• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Deimos

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,793
All of this. I've owned 3 HMDs and will always aim to have one for driving and flight sims. VR is amazingly Immersive and unlike anything else when it's done well. But the friction to use it and the isolation one experiences in it confine it to niche status. Even as just a pair of glasses it would be fighting an uphill battle.
Why would regular glasses be an uphill battle? People optionally wearing glasses for fashion has been a thing forever. Sunglasses are a status symbol.

People even wear fake prescription glasses for the look.

I can easily see glassholes making a return once the tech is actually there. If not for the functionality, just to flaunt, the same way people flaunt their iPhones, smartwatches, airpods, Ray Bans, etc.
 

Kill3r7

Member
Oct 25, 2017
24,524
It's the cost of doing business just like streaming. They are arguably the biggest player in that space. So yeah, if in a few years the market doesn't grow they might have to pull the plug on it.
 

Primal Sage

Virtually Real
Member
Nov 27, 2017
9,853
Tbh I'd be sad if Meta stopped. I'm really falling in love with my Quest3.

Well, I wouldn't be worried about that. So far everything seems to be going as planned.

...well maybe apart from the San Andreas release date :-D

It's going to be interesting to see the effect Quest Lite will have on the VR market. Or the two Apple Vision Pro competitors we are expecting this year. The Samsung/Google headset and the Quest Pro 2 from LG/Meta.
 

UAZ-469

Member
Dec 12, 2023
326
Why would regular glasses be an uphill battle? People optionally wearing glasses for fashion has been a thing forever. Sunglasses are a status symbol.

People even wear fake prescription glasses for the look.

I can easily see glassholes making a return once the tech is actually there. If not for the functionality, just to flaunt, the same way people flaunt their iPhones, smartwatches, airpods, Ray Bans, etc.
The key with glasses is that you put them on to see the world around you better (or less commonly to look good). VR glasses have the opposite purpose. AR has potential but even that introduces friction because the world around you is obstructed somewhat.
 

jman2050

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
5,840
You must have a narrow definition of "the norm." 33% of teens are growing up with a VR headset. When you think of the % who grew up with NES in the 80's, it's not so hard to envision a bright future for VR.

Current VR headsets are closer to the Magnavox Odyssey than the NES.

There is a possible bright future for the VR space if the vast amount of engineering challenges limiting progress in the space are eventually solved, but framing such a bright future as inevitable as some are wont to do is pure wishcasting.
 

Deimos

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,793
The key with glasses is that you put them on to see the world around you better (or less commonly to look good). VR glasses have the opposite purpose. AR has potential but even that introduces friction because the world around you is obstructed somewhat.
When I talk about glasses, I assume AR.

With AR, the world isn't obstructed, it's augmented. It's a feature, not a bug.
Current VR headsets are closer to the Magnavox Odyssey than the NES.



There is a possible bright future for the VR space if the vast amount of engineering challenges limiting progress in the space are eventually solved, but framing such a bright future as inevitable as some are wont to do is pure wishcasting.
I feel called out, lol. Many of the 'vast' challenges have already been solved. Quest 3 is a high-fidelity, lightweight, portable headset. Big screen Beyond is more goggles than headset, and Quest 2 is affordable.

At the current rate of progress, we'll have Bigscreen Beyond sized headsets with the standalone features of the Quest 3 in a few years. Few more years after that, it's cost the same as a Quest 2.
 
Last edited:

medyej

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,474
I love VR so I'm glad Meta is spending so much money investing in it, even if it is mainly a gamble on an AR future they want to be the top dogs in if it ever arrives. The Quest 3 is an amazing device.
 

Xwing

This guy are sick of the unshakeable slayer
Member
Nov 11, 2017
9,924
Maybe I'm just too fucking old, but I can't spend more than like an hour and a half with a VR headset on. Hurts my neck, hurts my ears. I keep thinking to myself, I'll get into VR when they release a full dive interface. It's not commercially viable yet, but the tech I've seen for neural interface with high end prosthetics is quickly reaching Octavius levels.
 

CatAssTrophy

Member
Dec 4, 2017
7,663
Texas
As time goes on I'm really starting to look at VR as a stop-gap technology between 2D experiences and whatever comes after VR. The headsets aren't ideal to wear long term, there's still motion sickness issues, and other inconveniences holding it back.

That said, as much as I hate meta and zuck I'm glad they're burning all this money keeping this stop-gap alive while future technologies are researched and refined so the market won't have to start over from scratch.
 
Oct 28, 2017
16,793
Why are people celebrating this? VR not doing well is not a good thing. If you don't care about VR, ok. But to celebrate an entertainment medium failing is just..... why?
 

jman2050

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
5,840
I feel called out, lol. Many of the 'vast' challenges have already been solved. Quest 3 is a high-fidelity, lightweight, portable headset. Big screen Beyond is more goggles than headset, and Quest 2 is affordable.

And yet those are still incredibly far away from where they need to be to reach the viable eyeglasses form factor with equivalent functionality.

And forgive me if I don't share your optimistic timeline on when (if ever) that will happen. It took 30+ years to get from the Apple II to the iPhone, and that was an era where Moore's Law wasn't dead and buried.
 

Deimos

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,793
And yet those are still incredibly far away from where they need to be to reach the viable eyeglasses form factor with equivalent functionality.

And forgive me if I don't share your optimistic timeline on when (if ever) that will happen. It took 30+ years to get from the Apple II to the iPhone, and that was an era where Moore's Law wasn't dead and buried.
If we're talking sci-fi transparent glasses, sure.

I don't believe we need to reach that level for VR/AR to become profitable and mainstream (as entertainment), eventually leading to it becoming smartphone-level commonplace in the long-term.
 
Feb 24, 2018
5,300
I don't know why VR makes people so angry and desperate for it to die. I don't think it was ever really popular enough to even be a "fad". VR still continues to be a thing, VR games keep releasing and I don't think it's ever going away.
In this case it's mostly targeted at Meta but for me it's because of exclusionary the technology is and 5 years back, VR's biggest fanboys were incredibly nasty about that if suffered from headaches, eye strain or simply couldn't use the tech for the many of reasons (not helped that back then devs REALLY were trying to re-push motion controls and stood up motion controls at that); they'd at worse tell you to fuck off and tell you that you didn't belong in the future or at best ignored those issues or downplayed them as not important. To me, the biggest fanboys really soured the pot especially since it doesn't seem VR has done much to improve on those issues. Plus it's hard for to want a future where gaming become more prohibitive or becomes impossible for me to play.
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,948
Era's boomer ass takes on VR is so annoying at this point. We get it, you checked out 10 years ago after the DK1 was announced. Same old shit about isolation and bricks. Mf, I've spent 300+ hours in my Beyond, surrounded by the most fun people I've ever met in my life. I sleep in this shit, in full body, multiple times a week. VRChat is the killer app, 550 hours here. Screw the mainstream, I'm having fun right now. You need the popular kids' permission to get in the lunch line in gradeschool too?

Zuck and now apple are putting in money. Keeping it flowing, even while their strangulating/strongarming things massively, is better than nothing. Gives Bigscreen a reason to make Beyond 2 in a few years.
 

cakefoo

Member
Nov 2, 2017
1,414
Current VR headsets are closer to the Magnavox Odyssey than the NES.
Quest 35M
Magnavox 350K


Why are people celebrating this? VR not doing well is not a good thing. If you don't care about VR, ok. But to celebrate an entertainment medium failing is just..... why?
It's not even news of VR "failing," or even news period. It's just the quarterly reminder that Meta continues to invest in their longterm VR and AR vision despite the upfront losses.

And what 99% of people don't realize, is AR accounts for half of Meta's spending and 0% of their income. That's the main reason they're so far in the red each year.
 

Clefargle

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,156
Limburg
The one good thing with Zuck is he see's the VR potential, even if he's scuppered it a bit by being so myopicly mobile focussed. The photo realistic avatar chat they've been developing for like 10 years would be here by now if they'd stuck some desktop stuff out. Instead Apple got to release it first, albeit still in mobile but an insanely expensive kit.



How do you think commercial technology develops. Particularly screen based technology. It releases in larger, expensive form factors, stays on the market and evolves. If its not on the market it just STOPS. They don't just stop VR now entirely for a decade and then magically turn up with Sunglasses VR outta nowhere. That's what all this continual massive R&D budget is building towards. Just cut it and give up now and you cede control to a competitor, while you'd have to start from scratch again a generation later. The Microsoft hardware problem basically.

So the earlier attempts at VR before Oculus were on the market the whole time?
 

UAZ-469

Member
Dec 12, 2023
326
When I talk about glasses, I assume AR. With AR, the world isn't obstructed, it's augmented. It's a feature, not a bug.
In theory, yes. In practice, I'm skeptical how well this will be implemented.
Why are people celebrating this? VR not doing well is not a good thing. If you don't care about VR, ok. But to celebrate an entertainment medium failing is just..... why?
For me it's because it's Meta.
But I also disagree with your framing of "an entertainment medium failing".
If an entertainment medium relies so much on one company that if the company fails, the medium fails, then it was never really sustainable to begin with. If something has potential and can make a profit, investment will find it. If not, then give it some time.

The idea of an entertainment medium failing is like watching a storm disperse and saying it failed, or watching snow melt and saying winter failed.
 

Ringten

Member
Nov 15, 2017
6,214
I'm glad someone is investing in VR!
But are they making loss on their headsets? Or is it also accounting for future R&D
 

wafflebrain

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,313
It's not even news of VR "failing," or even news period. It's just the quarterly reminder that Meta continues to invest in their longterm VR and AR vision despite the upfront losses.

And what 99% of people don't realize, is AR accounts for half of Meta's spending and 0% of their income. That's the main reason they're so far in the red each year.

Right, I read this article earlier this morning and the AR prototypes they've been working on for years sound like sci-fi stuff. Using materials that only can be made in the US due to their applications in radar tech the military uses.

www.uploadvr.com

Meta AR Glasses Lead Claims They're As Mindblowing As Original Rift

Caitlin Kalinowski claims Meta's true AR glasses elicit the same "Oh my God, wow! I can't believe this!" reaction as the original Oculus Rift.

Meta has been working on AR glasses for at least eight years now, spending tens of billions of dollars on the project that Mark Zuckerberg hopes will one day deliver him an "iPhone moment". The company has repeatedly spoken of its intentions to bring AR glasses to market since 2017, and in 2021 revealed the effort is called Project Nazare.

But in 2022 The Verge's Alex Heath reported that Meta no longer plans to release its first AR glasses, codenamed Orion, as an actual product. Instead, Heath wrote, Meta will distribute them to select developers in 2024 and also use them as a demonstration of the future of AR.


Meta CTO Andrew Bosworth appeared to confirm Heath's reporting in an interview with Heath in December. Bosworth said the glasses "might be the most advanced [consumer electronics device] that we've ever produced as a species", so much so that they "were built on a prohibitively expensive technology path" not suitable for an actual product.

This also seemed to corroborate the reporting of The Information's Wayne Ma last year. Ma reported that the Orion prototype glasses use microLED displays and silicon carbide waveguides.

The silicon carbide waveguides are also proving challenging to procure. The material can deliver a wider field of view than the glass waveguides used in current transparent AR headsets, but it is also incredibly expensive. Further, Ma's report explained that because the material is used in military radars and sensors, the US government imposes strict export controls on it. That means glasses using it will have to be assembled inside the US, significantly raising the production cost, despite most of the manufacturing and components coming from China and Taiwan.


I'm not sure if this will ever manifest into a good consumer pair of glasses, the article says as of that Ma report a year ago the fov is still small roughly the same as Hololens 2 (50). I don't know if this is sustainable for Meta long long term throwing this kind of money at R&D perpetually but it might help these discussions if people actually process and remember for future discussions that AR is the main white whale Zuck is chasing with this money.
 

Primal Sage

Virtually Real
Member
Nov 27, 2017
9,853
I'm glad someone is investing in VR!
But are they making loss on their headsets? Or is it also accounting for future R&D

Possibly they are making a small loss on the sale of each Quest headset but that will have been made up by software sales.
The yearly expenditures which eclipse the revenue and profit from selling hardware and software are caused by their investments in R&D.
 

sedael

Member
Oct 16, 2020
889
the fun thing about zuck is he also shoved the AI research under reality labs which is a huge reason for the losses. a lot of the money isnt just VR/AR anymore, its more or less the everything zuck thinks might be good for the future, not losing a billion a month on horizon worlds
 

Primal Sage

Virtually Real
Member
Nov 27, 2017
9,853
the fun thing about zuck is he also shoved the AI research under reality labs which is a huge reason for the losses. a lot of the money isnt just VR/AR anymore, its more or less the everything zuck thinks might be good for the future, not losing a billion a month on horizon worlds

They were never losing a billion a month on Horizon Worlds.

It was always hardware R&D investments.
 

JABEE

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,893
You must have a narrow definition of "the norm." 33% of teens are growing up with a VR headset. When you think of the % who grew up with NES in the 80's, it's not so hard to envision a bright future for VR.
VR is a much less popular Wii Sports targeted at porn addicts and NFT entrepreneurs.
 

dannzibar

Member
Oct 27, 2017
102
And they will probably get some tax breaks to offset the losses. So the American taxpayer is footing some of the bill for this atrocity.
 

Cantaim

Member
Oct 25, 2017
33,458
The Stussining
All things considered, Zuck probably should have spent those billions these last few years on AI. Got caught completely flat footed in a space that will take years to move forward in. Especially if they want to do hardware.
 

gyrspike

Member
Jan 18, 2018
1,998
You must have a narrow definition of "the norm." 33% of teens are growing up with a VR headset. When you think of the % who grew up with NES in the 80's, it's not so hard to envision a bright future for VR.
33% of teens? Where in the US? Even then I would call bullshit on that number.
 

Spork4000

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
8,585
Get fucked.

It's honestly been a while since I heard anybody mention VR. Am I out of touch or is it safe to say it was a fad now?

A bit of both?

Hardware sells okay but it seems like revenue isn't great for meta after that. I haven't heard of many VR games outright flopping besides assassin's Creed, so I think there's a core that buys a lot. I've kind of been reading it as a vita situation on a wider scale.
 

Pargon

Member
Oct 27, 2017
12,081
I've owned 3 HMDs and will always aim to have one for driving and flight sims. VR is amazingly Immersive and unlike anything else when it's done well. But the friction to use it [,,,]
This was largely solved with the Quest 2 (back in 2020).
You just put the headset on and go. You can be in a game within 30 seconds, no setup.
Even streaming from a PC, you just load the Virtual Desktop app and pick a game from the list.
 

AgeEighty

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,527
I think part of VR's problem is that it's a technology you really have to experience for yourself to understand the appeal of. But we don't live in the world of in store demo kiosks anymore; everyone shops online and rarely has the chance to get hands-on with anything before buying.
 

JABEE

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,893
This take isn't out of touch like most people here, it's willfully ignorant and incredibly inflammatory. What the hell?
It's the perception of VR on a whole. It doesn't interact with reality. It's treated like a toy. Apple wants it to be another vector for interacting with reality. VR in 2024 is a niche entertainment platform for nerds and enthusiasts. It's not a mainstream product children are trained to interact with like PCs that had productive applications like word processing.
 

wafflebrain

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,313

Seriously grow TF up and drop the Gamer tier reactionary "for the lulz" garbage for seemingly championing an entire medium to fail cause "Zuck bad". Lots of people in a lot of different companies would lose their jobs if VR failed completely. Thankfully that's not happening, if anything consumer VR is in a second wave of innovation currently between things like pancake lenses, micro oled displays, and better cheaper camera sensors becoming more ubiquitous for things like mixed reality.

But hey the very ripe hand wringing old man yells at cloud posts over VR in 2024 from ye olde gamers will never not tickle me so keep firing away assuming you think you're accomplishing anything. VR ain't going anywhere, deal with it.
 

Jhey Cyphre

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,108
The amount of hate VR gets around here is pretty annoying. Can't even have a game announcement without a few lamenting that it's for VR.

Meta has done some really shitty things but they are the only ones pumping money into this. Valve is MIA, Sony is barely trying... Meta has been making some good moves as of late.
 

Renna Hazel

Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,657
I think it's kind of crazy that people think the hurdles VR face today will never be overcome. That's what these 'loses' represent. Investment in the future of VR to address a lot of the things that people say make it niche and unable to become a mass adopted consumer product. I'd also say we have a ton of tangible proof of those advancements when you look at Quest 3 compared to older headsets.
 

Jhey Cyphre

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,108
I think it's kind of crazy that people think the hurdles VR face today will never be overcome. That's what these 'loses' represent. Investment in the future of VR to address a lot of the things that people say make it niche and unable to become a mass adopted consumer product. I'd also say we have a ton of tangible proof of those advancements when you look at Quest 3 compared to older headsets.

The one thing that always bugs me if folks complaining about the price. I wouldn't complain if they were cheaper of course, but something like the Quest 3 is a full fledged console. Like, how much do people think it should cost?

Only only hurdle I struggle to see them resolving is the space issue... you do need space.