|
|
|
|
|
|
by indrax
1683 days ago
|
|
|
I look at this like Multimedia and the web in 1995. Yes some of this is a shadow of Microsoft Bob. We don't know what we're doing with VR yet but the technology has crossed over the line from being a toy or experiment. Skeuomorphism is a temporary workaround until we (users and designers both) learn what conventions are most powerful and port more applications to VR. |
|
|
I agree with you generally, but I think the people who are big on this space are overstating this point in particular. The existing VR hardware still feels like a prototype of what will eventually "work" here. It's too big, too expensive, too low-resolution, and too dim, and it relies a lot on our brain's willingness to accept and accommodate sub-par imagery. Similar to the AR space, I genuinely do not believe that the technology we're building with has enough of a performance ceiling to get us where we want to be - I think that "LCD screens + funky optics" is getting us close enough to trial some VR experiences and play around with the interaction models, but I think it's got too many compromises (shitty resolution and no differential focus, among them) to really be the technology that takes us to the "promise land" here.