Brian Aviator exploring Second Life in his Vision Pro while also reading New World Notes on the web
While it's possible to run the iOS version of Second Life on Apple's Vision Pro, what would an optimized Vision Pro version of Second Life be like? In Comments, longtime virtual worlds developer/theorist/educator Gwyneth Llewelyn considers the possibilities:
Granted, one cannot expect the same level of quality as a specially-developed VR environment for the Apple Vision Pro. SL, after all, lags — and that will be very confusing, or probably even worse than that: inducing motion sickness, for instance. SL doesn't behave like the real world when you abruptly turn your head; all those textures coming in sight will need to be downloaded first. This is not going to change.
Also, there is a question of resolution: will the CPUs of the Vision Pro be able to render a full 360º environment at an acceptable FPS to be 'usable'? I have certainly seen videos of people (some of them my students, streaming live) who had at least 4K screens, rendering SL at sub-Ultra quality at 45 FPS.
Will that be enough? Will the Apple Vision Pro manage that as well as a top-of-the-line beefed-up PC, carefully built from scratch by a professional eSports athlete? (BTW, that's what my students were.) Maybe. The whole point is that it's not that far-fetched as it seems.
Gwyn goes on to make the case that Second Life would have an advantage on Vision Pro that other metaverse platforms would not:
Why Tilt Five May Be a More Attractive Model of Spatial Computing Over Apple Vision Pro
Good points from Martin K. on my thought that Jeri Ellsworth's low-ish cost Tilt Five AR device could be a viable Spatial Computing competitor against Apple Vision Pro:
That's part of what I mean, but my core premise is that Apple's vision for the Vision Pro is fundamentally flawed: I think it's very unlikely many people actually always want to be in a Spatial Computing environment all the time, especially if it's just to interact with content that's fundamentally 2D. And instead, that more people will prefer only wearing an AR headset when they very specifically need/want to interact with 3D content. (Think design, prototyping, planning etc. in a shared 3D space, along with social gaming/chatting/etc.)
If that's right, then something like the Tilt Five will be more broadly appealing, especially at one-tenth the price -- and for a lightweight headset they're not expected to hear for eight-plus hours a day.
Posted on Tuesday, March 26, 2024 at 09:46 AM in Comment of the Week, New World Tech | Permalink | Comments (2)
|
|