Yeah - VR is expensive right now. Maybe the price will drop a little - but this is one of the reasons why it will be niche for quite some time.
I totally agree with you that I don't think many people will watch the superbowl in VR...but!
What I predict (take with pinch of salt) is that as the Oculus and Vive are delivered there will be the common realization of some of the limitations and problems with VR (motion sickness, people who wear glasses etc) and the popularity will go down a little - but long term this type of thing just has so much potential I can only imagine it growing in the long term.
Something I notice in your comment is that you seem to be assuming that you can't have social experiences in VR, I see social in VR as one of its greatest strengths. You could see your buddies in VR as legendary warriors fighting demons. Or maybe some of your buddies are the demons. There's a huge market for that type of thing (or there will be).
AR like Google Glass (HoloLens, Magic Leap...) is also going to take off. Eventually AR and VR may converge. Want presence and to be fully immersed? Switch to VR mode.
Just as a sidenote, I recently purchased a GearVR headset for use with my galaxy S6 and the headset allows me to calibrate the diopter such that I don't even need to use my glasses (though it is also possible to use it with them, though I prefer without). I feel like this will be a must-have for any future HMD, as in my experience it solves the glasses problem entirely.
Even with diopter adjustment, I still prefer to wear my glasses (oculus DK2 in my case). I should really look into corrective surgery (lasik, etc.) again...
How is this facilitated by VR? It seems the same experience can be had with a traditional non-VR video game?
Sure, but I'd like to know what the significance of that is? In 2012 it was only an idea, it was 2013 when it became a physical thing at all that people could work with. Then people had to figure out how to fix the problems that were apparent once it was a physical thing you could actually use. Then you have to get people on board to create compelling content for an unproven peripheral. All the while working on the underlying driver and SDK, which includes all the problems and slowdowns that come from immature volatile software being a moving target.
For a new physical product, in a new consumer media niche, using new technology, using new software, needing a launch lineup of software developed by third parties, all originally started by community effort to take 4 years to go from idea to shipping consumer product is damn impressive, regardless of whether or not all this effort will ultimately succeed.
One example is when you take a camera next to a tall chimney and make a sweep shot from bottom to the top - you can see that chimney's dimensions "dance", they just get pretty distorted in every frame by a different ratio. Your eyes don't do that. You perceive the chimney as straight regardless of which angle you look.
VR that close to eyes must compensate for it. However, even the latest Oculus VR makes people feel dizzy... I don't see a future for this gen of VR unless they fix this substantial problem.
That sentence makes me want to say "get off my lawn". VR technology (including HMD) has been hyped (and tried, in many forms) for decades now.
I personally believe we now have the tech to actually deliver something useful this time. We shall see.
Watching Super Bowl with friends is not yet feasible. But there are other use cases that are better suited. And don't underestimate games.
We're trying to fool senses that have had millions of years to evolve.
What I am saying is that most people have been assuming that the general population is interested in such an experience, and I don't think they will be.
- addictive phone/puzzle games
- big budget games (CoD, etc)
- movies
- travel
- porn
- immersive escapism
- customising their surroundings
My brother lives interstate. With VR, we could watch a video together as though we were in a cinema beside each other. Or play Xbox as though we were in the same room. In either case, it's not as though we need contact or photorealistic avatars - it could be a dark shape next to you.
Right now, many people watch abysmal TV nightly just to relax. I think we'll see people just hanging out in VR worlds as an alternative to the depressing reality of many real lives. I think if you had some decent approximation of the world of Avatar (as one example), there'd be millions of people who would spend hours each day existing in that neon/blacklight environment rather than switching on TV and watching any old junk.
But let's put the price of adoption aside for a moment and assume that at some point it will come down in price. Even then I can't imagine that the average household will be buying this.
For one, you wouldn't want to use an HMD in any context other than sitting alone in a room, and that's something that the nerdy hobbyist market doesn't mind, but to the average person it makes it nothing other than a novel toy. I keep hearing people on CNBC talk about how this year the Superbowl will be able to be watched via an HMD, and how this is the future of media.
Are they serious? Have they ever heard of a Superbowl party? I watch football around friends, and we enjoy good food and beers. It's a social event first, and a content event second. How does an HMD fit into that? It doesn't. And I think most media we have today (save for video games) are social events. I watched the Breaking Bad finale with friends. I watch scary movies with friends. And that's not to say that I don't sometimes watch things alone, but when content creators have to worry about accommodating both of these experiences, it's difficult to make the VR experience comparatively worthwhile. VR content is going to face the same fate as 3D movies do today.
It might be the evolution of video games. But that's a far cry from the hype that it gets.
I think that the evolution of Google Glass is what will really take off.