binary solo said:
That's ambitious thinking. |
Indeed. The risk is that it could still be too early, but at least, unlike some other new techs, after the innovation, the evolution can be quite smooth: new materials and designs can make the helmets more comfortable, screen quality and definition betters and price lowers, and while input is still very open to new ideas developments, video output is already well defined, with motion control the system can detect position and orientation of the user's head to tell the GPU what view of the scene it must generate, and this part is well defined and it will be practically the same for every VR helmet. Also, stereoscopic 3D with a helmet, once helmets and displays comfortable enough become available, is very simple and effective, it doesn't suffer from the problems and compromises of 3D on normal screens, where neither glasses nor glasses-free solutions are immune from them.
Sure, a bad start can cost a lot of money like with all the other techs, but in this case all the R&D isn't wasted anyway, a successive evolution can become a viable solution, while both LED dispays and motion control components have already long become commodities, so even in the worst case, once the project is well defined, if a given implementation is still immature either for ddevs or users or both, it's just matter of waiting for components to evolve and put them togever in a newer and better device.
The right input methods and devices for VR, apart head position and orientation, are still a field very open to research and testing, but in this case, PCs and consoles can already accept input from a wide range of devices, and there are many standard definitions, protocols and libraries available to integrate them with most systems, so the problem will be to find the right ones, but then integrating them will be quite straightforward.
