Now, 30 years later, VR is used in scientific, industrial, medical, and gaming domains. But it doesn't seem to be anywhere near early mass adoption phase.
Why not? When will it? And what will be the "killer app"?
VR will always be a niche platform - simulation immersion simply isn't as useful in the general case as external monitors, and even if issues with vertigo are solved, the VR gear will always be less convenient than the utility and ergonomics of a cellphone and laptop.
Most applications and games aren't significantly improved with the addition of VR. This can be improved but until it's as easy to use a PS controller in VR as out, it will by definition be more limited in terms of mechanics. Hand tracking is a nice gimmick, but a controller has a higher bandwidth. Also, the need for physical space to interact with the virtual environment makes VR a toy for elites.
The immersivity of VR will never be what it is in sci-fi. No matter how good the resolution is, that virtual walking tour through Tokyo or the Louvre will never be "like being there." It can maybe kind of sometimes be good enough, but there needs to be a lot more high quality free content available, like a social media platform just for VR video. Yes, this would just be 3DOF, but unlike a lot of people, I think 3DOF video has a lot of untapped potential and it's likely to remain the dominant form of VR simply because you can experience it while sitting in one place.
I think there is potential particularly in virtual social spaces like VR Chat (a VR MMO like FFXIV and VR driven V-Tubing might be fun) but the ergonomic issues would have to be worked out first. As a consumer (I have an Oculus Go, and a Rift) the size and cost of the gear need to come down a lot to be worth it for most consumers, and the quality of hand and eye tracking need to go up by orders of magnitude. As a developer who wants to work with VR, the development and deployment workflow needs to be easier.
Maybe it is easy if you know what you're doing. I don't know what I'm doing and I'm wondering where the Unity for VR is.
I personally don’t see where VR is going to provide enough value—-and by that I mean in saving labor, money, resources or providing pure pleasure—-for mass adoption in legitimate markets. It is cumbersome, it looks silly, it’s unsettling and uncomfortable and it’s not really that great of an experience in my opinion.
However—-and I hesitate to say it—-it may become a bona fide substitute for certain kinds of “friendship”. That would seem to be the killer app, in more ways than one.
https://www.kitguru.net/desktop-pc/mustafa-mahmoud/the-oculu...
In less than one year the quest 2 became the most used VR headset on steam.
It has only taken 5 months to sell over 5 million units with adoption still going strong.
https://www.androidcentral.com/facebook-q1-earnings-show-que...
Looking at all of these things I expect parity with mainstream consoles inside of a decade.
There is one thing I look forward most for VR is the requirement or interest in reducing latency in all part of computing. For VR to work we need to reduce all latency down to single digit ms. This is a tall order especially when you realise even keyboard input add double digit ms latency before it is even processed.
The problem is convincing people. One cannot be told what VR is, one has to experience it for themself. But Google cardboard has given it a bad name. I often hear 'Yeah already tried that, those rollercoaster videos. Meh.'. People equate that to real 6dof VR with hand tracking when it's in fact a difference of night and day.
Nevertheless Facebook is doing good work with the Quest 2. It really made high quality standalone VR accessible.
As for when it'll be early mainstream.. I guess in a year or 2.