Abrash Predicts The Future Of VR

As is his tradition at Oculus Connect, Michael Abrash, Oculus' Chief Scientist, closed out the opening keynote of the event with his thoughts on the near and distant future of VR. If there’s anyone in the industry that can give us an educated guess as to where the industry is headed, Abrash can.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Contributor

Kevin Carbotte is a contributing writer for Tom's Hardware who primarily covers VR and AR hardware. He has been writing for us for more than four years.

  • TEAMSWITCHER
    Got it... I'll check back in five years.
    Reply
  • wifiburger
    must buy some VR stocks, not !
    the future is so bright it's going to burn your retina ! that should be their slogan,
    Reply
  • Spazzy
    VR is interesting as an occasional diversion. I cannot see this as a replacement for consuming content. Human interaction is already on the decline, can you imagine what will happen if VR takes over? We really will be in a world of our own!

    It is already known that too much time staring at a computer screen is bad for your eyes. Now we are going to put them within inches of our eyes with no buffering light source. Might be time to invest in your local optometrist.
    Reply
  • Jim90
    Since "the human visual system is capable of perceiving 120 pixels/degree" and we're currently at "15 pixels/degree" then we have a very, very long way to go till monitor/viewports catch up.
    Since it's only the eye's fovea which renders in high resolution to the brain, then it would seem highly illogical to dismiss any system employing or research into foveated rendering as anything but hugely significant.
    Reply
  • Jsimenhoff
    VR is to 2016 as the Atari 2600 was to 1980?
    Reply
  • bit_user
    Abrash started publishing books and articles on 3D graphics and assembly language optimization like 30 years ago. This man helped develop the original rendering engine in Quake, which was a huge leap ahead of anything that existed, at the time. Even today, I'm sure he's still one of the foremost experts in realtime 3D graphics.

    18711765 said:
    Since it's only the eye's fovea which renders in high resolution to the brain, then it would seem highly illogical to dismiss any system employing or research into foveated rendering as anything but hugely significant.
    He obviously understands the potential, but his point is not to underestimate the challenges in doing it well enough. He's also clearly saying that the brute-force approach isn't an option.

    I agree with him - we need like VR contact lenses, or something. The rendering pipeline needs to hack the human visual system at a more fundamental level.

    What you'd ideally like to do is render one pixel for each receptor on the retina. If we do that, we can afford to spend a lot more effort rendering each one. The problem is that the eye moves, and there's this deformable lens, in the way. But it's got to be cracked, and I think the refresh rate will need to be closer to 200 Hz.

    18711885 said:
    VR is to 2016 as the Atari 2600 was to 1980?
    Not that far back. I'd say more like 8-bit Nintendo or maybe 16-bit (Super Nintendo).
    Reply
  • bit_user
    Abrash expects that Touch will remain the “state of the art” input device for VR for years to come.
    Not this generation of it, I'm sure. Current VR input devices are like 1980's era mice. But he has a point that you can get tactile feedback by holding something. And I still prefer a mouse over touchscreen (if I'm seated at a desk).
    Reply
  • Memhorder
    I just can't see myself having a family AND one of these.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    18721686 said:
    I just can't see myself having a family AND one of these.
    So, ditch the family!
    Reply
  • Memhorder
    18721714 said:
    18721686 said:
    I just can't see myself having a family AND one of these.
    So, ditch the family!

    Maybe.....I'll get one of those rubber Japanese play toys and Baby Robots to along with the VR headset. :)
    Reply