Zoombael said:
No, just no. As the thread title suggests, non-gaming experiences will have their place on VR. It is already happening, however focus will be on gaming first. There is no point bringing up the price aspect without consideration of value. People pay multiple times more for traveling to some foreign country for a very limited time period.
"It's too little too late for this in my eyes, because they're too deep in the PS4 game machine hype - it's no PS2 or reveal-era XBO, where multimedia was a selling point" How erroneous. Like Sony was "just lucky"; the Playstation (PS) brand has nothing to do with it and was unbeknownst to the world; there is no such thing as AIDA ... etc etc
"more viable standalone options like Samsung's VR* or Google Cardboard." Lol, pardon me? More viable? Are you even aware of the differences? You should inform yourself a whole lot better before making such ridiculous statements and embarrass yourself. But oh well, many people believe VR equals VR, as a 40" screen is just the same as a 55" ... only a bit smaler. And gaming on a smartphone is as much phun as on a dedicated gaming system.
"and the viability of using a more mobile VR headset vs a stationary one." Aw man, the pain. |
Guys I found the VR fanboy!
Guess how many consumers care about anything you just said. They see a huge difference in price and viability and they're going that way whether you feel that's right or not. Look at TVs. You could buy a Sony 3D TV for way too much money in 2010 or so, or buy any other TV for way less. You could buy the objectively superior smartphone in the Xperia Z line or you could get a phone that isn't a pain in the ass to find on every carrier Stateside. Guess what phone I'm typing on, by the way. This is Sony's model and it always has been. They make, objectively, the best products of every market they jump into, but these come at some huge cost - be it price or viability. It's no coincidence, or luck if you want to put it that way, that their greatest successes as a company were by far the most consumer friendly. And it's no coincidence that their biggest failures were by far the least. If I were to buy a VR device it'd be PSVR because I'm positive it has the most to offer for a first gen VR device, but consumers don't care all that much about an add-on device that requires a dedicated gaming system first. Again, you can argue this all you want, but this is fact. Talk to any consumer outside of our niche and he/she will tell you that they'd much prefer something like Google Cardboard that's attached a device they already own over going in on something new, even if the experience is better (and we won't know how much better it is until we see the game lineup, which WILL disappoint and/or die off in a year knowing how bad Sony is at non-core devices). And the cost does matter, even if you want to set up a poor one-sentence counterargument using vacations of all things as a comparison point.
I'll try not to go too in-depth against your holier-than-thou approach to the rest of my comment since it's clear you're not one to look outside of your own perspective, so in a nutshell: The PS4 isn't selling as a multimedia device, it's selling as a game platform. I have no clue why you're comparing that to naysayers arguing "luck," or why you disagree since that's all you said. Saying "you're wrong" doesn't really make you convincing when all you say is that, bud. The viable comment I already somewhat addressed because viability is more than just which is better, because, yknow, viable isn't a synonym for better. VR is going to be, for the large majority of consumers, a fad. Just like fitbits, just like 3DTV, et alia res - and these consumers are far more likely to pay $100 on a fad that they can plug into their phone and try a couple times as compared to at least double that and at most (going by Sony's claims on price) eight times that. And a quick aside, these consumers aren't gonna pick up VR for genre-changing games or games in general, that's pretty much like arguing that people buy phones to play games and that's why phones are inferior to consoles. That's just ridiculous and you're setting your arguments up very poorly when you go this route. I won't even go further and point out that a good chunk of Wii buyers didn't buy the GAME console for good games, just showing how off-base you are overall for consumer mentality.
Anyway I'm starting to digress a bit. If you want to convince anybody that PSVR is the best option overall, you need more than what effectively comes down to poor excuses for strawman responses when somebody says something that you disagree with.
You should check out my YouTube channel, The Golden Bolt! I review all types of video games, both classic and modern, and I also give short flyover reviews of the free games each month on PlayStation Plus to tell you if they're worth downloading. After all, the games may be free, but your time is valuable!
