Fool me, this is real good shit ! [the VR thread]

[Dio]

Especially now there is major financial backing, I would expect the consumer Rift to be substantially ahead of even the new developer's kit. However, I would not be at all surprised if this development pushes it back in time a bit more.

[venusian]

It wouldn't be surprising the DK2 to complete disappear from public view. When you've got FB's resources why would you risk testing in the open?

[Misfit]

You can have my V1 for 200 quid if you like... It's just sitting gathering dust.

Thanks. Seems a fair price. I'd have bitten your hand off before they announced DK2. But it would have to be a super Pandora style deal for me to even consider a v1 now.

I agree that the consumer model should move on significantly from DK2, but I can't see how they will get it to market very quickly.

[snaff]

It wouldn't be surprising the DK2 to complete disappear from public view. When you've got FB's resources why would you risk testing in the open?

It will be telling as to which way they go with that. The availability of prototypes for people without industry connections and without NDAs is a kind of recognition that it takes a whole community to discover the potential of something like this.

If the open source community does get shut out I wonder what kind of replacement projects will appear.

[TFO]

I agree that the consumer model should move on significantly from DK2, but I can't see how they will get it to market very quickly.

Depending on how cross-platform and how good Morpheus will be, I suspect that the clock is ticking for them to do just that

[pogo]

Morpheus cross platform? It's a PS4 peripheral.

Sony's other peripherals are well suited for VR use. The current Dualshock with its light bar. The Playstation Camera that works with them. They make sense as a set, suggesting Sony have been working on this for a while, as long as the PS4 – it's not just a reaction to Oculus.

[Jamesac]

I'd be surprised if Sony locked down the Morpheus to PS4, unless they wanted to guarantee reduced sales. It's not the silliest thing a publisher has ever done, of course, but much like the original Kinect there's some nice extra sales to be had if it's not bound to one piece of hardware with iron shackles.

James

[Jimaroid]

Michael Abrash has jumped ship from Valve to Occulus.

Wow!

[The Caffeine Kid]

Everyone's at it now then...

Microsoft buys AR headset patents for $100-150 million

http://www.totalxbox.com/74099/microsof ... on-report/

[Jimaroid]

I think it's going to be the biggest game-changer I've ever seen

http://www.oculusvr.com/blog/introducin ... scientist/

Shit me, I'm practically wetting myself now. Abrash and Carmack together again. This is HUUUGE.

[pogo]

I'd be surprised if Sony locked down the Morpheus to PS4, unless they wanted to guarantee reduced sales. It's not the silliest thing a publisher has ever done, of course, but much like the original Kinect there's some nice extra sales to be had if it's not bound to one piece of hardware with iron shackles.

They're in the Playstation business though. Not the console but the platform: they make more money from games the more Playstations are sold. So anything that supports and differentiates that platform is a good thing for them. They won't make money off it directly, they may even sell it at a loss or close to break even, as happens with consoles.

I don't think patents will be that important. It's not a new idea, the first VR headsets appeared decades ago, so long ago that any patents for inventions then will have expired. The current crop of headsets aren't due to some new innovation, it's just that the devices they've been making for 20+ years are now cheap and powerful enough that a consumer version is possible.

[Jamesac]

The Morpheus doesn't differentiate the platform, though. It just gives it parity to other platforms.

James

[pogo]

The Morpheus doesn't differentiate the platform, though. It just gives it parity to other platforms.

What other platforms? Rift isn't out, the 2nd devkit isn't even released so we're a long way from a commercial version. Sony's main competitor in the console space is Microsoft, and we've not seen what if anything they have planned yet.

Morpheus could come out first, or be cheaper, or better. The latter two possibilities seem quite likely: with the cross-subsidy from the PS4 and its games they could sell it at cost or less, separately or bundled it with the PS4, and connected to the PS4's high performance memory and GPU the quality should be pretty high.

[Darkflame]

In terms of patents;

a) As the mobile market has demonstrated, innovation is not needed to get patents over something. The fact something has been done before is largely irrelevant these days.
Patents are a bargaining chip, a legal security, and in some case's even a marketing method. Most have little to do with new things being possible thanks to a idea.

b) In terms of optical, especially for AR headsets, however there probably is quite a few genuine innovations still. What Microsoft bought might contain some valuable stuff. Getting in focus graphics displayed near the eye is hard - getting it displayed near the eye on a transparent background while maintaining a good contrast is even harder.

[pogo]

Phones did usher in a wave of patenting, mostly due to touch/multitouch/UI innovations and rapid improvements in wireless technologies. I don't see this happening in VR as the concepts aren't new: people were using VR headsets 20 years ago. They've just got better and cheaper.

And even if things get patented it doesn't mean things get held up. Many wireless patents are included in standards, so anyone can implement them. We could e.g. see an open standard for VR. When big firms are involved they usually end up cross-licencing their patents, i.e. giving each other access to them, with additional payments to allow for the different values of them. Apple and MS have a big cross-license for example. Apple licensed some of Nokia's patents and pay them for every iPhone. Etc. I'm sure Sony and Facebook could do the same if they needed.

It's only not worked with phones as Google refuse to participate. They have relatively few patents, being very new entrants to the industry (though they obtained a few by buying Motorola) and steadfastly refuse to pay for other people's patents, mostly as then they'd have to pass on those costs in Android and it would no longer be free. They don't get sued over this - there's little point as they don't sell anything - instead all the phone makers do. Almost all Android phone makers have had to pay, requiring dozens of separate licence agreements and payments for Android, clogging up the courts in the process. It would be much cheaper and easier if Google took care of this but they refuse to.