Meta teases its next-gen headset in new videos with color passthrough

meta cambria.JPG

A couple of days ago, Meta, the company formerly known as Facebook, shared teaser trailers of its next-gen headset codenamed Project Cambria. In contrast to the company's previous headsets, the upcoming device won't just be a VR one but appears to also double as an MR headset as it features color passthrough as shown in the video below:


In addition to the video above, another video was shared showing CEO Mark Zuckerberg wearing the actual headset on (albeit blurred). It shows an in-house experience called The World Beyond that merges interactive virtual elements in the physical world through full color passthrough. A similar experience is also said to be available sometime soon on the Quest 2 through App Lab.


Details such as the final design, specs or price tag haven't been revealed at this time but Meta's Cambria Project headset is expected to launch sometime this year. But given that it is being termed as a "high-end VR headset" in the video above, it could be priced higher than the Meta Quest 2.

:arrow: SOURCE
 

Localhorst86

Robert'); DROP TABLE members;--
Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2014
Messages
2,589
Trophies
1
Location
Nintendo works for my dad
XP
3,880
Country
Germany
I love VR and think it has a bright future but I just don't get all this AR stuff. I don't see the appeal besides some business oriented use cases and even then I think that's a pretty niche market.

Also it looks way jankier than any VR game I've ever played and this is promotional footage?! Look at the hammer 55 seconds in on the linked Youtube clip. It's glitching around and looks jank as fuck.
Yeah. While i certainly think it's nice that developers can access passthrough and implement it into the gameplay (like they currently already can on the oculus quest 2), I don't believe there is a large market for AR focused gaming.
 

KitChan

Well-Known Member
Newcomer
Joined
May 1, 2022
Messages
57
Trophies
0
Age
29
Location
あなたの心に
XP
134
Country
New Zealand
Hololens makes better sense for AR.

I once played an AR game that uses a VR headset at an expo and it was just weird looking at the real world through crappy headset cameras

I think a consumer grade Hololens running games and apps powered by your phone, computer or xbox would have a lot of potential.
Imagine a Pokemon or Yugioh game where you and your friends can summon your monsters out on the street in front of you.

That being said, I wonder how the holograms being closer to your eyes than where they appear to be works. Your eyes can't focus close by and far away at the same time. That's why the Wii U gamepad generally sucked outside a few good Nintendo Land examples, my eyes had to keep readjusting between tablet and TV distance. Maybe that's why we haven't seen a consumer version despite Microsoft teasing those kinds of uses at some point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangy57

mspy

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2018
Messages
298
Trophies
0
XP
1,449
Country
Brazil
This all VR deal reminds me when back in the day they were marketing 3D-TVs as the future and now no one cares.

Personally I feel like Holography technology would be a better investment like holograms and stuff that are projected and you don't need the use of any glasses to see it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 64bitmodels

MikaDubbz

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2017
Messages
2,904
Trophies
1
Age
34
XP
5,122
Country
United States
I don't think I'll ever understand why Facebook bought Oculus for $2 billion. Did they think that there could never be a competitor for VR, that Oculus owned the entire concept of VR? Cuz, surely they could have instead thrown a fraction of that money, probably not even $10 million, at research and development to make a VR unit of their own, not unlike Valve, Sony or HTC, probably a safe bet that they didn't throw close to $2 billion at developing their VR units. Zucky might be great at making money, but he doesn't always seem the smartest with spending his money.
 

Tomato123

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2020
Messages
471
Trophies
1
Location
England
XP
1,483
Country
United Kingdom
I love VR and think it has a bright future but I just don't get all this AR stuff. I don't see the appeal besides some business oriented use cases and even then I think that's a pretty niche market.

Also it looks way jankier than any VR game I've ever played and this is promotional footage?! Look at the hammer 55 seconds in on the linked Youtube clip. It's glitching around and looks jank as fuck.
I really think they don't understand where the market currently is and where it is headed. People don't look at VR/AR as a practical thing to use in their daily lives. They look at it as a toy, a game console, etc. It would take something groundbreaking for it to shift that market as drastic as they want it to shift. Imagine trying to sell a Playstation, Xbox or Switch to someone without saying anything about games, it's a hard sell.

The reason the hammer looks jank is because it was done using the hand tracking, which I've used on the Quest 2 and while it's not bad... It's also not good either. Basically the kind of thing you use if you're too lazy to pick up the controllers because you left them across the room, but good luck playing games with it (It does not handle fast motions well).
 

Axido

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
1,176
Trophies
1
Age
30
XP
3,349
Country
Germany
I love VR and think it has a bright future but I just don't get all this AR stuff. I don't see the appeal besides some business oriented use cases and even then I think that's a pretty niche market.

Also it looks way jankier than any VR game I've ever played and this is promotional footage?! Look at the hammer 55 seconds in on the linked Youtube clip. It's glitching around and looks jank as fuck.
I wouldn't view AR solely from a gaming perspective. Cambria, by the way, is not even meant to be a consumer headset, even though they market it as if it was a premium version of the Quest.

That being said, I sure see the value in AR for the purpose of Zuckerbergs proposed Metaverse. That thing will probably be more AR than VR in the far future. With HUDs and holograms being rendered as if they are part of the physical world. I'd definitely like the option of putting on a pair of glasses and see friends and family walk through my appartment or sit next to me while they are actually somewhere far away. I could also see myself placing a virtual fishtank in my living room rather than a real one (maybe even a giant virtual TV instead of my current projector setup). Some of this is already possible and the rest might be within the next 10 years. Yet, experiences like the ones I described would still be better with actual AR glasses instead of VR headsets. However, a device being capable of both seems okay to me.
 

64bitmodels

Professional Nintendo Hater
Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2019
Messages
1,256
Trophies
1
Age
16
XP
2,104
Country
United States
I'm not sure why anyone would want to sit about with a box on their head, when they can just take it off and be in the real world. Maybe it would be good for disabled people that worked from home but for the rest of us.....nah, I'd rather look at real people face to face than some made up pixel representation of what they think they should look like.
we're in the real world. Like, every day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SexiestManAlive

64bitmodels

Professional Nintendo Hater
Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2019
Messages
1,256
Trophies
1
Age
16
XP
2,104
Country
United States
also, we could just... make actual holograms that people can see without the stupid VR headsets. AR is kind of fucking stupid when you need a camera to use it. Holograms are more practical, can be easily seen, and are more impressive than having to strap a pair of glasses on your mug just to see them. VR is made so you can immerse yourself into a digital world, not enhance the one you already live in
 

KitChan

Well-Known Member
Newcomer
Joined
May 1, 2022
Messages
57
Trophies
0
Age
29
Location
あなたの心に
XP
134
Country
New Zealand
also, we could just... make actual holograms that people can see without the stupid VR headsets. AR is kind of fucking stupid when you need a camera to use it. Holograms are more practical, can be easily seen, and are more impressive than having to strap a pair of glasses on your mug just to see them. VR is made so you can immerse yourself into a digital world, not enhance the one you already live in
And what will you do about holograms being difficult to see in bright lighting conditions?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SexiestManAlive

nero99

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2014
Messages
3,124
Trophies
1
Age
29
XP
3,607
Country
United States
Facebook are involved so i'm out :)

"You can change your name but it doesn't stop you being a c**t" - Someone Somewhere
Nothing but a typical hate follower. Every company you interact with sells your data. Even your phone company. Get used to it.
 

The Real Jdbye

*is birb*
Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2010
Messages
21,986
Trophies
3
Location
Space
XP
11,200
Country
Norway
Valve really needs to make a 'painfully priced' VR headset like the Quest 2, these things have sold well where I work.
They can't. It's not profitable for them. They aren't selling everyone's data and they don't make money on ads.

This all VR deal reminds me when back in the day they were marketing 3D-TVs as the future and now no one cares.

Personally I feel like Holography technology would be a better investment like holograms and stuff that are projected and you don't need the use of any glasses to see it.
It's a shame 3D didn't take off. It was really cool tech. And passive 3D has the potential to work well in 4K (and passive 3D is much cheaper to make than active) but few 4K TVs ever came out and they all had kinda crummy or no HDR.

I don't think I'll ever understand why Facebook bought Oculus for $2 billion. Did they think that there could never be a competitor for VR, that Oculus owned the entire concept of VR? Cuz, surely they could have instead thrown a fraction of that money, probably not even $10 million, at research and development to make a VR unit of their own, not unlike Valve, Sony or HTC, probably a safe bet that they didn't throw close to $2 billion at developing their VR units. Zucky might be great at making money, but he doesn't always seem the smartest with spending his money.
I dunno. But R&D is more expensive than you think.
I guess they just wanted to be first and establish a foothold in the market.
 

yusuo

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
3,428
Trophies
1
Age
37
XP
5,104
Country
United Kingdom
Do you own a cell phone? Do you own any smart device? Even a computer or tablet? Your data is already all over the internet if you’ve ever used one of these things.
Yes, but I don't want to pay ytlet another for the honour
 

zupi

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2020
Messages
228
Trophies
0
Age
35
XP
502
Country
United States
Ok, what heinous crime did mark Zuckerberg commit this time?

9 times out of 10 they make a grand announcement like this as smokescreen so people will forget whatever trial is going on.
 

MikaDubbz

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2017
Messages
2,904
Trophies
1
Age
34
XP
5,122
Country
United States
I dunno. But R&D is more expensive than you think.
I guess they just wanted to be first and establish a foothold in the market.
I feel like I have a pretty solid appreciation for how costly R&D can be. It's not like the Kickstarter to create the original Occulus Rift raised close to $2 billion. In fact they only made just over $2 million. Granted the Facebook buyout was huge, but they had created a working unit and getting early builds out before that point as it was. Even with additional funding outside of the Kickstarter, I don't believe their initial investment to get to that point was even $10 million.

Now granted, Facebook is a bigger organization that would have been more professional with their R&D, with more trial and error, more prototypes, more testing, etc. But even still, I don't imagine that would have had to cost more than $10 million, or $20 million if I'm being generous.
 
General chit-chat
Help Users
    Psionic Roshambo @ Psionic Roshambo: Or chicken lomein