Depends. Are you attacking my credibility with an ad hominem fallacy? Just wondering. Because if so, it is only because my argument has confounded you, and if you can't beat that, maybe you can beat me.
But have you? Because I have and to me, within the confines of what is economically feasible (eg hand tracking but not leg tracking), they seem to spend a lot of effort on proprioception.
I think in a conversation about VR it's ok to ask whether youve actually used it.
> I think in a conversation about VR it's ok to ask whether youve actually used it.
I don't see how it's relevant. Nearly all VR insights came from those who never actually used it, namely because it didn't exist yet.
But, in fact, I have used VR quite extensively. I do own or have owned or borrowed or used or demoed at least 50 different models over the last 25 years, and my experience over the last decade has only ever reinforced this grievance, that VR hardware developers and content producers are paying little to no attention to the user's proprioception, and nothing I have ever seen, neither in my own experience, in depth reviews, documentation, nor your own statements has led me to believe otherwise. Though the component technology is getting better all the time, the VR development is no different than it was in 1996. It's as though developers are either entirely unaware that proprioception exists, or are aware and think it will take care of itself. And though it does sometimes, accidentally, it is not every time and always, and there is no great reason why it shouldn't, other than that developers apparently either haven't discovered it, or haven't discovered how.
Quid pro quo, now please give me your VR credentials so I know I'm not wasting my time. After all, once you can no longer speak to someone's argument, you think it is ok to personally attack them. So let's scrutinize your experience and knowledge in kind and see how much of an expert you really are, and maybe see if we can't get you to realize that when your ability to persuade fails, and you have no further ability to make valid argument and nothing more to offer, then you should really simply stop, leave others alone, and not try to bully or attempt to humiliate them with personal attack.
I simply asked if you had used any modern VR sets and you have started accusing me of 'personally attacking you'.
Nearly all VR insights came from those who never actually used it, namely because it didn't exist yet.
Everything gets invented by people who've never used it. But VR is an explicitly experiential medium. Again, I think in a VR discussion its perfectly fine to ask if someone has used it.
I have an Oculus Quest 2 (for my sins), when I first used it I was blown away although I find myself not bothering with it much now, there doesnt seem to be much to draw me back there, which makes me think Meta are heading for trouble. But thats an aside.
I'm confused about your argument and I think perhaps by proprioception you mean something different to what I'm thinking?
Because my experience with the Quest is that the device knows exactly where my hands are, their exact orientation and even what my fingers are doing. And it puts a lot of effort into making my 'hands' part of the experience by showing them to me in VR. This to me seems to be leaning heavily on my innate sense of proprioception to maintain the VR illusion. True, it doesn't know where the rest of me is. But the hands are the most important part, hence it seems that within the confines of what is economically feasible (eg hand tracking but not leg tracking), the developers of the Quest have spent a lot of effort on proprioception.
But you maintain that VR developers are entirely unaware of proprioception. So I think you are talking about proprioception in a deeper sense? Or in a sense that has not occurred to me? I'd be interested to know exactly what you mean.
My point was lost. If your argument is valid, it will avoid any mention of your opponent and their personal circumstances and focus only on what was said. Otherwise, you are constructing a fallacious argument known as the ad hominem fallacy.
Regarding proprioception, you are likely very aware of most of your senses, such as sight, smell, taste, etc. Proprioception is a sense precisely the same as the sense of sight is a sense, and it is merely the perception and awareness of the position and movement of the body and it's parts. Without looking to see, you know where your nose is, you know where your hands are, you know if your feet are, say, pointed towards or away from each other or anywhere in between. This is the sense of proprioception. When you become experienced at driving a vehicle, you will have good sense of where the perimeter of that vehicle is, including the edges of a trailer if you are towing. This is an extension of proprioception, the vehicle more or less becomes a part of your body, and you know its edges without actually constantly checking to see where they are all the time.
In VR, what you see and hear and sometimes feel should give the sense of proprioception that what you see yourself manipulating, whatever it happens to be, should feel as though it is a part of you. There are tricks that developers can use to reinforce this sense of proprioception, but beyond seeing a moving limb in feedback to your own actual limb movement, I have never seen any development of proprioception beyond this.
There is a body illusion known as the wooden hand or wooden arm illusion. Your arm is placed under a table so that you can't see it, and a wooden beam (say, a short 4x4) is placed on the table so that you can see it. The assistant has two feathers, one in each hand, but you can only see one. Simultaneously the assistant strokes the wooden beam and your hidden arm with a feather in the same motion, and within seconds, your sense of proprioception (shockingly) fools you into believing that the wooden beam is your arm.
This is just an example of how sensory reinforcement is able to fool your sense of proprioception into rigorously believing that what you see is you. I have rarely, if ever, very deeply believed, so far as to the suspension of disbelief, that the elements that I've manipulated in VR have ever become an integral part of me, proprioceptively. Developers are ignoring proprioception, and all it takes is to clue them in somehow ("hey! Have you guys heard of proprioception? Look into it!"), and they will do the rest, which will take research, understanding and then changes to the product and content to constantly reinforce the illusion, and when they do, every VR experience will truly be immersive and not just said to be so in lip service by marketing materials.
Just because one subjectively likes something does not mean that it is objectively any good. Without addressing proprioception, no matter how advanced the underlying hardware technology gets in resolution or surround sound, unless proprioception is placed as the primary concern, VR will continue to kind of suck and never become mainstream. Everyone should have VR hardware, it should be everywhere in education, in commerce and in industry, and right now it is nowhere but in the rare gamers' inventory.
