The question is how did the PSVR do that? I don't really see a lot of revolutioning these days. Or does this revolution only apply to a tiny minority?
I wouldn't say it's a tiny minority, there are experiences that are totally different than what we had before. But from what I can see from previous post on the subject they don't attract you so for you it isn't revolutionary or even much different, that is fair, it is your POV and experience so it's valid for you. But it doesn't compare to 32x or CD since that was just a medium change (although sure the system as a whole having it on PS1 helped pushing boundaries like story telling and FMV).
A revolution is by definition something that replaces an existing institution and that affects everyone within a certain jurisdiction. It should also be quite a swift change, but let's not get technical here.
VR is neither replacing traditional gaming nor does it affect the majority of gamers, let alone everyone. So throwing hyperbole like this into the room does not help your point. Just because something is perceived inherently better by a select group of people doesn't make it a revolution. Betamax was perceived as inherently better than VHS by a select group of people and it didn't do shit and then died out. I'm not saying VR will die out, just trying to give some perspective.
VR still has to grow and will from now on always be a part beside traditional gaming but it won't replace it for a long long time. It might even never become mainstream, meaning the majority of gamers adopting it.
VR itself still has to evolve to become more appealing. The product it is right now is justifiably not the solution the majority of gamers accept. As shown by underwhelming sales.