Carzy Zarx’s PC Gaming Emporium - Catch Up on All the Latest PC Gaming Related News

[JEMC]

Chazore said:
Good read on the whole price tag talk of the OR and VR in general.

http://www.pcgamer.com/the-oculus-rift-price-hurts-now-but-ultimately-wont-matter/

I especially loved reading the part where the author talks about such tech that also started out expensive and got cheaper and more widespread over with time and I can totally agree with that, years ago I thought custom rigs were only meant for the gods who earned thousands, now I have my 2nd build already and grabbing a G-sync monitor this month.

I doubt this kind of article will ever make it on the front page OF VGC though, I can see this site being very geared against it and more for PSVR, I imagine Vive is being set up for the same kind of fall as OR. I don't care much for VR and won't until at least the 2nd and 3rd gens but as things are the bias is only going towards one direction.

http://www.pcgamer.com/the-oculus-rift-price-hurts-now-but-ultimately-wont-matter/

I don't fully agree with the article.

I agree when he says that VR headsets need to be good, even if high priced becaue otherwise it may hold VR for another 10 or 15 years like it has happened in the past.

But I disagree with the examples he gives of high priced products that succeed. An iPhone still cost as much today as when it launched (going against his defense that prices start high but then go down) and, if we talk about smartphones in general, they had success first because they were a status symbol and then because it could replace other devices. TVs and monitors going for LCD panels and HD resolutions are the result of the needs of the consumers, ie: bigger and better screens and image quality and the 1TB HDD was a business and then mainstream necessity because we all run out of storage. VR is nothing of said things.

VR is, strictly speaking, only useful for some limited business activities and army training. Those segments will gladly pay $600 for a good VR headset, but their activities don' translate well if at all into mainstream consumers.

In the article it is mentioned that Palmer Luckey chosed to optimize quality over cost. That's definitely not a bad thing if you go after the professional market, but if you want to go mainstream you have to balance quality AND cost. And if they want to succeed, they'll have to make that balance sooner rather than later because if they don't do it, someone else will.

There's a reason why professional monitors cost twice what the consumer versions do, and no one complains about it.