VR Pioneer Explains Why Virtual Reality is Making the Same Mistakes That Hurt VR in the 90s - And How to Avoid Them

"Don't let VR go wrong again!" is a blog post you should read right now, because it's by Jacquelyn "Jacki" Morie, a VR pioneer who sees the same mistakes being made by Oculus Rift and other leaders of the VR industry that caused the technology to hit a trough of disillusionment in the early 90s. Part of the problem is a resurgence of breathless headlines like "Could Oculus Rift bring people back from the dead?" (yes, really) which inevitably lead to disaster:

"What sensational headlines like these do is create extremely unreasonable expectations for VR - the same thing that happened towards the end of the 1990s in VR's first popularization," she writes. "When those promises don't pan out, then people are disappointed and things start to falter."

Another part of the problem is a generation gap, because many of today's VR industry leaders were barely around for VR's first wave. (Oculus Rift founder Palmer Luckey was born in 1992.)

"That's a big part of it," Jacki tells me, "but the other part is people with a long history in film and related media who want to take what they know and ride the VR wave. That is why we have Cinematic VR - which is not really interactive, immersive VR as VR can really be experienced."

Another problem is that the tech press is focused too much on covering venture funding of VR, as opposed to VR innovators: "I'd like to see more people really pushing the envelope on what VR could be," she says. "And I'd like the press to follow those people and their work, rather than just reporting on who got the latest big round of VC financing. VCs are not really investing in the full potential of VR - but on what today's media consumers know and feel comfortable with - just put into a sexy HMD. I don't have high hopes for the press doing that though."

As it happens, Jacki was a Senior Research Scientist at the Institute for Creative Technologies (at USC) while Palmer Luckey was a student engineer there, but didn't interact much with him directly. She does have advice that Oculus Rift and other VR companies could follow:

 Jacki with the author; I love her "Been there, done that" expression

"[I]t would be nice if the gear makers would buy into a broader spectrum of VR experiences instead of what is either easy or showcases their specific equipment. One of the bigger companies could put together a lab for artist residencies. I'd love to see the proposals that would come into that, if we really opened it up and people knew the history."

She does see some glimmers of innovation in VR, but so far, they are being held back by the limitations of the developer: "There are some interesting games that could be full fledged VR experiences and some cool stories," as she puts it, "but the authors are still exhibiting too much authority (in the true sense of the word) over the experience. They could loosen up and let the participant in the VR experience make choices and thus make the experience his or her own. That's the real power inherent in VR."

To do that, the current wave of creators might want to look into the past: "Some of the artists I mention in my LinkedIn post should be known and studied by the new generation who will take VR somewhere," Jackie tells me, but adds: "Just not sure if that is a VR destination to which I want to go."

Please share this post:

Tweet

 

Comments

[Steven Losco]

This is why I prompted the tweet on GoPro's attempt at 360 degree imaging. Is VR just about being able to inhabit a 360 degree image or is it something more immersive

[Iggy]

One of my game-savvy students just completed a research paper about the technical hurdles facing VR gaming: where the UI goes in one's field of vision, the issues of moving the avatar through a huge world, the problem of simulator sickness, and the issue of immersion when game narratives demand cinematic interludes.

The first one is a technical issue and the second and perhaps third can be solved by rigs that trick the body, but if VR is all about immersion, how can we achieve it and a good gaming experience without, to cop Stevenson's famous phrase, "Breaking the metaphor"?

I feel another Hype Cycle coming on. Back to reading a book. In print!

[Roblem VR]

What happened in the 90s is people predicted that the price would come down from the 5-6 figure prices to something people could afford in a manner of a few years. Price is the only thing that killed VR in the 90s. (I was born in 1967 do the math, I was there and that is why I gave up on it too.) Today I can ask someone to take the cell phone out of their pocket hand them a piece of cardboard a couple of lenses and magnets that cost less than $5 and they can experience better VR than $100K could buy you in the 90s. Price is the killer app for VR. Roll your eyes and make the "been their done that" face all you like. You are both WRONG this time around.