Well if Microsoft can change and flip their statement/PR Marketing, why would i cannot update or edit the thread based on what my data collection about Phil Spencer vision and statement on the past.  LOL 

It's funny how every Microsoft PR statement always ended up in damage control Xbox brand and their own Vision. 

Then you are disagreeing with Phil. Phil just phobia with isolated and the natural close mounted headset that separate from people around him, not because of cord or  wired problem. 

My updated's is just natural way on adding new info that related to OP, rather than making a new thread , If i found any new  info about his past vision and contradicted with his own statement it can be a good topic. 

And No they are not planning anything except by following others people and others company step. They just observing which will make a good profit, they think VR is not good they will just wait and see, the same thing with CLoud where Sony took it first and make it mainstream then they see it as opportunity then they follow Sony. Hell even they want to copied Sony single player driven games like Uncharted and God of War by acquiring Ninja Theory LOL. In the past they are copying Sony to make simulation racing like Gran Turismo and ended up with Forza. 

I am not saying it's bad to copying other company or waiting to be profitable or mainstream, it's just how he respond and damage controlling is bad, and shows that he is a pure PR guy that when making a statement is not really a trusted and honest.  

Hmmm NO LOL 

Plans can change and always change , but only Microsoft PR damaging that always stay the same from past until present. 

Is a big deal because Phil did the same thing on the past, making an upsie and suddenly bam , next day he made a drastically opinion and their fans suddenly agree with him

He is the head of Xbox, every words he said represent Xbox vision and Xbox Policy. It's might be not official but every words he spoke to Journalist are full of responsibility. 

I am not disagreeing with weather plan can change or not, it's not the topic we discussing here.

Me personal vendetta ??? LOL

Did He ever said they are looking and did a marketing research  for VR in 2016 or  it's just pure short policy to add Oculus peripheral to Xbox One?  because what i just see is a non consistency in his messages. As Xbox head he should not talked about what he dislike or like, because it will ended back fired him. It will be just simple if he just said " for now we have less demand on VR " without adding his own opinion. 

I bet latter in the future he will said " VR is comunal and great way to play ". then bam all of the fans will said " I am agree with him". Then suddenly people like you will said again, " That does not change the fact that plans change all the time for a company and/or person."

LMAO

Oculus Quest is cordless and portable for $399. Console built into headset. Like with other gaming devices, it's not quite as powerful as the competition but many  say the portability make it the best choice. It can also 'dock' to a PC to play more demanding games.

Copying Nintendo is probably the best way to go but I don't understand why they put the console in the headset. If they kept them separate, they'd have a handheld, home console and portable VR in one system for ~$399.

Actually they promised VR support on Xbox One X, and sold units and pre-orders on that lie.
Then they stopped talking about, and lateron admited it wasnt comeing after all.

Then it was the Hololense stuff..... which was obviously never ment for home usage (but by professionals and hospitals ect), and it was marketed with Minecraft, something it ll likely never be used for by anyone that ll ever own one (their like 15,000$ right?). Ontop of that, the show-case of minecraft running on it was "faked", and the actual experiance wasnt as good as what was showed (this was proved).  You had Xbox fans, going "who cares about VR, we re soon gonna get AR!"  (look how that turned out)

Then they lateron dropped the hololense stuff.

They also announce that, they where sad the couldnt give VR with the xbox One, and that the Scarlet (next xbox) would have VR, dont worry.

Now you have him going "well we dont like how it isolates players, we view our box as a communal experiance".


MS had a partner ship with occulus(?), and with marketing slides, you could see it along side a xbox.
I know this isnt their own product, but surely that counts as a "announcement".

MS have backtracked and changed the story alot, with VR.

@Marth
You cant honestly take Phil at his word, hes been caught too many times, in lies or backtracking on statements, changeing his story from one day to the next. If someone here calls him out on it, you shouldnt really call it a vendatta, or go on the defense force against it.

Every single time, some PR guy or Head of console, gets caught doing something like this, they should be called out for their BS.
Esp, when its so clear that this is what that is.

Its a lame excuse ( communal gameing ), and everyone knows it.

I don't think you're "making yourself much favor"

I don't think you've even understood what I was trying to say. Comparing value of these two things, one a service and the other a peripheral, is a total different thing when you look at the value towards the consumer. I just explained that. Besides, last number we got was 4.2 million in march as I recall. If it achieved 5 million, which I don't think is a good number anyway, it's still not an indication that it is moving hardware as the one cannot be played without the other. It's at less than 5% of the installbase. Lastly, the value you describe in your last sentence is not true. It's a cheaper less than ideal VR experience, one you can definitely get way better somewhere else.

Correcting my english certainly will do more favor to you right?

If Gamepass value is that much higher then it should have much more impact both for HW sales and total subs right? If I were to do the same type of comparison as you are pushing here I would say that PS+ is much more value than Gamepass since it allow you to play online, give you games for free and sold 40M+. It is more value than WiiU and perhaps even X1.

Well sorry, I didn't mean that kind of disrespect.

Moving on. Gamepass is a much different proposition because of the value it has towards the consumer, I already told you how less restrictive it is and much much lower price barrier. That is just the nature of a sub service and it is important to look at it from a consumers perspective. If you had compared PS+ rather, that would have been a much better comparison with Gamepass as they are both sub services. You could argue that Gamepass is cheaper and has more recent games but that is outside of the discussion of comparing PSVR or WiiU or whatever lmao.