How close are we to Deep Dive/Full Immersion VR?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Obsessed With Gaming
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the future of virtual reality (VR), particularly the potential for deep dive or full immersion experiences within the next few decades. Participants explore various technologies, such as Neuralink and exo-skeletons, and consider the implications of immersive VR on human experience and reality.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants speculate that full immersion VR could be achieved within 30-70 years, potentially using technologies like Neuralink and exo-skeletons.
  • There is a question of whether people would prefer to live in the real world or in a VR environment, with some suggesting that many might choose VR over reality.
  • One participant notes that while fully immersive VR may be far off, photorealism in graphics could be achieved in about 30 years, citing advancements in graphics power and algorithmic techniques.
  • Concerns are raised about the nature of tactile feedback in VR, with some suggesting that while it may be possible, achieving a natural experience could take several generations.
  • Another participant discusses the concept of total immersion and questions whether it will ever be fully realized, suggesting that audio and visuals are close but other senses may lag behind.
  • There is mention of existing VR technologies, such as the Tesla Suit, which aims to provide touch feedback, but challenges remain in bringing such products to market.
  • Some argue that the current state of VR technology could be improved significantly, particularly in headset design, to enhance user experience.
  • A participant challenges the assertion that current game engines render at higher resolutions than the human eye can perceive, suggesting that resolution capabilities are still far from human visual acuity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the timeline and feasibility of achieving full immersion VR, with no consensus on whether it will replace reality or how immersive experiences will impact human behavior.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include uncertainties regarding technological advancements, the subjective nature of immersion, and varying definitions of what constitutes "full immersion." There are also unresolved questions about the implications of VR on human experience and societal norms.

Obsessed With Gaming
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Will it happen within our lifetime ( in 30-70 years)?

By using Elon Musk's Neuralink (Neural Lace 2039?) ,NerveGear, exo-skeletons, OpenWorld VR maybe?

And if we were to achieve this would anyone still want to live in the real world apart from people who are maintaining the system and certain religious groups?(or at least take breaks from full dive VR)

And is VR a replacement for reality
 
Technology news on Phys.org
A 3-D version of this might be what you are looking for (the long-term story building in the game is pretty amazing, despite the violent parts)...

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51v7gSMfU3L._AC_US218_.jpg

51v7gSMfU3L._AC_US218_.jpg

Obsessed With Gaming said:
And if we were to achieve this would anyone still want to live in the real world apart from people who are maintaining the system and certain religious groups?(or at least take breaks from full dive VR)
I'll be here...
Obsessed With Gaming said:
And is VR a replacement for reality
For some folks, I guess...
 

Attachments

  • 51v7gSMfU3L._AC_US218_.jpg
    51v7gSMfU3L._AC_US218_.jpg
    12.2 KB · Views: 712
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: QuantumQuest and nsaspook
Obsessed With Gaming said:
would anyone still want to live in the real world
Would that not be dependent upon ...( a list of factors )?
( Perhaps the VR world may or may not be the fairy tail and every one lives happily ever after world, whatever that may mean for the expectations of the user ).
 
Literature rather than the Internet, is the best way to get a peek at possible futures.

Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
Snow Crash by Neal Stephenson
 
Fully immersive is likely a long way off, however I fully expect photorealism in about 30 years. John Carmack did a talk where he talked about how graphics power has done a million fold increase in the past 30 years and there is little reason to think that that tread will cease. It's disconnected from Moore's law because we keep finding cool new algorithmic tricks. Another million-fold increase would be rendering what currently takes 5 hours to draw at 60Hz. That's about how long it takes to render a photorealistic frame for a movie. So fully photorealistic complex environments are probably about 30 years away.

I think we'll start seeing some real push towards that now though because in the past the newest engines just drew more and more polygons on higher and higher resolutions, but in terms of that, there isn't much more progress to be made. This is actually true for a lot of what makes a game engine: they render at higher resolution and frame rates than our brains can see, and we know how to do all of the advanced lighting and stuff, we just can't do it fast enough.

As for tactile feedback, I think were several human generations off. That type of feedback is probably possible sooner than that, but I'm not sure if we'll figure out how to make it natural.

As for whether it'll replace reality. I'm not so sure. All of human history is about making our physical selves safer by isolating ourselves from the "wild," but we never stopped going outside. I could sit in my nice cozy house, with climate control, and endless supply of entertainment, and the ability to ship literally anything directly to my door, and I work remotely. I still go outside. I think we'll end up just thinking of the virtual space as just another level of "indoors."

Beyond the next dozen generations though would be impossible to predict. I find it entirely likely that civilizations eventually upload themselves into a virtual immortality.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
Fully immersive is a pretty fluid concept. If you are talking about full consciousness jack-in like Gibson's _Neuromancer_ or Vernor Vinge's _True Names_, I just don't see that being a reality any time soon, however I suspect that we are closer to a practical total immersion that you may suspect.

Audio and visuals are pretty much there, particularly if you want to spend the money. There are some questions about just how photorealistic ideal graphics should be. Type 'uncanny valley' into your favorite search engine for a bit on this.

As far as other senses go, taste is probably not too important, could could be dealt with. Olfactory could be easily enough attended to, but might be expensive and a bit potentially messy... really probably a question of how badly it was desired.

As for tactile, That is probably a bit closer than you might imagine. Elements of tactile response have been easily available for a long time. Back when joysticks were still common, the fanciest of them used force feedback, particularly with air combat simulators... I know other types of game controllers have some similar effects. There are expensive gaming seats with a bunch of reverb and vibration effects, and some even with various sorts of tilts to mimic variable G forces (these have been around for a while in professional flight simulators). Keep in mind that the whole area of tactile response is really all about how one tricks the brain. Also, I don't think that anyone seriously wants _total_ tactile immersion. When your character gets shot (or whatever) i don't think too many people are going to desire the excruciating pain of a gunshot wound.

As far as people getting totally immersed, involved in and consumed by their simulations, I think we are already there. even with just the basics of what we have now, people are all the time getting lost in their games and sims for hours or more at a time and losing track of 'the real world'. I don't think excessive technology is required there, at least not for a segment of the population.

I also question the premise that 'more immersive' necessarily implies more compelling. I mean maybe, and maybe for a meaningful segment of the market share. Further, I realize that I am likely a minority, marketwise, but just as a single example, I have grown up playing electronic and computer games, but the game I keep going back to and playing at least occasionally, is 1999's Unreal Tournament (albeit heavily patched, hacked and with all sorts of new, fan made code)... and there is still a significant online community for it. Also, I like bicycling on a nice day...

diogenesNY
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
There's a lot of vr tech out there, the only problem is these products reaching the production stage. Check out Tesla Suit. It's a touch feedback system, however the company has yet to release a product.

There is a huge amount of improvement that is possible for vr even with current tech. The only problem is someone needs to make these products.

For example, vr headsets could be made much smaller if they had two curved screens for each eye , rather than one flat screen with two large lenses to bend the light as they do now.
 
newjerseyrunner said:
...This is actually true for a lot of what makes a game engine: they render at higher resolution and frame rates than our brains can see...

Refresh rate, sure, resolution? No. We see around 576 Megapixels - computers can't come close to rendering that yet (16K is around the 130 megapixel mark). Maybe you mean the amount of colors that our brains can perceive?