Support NeoGAF

[GuitarAtomik]

So everyone that owns the camera has 2 now? I guarantee that we wouldn't hear the end of the complaining.

In the grand scheme of things, would anyone that falls in to the cross section of already owning the camera, and being seriously interested enough to drop money on PSVR, really not buy one because they already have a camera? Especially if it didn't add more than say $20 if that to the price? I think that battle is an easier fought one than releasing a SKU that doesn't include everything it needs to work in the box and hoping they can educate that to everyone AND make sure the camera supply is not too much or too little.

 

[Neuromancer]

Hold on a second... I'm sorry if this was already addressed, but wouldn't selling without a camera basically ensure no positional tracking? I couldn't imagine Sony being stupid enough to let any portion of their consumer base possibly experience VR that way. Yes, some people have the camera already, but some who don't would inevitably buy the lower costing option...

People buy stuff all the time and don't read the box and realize later that they need something else. I don't think it's Sony's responsibility to cater to that kind of consumer. Like I said, all you need is a line of text on the box for the standalone headset that says "Playstation Camera required/not included."

Also it would knocks about $50 off the price so Sony can advertise the PSVR at a cheaper price. It's a win win.

 

[Marvel]

Standalone it is.

 

[Elandyll]

They sell Moves without a camera; they'll sell the VR headset alone too.

Worst case, they'll sell it online only.

That's what I was thinking too.
I don't think it'll come to that, but worst comes to worst, if their first public survey polls indicate confusion, the bundle will be the only one at retail, and the HMD standalone will be sold online with a warning page before checkout.

 

[Luq]

They may be selling hardware at loss with this price and betting hard on making money from special software. Either way - if it's true, that will be the only VR I can probably afford 1st gen.

 

[TheKastorian]

If that happens, that is a great price.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

People buy stuff all the time and don't read the box and realize later that they need something else. I don't think it's Sony's responsibility to cater to that kind of consumer. Like I said, all you need is a line of text on the box for the standalone headset that says "Playstation Camera required/not included."

Also it would knocks about $50 off the price so Sony can advertise the PSVR at a cheaper price. It's a win win.

The camera is not going to cost Sony $50 to include it.

 

[TalonJH]

When am I supposed to find time to play all this stuff - that looks amazing!



Welp - definite purchase.

Lol

 

[Neuromancer]

The camera is not going to cost Sony $50 to include it.

Perhaps, but it's still going to cost more than I want to pay considering I already have one.

 

[Horohoro]

The camera is not going to cost Sony $50 to include it.

thats the point the headset will require the camera they will sell the standalone at cost and the bundle at 430$ to recoup from selling the standalone set at even cost.

 

[mushrambio]

I'm still not sold on them selling a barebones headset bundle without the camera. As essential as it is to the product and as low as the BOM must be, they might as well put it in every box. So then it comes down to whether or not they want two SKUs with and without the controllers. I'd imagine the controllers + camera would take retail price up about $50 and I'm not sure it's worth it to have two SKUs for that little a price difference. That's why I'm thinking they'll have one PSVR SKU which will be the headset (including the camera), and then a Move controller bundle with two wands for $50.

This is directed to people who already have a PS Camera more than likely. I'm sure their sales figures for the peripherial indicate that there's enough stand alone PS Cameras that they felt didn't need to be included with the PS VR as a standalone unit. I mean, what would people be doing with an extra camera? I think if this stands to be true, having two seperate SKUs/bundles, it will certainly make waves in setting up a good future for VR on Playstation.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

Perhaps, but it's still going to cost more than I want to pay considering I already have one.

What if it doesn't cost you anything and they just eat the price since the BOM is pretty low? Let's say it added a hypothetical $20 to the price (because if it costs anything it will be less than $50). Would $20 keep you from buying the headset? If worse came to worse, couldn't you sell your extra camera?

thats the point the headset will require the camera they will sell the standalone at cost and the bundle at 430$ to recoup from selling the standalone set at even cost.

They can do that with just the Move controllers which aren't an essential part of the headset.

This is directed to people who already have a PS Camera more than likely. I'm sure their sales figures for the peripherial indicate that there's enough stand alone PS Cameras that they felt didn't need to be included with the PS VR as a standalone unit. I mean, what would people be doing with an extra camera? I think if this stands to be true, having two seperate SKUs/bundles, it will certainly make waves in setting up a good future for VR on Playstation.

I just don't know if it makes sense to add the market confusion for the little price difference it's going to make.

 

[the-pi-guy]

I have major doubts on them selling the HMD without a camera in the box though. They aren't that stupid. Nobody owns these things and having a mandatory extra purchase is not going to go over well. It has to be as plug and play as possible.

Like what was said before, a lot of people do own these.

It's a really weird assumption to think it's necessary to include certain peripherals just because it's required. It happens all the time to not include something like that. The only time something is usually included is if there is no way people could have had it before.

It happens all the time.

There have been Guitar Hero games that you could buy separately because some people had guitars.
A lot of move games didn't include the move. A lot of camera games didn't include the camera. There's usually one first bundle that includes it, and everything after that doesn't.

It's not unprecedented.

In the grand scheme of things, would anyone that falls in to the cross section of already owning the camera, and being seriously interested enough to drop money on PSVR, really not buy one because they already have a camera? Especially if it didn't add more than say $20 if that to the price? I think that battle is an easier fought one than releasing a SKU that doesn't include everything it needs to work in the box and hoping they can educate that to everyone AND make sure the camera supply is not too much or too little.

They would absolutely buy it. Lots of people bought an Xbox One, didn't stop them from being upset about the included camera.
It'd add a lot more to the price, than just 20$. Almost certainly closer to a 100$ addition.

 

[Tigress]

Damn. That's cheaper than I expected. I expected 400 to be the base price. L

 

[the-pi-guy]

The camera is not going to cost Sony $50 to include it.

They are including more than just the camera.

 

[TalonJH]

What if it doesn't cost you anything and they just eat the price since the BOM is pretty low? Let's say it added a hypothetical $20 to the price (because if it costs anything it will be less than $50). Would $20 keep you from buying the headset? If worse came to worse, couldn't you sell your extra camera?

If this price is even close to real, they are probably already pretty close to their margins. Adding an extra $20 loss to each sell may be too much for something that will still be niche.

 

[TheOMan]

Lol

Yes, it looks downgraded, but good enough for me.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

They would absolutely buy it. Lots of people bought an Xbox One, didn't stop them from being upset about the included camera.
It'd add a lot more to the price, than just 20$. Almost certainly closer to a 100$ addition.

$100? You can buy the camera for $60 standalone and I highly doubt Sony is taking a loss on it.

 

[Horohoro]

What if it doesn't cost you anything and they just eat the price since the BOM is pretty low? Let's say it added a hypothetical $20 to the price (because if it costs anything it will be less than $50). Would $20 keep you from buying the headset? If worse came to worse, couldn't you sell your extra camera?



They can do that with just the Move controllers which aren't an essential part of the headset.



I just don't know if it makes sense to add the market confusion for the little price difference it's going to make.

Ppl probably wouldn't buy the controllers and unless absolutely necessary this way they are guaranteed profit otherwise they would get alot of complaints from people who already own headsets asking to drop the price 50$ and take out the camera. And it will move more units faster this way I would think... 299$ is pretty well priced to move and tbh I don't think this price is at loss if they don't include anything else just at cost I mean the specs arent truely all that special.

 

[hydrophilic attack]

$100 too expensive

 

[Navid]

I was expecting it to be $350 so if this rumour turns out to be true that would be good news... like others have said I expect the UK price to get the short end of the stick in terms of conversion rate no matter the final price.

 

[Chobel]

They sell Moves without a camera; they'll sell the VR headset alone too.

Worst case, they'll sell it online only.

OK, that could work.

 

[Extollere]

People buy stuff all the time and don't read the box and realize later that they need something else. I don't think it's Sony's responsibility to cater to that kind of consumer. Like I said, all you need is a line of text on the box for the standalone headset that says "Playstation Camera required/not included."

Also it would knocks about $50 off the price so Sony can advertise the PSVR at a cheaper price. It's a win win.

I'm not convinced... You need positional tracking to avoid simulator sickness. You'll need it for certain games to function as well. No way Sony will sell this thing lacking such a necessary component.

Controllers optional? Sure... My bet is the camera will be in the box.

 

[thiscoldblack]

I'm in

Spoiler

for some Knack VR

 

[cakely]

I will take this rumor with a truckload of salt.

It would be nice if this was true, though, it looks like it's priced to move.

 

[the-pi-guy]

$100? You can buy the camera for $60 standalone and I highly doubt Sony is taking a loss on it.

The people that already have a camera wouldn't be too happy about it.

Having a 350$ bundle of PSVR+camera would upset a good number of people. It's quite certain over 1 million people bought the camera. It makes more sense to have it be separate.

You can buy the camera and the headset separately yourself for 350$.

Don't force the camera on people who already have it.

 

[Cidd]

$299 is mass market price, Sounds too good to be true.

 

[kennyamr]

I still think this will cost $399 without the camera or the controllers.
$299 would be way cheaper than what most ppl and analysts think it will cost.
If true Sony will def have the upper hand on the VR market at least for the time being.
It's up to them to provide enough quality content to influence consumers.

I however, still believe it will be priced at $399 for the headset only.

 

[Hyperbole]

In the grand scheme of things, would anyone that falls in to the cross section of already owning the camera, and being seriously interested enough to drop money on PSVR, really not buy one because they already have a camera? Especially if it didn't add more than say $20 if that to the price? I think that battle is an easier fought one than releasing a SKU that doesn't include everything it needs to work in the box and hoping they can educate that to everyone AND make sure the camera supply is not too much or too little.

It's suboptimal. People would look at the price of the camera ($60) and ask why they can't just get the VR and save the $60. Gamers are cheap and very strategic about money. They wouldn't stand it.

 

[Camp1nCarl]

This is definitely a "I know this one guy" rumor. People getting hyped for this price point are going to be in for a rude awakening when it probably drops at a higher price point. If it does drop at this price I'd be pleasantly surprised.

 

[Elios83]

An official announcement shouldn't be too far off at this point if it's actually launching in the first half of the year. I wouldn't be surprised if the launch was delayed until September though.
299$ without camera and controllers is a good price for existing Playstation 4 users.
It's still very expensive for those who have to buy everything including a PS4.

 

[TalonJH]

Yes, it looks downgraded, but good enough for me.

I'm really looking forward to it.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

The people that already have a camera wouldn't be too happy about it.

Having a 350$ bundle of PSVR+camera would upset a good number of people. It's quite certain over 1 million people bought the camera. It makes more sense to have it be separate.

You can buy the camera and the headset separately yourself for 350$.

Don't force the camera on people who already have it.

Again, my theory is they'd just eat the cost. BOM of $50-$60 hardware is probably pretty low going by Palmer Luckey's comments about the included Xbox One controller. To me personally, I think it makes more sense to include it in every box and explain that to anyone "pissed" about it. Anyone who already has a camera can sell their extra one.

It's suboptimal. People would look at the price of the camera ($60) and ask why they can't just get the VR and save the $60. Gamers are cheap and very strategic about money. They wouldn't stand it.

I think it would be more optimal to explain to the subset of people who actually wouldn't buy PSVR because of a perceived bump in price that they're wrong about the added cost.

 

[Snake29]

I have both camera/move controllers and wireless Sony gold headset,so i only have to buy the headset and a game.

 

[TalonJH]

I was expecting it to be $350 so if this rumour turns out to be true that would be good news... like others have said I expect the UK price to get the short end of the stick in terms of conversion rate no matter the final price.

We don't include sales tax in our price listings in the US, so it will be closer to $320 (depending on the state). Meaning you're not too far off.

 

[Sidewinder]

An official announcement shouldn't be too far off at this point if it's actually launching in the first half of the year. I wouldn't be surprised if the launch was delayed until September though.
299$ without camera and controllers is a good price for existing Playstation 4 users.
It's still very expensive for those who have to buy everything including a PS4.

Yeah, 299$ for the helmet alone would be perfect for me. But yeah, they really need to announce that shit Soonysh!!1

 

[orioto]

Oh wait i don't really like that. So that means the camera and move controllers can't be used as base features for a game ? Isn't that a major problem ?

 

[Clefargle]

This is a reasonable price,

So I am doubtful it is true

 

[TalonJH]

Oh wait i don't really like that. So that means the camera and move controllers can't be used as base features for a game ? Isn't that a major problem ?

The barebones kit is for people that already have the camera. You need the camera to use it at all. The only optional part is the Move controllers, and the light on your DS4 works as a substitute in most cases. Sans games that need to realistically simulate hands.

 

[Sanke__]

Either this is false or Sony is gonna be selling this at a loss.

They are definitely going to sell it at a loss
They are way too far ahead this gen to worry about the difficulties involved in making an insignificant profit on hardware
They will definitely have a huge profit margin on the move shit though (really hope it isn't necessary, I'm pretty much tied to a classic controller for life at this point)

Also Sony is going to fucking kill it with this thing
Definitely going to be sold out this holiday season
This fall would be fucking perfect timing for launch
Plenty of people have PS4s
Economy is good and people have disposable income again
And Sony is positioned to have one or two absolutely fantastic vr exclusives based on the lack of exclusives last holiday

 

[mrklaw]

Move will be required for pretty much anything that simulates hands. The only exception I can think of where DS4 translated into hands was a short demo where your hands are bound together. Otherwise you want your hands to be free to do whatever.

The type of interactions you can do with Move that you can't do with a DS4:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlLw9LEmEfw

Not only because Moves are more ergonomic one-handed controllers, but also because their glowing ball has better visibility to the camera at extreme angles, compared to the one-sided flat triangular panel on the DS4.

I nearly used the recent Vive demo day as examples of games you'd need move controllers for. But thinking about it, a bunch of them you could totally play with a DS4. The mini golf game, Budget Cuts and a few others could definitely be updated to support a standard controller (especially if they want to release on OR).

Of course move will be better, but I don't think it is required. It would be interesting to see if Sony bundled them as standard though. I don't think they will due to cost, but I do think they may want to be seen as having a compelling motion control option

 

[the-pi-guy]

Again, my theory is they'd just eat the cost. BOM of $50-$60 hardware is probably pretty low going by Palmer Luckey's comments about the included Xbox One controller. To me personally, I think it makes more sense to include it in every box and explain that to anyone "pissed" about it. Anyone who already has a camera can sell their extra one.

They would probably already be eating some of the cost on the device. They are not going to want to eat more of the cost. They have to be in the right price where they either make money directly on the device, or just lose enough money that they can expect to make it up quickly after.

I don't know what the arrangement for including the Xbox One controller is. Are they making it? Is Microsoft pretty much giving them?

Anyone who doesn't already have a camera can buy it separately. But of course, no one wants to have to sell their camera for who knows how little money and no one wants to buy something separately.

 

[Elandyll]

Again, my theory is they'd just eat the cost. BOM of $50-$60 hardware is probably pretty low going by Palmer Luckey's comments about the included Xbox One controller. To me personally, I think it makes more sense to include it in every box and explain that to anyone "pissed" about it. Anyone who already has a camera can sell their extra one.



I think it would be more optimal to explain to the subset of people who actually wouldn't buy PSVR because of a perceived bump in price that they're wrong about the added cost.

Not gonna happen, as they already will (according to Shu) sell at loss or barely break even as is.
No point in increasing the loss by $20 or more, when you will then have 10's of thousand of such devices either ending up in a drawer or worse, sold as-new on ebay and thus devaluating the price of their $60 accessory on the market.

As said, worse comes to worse, after consumer surveys/ QA, they could sell the Standalone online only.

 

[rafaelr]

got camera and move (hope they still work, pretty much never used them) already, i´d definitely be down for a headset at this price.

 

[whitehawk]

Good, I need it to be as cheap as possible with this Canadian dollar. Either way, I'm in day one. It will still be the cheapest VR option.

 

[SuperRaddy]

The guy down the pub said PSVR was going to be £1000.

pinches his salt

 

[Shenmue]

No way it'll be 299. It'll be 499 visor only.

 

[LordofPwn]

would be nice if we could get an insider to squash/confirm this rumor so people can set real expectations. Hoping official word happens at GDC.

 

[Ushay]

£300 for a VR headset? Fuck that. Does it require the console to work?

 

[ChronotriggerJM]

I still for the life of me can't grasp why people think PSVR will be expensive. I'd honestly be surprised if the bundle actually costs more than $399.