You do realize Microsoft is one of the top 3 investors in R&D in the tech industry right?
There is a reason so many companies pay them royalties.
Last I checked it was around $8,000,000,000 a year.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Microsoft Gave Take-Two's CEO A Demo Of Its Mysterious VR Tech
- Thread starter Detective
- Start date
You do realize Microsoft is one of the top 3 investors in R&D in the tech industry right?
There is a reason so many companies pay them royalties.
Last I checked it was around $8,000,000,000 a year.
There seems so much potential crossover appeal with VR though. Like with the Facebook idea of Oculus being a way to video call friends, or watch sports. Even stuff like turning half an hour on an exercise bike into a virtual ride along the Great Wall of China or something. It's potential extends far beyond traditional gaming, so as long as the technology is up to scratch, the software possibilities are so diverse and exciting there'll be companies stepping over each other to create the next big thing for it.
Handy Fake
Member
Echoing other's posts, it certainly sounds more like AR to me.
Probably borne out by the comment that he was unsure if it would be a commercial success. You'd probably need a *lot* of room to get the best out of any AR game - moreso than even a Kinect game. In my opinion, obviously.
Probably borne out by the comment that he was unsure if it would be a commercial success. You'd probably need a *lot* of room to get the best out of any AR game - moreso than even a Kinect game. In my opinion, obviously.
"I'm certain I wouldn't like these apples, because I hate oranges!"
I H8 Memes
Member
I never really thought about the exercise angle. Or traveling for that matter. Amazing future with this tech. However 960x1080 (x2) is a really the minimum resolution for this kind of thing and I'm not sure if it's really going to take off outside of gaming until it can support a near 4k type of resolution at an affordable price.
There is no "minimum resolution" for VR, but 1920x1080 isn't going to be the resolution most VR headsets launch with, it'll be 1440p.
Handy Fake
Member
I'd be hugely worried about hurling myself around the room wearing a headset, hehe.
There are umpteen applications for both AR and VR though. Exciting time. I do get the inkling (not wishing to derail the thread) that Morpheus may be looking at a 2015 launch too.
I H8 Memes
Member
The screen door effect is too pronounced at anything less than 960 x 1080 times 2.
LyleLanley
Banned
You quoted a response to a post you made about someone once claiming that the internet would be nothing more than a fad in a thread that's discussing VR.
I don't think either console is a great fit to handle VR with anything besides very basic looking games.
History class is going to become a hell of a lot more interactive.
My argument isn't "the internet succeeded, hence vr will succeed!" But rather that people doubting vr sound exactly like that dude in 1995, missing the forest fun the trees because of superficial reasons.
Meanwhile, the counter argument is literally "3dtv failed, hence vr will fail."
Handy Fake
Member
True, although!
It does seem, as the months pass, that PS4 was actually built with it in mind. XBox should be able to handle AR fine as well. I wish it was next year, I feel like Cartman freezing himself to play the Wii.
JordanN
Banned
"Ok, students. Today's assignment is to go to Ancient Egypt and bring back 10 sheets of Papyrus"
Hey, I just invented field trips without leaving the classroom. I could make a business out of this idea...
YES. Another great VR idea, school field trips at a fraction of the cost
Seriously that is a legit great idea. You should do it, JordanN. (let me join your business too plz, I believe in this idea THAT much)
LyleLanley
Banned
Defile what I defile, eat who I eat.
On a related note, virtual field trips and vacations feels like the first step towards the civilization in Wall-E.
LyleLanley
Banned
Wrong thread.
And you are wrong. Surely it can't touch the pc powerness, but ps4 can get some interesting achievement. About xbone, I'm completely skeptical.
Dynamite Ringo Matsuri
Member
This augmented reality stuff never sounded interesting to me til I read this:
http://gizmodo.com/how-magic-leap-is-secretly-creating-a-new-alternate-rea-1660441103/all
I wonder if MS' Fortaleza tech is comparable
http://gizmodo.com/how-magic-leap-is-secretly-creating-a-new-alternate-rea-1660441103/all
I wonder if MS' Fortaleza tech is comparable
Handy Fake
Member
That just looks like a complete psychological breakdown waiting to happen.
LyleLanley
Banned
I could be wrong, but given how my PC has run my DK2 I can't imagine a PS4 pushing out demanding games in 3D.
Princess Carl
Member
Based on what?
Ol No Bones
Banned
I'm glad you can pull this info out yer bum.
You are incredibly over estimating the power of the ps4.
Remember VR has to render the same image twice while also running the game at a high and consistent frame rate.
Alx
Member
Now I want to watch that movie...
I don't really understand the issue with power... If anything I'd rather have tron-like environments in VR than software trying and failing at being photorealistic (which is also true for non-VR software by the way).
I would expect Fortaleza to be roughly on par with google glass. Google Glass, Magic Leap, likely Fortaleza - those are all essentially calculators in the 1970's compared to what people want AR to be - modern day PCs. The sort of AR everybody wants is a subset of VR - things that make VR great will make AR great. As such, while you can independently demonstrate every step of the AR process, realistically the tech is still a good 2 decades away from being something you buy off the shelf and perform telepresence with.
I like glass a lot - from the times I've tried it, it seems awesome. But right now it's more like a floating HUD than true AR. I'd compare it to the VR tech of the 80's versus where it wants to be. An important first step, of course, but not necessarily "right around the corner" or anything.
Alx
Member
I doubt it... both the leaked 2010 roadmap illustrations and the description in the OP of this very topic seem to indicate that Fortaleza is trying to insert full 3D characters in the user's field of view, and not only display 2D information in a corner like Glasses do.
Nexus Zero
Member
YES. Another great VR idea, school field trips at a fraction of the cost
Seriously that is a legit great idea. You should do it, JordanN. (let me join your business too plz, I believe in this idea THAT much)
I agree man. This is the single thing about VR I envy kids most about. History and astronomy are going to be amazing. Hell imagine standing in a geography lesson and witnessing a hyperlapse of terrain forming all around you.
I've mentioned this here before - my dream VR experience is being able to stand anywhere on Earth and scrubbing through all of history, having buildings pop up/demolished around you, seeing the different fashions on people, etc. Going further back than the dinosaurs and seeing what the climate would have been like. I'm guessing 10 - 15 years for this kind of seamless experience?
1. Get on treadmill
2. Start TRexchase.exe
3. Burn those calories!
(I actually do think that turning exercise into a natural part of a game is going to be more of a thing some day)
I think VR has a decent chance of succeeding because this the first gimmick(poor choice of words) that has many 3rd parties interested from the get go and are currently working on projects. Where as the Wiimote, PS move, Kinect, Eye Toy, Six-axis, Power Glove lmao etc ...3rd parties had no idea what to do with them and were dependent on the console manufacteres to lead the way.
Apart from Nintendo's Wiimote, console manufacturers all in all failed to show devs and the world in general how it's done with that hardware. And I don't expect Sony to lead the way with VR/Morpheus either, their history is appalling when creating new innovating software from their new peripherals/gimmicks. They will be dependent on 3rd parties as usually to fill their console with content, especially with VR.
It only needs 1 dev, even an indie dev for that matter to make a "minecraft" equivalent for Morpheus/OR and blow the whole VR scene wide open. They're going to have to....because the Big Dogs (EA, Activision, R* etc) ain't going to do jack until someone else shows it can be done and VR can be a way of the future.
VR is no certainty to succeed. But it won't be from the lack of trying compared to past peripherals/gimmicks.
LyleLanley
Banned
I think it'll be longer than that, who would even make such a thing?
Alx
Member
It depends on how realistic you want it to be, but in the end it's more an issue of producing the content (modelizing those places at different times in history) than rendering them. You can already do such "timelapses" with regular 3D graphics, VR is "only" placing you inside any 3D world.
I've seen full 3D characters inserted in google glass demonstrations already. EDIT: In fact, Google has a patent over this sort of stuff: http://www.google.com/patents/US20120099836
Nexus Zero
Member
Google.
The age of the waifu is almost upon us friends.
what is that pic from? I've seen it quite a bit.
AR is a subset of VR. AR is VR abstracted over reality. You need to be able to do VR well, before you can do AR well.
And I don't mean "microsoft needs to be able to do VR well," I mean us - humanity. We are babies gingerly walking with regards to VR, it's a brand new tech. AR, comparatively, is running full sprint.
Not at all. AR and VR have almost completely different design challenges. For one, VR doesn't have to worry about imposing digital constructs on a real environment, while AR does. Not only that, but AR functions mainly as /enhancing/ reality, whereas VR is mainly for substituting one reality for another--if you want to be philosophical about it.
Personally, I don't like that part of VR as it's necessary to almost completely forget about the reality you currently inhabit. This is great for movies and stories in general, when a suspension of disbelief is necessary, but for prolonged periods like that? I dunno, I can't seem to want that.
AR, however, is a lot more social, and while it may not have as many gaming functions, it's a lot more practical in a bunch of different areas.
Ol No Bones
Banned
The thing about AR that is so great for Microsoft is that it translates better into their other lines of business with their new mobile first cloud first vision. If they can do something truly impressive in this space and use gaming as a hook to get it into people hands than they may be able to sell the windows ecosystem better. It might not be for me but we will see.
RoyalLaFlame
Banned
To be honest I'm more excited for AR than VR. But that's me of course.
...none of that countradicts what I said. I said AR is a subset of VR, not that they are entirely the same. AR is derivative technology. AR is VR abstracted over reality.
Your personal feelings aside, you won't get the AR you desire until we conquer VR.
I still disagree with you, though that may be entirely up to where you and I differ in perceiving the abstraction.
I see AR and VR as two separate, but similar, technologies. Agree to disagree, I suppose.
This isn't a perception problem. I'm telling you flat-out how AR is done. I work with these technologies, and I've been doing research in computer vision for a while.
GuitarAtomik
Member
The consoles are close enough that if one can do it, the other probably can as well. Hell, Gear VR can do it and it's running on a phone.
The thing you guys need to remember with these console implementations is that they aren't going to be using them as optional ways to play for their regular AAA games. You're not going to get a Morpheus down the line or an Xbox Vision or whatever and have the option to play Uncharted 5 and Gears of War 6 in it. You're not going to get a game that looks like The Order fully playable in VR on either console. They will make specific, less demanding games tailored to the hardware. Or maybe as an option for other non-AAA games that aren't that graphically taxing.
Alx
Member
That's a common bias from people who are too close from the technical aspects. You may focus on how AR is done, but that's not why. AR and VR share most of their technology (display, positional tracking, ...), but don't have the same purpose, audience and applications.
As a technology, AR and VR are very similar. As a product, they are very different, and sometimes even opposed (for example AR is about the technology following you everywhere, VR is about keeping you attached to the technology).