Questions concerning the near future of VR (virtual reality)

As Oculus Rift preorders start, disagreement remains about how mainstream VR will be, whether it is around more than games, and what it will do to people


Is 2016 the year that virtual reality (VR) eventually makes its breakthrough as a mainstream technology? That is a question because of its evangelists and sceptics to argue about, and you’ll find lots in both camps.

With Facebook’s Oculus Rift headset now open to preorder, Sony’s PlayStation VR and HTC’s Vive on their way, and millions of inexpensive Google Cardboard headsets out in the crazy already, this year will visit a barrage of experimenting around VR.

Stepping back from your hoopla, there are three major questions – truly actual questions, you could say – about VR’s potential, so when the responses emerge in 2016, we’ll have a far greater idea of whether this time round, the technology is going to be a success or a flop.

How mainstream is this technology actually likely to be?
Facebook manager Mark Zuckerberg did not spend $2bn purchasing Oculus VR to release a market headset for high end PC owners, even though that is pretty much what its first commercial variant – selling for $599 plus the cost of a strong PC (if desired) – will be.

“One day, we believe this kind of immersive, augmented reality will become a part of daily life for billions of people,” wrote Zuckerberg in March 2014, when he declared the acquisition. Facebook views VR as another large computing platform, but that may depend on it becoming a mainstream apparatus.

Oculus VR creator Palmer Luckey has recognized the challenge. “Most folks do not have computers with high end graphics cards. As time goes on, that is likely to transform: give it five or six years, and most computers will soon be effective at running great virtual encounters,” he said in the Web Summit summit in December 2015.

“Right now it’s going to be this niche just because of the equipment … but you can still sell many millions of units.”

Will VR actually be about more than games?
When Oculus Rift first appeared as a $2.4m Kickstarter crowdfunding effort in 2013, it was all about the games. “The first truly immersive virtual reality headset for video games.”

When it ships this spring, it will come with two games: Lucky’s Story and EVE: Valkyrie, with the assurance of “more than 100 titles available by the end of 2016”. A few of the world’s top games console, PC and mobile programmers work on VR games for the Rift and PlayStation VR.

And yet … VR is going to be about more than games. Zuckerberg was definitely believing beyond gaming when he declared Facebook’s Oculus acquisition.

“This is only the beginning. After games, we are likely to make Oculus a platform for a number of other encounters,” he wrote. “Imagine enjoying a court side seat at a game, studying in a classroom of students and teachers all over the world or consulting with a doctor face to face – just by putting on goggles in your home.”

Already, several non-gaming uses are emerging to the fore: instruction and training; VR movies; music and sports. Plus, necessarily, porn.

In the Web Summit, Luckey looked especially keen on instruction. “There’s a lot of potential for virtual reality in the education industry,” he said. “Classrooms are busted. Children do not learn the best by reading novels.”

Maybe not viewpoints that’ll endear him to some teachers, but Luckey went to indicate that VR could be a means to provide kids virtual field-trips to areas they wouldn’t be able to see in the real world.

There is lots to discuss about virtual reality as a technology, but its future is going to be identified just as much by its societal gains and prices.

VR Gold Rush: The Pursuit for Seamless, High Quality Virtual Reality

Among the best challenges for developing a feeling of “presence” has long been real obstructions like your couch. Now, a number of firms are assembling apparatus built to allow you to go freely set up.

“I put on the head-mounted display and that I used to be really disappointed because all I saw were fat pixels. You know, nothing was fascinating,” says Mel Slater, a professor in the University of Barcelona as well as a world specialist in virtual reality (VR). “I was in an area. I could make out that much. But then somebody said ‘transfer your head,’ as well as the minute I moved my head, unexpectedly I was actually in an area, and that I heard sounds and that I really could see as I moved my head about.”

“I used a mouse button or a wand button to float over to the window, I looked out of the window, there was a boat down below on some water,” he continues. “I began floating down towards the boat. And then I heard someone say ‘your time is up.’ They took off the head-mounted display and that I used to be quite shocked to be back in this light, realistic reality.”


As a new wave of virtual reality peripheral equipent, including the much-talked-about Oculus Rift, gets press interest and a large number of preorders, encounters like Slater’s seem set to eventually become a growing number of common. Nevertheless, the amazing thing is the fact that his dreamlike narrative of feeling unexpectedly immersed in a virtual room is over 20 years old. It was, actually, Slater’s first ever experience of virtual reality; the very first time he ever experienced the sensation called “presence” — the feeling of “really being there,” or, as he describes it, “place illusion.”

I also have felt really present in a virtual environment. I have looked out over a gaping chasm, heard the wind wail within my ears, and felt my heartbeat quicken even though, cognitively, I could remind myself that it was all just pixels and audio files. But understanding this visceral awareness of existence has been available for decades raises a question about virtual reality’s long and tortured struggle to be taken as a mainstream type of amusement: Why the hiatus? Why has the magic of VR been confined for so long to occasional demos and laboratory research, essentially immobilized in academic obscurity?

Having talked to a number of programmers and proponents of VR, the consensus appears to be twofold. To begin with, the price of the hardware has, previously, been astronomic. A few of the most recent gadgets continue to be priced well above a consumer-friendly degree, including the IGS Glove, a peripheral developed by Synertial (previously Animazoo) which enables your virtual hand to bend and move just like your actual hand, right down to complex finger movements.

Mark Lewis, head of sales at Synertial, framed the glove in my experience as “a business product.” For instance, auto manufacturer Skoda is utilizing it to study how engineers on the production line manipulate mechanical parts during construction. Nevertheless, he included that Synertial was additionally “investigating” prospective consumer versions of the glove that might interest a modern VR market.

Second, and perhaps most clearly, seamless, high quality VR continues to be difficult to generate. Existence, although briefly extreme, is regarded as quite simple to interrupt, thus the VR term “break in presence,” or BIP for short. “The program must prevent you in this other world. That is extremely delicate,” Sebastien Kuntz, founder of software firm “I am in VR,” said to me, describing his conservatism about the present renewed interest in VR as an entertainment platform. Kuntz mentions several forms of technology which he says come close to enhancing VR but which, ultimately, might really result in a break in existence more frequently than not because they haven’t been designed thoughtfully enough.

By way of example, he mentions the frequent insufficient curiosity about developing successful soundtracks for VR programs. “If the sound is really great you don’t have to have to [worry about creating] better graphics because the senses compensate one another,” he says. He adds that reaching photorealism inside the virtual environment just isn’t essential when inducing a feeling of existence, a number of key perceptions should just be provoked in the correct manner.

But the biggest challenge for virtual reality has always been motion. The action of just walking around a virtual space remains limited by the inconvenient correlation coefficient of the virtual room to the actual room where a VR user is standing. This exact issue, however, is one which a varied variety of new peripherals is expecting to undertake.

There is the Omni, a sort of fixed grooved dish and harness you could walk and run on (your feet constantly come back to the exact same place); the recently established WizDish, a similar but more affordable theory which uses anti-friction studded shoes; and eventually the complex VirtuSphere, a 10-foot high hollow ball which encases the VR player within its spherical layout.

All of these, nevertheless, have limits. Jan Goetgeluk, inventor of the Omni, declares the harness which comes together with the apparatus means quite fit gestures or behaviour for example crawling aren’t potential. “You’re not gonna play soccer on the Omni for example,” he remarks. However, the apparatus is an exciting part of the correct path. In their now on-going Kickstarter start, Goetgeluk and his team have procured nearly $1 million of bunch-sourced funds.

“We’ve been doing this Half Life 2 demo,” Goetgeluk told me, remembering a promotion at E3 earlier this month. “At some point we see enemies plus they begin throwing grenades at you. Everyone, when they see that grenade coming, everyone just begins sprinting. Itis a natural reaction, it feels real. You want to begin sprinting, your brain thinks you are there, it is really extreme.”

The WizDish can also be seeking financial backing in the group. Having attempted the WizDish, I could report the sense of “walking” by sliding one’s feet back and forth on a low-friction stage is unusual but powerful enough to indicate that one is going more naturally by way of a virtual environment. For users of the VirtuSphere, there’s a tradeoff between having the ability to walk “in a natural way, in any direction,” and being unable to stand close to other players, according to among its originators, Allan Latypov.

One kit, Job Holodeck, has tried to unite various peripherals as a way to improve the VR experience. Its programmers have created simulations where players (enveloped in gear including translation trackers, the Oculus Rift, controls as well as a laptop in a backpack) work together to defeat objects in the virtual universe.

James Iliff, producer, says, “Users can reach out and hit their buddies’ arm in the virtual universe, as well as their buddy is physically there in reality. They are able to have sword fights, and fire at each other, and work collectively to fight enemies.”

But all of the approximations of walking effort to capitalize on the classic knowledge of existence which Kuntz and Slater discussed during dialogue: It does not have to be perfect to feel absolutely actual.

As Julian Williams, inventor of the WizDish, set it himself: “If you can simplify things so that your mind thinks they’re happening, your brain seems to be very plastic and very able to accept it.”

The exact same plasticity is the essential element in among the very interesting things about virtual reality: not it is likely to convince the user of being in another location, but to convince them that they possess another self.

“It’s one thing to change the world you’re in so that you perceive yourself to be above a great abyss, that’s interesting, but when you turn into a lobster or something, that’s really profound,” says Jaron Lanier, someone who experimented with VR in its first incarnations and who has possibly become its most well known proponent.

He tells me about a VR program he experimented with in his 20s which entailed “trading eyes with a lover,” an environment in which, “you look at each other’s eyes and you have to learn to coordinate a shared body.” He giggles as he envisions the “social problems” that could appear in a future where we all begin experimenting with such things.

But behind that laughter is a point of earnestness for Lanier. He says that much of his present-day technology criticism, like that in his 2010 novel, You AreN’t a Gadget, comes straight from his knowledge that Virtual Reality has this possibility to be such a radically transformative encounter.

“Seeing how readily people can be manipulated by virtual worlds has helped me, I think, develop a healthy sensibility of just how potent these tools can be,” he says when I ask him specifically in regards to the emotional ramifications of the feeling of “presence.” Really, Lanier talks about VR using a interesting mixture of delight and dread, occasionally calling it “cosmic,” but now and again indicating theoretical adverse results.

“There’s a real tension here for me,” he clarifies, “between the incredible beauty and power of this stuff and also the potential for humanity to confuse itself.”

Some experimental confusion, however, is just what Mel Slater attempts to reach daily in his research. Lately he’s published papers on giving individuals alternative bodies and documenting the effects on their behavior. As an example, it seems that a VR user who’s given a “Jimi Hendrix”-like body will play the drums more enthusiastically than someone whose avatar is a light-skinned man wearing a suit.

Relatedly, in a number of his latest study on the topic, Slater has investigated how white or light-skinned VR users would experience brief changes in racial prejudice (measured via implied organization testing) when they were given avatars with different skin colours in the virtual universe.

“The incredible thing is — not for long, I’m talking about ten minutes — you give them this implicit racial bias test again, the scores change,” he clarifies. “The ones you’ve put in a dark body have a lower racial bias than the ones you put in a white body or a blue body.”

Underpinning all of the experiments is a 20-year career of attempting to find what’s important to attain existence. Slater’s experiments with body morphology are in many ways dependent on existence not being busted. He tells me about one experiment that his team attempted which called for mimicking a barfight. Participants in early variants of the surroundings who watched the scene unfold had an unexpectedly flat result. Why? Because, they said, “a fight like that would never happen in a bar that looks like this.”

It is an anecdote that brings home the fragility of existence, the fact it’s really dependent on numerous variables: our many perceptions, our sophisticated anticipations of the planet around us. In virtual reality, a selection of stimulation compete to convince the brain of a built perceptual reality, but that perception is in the mercy of the nerve susceptibility making existence potential in the very first place: We may feel, hear, or see a thing that loses us right back to the cognitive reality that is completely conscious that that which we perceive is but a brilliant lie.

Stuart Cupit, cofounder of London-headquartered technology studio Inition, has been experimenting with VR demos for years and is intensely conscious of the technological constraints which coexist, as they’ve consistently done, alongside captivating science fiction fantasies of what might one day be possible.

For Cupit, the crudeness of what’s still somewhat clunky, “strap on hardware” stays clear. “What you want to be doing,” he says, “is tricking the senses at a base level.”

And is not that the essence of the virtual? It definitely appears to be what rests behind this strong line from The Matrix (1999): “How would you define ‘real’? In the event you are talking in what it is possible to feel, what you are able to smell, what you can taste and see, then ‘real’ is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brain.”

And Cupit, though excited about the way in which the area is growing, is, like most long term professionals, informed of what still must be performed prior to the complete concentration offered by something similar to The Matrix is even possible. “We’ve got to realize that the peripherals we’re seeing now aren’t the ones our kids will grow up using,” he asserts. “These are the embryonic steps towards a new way of interacting with media.”

To date, the story of virtual reality is still little higher than the usual history of many embryonic measures. But tantalizing chances to feel existence, even for short seconds, have been there throughout. This alone has propelled so many now working in the area. They’ve narratives both of these early experiences as well as their following dreams of how to make VR more secure and much more reachable.

Virtual Reality: What Can We Expect For The Future?

Everything we experience in life may be reduced to electric action arousing our brains as our sensory organs deliver information regarding the outside universe. This interpretation is that which we consider to be “reality.” In this perception, the brain is reality. Whatever you see, hear, feel, taste and scent is an interpretation of what is outside, and created completely as part of your mind. We often consider this interpretation fits quite closely to the outside universe. Nothing may be farther from the facts.


It’s the brain that “sees”, as well as in a few significant ways what it sees doesn’t represent the advice it derives from sensory stimulation. That is why, we’re all living in our personal reality simulations – abstractions – that we build as an outcome of both that which we perceive with our perceptions and how our brains change this perception. Such matters as colour, odor and flavor, for example aren’t properties of the external world itself, but instead a classification developed by the procedure for perception. So that you can see the universe in a meaningful way, the brain must become a filter/noise between us as well as the “real” world.
Words have consistently been a primitive way of relaying purpose. VR holds out the promise of enabling us to literally show one another what we mean rather than just describing it by primitive verbal approximations. The limit of words is the fact that the meaning they carry is just as detailed as the definitions the reader or listener attaches to them. That is why VR provides the chance for evolving our communicating right into some sort of telepathy, finally bridging the difference between our distinct imaginations. “This is what virtual reality holds out to us – the possibility of walking into the constructs of the imagination.” – Terence McKenna

VR is the best medium of syntactical intent; the lone way to figuratively “show” someone just that which you mean would be to literally reveal them. Words are extremely unsuccessful at communicating meaning, as they’re a low-bandwidth, lossy medium of knowledge transference. VR will let’s remove the ambiguity this is the disparity between our internal dictionaries and avoid communicating through symbolism completely. The effect is going to be perfect comprehension, as all parties behold the exact same info.

When it comes right down to it, having a physical body in a reality constrained by the limits of the physical laws has a lot of drawbacks. Our anatomies are very delicate and could be damaged or killed in a instant if we’re not cautious, or are just plain unlucky. If anything bad happens using a vital body part, the whole body could perish. Our physical bodies are also deteriorated by aging. Either way, for now, if the human body expires, your brain dies right as well as it. Every human brain comprises an enormous abundance of advice, memories, experiences and relationships. Whenever a human brain expires, that unbelievable, exceptional abundance of knowledge perishes with it, and is eternally lost. The planet is a dangerous spot to inhabit in a frail human body, and there certainly are plenty of other issues which come with having a physical existence in a real universe. Utilizing the toilet, body odor, problem traveling, restriction of chances, simply to name some. Up to the stage, we’ve had no choice to life, besides passing. Due to nanotechnology, there might come a period when folks will really have a choice between life in the “real world,” an existence in the computer generated simulation, or passing.
Reality has specific constraints which virtual reality will have the ability to circumvent. For example, going from one place to another in the real world needs transferring your physical body, which can be constrained by the laws of physics. Your body is a very fine thing, subject to damage incredibly readily from many effects. Transport also can take up lots of time. What if these risks and constraints may be completely removed?

A number of our technologies have in common the effort to take away the limits of our physicality. For instance, phones (which are really a kind of VR) empower us to speak to those who are too much from us in 3D space to speak to without using technology. The World Wide Web permits US to meet and socialize in a common (generally 2D, so far) virtual surroundings, no matter where we’re physically. The Internet, in its present form is a largely two dimensional virtual environment that enables individuals to meet and exchange thoughts and advice. For the time being, this remains an extremely level encounter, involving just 2D sight, and sound. SecondLife is among the first signs of exactly what the future Internet could be like. It’s going to get a 3rd measurement and start entailing more of the perceptions. It will get reality as bandwidth increases without end.

Virtual reality (or a virtual environment) is the projection of man-made stimulation upon the the perceptions so that you can make the interpretation of being in another place in spacetime. It’s going to even enable us to create virtual worlds that not and cannot exist in the ‘real’ universe.