We heard the same crap about 3D TV with the vendors and fans of 3D TV spruiking the same crap, the reality is VR (in its current form and current content) is not appealing to the majority beyond a brief gimmick. Unless MS or Nintendo release something significantly different/improved I can't see that changing, the buy in cost vs the benefit just isn't their and doesn't look like it will be their this gen of technology.

Oooohh... "the majority of people". Is that a big number? How many people are we talking about?

Oh, three people... you and your two friends. That seems to be a very representative group and not anecdotal at all!

http://www.alistdaily.com/digital/study-89-percent-of-vr-buyers-are-satisfied-with-their-purchase/

According to the study by research firm Magid, 89 percent of VR purchasers indicated they were “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with the product, with a majority naming the latter. In fact, 81 percent of those who purchased VR devices indicate a willingness to recommend to friends or family. Eighty-five percent of VR purchasers believed their device was a good value, while 90 percent rated their device as “easy” or “very easy” to use.

https://artillry.co/2017/09/12/psvr-and-vive-score-highest-on-vr-satisfaction-new-report/

Dumbed down? The only thing dumbed down is the graphic fidelity. Heck Polybius without VR is the dumbed down version as that game can really use 120fps at the speed its going. But sure, the market isn't large enough to risk long expensive projects on it, thus most if not all VR exclusive games are pretty short. Yet the ones shared with normal screen usage are not dumbed down, rather enhanced by playing in VR.

RE7 without VR is the dumbed down version since you can't peak through cracks in the door or out a window.
Until dawn wouldn't work outside VR, how would you shoot in two different directions which would both be off-screen.
The speed challenges in Eagle flight would be near impossible with a controller.
How would you weave through a hail of bullets in Superhot VR. It's not a dumbed down version, it's a different game.
Dirt Rally is much easier in VR, that's not because its dumbed down, simply because you have a far better sense of speed and situational awareness.

Ofcourse for all a better sense of situational awereness is highly beneficial. I have far less need of a map in VR. I would have gotten hopelessly lost in the solus project on a screen. In VR I'm surprised how easy I can find my way around and back.

Anyway I don't know what you and your friends have been playing. There are plenty of misses too, happens with the experimental nature of a new way to play games. The worst I've played are Loading human: Chapter 1, Super Stardust Ultra, virZoom Arcade and Neptune Flux. Lot of mediocre stuff too but the same is true for normal game releases.

Yeah, so we've established your orignial point is still wrong or at the very least utterly redundant, given we know they profit on the hardware.

What won't be the case on the PC side? The price would be the exact same. We're talking about a product that's already on sale at a set price point.

Are any of them made to play on PC? Considering we're talking strictly in hypotheticals here, I think you can make the leap there. It's an obvious one ,and certainly feasible. 

It has a price advantage in Europe and the UK over Occuls Rift, and is cheaper than the Hive by a significant amount. I would definitely call that a price advantage.

I'm not even sure why you're arguing these points, when the real question is simply is it worth their time and resources. Probably not, when they could be better used elsewhere.

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

What does he care how well the PCVR market is doing when his VR is selling gangbusters? Sony is mainly concerned about one thing, and that is their own business. Their business is slow because there isn't enough content because VR is struggling to appeal to the mass market. To appeal to the mass market VR needs to offer experiences that they can't get anywhere else and VR needs to be established as a mainstream medium. All this comes back to content. More content = more potential customers. Imagine if Netflix decides to produce all their new shows for VR. Suddenly the donsumer is there and VR is in everyone's awareness because there is now more content that people would actually like to see.

So why isn't there more content and why isn't Sony happy if their HMDs are selling so well? Because Sony doesn't make money through hardware, but software. More software means more bucks for them. It also brings more people into their eco system which is all they really want. So how do you get more content? You open your market to more content which will increase consumers, which will increase demand, which will increase content, which will increase the public image of VR, which will increase Sony's profits. And that's what they want.

Don't try to tell me they're concerned that other VR companies are not making enough money. They aren't complaining that they're making too much money, they're complaining that they're not making enough because the competitors aren't doing free marketing for them by having strong sales of their own.

IDC is a market research firm, so the 500k figure is an estimate, not hard data.

The validity of the estimate is doubtful because Sony's own announcement puts PS VR at ~1m LTD through June. Therefore IDC is estimating that half of Sony's sales happened during a slow quarter of the year.

How do you contradict yourself in the span of 3 sentences. You said their psvr is selling like gangbusters then you said their business is slow. I dont even.....

That was a rhetorical question. It obviously is not selling enough for Sony or else they wouldn't complain. If you read everything and not just the first 3 sentences you might get it from the context.

Considering PSVR already works on PC as is, why and what you change that would also make the PSVR would scale in price?

Let's see how much MS VR will sell.. and again it isn't my point is counterpoint to Vivister saying that if Sony wanted Oculus and Vive sell more they should also had released the PSVR on PC.

Exactly what games is the PSVR running on the PC.  Also when a company sell a device, do you think the price of the device is the hardware that makes up the device of the entire product chain that gets it to market.  Price is never just determined just by the components that are used to make the device.  From marketing, software and hardware to even QA and tech support.  All of those are cost that are using added to a product when it goes to market.

True it is Vivister point so we shall see in the next few months how things shake out with MS partner entry to the market.  So far the preview sound very promising but it will be the games that determine the worth of these new devices.

PSVR on PC run any game basically it also run videos...

Price is determined basically on two functions, how much the market is willing to pay and how much profit it will make. In the case of PSVR it wasn't being sold at a loss on the HW itself, so it didn't depend on sales of SW to pay for the loss if that is what you were trying to imply. And I surely know the difference between price, cost, value, etc.