I'm spending a year dead for tax reasons.
15th December 2002
This week, HTC promised to open 'Vive Arcades' in China, the US and Europe.
It seems to me that it makes more sense to pay for a more premium, rich VR experience, with various AR elements that can be provided such as wind, immersive sound, motion, and so forth, will make for a much better VR experience then spending hundreds of dollars on a home version, having nowhere practical to put it, then not getting the optimum experience.
For example, a theme park here in the UK, called Thorpe Park, has just opened a new ride, which is set on an old London Underground ride - the riders get aboard the train, then put on a Vive headset, and experience the rest of the ride in a form of AR - allowing lots of rather interesting and freeky possibilities. And because they're on a train and have the added sensations of genuine motion, sound, and so-forth, it makes for a particularly immersive experience.
I actually see this as a more exciting future for VR as opposed to home use.
Danny King | Community Manager | GameFront.com
11th November 2006
Now, this is something I could see a future in. There are boundless opportunities for VR, but very few of them are actually as a home entertainment unit. Rather, I can see it being applied for teaching and "experiences" similar to a cinema. Maybe a hall for lasertag, where your environments and the other players are "projected" by the VR? Or, as in here, an experience?