YOur just gona keep on going, right? Fine. Did I ever said it wont have? No I keep talking about the start, there wont be any in the begining and by then when the installbase reaches a desent number on pc's, it wont matter, consoles will have over triple the installbase, so there will be way more big exclusives in the future on consoles. Just like there are now, just like there has always been in the past, since gaming ever started and it will cntinu to be like that.

Think of it as how great a lexus is, everyone would like one, but most people cant afford it so they buy toyota. How many more toyotas are sonld than lexus? or hondas than acuras? or audi than larboghinys? note that I use car modles that are owned by the same company so they have similar builds.

This other application argument is nonsense. most people who have high end rigs for like video editing or work related stuff, dont use that for gaming. Most people who see some great use in studying, work practice or whatever and buy a $2000 pc + VR will probably not use it for games. So its pointless for game developers.

YOu want to keep going?.

1) You imply either way with the way you talk about it. I don't know why you seem to think a single generation of a console can somehow dawrf a number that has been growing for decades, but hey that's what we're going to go with what you infer towards. Your version of "big exclusives" seems to differ greatly from mine.

2) PC isn't owned by someone or a company though, big difference and yet it can have it's own form of "big exclusives", burt you'll no doubt bend the rules of what an exclusive is or some bullshit "true exclusive" (come on that dance is really old by now).

3) It's not nonsense, you just refuse to acknowledge that VR will serve other purposes other than gaming and PC is that platform to allow for that the PS4 simply won't, it;s like you expect the air force to strictly buy PS4's to do VR training instead of using the computers they have at base that are specifically designed for their training purposes or a friggin hospital, whenw as the last time you went to a hospital where reception or doctors used a console to do their work?. Last time I ever heard of a console ever being used in a big way was years ago with last gen where scientists hooked up a load of PS3's to do all sorts of data crunching and even then they were used for a limited time since they are no longer being used en mass.

4) I know plenty of people who use video editing rigs for their own gaming purposes, especially artists I follow around the world, but I guess they don't exist or we'll pull some bullshit "yeah but they are the minority so there!", still doesn't stop the fact that people canbuild high end rigs or medium ones to do what they want and also use VR if they wanted. VR isn't only meant for gaming and never will be because there have been countless times where we've invented something for a single use, only for time to turn said invention to serve multiple purposes, the same will happen with VR like it or not and it's going to happen with the platform that makes your games, that makes your very console, that makes virtually anything these days through design.

You can keep this going all day but it's still going to go to the same tune.

1) I wont deny it might sound like that. Why do I think A single generation will beat it, cuz it always does. After a gen ends, there are technically millions of pc's out there that are still usefull for gaming and people just started buying the new gen of consoles, but every gen consoles outsell it by a land slide. Could next gen be the one that changes this, maybe, but history say that its not going to happen.

2) No I will never doubt that it can have it, That was never the argument. The argument is that consoles have more, always had.

3) Did you read what I wrote? I said that pcs have that use and more, but wwhat does it ave to do with gaming? Will I buy a $2000 product intended for gaming and start using it for medical purpouses? or dre flying? So all thouse uses do nothing for gaming. So why would I not buy a $600 product then that it is used for gaming,? the sole purpose I want it for. So no, because people ave it for thouse uses, does not mean devs will makes for it.

4) I should have counted 3 nd 4 together, bu seriously, do you read at all? I said most people dont and that will still be what devs look at. And I will againg redirect you to the topic at hand, wich platform will have more suport? Op dint specify games to be the support, but I im willing to bet that is what he meant, also willing to bet that is what most of us on this thread are assuming and want in the future.

Yea your right, its getting boring going around in circles with you so I will quick reply at the bold before I go to work.

You keep spining this. I keep saying at the beginin devs will not risk pc exclusivity. There will be tons of games going to the pc big games and small games, but most of thouse games if not all, will be playable on the ps4. While ps4 will have some games that will come exclusivly to ps4 because they have exclusive studios. 

That is truly my only point here. Accept it or not, I have to go.

1), why make it sound like that then?. A single generation doesn't single handedly beat PC the way you think it does. I don't know why you are thinking it;s logical to compare numbers of a new gen to an overall number and then saying it "ousells" the bigger number without throwing in all the PC's built and bought, it's like making up numbers to suit how a gen somehow always wins, always beats PC's and is always better.

2)And again your version of exclusives and mine differe greatly, only mine aren't restrivice by made up rules and I go be definition of exclusives, which is to say the list that spans on since the 80's, of course to you they probably won't count as big exclusives because somehow you say so and that somehow becomes law and fact despite evidence and others claiming differently.

3)The more people that adopt VR for multuiple purposes can also add to the gaming side, just like those who buy a car strictly for racing but can also have another car or even use the same car for general transportation. The same could be said for VR equipment where an artist can use it for artistic purposes but at the end of a hard days worth they could also use it for gaming as well, on a console you don't really do that sort of thing. Devs will make games for PC and VR at the end of the day.

Do you read at all?, because so far we're going back in circles to a point where you're trying to harp the same point over and over while refusing anything thrown your way, same with the other guy who talked of PC advantages. All you are claiming here is that PC will get next to no support ever at all while PS4 will get it all and more despite everything that has transpired through history when it comes to consoles, gens and computers.

Shall we go for another round, keep this going till 1 in the morning? because this will keep going until you just accept the differences (mirror arguing doesn't work and is a cheap cop-out before you throw what I said back at me, it just proves my point) and history.

"You seem to forget that within the PC gaming spectrum, there are multiple types of PC gamers"

No, i did not. I pointed out that High End PCs are not the rule.

But you seem to think they are in order to call the platform users the "minority" despite the different numbers of users who have different builds.

"And yet you haven't thought to have given VR time to grow along with taking notice that PC has plenty of different communities to mod or create their own games, "

How many OR DKs are out there? I think the number is 300k. But all we have are a bunch of unimpressive... games. At least technicalwise. Also not very innovative. 99% of them in the weird department, demos, concepts, not full grown games.

Think the number all you want but it's not going to make it the right number. "unimpressive" games to you but to others it can be impressive.

Out of context. Again. First of all is said TECHNICAL WISE! As in not impossible to handle by PS4+PSVR. Secondly*

"Vive has already sold it's April pre-orders and May is up next: http://bgr.com/2016/03/01/htc-vive-vr-sold-out/."

Those reports are meaningless without context. The april stock is depleted. That was days ago. Since then nothing has changed. May is still up.

Still means that people out there are buying expensive tech.

Yes, there are certainly some people who buy expensive tech. There also people who bought OLED TVs when prices where  in the five digits zone. And i bet many of those Vive buyers are non-private (military, corporations, scientific institutions). E.g. Audi has shown high interest in VR. 

http://www.roadtovr.com/audi-virtual-reality-car-showroom-htc-vive-pre-oculus-rift-cv1/

"People" with large budgets, to whom 600-1000 WC (Whatever Currency) even multiplied times a hundred are a drop of change in the charity box.

"with PSVR you only have Sony or a few sel;ected studios that have to specifically make VR games to a system with definited and set parameters."

Only Sony? Or? Didn't you notice many of the games coming to OR and Vive will also be available on PSVR? Now guess who has the most full grown games. Protip: It's not the most expensive one. What do you mean by selected? Anybody who fulfills the requirements can develop a game for PSVR. Just like any indie game can make it's way to the PS Store. Like i said, most PC VR games we've seen are not out of PS VRs range. Prbly going to be like the current state of indie and AAA/AA games we have. Those be of worth will be made available on PSVR. And defined/set parameterers aren't a disadvantage. 

You seem to have the idea that the closed platform will have the most games despite history telling the same story each time. YOu talk of "home grown" but decide to exclude the fact that devs that make games for PC are home grown ebcause the platform itself isn't owned by a company but those willing to make games only for the platform do exist. a definited set can be a disadvantage like it or not.

Where did i imply anywhere PS VR will have the most games? It certainly will have some of the most significant VR games. Exclusive or non-exclusive. Like EVE Valkyrie, Adrift, The Assembly, Rigs... DOA X3. You know, games with names. I talked of "home grown"? I talked of "full grown" thats for sure. I did imply having the most isn't a important factor though. There is also quality, and the quality of quantity.

Are you excluding the fact that many of those "home grown" come to consoles? Not just a few but a very lot. And a very lot are forgettable. Unimportant. Of low quality. May i say... now hold on to you chair... sho..sho..shovelware.

I'm fully aware of adventages and disadventages. But you seem to have a very narrow alley view. You should teach yourself a lesson in history of video games.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_video_game_crash_of_1983#Causes_and_factors

I don't expect you to see the overlap. But i don't want to write endlessly either.

There is also this little fallacy you and others have created. Oculus Rift and Vive don't share the same library. Well, for the most part they prbly do. But there are already quite a few exceptions. Its not like the thread title suggests ... PC vs PS4. It's more like PSVR vs Oculus Rift vs HTC Vive vs ...

"this little fallacy you and others have created", oh like you haven't been doing that yourself for months on end?. End of the day the library of the various forms of PC vr will still be on PC, just like how I have my Steam, Blizzard, EA libraries on my PC via different clients, GoG if I count GoG Galaxy.

Yes, and there will be of course a library of PS VR exclusives. One game with the significance of 10 concept demos. Those are not words ment to degrade. It is a fact.

*Many of those unimpressive "games" for the Rift or Vive are nothing more then experimental, demonstrational, not full grown projects. And those digital distribution platforms are digital distribution platforms. They are free and don't cost large sums of money.

For example there won't be a Hover Junkers, Fantastic Contraption, Tilt Brush, Budget Cuts on the Rift. Or Edge of Nowhere, Lucky's Tail, Dragon Front, The Climb on HTCs Vive. Or Rigs, (Winter, Spring, Fall Lesson) Summer Lessons, Dreams, AceCombat7, London Heist on Vive or Rift. It is to be considered that we haven't goten any of those three HMDs yet. And that there might be changes of the exclusive status. At least regarding to the PC VR games. 

so wer'e doing an old school VGC style list war now?. Those typically never end well and never bring anything good other than "oh yeah" moments.

Yes and no.

No. I was pointing out that there is no single PC VR entity. All of the three mentioned HMDs will share a common library and each of them will have an exclusive library. It's not going to be like with Kinect where no other motion control devices outside the Xboxverse shared a large part of that little excursion. The support for each of those three VR HMDs will differ from one another. To what extent is to be seen. But by the list i've posted we can see PS VR has already established quite a number of exclusives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_VR

Yes. Are you dismissing the evidence of how well supported PS VR is in a thread where it's discussed how the hippest VR headsets will fare and where their supportive advantages are pitted against each other?

Anything else? Indeed. By the time hardware demanding games like Star Citizen can be played on PC via VR HMD... the next iteration of consoles will be knocking on the door. /looking at title.

"knocking on the door", sounds like someone is being a bit pretentious.

Sounds like someone can't handle the ordinary run of things. In about 3-4 years there will be another Playstation Console. Given that Sony wants to straighten out their expenditures it's highly likely PS VR will be compatible to a PS5. And a PS5 will have more Ooomph than a PS4. Taking time into account for PC VR is legit, but not for PS VR?