oculus says they're not making money on the hardware and that it's cheap based on the tech to make. bad news for peeps waiting on the htc and ps4. means it will be just as expensive, if not more. OR it won't be near as powerful most likely if cheaper.
You don't really earn much money on the first version, no. Once you start to produce higher numbers you will start to earn money but this version will be expensive to make.
A console also cost a lot to make in the beginning, the PS3 for example had problems with the blue ray players who both were expensive and hard to make in large enough numbers. They became cheaper prtty fast.
Consomer prices will go down and earnings will go up if it becomes a hit.
oculus says they're not making money on the hardware and that it's cheap based on the tech to make. bad news for peeps waiting on the htc and ps4. means it will be just as expensive, if not more. OR it won't be near as powerful most likely if cheaper.
You don't really earn much money on the first version, no. Once you start to produce higher numbers you will start to earn money but this version will be expensive to make.
A console also cost a lot to make in the beginning, the PS3 for example had problems with the blue ray players who both were expensive and hard to make in large enough numbers. They became cheaper prtty fast.
Consomer prices will go down and earnings will go up if it becomes a hit.
they are basically going for the same model to monetize as the Consoles do. I dont know exactly how its going to work but they have said they are more interested in having millions of people consuming content then they are making money off the hardware.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Oh I also forgot to add, Google/Samsung is probably popping champagne corks over this announcement, I believe that "slip your (Samsung) android smartphone in the cardboard box" VR will be dirt cheap assuming you have a compatible smartphone.
I expect to see a lot of apps (both ios and android) and DIY "hacks" to be a far more accessible alternative.
The screens in those phones don't cost 600$....lol
kind of like I knew you were going to say that but hoped that the rest was self explaintory
I know that.
so you want to talk about 3 usb cables now? maybe dissect each part per price into its own forum thread? or maybe you can infer what I was saying
It's very simple. They made a bundle thing to inflate the price point, I would also argue we are paying for all the DK1 people that get one for free.
They could easily sell just the rift at much lower price without selling at a loss. That was suppose to be the plan..to sell at cost to get the rift in as many homes as possible and make cash with software sales....guess facebook decided otherwise.
I have been very supportive and enthusiastic about the OR regardless of FB buying it out but I have to call BS when I see some.
It's like the hdmi cables you buy for 80$ if bought at the same store you buy your new widescreen tv that you can get for like 20$ at a different local shop...and it's the same brand/model in the same packaging etc etc
I guess we do.
ok what about motion sensors? what about the headset itself? what about the development time on the software itself? what about all other parts of the device that you and I are not aware of, should we look those up to? I bet there is a processor on it but not sure, should we find out?
what kind of screens are these SPECIFCALLY. are the OLED or amoled?
whats the most expensive part of a smart phone? is it the processor? or is it the monitor? I think its the monitor hence the example makes sense, should we look it up to validate?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Average consumers buy computers at Walmart for $350. They're charging $599 because that's how much they need to make their nut with expected sales numbers, which will likely be hard to meet.
Depends on whom the average consumer is. The average consumer you're talking about wouldn't be able to run the Oculus anyways, no matter what it cost.
Oh I also forgot to add, Google/Samsung is probably popping champagne corks over this announcement, I believe that "slip your (Samsung) android smartphone in the cardboard box" VR will be dirt cheap assuming you have a compatible smartphone.
I expect to see a lot of apps (both ios and android) and DIY "hacks" to be a far more accessible alternative.
I really don't think the Oculus Rift is competing with cardboard box VR phones. BTW Samsung actually partnered with Oculus already for their Galaxy phones for a $100.
The screens in those phones don't cost 600$....lol
kind of like I knew you were going to say that but hoped that the rest was self explaintory
I know that.
so you want to talk about 3 usb cables now? maybe dissect each part per price into its own forum thread? or maybe you can infer what I was saying
It's very simple. They made a bundle thing to inflate the price point, I would also argue we are paying for all the DK1 people that get one for free.
They could easily sell just the rift at much lower price without selling at a loss. That was suppose to be the plan..to sell at cost to get the rift in as many homes as possible and make cash with software sales....guess facebook decided otherwise.
I have been very supportive and enthusiastic about the OR regardless of FB buying it out but I have to call BS when I see some.
It's like the hdmi cables you buy for 80$ if bought at the same store you buy your new widescreen tv that you can get for like 20$ at a different local shop...and it's the same brand/model in the same packaging etc etc
I guess we do.
ok what about motion sensors? what about the headset itself? what about the development time on the software itself? what about all other parts of the device that you and I are not aware of, should we look those up to? I bet there is a processor on it but not sure, should we find out?
what kind of screens are these SPECIFCALLY. are the OLED or amoled?
whats the most expensive part of a smart phone? is it the processor? or is it the monitor? I think its the monitor hence the example makes sense, should we look it up to validate?
Don't be ridiculous, when Lucky says they're not making profit on the hardware it's BS. He says that meaning they're not into clear profits due to using the profits from the hardware sales to recoup R&D.
The plan was suppose to be to sell it at cost, that mean at what it cost them to physically make the hardware not including R&D investment. The R&D investment is to be earned back over time with software sales and the like.
Hell even if they do sell for a little more at first to recoup faster I would be okay with it but double the price...lol
Don't take me for a fool.
Sadly I wouldn't be surprised Vive goes the same route...
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Don't be ridiculous, when Lucky says they're not making profit on the hardware it's BS. He says that meaning they're not into clear profits due to using the profits from the hardware sales to recoup R&D.
The plan was suppose to be to sell it at cost, that mean at what it cost them to physically make the hardware not including R&D investment. The R&D investment is to be earned back over time with software sales and the like.
Hell even if they do sell for a little more at first to recoup faster I would be okay with it but double the price...lol
Don't take me for a fool.
Sadly I wouldn't be surprised Vive goes the same route...
please answer me this exact question.
Why is it BS to say you are doing pretty much EXACTLY what consoles have done the past two generations?
What he is saying he is doing is pretty much an exact copy of how consoles are sold. They sell consoles at a loss and make money from content.
Please do not avoid my question above
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I don't think this is going to be a success. People are already very reluctant to get into VR, and at that price, most won't.
It will move forward. More people buy into it the cheaper the tech gets. As it gets cheaper more will buy into it and more developers will make games. Its a snowball thing. Im waiting myself.
Don't be ridiculous, when Lucky says they're not making profit on the hardware it's BS. He says that meaning they're not into clear profits due to using the profits from the hardware sales to recoup R&D.
The plan was suppose to be to sell it at cost, that mean at what it cost them to physically make the hardware not including R&D investment. The R&D investment is to be earned back over time with software sales and the like.
Hell even if they do sell for a little more at first to recoup faster I would be okay with it but double the price...lol
Don't take me for a fool.
Sadly I wouldn't be surprised Vive goes the same route...
please answer me this exact question.
Why is it BS to say you are doing pretty much EXACTLY what consoles have done the past two generations?
What he is saying he is doing is pretty much an exact copy of how consoles are sold. They sell consoles at a loss and make money from content.
Please do not avoid my question above
Maybe you didn't read my post properly or I didn't explain properly but I am saying they are NOT doing what consoles do, they are not selling at cost. They are making a profit to pay for R&D and once that is all paid they will lower the price.
OR is not selling at a loss.
Anyways I didn't think others were right about you but this has convinced me they are. You will defend OR no matter what they do or don't do.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
So let me see US$600, plus shipping to arrive mid year in Aus. A list of games I will never play, a controller I will never use and a new CPU and graphics card to pad out the price even more. Add in the vomit bucket I will need beside my desk and I am all set.
Yeah, right. Going to rush out and place my order now ...... or not.
...Add in the vomit bucket I will need beside my desk...
I was just thinking about that in the context of BestBuy displays... PR disaster waiting to happen?
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
1st Gen tech always has a high price because of the research and development that went in to making it. You have to be able to get back what has already been spent paying engineers, scientists, developers, and planners to create the tech.
Later versions will have to support R&D too, but at less of a cost because the hardware already exists.
Like many others I will also wait a couple of years until the price drops (once more offers are on the market and it becomes main stream it should get to 350Eur in 2 years or so), the tech to be optimized and there are more games available for it, also although my pc fills the minimum requirements I'm not really sure it will have a great performance with it.
So let me see US$600, plus shipping to arrive mid year in Aus. A list of games I will never play, a controller I will never use and a new CPU and graphics card to pad out the price even more. Add in the vomit bucket I will need beside my desk and I am all set.
Yeah, right. Going to rush out and place my order now ...... or not.
yeah if none of the games on the list of 176 games for Oculus strike your fancy as far as playing in a VR style then I would agree you are making the right move by not buying...fairly obvious in fact
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Don't be ridiculous, when Lucky says they're not making profit on the hardware it's BS. He says that meaning they're not into clear profits due to using the profits from the hardware sales to recoup R&D.
The plan was suppose to be to sell it at cost, that mean at what it cost them to physically make the hardware not including R&D investment. The R&D investment is to be earned back over time with software sales and the like.
Hell even if they do sell for a little more at first to recoup faster I would be okay with it but double the price...lol
Don't take me for a fool.
Sadly I wouldn't be surprised Vive goes the same route...
please answer me this exact question.
Why is it BS to say you are doing pretty much EXACTLY what consoles have done the past two generations?
What he is saying he is doing is pretty much an exact copy of how consoles are sold. They sell consoles at a loss and make money from content.
Please do not avoid my question above
Maybe you didn't read my post properly or I didn't explain properly but I am saying they are NOT doing what consoles do, they are not selling at cost. They are making a profit to pay for R&D and once that is all paid they will lower the price.
OR is not selling at a loss.
Anyways I didn't think others were right about you but this has convinced me they are. You will defend OR no matter what they do or don't do.
oh really?
where did they state that ? I missed it. All I saw was 'at cost'
also..
at hardware cost at hardware cost + getting RD back at lower than hardware cost
doest that all translate into cheap? compared to how much it took to put the thing in your hands? and isnt all three items what consoles do?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I don't think this is going to be a success. People are already very reluctant to get into VR, and at that price, most won't.
thing is how many do you need to qualify for success? 1 million users? 1 billion users? I dont know, I think its completely possible for a majority of people to not like something and it still be a smashing success.
Moreover, 1. The pre-orders sold out within a few hours 2. Gear VR sold out as well when it first came on line 3. DK2 kits sell for 3x the price on ebay as they did when they were aviable for consumers
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
People spending 700$ for this now are crazy, the tech is new-ish, Vive is around the corner and will have FAR! superior tech. It has literally no game support yet, etc...
save your money, wait it out. You'll spend 700$, try it a couple of times, you'll say you love it, people won't care, you'll put it in your closet for a couple of years and probably spend another 500+ on something new.
I don't agree with calling someone liars when it's obvious they have absolutely no idea how much it ACTUALLY costs to make a high-end VR unit. I am however seeing VR game designers thanking Oculus for not nerfing the specs for a cheaper product. I find that pretty telling.
Comments
A console also cost a lot to make in the beginning, the PS3 for example had problems with the blue ray players who both were expensive and hard to make in large enough numbers. They became cheaper prtty fast.
Consomer prices will go down and earnings will go up if it becomes a hit.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I expect to see a lot of apps (both ios and android) and DIY "hacks" to be a far more accessible alternative.
What are your other Hobbies?
Gaming is Dirt Cheap compared to this...
ok what about motion sensors? what about the headset itself? what about the development time on the software itself? what about all other parts of the device that you and I are not aware of, should we look those up to? I bet there is a processor on it but not sure, should we find out?
what kind of screens are these SPECIFCALLY. are the OLED or amoled?
whats the most expensive part of a smart phone? is it the processor? or is it the monitor? I think its the monitor hence the example makes sense, should we look it up to validate?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Guess we'll see if that is true when the other VRs announce their price points....
Imagine Sony.... hey guys, here is our VR hardware and will only cost nearly 2x the price of our console's, enjoy!.
The plan was suppose to be to sell it at cost, that mean at what it cost them to physically make the hardware not including R&D investment. The R&D investment is to be earned back over time with software sales and the like.
Hell even if they do sell for a little more at first to recoup faster I would be okay with it but double the price...lol
Don't take me for a fool.
Sadly I wouldn't be surprised Vive goes the same route...
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Why is it BS to say you are doing pretty much EXACTLY what consoles have done the past two generations?
What he is saying he is doing is pretty much an exact copy of how consoles are sold. They sell consoles at a loss and make money from content.
Please do not avoid my question above
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
OR is not selling at a loss.
Anyways I didn't think others were right about you but this has convinced me they are. You will defend OR no matter what they do or don't do.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Yeah, right. Going to rush out and place my order now ...... or not.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
1st Gen tech always has a high price because of the research and development that went in to making it. You have to be able to get back what has already been spent paying engineers, scientists, developers, and planners to create the tech.
Later versions will have to support R&D too, but at less of a cost because the hardware already exists.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
oh really?
where did they state that ? I missed it. All I saw was 'at cost'
also..
at hardware cost
at hardware cost + getting RD back
at lower than hardware cost
doest that all translate into cheap? compared to how much it took to put the thing in your hands? and isnt all three items what consoles do?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
thing is how many do you need to qualify for success?
1 million users? 1 billion users?
I dont know, I think its completely possible for a majority of people to not like something and it still be a smashing success.
Moreover,
1. The pre-orders sold out within a few hours
2. Gear VR sold out as well when it first came on line
3. DK2 kits sell for 3x the price on ebay as they did when they were aviable for consumers
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
save your money, wait it out. You'll spend 700$, try it a couple of times, you'll say you love it, people won't care, you'll put it in your closet for a couple of years and probably spend another 500+ on something new.
Consoles usually launch with 7-10 titles max.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_Oculus_Rift_support