Support NeoGAF

[ChronotriggerJM]

The headset itself and the accessories required.

What's in the headset that you think is driving up the costs so significantly? Consider that Apple can make an Iphone for around $200, and that includes screen, ram, processor, speakers, antennas, storage, etc etc etc.

Obviously Apple has economy of scale in it's advantage, but beyond that?

 

[Lasty95]

It'll cost what people are willing to pay for it.

I'd pay £349.99, and in the context of Rifr and Vive, that almost seems like a bargain.

 

[LightOfTruth]

I probably won't buy it at launch, but being optimistic, I'd expect $299 for the headset only, and the main sku being $349 for the headset+Move+camera. Both should come with a game though.

I'd have to agree with the posters suggesting that it can't be much more expensive than the console itself, which is why I'm also predicting a $400 ceiling.

 

[ChronotriggerJM]

Also consider that a ton of R&D resources for Oculus stem from them being a VR only company with ~200 staff members (I believe is what I've heard). They also need to create a store, and source materials from companies they don't have footholds in.

 

[ZehDon]

You are really giving the licensing fees from games sold too much credit. The install base will be too small to make up for any initial losses on the HW. They take in like $7 per game sold so each $100 off the top would need to be made up by 10 game sales. With this small of an install base plus the R&D baked into the HW they are not going to take a bath on the HW. Sony is playing by the same rules as their competitors in regards to the components of their hardware. Its small production runs for this stuff which will be expensive.

Its worth remembering that the 399 PS4 only needed a single game sale, or PSN subscription, to be profitable for Sony. Sony went into this generation ready to win the price war. I doubt they have abandoned that philosophy, given that the PS4 was built with consumer based VR in mind. Given the specs of PSVR, and its use of pre-existing inputs, Sony are producing a cost effective, consumer friendly device. $399.

 

[gamechanger87]

Also consider that a ton of R&D resources for Oculus stem from them being a VR only company with ~200 staff members (I believe is what I've heard). They also need to create a store, and source materials from companies they don't have footholds in.

You are giving too much credit to a lot of this stuff. Economies of scale doesn't matter when you are looking at purchases of components with this small of a production run. They aren't committing to buy millions of components for this out of the gate.

 

[ElMexiMerican]

My purchase making price keeps going higher and higher. At first, I was willing to pay up to 300, then 350, now 400. I hope No Man's Sky is announced as PSVR compatible; I think that's what will really tip me over.

 

[Mushroomer25]

I think anything above $450 is a death blow to this product. It's not in the same tier as Oculus, and getting near it in price will not do PSVR any favors. $350 is probably the sweet spot for the device - high enough to establish it as a new platform (not just a peripheral), and far enough away from the Rift/Vive to establish it as the first generation of consumer-grade VR.

I also expect console/VR bundles at $600, out in time for Christmas.

 

[mrklaw]

Well I personally think the HMD only would be $299 and I anticipate bundles to include the HMD, camera, and two moves for $399. But I'm more than prepared to be wrong, I just think that's easily realistic.

Still not convinced Sony will confuse bundles by including move. One or two SKUs is enough I think
- headset only
- headset plus camera

Problem there is that the camera doesn't cost much more to add, so maybe they'll simplify and just do the headset+camera if they don't feel pressured on the price.

I'd prefer a headset only as I already have a camera and I think there are enough out there in the hands of early adopters that they should do one bundle without it.

I also think they'll include some value add in any bundle - my guess would be a free copy of rigs

 

[Piggus]

Sony is already on record saying they dont expect one million in sales for the first year of PSVR. That should be some indication on where they are pricing this.

Even at 299 I would not expect it to sell a million units in the first year.

 

[spekkeh]

49 bundled with bloodborne and i'll bite

25 euro and bundled with Mario Kart, Zelda and Metroid or bust.

 

[joecanada]

The price should be based on what people are willing to pay, not what it costs to build it. That's marketing 101.

If $299 is what it takes to to get a sustainable install base, you either figure out a way to sell it for that or just don't sell it at all.

At $299, I envision a product with less support than Kinect, because the install base will be tiny.

I own a $1,000+ gaming PC and all three consoles and a high five figure income, and I would pay maybe $150 for it. I was literally more excited for Kinect (and we know how that worked out).

If you would pay maybe 150 for screens, headphones combined then you aren't even close to who they are marketing this to.
Headphones are 150 easily
Elite controller is 150

I mean this has just reached crazy town now

 

[DSix]

No more than 400€ pls...

 

[Elandyll]

You are really giving the licensing fees from games sold too much credit. The install base will be too small to make up for any initial losses on the HW. They take in like $7 per game sold so each $100 off the top would need to be made up by 10 game sales. With this small of an install base plus the R&D baked into the HW they are not going to take a bath on the HW. Sony is playing by the same rules as their competitors in regards to the components of their hardware. Its small production runs for this stuff which will be expensive.

Many mistakes that I see here.

1) the fee is generally around $10 afaik. Probably make more on digital games.
2) they have no competition on PS4 for VR or sales portal, so EVERY VR game sold on PS4 is not just sold on their VR platform but also on their portal. Not so for HTC or Occulus.
3) Sony is a huge consumer of OLED screens. Only HTC compares in that regard, and then they are the only ones that combine proprietary camera sold as accessory for years, proprietary and lone sales portal, and sole VR headset on their market that is nearing 40m units of VR capable units sold.
4) Sony is a large maker of consumer electronics (HTC being again the closest example), with longtime experience in creating customer devices in terms of design/ comfort, and large scale manufacturing. They also have a tremendous amount of experience and capability in designing cameras and optics/ lenses.
5) Sony has already every unit (PS4) VR ready, with a VR controller (DS4) included and with Cameras widely available separately to split the cost ahead of time.

They are anything but playing by the same rules imo. But we'll see, hopefully within 2 months.

 

[-Plasma Reus-]

You talking porn, right?

I didn't want to put it so bluntly, but yes.

 

[Nafai1123]

Still convinced it'll be $299 standalone for the headset/PU, and $399 for headset/pu/camera/move controllers/game.

I haven't seen anyone claiming these prices are unrealistic providing any actual evidence for why the BOM would be so much higher than this. Oculus and Sony are in very different positions in the market and are producing different levels of products.

 

[KHarvey16]

This is true, but their HMD/whole package is probably quite a bit more expensive to build than Sony's (e.g. 2 displays, much larger FoV on the camera (custom?), etc.). And they might be paying more to source the components than Sony will.

I do expect the PSVR HMD to be significantly cheaper than the Rift (and the Vive to be significantly more expensive -- of course the whole package with that isn't comparable).

Was just a response to the idea Sony, being in a position to make money from software sales directly, were in a unique circumstance in the VR space and that their "competition" all had profit margins associated with hardware. We're unclear on HTC's pricing strategy at this point (although expectations are pretty universally on the highest end for a number of reasons) but it's pretty clear that PSVR sold at cost would be cheaper than either of its PC counterparts. I don't know if it'll be quite half but it will certainly be interesting to see.

 

[Bsigg12]

Many mistakes that I see here.

3) Sony is a huge consumer of OLED screens. Only HTC compares in that regard, and then they are the only ones that combine proprietary camera sold as accessory for years, proprietary and lone sales portal, and sole VR headset on their market that is nearing 40m units of VR capable units sold.

For the sake of correctness, PSVR is using a custom LCD screen, not an OLED.

 

[FStop7]

Seems like VR prices will be a tough reality check for many this year.

A virtual reality check?

 

[KingV]

If you would pay maybe 150 for screens, headphones combined then you aren't even close to who they are marketing this to.
Headphones are 150 easily
Elite controller is 150

I mean this has just reached crazy town now

I just think it's likely to be a throwaway oddity with about 10 real games, a few dozen that amount to fancy tech demos, and another dozen traditional games that have half-assed VR modes included that are fun for like an hour. That's basically par for the course for console add-ons.

I'm not going to pay $500 to play one or two pretty good games.

I would be pleasantly surprised if I'm wrong and there's great support and tons of new and interesting software for the next 5 years.....but I'm pretty sure I'm going to be right.

If its not $299 at release, i bet you'll be able to find it for $299 on clearance in 2 years or so.

 

[10k]

Way too high. Sony has to hit $299.

You are going to be a very upset person when the price is announced. If it's any lower than $399 I'll be shocked.

 

[ChronotriggerJM]

For the sake of correctness, PSVR is using a custom LCD screen, not an OLED.

Last we've heard, it's an RGB strip OLED panel running at 120hz.

 

[RiverKwai]

And as, like you said, they weren't giving out ballpark pricing, the price cannot be "interpretted" from that statement.

And yet, the thing you assure me can't happen, is happening all around us.
Never underestimate the ability of people to take zero information and then to convince themselves that it means something.

 

[Omnistalgic]

The thing people need to keep in mind with VR is that it's significantly different than launching something like a home console. Consoles are a known quantity - they've been around long enough that people know what they're getting and you can push for mass market faster.

VR is an experience most people haven't tried and the tech is significantly more expensive. You can't compromise the headset quality or profits to reach a mass market early when there are so many unknowns. Sony/Oculus/Valve are not trying to push this to the masses yet....that's a few years down the line. If they were trying, they would either go bust by selling units at a huge loss, or they would have built a lower-quality headset. Unfortunately, you don't get the same effect from VR below a certain quality theshold, so they are playing the long-game by prioritizing experience over all else.

Sony just isn't going to take a huge bath on the PSVR price. They will price the headset at least $399 IMO and it will sell out very fast just like Occulus did. Somy just got to a point of profitability and their shareholders would not be happy if they price it below cost (keep in mind there are years of R&D sunk costs they have already invested). They could price at a break even point but anything lower just isn't realistic. Even Occulus - backed by Facebook which has huge financial momentum and has shareholders that are very willing for it to spend a ton of cash for growth areas - didn't price it's headset below cost.

All the doom and gloom if they don't have a $299 headset shows a lack of understanding how new technologies launch. HDTVs, laser disc, the first iPhone, etc all launch at high prices that don't compromise quality and it takes years for the price to come down to a mass market level. I get that some people don't want to pay that much for a VR headset with so many question marks...but there are enough people willing to pay that they're going to sell it at a higher price early and wait until demand subsides and parts are cheaper to lower it.

i agree with everything u said here, and guess what IPhone have never come down to Mass market price, we just buy them on credit because the demand is sky high for smartphones.

$399 base model that includes camera and Earbuds and Mini games
$499 model that includes Move controllers, camera, earbuds, mini games and Rigs

 

[Bsigg12]

Last we've heard, it's an RGB strip OLED panel running at 120hz.

Oh dangit I forgot when they announced it as PSVR it had this video with that information. That's my bad.

https://youtu.be/LMq8gQkljMw

 

[ChronotriggerJM]

You are giving too much credit to a lot of this stuff. Economies of scale doesn't matter when you are looking at purchases of components with this small of a production run. They aren't committing to buy millions of components for this out of the gate.

Maybe not millions plural, but I can easily see them making a million units to split between at least 3 markets. I'm not sure when the real cost savings start regarding fabrication, but I don't think this is going to be as small a run as some anticipate.

 

[Aces&Eights]

I would pay 600 USD for a "bundle". Headset, camera, move controller and No Man's Sky launch title. Anything more than that will give me pause.

 

[FlashFlooder]

It's gonna be $350 standalone, $450 bundled with camera/move controllers/game.

 

[yyr]

If its not $299 at release, i bet you'll be able to find it for $299 on clearance in 2 years or so.

Not 2 years. It'll be 8-12 months.

Mark my words.

 

[AstroNut325]

Why does everything need to be mass market price friendly out the gate?

 

[Kabuki Quantum Lover]

Why does everything need to be mass market price friendly out the gate?

...in order to get mass market adoption?

 

[Az]

Probably $499

 

[ChronotriggerJM]

Why does everything need to be mass market price friendly out the gate?

Well Sony in particular are in a great place to capitalize on mass adoption. They have an established storefront, fixed hardware that's on the more affordable end, and a long history of manufacturing. Because the PS4 is the base station gives the PSVR unique advantages regarding approach ability that might not exist in the PC market.

 

[Chao]

VR is destined to fail with these prices. The price of an expensive console for an accessory? Fuck that a million times.

 

[Exile20]

...in order to get mass market adoption?

First gen products generally aren't for mass adoption. DVD, HD TVs, Blu Ray, etc.

 

[TrojanBlade]

Headset only $349
Headset with cam - $399
Headset with cam and move - $499

If Sony can pull it off that will be a nice entry point for many. But If the base starts @ $499, it will be hard to sell to masses.

 

[Piggus]

Headset only $349
Headset with cam - $399
Headset with cam and move - $499

If Sony can pull it off that will be a nice entry point for many. But If the base starts @ $499, it will be hard to sell to masses.

So they're going to charge a $150 premium for something that would cost $80 if bought separately?

 

[ChronotriggerJM]

First gen products generally aren't for mass adoption. DVD, HD TVs, Blu Ray, etc.

Playstation 1, 2 3, 4?

The Playstion 4 is fixed hardware. They aren't going to make any improvements on the PSVR hardware regarding output functionality.

Hypothetically later down the line, they could put out a model that has a 4k screen, with 240hz frequency, but the PS4 will never ouput that. The PS4 will only ever put out what the original is targeting.

 

[skelekey]

Whatever the price is, I won't even consider one until it's down to at least $299 and even that may be too expensive.

I think some here are kidding themselves thinking that these high prices are ok. Remember PS Vita. People thought it would be $500. Then they announced $249 and people thought it was great. It was great enough not to sell. High prices will drive even enthusiast consumers away. And what happens when these things don't sell? Publisher support plummets and everyone complains that there's no games for it. I really don't want to see that happen.

 

[vpance]

Even at 299 I would not expect it to sell a million units in the first year.

Really?

I think it will do better than The Order at minimum.

 

[Piggus]

Really?

I think it will do better than The Order at minimum.

It's extremely hard to market VR. The marketing relies significantly on word-of-mouth experiences. And even at $300, that's a pretty big ask for something most people have no experience with.

I think people will be surprised (in a good way) by the price the same way they were with the Vita and PS4.

 

[specialK]

fuck the price I'm in

 

[Gauloisess24]

Sony's audience is mainstream consumers, the majority of whom have chosen console gaming over PC gaming because of ease of use and lower cost. $299-349 is the sweet spot for this audience. Don't believe me? Look at console sales over the last year.

I have bought a PS4 next besides my PC. After finishing Bloodborne It's been put in the closet until Uncharted 4 releases. After i finish that game the PS4 will go in the closet again or serve as a phone charger.

 

[KoopaTheCasual]

First gen products generally aren't for mass adoption. DVD, HD TVs, Blu Ray, etc.

Huh? Wasn't the PS3, launched at the same time as first gen blu ray players and sold hundreds of dollars at a loss (and price-dropped fairly quickly) to ensure mass adoption?

Yes, it cost Sony a fortune, but lets not pretend that Sony doesn't go balls to the wall for new tech on occasion.

 

[Concept17]

Impossible to market this tech for mass consumer. They know, Oculus know this. It's just too expensive. After a few years once it becomes more adopted and the tech cheaper, the prices should begin to drop. Depending on reception, could be a major selling point of next-gen for mass consumer, but I don't see that happening this gen.

Of course, I could be completely wrong and the thing will take off right away, but the price just seems way too high.

 

[Kindekuma]

Way too steep if you ask me. Factoring if I had to buy the system that's an extra 300. Pass.

 

[iJudged]

TIL: VR is for rich people.

 

[KHarvey16]

Whatever the price is, I won't even consider one until it's down to at least $299 and even that may be too expensive.

I think some here are kidding themselves thinking that these high prices are ok. Remember PS Vita. People thought it would be $500. Then they announced $249 and people thought it was great. It was great enough not to sell. High prices will drive even enthusiast consumers away. And what happens when these things don't sell? Publisher support plummets and everyone complains that there's no games for it. I really don't want to see that happen.

Price isn't the only consideration. A device that costs more but offers a better experience can very easily be more popular than one that costs less but offers a worse experience.

I get the feeling that if some if you were in charge, people would open their $150 headsets and use them for 30 minutes before realizing it sucks and conclude VR is bad. That is precisely what anyone who cares about VR adoption should not want.

 

[klaushm]

Perhaps I worded it wrong. I think Sony will target the current userbase because PSVR is a significantly more difficult sell to a person without a console. This is assuming the unit will cost $299.99 at the very least. I think Sony will also target people who have expressed and shown intent to purchase a PS4 because a PS4+PSVR bundle is a very effective way to move units.

I agree that this is new display tech so it's not realistic to expect it to be affordable. With that said, I like to dream. In my dream, PSVR is $299.99.

Yup. I've said that we might not be their ideal target. They can't put their spectations that the whole PS4 userbase will buy the PSVR. That's what I was talking about. I wasn't very clear.

Sure it's better and easier to sell for it's userbase.

Talking about dreams... In my dreams it's $399 bundled with PS4-Slim.

 

[Mindlog]

Whatever the price is, I won't even consider one until it's down to at least $299 and even that may be too expensive.

I think some here are kidding themselves thinking that these high prices are ok. Remember PS Vita.

I would be willing to bet that the average price of VR will be ~$400+ when it finally hits its stride.
Many many many years from now.
When it doesn't require additional hardware to run.

I think expecting VR to sell millions or consider it a failure is silly. VR has been around for decades. Even this year's first modest step aimed directly at consumers will expand the market more than all those decades have combined. Sony, Oculus and everyone else are doing a great job growing this budding market. When the market matures there is no chance they are the only players. That's when the pricing gets very aggressive. It's not as important right now.