Inventor Predicts Maybe 5 Years Before Oculus Rift Goes Mainstream

[Esmeralda Portillo]

Inventor Predicts Maybe 5 Years Before Oculus Rift Goes Mainstream

The inventor of the Oculus Rift and founder of Oculus VR believes his product will go mainstream, but it may take a number of years before this is possible.

Last month Oculus Rift creator Oculus Rift in every home [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/tag/view/palmer%20luckey]. In an interview with GamesIndustry International Luckey has gone on to clarify this sentiment that he understands it can take a couple of years before the virtual reality headset goes mainstream.

"Maybe VR doesn't really take off for consumers for some time," Luckey explains, guessing that "it might be next year, it might be five years from now." However, "The good news at having such a big backer behind us [Facebook [<a href=]] is that we can now afford to play that long game. Rather than having to make money now or we stop existing and someone else takes over, we can think about the best thing to do for the long-term of virtual reality."

Luckey also acknowledges a key component that will help the Oculus Rift [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/tag/view/oculus%20rift] survive in the market once a retail version launches for the public is content, and they're working hard to make sure that business is operational by working with video game developers as well as exploring other mediums like movies and television. Oculus has just launched a program called Share, where developers can try out project ideas they have and receive feedback.

"With publishing, it's not just about what shows off the tech; it's about what is actually going to make people go out and buy a Rift. And that's been one of the gating factors to the consumer version, in the sense that a lot of people would buy the DK2 right now. But if you did that you would have no games to play. We need to help seed the ecosystem and remove that risk for developers. Super important."

Source: GameSpot [http://www.gamespot.com/articles/it-could-be-5-years-before-vr-becomes-mainstream-o/1100-6421980/]

Permalink

 

[Lightknight]

Sure, if it takes them five years to release the damn thing. Seriously, we have no way of knowing until it's out there. The current dev kit all but tells consumers not to buy it and yet 80k people have sunk money into it.

 

[Zontar]

What is mainstream in their minds? A million units? Ten million? One hundred million? This is why you don't let people who are only interested in making money hand over fist get control over a product which is a peripheral device for a niche market.

 

[Lightknight]

What is mainstream in their minds? A million units? Ten million? One hundred million? This is why you don't let people who are only interested in making money hand over fist get control over a product which is a peripheral device for a niche market.

Gamers (40% of the US population) and Movie watchers (89% of US) are a niche market? Maybe broadly, but there is a huge potential market for the product since it's basically a new way to enjoy various types of already popular media.

 

[Zontar]

What is mainstream in their minds? A million units? Ten million? One hundred million? This is why you don't let people who are only interested in making money hand over fist get control over a product which is a peripheral device for a niche market.

Gamers (40% of the US population) and Movie watchers (89% of US) are a niche market? Maybe broadly, but there is a huge potential market for the product since it's basically a new way to enjoy various types of already popular media.

Gamers, no, people willing to pay 300$ for a PC extension that allows you to look around in a few games, very much so. Even the original kickstarter acknowledge that it wasn't a mainstream machine but a peripheral device. It may sell well if it ever gets an official release, but the odds of it going mainstream are, well, I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Wan Shi Tong]

I seriously doubt that in five years VR will be as popular as say... the smartphone. I think VR is going to be great but VR is for a niche audience. To gain mass appeal your product needs to make everyday actions easier, like how smartphones made it easier to check your email, listen to music, post on social media, play casual games, ad infinitum. So far I think the only features Oculus has is that it can be used for games and social media, it doesn't even make playing games or social media easier to use, it just enhances them, which means that for now it is just optional. Something optional is going to have a hard time being mainstream.

So the inventor of Oculus Rift thinks that his invention, which as far as I can tell, is mostly aimed at hardcore gamers, who make up only 20% of the market, can become mainstream? He needs to pull down his expectations a bit and just focus on making a great VR product so that me and 20% of gamers can enjoy the heck out of it. If he can do that, THEN we can talk about making things mainstream.

 

[shirkbot]

Gamers (40% of the US population) and Movie watchers (89% of US) are a niche market? Maybe broadly, but there is a huge potential market for the product since it's basically a new way to enjoy various types of already popular media.

Gamers, no, people willing to pay 300$ for a PC extension that allows you to look around in a few games, very much so. Even the original kickstarter acknowledge that it wasn't a mainstream machine but a peripheral device. It may sell well if it ever gets an official release, but the odds of it going mainstream are, well, I'll believe it when I see it.

I second this, but I'd also like to know where we're getting that original "40% of US" figure. As Zontar points out, even if 40% of all people in the US play games, what percentage of those people would find this useful or interesting enough to pay the rather steep entry fee? On a strictly personal level, it's difficult to see the appeal of VR for anything that's not first-person, which is a rather large (if not the largest) chunk of the gaming market. Movies are a safer bet, but then you have to convince movie studios to create the incredibly expensive VR friendly films.

OT: Luckey, I hate to tell you this, but in being bought by Facebook you are now part of Facebook's long-term planning. If Oculus doesn't contribute positively to Facebook's long-term finances then it will be killed. You're still in the exact same situation of "make money or be disbanded," the decision just got handed off to someone else.

 

[Entitled]

I seriously doubt that in five years VR will be as popular as say... the smartphone. I think VR is going to be great but VR is for a niche audience. To gain mass appeal your product needs to make everyday actions easier.

That's true for utility tools, but not necessarily for entertainment mediums.

HMDs as a peripheral, as a tool to consume the pre-existing games with, are absolutely a niche. Even Oculus and Luckey have repeatedly agreed with you on that. But overall, Virtual Reality is also on the edge of becoming it's own medium, with it's own brand new appeals.

Playing video game consoless isn't "easier" than watching TV, and watching TV isn't "easier" than listening to the radio.

In fact, when the TV was invented, future-guessers complained that ?The problem with television is that people must sit and keep their eyes glued on a screen; the average American family hasn?t time for it".

As it turns out, the average american family didn't look at the TV as merely a tool that's expected to be more accessible than the radio, but as HOLY SHIT there is a window to the whole world in our living room, OF COURSE we will make extra time for gluing our eyes on it!"

Likewise, after the first 1-2 years of cluelessness and trying to treat it like a fancy monitor for older games, once direct developmentforit starts, (which is what the DevKits were for), VR really has the potential to start out as "HOLY SHIT I can stick my head inside WHOLE FICTIONAL WORLDS and let them surround me, OF COURSE I will make time for that specifically, in my life".

If not 5, then 10 yearsfrom now, it's easy to imagine that "gaming" would refer specifically to monitor-based entertainment, mostly emhasizing 2D menu based gameplay, and old-school genres, while the spotlight of immersive escapist entertainment is stolen by a "VR medium" that has it's own standards, nothing more than vaguely inspired by gaming as we know it.

 

[Lightknight]

What is mainstream in their minds? A million units? Ten million? One hundred million? This is why you don't let people who are only interested in making money hand over fist get control over a product which is a peripheral device for a niche market.

Gamers (40% of the US population) and Movie watchers (89% of US) are a niche market? Maybe broadly, but there is a huge potential market for the product since it's basically a new way to enjoy various types of already popular media.

Gamers, no, people willing to pay 300$ for a PC extension that allows you to look around in a few games, very much so. Even the original kickstarter acknowledge that it wasn't a mainstream machine but a peripheral device. It may sell well if it ever gets an official release, but the odds of it going mainstream are, well, I'll believe it when I see it.

PC extension? Samsung is releasing a mobile version this winter. Imagine a device that is compatible with Samsung phones and can play stuff like movies/TV/whatever else?

Besides, you don't need those full numbers to be mainstream (FYI, the 40% number was from the NDP document the Escapist just put an article out on for PC gamers, so the actual number of gamers will be much higher when we include consoles and such). I have no idea exactly how many of those are willing and able to buy it. Even 1% of all those would be significant and mainstream and if the devkits are already selling tens of thousands of units then it's doing damn well.

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/189271-will-samsungs-gear-vr-trigger-the-virtual-reality-revolution-before-oculus-rift

 

[Wan Shi Tong]

I seriously doubt that in five years VR will be as popular as say... the smartphone. I think VR is going to be great but VR is for a niche audience. To gain mass appeal your product needs to make everyday actions easier.

That's true for utility tools, but not necessarily for entertainment mediums.

HMDs as a peripheral, as a tool to consume the pre-existing games with, are absolutely a niche. Even Oculus and Luckey have repeatedly agreed with you on that. But overall, Virtual Reality is also on the edge of becoming it's own medium, with it's own brand new appeals.

Playing video game consoless isn't "easier" than watching TV, and watching TV isn't "easier" than listening to the radio.

In fact, when the TV was invented, future-guessers complained that ?The problem with television is that people must sit and keep their eyes glued on a screen; the average American family hasn?t time for it".

As it turns out, the average american family didn't look at the TV as merely a tool that's expected to be more accessible than the radio, but as HOLY SHIT there is a window to the whole world in our living room, OF COURSE we will make extra time for gluing our eyes on it!"

Likewise, after the first 1-2 years of cluelessness and trying to treat it like a fancy monitor for older games, once direct developmentforit starts, (which is what the DevKits were for), VR really has the potential to start out as "HOLY SHIT I can stick my head inside WHOLE FICTIONAL WORLDS and let them surround me, OF COURSE I will make time for that specifically, in my life".

If not 5, then 10 yearsfrom now, it's easy to imagine that "gaming" would refer specifically to monitor-based entertainment, mostly emhasizing 2D menu based gameplay, and old-school genres, while the spotlight of immersive escapist entertainment is stolen by a "VR medium" that has it's own standards, nothing more than vaguely inspired by gaming as we know it.

You know, I hadn't really considered that. I was still thinking of VR as an extension rather than a medium by itself. Honestly though, even if VR turns out to be just a better way to play skyrim, I would still buy it. I do have high hopes for the technology, and like you said if it isn't mainstream in 5 than it will be in ten etc.

I just think the companies releasing VR devices need to take a chill pill and think about releasing the darn things without anything blowing up (that's blowing up figuratively, not literally) in their collective faces. Also because I am Wan Shi Tong, he who knows ten thousand things, I wanted to point out that the first high quality broadcasts for tv were in 1936 by BBC but the television didn't become a common household item in America until 1948. (Although to be honest the long delay was because of world war 2)

 

[Gennadios]

I predict 8 months for the oculus rift to end up at the same place 3D televisions are. I'm pretty sceptical they'll ever fix the headache issue.

 

[Korskarn]

What is mainstream in their minds? A million units? Ten million? One hundred million? This is why you don't let people who are only interested in making money hand over fist get control over a product which is a peripheral device for a niche market.

Gamers (40% of the US population) and Movie watchers (89% of US) are a niche market? Maybe broadly, but there is a huge potential market for the product since it's basically a new way to enjoy various types of already popular media.

Ahahahaahahahahaahahaha!

Man, I love every time someone suggests that movies are going to be the big thing with this. It would be so awesome to turn your head in the middle of a movie and see
this [http://www.distractify.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads//2014/06/lunchbreak595x452-620x.jpg]

or this [http://www.distractify.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads//2014/06/87112-934x.jpg]

or this [http://www.distractify.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads//2014/06/29RJv-934x.jpg]

Half of mainstream movies are perspective tricks, which can be destroyed by viewing from another angle, let alone wireframe sets that stop 2 inches beyond the camera frame, plus several dozen camera crew members standing around (sometimes holding important lighting equipment) just out of shot.

No director wants to put out even an entirely digitally constructed 6 degrees of freedom movie designed for the Oculus where audiences miss significant plot points because they're looking in the wrong direction.

It's a gimmick for films at best - not viable for mainstream.

 

[JetVypre]

I always find it funny when people are STILL going on about how Oculus totally sold out to Facebook and how its now under the control of the dark overlord Zuckerberg who will plaster our visions with giant blue F's. Makes me chuckle.

OP: 5 years may be a bit optimistic. But since owning a DK1 and having used a DK2, I can honestly say that I believe eventually it will go mainstream. There is far too much potential for it to be ignored, even outside the gaming/film industry.

I like to quote Henry Ford at times like this:

'If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.'

 

[Lightknight]

What is mainstream in their minds? A million units? Ten million? One hundred million? This is why you don't let people who are only interested in making money hand over fist get control over a product which is a peripheral device for a niche market.

Gamers (40% of the US population) and Movie watchers (89% of US) are a niche market? Maybe broadly, but there is a huge potential market for the product since it's basically a new way to enjoy various types of already popular media.

Ahahahaahahahahaahahaha!

Man, I love every time someone suggests that movies are going to be the big thing with this. It would be so awesome to turn your head in the middle of a movie and see
this [http://www.distractify.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads//2014/06/lunchbreak595x452-620x.jpg]

or this [http://www.distractify.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads//2014/06/87112-934x.jpg]

or this [http://www.distractify.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads//2014/06/29RJv-934x.jpg]

Half of mainstream movies are perspective tricks, which can be destroyed by viewing from another angle, let alone wireframe sets that stop 2 inches beyond the camera frame, plus several dozen camera crew members standing around (sometimes holding important lighting equipment) just out of shot.

No director wants to put out even an entirely digitally constructed 6 degrees of freedom movie designed for the Oculus where audiences miss significant plot points because they're looking in the wrong direction.

It's a gimmick for films at best - not viable for mainstream.

*sigh* you do realize that the real draw of having this as a movie watcher isn't about being literally "INSIDE" the movie, right? It's basically a simulated private movie theater that has more realistic 3D than real theaters can accomplish (due to interacting with the real light in these places and projection issues) as well as a feeling of real space technology had not been previously able to simulate due to latency issues that the Rift solved early on.

<youtube=z_JkrU2kxag>

Way back on the first rift dev kit I recall reading a reviewer who was shocked that he was in his cramped office with his wife in the next room and his kid upstairs and yet he felt like he was in a theater. He was hesitant to say it, but he admitted that this could have a real impact on the way people view movies in the future. You can sit in any seat (walk around), toggle between 3D (which is perfect from any seat, unlike a real theater that has better seats to sit in than others), and have the sense that you're in your own private theater. The only complaint I remember at the time was that the original rift dev kit was 720p so there was a screen door effect to the movie and a little graininess. That was supposed to be resolved by the second dev kit at 1080p and the consumer version is supposed to be a significantly higher resolution than that (4k resolution is very close to what a screen this close up needs). The consumer version's refresh rate will also be higher but that shouldn't make as big of a difference as it would in games.

Maybe someone might create movies where the director is the only one holding the camera or something but I'd expect that to be terrible and short lived at best. You joke about being able to look back and see the crew, but are you telling me that movie buffs and aspiring movie makers wouldn't like the prospect of movies with a special feature at the end where you can watch some of the acting/directing as if you're there? Not the whole thing of course, that'd be days and days of video, so a few small edited clips. But just some of the interesting scenes caught in VR so you can see how the sausage is made if that's your thing. disney Epcot has built attractions around just panoramic camera views so they're obviously popular. This could be interesting as a nature show viewer or the like. Maybe someone could figure out a horror movie scenario with the cast out of the set. There could also be rail-movies made for first person where you can't control the perspective. I have a feeling that those would be nauseating to watch but that's already becoming a thing with go-pro movies.

<youtube=1YGdBq_qcuU>

But that's NOT what I'm talking about. Those are gimmicks and are of limited use (especially if first person view makes people sick due to the brain trying to make sense of it).

What I am talking about is your own private home movie theater for $200-$400. A theater you can throw anything you own into from you're old copy of The Great Escape that you'd never see in theaters because it's so old to newer movies that just came out and even TV shows. Now, I've personally always wanted a theater. I only just bought a house where this is finally possible. But now... I can sink $10k in a theater for a decent screen/projector combo (maybe more depending on how I'd want to do the seating) or I can buy a couple of these things in a year for less than $1k total and only consider building the theater if I just really really want to have movie-screen parties at my house which, again, ten of these sets would still be less than half of a theater at the maximum price range.

So maybe don't mock something someone says unless you actually know what they mean with their statement. This little device could be standard in home entertainment. I remember living in a shitty one bedroom apartment. This would have been amazing and within my range at the time with a few months of budgeting. But, it is funny that people actually thought the main prevailing comment of this being useful in movie watching. Glad that incorrect assumption is still a thing.

 

[ascorbius]

I recently (the other day) got the Google Cardboard to try with my Samsung S5.. I put it together, downloaded the app for my phone and popped it inside and was quickly watching YouTube videos on a screen as big as a cinema screen. Then I downloaded the Tuscany dive app and spent a little time walking around this cool house looking at everything. Really nice.

A few things quickly became apparent.
1. Even with a phone and a cheap cardboard box with lenses in - actual 3D is possible. I appreciate that the cardboard is a gimmick and nothing like the Oculus, but as a demonstration of potential - it was amazing. It gets me excited for the possibilities.

2. The headache issue is present. I got a mild headache however my wife had to have a lie down. It seems to affect different people to different extents.

3. Tunnel vision - it would be awesome if the 3D filled the entire field of view instead of looking at the world through binoculars. Having peripheral vision possible would be amazing for horror game tricks.

4. Framerate matters massively. I had headaches the most from the slowest apps.

I think I would be very happy playing a FPS using the current level of tech. keyboard or controller would still be used for movement but with the additional use of head tracking for looking around. I don't think this is 5 years away at all..


How scary would a game like Amnesia be?.. eeek! (a little poop just came out)

 

[Lightknight]

I recently (the other day) got the Google Cardboard to try with my Samsung S5.. I put it together, downloaded the app for my phone and popped it inside and was quickly watching YouTube videos on a screen as big as a cinema screen. Then I downloaded the Tuscany dive app and spent a little time walking around this cool house looking at everything. Really nice.

A few things quickly became apparent.
1. Even with a phone and a cheap cardboard box with lenses in - actual 3D is possible. I appreciate that the cardboard is a gimmick and nothing like the Oculus, but as a demonstration of potential - it was amazing. It gets me excited for the possibilities.

Cool, I was wondering if I should build one or not. I have the link to it favorited for when I have enough time.

2. The headache issue is present. I got a mild headache however my wife had to have a lie down. It seems to affect different people to different extents.

The consumer version has changed this by integrating the Move to track head leaning which was a big problem. They also figured out ways to change the display to help the brain process it. So this is resolved in the rift dk2 and will continue to be solved in the consumer version. What is making you have a headache or nauseated is that your brain expects your view to shift when you lean your head but then it doesn't so the brain suddenly kicks into overdrive to try to adjust to the new world.

Consider this, if you wear glasses that make the world appear upside down for long enough, your brain will flip the view. If you take them off afterwards, the world will look upside down until your brain flips the image back.

3. Tunnel vision - it would be awesome if the 3D filled the entire field of view instead of looking at the world through binoculars. Having peripheral vision possible would be amazing for horror game tricks.

Hmm, not sure if this is addressed. The larger rift screen may make a difference or at least alleviate the problem.

4. Framerate matters massively. I had headaches the most from the slowest apps.

I think I would be very happy playing a FPS using the current level of tech. keyboard or controller would still be used for movement but with the additional use of head tracking for looking around. I don't think this is 5 years away at all..

They announced that the consumer model is being upgraded from 75MHz to 90MHz. I doubt your phone is even necessarily 60MHz but I guess it could be.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2602906/final-oculus-rift-pricing-hardware-teased-as-gear-vr-reveals-oculus-ready-interface.html

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

I predict 8 months for the oculus rift to end up at the same place 3D televisions are. I'm pretty sceptical they'll ever fix the headache issue.

They can't, it's pretty much an unfixable issue. The headaches (which are a lesser form of motion sickness) are caused by the eyes insisting to the brain that the body is in motion whilst the body is insisting to the brain that it is stationary. It's the same flaw that has sunk the various pre-Rift VR projects and it's the issue that will sink every post-Rift VR project until VR headsets come with a complimentary warehouse for their wearers to run around in.

 

[Fluke]

"Oculus has just launched a program called Share, where developers can try out project ideas they have and receive feedback."

If by "just launched" you mean August last year, then yep, they have.

 

[Verlander]

Got the opportunity to use one last weekend. Visual quality was poor, and it started bring on a headache in less than a couple of minutes. Disappointed isn't the word - I think we need to accept that highly lit screens near our faces don't work very well.

 

[seris]

They announced that the consumer model is being upgraded from 75MHz to 90MHz. I doubt your phone is even necessarily 60MHz but I guess it could be.

what screen refreshes at 75MHz? thats 78,643,200 refreshes per second. i think you just mean 75Hz which is 75 refreshes per second, or FPS