from Hacker News

Missing the Point of VR

by owlbynight on 10/10/22, 4:25 PM with 179 comments

  • by AgentK20 on 10/10/22, 6:37 PM

    I think one thing that's being skirted past by the author with regards to allowing freecam movement is that freecam is the #1 way to cause motion sickness in VR. The purpose of the realism isn't _just_ to keep the user engaged/sell units/have a good experience, it's also because alignment between "what you see" and "what you're doing" is a critical part of the inner-ear feedback loop. There's a reason that so much effort goes into comfort reticles, motor controls, etc: That if you do it wrong your users puke.
  • by magic_hamster on 10/11/22, 6:15 AM

    I found the point of "lurking" to be very strange. Being invisible while standing right behind someone listening in to their conversation is creepy. VR is not discord, it's not text. Communication is more expressive. Even in voice chat (discord included) participates are aware of everyone present. The author's wish to be the invisible man in this situation is simply unfair to the participants.

    As for the range of motion: input is the cornerstone of every game system and technology in general. The content is defined by the physical input of the device. That's why touchscreen games are different from console games, why you have autoaim in consoles while it's considered cheating on PC. In VR the input is your head and hand movements, and it extends to your movements in the room too.

    VR is not missing the point. It might be missing accessibility features for disabled people (although some applications do try their best, like Half Life Alyx, and stationary mode is available for most applications). While I feel for the author for not being able to enjoy VR in their special circumstances, there's only so much the developers can do.

    > Why is VR more restrictive than my 27” monitor?

    Because you're trying to use it as such while being unable to use the intended input methods. It's like asking how is cycling slower than walking when you can't ride a bicycle.

  • by DoneWithAllThat on 10/10/22, 9:56 PM

    I feel like I’m taking crazy pills when both in the op and the thread that nobody mentions vrchat. Regularly peaks at 30k plus simultaneous users, tons of game and puzzle worlds, rich avatar system, lots of amazing art and immersive experience projects, and somehow it just flies underneath the radar.
  • by scyzoryk_xyz on 10/10/22, 8:33 PM

    I'm not so sure about all these insights, but I agree with the gist of what he has to say - quality of UX is going to be key with this stuff. Even more than it was with the smartphone revolution. When you are inside of a world and something doesn't work very well, the feeling of frustration is much more intense than when it's just your phone or computer screen. Getting that right will be an enormous project.

    My own suspicion is that the one company that can make a substantial move on this space has done extensive research on this topic and that they're waiting patiently until the technology gets to just the right sweet spot. I'm talking about screen resolution, processor size/speed/power, miniaturization, inside-out hand-tracking etc. But once that device gets rolling, developers will have a lot of work on their hands figuring out how to design these sorts of spaces and how to make work comfortable and natural in these sorts of environments.

  • by dexwiz on 10/10/22, 5:24 PM

    Every discussion about movement in VR reminds me of an old Penny Arcade Comic about Wii Sports. https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/11/13/you-know-it-to...

    Sure, it looks really cool to make big sweeping motions, and have them reflected in the digital world. But in reality, most people want to minimum input/maximum result. We need the power steering UX for VR.

  • by gernb on 10/11/22, 12:36 AM

    These are all good points ... but, it's hard for me to totally accept what I perceive to be the premise.

    Let's imagine perfect VR (the Matrix). Would it be better to play Mahjong, Poker, Blackjack, Chess, pick your favorite board game, with real pieces setting at a real table or at a computer terminal moving pieces with your mouse? I get each person might have a different answer to that.

    What I like about "immersion" when done right is I just do the thing I already know how to do. Pick up the ball, cards, dice. I don't have to fiddle with one 18 buttons on the 2 controllers (up, down, left, right, press, A, B, upper trigger, lower trigger) x (left hand, right hand) .... actually 20 buttons if you include the "system" buttons on each controller.

    This is one thing I hated about No Man's Sky in VR. I enjoyed it over all and never played non-VR No Man's Sky, but, while flying and aiming the gun/probe is VR, all the inventory management is 18 button based and even 25hrs in I'd be pressing the wrong button on each menu option.

    Now of course, VR isn't good enough yet to do this "immersion" so often, picking up the cards, ball, etc, is just to damn fiddley. Maybe I have to put my hand 10cm past where my brain believes the object is. I've had that very frustrating experience where I can't reach the thing in VR because it's below the physical floor in my room or behind the wall/sofa/desk, so there's a lot to be fixed.

    And, also, of course maybe someone will figure out better interfaces without the constraints of the physical world. For example I'm a little sad when someone makes a piano in VR given that you could invent a new instrument with a sphere of controls around you.

    But, every time I play a VR game that makes me memorize which of 18 buttons to press I want to scream.

  • by Ukv on 10/10/22, 7:59 PM

    > Do people really care that it kind of looks like they’re betting or it kind of looks like they’re really holding their cards, or do they just want to play poker and interact with people?

    I think people do care about factors that add towards the feeling of physical presence. Would maybe go as far as to say that it's the primary point of VR tabletop simulator games as opposed to the more convenient sites/apps for playing and chatting.

    Support for more/arbitrary seated positions seems like it'd make sense though.

  • by barnabee on 10/10/22, 9:43 PM

    This reads to me like criticising ski resorts because some people don’t like the cold and are afraid of heights.
  • by 3qz on 10/10/22, 6:29 PM

    > If you can’t do something in VR because of a limited range of motion in real life, I think that you have failed as a VR developer.

    I have never disagreed with an opinion on VR more. The worst VR experiences are the ones that would be possible without the VR. I thought half life Alyx was bad because of this. I don’t want to treat my headset as just another screen.

  • by Melatonic on 10/10/22, 9:01 PM

    Part of the problem here I think is the author is focusing on more metaverse style VR and also experiences that are more "documentary" like (as in watching a sports game) vs actual VR games. In my opinion VR is amazing for lots of video games (like a shooter or a flying space game) and the technology has seen tons and tons of development here. It is fairly mature (although takes a fast PC still) and attracts high end developers and artists. A project like "Poker Stars VR" is probably not very attractive to top end 3D artists and VR developers because it is kind of a boring use of VR. People want to work on cool stuff.

    In my opinion what we really need is the metaverse but for hackers. A bunch of business suits meeting in real life or VR will always be boring and sterile. But a place that has the magic of early IRC where a group of whitehats and blackhats anonymously can meet virtually? That could be pretty damn cool and result in some whacky crazy avatars and out of the box environments. Imagine a completely P2P capable hackerverse that mashed together something like Mr. Robot and A Scanner Darkly and your friend shows up looking like a cybernetic android dolphin. You won't see the suits Hug in VR - they're all about Handshakes ;-)

  • by recursive on 10/10/22, 8:22 PM

    > If motion sickness is the concern, just slow down the top speed of free looking.

    There is no non-zero speed of free looking that solves my motion sickness. If "free movement" is the only way to move around space in a VR title, then it's unplayable by me.

    Nothing mitigates it. Vignetting, reticles, low-acceleration movement curves. None of it really has an impact on my immediate visceral reaction.

  • by vlunkr on 10/10/22, 8:20 PM

    > It would actually be better for performance if those who wanted to hide their physical presence were allowed to do so

    Maybe I don't understand the point of VR chat apps, but if you're hiding your avatar, what is the point? You may as well just use discord.

  • by LarsDu88 on 10/11/22, 7:34 AM

    The problem with VR is the same as the problem with gamedev - for most talented devs, it's more lucrative to go work in a web/tech company than to develop a compelling VR game. That's because practically by definition, successful tech companies are network effect monopolies whereas most games have limited staying power and require sequels. VR gamedev is hard, so most VR experiences are demos. Meta has made this situation worse by hiring for VR devs at high salaries then stuffing them in unproductive and uncreative Corp incentive environments. Meta should just be guaranteeing 400k for every app that does more than 50k in sales and offers more than 8 hrs content
  • by phkahler on 10/11/22, 2:05 AM

    The author spends a fair bit talking about socially awkward people wanting to lurk - invisible until they see an entry into conversation. Dude, creepy f-ing stalker! Most people would rather you sit quietly not saying anything than discover you've been listening undetected.
  • by xwdv on 10/10/22, 7:31 PM

    > Why is VR more restrictive than my 27” monitor? Doesn’t that defeat the entire point?

    No sir, restrictions are the point. Restrictions are what prevent a reality from simply being a bunch of abstract concepts floating in and out of existence without rules or reason.

    Our physical reality has many restrictions: we cannot move through objects, energy is conserved, entropy cannot reverse. These are the restrictions we have to face. And in virtual reality you will have virtual restrictions.

  • by tartoran on 10/11/22, 1:55 AM

    In my opinion VR is not a fad but the ‘VR is going to take over the world’ seems like an industry mantra that is more wishful thinking than reality. But VR will be the primary mode of interactions for certain niches and will flourish there and will disrupt some areas but I personally see AR more like an ubiquitous mode of operation for technology in the future.
  • by cableshaft on 10/10/22, 11:26 PM

    I will say I wish there was more support for 'seated in a recliner' gaming, as that's my preferred way to play VR games when it's not an exercise app like Beat Saber. I even tried to play BoneLab seated for a while but it kept wanting me to reach down into the seat of the recliner to grab ammo, so it became a bit impossible (wasn't too bad besides that, though, just had to stand up to grab a few things).

    I actually have an issue where my right thigh starts burning like crazy if I stand in place for too long (walks are just fine, I can go for miles no problem, but if I mostly stand in place it starts being an issue until I sit down for a bit). I don't know exactly what causes it, but I'm guessing it's probably related to a known bulging disc in my lower back, pinching the nerve a bit.

    There's quite a few games that are good for 'seated in an executive chair', like where you can still spin around to react to things behind you, but several of those games don't really let you spin using the motion controller for if you're in a non-spinning chair (some do, I'm thankful for those). Also I've noticed that several games have height adjustment for sitting but for some reason the limits they set on it are too small and/or you have to go into a menu to adjust it. There are times in a game where I mostly want it to be a certain height, but something fell on the ground or at some weird position that's just out of a comfortable height for sitting, so I want to adjust it real quick to grab something and reset it back, but there's not a good way to do it.

    I'm not saying you have to do these things, but the games that have a good 'sit in a chair that doesn't swivel' experience get played a lot more than my other games, especially if it's a story driven game. I even play Ragnarock (viking drumming game) more than Beat Saber some weeks, to get my arms moving without having to stand mostly in place.

  • by dvirsky on 10/10/22, 8:06 PM

    > In all of its public spaces in the metaverse, you can walk around and listen in on conversations if you want to, but if you’re socially awkward it’s going to suck for you.

    That's true, but another thing that to me is a huge blocker in that sense, is simply having an accent. When I'm writing in chat rooms my English is fluent and I can just fit right in. But I'm really awkward going into a conversation with a foreign accent in the metaverse.

    Even though my accent is not strong at all, and I live in the US and have no problem interacting with people f2f or on the phone/Zoom all day, something about it in the metaverse just makes me feel too self conscious about it. It's weird, it's the only space in which I feel like that, it could just be me I suppose.

  • by ohCh6zos on 10/10/22, 7:26 PM

    Don’t a significant minority of people vomit or otherwise feel ill with VR? Is that adoption limiting?
  • by vineyardmike on 10/10/22, 6:06 PM

    TLDR: the author thinks accessibility and new UX is more important than mimicking real-world UX.

    IMO accessibility does need to be a consideration, VR can be a big help to disabled. That said, I don’t agree that the default should be “remove UX for accessibility”. I’d wager that mimicking the real world is VRs “files and desktops” skeuomorphic analogy that makes it more approachable in the short run to new users. Like other devices, there should probably be an accessibility mode in VR tools. The authors use case seems pretty common (reclining to use a headset) and probably should be handled well at the OS level.

  • by wisnoskij on 10/10/22, 8:29 PM

    I think this fundamentally misses the point of VR and buys into to the advertisements too much.

    Yes, titles need to be better at seated play, because it is a reasonable way to play, given almost no one has enough room to actually walk around.

    But the entire point of VR is the controllers, not the headset. The headset is a huge pain in the ass, annoying, blurry, and tiring to use. No one would put on a headset if it were possible to transfer hand movements to a game world any other way. The monitor has to be glued to your face, but that is a downside, not the benefit.

  • by dncornholio on 10/11/22, 7:51 AM

    VR is perfect for cockpit games. Racing and flying. It's freaking amazing. VR really makes sense in these kind of games.

    Simracing really got a thousand times better with VR. Completely eliminates the need to have 3 flatscreens on your rig. Also the immersion when racing other cars in VR is just something else.

    The best cockpit VR games are iRacing, Automobilista 2, DCS World and Elite Dangerous.

    Using it for anything else makes no sense to me. Especially walking around in some world, I prefer to do it in 3rd person with a controller.

  • by dirtyoldmick on 10/10/22, 5:59 PM

    It's all about porn
  • by neither_color on 10/11/22, 2:12 AM

    Chat rooms, and more recently technologies like Discord and Telegram, are popular because you’re not expected to participate in the conversations that are being held. You can just lurk. There are lots of people who like to wait for an opportunity to jump in to a conversation, and traditional chat platforms facilitate that very well.

    This part of the article really got my attention and I wonder if there's a better way to re-imagine the chat-lurker dynamic for VR. The author suggests opacity and free looking but I wonder if there's a better way to convey a crowd of people who are supposed to lurk. That way you get a visual representation of how many people are in a chat. What immediately comes to mind for me are:

    1. theater/stadium seating

    2. rap battle format(a group of people in a spontaneous circle around 2 main speakers

    3. Some sort of Oxford debate(https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-re...) app so you can listen in on people with strong opinions.

  • by chatterhead on 10/10/22, 7:40 PM

    On my list of projects I'll never do but dream about being a billionaire from is a multidirectional VR deck that uses an omniwheel and outerbound drive system to simulate terrain and elevation.

    https://www.omnifinity.se is a pretty awesome concept that I'm keeping an eye on.

  • by outside1234 on 10/10/22, 10:27 PM

    There are definitely applications for VR - see Microsoft Flight Simulator and Zwift.

    The key is that these are things that are either hard to do in reality (flight) without a lot of risk or that people can't do in reality for whatever reason (like when there is snow or lots of rain with Zwift).

    What people do not want is ordinary reality in cartoons.

  • by tootie on 10/10/22, 7:50 PM

    That would be a marginal improvement, but I don't see how it makes VR substantially more compelling or useful.
  • by taylodl on 10/11/22, 4:23 PM

    I don't share this enthusiasm for VR. I see AR (augmented reality) as being the the revolutionary technology, especially when we're able to fit them into contacts. Then we can talk about having literally different "worldviews" - what enhanced information do you want to see at the moment? Of course those views can be sold much like mobile apps today. It'd be nice to have context-driven views, so the view automatically switches depending on your activity, location, time, etc. Of course you should always be able to see the world without any augmentation too. In this world your phone essentially becomes a fob you carry in your pocket.
  • by gernb on 10/11/22, 12:19 AM

    VR Games I enjoyed from a sofa/chair

    Trover saves the Universe: This even makes fun of the fact that you're stuck in a chair. You're called a Chairorian.

    No Man's Sky: Most of the time you sit in a pilot's seat

    Astrobot (PSVR): Arguably one of the most polished VR games to date.

    Farpoint (PSVR): Again, designed to be played from a sofa

    No guarantee they can be played from a recliner. In fact I think No Man's Sky in particular worked best from a chair with no arms, like a dining room table chair.

    On other hand, most of my favorite experiences in VR, much of the enjoyment comes from physical movement. Half Life Alyx, Jet Island, Until You Fall, Eye of the Temple, Audica (on harder levels), Synth Riders (on harder levels).

  • by yCloser on 10/11/22, 6:53 AM

    #1 Problem is: sweat

    Even in winter, after a couple of minutes the headset screen is completely foggy and my head is uncomfortable

    I tried the oculus, htc, cardboards... all the same. At this point I think this technology will simply not work for me

  • by roboy on 10/11/22, 6:15 AM

    Yes please, Quest should just allow me to lie down and then define this as standing. This should not be an app feature but a headset feature. VR is currently only usable while standing or sitting… why?
  • by lucasfcosta on 10/11/22, 5:12 AM

    I'm not sure that UX is really the problem for VR. I think the tech itself needs to improve. I bought an Oculus Quest (the newest one) to experiment with immersive workspaces but the motion detector wasn't good enough to allow me to work without using the controllers.

    Furthermore, the resolution also meant I couldn't see code on the virtual screens unless I zoomed in significantly.

    IMO that's an impediment to the majority of the further use cases.

  • by kjkjadksj on 10/11/22, 3:41 AM

    What is the great use case of VR? If its just to do things like play poker, or type up a document on a big screen, it seems like a huge waste of energy (in dev time and in wattage rendering this stuff) to reinvent the wheel in yet another way like this. Give me something more compelling than what a computer from 1995 can do while using a fraction of the resources.
  • by eezing on 10/11/22, 2:06 PM

    Quest hardware is fantastic, but content is king.

    The top selling titles on Quest have been at the top for years. The Apple App Store model alone will not catapult the platform.

    Meta should deprioritize Horizon (a Mii lookalike ain’t it) and spend the next 10 years developing 1st party titles. Set the benchmark. Learn best practices. Let the technology evolve.

    We’re not ready for Ready Player One.

  • by sys_64738 on 10/10/22, 8:28 PM

    The elephant in the room with VR is wearing goggles which, no matter how you slice and dice them, just feel dumb to most people. It's why VR is a novelty that creates a laugh at Christmas but get dumped in the unused bin after new year.

    For me, I think the winning strategy of VR is to not have to wear goggles and something that can generate smells as this is our most powerful sense.

  • by syntheweave on 10/10/22, 8:48 PM

    Nobody really agreed about what VR was supposed to be. It was just a "cool future" dream made manifest. I had a friend try a VR expo demo where they put a vibrator on the headset for added immersion. It gave her a concussion.

    Like a lot of cool future dreams, there's a need for a "yes, and" follow-up that grapples with the consequences honestly.

  • by 2OEH8eoCRo0 on 10/11/22, 2:17 AM

    I think VR will be less profitable because you can't go around 18 hours a day using it and being nagged. When you take it off you're unplugged. Big tech doesn't want this.

    I'm extremely interested in VR but I'm cynical about what implementation will catch on.

  • by hartator on 10/10/22, 10:20 PM

    > You should be able to do anything you want to in VR without moving anything but the controllers, ideally. Not just for lazy people like me, but for people with disabilities who would benefit from improved accessibility in general.

    This. VR misses the boat thanks to Facebook's vision of a brand new world, instead of just a better more-accessible screen.

    It is the future for sure, but no one will care for fake 3D experience of your people. We want an actual reinvention of what an OS is, a higher bandwidth input, and a new way to visualize things. Instead of 2D views in a 3D environment. Such a miss opportunity so far.

  • by fspacek on 10/10/22, 4:48 PM

    Somebody needs to make a 4D function viewer for regular old 3D VR. And then look at the Riemann Zeta function