Support NeoGAF

[Petrae]

Most of us actually interested in purchasing this already have PCs that meet or exceed the recommended requirements.

Of course, and that brings the asking price down for the core enthusiast.

For the mass market, though, this won't be the case. It's asking for a substantial financial outlay that could very well wind up being the next Wii, in terms of adoption and quick throwaway. At least the Wii was a fraction of the price.

I'm not dissuading the existence of VR; I'm just thinking that it's got zero chance of penetrating the mass market in the short term and am not confident that development can continue long enough for the financial barrier to entry to come down enough to enable such penetration.

Enthusiasts will snag VR when it's available, casual players will think it's cool, but... when it comes to footing the bill for their own? Casual players will see the four-figure price tag and walk away.

 

[Arkham]

Why?

Because they're cagey on the pricing and said it wasn't aiming for the mass market, more of a niche-appeal to start with. The dev kit costs, what, $400 now? (edit: My mistake, $350 - I was under the impression the kits were $400-500). Sony's said that it's trying to keep it as low as possible, less than a console, which I expect at the time of release will be $299. That's what I think the basic kit will cost (maybe $200-250 stand-alone, up to $350 with bells & whistles/wands). A minimum of $100 difference, but I think it'll be more.

 

[InaudibleWhispa]

Samsung phones only or Android phones?

Given that Gear VR is a collaboration with Samsung, Samsung phones. That's (after a couple generations of new smartphones) hundreds of millions of people, and the majority share of the Android market. I'm sure HTC will have their own thing too.

 

[Seanspeed]

Because they're cagey on the pricing and said it wasn't aiming for the mass market, more of a niche-appeal to start with. The dev kit costs, what, $400 now? Sony's said that it's trying to keep it as low as possible, less than a console, which I expect at the time of release will be $299. That's what I think the basic kit will cost. A minimum of $100 difference, but I think it'll be more.

Dev kits are $350. And Oculus have also said they are going to sell the headsets as cheap as possible. Mass market/niche market wont be relevant. They are looking to make money elsewhere.

 

[maniac-kun]

Good luck with mass market appeal at that price point.

Isnt the Valve system supperior to the CV1? Probably has the same hardware needs tho.

 

[SmokyDave]

Man, the VR wars are weird. Ultimately, VR is the same as everything else:

PS4 - Cheaper, does less.
PC - More expensive, does more.

That's all there is to it. They aren't going to be shoulder to shoulder vying for the same wallets.

You people need to spend less time fighting pointless format wars and more time thinking about safety precautions and exit manoeuvres for VR Wanking Sessions.

 

[Vladmiris]

You said "while on the other hand Sony's VR will be able to do what $2,000 PC hardware can do EASILY, no problem whatsoever, and their VR experiences will be about high end, graphical quality, AAA, games only possible on a Sony console"

Can you show us the direct quotes where people said that because I haven't see that anywhere in this thread, but maybe I've just missed it?

I went through and checked. No one said this.

 

[SaggyMonkey]

I believe it was a comment made in answer to a question during an interview, not a self promoted statement/announcement to the press.

Yes, but when you don't prevent yourself from giving a quote like that, literally no other message makes its way around from that event. Media are going to find the clickbait quote and run.

I wouldn't be surprised to eventually learn that the Morpheus and Oculus headset prices come out the same.

My one worry with the PS4 VR is what happened with the Move controller. Sony wasn't able to keep publishing enough content for it to keep people interested or the device in stores. Its killer app (Johan Sebastian Joust) was something indie devs hacked onto a laptop, and only much later (when it became hard to find Move) did it come to PS.

 

[gunslikewhoa]

I'll leave the predictions to the droves of expert market analysts in this thread, but I have no idea why anyone is surprised by this.

 

[Dreamwriter]

Because they're cagey on the pricing and said it wasn't aiming for the mass market, more of a niche-appeal to start with.

I've never read that, I've always heard Oculus talking about targeting the mainstream, NOT niche. And there's no way the Morpheus will be cheaper than $299 - $300-400 is what the Rift is going to be, and that's selling it at cost, with no profits whatsoever (Oculus has made it clear that's what they are going to do). If Sony wants to sell for a profit, they'll have to charge at least $400 for theirs, or really cheap out on the components.

 

[Seanspeed]

Yes, but when you don't prevent yourself from giving a quote like that, literally no other message makes its way around from that event. Media are going to find the clickbait quote and run.

They're just being honest. Oculus are far more concerned with giving people the reality than being coy about these things and then having a nightmare on their hands as tons of people get outraged that their VR experience was totally awful due to lacking hardware. It's a PR hit now in order to save a bigger PR hit later.

 

[Lynn616]

Does OR require an external camera or any type of special controllers? Also, does the PS4 VR require a camera or move controllers?

 

[MadSexual]

19 pages and people are still decrying the price of entry for hardware pushing a new standard of resolution and frame rate -- Yep, it's a GAF VR thread!

I'm just thrilled I probably won't need to grab a second 970 to have a good experience.

 

[Arkham]

Dev kits are $350. And Oculus have also said they are going to sell the headsets as cheap as possible. Mass market/niche market wont be relevant. They are looking to make money elsewhere.

I was thinking of the original @ $500, granted, but I still completely expect the difference between the platforms to be well over $100. I'd say closer to $200. Still, considering the markets the pricing for both will be appropriate I'm sure.

 

[Seanspeed]

Does OR require an external camera or any type of special controllers? Also, does the PS4 VR require a camera or move controllers?

Yes, OR will require a camera. Not sure about controllers.

And yes, PS4 VR will require a camera, too. Move controllers might not be specifically mandatory, but there will likely be games/experiences you cant play without them.

 

[AllIsOneIsNone]

I'll leave the predictions to the droves of expert market analysts in this thread, but I have no idea why anyone is surprised by this.

Psh, ask Michael Pachter what he thinks about VR. Experts aren't always experts.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

I've never read that, I've always heard Oculus talking about targeting the mainstream, NOT niche. And there's no way the Morpheus will be cheaper than $299 - $300-400 is what the Rift is going to be, and that's selling it at cost, with no profits whatsoever (Oculus has made it clear that's what they are going to do). If Sony wants to sell for a profit, they'll have to charge at least $400 for theirs, or really cheap out on the components.

Oculus's long game is mainstream, but they realize the CV1 rollout is going to be niche. They don't expect this iteration to be the next Wii.

Yes, OR will require a camera. Not sure about controllers.

I know Crescent Bay does, but I don't think we know if the consumer model will yet. I know they were interested in making all of that internal.

 

[Solid Samus]

Fuck you Oculus? Because they pointed out the reality of the situation? lol

People are losing it.

some people don't know shit about oculus/rift and never have, but still wanna post

And newsflash - no way in hell is mobile VR going to take off with those clunky ass headsets.

these clunky ass headsets will be streamlined in short order as that's how devices of this nature tend to progress; and the experience of VR has outweighed the negative of putting on much more intrusive development kit headsets for the overwhelming majority of users both casual and enthusiast up to this point. it's not quite 3D where not enough genuine novelty or utility is offered to make the expense or potential inconveniences worthwhile.

 

[ZOONAMI]

They're targetting the mobile market too with Gear VR.

Who is they? Does Facebook have something to do with Samsung Gear VR?

And newsflash - no way in hell is mobile VR going to take off with those clunky ass headsets.

 

[Carn82]

By telling them it's the only way to experience virtual reality on PC.

Yeah, fair enough, but its quite the investment if you lack said equipment.

Since VR will not be solely the realm of gaming. It is the experiences that are not possible in other mediums that are most likely to drive VR. Right now, those types of things only lovely exist. Given several years that will change, and that is ultimately what all these companies are waiting for and hoping for both in the realms of gaming and outside of that. The killer apps have yet to be made, but the foundation of VR at this point is likely to make that happen. Chet Faliszec has a great talk on that

True, 'content is king'. VR-content will need to deliver. To be honest, I'm more interested in the volume and quality of VR content than which device will 'win'.

If they're not that interested in VR, you don't. It's not for them yet. But one day prices will come down to a point where it will be.

Yep. Let's hope the hype is real when that day arrives

That's the target audience for PC rift in year one. They're not trying to get your mother or sister who only plays Candy Crush saga to invest $1500 in a PC for Oculus. There are other devices better suited to them.

True, but my opinion is that you will need to convince those people down the road to make it a hit and not just a niche thing for gamers.

How are you going to convince somebody to buy a PS4 plus Project Morpheus for around $700 if they're already happy with their PS3?

Same answer either way: You show it to them. VR is gonna blow people away. It wont get everyone itching to throw tons of money at it, but it will plenty, and there are millions of us who already own a requisite PC or a PS4 that basically just need the headset. It doesn't need to be a worldwide explosion of mass market coverage right away, anyways. Just like most tech, costs come down. We'll all have 4k TV's soon enough, even though a few years ago they were thousands of dollars.

I hope you're right

 

[gunslikewhoa]

Psh, ask Michael Pachter what he thinks about VR. Experts aren't always experts.

If experts aren't always experts, and non-experts are never experts, what are non-experts?

Predictions are fine, but it's the tone of so many of them that is off-putting. It's not, "I was thinking that it really needed to be around $XXX to be successful initially." It's, "LOL this thing is going to cost $500. Nobody's going to buy that. It's DOA. WTF was Facebook thinking? If it was $299, they would have sold billions of them!"

 

[Seanspeed]

I was thinking of the original @ $500, granted, but I still completely expect the difference between the platforms to be well over $100. I'd say closer to $200. Still, considering the markets the pricing for both will be appropriate I'm sure.

The original DK1 was only $300.

And I'm still not sure why you think the gap would be that big? Neither will be pricing 'according to market', but will be selling as cheaply as possible to promote adoption.

 

[KooopaKid]

Parties are the most social a situation can get and your argument was that it's "socially awkward" and "will only be accepted amongst nerds or in dark places".

Yes it's going to be awkward in the comfort of your home during your daily life. Parties on the other hand are occasional. Most of you here do not see VR as a party only thing right?

 

[Dirtyshubb]

Man, the VR wars are weird. Ultimately, VR is the same as everything else:

PS4 - Cheaper, does less.
PC - More expensive, does more.

That's all there is to it. They aren't going to be shoulder to shoulder vying for the same wallets.

You people need to spend less time fighting pointless format wars and more time thinking about safety precautions and exit manoeuvres for VR Wanking Sessions.

I think the problem is though that there are quite a few people who cant wrap their brains round the idea that PS4 VR can work, or that the prospect of spending £600-£700 on a PS4 and Morpheus (Or £250-£300 for morpheus alone if you already have a PS4) is a better prospect for the majority of people compared to buying/upgrading their pc's to a good enough spec and then having to buy the Rift and then having to worry about settings/drivers etc.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

Yes it's going to be awkward in the comfort of your home during your daily life. Parties on the other hand are occasional. Most of you here do not see VR as a party only thing right?

Why is using a head set alone in your home going to be more awkward than at a party? If you're talking about the kid/spouse situation, they probably won't care and you probably aren't going to feel socially awkward around people you don't have a problem getting naked in front of.

 

[Eighty Deuce]

The VR market needs to adopt the cell phone model with contracts in order to break into a larger market

 

[Lynn616]

Yes, OR will require a camera. Not sure about controllers.

And yes, PS4 VR will require a camera, too. Move controllers might not be specifically mandatory, but there will likely be games/experiences you cant play without them.

That's going to knock the price a bit then. Unless that is already included in the basic packages.

 

[AllIsOneIsNone]

If experts aren't always experts, and non-experts are never experts, what are non-experts?

Non-experts. But there are a few people here that know a buttload about VR. I was just pointing out a false equivalence that you have to be an expert analyst to know what's up.

 

[Arkham]

The original DK1 was only $300.

And I'm still not sure why you think the gap would be that big? Neither will be pricing 'according to market', but will be selling as cheaply as possible to promote adoption.

I don't expect Palmer to be able to take as much of a hit on his device as Sony will be on theirs.

 

[Business]

That wasn't the best way to put it. If you add the price of the gaming PC you'll need you'll have people freaking out at 1,5k, even here in an enthusiast forum which is surprising btw.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

I don't expect Palmer to be able to take as much of a hit on his device as Sony will be on theirs.

Considering Sony's financial situation, and the Facebook money backing Oculus, I think it's likely the opposite.

 

[SmokyDave]

I think the problem is though that there are quite a few people who cant wrap their brains round the idea that PS4 VR can work, or that the prospect of spending £600-£700 on a PS4 and Morpheus (Or £250-£300 for morpheus alone if you already have a PS4) is a better prospect for the majority of people compared to buying/upgrading their pc's to a good enough spec and then having to buy the Rift and then having to worry about settings/drivers etc.

The PS4 will be good enough for an awful lot of people, I'm sure. For those that want more, PC & Oculus will be waiting with open arms. Everyone's getting attended to. Who gives a fuck which is a better prospect for anyone but themselves?

FWIW, I'll probably be getting both. Definitely in for Rift, and it'll only take a couple of decent games (or GT7) before I need Morpheus. If I had to pre-emptively declare a winner then it would be PC because it's the only one of the two that can support the primary driver of VR: porn.

They'll both be fucking great either way. The future is finally here.

 

[Oshimai]

Are there people super-hyped for the oculus who don't already have a PC setup?

Yep, I play on my laptop and the $1500 price-point is unreasonable. While we don't know the price yet, the Morpheus is probably the most cost-effective solution to VR when both products are available.

 

[KooopaKid]

Why is using a head set alone in your home going to be more awkward than at a party? If you're talking about the kid/spouse situation, they probably won't care and you probably aren't going to feel socially awkward around people you don't have a problem getting naked in front of.

Simply because you are completely cut from the real world and can't have a normal conversation. It's not very polite to talk to someone without looking at them. In parties, others are watching and talking. Is the person playing really interacting with others? Not really.

 

[Dreamwriter]

Yeah, fair enough, but its quite the investment if you lack said equipment.

True, but that's the cost of getting into VR - it's pricey no matter how you do it. Gear VR requires a $600-$700 phone, Morpheus requires a $400 console and $60 camera and probably $40 Move Controller, Oculus and Vive will require a hefty PC.

I don't expect Palmer to be able to take as much of a hit on his device as Sony will be on theirs.

Oculus is selling their device for cost, pure and simple. No profits, they've been clear about that from the beginning, and continued after being purchased by Facebook.

 

[Seanspeed]

That's going to knock the price a bit then. Unless that is already included in the basic packages.

Well the price has always included the camera with the Rift.

We'll see with Morpheus. There'll probably be multiple SKU's.

I don't expect Palmer to be able to take as much of a hit on his device as Sony will be on theirs.

Why? They are looking at making money on the ecosystem side, just like Sony.

The PS4 will be good enough for an awful lot of people, I'm sure. For those that want more, PC & Oculus will be waiting with open arms. Everyone's getting attended to. Who gives a fuck which is a better prospect for anyone but themselves?

FWIW, I'll probably be getting both. Definitely in for Rift, and it'll only take a couple of decent games (or GT7) before I need Morpheus. If I had to pre-emptively declare a winner then it would be PC because it's the only one of the two that can support the primary driver of VR: porn.

They'll both be fucking great either way. The future is finally here.

Lovely post.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

Simply because you are completely cut from the real world and can't have a normal conversation. It's not very polite to talk to someone without looking at them. In parties, others are watching and talking. Is the person playing really interacting with others? Not really.

How is that any different than playing video games with headphones on? Why does it have to be an always social experience? What is socially awkward about playing a VR game while your spouse reads a book or watches TV? If you're in a situation where you need to be having a conversation with your spouse or be in the moment with your family, you probably shouldn't be playing any immersive video games at all unless they like watching you play. And if they like watching you play, they can totally do that with VR as well as described earlier in the thread.

There's actually a game already based around the concept of one person with the headset communicating with a bunch of people that aren't. Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes.

 

[Nzyme32]

You can't consider this a rule because you can find too much exceptions.
But i get it, you have the faith

Oh I totally agree, it's no rule. This was just to prove a point of what happened in the past

 

[Solid Samus]

Simply because you are completely cut from the real world and can't have a normal conversation. It's not very polite to talk to someone without looking at them. In parties, others are watching and talking. Is the person playing really interacting with others? Not really.

You can be as cut off from the real world as you want to be. There is nothing stopping you from being able to hear and conversate with the people around you unless you're wearing earbuds or noice cancelling headphones. and if I busted out some sort of off the wall VR experience at a party I'm pretty sure I'd have a healthy contingent of my friends wanting to fuck around with it for a few minutes, at the very least. I'd still be talking to them and in fact I'd give them advice while other people around watch (my friend, or the screen being mirrored nearby on my TV) and wonder what he's doing and how he's 'in it'. "Put this thing on", I'd say. Shit can probably be a social catalyst as much as any strange and enabling new technology, although that's not to say I'd make bringing it out at social gatherings a habit. and, i mean, I don't think it would take much to provide a rudimentary window 'through' your VR headset using two cameras on the outside of the device so that you're temporarily back in the real world at the push of a button.

 

[Mr Git]

Actually cheaper than I thought. That's under a grand in auld sterling. Which isn't a tremendous amount for a decent PC. I do want to know how much the device costs, mind. That'll be a sticking point.

 

[Dirtyshubb]

The PS4 will be good enough for an awful lot of people, I'm sure. For those that want more, PC & Oculus will be waiting with open arms. Everyone's getting attended to. Who gives a fuck which is a better prospect for anyone but themselves?

FWIW, I'll probably be getting both. Definitely in for Rift, and it'll only take a couple of decent games (or GT7) before I need Morpheus. If I had to pre-emptively declare a winner then it would be PC because it's the only one of the two that can support the primary driver of VR: porn.

They'll both be fucking great either way. The future is finally here.

Oh I totally agree on the aspect that if you want to get the most out of VR you will want a beefy PC and the Rift/Vive since that goes for gaming in general, it just gets annoying seeing so many posters (or just a few very vocal ones) dismiss the capability of Morpheus as if its not physically possible for it to have engaging content because it isn’t a self-made PC when we have hands on results of people saying that the tech demos’ are really engaging and made them want more, let alone any full sized games that will be coming out on the machine.

As for myself, I don’t game on PC due to all the hassles it can bring regardless of performance gains. My friend for example had a pc built for around £700 and he is still having issues getting games to run properly and has had to upgrade it already to fix issues. That’s the sort of thing that puts me off hence console gaming being my main haunt.

As for porn, I honestly don’t think PC VR will be the driving force for that but instead it will be mobile. Being able to whip out (Pun intended) your phone and Vr headset and do your business wherever would most likely be preferable to having to sit at your computer desk every time. But of course time will tell on how this all goes down.

 

[InaudibleWhispa]

Who is they? Does Facebook have something to do with Samsung Gear VR?

And newsflash - no way in hell is mobile VR going to take off with those clunky ass headsets.

Facebook owns Oculus, Oculus make the Gear VR for Samsung. Also I think you're entirely wrong about nobody wanting to wear a clunky (short-term problem) headset. It's the cheapest entry and offers a great experience for what casuals will want out of these. We're talking about something that in a few years will be a $100 add-on (if not free with your contract), likely half the size it is now, that can turn your phone into a 4K Imax screen, or let you sit in the best seat at your favourite sports game/concert. The grievances about wearing a headset will quickly fall away once people try it and are blown away.

 

[Arkham]

Well the price has always included the camera with the Rift.

We'll see with Morpheus. There'll probably be multiple SKU's.

For sure there'll be multiple SKUs. Morpheus stand-alone and at least one that includes Morpheus, PS Camera, and 1-2 Move(s).

 

[MaxiLive]

I've never read that, I've always heard Oculus talking about targeting the mainstream, NOT niche. And there's no way the Morpheus will be cheaper than $299 - $300-400 is what the Rift is going to be, and that's selling it at cost, with no profits whatsoever (Oculus has made it clear that's what they are going to do). If Sony wants to sell for a profit, they'll have to charge at least $400 for theirs, or really cheap out on the components.

They are cheaping out on the components for specs of Morpheus are going to be far lower than the Rift/Vive. Not just in screen quality but the optics, input devices (Move controller/ controller sold separately), internal tracking, camera tracking, aesthetics, build quality. The Morpheus will be lower in each category but will also be $100+ cheaper to fit within the console market place.

Now, none of this will make a blind bit of difference if the presence is a similar experience on both devices. The software will be the main thing carrying these devices at launch.

From my personal standpoint I think the Mopheus will provide amazing experiences comparable to what the DK2 can give today. The new Rift/Vive will give even more presence than the DK2 but lack if the software department until Oculus/Valve show off what they have been working on. Also for the average gamer I wouldn't suggest jumping on board the $300-500 hype train in the early years due to limited VR experiences.

For the core VR fans and peeps who love first person simulation (racing/flight simulations) then the Rift/Vive would be by far the best choice!

 

[Lynn616]

For sure there'll be multiple SKUs. Morpheus stand-alone and at least one that includes Morpheus, PS Camera, and 1-2 Move(s).

So about $200 for Morpheus and go up from there.

 

[hodgy100]

Good luck with mass market appeal at that price point.

Isnt the Valve system supperior to the CV1? Probably has the same hardware needs tho.

that price point is for a PC (overpriced mind) + the headset. you didn't think it would work stand alone did you?

 

[KooopaKid]

How is that any different than playing video games with headphones on? Why does it have to be an always social experience? What is socially awkward about playing a VR game while your spouse reads a book or watches TV? If you're in a situation where you need to be having a conversation with your spouse or be in the moment with your family, you probably shouldn't be playing any immersive video games at all unless they like watching you play. And if they like watching you play, they can totally do that with VR as well as described earlier in the thread.

So you agree it will mostly be a alone experience when it's quiet around you with no one to disturb you in your everyday life. Accepted socially as much as video-games then, which are not. The occasional parties don't change that. It's still awkward to even talk about video-games.

 

[Solid Samus]

Accepted socially as much as video-games then, which are not. The occasional parties don't change that. It's still awkward to even talk about video-games.

Among my social circle, which is 20-something college kids and working people, (or among damn near any social circle that skews younger than me) that's just plain far from the truth, and I don't know why you presume to speak for everyone with that statement.

I've got a few traditional 'bros' I party with on the regular, and games come up as a topic of conversation every now and then because we're not fuckin' old people, lmao, not to mention we actually play games like fifa and MK8 during parties, with each other and with the other people that are there. And we usually have a blast, chatting and getting more drunk while we play.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

So you agree it will mostly be a alone experience when it's quiet around you with no one to disturb you in your everyday life. Accepted socially as much as video-games then, which are not. The occasional parties don't change that. It's still awkward to even talk about video-games.

I think you're moving the goal posts. An activity/product that works in a social situation such as a party can't be suddenly described as socially awkward just because it also works as a solo experience. Rock Band works great in a party setting, but I still enjoy playing it solo. That doesn't make it a socially awkward game.

 

[Sami+]

Simply because you are completely cut from the real world and can't have a normal conversation. It's not very polite to talk to someone without looking at them. In parties, others are watching and talking. Is the person playing really interacting with others? Not really.

How is this any different from playing single player games alone in your game room or whatever? Unless you're that asshole friend like "hey Timmy wanna come over and watch me play Zelda" then that's not very social either.