Support NeoGAF

[DonkeyPunchJr]

In most cases it's the exact opposite.

Most people think VR sounds neat, and then they try it and it blows them away.

If people were so “blown away” then we wouldn’t be here, over a decade after Oculus Rift launched, looking at declining sales #s and (still) questioning if/when it’s really going mainstream.

 

[R6Rider]

If people were so “blown away” then we wouldn’t be here, over a decade after Oculus Rift launched, looking at declining sales #s and (still) questioning if/when it’s really going mainstream.

Since you said what the poster above already said, see my response there.

 

[Mozza]

VR will never be mainstream while it cuts you totally off from your real word surroundings, which is a massive issue, as this feature is sort of key to the whole experience in the first place.

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

Since you said what the poster above already said, see my response there.

That's the thing, very few listen to the positivity. You can see that all over this forum.

There's always dozens of excuses.

Lol that’s your response? Who’s the one making excuses? I’m choosing to remain skeptical and trust the actual data and sales #s over the “positivity” of some nerds on the internet.


What’s your excuse for VR still remaining a niche/novelty over a decade after Oculus Rift and seeing a year-over-year decline?

 

[R6Rider]

Lol that’s your response? Who’s the one making excuses? I’m choosing to remain skeptical and trust the actual data and sales #s over the “positivity” of some nerds on the internet.


What’s your excuse for VR still remaining a niche/novelty over a decade after Oculus Rift and seeing a year-over-year decline?

Your reading comprehension is so bad that I'm not going to bother continuing with this.

 

[ZoukGalaxy]

Consumers are lazy, don't want to play games while also burning calories, at least that is my opinion. Playing games in VR is 1000x better than with a controller in front of a TV, more immersive, and your body can be used instead of being sedentary. I think the big problem with lack of adoption more so however is not enough AAA games. If tomorrow the industry began to push hardcore native support for VR, with exclusive content, it would be a game changer. The vast majority of games out there are at best amazing tech demos for what is possible.

First post nailed it, "gamers" are so lazy that they can't even change a disc.
Incoming boring 1000x times seen whatyearitis.gif

/thread

 

[Crayon]

Lol that’s your response? Who’s the one making excuses? I’m choosing to remain skeptical and trust the actual data and sales #s over the “positivity” of some nerds on the internet.


What’s your excuse for VR still remaining a niche/novelty over a decade after Oculus Rift and seeing a year-over-year decline?

Games. Pretty simple. We're at a point where most games need to be heady productions to be a real sysytem seller. Literally anything less than aaa graphics on vr gets handwaved as a demo. Quest cannot exceed that and even if it could, you basically got Alyx and Astrobot and some really nice simulators. The psvr2 launch alone is bringin a horizon game, Gran Turismo (by far most popular sim), and resident evil all with better graphics that most flat AAA games. You notice those are getting peoples interest. In the long run you need an actual steady stream of that.

Games is what you need to get people buying and using it. It was always that way. And they don't need to be exclusive. Look at xbox. It has "nothing" to us wth 3,4,5 systems but to a normie it has tons of games and it sells well enough. Games games games games it has never been different. The prices on some headsets are somwhat prohibitive still but even a $550 one is affordable enough to pick up for someone who sees 4 or 5 games they really want.

 

[Guerilla Munch]

VR will never be mainstream while it cuts you totally off from your real word surroundings, which is a massive issue, as this feature is sort of key to the whole experience in the first place.

This is the biggest reason I think. If you don't have a big enough play space to set aside, and the necessary alone time, then you won't be playing VR. This alienates the vast majority of people with families or roommates, which is most of the adult population.

And most younger people don't want to play in total seclusion either. They want to watch Twitch streams or broadcast themselves playing or play Warzone/Fortnite with all their friends on console.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

There's new hardware from one of the big players on the horizon. Who would've thought the total sales be down?

it was down the whole year of 2022, you bumped a thread with bad info.

That seems like a lot seeing as there isn't many major releases that I hear being talked about for VR.

Among Us VR passed 1 million units.

Of course that’s pretty much what we got with Kinect 2… and it flopped. Turns out the more important question is “is this how people want to spend their entertainment time?” And it seems like the answer is mostly “no”.

Kinect 2 was forced bunded with the Xbox One, rising it's price an extra $100 during a NS and international spy/censor/data collection scandal, with out many new games prepared ahead of time for Kinect 2.0, because it was supposed to mostly be used for switching between games a TV, voice commands, and interactivity and touch controls before the games, therefore all the kinect parents left, the $500 price for Xbox One worked well for a few months with some casuals and the hardcore, but the others weren't touching it, forcing them to unbundle Kinect from Xbox One.

In comparison, Kinect 1.0 was new, novel, cheap standalone, or cheap in a 360 bundle, had a crap ton of games ready for it, and the base consoleitself was cheap.

Kinect 2.0 didn't flop because people didn't want improvements for Kinect it flopped because decisions were stupid, and bad timing.

VR on the other hand, had has since 2015 to really take off, and instead we saw the whole market collapse outside the Quest 2, and that was mainly cheap price, wireless, and beat Saber and friends novelty. Now that it's over, VR's next direction to bring back all those millions a third time is definitely questionable.

 

[mckmas8808]

I started using my Quest/PSVR less and less when my girlfriend moved in with me, and since we've had a kid I haven't touched it once. Unless you live alone VR is absurdly impractical.

Not true at all. Learn how to do better family planning.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

Quest 2 was 299 for a hot minute. 299 is the new 199!

No.

VR's entry was just so high that $299 was a big deal. Zuck also wanted a base for his gimmick software including HW which didn't work out the way he thought.

I do think the $349 from the $299 did create a hard ceiling for a headset to crack and still sell boatloads, most VR headsets are above $500, so that's definitely something that will have an impact on the market.

You notice those are getting peoples interest.

Are they? or is it the hardcore and journalists are making a smoke screen? This is the same argument people were making about the Index.

 

[mckmas8808]

Still a niche and still way too expensive. I thought Half Life Alyx was going to be the game to bring VR to the mainstream, but alas it wasn't meant to be. The hardware is still too clunky and expensive.

I guess we're going to have to wait for Apple to bring it mainstream and disrupt the entire gaming industry. There are still important questions that Sony, Valve and Facebook aren't even asking, much less answering. Microsoft can afford to hang back and see where it goes and they can also afford the disruption with their diverse high-revenue businesses. Can Sony?

You aren't making much sense at all. Content has to come first. Apple has shown us nothing yet. Literally nothing.

 

[IlGialloMondadori]

In most cases it's the exact opposite.

Most people think VR sounds neat, and then they try it and it blows them away.

Was just talking to my brother yesterday about psvr2. He was telling me he bought the latest quest, and he uses it with his pc for stuff, but that he wouldn’t spend the money on vr again. He said it’s cool, but it’s hot and annoying and isolating and he doesn’t want to do it for long periods, and most of the time he’d just rather play a normal game.

He said it is mind blowing at first, then it’s like well, it is awesome, but it’s a pain, and a lot of these experiences aren’t that great.

 

[Crayon]

No.

VR's entry was just so high that $299 was a big deal. Zuck also wanted a base for his gimmick software including HW which didn't work out the way he thought.

I do think the $349 from the $299 did create a hard ceiling for a headset to crack and still sell boatloads, most VR headsets are above $500, so that's definitely something that will have an impact on the market.



Are they? or is it the hardcore and journalists are making a smoke screen? This is the same argument people were making about the Index.

The index with alyx did turn heads tho. Alyx is of great interest to this day. And yes I think those by virtue of (for better or worse) their graphics in brand names are getting noticed. You can call the smoke screen. I don't know why.

 

[mckmas8808]

The index with alyx did turn heads tho. Alyx is of great interest to this day. And yes I think those by virtue of (for better or worse) their graphics in brand names are getting noticed. You can call the smoke screen. I don't know why.

Because he needs VR to fail.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

Because he needs VR to fail.

Or you have no clue what you're saying and every reasonable criticism of the VR market you label as "wanting to fail" showing you aren't that interested in the market or it improving, and want it to stay stagnant without fixing any shortcomings or mistakes.

The index with alyx did turn heads tho. Alyx is of great interest to this day. And yes I think those by virtue of (for better or worse) their graphics in brand names are getting noticed. You can call the smoke screen. I don't know why.

The index didn't move many headsets, VR had turned heads many times the idea is to get people to actually buy the product.

You aren't making much sense at all. Content has to come first. Apple has shown us nothing yet. Literally nothing.

All the data shows consumers are incredibly interested in Apples headset before even showing it, as previous thread already discussed with data information compiled by Morning Consult.

That should have erased any doubt that if executed right, the Apple headset is at least going to get millions of peoples attentions, even if it dies off quickly and falls over shortly.

That same data also showed many consumers don't want to control their software with controllers.

The hardcore on forums like these are disconnected from what Tim and Karen want with VR.

 

[Crayon]

The index didn't move many headsets, VR had turned heads many times the idea is to get people to actually buy the product.

I didn't say it moved a bunch. I'm saying people noticed. Index was a grand and alyx was just one game. They rerquired a decent pc and an index is a whole lot less convenient to set up that plugging in one cable, believe you me. To this day, Alyx has a reputation as "the best vr gamme" or even "the only ygood vr game" among people who have neverr even had vr. That is what I mean by turrning heads. Now that we have a really nice set that is not priced in the stratosphere, a trickle of alyx-grade games will take it to the next level.

I though we established the other night, while I was in the drive through at wendys, that they are probably shooting for something under 10 million sold.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

Alyx has a reputation as "the best vr gamme" or even "the only ygood vr game" among people who have neverr even had vr. I didn't say it moved a bunch. I'm saying people noticed. Index was a grand and alyx was just one game. They rerquired a decent pc and an index is a whole lot less convenient to set upThat is what I mean by turrning heads. Now that we have a really nice set that is not priced in the stratosphere, a trickle of alyx-grade games will take it to the next level.

On gaming boards and VR enthusiasts, communities, the average general buyer has no idea what Alyx is and has probably if anything, heard about Creed, Beats Saber or the recent million seller Among Us VR. Although there's a chance people have heard of any of those, but more likely than Alyx.

But even if we remove that and throw it to the side, a trickle of Alyx's is something that has yet to happen and I don't think it will. Alyx wasn't just an enhanced port of a mobile or console game, it was a major VR-ready software made with VR in mind, I'm not seeing that type of investment on a CONSISTENT bases with a stream of releases at all. At least not in this wave of VR.

A company would need to take the risk and be an example raising the bar for AA-AAA VR games and output, but no company has done this so far.

 

[Guerilla Munch]

Not true at all. Learn how to do better family planning.

You're right, I'll just put my toddler in a kennel so I can strap a Quest 2 to my face to play Beat Saber or Thumper, which are the only games that are better in VR than on console.

 

[Crayon]

On gaming boards and VR enthusiasts, communities, the average general buyer has no idea what Alyx is and has probably if anything, heard about Creed, Beats Saber or the recent million seller Among Us VR. Although there's a chance people have heard of any of those, but more likely than Alyx.

But even if we remove that and throw it to the side, a trickle of Alyx's is something that has yet to happen and I don't think it will. Alyx wasn't just an enhanced port of a mobile or console game, it was a major VR-ready software made with VR in mind, I'm not seeing that type of investment on a CONSISTENT bases with a stream of releases at all. At least not in this wave of VR.

A company would need to take the risk and be an example raising the bar for AA-AAA VR games and output, but no company has done this so far.

Idk you keep going back to the world at large adopting vr en masse and I have to repeat that I think we are in agreement there. That is quite awhile down the road. I'm only talking about incremental steps. Getting an alyx once a year instead of once every 3 years is a big difference and it will raise interest. You could really do to be more specific about these standards of success. I'm talking about sony getting off 10 million instead of 5 million. A real AAA game from a big franchise here and there will help. Again, you can dismiss re8, horizon, and gt7 as you please but that's yet another reach. I'm sure they aren't "native" or something like that.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

Idk you keep going back to the world at larrge adompting vr en masse

No, you keep imagining there's a lot of room in the VR market when there isn't

VR is incredibly niche, even 3 million is a major breakthrough even if that would cause losses.

There is no "en masse", the BR market generally buys one VR headset, or eventually consolidates around 1 VR headset, outside of a major change with the upcoming units about to release within the next year, VR headsets generally don't sale. That's just the truth of it.

Alyx releases being (relatively) high in output and consistent would require a level of investment that is unlikely to exist unless PSVR2 ends up being the Quest 2 replacement (and it's unlikely any replacement is going to sell as much as Q2 but probably 10+ million).

No one is dismissing any of those PSVR2 games, what you're doing is projecting because you know those games are not Alyx level and you know those games aren't going to help PSVR2 reach 10 million units.

There is also very little room for any upcoming VR headset to hit 10 million units. There is no reaching either, you're still on this native thing without reading the previous conversation, admitting it, and doubling down anyway.

Again, if you want an ACTUAL Alyx once a year, that's going to take consistent VR investment we have not seen yet from any company, this is not a controversial statement, this is true, and still is. We will only see this happen with large adoption of the headset to continue momentum over the competition.

Now what could happen is maybe Sony has a trick up their sleeve which results in a big launch, and they have huge Alyx level AAA games ready to release in a consistent stream to push the hardware. But if that isn't the case, then It's unlikely to expect that level of investment from ANY VR company.

PSVR 2's launch month is important for this reason, as well as the amount of units Sony shipped and sold through.

 

[Crayon]

No, you keep imagining there's a lot of room in the VR market when there isn't

VR is incredibly niche, even 3 million is a major breakthrough even if that would cause losses.

There is no "en masse", the BR market generally buys one VR headset, or eventually consolidates around 1 VR headset, outside of a major change with the upcoming units about to release within the next year, VR headsets generally don't sale. That's just the truth of it.

Alyx releases being (relatively) high in output and consistent would require a level of investment that is unlikely to exist unless PSVR2 ends up being the Quest 2 replacement (and it's unlikely any replacement is going to sell as much as Q2 but probably 10+ million).

No one is dismissing any of those PSVR2 games, what you're doing is projecting because you know those games are not Alyx level and you know those games aren't going to help PSVR2 reach 10 million units.

There is also very little room for any upcoming VR headset to hit 10 million units. There is no reaching either, you're still on this native thing without reading the previous conversation, admitting it, and doubling down anyway.

Again, if you want an ACTUAL Alyx once a year, that's going to take consistent VR investment we have not seen yet from any company, this is not a controversial statement, this is true, and still is. We will only see this happen with large adoption of the headset to continue momentum over the competition.

Now what could happen is maybe Sony has a trick up their sleeve which results in a big launch, and they have huge Alyx level AAA games ready to release in a consistent stream to push the hardware. But if that isn't the case, then It's unlikely to expect that level of investment from ANY VR company.

PSVR 2's launch month is important for this reason, as well as the amount of units Sony shipped and sold through.

Aaaaalrright let's simma down. ttyl.

 

[flying_sq]

I've played VR on various setups and it was interesting, but nothing worth the hassle of actually owning it. Plus I shudder to think of the EULA for ones with cameras looking out of the headset. The only one of slight interest is the Index, but at this point, I'll wait for Index 2.

 

[Mozza]

Not true at all. Learn how to do better family planning.

Evidence please, or is this just a personal feeling, as I do agree to a certain level that you can make most situations work if you want to, my argument is the masses will not do this, and VR will remain niche.

 

[Neff]

My anecdotal experience of VR as someone who is fascinated by the idea is getting a PSVR for christmas a couple of years ago, loving it, playing it over a week or so and shelving it because I played everything worth playing in that one week, and there's been little of note since.

So any decline we might witness doesn't surprise me.

 

[Mozza]

My anecdotal experience of VR as someone who is fascinated by the idea is getting a PSVR for christmas a couple of years ago, loving it, playing it over a week or so and shelving it because I played everything worth playing in that one week, and there's been little of note since.

So any decline we might witness doesn't surprise me.

For me VR is to videogames, what 3D was for T.V's.

I have a JVC DLA projector that has 3D for Blu-ray's, and initially was blown away by it, but after a while just much prefer watching movies without the glasses. Shame really as it's pretty awesome 3D, and there are lots of new releases that support it, but the T.V manufacturers ditched the tech years ago.

 

[acm2000]

VR will be great when you dont have to wear a headset, just audio/visual signals injected right into your brain via anal probe.

 

[ResilientBanana]

Only? How do you downplay 9.6 MILLION?! I wonder how many people have VR total?

 

[pleaseinsertdisctwo]

Consumers are lazy, don't want to play games while also burning calories, at least that is my opinion. Playing games in VR is 1000x better than with a controller in front of a TV, more immersive, and your body can be used instead of being sedentary. I think the big problem with lack of adoption more so however is not enough AAA games. If tomorrow the industry began to push hardcore native support for VR, with exclusive content, it would be a game changer. The vast majority of games out there are at best amazing tech demos for what is possible.

Lol what is this post?

First of all, plenty of people do actual exercise by going to the gym/playing a sport/doing cardio. Not by playing video games, where I’d imagine the amount of calories burned is tiny.

Secondly, are you forgetting how many units the Wii sold?

 

[crackajack]

That's the thing, very few listen to the positivity. You can see that all over this forum.

There's always dozens of excuses.

Most people think VR sounds neat, and then they try it and it blows them away.

Most people think VR sounds great, and then they try it and those who are not blown away, the majority, realise that it is just neat for certain stuff, now and then, but usually not worth the downsides.
There are probably people shitting on cabled VR2 ignoring that most living or gaming rooms don't have enough space to walk around in any meaningful capacity anway. Practically no one will move their furniture anytime playing someting in VR.
Stereoblind people get left out anyway and sickness problems should improve at least a bit with better tech and knowledge how to avoid camera moves that are sickening, even though it seems like a lottery what punches your stomach or not, but weight, steamy, just not the prefered and used couch comfy gaming expirience are not soon or not at all improveable.
If I am in the slightest interested in something and read just one actually blown away review, which certainly exist, I would not care about excuses, any negativity, especially since Sony offered trial sessions in stores with VR1. The potential market, ie interested at all, not entirely clueless what VR offers, willing to pay the price and willing to accept the negatives of those helmets for a regular or even exclusive use is just not huge and Meta and Sony not cooperating hardly helped.

But 10 mio. isn't really bad at all, considering all, but possibly is already what is the ceiling and we will see if meta and sony don't have to go back to 299 or something to get this every year. To be profitable both main vendors seem to think it has to be more, but that will hardly attract more people.

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

Lol what is this post?

First of all, plenty of people do actual exercise by going to the gym/playing a sport/doing cardio. Not by playing video games, where I’d imagine the amount of calories burned is tiny.

Secondly, are you forgetting how many units the Wii sold?

I go to the gym 4 days a week. But my gaming time is usually 1-2 hours at the end of the day when I just want to sit on my ass and be entertained.

And Wii pantomime controls (and Kinect) were both fads that exploded in popularity and then died out a few years later. If anything, all that proves is that sometimes people will spend a couple hundred bucks to see what some novelty hype is about, then go back to the old way once the novelty wears off.

 

[mckmas8808]

All the data shows consumers are incredibly interested in Apples headset before even showing it, as previous thread already discussed with data information compiled by Morning Consult.

That should have erased any doubt that if executed right, the Apple headset is at least going to get millions of peoples attentions, even if it dies off quickly and falls over shortly.

That same data also showed many consumers don't want to control their software with controllers.

The hardcore on forums like these are disconnected from what Tim and Karen want with VR.

Here's the thing Eddie-Griffin . I don't care about the people in your quote that I bolded. I couldn't care less. They have nothing to do with the industry that I personally care about. We are clearly two TOTALLY different markets. I've been on GAF since 2001 or so. Back then "those" people thought talking to strangers on the internet was weird and stupid. They said doing what me and you are doing was a waste of time and meant you had no friends.

Guess what came out a couple of years later? You guessed it! Myspace and Facebook. Slowly "those" people understood the power of communicating on the internet to people that didn't know. It took a while, but this whole social media thing was always going to happen. It was just a matter of time.

The same thing here. VR and AR WILL 100% happen! It's just a matter of time. Will it replace our TVs? No! But it will be mainstream. And Sony will be a player within it, if they choose to keep building on PSVR and PSVR2. That's obvious to see right?

 

[Denton]

I would get PSVR2 if it supported natively both PS5 and PC.

But since there is no headset that does both, I am just gonna keep waiting..

 

[mckmas8808]

You're right, I'll just put my toddler in a kennel so I can strap a Quest 2 to my face to play Beat Saber or Thumper, which are the only games that are better in VR than on console.

Are you a single parent perhaps? Because if you can't put your toddler down 1 or 2 hours in a day while you play in VR, I don't know what to say. Consider this.....I have a 3 year old. I'm fully aware of her sleep schedule. Unless your kid has special needs or something or you have 2 or 3 jobs, I'm sure you have 1 to 2 hours within a day to play VR games. Or sometimes on the weekend to do so, if you wanted.

No one is dismissing any of those PSVR2 games, what you're doing is projecting because you know those games are not Alyx level and you know those games aren't going to help PSVR2 reach 10 million units.

There is also very little room for any upcoming VR headset to hit 10 million units. There is no reaching either, you're still on this native thing without reading the previous conversation, admitting it, and doubling down anyway.

Again, if you want an ACTUAL Alyx once a year, that's going to take consistent VR investment we have not seen yet from any company, this is not a controversial statement, this is true, and still is. We will only see this happen with large adoption of the headset to continue momentum over the competition.

Now what could happen is maybe Sony has a trick up their sleeve which results in a big launch, and they have huge Alyx level AAA games ready to release in a consistent stream to push the hardware. But if that isn't the case, then It's unlikely to expect that level of investment from ANY VR company.

PSVR 2's launch month is important for this reason, as well as the amount of units Sony shipped and sold through.

The bolded is super weird to me dude. Like...............clearly we haven't played Horizon: COTM. But to say RE8 and GT7 aren't close to Alyx level is just so off to me. Now I haven't played RE8 yet, but I can tell you for a fact that the personal expireance I had with RE7 in VR was close to Alyx close. Close but not completely there yet. But it looks like Capcom has made RE8 better in VR, than RE7 was. So.......

And GT7 in VR looks like what GOD himself would have created. We'll know more tomorrow, but if early impressions stay the same......bruh! Go-karting in VR in GT7 with a racing wheel will be next-level. I have no idea how you can say that isn't Half-Life Alyx level.

Evidence please, or is this just a personal feeling, as I do agree to a certain level that you can make most situations work if you want to, my argument is the masses will not do this, and VR will remain niche.

No the masses will not do that. You're right. At least not right now. I'd say we are 10-15 years away from "the masses" from being into VR\AR and that's okay.


***QUESTION***

When do you guys consider "playing video games at home" to have been mainstreamed? Keep in mind the NES came out in 1985. To me......video games became mainstream in or around the year 2001. Or I can say the PS2 generation.

 

[Mozza]

Are you a single parent perhaps? Because if you can't put your toddler down 1 or 2 hours in a day while you play in VR, I don't know what to say. Consider this.....I have a 3 year old. I'm fully aware of her sleep schedule. Unless your kid has special needs or something or you have 2 or 3 jobs, I'm sure you have 1 to 2 hours within a day to play VR games. Or sometimes on the weekend to do so, if you wanted.



The bolded is super weird to me dude. Like...............clearly we haven't played Horizon: COTM. But to say RE8 and GT7 aren't close to Alyx level is just so off to me. Now I haven't played RE8 yet, but I can tell you for a fact that the personal expireance I had with RE7 in VR was close to Alyx close. Close but not completely there yet. But it looks like Capcom has made RE8 better in VR, than RE7 was. So.......

And GT7 in VR looks like what GOD himself would have created. We'll know more tomorrow, but if early impressions stay the same......bruh! Go-karting in VR in GT7 with a racing wheel will be next-level. I have no idea how you can say that isn't Half-Life Alyx level.



No the masses will not do that. You're right. At least not right now. I'd say we are 10-15 years away from "the masses" from being into VR\AR and that's okay.


***QUESTION***

When do you guys consider "playing video games at home" to have been mainstreamed? Keep in mind the NES came out in 1985. To me......video games became mainstream in or around the year 2001. Or I can say the PS2 generation.

Totally agree that videogames do not need to be mainstream, however all the attention and money that has been thrown at VR, the tech needs to be more than very niche.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

The bolded is super weird to me dude. Like...............clearly we haven't played Horizon: COTM. But to say RE8 and GT7 aren't close to Alyx level is just so off to me.

This only serve to show how disconnected you are from the general VR buying population, and some of the enthusiasts who hold HLA on a pedestal who don't believe either of those two games are enough

You are trying to attribute peoples perspectives in the market to me, that's the mistake you've been making. I want to see more real investment in VR, and want to see competitive headsets which will drive innovation and create healthy competition, and I have to put my personal opinions aside for that to happen, because the games I want to play, most of them, aren't going to do that and neither will many games people on a forum like this want to play.

Totally agree that videogames do not need to be mainstream, however all the attention and money that has been thrown at VR, the tech needs to be more than very niche.

Exactly, we aren't going to see that competition, the market become more viable, or the increase in investment if we are going to continue to have headsets and sometimes the software attached to them sell peanuts.

Here's the thing Eddie-Griffin . I don't care about the people in your quote that I bolded. I couldn't care less. They have nothing to do with the industry that I personally care about.

They literally do, and people like you not caring about them is what led to the previous VR wave imploding out of nowhere, headsets sales coming to a crawl, until Quest 2 reintroduced the novelty factor with a low price and heavy marketing with (initially) software to back it, leading to a consolidation around ONE headset stagnating improvements in software development and investment.

(Your social media comparison is also frankly bizarre)

Only? How do you downplay 9.6 MILLION?! I wonder how many people have VR total?

Worldwide shipped not sold? That's pretty low, especially when most of that is ONE Headset out of over a dozen.

 

[mckmas8808]

They literally do, and people like you not caring about them is what led to the previous VR wave imploding out of nowhere, headsets sales coming to a crawl, until Quest 2 reintroduced the novelty factor with a low price and heavy marketing with (initially) software to back it, leading to a consolidation around ONE headset stagnating improvements in software development and investment.

(Your social media comparison is also frankly bizarre)

I'm sorry but the bolded shows you have no idea what would make a VR market healthy. It's all about content. And good content. Games like GT7 and RE8 are the perfect examples of what that content would look like. But so is Half-Life Alyx. We honestly need at least 10-20 of those level games to come out every year for a healthy VR gaming market.

The Social media comparison isn't bizarre. You just know I'm right and you are moving the goalposts. The whole point was that these technologies can take years to get going before they become 'mainstream'. Yet it needs the hardcore users to be there first and using it. The hardcore matter first, then the mainstream. You can't get to the mainstream, because you satisfy the hardcore.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

I'm sorry but the bolded shows you have no idea what would make a VR market healthy. It's all about content.

Which is what I'm talking about, the problem is your mind is focused on favoritism you want over what the industry needs to actually grow and be healthy. You're disconnected from what the market needs to facilitate growth. You have to push what you want aside, to see where the real growth needs to be, and then you can worry about the stuff you want once the market is in the right place.

We are on a gaming forum, the first thing several people did when the stats showed many people don't want game controllers for their games was shun the data. 10 games of GT7 caliber every year isn't going to shift VR. We've seen one not even work within one month.

The Social media comparison isn't bizarre. You just know I'm right and you are moving the goalposts.

You're projecting, you brought the social media nonsense out of nowhere, you are the one moving the goal posts, me saying the comparison was odd isn't even what "move the goalposts" means, at this point you're just rambling.

VR market is in no position for split demographics, and there isn't enough viable healthy competition going on either, VR currently is dead outside ONE brand of headset, outside of that it has been on a decline since 2018. These issues plus other factors, are different than what Social media went through and is going through, there are no parallels, there's no costs to entry for the services themselves, and there's many choices with millions in MAU and engagement, among other major differences from VR making such a comparison questionable.

Yet it needs the hardcore users to be there first and using it. The hardcore matter first, then the mainstream. You can't get to the mainstream, because you satisfy the hardcore.

People have been saying this for 7 years, this is clearly a false statement regarding VR. VR has only taken off three times and it was catering to more technically comfortable casuals, Gear VR, Quest 1, and Quest 2. PSVR1 for awhile also grabbed decent marketshare before dropping off by catering to that same group by going right against Gear VR in stores with similar marketing and coverage.

The hardcore is the one saying the upcoming PSVR2's launch line up is mainly Quest ports and mobile games, so Sony is clearly not positioning the PSVR2 to aim squarely at the hardcore first. Sure they want them but you're acting like Sony can sell 2 million units with just the hardcore.

 

[Crayon]

The hardcore is the one saying the upcoming PSVR2's launch line up is mainly Quest ports and mobile games, so Sony is clearly not positioning the PSVR2 to aim squarely at the hardcore first.

Dude c'mon. The hardcore are not complaining about quest ports, they're drooling over the first time a full set of AAA games with no-compromise graphics are coming to vr. Go ahead and keep handwaving those games.

 

[Techies]

VR will never be mainstream while it cuts you totally off from your real word surroundings, which is a massive issue, as this feature is sort of key to the whole experience in the first place.

I played Demeo the other day in mixed reality whilst making coffee. Table top games with mixed reality/turn based games allow you do IRL stuff.

The quest2 and quest pro show it works well. If they can just up the quality it'll be perfect. I can choose to play in a fully immersed world or just a social game to kill the time.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

Dude c'mon. The hardcore are not complaining about quest ports,

Literally have, even all over the social media.

Go ahead and keep handwaving those games.

I didn't handwave anything, now you're making things up. You're trying to make your disconnect form the general VR market vanish by hype, instead of looking at the market correctly.

Nothing is stopping you from still playing those games, but those aren't the games that are going to move headsets. Just like Alyx, good game, great reviews, fun to play, didn't help the Index.

 

[Crayon]

Literally have, even all over the social media.

It's called trolling. Trolls latch onto to one point, and repeat it as much as possible with minimal effort to boost signal. You'll notice a lot of these complaints are quick drive-bys just parroting "quest sports" without anything to add. If you compare it with the complaints around cross-gen development, you'll notice a lot more nuance around those conversations. Like, actual conversations.

Note that most serious coverage is focusing on those big games, and not disparaging popular existing games being on the platform from the start. Your hardcore are mostly not being targeted cuz this is not a real mass-market thing. People who are actually interested in VR are the target audience. Not people who need a hard sell on it.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

It's called trolling. Trroolls latch onto to one point, and repeated as much as possible with minimal effort to boost signal. You'll notice a lot of these complaints are quick drive-bys just parroting "quest sports" without anything to add. If you compare it with the complaints around cross-gen development, you'll notice a lot more nuance around those conversations. Like, actual conversations.

Note that most serious coverage is focusing on those big games, and not disparaging popular existing games being on the platform from the start. Your hardcore are mostly not being targeted cuz this is not a real mass-market thing. People who are actually interested in VR are the target audience. Not people who need a hard sell on it.

I'm talking about experts or enthusiast who break down VR, and are clearly interested in the industry putting out video, not comment on twitter. You also seem to think people can't criticize or make mention of what's needed in the industry, and still enjoy those games at the same time. This isn't an ultimatum.

Also, I expect Sony to announce demos at retailers for PSVR2 to convince people who need a hard sell on it just like PSVR1, because Sony needs those people to come and much of their launch lineup is for them.

This time demo booths will also be less complicated.

 

[Crayon]

I'm talking about experts or enthusiast who break down VR, and are clearly interested in the industry putting out video, not comment on twitter. You also seem to think people can't criticize or make mention of what's needed in the industry, and still enjoy those games at the same time. This isn't an ultimatum.

Also, I expect Sony to announce demos at retailers for PSVR2 to convince people who need a hard sell on it just like PSVR1, because Sony needs those people to come and much of their launch lineup is for them.

This time demo booths will also be less complicated.

Nah, I''ve been open to criticisms. Good ones, though. Bad criticism: The launch lineup is weak. Good criticism: we have no idea how the library will develop after that. Good criticism: $550 is prohibitively expensive. Bad criticism: It costs $1,140 with two games. Etc.

As for coverage, every vr outlet I have seen had glowing impressions. Those with criticisms were level-headed and not based on speculation about "people". Such as the controllers having questionable tracking range towards the side of the head. Fresnel lenses showing their inferiority to the latest pancake lenses. In fact, most anything I've seen talking about "why you should buy" or "why you should not buy" have been more listicle click generator style things.

You should link me to some though, because my feed could be serving me all the more positive impressions.

 

[mckmas8808]

Which is what I'm talking about, the problem is your mind is focused on favoritism you want over what the industry needs to actually grow and be healthy. You're disconnected from what the market needs to facilitate growth. You have to push what you want aside, to see where the real growth needs to be, and then you can worry about the stuff you want once the market is in the right place.

We are on a gaming forum, the first thing several people did when the stats showed many people don't want game controllers for their games was shun the data. 10 games of GT7 caliber every year isn't going to shift VR. We've seen one not even work within one month.



You're projecting, you brought the social media nonsense out of nowhere, you are the one moving the goal posts, me saying the comparison was odd isn't even what "move the goalposts" means, at this point you're just rambling.

VR market is in no position for split demographics, and there isn't enough viable healthy competition going on either, VR currently is dead outside ONE brand of headset, outside of that it has been on a decline since 2018. These issues plus other factors, are different than what Social media went through and is going through, there are no parallels, there's no costs to entry for the services themselves, and there's many choices with millions in MAU and engagement, among other major differences from VR making such a comparison questionable.



People have been saying this for 7 years, this is clearly a false statement regarding VR. VR has only taken off three times and it was catering to more technically comfortable casuals, Gear VR, Quest 1, and Quest 2. PSVR1 for awhile also grabbed decent marketshare before dropping off by catering to that same group by going right against Gear VR in stores with similar marketing and coverage.

The hardcore is the one saying the upcoming PSVR2's launch line up is mainly Quest ports and mobile games, so Sony is clearly not positioning the PSVR2 to aim squarely at the hardcore first. Sure they want them but you're acting like Sony can sell 2 million units with just the hardcore.

Sony absoultely can sell 2 million units to just the hardcore. But that's not enough. Me and you agree on more than we disagree. The main place we disagree (in my opinion) is here....


A. I think you need to feed the hardcore VR audience first a steady flow of quality games and grow from there to the casuals. Exactly like what happened in the console gaming market.

B. You seem to think companies need to pull in the casuals first and then with a huge market, start giving the hardcore the games that they want.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

As for coverage, every vr outlet I have seen had glowing impressions. Those with criticisms were level-headed and not based on speculation about "people". Such as the controllers having questionable tracking range towards the side of the head. Fresnel lenses showing their inferiority to the latest pancake lenses. In fact, most anything I've seen talking about "why you should buy" or "why you should not buy" have been more listicle click generator style things.

I didn't say that PSVR2 had negative impressions, I was talking about those games having the ability to shift large numbers of VR headsets. You seem to be conflating that with quality for some reason.

 

[Crayon]

I didn't say that PSVR2 had negative impressions, I was talking about those games having the ability to shift large numbers of VR headsets. You seem to be conflating that with quality for some reason.

I agree there. Those existing games are for people already into vr. It's the AAA games that are needed to bring people in. And I also agree that 3 is not enough. It's a huge step going from 1 to 4 in a single day but the public has to be able to reasonably expect more unnanounced games coming (like a mainline console) and it will take a long time to build up that trust after vr languishing in low-spec land for so long.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

Sony absoultely can sell 2 million units to just the hardcore. But that's not enough. Me and you agree on more than we disagree. The main place we disagree (in my opinion) is here....


A. I think you need to feed the hardcore VR audience first a steady flow of quality games and grow from there to the casuals. Exactly like what happened in the console gaming market.

B. You seem to think companies need to pull in the casuals first and then with a huge market, start giving the hardcore the games that they want.

Console gaming market was started to bring more accessibility to people at home so you don't have to depend on the arcade which was then the enthusiast market, and that then turned into needing to attract consumers with appealing software to sell systems instead of just better hardware and a bunch of features, you needed appealing hardware to attract the bigger groups at a price that was accessible. There was never a time during consoles that you had to atreact the hardcore first,.

The one exception which isn't really one, was the PS2/Xbox/360/PS3 time frame where the term "hardcore" applied to everyone interested in games, where as casual was changed to most who were not interested in games, which then changed to not interested in console games, but flash browser and mobile games, creating massive confusion over those terms mainly because of the Wii (and DS to a lesser extent)

However, the semi-casual gamers are still the same casuals they were the gen before that time, and those are still the ones who play COD on Xbox over the wii, that you need to attract.

VR is no different. For one, VR has been mostly an enthusiast hardcore market for 8 years. VR this generation has only taken off 3 times and all due to 3 headset brands managing to get casuals on board, with PSVR1 also doing well with that market earlier on. .

How can you possibly still be saying we need to pull the hardcore first over casuals when hardcore has been the primary target of the market for 8 years? We have seen it doesn't sell headsets. I think you're gravely underestimating how bad the VR market is right now.

All post Quest 1 headsets not the Quest 2 haven't even sold 1 million units combined, and that's including whatever sales were still going on whatever retail is/was still selling older headsets from earlier this wave, including the last few years of PSVR1. Only Quest 2 has managed to do that in this period post-Quest 1, that is sell 1 million units by itself, not combined with anything else..

Really, you could probably move that start time to 2018, and the results would likely still be the same where all outside Quest 1 and Quest 2, combined don't make up 1 million units.

You have Quest 2 shipping (maybe) 20 million, and then what's after that since 2018? Quest 1?

Most of PSVR1's sales were in the first few years, and Gear ended up being killed a year after that so Oculus can focus on the original Quest and other products going on their own. So we are talking about a VR market that's been dead outside one brand for 5-6 years. Quest. (Heck, technically Oculus has been leading VR since they partnered wit Samsung.)

VR does not move without general audiences. Period.

Sony also knows this, hence the launch lineup, I expect we will see demo booths at retailers again to get the casuals to buy the headset, or both headset and PS5 if they don't already have the latter.

 

[mckmas8808]

I agree there. Those existing games are for people already into vr. It's the AAA games that are needed to bring people in. And I also agree that 3 is not enough. It's a huge step going from 1 to 4 in a single day but the public has to be able to reasonably expect more unnanounced games coming (like a mainline console) and it will take a long time to build up that trust after vr languishing in low-spec land for so long.

Agreed! I also think we need to respect technological achievements as they happen. And not just jump the gun. The fact is, we were never going to go from the Atari 2600 to PS4 in 7 years. To me we are possibly entering into the NES territory of VR, where 2D games ruled the day, but 3D gaming wasn't much of a thought or even a possibility yet.

I'm not going to be the guy playing an NES wishing we had some super future-style game that allowed me to play in 3 dimensions with full voice acting and real-time physics. I think that's the problem I have with many VR doubters at the moment. Like slowdown and at least let us enjoy what we have and demand for these companies to keep supporting the format.

 

[mckmas8808]

Console gaming market was started to bring more accessibility to people at home so you don't have to depend on the arcade which was then the enthusiast market, and that then turned into needing to attract consumers with appealing software to sell systems instead of just better hardware and a bunch of features, you needed appealing hardware to attract the bigger groups at a price that was accessible. There was never a time during consoles that you had to atreact the hardcore first,.

The one exception which isn't really one, was the PS2/Xbox/360/PS3 time frame where the term "hardcore" applied to everyone interested in games, where as casual was changed to most who were not interested in games, which then changed to not interested in console games, but flash browser and mobile games.

However, the semi-casual gamers are still the same casuals they were the gen before that time, and those are still the ones who play COD on Xbox over the wii, that you need to attract.

VR is no different. For one, VR has been mostly an enthusiast hardcore market for 8 years. VR this generation has only taken off 3 times and all due to 3 headset brands managing to get casuals on board, with PSVR1 also doing well with that market.

How can you possibly still be saying we need to pull the hardcore first over casuals when hardcore has been the primary target of the market for 8 years? We have seen it doesn't sell headsets. I think you're gravely underestimating how bad the VR market is right now.

All post Quest 1 headsets not the Quest 2 haven't even sold 1 million units combined, and that's including whatever sales were still going on whatever retail is/was still selling headsets from earlier this wave, including the last few years of PSVR1. Only Quest 2 has managed to do that in this period post-Quest 1.

Really, you could probably move that start time to 2018, and the results would likely still be the same where all but Quest 1 and Quest 2, combined don't make up 1 million units.

You have Quest 2 shipping (maybe) 20 million, and then what's after that since 2018?

Most of PSVR1's sales were in the first few years, and Gear ended up being killed a year after that so Oculus can focus on the original Quest and other products going on their own. So we are talking about a VR market that's been dead outside one brand for 5-6 years.

VR does not move without general audiences. Period.

Sony also knows this, hence the launch lineup, I expect we will see demo booths at retailers again to get the casuals to buy the headset, or both headset and PS5 if they don't already have the latter.

The bolded is a great question. Because the hardcore VR heads (like myself) never got our full feeding of what VR gaming is supposed to be yet. You say 8 years as if it's truly been 8 real years of content. Since 2014, we've probably had 3 strong years worth of content. And half of that time was more novelty type games that made us hardcore VR people happy, but that was never going to last long.

But I think we may be using the word "casuals" differently. To me, a casual VR buyer is someone that may play 1 or 2 games a year, but also want VR to be in the "MetaVerse" and watch the latest Futbol Premier League match in VR and that's mostly it. Is that how you are defining the word "casual"?