top of page
Writer's pictureChris Burgess

The Reality of Immersive Technology Adoption

Updated: 7 hours ago



In light of the Snap announcement yesterday, I felt like it was an appropriate moment to talk about immersive content.


In my experience, it's easy for those people building immersive content to get caught up in the pursuit of pushing boundaries and creating groundbreaking experiences. However, as I've learned from my years working in AR/VR, pushing the boundaries is not what will get mass adoption.


In this blog post, I explore the common pitfalls of focusing solely on pushing boundaries and discuss the importance of balancing innovation with accessibility. By understanding your target audience's needs and providing the necessary tools, you can create immersive experiences that truly resonate.


 

The First Pitfall: Innovation as the solution

Immersive technologies are innovative by their very nature, however as a veteran in the immersive technology space I have been guilty of feeling underwhelmed by experiences that do not push the boundaries. I constantly need to remind myself that the technology is still in its relative infancy and the majority of people out there are still yet to experience it.


However, it is not uncommon for immersive technology creators to push what is possible with the technology, at the expense of first-time usability. As soon as interactivity is added to an immersive experience, UX complexity is created because users need to learn how to interact, causing barriers to entry and a longer onboarding experience.


In my experience, there are three reasons why companies want to push the boundaries:


1. Lower usage than expected

It is not unusal for immersive experiences to get lower usage than expected, relative to more established channels due to the fact that the tech is still emerging. Companies can make assumptions that the content itself is the issue and as a result start to expand the capabilities rather than focussing on the context, environment, or call-to-action.


2. Lack of user empathy

The teams building immersive technologies live and breathe the technology every day, meaning they become numb to the first time experience. As a result they can begin to push the realms of what is possible, forgetting that people only just being exposed to the technology will still be amazed by relatively simple content.


3. Differentiation

A number of players have entered the immersive space, whilst devices themselves are still very similar and with an underdesirable form factor for mass adoption, content has become the differentiator meaning brands and tech companies alike try and push what is possible.



A Personal Anecdote

I started working with augmented reality in 2011 when we were pushing boundaries and creating groundbreaking experiences, but we did not get the audience engagement that we felt our efforts deserved. Ultimately the issues were about education; the technology was so new that users needed to be made aware of its existence. Instead we denied this fact and believe that the content was not compelling enough - the more time we spent trying to create more advanced experiences, the more time and money that we wasted. Ultimately, consumers weren't ready to adapt their behavior to accommodate the technology, and our focus on innovation was misplaced.


Success Story: Universal Studios

When working with Universal Studios on their 100-year anniversary celebration, we focused on creating visually appealing AR experiences that brought the DVD covers of 15 classic titles to life. The experiences were not complex; there was no interactivity, and no financial incentive, but it was the nostalgic and immersive nature of the content that enticed users to purchase the DVDs (unfortunately I don't have access to the sales figures).


Key Takeaways:

  • Assess your audience and the context: It is important to accept that users might not be ready for interactive content without clear instructions or guidance on-hand.

  • Keep it simple: Avoid overwhelming users with complex features and interactions.

  • Focus on value: Prioritise content that is unique, engaging and visually appealing.


 

The Second Pitfall: Inflated Expectations

Whilt I have no data to back up this hypothesis, I would assume that the most popular or successful content is built by people who know how to build a good experience. Given they have the skills to build compelling content, they set the bar high and as a result give the impression that this is what all immersive content should look and function like.


The question is, how easy is it for new content creators to replicate these experiences? Whilst no-code solutions are gaining popularity, is it realistically possible to create experiences that are as immersive and interactive as what a developer can achieve writing code?


It is important to make sure that whatever experiences you build are easily replicable by your target content creators, whether they are writing code or not. You need to include templates, or commented code to lower the barrier to entry, and ensure that the quality bar remains high, despite the 'skills' of whomever is creating the content.


Case Study: Hand Tracking in VR

When I worked with hand tracking in VR we always pushed what was possible and the feedback we got from end-users was always positive. However, none of our customers were able to replicate the content with the same level of interactivity and polish. The problem was that we were the experts, and we had the knowledge and time required to build compelling experiences that our customers did not. Ultimately, we did not do enough to make it really simple to build compelling content and either our customers were not willing, or were simply unable to do it themselves.


Key Considerations:

  • Tutorials and documentation: People learn in different ways and as a result you need to provide resources to accomodate different styles if you want people to build delightful content

  • Provide tools and templates: Make it easy for users to create their own content.

  • Set realistic expectations: Don't assume that all users will want to build groundbreaking AR experiences.


Conclusion

In the realm of immersive technologies, success hinges on a delicate balance between innovation and accessibility. By understanding your target audience's needs, providing the necessary tools, and fostering a supportive ecosystem, you can create immersive experiences that resonate and drive adoption.


Key takeaways:

  • Prioritise user experience: Focus on creating experiences that are intuitive, engaging, and easy to use.

  • Set realistic expectations: Avoid setting the bar too high, especially for early adopters.

  • Provide necessary tools: Offer templates, tutorials, and documentation to empower content creators.

  • Foster a supportive community: Encourage collaboration and knowledge sharing among developers and creators.

  • Continuously iterate and improve: Listen to feedback from users and adapt your offerings accordingly.


By following these guidelines, companies can create immersive experiences that resonate with a broader audience and drive long-term success for immersive technologies.


 

Side note: How is AR content different today than it was in 2011?


AR experiences that are built today are not dissimilar to what was being built in 2011 - the difference now is the hardware. Back then we were using an iPhone 4 - now mobile devices have so much more compute, additional sensors and new software capabilities that make it possible to be more immersive. For example, being able to use light estimation to make 3D content look more realistic; knowing where the floor is relative to the device; knowing exactly where the device is in space and time; using generative AI to make content more dynamic; using personal data making it possible to personalise the experience dynamically.


It's easy to forget that even today in most instances users still get the 'wow' effect from holding up their phone camera and seeing something like a T-Rex in the streets of London, despite the fact that this was something I was doing back in 2012. The difference now is that this content benefits from the extra compute, additional sensors and new software capabilities.


19 views0 comments

Comments


bottom of page