As Carmack (the game guy, head of Oculus, etc.) says, until the headgear gets down to swim goggle size, it's not going to get any traction, and until it gets down to eyeglass size, it's not going mainstream.
The Apple Vision Pro was an unexpected dud. Something more eyeglass sized, with phone-like functionality and good design, would have been more in line with Apple's aesthetic. Instead, it was another half brick on your head VR headset. Apple had a success with iDweebs, their ear pieces, as something worn full time. The Apple Vision Pro could not be used that way.
You say it was unexpected, I say it was entirely expected given the form factor (comfort), battery life (awful), and lack of a killer app to drive adoption (if anyone knew what that was, Meta and Microsoft would be all over it already).
But Apple has tons of money, so they can learn from the devices in market now and decide how best to target Gen 2.
Microsoft seems to be exiting AR other than the military contract. Meta continues spending billions on their research project that might someday be a product, though they also continue iterating on their VR products.
We're still waiting for the tech to get cheap enough, small enough, and with a good enough ecosystem people will want to put up with it.
Meanwhile, Apple put out a tech demo to test the market. And probably to light a fire under the VP in charge of the program.
>Or are you referring to the ridiculous 12/12/2012 TEDX "talk" that Rony Abovitz performed at the Ringling College of Art, and all the FAKE and DECEPTIVE videos they posted and lied about on youtube, that tarnished Magic Leap's reputation? [...]
>That didn't stop them from making fraudulent concept video demos that they falsely claimed to be actual existing games that they were already playing around the office, and that they promised much much more than they could actually deliver.
>So if you can't reproduce the experience on a 2D screen, then fake it and lie, you're saying? That IS the whole point.
>Or are you referring to the way Magic Leap picked up and ripped off so many other people's original designs and IP in their patent applications without giving the actual inventors credit, that tarnished Magic Leap's reputation? [...]
>The point is that the name Magic Leap IS extremely and deeply tarnished, in so many ways, and Magic Leap pretending it's not just makes them look more laughably delusional than they already are (which is extremely), just like Trump still believing that he won the election. [...]
Half Life: Alyx is one of the most amazing games I've ever played. And yet... I haven't finished it. When I have free time to play games I'd rather play my Switch. It's a lot more hassle setting up HL: Alyx, and the heavy headgear bugs my nose and causes eye strain headaches eventually if I play too much. So instead I play Tetris 99.
I have a Quest 2. After 6 months the non-replaceable battery lost 70% of its capacity and the controllers developed unfixable drift. Never making the Meta mistake again.
It's definitely fixable, by both Meta and yourself [1]. I've done it twice. A replacement kit is $14 on Amazon.
You would think joysticks would be a solved problem by now, but no. Meta chose garbage, with the same garbage installed in the quest pro controllers that are not really serviceable, from being glued together and jam packed with electronics (3 camera inside out tracking in each controller).
Battery can also be replaced, but with somewhat ridiculous effort [2].
Alyx is really a bad game. People don’t recognize this because they play it for a very short time and then that’s it.
The gun and grabbing UX is fantastic. It’s really good. But the enemies and movement are awful. The enemies are simply not designed to handle your movement. The game is secretly an on rails arcade shooter except you can control the rails.
This is a fundamental problem with VR. You cannot expect humans to move to the degree required for game movement irl, so most of your movement HAS to come from control stick movement. But if most of your movement is coming from control stick movement then your irl movement is largely pointless.
But people WANT the irl movement to be the thing that matters. Because it is fun to duck in and out of cover. So that’s what Alyx largely is. You see enemies. You play the duck and peeking game, and if the enemies come too close or are melee you yeet yourself back to a safer spot.
The basic enemies with guns and melee and drones are pretty good with this gameplay. When they start trying to do something a little bit more interesting in the game later, it really falls apart. Why? Because the enemies are incredibly dumb. Much dumber than a typical game. And the basic concept you get to is that any enemy that does not respect peeking is just asking you to do this clumsy movement scheme rather the fun arcade on rail gun shooter gameplay and it feels dumb.
Imo the Valve team did a very good job trying to accommodate what they found were enormous limitations. But the end result is really underwhelming. You can’t play many games like that for the novelty of on rails shooter gameplay to still work.
can't wait to be back in Bangkok so I can go to a VR cafe and play HL: Alex. Huge fan of the series and haven't been able to justify buying a headset myself.
It's not about the hardware but about the content. There's a lack of compelling content. And because the audience is so small, publishers aren't in a hurry to create that content. And they cross publish what little they create to boost its value. Which further dilutes the value of these devices.
Apple and Meta need to start investing in exclusive content for these devices. Neither of them is really doing that. Apple has some bits and pieces but it doesn't really add up to much. Both are spending billions on the hardware; but not on the content. They need to be doing both. And not just on launch content but on a steady stream of content, games, and apps that people will want, talk about, review, etc. That will create demand for these devices.
I think the problem isn’t size, after all people are happy to put ever larger TVs in their homes.
I think the problem is that VR/AR are such dislocating experiences, so unlike anything else that consumers can’t relate to the technology.
These devices do not follow a technological linage such as TV. First came radio, then cinema and then TVs - each technology gave the consumer a relationship to understand the new technology: TV is like having cinema at home, cinema is like radio with pictures etc
There isn’t this same graduation in technology with VR/AR hence consumers are overwhelmed with this technology and don’t grasp the use cases yet.
Thinking of TVs as size comparison is wrong thing... Think of laptops. How big laptops people want if they are going to move around with them?
Unwieldy gaming laptop are reasonable if you move them once a week or absolutely need them. But otherwise people would go for lighter and thinner devices.
And here the weight is carefully balanced on your head...
I think it's more likely it was an expected dud (look at how limited the manufacturing numbers were) and they were perfectly happy setting the money on fire for however long it takes to iterate down to that eyeglass-sized device 10 or 20 years form now.
The Apple Vision Pro was an unexpected dud. Something more eyeglass sized, with phone-like functionality and good design, would have been more in line with Apple's aesthetic. Instead, it was another half brick on your head VR headset. Apple had a success with iDweebs, their ear pieces, as something worn full time. The Apple Vision Pro could not be used that way.