Quantcast
Contributor to Forbes : Sony VR to be more than x 3 that of Oculus Rift In 2016

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Contributor to Forbes : Sony VR to be more than x 3 that of Oculus Rift In 2016

SWORDF1SH said:
kowenicki said:
SWORDF1SH said:

More importantly, do you agree? It might be a blog post but it's a well written piece that provides a lot of facts. Not anybody can blog on Forbes and if it has been published on Forbes then it's endorsed by Forbes.

 

Couldn't  be more wrong. Forbes actually make a point of saying they DON'T endorse blog posts.

is he right? no idea, neither has he.   nobody knows how this is going to fly at this point.

Wrong again. I've said this about numerous threads sourced from Forbes 'contributors'. It has nothing to do with the content. Its an opinion, no better than yours or mine.





I'm not really here!

Link: Shipment History Since 1995


Around the Network
Mummelmann said:
Can't imagine it'll be much cheaper though, which makes the installed base argument near worthless. Out of those 13 million who have a PC capable of proper VR (I happily count myself among them), the percentage of people willing to shell out hundreds of dollars for VR is probably vastly bigger than that of those 36 million PS4 owners.
The average gamer doesn't really spend that much money on gaming and tech; people who have powerful PC's are a lot more likely to.

In short; it's a very simplified argument. As for myself; VR isn't really interesting yet at this point and appears nothing more than a gimmick for now, and I would not pay several hundred dollars for it (the total cost with VATS, taxes and transport fees will go into the 800-850$ ranger here in the Nordic region, which is way beyond ridiculous for a peripheral with almost zero function and impact yet).

Its onyl worthless if your on the other side of the opinion.  Fact is its a fact, not only by the time VR comes there will actually be 40m PS4 in the wild Sony is backing VR with one of their biggest franchises.

PS has a massive advantage, Gran Turismo can push more headsets then all the occulus games combined.  This fanbase is already used to buying expensive add ons for the game.



I do belive sony´s device is going to sell better, however VR is going to become irrelevant pretty fast



                                                                                     

kowenicki said:
I do wish there was a rule on quoting this as Forbes. Its a blog.

Agreed. At the very least it should say something like 'Contributor to Forbes blog' in the title.

Really it should say 'average joe writes stuff on user-generated Forbes website.'

As to the topic itself:

It makes sense that Sony will see some more initial early adopters than Rift if they can price significantly below Rift on a platform with a higher viable userbase. But the whole things reeks of Kinect for both companies. And Sony's no-doubt watered-down version especially.

There will be light years between the capabilities of the Sony version and the Rift version attached to a high-end PC.

As ever, it'll come down to content, and whether or not Sony can create something truly immersive and fun using an underpowered system to generate VR. Microsoft is going to have the same problem.





starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

Ttech. said:
Mummelmann said:
Can't imagine it'll be much cheaper though, which makes the installed base argument near worthless. Out of those 13 million who have a PC capable of proper VR (I happily count myself among them), the percentage of people willing to shell out hundreds of dollars for VR is probably vastly bigger than that of those 36 million PS4 owners.
The average gamer doesn't really spend that much money on gaming and tech; people who have powerful PC's are a lot more likely to.

In short; it's a very simplified argument. As for myself; VR isn't really interesting yet at this point and appears nothing more than a gimmick for now, and I would not pay several hundred dollars for it (the total cost with VATS, taxes and transport fees will go into the 800-850$ ranger here in the Nordic region, which is way beyond ridiculous for a peripheral with almost zero function and impact yet).

Its onyl worthless if your on the other side of the opinion.  Fact is its a fact, not only by the time VR comes there will actually be 40m PS4 in the wild Sony is backing VR with one of their biggest franchises.

PS has a massive advantage, Gran Turismo can push more headsets then all the occulus games combined.  This fanbase is already used to buying expensive add ons for the game.

 

Like all those who bought a Logitech G27 for GT5 and GT6? Gran Turismo owners are used to buying expensive add-on's for games? That's news to me, most of my pals who bought one or more of the games didn't own anything besides the disc(s) and the console and the steering wheels didn't really fly off shelves despite the GT games (plus; these steering wheels had support for practically every racing there was and were great value due to that). And they cost quite a bit less as well. Kinect sold around 20 million units or so and was a fraction of the price and had mainstream appeal on top.

Like I said; average gamers don't spend that much on gaming, the attach rates through the generations paints a picture supporting that. People who buy 100+ games for one console for a generation and spend thousands on peripherals are the minority by leaps and bounds.
PS4 probably won't be the platform to spurr VR into something big, the technology is too young, too expensive and has lackluster developer incentive right now and there probably won't be an abundance of good titles with proper VR support.

Wasn't PS4 also supposed to usher in 4k gaming and 60 FPS 1080p gaming? That's what people said last generation, and PS3 was supposed to staple 1080p gaming in the industry. All this has been said before. Look, I'm not saying it's impossible that VR will be a success, on PS4 or otherwise, but I see it as unlikely, the prices are ridiculous and I can see only enthusiasts willing to shell out this kind of money on a peripheral, that doesn't make for a huge market. To expect more casual oriented gamers, which make up the majority of any platform's installed base, to suddenly buy these kits in droves is highly unrealistic no matter how one looks at it and my argument for those 13 million vs those 36 million still very much stands regardless of yours or my personal opinion on the product itself.



End of 2016 hardware sales:

Wii U: 15 million. PS4: 54 million. One: 30 million. 3DS: 64.8 million. PSVita: 15.2 million.

Around the Network

Am I the only one who thinks Samsung's VR can potentially beat Sony's?

Think about it. One hundred dollars. All you need is one of the more recent phones(and most likely the next generation, as leaks show sizes will be similar). Considering you most likely have a phone, a lot of people wouldn't mind buying it, even if they use it once every few days.



 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

12/22/2016- Made a bet with Ganoncrotch that the first 6 months of 2017 will be worse than 2016. A poll will be made to determine the winner. Loser has to take a picture of them imitating their profile picture.

I'm hoping it's $350. $700 for a VR system would be awesome.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

starcraft said:
kowenicki said:
I do wish there was a rule on quoting this as Forbes. Its a blog.

Agreed. At the very least it should say something like 'Contributor to Forbes blog' in the title.

Really it should say 'average joe writes stuff on user-generated Forbes website.'

As to the topic itself:

It makes sense that Sony will see some more initial early adopters than Rift if they can price significantly below Rift on a platform with a higher viable userbase. But the whole things reeks of Kinect for both companies. And Sony's no-doubt watered-down version especially.

There will be light years between the capabilities of the Sony version and the Rift version attached to a high-end PC.

As ever, it'll come down to content, and whether or not Sony can create something truly immersive and fun using an underpowered system to generate VR. Microsoft is going to have the same problem.



Light years? All previews point to them being equal with PSVR having a crisper display.





Mummelmann said:

 

Like all those who bought a Logitech G27 for GT5 and GT6? Gran Turismo owners are used to buying expensive add-on's for games? That's news to me, most of my pals who bought one or more of the games didn't own anything besides the disc(s) and the console and the steering wheels didn't really fly off shelves despite the GT games (plus; these steering wheels had support for practically every racing there was and were great value due to that). And that cost quite quite a bit less as well. Kinect sold around 20 million units or so and was a fraction of the price and had mainstream appeal on top.

Like I said; average gamers don't spend that much on gaming, the attach rates through the generations paints a picture supporting that. People who buy 100+ games for one console for a generation and spend thousands on peripherals are the minority by leaps and bounds.
PS4 probably won't be the platform to spurr VR into something big, the technology is too young, too expensive and has lackluster developer incentive right now and there probably won't be an abundance of good titles with proper VR support.

Wasn't PS4 also supposed to usher in 4k gaming and 60 FPS 1080p gaming? That's what people said last generation, and PS3 was supposed to staple 1080p gaming in the industry. All this has been said before. Look, I'm not saying it's impossible that VR will be a success, on PS4 or otherwise, but I see it as unlikely, the prices are ridiculous and I can see only enthusiasts willing to shell out this kind of money on a peripheral, that doesn't make for a huge market. To expect more casual oriented gamers, which make up the majority of any platform's installed base, to suddenly buy these kits in droves is highly unrealistic no matter how one looks at it and my argument for those 13 million vs those 36 million still very much stands regardless of yours or my personal opinion on the product itself.

Ever been on Gt planet, some crazy amounts people spend on setting up their racing seats and wheels.  Just now MS cant even maintain stock of a 150$ controller.  Kinetc sold to over 30% of 360 Current user base.   Spending money is easy for people, Sony and the others just have to make then think its worth it.  Thats all.  

Id say the insentive is quite big, im sure every vr maker wants to be the apple of Vr.  Im really sure sony wants its VR to be the vr equavelent of what PS is to gaming.  The incentives are world changing.  This can be kim to the cell phone to smartphone transition, its obvious most of them get that but you dont.  

Sure causal types make up majority of a 160m selling PS, but right now you know damn well most PS4 owners are of the hardcore core gamer type.  So the initial assesment from they article is more right then wrong.  It looks like your argument does not stand, as its based on a false assertion that PS4 owners Now are more casual then hardcore/core.



hershel_layton said:
Am I the only one who thinks Samsung's VR can potentially beat Sony's?

Think about it. One hundred dollars. All you need is one of the more recent phones(and most likely the next generation, as leaks show sizes will be similar). Considering you most likely have a phone, a lot of people wouldn't mind buying it, even if they use it once every few days.

 

Lol no, that vr is weak as hell.