Sony will show a HMZ Prototype AR HMD at TGS

[Alucardx23]

I guess Sony doesn't want to stay behind the Oculus Rift. :smile:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77oCTRIUCk8&feature=youtu.be

 

[eastmen]

Apparently the price for the new one went up in japan even while they removed the headphones .

Seems like sony's MO

 

[Arwin]

Yeah. Glad to see it. It actually goes a step further, with a built in camera for Augmented Reality stuff.

EDIT: you're talking about the HMZ Z2 or something, which is the regular one that is just for TV viewing, basically. But this is a different one, with head-tracking, augmented reality etc. - the one that's actually interesting for gaming purposes, and gets to compete with the Oculus Rift ... (how well will remain to be seen)

 

[eastmen]

ah yes my bad

http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/11/sony-hmz-t2-price-release-date-japan/

 

[Prophecy2k]

These things are never gonna go anywhere besides perhaps arcades and the bedrooms of the most nerdiest gamers.

Two reasons:

a) They aren't cool and are super nerdy. The stigma will keep the mainstream away, relegating these devices to a small and very dedicated nerdy niche.

b) They only serve one person - thus in an age where the best selling console (Wii) and highest selling peripheral (Kinect) were all about local-based social gaming, these types of devices are to restricting to be mass market.

I can see a) not really changing unless a company like Apple somehow manages to convince US hipsters otherwise, which is unlikely given how little Apple care about games.
b) could be overcome, but either at too high a performance cost for the HW rendering the games (rendering to both the headset and TV, ala WiiU), or too high a monetary cost to the consumer (having to buy multiple headsets).

 

[Shifty Geezer]

These things are never gonna go anywhere besides perhaps arcades and the bedrooms of the most nerdiest gamers.

Two reasons:

a) They aren't cool and are super nerdy. The stigma will keep the mainstream away, relegating these devices to a small and very dedicated nerdy niche.

When the form factor changes to a pair of shades, they will.

 

[Prophecy2k]

When the form factor changes to a pair of shades, they will.

If people refused to wear 3D glasses, I can't see these being any different, regardless of form factor.

 

[Arwin]

Cool is a matter of perspective, and benefit. Something will become cool if it works really well.

What I imagine for instance is that I am walking or cycling, and have my route and stats (speed, distance etc.) displayed integrated into the scenery, or I'm in France and all objects I see have their French name printed on them, landmarks have their backgrounds, etc.

Of course that's just the augmented reality part. I'm still already very thrilled just about having the virtual reality part.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

If people refused to wear 3D glasses, I can't see these being any different, regardless of form factor.

Go to any 3D movie and count the people refusing to wear 3D glasses. If you count more than 0, give me a call.

It's a matter of experience. There are various negative reasons to avoid 3D glasses on a TV screen in the home. However, for solo gaming, a personal VR experience is potentially compelling. Big headsets lack comfort so that'll be a detractor. Lightweight glasses are no problem - people choose to wear sunglasses and specs even as a point of fashion. I can see several reasons why headsets might never take off, but having to wear some eyewear isn't one of them. If the experience is compelling and doesn't make people sick and doesn't cost too much, then gamers will want it. Early models and prototypes failing to perform well don't indicate a dead-end future any more than Windows Tablet PCs failure proved that people would never want a tablet computer, so even if the current wave of VR does as well as previous Virtual Boy and Virtuality efforts, the future could still see stylish eyewear for VR/AR as very popular.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Cool is a matter of perspective, and benefit. Something will become cool if it works really well.

I wouldn't go as far as that. Human taste is fickle and unpredictable. Superbly functional ideas can still be snubbed as unstylish. That's why we have designers trying to make products more appealing (or even acceptable) through aesthetics. If DS had been released a ghastly, chunky block like a 4 year old's toy, it'd have probably struggled to gain adoption. A truly realistic VR headset that looks like a dustbin lid and collection of tin cans assembled around a wedding veil would not sell to the masses, no matter how good the experience.

 

[Arwin]

Blue used to be a girl's color (pink came later), and fat women used to be all the vogue. This has as much to do with fashion as with interpretation. There are definitely exceptions though - few people like large above ground electricity towers, I think.

But don't underestimate people's flexibility in associating looks with function/feeling.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Sure, but fashion isn't decided by functionality. Something that is out of vogue in aesthetics will meet an acceptance wall regardless of how well it works. Big, ugly headsets won't gain mainstream adoption no matter how well they work, unless fashion moves towards that aesthetic independently. eg. The catwalks start showing stupid headset style sunglasses, a few popular celebs turn up at events wearing them, trendsetting kids adopt the look and then everyone follows. If that should happen, then clunky VR headsets would be acceptable attire without the wearer feeling embarrassed.

 

[Arwin]

Possible, but let's say, theoretically, that if you put it on, you could walk around in a jungle or on Mars with perfect fidelity in full 3D etc. then people will start to love the device for its 'personality' ... conversely, if the device looks, for the lack of a better word, perfect, if you then put it on and use it and you get the most horrible motion sickness ever, you'll be over it in no-time, and its looks will lose all meaning quickly.

 

[MfA]

Dunno about VR, but when there are actual affordable see through AR glasses with high FoV in the form factor of normal glasses you'll soon become the odd one out for not wearing it ... unless you're old

 

[BoardBonobo]

Much prefer the idea of the projected play area that MS are looking into. It's one step closer to a holo deck and reminds of a room I had a play with in a VR lab once. All four walls, ceiling, and floor were screens and you sat in what was basically a hammock in the centre. They then played a number of scenarios that you could control yourself. Both the space flight and falling from a great height were incredibly intense and made me feel quite queasy. But in a good way!

 

[Shifty Geezer]

MS's projector isn't VR though. It requires the player to watch the main screen, meaning you can't turn your head and look around in full clarity. The projection will also be heavily influenced by the room. Non-white walls will affect the projection colour, and furniture will disrupt the immersion. MS's idea is good for ambience and a simpler implemetation, but no alternative to a headset.

 

[BoardBonobo]

MS's projector isn't VR though. It requires the player to watch the main screen, meaning you can't turn your head and look around in full clarity. The projection will also be heavily influenced by the room. Non-white walls will affect the projection colour, and furniture will disrupt the immersion. MS's idea is good for ambience and a simpler implemetation, but no alternative to a headset.

I thought they had some form of head tracking in there as well as the ambient solution? Having used VR kit from way back when, remember the VR kit based on the Amiga - Virtuality I think it was called, I've just never got on with headsets.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

They can add head-tracking for small camera adjustments, but they can't provide full rotational viewing. That is, you can't hear a noise behind you, spin around, and see an enemy. In this patent you'd have to turn the player character just as an ordinary FPS. The peripheral vision would give indicators on the wider play area, which is a good idea, but can't replicate the full feedback possible via a headset. No solution can replace the individual player experience of a headset (beyond direct eye projection or brain projection!). That experience needs an independent image to each eye that follows head and body movement. I guess you could build a pneumatic chair with a 3D TV that spins you around at great speed. And expense...

 

[V3]

Will this thing have higher FOV? Come on Sony give us an affordable 180 degree fov headset with low latency for gaming.

 

[dobwal]

a) They aren't cool and are super nerdy. The stigma will keep the mainstream away, relegating these devices to a small and very dedicated nerdy niche.

I don't understand why this belief still hold as "nerd" is the new cool. Tekkies aren't really dominated by the introverted and socially inept crowd anymore. Ever watch a NBA after game news conference?

Its not the stigma that stands in the way of VR glasses, its the lack of imagination.

The biggest fad market today is the smartphone. 15 years ago no one cared about smartphones outside of the business and geek crowd. Mostly because all vendors tried to offer is a phone version of a lap or desktop. Devices like the SideKick made texting cool for the young crowd. Apple, Android and third party developers made it relevant to the masses.

Its just a question of someone trying to make it more than a console that you wear on your head. A totally 3D enviroment isn't going to do it alone. Its going to take that plus some features that make playing games on a TV display seem stale and archaic.

I can see features like instead of turning your body to see the game world on your right, which is something done by simply using an analog stick today. Turning your head or body 90 degrees or greater to the right transitions you into another enviroment like a live NBA or NFL game where your point of view is equivalent to the best seats (court side or 50 yard line) in the stadium. How about looking straight up or down to catch a text message, video email or an RSS feed?