Support NeoGAF

[dreamlock]

I'd bet that within 10-15 years you'll be seeing a lot of AR. It'll hit bigger than the first smartphone did. They only need to perfect the technology and have people wear non-disruptive glasses or contact lenses. Noone's going to wear big goggles to work everyday.

Virtual ads will be a thing, unfortunately. I wonder how they'll even control it to prevent people from putting up virtual walls suddenly in the middle of a highway. So yeah, there's a lot of scenarios that needs to be considered and a long road of development before this becomes big.

 

[ALLseeingEYE]

What they demonstrated today is well beyond the current Google Glass kit, much more in-line with CastAR.

The Holographic microsoft exec example reminded me of the virtual chat rooms in Ready Player One. This could be a done with VR as well of course, but I just thought this would be awesome for hanging out with friends that aren't in the same vicinity. Also, if we could sit in on concerts or virtual classrooms, that could be awesome.

 

[Einbroch]

Riiight, as the only gaming.. is what you and your friends say is gaming. Screw Board gamers, screw gaming that has been around for as long as humans were alive. Nope, only you know what is gaming, and it is only electronic.

That some people might enjoy this for board games, or filling the whole field of vision with one big hologram for something like Viva Pinata AR (Not that it exists, just an example). NAaaaaah that can't be fun .

This can't be a serious post. Seeing as how this is in the videogame section of a videogame forum, and we're in a thread with the Xbox One in the title, I'm obviously talking about videogames.

 

[DidntKnowJack]

I guess its a good thing someone out there is working on these kinds of things, pushing boundaries to see what will stick, but I can't say I'd ever personally be interested in an augmented reality system/app/game/what have you.

 

[gofreak]

I'm really curious to learn more detailed tech specs on this thing.

If it is indeed going to be strictly standalone, then that's a big question mark for sure.

Remote processing (i.e. 'in the cloud') could eventually open up that side of things a bit.

I think we'll get there eventually with AR tech, but I'm also more skeptical now about how long it'll take to get to a really robust solution than I was 5 or 10 years ago. Hands-on demos don't mean much - there were cool hands-on demos for 'Natal' too, but computer vision isn't a 'runs once well, runs always well' type of thing.

 

[Gnub]

One step closer to Denno coil.

Came to post this. I'm ready for AR Zombie Laser Tag weekend at my local national park.

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

I'm really curious to learn more detailed tech specs on this thing.

same here. What was all that stuff in the wired article about a light engine and HPU?
Is it just marketing speak?

 

[Krejlooc]

They should have had a illumniroom xbox one demo with hololens.

That would have been awesome.

It would have been redundant.

 

[Chobel]

Actually it isn't.

The fundamental issue with VR and most failed IO tech is them not being 1:1

VR is designed for you to be immersed in worlds, but you have terrible ways of navigating through them so it ends up feeling claustrophobic and you become a virtual couch potato

Since when gaming in couch become bad thing? Fuck what have I been doing all these years?

 

[Krejlooc]

I don't know what kind of VR hardware you've tried (if you tried one at all), but this is absolutely wrong from my experience with the Oculus. VR is really immersive, controls just as well with a controller as any other game and you are a little more active while playing than traditional gaming.

Not saying AR won't be a nice complement for a different kind of gaming experience, but saying it's better suited for games is pure BS !

this distinction is silly to begin with. the solution for locomotion and positional tracking in virtual reality will be the exact same one that augment reality uses. they are the exact same problem.

 

[SlickShoesRUCrazy]

It would have been redundant.

Why?

Instead of needing to spend money on a projector and second kinect, you just put on hololens and get the same experience?

 

[MrCunningham]

I think Jeri Ellsworth's CastAR project looks a little more interesting than this one. But kudos to Microsoft for taking some baby steps to try and invent the holodeck. Even if it doesn't look too appealing right now.

 

[Krejlooc]

Why?

Instead of needing to spend money on a projector and second kinect, you just put on hololens and get the same experience?

Anything you can do with illumiroom, you can do presumably better with hololens. Using both in conjunction isn't necessary.

 

[Lemon King]

Like VR, AR would have many more uses than just gaming. I would say, actually, that the non-gaming uses of AR are much more compelling. You can use triangulated depth sensing cameras to capture and stitch a person entirely in another space, then project them into your room from your vantage point as though they were there, even culling bits of them that appear behind IRL geometry.

True telepresence, in other words. Every step of the equation can be demonstrated independently, we just need to wait for our hardware to get much faster and more accurate to do it well enough for consumer technology.

I can see AR being used in more than just gaming, US Defense contractors would go nuts over this tech with just a little forward thinking.

 

[DorkyMohr]

I don't wanna wear a kinect on my face.

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

I guess its a good thing someone out there is working on these kinds of things, pushing boundaries to see what will stick, but I can't say I'd ever personally be interested in an augmented reality system/app/game/what have you.

You're probably just not thinking about it in the right context. Almost everything you do today, from complex problem solving to having the most casual social conversation can directly benefit from AR. Any time you visualise an object or a shape or a scene from a sitcom in a social context. If done properly it could completely revolutionize human communication in the same way the invention of writing did.

I don't wanna wear a kinect on my face.

"I don't want to wear speakers on my head when I'm outside" - said somebody 100 years ago.

 

[SlickShoesRUCrazy]

Anything you can do with illumiroom, you can do presumably better with hololens. Using both in conjunction isn't necessary.

That's what I am saying.

They should have had an illumniroom demo, but instead of the proof of concept setup, achieved the same experience via hololens.

I wish they would have shown that.

 

[Krejlooc]

I think Jeri Ellsworth's CastAR project looks a little more interesting than this one. But kudos to Microsoft for taking some baby steps to try and invent the holodeck. Even if it doesn't look too appealing right now.

The obvious downside of castar is that it's limited to special mats used for real world mapping.

I think all this tech looks awesome.

 

[Krejlooc]

That's what I am saying.

They should have had an illumniroom demo, but instead of the proof of concept setup, achieved the same experience via hololens.

I wish they would have shown that.

My mistake, I thought you meant they should have demoed this and illumiroom at the same time.

 

[DidntKnowJack]

You're probably just not thinking about it in the right context. Almost everything you do today, from complex problem solving to having the most casual social conversation can directly benefit from AR. Any time you visualise an object or a shape or a scene from a sitcom in a social context. If done properly it could completely revolutionize human communication in the same way the invention of writing did.

Probably my age. I'm 50 years old. None of that sounds good to me.

 

[Krejlooc]

I don't wanna wear a kinect on my face.

You don't understand what this is at all, it seems.

 

[gofreak]

Not sure if posted, but website is up:

http://www.microsoft.com/microsoft-hololens/en-us

Certainly sounds very standalone. No wires, no companion device.

 

[TAJ]

Its a far better tech for gaming than VR fyi

Of course you'd think that. Have you been less than excited about anything MS has done, ever?

 

[Flappy]

Could be cool for Autovista in Forza.

I wouldn't mind a Ferrari appearing in my living room.

 

[Durante]

Not sure if posted, but website is up:

http://www.microsoft.com/microsoft-hololens/en-us

Certainly sounds very standalone. No wires, no companion device.

Sadly it's completely free of concrete information.

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

Probably my age. I'm 50 years old. None of that sounds good to me.

You don't think it will live up to the potential (which is a legitimate possibility, if there difficulties implementing it well) or you don't see the value in the proposition?

 

[Krejlooc]

Sadly it's completely free of concrete information.

I don't think they are going to release information on resolution or latency any time soon. I don't think this is something they intend on releasing soon.

 

[DopeyFish]

Your logic is incredibly backwards. In VR you can immerse yourself and explore a fucking world.

You don't seem to understand the limitations of VR.

In AR you can play with hologram gimmicks in your living room.

Also a very poor understanding of the potential of AR

Virtual couch potato? Thats how video games have always been played you sit down and play. AR is supposed to be better when you're restricted to monkeying around in your room with holograms? The tech is amazing and will have tons of real life uses but right now as far as gaming goes VR is better. In 10 years maybe that'll change but as of right now AR is incredibly limited in the gaming space compared to VR.

To put it as simply as I can:
In VR, you're a floating entity in the world. Bound with the physics of the game world. Controlled with inaccurate and unrealistic control schemes and bound to fairly inaccurate and jarring location sensors. You can move your head but never your body so you need other things to assist. You generally can't use it in 3d space, so you're sitting in place.... using something else to help move your head and body.

In AR, you're fixed in your current world. You're not bound by the physics of their world so you have direct control of yourself. This means more time is spent on how you interact with the world. This part also has no limitation. You can interact with your hands, gamepad and objects... you have relative freedom to explore this world.

In a sense, when the technologies reach their peak...an AR constructed world will always seem more believable than a VR one.

I don't know what kind of VR hardware you've tried (if you tried one at all), but this is absolutely wrong from my experience with the Oculus. VR is really immersive, controls just as well with a controller as any other game and you are a little more active while playing than traditional gaming.

Not saying AR won't be a nice complement for a different kind of gaming experience, but saying it's better suited for games is pure BS !

I have a couple oculus devkits.

It was proof to me that VR is still 10 years away from being 10 years away.

 

[Chobel]

So what's the thing doing all the heavy calculations for lens? separate device?

 

[loaf of bread]

From what I gather this will be its own thing and platform apart from Xbox that might have games along the lines of iOS games but for AR. So i don't think its going to be Halo AR or something, Minecraft is probably the higher end of what sort of games will be available.

 

[Ferrio]

To put it as simply as I can:
In VR, you're a floating entity in the world. Bound with the physics of the game world. Controlled with inaccurate and unrealistic control schemes and bound to fairly inaccurate and jarring location sensors. You can move your head but never your body so you need other things to assist. You generally can't use it in 3d space, so you're sitting in place.... using something else to help move your head and body.

In AR, you're fixed in your current world. You're not bound by the physics of their world so you have direct control of yourself. This means more time is spent on how you interact with the world. This part also has no limitation. You can interact with your hands, gamepad and objects... you have relative freedom to explore this world.

In a sense, when the technologies reach their peak...an AR constructed world will always seem more believable than a VR one.

But I game so I'm not fixed to my current world limitations!

 

[Nzyme32]

I don't think they are going to release information on resolution or latency any time soon. I don't think this is something they intend on releasing soon.

They claimed it was releasing "in the same time frame as Windows 10". Not sure what soon would mean to you, but I would have thought that was sooner than I expected. Unless they mean a sort of developer kit, which would actually make a fair bit more sense

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

I don't think they are going to release information on resolution or latency any time soon. I don't think this is something they intend on releasing soon.

can you help clarify some of the terms used in the wired article like "light engine" and holographic processing unit?

are those just marketing speak or is there some kind of novel mathematical modeling going on behind the scenes to help better integrate the virtual object with its perceived surroundings?

 

[RexNovis]

Sadly it's completely free of concrete information.

Yes well this seems to be a pattern.

 

[Durante]

can you help clarify some of the terms used in the wired article like "light engine" and holographic processing unit?

I really think they are making those up as they go along.

 

[loaf of bread]

To put it as simply as I can:
In VR, you're a floating entity in the world. Bound with the physics of the game world. Controlled with inaccurate and unrealistic control schemes and bound to fairly inaccurate and jarring location sensors. You can move your head but never your body so you need other things to assist. You generally can't use it in 3d space, so you're sitting in place.... using something else to help move your head and body.

In AR, you're fixed in your current world. You're not bound by the physics of their world so you have direct control of yourself. This means more time is spent on how you interact with the world. This part also has no limitation. You can interact with your hands, gamepad and objects... you have relative freedom to explore this world.

In a sense, when the technologies reach their peak...an AR constructed world will always seem more believable than a VR one.

You are limited in AR! YOU ARE LIMITED TO YOUR LIVING ROOM! THERE IS NO WORLD YOU ARE EXPLORING! You refer to it as a "world" you aren't immersed in any sort of world. You are in your living room and are bounded by the real world which is where VR is leagues ahead of AR for gaming. You are so clearly blinded. And yes, in 10-15 years this might change, but right now and the foreseeable future? VR wins out for gaming.

 

[DopeyFish]

You are limited in AR. YOU ARE LIMITED TO YOUR LIVING ROOM. You refer to it as a "world" you aren't immersed in any sort of world. You are in your living room and are bounded by the real world which is where VR is leagues ahead of AR for gaming. You are so clearly blinded. And yes, in 10-15 years this might change, but right now and the foreseeable future? VR wins out for gaming.

You are nt limited to your living room. Stop thinking so small.

 

[Alx]

You don't understand what this is at all, it seems.

Well technically he's right, the user is indeed wearing a Kinect of his face (probably two depth sensors, plus the voice recognition). But that's in addition of everything else (processors and display).
It's another proof of the benefit of quirky research like Kinect, illumiroom etc by the way. All that experience on the concept of user perception and interaction is what's letting them develop and improve products like Cortana or Holo-thing.

 

[Ingueferroque]

I don't want this. I want virtual reality.

 

[Metal B]

To put it as simply as I can:
In VR, you're a floating entity in the world. Bound with the physics of the game world. Controlled with inaccurate and unrealistic control schemes and bound to fairly inaccurate and jarring location sensors. You can move your head but never your body so you need other things to assist. You generally can't use it in 3d space, so you're sitting in place.... using something else to help move your head and body.

In AR, you're fixed in your current world. You're not bound by the physics of their world so you have direct control of yourself. This means more time is spent on how you interact with the world. This part also has no limitation. You can interact with your hands, gamepad and objects... you have relative freedom to explore this world.

In a sense, when the technologies reach their peak...an AR constructed world will always seem more believable than a VR one.

What again is good at being bounded to the physics of the real world. The real world sucks. since i can't jump from any distance, run in the speed of light or simply fly! I don't need my limited body to explore boundless worlds. This is what VR is! AR is also very cool, but VR will always have the better experiences.

OMG! VR vs AR discussion. This is truly the future!!!

 

[loaf of bread]

You are nt limited to your living room. Stop thinking so small.

Explain? What I'm supposed to go outside and embarrass myself by dancing around in my front lawn?

 

[RexNovis]

can you help clarify some of the terms used in the wired article like "light engine" and holographic processing unit?

are those just marketing speak or is there some kind of novel mathematical modeling going on behind the scenes to help better integrate the virtual object with its perceived surroundings?

Definitely seem like meaningless buzzwords to me. Complete with 0 technical explanation. Should definitely set off some warning bells.

 

[Chobel]

You don't seem to understand the limitations of VR.



Also a very poor understanding of the potential of AR



To put it as simply as I can:
In VR, you're a floating entity in the world. Bound with the physics of the game world. Controlled with inaccurate and unrealistic control schemes and bound to fairly inaccurate and jarring location sensors. You can move your head but never your body so you need other things to assist. You generally can't use it in 3d space, so you're sitting in place.... using something else to help move your head and body.

In AR, you're fixed in your current world. You're not bound by the physics of their world so you have direct control of yourself. This means more time is spent on how you interact with the world. This part also has no limitation. You can interact with your hands, gamepad and objects... you have relative freedom to explore this world.

In a sense, when the technologies reach their peak...an AR constructed world will always seem more believable than a VR one.



I have a couple oculus devkits.

It was proof to me that VR is still 10 years away from being 10 years away.

News flash to you, people play games because they can escape reality. A believable world in AR is still constricted to reality, VR in the other hand, believable or not, you can create any type of world/physics.

 

[Krejlooc]

can you help clarify some of the terms used in the wired article like "light engine" and holographic processing unit?

are those just marketing speak or is there some kind of novel mathematical modeling going on behind the scenes to help better integrate the virtual object with its perceived surroundings?

Those are marketing terms.

 

[Ferrio]

You are nt limited to your living room. Stop thinking so small.

Why aren't you limited by your living room? Okay ya you can leave it, but you're still limited to your physical surroundings.

 

[Alx]

They claimed it was releasing "in the same time frame as Windows 10". Not sure what soon would mean to you, but I would have thought that was sooner than I expected. Unless they mean a sort of developer kit, which would actually make a fair bit more sense

The first dev kits will be available in spring according to wire. If we take Kinect as a reference, the revealed it first at E3 with short démos and concept videos, then showed the finished product one year later, and it reached the market a few months later.
So I wouldn't expect the thing to release before 18 months from now, but not much more either to fit in the "Windows 10 time frame".

 

[Chobel]

You are nt limited to your living room. Stop thinking so small.

You're still limited to real world, and this case you're limited to whatever places you can reach.

 

[Seanspeed]

I have a couple oculus devkits.

It was proof to me that VR is still 10 years away from being 10 years away.

Its 10-20 years away from where you'd like it to be maybe, but VR is here.

 

[Metal B]

Why aren't you limited by your living room? Okay ya you can leave it, but you're still limited to your physical surroundings.

Leaving the living room is actually the best part of AR! Walk through the streets of your city, see information flying by or dress your own self with virtual clothes others can see. People really should read some Cyperpunk books to get an idea of the future.

 

[Ferrio]

Leaving the living room is actually the best part of AR! Walk to the streets of your city, see information flying by or dress your own self with virtual clothes others can see. People really should read some Cyperpunk books to get an idea of the future.

But that's not gaming. I think AR has some neat applications, but gaming is not one of them IMO.