Do you think the future will be VR or AR dominant?

  • 2
    Perhaps, but not via the "metaverse" bullshit. I foresee it will be even more dominant in Japan-like countries as finer body tracking methods are developed.
  • 5
    Well AR is fucking amazing in some of it's possibilities. Having a HUD or other stat-bars available, maybe in-place directions for a car navi or just plain measuring stuff with your phone camera or displaying on your phone how a room will look after certain works be done (or where the pipes are for a worker) ...

    Would definitly be a nice to have in many jobs. Whether it'll actually be widely used or not I can't guess
  • 2
    @Jedidja mmm i forgot about HUD in real life

    Sir, you got my mouth watering for tech.
  • 2
    I hope it will find it's places but not be a thing everyone is walking around with.
    For example in the car industry, like fixing stuff with ar guidance with many many informations.
    But not as something where ads will float in your eyesight and you need to upgrade to enjoy your daily life without ads
  • 2
    Both probably. AR mainly is for industry and quality of life. VR is mainly for entertainment and gaming.
    Personally I think we should focus more on VR because once you have a camera facing forward, you can mix the camera feed with the virtual image and have a kind of AR. It‘s more difficult to make decent VR from an AR headset.
  • 1
    @Lensflare well what is decent VR though.... I would think it would need to be almost realistic looking.

    Horizon Worlds and even the Nvidea Huang Avatar looks like a joke/cartoon right now.

    I have a feeling actually AR will creep in... Project glass was a flop due to privacy concerns but... When your home starts listening to you and cars start driving themselves...

    Privacy .... What privacy?
  • 2

    Dear {{CUSTOMER_NAME}},

    We are making sure our company data is never used for advertising or other data processing purposes. Yours, however will be used as we like.

    [ ] - I agree, lololololo

    COOMPANY, by rutee07(!)
  • 1
    @donuts I disagree. VR is not about how realistic it looks. It just needs to be immersive.

    So we need a high resolution, high refresh rate and high field of view. Then there are some secondary things like how comfortable and light the headset is.
  • 1
    Also, the bigger problem with VR atm is adaptation and software.
  • 1
    @Lensflare and body tracking
  • 1
    @Lensflare yes so the "so we need" part I don't think is gonna happen before.

    Occulus I think overheats unless you plug it into a PC and basically use that as the CPU GPU?

    Same with DayDream... So unless you go cloud streaming... (Stadia and whatever Amazon released) you can't get full immersion easily?
  • 0
    @donuts depends on the workcase I think, for real estate business there is no need for raytracing so textures could be baked in with light and prepare many hard calculations.

    Gaming: a room with cables coming from top so you won't get tangled on it until you forget you are in that room, and jump.

  • 2
    @donuts what is "full immersion"?

    This is a subjective and gradual quality.

    I had a Oculus Rift DK2 and it was already very immersive for me.

    Now I have a Valve Index and it’s much, much better.

    Of course it can always be better, but for me, the visual immersion is already good enough.
    Next steps could be body tracking, locomotion (e.g. treadmill), feedback like hits via vibration (e.g. a vest), hand/finger tracking and feedback (e.g. gloves), etc.

    That would improve the immersion by including more of the human senses into VR than just the visual sense.
  • 1
    @Lensflare seems the requirements are pretty steep so only hardcore gamers would be the target market?

    For most people think VR would need to be something like Quest.... Not too expensive or hard to set up?

    Then again Tesla cars aren't too cheap either...
  • 0
    Both. But personally I can’t wait for AR to become mainstream.
  • 3
    VR could really take off in the adult gaming industry. Current game graphics are good enough, 4k headsets still have a noticable "grid" but it isn't more noticable than that of 1080p when using a monitor. Body representation is still in its infancy it seems - couldn't adjust length of arms or legs in any tried VR application. And VR motion sickness is real too. Shakycam and input lag basically kill the VR experience almost instantly. every movement which isn't actively controlled by the player is inducing motion sickness.

    AR on the other hand might become a mainstream casual user thing as it doesn't have any of the problems of VR. Elecronic shades with an integrated laser projecter could become the only display to look at for the majority of todays phone and computer users. Of course, there still is the input device problem. Maybe, monitors will disappear from the common office as everyone already wears their ARShades all the time anyways.
  • 1
    AR has real life applications.

    VR is for personal use.

    I can see AR taking off, so long as we actually release something into the wild for consumers.

    VR is just a way to escape the world, modern society just calls that cocaine 😏
  • 1
  • 1
    I think the future will be dominant, yes.
  • 1
    I don't see a huge market for VR other than as rare experiences for gamers.

    But AR has big potential.

    Imagine map directions in AR while walking down the street.
  • 1
    @jiraTicket uh.... Google maps has that except you need to hold up your phone which I guess looks weird.


    For VR, actually I thought if the characters are like anime, 2.5D like in Genshin Impact... VR could work... since then you wouldn't be comparing the virtual world graphics to the real world.
Add Comment