Washington - One of the promises that virtual reality offered was that
we would all be able to watch "courtside" sporting events without
having to leave our couches. Organisers including those from the Rio Olympics
and soccer's English Premier League have touted the new technology as a way to
be there without having to deal with the expense, travel and crowds of an
in-person game.
But is it any good? To find out, I tried watching a
basketball game using NextVR, a company that broadcasts one National Basketball
Association game a week, as part of the NBA's League Pass package. (Plus the
cost of either a Samsung Gear VR or Google Daydream and a compatible
smartphone.) Earlier this month, the company offered its weekly game free, so I
watched the San Antonio Spurs crush the Minnesota Timberwolves from a
just-about courtside vantage point.
In the interest of full disclosure, the Wolves are my
hometown team, so I already had an interest in watching. That aside, there is a
lot to like about the experience. You do feel very close to the action, and the
cameras replicate the vantage point you would get from a close seat. Plus, you
get a sense of scale when you're watching - the height of the players, the
baskets, the video board - which adds a sense of presence you do not get on television.
You are not so close to the action that you cannot see
everything at once, as that would somewhat defeat the purpose of watching a
game. And because you are sitting at the fixed camera's vantage point, you
don't necessarily see the game as you would see it: At 5-foot-2, I actually got
to be taller watching the broadcast than I would have been in a courtside seat.
But I felt far more engaged - even more, I would say, than when I bought a
ticket to see the Wolves play in person a couple of months ago, because this
view was better than the seats I could afford.
Read also: How virtual reality can make you more productive
David Cole, the company's co-founder, said he thinks of
this sort of programming as "prescription-strength media"- a
broadcast that has the power to be more engaging than a traditional televised
game. Anecdotally, Cole said that he has heard from NextVR customers who say
they have memories of sitting courtside at games they attended virtually.
"That's impactful - and a very tiny bit scary,"
Cole said in an interview. "It shows, at the danger of using hyperbole,
that we're connecting the content to the nervous system of our viewer."
On the flip side, you do not get close-ups of players'
faces - meaning personalities will not always come through as clearly as they
might on a typical broadcast. But once, while watching, I was wondering what
Spurs Coach Gregg Popovich's face looked like after a particular play. Then I
remembered I was essentially standing next to him, and I was able to turn my
head to see for myself.
To pull off the immersive broadcast, Cole said the
company swoops into town with the other crews and sets up several cameras along
with microphones that let them pick up ambient noise, such as the squeak of a
player's sneaker. It takes about the same amount of time for their crews to set
up as it does for a traditional film crew. For basketball broadcasts, there are
cameras behind each basket, at center court and above the crowd - so you get a
sense of the atmosphere of the arena. Cole said they also have two
"floater" cameras that can pick up sideline action as needed.
As a viewer, it's nice to have more control over which
part of the game you watch. To make sure you don't miss the action, NextVR
hires its own commentators to go along with its broadcast, which is useful
because they can remind viewers to look left for an incoming drive, or pan
right to follow a surprising pass. Cole said they put their commentators
through a training camp of sorts to develop those skills.
That makes up, in part, for the loss of editorial
direction you would get from a television broadcast, and ensures that viewers
aren't missing key parts of the game.
Read also: VIDEO: Sony brings virtual reality to the masses
Overall, I had a more direct connection to the game than
I have watching other broadcasts. I will not recall the game in the future as
if I were courtside, but I was definitely more into it than I have been for
other, more important, games. Being so close to the action was a big part of
the immersion. But so was the mere fact that by wearing a headset I was not
able to look at my phone or get otherwise distracted. I didn't even eat snacks;
Cole joked that "beer-finding" technology is on the road map.
I'm not prone to motion sickness in VR, but I had my
moments watching this game - perhaps from following all the ball movement. The
shots are static, however, so it's probable that any motion sickness was
because of my phone not being placed right in the headset or because of the
focus. I certainly didn't notice any latency issues. Even when I had to put it
down, however, I was able to listen to the audio, so I did not have to
interrupt the flow of the game. Cole said that NextVR rarely receives
complaints about motion sickness.
The biggest drawback, of course, is not being able to
watch along with another person at the same time. Part of the fun is pointing
out a pretty pass or debating a dirty foul to the person next to you on the
couch and seeing their reaction. Maybe if you had two headsets, it would be fun
- you could both see the game close-up and still trade observations.
I would still say, ultimately, that it's still an
experience best suited to watching by yourself. That way, you don't have to
share your headset.
WASHINGTON POST