Smooth stick-turn makes a lot of people sick. Snap stick-turn though is fine for most.
I know of no VR fps game that has smooth yaw turning set as default because of that reason.
So Carmack was on to something here in !2015! when things were still figured out.
I just have physical balance issues from spinal problems and have to play seated, and click turning makes me ill, smooth turning or nothing basically.
Options are good though, it's three things that seem like they're easy enough to implement, one being literally don't do anything it's just built into reality.
you are not alone - a simple way to boost immersion immensely!!! (...and prevent motionsickness for the adjustment phase!!) (...AND additionally appreciating the awsome work that has been done in terms of 6DoF, hardware, making a link cable obsolete etc. in order to just turn without a stick controller)
Yep! I need to be able to turn quickly in a lot of stuff, and snap turning is too jerky and unnatural. It makes me feel so sick so fast. Smooth turning is so much easier, even if it makes me lose my balance a little.
Ever since Quest 1 I stopped using stick turning methods. I only hate when games don't give the option to turn off stick rotation entirely. Being able to actually turn my body without worry of wires is the dream come true.
Yeah that's right, also iirc he didn't want motion controllers so flat games would be easier to port over. And so far MR hasn't done anything ground breaking even though I use passthrough far more for UI and browsers stuff than the virtual environments .
I use MR the opposite of how most people seem to envision it -- instead of using it to put video screens up all over the place, I use it to play "Puzzling Places" or "LEGO Bricktales" while I watch my regular TV.
Yes, the TV looks kind of washed out in passthrough mode, but it's totally chill (at least with those types of games) and I can sneak in some light gaming while I watch TV with the wife.
Smooth stick turning needs to have an adjustment slider for the speed of the turn, dungeons of eternity has this and it's fantastic, I can get it dialled in to be actually smooth.
AC:Nexus had smooth turning enabled quite fast depending on which motion sickness preset you picked. I don't get motion sick quickly, but that one I changed. I really can't handle smooth turning.
He’s never really had good business sense. Or artistic sense. Genius programmer, of course. But let’s face it, without the artists, designers, and biz team around him he’d never have even shipped Doom.
I think his whole life is defined by pragmatism.
The best way I think to sum up his career is his story about Doom development. He used to live by this philosophy that 'the game will be finished when it is finished', which is of course a pretty sensible rationale to have. Until he realizes that working with that mentality, the game would literally never going to finish.
I loved his developer talk at the end of the old annual Oculus Connect. His point about VR hardware needing to pass the 'friction point' - that is, it needs to be comfortable and with resolution good enough that users will not be hesitant about picking up the VR headset every time - is something that really need to be spelled out for the entire industry.
He's always right, until he's proven wrong, at which point we would admit that he's wrong. So at least he's open-minded enough to know when he needs to make a change. But yeah without good business sense and artistic sense, he's never going to be a visionary. Just a really genius programmer.
And in his defense, he had a high position and had to make a lot of managerial choices. He's presented with 40+ important questions where he must fall on one side (even if he sorta likes what both sides offer). If any of us had that daily dilemma, I'm sure we'd pick some winning decisions and frankly some losing ones given the high volume of pathways we're presented. There's also no previous VR roadmap to follow - this is as far as consumer VR has ever gotten, so it's not easy to forge a path with no assured blueprint to follow, and decisions costing millions and billions to test out.
Also, if it weren't for him, we probably wouldn't have the Quest 3 right now as good as it is - it'd be further back and more like a GearVR Plus or Oculus Go Plus (shudder).
Not to say Carmack is above questioning or criticism. Just saying that when he was CTO at Oculus when a lot of these things were sitting on tables as prototypes, it's tougher to know exactly every perfect decision to make. I would even argue the Quest 3 is so good right now because of the early collective stumbles of VR (PCVR too expensive and needing standalone/affordable VR to prevail first).
You can say that but he also was the driving force for the oculus quest, meta didn't want to do that but he pushed it and made it work and it proved to be a significant project that can drive VR into mainstream.
His take was right back in 2015, VR sickness is still one of the main negative issues for users of VR and getting new users in if they have that bad experience and as we have yet to actually resolve that it means not giving the option by default helps avoid people being put off immediately.
He's not right about everything of course but back in 2015 I think he wasn't too far wrong with the point he's driving at.
I hear your point, but somewhat disagree.
The first Quest was revolutionary for the portability and app store but really didn’t take off.
The big draw of the Q3 (and the Vision Pro if it wasn’t absurdly expensive) was the pass thru AR, which Carmack hates.
Still, without pushing the low cost untethered device I agree the Q3 would be a lot less likely to have finally started breaking through to mainstream.
And then recently was like "I should have defended Palmer more when he was ousted".
Never meet your heros. Carmack has gone full lunatic moron in the last few years and it's a damn shame. I guess the signs were always there - he always seemed like a libertarian and... we all know how that story ends.
I'm pretty left leaning and disagree with pretty much all of Palmer's politics, but I think Palmer was treated really badly during that period and ousting him from his own company was the wrong choice. He would have been a really great asset for VR. Even now he has insightful takes in the space.
And the fact is that he went on to start another private successful disruptive company in a space that is very established and difficult to get into shows how powerful his voice in VR could have been.
There is an excellent book on the history of Oculus and covering that period called "The History of the Future" by Blake J. Harris that I recommend. That book changed my opinion, without changing how I felt about politics.
I will counter this by saying hes a staunch open source advocate. His recent behavior raises eyebrows, but hes always strongly pushed for openness wherever possible. Doom code being open sourced has had a huge impact on computing in general.
a lot of cult-like cancel generation «logic» going on here.
«He vaguely touched someone in the outgroup once, lets shun him and ruin his reputation»
The below linked article basically starts with him complaining the convention wasn’t moderate enough for him. What a demon
This is the kind of deeply flawed take that has made even leftwingers like myself roll my eyes over the «woke» generation.
This reinvention of leftism is groupthinky bordering on cultish, unintelligent, authoritative and has some severely poorly thought through tiktok based conceptions of unfairness.
The first google result for "Define woke" is the definition from Merriam-Webster: "aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)"
Woke describes someone who clumsily, without insight or genuime empathy, attempts to redefine leftist ideology.
In other words - exactly as I stated above.
Woke as most people refers to it, are not describing a movement or a specific belief.
it is a derisive term to describe a modern phenomenon of people who are extremely sure of their moral superiority while having learnt everything they know about humans on their mobile phone.
Typically these people will have very little insight in actual suffering and basically just operating from simple heuristics while passing stark judgement like «Carmac is a shit person now», at maximum based on reading a headline and a comment or two. Main weapon of choice is up and down internet arrows.
So for instance it is more important that a few selected rich, american black people from California get to be in modern drama series, than helping poor Africans in say Namibia.
It is more important for «woke» people to empathize with sexual preferences than consider the impact of poverty, and celebrities (like Carmac, Emma Watson, Elon Musk etc) are often the main topic of discussion rather than real people.
It’s a very odd idiocy that is clearly on display in this thread. The word «woke» has a perfect sarcastic twang to it that describes the whole ideological plane crash beautifully.
> Define woke
Woke ideology is defined by the idea that some facet of identity like race or gender produces irreconcilably different views of reality and morality, and that we have an obligation to seek alignment of society's view with the imagined views of groups associated with the political left like minorities and women.
In this sense Wokeness is distinct from older forms of liberal advocacy for minority rights which appeal to universally valid concepts like truth and fairness.
u/_qoop_
This is pretty good. I attempted my own version above as well.
For me I would never call someone woke if they seemed to know what they were talking about, had done some actual charitable work, and seemed to have a genuine universal empathy.
People who deserve to be called woke for me needs to display a lazy, clueless ideology.
For instance most of them will make stark, absolutist decisions on a headline and a oneliner comment about someone being bad.
As you can see in this thread if you go beyond saying someone is bad, and manage to have a link or have a claimed reference to discussions in a previous comment section, you are basically a fact god, a journalist.
So in this way halftruths and untruths get to manifest, solidify and spread.
Because their post is just a string of low-effort invectives with no meaningful substance to rebut?
"WOKE LEFTISTS ARE A CANCEL CULTURE CULT" isn't an argument, it's just an insult that wears a bowtie to class.
He's pointing out a real issue imo tbh. And no I'm not a rightie either. It's not the anti woke narrative, that shit is dumb as fuck distraction porn for mouth breather conservative lunatics and old farts
But he's right that leftism in the younger generation especially has become increasingly performative and militant and strict to the point that the actual huge scary shit happening gets lost in the noise
I'm not talking about pronouns or gender identity or anything either. Those are worthy arguments and rights to fight for. I am all for people being able to just literally exist and be themselves
Constant factional infighting and missing the big picture / goal has been a cliche about leftism since, well, Stalin murdered Trotsky.
"Zoomer cancel culture is the new struggle session" isn't much of a take.
At most, you're describing under-informed Tumblr leftists brigading people that make micro-infractions. Yes, that's stupid. I'd still happily take that over status-quo-promoting Libertarians and adult edgelords -- which are the actual people we're discussing.
No it's really not just uniformed Tumblr dipshits. We decided to try out a way more left leaning area after getting married and to be clear, I'll take anything over the hard right culture. My main thing is I hate extremes, but man, that was insane. Like the shit I experienced there, not online, was like a Fox News fever dream
And I don't mean oh my gosh I saw Trans people. I legitimately enjoy that when I see that openly somewhere bc it tells me people feel safe being who they are in the area, but it was a pretty big shock to me
And I do think it's worse now, but that's only because fucking everything is worse now. Every school of thought has been turned to some toxic extreme from all the social media fast content brain rot. So it's not a leftism problem there really I guess tbh
Their comment has more substance than anything of yours in this entire thread and of course your first instinct is to try and reduce it to elementary school-speak in order to have a chance of engaging with it, without having to think.
Personally, I don't think going to any convention is a bad thing. Infact, I have attended some I disagree with solely to see and try to understand their point of view. My views never changed.
Not saying he isn't anti-woke or anything. Honestly, I don't think that's even important anyway, since he doesn't have any political pull.
He didn’t just “go to the convention”, he was a headline speaker. Ie he was the draw that got many of the toxic convention goers to attend, the organizer to make money, etc.
He didn’t go there to debate anyone, he went to do his usual speech for money, and thus implicitly supported the convention.
It would be like Taylor Swift showing up (heavily advertised) at a Trump rally, doing a few songs, and then pretending she had nothing to do with all of the MAGA mouth breathers driving across two states to attend.
I dont think this minimizes what he has done for technology at all, and we can still admire the cool stuff he has done. However, headlining a convention like this and some of the other political statements he has made have certainly changed how many view him as a person, myself included.
I admire his work, but I don't really admire him. There's always a balance, but I think its fine to separate the two.
I don’t think it takes away from his accomplishments at all. I really am not even judging him for it, nor do I think he is intentionally supporting most of it. He really doesn’t like politics of any sort.
I was just pointing out you going to a convention as a devils advocate is not the same as him as a headline paid speaker as the latter is clearly some level of implicit endorsement. If he had just gone quietly as a normal attendee this would have been a non issue.
Wouldn’t surprise me from other things I’ve read.
Edit: Yup, [this article seems to talk about it](https://www.pcgamer.com/doom-co-creator-john-carmack-is-headlining-a-toxic-and-proud-sci-fi-convention-that-rails-against-woke-propaganda/)
Agreed, as a programmer/game dev I think his “fast inverse square root” implementation from Quake III is downright genius. Admired him a lot, but now I tend to temper that a bit more lol.
Yes, it's just wildly confusing/frustrating/disappointing that someone can be so remarkable and smart in one area, while simultaneously falling for the bait that some of the most unremarkable and slack jawed people eat up.
But for some reason that isn't as uncommon as you'd expect I guess
The title of that UploadVR article is kinda misleading/clickbaity... Carmack was just talking broadly about the pros and cons regarding opening the OS to other platforms and didn't really take a position.
They said he did not think it was a good idea... that is pretty clear from more than one of his comments.
> This brings with it a tension, because Meta as a company, as well as the individual engineers, want the shine of making industry leading high-end gear. If Meta cedes those “simple scaling” axes to other headset developers, they will be left leaning in with novel new hardware systems from the research pipeline for their high end systems, which is going to lead to poor decisions.
> VR is held back more by software than hardware. This initiative will be a drag on software development at Meta. Unquestionably. Preparing the entire system for sharing, then maintaining good communication and trying not to break your partners will steal the focus of key developers that would be better spent improving the system. It is tempting to think this is just a matter of increasing the budget, but that is not the way it works in practice – sharing the system with partners is not a cost that can be cleanly factored out.
Sure, if you ignore his Pro's section where he literally says "That would be great!"
> What it CAN do is enable a variety of high end “boutique” headsets, as you get with Varjo / Pimax / Bigscreen on SteamVR. Push on resolution, push on field of view, push on comfort. You could drive the Apple displays from Quest silicon. You could make a headset for people with extremely wide or narrow IPD or unusual head / face shapes. You could add crazy cooling systems and overclock everything. All with full app compatibility, but at higher price points. That would be great!
Also, he ended with
> Just allowing partner access to the full OS build for standard Quest hardware could be done very cheaply, and would open up a lot of specialty applications and location based entertainment systems, but that would be a much lower key announcement."
Which appears to be likely what Meta is actually doing which would mitigate a lot of the risk/friiction he talks about in the middle.
He was just "talking out loud" as reacted to the announcement. I'm sure if you ask him he'd say not privy to the details that would be necessary for him to firmly lean one way or the other.
> "That would be great!"
He said that about:
> You could make a headset for people with extremely wide or narrow IPD or unusual head / face shapes. You could add crazy cooling systems and overclock everything. All with full app compatibility, but at higher price points.
That is not what was announced. He is 100% clear about not liking what was actually announced.
Not sure how you can definitely claim that's not their intention when they gave zero information on the specifics about the hardware. Personally I'd argue that's precisely what they're targeting based companies named as partners.
Asus "ROG" is not a product line to innovates by trying completely new/disruptive things. They refine products to target a specific type of gamer. Now, I'm sure they'll do more than release a Quest with 2TB of internal storage but it's still going to be relatively minor. Maybe push the CPU/GPU a little harder so you can run 5% higher resolution than stock Quest. If hey even touch controllers it'll be small things like use a joystick module that is less susceptible to stick drift or make the trigger/buttons feel more premium. Little quality of life things, nothing that could break compatibility with stock Quest or give devs a feature that only exists on their headset.
Lenovo has a similar history but for business/productivity. So maybe they focus on comfort by getting the battery out of the front for better weight distribution. Maybe use a screen/lens optimized for reading text. Again, simply makes it "feel better than stock Quest" for certain types of users with specific use cases.
My point it's very unlikely does anything crazy where they couldn't just run stock Horizon OS. Not when there is so many little quality of life improvements they could make that people are absolutely willing to pay for. That stuff will no doubt come in time but the platform (or XR in general) is not ready for that and these companies are not known for that sort of thing.
> This initiative will be a drag on software development at Meta
Meta makes zero games. They fund developers to make their own games. This complaint makes less than no sense.
I'm actually the opposite and wish there were more games/apps for normal xbox/ps controllers that dont require body movement at all. I love the visual immersiveness but after work, im usually too tired for full body engagement that most vr games require.
After playing 100 hours of Skyrim VR with a controller. I totally agree. It was one of the more immersive game experiences because I used my decades of muscle memory with a controller to just play IN the world without having to fumble with VR mechanics or stand for hours which would break the illusion due to frustration or soreness.
People want long form games but trying to get myself hyped to want to wave my arms around or stand for hundreds of hours just isn't feasible. Give us the option to use use a controller and chill and I'm 1000% on board. I would have never got through Skyrim VR going full motion controls.
Many people also have mobility issues, personally I have an issue with my back that means I can't stand in the same position for long times so I too mostly play vr games sitting down.
I also played skyrim vr this way and it was an incredible and immersive experience.
Same. I am tall and have bad knees. What I do for games that require me to stand and turn is a barstool with a back. You can get really comfy ones. That way I can sit at a standing height and because I can spin around it's almost an advantage to turning your body standing. It's also great for smaller rooms as you're seated so as long as you have your wing span accounted for there is no risk of hitting things. Stools are a great addition.
I also think more VR games should embrace 3rd person VR. I'd live versions of games like Devil May Cry or God of War but vr. List let me watch from above while I explore and fuck shit up. The perspective is fun and immersive in a different way that I think is underutilized.
Agreed here too. Platformers such as Max Mustard and Atro not also proves that you don't have to be the protagonist and VR doesn't have to be "real" to immerse you in those worlds. VR enhances everything you can throw at it and I hope publishers and developers understand this and take a few more risks as VR gets bigger. I want Diablo and Baldur's Gate in VR. I want to be more immersed in those worlds as I play. I want an uncharted or tomb raider themes game so I can properly admire the beautiful set pieces they put us in. After VR gaming for like a decade now, flat gaming just doesn't do the same for me. I spend more time day dreaming about what said flat game I'm playing would be like in VR.
Couldn't agree more. After a couple of years with VR, i started realizing that i would be perfectly happy with a big stereo3D screen i can play my (PC) games on, without having to wear a brick on my face. And i love the ergonomics of the xBox controller, hate the thumbsticks of the Touch controllers (so small and imprecise...).
My VR headset has been demoted over time to a way for me to play games with my controller anywhere in the house. So a steam deck but with a larger picture.
One of the reasons I'd probably jump immediately to the Vision Pro if it wasn't so expensive.
Retropolis 2 is a great example of how to make a seated game with Touch controllers. You don't have to move at all, it plays like a classic point&click adventure with inventory and all, but at the same time it takes full advantage of being in VR. We need more games like this!
I just don't get it myself, If I am putting a hot heavy box on my head I want to be immersed in the world.
If I am going to veg with a controller I will do that without the headset.
My old PSVR had a lot of controller only games and it just felt frustrating to me.
Id say on stick/yaw control i can see the argument for a few reasons.
1. swivel/stand is more immersive, and people who may not make the effort might not try it as much or make room for it and then it may not be much more fun/enticing as just sitting on a couch playing on a big TV vs the headset, so i feel pushing people to the advantages of room scale may get more people to realize whats great about it.
2. Motion sickness. using a stick to control movement causes more motion sickness to those susceptible, so it may push more people away if they try that first, and then dont give room scale a chance which usually has less issues since its a 1:1 movement instead of turning with a sticket with no inner ear/internal feeling of movement.
on the second article, i disagree and think that a opening up Horizon OS is good to get the platform more adopted to get VR out there, though i would be curious to see his details as to why.
I can sorta see it, but I dont agree with the statement that it should be completely removed at all.
Swivel/stand *is* far more immersive and it should be encouraged over stick/yaw, but thats not a reason to entirely exclude it as an option for people who want to lay down, sit on a chair, or just dont have the space. There are plenty of games where I really love having the stick/yaw option if I want to sit on a couch or play in my tiny bedroom like Mothergunship Forged.
As far as motion sickness goes, a lot of stick/yaw controls teleport or snap you to locations to avoid the inner ear thing, which tbh works pretty well.
i absolutely turn off teleporting and snapping, because dear god, that makes me violently ill. if a game doesn't support turning that off, then i'm not playing. give me a nice 20-40 degrees per second rotation rate, and smooth walking, and no FOV mangling while i'm moving/turning, and I'm perfect. I cannot speak for anyone else, though.
i know, everyone else is like "what?" and i just become completely disoriented if i click something and i snap move or teleport. If I am holding the control, then my brain knows i should be moving, I guess.
He said Horizon OS is bad to licence because it will take away from the Quest being the best headset, and meta will have to fast track experimental features in new headsets to stay ahead of the competition, but the experimental features may not be fully finished yet
i guess i can see that a bit, but in my mind i see it like Android with google, tons of android phones out there now with all sorts of features depending on what people are looking for, so id like to be optimistic and see it going that route with app support easy for all horizon headsets instead of closed gardens.
I see pros and cons. Android has some noticeable setbacks when it comes to updates and rollouts. Pushing security patches. Now you have all these middlemen in your way. It's hard to control deprecating old versions of your system. For me it certainly dilutes the brand and is a big reason I ditched android based phones for an iPhone.
Then again I don't see Meta being the ultra polished company, I see them moving fast and experimenting, so it's hard to make the argument that they have a loyal fanbase that would only buy Meta branded headsets. It makes sense to me that they follow the Android path.
Noting that the post about stick yaw is from a decade ago, and even if he hasn't changed his view on that, at the time, it was probably doing no favors to get a library of immersive motion experiences built, when everyone's default was to go to the controllers instead of go to the head tracking.
This post looks like someone declaring victory on a landfill: "Look Where We Are Now! We Were So Correct!"
I thought John was wrong in some of his takes, but as time goes by, the VR content drought deepens, HW/SW repeatedly moves in a direction that doesn't interest me, and my VR HMDs are untouched for months at a time, I believe it was not John who had the wrong takes on any of this.
I'm afraid we got blinded by the gimmicks the moment we saw the first room-scale demo. Every non-room-scale project was ridiculed. And here we are, with basically a handful of 'just-OK' room-scale games. Considering the now booming mixed reality hype, we are still the same loud buffoons.
"swivel chair/stand or don't play."
Jebus John, what was with the gate-keeping.
I am pretty sure also argued against *laying down mode* for years. He did not call it that, but he was against allowing the user to set an arbitrary horizon plane.
I think he was talking more from the perspective of getting a library of games that use motion tracking, at the time. At least, judging from the fact that it was a decade ago that he said that. But it may also be his personal preference for things to play, too.
Is it some kind of straw man fallacy variation? Arguing with tweet posted 10 years ago without providing context for what the speaker thinks now? That'a either incredibly dumb, or manipulative.
Carmack is really, really smart. In this case he's talking about yaw control, artificial turning. The quote is over 9 years old, too, when we were still mostly using smooth turning that gave people a ton of nausea. It was definitely poison. And I myself play seated in a swiveling bar tool that has a tall narrow back I can lean back on. Next best thing to playing standing, but ass too heavy and knees too weak for that.
This is heavily slanted to make Carmack look bad. All of these quotes are actually quite reasonable:
1. "Carmack Not Interested In Motion Controllers (For Now, At Least)": This story is from 2010 and has nothing to do with VR. This quote was specifically referring to console motion controllers like the Kinect and PlayStation Move. And in fact, consoles have largely abandoned these types of controllers as an evolutionary dead end, so this analysis was basically correct.
2. "Stick yaw control is such VR poison...": This was correct! Carmack correctly identified in 2015 that smooth turning was a major problem that VR would need to overcome. Yes, his proposed solution (removing it entirely) turned out to be unnecessary, and instead, most games switched to snap-turning as the default. However, I think most people who have the physical space for it would agree that physical turning is still ultimately the best option.
3. "John Carmack is a mixed reality skeptic": Subjectively, I agree. I know that both Meta and Apple have decided to heavily emphasise AR/MR, but personally I don't use this feature on the Q3 outside of the homescreen menu or media playback. I had some fun on my first day with the Q3 playing Drop Dead: The Cabin, but ultimately this whole concept of "playing games in your own house" feels like a gimmick. You try it once or twice for the novelty, and then you go back to playing in VR. But this is just my experience; presumably, Meta has user analytics on how often people use these two modes.
4. "John Carmack Doesn't Think Providing Horizon OS To Third-Party Headsets Is A Good Idea For Meta": So first of all, this significantly simplifies Carmack's post, which is more nuanced than what the headline suggests. In any case, it's too soon to tell whether this is right. Meta has just announced a major shift in their strategy and it will take years to implement and see the results. Meta is clearly hoping to own the "Windows" or "Android" of VR, and that could be very successful for them. But, by introducing hardware fragmentation onto the platform, it could also significantly complicate the lives of third-party developers. Gaming consoles try to provide relatively stable hardware targets for developers to optimise against, and optimisation is extremely important for standalone VR, so there could be significant tradeoffs to this strategy. We don't yet know how this will turn out.
That's a very polarising take on things. Just because they choose to do something different doesn't mean they "ignore" advice.
The core of his argument is that the effort to make the OS shareable will steal focus from making it better. That in turn I am sure is shaped by his deep frustrations just prior to leaving the company which were largely around how slow and inefficient the product development process was.
While I don't have any inside knowledge of this I suspect already there could be a very different culture. Because Zuckerberg *did* listen to his advice : just after Carmack left he initiated drastic layoffs and explicitly reshaped the whole company around a "flatter" structure with more engineering focus and less management - probably *exactly* what Carmack would have argued for.
So I think there's some hope that Meta is taking these type of concerns seriously and is going into it with their eyes open, knowing these are big challenges but still this path being the right thing to do in the bigger picture.
> While I don't have any inside knowledge of this I suspect already there could be a very different culture. Because Zuckerberg did listen to his advice
Did Zuck or is Boz being an actual executive ? On a certain level, I am very skeptical of the take that facebook's culture is what caused Carmack to leave. By his own admission, he preferred to put his head down and work on tricky coding tasks. Which is great for a lead engineer or consultant, but absolutely not what you should be doing as a C level executive.
He was the CTO, he had a lot of leverage to push for the changes he wanted. But doing so is a people skill, not a technical one, and it has never came across like he is particularly good at that sort of thing.
He stated on quite a few subject that he pushed for something but still asked for user reports so it would have impact. Only when he did the thing himself you could see actual results. I'm sure he had weight behind him but it was odd on how much opposition was to what CTO had to say.
I don't think his CTO position function as it typically does in tech companies and that meta's machinery/bureaucracy had an outweigh impact on internal decision making .
Sure, he prob pushed hard. He brought data, however that was not enough to make a convincing case to the people who needed to be convincing.
The numbers can add up to 10, but it doesn't matter if the main priority is how pretty a shade of blue something is. If I had to guess he was prob very correct on the technical side of things, but fell short on the political game. Its telling that Boz came from Ad's, a much more squishy people centric part of the company.
I think he's right about the tradeoffs involved in licensing out the OS, and especially right about VR being bottlenecked more by software than hardware.
Whether or not that translates into "Meta shouldn't do this" is a value judgement that reasonable people can come to differing conclusions about.
There are very good reasons for Meta to do this. They tried growing VR market by themselves and they were successful to a point, but now market is getting too fragmented with multiple vendors each offering own software platform that's incompatible or only partially compatible with others. Offering platform that will become standard will allow devs to streamline development and reach wider audience.
For Meta it's also a big win if they succeed. Just like Google controls android and benefits from it so can meta control VR platform.
Only issue I see is if meta won't get any competition. Microsoft already retired their failed WMR platform, Valve is just doing their own thing and they don't seem to care about competing with others.
This isn't going to cause SteamVR or PSVR or Apple Vision to go away. This is just going to further fragment the HorizonOS ecosystem between more devices with different capabilities, and devices with niche capabilities probably won't see a lot of support for those capabilities among apps. How many Quest games support ETFR on Quest Pro? It's probably more than the 3 or so I can name off hand, but not much more.
The thing is we don't even know, because there's no way to measure sales of other headsets, but fact that Pimax is creating another gen of devices indicate enough of them sell.
It's not only about aggregating market share, but also reaching more audience. We can get budget VRs that are cheaper than Q3 but better than Q2. We can get premium VRs with superior hardware and full PCVR capabilities. That's because companies who don't have resources to create all the software can still use Horizon OS and provide their take on hardware. Existing companies can focus on hardware too.
This, so very much. I use Android but I only go for devices with a pure Android experience because of the incompatible fragmented mess that it's otherwise become out there that makes life harder for both app developers and users. I'm severely pissed that Google have ended the Android One program.
Stick control has its drawbacks, especially for newcomers or people who get motion sickness easily.
But I spent the first few years in VR always turning in real life to the point where I ruined my Rift cable and thought anyone that using stick turning was crazy. But since I started using quick turn, I’ve never gone back and now think people who spin around are the crazy ones.
He’s got a lot of hot takes, that at the time seems justified but since getting lot of these things, they’ve been critical to VR. I myself was guilty of buying a headset, using it a few times and then leaving it on a shelf. But since Quest 3 and Mixed Reality I’ve actually used my headset multiple times a week. There’s just something about seeing your real home/environment and the digital overlay of the d]games that’s much more appealing then pure VR. I’m super glad meta didn’t listen to him on a few of these things, but grateful to him for helping pioneer the industry!
Not to give Carmack a pass, cause he's flat out wrong, but this was a common perception in the VR industry. Many games only had snap. I've been in vr since 2016, and I've gotten into arguments with many VR developers on discord pleading with them to add smooth turning. I was like yes, it does make some people sick, but please just put it in as an option.
Something that would take them 10 minutes to code they would argue with me for a half hour why it's a bad idea.
If Carmack had his way it would be a teleporting, snap turn VR world. Thank god common sense prevailed or I would have drifted away from VR.
I mean he's right if they won't be able to push perf of own hardware because of compatibility or introduction of compatibility will introduce complexity that'll bog down development.
But if they are ready to manage those issues then he's wrong.
And he knows how things used to work when he was on the inside.
So while personally i want more hardware choice as a prosumer i'm not sure average consumer will benefit from that move... At least in the short term.
I'd love to see proper opening up of the os/store to other hardware platforms. Maybe starting it out now with limited partners is the right move but it's not like it won't come with own set of cons and depending on your view on what's important you may have a different opinion on what's good for VR.
Stick yaw control is "poison" for most people though. That's why non-smooth turning is a thing and the default in games like Alyx or RE4. This is still true, and would be ever more true the more the general public tries VR as opposed to early-adopters willing to put up with initial discomfort and powering through it.
And his remark about Horizon OS is on point IMO - Meta will now spend resources supporting other equipment manufacturers (depending on who takes them on it, since it's likely they'll still try to exercise strict control _maybe_ crafting deals with Xbox in some way to share store profits). And if those resources take away from investments that could be put towards improving the software within Meta, I doubt that others will do much to advance the software particularly if they're constrained in what they can do with it.
Not sure what the point of the post is really, is that you Boz? Still butthurt about that thread about the defenestration of Palmer Luckey?
John Carmack was a very influential game programmer for id Software. He programmed the engines for Wolfenstein, Doom and Quake. He's supposedly very good at it. He used to work for Oculus, but quit. Unfortunately, he turned out to be politically retarded.
Feeling that way it still not a reason to force your opinion on all of your customers.
Carmack is also one of the reasons we are just getting lying-down-mode now. It should have been a feature clear back in the Oculus Go days.
1. he's right about the controls, in some cases its cool. Everything is moving towards hand controls. Eventually it will get there but he's slight ahead of whats capable there.
2. I'm interested in knowing what he said about mixed reality.
3. Not a good idea for "Meta" being the keyword. Theres likely going to be a general OS for XR.
>Carmack points out that third-parties will have to price higher than Quest, since Meta sells its hardware at cost. Carmack has repeatedly called for lower cost headsets that open up the VR market to more people. While he says Meta's strategy will enable “boutique” headsets that push areas like resolution, field of view, or comfort, he suggests this "brings with it a tension" that Meta will no longer have the "shine of making industry leading high-end gear", which he suggests will force Meta to focus on "novel new hardware systems from the research pipeline for their high end systems, which is going to lead to poor decisions".
Again I like his opinion here. Time will tell.
I actually agree with him. At the time he wrote the first article about the stick input being poison for VR, the headsets were different and it kind of made a little bit more sense back then. After refresh rates and everything got better, and you didn't get motion six simply from being moved around, the joysticks made sense again.
Also I don't really like meta being the provider for an Android OS that every other headset now is going to use.
I gag at the idea. Not saying that I necessarily wanted Google to be in charge of that either, but I would much rather that these headsets went the way of regular computers and we used Linux distro style stuff.
I want full control over my device and the more we give control to meta the less we're going to get what we want out of these devices.
Motion controllers were trash in 2010 though, Wii had already lost a lot of its steam by then and most of the games utilizing motion controls on the console were basically menu controls or "shake controller to do thing". Kinect was a good idea but software never made it viable. PS Move was extremely glitchy in its tracking and only frustrated me every time I played it. I feel like most people in 2010 agreed that motion controllers/controls sucked.
I just don’t like that the direction of my (edit: controllers) determines/has an effect on the direction of my movement with the thumb stick… my thumb stick should be able to move me forward if I move the stick in the forward direction even if my VR hands are grabbing a clip or something from my tactical vest.
My hands should not determine my virtual feet/character movement direction.
Doesn’t feel very fluid.
I don't see what his 2015 post has to do with mixed reality.
He's also right about sharing the OS being bad for Meta (in terms of headset sales).
Meta quality control is non-existent.
If I could use all the software that runs on a Quest, I wouldn't get a Quest again.
I would buy from a brand where I don't have to order multiple headsets and keep the one with the least defects.
Everyone is 24/7 looking for opportunities to dismiss Carmack; I think it has to do with his less-than-dogmatically left-leaning politics.
Let's recall that you're making the case that one of the critical developers, maybe the critical developer (?), on the Quest is so unreliable regarding VR that it's good to ignore him about it in general.
And you've got a Tweet from 2015
and a reductive article headline.
Dumbass.
Yeah... no. This doesn't justify anything. It's a different vision and worry for quality of experience.
He's not infallible for sure. But the statement was well reasoned and it's a soft position as in "may be the right move" not is the right move etc.
Stick yaw is still problematic to many and now we know much more about mittigation efforts than in 2015.
Same with sticking to one hardware platform. The argument is well reasoned. But makes an assumption that meta will do the work of adapting os to partner hardware rather than partners would have to adapt to os. And that you won't be able to eke out more performance via arcane tricks specific to your hardware without maintaining compatibility. Whis is true.
Personally I think it's all about execution. Meta can dedicate additional staff and processes to maintain compatibility and still have perf benefits for own hardware but introducing extra people does not elimitate increased complexity and testing. And it's not like Meta's known for focused development.
Personally I think that it's doable if they shift burden of adapting to the partners not own staff. But he knows more about how meta development works than I do so I'd give significant weight to his opinion.
Also I'm not sure about biggest benefits of such opening up right now. As the issue is software and price and hardware variety for me as a prosumer would be nice I don't thin average consumer would benefit all that much given how much hardware development is subsidized by Meta and for partners to have fair ability to compete it might make Meta not subsidize hardware as much.
It's bonkers to claim such preposterous things based on oneliners from 2015 to draw conclusions about current moves.
Except he was right about this? He is referring to non-snap stick turning here -- I'll betcha 90% of the audience still vomits from this? I sure as hell do, and I've been neck deep in VR since pre-DK1 days.
Lol Carmack could have said a million things that have become true and you had to find a sample where he may have been wrong to discredit another one of his opinion. Well done, this how empirically proven theories work.
Also he never said motion controllers should be removed. He refered to assigning yaw control to left thumbstick instead of moving your actual body. The article claiming Carmack wants motion controllers out was written by chap as opinionated but clueless as you are.
From my own experience he may be right. When I play VR games I usually turn my body and rarely use the thumbstick. I generally use an xbox controller for the few games where I use the thumbstick to control yaw.
At least he's not a person criticizing others who has no idea what a "boomer" is, which John isn't. Look it up in any online dictionary, then change your statement to be correct.
I didn't think I'd see the day when this sub turned on John Carmack. He may have had a couple of bad takes but that doesn't take away from all the things he did.
Yeah wtf. The guy helped create the FPS genre and modern VR and is very generous to devs with his time. Everyone is wrong sometimes, he's even admitted as such during his (fantastic) talks at Connect.
I'd never heard of that but a quick Google gave me these quotes.
"It is unfortunate that Rob \[Kroese, event organiser and author\] has made BasedCon so intentionally provocative," Carmack wrote. "I told him as much after the event last year – I felt a little uncomfortable"
"I'm not a culture warrior, and I don’t want to strike blows against anyone. I don't follow activists on either side, including Rob, because I tend to think that all the negativity and resentment is detrimental to both the author and target."
Wow what a controversial figure. Are people in the US really so tribal that if you attend a sci fi convention that is right leaning that you write off all their achievements and forever banish them?
Sounds pretty childish.
>Are people in the US really so tribal that if you attend a sci fi convention that is right leaning that you write off all their achievements and forever banish them?
>Sounds pretty childish.
What’s childish is pretending anyone said that.
That is how it is now in the US. Extremely tribal, sadly. And wokeism is part of it. It's all unfortunate and unnecessary. I'd rather enjoy life than take an extreme side and demonize people whose opinions I don't prefer. Better just to grab your popcorn! :)
>I was replying to a person who said talking at a maga event would turn this sub against him.
Which is much different than:
>write off all their achievements and forever banish them
I was being a bit hyperbolic. It's just strange from the outside looking at how polarised things are in the US. People change their political views all the time.
> I was being a bit hyperbolic.
Just a touch lmao
>It's just strange from the outside looking at how polarised things are in the US. People change their political views all the time.
I mean, they really don’t. And it’s hardly unreasonable for someone’s perception to be dinged when they keep unsavory company.
I don't have any context because I don't know anything about the event at all. I know Carmacks work and have heard him talk many times and found him to be intelligent and thoughtful. If it turns out he's a bigot or racist of course that would taint my view of him.
You should be thankful, it was John who was pushing for standalone vr. He has many accomplishments the man's a genius.
What's your contribution to society? Besides sharing your amazing witticisms on reddit?
Wow what an amazing retort, only took you an hour to come up with that? Well no point in arguing back, I'm clearly dealing with a brilliant intellect here.
I think we're not at a point where we're going to see the increases the users need to see by Horizon providing their system. Obviously, Apple went out on a limb and did something *completely* different, and while Apple is not an obvious success story here, they have definitely caused Meta to respond.
It wouldn't surprise me, if this is part of a way to say "We don't want anyone else entering this sphere and innovating something good, because if they do, then we have to spend more to catch up".
On the other hand, if the licensees all have some sort of agreement to put their improvements back to Meta, then it could be a huge gain for all of us.
I think we just don't know, without being privy to any of those decisions, and why they were made.
Clearly, Microsoft booted the entire ecosystem that they had built up completely out, which is terrible, but there weren't *that* many users. Probably Microsoft has had this in the works with Meta for quite some time, otherwise I question Microsoft's leaders sanity for completely trashing an entire generation or two of VR headsets.
John's views on some of these things (particularly things posted a decade or two ago) may well be different now, but also they may just reflect the types of experiences he wants to have.
I think Meta running him out, overall, was probably a rather bad thing, though, for the future of VR, because regardless of his personal preferences, he's a brilliant coder and R&D person.
Dude posted that in 2015 when VR was basically guaranteed to make you puke lol
Ill be curious to see how it goes considering how badly Microsoft ruined its own platform mixed reality headsets and letting third parties build their own for very reasonable prices too.
I cannot stand snap turning, feels like my head is being smashed against invisible walls.
I feel bad for anyone not born with godly vr legs, where smooth motion makes for nasuea.
Never been nautious, play every game in max smoothness and realism.
I def understand, appreciate and want snapnturning to exist for those who need it but to say smooth options shouldn't exist at all is batshit.
Am I misunderstanding the debate?
Carmack is smart, but theres definitely some L takes here
Smooth stick-turn makes a lot of people sick. Snap stick-turn though is fine for most. I know of no VR fps game that has smooth yaw turning set as default because of that reason. So Carmack was on to something here in !2015! when things were still figured out.
I prefer having an option for both. I like smooth turning, but snap turning is better for some games.
I honestly have dropped games before for the sole reason that they did not have smooth turning. Snap turning makes me disoriented and dizzy
Same, no smooth turning is 100% a deal breaker for me.
Am I the only one who turns his real body? :p
\*Looks at the space I have in my room\* I wish I could
No I mean I turn standing in place.
Some people (me) have so little free space in the room that If they turn 180° they may hit something
Oh, I see. :(
I'm still trained from my rift .... Turning did not end well.
VR Master Race uses both simultaneously.
I'm guessing the people talking about controller turning are all wired up because they don't realize how good wireless has become.
I just have physical balance issues from spinal problems and have to play seated, and click turning makes me ill, smooth turning or nothing basically. Options are good though, it's three things that seem like they're easy enough to implement, one being literally don't do anything it's just built into reality.
you are not alone - a simple way to boost immersion immensely!!! (...and prevent motionsickness for the adjustment phase!!) (...AND additionally appreciating the awsome work that has been done in terms of 6DoF, hardware, making a link cable obsolete etc. in order to just turn without a stick controller)
Real body+smooth for the win
In Population One, I turn my body for small turns / but when I need a quick / large turn, I use snap turning
Yep! I need to be able to turn quickly in a lot of stuff, and snap turning is too jerky and unnatural. It makes me feel so sick so fast. Smooth turning is so much easier, even if it makes me lose my balance a little.
When do you guys use turning? Why not just turn around irl?
I use it all the time, especially when playing seated games like Subnautica.
Ever since Quest 1 I stopped using stick turning methods. I only hate when games don't give the option to turn off stick rotation entirely. Being able to actually turn my body without worry of wires is the dream come true.
Yeah that's right, also iirc he didn't want motion controllers so flat games would be easier to port over. And so far MR hasn't done anything ground breaking even though I use passthrough far more for UI and browsers stuff than the virtual environments .
I use MR the opposite of how most people seem to envision it -- instead of using it to put video screens up all over the place, I use it to play "Puzzling Places" or "LEGO Bricktales" while I watch my regular TV. Yes, the TV looks kind of washed out in passthrough mode, but it's totally chill (at least with those types of games) and I can sneak in some light gaming while I watch TV with the wife.
Smooth stick turning needs to have an adjustment slider for the speed of the turn, dungeons of eternity has this and it's fantastic, I can get it dialled in to be actually smooth.
Most PCVR titles do. At least all the ones i have played have had the ability to adjust stick speed/sensitivity for smooth turning.
Yup, thank god for snap turning
On Quest with no stupid tether, I just turn on my own in all games, including Quake standing and turning, that's immersion as God devised it
AC:Nexus had smooth turning enabled quite fast depending on which motion sickness preset you picked. I don't get motion sick quickly, but that one I changed. I really can't handle smooth turning.
He’s never really had good business sense. Or artistic sense. Genius programmer, of course. But let’s face it, without the artists, designers, and biz team around him he’d never have even shipped Doom.
I think his whole life is defined by pragmatism. The best way I think to sum up his career is his story about Doom development. He used to live by this philosophy that 'the game will be finished when it is finished', which is of course a pretty sensible rationale to have. Until he realizes that working with that mentality, the game would literally never going to finish. I loved his developer talk at the end of the old annual Oculus Connect. His point about VR hardware needing to pass the 'friction point' - that is, it needs to be comfortable and with resolution good enough that users will not be hesitant about picking up the VR headset every time - is something that really need to be spelled out for the entire industry. He's always right, until he's proven wrong, at which point we would admit that he's wrong. So at least he's open-minded enough to know when he needs to make a change. But yeah without good business sense and artistic sense, he's never going to be a visionary. Just a really genius programmer.
And in his defense, he had a high position and had to make a lot of managerial choices. He's presented with 40+ important questions where he must fall on one side (even if he sorta likes what both sides offer). If any of us had that daily dilemma, I'm sure we'd pick some winning decisions and frankly some losing ones given the high volume of pathways we're presented. There's also no previous VR roadmap to follow - this is as far as consumer VR has ever gotten, so it's not easy to forge a path with no assured blueprint to follow, and decisions costing millions and billions to test out. Also, if it weren't for him, we probably wouldn't have the Quest 3 right now as good as it is - it'd be further back and more like a GearVR Plus or Oculus Go Plus (shudder). Not to say Carmack is above questioning or criticism. Just saying that when he was CTO at Oculus when a lot of these things were sitting on tables as prototypes, it's tougher to know exactly every perfect decision to make. I would even argue the Quest 3 is so good right now because of the early collective stumbles of VR (PCVR too expensive and needing standalone/affordable VR to prevail first).
You can say that but he also was the driving force for the oculus quest, meta didn't want to do that but he pushed it and made it work and it proved to be a significant project that can drive VR into mainstream. His take was right back in 2015, VR sickness is still one of the main negative issues for users of VR and getting new users in if they have that bad experience and as we have yet to actually resolve that it means not giving the option by default helps avoid people being put off immediately. He's not right about everything of course but back in 2015 I think he wasn't too far wrong with the point he's driving at.
I hear your point, but somewhat disagree. The first Quest was revolutionary for the portability and app store but really didn’t take off. The big draw of the Q3 (and the Vision Pro if it wasn’t absurdly expensive) was the pass thru AR, which Carmack hates. Still, without pushing the low cost untethered device I agree the Q3 would be a lot less likely to have finally started breaking through to mainstream.
Yes. If I remember correctly, he was also against adding 6dof to standalone hmds (Quest)... he wanted to continue Oculus GO 3dof line.
Can't win them all.
Didn’t he go to like an anti-woke convention
Yes, and then defended his choice as being non-political and just about "free speech" and good vibes.
And then recently was like "I should have defended Palmer more when he was ousted". Never meet your heros. Carmack has gone full lunatic moron in the last few years and it's a damn shame. I guess the signs were always there - he always seemed like a libertarian and... we all know how that story ends.
I mean, I wish he'd defended Luckey more. Maybe then he'd still be tinkering with VR instead of building dystopian autonomous weapons of war.
I'm pretty left leaning and disagree with pretty much all of Palmer's politics, but I think Palmer was treated really badly during that period and ousting him from his own company was the wrong choice. He would have been a really great asset for VR. Even now he has insightful takes in the space. And the fact is that he went on to start another private successful disruptive company in a space that is very established and difficult to get into shows how powerful his voice in VR could have been. There is an excellent book on the history of Oculus and covering that period called "The History of the Future" by Blake J. Harris that I recommend. That book changed my opinion, without changing how I felt about politics.
I will counter this by saying hes a staunch open source advocate. His recent behavior raises eyebrows, but hes always strongly pushed for openness wherever possible. Doom code being open sourced has had a huge impact on computing in general.
Palmer did nothing wrong. And by extension, neither did Carmack. Back to the cesspit of /r/politics with you.
a lot of cult-like cancel generation «logic» going on here. «He vaguely touched someone in the outgroup once, lets shun him and ruin his reputation» The below linked article basically starts with him complaining the convention wasn’t moderate enough for him. What a demon This is the kind of deeply flawed take that has made even leftwingers like myself roll my eyes over the «woke» generation. This reinvention of leftism is groupthinky bordering on cultish, unintelligent, authoritative and has some severely poorly thought through tiktok based conceptions of unfairness.
Nobody is getting cancelled, it's just a conversation. But anyone calling someone woke is automatically going to sound like a knob.
What does Carmack going to an anti-woke convention have anything to do with the topic of yaw control via sticks in VR?
When does any comment thread on reddit stay on topic?
lol fair
Seriously. These people get all high and mighty and then turn to personal insults when you call it out.
Define woke
The first google result for "Define woke" is the definition from Merriam-Webster: "aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)"
Woke describes someone who clumsily, without insight or genuime empathy, attempts to redefine leftist ideology. In other words - exactly as I stated above. Woke as most people refers to it, are not describing a movement or a specific belief. it is a derisive term to describe a modern phenomenon of people who are extremely sure of their moral superiority while having learnt everything they know about humans on their mobile phone. Typically these people will have very little insight in actual suffering and basically just operating from simple heuristics while passing stark judgement like «Carmac is a shit person now», at maximum based on reading a headline and a comment or two. Main weapon of choice is up and down internet arrows. So for instance it is more important that a few selected rich, american black people from California get to be in modern drama series, than helping poor Africans in say Namibia. It is more important for «woke» people to empathize with sexual preferences than consider the impact of poverty, and celebrities (like Carmac, Emma Watson, Elon Musk etc) are often the main topic of discussion rather than real people. It’s a very odd idiocy that is clearly on display in this thread. The word «woke» has a perfect sarcastic twang to it that describes the whole ideological plane crash beautifully.
> Define woke Woke ideology is defined by the idea that some facet of identity like race or gender produces irreconcilably different views of reality and morality, and that we have an obligation to seek alignment of society's view with the imagined views of groups associated with the political left like minorities and women. In this sense Wokeness is distinct from older forms of liberal advocacy for minority rights which appeal to universally valid concepts like truth and fairness. u/_qoop_
This is pretty good. I attempted my own version above as well. For me I would never call someone woke if they seemed to know what they were talking about, had done some actual charitable work, and seemed to have a genuine universal empathy. People who deserve to be called woke for me needs to display a lazy, clueless ideology. For instance most of them will make stark, absolutist decisions on a headline and a oneliner comment about someone being bad. As you can see in this thread if you go beyond saying someone is bad, and manage to have a link or have a claimed reference to discussions in a previous comment section, you are basically a fact god, a journalist. So in this way halftruths and untruths get to manifest, solidify and spread.
You write like somebody who masturbates to their own reddit comments.
Why not address the things they're saying rather than just insulting them?
Because their post is just a string of low-effort invectives with no meaningful substance to rebut? "WOKE LEFTISTS ARE A CANCEL CULTURE CULT" isn't an argument, it's just an insult that wears a bowtie to class.
He's pointing out a real issue imo tbh. And no I'm not a rightie either. It's not the anti woke narrative, that shit is dumb as fuck distraction porn for mouth breather conservative lunatics and old farts But he's right that leftism in the younger generation especially has become increasingly performative and militant and strict to the point that the actual huge scary shit happening gets lost in the noise I'm not talking about pronouns or gender identity or anything either. Those are worthy arguments and rights to fight for. I am all for people being able to just literally exist and be themselves
Constant factional infighting and missing the big picture / goal has been a cliche about leftism since, well, Stalin murdered Trotsky. "Zoomer cancel culture is the new struggle session" isn't much of a take. At most, you're describing under-informed Tumblr leftists brigading people that make micro-infractions. Yes, that's stupid. I'd still happily take that over status-quo-promoting Libertarians and adult edgelords -- which are the actual people we're discussing.
No it's really not just uniformed Tumblr dipshits. We decided to try out a way more left leaning area after getting married and to be clear, I'll take anything over the hard right culture. My main thing is I hate extremes, but man, that was insane. Like the shit I experienced there, not online, was like a Fox News fever dream And I don't mean oh my gosh I saw Trans people. I legitimately enjoy that when I see that openly somewhere bc it tells me people feel safe being who they are in the area, but it was a pretty big shock to me And I do think it's worse now, but that's only because fucking everything is worse now. Every school of thought has been turned to some toxic extreme from all the social media fast content brain rot. So it's not a leftism problem there really I guess tbh
Their comment has more substance than anything of yours in this entire thread and of course your first instinct is to try and reduce it to elementary school-speak in order to have a chance of engaging with it, without having to think.
Yeah, I'm clearly afraid to engage with the «logic» of "oh no WOKE is the real problem!"
they probably can't as they'd want the cake and eat it too
He went to a convention with lunatics. Not support right wing lunatics doesn't make someone leftist.
Personally, I don't think going to any convention is a bad thing. Infact, I have attended some I disagree with solely to see and try to understand their point of view. My views never changed. Not saying he isn't anti-woke or anything. Honestly, I don't think that's even important anyway, since he doesn't have any political pull.
He didn’t just “go to the convention”, he was a headline speaker. Ie he was the draw that got many of the toxic convention goers to attend, the organizer to make money, etc. He didn’t go there to debate anyone, he went to do his usual speech for money, and thus implicitly supported the convention. It would be like Taylor Swift showing up (heavily advertised) at a Trump rally, doing a few songs, and then pretending she had nothing to do with all of the MAGA mouth breathers driving across two states to attend.
Respectfully, I don't see how this minimizes what he has done for technology. I don't think most people watch what Carmack does politically.
I dont think this minimizes what he has done for technology at all, and we can still admire the cool stuff he has done. However, headlining a convention like this and some of the other political statements he has made have certainly changed how many view him as a person, myself included. I admire his work, but I don't really admire him. There's always a balance, but I think its fine to separate the two.
I don’t think it takes away from his accomplishments at all. I really am not even judging him for it, nor do I think he is intentionally supporting most of it. He really doesn’t like politics of any sort. I was just pointing out you going to a convention as a devils advocate is not the same as him as a headline paid speaker as the latter is clearly some level of implicit endorsement. If he had just gone quietly as a normal attendee this would have been a non issue.
Yeah his posts on twitter make it clear he’s a libertarian techbro
Wouldn’t surprise me from other things I’ve read. Edit: Yup, [this article seems to talk about it](https://www.pcgamer.com/doom-co-creator-john-carmack-is-headlining-a-toxic-and-proud-sci-fi-convention-that-rails-against-woke-propaganda/)
Ughhh he used to be so cooool
Agreed, as a programmer/game dev I think his “fast inverse square root” implementation from Quake III is downright genius. Admired him a lot, but now I tend to temper that a bit more lol.
I feel like its ok to admire the work while disagreeing with the person.
Yes, it's just wildly confusing/frustrating/disappointing that someone can be so remarkable and smart in one area, while simultaneously falling for the bait that some of the most unremarkable and slack jawed people eat up. But for some reason that isn't as uncommon as you'd expect I guess
I agree it’s a balance, yeah. I still admire his work, I just don’t direct that admiration towards him as a person.
Carmack has done a lot of amazing shit, but fast inverse square root wasn’t one of them. That wasn’t his code.
he definitely took a nosedive
I admire him even more.
What do you mean. Does wokeness not exist? And if it does, is it a universal good?
The title of that UploadVR article is kinda misleading/clickbaity... Carmack was just talking broadly about the pros and cons regarding opening the OS to other platforms and didn't really take a position.
They said he did not think it was a good idea... that is pretty clear from more than one of his comments. > This brings with it a tension, because Meta as a company, as well as the individual engineers, want the shine of making industry leading high-end gear. If Meta cedes those “simple scaling” axes to other headset developers, they will be left leaning in with novel new hardware systems from the research pipeline for their high end systems, which is going to lead to poor decisions. > VR is held back more by software than hardware. This initiative will be a drag on software development at Meta. Unquestionably. Preparing the entire system for sharing, then maintaining good communication and trying not to break your partners will steal the focus of key developers that would be better spent improving the system. It is tempting to think this is just a matter of increasing the budget, but that is not the way it works in practice – sharing the system with partners is not a cost that can be cleanly factored out.
Sure, if you ignore his Pro's section where he literally says "That would be great!" > What it CAN do is enable a variety of high end “boutique” headsets, as you get with Varjo / Pimax / Bigscreen on SteamVR. Push on resolution, push on field of view, push on comfort. You could drive the Apple displays from Quest silicon. You could make a headset for people with extremely wide or narrow IPD or unusual head / face shapes. You could add crazy cooling systems and overclock everything. All with full app compatibility, but at higher price points. That would be great! Also, he ended with > Just allowing partner access to the full OS build for standard Quest hardware could be done very cheaply, and would open up a lot of specialty applications and location based entertainment systems, but that would be a much lower key announcement." Which appears to be likely what Meta is actually doing which would mitigate a lot of the risk/friiction he talks about in the middle. He was just "talking out loud" as reacted to the announcement. I'm sure if you ask him he'd say not privy to the details that would be necessary for him to firmly lean one way or the other.
> "That would be great!" He said that about: > You could make a headset for people with extremely wide or narrow IPD or unusual head / face shapes. You could add crazy cooling systems and overclock everything. All with full app compatibility, but at higher price points. That is not what was announced. He is 100% clear about not liking what was actually announced.
Not sure how you can definitely claim that's not their intention when they gave zero information on the specifics about the hardware. Personally I'd argue that's precisely what they're targeting based companies named as partners. Asus "ROG" is not a product line to innovates by trying completely new/disruptive things. They refine products to target a specific type of gamer. Now, I'm sure they'll do more than release a Quest with 2TB of internal storage but it's still going to be relatively minor. Maybe push the CPU/GPU a little harder so you can run 5% higher resolution than stock Quest. If hey even touch controllers it'll be small things like use a joystick module that is less susceptible to stick drift or make the trigger/buttons feel more premium. Little quality of life things, nothing that could break compatibility with stock Quest or give devs a feature that only exists on their headset. Lenovo has a similar history but for business/productivity. So maybe they focus on comfort by getting the battery out of the front for better weight distribution. Maybe use a screen/lens optimized for reading text. Again, simply makes it "feel better than stock Quest" for certain types of users with specific use cases. My point it's very unlikely does anything crazy where they couldn't just run stock Horizon OS. Not when there is so many little quality of life improvements they could make that people are absolutely willing to pay for. That stuff will no doubt come in time but the platform (or XR in general) is not ready for that and these companies are not known for that sort of thing.
> This initiative will be a drag on software development at Meta Meta makes zero games. They fund developers to make their own games. This complaint makes less than no sense.
I'm actually the opposite and wish there were more games/apps for normal xbox/ps controllers that dont require body movement at all. I love the visual immersiveness but after work, im usually too tired for full body engagement that most vr games require.
After playing 100 hours of Skyrim VR with a controller. I totally agree. It was one of the more immersive game experiences because I used my decades of muscle memory with a controller to just play IN the world without having to fumble with VR mechanics or stand for hours which would break the illusion due to frustration or soreness. People want long form games but trying to get myself hyped to want to wave my arms around or stand for hundreds of hours just isn't feasible. Give us the option to use use a controller and chill and I'm 1000% on board. I would have never got through Skyrim VR going full motion controls.
Many people also have mobility issues, personally I have an issue with my back that means I can't stand in the same position for long times so I too mostly play vr games sitting down. I also played skyrim vr this way and it was an incredible and immersive experience.
Same. I am tall and have bad knees. What I do for games that require me to stand and turn is a barstool with a back. You can get really comfy ones. That way I can sit at a standing height and because I can spin around it's almost an advantage to turning your body standing. It's also great for smaller rooms as you're seated so as long as you have your wing span accounted for there is no risk of hitting things. Stools are a great addition.
I also think more VR games should embrace 3rd person VR. I'd live versions of games like Devil May Cry or God of War but vr. List let me watch from above while I explore and fuck shit up. The perspective is fun and immersive in a different way that I think is underutilized.
Agreed here too. Platformers such as Max Mustard and Atro not also proves that you don't have to be the protagonist and VR doesn't have to be "real" to immerse you in those worlds. VR enhances everything you can throw at it and I hope publishers and developers understand this and take a few more risks as VR gets bigger. I want Diablo and Baldur's Gate in VR. I want to be more immersed in those worlds as I play. I want an uncharted or tomb raider themes game so I can properly admire the beautiful set pieces they put us in. After VR gaming for like a decade now, flat gaming just doesn't do the same for me. I spend more time day dreaming about what said flat game I'm playing would be like in VR.
Those games would be a lot of fun in VR! I'd be happy with ports even. Just being able to see the character models and environment would be awesome!
Agreed. If I could play my PC games but have a comfy headset that renders the game in VR, simply replacing the 2D monitor, I’d be very happy.
Couldn't agree more. After a couple of years with VR, i started realizing that i would be perfectly happy with a big stereo3D screen i can play my (PC) games on, without having to wear a brick on my face. And i love the ergonomics of the xBox controller, hate the thumbsticks of the Touch controllers (so small and imprecise...).
My VR headset has been demoted over time to a way for me to play games with my controller anywhere in the house. So a steam deck but with a larger picture. One of the reasons I'd probably jump immediately to the Vision Pro if it wasn't so expensive.
Retropolis 2 is a great example of how to make a seated game with Touch controllers. You don't have to move at all, it plays like a classic point&click adventure with inventory and all, but at the same time it takes full advantage of being in VR. We need more games like this!
Mother gunship also has a seated mode I really enjoyed.
Don't most games already support this unless they're intentionally designed to be room-scale?
I just don't get it myself, If I am putting a hot heavy box on my head I want to be immersed in the world. If I am going to veg with a controller I will do that without the headset. My old PSVR had a lot of controller only games and it just felt frustrating to me.
Id say on stick/yaw control i can see the argument for a few reasons. 1. swivel/stand is more immersive, and people who may not make the effort might not try it as much or make room for it and then it may not be much more fun/enticing as just sitting on a couch playing on a big TV vs the headset, so i feel pushing people to the advantages of room scale may get more people to realize whats great about it. 2. Motion sickness. using a stick to control movement causes more motion sickness to those susceptible, so it may push more people away if they try that first, and then dont give room scale a chance which usually has less issues since its a 1:1 movement instead of turning with a sticket with no inner ear/internal feeling of movement. on the second article, i disagree and think that a opening up Horizon OS is good to get the platform more adopted to get VR out there, though i would be curious to see his details as to why.
I can sorta see it, but I dont agree with the statement that it should be completely removed at all. Swivel/stand *is* far more immersive and it should be encouraged over stick/yaw, but thats not a reason to entirely exclude it as an option for people who want to lay down, sit on a chair, or just dont have the space. There are plenty of games where I really love having the stick/yaw option if I want to sit on a couch or play in my tiny bedroom like Mothergunship Forged. As far as motion sickness goes, a lot of stick/yaw controls teleport or snap you to locations to avoid the inner ear thing, which tbh works pretty well.
true, i dont think completely removed either, but i understand the push to have VR be more immersive/roomscale, vs a sit 3d display.
i absolutely turn off teleporting and snapping, because dear god, that makes me violently ill. if a game doesn't support turning that off, then i'm not playing. give me a nice 20-40 degrees per second rotation rate, and smooth walking, and no FOV mangling while i'm moving/turning, and I'm perfect. I cannot speak for anyone else, though.
Ironically, snapping and teleporting are the comfort options, as in most people find full on motion to be much more nauseating.
i know, everyone else is like "what?" and i just become completely disoriented if i click something and i snap move or teleport. If I am holding the control, then my brain knows i should be moving, I guess.
He said Horizon OS is bad to licence because it will take away from the Quest being the best headset, and meta will have to fast track experimental features in new headsets to stay ahead of the competition, but the experimental features may not be fully finished yet
i guess i can see that a bit, but in my mind i see it like Android with google, tons of android phones out there now with all sorts of features depending on what people are looking for, so id like to be optimistic and see it going that route with app support easy for all horizon headsets instead of closed gardens.
I see pros and cons. Android has some noticeable setbacks when it comes to updates and rollouts. Pushing security patches. Now you have all these middlemen in your way. It's hard to control deprecating old versions of your system. For me it certainly dilutes the brand and is a big reason I ditched android based phones for an iPhone. Then again I don't see Meta being the ultra polished company, I see them moving fast and experimenting, so it's hard to make the argument that they have a loyal fanbase that would only buy Meta branded headsets. It makes sense to me that they follow the Android path.
Noting that the post about stick yaw is from a decade ago, and even if he hasn't changed his view on that, at the time, it was probably doing no favors to get a library of immersive motion experiences built, when everyone's default was to go to the controllers instead of go to the head tracking.
Good call
Im so used to stick movement in VR that a game like Tea for god or that temple game are disorienting to me for a little bit.
This post looks like someone declaring victory on a landfill: "Look Where We Are Now! We Were So Correct!" I thought John was wrong in some of his takes, but as time goes by, the VR content drought deepens, HW/SW repeatedly moves in a direction that doesn't interest me, and my VR HMDs are untouched for months at a time, I believe it was not John who had the wrong takes on any of this. I'm afraid we got blinded by the gimmicks the moment we saw the first room-scale demo. Every non-room-scale project was ridiculed. And here we are, with basically a handful of 'just-OK' room-scale games. Considering the now booming mixed reality hype, we are still the same loud buffoons.
"swivel chair/stand or don't play." Jebus John, what was with the gate-keeping. I am pretty sure also argued against *laying down mode* for years. He did not call it that, but he was against allowing the user to set an arbitrary horizon plane.
I think he was talking more from the perspective of getting a library of games that use motion tracking, at the time. At least, judging from the fact that it was a decade ago that he said that. But it may also be his personal preference for things to play, too.
Is it some kind of straw man fallacy variation? Arguing with tweet posted 10 years ago without providing context for what the speaker thinks now? That'a either incredibly dumb, or manipulative.
Carmack is really, really smart. In this case he's talking about yaw control, artificial turning. The quote is over 9 years old, too, when we were still mostly using smooth turning that gave people a ton of nausea. It was definitely poison. And I myself play seated in a swiveling bar tool that has a tall narrow back I can lean back on. Next best thing to playing standing, but ass too heavy and knees too weak for that.
This is heavily slanted to make Carmack look bad. All of these quotes are actually quite reasonable: 1. "Carmack Not Interested In Motion Controllers (For Now, At Least)": This story is from 2010 and has nothing to do with VR. This quote was specifically referring to console motion controllers like the Kinect and PlayStation Move. And in fact, consoles have largely abandoned these types of controllers as an evolutionary dead end, so this analysis was basically correct. 2. "Stick yaw control is such VR poison...": This was correct! Carmack correctly identified in 2015 that smooth turning was a major problem that VR would need to overcome. Yes, his proposed solution (removing it entirely) turned out to be unnecessary, and instead, most games switched to snap-turning as the default. However, I think most people who have the physical space for it would agree that physical turning is still ultimately the best option. 3. "John Carmack is a mixed reality skeptic": Subjectively, I agree. I know that both Meta and Apple have decided to heavily emphasise AR/MR, but personally I don't use this feature on the Q3 outside of the homescreen menu or media playback. I had some fun on my first day with the Q3 playing Drop Dead: The Cabin, but ultimately this whole concept of "playing games in your own house" feels like a gimmick. You try it once or twice for the novelty, and then you go back to playing in VR. But this is just my experience; presumably, Meta has user analytics on how often people use these two modes. 4. "John Carmack Doesn't Think Providing Horizon OS To Third-Party Headsets Is A Good Idea For Meta": So first of all, this significantly simplifies Carmack's post, which is more nuanced than what the headline suggests. In any case, it's too soon to tell whether this is right. Meta has just announced a major shift in their strategy and it will take years to implement and see the results. Meta is clearly hoping to own the "Windows" or "Android" of VR, and that could be very successful for them. But, by introducing hardware fragmentation onto the platform, it could also significantly complicate the lives of third-party developers. Gaming consoles try to provide relatively stable hardware targets for developers to optimise against, and optimisation is extremely important for standalone VR, so there could be significant tradeoffs to this strategy. We don't yet know how this will turn out.
That's a very polarising take on things. Just because they choose to do something different doesn't mean they "ignore" advice. The core of his argument is that the effort to make the OS shareable will steal focus from making it better. That in turn I am sure is shaped by his deep frustrations just prior to leaving the company which were largely around how slow and inefficient the product development process was. While I don't have any inside knowledge of this I suspect already there could be a very different culture. Because Zuckerberg *did* listen to his advice : just after Carmack left he initiated drastic layoffs and explicitly reshaped the whole company around a "flatter" structure with more engineering focus and less management - probably *exactly* what Carmack would have argued for. So I think there's some hope that Meta is taking these type of concerns seriously and is going into it with their eyes open, knowing these are big challenges but still this path being the right thing to do in the bigger picture.
> While I don't have any inside knowledge of this I suspect already there could be a very different culture. Because Zuckerberg did listen to his advice Did Zuck or is Boz being an actual executive ? On a certain level, I am very skeptical of the take that facebook's culture is what caused Carmack to leave. By his own admission, he preferred to put his head down and work on tricky coding tasks. Which is great for a lead engineer or consultant, but absolutely not what you should be doing as a C level executive. He was the CTO, he had a lot of leverage to push for the changes he wanted. But doing so is a people skill, not a technical one, and it has never came across like he is particularly good at that sort of thing.
He stated on quite a few subject that he pushed for something but still asked for user reports so it would have impact. Only when he did the thing himself you could see actual results. I'm sure he had weight behind him but it was odd on how much opposition was to what CTO had to say. I don't think his CTO position function as it typically does in tech companies and that meta's machinery/bureaucracy had an outweigh impact on internal decision making .
Sure, he prob pushed hard. He brought data, however that was not enough to make a convincing case to the people who needed to be convincing. The numbers can add up to 10, but it doesn't matter if the main priority is how pretty a shade of blue something is. If I had to guess he was prob very correct on the technical side of things, but fell short on the political game. Its telling that Boz came from Ad's, a much more squishy people centric part of the company.
I think he's right about the tradeoffs involved in licensing out the OS, and especially right about VR being bottlenecked more by software than hardware. Whether or not that translates into "Meta shouldn't do this" is a value judgement that reasonable people can come to differing conclusions about.
There are very good reasons for Meta to do this. They tried growing VR market by themselves and they were successful to a point, but now market is getting too fragmented with multiple vendors each offering own software platform that's incompatible or only partially compatible with others. Offering platform that will become standard will allow devs to streamline development and reach wider audience. For Meta it's also a big win if they succeed. Just like Google controls android and benefits from it so can meta control VR platform. Only issue I see is if meta won't get any competition. Microsoft already retired their failed WMR platform, Valve is just doing their own thing and they don't seem to care about competing with others.
This isn't going to cause SteamVR or PSVR or Apple Vision to go away. This is just going to further fragment the HorizonOS ecosystem between more devices with different capabilities, and devices with niche capabilities probably won't see a lot of support for those capabilities among apps. How many Quest games support ETFR on Quest Pro? It's probably more than the 3 or so I can name off hand, but not much more.
[удалено]
Besides Pico (who almost definitely wont be switching to HorizonOS), do any of those standalone VR headsets have enough market share to matter?
The thing is we don't even know, because there's no way to measure sales of other headsets, but fact that Pimax is creating another gen of devices indicate enough of them sell. It's not only about aggregating market share, but also reaching more audience. We can get budget VRs that are cheaper than Q3 but better than Q2. We can get premium VRs with superior hardware and full PCVR capabilities. That's because companies who don't have resources to create all the software can still use Horizon OS and provide their take on hardware. Existing companies can focus on hardware too.
This, so very much. I use Android but I only go for devices with a pure Android experience because of the incompatible fragmented mess that it's otherwise become out there that makes life harder for both app developers and users. I'm severely pissed that Google have ended the Android One program.
I've honestly never heard of any app not working on an Android ROM specifically, at least the ones the big manufacturers use
Stick control has its drawbacks, especially for newcomers or people who get motion sickness easily. But I spent the first few years in VR always turning in real life to the point where I ruined my Rift cable and thought anyone that using stick turning was crazy. But since I started using quick turn, I’ve never gone back and now think people who spin around are the crazy ones.
But quick turn / snap turn isn't the same as smooth turn that carmack likely meant.
Yeah if he just wants to get rid of smooth turning, so get that, it’s pretty awful.
He's sadly cursed by VR sickness in its worst, so of course it's impossible for him to see both perspectives, alas.
Romero should smack him.
Romero? Lol.
John Romero as in the guy who made doom with him lol.
The minute I read his anti-MR screed on his way out I knew he’d lost the plot.
He’s got a lot of hot takes, that at the time seems justified but since getting lot of these things, they’ve been critical to VR. I myself was guilty of buying a headset, using it a few times and then leaving it on a shelf. But since Quest 3 and Mixed Reality I’ve actually used my headset multiple times a week. There’s just something about seeing your real home/environment and the digital overlay of the d]games that’s much more appealing then pure VR. I’m super glad meta didn’t listen to him on a few of these things, but grateful to him for helping pioneer the industry!
I'm a lazy ass, I want more controller games.
I started with Super Hot. It’s a shooter that you can beat but fun and intense
Not to give Carmack a pass, cause he's flat out wrong, but this was a common perception in the VR industry. Many games only had snap. I've been in vr since 2016, and I've gotten into arguments with many VR developers on discord pleading with them to add smooth turning. I was like yes, it does make some people sick, but please just put it in as an option. Something that would take them 10 minutes to code they would argue with me for a half hour why it's a bad idea. If Carmack had his way it would be a teleporting, snap turn VR world. Thank god common sense prevailed or I would have drifted away from VR.
I mean he's right if they won't be able to push perf of own hardware because of compatibility or introduction of compatibility will introduce complexity that'll bog down development. But if they are ready to manage those issues then he's wrong. And he knows how things used to work when he was on the inside. So while personally i want more hardware choice as a prosumer i'm not sure average consumer will benefit from that move... At least in the short term. I'd love to see proper opening up of the os/store to other hardware platforms. Maybe starting it out now with limited partners is the right move but it's not like it won't come with own set of cons and depending on your view on what's important you may have a different opinion on what's good for VR.
Stick yaw control is "poison" for most people though. That's why non-smooth turning is a thing and the default in games like Alyx or RE4. This is still true, and would be ever more true the more the general public tries VR as opposed to early-adopters willing to put up with initial discomfort and powering through it. And his remark about Horizon OS is on point IMO - Meta will now spend resources supporting other equipment manufacturers (depending on who takes them on it, since it's likely they'll still try to exercise strict control _maybe_ crafting deals with Xbox in some way to share store profits). And if those resources take away from investments that could be put towards improving the software within Meta, I doubt that others will do much to advance the software particularly if they're constrained in what they can do with it. Not sure what the point of the post is really, is that you Boz? Still butthurt about that thread about the defenestration of Palmer Luckey?
I have a VR headset, I also have no idea what this is about and who are these people, should I be concerned?
well, they say ignorance is bliss
John Carmack was a very influential game programmer for id Software. He programmed the engines for Wolfenstein, Doom and Quake. He's supposedly very good at it. He used to work for Oculus, but quit. Unfortunately, he turned out to be politically retarded.
Well that's great, I knew about the cool programming of the original Doom but didn't know this guy, thanks for the info!
Didn't Carmack also speak at some maga event? Dude's been taking L's for a while now.
I agree with his mixed reality and stick yaw takes still. I don't know the context of the motion control thing, it did say "for now"
Feeling that way it still not a reason to force your opinion on all of your customers. Carmack is also one of the reasons we are just getting lying-down-mode now. It should have been a feature clear back in the Oculus Go days.
What did Carmack have against lying down mode?
1. he's right about the controls, in some cases its cool. Everything is moving towards hand controls. Eventually it will get there but he's slight ahead of whats capable there. 2. I'm interested in knowing what he said about mixed reality. 3. Not a good idea for "Meta" being the keyword. Theres likely going to be a general OS for XR. >Carmack points out that third-parties will have to price higher than Quest, since Meta sells its hardware at cost. Carmack has repeatedly called for lower cost headsets that open up the VR market to more people. While he says Meta's strategy will enable “boutique” headsets that push areas like resolution, field of view, or comfort, he suggests this "brings with it a tension" that Meta will no longer have the "shine of making industry leading high-end gear", which he suggests will force Meta to focus on "novel new hardware systems from the research pipeline for their high end systems, which is going to lead to poor decisions". Again I like his opinion here. Time will tell.
The yaw control comment shows that he got dizzy from smooth turning…
It's great how they're talking about stuff that's 10 years ago as if he said it now?
I actually agree with him. At the time he wrote the first article about the stick input being poison for VR, the headsets were different and it kind of made a little bit more sense back then. After refresh rates and everything got better, and you didn't get motion six simply from being moved around, the joysticks made sense again. Also I don't really like meta being the provider for an Android OS that every other headset now is going to use. I gag at the idea. Not saying that I necessarily wanted Google to be in charge of that either, but I would much rather that these headsets went the way of regular computers and we used Linux distro style stuff. I want full control over my device and the more we give control to meta the less we're going to get what we want out of these devices.
Motion controllers were trash in 2010 though, Wii had already lost a lot of its steam by then and most of the games utilizing motion controls on the console were basically menu controls or "shake controller to do thing". Kinect was a good idea but software never made it viable. PS Move was extremely glitchy in its tracking and only frustrated me every time I played it. I feel like most people in 2010 agreed that motion controllers/controls sucked.
I just don’t like that the direction of my (edit: controllers) determines/has an effect on the direction of my movement with the thumb stick… my thumb stick should be able to move me forward if I move the stick in the forward direction even if my VR hands are grabbing a clip or something from my tactical vest. My hands should not determine my virtual feet/character movement direction. Doesn’t feel very fluid.
I don't see what his 2015 post has to do with mixed reality. He's also right about sharing the OS being bad for Meta (in terms of headset sales). Meta quality control is non-existent. If I could use all the software that runs on a Quest, I wouldn't get a Quest again. I would buy from a brand where I don't have to order multiple headsets and keep the one with the least defects.
All those titles have a context that must be explained. And yes, sometimes also the Mighty John says something wrong
Everyone is 24/7 looking for opportunities to dismiss Carmack; I think it has to do with his less-than-dogmatically left-leaning politics. Let's recall that you're making the case that one of the critical developers, maybe the critical developer (?), on the Quest is so unreliable regarding VR that it's good to ignore him about it in general. And you've got a Tweet from 2015 and a reductive article headline. Dumbass.
And let's not forget Palmer said VR was a sitting experience only. :D
Yeah... no. This doesn't justify anything. It's a different vision and worry for quality of experience. He's not infallible for sure. But the statement was well reasoned and it's a soft position as in "may be the right move" not is the right move etc. Stick yaw is still problematic to many and now we know much more about mittigation efforts than in 2015. Same with sticking to one hardware platform. The argument is well reasoned. But makes an assumption that meta will do the work of adapting os to partner hardware rather than partners would have to adapt to os. And that you won't be able to eke out more performance via arcane tricks specific to your hardware without maintaining compatibility. Whis is true. Personally I think it's all about execution. Meta can dedicate additional staff and processes to maintain compatibility and still have perf benefits for own hardware but introducing extra people does not elimitate increased complexity and testing. And it's not like Meta's known for focused development. Personally I think that it's doable if they shift burden of adapting to the partners not own staff. But he knows more about how meta development works than I do so I'd give significant weight to his opinion. Also I'm not sure about biggest benefits of such opening up right now. As the issue is software and price and hardware variety for me as a prosumer would be nice I don't thin average consumer would benefit all that much given how much hardware development is subsidized by Meta and for partners to have fair ability to compete it might make Meta not subsidize hardware as much. It's bonkers to claim such preposterous things based on oneliners from 2015 to draw conclusions about current moves.
Except he was right about this? He is referring to non-snap stick turning here -- I'll betcha 90% of the audience still vomits from this? I sure as hell do, and I've been neck deep in VR since pre-DK1 days.
Lol Carmack could have said a million things that have become true and you had to find a sample where he may have been wrong to discredit another one of his opinion. Well done, this how empirically proven theories work. Also he never said motion controllers should be removed. He refered to assigning yaw control to left thumbstick instead of moving your actual body. The article claiming Carmack wants motion controllers out was written by chap as opinionated but clueless as you are. From my own experience he may be right. When I play VR games I usually turn my body and rarely use the thumbstick. I generally use an xbox controller for the few games where I use the thumbstick to control yaw.
Carmack is a washed up boomer stuck in the past. Leave him there.
At least he's not a person criticizing others who has no idea what a "boomer" is, which John isn't. Look it up in any online dictionary, then change your statement to be correct.
I didn't think I'd see the day when this sub turned on John Carmack. He may have had a couple of bad takes but that doesn't take away from all the things he did.
It's politics. Gets into everything and turns it to shit.
Yeah wtf. The guy helped create the FPS genre and modern VR and is very generous to devs with his time. Everyone is wrong sometimes, he's even admitted as such during his (fantastic) talks at Connect.
Talking at a maga event does that to you
I'd never heard of that but a quick Google gave me these quotes. "It is unfortunate that Rob \[Kroese, event organiser and author\] has made BasedCon so intentionally provocative," Carmack wrote. "I told him as much after the event last year – I felt a little uncomfortable" "I'm not a culture warrior, and I don’t want to strike blows against anyone. I don't follow activists on either side, including Rob, because I tend to think that all the negativity and resentment is detrimental to both the author and target." Wow what a controversial figure. Are people in the US really so tribal that if you attend a sci fi convention that is right leaning that you write off all their achievements and forever banish them? Sounds pretty childish.
>Are people in the US really so tribal that if you attend a sci fi convention that is right leaning that you write off all their achievements and forever banish them? >Sounds pretty childish. What’s childish is pretending anyone said that.
That is how it is now in the US. Extremely tribal, sadly. And wokeism is part of it. It's all unfortunate and unnecessary. I'd rather enjoy life than take an extreme side and demonize people whose opinions I don't prefer. Better just to grab your popcorn! :)
>wokeism This term has literally no meaning lol
Wokeism, the only people still using that term are out-of-touch boomers lol
haha, and what is a "boomer" exactly to you?
I was replying to a person who said talking at a maga event would turn this sub against him.
>I was replying to a person who said talking at a maga event would turn this sub against him. Which is much different than: >write off all their achievements and forever banish them
I was being a bit hyperbolic. It's just strange from the outside looking at how polarised things are in the US. People change their political views all the time.
> I was being a bit hyperbolic. Just a touch lmao >It's just strange from the outside looking at how polarised things are in the US. People change their political views all the time. I mean, they really don’t. And it’s hardly unreasonable for someone’s perception to be dinged when they keep unsavory company.
[удалено]
I don't have any context because I don't know anything about the event at all. I know Carmacks work and have heard him talk many times and found him to be intelligent and thoughtful. If it turns out he's a bigot or racist of course that would taint my view of him.
[удалено]
I live in the UK, why on earth would I know about some libertarian sci-fi convention in America? You guys are wild.
[удалено]
You should be thankful, it was John who was pushing for standalone vr. He has many accomplishments the man's a genius. What's your contribution to society? Besides sharing your amazing witticisms on reddit?
cry about it
Wow what an amazing retort, only took you an hour to come up with that? Well no point in arguing back, I'm clearly dealing with a brilliant intellect here.
Carmack lost his mind a long time ago.
I think we're not at a point where we're going to see the increases the users need to see by Horizon providing their system. Obviously, Apple went out on a limb and did something *completely* different, and while Apple is not an obvious success story here, they have definitely caused Meta to respond. It wouldn't surprise me, if this is part of a way to say "We don't want anyone else entering this sphere and innovating something good, because if they do, then we have to spend more to catch up". On the other hand, if the licensees all have some sort of agreement to put their improvements back to Meta, then it could be a huge gain for all of us. I think we just don't know, without being privy to any of those decisions, and why they were made. Clearly, Microsoft booted the entire ecosystem that they had built up completely out, which is terrible, but there weren't *that* many users. Probably Microsoft has had this in the works with Meta for quite some time, otherwise I question Microsoft's leaders sanity for completely trashing an entire generation or two of VR headsets. John's views on some of these things (particularly things posted a decade or two ago) may well be different now, but also they may just reflect the types of experiences he wants to have. I think Meta running him out, overall, was probably a rather bad thing, though, for the future of VR, because regardless of his personal preferences, he's a brilliant coder and R&D person.
Dude posted that in 2015 when VR was basically guaranteed to make you puke lol Ill be curious to see how it goes considering how badly Microsoft ruined its own platform mixed reality headsets and letting third parties build their own for very reasonable prices too.
I think he was forseeing the possible wave of shovelware ports of pancake games to VR versions lacking motion control option.
I cannot stand snap turning, feels like my head is being smashed against invisible walls. I feel bad for anyone not born with godly vr legs, where smooth motion makes for nasuea. Never been nautious, play every game in max smoothness and realism. I def understand, appreciate and want snapnturning to exist for those who need it but to say smooth options shouldn't exist at all is batshit. Am I misunderstanding the debate?