JRPGfan said:
HoloDust said:
No idea what you're babbling about. It is GBA/DS situation - having one established platform, while trying something new. MK VR exists, it's in arcades for years now, and if you can't imagine Zelda in VR, well...I guess you either never tried VR or you lack imagination. Nintendo is probably only one who can bring VR to mainstream - as much as Quest managed to do that somewhat, META doesn't have 1st party must have games (although there's plenty of great games on Quest) that will make people go out and buy VR console - and Mario and Zelda are just that. |
Nintendo would have a situation like the PSVR where it doesn't go on to sell all that much.
Like PSVR2 is currently at like 2,5m or something small like that.
I don't see why nintendo would have more success with it, than others, esp if its a stand alone, released along sides their Switch. |
Because Quest 2 sold around 20 million - without Mario and Zelda. I see folks massively keep underestimating how much reasonably priced VR headset with descent enough specs, that is (and this is THE key feature) standalone can succeed and Quest 2 proved it.
And Nintendo can just put SW2 SoC (which is somewhat above Quest 3's SoC) inside reasonably priced VR headset with descent enough specs and have something that is new Wii.
