YouTube's revealed the secret to making an engaging virtual reality video: put the best parts right in front of the audience so they don't have to move their heads.
Google's video vault offers that advice on the basis of heat maps it's created based on analysis of where VR viewers point their heads while wearing VR goggles. There's just such a heat map at the top of this story (or here for m.reg readers) and a bigger one here.
The many heat maps YouTube has made lead it to suggest that VR video creators "Focus on what's in front of you: The defining feature of a 360-degree video is that it allows you to freely look around in any direction, but surprisingly, people spent 75% of their time within the front 90 degrees of a video. So don't forget to spend significant time on what's in front of the viewer."
YouTube also advises that "for many of the most popular VR videos, people viewed more of the full 360-degree space with almost 20% of views actually being behind them." Which sounds to El Reg like VR viewers are either staring straight ahead, or looking over their shoulders with very little time being devoted to sideways glances.
A video channel wants people to treat VR like video. Hmmm. Perhaps the answer to their question is in the question: people should be considered "participants" instead of an "audience."
Related Stories
Google is launching VR180, a format which ignores the world behind the camera:
Google is launching a new, more limited cinematic VR format that it hopes will be almost as accessible as regular YouTube videos. It's called VR180, a collaboration between YouTube and Google's Daydream VR division. And it'll be produced with a new line of cameras from Yi, Lenovo, and LG, as well as other partners who meet VR180 certification standards.
As the name suggests, VR180 videos don't stretch all the way around a viewer in VR. They're supposed to be immersive if you're facing forward, but you can't turn and glance behind you. Outside VR, they'll appear as traditional flat videos, but you can watch them in 3D virtual reality through the YouTube app with a Google Cardboard, Daydream, or PlayStation VR headset.
Creators can shoot the videos using any camera with a VR180 certification. Google's Daydream team is working with the three companies above, and the first of their VR180 products are supposed to launch this winter, at roughly the same price as a point-and-shoot camera. So far, the only image we've seen is the one above, a line drawing of Lenovo's design. It appears to have two wide-angle lenses that can shoot stereoscopic video, and it's a far cry from the expensive alien orbs that we often see in VR film shoots.
Highly Related: Virtual Reality Audiences Stare Straight Ahead 75% of the Time
Facebook is attempting to make virtual reality a mainstream product, and hopes to reach one billion VR users "one day":
In its continued effort to take virtual reality mainstream, Facebook has announced Oculus Go - a standalone headset that will be released in 2018. Mark Zuckerberg said the device, priced at $199, would be the "most accessible VR experience ever".
Sales of the company's VR hardware have been slow since launching the first Oculus Rift headset in March 2016. "If VR doesn't go mass market at this price point, I think we can conclude that it never will," said John Delaney, an analyst with IDC. Facebook's previous budget VR product, Gear VR, is $129, but requires a high-end Samsung smartphone in order to work. Speaking at Facebook's yearly virtual reality developers conference in San Jose, Mr Zuckerberg acknowledged the slow adoption of the technology to date. But he said his company's goal was that one day, it would get one billion people into VR.
The headset is a standalone device that does not require a smartphone, headphones, or tether to a desktop computer. The high-end Oculus Rift headset has had its price cut to $400 (for good).
Oculus Go is not being sold anytime soon, and the Oculus blog warns that "Oculus Go is not, and may not be, offered for sale or lease, or sold or leased, until [FCC] authorization is obtained". Facebook says that the devices will be sent to developers within the next 12 months. Specs and battery details are also unknown (maybe they need to use one of these for you to feel safe strapping it to your head).
Also at Washington Post and TechCrunch. Oculus Blog.
Previously: Google Partnering With HTC and Lenovo for Standalone VR Headsets
Virtual Reality Audiences Stare Straight Ahead 75% of the Time
Google Bisects VR
Facebook/Oculus Reportedly Working on $200 Standalone VR Headset
Here's another 360° video camera:
There are quite a few 360-degree cameras on the market now and they cover a range of needs. For professionals and major VR buffs, there's the Samsung 360 Round and for more casual videographers there are a slew of options from companies like Ricoh Theta, Garmin and Samsung. But there's now a growing market for those wanting to shoot high quality 360-degree video and decide later on during editing what images to focus on and what to cut out, minimizing how much effort is required during the actual video-capturing process. For that, there's the GoPro Fusion, the Insta360 and, as of today, the Rylo.
Rylo has two 208-degree wide-angle lenses that capture your entire surroundings in 4K resolution. Its stabilization technology even allows you to carry the camera while shooting and still get a smooth image. To edit your video, plug it into your iPhone and use the companion app to easily find what frames you want to include in your HD video or alternatively, download the whole thing for a fully immersive 360-degree viewing experience. You can then easily post your videos on Instagram, Facebook or share them directly with others.
It will ship with a 16 GB MicroSD card. How is that even remotely enough storage for 360° video?
Also at TechCrunch and CNET.
Related: Secure Digital 5.0 Standard: Memory Cards Intended for 8K and Virtual Reality Recording
YouTube Adds Support for Live Streaming 360-Degree Video
Virtual Reality Audiences Stare Straight Ahead 75% of the Time
Google Is Building A New Foveation Pipeline For Future XR Hardware
Google's R&D arm, Google Research, recently dedicated some time and resources to discovering ways to improve the performance of foveated rendering. Foveated rendering already promises vast performance improvements compared to full-resolution rendering. However, Google believes that it can do even better. The company identified three elements that could be improved, and it proposed three solutions that could potentially solve the problems, including two new foveation techniques and a reworked rendering pipeline.
Foveated rendering is a virtual reality technique that uses eye tracking to reduce the amount of image quality necessary in areas covered by the peripheral vision.
The new techniques mentioned are Phase-Aligned Rendering and Conformal Rendering.
Also at Google's Research Blog.
Related: Oculus VR Founder Palmer Luckey on the Need for "Unlimited Graphics Horsepower"
Google Implements Equi-Angular Cubemaps Technique for Better VR Quality
Oculus Research Presents Focal Surface Display. Will Eliminate Nausea in VR
Virtual Reality Audiences Stare Straight Ahead 75% of the Time
Google has published code and details for VR180, a video/photo format intended for simpler devices to capture or display content for virtual reality:
For Google's VR180 to become successful, manufacturers and developers have to be onboard, creating devices and churning out videos and apps that use the format. That's why the tech giant is now opening it up to hardware-makers and devs by publishing the remaining details on how they can start engaging with the format and offer VR180 products. When Google-owned platform YouTube introduced VR180 last year, it introduced the format as a way for creators to shoot immersive photos and videos for VR headsets that still have a normal perspective when viewed on a phone or PC.
From Google's blog:
Today, we're publishing the remaining details about creating VR180 videos on github and photos on the Google Developer website, so any developer or manufacturer can start engaging with VR180.
For VR180 video, we simply extended the Spherical Video Metadata V2 standard. Spherical V2 supports the mesh-based projection needed to allow consumer cameras to output raw fisheye footage. We then created the Camera Motion Metadata Track so that you're able to stabilize the video according to the camera motion after video capture. This results in a more comfortable VR experience for viewers. The photos that are generated by the cameras are written in the existing VR Photo Format pioneered by Cardboard Camera.
The Lenovo Mirage VR180 camera is set to launch on May 4 for $300. The Yi Horizon VR180 is set to launch sometime in the summer for $400.
Good news for the stereoscopic 3D imaging enthusiasts out there.
Previously: Google Bisects VR
Related: Virtual Reality Audiences Stare Straight Ahead 75% of the Time
A new, business-oriented VR headset uses a tiny, high resolution display panel within a larger panel in order to display very high quality imagery to users looking straight ahead:
The VR-1 calls its center panel a "Bionic Display." It's a 1920 x 1080 "micro-OLED" display with a resolution of 3,000 pixels per inch. (For context, last year's high-resolution prototype display from Google and LG had 1443 ppi.) Within that central strip, images are supposed to roughly match the resolution of the human eye. As Ars Technica, which checked out the headset, puts it, that section looks "every bit as detailed as real life." Outside that super crisp panel, there's a 1440 x 1600 display that produces images of more average quality.
The VR-1's total 87-degree field of view is smaller than that of the Oculus Rift or HTC Vive, let alone the 200 degrees offered by something like Pimax's more experimental VR headset. The Bionic Display only comprises a slice of it. Ars Technica describes great image quality while you're looking straight ahead, with a noticeable downgrade outside that. And rendering that high-resolution slice requires more processing power than you'd need for average VR headsets, which are already fairly demanding.
[...] The VR-1 uses standard SteamVR base stations for tracking, and it supports both the Unity and Unreal engines, so you could theoretically play games or use other consumer software. But the headset isn't priced for consumers. It costs $5,995 with an annual service fee of $995, and Varjo stresses that it's "only available for businesses and academic institutions." The company is already working with Airbus, Audi, Saab, Volkswagen, and Volvo, among others.
Also at Road to VR.
Related: Virtual Reality Audiences Stare Straight Ahead 75% of the Time
Google Research Proposes New Foveated Rendering Techniques for VR
Google and LG to Show Off World's Highest Resolution OLED-on-Glass Display in May
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @04:53PM (2 children)
Didn't thespians figure this out a long time ago?
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @04:59PM (1 child)
No, old dead people were stupid and that's why they're dead. Only young hipsters know anything about anything. Disrupting, bro!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @08:21PM
Found the old dude who somehow managed to figure out the internet!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @05:01PM (5 children)
i'm not going to comment since it will be considered off-topic and be deleted anyways ...
nevermind that "occulus app" and "daydream app" are artificially incompatible.
a +100 $$$ headset that can't (or won't) run apps that run on a literally cardboard made headset.
nevermind that the "daydream" apps have a mega-huge server farm with gazillion HDDs w/ data (read: google) for the
VR to look into.
note: bonus points if you can get "streetview 360" to run on a samsung gear VR headset ... nasty stuff.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @05:09PM (3 children)
Seriously. Give up computing; it's a total waste of time, especially now that computers don't really exist anymore—everything is just a "device" now.
You don't need these things in your life, and you'll feel so much better when you start spending your time with aspects of being alive which do not require you to mold yourself to some other person's view of the way things should be; computers suck because people suck, so drop them like you would a toxic relationship.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @06:01PM
Socializing is for winners and I'm a loser so I'll just stay in the basement with a big pile of books. Can't ever have a toxic relationship with a book. Except those books that are printed on glossy lead based paper. Those books are toxic so I don't have any of those books.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @08:40PM (1 child)
Nah, we're just in the painful inbetween stage. Once we get privacy clawed back from the corporations (or at least popular non-central alternatives) then we can get back to human value with computing.
It is funny, you say go out into the world cause people suck... so what is the difference between hiking alone away from people (or whatever you're in to) and playing a single player game? Reading a book? Etc.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @08:56PM
Try again.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday June 19 2017, @08:02PM
Comments don't get deleted and you made a comment anyway. Fix your head.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday June 19 2017, @05:04PM (8 children)
The best way to design a VR experience is to minimize the part that actually makes VR unique?
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @05:07PM
Perhaps if there were audio clues to get the user looking in that direction.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @05:17PM
no. according to MARKETING the best VR experience is the one that fleeces the buyers pocket.
imagine:
nice brown fertil dirt. it just rained and if you look closely you see a small two leaf sprout (w/ a nice rain drop that covers half a leaf).
along jumps a merry market-guru and happens upon this new life in the world.
in astonishment, he grabs his mobile phone and snaps picture from all sides and sends it off for the whole world to see.
not long after, people show up to have a look too.
the market-guru, thus, sticks some branches into the ground and proceeds to collect "entrance fees". photos cost extra.
after doing this for a while, he stops because he made so much money that any penny more would not allow him to walk because of the weight.
nevermind that on his exit he happens to step onto the sprout, crushing it.
this is VR on android. it totally works, but IT wasn't the main goal. the main goal was to hype it (maybe we'll get a version 2.0 this time with "deep learning") and to fleece the pockets of ... well .. consumers. consumers, not supporters!
(Score: 2) by rigrig on Monday June 19 2017, @05:17PM (4 children)
The advantage of VR is the immersion you get because you can look anywhere and still see the virtual world.
Having the action move around you is at best annoying because you need to keep turning around to watch what is happening, and at worst really detrimental to the experience because you are constantly reminded that things are only zipping all around you because the content creator felt the need to use the possibilities of VR to the fullest.
No one remembers the singer.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday June 19 2017, @07:15PM (1 child)
I'm split between the need to point out people dwindling attention spans, with the need to always look around rather than focus on something, and the need to point out that people's lives and ficus now seem to fit on 5 degrees of their visual space, or whatever less than 6 inches resolves to at arms' length (crotch location optional).
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 20 2017, @01:38AM
I'd call that low-hanging fruit!
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday June 19 2017, @08:28PM (1 child)
On the other hand something like "very full field of vision with few distractions" would work well for games like minecraft.
As a gaming related topic I'd say based on the flight lessons I took in meatspace that 75% of the time looking forward is not a problem for a flight simulator.
"Gaming" as defined in the popular press as FPS sequels probably works 75% looking forward. I can't imagine turning physically in circles IRL to play a game so glancing left and right is for situational awareness not bodily rotation. I don't rotate my neck to turn my body anyway, seems unnatural.
Probably a separate problem WRT people not being used to being passive observers who can turn around. So you're playing the FPS or whatever and the something is sneaking up on you while you don't turn around, or something.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday June 19 2017, @08:47PM
Even a minuscule amount of head rotation while mostly looking straight forward is going to feel immersive in VR. Think of something like the opening of TES V: Skyrim.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday June 20 2017, @06:22AM
Wait, you yourself spend 75 percent of your time looking in that same 90 degree cone straight in front of you.
All people do. We have periferal vision to warn us to take a quick peek, then we go right back to the task at hand looking pretty much straight ahead. That's how we operate. If something requires much attention to the left or right we turn our bodies.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Monday June 19 2017, @05:05PM (16 children)
I think VR video is pretty unnecessary as a form of entertainment. What else is the audience going to look at? The extra standing off frame talking to their fake extra girlfriend? The fireball from an explosion as it rises into the sky? I don't get it other than the "oh shiny" factor that dupes idiots into spending thousands on gimmicks that won't see use past the first or second day.
I have tested a few VR rigs and while extremely impressive, still needs applications that make it worthwhile. Games are a big chunk of that along with simulations, virtual tours, and even medical or defence. But sitting in a chair at a theater or living room to watch a movie is just stupid. It reeks of trying to give VR mass appeal so more people throw their money away on stupid shit.
And lastly, picture what that would look like. Imagine walking into a room full of people sitting in chairs, with a VR headset strapped to their head, each in their own little world oo-ing and ah-ing at nothing. Would look like an insane asylum. It's rather dehumanizing.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @05:13PM (5 children)
For instance, an interaction between 2 characters is frequently shot with one in the background and one in the foreground; I'm almost never satisfied with the choice of focus—I tend to be interested in looking at the person who is blurry, which kind of ruins the magic of visual media.
If VR tech can handle my ability to choose what should be in focus, then that would be utterly transformative for the sense of immersion.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday June 19 2017, @07:23PM (4 children)
It is quite idiotic to use VR, a system designed for free-form 360 degrees viewing, to watch a movie or documentary, where a big part of the director's effort go to making you look at various things in a certain sequence to create a narrative.
Use VR for open-world games (renew the detective genre, or go around shooting stuff as usual), architecture, landscapes... Anything where you're advancing the story at your pace, not someone else's...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @07:40PM (1 child)
I'm telling you that I think the director made a mistake; he has failed to capture my attention, and has instead broken the illusion.
Then again, when I watch movies with other people, I find that they have almost zero conscious appreciation for the cinematographic choices that are being made; they seem completely oblivious to that aspect of the artistry.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @09:14PM
People care more for content than the delivery. If two people are talking then the importance of the videography is second to the story line. Generally people focus on what the people are saying more than the atmosphere they're saying it in. That is just normal, deviations from that norm require focus and attention otherwise the brain just works around any awkward visuals as long as they aren't too extreme.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday June 20 2017, @06:25AM (1 child)
I find it idiotic for You to make pronouncements about how OTHER people use technology.
Who appointed you?
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday June 20 2017, @07:18AM
Someone who likes to read opinions preceded or followed by a rational, if arguably limited by time and format, justification.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @05:21PM
3D in VR is pretty cool. it doesnt need a big TV and you can watch in the bed or stretched out on the couch.
nevermind, that the "occulus app store" app "occulus video" cannot even access a samba share and the +1 GB 3D movie file has to reside on the mobile phone, which has like, you know ... storage space come out the ears ...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @05:27PM (1 child)
Yeah, I'm not sure honestly what kind of potential VR has for movies. Isn't everything the director wants me to see going to be straight ahead anyway? I mean, maybe they could release a remake of Cloverfield where you're the camera guy, which would be cool. I don't see many other movies where that would work.
On the other hand, there's a new Monster Hunter coming out, and I would love for it to support VR. Having 3D on the 3DS with MHGen really helped improve my accuracy. My spatial awareness without depth perception is basically non-existent, and judging exactly how far my character is from the monster can be the difference between dodging the move I know the monster is about to do and then landing a nice combo vs. being sent flying with a pixel of health left. I mean, not that my spatial awareness is great with 3D, but it needs all the help it can get.
Even better if I'm able to glance around when I realize that I'm one wrong move away from getting my ass handed to me and desperately trying to run to the next area over so I can heal. The camera controls on the 3DS were pretty much shit, with which I fault the DS itself. (Options are a nub on 3DS XL that's nowhere near as good as the keyboard nipple on Thinkpads or a touchscreen with no tactile feedback so I have no idea what direction my thumb is pressing until it's too late and I run smack into a wall because the camera is now staring straight at the ground, quickly followed by a death blow from the monster. Also the d-pad is available, which is what I use sometimes, but it's on the same side as the movement stick, which made it next to worthless.) The Wii classic controller on MHTri was excellent, but being able to just glance would be perfect.
(Score: 3, Informative) by arslan on Monday June 19 2017, @11:12PM
Have you actually tried it? I have on my cheap $5 google cardboard, first version a while ago, and it is pretty good. Much better than the gimmicky 3D in cinemas. Yes things you're supposed to focus on is straight ahead, but the things that move past you are within your peripheral vision making it more realistic. Can't really get that in the movies. Of course back then, the resolution was crap but that was a while ago, hopefully they've improved now. Also I can lie down in my hammock or deck lounge comfortably while watching...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @05:55PM
Probably about as useful as 3D TV which died in 2 years...
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday June 19 2017, @08:31PM (3 children)
I suspect this is where its gonna be at.
The problem legacy TV has is progressive politics repels pretty much everyone making it impossible to produce something not-leftist while nobody non-leftist wants to watch.
The politics of visiting the grand canyon are, so far, tolerable and profitable.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday June 19 2017, @08:43PM
I think I can think of a political angle or two for the grand canyon [wikipedia.org].
Here's a 360 video of the grand canyon btw: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOajv_P6UQE [youtube.com]
One related video shows a tornado. Let's slap 360 degree
canyonscameras on the vans of all storm chasers.[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday June 19 2017, @10:01PM
Come, now. Surely you can watch Left Behind and its sequels, Happy Days, Highway to Heaven, and the Lawrence Welk Show. There's plenty of conservative-friendly fare if you're willing to look and not insist that liberal fare not exist at all at the same time.
Or maybe this is a business opportunity: create an all-torture channel, or a comedy channel that does nothing but make fun of minorities (not sure which way your conservatism tends).
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday June 20 2017, @06:34AM
Virtual tour of real estate probably is a market.
Maybe grocery shopping after Amazon bolts all the doors at whole foods. And maybe you can ride along with your groceries when they start flying drones off the roof of all the whole foods stores.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday June 19 2017, @08:34PM
It's up to filmmakers to make it worth a damn for narrative experiences that aren't games. One glaring problem is that if the camera is translating and rotating, there's a disconnect between those changes in view and your lack of movement. I guess the test for this would be to watch something like Hardcore Henry in VR and then see if you feel like shit afterwards.
Video of real life events such as protests or security footage could benefit. Also think of videos where someone gets on a motorcycle and films using a 360 degree camera. Stuff like that can already be uploaded on YouTube right now. If important historical events were captured in 360 degrees, you could pause and look around at certain frames. Might have made the Zapruder film more compelling, eh?
Nature docs, night sky timelapses, views from plazas or street intersections, and concerts [youtube.com] could all be interesting to see in 360 degrees. W.R.T. the night sky, although applications like Space Engine, Stellarium, Universe Sandbox, Digital Universe Atlas, etc. are more obvious targets for VR support than astronomy videos, videos of the night sky would allow you to see real world phenomena including meteors, aurora, the ISS orbiting, etc. that would otherwise have to be simulated. Although you could just go outside and lay down on your back to get a 360 degree view of the sky, that won't work if it's cloudy or there's light pollution. Not to mention the bugs.
Your weakest objection yet. If it's too embarrassing for the movie theater, stick it in the living room. If you can't even stand to be seen by your (hopefully existent) friends and loved ones, then you exile VR to the bed or basement.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @10:06PM
Oh just wait, it will take a while for people to create the content. It will be a different approach to entertainment, and likely one that requires some choices to be made.
Off the top of my head I see two basic choices for movie makers:
1) allow viewers to pause, go back, or otherwise explore the depths of your content that won't fit in one frame during a continuous timeline. Want to see every fight in the superhero movie instead of highlights for each hero? We can do that!
2) allow viewers to change view but not timeline. That way every time they watch the movie they can explore different facets.
You can mix/match those two choices throughout the movie
This allows content creators to tell a much deeper story that I think would really rope people in.
(Score: 2) by rigrig on Monday June 19 2017, @05:24PM
Did they control for all the 360 videos where everything of interest is happening in the front 90 degrees?
(i.e. rotate videos for all visitors by a random amount, then check if they compensate)
Also, there seem to be quite a few "360" videos that only have 180 degrees of content...
No one remembers the singer.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday June 19 2017, @05:29PM (1 child)
People seem to be acting very cynical and taking the wrong lesson here. The YouTube advice doesn't seem to be "treat VR like video" or "ignore what makes VR unique" (as someone else suggested here).
Read on to the next paragraph from TFA:
Seems to me this boils down to a simple realization: People pay more attention to stuff that's in front of them. That's basic human nature. If you're going to be successful at building VR, you can't ignore that.
So why aren't people looking around, aside from that fact that that's their default behavior anyway? Well, it could be unfamiliarity with new tech. In which case, you need to give people a reason to look around. But another simple reason may be that people just aren't that interested. You know how you get them interested? Show them something interesting -- WHERE THEY'RE LOOKING, i.e., in front of them. Then move focus beyond that gradually to get them to look around. Maybe place visual stimuli near that "focus area" and get them to move off to the side, drawing attention. There are lots of possibilities.
Seems the lesson here is that you need more engagement generally, and that starts with making sure people are interested where they're by default looking to begin with. Sounds like Google's saying, "If you fix that and get people engaged, maybe they'll care enough to look around." Which seems like a reasonable argument, though perhaps not the only possible strategy.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday June 20 2017, @05:59AM
One of those possibilities: place a hungry tiger behind them.
Like... for real! If they don't look behind, they don't deserve to live
(mind you, I'm not saying that if they do look behind, they are more worthy to live).
(grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by looorg on Monday June 19 2017, @05:48PM (1 child)
Isnt this great news? You can just compress the shit out of everything that isn't straight forward, or whatever is considered to be in focus. Really dropping down on the amount of things that need to be rendered and by that increasing performance?
(Score: 3, Informative) by jasassin on Tuesday June 20 2017, @12:26AM
Kinda like a Z-buffer?
jasassin@gmail.com GPG Key ID: 0xE6462C68A9A3DB5A
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @06:54PM (1 child)
Have you seen the shit on youtube? I'd say 99.999% of it is too awful to watch. Fake videos, scam videos, horrible copies of hollywood crap, incompetent instructional videos, advertising videos, etc. Only thing worse than network TV is youtube.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday June 19 2017, @08:01PM
Those things don't take the advice.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 20 2017, @09:53AM
I'm pretty sure I look forward about 95+% of the time without VR.
(Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Tuesday June 20 2017, @01:53PM
I wonder how much of this is due to conditioning, because we are most often using screens which we must face directly while holding still.
The other more likely reason I would imagine, is that in general, looking "straight ahead" is most natural and comfortable for our necks, so most VR content, even ones that use gyroscopes to sense head position and adjust perspective accordingly, would put most content "straight ahead" for ergonomic reasons.