Support NeoGAF

[Ozriel]

I can get behind that.

Meta Quest 2 sold ~20 million units, if I am not mistaken in ~2-3 years? That's roughly the same number of units that Xbox Series X|S sold. I don't think "VR is niche" is an argument that is as valid as before - especially if we're just talking about gaming platform companies in the industry.

We can't say that Meta is a "console" manufacturer because of the technical differences, but as a gaming platform, it certainly deserves recognition.

That 20 million metric is for all Quest headsets sold to date. From Quest 1 to the Quest 3, including the Quest Pro.

I was about to mention Steam. Maybe not the deck by itself…at least not yet. But with the arrival of the steam deck and others arriving from ROG and Lanovo, I do believe Steam will possibly become that 4th pillar. Especially once Steam OS is available to run on devices other than the deck.

These are PCs. As much a 4th pillar as any other gaming desktop or laptop.

 

[AJUMP23]

The baddest of bad takes I have read in a while. Thanks for that.

 

[Humdinger]

Quest is definitely a console by any definition.

Is it though? By any definition? What if I said my definition of a console is something you plug into a TV, then sit on a couch and play with a controller? The Quest doesn't fit that definition. What if I said a console is something that plays a wide variety of types of general games? I don't think Quest fits that definition either, since it only plays a specific, rather delimited sort of game (VR).

I'm not saying those are the "right" definitions of a console. I'm just saying it's arguable whether Quest fits our general understanding of "console gaming."

 

[Spyxos]

I love Vr, i wish it wasn't so niche, but what was the last big Vr game Half Life Alyx? Horizen Call of the Mountain? There are good headsets, but there are almost no games.

And I have zero trust in Meta. I have a Rift S headset for which support was discontinued after just one year.

 

[Wonko_C]

It's an interesting argument. The sales figures are more substantial than I realized (I don't pay much attention to the VR market).

This is the only part I disagree with:




Is it, though? How are we defining console?

Heisenberg called it a "gaming platform," rather than a console. That makes more sense to me -- although, I've always considered PC a "gaming platform," and there is some distinction between Quest and PC.

I would define gaming platform as anything that lets you play games. This includes PC, mobile phones, cloud, handhelds and yes, consoles.

The reason I say Quest is a console is because its a closed hardware platform, with is own games, game store and even first party exclusives, in the end it has more in common with an Xbox or Nintendo than a PC or phone.

But do those people actively campaign against buying videogame consoles? Probably not.
I know its anecdotal, but I'm just saying I've been talked out of it by multiple people who say they wished they didn't spend the money on VR and don't want to use it in the future. And this is my opinion, but it still feels like an extra-sometimes, not a main thing like a computer or a console, or like a phone or a TV.

I won't deny you're actually right here, retention is a real problem, which is something that needs to be fixed with more good quality software to keep interest.

I can see that. VR does have a bit more of a novelty value than traditional consoles.

But to be fair, I have also seen plenty of posts like "I haven't powered on my Series X since Hi-Fi Rush released 7 months ago" or "I haven't powered by PS5 since God of War Ragnarok 4 months ago," etc.

For what it's worth, I have been using my Quest 2 almost daily . You gotta find that one game/software that would have you keep coming.

With a backlog of more than 50 games and growing, I don't even have time to have that one game to keep coming back to! Add VR mods of flat games on top of that and I ended up playing much less flat games at this point. Aside from Street Fighter 6 and Robocop: Rogue City (which I wish I could play in VR), 2023 has been a pretty underwhelming year for me. I can see why flat gamers are having the time of their lives, but it's not for me at this point.

Not until they start producing more full length AAA games. If VR is to succeed it needs to substantially increase its offering of high quality, long, immersive experiences with decent narratives and replay value. We should have many, many games of the equivalent to Alyx, instead of virtually none.

Meta seems to be picking up the pace with their studios (Asgard's Wrath II, a 60-hour Action RPG) and partnerships with publishers like Ubisoft (Assassin's Creed Nexus). They had several high-production games on the Rift PC store but stopped once they shifted to the Quest. They just need to release titles more often.

 

[Three]

And I think what people like to ignore is the growth of VR. The previous bestselling VR headset was psvr1's 5 million lol. That took 5 years compared to Quest. 4x more Quest sales in half the time.

Quest is amazing but I think the audience for Quest is a little more broad than just gaming.

 

[Humdinger]

The reason I say Quest is a console is because its a closed hardware platform, with is own games, game store and even first party exclusives, in the end it has more in common with an Xbox or Nintendo than a PC or phone.

That seems like a reasonable position to take. I'm still having trouble thinking of it in the same category as a PS5, XSX, or Switch, though.

Perhaps it's the fact that it is limited to VR games, which seem rather niche to me. I know sales are good, so perhaps "niche" is unfair, but it's the term that comes to mind. To me, it seems as if people playing traditional consoles are playing one type of game, and Quest users are playing another.

 

[Magic Carpet]

The Quest 3 and the Steamdeck are like open consoles you can connect to a PC for added functionality. Quest 3 gets better graphics games from PC and the Steamdeck can load other OS including Windows.
The Xbox and the PS5 are locked down with short chains comparatively.

 

[ahtlas7]

I think it’s just the Big 1 now. Right, PhiIII

 

[diffusionx]

Is it though? By any definition? What if I said my definition of a console is something you plug into a TV, then sit on a couch and play with a controller? The Quest doesn't fit that definition. What if I said a console is something that plays a wide variety of types of general games? I don't think Quest fits that definition either, since it only plays a specific, rather delimited sort of game (VR).

I'm not saying those are the "right" definitions of a console. I'm just saying it's arguable whether Quest fits our general understanding of "console gaming."

Would you call a Vectrex a console? You’re being pedantic. It’s a closed platform with common hardware, inputs, software, SDK, etc being developed and supported by a company.

Saying “VR” is a “type” of game is like saying Game Boy can only play one type of game (portable). There are all sorts of games you can play on the system. Puzzle, action, RPG, sports, simulation, etc.

The Quest is a little bit more flexible than most consoles because you can hook it up to a PC and play supported games from there, but I’m just speaking to the standalone, Meta setup.

 

[T4keD0wN]

Id sooner acknowledge Android and iOS as "gaming devices"

 

[Gamer_By_Proxy]

VR should be considered its own category of gaming like console, mobile, pc, etc. but considering it's almost all 3rd party games, there is no "Big 3" company putting out the first party content at that level yet.

 

[Humdinger]

Would you call a Vectrex a console? You’re being pedantic. It’s a closed platform with common hardware, inputs, software, SDK, etc being developed and supported by a company.

Saying “VR” is a “type” of game is like saying Game Boy can only play one type of game (portable). There are all sorts of games you can play on the system. Puzzle, action, RPG, sports, simulation, etc.

The Quest is a little bit more flexible than most consoles because you can hook it up to a PC and play supported games from there, but I’m just speaking to the standalone, Meta setup.

If I sound pedantic to you, that's not how I intended to come across. You actually sounded overly definitive and closed-minded to me, so I was questioning what I perceived as your dogmatism about the topic -- as if no one could possibly disagree.

I'm open to persuasion, though. I don't have a fixed opinion about it. I've never really thought about it before. I don't even particularly care -- these are just labels we're throwing around. It's not as if they matter a whole lot. It's not as if there is some Honor in being deemed a console.

I don't know what Vectrex is. Never heard of it.

Re. the GameBoy comparison, I wasn't referring to genre types, but to the type of game itself -- i.e., VR vs. "normal" game. But the comparison to a handheld-only device is interesting. In that sense, Quest would fit better there than alongside traditional home consoles.

 

[ChoosableOne]

No no, wait, don't leave yet!

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

OP, sorry but you fucking goofed with this thread.

 

[Killjoy-NL]

Can MS still be considered one of the big three?
Phil Spencer conceded a while ago.

Meta shouldn't even be in there.

 

[Kataploom]

VR is a hippie thing, the fourth big guy is Valve

 

[midnightAI]

(At least you didn't say Apple)

 

[keefged4]

VR is a hippie thing, the fourth big guy is Valve

This is the correct answer.

 

[CuteFaceJay]

This would be like calling Tiger Electronics the big third in the 80s.

FisherPrice!

 

[diffusionx]

If I sound pedantic to you, that's not how I intended to come across. You actually sounded overly definitive and closed-minded to me, so I was questioning what I perceived as your dogmatism about the topic -- as if no one could possibly disagree.

I'm open to persuasion, though. I don't have a fixed opinion about it. I've never really thought about it before. I don't even particularly care -- these are just labels we're throwing around. It's not as if they matter a whole lot. It's not as if there is some Honor in being deemed a console.

I don't know what Vectrex is. Never heard of it.

Re. the GameBoy comparison, I wasn't referring to genre types, but to the type of game itself -- i.e., VR vs. "normal" game. But the comparison to a handheld-only device is interesting. In that sense, Quest would fit better there than alongside traditional home consoles.

Well you made me explain myself so it’s fine. I hope I made my point. Look up the Vectrex it’s quite interesting. Or, I could have gone with the more obvious and say the Virtual Boy lol.

There is no “VR” type of game. I played several VR games lately. Tetris Effect, Little Cities, Ultrawings, Pistol Whip, Moss. Look them up. They’re entirely different. Probably only Pixel Whip is what you would think of as a VR game. There are also official ports of VR games like Fallout 4 and Talos Principle, so again, the line isn’t quite as clear as you may think.

 

[SmokedMeat]

More like "the big 3 and the midget".

I like VR, I really do, but the VR market barely has complete games, let alone studios that can make a living out of it.

More like the big three shit stains on my underwear. - Mobile

 

[SHA]

And I think what people like to ignore is the growth of VR. The previous bestselling VR headset was psvr1's 5 million lol. That took 5 years compared to Quest. 4x more Quest sales in half the time.

Cause we're used to this thing called fad, nothing before vr stayed strong in the industry.

 

[Dacvak]

I wish the entire VR industry would go on hiatus for like 5-10 years and wait for tech to catch up. It’s been limping along ever since Half Life Alyx, almost to the point of it being a joke. (I mean look at the replies to this thread.)

I love VR, but its current form just has too much friction to be widely adopted by consumers. It parallels 3D TVs. The whole industry needs some more time in the oven, imo.

 

[diffusionx]

I wish the entire VR industry would go on hiatus for like 5-10 years and wait for tech to catch up. It’s been limping along ever since Half Life Alyx, almost to the point of it being a joke. (I mean look at the replies to this thread.)

I love VR, but its current form just has too much friction to be widely adopted by consumers. It parallels 3D TVs. The whole industry needs some more time in the oven, imo.

Realistically how will the tech advance unless it's actually being put to work in products?

 

[Dacvak]

Realistically how will the tech advance unless it's actually being put to work in products?

Well hey, I didn’t get that far in my flawed logic. Good point

 

[NeverYouMind]

I love Vr, i wich it wasn't so niche, but what was the last big Vr game Half Life Alyx? Horizen Call of the Mountain? There are good headsets, but there are almost no games.

And I have zero trust in Meta. I have a Rift S headset for which support was discontinued after just one year.

Doesn't exactly inspire confidence for the future...

 

[twilo99]

Doesn’t the quest also have access to the Xbox catalog through gamepass/cloud?

 

[twilo99]

LMAO if anyone is the new member of the Big 4 it's Apple, the company which actually makes all the money in gaming.

Visualizing Apple’s Rise to the Top of the Gaming Business

In 2020, Apple generated an estimated $13.5 billion dollars in gaming revenue, despite the fact it doesn't make any games or gaming consoles.

www.visualcapitalist.com

They should just buy Sony, keep the image sensor/camera business (they use Sony sensors anyway), use the entertainment business to fuel Apple TV, and keep the PlayStation brand for gaming, scrap the rest.

I think it fits nicely

 

[Hot5pur]

I really hope meta continues investing into VR.
I always thought of VR as kinda meh compared to flatscreen gaming, but once I tried it flatscreen games are kinda lame now...especially shooters, I'm not sure I can ever play a flatscreens shooter again.

 

[Magic Carpet]

I wish the entire VR industry would go on hiatus for like 5-10 years and wait for tech to catch up. It’s been limping along ever since Half Life Alyx, almost to the point of it being a joke. (I mean look at the replies to this thread.)

I love VR, but its current form just has too much friction to be widely adopted by consumers. It parallels 3D TVs. The whole industry needs some more time in the oven, imo.

No! I just bought a Quest 3. The tech is here and now. But I think it's still missing big meaty games.
The recent The 7th Guest is a nice example of a game with some meat on it's bones.

 

[LordBlodgett]

Ehhh, I see your point with how many headsets Meta has sold. On the other hand they have invested an absolutely massive amount of money in it and almost all of the best games are ports. Seems kind of like a failure. It has been nothing more than a fad to me. Everyone I know who has one rarely uses it.....

 

[Hot5pur]

No! I just bought a Quest 3. The tech is here and now. But I think it's still missing big meaty games.
The recent The 7th Guest is a nice example of a game with some meat on it's bones.

I also think VR is here and now, they just have a big publicity/advertisement problem as most people don't understand what they are missing.
VR has much more potential to get both casual and hardcore audiences into gaming.

 

[soulbait]

And the fourth pillar is none other than Meta. No no, wait, don't leave yet!

I know VR is not huge, and somehow it's looked at with disdain or resistance by some of the most hardcore gamers, yet they ironically are the ones who are supposed to keep up with the latest trends. (Xbox was seen with opposition when they were new too.)

But at the very least, with as many consoles sold (arguably more, no updated info on this) as the Xbox Series combined, Meta Quest is a legitimate console with its own ecosystem, it even has a "Games with Gold" style subscription in Meta Quest Plus. It's basically a console at this point.

And it's backed by a multi-billion company which in the past acquired several big studios who are their first party developers now, a company that is very similar to Microsoft in that they use the same bullish, monopolistic tactics to get what they want.

Meta is already a player in the console space alongside Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft, and seemingly nobody realized this yet.

On one hand, I disagree because it is called the BIG three. I am not sure if Quest is big enough yet.

On the other hand, all the younger kids I know (nephews, cousins' kids, and more) they either want a quest or they have one and play it all the time. It has essentially become the "Gameboy" for these kids. They take them everywhere. While in the car or a restaurant, sure, they are playing on the phones. But if they have their Quest with them and have the space to play, it is on their face and their arms are swinging.

Edit: GameBoy of course sold more and was an overall bigger hit. But when it comes to what kids want and are always trying to play when bored, Quest is very similar. So maybe a less successful handheld would be a better comparison, but if you give a kid a mobile device and a Quest, they are happier than a pig in shit.

 

[tkscz]

LMAO if anyone is the new member of the Big 4 it's Apple, the company which actually makes all the money in gaming.

Visualizing Apple’s Rise to the Top of the Gaming Business

In 2020, Apple generated an estimated $13.5 billion dollars in gaming revenue, despite the fact it doesn't make any games or gaming consoles.

www.visualcapitalist.com

I've pointed out the issue of Apple entering the Business before, they've already trained people into believing cell phone games are either cheap or free. Full gaming experiences costing $70 may be a hard sell to the majority of people.

 

[Kdad]

Lo

And the fourth pillar is none other than Meta. No no, wait, don't leave yet!

I know VR is not huge, and somehow it's looked at with disdain or resistance by some of the most hardcore gamers, yet they ironically are the ones who are supposed to keep up with the latest trends. (Xbox was seen with opposition when they were new too.)

But at the very least, with as many consoles sold (arguably more, no updated info on this) as the Xbox Series combined, Meta Quest is a legitimate console with its own ecosystem, it even has a "Games with Gold" style subscription in Meta Quest Plus. It's basically a console at this point.

And it's backed by a multi-billion company which in the past acquired several big studios who are their first party developers now, a company that is very similar to Microsoft in that they use the same bullish, monopolistic tactics to get what they want.

Meta is already a player in the console space alongside Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft, and seemingly nobody realized this yet.

Lol no.

 

[Gojiira]

How OP? Dont you know Xbox ‘cant compete’ and lost the console war, so Meta would be the third member joining the Big Two, Dynamic Duo Sony and Nintendo

 

[SteadyEvo]

This. I don’t see VR catching on in the console space.

 

[Banjo64]

Apple and Valve yes.

Facefuck lol.

 

[Arsic]

 

[tr1p1ex]

They are trying but ...

 

[Crayon]

Uh idk bout that. I think it's fair to say it's established as a platform but it's not huge.

I do count steam, though. Not pc, but steam.

 

[deriks]

Meta glasses are a thing, and they sell well. Consoles are another thing that also sell well

Don't mix apples and oranges

 

[ResurrectedContrarian]

Meta is such an evil company that shouldn't exist. Hoping they get out of gaming.

They'll come around when we get holodeck technology!

Agree that Meta is evil, but MS is substantially more evil and I'd put Sony not far behind at this point. So I don't think that really matters to the question.

On the other hand, all the younger kids I know (nephews, cousins' kids, and more) they either want a quest or they have one and play it all the time. It has essentially become the "Gameboy" for these kids. They take them everywhere. While in the car or a restaurant, sure, they are playing on the phones. But if they have their Quest with them and have the space to play, it is on their face and their arms are swinging.

Can confirm, Quest is huge in our son's friends group. They all meet up regularly as a group of friends in online games like Gorilla Tag--lately even more than they do in games like Fortnight.

 

[touchfuzzy]

Based on my dealings with my son and his friends and my nephews, I am convinced that quest has become that "what else can i get him?" device that people buy when they have nothing else to buy the "gamer" in their life and it ends up getting used for a few days or weeks and then collects dust.

Not my kid man, he asked for VR for years and we finally got him a Quest 2 in the summer, he plays literally every day. We do limit his time on it which probably makes it more interesting, but still, gets way more use than I thought! I've played a bit on it too and been pretty impressed, though I can't stay in too long before needing a break (old man motion issues).

 

[Peter303]

Thirty years ago.

VR will never be anything more than niche.

 

[alucard0712_rus]

I always thought of Quest as a platform. It have all signs of a platform (it's own hardware and software, including exclusives of course)
Quest 1 and 2 was too compromised but now we can play in VR with good enough graphics, all in helmet itself and we are yet to see full potential of that software+hardware.

 

[CamHostage]

(Sorry to detour this thread for a sec, but...)

P.S. My brother has a Quest 2, but it collects dust after RE4 and has terrible streaming options for wireless PC interconnectivity. It uses WiFi instead of Bluetooth! WTF?

Because WiFi is the protocol that you use for transferring high-bandwidth, low latency data streams.

Bluetooth is low bandwidth and short range. It's a little radio meant to fit into tiny devices and transmit with just a sip of battery consumption. You can stream some video over BT, but it's not at all ideal. (BT is still adding new audio codecs to try to fit good sound into its simple devices.)

For whatever reason, a dedicated wireless video protocol never fully caught on. (You shared a video of Miracast BTW, but that's actually WiFi, or rather WiDi. Miracast was made by the WiFi alliance, and connects through the Wi-Fi Direct protocol. It is also unfortunately out of date, with no update since 2017 and lots of dropped supporters.) But even without a common standard, everybody went with WiFi, and for good reason. The ubiquity and wide capacity of WiFi allows way more options than just getting internet from your wall to your PC or phone or game box. WiFi routers and the receivers in for example Quest are made for the incredibly high data transfer needs of VR. (Wireless VR must be at a high framerate, high perceived resolution, and with imperceptible lag or drops. Some say that even the current and emerging new wireless protocols are still not enough for hi-res 90/120Hz needs of Quest 2/3 and beyond, and PS5 could have done wireless VR with its WiFi6 router but they still went corded with PSVR2. However, many people are happily leaving that USB cord behind, so the difference has narrowed if not been erased.)

VR today on a WiFi 6 device with an isolated 5Ghz signal (or better still, 6e with 6Ghz, if you have it close and direct enough) is pretty much the best and most acceptable wireless video option out there without a custom "wireless HDMI" radio/receiver (which I'm guessing are often extensions/hacks of WiFi radio protocols anyway.) That's why Quest uses it, and why it doesn't need a custom add-on "wireless VR" accessory to allow wireless VR tethering.

 

[NeverYouMind]

(Sorry to detour this thread for a sec, but...)



Because WiFi is the protocol that you use for transferring high-bandwidth, low latency data streams.

Bluetooth is low bandwidth and short range. It's a little radio meant to fit into tiny devices and transmit with just a sip of battery consumption. You can stream some video over BT, but it's not at all ideal. (BT is still adding new audio codecs to try to fit good sound into its simple devices.)

For whatever reason, a dedicated wireless video protocol never fully caught on. (You shared a video of Miracast BTW, but that's actually WiFi, or rather WiDi. Miracast was made by the WiFi alliance, and connects through the Wi-Fi Direct protocol. It is also unfortunately out of date, with no update since 2017 and lots of dropped supporters.) But even without a common standard, everybody went with WiFi, and for good reason. The ubiquity and wide capacity of WiFi allows way more options than just getting internet from your wall to your PC or phone or game box. WiFi routers and the receivers in for example Quest are made for the incredibly high data transfer needs of VR. (Wireless VR must be at a high framerate, high perceived resolution, and with imperceptible lag or drops. Some say that even the current and emerging new wireless protocols are still not enough for hi-res 90/120Hz needs of Quest 2/3 and beyond, and PS5 could have done wireless VR with its WiFi6 router but they still went corded with PSVR2. However, many people are happily leaving that USB cord behind, so the difference has narrowed if not been erased.)

VR today on a WiFi 6 device with an isolated 5Ghz signal (or better still, 6e with 6Ghz, if you have it close and direct enough) is pretty much the best and most acceptable wireless video option out there without a custom "wireless HDMI" radio/receiver (which I'm guessing are often extensions/hacks of WiFi radio protocols anyway.) That's why Quest uses it, and why it doesn't need a custom add-on "wireless VR" accessory to allow wireless VR tethering.

My bad. Still, they need to make it work without needing a router connected to the internet. If internet goes out, this device should be able to function wirelessly instead of going full retard.

 

[ZoukGalaxy]

Definitely not, meta is a monopoly ads system, more like a parasite you want to get rid of. They built nothing, they bought Oculus.