Zathalus
Member
*If.When the vr market does get big, sony will have a matured platform on their hands at the ready, and companies experienced with vr games.
*If.When the vr market does get big, sony will have a matured platform on their hands at the ready, and companies experienced with vr games.
Because Don Mattrick is a snake, and detrimental to the xbox brand.So why was Xbox promising VR content and VR compatibility with Xbox One X back in 2016?
It was Phil Spencer that announced it as counter to competitors at the time. All PR smoke & mirrors.Because Don Mattrick is a snake, and detrimental to the xbox brand.
Because at the time he was told to.It was Phil Spencer that announced it as counter to competitors at the time. All PR smoke & mirrors.
Never Phil's fault.Because at the time he was told to.
Phil wasn't in power at the time like he is now.
Is this satire?Because Don Mattrick is a snake, and detrimental to the xbox brand.
Don left in 2013, and Phil took after him. In 2016, Phil had a lot of power.Never Phil's fault.
Is this satire?
The same way psvr2 doesn't need to sell millions and millions to be profitable, since both the hardware and software are being sold at profit.You are contraindicating yourself.
If the Xbox series is profitable, then it's a success. It doesn't need to sell as much as the PS5 to be successful.
The messaging since 2017 has been pretty clear that they are not working on VR support. The original message in 2016 was that it would come but they pivoted a year later and the message for the past 6 years has been the exact same. It's not exactly a secret.So why was Xbox promising VR content and VR compatibility with Xbox One X back in 2016?
That's one tech I definity miss. Unfortunately, most companies chased active tech, which had to be charged and were a little heavier than normal glasses, and expensive. They should have used the same tech LG used, passive. Not only were the glasses lighter, they were way cheaper. Hell, if you watched a 3D movie in theaters, just keep the glasses and they worked.It will get as big as 3D TVs are now.
Don left in 2013, and Phil took after him. In 2016, Phil had a lot of power.
The only plausible cause is the xss. Otherwise it makes no sense for them to not chase this sector. They have the biggest games that works very well with VR.
Significant spec bump to play what?You’re absolutely right that it’s Likely it’ll sell worse than Quest 2. The casual audience can happily keep playing beat saber on their Quest 2, and Q3 is quite the price hike at $500
Hype cycle isn’t there yet, but you’ll still get a certain amount of folks upgrading from the Quest 2 for the significant spec bump.
They can hire extra people for that.They already struggle to feed their consoles with content and sell their hardware at loss, imagine if they had to spread themselves out to VR.
And wait 5 years to have content... smart move.They can hire extra people for that.
I mean you can make the game and have a vr team like RE4 remake.And wait 5 years to have content... smart move.
So Xbox just don't want to shepherd anything. They just want to Chase.
Said so themselves. wow
Significant spec bump to play what?
I saw the unveil, there was nothing there that I was truly wowed at. Then came Apple Vision Pro and made Quest 3 look bad.
I like that everything on the Quest 2 library will work on Quest 3 though, means the move will be smoother for those who jump over. But I don’t see any hype. Same goes for PSVR2. Apple Vision Pro was cool but too expensive to get any type of mass appeal, which yet again means big devs won’t bother, and no PC compatibility. I think the whole industry will crumble. And that sucks because I really like VR, when it’s good nothing else comes close.
In this case, MS's and only MS.
I just ignore what any company heads say and I just play the good games that get released.I wonder where I'd be in my gaming hobby if I just went with whatever MS said at the time.
It's just crazy. Like I'd all about the most powerful console ever, but then not really care about console and do cloud. But I'd also think SP games are dead but then release a bunch of western rpg SP games, etc. They're always on both sides of everything. They used to even talk about doing VR. They get their fanboys to sound hypocritical all the time with their nonsense.I just ignore what any company heads say and I just play the good games that get released.
Well before the cma they'll need to make sure xbox exists in that era. Why would ms give money for vr if their gaming division isn't profitable?Oh you mean in like 10 years? The CMA might want to investigate this then and shut them down so they don't maybe one day become a VR monopoly or something
Correct. VR is lame
Correct. VR is lame
They did. At their earnings.
Yes, they tried to spin it as good news when it wasn't. The fact is psvr2 has proven that ms made the right choice from a sales standpoint. Personally I would love having ms join vr, it just doesn't make sense from a market standpoint, being a vr junkie and saying they should doesn't make it so.
The tech still needs to evolve to a level similar to the vision pro bit at psvr2 price levels - thats when vr will get some momentum with the general public.
Why do you care if Microsoft invests in VR or not? You don't have an Xbox.
Oh wow GOTCHA because companies can never reassess decisions based on market trends and researchSo why was Xbox promising VR content and VR compatibility with Xbox One X back in 2016?
Out of all the major players in gaming, with their financial resources they are the ones who can afford to take the most risk in this area.
Why would they take a risk that other companies already took a risk on and left after being burned, or are trying to make profit by selling peanuts or because there's not enough active users?
What would Microsoft's consumer VR headset hypothetically do differently than Quest 3, Apple, or Sony which are all similar to headsets we have already seen with almost all the same issues preventing mass appeal? The current format started in 2016 for VR headsets needs to be gotten rid of, and VR has to come back with a new implementation. We are not there.
Ooooh, you know!It's bizarre to see people making excuses for them.
It was Phil Spencer that announced it as counter to competitors at the time. All PR smoke & mirrors.
Out of all the major players in gaming, with their financial resources they are the ones who can afford to take the most risk in this area. It's bizarre to see people making excuses for them.
The thing is, Microsoft have never made their own consumer VR hardware and from a logical standpoint don't need to.
They can support 3rd party headsets, just as they did on windows with WMR.
The biggest issue is the fact that they aren't hesitating in purchasing developers who were previously more than happy to (and had plans to continue to) support VR. If you're going to do that then at least allow them to have a pathway to continue to develop for VR, even if it's only via PC.
Lmao. They were not allowed to change their minds?
Especially when they revised their VR plans before launch?
Please buy the Walmart Onn VR headset for $50. Now with 8 bit graphics and pixel hdr!VR needs to be affordable first
Hopefully ms changes their mind in a few years if VR takes off.
Gonna grab a quest 3 this year and I wish it would work on xbox but I get why MS wouldn't go near facebook.