For META this is a pit.
Comment on Meta Reportedly Cutting About 1,500 VR and AR Jobs Amid Renewed Push to Become an AI Juggernaut
dil@piefed.zip 1 day agoidk vr never felt like a pit, just early, comfort and fov was an issue, literally my main issue was not being able to see my phone without taking it off. Once that is solved I could use it indefinitely, taking it off and putting it back on was annoying and it always felt wrong after
Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
dil@piefed.zip 1 day ago
Genuinely love vr/ar, glad theyve pushed it enough that its not just seen as the cardboard stuff anymore
Damage@feddit.it 1 day ago
A friend had me try his quest 3 (I think?) and for the 15 minutes I used it, it was amazing (except I could see the pixels, he said it was impossible and that it must have been a focus issue, but, well…).
Of course I would never buy anything made by Meta, so I’m waiting for the Steam Frame, but it’s definitely and interesting technology!
Euphoma@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
The quest 3 has like 25 ppd (pixels per degree) and the human limit is like at least 60 ppd. So your friend needs some glasses
Damage@feddit.it 1 day ago
He has them, quite thick to be honest
kalleboo@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I mean I’m a big fan of VR but it’s clearly been a money pit for meta, their massive investment in it is never going to pay back, they were betting on selling “metaverse” real estate rather than making money on the hardware
mPony@lemmy.world 1 day ago
they weren’t paying attention when people tried that very same thing in SecondLife
a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
Somehow they also made it worse than second night.
captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 day ago
That whole thing was weird. Like, even if it was a perfect simulation, it still wouldn’t keep me dry and warm like real real estate, nor could I keep my stuff there.
Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
They tried to jump right into the “popular thing drives high demand for popular spaces in popular thing” and skip the whole “make thing popular” step, banking on their name and people thinking it’ll make them a ton of money.
Though tbh I can’t say that was necessarily the wrong move (at least not if their entire goal is maximizing gains), since it wasn’t going to get popular like they wanted in the first place, so skipping that step and going straight to fleecing those dumb enough to throw money at it might have made the most sense.
That said, I think they put more money into it than they got out of it, so I doubt that it was deliberate. Zuck probably just thought if he paid people to make it, users would just flock to it and it would be as popular as fictional VR worlds are, despite missing the tactile VR system they tend to use or the whole “VR world is popular (or the focus of everyone’s life)” being a plot point rather than the consequence of someone building the world and people choosing to spend their time and money there.
Also, I’m in the demographic that probably would have been the most interested (like as a user of VR, not someone looking to just make money from it), but their offering didn’t even raise enough curiosity for me to check out what they made. There is an anti-meta bias in play, but even if it had been offered by a separate entity, I still wouldn’t have been interested because it sounded enshitified from the moment of concept.
Damage@feddit.it 1 day ago
It could have worked with a more measured approach, but they’ve been stupid about it.