Today, we’re debuting our latest collaboration: “On the Verge,” an original VR video series that provides an up-close, behind-the-scenes look at the lives of young MLB stars around the game.
The first episodes of “On the Verge” will take you on the field, inside the batting cage, in the clubhouse and to more places with young MLB stars Josh Bell (Pittsburgh Pirates), Mookie Betts (Boston Red Sox), Manuel Margot (San Diego Padres), and Jose Berrios (Minnesota Twins). These four episodes are available today in the recently released MLB.com At Bat VR Daydream app, which combines live video streaming and real-time stats for a complete live game sports experience in VR. They’ll also be available on MLB’s official YouTube account soon.
I love this direction for VR and other cutting edge storytelling tech: Don’t (just) recreate content we already get via traditional channels. Leverage VR’s unique capabilities to give us something unique. Behind the scenes is perfect; if I’m going to be allowed somewhere usually off-limits to me, like an MLB clubhouse, I’m going to want to look everywhere once I’m inside. VR is perfect for that.
On the Verge leverages Google’s Jump VR creation platform:
We worked closely with MLB to tell these stories from a new perspective amidst unique access points around ballparks with Jump, Google’s platform for VR video capture that combines high-quality VR cameras and automated stitching. Because the Jump cameras don’t take up a ton of space, it allowed MLB to capture memorable moments on and off the field, ultimately producing fun stories of what it’s like to be big leaguers.
The first four episodes are available now via the MLB.com At Bat VR Daydream app. Episodes will also be available on YouTube to be viewed via Cardboard and Daydream View players.
During Monday’s earnings call, Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai promised 11 Android phones supporting Google’s Daydream VR platform will be in the marketplace by year’s end. No specifics were mentioned regarding how many of the 11 might be brand new devices, and how many existing phones in line for updates to work with the next generation of Daydream.
The announcement isn’t at all surprising, but it does get me to wondering about a long-running theme of the Android world: Fragmentation. With standalone Daydream headsets also promised by year’s end, my big question about Google’s VR plans is this:
Will Daydream force hardware OEMs into standardization, or will it follow the path of Android down the path of “One Platform Fits All. Sort of. After you fork and/or patch it.” ?
Ideally, all compatible hardware – phones and standalone headsets both – will run the same Daydream platform and the same apps. Android developers and users alike have long suffered with everything from drivers to apps that work on some but not all Android handsets. While things have gotten somewhat better over the years, Daydream represents a chance for Google to get the mobile platform thing right and sow the seeds for a more robust developer ecosystem and better user experience. Apple has long since reaped these benefits, as they control the full iOS stack, from hardware to software to ecosystem.
Currently, seven Android phones support Daydream:
– Google’s own Pixel & Pixel Plus
– Asus Zenfone AR
– Huawei Mate 9 Pro & Porsche Design Mate 9
– Motorola Moto Z
– ZTE’s Axon 7
Samsung has also announced Daydream support for Galaxy S8 & S8+ is coming soon.
One caveat to Pichai’s announcement, as PhoneArena points out:
Exciting news indeed, but before you get super-duper excited, make sure you check if Daydream is supported in your country of residence, as Google has not yet expanded it to countries, such as Mexico or some smaller countries in Europe.
That Facebook would do this, if in fact they are, should come as no surprise. Oculus Rift has been around for a few years, and Facebook slashed its price by half over the past four months. Rift also has to be plugged into a high-end Windows PC to work, and main competitors Google, HTC, Lenovo, and Samsung have all announced their own standalone VR headsets for launch later this year.
A few other bits from Gurman’s report bear some quick analysis:
The new headset will have a similar interface to Samsung’s VR Gear and can be controlled by a wireless remote. Facebook has said it’s also working on a prototype device code-named Santa Cruz that’s basically a wireless Rift, with the full power of the original device sans PC.
Two tiers: The original Rift, perhaps soon with a wireless upgrade, for developers and enthusiasts, and; The new standalone model for more casual users.
Oculus has plans to enlist China’s Xiaomi and its network of contract manufacturers to produce the new headset for global distribution, people familiar with the arrangement said. The device will feature Oculus branding around the world, except a custom version for China will feature Xiaomi branding and run some Xiaomi software applications, the people said. Hugo Barra, recently put in charge of Oculus’s VR products, was previously a Xiaomi executive. Xiaomi declined to comment.
The company plans to begin briefing content makers, such as video game designers, on the device by October so that the product’s application store could launch with compatible games, one of the people said. The downloads store will be re-written and accessible from the virtual reality interface itself, this person said.
That first sentence is smart business and shouldn’t be surprising. It’s what Apple’s doing with ARKit right now, and how you do a good platform launch in 2017.
The second sentence is, in a nutshell, the key to why the coming class of consumer-level standalone headsets has a chance at really taking off. Pro VR rigs like Rift and HTC Vive are expensive and complicated for the casual user to setup and maintain. Phone-based VR systems like Gear VR and Google Cardboard are cheaper and easier to dive into, but they’re based on a user experience originally designed for touch screen computing, not immersive computing.
I’m pretty experienced with consumer gadgetry, and phones in particular. I still get frustrated and run into road blocks using Gear VR with my Samsung Galaxy phones. VR puts a ton of strain on a phone’s CPU, GPU and battery, and running VR software atop a phone’s base OS can lead to all kinds of issues. System-level notifications interrupting a VR experience can ruin the effect. Background apps eating up resources can bring your VR environment crashing to a halt, period.
A task-specific VR rig running hardware and software built for nothing else should theoretically be much easier to use than a VR layer woven into a phone’s stack. Much will depend on the quality of user experience, starting with the Oculus store. It’s not bad currently, but it needs to be simpler and offer more (optional) hand holding for novices if Facebook really wants their new headset to make waves.
Yet despite many pronouncements that 2016 was the year of VR, a more apt word for virtual reality might be absence. Of the 6.3m headsets that were shipped last year, most were cheaper, less sophisticated devices, such as the Samsung Gear VR, that rely on smartphones to act as their screens, according to SuperData, a games-market research firm. Only 200,000 high-end Oculus Rift headsets were sold globally (see chart). In the end, SuperData revised its first forecast, made in January last year, that total revenue from VR software and hardware would reach $5.1bn in 2016, down to $3.6bn. The actual figure for total worldwide revenue was a meagre $1.8bn.
Here’s the aforementioned chart:
I’d never heard of SuperData before reading this Economist post. That doesn’t mean anything — I’m not particularly up on who’s who in the world of gaming business analysis. A quick visit to SuperData’s website was notable for several prominent grammatical errors amidst the copy marketing their consulting services. Again, may not mean anything. Just passing along the very little I know about them before saying the following:
When an analyst says their own forecast was off by 275% — especially when that margin represents $3.1 Billion — I’m not sure that’s an indictment of the industry they’re trying to analyze. Seems like it’s at least worth considering whether the industry underperformed or the analyst did.
I agree with Williams in that there was a lot of VR-related noise last year. I started getting involved with consumer-grade VR in 2015 when I hosted a panel on AR and VR for Salesforce Developers at Dreamforce. I spent some time ahead of the conference with a Samsung Gear VR and Kodak 360 camera, and checked out an Oculus Rift-based experience at the show itself. Google Cardboard was also a thing that year.
And Palmer Luckey was on the cover of Time that August. Luckey, of course, is no longer CEO of the VR company he founded. But that’s how it goes when you sell your startup for $2 Billion.
The story accompanying Luckey’s infamous cover photo included this paragraph:
Headsets will start going on sale this year, and competition will increase dramatically through 2016. At first they’ll be bought by hardcore gamers and gadget geeks. They’ll be expensive–as much as $1,500 with all the accoutrements. And just as with cell phones, everyone else will mock the early adopters for mindlessly embracing unnecessary technology with no useful purpose. At first.
We’re past that stage, if barely. Useful purposes for VR have emerged. They’re just not mainstream. VR is most useful to gamers and niche users across health care, industry, research, and training. Prices of consumer VR headsets have dropped some, but an Oculus with the necessary PC to run it will still set you back right around $1,500, minimum. As the chart above shows, Superdata is forecasting year over year growth of VR headset sales in 2017, but the numbers are still quite small.
VR is a long play. Everyone involved knows that. Tons of money is being invested in the VR ecosystem by tech industry giants betting on it becoming one of the pillars of a new wave of immersive computing. These companies have the resources to invest and don’t need to realize immediate returns.
Facebook (owns Oculus), Google, Samsung, and Sony are all big players in VR’s early stages but none of them relies all that heavily on headset sales for revenue right now. Intel, Lenovo, and Qualcomm are slightly smaller players, and they, too, make their bread and butter elsewhere. Apple and Microsoft get mentioned with the terms “Augmented Reality” and “Mixed Reality” more than VR, but let’s mention them, too: They don’t need to sell headsets to keep chugging along.
That basically leaves HTC. HTC probably has the most to win or lose when it comes to VR’s near-term success. Once a darling of the smartphone world, the company has struggled to generate meaningful profits from their phone business in a market dominated by Apple and, to a lesser extent, Samsung. While they still sell phones, HTC’s future lies in something else. For the time being, that something else is their Vive VR headset.
HTC has sold other assets to fund its VR focus, and their need to generate meaningful revenue from this new line of business is more immediate than what their competitors face. But even if Vive “fails” and HTC is forced to close up shop, the VR business itself isn’t going anywhere even if headset sales don’t grow meaningfully over the next few years. (And don’t get me wrong, I’m rooting for HTC; they made some of the best smartphones in the world ten years ago, and Vive is arguably the best VR system on Earth today.)
That said, we’re on the brink of a transition from VR’s earliest days to the beginnings of mainstream VR. All of the VR hardware action to date has been at the extreme ends of the price spectrum, plotting out a barbell curve with super cheap headsets (Cardboard, Gear VR) on one end and super expensive headsets (Rift, Vive) on the other. A new wave of standalone VR rigs offering more power and ease of use than today’s cheap stuff, but in simpler, less expensive form factors than today’s expensive stuff, will launch by year’s end. Google, HTC, Lenovo, and Samsung have already shown their intentions. Facebook/Oculus just jumped on the train today, too, according to this Bloomberg report.
As technology and production techniques improve, and consumer preferences mature, the VR industry will mature. Too much has been invested, and too many big players are excited, for VR to fizzle out now. Ignore the short-term projections and anxiety and play the long game. The Virtual Reality industry is barely in its adolescence.