Switch VR HMD mockups.

[Frogger]

NATO said:

spemanig said:

It was a terrible, terrible device that still managed to blow so many people away so much that it literally kickstarted the VR arms race we're seeing now. I'm not missing the point - you are. It doesn't matter how terrible you think it was. With no games and a $350+ price tag, it was good enough. Switch VR with better games at a $100 price tag will be much better off than that.

As for smudges and dust. Okay. The HMD comes with a wipe. Crisis averted. You know what the best selling VR headset is? Not Oculus. Not Vive. Not even PSVR. Gear VR. Worse games AND succeptible to dust and finger prints. No one cares.

VR just needs to be cheap, convenient, and have a steady stream compelling software to be good enough to go mainstream. Switch is the first device that can actually make all of that happen at once, 720p screen and all.

Gear VR isn't the best selling device.

See:

• Google Cardboard: 84,400,000.
• Samsung Gear VR: 2,316,632.
• PlayStation VR: 745,434.
• HTC Vive: 450,083.
• Oculus Rift: 355,088.
• Google Daydream: 261,083

Cardboard: $15 - Ample stock

Gear VR: $69.99 - Ample stock

PSVR: $399 - Barely in stock anywhere

HTC Vive: $799 - Limited stock

Oculus Rift: $600 - Limited stock

Google Daydream - $69 but only released a few weeks ago

There's a mighty big step up in pricetag there that more than explains the disparity.

And here's the thing, if Nintendo did make a VR option for Switch, it would require the accelerometer and Gyro, but would lack depth tracking entirely, so you'd get a $80-$120 headset addon for a poor VR experience.

Good luck with that.

Oops. Totally forgot Cardboard existed for a second.

You proved my point though, so all is well. You're right. There is a mighty big step up in price tag and it does more than explain the disparity. That's my point. 

I don't know why you're still going on. Don't you get it? None of that matters. Even if the Switch VR didn't come with a solution for depth tracking, it would still sell better than the competition because, as you literally just said, the mighty big step down in price would create a disparity in sales. People don't care that it's not as good when they're paying that much less for it. That's common sense. I don't buy a $20 shirt expecting $80 quality. The question is, is this $20 shirt good for $20?

VR on the Switch for $100 would far and away blow the competition out of the water in the same price bracket in almost every concievable way. The only downgrade would be the screen quality. Better games, bigger, more ambitious, have higher production values, more polished games, and more of them released at a consistent pace. Better control in every concievable way without the need to buy unreliable third party controllers. And remember, those cell-phone VR experienced has blown every single dedicated PC/Console gaming HMD out of the water in terms of sales without any of that. Because nobody really cares about any of the things you're talking about when it costs that much.

You know why the stock is ample on the HMDs that sell better? I'll let you put 2 and 2 together there. You know why the cheaper PSVR is selling more than the superior but more expensive Vive and Oculus? I think you get my point. Nintendo doesn't need luck. They have basic economics.