PS4Pro isn't a different product to support than PS4, so it would be only supporting 2 systems (since Vita isn't supported anyway), they done decent enough with 3 products with PSP, PS3 and initial Move launch. So with two systems they could support, only time will tell.

Or perhaps the cost of production will take a little longer to drop so they saw no reason to ramp up production. But I agree with you that they should/could have produced more

Where are you? It's sold out in the US, the UK, Japan, and Germany. The simple fact of the matter is that Sony produced a certain number of units for launch, and it did not end up being enough. Demand is currently higher than supply and yet people are in here claiming doom? It's just silly.

I do agree that it's a niche technology though.

Ooor... maybe...

1. It's hard to make a proper sales projection for a technology new to the market in the long term. Initial demand might be looking high, but there is no indicator of how the particular product will fare in the future.

Which brings us to..

2. Sony is a not a non-profit-organisation. They re trying to do businees and not go bankrupt in the process. Therefore they look for the best route to sell the product <b>long term</b> wise, not overproducing, not underproducing, being well aware that demand initially won't be satisfied, but also taking small risk of sitting on stockpiles (storage costs) of unsold units, disassembling of production lines/facilities...

People who say Sony should make PSVR compatible to PC should stop being smartasses. It would neither be good for company nor the consumer market.

I do agree with you on both. Just that it's possible that they misread a little the demand. But sure they are on the saffer route.

1.  As I said: Their market research really sucks. You just agreed with me.

2. I agree and they failed to do it right.

I think that Sony could have made so much more out of PSVR. Release a MUST-HAVE AAA game this holiday season for it.
Something like the new God of War or whatever. Big budget, Big franchise, big marketing and make it THE VR game everyone wants to play and make it an exclusive.

Ramp up production, bundle it with the Pro and just market it like you would really care about it.

Sony didn't do anything with it. In fact I think they gave Rift / Vive and Xbox a chance to not fight an uphill battle against them when it comes to VR.

1. He doesn't agree with you... his analysis is that although initial demand is higher than supply (we don't know by how much, we had similar outrcries for PS4 release as well, and they were always marginally lower on output against demand so marginal scarcity was in place) but long term it would be just right to meet demand at the output level they have decided.

Yes they could do all of it, the question is, would it pay out? No way to know. They are sold out, so the AAA wouldn't be able to sell more boxes, and perhaps the production couldn't be ramped up so early.

A bundle of the game and the two HW for 800 would be very very niche.

The overall market response to VR has been soft (this is not exclusive to PSVR), indicating the primary, if not only buyers have been early tech adopters.

The biggest hurdle as a consumer device is the prohibitive price. $400 plus the PS4 Camera and a pair of Move controllers pulls the price up to $550 for the full experience. But everyone knew this was the cost month ago, so this is no surprise although it puts PSVR on par with a decent 4K HDTV for the gamer who hasn't already converted to 4K, which incidentally, Sony is pushing as the reason to buy a PS4P.

Realistically, PSVR pairs better with the PS4Pro, so those who are really sold on the PSVR experience will want to do that upgrade first, and these customers are looking at closer to a $1,000 initial investment in the tech ($400 PS4P, $400 PSVR, camera, Move).

Existing PS4 owners could just drop $400 on the headset, play existing games and the new demos with the headset rather than on a new flat screen, but it would be interesting to see which percentage of current buyers fall into this category as opposed to the former. It would depend upon consumer priorities. Most would prefer a PS4P/4K HDTV set up, which I'm sure some enthusiastic VR pundits will argue, but I'm standing pretty firm on that assertion until I see data that indicates otherwise.

As someone who had a bit more than a casual interest in PSVR, I have not read about or heard of any current game or application that made me stand up and say "I will buy that today." I had no intention of buying any other VR system and have been fairly immune to the VR hype and simply see it as a potential natural progression of visual media. Or it may just become history's next Kinect, only a lot more expensive.

Personally, I will end up buying a PS4Pro before buying PSVR and I'm in no rush to do either due to a lack of current compelling reasons to do so.

The tech itself is not the killer app. That's like saying the PS3 was a killer app due to the much touted tech back when it was released, yet the market made a strong statement of "where are the games that take advantage of this hardware that justify the price" and withheld sales. Opinions vary, but I'm seeing a similar response to PSVR.

When the games are released that justify the current price, there will be conversion, but I see it as a more gradual process unless SCE releases an app that is such a game changing killer app that people will "get a second job" to pay for all the hardware required to play it.

It's currently available at $399 MSRP on Amazon. I've yet to see piles of them sitting unbought at retail, but my guess is that it's a lower order item compared to say the PS4P. 

As for Sony shifting focus to selling headsets as opposed to selling the Playstation brand, I'm not sure I'd agree with that. Goldman Sachs had an initial BoM of the PSVR set at about $350, meaning Sony may actually be losing money on each unit sold, which implies they made the hardware as cheaply as they could with existing supply lines and available tech without making any serious design/spec compromises (co-processing unit). 

Sony decides to start losing money by selling headsets to a competing market and the risk they run is exposing the inferiority of their product to the VR competition in a head to head comparison.

Consumers can let that go if they are already part of the PS4 consumer base, or they simply prefer gaming through the Playstation environment, but if Sony starts competing directly with say Oculus, then there are one of two ways to get consumers to purchase potentially inferior tech (based upon specs): either sell it for significantly less than the competition as a poor man's option (SCE may already be losing money on headsets) or sell it along with apps that were previously only available to their PS4/Playstation audience. In the case of the later, the legitimate question becomes "then why do I need to buy a PS4?"

1. There's no precident for a console VR launch. Hell, there's barely any for a consumer VR launch of any time. They had very little information with which to decide how to go forward.

2. I'm sure they could have made 5 million units, spent 10's of millions on a big AAA game, and advertised the crap out of PSVR. But it would have failed if they did.

The expertise does not yet exists to be able to confidently say that anyone could even make a must have AAA VR game. The tech is just too new, and developers are still learning how to use it. Beyond that, it takes years to make AAA games and they would have pissed off fans of whatever series they used to try and push PSVR.

Instead, they made what they thought would be enough units, advertised it in accordance with how many units they would have available, and spent money on making several smaller games for people with different tastes.

Sony has said over, and over again that VR is going to be a slow burn. Maybe people should start listening.