By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
the-pi-guy said:


potato_hamster said: 

So you decided to move the goalpost and focus on wireless VR. That's a non-starter. There's an even more niche market for Wireless VR devices than there are for VR devices.

That's because you asked if it was strange that Oculus released 2 stand alone headsets in a row.  I said no, because it's the easiest way to do wireless VR.  

Anyone who is interested in VR is interested in wireless VR, as it is less restricting.  So no, it's not more niche.  

potato_hamster said: 

I never said that VR is three companies competing with each other. I said there are three main competitors. Sony, HTC, and Oculus make up the vast majoriity of VR headset purchases. Let's not pick nits.

I was pointing out that Sony, HTC and Oculus are not competing with each other the same way Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony are.  

potato_hamster said: 

You're comparing old hardware to old hardware when you say (paraphrasing) "In 10 years time, they can probably make a better VR headset for $50". It sounds to me like you're talking about the technology and pricing of 10 years from now, not today. There might be tons of other cheaper ways to emulate PS1 games, but that doesn't mean that 10 years from now the latest and greatest technology of that era is going to be cheaper to be than the latest and greatest technology of this one. There's no reason to expect the Oculus Rift 3 of 2028 is going to cost less than $200 on release, for example. If the prices aren't going down, then the devices aren't getting cheaper, are they?

Except that it isn't what I mean in at all.  I'm talking about something that's roughly the same spec as right now.  

I'm talking about price drops with PSVR.  I'm not saying that PSVR 2 will be released cheaper, I'm saying PSVR could remain on the market and be a low cost option.  

potato_hamster said: 

If there are already headsets that cost $150 and beat the Vive, then VR has even less of an excuse for why it is not succeeding, and it means the VR industry as a whole is in much more dire shape than even I imagined.

Again there are plenty of reasons why things don't sell.  

Marketing, software are big ones that are holding VR back.  

It still makes absolutely no sense. Two different wireless VR headsets are necessary because one of them is the "easiest way to do wireless VR". If you say so. And Wireless VR isn't more niche than VR? That's like saying supercars aren't niche because Ford Fiesta ST owners would also like to own a Ferrari despite their inability or unwillingness to buy one.

Sony HTC and Oculus aren't competing against each other directly? Really? So do you think a PSVR owner is just as likely to buy an HTC Vive as someone who doesn't own a PSVR? If you don't, then how are they not competing against each other directly? This reeks of the "Nintendo isn't competing against Sony and Microsoft" arguments that are equally nonsensical.

... you honestly think the PSVR is going to be on the market 10 years from now and with revisions and technological advancements, could cost $50 at that time? Well I can assure you there's about as likely chance of that happening as KBG is of getting his Nintendo Switch that makes phone calls.

You're right, there are plenty of reasons why things don't sell, but devices that apparently have swaths of people waiting to jump in and buy when the price is right don't have issues selling, especially ones that apparently everyone wants to buy upon trying for the first time. It makes absolutely no sense to argue that marketing is a problem when two of the biggest players in VR are Sony and fucking Facebook,with the support of one of the biggest cell phone manufacturers in the world that has given away millions of VR devices for free.