Vitual Reality never went far. Does anyone remember VR troupers? It is funny to watch what they thought back then. I thi
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Lawnmower Man 2: Beyond Cyberspace
jdkeaton1 — 19 years ago(January 29, 2007 06:33 PM)
Vitual Reality never went far. Does anyone remember VR troupers? It is funny to watch what they thought back then. I think that this movie is more like a kids movie when compared to the first. Kids are the main caratures against a super villin trying to take over the world. A childish plot. I think it is a movie for depressed people who listen to Tool way too much.
-
CMRKeyboadist — 19 years ago(February 15, 2007 03:17 PM)
LOL! Yeah, I remember seeing this one in the theaters and people were actually walking out half way through. On your question about Virtual Reality, it is still something that is being perfected and it is a long way from that. The early to mid 90's kind of overhyped virtual reality with all of those movies being based around it (Ghost in the Machine, Lawnmower Man, etc). I have a feeling we haven't seen the last of virtual reality.
-PCyst -
mstrorm — 18 years ago(April 25, 2007 03:29 PM)
You know, even at the peak of the early-90s VR hype, someone said something like "it is being hyped, and eventually the fad/hype will pass and something else will take its place. But one day in the future we'll wake up and virtual reality will be everywhere."
The gist was that back then, VR was a craze being hyped way beyond its (then) current capabilities, and that the fad would pass. but that subsequent technological developments would slowly but surely bring more and more VR-like technologies into practical everyday use, until they were everywhere. -
Hazzer_99 — 18 years ago(April 30, 2007 10:30 AM)
I remember. Lol, those were the days. They never imagined the insides of VR would be anything more than their current level of computer games at the time either - all platforms made of flashing green lines, some kind of spandex containment suit for the protagonist and Tron-esque backgrounds. No one even talked about VR until The Matrix arrived, and even then I don't think the phrase was ever actually mentioned.
-
mstrorm — 18 years ago(June 06, 2007 04:28 PM)
What on earth are you on about? The phrases "virtual reality" and "VR" were as common as muck in the early 1990s. It was hyped to oblivion, and you're right; it wasn't mentioned in The Matrix, which is just as well, it would have sounded like a dated cliche (even by 1999) and cheapened the film.
By contrast, now that the idea is much more technically feasible, the expression isn't that common. -
Hazzer_99 — 18 years ago(June 06, 2007 08:01 PM)
I meant no one delved into the modern day realistic idea of VR, when VR would actually have practical use. The Matrix was the first film to go into it, but not as Tron but futuristic-perfect.
Go to the loo, 'cause all the beep's coming out your mouth instead of your a-hole -
mstrorm — 18 years ago(June 07, 2007 01:52 PM)
To be fair, I don't think Tron was really meant to be VR, since what was shown on screen wasn't a computer-generated world accessible to humans. On the contrary, it was a representation the computer itself. The film was pure fantasy based upon the conceit that at some abstract, virtual level computer programs were "sentient" and the computer operation was somehow analogous to a fantasy world.
By contrast, The Matrix truly was a computer-generated world made with humans in mind.
That's probably analysing Tron it too deeply anyway; as I said, Tron's ultimately fantasy (in a general rather than swords-and-sorcery sense) and flight of imagination masquerading as sci-fi. Whereas The Matrix really is sci-fi. -
Hazzer_99 — 18 years ago(June 11, 2007 07:23 AM)
Okay, we're taking what I originally said way out of it's league. I was merely using Tron as a visual reference, i.e. what VR looked like to all of us during the late 80's / early 90's whatever. But yeah, I think we a both pretty much in agreement on the subject.
Go to the loo, 'cause all the beep's coming out your mouth instead of your a-hole -
jdkeaton1 — 18 years ago(July 18, 2007 02:02 PM)
Virtual Reality was mentioned at the beginning of "The Lawnmower Man" and through out the movie back in 1992-1993. I think people should watch and then make a comment. "The Lawnmower Man" uses VR as a means of mental enhancement via direct stimulation of the nervous and endrocrine system to promote growth and also to make the simulated world even more realistic. In the Matrix the persons brain and nervous system are "hard wired" to a computer system to create an extreamly realistic simulated world and also it is used to excellerate learning. I am just pointing out the simularities between the two movies.
-
Promontorium — 12 years ago(August 04, 2013 03:34 AM)
Hey, guy from 6 years ago, you really don't seem to have a grasp on this subject. The Matrix by no means was the first in any way to portray a realistic virtual reality, or pretty much anything close to that. Just give up. Stay wrong 6 years ago.
I don't even have to look anything up. Virtuosity is an example off the top of my head. Johnny Mnemonic with Keanu Reeves even. -
Hazzer_99 — 12 years ago(August 04, 2013 11:38 AM)
You seriously gonna link me back to a comment I made six years ago and had completely forgotten about with a goad and then not expect me to reply?
Well done. You were probably a twat six years ago too.
P.S. A grasp on what? The realism of fake virtual reality? Well if so I'm alright thanks, I think I'll stick to my day job.
A lover not a fighter: someone who finds alternative ways to make their jaw ache -
Promontorium — 12 years ago(August 25, 2013 01:57 AM)
Why are you looking up comments you made 6 years ago? Also, you really posted 6 years later with such a lame ass reply to my funny comment? You had 6 years to get a sense of humor. Maybe you need another 6.
-
Hazzer_99 — 12 years ago(August 28, 2013 02:19 AM)
I got an email in my inbox. It said somebody wanted to tell me something. That person was you. I completely disagreed with your comment and anonymously notified you accordingly. Because that is what message boards are for.
So you, clearly trying to be a bit cool, defaulted to the bog standard a some-what boring playground tactic of chucking back the same things I said to you. Wohoo. Goodbye, I plan on never talking to you again. Peace out.
A lover not a fighter: someone who finds alternative ways to make their jaw ache -
devilmaster — 18 years ago(September 17, 2007 01:03 PM)
There is still a niche of "virtual reality" enthusiasts, but they (we, as I am one) don't really use the term when talking about it, because it's too generic and non-descriptive.
Virtual reality is a mixture of different technologies (stereoscopic glasses or goggles, wired gloves, head/hand trackers, haptic/force feedback systems - which ARE currently developed, they're just not hyped as "virtual reality" was in the 90s) so we just use the specific term, instead of the umbrella term "virtual reality". -
brad-of-mygt — 14 years ago(November 01, 2011 04:09 AM)
The Matrix stole concepts from this movie
This SHOUDL NOT BE ON THE TOP WORST I SEEN WAY WORSE!!!
This is a good movie and the first is good but not great but worth a watch, I love scifi and this is a fascinating watch if you a nerd. I don't see how IMDB and all can HATE SO MUCH.
VR is in your games, your Nintendo DS, the 3d, etc, the Internet is a form of VR
Old thread but I want some replies
Gonna eat got da muncheis!
PEACE -
avortac — 11 years ago(June 05, 2014 12:09 PM)
What makes people choose such horrible nicknames?
Anyway, what you are describing, is not a 'virtual reality', but more like 'interfaces' or 'platforms'. You can display anything with goggles, you can use gloves for anything, and so on. That tech has nothing to do with virtual reality per se, it only acts as the technological platform or interface INTO the program, that may or may not be 'virtual reality'.
'Virtual Reality' itself is the visual-aural world, that exists only as a computer program (basically anyway), that can then be displayed in a more-or-less three-dimensional illusion to the viewer/user/experiencer. If we take an old game, like Doom, for example - that was played a lot with the so-called 'VR equipment', but that didn't mean that the equipment was the 'reality'. The game itself, the textures, the walls, the levels, the sounds, sprites, and the program are what forms the actual 'virtual reality', not the equipment.
The whole concept, the tech, the culture and all that - it never developed the way that many morons predicted. They envisioned that we would be using truly three-dimensional displays (as opposed to the completely two-dimensional displays we still use, no matter how "3D" game or program we use - every single "3D" game, program, image, animation, etc. that the normal PC user ever sees, is always just a two-dimensional PROJECTION of three-dimensional mathematics, handled by a program - there is nothing actually three-dimensional about it. There are a few useless excpeptions, which still do not actually fulfill the criteria for real three-dimensional display, like using "3D-glasses" or the kind of goggles you mention. Those simply utilize slightly different two-dimensional projection for each eye, but they are not actually three-dimensional.
It's still a long way to really three-dimensional graphics, if it ever really happens on this planet..
(the masses certainly are too dumb to ever really demand it - heck, they don't even know how to demand HDR after being confined to the finite supply of brightness (in 24 bit (and practically, even in 32 bit, because of how the 8 extra bits are used for alpha etc.), all you get is 256 different brightnesses. That's certainly not even close to how much variance there is in the real world, and could be expanded tremendously before hitting any kind of practical limitation, like being so bright it can cause eye damage or something -- this is a long topic, but suffice to say that when the hospitals were moving from film (that can actually capture more than 256 degrees of brightness) that is displayed against a really bright light, for Rntgen film and such, to computer displays, they started complaining that they were not able to see the details properly, detail was lost, they were not able to make accurate diagnoses anymore, and so on, so they really wanted HDR monitors (and graphics cards, and image formats), but I don't even know what happened next, or are they still suffering, or what)
..but if it ever happens here, I am sure that a completely different way of capturing and displaying light will have to be invented, so that light waves/particles can be completely controlled.
True three-dimensional graphics would be like any three-dimensional object in the room, and you could see it from all sides, by just walking to the other side of it or just peeking around its corner, or whatever. This could be probably done in a room, to form a completely different kind of room, hallway, scenery, whatever, la Holodeck, but of course the physical touching would be incredibly tricky to create in a believable fashion, and preventing the 'experiencer' from bumping into the walls of the room would be practically impossible to prevent (like in Holodeck, they supposedly somehow are able to create very large areas, and prevent that from happening, but it's not really credibly explained, how exactly that is achieved).
The Matrix idea about 'virtual reality' is also quite silly. On the surface, it seems credible - just replace the impulses that the brain receives from your physical body, by a digital version of those same exact impulses. (They forgot that it's not really the brain that's responsible for things like 'feel' - it's the soul, but the soul is sometimes convincingly duped even by this world, so why not a 'virtual version'?)
Except that this is NOT how the movie works!
They plug in, and they GO into the Matrix, and then they have to GET_OUT of it to return to the real world. Otherwise, they DIE.
This is of course ridiculous, but absolutely required by the plot, because otherwise there would be almost zero tension, especially in fights that happen in the 'virtual reality'.
I would never accept or suggest directly tampering with impulses and signals that the brain processes..
(heck, the clumsy Terran 'scientists' (or mockeries thereof) don't even know how it all works, but they pretend to know which area of brain is 'responsible' for which activity, stimulus
- this is a long topic, but suffice to say that when the hospitals were moving from film (that can actually capture more than 256 degrees of brightness) that is displayed against a really bright light, for Rntgen film and such, to computer displays, they started complaining that they were not able to see the details properly, detail was lost, they were not able to make accurate diagnoses anymore, and so on, so they really wanted HDR monitors (and graphics cards, and image formats), but I don't even know what happened next, or are they still suffering, or what)
-
Ashley Pomeroy — 11 years ago(February 14, 2015 05:22 PM)
VR seemed silly at the time. We knew it was a silly craze. Like Google Glass today; a tiny tiny number of people used it, it was superficially interesting, but the appeal melted away as soon as you thought about it and it was never cheap enough to buy on a whim. The media jumped on VR because it was visually interesting and The Kids might spend some money on it.
On a practical level a 3D helmet with gloves is a very poor general-purpose interface. It's awkward and leaves you unable to quickly grab snacks from the fridge. If you want to buy stuff online, it's quicker and easier to use an Amazon-style menu system rather than by flying through a 3D shop.
Looking back, it's almost embarrassing how hard VR died. Two of the biggest consumer technology growth engines of the last twenty years were 3D games and social networks, both of which seemed like natural applications for VR back in the 1990s. But no-one has even the slightest desire to pop on a helmet and some gloves when they use Facebook, and very few people are fussed enough with Oculus Rift to use it. Motion-based controllers have taken off, and Microsoft's HoloLens and so forth might one day be popular, but they're never going to dominate the mainstream.
There were big dreams of a VR future. We live in the future today, and we are all connected with cyberspace; but we use tablets and laptops, not great big helmets, and ICE and attack bots are scripts, not little triangular 3D things with lasers.