Betta Lines
Member
Are they?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Oculus Rift available for preorder for $599.99, shipping in March
- Thread starter War Eagle
- Start date
This guy is kind of a dick, huh?
Man, no wonder Adam Orth is making a VR game. It all makes sense now.
Permanently A
Junior Member
Xaero Gravity
NEXT LEVEL lame™
Even though I expected it, I'm still stunned at the price, but I'll be waiting to see if VR takes off before I decide to jump in. At the very least, this should create some interesting competition between headsets and their price points.
It's not about the hardware. It's about the software. No company is going to be making any software for a device that costs 700 euros when the install user base will almost be non existent. Everyone will stick to developing platform specific games, such as the PS4 and Xbox where the money can be made.
Sure hardware will come down over the years but by then this thing will be dead in the water with no momentum behind it.
plagiarize
Banned
Basically nothing starts with a 1 million install base. When new technology debuts, it starts off selling slowly, and then gradually starts to build steam. I linked this before, but please take another look at it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_life_cycle#S-curve
It was never meant to be mass market. Palmer said so already.
The Elite
BOSS
I am not going to try it but it looks like you can edit your payment info.
Finally! Was about time.
Managed to buy 3 (plus 2 free from the kickstarter backing), 2 of which should be coming in March, 1 in April and I guess the free ones will get to us backers much later on.
(That many, as my studio was born basically only with VR in mind - back to just before DK1 times - and we do installations with them)
That aside, I'm impressed with the amount of people on here saying (or worse, hoping) that the Rift will be a flop, VR doomed and so on.
Either it's a bunch of salty people that want it but can't afford it (forgetting either how much early new tech costs, or not realising it if someone else bought that early tech for them), or just out of touch with how some things work/are priced/are built
Especially reading how some people are actively hoping the Vive will cost less than the OR.
People who want to go into a GameStop and get a Rift+Game for 250-350 will of course be able to, at a later stage though. VR is not only for games and the 'non-games' will drive a lot of its initial interest and recognition.
Also, the Rift is pretty much...well, A LOT different than the DK2. Yes, you're putting some pixels in front of your eyes in both cases, but the quality and experiences are really, really different.
Once you try the CV Rift or Vive's latest DK it gets clear immediately - for VR, that's the way to go. DK2 wasn't even close in comparison.
Obviously it's not going mainstream in the first week or month. Can't understand how some think that should be the case.
It's also a dangerous thing to do in the case of virtual reality. Pisspoor headset sold for 250, grandma buys it as gift for grandson, grandson connects it to his low/midrange PC, starts EVE Valkyrie, throws up his birthday cake, throws the headset in the bin and *that* is a forever lost consumer for VR.
Also, people forget that VR generally is, and has always been an incredibly high-cost operation to create, maintain - and from a developer POV, sustain. Even if you take the hardware out of the equation - and you can't - it's not like you have your Candy Crush, Uncharted or Temple Run and can just throw it into VR. (some will do that of course, unfortunately)
It's not a new TV, where you can create content for it with the same instruments and thought process as always, just in 4k - and if you don't have a 4k camera, do it in 2k. The experience is just marginally changed.
VR needs custom workflows, custom thought train to produce content for it, lots and lots of testing not only on different hardwares but on different kinds people - not just your target, and the list could go on.
Cinematography took decades and decades to get refined and standardised, and it had the advantage of forced shots, for VR will be just a bit shorter than that time-wise, I think, since we can readapt some things from original cinematography concepts, but won't be too far off.
In conclusion I do not think it is overpriced at all. It is 'pricey', as in, not an impulse buy, but it can't be at this stage.
I understand the ones pissed off at Palmer's comments that CV would be in the ballpark of 350, but Palmer hasn't been CEO of Oculus in a very very long time now - his words, especially when talking market and money, at this point are of marginal meaning.
He doesn't even know how the pricing of his own consumer product works.
Of us who ordered from Europe, we paid more and that includes taxes. The only thing we need to add on top of that price is the shipping. Which will happen from Europe by the way, as it has happened with DK1 and DK2 (and we bought 2 DK1 and 8 DK2) - there WILL NOT be any 'import' or 'custom duty' tax that will apply to your CV1 order. Want to bet?
TL;DR: The Rift will be fine even priced like that, and VR will be fine too. You'll be able to afford it at 200/250, its games and have the good-enough machines that runs them in 1, 1.5 year's time.
Sums up a lot of my feelings... except I don't think it's going to be that much more affordable in one or two years.
Except for the part where the site was broken for a good part of the morning from the sheer number of people trying to order a Rift. Backlash doesn't mean much if they're still selling more than they can ship initially.
Terrible_Majesty
Member
I wish I backed this for a dollar. I would be getting it for 598 dollars less lol
The Elite
BOSS
They are two incredibly different products. What do you want/need more?
Yeah you can, but I don't exactly want to have to put in a CC that won't go through just to make sure my order doesn't ship.
The Elite
BOSS
You should feel Lucky to have it.
support.oculus.com --> submit a request
Remembering what I learned in business school, here's a bit of insight.
This is "Rogers Adoption Curve". What this shows is a business's (especially relevant in the tech industry) market penetration from the start and to the finish of its lifecycle. Price is one of the factors directly associated to the increase in penetration as time (X axis) goes on.
From Oculus perspective, the people who are all in on Oculus Rift "the innovators", they're willing to pay the $600 price tag. If you are not willing to pay that, then you are not part of this label. If you are waiting for the price to drop a bit, and it will, then you are the "early adopters". The people who go on forums, who are excited for this thing and have been for so long and will preach to friends and family about how amazing it is. As time goes on, marketing pushes occur, further price drops happen, the mainstream target audience gains awareness and access to the product, "early majority" and "late majority" will make their purchases. Finally "laggards" would be the people who come across this tech when Oculus 2 is already out and they're LTTP. They're picking this thing up on clearance (not really, but they're far behind).
We can throw our arms up in the air, but until we hear that this is a complete failure, Oculus will continue to work on their shit and making the price cheaper for the rest of us unwilling to pay.
This is "Rogers Adoption Curve". What this shows is a business's (especially relevant in the tech industry) market penetration from the start and to the finish of its lifecycle. Price is one of the factors directly associated to the increase in penetration as time (X axis) goes on.
From Oculus perspective, the people who are all in on Oculus Rift "the innovators", they're willing to pay the $600 price tag. If you are not willing to pay that, then you are not part of this label. If you are waiting for the price to drop a bit, and it will, then you are the "early adopters". The people who go on forums, who are excited for this thing and have been for so long and will preach to friends and family about how amazing it is. As time goes on, marketing pushes occur, further price drops happen, the mainstream target audience gains awareness and access to the product, "early majority" and "late majority" will make their purchases. Finally "laggards" would be the people who come across this tech when Oculus 2 is already out and they're LTTP. They're picking this thing up on clearance (not really, but they're far behind).
We can throw our arms up in the air, but until we hear that this is a complete failure, Oculus will continue to work on their shit and making the price cheaper for the rest of us unwilling to pay.
It's really weird to me to see people that don't understand the people that thought it was going to be cheap.
1. They said it was going to be cheap, right away, as little as a month ago.
2. Their dialog all along was this would be affordable, mainstream tech.
If that's not enough, this is an
3. ACCESSORY for PC. This is a market where $200 steering wheels and flight sticks are laughed at. And you somehow think a $600 accessory would be treated as completely expected? Expensive accessories have ALWAYS FAILED. Always.
I think that should be enough for anyone who doesn't understand why we didn't expect a lower price.
Then again, I'd venture a good amount of these inexplicable replies are simply those that are so deep in that they drink the kool aid and then some.
I'm sure Oculus is factually great. I'm sure it's better than PSVR. I'm sure it actually costs at least $600 to make if not $1000 or $1200.
However, know there are limits to whatever greatness the thing possesses. I can't just strap this thing on and automagically play Descent in DOSBOX and experience no nausea. It's not the second coming. Noone expected that. But most of us didn't expect $600, either. I know I didn't.
I'd say this forum is comprised of ONLY the 0.01% of all consumers. So we have a ~0.001% acceptance rate of this product.
1. They said it was going to be cheap, right away, as little as a month ago.
2. Their dialog all along was this would be affordable, mainstream tech.
If that's not enough, this is an
3. ACCESSORY for PC. This is a market where $200 steering wheels and flight sticks are laughed at. And you somehow think a $600 accessory would be treated as completely expected? Expensive accessories have ALWAYS FAILED. Always.
I think that should be enough for anyone who doesn't understand why we didn't expect a lower price.
Then again, I'd venture a good amount of these inexplicable replies are simply those that are so deep in that they drink the kool aid and then some.
I'm sure Oculus is factually great. I'm sure it's better than PSVR. I'm sure it actually costs at least $600 to make if not $1000 or $1200.
However, know there are limits to whatever greatness the thing possesses. I can't just strap this thing on and automagically play Descent in DOSBOX and experience no nausea. It's not the second coming. Noone expected that. But most of us didn't expect $600, either. I know I didn't.
I'd say this forum is comprised of ONLY the 0.01% of all consumers. So we have a ~0.001% acceptance rate of this product.
plagiarize
Banned
You seem to think a developer has to either specifically target the rift, or not target it at all. How expensive do you think it was for Dirt Rally to *add* rift support to their game? Furthermore, it is very easy using an engine like UE4 or Unity to simultaneously target numerous VR platforms at once. The additional cost of supporting the Rift over supporting the Vive (or vice versa) is very small.
And it won't stay $700 euros. Remember the PS3? Why did that get so much third party software support? Because the additional cost of making a PS3 port was worth it.
Ah, OK. Tad bit bullshit there isn't just a clear cancel order button. Never know what issues might arise relying on customer support to cancel orders.
The Lamonster
Member
Is it possible to detatch the included headphones and use your own?
He isn't wrong.
That's the price you pay for the government you elect.
If it bothers you, don't buy it. I shouldn't have to pay more in the US to subsidize the price in EU or whatever for the sake of parity.
SkeptiMism
Member
Oculus does make software actually. They've hired just for that.
The big publishers won't be on board right away obviously.
Disaster Nebraska
Banned
Unlikely, but possible.
What's more likely is that they know the price is high and they're trying to entice buyers with tons of incentives to soften the high cost. If they only did the headset at-cost, it'd still be around $550. Markup on controllers is notorious.
At the same time, there is a cost associated with everything except maybe the games (depending on the deal that was made), so the cost could have been reduced at least a small amount. Although admittedly probably not enough to matter in the grand scheme.
Betta Lines
Member
DK1 was $300, DK2 was $350. They hoped the consumer version would be around the same kind of price, and that the Facebook acquisition would help keep costs down too.
I'm quite sure including the remote and controller does not cost them $100, I bet not even half that.
$599? Priced as expected for a high quality VR device. This is not the thing that will open up mass market VR, cardboard like devices give people a taste of what VR can do, Oculus is on a whole different level. This price point won't be an issue really as this will be snapped up by early adopters that will put up with limited applications, buggy implementations, and new modes of interactivity.
The components, refinements, materials, etc. are all much higher than the dev kits. Why would you think they would be cheaper?
The point? How do you know that's where the extra cost is? I bet the cost is mostly in new panels, yield costs, etc.
Also, SUPER SMART of them to include the controllers in the box. Apple didn't include anything in the AppleTV and it was a terrible decision on their part. Remember, "If it's not in the box, it's not in the box."
The components, refinements, materials, etc. are all much higher than the dev kits. Why would you think they would be cheaper?
The point? How do you know that's where the extra cost is? I bet the cost is mostly in new panels, yield costs, etc.
Also, SUPER SMART of them to include the controllers in the box. Apple didn't include anything in the AppleTV and it was a terrible decision on their part. Remember, "If it's not in the box, it's not in the box."
The Elite
BOSS
Common Sense
History of new technology launches
The custom made parts involved
Palmer saying it was going to cost more than they expected
Common Sense
It was never going to be cheap.
Home theater systems have been expensive for years and haven't failed. We just developed tech that could be bought on the cheap (sound bars). VR development will continue to grow. It will get cheaper.
Aw yeah. Glad someone brought this into the discussion. I had to deal with this in business school also, hah. Personally, I feel that Oculus already hit the "innovators" part of the cycle during the KS phase; I feel like this shipment should be targeting the early adopters.Remembering what I learned in business school, here's a bit of insight.
This is "Rogers Adoption Curve". What this shows is a business's (especially relevant in the tech industry) market penetration from the start and to the finish of its lifecycle. Price is one of the factors directly associated to the increase in penetration as time (X axis) goes on.
From Oculus perspective, the people who are all in on Oculus Rift "the innovators", they're willing to pay the $600 price tag. If you are not willing to pay that, then you are not part of this label. If you are waiting for the price to drop a bit, and it will, then you are the "early adopters". The people who go on forums, who are excited for this thing and have been for so long and will preach to friends and family about how amazing it is. As time goes on, marketing pushes occur, further price drops happen, the mainstream target audience gains awareness and access to the product, "early majority" and "late majority" will make their purchases. Finally "laggards" would be the people who come across this tech when Oculus 2 is already out and they're LTTP and they're picking this thing up on clearance (not really, but they're far behind).
We can throw our arms up in the air, but until we hear that this is a complete failure, Oculus will continue to work on their shit and making the price cheaper for the rest of us unwilling to pay.
Spot on. I'll just wait it out a bit to see how it all goes. Need an upgraded PC first!
plagiarize
Banned
1. Since unveiling the CV1 they changed how they were talking about price.
2. They have ALWAYS maintained that they were targeting high end PC gamers with their first consumer product because those are the people with the hardware powerful enough to offer a great experience, and that VR would become mainstream *LATER*. ALWAYS. ALWAYS.
3. You call it a peripheral. I call it a display. High end PC gamers have been known to spend $600 dollars or more on secondary displays.
Turin Turambar
Member
I doubt they can decrease the price by $100 with just that.
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
From all the statements prior to the last few months maybe? From their Kickstarter campaign or maybe the price the dev kits?
Ninja Scooter
Member
1) GAF threads have never been a good measure for anything. If it were, Fallout, Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed would be the worst selling games of the year and Platinum would be the most successful developer on the planet. Color me shocked that a GAF thread is overwhelmingly negative about something.
2) the kind of mainstream acceptance you are talking about, with EA and Ubi sinking big budgets into VR, was never going to happen right out of the gate. This is a tech in its infancy. This idea that VR was going to be the Wii of 2016 was delusion, and seemingly nobody actually involved in producing VR hardware or software believes that. People complained about comparing VR adoption to bluray players or smartphones but using 3DTV as some kind of barometer is infinitely stupider and just plain lazy.
I know that, just asking what is overly expensive about the rift compared to a 4k monitor someone uses for gaming. yes one is a monitor and the other is a head set but, one is more immersive and cheaper.
captjohnboyd
Member
Obviously at $600-$700 VR isn't going to go mainstream (I'm confident it will eventually) but my concern is more about whether or not this will be a barrier to many enthusiasts as well. Will most dive right in like they planned all along or are many now going to take a wait and see tact? How long this sticker shock will last and whether or not it will have a marked effect on games being designed for VR is the real question here. If it has a low adoption rate the software simply won't be there and while I think VR is here to stay it could take a little longer then I hoped (I've been waiting my entire life already and I want it now god damn it lol)
Yup. The included ones are supposed to be pretty great though.
Teknopathetic
Member
"3. ACCESSORY for PC. This is a market where $200 steering wheels and flight sticks are laughed at."
The PC accessory market, especially within the sim community, buys peripherals that cost well past $200. The Thrustmaster Warthog is extremely highly regarded and $400 (and that's cheaper than it launched). $300-400 Racing wheels, plus after market pedal mods, 3 display setups, etc. are fairly common in the Enthusiast sim racing community on PC.
You're entirely off.
The PC accessory market, especially within the sim community, buys peripherals that cost well past $200. The Thrustmaster Warthog is extremely highly regarded and $400 (and that's cheaper than it launched). $300-400 Racing wheels, plus after market pedal mods, 3 display setups, etc. are fairly common in the Enthusiast sim racing community on PC.
You're entirely off.
Yeah I remember the PS3. Sony worst selling console, after their best selling console (PS2) and all the momentum that came with it and they dropped like a stone. From 155 million to 80 million. With this came poor 3rd party developer support where all the multi platform games performed worst, even though the PS3 itself was the most powerful.
As for the Dirt game. Sure it may work using VR but is a game not designed for VR. The experience will be significantly worse than a proper VR developed game.
The final kit is much improved over the dev kits though, that kind of tech comes at a cost.