Google announces Daydream VR: Luxury Cardboard for 79$ + will only work with Pixel phones for now
44 replies, posted
[URL="https://vr.google.com/daydream/"]https://vr.google.com/daydream/[/URL]
[video=youtube;rLLAA4ENIP4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLLAA4ENIP4[/video]
[URL="http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/4/13161506/google-vr-headset-photos-daydream-view-virtual-reality"]http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/4/13161506/google-vr-headset-photos-daydream-view-virtual-reality[/URL]
[QUOTE]Google has just unveiled the first headset for its Daydream VR platform: Daydream View, shipping in November for $79. Daydream View is both a consumer product and a general reference design for all future Daydream headsets, which Google hopes will proliferate next year.
Daydream View's body is made of foam and soft fabric, with a hinged plastic panel where you place an Android phone. Google says it weighs 220 grams, making it significantly lighter than the competing Gear VR headset. The face mask is held in by velcro, so it's removable and hand-washable; people will also be able to buy replacements separately. Currently, Daydream is only working on Google's new Pixel and Pixel XL phones, but the View is supposed to hold any phone that ends up supporting the platform — the hinges slide out slightly to accommodate different thicknesses or even phones in cases. Similarly, future headsets based on the design should work with any Daydream phone.
While we've already seen the basic Daydream controller design, Google is now showing it off as an actual piece of hardware. The controller has one home button and one menu button, plus a clickable trackpad on the end, volume buttons on one side, and internal sensors that can detect motion — it can't tell your absolute position in space like Oculus Touch or the HTC Vive, but it can sense which direction it's pointing, and loosely follow your hand. When you're not using it, the controller fits into a slot on the inside of the headset, so the whole device is self-contained.
[/QUOTE]
seems neat but i'm not a fan of the fabric look tbh
I wish cardboard worker on my Huawei. It was great on my Samsung note 4
Isn't this the same as those VR things you can get on eBay for $10?
[QUOTE=RoboChimp;51155640]Isn't this the same as those VR things you can get on eBay for $10?[/QUOTE]
They're sorta janky and pretty damn uncomfortable, plus this comes with the controller, which is the main issue with phone VR stuff, you can't really interact with anything aside from looking around and the magnetic switch unless you have a full bluetooth controller
No. Just No.
Stop trying to make phones VR.
I honestly thought better of google.
Technology giant reveals.....another fucking vr headset for your phone.
Don't they realize this has already been done to death?
[QUOTE=DiBBs27;51155817]No. Just No.
Stop trying to make phones VR.
I honestly thought better of google.
Technology giant reveals.....another fucking vr headset for your phone.
Don't they realize this has already been done to death?[/QUOTE]
An actually decent device to supplement the cheap cardboard for the market that will arguably make up the mainstream and norm of VR? I don't see a problem.
$70 is a bit much for a piece of kit that just holds your phone so you can watch videos in 360 3D. You can get the same chinese knock offs for about £20 off ebay, do the same thing, not really that uncomfortable and you still get bored of it within a week.
[QUOTE=Levelog;51155855]An actually decent device to supplement the cheap cardboard for the market that will arguably make up the mainstream and norm of VR? I don't see a problem.[/QUOTE]
I see a problem. It's a gimmick and waste of money. And it is the wrong 'norm' to set.
Phone VR sets the bar for this technology too fucking low.
This is going to push developers to make easy money on mobile devices with only a fraction of the processing that computers have. And it's going to stifle growth in the actual VR market of gaming. You know, the VR that everyone was excited about?
Well now we've got over saturation of dumbed down phone VR sets that most people will buy, use 3 times and discard.
For such a promising industry, it's really being handled terribly.
[QUOTE=DiBBs27;51155884]I see a problem. It's a gimmick and waste of money. And it is the wrong 'norm' to set.
Phone VR sets the bar for this technology too fucking low.
This is going to push developers to make easy money on mobile devices with only a fraction of the processing that computers have. And it's going to stifle growth in the actual VR market of gaming. You know, the VR that everyone was excited about?
Well now we've got over saturation of dumbed down phone VR sets that most people will buy, use 3 times and discard.
For such a promising industry, it's really being handled terribly.[/QUOTE]
I dunno, I'm a lot more excited about ARG and lighter weight VR than I am gaming. Being able to visualize furniture in a room, virtual apartment and home tours, virtual theaters, healthcare, being able to tour museams, the next level of telepracticing.
do you know anything about daydream? this isn't low end VR at all
I am personally looking really forward trying this headset. I am a big believer in VR in generel. And my experience with Gear VR was properly one of the most comfortable ones. I differentiate the Mobile VR for the Desktop VR. They er completely different experiences.
Mobile VR is just a lot more casual - And seeing Google trying to make VR more streamline is properly a good idea for expanding the market to people that find the current headsets looking like spaceships and have no idea how to handle them.
Cardboard was bit of a joke honestly and the clones coming out of it - It shows the idea of it. But it is just really awful. Daydream is the next step really.
This just seems like a much more premium experience and I am really excited about the controller to see what it is capable of and the interaction it will create.
[QUOTE=DiBBs27;51155884]I see a problem. It's a gimmick and waste of money. And it is the wrong 'norm' to set.
Phone VR sets the bar for this technology too fucking low.
This is going to push developers to make easy money on mobile devices with only a fraction of the processing that computers have. And it's going to stifle growth in the actual VR market of gaming. You know, the VR that everyone was excited about?
Well now we've got over saturation of dumbed down phone VR sets that most people will buy, use 3 times and discard.
For such a promising industry, it's really being handled terribly.[/QUOTE]
It's bad because you're personally only interested in VR gaming and you don't want people to be interested in other forms of VR? That's not a legitimate criticism.
So it's basically Google's take on GearVR? That was pretty fun the few times I've tried it (Sure as hell blows my Cardboard+Dualshock 4 setup out of the water), so if Google can bring proper VR like that to more phones I'm excited.
[QUOTE=DiBBs27;51155884]I see a problem. It's a gimmick and waste of money. And it is the wrong 'norm' to set.
Phone VR sets the bar for this technology too fucking low.
This is going to push developers to make easy money on mobile devices with only a fraction of the processing that computers have. And it's going to stifle growth in the actual VR market of gaming. You know, the VR that everyone was excited about?
Well now we've got over saturation of dumbed down phone VR sets that most people will buy, use 3 times and discard.
For such a promising industry, it's really being handled terribly.[/QUOTE]
I actually think phone VR could be a potentially hugely important step for deciding whether VR will fade as a gimmick for another 5-10 years or slowly gain mainstream momentum.
One of the big problems with trying to advertise VR is that you can't simulate the experience on normal computers. If people want to see what all the fuzz is about, just an entry level demo experience, they need to dig up information on where a (hopefully nearby) vendor is demo'ing a VR headset, preferably the one they're interested in, and then they need to go/drive there. Then they get a regulated amount of demo time and experiences.
In a day and age where competing distractions are more accessible than they've ever been and people have even started ordering from Amazon instead of getting the same thing from the shop just down the street, I think it's easy to see why a lot of people wouldn't go through the inconvenience to decide for themselves whether VR is something even worth caring about.
But since virtually everyone has smartphones nowadays, you can use tech like cardboard to make VR demos waaaay more accessible. I'd call it entry-level VR, not exactly in the same ballpark as the tech enthusiast-level VR offered by Oculus and Vive. The middle ground (which right now would just be PSVR I guess?) will hopefully come with time as people grow more familiar with VR as a general experience (through stuff like this) and hardware becomes cheaper - if not the actual headsets, then at least the computing power.
[QUOTE=DiBBs27;51155884]I see a problem. It's a gimmick and waste of money. And it is the wrong 'norm' to set.
Phone VR sets the bar for this technology too fucking low.
This is going to push developers to make easy money on mobile devices with only a fraction of the processing that computers have. And it's going to stifle growth in the actual VR market of gaming. You know, the VR that everyone was excited about?
Well now we've got over saturation of dumbed down phone VR sets that most people will buy, use 3 times and discard.
For such a promising industry, it's really being handled terribly.[/QUOTE]
This is like the most shallow perspective on vr I've ever seen, build yourself a cardboard and sample some of the shit on Android cause there's some REALLY neat experiences
[QUOTE=DiBBs27;51155817]No. Just No.
Stop trying to make phones VR.
I honestly thought better of google.
Technology giant reveals.....another fucking vr headset for your phone.
Don't they realize this has already been done to death?[/QUOTE]
Phones having VR is the natural direction to take. Completely wireless and a bunch of processing power stuffed into a little case.
The more competition there is, the faster the technology will progress.
[QUOTE=Shadaez;51155908]do you know anything about daydream? this isn't low end VR at all[/QUOTE]
Does it have positional tracking? I'll admit I don't know anything about Daydream, but even if it's the best experience in entertainment forever, it's still low end VR without positional tracking. In fact, it's arguably not even VR at all.
Isn't Google the ones making that really cool modeling game where you just sort of stack polygons and easily change shapes and... Really strange that I absolutely can't find it right now.
[QUOTE=DiBBs27;51155884]
This is going to push developers to make easy money on mobile devices with only a fraction of the processing that computers have. And it's going to stifle growth in the actual VR market of gaming. You know, the VR that everyone was excited about?[/QUOTE]
You mean the two completely different markets?
Are you seriously suggesting that the mobile gaming market stifles the PC/console gaming market?
[editline]5th October 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;51156039]Does it have positional tracking? I'll admit I don't know anything about Daydream, but even if it's the best experience in entertainment forever, it's still low end VR without positional tracking. In fact, it's arguably not even VR at all.
Isn't Google the ones making that really cool modeling game where you just sort of stack polygons and easily change shapes and... Really strange that I absolutely can't find it right now.[/QUOTE]
Oh I'd love to hear your argument on why it's "not even VR at all".
P.S. the program you're thinking about might be SketchUp, unless you're talking about something new.
[QUOTE]P.S. the program you're thinking about might be SketchUp, unless you're talking about something new.[/QUOTE]
Oh, nevermind, I was thinking of Playstation VR's [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVfeeuuw83Q"]Dreams[/URL].
[QUOTE=HybridTheroy;51156042]Oh I'd love to hear your argument on why it's "not even VR at all".[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I would like to show you, it was an article by some professor or something about the requirements and definitions of what makes actual virtual reality, but I couldn't find it. But honestly it's not a good discussion since defining [I]"VR"[/I] is anyone's game, so who cares who I can quote, honestly. Shouldn't have brought that up, I guess. I suppose the most true thing I can say without being a pedantic semantics warrior is that positional tracking is incredibly important for immersion and therefore anything that doesn't have it won't be as immersive [I](i.e. the 'reality' part)[/I] and thus won't be as good virtual reality regardless of how good it is otherwise.
Ew, looks like a hipster infected it with all the corduroy fabric look to it.
[QUOTE=RoboChimp;51155640]Isn't this the same as those VR things you can get on eBay for $10?[/QUOTE]
I remember back to when people were debating whether google cardboard would give people a negative impression as "what VR is" on phones. The question was already semi-answered with the gear VR when everyone thought that was just a nice plastic cardboard, but now it's happening with daydream too I think the answer is a big "yes, it did".
Not 100% sure everything that's inside the headset but a comfortable, light, and secure mount for your phone that tells it to automatically enter daydream, and comes with a controller is probably worth the $ over buying a $10 cardboard if you're into mobile VR, not to mention what the tech on the phone itself does for mobile VR.
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;51156007]This is like the most shallow perspective on vr I've ever seen, build yourself a cardboard and sample some of the shit on Android cause there's some REALLY neat experiences[/QUOTE]
There's even ports of Quake and Half-Life with working multiplayer.
While Half-Life can feel a bit off when crouching, Quake feels like it was made for Cardboard.
[editline]5th October 2016[/editline]
Also if you have one of the headsets with a button, Fulldive's VR Web Browser is amazing.
Fyi it's free with pixel preorders
[QUOTE=massaki;51155859]$70 is a bit much for a piece of kit that just holds your phone so you can watch videos in 360 3D. You can get the same chinese knock offs for about £20 off ebay, do the same thing, not really that uncomfortable and you still get bored of it within a week.[/QUOTE]
Except you also get a controller like the VIVE has, and it's free with a pre-order of the phone.
[QUOTE=1/4 Life;51156312]Except you also get a controller like the VIVE has, and it's free with a pre-order of the phone.[/QUOTE]
I agree with the sentiment, but it's much closer to a wii device than the vive, it has no absolute spatial tracking and no IR bar for correcting drift.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;51156078]Oh, nevermind, I was thinking of Playstation VR's [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVfeeuuw83Q"]Dreams[/URL].
Yeah, I would like to show you, it was an article by some professor or something about the requirements and definitions of what makes actual virtual reality, but I couldn't find it. But honestly it's not a good discussion since defining [I]"VR"[/I] is anyone's game, so who cares who I can quote, honestly. Shouldn't have brought that up, I guess. I suppose the most true thing I can say without being a pedantic semantics warrior is that positional tracking is incredibly important for immersion and therefore anything that doesn't have it won't be as immersive [I](i.e. the 'reality' part)[/I] and thus won't be as good virtual reality regardless of how good it is otherwise.[/QUOTE]
So by that logic, the Oculus Rift DK1 wasn't a VR headset? It only had rotational tracking as well.
I realize we are arguing semantics, but I'd like to add my take on it anyway.
Virtual Reality is about tricking the mind into believing that it is occupying a virtual space. With positional tracking you have an almost seamless experience. But when you have no positional tracking, only rotational tracking, do you lose that experience? Well of course, but not entirely, you will only lose the experience when it comes time to translate your position. You will retain that immersion as long as you are in one position, and you are free to look around as it only requires rotation. To the person in the headset, it is all a seamless experience, and will continue to feel seamless until (like I said before) the experience requires translation.
Now if we step even further back, and remove rotation? The mind is still (at least subconsciously) convinced that it is occupying the virtual space as long as there is no rotation or translation. To me, that is still VR, even if it is just a stereoscope.
Keep in mind as well, nothing is preventing positional tracking from coming to daydream as an optional (Or even third party) feature. Given how connected a cell phone is at all times, and the versatility of USB-C, we can add just about anything to this package to make it more complete.
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JqtB6Dt_9c[/media]
[QUOTE=1/4 Life;51156365]Keep in mind as well, nothing is preventing positional tracking from coming to daydream as an optional (Or even third party) feature. Given how connected a cell phone is at all times, and the versatility of USB-C, we can add just about anything to this package to make it more complete.[/QUOTE]
From an engineering perspective it's not likely to happen without a new generation of hardware, though I guess not impossible. Calibrating a positional tracking system to a device is extremely difficult. The reason they can do semi-absolute position tracking of the headset is by using SLAM to map the environment and try and position yourself based on your understanding of the environment. I work with the HoloLens on a daily basis, and I can tell you right now although the HoloLens is several magnitudes of order better than something Daydream could *ever* do, with dual wide angle stereo camera rigs and a wide angle depth camera, it's still not as good as lighthouse tracking for a big list of reasons.
The only thing you could do without hardware changes (which would be shit) is use the camera on the front of the HMD trying to detect the position of the controller in your hand, and it would only be able to do it while holding the controller in front of your face (to the FOV of the camera, of course).
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
