SEANMCAD said: there does that help you understand?
Condescension is endemic to your character. Yes, I understand that, hence the returned volley.
Too subtle for you, noted.
it just gets exhausting arguing about the sales figures of OR when I am still waiting on my pre-order to be filled. which by the way doesnt even count as a sale
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Making VR exclusive games is like making games exclusively in Norwegian (0.21% of Steam users).
While that sounds amusing, it isn't a valid comparison. The market for VR is expected to grow rapidly over the next few years, unlike Norway. The upcoming $400 Razer headset puts VR within reach for a lot more budgets. That will likely result in attempts from others to compete at or below that price. Without VR games ready for users to play, there wouldn't be any motivation to spend $200 on a VR headset. Early VR game makers are taking a slight risk, but the experience they gain in making the games will pay off greatly when they are able to produce better VR games than those who wait until later to enter the VR game market.
the problem is peoples suggested benchmarks are often ridiculous to begin with. If any VR headset was anywhere near the number of Steam users or the number of people in the US by now it would likely be the most successful new product in human history. People need to find a benchmark that makes fucking sense
No one was suggesting that the benchmark be the population of the US, or even equal to the total number of Steam users.... On the contrary, if one in five Steam users owned a VR headset, that would be extraordinarily successful (the headsets are only 19.78% away!).
Less than a percent is just not an indicator of any widespread success.. Though there are more than likely some issues with the Steam survey that should be considered when you're considering this survey in the larger context.
It's not a locked platform. The intent was always to allow other headsets to play Oculus games. I actually know a couple people that have Vive and they are thankful because Oculus is one of the only ones really making good games for the VR right now.
I love reading these threads from posters that have A) Had experience with VR once at a con with crap computer/game and convinced the rest of VR is awful. Are unnaturally aggressive about the topic. C) Have not a clue what they are talking about so just make crap up. Or they regurgitate what they read from other misinformed internet trolls. D) Look at Steam's craptastic offering of what VR Devs are putting out and jump to the conclusion that it equals every VR game out there. E) People like the poster above that 'know for sure' what they are talking about, when in reality (virtual or otherwise) they really don't.
VR is far from perfect. This iteration is new tech. As for Vive being a complete package, I'm not too sure about that. Room Scale VR is definitely something to shoot for, but for long periods of gaming you need to be comfortable. Headset needs not to get heavy after long playtimes. You need a relaxed play area (comfortable chair.) You need a game that runs at 90fps and a computer that can actually handle it. That's not even factoring in those that would just get nauseous from playing VR regardless.
SEANMCAD said: there does that help you understand?
Condescension is endemic to your character. Yes, I understand that, hence the returned volley.
Too subtle for you, noted.
it just gets exhausting arguing about the sales figures of OR when I am still waiting on my pre-order to be filled. which by the way doesnt even count as a sale
Making VR exclusive games is like making games exclusively in Norwegian (0.21% of Steam users).
While that sounds amusing, it isn't a valid comparison. The market for VR is expected to grow rapidly over the next few years, unlike Norway. The upcoming $400 Razer headset puts VR within reach for a lot more budgets. That will likely result in attempts from others to compete at or below that price. Without VR games ready for users to play, there wouldn't be any motivation to spend $200 on a VR headset. Early VR game makers are taking a slight risk, but the experience they gain in making the games will pay off greatly when they are able to produce better VR games than those who wait until later to enter the VR game market.
the problem is peoples suggested benchmarks are often ridiculous to begin with. If any VR headset was anywhere near the number of Steam users or the number of people in the US by now it would likely be the most successful new product in human history. People need to find a benchmark that makes fucking sense
No one was suggesting that the benchmark be the population of the US, or even equal to the total number of Steam users.... On the contrary, if one in five Steam users owned a VR headset, that would be extraordinarily successful (the headsets are only 19.78% away!).
Less than a percent is just not an indicator of any widespread success.. Though there are more than likely some issues with the Steam survey that should be considered when you're considering this survey in the larger context.
Steam doesn't equal all VR users. Steam has not a clue how well OR is doing. They have a good idea on sales for Vive and OR people that are using Steam. That's it.
My guess is that Gear VR is doing better than either of them, but who knows unless Oculus comes out with total solid numbers to place where their products are in sales/use.
Making VR exclusive games is like making games exclusively in Norwegian (0.21% of Steam users).
While that sounds amusing, it isn't a valid comparison. The market for VR is expected to grow rapidly over the next few years, unlike Norway. The upcoming $400 Razer headset puts VR within reach for a lot more budgets. That will likely result in attempts from others to compete at or below that price. Without VR games ready for users to play, there wouldn't be any motivation to spend $200 on a VR headset. Early VR game makers are taking a slight risk, but the experience they gain in making the games will pay off greatly when they are able to produce better VR games than those who wait until later to enter the VR game market.
the problem is peoples suggested benchmarks are often ridiculous to begin with. If any VR headset was anywhere near the number of Steam users or the number of people in the US by now it would likely be the most successful new product in human history. People need to find a benchmark that makes fucking sense
No one was suggesting that the benchmark be the population of the US, or even equal to the total number of Steam users.... On the contrary, if one in five Steam users owned a VR headset, that would be extraordinarily successful (the headsets are only 19.78% away!).
Less than a percent is just not an indicator of any widespread success.. Though there are more than likely some issues with the Steam survey that should be considered when you're considering this survey in the larger context.
Steam doesn't equal all VR users. Steam has not a clue how well OR is doing. They have a good idea on sales for Vive and OR people that are using Steam. That's it.
My guess is that Gear VR is doing better than either of them, but who knows unless Oculus comes out with total solid numbers to place where their products are in sales/use.
By numbers alone gear VR has given away more than either the Vive or the Rift has sold. While the Rifts numbers haven't been released, we know generally they are pretty poor.. simply because they will release every other metric to show popularity aside from what is actually sold.
Thus far they've spoken about.. 1) Time spent in VR 2) The amount of users that tried VR 3)Top grossing Oculus store purchases (newsflash, the majority of the top grossing purchases were videos, not games)
But they haven't released anything on numbers, nor will they until there is something positive to release. They want to purvey strength and adoption, not low sales and failure, so they'll likely stay tight lipped until they hit a milestone worth talking about. That would be .. maybe 500K maybe 1 Million.
Meanwhile, Samsung is gearing up likely for another mass Gear VR giveaway release with the Note 7. Rumors have it they already have a new Gear VR set to go along with the phone, and since the S7 line had multiple giveaways of the gear VR set, the first of which was slated that they gave away well over 1 Million sets, (and then they ran the promotion again a month or two later) you can bet they'll do the same or something similar for Note 7 purchases too.
I already have the gear VR set. I didn't get it on a promotion, my carrier had a better promotion of 200 dollars of in store items (which I could have bought the gear VR set there and then still had some left) but I opted to buy a new in box gear VR set from someone off of craigslist for 50 bucks. The market is flooded with them since a lot of people got them for free and don't want them.
Just to give you a brief example: my brother who is in medical school got to experience the Da Vinci machine during his surgery rotation that makes use of VR tech; it was initially developed for the military, but now allows a surgeon specialist to perform delicate surgery on a patient remotely, from across the country if necessary.
There are many others I can think of.
The Da Vinci does not use VR tech. There is no virtual world, there is a camera. The surgeon watches a screen and manipulates what is on the screen with a control console. If anything, it is more like playing a video game conventionally with a very specialized controller.
It is also grossly expensive, so unless that remote island has a very expensive patient side unit sitting around waiting for someone to show up dying, you're probably going to die. I guess the expensive aspect fits other narratives here though
Making VR exclusive games is like making games exclusively in Norwegian (0.21% of Steam users).
While that sounds amusing, it isn't a valid comparison. The market for VR is expected to grow rapidly over the next few years, unlike Norway. The upcoming $400 Razer headset puts VR within reach for a lot more budgets. That will likely result in attempts from others to compete at or below that price. Without VR games ready for users to play, there wouldn't be any motivation to spend $200 on a VR headset. Early VR game makers are taking a slight risk, but the experience they gain in making the games will pay off greatly when they are able to produce better VR games than those who wait until later to enter the VR game market.
the problem is peoples suggested benchmarks are often ridiculous to begin with. If any VR headset was anywhere near the number of Steam users or the number of people in the US by now it would likely be the most successful new product in human history. People need to find a benchmark that makes fucking sense
No one was suggesting that the benchmark be the population of the US, or even equal to the total number of Steam users.... On the contrary, if one in five Steam users owned a VR headset, that would be extraordinarily successful (the headsets are only 19.78% away!).
Less than a percent is just not an indicator of any widespread success.. Though there are more than likely some issues with the Steam survey that should be considered when you're considering this survey in the larger context.
Steam doesn't equal all VR users. Steam has not a clue how well OR is doing. They have a good idea on sales for Vive and OR people that are using Steam. That's it.
My guess is that Gear VR is doing better than either of them, but who knows unless Oculus comes out with total solid numbers to place where their products are in sales/use.
By numbers alone gear VR has given away more than either the Vive or the Rift has sold. While the Rifts numbers haven't been released, we know generally they are pretty poor.. simply because they will release every other metric to show popularity aside from what is actually sold.
Thus far they've spoken about.. 1) Time spent in VR 2) The amount of users that tried VR 3)Top grossing Oculus store purchases (newsflash, the majority of the top grossing purchases were videos, not games)
But they haven't released anything on numbers, nor will they until there is something positive to release. They want to purvey strength and adoption, not low sales and failure, so they'll likely stay tight lipped until they hit a milestone worth talking about. That would be .. maybe 500K maybe 1 Million.
Meanwhile, Samsung is gearing up likely for another mass Gear VR giveaway release with the Note 7. Rumors have it they already have a new Gear VR set to go along with the phone, and since the S7 line had multiple giveaways of the gear VR set, the first of which was slated that they gave away well over 1 Million sets, (and then they ran the promotion again a month or two later) you can bet they'll do the same or something similar for Note 7 purchases too.
I already have the gear VR set. I didn't get it on a promotion, my carrier had a better promotion of 200 dollars of in store items (which I could have bought the gear VR set there and then still had some left) but I opted to buy a new in box gear VR set from someone off of craigslist for 50 bucks. The market is flooded with them since a lot of people got them for free and don't want them.
Samsung did a promotion for pre-order to get people to get the new 7. Gear VR was selling out before that promotion. We simply don't know the numbers for sure on that.
As for Oculus Rift, its demand right now out pacing its supply. Sure people can buy one for more money than $600 from resellers, but from Oculus? No. People are still waiting.
VR seems like a complete waste of money. Wake me from the dead when they develop Star Trek-like holodecks. Until then, I will not be sold.
Thats what people said about cell phones.
You mean that thing that is actually useful for communications, actually solved a problem, and doesn't actually make people vomit after 5 minutes of use?
That's the misconception of VR though isn't it? That it's only useful for video games? Except it's not. It could actually be a great tool for collaboration, conferences, teaching, planning, and designing. There's already apps where you can even program/code within VR. Look up AltspaceVR and JanusVR, and you'll see the possibilities in action already.
Check out the 2nd video of BigScreen on this steam page. http://store.steampowered.com/app/457550/ You can browse the web, or watch netflix, youtube, etc, with other people next to you. I'm not here to convert you to anything, but you, and others, seem to have a misconception of the possibilities of VR.
I'm personally waiting for Augmented Reality (AR) though.
Just to give you a brief example: my brother who is in medical school got to experience the Da Vinci machine during his surgery rotation that makes use of VR tech; it was initially developed for the military, but now allows a surgeon specialist to perform delicate surgery on a patient remotely, from across the country if necessary.
There are many others I can think of.
The Da Vinci does not use VR tech. There is no virtual world, there is a camera. The surgeon watches a screen and manipulates what is on the screen with a control console. If anything, it is more like playing a video game conventionally with a very specialized controller.
It is also grossly expensive, so unless that remote island has a very expensive patient side unit sitting around waiting for someone to show up dying, you're probably going to die. I guess the expensive aspect fits other narratives here though
"Virtual Reality" were the words he used to describe it after experiencing it first-hand.
I assume he knew what he was talking about, being in med school.
I wasn't trying to imply that the Oculus Rift or the Vive are the same thing as the Da Vinci machine; I was using the example to illustrate my point that VR technology can be very useful in problem solving.
This is important because it relates to another point earlier in this thread about cell phone adoption being tied to real world applicability.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
Making VR exclusive games is like making games exclusively in Norwegian (0.21% of Steam users).
While that sounds amusing, it isn't a valid comparison. The market for VR is expected to grow rapidly over the next few years, unlike Norway. The upcoming $400 Razer headset puts VR within reach for a lot more budgets. That will likely result in attempts from others to compete at or below that price. Without VR games ready for users to play, there wouldn't be any motivation to spend $200 on a VR headset. Early VR game makers are taking a slight risk, but the experience they gain in making the games will pay off greatly when they are able to produce better VR games than those who wait until later to enter the VR game market.
the problem is peoples suggested benchmarks are often ridiculous to begin with. If any VR headset was anywhere near the number of Steam users or the number of people in the US by now it would likely be the most successful new product in human history. People need to find a benchmark that makes fucking sense
No one was suggesting that the benchmark be the population of the US, or even equal to the total number of Steam users.... On the contrary, if one in five Steam users owned a VR headset, that would be extraordinarily successful (the headsets are only 19.78% away!).
Less than a percent is just not an indicator of any widespread success.. Though there are more than likely some issues with the Steam survey that should be considered when you're considering this survey in the larger context.
Steam doesn't equal all VR users. Steam has not a clue how well OR is doing. They have a good idea on sales for Vive and OR people that are using Steam. That's it.
My guess is that Gear VR is doing better than either of them, but who knows unless Oculus comes out with total solid numbers to place where their products are in sales/use.
By numbers alone gear VR has given away more than either the Vive or the Rift has sold. While the Rifts numbers haven't been released, we know generally they are pretty poor.. simply because they will release every other metric to show popularity aside from what is actually sold.
Thus far they've spoken about.. 1) Time spent in VR 2) The amount of users that tried VR 3)Top grossing Oculus store purchases (newsflash, the majority of the top grossing purchases were videos, not games)
But they haven't released anything on numbers, nor will they until there is something positive to release. They want to purvey strength and adoption, not low sales and failure, so they'll likely stay tight lipped until they hit a milestone worth talking about. That would be .. maybe 500K maybe 1 Million.
Meanwhile, Samsung is gearing up likely for another mass Gear VR giveaway release with the Note 7. Rumors have it they already have a new Gear VR set to go along with the phone, and since the S7 line had multiple giveaways of the gear VR set, the first of which was slated that they gave away well over 1 Million sets, (and then they ran the promotion again a month or two later) you can bet they'll do the same or something similar for Note 7 purchases too.
I already have the gear VR set. I didn't get it on a promotion, my carrier had a better promotion of 200 dollars of in store items (which I could have bought the gear VR set there and then still had some left) but I opted to buy a new in box gear VR set from someone off of craigslist for 50 bucks. The market is flooded with them since a lot of people got them for free and don't want them.
Samsung did a promotion for pre-order to get people to get the new 7. Gear VR was selling out before that promotion. We simply don't know the numbers for sure on that.
As for Oculus Rift, its demand right now out pacing its supply. Sure people can buy one for more money than $600 from resellers, but from Oculus? No. People are still waiting.
Samsung did MULTIPLE promotions for the 7.. not just the initial one, they did it again. I've posted an article a while back that you're welcome to sift through my post history for where over a million units were confirmed as sent.
That was only the first go 'round. Samsung did another set release in April. They've been trying to GIVE them away for a long time.. and NO.. they were not selling out before the promotion, you could find them in just about every store, cell phone stores, best buys, it wasn't a popular peripheral.
And no, they can't buy them from Oculus, thats partially oculuses part and partially due to those resellers. There are well over a hundred units available on Amazon... resellers are also buying multiples. For example, you can check my post history IN THIS THREAD.. where it detailed pretty well the amount of Rifts that were in stock for a certain retailer. When one retailer sells out at that price they move to the next reseller. One of them had OVER 10 in stock.
It's a manufactured demand.. not one out of excitement. Not one out of interest. People just don't care enough about the Rift. Equally so with other VR sets. Nothing is driving sales.
Just to give you a brief example: my brother who is in medical school got to experience the Da Vinci machine during his surgery rotation that makes use of VR tech; it was initially developed for the military, but now allows a surgeon specialist to perform delicate surgery on a patient remotely, from across the country if necessary.
There are many others I can think of.
The Da Vinci does not use VR tech. There is no virtual world, there is a camera. The surgeon watches a screen and manipulates what is on the screen with a control console. If anything, it is more like playing a video game conventionally with a very specialized controller.
It is also grossly expensive, so unless that remote island has a very expensive patient side unit sitting around waiting for someone to show up dying, you're probably going to die. I guess the expensive aspect fits other narratives here though
"Virtual Reality" were the words he used to describe it after experiencing it first-hand.
I assume he knew what he was talking about, being in med school.
I wasn't trying to imply that the Oculus Rift or the Vive are the same thing as the Da Vinci machine; I was using the example to illustrate my point that VR technology can be very useful in problem solving.
I'm guessing he's more med student than gamer. It isn't VR. Intuitive Surgical even states it isn't. It is a narrow field stereoscopic 3D. I've done quite a bit of work at a couple hospitals that have them here in the area. Was pretty fascinated with them. Talked to some doctors who use them. Even got a brief demo. As another aside, most of the surgeons I talked to said that while it does make certain procedures easier, it also feels very hands off and makes them feel more technician than physician.
Getting back on the main path though, I do think there are going to be some very interesting VR applications in the way of problem solving. Don't think they are here in bulk yet though. They have already used the Rift with a Da Vinci to create a virtual surgery of an actual surgery. Mostly for training and skill assessment regarding using the actual Da Vinci.
Making VR exclusive games is like making games exclusively in Norwegian (0.21% of Steam users).
While that sounds amusing, it isn't a valid comparison. The market for VR is expected to grow rapidly over the next few years, unlike Norway. The upcoming $400 Razer headset puts VR within reach for a lot more budgets. That will likely result in attempts from others to compete at or below that price. Without VR games ready for users to play, there wouldn't be any motivation to spend $200 on a VR headset. Early VR game makers are taking a slight risk, but the experience they gain in making the games will pay off greatly when they are able to produce better VR games than those who wait until later to enter the VR game market.
the problem is peoples suggested benchmarks are often ridiculous to begin with. If any VR headset was anywhere near the number of Steam users or the number of people in the US by now it would likely be the most successful new product in human history. People need to find a benchmark that makes fucking sense
No one was suggesting that the benchmark be the population of the US, or even equal to the total number of Steam users.... On the contrary, if one in five Steam users owned a VR headset, that would be extraordinarily successful (the headsets are only 19.78% away!).
Less than a percent is just not an indicator of any widespread success.. Though there are more than likely some issues with the Steam survey that should be considered when you're considering this survey in the larger context.
Steam doesn't equal all VR users. Steam has not a clue how well OR is doing. They have a good idea on sales for Vive and OR people that are using Steam. That's it.
My guess is that Gear VR is doing better than either of them, but who knows unless Oculus comes out with total solid numbers to place where their products are in sales/use.
By numbers alone gear VR has given away more than either the Vive or the Rift has sold. While the Rifts numbers haven't been released, we know generally they are pretty poor.. simply because they will release every other metric to show popularity aside from what is actually sold.
Thus far they've spoken about.. 1) Time spent in VR 2) The amount of users that tried VR 3)Top grossing Oculus store purchases (newsflash, the majority of the top grossing purchases were videos, not games)
But they haven't released anything on numbers, nor will they until there is something positive to release. They want to purvey strength and adoption, not low sales and failure, so they'll likely stay tight lipped until they hit a milestone worth talking about. That would be .. maybe 500K maybe 1 Million.
Meanwhile, Samsung is gearing up likely for another mass Gear VR giveaway release with the Note 7. Rumors have it they already have a new Gear VR set to go along with the phone, and since the S7 line had multiple giveaways of the gear VR set, the first of which was slated that they gave away well over 1 Million sets, (and then they ran the promotion again a month or two later) you can bet they'll do the same or something similar for Note 7 purchases too.
I already have the gear VR set. I didn't get it on a promotion, my carrier had a better promotion of 200 dollars of in store items (which I could have bought the gear VR set there and then still had some left) but I opted to buy a new in box gear VR set from someone off of craigslist for 50 bucks. The market is flooded with them since a lot of people got them for free and don't want them.
Samsung did a promotion for pre-order to get people to get the new 7. Gear VR was selling out before that promotion. We simply don't know the numbers for sure on that.
As for Oculus Rift, its demand right now out pacing its supply. Sure people can buy one for more money than $600 from resellers, but from Oculus? No. People are still waiting.
Samsung did MULTIPLE promotions for the 7.. not just the initial one, they did it again. I've posted an article a while back that you're welcome to sift through my post history for where over a million units were confirmed as sent.
That was only the first go 'round. Samsung did another set release in April. They've been trying to GIVE them away for a long time.. and NO.. they were not selling out before the promotion, you could find them in just about every store, cell phone stores, best buys, it wasn't a popular peripheral.
And no, they can't buy them from Oculus, thats partially oculuses part and partially due to those resellers. There are well over a hundred units available on Amazon... resellers are also buying multiples. For example, you can check my post history IN THIS THREAD.. where it detailed pretty well the amount of Rifts that were in stock for a certain retailer. When one retailer sells out at that price they move to the next reseller. One of them had OVER 10 in stock.
It's a manufactured demand.. not one out of excitement. Not one out of interest. People just don't care enough about the Rift. Equally so with other VR sets. Nothing is driving sales.
From resellers. There's a few used ones for sale too. Every one of them is asking for more than retail price. I guess it's just because they like having their products not sold asking for so much when nobody wants them.
From resellers. There's a few used ones for sale too. Every one of them is asking for more than retail price. I guess it's just because they like having their products not sold asking for so much when nobody wants them.
Thats 10 left in stock from an AMAZON PRIME reseller. There's over 65 NEW some even cheaper than the PRIME listed price. Sure, that IS down from the last time I had to posted this.. but not by much. Yes there are also used units.. but there is still an overwhelming amount of NEW units, and it looks like the prices are coming down from resellers because they aren't selling them right now.
Just to give you a brief example: my brother who is in medical school got to experience the Da Vinci machine during his surgery rotation that makes use of VR tech; it was initially developed for the military, but now allows a surgeon specialist to perform delicate surgery on a patient remotely, from across the country if necessary.
There are many others I can think of.
The Da Vinci does not use VR tech. There is no virtual world, there is a camera. The surgeon watches a screen and manipulates what is on the screen with a control console. If anything, it is more like playing a video game conventionally with a very specialized controller.
It is also grossly expensive, so unless that remote island has a very expensive patient side unit sitting around waiting for someone to show up dying, you're probably going to die. I guess the expensive aspect fits other narratives here though
"Virtual Reality" were the words he used to describe it after experiencing it first-hand.
I assume he knew what he was talking about, being in med school.
I wasn't trying to imply that the Oculus Rift or the Vive are the same thing as the Da Vinci machine; I was using the example to illustrate my point that VR technology can be very useful in problem solving.
I'm guessing he's more med student than gamer. It isn't VR. Intuitive Surgical even states it isn't. It is a narrow field stereoscopic 3D. I've done quite a bit of work at a couple hospitals that have them here in the area. Was pretty fascinated with them. Talked to some doctors who use them. Even got a brief demo. As another aside, most of the surgeons I talked to said that while it does make certain procedures easier, it also feels very hands off and makes them feel more technician than physician.
Getting back on the main path though, I do think there are going to be some very interesting VR applications in the way of problem solving. Don't think they are here in bulk yet though. They have already used the Rift with a Da Vinci to create a virtual surgery of an actual surgery. Mostly for training and skill assessment regarding using the actual Da Vinci.
I guess we more or less agree, then. It may seem like splitting hairs, but I would argue that any stereoscopic POV transference that makes the user feel ' somewhere else' (note Da Vinci has been used for "telesurgery") is related to the technology that produced Rift, Vive et al in as much as the inception of cell phone technology is related to present day use.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
From resellers. There's a few used ones for sale too. Every one of them is asking for more than retail price. I guess it's just because they like having their products not sold asking for so much when nobody wants them.
Thats 10 left in stock from an AMAZON PRIME reseller. There's over 65 NEW some even cheaper than the PRIME listed price. Sure, that IS down from the last time I had to posted this.. but not by much. Yes there are also used units.. but there is still an overwhelming amount of NEW units, and it looks like the prices are coming down from resellers because they aren't selling them right now.
anything you find with a price tag that is more than retail should be and will be immediately discarded as evidence of a stastical population.
peroid
'resellers' and used should also likely be discarded
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
From resellers. There's a few used ones for sale too. Every one of them is asking for more than retail price. I guess it's just because they like having their products not sold asking for so much when nobody wants them.
Thats 10 left in stock from an AMAZON PRIME reseller. There's over 65 NEW some even cheaper than the PRIME listed price. Sure, that IS down from the last time I had to posted this.. but not by much. Yes there are also used units.. but there is still an overwhelming amount of NEW units, and it looks like the prices are coming down from resellers because they aren't selling them right now.
anything you find with a price tag that is more than retail should be and will be immediately discarded as evidence of a stastical population.
peroid
'resellers' and used should also likely be discarded
..... So if Oculus releases 5000 more sets tomorrow but they all get bought by all resellers so they can mark them up and resell them... that means "Oculus Rift is popular, and all Rifts are sold out and consumers really love them" even if you can buy them... anytime... just about anywhere (geographically).
From resellers. There's a few used ones for sale too. Every one of them is asking for more than retail price. I guess it's just because they like having their products not sold asking for so much when nobody wants them.
Thats 10 left in stock from an AMAZON PRIME reseller. There's over 65 NEW some even cheaper than the PRIME listed price. Sure, that IS down from the last time I had to posted this.. but not by much. Yes there are also used units.. but there is still an overwhelming amount of NEW units, and it looks like the prices are coming down from resellers because they aren't selling them right now.
anything you find with a price tag that is more than retail should be and will be immediately discarded as evidence of a stastical population.
peroid
'resellers' and used should also likely be discarded
..... So if Oculus releases 5000 more sets tomorrow but they all get bought by all resellers so they can mark them up and resell them... that means "Oculus Rift is popular, and all Rifts are sold out and consumers really love them" even if you can buy them... anytime... just about anywhere (geographically).
Gotcha. More ridiculous rules by Sean.
I am talking about availability.
I have no fucking clue what you are talking about but it sounds like your trying to change the subject again
and yes my dear trolls the same rule applied to GTX1080 so you all can come out of hiding now.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
From resellers. There's a few used ones for sale too. Every one of them is asking for more than retail price. I guess it's just because they like having their products not sold asking for so much when nobody wants them.
Thats 10 left in stock from an AMAZON PRIME reseller. There's over 65 NEW some even cheaper than the PRIME listed price. Sure, that IS down from the last time I had to posted this.. but not by much. Yes there are also used units.. but there is still an overwhelming amount of NEW units, and it looks like the prices are coming down from resellers because they aren't selling them right now.
anything you find with a price tag that is more than retail should be and will be immediately discarded as evidence of a stastical population.
peroid
'resellers' and used should also likely be discarded
..... So if Oculus releases 5000 more sets tomorrow but they all get bought by all resellers so they can mark them up and resell them... that means "Oculus Rift is popular, and all Rifts are sold out and consumers really love them" even if you can buy them... anytime... just about anywhere (geographically).
Gotcha. More ridiculous rules by Sean.
I am talking about availability.
I have no fucking clue what you are talking about but it sounds like your trying to change the subject again
and yes my dear trolls the same rule applied to GTX1080 so you all can come out of hiding now.
Yes.. and I am also talking about availability.
If you can buy it.. then it is on the market. You don't have to go to some crazy back alley that nobody has heard of... Amazon is quite possibly the largest online retailer. Ebay has been around for decades. Even Newegg shows them as in stock.
It's kind of the point of resellers and retailers. That's why they do what they do, because it makes money. Selling things for a markup. You may not realize that those oranges you bought from your grocery store probably could have been gotten from your local farmers market for half the price and twice as fresh.. but I guess people shouldn't buy fruit until the grocery stores have the "manufacturer" prices.
Is it the same for the GTX 1080? No. Not really. Why? Because which GTX 1080 are you talking about?
There's a lot of different manufacturers here. A lot of them are in stock too... but the point is.. you have a lot of configurations, manufacturers, and sellers. It doesn't make sense for companies to try and corner the market on a GTX 1080. There are too many manufacturers and configurations to take the gamble on which ones will sell.
The OR and the HTC VIVE are the ONLY configurations on the market today. They only need to buy just that 1 model from that 1 manufacturer. And in the Rifts case ... a very poor manufacturer that is slow to production.
From resellers. There's a few used ones for sale too. Every one of them is asking for more than retail price. I guess it's just because they like having their products not sold asking for so much when nobody wants them.
Thats 10 left in stock from an AMAZON PRIME reseller. There's over 65 NEW some even cheaper than the PRIME listed price. Sure, that IS down from the last time I had to posted this.. but not by much. Yes there are also used units.. but there is still an overwhelming amount of NEW units, and it looks like the prices are coming down from resellers because they aren't selling them right now.
anything you find with a price tag that is more than retail should be and will be immediately discarded as evidence of a stastical population.
peroid
'resellers' and used should also likely be discarded
..... So if Oculus releases 5000 more sets tomorrow but they all get bought by all resellers so they can mark them up and resell them... that means "Oculus Rift is popular, and all Rifts are sold out and consumers really love them" even if you can buy them... anytime... just about anywhere (geographically).
Gotcha. More ridiculous rules by Sean.
I am talking about availability.
I have no fucking clue what you are talking about but it sounds like your trying to change the subject again
and yes my dear trolls the same rule applied to GTX1080 so you all can come out of hiding now.
Yes.. and I am also talking about availability.
If you can buy it.. then it is on the market.
I have already explain to you why this is false
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
From resellers. There's a few used ones for sale too. Every one of them is asking for more than retail price. I guess it's just because they like having their products not sold asking for so much when nobody wants them.
Thats 10 left in stock from an AMAZON PRIME reseller. There's over 65 NEW some even cheaper than the PRIME listed price. Sure, that IS down from the last time I had to posted this.. but not by much. Yes there are also used units.. but there is still an overwhelming amount of NEW units, and it looks like the prices are coming down from resellers because they aren't selling them right now.
anything you find with a price tag that is more than retail should be and will be immediately discarded as evidence of a stastical population.
peroid
'resellers' and used should also likely be discarded
..... So if Oculus releases 5000 more sets tomorrow but they all get bought by all resellers so they can mark them up and resell them... that means "Oculus Rift is popular, and all Rifts are sold out and consumers really love them" even if you can buy them... anytime... just about anywhere (geographically).
Gotcha. More ridiculous rules by Sean.
I am talking about availability.
I have no fucking clue what you are talking about but it sounds like your trying to change the subject again
and yes my dear trolls the same rule applied to GTX1080 so you all can come out of hiding now.
Yes.. and I am also talking about availability.
If you can buy it.. then it is on the market.
I have already explain to you why this is false
So, if it is on the market, and you have the ability to buy it, it is unavailable?
Pretty sure you gave no solid explanation apart from "It should be discarded"
Comments
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Less than a percent is just not an indicator of any widespread success.. Though there are more than likely some issues with the Steam survey that should be considered when you're considering this survey in the larger context.
https://github.com/LibreVR/Revive
For a short time they did block it, but then this happened...
http://uploadvr.com/confirmed-oculus-removes-drm-restrictions-blocking-revive-hack/
It's not a locked platform. The intent was always to allow other headsets to play Oculus games. I actually know a couple people that have Vive and they are thankful because Oculus is one of the only ones really making good games for the VR right now.
I love reading these threads from posters that have
A) Had experience with VR once at a con with crap computer/game and convinced the rest of VR is awful.
C) Have not a clue what they are talking about so just make crap up. Or they regurgitate what they read from other misinformed internet trolls.
D) Look at Steam's craptastic offering of what VR Devs are putting out and jump to the conclusion that it equals every VR game out there.
E) People like the poster above that 'know for sure' what they are talking about, when in reality (virtual or otherwise) they really don't.
VR is far from perfect. This iteration is new tech. As for Vive being a complete package, I'm not too sure about that. Room Scale VR is definitely something to shoot for, but for long periods of gaming you need to be comfortable. Headset needs not to get heavy after long playtimes. You need a relaxed play area (comfortable chair.) You need a game that runs at 90fps and a computer that can actually handle it. That's not even factoring in those that would just get nauseous from playing VR regardless.
Steam doesn't equal all VR users. Steam has not a clue how well OR is doing. They have a good idea on sales for Vive and OR people that are using Steam. That's it.
My guess is that Gear VR is doing better than either of them, but who knows unless Oculus comes out with total solid numbers to place where their products are in sales/use.
Thus far they've spoken about.. 1) Time spent in VR 2) The amount of users that tried VR 3)Top grossing Oculus store purchases (newsflash, the majority of the top grossing purchases were videos, not games)
But they haven't released anything on numbers, nor will they until there is something positive to release. They want to purvey strength and adoption, not low sales and failure, so they'll likely stay tight lipped until they hit a milestone worth talking about. That would be .. maybe 500K maybe 1 Million.
Meanwhile, Samsung is gearing up likely for another mass Gear VR giveaway release with the Note 7. Rumors have it they already have a new Gear VR set to go along with the phone, and since the S7 line had multiple giveaways of the gear VR set, the first of which was slated that they gave away well over 1 Million sets, (and then they ran the promotion again a month or two later) you can bet they'll do the same or something similar for Note 7 purchases too.
I already have the gear VR set. I didn't get it on a promotion, my carrier had a better promotion of 200 dollars of in store items (which I could have bought the gear VR set there and then still had some left) but I opted to buy a new in box gear VR set from someone off of craigslist for 50 bucks. The market is flooded with them since a lot of people got them for free and don't want them.
The Da Vinci does not use VR tech. There is no virtual world, there is a camera. The surgeon watches a screen and manipulates what is on the screen with a control console. If anything, it is more like playing a video game conventionally with a very specialized controller.
It is also grossly expensive, so unless that remote island has a very expensive patient side unit sitting around waiting for someone to show up dying, you're probably going to die. I guess the expensive aspect fits other narratives here though
Samsung did a promotion for pre-order to get people to get the new 7. Gear VR was selling out before that promotion. We simply don't know the numbers for sure on that.
As for Oculus Rift, its demand right now out pacing its supply. Sure people can buy one for more money than $600 from resellers, but from Oculus? No. People are still waiting.
Check out the 2nd video of BigScreen on this steam page. http://store.steampowered.com/app/457550/
You can browse the web, or watch netflix, youtube, etc, with other people next to you. I'm not here to convert you to anything, but you, and others, seem to have a misconception of the possibilities of VR.
I'm personally waiting for Augmented Reality (AR) though.
I assume he knew what he was talking about, being in med school.
I wasn't trying to imply that the Oculus Rift or the Vive are the same thing as the Da Vinci machine; I was using the example to illustrate my point that VR technology can be very useful in problem solving.
This is important because it relates to another point earlier in this thread about cell phone adoption being tied to real world applicability.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
That was only the first go 'round. Samsung did another set release in April. They've been trying to GIVE them away for a long time.. and NO.. they were not selling out before the promotion, you could find them in just about every store, cell phone stores, best buys, it wasn't a popular peripheral.
And no, they can't buy them from Oculus, thats partially oculuses part and partially due to those resellers. There are well over a hundred units available on Amazon... resellers are also buying multiples. For example, you can check my post history IN THIS THREAD.. where it detailed pretty well the amount of Rifts that were in stock for a certain retailer. When one retailer sells out at that price they move to the next reseller. One of them had OVER 10 in stock.
It's a manufactured demand.. not one out of excitement. Not one out of interest. People just don't care enough about the Rift. Equally so with other VR sets. Nothing is driving sales.
Getting back on the main path though, I do think there are going to be some very interesting VR applications in the way of problem solving. Don't think they are here in bulk yet though. They have already used the Rift with a Da Vinci to create a virtual surgery of an actual surgery. Mostly for training and skill assessment regarding using the actual Da Vinci.
https://www.amazon.com/Oculus-Rift/dp/B00VF0IXEY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1468210019&sr=8-1&keywords=oculus+rift
From resellers. There's a few used ones for sale too. Every one of them is asking for more than retail price. I guess it's just because they like having their products not sold asking for so much when nobody wants them.
Thats 10 left in stock from an AMAZON PRIME reseller. There's over 65 NEW some even cheaper than the PRIME listed price. Sure, that IS down from the last time I had to posted this.. but not by much. Yes there are also used units.. but there is still an overwhelming amount of NEW units, and it looks like the prices are coming down from resellers because they aren't selling them right now.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
peroid
'resellers' and used should also likely be discarded
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Gotcha. More ridiculous rules by Sean.
I have no fucking clue what you are talking about but it sounds like your trying to change the subject again
and yes my dear trolls the same rule applied to GTX1080 so you all can come out of hiding now.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
If you can buy it.. then it is on the market. You don't have to go to some crazy back alley that nobody has heard of... Amazon is quite possibly the largest online retailer. Ebay has been around for decades. Even Newegg shows them as in stock.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA6V64781263&cm_re=oculus_rift-_-9SIA6V64781263-_-Product
It's kind of the point of resellers and retailers. That's why they do what they do, because it makes money. Selling things for a markup. You may not realize that those oranges you bought from your grocery store probably could have been gotten from your local farmers market for half the price and twice as fresh.. but I guess people shouldn't buy fruit until the grocery stores have the "manufacturer" prices.
Is it the same for the GTX 1080? No. Not really. Why? Because which GTX 1080 are you talking about?
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?url=search-alias=aps&field-keywords=gtx+1080
There's a lot of different manufacturers here. A lot of them are in stock too... but the point is.. you have a lot of configurations, manufacturers, and sellers. It doesn't make sense for companies to try and corner the market on a GTX 1080. There are too many manufacturers and configurations to take the gamble on which ones will sell.
The OR and the HTC VIVE are the ONLY configurations on the market today. They only need to buy just that 1 model from that 1 manufacturer. And in the Rifts case ... a very poor manufacturer that is slow to production.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Pretty sure you gave no solid explanation apart from "It should be discarded"
Stand by for a whole slew of AR-inspired apps now.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me