Other

By Jeff Mottle

Virtual Reality in Arch Viz - Hype or Reality?

The Resurgence of VR

Anyone who has been around the visualization industry a while knows VR is certainly not new. In fact the HMDs (Head-Mounted Displays) as we know them today came about in the 1960s and saw a somewhat disastrous resurgence in the 1990s in the consumer space. 



When the hype started all over again a few years ago with the release of Oculus’ DK1 (Developers Kit 1) Kickstarter, I have to admit I viewed it with a healthy amount of skepticism.  So much so, it was not until mid 2013 that I even bothered to give it a try, despite having walked passed crowded Oculus booths a number of times in my travels to events around globe.  Like so many technologies in the 3D/CG field I’ve seen over the last 21 years, I chalked the DK1 up to yet another soon to fail technology - right there next to 3D televisions. What I am witnessing in our own field has really taken me a bit by surprise and it seems this is a technology that is not going away any time soon. Its path is certainly not paved in gold, but I think it actually stands a chance this time!



Architecture is generally one of the most technology laggard fields around, so when I started seeing around 50% of the architectural firms and visualization studios purchasing DK1’s, I was a bit taken aback.  What was it this time that made this not only a seemingly viable technology, but a technology that even the most technology averse companies were wanting to purchase and put into practice? 



Throughout 2014 and into mid 2015 I slowly watched more and more companies experimenting behind the scenes. Many not even knowing how it would be used in production. By late 2015 a critical mass of new technology companies jumping behind the VR movement, coupled with actual internal and external client projects successfully being developed within our own field, appears to have been a recipe for success.  I’ve even spoken to one company who told me the revenue they are currently generating on the VR side of the business is surpassing their bread and butter imagery work in terms of profitability.


NVIDIA VR Experience Pods at GTC

NVIDIA VR Experience Pods at GTC - line ups for hours. 

Why VR, Why Now?

Unless you’ve tried VR it’s really hard to put into words why it has so many people excited and why it feels so amazing. Two words that I think describe its usefulness in architecture are: Scale and Presence.  Two things that also neatly sum up what we feel when we experience architecture in the real world.  This ability to experience a space we can’t visit, or one that does not yet exist, is the basis of nearly everything professionals in the field of architectural visualization do on a daily basis, so really VR is quite complementary and takes what we do to another level.

So why is VR having a resurgence now and why might it be here to stay this time?  Quite simply the technology required for us to start to developing near reality experiences did not exist until very recently.  Even as recently as ten years ago we did not have a 1080p display small enough to fit an HMD. We can thank the mobile phone market for pushing that forward.  Another big catalyst for VR has been the advancements of real-time computer graphics compute power.

Both NVIDIA and AMD have announced video cards that are orders of magnitude faster than their predecessors.  Companies like Oculus, HTC, Microsoft, and dozens more are simply packaging an ecosystem and hardware in a way that can leverage these advancements in a way that supports VR experiences.  

Oculus DK2 at the End User Event

Microsoft Hololens at the End User Event

Challenges Ahead

While the business cases and initial successes with VR in architecture are positive, there remains many outside forces that will dictate whether VR will stay.  AR (Augmented Reality) HMDs have a long and successful presence in the industrial/commercial space, but VR, for now, is primarily being targeted to the consumer space, and it’s a bit of a chicken or the egg scenario at the moment.  People don’t buy HMDs en-masse unless there are titles, and game developers don’t develop big titles unless there is a large enough market to support it.  Which brings us to the number one issue I see with VR HMDs in the consumer space - price.  



By far the best VR experience is currently the HTC Vive, but at $800 that is far from affordable at the consumer level, and that’s just the HMD.  You are going to spend at least another $2,000 for a PC capable of driving a VR experience, which puts this out of reach to all but the most avid gamers and professionals.   NVIDIA recently estimated that less than 1% of all PCs on the market in 2016, will be able to run a VR experience.  So the question now becomes, how long are these VR hardware developers willing to wait for an audience and how big does that audience need to be for it to be profitable?  And more importantly, will the commercial side of the industry factor into their equations?  HTC just recently announced a Vive Business Edition, so it’s clear they understand the market exists, but is it enough?  

Leap Motion gesture control in VR

Autodesk Stingray

From a form factor point of view, size, weight, and untethered experience are all high on the list of improvements that need to happen, in addition to increased screen resolution.  



From a technology stand point of view, all of the pieces of the puzzle are there, but the business model and hardware refinements are far from resolved. I think the next 24-36 months will be very telling.  Gartners, an industry analysis company that plots new technology trends, places VR just exiting the Trough of Disillusionment with a 5-10 year horizon to reach the Plateau of Productively.  I had a chance to speak to one of the analysts who helps determine where these technologies fall on the graph and I commented how I was surprised not to find it at the top of the hype curve.  He said, they debated if they should “reset the clock” and place it there, however the current position reflects the decades of work that came before, even though the industry was literally in a holding pattern for 20 years.  

Gartners Emerging Technology Hype Cycle 2015

How is it being used now?



It’s still very early days, but I am seeing new companies popping up almost daily announcing they are working with VR on client projects.  Architectural firms like Gensler are using it to gain buy-in on design proposals from their clients and to help internal design discussions.  Some visualization companies are taking existing projects and porting them to VR and to help developers better understand their spaces.  

Over the coming months, our plan is to develop an entire series of articles around the use of VR/AR/MR in architectural visualization, including in depth discussions about what it means from a business perspective and what opportunities exist, and how this technology might impact our field.



In the interim, we’d love to know what you think, what you’d like to see, and to tell us what your plans are for VR/AR/MR in your business in 2016 and 2017.  

We’ve put together a very quick survey below and will be publishing the results as soon as we get a good number of results.  Hopefully within the next few weeks.  Only takes 1-5 minutes to complete.

You must be logged in to post a comment. Login here.
In the present day there are many ways to navigate through full 3D VR on your mobile device including buttons on your headset, and a simple handheld controller
LOL, count me out. Google Cardboard makes makes me sick within 30 seconds. I can not even imaging subjecting someone to navigation on that type of HMD.
[/QUOTE] There are a number of things in there. I see AR with paper targets and I see mobile based real-time, but not what I could call VR. If you want to use a GearVR you need to "teleport" yourself between 360 cubemaps. There is no way on the GearVR that I know of to navigate. You would not want to even if you could. If you want to see someone throw up really quick on ANY HMD, give them the ability to navigate without actually moving (ie. walking around) That's why you almost always have people teleport between locations and then look around (think Google StreetView).[/QUOTE] It is a good point you made. I think that in the past it's been difficult to navigate like you explain. In the present day there are many ways to navigate through full 3D VR on your mobile device including buttons on your headset, and a simple handheld controller https://youtu.be/AayyTFCeXDA?list=PLYIFoBS_-TmuLQoT2snFpR2RsHFyxFg2I
This is a link to an example of what my employer is doing with these models.
There are a number of things in there. I see AR with paper targets and I see mobile based real-time, but not what I could call VR. If you want to use a GearVR you need to "teleport" yourself between 360 cubemaps. There is no way on the GearVR that I know of to navigate. You would not want to even if you could. If you want to see someone throw up really quick on ANY HMD, give them the ability to navigate without actually moving (ie. walking around) That's why you almost always have people teleport between locations and then look around (think Google StreetView).
[/QUOTE]Technically I guess you could run real-time apps (as much as a phone could handle) and view with GearVR, but the vast majority of people are using GearVR in architecture to view spherical cubemap 360 images and video . There are some great examples here: Here The interaction ability of a GearVR is limited too in that you can only really point a "cursor" at something and click the button on the side of the GearVR, so not as immersive as true VR HMDs like the Vive, Oculus etc. I did try a modded GearVR that had eye tracking so you could control elements with your eyes, but in the end, you're just controlling a cursor.[/QUOTE] Jeff, that is a good point you made. This is a link to an example of what my employer is doing with these models. They are definitely being run on mobile devices and they are definitely full VR 3D - https://youtu.be/eNIzJFH88ZI?list=PLYIFoBS_-TmuLQoT2snFpR2RsHFyxFg2I
I am definitely a little confused. I was under the impression that Gear VR is only a headset that you use to run vr on your mobile device
Technically I guess you could run real-time apps (as much as a phone could handle) and view with GearVR, but the vast majority of people are using GearVR in architecture to view spherical cubemap 360 images and video . There are some great examples here: Here The interaction ability of a GearVR is limited too in that you can only really point a "cursor" at something and click the button on the side of the GearVR, so not as immersive as true VR HMDs like the Vive, Oculus etc. I did try a modded GearVR that had eye tracking so you could control elements with your eyes, but in the end, you're just controlling a cursor.
[/QUOTE] Ironic that GearVR is on the opposite end of the spectrum in that you have to render even high res, but opposite for realtime VR[/QUOTE] I am definitely a little confused. I was under the impression that Gear VR is only a headset that you use to run vr on your mobile device
I have been hired a few weeks ago to turn bim models and high poly design models to low poly of the exact same content for mobile devices. The models range from one building to city planning models. The main obstacles seam to be poly count, file size, and texture size. I personally prefer the Gear VR since it's cord free
Ironic that GearVR is on the opposite end of the spectrum in that you have to render even high res, but opposite for realtime VR
I have been hired a few weeks ago to turn bim models and high poly design models to low poly of the exact same content for mobile devices. The models range from one building to city planning models. The main obstacles seam to be poly count, file size, and texture size. I personally prefer the Gear VR since it's cord free
Anyway here's my take on VR, have a read let me know your thoughts... Virtual Reality is Here
I think GearVR is awesome. While technically not VR (it's 360 imagery or video). By far the lowest barrier to entry and you still get that sense of immersion. For sure this is the easiest and cheapest way to get clients excited.
@doug I'll have the results from the survey in this article soon. Just got a bunch of responses overnight and will push again next week. Right now based on about 200 responses I'm seeing 67% of people currently using in production and 75% who plan to experiment with it in the next year. Certainly the results could be biased given only those interested in VR might read the article and the audience on CGA tends to be more technical, but still pretty telling I think. Full results soon.
[/QUOTE] It's anecdotal, but also based on the experience of others who like myself travel all over the world speaking to people in the industry and visiting studios.[/QUOTE] Thanks for the clarification. I have friends working in many areas of the country. I am in Chicago and have a number of friends at different firms here. I know that other people are using VR, but I don't know of anyone else personally who is. So out of the 30-40 firms where I know people, in multiple areas of the country, I am the only one using VR. Most of my architecture friends haven't even heard of it until I bring it up. (And I am at the smallest firm). I would believe that it would have a higher adoption rate in visualization firms, but I am just not seeing it in architecture firms. My information is also anecdotal and should be taken as such. I hope that the reality is closer to what you've experienced than what I've experienced and I look forward to seeing what the next 24 months bring. Thanks!
Where are you getting the data that 50% of architecture firms where purchasing DK's? That seems unbelievably high.
It's anecdotal, but also based on the experience of others who like myself travel all over the world speaking to people in the industry and visiting studios.
Where are you getting the data that 50% of architecture firms where purchasing DK's? That seems unbelievably high.
I look forward to reading the rest of this series, especially if it includes some nuggets of knowledge from the IrisVR team. Thanks Jeff.
I personally think mobile devices will be larger than the Oculus, Vive, Playstation, etc. You're right, the technology needed for AAA gaming is expensive, but for something to be used as a marketing tool for a 2 min experience, then the likes of GearVR and Google Cardboard are easily more preferable. Most people have the basic tech in their pocket already, all we need to do is build experiences that best suit the hardware. Anyway here's my take on VR, have a read let me know your thoughts... Virtual Reality is Here Dean
Thanks for putting up a chart that places us on the Slope of Enlightenment, Jeff! It's interesting to hear that you were seeing DK1s popping up at firms; we saw a very similar adoption curve in 2014 and 2015 when taking IrisVR on the road - by the time Oculus DK2s were shipping over 50% of firms had ordered kits. I think AR will see a very similar adoption curve in ~5 years with AEC. Until then I'm sticking with the Vive.
I went to the Augmented World Expo a month ago and it was an eye opening experience to see just how mature AR is. Some interesting stuff that Gensler is doing with the Hololens too. You going to be at SIGGRAPH? Would love to reconnect either way. Would love to include you guys in the VR series.
Thanks for putting up a chart that places us on the Slope of Enlightenment, Jeff! It's interesting to hear that you were seeing DK1s popping up at firms; we saw a very similar adoption curve in 2014 and 2015 when taking IrisVR on the road - by the time Oculus DK2s were shipping over 50% of firms had ordered kits. I think AR will see a very similar adoption curve in ~5 years with AEC. Until then I'm sticking with the Vive.
Great article. I really believe vr will be used a lot in archviz and development. The real question to me is in what form. Full 3d game engine or stereo vr panoramas? In a perfect world of course, we would like to have everything in full real time 3d in pathtracing quality. But we are not there yet.
Great article. It's interesting to experience the resurgence after the Virtuality systems of the past but it's still primarily a solo experience. This works fine for games but architecture is meant to be experienced in a simultaneous shared environment. The hololens tech is very promising and now that Microsoft seems to have cut loose the hardware side, it will be interesting to see where it goes. A solution that incorporates rapid, on site setup/calibration of the environment bounds would open up a lot of opportunities.
There are shared experiences that I've tried with the HTC VIVE and it's pretty cool. Was just a very basic head avatar and a set of hands, but IMHO was more than sufficient to have someone guide you through a space and explain things. I'll likely write more about share space experiences in a separate article.
Great article. It's interesting to experience the resurgence after the Virtuality systems of the past but it's still primarily a solo experience. This works fine for games but architecture is meant to be experienced in a simultaneous shared environment. The hololens tech is very promising and now that Microsoft seems to have cut loose the hardware side, it will be interesting to see where it goes. A solution that incorporates rapid, on site setup/calibration of the environment bounds would open up a lot of opportunities.

About this article

Why is VR having a resurgence now and why might it be here to stay this time?

visibility25.9 k
favorite_border14
mode_comment40
Report Abuse

About the author

Jeff Mottle

Founder at CGarchitect

placeCalgary, CA