Xbox’s Phil Spencer doesn’t think VR is a ‘now’ thing

"Head of Xbox Phil Spencer explains why he doesn’t think virtual reality is a ‘now thing.’"

[Gazondaily]

" But they’ve announced [it for] the first half of 2016, so a little over a year from now.”

Well, in the grand scheme of things, the first half of 2016 isn't actually that far away. I have to disagree here. If it DOES come out first half of 2016 then it is definitely a 'now' thing because you can bet that it will have a very strong presence at E3 2015.

[Tapani]

Yeah, because E3 determines the lives of billions on this planet.

[Gazondaily]

No my point is, its a 'now thing' because the real momentum for the tech with the masses could potentially begin at E3 this year IF (and its a big if) the likes of Morpheus are released in the first half of 2016.

[Cindy-rella]

Ps4 was made with VR in mind and because sony has been working on project morpheus for a while i believe it will be a mass market device and a hit amoung playstation gamers. Microsoft wont be a big proponent of VR because the xbox one wasnt made with VR in mind, and microsoft arent anywhere close to the r and d of VR as sony is

[OC_MurphysLaw]

@Septic yeah but to be fair 3D was a now thing about 4-5 yrs ago and the "industry" told us it was "The Thing" and now it's a pretty dead topic for TV selling points.

[Gazondaily]

I think the mainstream latched on to 3D yeah but this time we are seeing industry vets really take this seriously. This has a lot more potential than 3D because 3D by its very nature was a sort of half-arsed take on VR.

[Tapani]

Yeah, well, the reality is that AR market is going to be around $800M whereas VR market is seen around 30% of it. Some reports (such as eonreality.com) that the AR is stands around $650M and VR at $400M. So it's perfectly normal for Microsoft to take that stance, it's by the book.

So talk all you can, but the numbers walk. Too much feelings-based speculation just leads you out of the window to fairytale land.

Analysts say that it looks like VR is going to be more of a PC enthusiast thing, instead of a mass market product. And if it fails this time, it can't be attempted at least in another 10-20 years, just the way consumers and companies behave. Nevertheless, penetration will be extremely slow, just like with first mobile phones.

I'm sceptical of the whole VR thing in it's current form, because of all the nausea (especially in nausea sensitive Japan), bugs, horsepower to push it, being a device that blocks you from the real world not going well with elder people etc.

I am excited about Morpheus and Oculus, and why not for ViVo as well, but just not entirely sure the soccer mom will be. Plus, it's a rather expensive gimmick, that currently doesn't have that many compelling exclusive software even. Half-Life 3, Sony exclusives and Facebook exclusives could change the thing, though. Nevertheless, I can see many adults thinking "We can do without this and play games just like we used to." Doesn't that sound like a bit like 3D TVs to you?

Just don't think everything always goes just like you plan if you don't even look at the fundamentals, such as the current state of the target markets, it's purchasing power, Greece, Ukraine, FED raising rates, currency that companies use etc that are surrounding these things.

I think I made my case, that Spencer is closer to the truth than some people here. In my mind, Spencer is actually hitting the right market with AR now and perhaps do a better VR device later for it's growing market.

[darthv72]

the way i see it, VR is not a "now" thing because is has been around for close to 30 years. It has been out of the reach for the masses but that doesnt mean it would remain that way.

there had been chances for the tech to reach the masses via gaming before but always seemed like something wasnt right and the window closed.

so, much like 3D... it is making the rounds again. and the tech behind it is much improved and will likely sell but not to the masses unless something really big and life changing causes it to get adopted.

I think for that to happen... it would be Apple of all companies. Just look at the adoption rate of certain pieces of tech once they put their version out. there were MP3 players on the market before the ipod. there were smart phones on the market before the iphone so it just seems rather plausible for Apple to make this work.

they can call it iView or iVision and because of the association of the name and the millions who buy into what apple sells... there is the opportunity for it to succeed. not just for gaming but for other applications as well.

[BitbyDeath]

Isn't 3D standard on every new TV now?
I wouldn't call that dead.

[Gamer1982]

VR is going to explode in 2016 everybody will want to do it in some form.

[darx]

VR will not be as big as a lot of people think. The next 3D or motion control.

[Gazondaily]

I hope not. I hope VR takes hold and isn't a gimmick. A lot of people genuinely seem convinced by its future (John Carmack, Cliffy B and others) and Sony seem to be taking it rather seriously it seems.

It is an uphill battle for sure, but if it works, and that's the key, the tech actually working, then that's all it needs to be a success.

[Perjoss]

its already bigger than both of those things, if you look around the web you can see that VR is not just a gaming thing, its being used as a training tool for many areas including space, military, surgery, to name just a few.

[stuna1]

I think what will make VR a natural fixture in games is if games are made with VR in mind not as a afterthought. When they are built and, advertised as a selling point, that will be the momentum needed to push VR forward and into the mainstream.

But.....

Above all else VR must hit the industry at a reasonable entry price! It's a lot harder to push a product that hasn't been tested on real world application to the masses.

When I say real world application I mean where a large amount of people have had on experience with the tech. Not someone who follows the gaming aspects or real world application if VR can offer, just your regular Joe.

@ Septic I agree with both of your first 2 comments.

@ Perjoss I also agree with your comment, but the areas you mention are only exclusive to certain individuals. Which is still not a big enough market to make a big enough impression. To many it is still considered a niche market.

[LexHazard79]

@perjoss, agreed vr has been in use for ages in the commercial space. But as a consumer product I dont know how quickly it will catch on. I hope VR proves to be a hit for those waiting on it.

[Joe913]

Idk if anyone seen the last facebook keynote or whatever but they seem to have some good non gaming ideas for VR that is where I think VR will take off for the average joe that stuna1 is talking about.

[darx]

Been gaming for 30 years and the standard controller, KB & mouse are always left standing. Everything else went by the wayside.

[Tapani]

One thing that binds 3D, motion control and VR together is the problem of how to market it to the masses. If you ask local people on the street what they know about gaming industry, they have absolutely no idea. So I'm not entirely convinced this will sell for ordinary casual gaming folk.

VR will probably hit an entirely different market than 3D TV and motion control, the PC enthusiast market. I can see it thrive there with some market share and maybe slowly get bigger. But so did many think others when they were vouching for blu-ray, 3D and kinect.

Edit: Maybe it's more like gaming enthusiast market, which can include some PS4 gamers (as morpheus is the only VR device one coming for the current gen consoles).

[vallencer]

I think he's right. I think it's going to end up flopping. I personally don't like VR as it nauseates me. That'll be the biggest hurdle for companies to get over. People aren't going to want to buy and play VR if they feel like puking while playing it. Also the price point. Maybe it'll do well but I honestly don't think it will. Motion controls did well for kids and parents. But VR will have an age warning on it like 3d and parents won't buy it for kids and honestly I don't know how many gamers are going to want to buy VR and stand up in their house to use it.

[MRMagoo123]

you get the same amount of ppl that cant play video games full stop because it makes them feel sick, I dont see consoles selling badly because of it.

[medman]

Hmmmm...VR has many backers, and billions of dollars of investment money behind it...not to mention VR is here now, and many of the big players have scheduled release date windows. Does the AR Hololens have a release date yet? Ssshhhhh Phil....shhhhh. Less talk, more production.

[TheCommentator]

So by your standards, the Powerglove for NES, Sony's Eye Toy for PS2, and the Kinect for 360 were ready for the market because they sold it?

VR launching in 2016 is the gaming equivalent of electric cars 15 years ago, and just good enough to prove a concept is not the same as a "now" thing, as all gaming companies have also proven in the past as well.

[3-4-5]

* Some of you may not be able to handle this truth but here goes:

* This Gen, is just a bridge to the next "real next gen" of gaming.

* All 3 have hinted at this, as have other Dev's and even AMD/NVidia. You just fail to pay attention.

* This gen was never going to be what we thought it was.

* This gen was to FIX all the flaws of last gen, not actually had a ton of new stuff.

* It's a Gap Filler generation to lead into the new one.

* In order to get where they want to get, they had to rebuild the infustructure to support it from the ground up within their companies.

Basically planned this current gen, THE ENTIRE TIME, as a lead in to what they really want to do in the next gen.

* EVERYTHING being done now....this gen, is ACTUALLY for next gen in about 3-5 years.

* This gen was never going to last as long as the last one.

They had to alter their base way of doing things and to do so, it took a whole gen to implement this.

That gen...the tinkering gen...the practice gen....is this gen.

Except it....deal with it.....it is what it is.

It's not a bad thing, but just don't get your hopes and expectations up.

Most of the thoughts in our heads about "next gen" that we started getting in 2009/10/11, are actually going to be realized......but not until about 2018/19.

[Lukejrl]

Yea I agree with the majority of what you said. I do believe a lot people think stuff is decided over light and only for the year to the next. These companies plan a lot of stuff, with contigencies and other options in case they misread the market. The market is not being misread; but with all this hype we are thinking we are going to see a huge life altering experience, but this generation of vr is going to be like the Nes generation was to home consoles.

I say this because the experiences of the arcades were still better games and way better graphics, so while the nes was cool and invited the most complex games ever seen into the home, the arcades were still heavily involved. Likewise today vr will debut but a huge amount of gamers will not see or be able to fully get into it. Motion sickness cost, perhaps the effects will seem to difficult for the brain to adjust Etc... All these will be worked out. Until then home console of non vr will be king and slowly die out.

[Azzanation]

Let's be real here, VR is only a popular topic Because Sonys pushing it. If this was a MS idea from the start it would be getting the same flak as Kinect. How many casual gamers are going to fork out $150+ on head gear and how many want to wear it while playing games?

One of the worst things about 3D TVs was the fact people had to wear glasses, imagine wearing a Helmet for games.

Sorry im a Hardcore gamer and I wont be buying VR because I don't like wearing stuff to play games or watch movies.

[Lukejrl]

The vr craze started with oculus rift getting kickstarted and logging huge names endorsing it long before the morpheus project was announced. So the ps4 /xbox thing is a moot argument of vr success.

Your other point of wearing something for gaming is pretty spot on. Playing a game like call of duty or something may overload senses. Imagine being pushed the ground and you brain is thinking you body is lying down but it isn't. it would be a really weird feeling without some actual body response.

Those rides where you look at screen and the machine moves you body as if your actually on the roller coaster only work because the machine is stimulating other senses other than the visual one.

[bunt-custardly]

PS4 will struggle to offer top quality experiences gamers might expect coming from the almost standardized HD 1080p format (let's say the next Call of Duty style graphics on the platform as an example). Xbox One even more so due to limitations of both hardware platforms.

VR is a beast even on current top end PCs, and what these companies really need to fathom is that if they get the "first impression" wrong they will for ever consign VR to a niche market rather than the mass appeal it so rightfully deserves.

Maybe MS are playing it smart in this regard and just waiting it out. I certainly believe a lot of folks are going to be disappointed when they first play Morpheus expecting a certain visual clarity which simply isn't there or possible given the limitations.

Lol@ the silent disagrees. What because I used the word "PS4" and "struggle" in the same sentence?

[Gazondaily]

That's my worry too. I feel like this is the moment to get VR right. If it ends up being executed poorly or not as effectively to get mass market appeal and ends up being regarded as a gimmick, then the industry will actually set itself back from that holy grail of true immersion for decades.

[bunt-custardly]

Yep, I've played extensively on the Gear VR and Rift DK 2 and both are simply not ready for mass market - not that they purport to be with their "innovators" and "development kit" tags. To me it shows the tech isn't quite there yet so for Sony (and Valve/HTC) to announce a consumer version so soon is exciting yet worrying at the same time.

[its_JEFF]

I think that a really big misconception... that PS4/X11 can't do VR justice, hell there's a smart phone version! People who have played around with The Oculus DK1/2 or even the Valve VR head set said the visuals didn't really matter as much as they thought it would. They were still really immersed. News coming from the Valve VR demos is that they focused on experience like scale and other tricks to make demonstrate the power of VR, using simple textures and geometry. The gracias didn't seem to make it any less impressive.

TBH I think of the 2, VR and AR, VR has a better chance of catching on... it's just more practical. AR was a good idea, but in practice has never held much weight. It's the same with controlling games using your body as a controller, great tech but it's just practical for gaming. That tech would have been better suited for other applications. There's still a chance both of these will fail... but my fingers will be crossed that they don't.

[bunt-custardly]

I never said they can't do VR (as I said I've played enough of the Note 4 quality games with the Gear VR). But, if gamers are expecting COD like graphics and 1080p HD visuals using Morpheus that's not going to happen. That's all I'm getting at really.

[morganfell]

With a history of disliking Sony, Ars wrote this: http://arstechnica.com/gami...

[bunt-custardly]

And this is what they said amongst other things regarding resolution.

"I was a bit surprised that Sony's headset hasn't advanced past the 1080p resolution we saw in last year's Morpheus prototype, especially when devices like the Gear VR are already pushing more pixels to users' faces in homes across the country. At the current resolution, there's still a subtle but noticeable "screen-door effect" that can distract from the experience, especially when trying to focus on virtual objects up close.

This is still a prototype about a year out from release, but I'm a bit worried that Sony will stick with the 1080p resolution that's already proven comfortable for the PlayStation 4 hardware on TV screens. It's possible that the system just can't push past that resolution and still maintain the high frame rate necessary for convincing VR (at least, not without sacrificing the visual fidelity of in-game models)."

"both of these demos made it easier to forget about the relatively low resolution, for the most part."

So although they might say the overall experience is great and defining (there's no real doubt about that as I can get fully immersed with Dreadhalls on the Gear VR) in terms of visual acuity it's lacking where it's "easier" to "forget" about the low res..."for the most part".

The language used is very diplomatic here and rightfully so. Having spent hours, days even in VR I can imagine the sentiment might not be so forgiving once the initial honeymoon period is over.

This is the biggest challenge Sony, Valve, Samsung etc. are facing when mass marketing VR. It has to sit comfortably with the viewer and meet the high expectations otherwise as others have mentioned it simply becomes a gimmick.

[LexHazard79]

You act as if Hololens is MS response to VR for gaming. Its a standalone device that wi be compatible with Xbox and PC for gaming but when then showcased it, they did it with the private space in mind not just gamers. I think AR has better and more vaible to be used in everyday application than VR. but we will have to wait and see.

[morganfell]

^^^^And the positive things they wrote in the article are so long they won't fit in a single post. Considering only a sliver, a very small sliver of personal computers can run anything approaching 4K, why whould Sony go after anything higher than 1080p for the moment. Answer? There isn't a reason.

When it comes to gaming, 4K is like a ghost. A lot of people talk about it and almost no one has actually seen it. And like a ghost it won't directly impact the lives of 99.99% of the people.

All demos on all platforms have done the same thing - backseated resolution to enjoyment. That is the capital point and one that burns through everything else. Of course one may imagine certain things when they are determined to see it fail. People may rage on. I'll be a day one purchaser along with a ton of other people. The angst of people on a forum will not affect my enjoyment one iota. If anything it will increase my pleasure.

[its_JEFF]

@BakPAin you act as if you're so sure it's not. I'm never said it was a response to VR, it's just the route Theyve taken. Some cars went hybrid and some went Full electric. One went BluRay and one went HD-DVD. One went BetaMax and the other went VHS. It's hard to argue, when it comes to gamers, that the thing was made for gaming cause the first we've ever heard or seen of MS "AR lens" is in their leaked X1 road map. But it's obvious that it's not just for gamers. The biggest hurdle for the thing is precision and how much like the concept video is that thing going to actually be.

[WeAreLegion]

Read previews of the latest Morpheus build and say that again.

[iamnsuperman]

And AR is? AR is a hardier sell than VR. He maybe right about VR (it depends on developers /publishers taking a risk with history showing they tend not to) but AR just isn't a product people want. Google Glass proved that (which is why I am not sure how they could build on hololens)

[Gazondaily]

I dont think AR is a harder sell than VR. AR has a lot more potential worldwide uses. The tech seems extremely powerful (in the tech demos anyway- doubtlessly exaggerated I'm sure but still).

[iamnsuperman]

The issue with AR (and will always hold AR back) is the requirement to wear a headset. Google went in the right direction with trying to go for a minimalistic style. Microsoft have gone the other way. AR is pure science fiction fantasy. It is cool tech but no one really wants to wear a headset to see an augmented view of the world. AR is better sold through smart phones where you don't need to carry/wear a big headset. When you want to use AR features you wip out your phone (a lot of that demo video, which no doubt was exaggerated like the kinect videos, would be better suited in something less wearable and more portable).

The one thing VR headsets will have over AR headsets is at least it can be a TV. It still has the wearable issue that AR (though to a lesser extent that AR) has but it least it can be used/sold as a cheap, high quality, TV

[lemoncake]

@iamsuperman i think VR has more wearable issues because it also has to be physically connected via a cable, Microsofts AR doesn't have that which is a big plus on that side. Also the Microsofts AR is almost a standalone device with everything built into the device so the current hardware in your console or pc won't impact it.

[LexHazard79]

@imsuperman, last I checked VR had you wearing a headset that covers half your face and are heavier than Hololens. so I dont see how wearing a VR headset all day to play games is some how worse thaN wearing glorified ray bans with a chip on it. But I'll let you tell it and watch how fanboys agree with you just because youre downplaying AR and MS.

@ulemoncake, he knows we are right but hes a hater. Soon as I read he thought the issue was having to wear the thing i knew he was a hater! Lol...when he said you can watch TV with VR. So now gamers and average joe want TVs on their faces!

Also it looks like running VR will also be more expensive than AR. you need alot more things to ruN VR than AR which again is a standalone product for Windows10.

[andibandit]

has but it least it can be used/sold as a cheap, high quality, TV

Im not really sure where you got "Cheap" or "High quality" from, and you might want to add "TV watchable by only 1 person"

[bleedsoe9mm]

i think AR especially if its going to be used in combination with a TV is much easier for people to see why its cool with a short video . VR you really need to put on the headset . thats why i think allot of sony 1st party studios are working on morpheus games for launch they need allot of the based to buy and sell it too everybody else .

[StrayaKNT]

Ar is so much more appealing I would rather have a game react in my world then have a huge screen right Infront of my eyes. Did you read what you just wrote?

[MasterCornholio]

I think that VR is better for gaming than AR. Just take Minecraft as an example. Being in the world is a lot more appealing then just putting what you built on the world on your living room.

AR will be better for other things like designing 3D prototypes or previewing something that you will buy on the internet for example.

[bleedsoe9mm]

my opinion thats why VR games need to be short 1 or 2 hrs max

[gangsta_red]

I see AR as the better marketed device. Especially if you could take it outside and have real life Laser like battles on playgrounds or other large areas. Especially for people into parkor(?). Marketing could definitely play into whole "get active" movement.

VR is just not appealing as you just sit there with a hunk of metal strapped to your face, cut off from the outside world.

It's bad enough sitting for long periods of time gaming nowadays. But now sitting with a huge screen directly in front of your eyes.

I would be more worried if Sony would support their VR device. Their track record of supporting peripherals has not been stellar for the past few years. If VR doesn't take off then that will just be another device thrown to the back of the line in terms of support.

[ninsigma]

I think the way ms are doing AR with the hololense and if they can pull it off and the tech works then it will have much more of a mass appeal than vr would.

[WeAreLegion]

Both on one device would be nice. Several phone VR apps do this.

[SaveFerris]

Could this end up like Beta vs. VHS or Blu-ray vs. HD-DVD, or can they co-exist?
Certainly both VR and AR can be used for gaming and non-gaming applications, and hopefully it will be more than a passing fad similar to what 3D seems to have become.

[NecotheSergal]

This is a repeat :/?? I swear I saw this 1-2 days ago... Was it deleted and reposted >_>?

[Cernunnos]

He is right. 1080p Occulus simply isn't good enough to replace monitors for gaming. Too blocky, it is a nice and awesome experience, but not something you use daily. We need at least 1440p Occulus, + a very high refresh rate, at least 80-90fps stable, preferably 120+ to remove motion sickness and have it completely smooth. 90% of people will not have the expensive SLI rigs to run this setup, and the consoles will have no chance at all. VR is still a few years away from mainstream.

[SteamPowered]

VR can scale the screen to be as big or small as you want. If you want a 10' screen from 14' away, they can make it happen. Plus the aspect ration would be a snap. 4:3, 16:9, 21:9, its all possible. The Virtual Desktop was a nice touch on how you can use VR as a viable monitor.
It may not replace your every day monitor, but it sure gives you a lot of nice options.

Oh and the Virtual Movie Players are fantastic!! I for one will be a day one adopter for the Vive.

[feraldrgn]

Well of course he wouldn't, because that's what all of the other companies are doing, except for Microsoft.
*sigh*

[bleedsoe9mm]

you really think if VR takes off MS isn't going to have a device

[feraldrgn]

That wasn't the point I was making.
MS hyped HD DVD, even though it was worse than Blu-Ray, because that was what MS chose to support.
This is no different, it's a meaningless comment by MS/Phil, because of course they'll downplay what the opposition is supporting.

[bleedsoe9mm]

@feraldrgn i agree with that 100% but i also think its good that ms is going to try something different , at least until its a proven market .

[IrishSt0ner]

Optimal resolution 1440p, optimal refresh rate 90-120hz... multiplied by two.

Yea I agree it's definitely not a now thing with respect to mass market appeal (due to very few having the capability to run at the suggested optimal range).

Maybe Sony could get this to work with the split frames thing they suggested to hit 120fps, and 1080p OLED ain't too shabby, hope they show something at E3.

For me, true AR is physically based using projection or lasers, not a hud through glasses.

[Cernunnos]

Yeah. to run a game like Battlefield 4 at 1440p 120hz refresh rate stable with a VR headset will require something along the lines of GTX 780 in SLI or better. We're talking at least 5-6 times as much graphical horsepower as the PS4 GPU, and BF4 is a pretty well optimized game on PC to begin with.

VR games for current gen consoles will be very stripped down graphically, something will have to give in favour of resolution and framerate.

[WESKER2015]

this is why phil spencer is a legend, its still a gimmick, it will always be a gimmick until we have flying cars, brings us the games phil, cant wait for Microsoft E3 2015

[KryptoniteTail]

It is, but barely. It will looj like the Virtual Boy in 20 years. True VR is not feasible yet but it's good enough to have fun and switch s*** up a bit.

[ninsigma]

I think morpheus could be great but obviously you're right it won't be true vr. But without steps like this from sony and the occulous guys and nvidia, we'll never get vr to the point we all dream about.

[Moldiver]

Interesting comments all round. But you guys have not talked about the other thing that will define console VR's success. Price. A PC gamer is more inclined to spend headset money. A console gamer though? Most of whom seem to dread annual subs and DLC? The same people who usually can only afford one console ( A VR headset is almost the price of a second console)? Most console owners dont even own a fightstick..or a descent force feedback steering wheel. are these the same people who are going to take up VR en masse? Based on general observations of the sale of peripherals,I doubt it. If its something other than a controller,highly priced,and not mandatory, console owners will choose to live without it as demonstated by pretty much every peripheral ever. Its niche. But this is expensive niche by console gamer standards. But on PC? well thats another story. We buy all kinds of stuff in the price bracket of VR for our rigs anyway.I have spent just under £600 between two GPUs in the last 5 years. My ram cost more than my ps4 or my xbox. console gamers dont spend that kind of money. they but games pads, subs..and MAYBE DLC at most.

MS are smart to keep hololens with both Xbox and PC in the forefront of its development the risks can be mitigated a little bit. Oculus will probably become the VR standard on PC, unless valves answer is better. So the question that is left is...how will VR fair on PS4? its success depends entirely on PS4s fanbase.

[mcstorm]

I think you are spot on but I still don't see VR being a hit. For me AR is looking the better product as more can be done with it but I still think we are another 5 to 1o years away from AR being in a lot of peoples lives. If AR can be put into something the size of day to day glasses then I see if being a hit if it cant I don't see it being. VR for me is not going to be a hit for home gaming. Most people esp kids multi task when gaming and having to put on and off the head set all the time to do this will not be something they want.

The price will also be another issue. It will kind of be like the Move situation where it costs far too much to have more than one player too.

I also think the VR tech still needs another 5 or more years to get smaller and better too but for me if I was going to put money on one of them taking off I would put it on AR as more things can be done with this tech than VR.

[SteamPowered]

Once you try VR though, AR seems like a joke. Why Augment reality when you can be completely Immersed in fantasy? VR is far ahead of the curve when compared to AR. One trip to the Oculus Share site will tell you how far along VR really is.

Even Steam has a VR mode now. Thats a pretty heavy-hitter to be backing VR in such a big way.

[mcstorm]

Its all about choice. For me I see AR being used more than VR and for games I am not really excited for VR or AR. Yes they both have + and - points but for me its just like how 3D is. Its each to their Owen though.

[iNFAMOUZ1]

i rather have vr than what they have honestly, i want to lose myself in a game world not put elements of them into my pathetic life

[_LarZen_]

I hope he is wrong. I have tested it and even if it was an early version of the Rift. I was engaged in a game like I have never been before.

It's something I have been wanting since I as a kid watched The Lawnmower Man.

[DougLord]

Sigh. VR for AAA games is a next gen thing. It's simple math. We are struggling to put up 1080p @ 60 fps. VR needs 1080px2 (2 eyes) @ 120 fps. Some people say it needs even more the 1080p. So we need 4x to 10x current console power to do this. IE 2 Titan Xs in SLI.

Then you need to get the hardware to weigh less then 1lb and cost less then $150. This is so obviously a 2020 thing.

[weirdo]

stick to your pr job phil. morpheus says hello

[Tedakin]

I'm not sure. I don't think people in general want to wear giant devices on their heads while playing games. Same as people didn't want to wear 3D glasses while watching movies at home. BUT there is cool stuff you can do with it like the shark cage demo they had on Morpheus.

But like 3d..... VR is not a new thing. It's been around for decades and people act like it's a brand new breakthrough.

[Minute Man 721]

The Market will decide

[Ark_]

I gotta agree. It's just beginning. Let's talk 5 years from now, when the next console generation arrives.

1) The hardware is too weak right now, even most PCs won't cut it.
2) Motion sickness.
3) Screen door effect.
4) Controllers?
5) Comfort?: Weight, cables and so on. If playing for hours, ppl might get problems wiht their cervical spine for example.
6) Possible lack of convincing software and apps.

As excited as I am for VR, their are a lot of unresolved issues.

Hololens on the other hand might be a great tool for education and coolaboration, also design and engineering. But it will be more like an evolution of present tech rather then an revolution.
What I mean is, that you will be able to show text, pictures, videos and 3D modells with the Hololens, which is all possible right now on any monitor. It will just get more lively and allows interaction and movement in space ... which of course is engaging and healthy ... and basically awesome. ;)

I am really excited for both things and curious how things will turn out. But I gotta agree: it's still a "future" thing.

[bleedsoe9mm]

personally i think VR needs to be stand alone (no pc or console) maybe tied to your phone but untethered preferably . need to be able to use it on a plane or a bus . AR on the other could tie well into console or pc game as a enhancer to whats going on on your TV . if AR is standalone it will fail as well . i don't think VR is going to be popular for gaming (games will be too short) , where it coulld become really big is social networks , movies and porn .

[rawrock]

Good VR is still a long way off. Just too bad the big holodeck rooms like they had star trek wont be around till after we die. Imagine actually running around a game like Dying Lights world,that would be so awesome...

[MCTJim]

I tend to agree that its not a now thing. Don't get me wrong, I would love to be able to be fully immersed in my game. The problem "now" is they can't bring a viable system out for the price point they are trying to reach with mass marketing. Everything is determined by price in the mass market... that magic price. I don't want trade offs, I want actual VR and for a $400 system, I just don't see it happening "now." All I am seeing is a pair of goggles with two screens and a less than $500 price tag.

[Yetter]

and of course the AR vs VR argument is going to show up in the comments. Personally I think both are very exciting but I feel like AR is the real step towards the future of entertainment. A system that can read your surrounds and work with your senses seems much more immersive and appealing than a system that cuts you off from your senses.

[ShadowGhost]

I think it all depends on the games and the resources. VR has been around for a while in the gaming landscape while AR still has some ways to go before becoming the next big thing. Space is also a concern. With Project Morpheus and Oculus Rift, you have the head mounted wired to the device with its tracking. AR on the other hand will be a hassle for those that don't have a lot of space. Not everyone has the ability to move their tv to an area to see Minecraft on their coffee table for example.

Both will play huge roles but they need to have to perfect it in order for us, the gamers to see what makes both unique.

[Fishermenofwar]

Neither was Blu-ray right?????

[BudokaiGamer]

Never cared for VR or anything like that. People think Nintendo things are "gimmicky," well VR and 3D movies are "gimmicky" to me.

[BC_Master_Haze]

Have you tried VR? Believe me, I knew wii, 3d and companion apps were gimmicks the second i touched them but this is for real good. Not just good but crazy good

[BudokaiGamer]

I'm stupid, I accidentally made a new post instead of replying...

To me, it's adding things that people feel they want and will just not care for after too long.

I could be wrong! And I wouldn't mind being proved wrong. But when I see videos of people having to move their head, or with the whole treadmill thing w/ Oculus or something I just lose more interest. I'm playing games to be lazy, not to do something that I could go outside and do.

Obviously you could turn off motion controls and stuff, but I get very motion sick too with something like riding in the back seat of the car, let alone what would happen to me if I used VR.

I'll try it out at some point and probably like it, but like the 3D on the regular 3DS systems, I'll probably just have it off.

[BC_Master_Haze]

That's the part I'm looking forward to most, turning off head movement. I've got a bad back, so lying down with a HMD is perfect for me personally. I feel you there too with the motion sickness, and that is a minor issue. I was lucky enough to try the oculus demo lying down and it had no motion sickness but my friends DK2 I can't do for more than 2 hours at a time.

[Mithan]

It isn't a now thing. It is still a good few years off.

[generalthadeape]

Good call Phil.

I'm not intersted in VR or AR any time soon.

I'd rather see your efforts obtaining awesome AAA titles for the Xbox One and squeezing as much power out of the Xbox One as humanly possible.

Thank you very much.

Now get back to work!

[Mrveryodd]

Phil I think you may be wrong .... People my age have been waiting for Cheap VR for 10 years or more . Bring me VR for my Xb1 or I will just buy a ps4 and Morpheus day one .

[TheNemesis501]

Microsoft has no idea whats a "now" thing.

[mochachino]

Yeah, the same company that thought Smartphones weren't a "thing" and is now desperately struggling to get even a 10% share of the Smartphone industry. An industry which happens to be the biggest threat to it's bread and butter - windows and office.

It won't be long before the phone in your pocket will be used for everything needed for 90% of computer users. Just a screen input and interface away really. And those OS's will be Android and iOS it seems.

Honestly, with all the money MS currently has, would it kill them to hedge their bets even if they don't think it's going to work out...just incase it does. They obviously don't do well at catch up.

[BC_Master_Haze]

They're awful at catch up but they're improving. I think this is the usual PhilR we hear about Xbox products though, just trying to draw negative attention to the biggest threat of their AR products.

[BudokaiGamer]

To me, it's adding things that people feel they want and will just not care for after too long.

I could be wrong! And I wouldn't mind being proved wrong. But when I see videos of people having to move their head, or with the whole treadmill thing w/ Oculus or something I just lose more interest. I'm playing games to be lazy, not to do something that I could go outside and do.

Obviously you could turn off motion controls and stuff, but I get very motion sick too with something like riding in the back seat of the car, let alone what would happen to me if I used VR.

I'll try it out at some point and probably like it, but like the 3D on the regular 3DS systems, I'll probably just have it off.

[ibrake4naps]

I'd love to be in sword art online, but to also see portions of my living room with ar!