How so? At $400 it's still out of purchase price for many gamers.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Develop: PC VR sales has almost ground to a halt
- Thread starter Wollan
- Start date
How so? At $400 it's still out of purchase price for many gamers.
ChaosZeroX
Banned
Yep 100% agreed. People are just alot more enthusiastic about it because its cooler and its a new way to play vs 3D which is just a graphical change.
AquaWateria
Member
PSVR will probably be a hit for the hardcore gamers but for the casuals its definitely not especially for the price.
Inb4 it isn't as expensive as PCVRs well its still expensive for casuals. They're better off buying something that's worth their time. In all honestly its a gimmick that will lose steam in the long run.
Inb4 it isn't as expensive as PCVRs well its still expensive for casuals. They're better off buying something that's worth their time. In all honestly its a gimmick that will lose steam in the long run.
Pretty much.
Also, just because sales are receding (early adopters...) doesn't mean the interest is going anywhere. Most people have yet to try VR. The queues and reaction at Gamescom were insane.
UnemployedVillain
Member
Lol, prices are lowered when products naturally get cheaper to manufacture (it's WAY too soon for that) and once they've reached some significant level of manufacturing scale (which clearly isn't the case). The prices aren't being lowered anytime soon. This would be like expecting Nintendo to lower the cost of the Wii U just because they've had some millions of sales. The volume simply isn't there yet for a price cut
GuitarAtomik
Member
Was sad to find this is not about tardigrades.
It actually kind of is lol. They're just cutesified versions of them.
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
I've tried all 3. Understandably, PSVR is way more limited with what they can do graphically.
Even if there were millions of aaa titles. It's a novelty that gets tiresome.
You're going to enjoy it. Then not want to put on goggles every day..
GuitarAtomik
Member
There are already cheaper options coming out soon. OSVR is one and it's in the $300-$400 range. China has a bunch of cheaper options coming too at even lower prices.
PeakPointMatrix
Member
Sony's first party investment is key here.
Wowfunhappy
Member
I feel like we're in this really weird place with VR right now. It's very good, but it's too complicated to be a general consumer product, and I'm not sure how to get from now to then.
The Vive, at least, is well worth the cost of entry. Consider how much people spend on large televisions or ultrawide monitors, and then realize that you're getting a type of screen that can actually transport you to a different location. We've all had childhood dreams of being able to go inside a game. The Vive really does make you feel like you've stepped through a teleporter, and that's a big deal.
I think that the issue isn't one of cost so much as complexity. The Vive requires you to mount two black boxes near the ceiling at opposite corners of a room, and plug both of them in, preferably in a way that doesn't live ugly trailing black wires. Then you need to connect a TON of different wires to different places between the PC, the breakout box, and the headset.
This is going to be a problem for the PSVR as well, by the way. There's no lighthouses to mount, but there's still a LOT of different wires to connect. Not sure how well that will go for the average console owner. I'm also not convinced that the same value proposition exists for seated VR in general; I've played a lot of Oculus games on my Vive, and I haven't been particularly impressed.
So yeah. I really do think VR is worth the hassle, but I'm not sure how we overcome the barrier to entry.
The Vive, at least, is well worth the cost of entry. Consider how much people spend on large televisions or ultrawide monitors, and then realize that you're getting a type of screen that can actually transport you to a different location. We've all had childhood dreams of being able to go inside a game. The Vive really does make you feel like you've stepped through a teleporter, and that's a big deal.
I think that the issue isn't one of cost so much as complexity. The Vive requires you to mount two black boxes near the ceiling at opposite corners of a room, and plug both of them in, preferably in a way that doesn't live ugly trailing black wires. Then you need to connect a TON of different wires to different places between the PC, the breakout box, and the headset.
This is going to be a problem for the PSVR as well, by the way. There's no lighthouses to mount, but there's still a LOT of different wires to connect. Not sure how well that will go for the average console owner. I'm also not convinced that the same value proposition exists for seated VR in general; I've played a lot of Oculus games on my Vive, and I haven't been particularly impressed.
So yeah. I really do think VR is worth the hassle, but I'm not sure how we overcome the barrier to entry.
What about Valve?
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
I can't see AR taking off anywhere but on cell phones.
Darkangel
Member
I don't think it's the price, I think it's that 95℅ of VR games suck.
If Ace Combat 7 and RE7 aren't good in VR, then I will start to feel worried about the future of the technology. Right now it reminds me a bit of 3D in that it's cool to play around with in a tech demo sense, but most people will want to go back to regular gaming in the long run.
If Ace Combat 7 and RE7 aren't good in VR, then I will start to feel worried about the future of the technology. Right now it reminds me a bit of 3D in that it's cool to play around with in a tech demo sense, but most people will want to go back to regular gaming in the long run.
Pops Maellard
Member
$600 would be fairly reasonable if it included Touch. It would be great to see the Vive hit this price point as well.
I feel like a huge issue with VR is conveying how entirely worth the cost it is.
diablos991
Can’t stump the diablos
Glad I sold off my Rift while I could still make a profit.
Current VR tech is not impressive from an IQ standpoint and gives me ridiculous headaches.
I'll check back in after a few generations of refinement (if it makes it they far)
Current VR tech is not impressive from an IQ standpoint and gives me ridiculous headaches.
I'll check back in after a few generations of refinement (if it makes it they far)
My problem is purely cost. Vive is amazing, and almost worth it just for minecraft in VR. And PSVR looks to have some really interesting games (tumble VR based on one of my favourite move games), Driveclub etc.
But it is light on content. And having both is like £1000 which is hard for me to swallow - even for someone crazy for tech and old enough to have played the old virtuality arcade games as a teenager. I often think I should sell my vive or cancel my PSVR preorder. but it's *so* damn good
But it is light on content. And having both is like £1000 which is hard for me to swallow - even for someone crazy for tech and old enough to have played the old virtuality arcade games as a teenager. I often think I should sell my vive or cancel my PSVR preorder. but it's *so* damn good
Fabtacular
Member
My only VR experiences have been the Rift DSK2, PSVR Demo at Bestbuy, and the Gear VR on Galaxy S7 Edge. All of them were super cool in their own way, but nothing I'd invest significantly in. (Like not even the ludicrous $150 figure someone was throwing around earlier.)
My biggest concern about VR is that despite having an amount and variety of early-gen content development that is basically unprecedented for a new technology, thus far nobody has been able to even give us a taste of what a killer app looks like.
People routinely dump dozens of hours into traditional and mobile games. When well-designed they just naturally pull you in and make you want to play them more and more. But thus far I haven't come across a single person in the games media who's "gotten way into" *any* of the VR stuff that's out there.
The guys at Giant Bomb have noted a few times that they have a Vive and a Rift in the office that people can use whenever, and nobody ever really uses them outside of doing their VRodeos. Dan went from "I'm going to buy all the VR headsets" to "I don't think I'm going to buy any of the VR headsets." It's pretty damning that the people with the most access and exposure are some of the least enthusiastic about it.
The weird thing is that it seems like it should be so simple. The immersion works. I literally can't play the horror games in VR because it's just too much for me. The dream for me is to be able to play Fallout or Far Cry or GTA in VR. Or Alien Isolation. Or Bioshock. Just any of these games where so much time and care has been put into creating these vast open worlds.
But I guess the issue is that we can't do that because people get sick?
That's kinda shitty, because I'm not sure that the killer app for VR is going to come in the form of one of those "teleport around the world" games or from slow-moving Gone Home-style walking simulators and Witness-style puzzle games.
I mean, those can be cool and all. I just think that, with the technology being as it stands right now and in the immediate future, even with those games I'm not willing to trade image quality for immersion.
(My best current idea of what might constitute a VR killer app is something along the lines of a cross between Hitman and Clue. Like, create a Hitman style interactive world that you have to observe and sneak around it, and use your observations to solve mysteries. I think this might work in terms of being able to slow down the movement enough that you don't get sick, while also being able to be immersed and interact with something that's not a dead world. Of course, the slow movement and large areas might make it boring to traverse over and over again. This is such a hard problem.)
My biggest concern about VR is that despite having an amount and variety of early-gen content development that is basically unprecedented for a new technology, thus far nobody has been able to even give us a taste of what a killer app looks like.
People routinely dump dozens of hours into traditional and mobile games. When well-designed they just naturally pull you in and make you want to play them more and more. But thus far I haven't come across a single person in the games media who's "gotten way into" *any* of the VR stuff that's out there.
The guys at Giant Bomb have noted a few times that they have a Vive and a Rift in the office that people can use whenever, and nobody ever really uses them outside of doing their VRodeos. Dan went from "I'm going to buy all the VR headsets" to "I don't think I'm going to buy any of the VR headsets." It's pretty damning that the people with the most access and exposure are some of the least enthusiastic about it.
The weird thing is that it seems like it should be so simple. The immersion works. I literally can't play the horror games in VR because it's just too much for me. The dream for me is to be able to play Fallout or Far Cry or GTA in VR. Or Alien Isolation. Or Bioshock. Just any of these games where so much time and care has been put into creating these vast open worlds.
But I guess the issue is that we can't do that because people get sick?
That's kinda shitty, because I'm not sure that the killer app for VR is going to come in the form of one of those "teleport around the world" games or from slow-moving Gone Home-style walking simulators and Witness-style puzzle games.
I mean, those can be cool and all. I just think that, with the technology being as it stands right now and in the immediate future, even with those games I'm not willing to trade image quality for immersion.
(My best current idea of what might constitute a VR killer app is something along the lines of a cross between Hitman and Clue. Like, create a Hitman style interactive world that you have to observe and sneak around it, and use your observations to solve mysteries. I think this might work in terms of being able to slow down the movement enough that you don't get sick, while also being able to be immersed and interact with something that's not a dead world. Of course, the slow movement and large areas might make it boring to traverse over and over again. This is such a hard problem.)
95% of everything sucks tho.
If we're talking purely about having some good games, that isn't an issue right now. There are GOTY contenders that are VR.
As a Rift owner and someone who was more excited about VR then pretty much anyone, I can say that the Rift did not at all live up to my hype and what I had hoped for the product (not just the Rift but VR in general).
The current headsets have a WAY to narrow field of view, absolutely cringe worthy image quality (piss poor resolution in headset that feels less then DVD quality).
Add to that, the poor game lineup and all of the motion sickness problems on games that I would actually like to be able to play in VR and I would say that VR has been a massive flop in my book.
Virtual Reality will need to see massive tech gains and massive price cuts in order to become a more viable product and I think we are many years away from that.
The current headsets have a WAY to narrow field of view, absolutely cringe worthy image quality (piss poor resolution in headset that feels less then DVD quality).
Add to that, the poor game lineup and all of the motion sickness problems on games that I would actually like to be able to play in VR and I would say that VR has been a massive flop in my book.
Virtual Reality will need to see massive tech gains and massive price cuts in order to become a more viable product and I think we are many years away from that.
Wowfunhappy
Member
Not only is it not here, it's not going to be here for another decade at minimum. You simply can't transfer that much data through the air, at least not with the bands of spectrum currently licensed for consumer use.
Wireless VR is a nonstarter. The only way to do it is to have a fully self-contained headset, and the computers that are small enough for that don't have anywhere near the processing power required.
I guess you could make either a backpack or a super bulky headset, but who wants to play movement-intensive games with a bulky, hot, heavy computer strapped to your head or back? I'd much rather just use a wire.
Beer Monkey
Member
That is extremely damning.
As if that isn't already fucking ridiculous. Like I said, that isn't much more likely to take off- especially against mobile VR.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
If VR had good GotY quality contenders as you say, then sales wouldn't be nearly as poor with enthusiasts. I don't even see much discussion about VR centric games, which is odd if it's got "GotY" contenders.
Fabtacular
Member
The resolution limitations aren't discussed enough when people are touting VR. When people start up with how amazing DriveClub VR looks in YouTube videos, I wonder if they know that it looks nothing like that in the headset. Personally I'd prefer Virtua Racing-quality graphics if the basic IQ was like my television.
It always seems crazy to me that in this forum where we nitpick over the most trivial IQ differences between consoles, and then have people just totally ignore the obvious blurriness and screen-door-effect of the VR headsets.
TheMan
Member
Stuff like this is what has killed my interest the most. I'm not totally down on VR as i think the potential for games and porn is amazing, but yeah. That giant bomb VR special when OR came out was deflating.
It's just too feaking expensive on PC. When you go after a niche of a niche, it surprises me how one can assume it'll be huge.
PSVR is a completely different story. That all rides on how well Sony can follow-through on the thing and how much a regular consumer can see the value in it.
PSVR is a completely different story. That all rides on how well Sony can follow-through on the thing and how much a regular consumer can see the value in it.
SugarDaddy
Member
It'll probably be ~10 years (honestly probably longer) before the tech becomes cheap enough to compete on a consumer level. It's just way too early right now.
A VR headset probably needs to be about $300 or less to truly get market presence and that's just not feasible anytime soon.
Current technology drives manufacturing cost which drives consumer cost which drives content and developers. Purely from an investment standpoint, it's a harder sell when the user base is so much smaller than the normal console/pc/mobile user base. We'll get there eventually.
A VR headset probably needs to be about $300 or less to truly get market presence and that's just not feasible anytime soon.
Current technology drives manufacturing cost which drives consumer cost which drives content and developers. Purely from an investment standpoint, it's a harder sell when the user base is so much smaller than the normal console/pc/mobile user base. We'll get there eventually.
What about Valve? They made the lab, and that seems to be about it.
flaxknuckles
Member
And if they weren't lazy asses and actually made more games for it then VR might be worth it right now. Oculus is making a bunch of games but I'm just not that interested in sit-down VR enough to spend $600+.
Not Spaceghost
Spaceghost
So all the enthusiasts bought their headsets and now no one else wants one? More like no one else can just get one. I doubt it is lack of interest too, it's likely a mix of the price point and base requirements being way too much for most people who are interested in trying out the technology.
Imagine you game on a laptop or low end pc because you mainly play a few major pc releases like world of warcraft or league or other popular games that run on any type of hardware. Getting VR is a massive investment, because you need to basically upgrade everything plus drop 600 bucks for a kit.
VR to an average consumer is just seemingly locked behind tons of barriers to entry. You could always argue that VR isn't built for the average consumer and that it is only for the hardest of the hard core but that's squandering it's potential.
Imagine you game on a laptop or low end pc because you mainly play a few major pc releases like world of warcraft or league or other popular games that run on any type of hardware. Getting VR is a massive investment, because you need to basically upgrade everything plus drop 600 bucks for a kit.
VR to an average consumer is just seemingly locked behind tons of barriers to entry. You could always argue that VR isn't built for the average consumer and that it is only for the hardest of the hard core but that's squandering it's potential.
Version 3.0
Member
There are? What are they? I'm missing out.
Valve isn't lazy, I want you to TRY to find me a video game company with as many employees as Valve has that is doing more than them.
It's actually annoying how ignorant people are on a supposedly hardcore video game forum.
Lister
Banned
Didn't they recently say that there's over a 100 people working on VR stuff? Valve VR stuff is coming.
Wowfunhappy
Member
VR "stuff" does not necessarily mean games, unfortunately.
I hope you're right because The Lab is incredible. In terms of immersion, it's on an entirely different level from everything else on the market, except possibly Budget Cuts (which is only a demo atm).
Trojan
Member
Yes, this is the Catch-22 of any new game technology and it's definitely playing out now. It's inevitable for any product that relies on developers to create content. Sony is basically the one company that can reverse this because they can leverage a bunch of their studies to solve this, but it remains to be seen if that content is enough to jump start the market.
Waaaay to early to pronounce VR dead as some are in this thread.
I can only afford to buy a headset one time over the next 5 years or so, realistically.
Therefore I'm basically waiting for second gen tech once the kinks have been ironed out and the resolution has improved, and also waiting for software - in particular some dynamite virtual girl / stripping simulator to use it with. DoAX4 would probably do the job. It's gonna be a while I think.
Therefore I'm basically waiting for second gen tech once the kinks have been ironed out and the resolution has improved, and also waiting for software - in particular some dynamite virtual girl / stripping simulator to use it with. DoAX4 would probably do the job. It's gonna be a while I think.
Wowfunhappy
Member
It is, but you can bet news like this is going to create problems. No doubt all of the game development companies are watching these early sales results closely.
I'm convinced mainstream VR is coming, I just don't know if it's going to happen in the next few years or the next few decades.
Allforce
Member
Sony also has the opportunity to leverage a bunch of VR video content through their various film and television holdings. Launching a "VR Channel" application on the PS4 would go a long way I think, with live events possible in the future the way Samsung and NBC partnered up during the Olympics.
And on top of that, I doubt most of the flagship Sony studios would risk making a game with more than token VR support. A lot of them never even made a PSP game, and that thing sold tens of millions of units and had healthy software sales prior to custom firmware nuking the market. Maybe getting VR sequences into some more recognizable games as they have been doing will help, but it is hard to see where the killer app is going to come from. I think if VR breaks out, it will be on mobile. The phone portion of the hardware combo gets subsidized, and the content pricing is more in line with what you are actually getting.
Patrick S.
Banned
Give me a lag free Arma game for VR, in addition to Assetto Corsa and Project Cars, and I'm interested.
Shalashaska161
Member
Poor sales at this point isn't really a surprise, PC VR is way too niche due to price and system requirements to really be mass market. Not to mention the lack of great software currently available.
I think PC VR will get a big boost from consoles doing it, it will really help them get over their chicken or the egg problem they have with software. Having Sony (and I'm sure Microsoft soon) push their own hardware will help convince third parties to invest in VR games, and I can't see VR software staying exclusive to one headset unless one of the platform holders is helping with the bill.
Regardless, VR is still a few years off being mainstream. I'm betting by the next round of consoles prices will have fallen enough to actually be reasonable, and VR will get a huge push from everyone around that time.
I think PC VR will get a big boost from consoles doing it, it will really help them get over their chicken or the egg problem they have with software. Having Sony (and I'm sure Microsoft soon) push their own hardware will help convince third parties to invest in VR games, and I can't see VR software staying exclusive to one headset unless one of the platform holders is helping with the bill.
Regardless, VR is still a few years off being mainstream. I'm betting by the next round of consoles prices will have fallen enough to actually be reasonable, and VR will get a huge push from everyone around that time.
gamechanger87
Member
These types of comments mean nothing to actually move units. This is like Sony saying over 200 developers are working on PSVR. There may be 200+ dev kits out there with 99% of them being at small indie studios kicking it around, but none of them are going to put out something that will be large enough to justify a purchase. You will see a ton of "experiences" that sell tens of thousands of units and then head off into the ether.
It will take a large publisher developing a VR only game with the required AAA budget to create a game potentially worth the price of admission. However, I have yet to see a single one actually put it out there that they are developing this type of game. They are dabbling in little experiences which they can make on the cheap. The big developers look at the ROI and the user base in VR and they realize that it makes little financial sense to do a full VR game. Thus, we are in the Catch 22 where the games don't exist to create the user base to incentivize the big houses to actually take VR seriously.
Even Sony's first party investments seem to be just projects to justify why they are selling PSVR. Is Sony making any of its large in-house teams develop a VR game with the budget they would allocate to any of their large exclusives? No, just token support attached to work they are already doing.
Wowfunhappy
Member
I totally agree with. Not sure why everyone seems to get hung up on image quality. Nobody I've showed the Vive to seems to even notice it.
I agree with your list of priorities, except I'd switch FoV and Resolution (everyone notices FoV, at least to some extent), and I'd take out wireless simply because it's an impossibility.