Yes, VR has had a terrible low saturation into the market and is all but dead as hardware because it is a great solution that everyone wants. One of us is living in fairy tale land. I suspect in 15 years you be proven wrong and me correct. Now we just have to wait.
You realize that the low market saturation is meeting exceptions? Everyone that understands how tech adoption works knows that all technology mediums take 10+ years to establish. Smartphones took just over 10, and PCs took 20. VR may very well be somewhere inbetween. So if anything, I will likely be proven right in 15 years, when at least a billion people own a VR capable device.
Again, it's not dead because it's selling out all the time and the year-over-year sales are increasing and so is the retention rate and overall active userbase. You've already been proven wrong on all of your points. I mean how can someone seriously state that you can't multi-task entertainment in VR when it's actually the best medium for multi-tasking? Some people...
It didn't take 10 years for smart phones to take off any more than it did PC 20 years...
If you're going to count the very first inception as part of the timeline, then VR hit the streets well over 2 decades ago...
VR isn't going to have any meaningful foothold for another 2 decades at the earliest... still doesn't stop people from being the first to own a mood ring when it comes out. I say pack that baby up and in about 50 years or so, you can sell it as a relic on eBay for a small fortune to the nostalgic.
For the product review testers. How is it for those of us that have to wear glasses to correct our vision?
Having to put it on over glasses can open up a world of problems from wieght, resting on top of glasses, to hitting the lens of glasses.
I think you are without a hardcore fan of the tech and in the minority. Even if there are 50 million active users in 5 years, that assumes a lot, it is still less than 20% of the gaming pop that would be reasonably assumed to use it.
About 150 million ps4/xbox one sold, and about another 150 million PC gamers.
That 50 million is 16.66% market adoption after about almost a decade. This also assumes all sales are new sales, not replacements, and all people who buy it stay active with it, and the extremely favorable 5 million headset sales for 2018, an over inflated number to begin with.
So your own best case scenario is 20% of the market 5 years from now, after already being out for years. All of the barriers to entry in VR, outside of the hardware being bad (if it is), are gone. If we don't see massive growth, what will you will say next year. If this hardware fixes the issues, we should see massive sales by then end of 2020 and very strong sales by the end of this year.
Creeping along slowly only happens when there is serious barriers to entry and I don't see any for VR headsets, well outside of people not wanting VR headsets or issues that cannot be fixed by VR headsets. Unless you want to tell me this new tech is garbage and that is what is holding the headset back.
Like I already told you, no technology medium gains mass adoption in under 10 years. Why can't you see that? The mass consumer never adopts tech until gen 3 or later.
And I told you all the barriers to entry for VR. There are a lot of them, with the counterpoint being that they are on their way to being fixed fast.
Yes, VR has had a terrible low saturation into the market and is all but dead as hardware because it is a great solution that everyone wants. One of us is living in fairy tale land. I suspect in 15 years you be proven wrong and me correct. Now we just have to wait.
You realize that the low market saturation is meeting exceptions? Everyone that understands how tech adoption works knows that all technology mediums take 10+ years to establish. Smartphones took just over 10, and PCs took 20. VR may very well be somewhere inbetween. So if anything, I will likely be proven right in 15 years, when at least a billion people own a VR capable device.
Again, it's not dead because it's selling out all the time and the year-over-year sales are increasing and so is the retention rate and overall active userbase. You've already been proven wrong on all of your points. I mean how can someone seriously state that you can't multi-task entertainment in VR when it's actually the best medium for multi-tasking? Some people...
It didn't take 10 years for smart phones to take off any more than it did PC 20 years...
If you're going to count the very first inception as part of the timeline, then VR hit the streets well over 2 decades ago...
VR isn't going to have any meaningful foothold for another 2 decades at the earliest... still doesn't stop people from being the first to own a mood ring when it comes out. I say pack that baby up and in about 50 years or so, you can sell it as a relic on eBay for a small fortune to the nostalgic.
Actually it did. The first consumer smartphones launched in the late 90s and took until around 2010 before it reached mass adoption. The first PCs were in the mid 70s and took until the mid 90s. You can look this up very easily yourself.
VR's inception in the 90s is in an entirely different league. It was a false start, as it never lead to continued development. Not only was it a false start, but the only consumer products came from small startups. There wasn't a single big tech company that ever released a VR headset for consumers in the 90s. Not one. They wanted to, but they never did.
And your 2 decades estimation is a random guess where you throw a dart at the board with no prior knowledge or research done on the state of VR R&D. You clearly haven't looked into the advancements going on in the space.
Valve said in the link I posted that they were very happy with VR adoption and progress. They didn't expect to be this far so soon. The leadership expected it to be decades out when they started.
Not only that but Valve is working with another company with a technology that goes beyond just headsets. Just wait a few years it is going to get nuts!
They hinted at this in the release party video but wouldn't say more. I was surprised by how focused on VR they seem.
They've been focused on VR for years now. They have 3 AAA games in the works for the medium, one of them already leaked as a Half Life 2 prequel. Could be releasing this year.
VR has been the same since first hinted at over 20 years ago by Nintendo.Like really,who cares how many units of VR stuff are sold,what are you going to do walk around the house with a helmet on and pretend to play a HQ game? You can create all the peripherals,helmets,VR stuff you want but when the games are very much sub par,why should i care? I already stated that VR will not be a decent concept for at least another 15 years.By that i mean,seeing both good VR peripherals AND AAA games to support it. Marketing is just that,trying to talk us into buying stuff that is not good or not yet viable.I am sure someone could sell me a rocket ship,yeah sure amazing,but what am i going to do with a rocket ship?
When i start seeing a LOT more quality AAA games,then we can start thinking about HQ games+VR in the same breath.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
VR has been the same since first hinted at over 20 years ago by Nintendo.Like really,who cares how many units of VR stuff are sold,what are you going to do walk around the house with a helmet on and pretend to play a HQ game? You can create all the peripherals,helmets,VR stuff you want but when the games are very much sub par,why should i care? I already stated that VR will not be a decent concept for at least another 15 years.By that i mean,seeing both good VR peripherals AND AAA games to support it. Marketing is just that,trying to talk us into buying stuff that is not good or not yet viable.I am sure someone could sell me a rocket ship,yeah sure amazing,but what am i going to do with a rocket ship?
When i start seeing a LOT more quality AAA games,then we can start thinking about HQ games+VR in the same breath.
You assume the games are sub par. Sure, VR has a lot of shovelware out there, but there are plenty of full games that are actually good. Take Astro Bot for instance. It was going up against giants like God of War for game of the year. It's pretty much at that level.
VR has been the same since first hinted at over 20 years ago by Nintendo.Like really,who cares how many units of VR stuff are sold,what are you going to do walk around the house with a helmet on and pretend to play a HQ game? You can create all the peripherals,helmets,VR stuff you want but when the games are very much sub par,why should i care? I already stated that VR will not be a decent concept for at least another 15 years.By that i mean,seeing both good VR peripherals AND AAA games to support it. Marketing is just that,trying to talk us into buying stuff that is not good or not yet viable.I am sure someone could sell me a rocket ship,yeah sure amazing,but what am i going to do with a rocket ship?
When i start seeing a LOT more quality AAA games,then we can start thinking about HQ games+VR in the same breath.
Problem is you pretty much dislike all games. Saying VR is like it was twenty years ago, I assume you were referring to the virtual boy, tells me you really don't really know jack about VR today.
Things is plenty of non VR games can be played pretty decently in VR through vorpX. VR is here to stay this time and as time goes by the headset will get better and so will the pricing and games for it.
Also you don't walk around your house, you have a play area set up, and things like walkovr allow to walk in place, or run in place to simulate walking or running in game.
There's other solutions if you want to play seated as well that allow you to use your feet to simulate walking/running forwards too or you can just the controller you are using to do so or a keyboard even....
Some of you here remind me of this article from rock, paper, shotgun.
VR isn’t going to succeed. It doesn’t matter how many companies jump in, how technically competent their VR goggles might be, nor even if they can figure out a way that wearing them doesn’t make your face melt off and slide down your neck – VR gaming will never be more than a niche interest, and a lot of money is about to get wasted.
Four years later, article is from june 2015, and we are still waiting for this "dive" into VR to fail like they prophesied.
Whew good thing I didn't hold my breath there, guess I dodged a bullet.
Here's a nice fact for you all, VR doesn't need to be the next big thing, it doesn't need to be in everyone's household...it just has to be profitable enough for companies to keep working on it and guess what it is.
Like others have mentioned it's even doing better than some companies expected, not to mention how it's doing in non gaming application.
You know kind of like simpits...it's not for everyone but those that have one don't really want to go back.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
There are must plays with VR but they aren't AAA. That's the difference. Killer apps generally have to be AAA to shift lots of systems. But the 3 must haves which aren't AAA are Astro Bot, Lone Echo / Echo VR, and Beat Saber.
Number of "must play" mmo's right now - zero..... and see how it's not a problem. It's the entire problem with gaming yet see how it not really the problem some would make it out to be.
There's only a small hand full of games on the horizon that look interesting right now.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
For the product review testers. How is it for those of us that have to wear glasses to correct our vision?
Having to put it on over glasses can open up a world of problems from wieght, resting on top of glasses, to hitting the lens of glasses.
It's not too bad, actually, though you can't move the lenses as close. You lose a slight amount of FOV.
Gabe pretty much said the same in the article link I posted. They hinted at stuff (games) in the works.
Eh, I would say there are a few games that are great on VR. Superhot and Astro Bot come to mind. Space Junkies is damn good as well, along with Moss.
It's not totally devoid of great games, but it's not oozing them either. For us in this community, I'm surprised nobody has brought up OrbusVR, which is also damn good especially with the new reborn update.
Comparing VR to phones, PCs etc. is useless. These are standalone products, you buy them, you can use them. VR has a higher barrier of entry, you need a powerful rig first.
Growth of VR isn’t a steady % increase a year. Its a snowball effect and once it reaches a critical point it will have its breakthrough moment. Its not said that will ever happen, it needs to keep gaining momentum.
That momentum needs to come from more then just technological advancement, good games and affordability need to be taken into account as well.
Would VR be a succes if everybody with an average pc could get a VR set for around 150 bucks and the new Doom, Elder Scrolls and FarCry would be exclusives? I definitely think so, I just don’t know if we’ll ever reach that point. Companies are investing heavily, they kind of have to, they want a new untapped market and although it isn’t a complete blue ocean situation its still a pretty big pond.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Post edited by lahnmir on
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
I look at the inside of that unit, the part that goes over the eyes, and think to myself, "Nope. Nope. Nope." I believe(d) my grandmother when she said not to get anything that close to your eyes, including TV.
Seriously, though, I'll just wait to see longitudinal studies on the effects of something that close to eyes and its effect on the brain before I sign on.
Lastly, I like seeing and hearing the world around me. There's immersion and there's too much immersion, in my opinion. I prefer the former.
Not so much 'next gen' as a sidegrade, too obtrusive, too expensive, for it to be a true 'next generation' it needs to be neither of those things. Ultimately i do not see much interest in this version beyond those who are prepared to spend a lot of money on a device that is of limited use, it will take a lot more than this to make VR mainstream, to put it briefly, its expensive tat.
Had a look over the posts, I may have to wait until they create a VR room, a sort of holographic room which occupies one of the rooms of my mansion. There we can play in a virtual reality, eat some snacks, take a call no problem.
I find that VR is one of those things that people that want it to happen are super die hard about it and will tell anyone that isn't so interested or on the fence that they are wrong for thinking it's just a fad and it's 100% going to be the next big thing.
For some of us gamers VR just isn't attractive in it's current or near future forms and while there may be a few great games on it, great for VR is still average at best to non VR even with the technology advancing and getting better at a steady pace.
I can't say i would never buy a VR headset, but i can say that it wouldn't be in the next 5 years and to get me to do it, there would have to be some ground breaking game that i couldn't live without or play without VR because especially in it's current iteration i just don't find it all that great.
The headset would need to be so much more slimline with full body gestures to start with, the thought of playing VR with controllers is actually kind of disgusting to me, especially after watching so many anime's and having super high expectations of what my VR experience should look like.
This isn't any kind of argument that VR is just a fad, in my eyes it is and i never see it becoming mainstream and telling me i'm wrong and providing me all the evidence in the world won't change my mind, just like me doing the same wouldn't change VR fans minds that i'm wrong. it's just my opinion on the subject, nothing more.
The problem that VR has is not so much with the technology (Although I admit it needs at least two more iterations before I'd even consider buying in) but with the stigma and price attached to it.
The fact that VR was attempted a couple of times when it wasn't anywhere near ready, and the technology just wasn't there yet, means that it had one of the most dreaded industry labels possible attached to it: Gimmick.
Smart consumers don't want to buy a gimmick, especially a $400+ gimmick, and its going to take a lot of redefining the genre in order to make it mainstream.
I think some companies are making strides. I almost never watch TV, but when I have I saw some Samsung VR commercials that were great. However, the advertising push needs to be a little stronger. People playing VR games needs to be in a couple of big movies using current gen recognizable technology.
In addition, and probably the thing that will save VR, is when the good headsets, not the cardboard and phone garbage, but the Oculus, HTC and Index, come down at least halfway in price.
There's just too much you can do to your current PC rig for $400-$1000 that buying a "gimmicky" peripheral just isn't in the budget. Why spend a grand on an index when you've got a GTX 760 sitting in your machine, struggling to keep up with current gen games on your 4K monitor? With that kind of money you can go big on your next video card.
So these companies have to do two things. They need to get some good product placement out that that helps erode the gimmick label and they need to get the price down lower than an entry level VGA card so that I'm not sitting in the store with a GTX 2080ti in one hand and a Valve Index in the other. I know which one I'm choosing every single day and twice on Sunday if I've got an extra grand to toss at my PC and it's not the VR device.
I could afford to buy this right this second, I love gaming, and can't wait for VR to be perfected. Saying that, no way in hell I will pay this much for a single gaming component. I can't believe there is a market for this.
I find that VR is one of those things that people that want it to happen are super die hard about it and will tell anyone that isn't so interested or on the fence that they are wrong for thinking it's just a fad and it's 100% going to be the next big thing.
For some of us gamers VR just isn't attractive in it's current or near future forms and while there may be a few great games on it, great for VR is still average at best to non VR even with the technology advancing and getting better at a steady pace.
I can't say i would never buy a VR headset, but i can say that it wouldn't be in the next 5 years and to get me to do it, there would have to be some ground breaking game that i couldn't live without or play without VR because especially in it's current iteration i just don't find it all that great.
The headset would need to be so much more slimline with full body gestures to start with, the thought of playing VR with controllers is actually kind of disgusting to me, especially after watching so many anime's and having super high expectations of what my VR experience should look like.
This isn't any kind of argument that VR is just a fad, in my eyes it is and i never see it becoming mainstream and telling me i'm wrong and providing me all the evidence in the world won't change my mind, just like me doing the same wouldn't change VR fans minds that i'm wrong. it's just my opinion on the subject, nothing more.
Not saying people are wrong to not be interested in VR, people feel how they feel and that's okay.
Hell I have no interest in MOBA's and think esport are not real sports, I am not wrong to feel this way but I wont argue that it's a "fad" and I certainly wont try and argue that it's going to die out simply because it has zero interest for me..
Thing is these are forums and we use words to explain or express our thoughts as such it kind of behooves us to try and use the proper words to explain what we mean.
I think people are using the term it's a "fad or gimmick" to say they are not interested in VR for XYZ reasons but then not using the proper words to say so or explain themselves.
What does "Fad" mean?
an intense and widely shared enthusiasm for something, especially one that is short-lived and without basis in the object's qualities; a craze.
I italicized what I think is the key part about using the word "fad". Something that is "short lived". I do not think this is the case this time around... like VR, or not, I do believe it is here to stay this time and will not be any more short lived than say simpits or hotas.
This doesn't mean it will be for everyone or that it will be mainstream but it certainly doesn't mean it's a "fad". Sure right now it's a popular "trend" but I rather doubt the trend will die out like fads do. Instead I think like many new technologies that it will keep growing and evolve and certainly has a chance to become mainstream at some point but no one is saying that is now or even tomorrow.
Right now I feel it's still a tad overpriced but people seem to forget that this tech right now targets gamer's that like to splurge on pretty lights, screens that are worth $1k+ and even gpu's worth $1500+...so is it for casual gamer's like myself?
No not really..I have no argument against that but we certainly can't say it's a "fad"..VR is here to stay this time around.
I will say though the rig that I currently use as HTPC, looks below at siggy, is getting long in the tooth and I will be most likely changing it to a 3800x with 16gb 3200 ram with at min a rtx2080 all mostly so I can look into getting my own VR headset.
Not sure which one yet as like many I think there still some improvement to be made on VR but certainly an odyssey+ (with 3rd party facepad) is worth looking into for the time being as it often comes on sale at 299$usd.
As such I do not think people are wrong to feel how they feel or even to not be interested in VR it's certainly all valid in my eyes but then I do feel people are not truly meaning that it's a fad or certainly not using the correct term to "accurately" express what they feel.
Now some few do feel exactly that, that VR is a fad that will die down and is or will be short lived and they are correctly using the term but I think they are just wrong.
Other posters however are saying yes they think it's a fad but then go on the explain why VR isn't appealing to them and they are the ones I feel need explaining that VR isn't a fad. A lack of interest on their part in some tech doesn't mean the tech is going to die tomorrow, the day after or even the day after that.
It just means they are not interested in it...just like I have zero interest in mobas.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Comments
If you're going to count the very first inception as part of the timeline, then VR hit the streets well over 2 decades ago...
VR isn't going to have any meaningful foothold for another 2 decades at the earliest... still doesn't stop people from being the first to own a mood ring when it comes out. I say pack that baby up and in about 50 years or so, you can sell it as a relic on eBay for a small fortune to the nostalgic.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Having to put it on over glasses can open up a world of problems from wieght, resting on top of glasses, to hitting the lens of glasses.
And I told you all the barriers to entry for VR. There are a lot of them, with the counterpoint being that they are on their way to being fixed fast.
VR's inception in the 90s is in an entirely different league. It was a false start, as it never lead to continued development. Not only was it a false start, but the only consumer products came from small startups. There wasn't a single big tech company that ever released a VR headset for consumers in the 90s. Not one. They wanted to, but they never did.
And your 2 decades estimation is a random guess where you throw a dart at the board with no prior knowledge or research done on the state of VR R&D. You clearly haven't looked into the advancements going on in the space.
You can create all the peripherals,helmets,VR stuff you want but when the games are very much sub par,why should i care?
I already stated that VR will not be a decent concept for at least another 15 years.By that i mean,seeing both good VR peripherals AND AAA games to support it.
Marketing is just that,trying to talk us into buying stuff that is not good or not yet viable.I am sure someone could sell me a rocket ship,yeah sure amazing,but what am i going to do with a rocket ship?
When i start seeing a LOT more quality AAA games,then we can start thinking about HQ games+VR in the same breath.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Grandma's contacts, probably.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
It's not totally devoid of great games, but it's not oozing them either. For us in this community, I'm surprised nobody has brought up OrbusVR, which is also damn good especially with the new reborn update.
Comparing VR to phones, PCs etc. is useless. These are standalone products, you buy them, you can use them. VR has a higher barrier of entry, you need a powerful rig first.
Growth of VR isn’t a steady % increase a year. Its a snowball effect and once it reaches a critical point it will have its breakthrough moment. Its not said that will ever happen, it needs to keep gaining momentum.
That momentum needs to come from more then just technological advancement, good games and affordability need to be taken into account as well.
Would VR be a succes if everybody with an average pc could get a VR set for around 150 bucks and the new Doom, Elder Scrolls and FarCry would be exclusives? I definitely think so, I just don’t know if we’ll ever reach that point. Companies are investing heavily, they kind of have to, they want a new untapped market and although it isn’t a complete blue ocean situation its still a pretty big pond.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Middle aged woman detected.
The headset would need to be so much more slimline with full body gestures to start with, the thought of playing VR with controllers is actually kind of disgusting to me, especially after watching so many anime's and having super high expectations of what my VR experience should look like.
The fact that VR was attempted a couple of times when it wasn't anywhere near ready, and the technology just wasn't there yet, means that it had one of the most dreaded industry labels possible attached to it: Gimmick.
Smart consumers don't want to buy a gimmick, especially a $400+ gimmick, and its going to take a lot of redefining the genre in order to make it mainstream.
I think some companies are making strides. I almost never watch TV, but when I have I saw some Samsung VR commercials that were great. However, the advertising push needs to be a little stronger. People playing VR games needs to be in a couple of big movies using current gen recognizable technology.
In addition, and probably the thing that will save VR, is when the good headsets, not the cardboard and phone garbage, but the Oculus, HTC and Index, come down at least halfway in price.
There's just too much you can do to your current PC rig for $400-$1000 that buying a "gimmicky" peripheral just isn't in the budget. Why spend a grand on an index when you've got a GTX 760 sitting in your machine, struggling to keep up with current gen games on your 4K monitor? With that kind of money you can go big on your next video card.
So these companies have to do two things. They need to get some good product placement out that that helps erode the gimmick label and they need to get the price down lower than an entry level VGA card so that I'm not sitting in the store with a GTX 2080ti in one hand and a Valve Index in the other. I know which one I'm choosing every single day and twice on Sunday if I've got an extra grand to toss at my PC and it's not the VR device.
huh?
I could afford to buy this right this second, I love gaming, and can't wait for VR to be perfected. Saying that, no way in hell I will pay this much for a single gaming component. I can't believe there is a market for this.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.