Is VR an approachable medium for JavaScript developers? Can we, as front-end developers, use what we already know to build a 3D world? Can we use React to reach the 4th dimension? Yes! ReactVR is here to let us create delightful VR experiences in the browser.
We live in a 3D world, and now the web does too. Virtual Reality games and product demos immerse the user more than the traditional 2D web experience. Luckily for us JavaScript developers, building VR apps on the web could not be easier. ReactVR allows us to be immediately productive creating 3D worlds in the browser using the same React APIs we're already familiar with. Take your web apps to another dimension as we demystify VR web app development. We'll be learning the fundamentals and more as we take a new look at a classic game, Frogger. The discussion will then focus on UX principles for Virtual Reality apps.
Matt Hamil is a Software Development Engineer at Spera Health. He's a collaborator of react-navigation, an avid tea drinker, and a Rick Moranis look-a-like.
I gave a lightning talk about ReactVR at the NashReact meetup on August 8. Below is an outline of this updated talk for Nodevember:
I. Introduction [10 minutes]:
- Thinking in React on the Web
- React as an abstraction over any view system
- Introducing ReactVR (thinking in React in VR)
II. Demystifying VR [15 minutes]
- Understanding the transition to a 3D environment for your apps
- Building an app with ReactVR (using Frogger as an example)
III. UX Principles and Their Difference From the 2D Web [12.5 minutes]
- Comfort, Interface, Movement, and Immersion
- Being Responsible for your User's Experiece and Well-being
IV. Conclusion [3 minutes]
- Highlight of VR Development Principles
- Inspiration to use what we already know to create VR experiences on the web
Love the punch of the abstract! I already want to attend this talk. I have some minor edits to suggest that improve the flow of the proposal a bit. None of them are essential, in that I think this proposal gets across what you'll be doing in the talk very effectively, but I think they'd help it stand out.
Final sentence in the abstract-- "ReactVR empowers JavaScript developers" -- doesn't follow through on the questions raised in the first three sentences. Answer them! "Yes! ReactVR is here to let us create delightful VR experiences in the browser." I'd also comb out everything in the proposal to use the first person plural. "Can we, as front-end developers" etc.
That first sentence of the description is so great.
"With the rise of Virtual Reality technology, there lies great potential to entertain and immerse users using VR in the browser." Passive voice. Not as punchy as everything that preceded it. I'd go here for something more specific that your audience might want to do with VR in the browser that they couldn't do before. Games? Architectural walkthroughs? Dangle a bit of bait about what's possible and sell the audience on why they want to do it.
Next two sentences don't carry as much weight as they could. "Web developer of today" followed by "javascript developer" in the next. Stick with the "we" here. These two sentences want to do the job of convincing the audience that this is possible for them, not a mess of APIs they're going to hate with some quaternion math to make it even worse. Try: "ReactVR allows us to be immediately productive creating 3D worlds in the browser". If you can safely say something like "using APIs/tools/whatever that we're already familiar with" or something like that, say it!
Love everything that follows and definitely want to see VR Frogger :)
Structure of the description section: "it's here now / this is why you want to do it / it's achievable by you / here's what you'll learn from the talk". Tighten until every sentence does meaningful work in that structure. (I am assuming that there's a word limit here?)
And now you have survived being edited by me!