Support NeoGAF

[boredandlazy]

Yes, there are only around 1m people out there that own a GTX970. But why is this an issue? A GTX970 costs 300$ now, 200$ next year and 99$ the year after. I'd say in 2 years, every PC that isn't complete garbage will run VR experiences just nicely.

Sony has 30m people owning a PS4 right now, but I'd guess only about 20% or so will buy the expensive PSVR headset, so you could possibly reach 6m people when you're making PSVR games.

By next year and the year after, there will be many more PCs that are capable of running VR properly and then it's just about the VR experiences themselves and which one gives you the best value for your money. If PSVR is locked to PS4 and all the cool stuff on PC is only available for Oculus and Vive, people will think twice before they'd buy a PSVR.

How many PC's around the world meet the minimum specs for Occulus? Do you think it's more or less than the amount the PS4 has sold?

 

[Illucio]

They would need to make a profit on the hardware at that point, but that's assuming VR will catch on. Not making a profit on the device so it has a low price point is critical for its success and adoption.

To have PC support seems like a phase 2 idea. Once they release a newer and better version of the first run VR headsets. That way they can sell the better one at a premium for the PC crowd.

I'm sure people will be making their own drivers anyways.

In all honesty it depends of VR takes off at all.

Edit: in hindsight having Sony focus solely for Playstation would keep the VR headset on the cheap side. So isn't it more to the PC crowd benefit to being able to buy a cheap headset and download drivers from the community?

 

[UnrealEck]

Yes, there are only around 1m people out there that own a GTX970. But why is this an issue? A GTX970 costs 300$ now, 200$ next year and 99$ the year after. I'd say in 2 years, every PC that isn't complete garbage will run VR experiences just nicely.

Where did you get the 970 sales data? I didn't even know that was a thing because of all the different vendors.

 

[thomasmahler]

How many PC's around the world meet the minimum specs for Occulus? Do you think it's more or less than the amount the PS4 has sold?

It's not even anywhere close right now, which is exactly why no one doubts that Sony will win the early race.

I don't have concrete numbers, but half a year ago, only about 1m people world-wide owned a GTX970 or better -> I'm sure that number has already increased significantly. And that number will continue to grow exponentially, even though it'll take quite some time until it reaches the potential 30m installed base Sony already has. Having said that, how many people are ACTUALLY going to buy a PSVR? I'd say 20% of all PS4 owners (every fifth person who bought a PS4) is a very generous estimate and that'll quickly be outmatched by the PC market.

Now, these are still very small numbers for developers - Which is why you don't see many AAA games being made for VR, since the numbers don't add up yet. And that'll mean that almost all developers will have to make their VR games multi-platform, so that they can actually make their money back.

Is Sony decides to not support PSVR on PC, I'd guess that most devs at some point won't even bother porting their stuff to it or it just technically won't be feasible at all anymore.

 

[Raven Prime]

A tiny fraction is better than zero, so they would gain more supporting PC than not doing it.

No they wouldn't. Sony isn't a charity, if they sell the PSVR ~ at cost, then every sale that goes to a PC owner represents a waste of resources. PSVR is an investment in the PS ecosystem as has been explained before. Sony doesn't want to sell PSVR HMDs as much as Sony wants to sell PSVR software and the potential extra hardware sales that come with it. It really isn't too hard to understand, if you just think about it for longer than a second.

PSVR is very likely going to be the cheapest HMD out there, ignoring stuff like the Gear VR. So the subsidized PSVR would be a very appealing proposition to many PC owners, meaning Sony would not see the expected returns within the Playstation ecosystem for every PSVR set sold to PC owners. Which would mean that if sold to PC owners, the PSVR HMD would have to be more expensive.

 

[thomasmahler]

No they wouldn't. Sony isn't a charity, if they sell the PSVR ~ at cost, then every sale that goes to a PC owner represents a waste of resources. PSVR is an investment in the PS ecosystem as has been explained before. Sony doesn't want to sell PSVR HMDs, Sony wants to sell PSVR software and the potential extra hardware sales that come with it. It really isn't too hard to understand, if you just think about it for longer than a second.

PSVR is very likely going to be the cheapest HMD out there, ignoring stuff like the Gear VR. So the subsidized PSVR would be very appealing proposition to many PC owners, meaning Sony would not see expected returns within the Playstation ecosystem for every PSVR set sold to PC owners. Which would mean that if sold to PC owners, the PSVR HMD would have to be more expensive.

If you buy a PSVR, chances are you'll also buy PSVR software on your PS4. And don't forget that the cost of making these headsets will quickly become less and less expensive. Look at GearVR, that thing costs a measly 99 bucks now (which probably means Samsung produces these things for 30-50 bucks -> Buy it for a dollar, sell it for two). 2 years from now, I'd guess that Sony can probably produce these things for 50 bucks a pop. Compare this to Sony potentially handing the VR market over to Oculus and Valve and your argument suddenly doesn't really make sense anymore.

 

[ArtHands]

How many PC's around the world meet the minimum specs for Occulus? Do you think it's more or less than the amount the PS4 has sold?

Its not a very narrow estimation, but an estimation regardless.
http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...win-the.aspx?source=isesitlnk0000001&mrr=0.20

Sony's PlayStation VR is ultimately limited by the number of PS4 gamers. To date, over 30 million PS4 consoles have been sold. If PS4 sales eventually rise to PS3 levels, the PlayStation VR could potentially reach over 86 million consoles. That's a pretty big market, but it's likely that only hardcore gamers will pay up to $400 for a VR headset.

Facebook's Oculus Rift could reach a much wider audience of PC gamers. Various market estimates place the global PC gaming population at 700 million to 800 million. Last year, research firm NPD Group estimated that about 20% of those gamers (140 million to 160 million people) are considered "heavy core" gamers. Those numbers indicate that Facebook could easily sell more VR headsets than Sony.

 

[jmga]

No they wouldn't. Sony isn't a charity, if they sell the PSVR ~ at cost, then every sale that goes to a PC owner represents a waste of resources. PSVR is an investment in the PS ecosystem as has been explained before. Sony doesn't want to sell PSVR HMDs as much as Sony wants to sell PSVR software and the potential extra hardware sales that come with it. It really isn't too hard to understand, if you just think about it for longer than a second.

PSVR is very likely going to be the cheapest HMD out there, ignoring stuff like the Gear VR. So the subsidized PSVR would be a very appealing proposition to many PC owners, meaning Sony would not see the expected returns within the Playstation ecosystem for every PSVR set sold to PC owners. Which would mean that if sold to PC owners, the PSVR HMD would have to be more expensive.

I think I clearly appointed why giving PC support to PSVR will bring more potential customers to PS4 VR ecosystem, don't ignore it.

A few more customers is better than no customers.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

No they wouldn't. Sony isn't a charity, if they sell the PSVR ~ at cost, then every sale that goes to a PC owner represents a waste of resources. PSVR is an investment in the PS ecosystem as has been explained before. Sony doesn't want to sell PSVR HMDs as much as Sony wants to sell PSVR software and the potential extra hardware sales that come with it. It really isn't too hard to understand, if you just think about it for longer than a second.

PSVR is very likely going to be the cheapest HMD out there, ignoring stuff like the Gear VR. So the subsidized PSVR would be a very appealing proposition to many PC owners, meaning Sony would not see the expected returns within the Playstation ecosystem for every PSVR set sold to PC owners. Which would mean that if sold to PC owners, the PSVR HMD would have to be more expensive.

A lot of these replies are written under the assumption that Sony would never release VR games for PC. If there ever came a time where they saw Oculus or Vive eating their lunch, I don't see why cross platform would be out of the question for them as a publisher, considering they've already partnered for numerous cross platform "console exclusive" games.

Edit: and there is precedent for a more expensive version of console hardware for PC, MS with Kinect.

 

[boredandlazy]

Its not a very narrow estimation, but an estimation regardless.
http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...win-the.aspx?source=isesitlnk0000001&mrr=0.20

Just because someone is a 'Heavy Core Gamer', doesn't mean they meet the minimum specs for Occulus.
Buying a new GPU plus an Occulus Rift limits numbers far more than having a VR headset tied to the PS4.

Just to make sure people understand my position on this, I don't think PSVR/PC compatibility is an inherently bad thing. I'm just saying from Sony's perspective it doesn't make much business sense at the moment.

 

[Raven Prime]

If you buy a PSVR, chances are you'll also buy PSVR software on your PS4.

While the PS4 is unmistakenly very successful, we shouldn't be pretending that everyone owns one. There are more people that own half decent PCs than people that own PS4s.

And don't forget that the cost of making these headsets will quickly become less and less expensive. Look at GearVR, that thing costs a measly 99 bucks now (which probably means Samsung produces these things for 30-50 bucks -> Buy it for a dollar, sell it for two). 2 years from now, I'd guess that Sony can probably produce these things for 50 bucks a pop. Compare this to Sony potentially handing the VR market over to Oculus and Valve and your argument suddenly doesn't really make sense anymore.

There is no handing over the VR market, since Oculus and Valve are aimed at the enthusiast group of PC owners, while the PSVR is compatible with the user friendly PS4. You have to understand that the VR market is going to be very, very large and diverse eventually, and there is more than enough space for multiple VR solutions to coexist. We really shouldn't pretend that the Oculus/Vive segment of the market is the exact same segment as the PSVR one. Of course when it comes to general VR interest there is overlap, but Sony is offering a relatively cheap plug and play solution. I don't think arguments based on PC's open nature are that much valid in this discussion. Nintendo has been quite successful for years by offering systems and games that aren't technologically impressive. They stay relevant by making sure that what they offer is polished and relatively original. I think you'll have to understand PSVR's appeal in a similar way.

I think I clearly appointed why giving PC support to PSVR will bring more potential customers to PS4 VR ecosystem, don't ignore it.

A few more customers is better than no customers.

And I pretty much covered all the points raised by you, I don't think you have much of an argument to be honest.

A lot of these replies are written under the assumption that Sony would never release VR games for PC. If there ever came a time where they saw Oculus or Vive eating their lunch, I don't see why cross platform would be out of the question for them as a publisher, considering they've already partnered for numerous cross platform "console exclusive" games.

Edit: and there is precedent for a more expensive version of console hardware for PC, MS with Kinect.

Cross platform console exclusives aren't the same thing as Uncharted appearing on PC. I think it highlights how much Sony sees PC gamers and PS4 gamers as two separate things. They don't care about SFV going to PC because they know it won't cost them that many sales to begin with. I'm not that up to date on the fighting game scene, but don't they just use consoles during tournaments and stuff? The problem with PSVR going to PC is that it will cannibalize their investment, because PSVR is intended to boost general PS ecosystem sales.

 

[ArtHands]

Just because someone is a 'Heavy Core Gamer', doesn't mean they meet the minimum specs for Occulus.
Buying a new GPU plus an Occulus Rift limits numbers far more than having a VR headset tied to the PS4.

Just to make sure people understand my position on this, I don't think PSVR/PC compatibility is an inherently bad thing. I'm just saying from Sony's perspective it doesn't make much business sense at the moment.

That's why I said it is not a very narrow estimation. But these group of people who most likely wouldn't mind throwing lots of cash to upgrade their PCs.

 

[GhostTrick]

Not releasing it on PC has a negative effect IMO. VR is going right into the wall with all these closed environnement and such. We're not talking about an hardware that is supposed to be closed, but about a DISPLAY. It would be like your TV running on specific hardware brands. But it's the same for Oculus or Vive or whatever.

 

[RoadHazard]

Sony and Microsoft learned that selling their consoles at a loss was an enormous, terrible mistake and it is the primary reason why the PS4 and Xbox One weren't pushing the hardware envelope at release.

Again, I don't see why Sony would work for free. They are already doing their part to hasten the spread of VR tech by being the most affordable option and providing a solution that will be available for use by more people than any other platform. There will be 40+ million PS4 owners by the time PSVR hits. Rift and Vive are the ones running into the problem of potentially pricing out everyone but the type of people who buy spaceships in Star Citizen, they need to fix their shit way before Sony does right now.

The PS4 was sold at a loss at launch though. Not by nearly as much as the PS3, of course, but around where it would only get profitable for them after the first game purchase. Which I think is about where they'll price the PSVR. Buy only the headset, and Sony loses a little money. Buy it with a game, and they profit or at least break even.

 

[jmga]

And I pretty much covered all the points raised by you, I don't think you have much of an argument to be honest.

You said that selling PSVR to PC Gamers will probably not give them the expected returns per customer.

I tell you that not selling it to PC Gamers will give them 0 returns from them, so a few money from PC/PS4 owners is objectively better than 0 money from them.

 

[VolticArchangel]

Compare this to Sony potentially handing the VR market over to Oculus and Valve and your argument suddenly doesn't really make sense anymore.

As much as PS VR not not being on other platforms, Vive & Oculus don't have official PS4 support either. If SONY can lock their proprietary hardware to their platforms they can refuse other HMD's entering their platform too (officially, not talking about homebrew and mods), unless Vive/Oculus (Xbox One as of now) are announced for PS4 too. I don't see how SONY are handing the market (PS4 install base - their market) to Oculus & Valve.

 

[RoadHazard]

You said that selling PSVR to PC Gamers will probably not give them the expected returns per customer.

I tell you that not selling it to PC Gamers will give them 0 returns from them, so a few money from PC/PS4 owners is objectively better than 0 money from them.

Not if they, as I believe, plan on selling the headset at a loss (or even at cost) initially.

 

[jmga]

Not if they, as I believe, plan on selling the headset at a loss (or even at cost) initially.

I don't think that will be even legal(at least in Europe), the least they will be able to sell it is 0 profit.

 

[benny_a]

I don't think that will be even legal(at least in Europe), the least they will be able to sell it is 0 profit.

It's illegal in Europe to use the razor blade business model?

 

[Raven Prime]

You said that selling PSVR to PC Gamers will probably not give them the expected returns per customer.

I tell you that not selling it to PC Gamers will give them 0 returns from them, so a few money from PC/PS4 owners is objectively better than 0 money from them.

If I build something for ~$5 and sell it for $5, but in order to use it you'll also have to buy something I made for $1 at the price of $3, then you can see how that is a pretty decent business model. What do I gain if I make something for ~$5 and sell it for $5 and you never buy anything else I made? The exact things I intended to make a profit on?

Not if they, as I believe, plan on selling the headset at a loss (or even at cost) initially.

.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

While the PS4 is unmistakenly very successful, we shouldn't be pretending that everyone owns one. There are more people that own half decent PCs than people that own PS4s.


Cross platform console exclusives aren't the same thing as Uncharted appearing on PC. I think it highlights how much Sony sees PC gamers and PS4 gamers as two separate things. They don't care about SFV going to PC because they know it won't cost them that many sales to begin with. I'm not that up to date on the fighting game scene, but don't they just use consoles during tournaments and stuff? The problem with PSVR going to PC is that it will cannibalize their investment, because PSVR is intended to boost general PS ecosystem sales.

Uncharted isn't going to be a VR game anytime soon, nor are most of Sony's current franchises (the framerate requirements would restrict them too much). SF5 is one of only dozens of games that Sony currently has arranged console exclusivity for.

It would be a huge missed opportunity to restrict PSVR to console, especially when you look at what amateur hobbyists did with Kinect on PC. Even if you don't release any software yourselves, you sell it for $50 to $100 more for PC and you then get the downstream benefit of more 3rd party PC/PS4 VR co-releases that don't have to worry about compatibility issues.

The biggest risk to Sony's VR venture is that it simply proves too costly for wide adoption on console, yet somehow blows up on PC. Making the peripheral PC compatible mitigates that risk.

 

[jmga]

It's illegal in Europe to use the razor blade business model?

It usually is if it kills competition.

For example, Oculus could probably afford selling the Rift at loss, but HTC would not because they will only make profit from hardware, so Oculus would kill the Vive(and pretty much any other HMD) by selling it at loss.

 

[notaskwid]

Unless Sony has the most amazing VR exclusives, which I doubt, I think for a lot of people, buying a VR Headset for 500 bucks that only works on a console that's already 2 years on the market and will probably only have 3-4 more years left isn't the most exciting idea.

Assuming it won't work with PS5.

 

[cheezcake]

Assuming it won't work with PS5.

The markets gonna move quickly, I assume 2nd and maybe 3rd gen headsets from HTC/Oculus will exist by the time PS5 is out and there's going to be some significant improvements on them. Sony will defs be upgrading their product to keep up with the competition.

 

[benny_a]

It usually is if it kills competition.

Maybe I just can't follow a lot of this. Because depending on the time of day and the thread one enters about this topic we're talking about how a stillborn the PS VR is. How it's absolutely weak ass shit and will be left in the dust after a year and now we're talking about how it will create a monopoly so strong that European Antitrust workgroup has to get on it.

In any case there is nothing illegal about the razor blade model unless in certain instances where a monopoly is abused. I think that monopoly part is probably not the immediate short term goal for the PS VR on PS4, nor it is likely.

 

[Alo0oy]

It's nothing but downsides for them. They're going the same route as the dualshock, if people get it up and running on the PC fine.. but they don't wanna deal with the headache.

The dualshock is sold at a profit, PSVR isn't, allowing PC support means they're selling it at a loss with no real way of making that money back via royalties like they could on PS4.

Besides, the dualshock works fine on PC, plug & play too.

 

[Raven Prime]

Uncharted isn't going to be a VR game anytime soon, nor are most of Sony's current franchises (the framerate requirements would restrict them too much). SF5 is one of only dozens of games that Sony currently has arranged console exclusivity for.

It would be a huge missed opportunity to restrict PSVR to console, especially when you look at what amateur hobbyists did with Kinect on PC. Even if you don't release any software yourselves, you sell it for $50 to $100 more for PC and you then get the downstream benefit of more 3rd party PC/PS4 VR co-releases that don't have to worry about compatibility issues.

The biggest risk to Sony's VR venture is that it simply proves too costly for wide adoption on console, yet somehow blows up on PC. Making the peripheral PC compatible mitigates that risk.

I don't share that concern. I think Sony's solution will prove the most successful and accessible in the near future.

The PU and PS Cam integration may make it hard for PSVRs to work on PCs, but I'm sure some crazy hobbyist will find a way to make it work. I think the Kinect is also different because it was a pretty unique combination of technology, way superior to existing webcams for example. When it comes to PSVR, while having it's own unique appeal with the 120hz display for example, it's really not that different from what Oculus and HTC/Vive are offering. So I just don't see the need for Sony to make it accessible to PC owners, even at ~$100 more.

 

[Foxyone]

I think it'd be a positive in that it would allow people to use the PSVR on both console and PC, so they might not even have to bother having another VR headset, leading to to a larger portion of people using PSVR. It would also allow lower hardware requirements for PC gamers only having to reach 60 fps ( assuming the special 60 to 120 hz thing worked).

Also, in terms of required VR hardware on PC, would also playing at 1080p like PSVR be a viable option? I would have thought that could potentially be done on an overclocked $150 GPU (950), or at least something $200 or less?

 

[Alo0oy]

I don't think that will be even legal(at least in Europe), the least they will be able to sell it is 0 profit.

Every single Playstation console was sold at a loss initially, every single one including the PS4.

They make their money back if you buy a game with it or a PS+ subscription, that business model works for them because they consider every PS4 owner an investment, they get money from peripheral sales, PS+, 30% of third party games, & 85% of first party games.

If PSVR is compatible with PC, they lose money on you & have absolutely no way of getting that back, the only way that would work is if they sell PSVR at a profit, which is actually unprecedented for Playstation platforms, & it would kill their affordable/mass market price advantage over their competition, all of that to reach the few million of people that can actually run it.

Sony is running a business after all, I'd be happy if everything is roses & you can play everything on anything, but those businesses are in it for the money.

 

[Raist]

All this talk about them potentially expanding the sales by making it PC compatible is silly. Why would they want that as opposed to potentially expanding their own base by offering a cheap and accessible VR platform? They want to build their own ecosystem up. Not be nice to people who want VR and would like to only buy one headset for multiple systems.

So the logic is, try to get potential VR enthusiasts to buy their console, their games, and get a PS+ subscription.

 

[Raven Prime]

All this talk about them potentially expanding the sales by making it PC compatible is silly. Why would they want that as opposed to potentially expanding their own base by offering a cheap and accessible VR platform? They want to build their own ecosystem up. Not be nice to people who want VR and would like to only buy one headset for multiple systems.

So the logic is, try to get potential VR enthusiasts to buy their console, their games, and get a PS+ subscription.

It is quite silly, I think many are just concerned that the Rift and Vive are going to be way more expensive than they hoped.

 

[the-pi-guy]

I can imagine the following arguments:

Expensive for Sony. I can agree with this. Users may be able to do it themselves though.

Losing out on software. I don't think this is necessarily the case.
If people are buying a different headset due to costs, then those are headsets that Sony can't sell games at all to.
It's certainly possible that they would be buying less games on average, but the higher number of headsets may offset that.
If someone is buying a PS4 headset, they'll be buying a PS4. There's little reason to be buying PSVR if all you have is PC. (Unless of course the costs for it are lower).

All this talk about them potentially expanding the sales by making it PC compatible is silly. Why would they want that as opposed to potentially expanding their own base by offering a cheap and accessible VR platform? They want to build their own ecosystem up. Not be nice to people who want VR and would like to only buy one headset for multiple systems.

So the logic is, try to get potential VR enthusiasts to buy their console, their games, and get a PS+ subscription.

Because some people are likely to be choosing between a PS4 headset and a PC headset. With the uneasiness of Sony's offerings, not supporting PSVR on PC, could lead to a decline in sales of the headset and subsequently sales of PSVR games for PS4.

 

[……forgetit]

Console makers don't make the bulk of their profits from hardware, they make there money from the games, they'd probably lose money by selling a bill of units in PC that they'll never see a profit from.

 

[Alo0oy]

Console makers don't make the bulk of their profits from hardware, they make there money from the games, they'd probably lose money by selling a bill of units in PC that they'll never see a profit from.

I can't believe some people still don't know this, hardware profits are close to irrelevant for Sony & Microsoft, they lose money on the hardware for the first year or two, & then they only make a fraction of profits from their hardware after the launch window.

It's when Call of Duty makes 1 billion they get a share of 300 million, & that's just one game, compared to making ~30$ in profits from every console, adding up to ~500 million for the entire year, subtract marketing & all that, & they'd still be losing money on the hardware.

They also get to keep all the money to themselves on first party games, no revenue sharing except for retailer margins.

 

[CyberPunked]

I don't understand the desire for PSVR from people who have capable PCs for VR, when the Rift and Vive will both be superior in terms of hardware.

 

[Neuromancer]

VR on PC is quickly turning into a red ocean. Why on earth would Sony want to go directly head to head against Facebook and Valve/HTC? There's no part of it that makes any sense.

 

[Blackleg-sanji1]

It's not coming to pc let it go guys lol. I think it will do just fine.

I don't understand the desire for PSVR from people who have capable PCs for VR, when the Rift and Vive will both be superior in terms of hardware.

And why does every psvr thread always turn into this right here..bah whatevs

Merry Christmas gaf!!!

 

[Raven Prime]

I don't understand the desire for PSVR, for people who have capable PCs for VR, when the Rift and Vive will both be superior in terms of hardware.

I think the desire for PSVR itself is very understandable. Because many people don't have PCs ready for Oculus and Valve's VR offerings and there are also many that own both PCs and PS4s and don't want multiple HMDs. Also whilst the Rift and Vive do have higher specs in many regards, the many reports suggest that when it comes to the actual experience with them they are quite comparable with the PSVR HMD. With some people even preferring the PSVR HMD.

But yes, for the relatively small group of capable PC owners, that don't own PS4's, it would indeed be weird to desire the PSVR.

 

[VolticArchangel]

What I don't understand is why the biggest demographic on the PC platform, the PC-ONLY folk (the one headset for all platforms argument is invalid here), would care about a console HMD which is inferior in hardware compared to VIVE & OCULUS, to be "officially" (lets be honest, PS VR will work on PC within 2 years from its release thanks to FOSS developers, just like Kinect) compatible on PC with SONY support ?

 

[the-pi-guy]

I don't understand the desire for PSVR, for people who have capable PCs for VR, when the Rift and Vive will both be superior in terms of hardware.

Because some people own consoles too, and find those experiences enjoyable as well.

I would much rather take Uncharted 4, Horizon, Driveclub, etc over almost any native PC games.

VR on PC is quickly turning into a red ocean. Why on earth would Sony want to go directly head to head against Facebook and Valve/HTC? There's no part of it that makes any sense.

No one wants it to compete with Valve/Facebook. No one is even asking for it to.
What some people want is for the ability to buy 1 headset to support their PS4 and PC, because some people have both.

What I don't understand is why the biggest demographic on the PC platform, the PC-ONLY folk (the one headset for all platforms argument is invalid here), would care about a console HMD which is inferior in hardware compared to VIVE & OCULUS, to be "officially" (lets be honest, PS VR will work on PC within 2 years from its release thanks to FOSS developers, just like Kinect) compatible on PC with SONY support ?

I don't think any PC only folks care about PSVR.

 

[Neuromancer]

Because some people own consoles too, and find those experiences enjoyable as well.

I would much rather take Uncharted 4, Horizon, Driveclub, etc over almost any native PC games.


No one wants it to compete with Valve/Facebook. No one is even asking for it to.
What some people want is for the ability to buy 1 headset to support their PS4 and PC, because some people have both.


I don't think any PC only folks care about PSVR.

So what you're saying is, it's wishful thinking. I agree.

 

[Apathy]

I don't understand the people that argue in Sonys favor of locking PSVR for PCs... If you buy a PSVR, chances are you'll buy a bunch of software for it on PS4 as well and Sony will reap the benefits there.

I don't see how making it possible to also use the device on PCs would affect Sony negatively at all - Quite the opposite, I feel like Sony would make a terrible mistake and basically hand the VR market over to Oculus, Valve and whoever if they completely lock it to PS4, since there's no fucking way in hell developers who're just making PS4 software will be able to keep up with all the stuff that's gonna happen in the PC space. Quite the opposite will be true, I'd say most VR games right now will be developed as Multiplatform titles (everything else doesn't make sense for developers since the installed base of VR devices is 0 at th emoment, so unless Sony frontloads a boatload of cash to a developer, Multiplatform is going to be the preferred choice) and you could possibly play most of the VR games that are available on your PS4 on your PC with better VR hardware as well.

So PSVR might very well become a quick success like Kinect for 360 was, but very soon (1-2 years in), the stuff Sony offers on their PS4 will seem ludicrous compared to the experiences available on the open PC Platform. And if I can't use my PSVR for any of this stuff, why get one instead of one of the much superior alternatives? Alternatively, if PSVR does work on PS4 and PCs, people might just stick with it for a longer period of time, since they'll not want to upgrade their VR Headsets every year or so - unless they have to, since all the 'cool stuff' isn't available for you if you bought a PSVR.

The people who have a great pc to run the games and headset and are willing to spend over $500 on the headset are not as many as you think. You also say that multiplatform games are going to be the main type of games, right, so just like now, they are made more scalable than say a game that specifically targets one sku, therefore the difference won't be as big. Even then, we already have exclusive games in the works for all the headsets. I also like how you already think the "cool stuff" won't be in the psvr. With the cheaper point of entry and larger possible market share, you better believe the "cool stuff" is going to be made for it, devs and publishers like money.

 

[Dahaka]

I have a highly capable PC and a PS4. I'd like a headset for both and I trust SONY's design and choice in material, ergonomics (grew up with them and also prefer Apple devices to the toyish feel and design of most android hardware) and their extensive experience in creating hardware.

Spoiler

Yes I know the first gen DS4s had bad rubber.

Occulus Rift gives me the vibe of highly powered smartphones with okayish built and design (lacking the overall sleekness both in software and hardware, like Iphone vs. Samsung Galaxy) or (kinda extreme) Angry Joe's PC in Patrick Bateman's appartment.

 

[travisbickle]

So PSVR might very well become a quick success like Kinect for 360 was, but very soon (1-2 years in), the stuff Sony offers on their PS4 will seem ludicrous compared to the experiences available on the open PC Platform. And if I can't use my PSVR for any of this stuff, why get one instead of one of the much superior alternatives? Alternatively, if PSVR does work on PS4 and PCs, people might just stick with it for a longer period of time, since they'll not want to upgrade their VR Headsets every year or so - unless they have to, since all the 'cool stuff' isn't available for you if you bought a PSVR.

Sounds like Sony are damned if they do and damned if they don't?

I assume your game won't come to PSVR and is part of the "cool stuff" you talk about?

 

[TalonJH]

Unless they set up a PSVR store, I don't see that happening since they are selling at cost.

 

[Raist]

Because some people are likely to be choosing between a PS4 headset and a PC headset. With the uneasiness of Sony's offerings, not supporting PSVR on PC, could lead to a decline in sales of the headset and subsequently sales of PSVR games for PS4.

The exact same argument can be made for the other ones if you're concerned about people owning both platforms.

 

[RoadHazard]

I don't think that will be even legal(at least in Europe), the least they will be able to sell it is 0 profit.

What? Maybe if it becomes completely anti-competitive, but surely it's not flat-out illegal. The PS3 was sold at a huge loss everywhere.

 

[RoadHazard]

The markets gonna move quickly, I assume 2nd and maybe 3rd gen headsets from HTC/Oculus will exist by the time PS5 is out and there's going to be some significant improvements on them. Sony will defs be upgrading their product to keep up with the competition.

That doesn't necessarily mean PSVR 1.0 won't still work with the PS5. It won't give you as good an experience as the PSVR 2.0 (which should have higher resolution, FOV, etc), but if they want to they can maintain compatibility.

 

[Raist]

I don't think that will be even legal(at least in Europe), the least they will be able to sell it is 0 profit.

Manufacturers are perfectly allowed to sell their own products at a loss. It's illegal for retailers except particular conditions.

 

[hodgy100]

You win some, you lose some. Your words already suggest that you would probably still get PSVR if it gets discounted eventually. Besides you'll have to remember that you represent a very small subgroup within the group of PS4 owners, most won't have PCs capable of supporting decent VR experiences. Sony really isn't concerning themselves with that group. Besides they tend to represent wealthier consumers that will buy stuff just because they can.

I'm part of a small subsection but I'm arguably part of the most important: a game dev that will likely be an early adopter and will introduce many friends and family to VR its in sonys best interest to win over people like me