>>105899078Every single bit of sci-fi written that involves some sort of widely adopted VR world usually establishes a couple of things first
>Inexpensive, standardized access to the same virtual world. Meta was probably the most proprietary-seeking VR platform, with their Quest having a Facebockulous owned phone strapped to your eyes pretty much, even if it was connected to your PC manually. All that shit was data mining, and they also pushed exclusivity. I'm still rather annoyed that the VR version of Resident Evil 4 (original, non-remake) was Oculus exclusive. Valve was, as usual, pretty much one of the only ones out there making FOSS and standardized specs for both hardware and software, but outside of SteamVR there wasn't really a ubiquitous attempt at a universal , modular virtual universe everyone could connect and make their own stuff.
>Hardware was relatively cheap, comfortable, and immersiveThis is a big one. While hardware costs have come down, high performance stuff (or even not that high) is still expensive, requires a heavy visor, etc. I think when we reach the level where a Valve Index or preferably Varjo XR-4 level headset features can be confined in a pair of blocky sunglasses, that will help. The other issue is immersion. The way you interact with the world is usually a pair of joysticks with finger tracking if you're lucky - we don't have full haptic gloves yet that can simulate holding an object etc. Features like eye, face etc. tracking require other upgrades and components - each with their own SDKs and compatibilities so the cost goes up. Motion is a big issue here as at least last I checked, you'll need a fairly comprehensive and expensive set of trackers to get full body mocap. Almost out of room, but my biggest concern is the proprietary nature of it all - the hardware, the firmware, the drivers for said hardware, the software etc.. is often proprietary and not universally interoperable.