Half-Life: Alyx Update Adds Native Linux Support, Vulkan Rendering

[Michael_S]

The issue with VR/AR and why it will never be outside of niche area, is because it's inconvenient, it is fun for a while I'm sure, but at some point, it gets old and more convenient ways are preffered by large majority of people.

I think the technology will improve. The headsets will get lighter and more comfortable, the level of detail in the graphics will get better, the latency between when you change the direction of vision or move your hands to interact with the environment and when it reacts will decrease.

Today it's a niche because a good experience requires an $800 gaming PC, $600 headset, and a decent amount of open space. But $200 today will get you a smart phone with specs not far off the best Android devices from 10 years ago. I think it's realistic to expect that some time before 2040 you will be able to purchase a VR device that performs like a top end gaming rig and VR headset today for less than $300, total.

Personally, I fail to see any use of such technologies in education proper (teaching people how to think, rather than what to think and exercising memory and other capacities/skills with large amount of data), but it is possible that there is a use case I failed to see.

I think we're constrained by what we've already experienced and are just beginning to explore the possibilities with this technology.

Imagine a semi-transparent model of the human body that allows a person to touch any section and get information on the organs, blood flow, and hormones and then being able to zoom in and zoom out to explore parts of the body as big as a heart or skull or as small as one of the alveoli in the lungs.

Imagine a geometry class in which the students are examining the shapes in 3D space and can rotate, resize, and invert the objects they are dealing with. Quick story - one of my kids was a year ahead in math for her first five years of school, then hit a wall this year with algebra and kept failing to grasp concepts. Then during the COVID-19 quarantine, the school switched her teacher... and she's now answering all of the questions properly and learning the material without effort. Our education systems often fail students not because those students are inherently stupid, but because the teacher doesn't present the material in a way that fits the students' learning style.

Science education - how about an interactive model of erosion over time, or chemical bonds in molecules, or cellular biology?

And I have really come to believe that the best form of education is project-based. So don't tell your students that the flying buttress is important, instead put them in a VR environment with a task to make the biggest building they can using medieval construction techniques, and then see how far they get without it.

Even for programming, grasping pointers, nand gates, stacks and heaps would be easier for many people if they had an interactive model to examine and the ability to run parts of a program backwards and forwards through it.

Now to be clear, a great teacher without VR educational tools will educate children better than an average teacher with them. But we should be using every possible effective tool.

Really, only sphere where VR/AR have some chance is movie/video industry, not even in TV networks in 100 years from now, and nothing of that is related to technology, only convenience.

Personally, I can't even take advantage of stereoscopic vision, so it wouldn't be of any use to me. But, my point is, most likely, it will never become large market where you can enter easily with average or slightly above average skills, best at the job will earn a lot, others, not really IMO.
With that being said, it's always good to learn new things, even for fun factor, with that as an expectation, go for it. I do kinda doubt that there's any difference in programming in comparison to other non-VR applications, the only difference is in controlling from what I can see, and until optimal way of controlling VR environment is discovered (because current way is obviously sub-optimal), you will face changes and learning curve consistently I guess. But I am not a programmer, and with toolkits and APIs and so on, you will have to learn per project basis with more or less steep curve.

My work experience for the past fifteen years has been web development and the bits connected to it. So VR might not be that different from other 3D visual programming and physics engine programming, but the whole thing would be new to me.

I did other programming before that.

[pal666]

1. Cost (needs a much beefier system than your normal games) + a good VR headset alone costs $1000 (Valve Index) - in my country people on average earn just $500 ... a month

cost may explain why you refuse to buy it, not to put it on your head. and average salary affects average person, you are affected only by your salary

5. Extreme eye strain

i think it's your extreme imagination

[pal666]

I would think it would mess your eyesight, keeping a screen so close to your eyes for hours.

screen is not close to your eyes. there are lenses which put screen at some appropriate distance in front of headset. normal people can't see anything at few cm distance, it would not work at all otherwise. only people with extreme myopia could see at such distance, it helps reading fine print btw

[leipero]

I think the technology will improve. The headsets will get lighter and more comfortable, the level of detail in the graphics will get better, the latency between when you change the direction of vision or move your hands to interact with the environment and when it reacts will decrease.

Today it's a niche because a good experience requires an $800 gaming PC, $600 headset, and a decent amount of open space. But $200 today will get you a smart phone with specs not far off the best Android devices from 10 years ago. I think it's realistic to expect that some time before 2040 you will be able to purchase a VR device that performs like a top end gaming rig and VR headset today for less than $300, total.

Technology will improve, without any doubt, headsets will become lighter, connections will improve, latency as well, I don't see technology being an issue on the long run, we are on the same page considering that.

I think we're constrained by what we've already experienced and are just beginning to explore the possibilities with this technology.

Imagine a semi-transparent model of the human body that allows a person to touch any section and get information on the organs, blood flow, and hormones and then being able to zoom in and zoom out to explore parts of the body as big as a heart or skull or as small as one of the alveoli in the lungs.

Imagine a geometry class in which the students are examining the shapes in 3D space and can rotate, resize, and invert the objects they are dealing with. Quick story - one of my kids was a year ahead in math for her first five years of school, then hit a wall this year with algebra and kept failing to grasp concepts. Then during the COVID-19 quarantine, the school switched her teacher... and she's now answering all of the questions properly and learning the material without effort. Our education systems often fail students not because those students are inherently stupid, but because the teacher doesn't present the material in a way that fits the students' learning style.

Science education - how about an interactive model of erosion over time, or chemical bonds in molecules, or cellular biology?

And I have really come to believe that the best form of education is project-based. So don't tell your students that the flying buttress is important, instead put them in a VR environment with a task to make the biggest building they can using medieval construction techniques, and then see how far they get without it.

Even for programming, grasping pointers, nand gates, stacks and heaps would be easier for many people if they had an interactive model to examine and the ability to run parts of a program backwards and forwards through it.

Now to be clear, a great teacher without VR educational tools will educate children better than an average teacher with them. But we should be using every possible effective tool.

Yeah, I mean you are right on that point, practice is and important part of the education process, I keep forgetting that. That is true, nothing can substitute a good teacher for student performance, likewise, bad teacher will seriously damage student performance as your example shows.

But, on the flip side of what you said about VR being used for 3D models etc., but I'm afraid that would take away from student capability of visualization, because visualization is extremely important for many tasks, from medical field to architecture and innovation and creating new systems etc. (visualize something, some machine, whatever, working and potential issues with it etc.). That capability needs to be developed in students, usually at very young age for neuron paths to be established and that he/she could apply that capability with further development. So i'm not sure if project-based is the best type of general education, for specialized, after all those capabilities are developed, I guess it is, but as general thing, I wouldn't be so sure.

Long story short, while you gave good examples, all of them have a flip side to it, because, even when visualization is developed in one person (student in our case), if not used consistently with thinking process for prorogued period of time, brain will gradually re-wire itself and parts of that capability will be lost, potentially forever because with age, it becomes harder and harder to re-wire parts of the brain (it takes much more time).

My work experience for the past fifteen years has been web development and the bits connected to it. So VR might not be that different from other 3D visual programming and physics engine programming, but the whole thing would be new to me.

I did other programming before that.

I don't really know, I am not programmer, really, all I know that you may consider "programming" is bash and css object oriented things using specific toolkits. But from my limited experience, I sort of doubt mechanism itself is much different, so as an good programmer, you will probably have no issue doing VR, just curve of learning new toolkits, APIs or whatever the case may be.

[profoundWHALE]

And for those w/o Linux, Steam, VR, or possibly even money, Epic is giving out GTA V for free

If the Epic Games Store died, I would celebrate.

One proprietary store is enough, and at least Valve invests in Linux and places all of their AAA games on Linux.

[profoundWHALE]

1. Cost (needs a much beefier system than your normal games) + a good VR headset alone costs $1000 (Valve Index) - in my country people on average earn just $500 ... a month

What does that have to do with "refusing to put a VR headset on your head"? That's just saying it costs a lot for you to buy one. Same here, but some people have to be the early adopters so that people like me are able to afford it later on.

2. Space

You can play sitting down or standing up, and literally just need an arm's length away from anything that you'd knock over.

3. Cables

I guess you have wireless keyboard and mouse for gaming right?

4. Vertigo

I get vertigo all the time, it's called "being car-sick" and it doesn't mean I stop riding in cars, it means I need to take more breaks or that I cannot read and ride as a passenger at the same time.

5. Extreme eye strain

Those lenses make the screen appear far away so it's no less straining than your monitor or phone.

6. Still feels extremely clunky

How would you know that if you've never put on a VR headset?

Sorry, I need a VR system which neither requires having any cables, nor wearing any gloves and has a 4K resolution for each eye and 120Hz refresh rate, and near zero lag (<10ms) when I'm spinning my head.

That doesn't make any sense.

1) If you want no cables, your latency immediately suffers (4), and it increases the cost (5) and the battery will increase the weight (5) (6).

2) If you want no "gloves" or controllers or whatever, then you need camera tracking, all of which is more expensive (1), and requires even more room (2)

3) You want 4K in each eye. Well, if I look up the price of 4K 1ms IPS panels, I see $400 to $1000 for one panel. You want TWO for less money than the Index. How the heck are you going to afford a computer that can push 240Hz (120Hz in each eye) in 4K?!. I can understand the desire for a higher pixel density, but resolution increases cost in bandwidth, processing power, and money.

-----------------

In summary, birdie wants the best of everything but doesn't want to pay top dollar for it. If you can't afford the Index, how are you going to afford this imaginary top-of-the-line VR headset, and how the heck are you going to have a powerful enough computer to push those pixels?

[skeevy420]

If the Epic Games Store died, I would celebrate.

One proprietary store is enough, and at least Valve invests in Linux and places all of their AAA games on Linux.

I like them for the simple fact that they're both competition and they're bringing to light how much of a rip-off Steam can be for developers.

Valve still gets the high marks in my book for their Linux support, but them not being a monopoly is a good thing for everyone in the long run.

[birdie]

What does that have to do with "refusing to put a VR headset on your head"? That's just saying it costs a lot for you to buy one. Same here, but some people have to be the early adopters so that people like me are able to afford it later on.



You can play sitting down or standing up, and literally just need an arm's length away from anything that you'd knock over.



I guess you have wireless keyboard and mouse for gaming right?



I get vertigo all the time, it's called "being car-sick" and it doesn't mean I stop riding in cars, it means I need to take more breaks or that I cannot read and ride as a passenger at the same time.



Those lenses make the screen appear far away so it's no less straining than your monitor or phone.



How would you know that if you've never put on a VR headset?



That doesn't make any sense.

1) If you want no cables, your latency immediately suffers (4), and it increases the cost (5) and the battery will increase the weight (5) (6).

2) If you want no "gloves" or controllers or whatever, then you need camera tracking, all of which is more expensive (1), and requires even more room (2)

3) You want 4K in each eye. Well, if I look up the price of 4K 1ms IPS panels, I see $400 to $1000 for one panel. You want TWO for less money than the Index. How the heck are you going to afford a computer that can push 240Hz (120Hz in each eye) in 4K?!. I can understand the desire for a higher pixel density, but resolution increases cost in bandwidth, processing power, and money.

-----------------

In summary, birdie wants the best of everything but doesn't want to pay top dollar for it. If you can't afford the Index, how are you going to afford this imaginary top-of-the-line VR headset, and how the heck are you going to have a powerful enough computer to push those pixels?

In 10-20 years VR will become what I want it to be (aside from eye strain which is physically impossible to solve). There's no need to be aggressive. ;-)

[castlefox]

Great to see Alyx coming to Linux. I am very excited for VR but I dont see myself getting a VR setup for at least 2 years.

$1000 for a full Steam Index would be a large investment for me. And I would need to upgrade my PC video at minimum. So I would be looking at a $1500+ investment if I wanted to want play Alyx on the Index in the next 8+ weeks. Hopefully more AAA VR games come out to help me justify that large investment.

[profoundWHALE]

In 10-20 years VR will become what I want it to be (aside from eye strain which is physically impossible to solve). There's no need to be aggressive. ;-)

Saying "I'll try VR in 10-20 years" is different than saying "And I still refuse to put a VR headset on my head." when the article is about LINUX SUPPORT.

Why do you care if it's VR or AutoCAD, or whatever, isn't more Linux support good?

If you aren't interested in VR, then why did you comment at all?