VR headsets shouldn't be peripherals

Started by the-pi-guy, Jan 03, 2020, 06:56 PM

previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

the-pi-guy

I've been thinking about this for a while.

There's this bizarre gap in direction for where VR feels like it's heading and where it should be heading. And it comes down to every VR headset is very tied to its own platform. You can't expect to plug in any random device into a Rift. You can't plug in a Rift to your PS4 and it takes a little bit of work to plug in your PSVR to your PC.  

I think it's pretty clear that the future should include these devices broadcasting to whatever VR headset.

The downsides of how it's being done right now, mean that the platforms are fragmented from each other, but they're also in a weird space where they simultaneously can do way more than a TV can do but they also can't do as much.

Legend

While things are still experimental, I think the current approach works best.

Long term VR headsets should either be like computer monitors or be complete solutions ala Oculus Quest. Short term however things are too volatile. Standard headsets are somewhat plug and play on PC with OpenVR but the second a headset/controller attempts something novel, a lack of standards is beneficial.

Take for example something funky like a wireless VR headset that applies reprojection within the headset itself to decrease latency. It'd specifically need games to render the game to two separate images so that reprojection isn't applied to HUD elements. As a peripheral, this new technique could be "forced" into existence the second it makes sense. If a next gen system wanted to do this they could just do this and that'd be that. If however VR worked like computer monitors/TVs, this new technique would be slow to implement ala G-Sync and take a while to gain serious support. By that time a better VR technique could be developed.

kitler53

legend is right.  vr isn't ready for "standardization" right know.  every vr set is a bit different in it features and capabilities and requirements so they really are not interchangeable. 

also, there is no motive for sony or valve to invest money making their hardware work on someone else's platform.  no one is making money on hardware right now.  all the money is in software,.. so a vr set that was cross platform compatible would cost a lot more and vr is too expensive as is. 
       

the-pi-guy

While things are still experimental, I think the current approach works best.

Long term VR headsets should either be like computer monitors or be complete solutions ala Oculus Quest. Short term however things are too volatile. Standard headsets are somewhat plug and play on PC with OpenVR but the second a headset/controller attempts something novel, a lack of standards is beneficial.

Take for example something funky like a wireless VR headset that applies reprojection within the headset itself to decrease latency. It'd specifically need games to render the game to two separate images so that reprojection isn't applied to HUD elements. As a peripheral, this new technique could be "forced" into existence the second it makes sense. If a next gen system wanted to do this they could just do this and that'd be that. If however VR worked like computer monitors/TVs, this new technique would be slow to implement ala G-Sync and take a while to gain serious support. By that time a better VR technique could be developed.
I kind of mispoke in the OP, I meant where VR will eventually be heading.  Not that VR should be standardized right now.  

There's a lot of pros and cons with the way it's done right now.  
Example:
-fragmentation
+easier for a better technique to become more dominant




On a related note, Oculus has been doing really great in that, there's a layer for their software so that games can take advantage of some of the new developments without the dev having to do any work.  They added ASW that way for example.