It's artificial. You misread something that was clearly written and now walking back. You spend several posts trying to argue with me over a part of my post by ignoring the rest of the paragraph you highlighted in your photo. There's nothing confusing about the paragraph at all if you read the whole thing, it's very clear I believe there wasn't profit since 2018 based on logical reasoning giving the low margins and common losses made on VR headsets, which has gotten worse over time, and due to the fact Sony pulled support after the first few years, with no other price cuts, with units collecting dust, even more so after Quest 1 released, and triple when Quest 2 released. Most PSVR2's were sold within the first 3 years, and then reached too until 2019 to reach 4.2 million, and 5 million Jan 2020, and radio silence since.
Yes, this is what many VR companies did back then. It was a loss-leading strategy aiming to be first past the post.
Clearly written? Where? Walking what back? Where? You do know there is a quote function right? Use it. Show me.
Please see exhibit A:
(Your post in question and the source of my confusion)
Depends on their margins, PSVR 2 is likely more costly to make than 1, and that price with the current economic situation won't bring in as much as if the PSVR1 costed $549 in 2018. The same goes for the more costly games.
They want to cement an audience that could grow so they can ride the growth of the industry if it takes off, that seems to be the goal of almost every company in VR right now other than those who are intentionally targeting a niche with limited units for profits.
No it was Samsung with their GEAR VR partnering with Oculus to use their tech. So in a way Quest has been the leader since the inception, with a side of Samsung.
And some say the opposite, I am doubtful on profitability, i could see break even around 2018, but that was when things were down and the headset was stagnating, and since then PSVR1 has been effectively dead with stock sitting on shelves, and software sales were never that pretty, Beat Saber was still a top game on the system, but Sony never revealed any million sellers at all.
As far as we know CREED, Beat Saber, and Among Us are the only major VR titles to cross 1 million units on any headsets/platforms.
Strawman argument 1:
(Making claims that I said xyz)
You claimed I said it wasn't until 2018, which ends the same, you misread. I said it's been dead since 2018, and I doubt there's been any breakeven since then, IF that was the case. hence the many posts before you jumped in saying "since 2018" ...
I never made any such claim, you pulled this from your bum.
Strawman argument 2:
(Making another claim that says I said xyz)
The rest of that paragraph you didn't highlight literally debunks you.
It literally says "I am doubtful" on profitability and "I could see break even around 2018 BUT" and then "Since then effectively dead with stock sitting on the shelves".
Nowhere does it say I thought it was profitable UNTIL 2018, only that I "COULD SEE" it break even in 2018, and then being dead since then. Which is why I brought up in multiple previous posts when people brought up profitability about if it was ever profitable "SINCE 2018".
Again, I never made any such claim, another tale plucked from your bum.
And furthermore, I am not the only confused by your post regarding profitability. If anyone is walking anything back, it's you. I have not waffled one single time, I have actually doubled down on it. Articles were provided as source that showed profitability out the gate, you casted doubt, and claimed that you could see break even in 2018 as referenced in the above quote. But I will provide it here:
"And some say the opposite, I am doubtful on profitability, i could see break even around 2018, but that was when things were down and the headset was stagnating, and since then PSVR1 has been effectively dead with stock sitting on shelves, and software sales were never that pretty, Beat Saber was still a top game on the system, but Sony never revealed any million sellers at all."
One more time, what I have been saying:
"And some say the opposite, I am doubtful on profitability, i could see break even around 2018"
"and some say the opposite" was your response to an article that showed profitability in 2016.
"I am doubtful on profitability" - Your hot take.
"I could see break even around 2018" - Another hot take, despite sources saying nah, profit out the gate bruh.
It doesn't matter if it stagnated, that late in the cycle, costs GO DOWN due to continuous process improvements, iterations, etc.
Again, we're no longer arguing if it was or was not profitable, it's an argument about what you 100% clearly said, which you are saying you didn't say. It's fine, this debate will have to remain unsolved, for me at least.
