z0gq9 wrote
>I don’t understand how anyone thinks achieving a $450 capable VR headset is a flop at all.
100%, the advancements in VR and AR are astounding really in recent years. the future is going to be a blend of both without a doubt, when and how that will unfold is still wide open.
Ziatora t1_j90mgdc wrote
I read all of this hate for Quest and Meta. You know what? Fuck Zuck. I don’t have a FB account. We have a house account for the Quest, and don’t do jack on Zuck’s shit platforms.
But even I can admit the Quest is fucking amazing, and Meta has something amazing here. The media has a hard on for hating this stuff and I don’t get it.
DarthBuzzard t1_j8xltmp wrote
> Tbh I think analysts were full of crap and way off the mark, as they often are.
The annoying thing is that all these VR companies have been telling people from the start not to expect it to be mainstream even in 2023, and that includes Zuck/Facebook all the way back in 2015.
Truth gets distorted. The media picks up on all these analysts who don't understand anything other than mature technology growth patterns, and then that all gets reported across all the mainstream media outlets, and then everyone reads that and takes it as gospel for actual sales figures and targets being missed.
Talk to an engineer at any one of these VR companies and every single one of them will say that VR is at best, as mature as an early 1980s PC. It took until 1992 before PCs took off, and longer for them to hit the majority of homes. That's the kind of timescale at play here - it's always been the timescale for the majority of hardware shifts, but again, the truth gets distorted and history is rewritten in people's minds to where new hardware has to be a fast shift otherwise it's a failure.
buntopolis t1_j8y1xxi wrote
God damn, was it really 1992 when PCs became ubiquitous? That’s wild. Looking back at my life, I suppose I almost always had one or at least access to one. Didn’t realize I was actually alive when they really took off.
DarthBuzzard t1_j8y2kcd wrote
Mainstream. It still took longer to become ubiquitous, as only a minority of homes had them in 1992, but it had passed a 25% household adoption rate, which from what I can tell, is a figure that tends to get used for judging mainstream success.
Here's an interesting set of statistics showing the rough sales of the emerging PC industry: https://web.archive.org/web/20120606052317/http://jeremyreimer.com/postman/node/329
Twilighttail t1_j8z000y wrote
>Valve working on 3 titles.
They DO just love messing with us, don't they?
NekoShade t1_j8xgl1d wrote
Meanwhile, I'm hoping for development in VR so they can become cheap enough for me to buy one, can't afford one because they become as expensive as a popular motorcycle when imported from where I live.
People are dooming it, but i have seem good advancements, like new lenses, new people making VR, new interesting games under development or adapted, playstation VR 2 just got released, i can't see the same future those doomers see.
Edit: also, where else could we go towards new entertainment technologies? A TV and a controller have been used since the 90ths, there is a limit of how immersive we can be that way.
ScarletCaptain t1_j8yc1eh wrote
I have a coworker who is still designing in Sansar...
Tyrilean t1_j8y62fj wrote
I think Zuck might have done more harm than good. He hyped it up so much that everyone’s expectations were higher than possible, and now that it’s fallen short they’re all pulling out.
[deleted] t1_j8ylsx5 wrote
[removed]
Cymdai t1_j8zgaqp wrote
It’s almost like the Metaverse was nothing more than a bullshit buzzword all along. Imagine that.
atmtn t1_j907umj wrote
But in the metaverse I can be a sports reporter in Philly and have a sweet guitar swung over my shoulder.
Fortune_Cat t1_j90axyi wrote
Also kind of weird everyones linking metaverse to VR
They are not directly tied to the hip
Metaverse can mean alot of thing like interoperable avatars or games. Without being relevant to a vr headset
In fact ironically having a closed ecosystem like occulus is the antithesis of a metaverse
NefariousnessNoose t1_j90d7he wrote
Yeah, there’s a fair amount of misdirection in the media regarding practicality of the metaverse. Also asset ownership is somehow completely unappealing to gamers?
Fxwriter t1_j8yuxy7 wrote
VR needs to be a main driver for porn first, then it will fall into mainstream.
techieman33 t1_j8z0i6m wrote
They need to figure out the tech and production before it’ll really be popular. A lot of it, even the 8k stuff is just plain blurry. The depth of field is very fixed. In that sweet spot it looks good, but to close or to far away and it’s very flat looking. They also really seem to struggle with camera placement sometimes. I’ve seen some good parts where they get everything right, but it’s usually only a couple minutes and then something looks off again and throws any shred of realism right out the window. And anything less than 7k is generally unwatchable. But a lot of studios are still only releasing at 6k or lower. And even the 7k and 8k stuff the bit rate is way to low to the point that it looks worse than a decent 6k scene. When they get it right it’ll be amazing, but they still have a long way to go to really get things dialed in.
essaitchthrowaway3 t1_j8xrzyq wrote
I wonder if this news is why Facebook stock is down over 1% today.
salahelbat t1_j8zv5ic wrote
whole market is down today.
SupaflyIRL t1_j8ym0az wrote
Why would facebooks stock be down? Tencent is a Chinese company…
essaitchthrowaway3 t1_j8ynwp1 wrote
Because Zuck has invested heavily in VR.
SheepRoll t1_j903cjv wrote
When I was over at my parents during Chinese new year. They been talking about how hype is meta verse in china. I feel at this point, metaverse become one of those buzzword where every WeChat investment guru talk about.. just like nft and stable coins.
yaykaboom t1_j90npl6 wrote
Yeah, anything that has the interest of corporate you should just stay away from it. Or at the very least ride the hype early and dump it whem everyone else catches on the scam.
Chatgpt has revived corporate’s interest in AI. They had been pursuing this but almost lost interest in it. Im still skeptical about it.
St3fanz t1_j8yyhcu wrote
It’s like 1992 all over again.
As it always was going to be.
“Look, here’s VR to the best of our current computing power!”
People: “WOW1!1!”
“Here’s VR still! Can we have some money!”
People: “No. New shiny things found, sorry.”
prefuse07 t1_j90r8nw wrote
Bingo!!!!
Then came 97, and what happened? ............Doh!!! 🤣
Idiots never learn
unicron7 t1_j901cln wrote
Meta is a rest home now. A landfill overflowing to the brim of stupid, prayer requests, vacation validation posts and misinformation. What made them think young people would rush to their VR wonderland?
[deleted] t1_j8x6k7m wrote
[removed]
RagingHeretic t1_j8zwx1s wrote
Zuck bet everything on this and it's DOA. Lol
Low_Soul_Coal t1_j909imf wrote
I feel like you could have a way better experience with something as simple as Tobii Eye with a desktop based environment than a VR headset in terms of a "meeting place".
You can still move your head around. but you're also sitting comfortably in your chair with nothing on your head (and still drink your coffee)
DarthBuzzard t1_j90pzsr wrote
It would be 2D though, which is unnatural/less engaging for real-time communication and much less interactive.
Denadiss t1_j90vw61 wrote
VR right now is a fine fun gimmick. I enjoy it but we aren't really there yet. Haptic feedback will really help things, lighter and easier goggles and the ability to move or walk on the spot will help things tremendously.
Finally only 1 AAA company is taking VR games seriously and thats Valve. Stress Level Zero did really well with Boneworks and Warpfrog as well but they don't have the man power or resources many of these massive studios do who simply don't really care about VR.
Could you imagine if they did Skyrim VR properly? Or Fallout? There isn't enough in VR at the moment to attract people.
But I think next gen that will change a fair bit.
MethodZealousideal11 t1_j91jpm9 wrote
The real world is already so complicated to live and why the hell we need an alternative and yet parallel world. The same issues in the real world will come up in the metaverse eventually.
VampyreOfNazareth t1_j92y0aw wrote
Allow porn games and you’ll be a billionaire in 2 weeks.
ltethe t1_j938wkt wrote
3D TVs. Good riddance.
Unable_Wrongdoer2250 t1_j96ap9z wrote
Hardware is exactly what is needed for VR to reach mass adoption. Thing is it's a $3-4k treadmill/desk/workstation which will take up a corner of a living room so that's quite a big hurdle. Also it doesn't exist yet and the katvr virtuix that are available just aren't good enough
iampliny t1_j9dpbez wrote
r/UpliftingNews
Seanspicegirls t1_j8x96ut wrote
Sorry
IamPurgamentum t1_j90yoec wrote
Metaverse is a complete rip off of second life. Second life has been around for over a decade. The metaverse is not new or original in any way.
I'd be amazed if they don't sue.
shakemix t1_j92cyco wrote
How could they sue though? They really don’t have any grounds to. Second life is a metaverse, but not virtual reality.
IamPurgamentum t1_j92ezix wrote
Virtual reality is just hardware. You can use it on anything.
shakemix t1_j92fg3i wrote
True, but the concept of a metaverse isn’t proprietary. I agree Second Life did it way better before anyone else did, but I don’t think they can sue just based on another metaverse being made.
IamPurgamentum t1_j92tu4k wrote
I think they could. From what I've seen it's the same thing but with a VR headset - the headset doing all the work.
Second Life looks the same and works the same. You can even buy property. Metaverse just feels like a rip off to me and it gets my back up a bit given facebook and Zuckerbergs story. It's all hype and no substance.
KingKapwn t1_j8ymf2j wrote
They keep pushing the Metaverse as some kind of alternative or new social media, but it’s flatly not. Something like VRChat is popular because it doesn’t feel corporate. It’s a creative environment where you’re free to build what you want. Metaverse on the other hand feels like a sterile corporate product that confines you.