[mr_gibbins]

I can manage 15 minutes or so on my aging Oculus Quest but that's about it. There's a Netflix option on there, I can relax in a virtual cinema with surround sound and a screen sized big enough to feel like a cinema screen and I've not been able to watch anything because of the vertigo.

I thought my kids would go crazy on it, perhaps I'm too old, out of touch etc. but they can do 15 mins max too. It's a novelty toy, quickly put away.

If Google Glasses had really taken off and I could have AR, not VR - overlays on ordinary vision - I'd be there. Handy for work, could do virtual meetings, notifications, all sorts. But as with most things Google it went the way of the dodo and I haven't heard of any replacement poised to take the world by storm.

[fatneckbeardz]

TiltFive AR (formerly Cast AR) is still a thing. they are shipping product to early backers and people are working on games for it.

[samplatt]

The Quest has a fairly low refresh rate, which is one of the main barriers to delivering a product that doesn't make you sick.

Back when Carmack was leading the tech dev, they came out with a rule saying that they needed a working minimum of 90fps for MOST people to tolerate VR.

The Quest headset screens operate at 72hz, iirc.

[webmaven]

We've known for a long time that for actual use refresh rate (and secondary factors like jitter and tearing) is far more important than resolution, or polygons (and before it became a moot point, color depth).

But the demos and screenshots required to sell the idea aren't impressive if they don't look comparable to recent AAA games, so the wrong kind of hardware keeps getting crammed into the prototypes, and the target keeps moving so there is no opportunity for Moore's Law to solve the mismatch for you.