well I have to say thank you and laserit for illustrating that the data in question is far more important and has much larger impact and is far more serious then just a news article. because it does in fact involve millions if not billions of dollars being invested based on the data and the company in question has its intergrity on the line.
so yeah, that helps me...thanks.
so yeah. one side has data, the other side does not.
What happened to you?
just rockin with data to show people all the claims from a year ago of 'VR will fail miserably before it even gets started' is a bit wrong.
Although I have not said it, pretty much every single exchange and readjustments of what 'failure' means that has happened on this board I predicted over the course of 12 months.
The only one I got wrong is that AAA titles are getting made faster then I thought.
It has not been a success as well. Sure a few million people out of 7 billion bought into VR. We have yet to have a groundbreaking game we can point to, to sell systems. Right now people are buying into an idea. Your pointing at a snowflake and yelling blizzard. The blizzard still may or maynot come.
He also refuses to acknowledge that the year ago that was predicted, didn't have PSVR on the list.. it was announced in early 2016, PC VR is still widely a failure by industry estimates and company projections.
Remember facebooks 100Million needed to break even? They aren't even estimating 1 million will be sold after a YEAR on the market. Not even 500K
1. the PSVR coming into existence just helped me with my prediction is all 2. I know you dont want to hear this because you have told me explictly but you are reading the facebooks statements ENTIRELY wrong. EVERYTHING needs to break even point and EVERYTHING doesnt get that back on day one (ok well maybe not everything) so shocker! say it aint so! no way! you mean VR has to break even? get the F out! impossible!
It's not out of context, it's not incorrect. It's a direct statement on profitability and making back money on the current generation of hardware. Based on the CURRENT RIFT they need to sell 100MILLION to break even, yes or no? Thats exactly what the statement means, from the CEO.
They aren't even close to .01 percent of that goal. Anyone can see that.
well I have to say thank you and laserit for illustrating that the data in question is far more important and has much larger impact and is far more serious then just a news article. because it does in fact involve millions if not billions of dollars being invested based on the data and the company in question has its intergrity on the line.
so yeah, that helps me...thanks.
so yeah. one side has data, the other side does not.
What happened to you?
just rockin with data to show people all the claims from a year ago of 'VR will fail miserably before it even gets started' is a bit wrong.
Although I have not said it, pretty much every single exchange and readjustments of what 'failure' means that has happened on this board I predicted over the course of 12 months.
The only one I got wrong is that AAA titles are getting made faster then I thought.
It has not been a success as well. Sure a few million people out of 7 billion bought into VR. We have yet to have a groundbreaking game we can point to, to sell systems. Right now people are buying into an idea. Your pointing at a snowflake and yelling blizzard. The blizzard still may or maynot come.
He also refuses to acknowledge that the year ago that was predicted, didn't have PSVR on the list.. it was announced in early 2016, PC VR is still widely a failure by industry estimates and company projections.
Remember facebooks 100Million needed to break even? They aren't even estimating 1 million will be sold after a YEAR on the market. Not even 500K
1. the PSVR coming into existence just helped me with my prediction is all 2. I know you dont want to hear this because you have told me explictly but you are reading the facebooks statements ENTIRELY wrong. EVERYTHING needs to break even point and EVERYTHING doesnt get that back on day one (ok well maybe not everything) so shocker! say it aint so! no way! you mean VR has to break even? get the F out! impossible!
It's not out of context, it's not incorrect. It's a direct statement on profitability and making back money on the current generation of hardware. Based on the CURRENT RIFT they need to sell 100MILLION to break even, yes or no? Thats exactly what the statement means, from the CEO.
They aren't even close to .01 percent of that goal. Anyone can see that.
no you got it completely wrong.
1. when a product is released, ANY PRODUCT, there is an amount that is needed to break even.
This is true for VR as it is for Diswashers. So VR having a break even dollar amount is not a shocker.
2. The only question is how does it take to hit that breaking point? one day? two days? 2 weeks? 2 months? 4 years? what is it is?
3. 'to hit breaking point' doesnt mean 'we need to and if we dont the project will go bankrupt'. it depends on the goals. The first Xbox is a perfect example, it didnt break even for YEARS and it didnt 'need to' because it wasnt even part of the economic stradegy.
so the statement you hold so dearly falls flat in multiple ways and you have been told this multiple times
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
@SEANMCAD I wasn't "knocking" VR in any way. However whenever I have checked publisher's numbers - when they give them out - against Superdata's "estimates" I have found that they were not simply "not right" - you'd expect that - but that they were "badly not right". Often very badly "not right".
And its no different with their VR stuff - according to Superdata themselves. They had a number of "notes" out in 2015 with "projections" that changed etc. If we stick to 2016 however:
This type of estimating is "piss poor". A company that was investing heavily in VR wouldn't give something that changed so drastically so quickly the time of day.
More "serious" reports are not as headline grabbing. For Superdata do produce a regular stream of "eyewatering drivel estimates" for VR, PC, WoW, Playstation, XB1, Hearthstone, Witcher, mobile, etc. etc.
(Note: not saying what is in that link is right either. And at the end of the day just like the stuff Superdata produce its essentially a sales pitch. I just find it a more considered article and more grounded in reality - I know bad pun. There are others out there as well. Lots of guesstimates.
the point I am trying to get across is this. follow along this one bit really close.
IF the numbers where that wrong as you suggested dont you think at least one journalistic site or article would have numbers that strongly suggest these numbers are incorrect?
the problem is here that one side has articles, the other has not. that is highly questionable and makes a person wonder why.
I am looking for articles that are drawing the same conclusion or very similar conclusion as you are. not a string of articles that in total added with your insight draw a conclusion because if your conclusion was strong then another site would have come to your same conclusion and written about it.
This is reaching in the most obtuse manner. G....
there is nothing remotely 'obtuse' about it.
If in the news you have several articles that suggest there are WMDs in Iraq and no articles that shows that there are not, yet one has a good theory as to why there isnt any then a fair question is to ask...why hasnt any news story covered that perspective?
It doesnt mean the proposition is wrong, it just makes the fact that no author of any article has came to the same conclusion is extremely suspicious.
at the moment somewhere around 95% to 99% of ALL articles that have come out prior to this month suggest that VR is gang busters and the only people complaining are posters on gaming websites who cant find any strong articles that support their theory DIRECTLY.
I always thought that Superdata was a market analysis company that sold significantly priced reports to the video game industry so they could plan their business's around current market trends
I had no idea that they were a member of the news and/or entertainment media
your post would be what is called a strawman.
you illustration matters how in my point? in fact it actually kind of helps my point more than damage it.
.. How do we define failure?
VR is here to stay, anyone who doesn't believe so is foolish. I...
absolute unabashed horeshit and redefininig (which I predicted people would do) what was said 6 months ago.
'fail flat on its face before it even gets to the public' is not 'VR is here to stay' what a pile of crap
Few things, one cutting someone post to a few words to cherry pick a response is rude. Use strike through to show what you are not responding to. Thats just forum manners. Also your responses are rude and cutting. If you cant be civil Im not sure what the point of having a conversation with you is. Matter of fact Im done, welcome to my ignore list. Good day to you.
@SEANMCAD I wasn't "knocking" VR in any way. However whenever I have checked publisher's numbers - when they give them out - against Superdata's "estimates" I have found that they were not simply "not right" - you'd expect that - but that they were "badly not right". Often very badly "not right".
And its no different with their VR stuff - according to Superdata themselves. They had a number of "notes" out in 2015 with "projections" that changed etc. If we stick to 2016 however:
This type of estimating is "piss poor". A company that was investing heavily in VR wouldn't give something that changed so drastically so quickly the time of day.
More "serious" reports are not as headline grabbing. For Superdata do produce a regular stream of "eyewatering drivel estimates" for VR, PC, WoW, Playstation, XB1, Hearthstone, Witcher, mobile, etc. etc.
(Note: not saying what is in that link is right either. And at the end of the day just like the stuff Superdata produce its essentially a sales pitch. I just find it a more considered article and more grounded in reality - I know bad pun. There are others out there as well. Lots of guesstimates.
the point I am trying to get across is this. follow along this one bit really close.
IF the numbers where that wrong as you suggested dont you think at least one journalistic site or article would have numbers that strongly suggest these numbers are incorrect?
the problem is here that one side has articles, the other has not. that is highly questionable and makes a person wonder why.
I am looking for articles that are drawing the same conclusion or very similar conclusion as you are. not a string of articles that in total added with your insight draw a conclusion because if your conclusion was strong then another site would have come to your same conclusion and written about it.
This is reaching in the most obtuse manner. G....
there is nothing remotely 'obtuse' about it.
If in the news you have several articles that suggest there are WMDs in Iraq and no articles that shows that there are not, yet one has a good theory as to why there isnt any then a fair question is to ask...why hasnt any news story covered that perspective?
It doesnt mean the proposition is wrong, it just makes the fact that no author of any article has came to the same conclusion is extremely suspicious.
at the moment somewhere around 95% to 99% of ALL articles that have come out prior to this month suggest that VR is gang busters and the only people complaining are posters on gaming websites who cant find any strong articles that support their theory DIRECTLY.
I always thought that Superdata was a market analysis company that sold significantly priced reports to the video game industry so they could plan their business's around current market trends
I had no idea that they were a member of the news and/or entertainment media
your post would be what is called a strawman.
you illustration matters how in my point? in fact it actually kind of helps my point more than damage it.
.. How do we define failure?
VR is here to stay, anyone who doesn't believe so is foolish. I...
absolute unabashed horeshit and redefininig (which I predicted people would do) what was said 6 months ago.
'fail flat on its face before it even gets to the public' is not 'VR is here to stay' what a pile of crap
Few things, one cutting someone post to a few words to cherry pick a response is rude. Use strike through to show what you are not responding to. Thats just forum manners. Also your responses are rude and cutting. If you cant be civil Im not sure what the point of having a conversation with you is. Matter of fact Im done, welcome to my ignore list. Good day to you.
I wish you would do exactly that frankly
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
@SEANMCAD I wasn't "knocking" VR in any way. However whenever I have checked publisher's numbers - when they give them out - against Superdata's "estimates" I have found that they were not simply "not right" - you'd expect that - but that they were "badly not right". Often very badly "not right".
And its no different with their VR stuff - according to Superdata themselves. They had a number of "notes" out in 2015 with "projections" that changed etc. If we stick to 2016 however:
This type of estimating is "piss poor". A company that was investing heavily in VR wouldn't give something that changed so drastically so quickly the time of day.
More "serious" reports are not as headline grabbing. For Superdata do produce a regular stream of "eyewatering drivel estimates" for VR, PC, WoW, Playstation, XB1, Hearthstone, Witcher, mobile, etc. etc.
(Note: not saying what is in that link is right either. And at the end of the day just like the stuff Superdata produce its essentially a sales pitch. I just find it a more considered article and more grounded in reality - I know bad pun. There are others out there as well. Lots of guesstimates.
the point I am trying to get across is this. follow along this one bit really close.
IF the numbers where that wrong as you suggested dont you think at least one journalistic site or article would have numbers that strongly suggest these numbers are incorrect?
the problem is here that one side has articles, the other has not. that is highly questionable and makes a person wonder why.
I am looking for articles that are drawing the same conclusion or very similar conclusion as you are. not a string of articles that in total added with your insight draw a conclusion because if your conclusion was strong then another site would have come to your same conclusion and written about it.
This is reaching in the most obtuse manner. G....
there is nothing remotely 'obtuse' about it.
If in the news you have several articles that suggest there are WMDs in Iraq and no articles that shows that there are not, yet one has a good theory as to why there isnt any then a fair question is to ask...why hasnt any news story covered that perspective?
It doesnt mean the proposition is wrong, it just makes the fact that no author of any article has came to the same conclusion is extremely suspicious.
at the moment somewhere around 95% to 99% of ALL articles that have come out prior to this month suggest that VR is gang busters and the only people complaining are posters on gaming websites who cant find any strong articles that support their theory DIRECTLY.
I always thought that Superdata was a market analysis company that sold significantly priced reports to the video game industry so they could plan their business's around current market trends
I had no idea that they were a member of the news and/or entertainment media
your post would be what is called a strawman.
you illustration matters how in my point? in fact it actually kind of helps my point more than damage it.
.. How do we define failure?
VR is here to stay, anyone who doesn't believe so is foolish. I...
absolute unabashed horeshit and redefininig (which I predicted people would do) what was said 6 months ago.
'fail flat on its face before it even gets to the public' is not 'VR is here to stay' what a pile of crap
Really...
Show me where I've *ever* stated that VR will be a failure. I've disagreed with your optimism and you seem to have quelled it quite a bit.
If you believe my points are horseshit, lets hear your arguments.
VR is here to stay, anyone who doesn't believe so is foolish. I'm just not as optimistic as you are. In its current iteration the novelty wears thin pretty quickly. VR is really cool but it has some big hurdles to overcome to make it more than a novelty item.
I believe it will take quite a few years for Oculus and HTC to recoup costs and turn a profit if they ever do. Later adopters like Sony and Microsoft will make profitability for Oculus much more difficult. HTC from a manufacturing experience point of view is in a better position.
That $300 price point is huge. That is where the winners and the losers will be made.
the point I am trying to get across is this. follow along this one bit really close.
IF the numbers where that wrong as you suggested dont you think at least one journalistic site or article would have numbers that strongly suggest these numbers are incorrect?
the problem is here that one side has articles, the other has not. that is highly questionable and makes a person wonder why.
I am looking for articles that are drawing the same conclusion or very similar conclusion as you are. not a string of articles that in total added with your insight draw a conclusion because if your conclusion was strong then another site would have come to your same conclusion and written about it.
Its Superdata that are saying Superdata are wrong however. I am just pointing this out. And saying that on past history this should come as no surprise.
There are, as I said, other articles out but you have to search for them. And many "news sites" tend to just go with the (clickbait) headlines that Superdata churn out like the one you linked: "Sony has won the VR war" - so by inference everyone else has lost. Until the next Superdata note at any rate.
(To be fair to some sites however they are starting to take Superdata's "notes" with lumps of salt.)
absolute unabashed horeshit and redefininig (which I predicted people would do) what was said 6 months ago.
'fail flat on its face before it even gets to the public' is not 'VR is here to stay' what a pile of crap
Really...
Show me where I've *ever* stated that VR will be a failure. I've disagreed with your optimism and you seem to have quelled it quite a bit.
If you believe my points are horseshit, lets hear your arguments.
VR is here to stay, anyone who doesn't believe so is foolish. I'm just not as optimistic as you are. In its current iteration the novelty wears thin pretty quickly. VR is really cool but it has some big hurdles to overcome to make it more than a novelty item.
I believe it will take quite a few years for Oculus and HTC to recoup costs and turn a profit if they ever do. Later adopters like Sony and Microsoft will make profitability for Oculus much more difficult. HTC from a manufacturing experience point of view is in a better position.
That $300 price point is huge. That is where the winners and the losers will be made.
I am saying (because i was here 12+ months ago) that posters 12 months ago said a lot of things that have prooven to be incorrect but what the community does (which is EXTREEMLY predictable) is simply move the bar to mean something else. like 'failure means becoming a niche market' well I think Thrustmaster would disagree that their business is a failure. people saying 'VR is here to say' would have been laughed at 12 months ago (as I was)
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
well I have to say thank you and laserit for illustrating that the data in question is far more important and has much larger impact and is far more serious then just a news article. because it does in fact involve millions if not billions of dollars being invested based on the data and the company in question has its intergrity on the line.
so yeah, that helps me...thanks.
so yeah. one side has data, the other side does not.
What happened to you?
just rockin with data to show people all the claims from a year ago of 'VR will fail miserably before it even gets started' is a bit wrong.
Although I have not said it, pretty much every single exchange and readjustments of what 'failure' means that has happened on this board I predicted over the course of 12 months.
The only one I got wrong is that AAA titles are getting made faster then I thought.
It has not been a success as well. Sure a few million people out of 7 billion bought into VR. We have yet to have a groundbreaking game we can point to, to sell systems. Right now people are buying into an idea. Your pointing at a snowflake and yelling blizzard. The blizzard still may or maynot come.
He also refuses to acknowledge that the year ago that was predicted, didn't have PSVR on the list.. it was announced in early 2016, PC VR is still widely a failure by industry estimates and company projections.
Remember facebooks 100Million needed to break even? They aren't even estimating 1 million will be sold after a YEAR on the market. Not even 500K
1. the PSVR coming into existence just helped me with my prediction is all 2. I know you dont want to hear this because you have told me explictly but you are reading the facebooks statements ENTIRELY wrong. EVERYTHING needs to break even point and EVERYTHING doesnt get that back on day one (ok well maybe not everything) so shocker! say it aint so! no way! you mean VR has to break even? get the F out! impossible!
It's not out of context, it's not incorrect. It's a direct statement on profitability and making back money on the current generation of hardware. Based on the CURRENT RIFT they need to sell 100MILLION to break even, yes or no? Thats exactly what the statement means, from the CEO.
They aren't even close to .01 percent of that goal. Anyone can see that.
no you got it completely wrong.
1. when a product is released, ANY PRODUCT, there is an amount that is needed to break even.
This is true for VR as it is for Diswashers. So VR having a break even dollar amount is not a shocker.
2. The only question is how does it take to hit that breaking point? one day? two days? 2 weeks? 2 months? 4 years? what is it is?
3. 'to hit breaking point' doesnt mean 'we need to and if we dont the project will go bankrupt'. it depends on the goals. The first Xbox is a perfect example, it didnt break even for YEARS and it didnt 'need to' because it wasnt even part of the economic stradegy.
so the statement you hold so dearly falls flat in multiple ways and you have been told this multiple times
base it off of sales, base it off of saturation, the RIFT is the lowest on the totem pole. Cut the data and your rhetoric however you choose, they aren't making money on the rift and it isn't penetrating the market even against its next competitor which is MORE expensive. It's a failed product as of 11/17/2016
the point I am trying to get across is this. follow along this one bit really close.
IF the numbers where that wrong as you suggested dont you think at least one journalistic site or article would have numbers that strongly suggest these numbers are incorrect?
the problem is here that one side has articles, the other has not. that is highly questionable and makes a person wonder why.
I am looking for articles that are drawing the same conclusion or very similar conclusion as you are. not a string of articles that in total added with your insight draw a conclusion because if your conclusion was strong then another site would have come to your same conclusion and written about it.
Its Superdata that are saying Superdata are wrong however. I am just pointing this out. And saying that on past history this should come as no surprise.
There are, as I said, other articles out but you have to search for them. And many "news sites" tend to just go with the (clickbait) headlines that Superdata churn out like the one you linked: "Sony has won the VR war" - so by inference everyone else has lost. Until the next Superdata note at any rate.
(To be fair to some sites however they are starting to take Superdata's "notes" with lumps of salt.)
I understand your point.
I dont think you understand my point however.
for 12 months now people there are two groups on MMORPG
One group over the course of 12 months almost never produces an article to back up what they claim. or they use two or three articles and come up with a connection point of which no article makes the same conclusion.
Second group is posting articles that make direct claims, direct assertions many times undisputed facts nearly every day.
I am asking for group one to step it up
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
the point I am trying to get across is this. follow along this one bit really close.
IF the numbers where that wrong as you suggested dont you think at least one journalistic site or article would have numbers that strongly suggest these numbers are incorrect?
the problem is here that one side has articles, the other has not. that is highly questionable and makes a person wonder why.
I am looking for articles that are drawing the same conclusion or very similar conclusion as you are. not a string of articles that in total added with your insight draw a conclusion because if your conclusion was strong then another site would have come to your same conclusion and written about it.
Its Superdata that are saying Superdata are wrong however. I am just pointing this out. And saying that on past history this should come as no surprise.
There are, as I said, other articles out but you have to search for them. And many "news sites" tend to just go with the (clickbait) headlines that Superdata churn out like the one you linked: "Sony has won the VR war" - so by inference everyone else has lost. Until the next Superdata note at any rate.
(To be fair to some sites however they are starting to take Superdata's "notes" with lumps of salt.)
I understand your point.
I dont think you understand my point however.
for 12 months now people there are two groups on MMORPG
One group over the course of 12 months almost never produces an article to back up what they claim. or they use two or three articles and come up with a connection point of which no article makes the same conclusion.
Second group is posting articles that make direct claims, direct assertions many times undisputed facts nearly every day.
I am asking for group one to step it up
There are two types of people, those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
"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
When it comes to hardware sales, these are still pretty small. These are niche devices that are mostly sold at a very small profit margin / a loss. It will be a long time until we see VR go completely mainstream; if it ever does. Just for comparison: Kinect sold 8 million in the first 60 days of sale, VR has not hit that much in a year. Look at where Kinect is now ;P I know Kinect was cheaper, but that doesn't mean much considering it is a similar situation. New fancy tech that people want to try out, fizzled out after a while. Nothing is certain when it comes to VR yet. 3d TV anyone?
When it comes to hardware sales, these are still pretty small. These are niche devices that are mostly sold at a very small profit margin / a loss. It will be a long time until we see VR go completely mainstream; if it ever does.
I think what a lot of people miss is the fact that at least Oculus have stated that they are not interested in making money from the hardware in the first place.
Their model is that of what xbox was when they started
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
the point I am trying to get across is this. follow along this one bit really close.
IF the numbers where that wrong as you suggested dont you think at least one journalistic site or article would have numbers that strongly suggest these numbers are incorrect?
the problem is here that one side has articles, the other has not. that is highly questionable and makes a person wonder why.
I am looking for articles that are drawing the same conclusion or very similar conclusion as you are. not a string of articles that in total added with your insight draw a conclusion because if your conclusion was strong then another site would have come to your same conclusion and written about it.
Its Superdata that are saying Superdata are wrong however. I am just pointing this out. And saying that on past history this should come as no surprise.
There are, as I said, other articles out but you have to search for them. And many "news sites" tend to just go with the (clickbait) headlines that Superdata churn out like the one you linked: "Sony has won the VR war" - so by inference everyone else has lost. Until the next Superdata note at any rate.
(To be fair to some sites however they are starting to take Superdata's "notes" with lumps of salt.)
I understand your point.
I dont think you understand my point however.
for 12 months now people there are two groups on MMORPG
One group over the course of 12 months almost never produces an article to back up what they claim. or they use two or three articles and come up with a connection point of which no article makes the same conclusion.
Second group is posting articles that make direct claims, direct assertions many times undisputed facts nearly every day.
I am asking for group one to step it up
There are two types of people, those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
in this case there is:
group 1: which has data and extrapolates from it
group 2: has no data and pulls random stuff out of their ass
that is how I see it anyway.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
When it comes to hardware sales, these are still pretty small. These are niche devices that are mostly sold at a very small profit margin / a loss. It will be a long time until we see VR go completely mainstream; if it ever does.
I think what a lot of people miss is the fact that at least Oculus have stated that they are not interested in making money from the hardware in the first place.
Their model is that of what xbox was when they started
based off of what? where are the links to that quote?
When it comes to hardware sales, these are still pretty small. These are niche devices that are mostly sold at a very small profit margin / a loss. It will be a long time until we see VR go completely mainstream; if it ever does.
I think what a lot of people miss is the fact that at least Oculus have stated that they are not interested in making money from the hardware in the first place.
Their model is that of what xbox was when they started
based off of what? where are the links to that quote?
yup that is what they said about 18 months ago. now it might not be true anymore I dont know but that was the orginal plan and no for you and I am not doing that work.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
When it comes to hardware sales, these are still pretty small. These are niche devices that are mostly sold at a very small profit margin / a loss. It will be a long time until we see VR go completely mainstream; if it ever does.
I think what a lot of people miss is the fact that at least Oculus have stated that they are not interested in making money from the hardware in the first place.
Their model is that of what xbox was when they started
based off of what? where are the links to that quote?
yup that is what they said about 18 months ago. now it might not be true anymore I dont know but that was the orginal plan and no for you and I am not doing that work.
Completely made up. No links. Nothing. Nobody says "we don't want to make a profit on our 2 Billion dollar business.
Putting out headsets that aren't making them any money isn't called a business thats called a charity.
When it comes to hardware sales, these are still pretty small. These are niche devices that are mostly sold at a very small profit margin / a loss. It will be a long time until we see VR go completely mainstream; if it ever does.
I think what a lot of people miss is the fact that at least Oculus have stated that they are not interested in making money from the hardware in the first place.
Their model is that of what xbox was when they started
based off of what? where are the links to that quote?
yup that is what they said about 18 months ago. now it might not be true anymore I dont know but that was the orginal plan and no for you and I am not doing that work.
Completely made up. No links. Nothing. Nobody says "we don't want to make a profit on our 2 Billion dollar business.
Putting out headsets that aren't making them any money isn't called a business thats called a charity.
I knew you were going to say that by the way. I just dont feel like you personally are worth the effort is all.
but with that said. if one asks 'how does one get to Flagstaff from here' 'well one has to drive X miles'
that does not mean the person asking question even wants to go to Flagstaff let alone 'has to'
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
When it comes to hardware sales, these are still pretty small. These are niche devices that are mostly sold at a very small profit margin / a loss. It will be a long time until we see VR go completely mainstream; if it ever does.
I think what a lot of people miss is the fact that at least Oculus have stated that they are not interested in making money from the hardware in the first place.
Their model is that of what xbox was when they started
based off of what? where are the links to that quote?
yup that is what they said about 18 months ago. now it might not be true anymore I dont know but that was the orginal plan and no for you and I am not doing that work.
Completely made up. No links. Nothing. Nobody says "we don't want to make a profit on our 2 Billion dollar business.
Putting out headsets that aren't making them any money isn't called a business thats called a charity.
I knew you were going to say that by the way. I just dont feel like you personally are worth the effort is all.
but with that said. if one asks 'how does one get to Flagstaff from here' 'well one has to drive X miles'
that does not mean the person asking question even wants to go to Flagstaff let alone 'has to'
VR sales analysis: popular with the chimp segment!
I suppose an ethologist would not approve.
Post edited by Phaserlight on
"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
So a lot of people are buying VR headsets. Many ways to spin this story. Curious
Those aren't sales stop trying hard. For example Psvr is a projection they have yet to release sales numbers. Superdata last showed WWE beat psrv in sales.
The desperation to try and push VR so hard is hilarious.
So a lot of people are buying VR headsets. Many ways to spin this story. Curious
Those aren't sales stop trying hard. For example Psvr is a projection they have yet to release sales numbers. Superdata last showed WWE beat psrv in sales.
The desperation to try and push VR so hard is hilarious.
Sales will keep continuing to climb once more people get to try it.
Out of probably 15 Friends & family I have demoed the HTC Vive to, 2 have bought PSVR and 1 is currently upgrading their PC for a Vive. All, with no exceptions have been amazed!
So a lot of people are buying VR headsets. Many ways to spin this story. Curious
Those aren't sales stop trying hard. For example Psvr is a projection they have yet to release sales numbers. Superdata last showed WWE beat psrv in sales.
The desperation to try and push VR so hard is hilarious.
Sales will keep continuing to climb once more people get to try it.
Out of probably 15 Friends & family I have demoed the HTC Vive to, 2 have bought PSVR and 1 is currently upgrading their PC for a Vive. All, with no exceptions have been amazed!
So out of 15 people 3 bought a VR? And out of those 3 everyone has been "amazed"? So by using your logic the 12 other people didn't care for it and had a negative experience right? My point was the OP stated "so a lot of people are BUYING" when that is actually a lie. He and other are extremely desperate when they need to lie and say people are "buying" VR when he post a link that a projection of sales.
So a lot of people are buying VR headsets. Many ways to spin this story. Curious
Those aren't sales stop trying hard. For example Psvr is a projection they have yet to release sales numbers. Superdata last showed WWE beat psrv in sales.
The desperation to try and push VR so hard is hilarious.
Sales will keep continuing to climb once more people get to try it.
Out of probably 15 Friends & family I have demoed the HTC Vive to, 2 have bought PSVR and 1 is currently upgrading their PC for a Vive. All, with no exceptions have been amazed!
So out of 15 people 3 bought a VR? And out of those 3 everyone has been "amazed"? So by using your logic the 12 other people didn't care for it and had a negative experience right? My point was the OP stated "so a lot of people are BUYING" when that is actually a lie. He and other are extremely desperate when they need to lie and say people are "buying" VR when he post a link that a projection of sales.
No, the other 12 was either young, elderly or have other priorities to spend money on.
So a lot of people are buying VR headsets. Many ways to spin this story. Curious
Those aren't sales stop trying hard. For example Psvr is a projection they have yet to release sales numbers. Superdata last showed WWE beat psrv in sales.
The desperation to try and push VR so hard is hilarious.
Sales will keep continuing to climb once more people get to try it.
Out of probably 15 Friends & family I have demoed the HTC Vive to, 2 have bought PSVR and 1 is currently upgrading their PC for a Vive. All, with no exceptions have been amazed!
So out of 15 people 3 bought a VR? And out of those 3 everyone has been "amazed"? So by using your logic the 12 other people didn't care for it and had a negative experience right? My point was the OP stated "so a lot of people are BUYING" when that is actually a lie. He and other are extremely desperate when they need to lie and say people are "buying" VR when he post a link that a projection of sales.
No, the other 12 was either young, elderly or have other priorities to spend money on.
I just find it funny people like the OP and apparently you brag about psvr potentially selling 2 milliom units by the end of the year (3months from launch) when xb sold 8 MILLION Kinects in the first 60 days. A matter of fact the Kinect was the fast selling consumer electronic device according to guiniss book. Let's just lower the hype a little bit lol
Comments
They aren't even close to .01 percent of that goal. Anyone can see that.
1. when a product is released, ANY PRODUCT, there is an amount that is needed to break even. This is true for VR as it is for Diswashers. So VR having a break even dollar amount is not a shocker.
2. The only question is how does it take to hit that breaking point? one day? two days? 2 weeks? 2 months? 4 years? what is it is?
3. 'to hit breaking point' doesnt mean 'we need to and if we dont the project will go bankrupt'. it depends on the goals. The first Xbox is a perfect example, it didnt break even for YEARS and it didnt 'need to' because it wasnt even part of the economic stradegy.
so the statement you hold so dearly falls flat in multiple ways and you have been told this multiple times
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
Show me where I've *ever* stated that VR will be a failure. I've disagreed with your optimism and you seem to have quelled it quite a bit.
If you believe my points are horseshit, lets hear your arguments.
VR is here to stay, anyone who doesn't believe so is foolish. I'm just not as optimistic as you are. In its current iteration the novelty wears thin pretty quickly. VR is really cool but it has some big hurdles to overcome to make it more than a novelty item.
I believe it will take quite a few years for Oculus and HTC to recoup costs and turn a profit if they ever do. Later adopters like Sony and Microsoft will make profitability for Oculus much more difficult. HTC from a manufacturing experience point of view is in a better position.
That $300 price point is huge. That is where the winners and the losers will be made.
Read more at http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/458219/vr-sales-analysis/p4#vEkoF3CcD7IPkKHQ.99
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
There are, as I said, other articles out but you have to search for them. And many "news sites" tend to just go with the (clickbait) headlines that Superdata churn out like the one you linked: "Sony has won the VR war" - so by inference everyone else has lost. Until the next Superdata note at any rate.
(To be fair to some sites however they are starting to take Superdata's "notes" with lumps of salt.)
I am saying (because i was here 12+ months ago) that posters 12 months ago said a lot of things that have prooven to be incorrect but what the community does (which is EXTREEMLY predictable) is simply move the bar to mean something else. like 'failure means becoming a niche market' well I think Thrustmaster would disagree that their business is a failure. people saying 'VR is here to say' would have been laughed at 12 months ago (as I was)
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I dont think you understand my point however. for 12 months now people there are two groups on MMORPG
One group over the course of 12 months almost never produces an article to back up what they claim. or they use two or three articles and come up with a connection point of which no article makes the same conclusion.
Second group is posting articles that make direct claims, direct assertions many times undisputed facts nearly every day. I am asking for group one to step it up
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Their model is that of what xbox was when they started
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
group 1: which has data and extrapolates from it
group 2: has no data and pulls random stuff out of their ass
that is how I see it anyway.
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
Putting out headsets that aren't making them any money isn't called a business thats called a charity.
I just dont feel like you personally are worth the effort is all.
but with that said. if one asks
'how does one get to Flagstaff from here'
'well one has to drive X miles'
that does not mean the person asking question even wants to go to Flagstaff let alone 'has to'
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
I suppose an ethologist would not approve.
"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
The desperation to try and push VR so hard is hilarious.
Out of probably 15 Friends & family I have demoed the HTC Vive to, 2 have bought PSVR and 1 is currently upgrading their PC for a Vive. All, with no exceptions have been amazed!