Virtual Reality is a technology that seems to have been just around the corner for decades, but which, as yet, has not been widely-adopted outside of a small core of dedicated enthusiasts. When, in 2014, Facebook acquired Oculus VR for around $2.3 billion, the future looked promising – so where are we now? Let’s take a closer look at the state of VR, and see where it might lead us.
As the name might suggest, a Virtual Reality is a computer-generated 3D environment which emulates a real one. In practice, this means strapping a display to your face so that it encompasses your entire field of vision (two dome-shaped displays, one for each eye, is common). The headset also comes with gyroscopic sensors which send position information to the software. Thus, the movements of the user’s head will affect their field of vision in the virtual world.
As ever, VR promises immersive forms of entertainment. If controlling an onscreen character in your favourite videogame is compelling, then being totally surrounded in a virtual environment is even more so. But VR’s potential applications are far more extensive.
Among the more interesting of them involve healthcare. Sufferers of specific neurological disorders like phantom limb syndrome can be relieved of pain using a piece of mirrored glass; virtual reality provides a raft of similarly helpful illusions.
It might also function as an educational tool for surgeons and fighter pilots. The risks of learning on-the-job in such roles are considerable – even an imperfect simulation might be enough to mitigate them.
Augmented reality is a slight variation on the formula. It seeks to add to our existing perceptions of the world, rather than replacing them. Like its cousin, it’s been around for awhile, most famously in the form of Google Glass.
An AR device of this sort displays information directly onto a user’s field of vision. For example, tourists might navigate an unfamiliar city by following a virtual arrow on the floor, thanks to light projected onto your glasses. The same benefits can be more easily granted to drivers, who already have a glass surface in front of them. Satnav systems are already available that project a HUD onto the windscreen, displaying speedometers, rev counters and other information directly into the driver’s field of vision.
One of the biggest problems with virtual reality is the cost. Even a modestly priced VR headset is going to set you back several hundred pounds, which is enough to make all but the most well-financed technophile hesitate, especially given the relative paucity of compatible software.
Other drawbacks are physiological. Virtual reality is notorious for inducing motion sickness. This effect occurs when your senses report conflicting information about the way that you’re moving. Much of this comes as a result of poor rendering. Even a tiny delay between head movements and the virtual world updating are likely to cause sickness. The same effect might occur if the machine powering the VR is incapable of delivering frames at the required rate.
If you’ve ever seen a film in which slow pans take place across angular, artificial objects like buildings, then you might have noticed a ‘stuttering’ effect produced by the 24fps cinema framerate. Savvy directors will avoid these problems by avoiding these sorts of shots, but in an environment where the user has control over the camera, these effects cannot be disguised. Thus, the framerate will need to be so high that the user cannot perceive the effect. Studies have shown that around 90fps is required to avoid adverse effects. Since each frame is effectively being rendered twice to preserve the 3D effect (one for each eye) this places a considerable strain on resources.
Manufacturers have attempted to address this shortcoming using something called frame interpolation – a technology that generates new frames between existing ones. Owners of recent TVs might be familiar with the effect: it can give billion-dollar blockbusters the smooth, sped-up effect of a soap opera.
Even when the framerate is sufficiently high, some users might still experience difficulties. More radical solutions have been proposed, which involve using the software to generate tiny electrical signals that stimulate the relevant nerve fibres. Other solutions are more rustic: a classic remedy among PC gamers is to chew raw ginger.
If Virtual Reality is to achieve mainstream traction, it will need to make the itself available at a more attractive price-point. One ingenious solution involves installing a smartphone into a (relatively) inexpensive head-mounted enclosure. Google’s Cardboard costs less than £1.
Given that a modern phone already contains a gyroscope, a display and a GPS, this approach makes economic sense. Though phone-powered solutions can’t display modern games at the required ninety-frames-per-second (indeed, even modern console hardware often struggles to render upwards of thirty), they’re still capable of displaying films, specialised games, and adapted versions of the games of yesteryear. Phones might soon be capable of powering advanced games in full VR, or of streaming image-information from computers that can. For now, they’re an affordable way to dive into the virtual world.