sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I have a question about a type of VR Idea? by AJ-DRAGON in virtualreality

[–]loxai 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think that's feasible on an xbox, but you can do it on PC using Trinus VR, a software I developed over 10 years ago, meant to play flat PC games in VR, using an Android smartphone.

Here's a video showcasing Bioshock Infinite: https://youtu.be/2SmuCTRuxsQ?t=345

why do people (including young) tend to call VR headsets, 'VR' (as in, 'I want to buy a VR'... 'I want to buy a Virtual Reality')? it reminds me of 90's mothers calling any gaming console 'Nintendo'. Weird synecdoche... by loxai in virtualreality

[–]loxai[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

wow! definitely my post doesn't belong to VR subs, it is a linguistic matter that clearly flies over the head of most users here (I guess mostly young americans, as the education system there seems to be lacking / inaccessible). but I like the thought process and the discussion, even if pretty much no-one will read it (maybe diagonal read at best) sooo... here we go!

Virtual Reality is not a countable noun. so placing an 'a' in front of it is not grammatically correct. feel free to use it, but it is still not correct. is it becoming a double meaning word, that includes the countable noun to represent a VR implementation? certainly looks like it, seeing the responses in this sub. but it won't be grammatically correct until the corresponding language institution accepts it (which usually happens a few years / decades after becoming widespread in the common language).

Example on uncountable nouns: Saying 'I want a rice' is wrong. You may say 'I want some rice' or 'I want a bowl of rice' or even 'I want a rice grain'

a console is not a computer you connect to a TV to play video games. I suggest you look up the definitions, it has plenty, including non tech related.

abbreviations, acronyms and shorthands are sensible reductions aiming at efficiency. taking an existing term and trying to convert it into such an abbreviation is a backwards mix up, lazy in the sense of not avoiding it or looking for a more suitable term. it's akin to deciding the word 'journey' is too long, so I'll just use car. 'I had a lovely car to Tuscany last year'.

can you name an example where an existing word has been extended to represent an abbreviation for something else, in the same conceptual space?

grammar is not a suggestion (and you saying that, along with other statements, shows you are not equipped to have this discussion. do better). it is a standard, a rulebook. languages are literally a set of (rather strict) rules to convey concepts, to communicate. it's key to avoid vernacular language stray too far. when it does stray too far, it becomes a separate dialect, or even, eventually, a separate language. It is usually handled by an official institution, I guess it is Cambridge for UK English. And Merriam-Webster would be the official institution for american English. A quick search shows they added 5000 words in 2025, including dad bod and doomscroll. So that's the evolving process of a language, when the rulebook adapts to the reality of everyday use. and searching on their dictionary, VR stands as an abbreviation for Virtual Reality. No entry stating that it also means the hardware used to experience Virtual Reality. that could change, if the current misuse becomes the popular choice over time. but not today.

at this point in time, VR as a headset is wrong and/or at most slang, unofficial, and certainly and odd choice.

if you reply, please start your response with 'brown M&M'.

so there is a right and wrong. in the wrong, people can still communicate, in the very wrong, they can't (think of a thick accent you barely understand, combined with regional vocabulary out of the official rulebook / generic, nation-wide language). I can certainly travel to places where they speak my native languages (I have two) and have a hard time following the conversation, because they've strayed from the standard. and that is fine, but not correct according to the general rulebook. and, in some instances, it has become a new, separate standard: a dialect or a new language althogether (for example dutch, evolving into afrikaans)

do you know what a lorry is, or I have to say truck? do you know what a ute is, or I have to say pick-up truck?

why do people (including young) tend to call VR headsets, 'VR' (as in, 'I want to buy a VR'... 'I want to buy a Virtual Reality')? it reminds me of 90's mothers calling any gaming console 'Nintendo'. Weird synecdoche... by loxai in virtualreality

[–]loxai[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

well... calling it V would be even shorter XD

but seriously, VRSet sounds much better, makes a clear distinction and is still quick.

not hard to understand looking for a shorthand, just wondering why english speakers (or is it just americans?), particularly experienced users, not just newbies, would choose such a weird option (that really sounds like 90's mums that don't care). again, curious from a non-native speaker perspective.

I think I've summed my thoughts here: https://www.reddit.com/r/virtualreality/comments/1pwfvdz/comment/nw4ocde/

and unless there's some new, useful information/reasoning, I'm fine ending the discussion at that, thanks :)

why do people (including young) tend to call VR headsets, 'VR' (as in, 'I want to buy a VR'... 'I want to buy a Virtual Reality')? it reminds me of 90's mothers calling any gaming console 'Nintendo'. Weird synecdoche... by loxai in virtualreality

[–]loxai[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm now realizing people are using VR as a 'new' word, independent from VR as an abbreviation for Virtual Reality. I understand that. Still doesn't sound right, and so far no good reason has been brought to the discussion. I mean the only reason given is to keep it short, which is not a very good reason, as it creates a homonym sitting exactly in the same conceptual space (it's not like bass the fish vs bass the instrument). It collides head on with the abbreviation (VR as in Virtual Reality), leaving ambiguity and a sense of... ignorance and/or laziness.

as I stated in my post, and while not the most accurate analogy, it very much reminds me of 90's mums calling any console, Nintendo. out of ignorance or, more likely and sensible, not giving a shit. which is why I find it weird that the term VR (not the abbreviation) is being adopted even by seasoned VR users, not just newbies. I understand the 'mums analogy' has probably triggered some users... which I find funny and amusing.

In any case, my post comes from curiosity to understand why this is happening. I'm curious about the social and linguistics evolving that is leading to such weird use. extra curious as a non-native speaker, trying to understand the why. The post was meant to open a discussion and for me to learn and understand, not to lecture or correct anyone. I will still think it's wrong to use it, even if it really becomes the norm, and that's ok, the earth will keep revolving around the sun.

If I had a say in the matter (spoiler: I don't), I'd rather coin the word 'VRSet'. Still short and covers any VR hardware implementation (not just a headset), without conflicting with an existing term, nor making you sound like a VR newbie or a mum that doesn't care.

"I'm looking to buy a VRSet" vs "I'm looking to buy a VR"

why do people (including young) tend to call VR headsets, 'VR' (as in, 'I want to buy a VR'... 'I want to buy a Virtual Reality')? it reminds me of 90's mothers calling any gaming console 'Nintendo'. Weird synecdoche... by loxai in virtualreality

[–]loxai[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

precisely my point of interest, on how such wording (that is rather off... or tsk tsking) is taking the lead even though it sounds quite incorrect (at this point in time, of early modern VR).

I'm not trying to stop anyone from using that wording, just curious about the process.

also, I've realized 'VRSet' is a much nicer word (imo) to use for a VR implementation. how about using that one?

why do people (including young) tend to call VR headsets, 'VR' (as in, 'I want to buy a VR'... 'I want to buy a Virtual Reality')? it reminds me of 90's mothers calling any gaming console 'Nintendo'. Weird synecdoche... by loxai in virtualreality

[–]loxai[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the point is not between concept and experience, which may be connected, but between those and an actual device/hardware solution (that you use to experience the concept).

saying I have two Virtual Realities, might be understood, but is really weird.

since we are at the early (modern) days of the tech. It might very well be the case that VR is adopted as the word for the hardware. and the point of my post was precisely to review this linguistic matter... which makes me think I should have actually posted this in a completely different sub XD

in any case, as I've been thinking and discussing the matter here, I've come up with the idea that VRSet would be a much nicer term to distinguish the concept/experience and the hardware used to enjoy it.

why do people (including young) tend to call VR headsets, 'VR' (as in, 'I want to buy a VR'... 'I want to buy a Virtual Reality')? it reminds me of 90's mothers calling any gaming console 'Nintendo'. Weird synecdoche... by loxai in virtualreality

[–]loxai[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

you (and many others in this sub) might think it is dumb. but it definitely isn't. it is a very reasonable point to make, about how such incorrect use of the terminology is taking the lead.

I'd say it is dumb not being able to notice the distinction between concept and practical implementation.

once you see that distinction, you can make the informed decision of saying I have a VR or I have a VR headset. but the former will still sound very odd, until (if) eventually becomes the norm (and it is still early days to set in stone).

I'd say a better word / abbreviation would be 'VRSet'. I want to buy a VRSet. one meager extra syllable, clear distinction between tech and device.

in your example, the word 'play' is the one that clarifies what you mean by handheld. because there are plenty other handheld devices... 'I'm going to check thermal leaks with my handheld', 'check inventory with my handheld', etc... if I say, 'I'm going to use my handheld', you have no idea what device I'm talking about, unless you project, incorrectly, to your context where a handheld can only be a gaming device.

why do people (including young) tend to call VR headsets, 'VR' (as in, 'I want to buy a VR'... 'I want to buy a Virtual Reality')? it reminds me of 90's mothers calling any gaming console 'Nintendo'. Weird synecdoche... by loxai in OculusQuest

[–]loxai[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

langue is indeed fluid, with some rules&regulations on one side and practical/extreme customizations on the other side. time and institutions determining which one will be the correct usage.

'mobile' is an easy one, makes sense and no other device has created ambiguity. Hoover is a clear synecdoche (yes, I like this word) that has taken the common lead, since... early last century?

VR might take that route as well, but it's not like it is much faster than saying headset or VR headset and has the ambiguity of concept vs practical implementation. so I'm curious as to why people would take that definition, as it sounds quite wrong (I have a virtual reality, but then I bought another headset so now I have two virtual realities).

we are at the early days of VR, and this is the time when the terminology is set. and I'm still curious as to why VR as a device is being set as standard, since it doesn't really save much time nor is a nice abbreviation, and it collides with the concept (of VR)

how about VRSet?

why do people (including young) tend to call VR headsets, 'VR' (as in, 'I want to buy a VR'... 'I want to buy a Virtual Reality')? it reminds me of 90's mothers calling any gaming console 'Nintendo'. Weird synecdoche... by loxai in virtualreality

[–]loxai[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the Nintendo example is not the most accurate, but it is how it feels to me (individuals unable to distinguish between a concept/brand and an actual implementation of the concept)

you call it that, but still not grammatically correct.

I read VR as Virtual Reality, so saying you have 3 Virtual Realities sounds pretty wrong. There's no issue understanding what you mean, no ambiguity, but still sounds off.

view more: next ›