By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft - Microsoft’s HoloLens Looks More Promising Than VR, but May Be Ahead of Its Time

aLkaLiNE said:

I fail to see AR surpassing VR in sales or reception. Two breeds of the same creature no doubt, but anything that can be done in AR can be done in VR while the inverse is not true. AR is extremely limited by your environment, more specifically your home. Anyone thinking they're going to walk around outside with HD wireless AR is living a pipe dream with where current technology is at.

Something that the OP seems to ignore is the hindrance in procedurally generated AR as well. I look forward to seeing how this tech actually performs in the real world. (Blu-ray vs HDDVD?)

 

Yet again I'm waiting for Microsoft to deliver on a promise.

Ok, i see it you're against Microsoft. Fine for you. on the other hand, when writing about the concept in place, you're completely wrong. AR is a superset of VR. Theoretically one could block the real-world input of an AR device and get a VR experience while the opposite doesn't stand without actually transforming the VR device into an AR one.



Ex Graphics Whore.

Around the Network


View on YouTube



zero129 said:
Jimbo1337 said:

I would actually argue that VR has endless possibilities because it has endless realities, while AR is confined to just the reality that we are currently living in.

How is VR "a kids toy"?  

Do you not value the applications of VR in say....the military?  Or do you think that war is just another game to you?

A kids toy:  Something that could provide combat training, combat simulation, flight simulation, vehicle simulation, battleifield simulation, and medic training is childs play right?  Or how about providing virtual reality to our wounded soldiers who are now disabled?  Virtual reality would rehabilitate patients to help them walk again or give those an experience who may have lost their limbs in a war or an accident.

Now this is just one specific area that I decided to pull up out of the multitude of possibilites that VR can provide.  

Care to explain how this would be possible?? unless they really where walking, sitting on a couch controlling someone that is walking is not the same as walking yourself so no it wouldnt give them the same experience as unl;ess they could really walk it would be no different then them closing their eyes and imagine they are walking...

So when I said "rehabilitate patients", I was specifically thinking about those who have a stroke.  Within minutes of having a stroke, there is severe and extensive damage that is done to the brain that causes the individul to lose a number of skills, most notably the ability to walk.  Now for some odd reason, you are under the impression that physical therapy involves an individual sitting on a couch the entire time instead of getting up and trying to walk every day.  What I am trying to say is that your thinking is completely backwards.  You envisioned how you apply virtual reality when you are gaming at home (sitting on a couch) instead of thinking what an individual does during physical therapy and then applying virtual reality to that given situation.

Virtual reality given in a group setting would keep the particapants motivated and offer them a challenge in the various exercises.  You can imagine that these people have symptoms of depression, anxiety, and fatigue.  Virtual reality would provide meaningful task related movements and positive feedback.  Studies have also shown that particpants who use virtual reality headsets were able to achieve five times more repitions of active and purposeful movements than those who didn't use VR headsets.  Not only is there potential in increased movement, but it also provides a huge emotional reward.

For those who have lost their limbs suffer from what is called "Phantom limbs". This is a symptom in  which they feel as though their missing limb is still there and even experience an itching sensation.  By seeing a virtual limb, studies have shown that these patients are better able to come to terms with the loss of their limbs.  You can also imagine the possibility of creating experiences in a virtual world that they would otherwise not be able to do in real life.  



Vasto I figured you out. You aren't actually that paranoid, just an Xbox fanboy.. playing MS apologist.

AR will have real world applications, but in terms of gaming it's straight gimmicky.

~Mod Edit~

This post has been moderated.

-Smeags



Unlike VR with AR you can do real things in the real world like the guy in the short film video cooking the eggs and the lady in the Hololens video fixing the sink. You can move around and go places and do things. You can use AR in your everyday life. This is why AR is going to be better and succeed. One step closer to Iron Mans Holographic computing!



Around the Network
aLkaLiNE said:

I fail to see AR surpassing VR in sales or reception. Two breeds of the same creature no doubt, but anything that can be done in AR can be done in VR while the inverse is not true. AR is extremely limited by your environment, more specifically your home. Anyone thinking they're going to walk around outside with HD wireless AR is living a pipe dream with where current technology is at.

Something that the OP seems to ignore is the hindrance in procedurally generated AR as well. I look forward to seeing how this tech actually performs in the real world. (Blu-ray vs HDDVD?)

 

Yet again I'm waiting for Microsoft to deliver on a promise.


Anything done in AR cant be done in VR. VR cannot blend the real world because if it does its not VR anymore it becomes AR.



sabvre42 said:

Vasto I figured you out. You aren't actually that paranoid, just an Xbox fanboy.. playing MS apologist.

AR will have real world applications, but in terms of gaming it's straight gimmicky.


The door is that way. ----------->



Vasto said:
sabvre42 said:

Vasto I figured you out. You aren't actually that paranoid, just an Xbox fanboy.. playing MS apologist.

AR will have real world applications, but in terms of gaming it's straight gimmicky.


The door is that way. ----------->

 

Funny... You invade the other thread taking down headsets, but praise hololens.

 

On topic though, ar truly is gimmicky for gaming. Good luck trying to get actual dev adoption. Sony put thier ar demo on every ps4. It's fun for an hour.. or to entertain a 3 year old, but other than that it's a novelty.



Vasto said:
Jimbo1337 said:

I would actually argue that VR has endless possibilities because it has endless realities, while AR is confined to just the reality that we are currently living in.

How is VR "a kids toy"?  

Do you not value the applications of VR in say....the military?  Or do you think that war is just another game to you?

A kids toy:  Something that could provide combat training, combat simulation, flight simulation, vehicle simulation, battleifield simulation, and medic training is childs play right?  Or how about providing virtual reality to our wounded soldiers who are now disabled?  Virtual reality would rehabilitate patients to help them walk again or give those an experience who may have lost their limbs in a war or an accident.

Now this is just one specific area that I decided to pull up out of the multitude of possibilites that VR can provide.  

Sure their are possiblitles for both VR and AR but what do we see the current VR devs trying to do? They are all trying to makes games but with AR it looks to be trying to change the way we live our everyday lives.  Just look at how Microsoft presented Hololens and see just how different it is. I was all in with VR until I saw Hololens and started to read more into AR.

I don't know if I can really take you seriously when you say that VR game developers are doing nothing but create...games.  I mean what else do you expect game developers to do?  I was under the impression that their main job was to create games.

I did look at Mircosoft's presentation for Hololens and Sony's presentation of Project Morpheus.  A presentation does not dictate when, where, and what it can be used for.  I mean doesn't it make sense for Sony to present Project Morpheus as a game peripheral at a Game Developers Conference?  Does it also not make sense that they would back up their most successful division (Playstation) in their entire corporation first?  Just because they are primarily focused on using project morpheus for gaming does not mean it is the only thing it is going to be used for.  

A fantastic example would be scientists building a supercomputer from playstation 3's to study black holes.  Just because the average consumer uses a PS3 for gaming doesn't mean the rest of the world has to use the technology in this fashion.



Jimbo1337 said:
Vasto said:
Jimbo1337 said:

I would actually argue that VR has endless possibilities because it has endless realities, while AR is confined to just the reality that we are currently living in.

How is VR "a kids toy"?  

Do you not value the applications of VR in say....the military?  Or do you think that war is just another game to you?

A kids toy:  Something that could provide combat training, combat simulation, flight simulation, vehicle simulation, battleifield simulation, and medic training is childs play right?  Or how about providing virtual reality to our wounded soldiers who are now disabled?  Virtual reality would rehabilitate patients to help them walk again or give those an experience who may have lost their limbs in a war or an accident.

Now this is just one specific area that I decided to pull up out of the multitude of possibilites that VR can provide.  

Sure their are possiblitles for both VR and AR but what do we see the current VR devs trying to do? They are all trying to makes games but with AR it looks to be trying to change the way we live our everyday lives.  Just look at how Microsoft presented Hololens and see just how different it is. I was all in with VR until I saw Hololens and started to read more into AR.

I don't know if I can really take you seriously when you say that VR game developers are doing nothing but create...games.  I mean what else do you expect game developers to do?  I was under the impression that their main job was to create games.

I did look at Mircosoft's presentation for Hololens and Sony's presentation of Project Morpheus.  A presentation does not dictate when, where, and what it can be used for.  I mean doesn't it make sense for Sony to present Project Morpheus as a game peripheral at a Game Developers Conference?  Does it also not make sense that they would back up their most successful division (Playstation) in their entire corporation first?  Just because they are primarily focused on using project morpheus for gaming does not mean it is the only thing it is going to be used for.  

An fantastic example would be scientists building a supercomputer from playstation 3's to study black holes.  Just because the average consumer uses a PS3 for gaming doesn't mean the rest of the world has to use the technology in this fashion.

 

 

I never said that it will be the only things its used for but its what its being used for right now. Gaming is the focus of VR from both Morpheus and Oculas. When they show different then we can talk different. AR is showing the ablity to play games and do other things in the real world which VR will never be able to do. You cant do anything in the real world if you have a VR headset on because the whole purpose of VR is to take you away from the real world.