Quantcast
Phil Spencer hopes VR isn't the future of gaming.

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Phil Spencer hopes VR isn't the future of gaming.

Nem said:


I did think about it. I have said before that this can only make sense when coupled with the kinect, but then theres the problem of physical space traveling. Real VR needs to tap the brain signals to really happen. We are still away from that.

Now to the example of urgency, i see what you mean, but if you stand close to the TV screen the sense of falling will be higher aswell. Yeah, you are tricking your brain, but its still far from beeing a VR experience. Its albeit a very limited one. So limited that i dont see the point, especially when weighed against health and confort issues.

The idea that a fully realized holodeck is the only thing that can be considered VR is a bit limited.

Like saying that in order to be considered a house, you must have 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms at least. 

2 bed rooms and 2 bathrooms isn't a house, because that's your definition. 

Disagree about the first bolded, I haven't really had that same sense with TV.  TV always feels like a gate to another reality, but there's still a separation. 

Second bolded, I'm not sure what you mean. 

 

Yes, there are limitations to current headsets, but it doesn't mean that it's not VR. 



Around the Network
the-pi-guy said:
Nem said:

especially when weighed against health and confort issues.

 

Second bolded, I'm not sure what you mean. 

 

 

Yeah, I don't get this line either. I've seen some people claim that there are potential health issues related to VR, but they are largely unfouned speculation. Actually, there is a chance VR headsets could actually help your eyesight.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2015/03/04/why-not-to-fear-the-impact-of-virtual-reality-goggles-on-your-long-term-health/



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Everyone in this thread is trying to define VR/AR as they understand it, making it needlessly more complex as the make concessions to defend their ideas against criticism instead of actually reading others definitions.

VR - provides artificial stimuli and reduces external stimuli in order to increase immersion.

A tv does the former but is not a "VR"device because it does not do the later. Earphones, however can be considered a VR device, and VR devices utilize similar technology.

AR - provides artificial stimuli through response to and modification of external stimuli.

Google Glass, Kinect Pets, PS Eye pets do this.

There you go. 



In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank

Normchacho said:
the-pi-guy said:
Nem said:

especially when weighed against health and confort issues.

 

Second bolded, I'm not sure what you mean. 

 

 

Yeah, I don't get this line either. I've seen some people claim that there are potential health issues related to VR, but they are largely unfouned speculation. Actually, there is a chance VR headsets could actually help your eyesight.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2015/03/04/why-not-to-fear-the-impact-of-virtual-reality-goggles-on-your-long-term-health/

To be fair, the company selling that VR has a vested interest in calling VR good for your health, since they are selling it. There are no numbers, studies, or other scientists backing it up.

Keep in mind, Smoking companies alleged smoking was beneficial, then no harmful, before they had to put the warning label on.

ExxonMobil told people in some latin american countries they where drilling in that, rubbing crude oil on their skin was healthy so that they could get away with pollution. It's not its highly toxic.



In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank

Justagamer said:
He doesn't have to hope it isn't the future, because it isnt.

Agreed



Around the Network
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
Normchacho said:

Yeah, I don't get this line either. I've seen some people claim that there are potential health issues related to VR, but they are largely unfouned speculation. Actually, there is a chance VR headsets could actually help your eyesight.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2015/03/04/why-not-to-fear-the-impact-of-virtual-reality-goggles-on-your-long-term-health/

To be fair, the company selling that VR has a vested interest in calling VR good for your health, since they are selling it. There are no numbers, studies, or other scientists backing it up.

Keep in mind, Smoking companies alleged smoking was beneficial, then no harmful, before they had to put the warning label on.

ExxonMobil told people in some latin american countries they where drilling in that, rubbing crude oil on their skin was healthy so that they could get away with pollution. It's not its highly toxic.


I think you have that backwards. Its was Magic Leaps CEO that said that stereoscopic headsets could be harmful to your health. Going as far as saying that he wouldn't wear one.

It was a pair of UC Berkley professors that said that A. there wasn't really any evidence to suggest that those headsets could cause lasting neurological damage. And B. that wearing them may actually help your vision.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

rolltide101x said:
Justagamer said:
He doesn't have to hope it isn't the future, because it isnt.

Agreed


Its going to be big though.... like every other (console) game, can be played in VR big.

Just gotta wait for everyone to have headsets(guessing maybe 10-15 years down the line here).



JRPGfan said:
rolltide101x said:

Agreed


Its going to be big though.... like every other (console) game, can be played in VR big.

Just gotta wait for everyone to have headsets(guessing maybe 10-15 years down the line here).

I do not think so, I expect it to go the way of 3D tvs



pbroy said:
I hope VR fails because Sony is doing it.

They always put out tech, but don't back it up. I'm still bitter about my Clie PEG-UX50, I loved that bitch.


Yeah, totally different than Microsoft in that regard! The support für Zune was brilliant, let alone the original Xbox, which was on the market for three years here in europe!

Honestly, if some product fails, no corporation in this world will support it. Not even Apple. 



Official member of VGC's Nintendo family, approved by the one and only RolStoppable. I feel honored.

OdinHades said:
pbroy said:
I hope VR fails because Sony is doing it.

They always put out tech, but don't back it up. I'm still bitter about my Clie PEG-UX50, I loved that bitch.


Yeah, totally different than Microsoft in that regard! The support für Zune was brilliant, let alone the original Xbox, which was on the market for three years here in europe!

Honestly, if some product fails, no corporation in this world will support it. Not even Apple. 

QFT... Absolutely correct, good sir. Zune failed years ago and was supported till this year. Phil is also looking into bringing OG Xbox games over to BC once 360 BC gets sorted out. M$ really is good at supporting things they failed at. 😉

y







VGChartz♥♥♥♥♥FOREVER

Xbone... the new "N" word   Apparently I troll MS now | Evidence | Evidence