Facebook can’t decide how much VR should cost

https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/14/oculus-rift-and-touch-receive-yet-another-price-cut-now-just-499

by janober • 9 years ago

28 55 9 years ago

techcrunch.com

throwitlong• 9 years ago

PS VR effect.

striking• 9 years ago

And the "Vive is winning" effect...

Is there anyone who prefers Oculus' IR over Vive's LIDAR?

ajsalminen• 9 years ago

Neither Vive nor Rift have been selling very well recently if the Steam Survey is any indication. PSVR numbers are better but I don't think they're that impressive either.

droopyEyelids• 9 years ago

Thats still a lot of money for something you're only going to use for ~6 hours

dataminded• 9 years ago

It is still way too expensive. I like VR and enjoy gaming but not enough to replace a PC that comfortably plays everything else I want to play.

workerIbe• 9 years ago

Saw a headline yesterday that Oculus is coming out with a $299 headset next year.

bryanlarsen2• 9 years ago

According to that rumour that headset is a competitor to Daydream or Gear VR, not the Rift or Vive. (IOW it doesn't have 6DOF positioning). So it'd be good for passive consumption but not so great for games or content creation.

cillian64• 9 years ago

I assume this is the Santa Cruz headset? The big thing with that one is it's standalone -- my guess is that it includes electronics similar to a smartphone.

My question is whether I'll be able to connect this new, cheaper (better?) headset to my PC for gaming or whether it can only be used standalone. Given the PC specs required for current VR games, I can't see how a system builtin to the headset could provide a comparable experience.

43224gg2522• 9 years ago

Is it safe to say that VR still has another decade (at least) before it gets any kind of wide spread adoption? I was hyped a couple years ago for VR but it feels like its fizzled out.

mrfusion• 9 years ago

We're in the trough of disillusionment.

hacker_9• 9 years ago

Indeed, the hype train is always miles ahead of reality.

Strom4• 9 years ago

How do you define widespread adoption? When adding all the current gen VR systems together we're already over 10M units sold.

aphextron5• 9 years ago

Those are really optimistic numbers which must include GearVR and its competitors, which are toys that most people do not consider true VR.

Total sales for Rift, PSVR, and Vive are ~1.5 million units combined. All the others (OSVR, chinese clones, et. al.) might add up to 2 million total.

43224gg2522• 9 years ago

Basically when new games are made for VR first and traditional games (PS4/XBOX/Nintendo) are more for niche gamers.

Ajedi322• 9 years ago

Well, there's certainly not as much hype anymore as there may have been a couple years ago, but I wouldn't really say it's "fizzled out". New games are coming out all the time (e.g. Robo Recall, Echo Arena), new hardware is being developed (version 2 of the lighthouse trackers, Valve's knuckle controllers, new headsets from LG, etc.), and we're finally starting to get to the point where there are a lot of games available for VR that are more than just tech demos. The ecosystem is still very much alive.

empath75• 9 years ago

I'd say we'd have to wait for generation two before giving up on it. Cheaper, lighter, higher resolution, etc.

ghaff4• 9 years ago

I don't know what the timeframe is but, yeah, it probably needs to get to untethered few hundred dollar with better video quality range. At that point it's pretty much a no-brainer for anyone who doesn't have motion sickness problems with it. At which point, volume drives content like virtual tourism that gets beyond hardcore gaming.

AR is probably more interesting in the long-term although that will have to navigate through the glass-hole problem among other things.

jackmott• 9 years ago

id say five years. the price cuts will help. i will get one (again) when pixel density doubles.

aphextron5• 9 years ago

Yes. I was a hardcore fanboy, bought the DK2, had both Rift and Vive preorders on day one. Spent months making my own games and VR experiments in Unity. However I just sold all of my headsets last month.

Theres been a lot of amazing stuff to come out of this generation of VR. But as hard as the software devs try, you simply can't get past the fact that the hardware isn't ready for primetime yet.

The clunky controllers, the wires, the sensors. We need full wireless, full FOV, and at least double the pixel density/resolution with a control scheme that uses finger tracking lightweight gloves.

Th current gen of tech is really mindblowing at first, and it certainly has incredible potential. But until then VR will unfortunately remain a niche toy like HOTAS controllers.

barkingcat• 9 years ago

Full wireless would be a great thing to have. The wires as it is now are not ready for mass adoption.

hkmurakami• 9 years ago

This is why I'd never want to do a VR company right now (at least not with my own money and shouldering all the risk). Having my fate depend on hardware vendors who don't necessarily have interests aligned with me is not a situation I want to get into!

simonhughes22• 9 years ago

Have you seen the TPCast? That makes the vive wireless, and can already by shipped from China, coming to the US later this year. Intel is also releasing something similar for the vive next year. So that is wireless. LG is bringing out a SteamVR headset later this year with a higher pixel density. And valve just sent out the Kunckles controller to devs, which has full on finger tracking. So we are not very far away from solving most of those problems.

mtgx2• 9 years ago

A decade seems like too much. Maybe 3-5 years. You know that expression "wait for the third generation" - I think it applies to VR headsets, too. I've also tried both Oculus Rift and Vive and despite what some may say, 1440p is just not enough. I feel like 4k needs to be the bare minimum resolution, so I don't plan on getting one until it has a 4k resolution. There are also other kinks to solve in the overall technology/experience, so waiting a few more years could pay-off.

sigstoat• 9 years ago

You know that expression "wait for the third generation"

which generation are we on, now?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_reality#History

Paul_S• 9 years ago

This is pointless, people are not buying VR because there is nothing there they really want to use it for, not because it costs too much. A gaming rig to run it will cost you more.

Ajedi322• 9 years ago

Anecdotally, cost was a significant factor for me. I've been looking to purchase a headset ever since I had an opportunity to demo one a year ago, but $600 was a bit too steep for something that I likely wouldn't use for anything other than playing games (unlike a PC, which I use for much more than that). $400 though (the current price thanks to the summer sale) was enough to make me pull the trigger.

I also noticed a huge surge in the level of activity from new Rift owners on the /r/oculus subreddit after the sale started, and many there are reporting that the headset is sold out in a lot of stores, so I'm pretty sure I'm not alone here.

Strom4• 9 years ago

The $399 sale was what put me over the edge to finally buy one. Based on comments around the internet that I've read on this sale announcement, there are plenty of people similar to me.

Retric• 9 years ago

Much of this is just how computer parts get cheaper over time. VR may end up like trackballs which never replaced mice, but still sold millions of devices.

PS: I flat out will not buy a Facebook product which may be contributing to HTC’s $799 Vive is continuing to sell better than the Rift.

evan_• 9 years ago

But people are more likely to pay $200 for something that they might not get a huge amount of use from than $500+.

borne02• 9 years ago

I think live sports and being able to switch between players/drone/sideline 360 views would be a killer app.

ghaff4• 9 years ago

That's a popular opinion. And it's something that people have a demonstrated willingness to pay for.

It does make it into a solitary experience. And I think there's also the question of whether people would really want to be that immersed for a 2+ hour game.

Talbotson• 9 years ago

VR is not going to happen for general productivity purposes, but it will be handy for some specialties. Then they can invest in better, more expensive equipment.

VR is such a closed off experience right now, I would schedule it under Dreaming. Sweaty too, with today's gear.

It asks a lot for what it can deliver for now.

philipov• 9 years ago

It is not Facebook's right to decide how much VR should cost. That's what a free market is for. They do believe in the free market, right? Right??

logicallee• 9 years ago

Ordinarily technical companies are well-differentiated which means they are not commodities that you can interchange precisely - unlike rice or wheat. So while it is not sensible to state "(biggest wheat importer) can't decide how much wheat should cost" since their options are probably within a very narrow limit where asking for just 15% more would cause their sales to drop to 0 and asking for 15% less would let them capture 50%+ of the market - but at a loss for them - the same is rarely true in the technical industry, which has high margins and high differentiation.

So for these reasons, Facebook's pricing choices are complicated and the free market does not clearly prescribe their pricing strategy in the way you suggest.

pavement• 9 years ago

I don't think anyone can really gauge VR's day-to-day casual consumer value. It's genuine applications are rare, and it's primary value is in deflecting hazardous situations onto remote operated robotic vehicles with telepresence.

But humans prefer actual experiences above all, every single time, unless real dangers are presented, so VR always feels like an undesirable compromise.

beisner• 9 years ago

I'm not so sure about that. There are a lot of domains where actual experiences are impossible. Think re-living an important moment in history, exploring the world with a hawks-eye view, or interacting in 3 dimensions with someone half-way across the globe. You can't exactly say that VR is a compromise in these situations, because there is no alternative.

rocky1138• 9 years ago

humans prefer actual experiences above all, every single time

I love the idea of living in my virtual forest in Potioneer but I wouldn't want to do it for real.

avaer• 9 years ago

I'm not sure humans prefer "actual experiences" every single time; the business models of Facebook, Amazon, and Google depend on that not being the case.

Back when the internet was still low-res and slow people said the same thing about it: chatting, buying, and researching with a computer is an undesirable compromise. That's where we are with VR.

Anecdote: I fondly remember the days spent hacking AOL with people online, being ostracized and punished by people around me for not having "actual" experiences like going out and playing sports. These people now spend countless hours on Facebook and Instagram. Now apparently I need to be more social with actual people (on Facebook) instead of hacking with fake people in fake virtual reality.

MikusR• 9 years ago

They ran out of the old bundle that had two boxes (one with headset, sensor ,Xbox controller and remote. other one with touch controllers and sensor). And announced earlier than expected the new cheaper bundle: one smaller box with headset, touch controllers and two sensors. The new box has no Xbox controller and no touch remote.

Facebook can’t decide how much VR should cost

Related Stories