there's no way the Switch would work as a VR screen. First off, it's going to be way too heavy to be comfortable. It's likely going to be too low res, and it doesn't have any form of positional tracking.

The black frame around the screen is obviously because VR.

The idea of VR is good..... but software sells hardware. If Nintendo has time to make games for the Switch and VR then sure. If not then............ 

Seriously? I attend IUPUI, it's on my bio. The school of informatics and computing. I just played Layers of fear on Friday with the VR update, the last day for the semester. I've also played Batman Arkham VR, The London Heist, The Climb, The Lab, and numerous other games. It just isn't ready. It's novel at best and vomit enducing. PSVR Sales slumped greatly and projections couldn't have been any more wrong. It was projected to do 2.6 million and it hasn't even broken the 1 million mark yet. It's not a good sign in any field. They're terrible. If Nintendo said they've sold out of Wii Us and they only shipped 2 of them, is that a good thing? I don't think so, it's the same with PSVR. They may have sold out in some areas, they're stacked high in Indiana, but that doesn't mean it's selling well.

PSVR's sales are an issue of the product, not the current viability of the tech. I always knew PSVR wouldn't do well. $400 is way too expensive for a mass market accessory with a tiny software landscape.

I honestly don't think the tech is ready to be something that everyone wants to use on a regular basis. It is very frustrating to get up and running,  the software is one and done from my experience, there's a bad psynergy between the device and the majority of gamers. The technology is impressive, I was pleasantly surprised by Batman and The London Heist. I think the price wasn't a huge factor. People will pay for quality and desire. It had quality but nobody really had a need or desire for it. At this point, it's even more gimmicky than the Wii And they need to find a way to make you look less ridiculous while playing. 

Alright I doubt this would end in anything but endless texting

To keep it short, bookmarked this to proove you wrong next year ;)

And again, if sony cant produce more the sales arnt low. THis is just incredible stupid thinking. Even if 100 Mio people want to buy a PSVR, it would still just have sold 800k because Sony hadnt made more. They have problems in the production of the 1080p120hz full RGB Oled Panel.

The 2,6 Mio expectation wasnt even made by Sony LMAO: Andy random company just "predicted" a high number to get some press. You can see how inaccurate they were so not really a good source.

Its like if I would predict the Switch will sell 10 Milion in its launch month but Nintendo would just be able to manufacture 3 mio and sell all those. Would that be proove the switch failed?

Alright then here is my prediction: Nintendo will sell 10 mio Switchs in march 2017. 

Lets see if the switch is a failed product thats not ready for the consumer market in april ;)

Actually is cheaper then a new TV (like 4k TV). And its better. Shouldnt be a big issue.

As soon sony get those things in stock and more and more people are able to test it, it will do very well. Sure, it wont outsell the Ps4, but im sure we will have 5-10 Mio at the end of 2017. And thats good numbers for brand new tech,

The first television sold ALOT less in the beginning. And now a days everybody has one.

The Switch doesn't have to be strapped to your head, it could be attached to your belt or worn like a man-bag and still be more wireless than other offerings.

The Switch screen doesn't have to be the screen(s) used in the VR headset.

A VR addon that included a VR headset and a second Switch would be more powerful than PS4VR and it would have Nintendo software.

No, people won't pay for quality. People will pay for accessibility. $400 is way to high. That's obvious from how PSVR has done. Like I said, the software is a problem, too. Most of VR's software is experimental demo-tier stuff. Nintendo would tackle both issues. $400 is too much for an accessory like this to reach the mass market, but $50-$100 wouldn't be. Nintendo would bring compelling and complete software meant to sell the experience and keep them coming indefinitely, which is something VR needs desperately.

No one's buying a $400 device on a $300 console with $100 accessories to play a small handful of neat VR demos with a few good random IP no one's ever heard of here and there. They absolutely would pay $99 on a $250 console to play a steady line up of compelling VR exclusives from recognizable IP. Niche vs. the mass market. It doesn't matter if it's inferior and it doesn't matter if it's "gimmicky." It matters if people will buy it, and for only $99 and a promise that recognizable franchises like Star Fox, Metroid Prime, Mario Kart, F-Zero, Pilot Wings, Excitebike, Waverace, and Punch Out would appear with VR support, as well as something new in the vein of Wii Sports to bundle in with the hardware, they absolutely would.

The mass market doesn't care about having the highest quality product, and they never will. They only care about "good enough." For only $99 with all the software I just mentioned on top of all the third party support they'd garner from being the first to make VR an actually lucrative mass market buisness venture, Switch VR would be more than good enough. The cheaper something is, the less it has to do to impress you.