This is an interesting proof of concept, and it's cool to know that you can carry a "pocket living room" around with you.
That said, shouldn't virtual reality free us to do more than replicate real life environments? It looks like VR will have its own period of skeuomorphism until better UI is invented. I'd love to be a designer at Facebook right now.
I agree with what you're saying, but I don't think there's necessarily a concept of skeuomorphism in VR.
Skeuomorphism is a mapping of real world 3D physical objects to a more constrained space, like a 2D phone screen, ostensibly to aid usability in an otherwise unfamiliar space by invoking recognition and instinct.
In theory at least no mapping like this is necessary at all for VR, things just look and act however they do, in a recreated 3D space. Of course there will be 'skeuomorphism' insofar as objects from the real world will be copied 1:1 into the VR environment, but it's kind of a redundant term at that point.
It's indeed an interesting question if we'll discover better 'UX' for virtual 3D environments than the physical ones we've built for ourselves in the real world. I'd venture yes, including but not limited to discovering tweaks that break the laws of Physics to allow greater convenience. Like wormholes that act as hyperlinks for 3D space, or something.
It'll be fascinating to see if things like this are experimented with and accepted from the get-go, or if there will be a 'skeuomorphism-like' era of VR where we play it safe and just copy our existing world for a while, until we collectively 'find our feet' in VR and learn to make tweaks that expand the possibilities. I'd hope and actually somewhat expect the former.
Of course there's a concept of skeuomorphism. Everyone expects their POV about 2m off the "ground". Objects are of a common range of sizes, 3D space is even & regular in each direction, etc. "Floating" is kinda nifty but likewise just an extension of our real-world 3D experience.
People in general aren't ready for scaleable space (sizes changing orders of magnitude instantly), varying measurements (say: X is normal, Y is logarithmic, Z is sinusoidal), warping space (various Einstein's Dreams scenarios here like consequences of "speed of light is 15 MPH", or Interstellar scenarios), varying or nonexistent notions of "up" (see Ender's Game arena), absence of normal gravitational phenomena, etc.
Early on in the 3D game realm, game writers explored lots of variations on non-skeuomorphic scenarios (Descent II comes to mind, a 3D flying maze game devoid of any sense of "down"). Many years later, with endless technology & imagination available, 3D games are dominated by soldiers running around battlefields little different from reality.
People will have enough trouble with entering/exiting VR. Having seen other technologies bloom, I assure you it will be years before advancing beyond paradigms based in the real world.
I do wonder what the point is of spending lots of energy making alternate universes if we end up replicating thing we’re doing now. In a world where we can only walk, we'd like to be able to fly. In a world where we can only fly, we'd like to teleport. But then we’d probably make the environment bigger to ‘keep it fun’ so what’s the point? Do we all just want to be floating points of light?
Maybe the only real benefit of VR is having the undo button.
All in all, maybe it's not so bad that we haven't had much choice in the design of our species and world so far. Super tangentially related: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34151049
I think the VR paradigm will evolve as a social signal of detachment from availability for interaction. Like being on the phone. It's like closing the door to your office.
AR may become a commonplace, useful layer on social interaction. For people with compatible hardware... AR that could aid daily life will always signal social detachment for some, but for a younger generation it may be as natural of a tool of rich expression as a whiteboard.
We have somehow managed to understand that wearing headphones and sunglasses means you don't want to talk to people, or that you don't want to be interrupted. Wearing headgear around will die off like Bluetooth headsets if it doesn't allow for clear distinction between local and digital interaction. The phone to ear gesture is well known. Talking to thin air remains dubious to those around you.
That said, shouldn't virtual reality free us to do more than replicate real life environments? It looks like VR will have its own period of skeuomorphism until better UI is invented. I'd love to be a designer at Facebook right now.