HTC Hints at Less Expensive VR Headsets

[Megalith]

Marc Metis, Global Head of Vive X at HTC Vive, has suggested that a cheaper version of the Vive is on his company’s roadmap. I don’t see the Vive 2 being cheaper than the original (I think it’s leaning toward the cutting edge, with wireless VR and other novel tech), but this is good news for those who want some assurance that affordable sets are in the works. What is the maximum price you are willing to pay for one?

...we asked whether the HTC Vive price of $799 coupled with the need to be hooked up to a high-end PC could be a hindrance to broadening the Vive’s user base. Metis responded by saying the Vive is the “most immersive, high-end product in the market,” one with “huge strengths and benefits” for fields like medicine and education, but added HTC isn’t finished innovating. “We’ll also always try to address other market segments as well,” Metis said. “Expect new offerings from us over time. We’re an entrepreneurial company. Don’t view us as static. We’ll only enter a segment when we can offer the most immersive and considered experience.“ “We’ll enter different segments at different price points,” he said.

 

[hamm3rhead]

400-500ish for something that doesn't make me want to hurl

 

[SighTurtle]

Cheap is good, but the content (for me) isnt there yet.

 

[jnemesh]

I made the call early...I DO NOT WANT a cheap headset, I want the best VR experience possible!

 

[Iratus]

It'd be good to help it go mass market and increase the addressable market for developers but if anything I want a more expensive one.

My frame of reference is being able to read the button labels in DCS easily.

Being smaller, lighter, wireless and having higher res tracking so it can do finger level movements would all be great but they've gotta sort the fidelity.

 

[Spidey329]

$499, $999 if it's designed by Keenan Feldspar.

 

[Lakados]

Well with Dell, Asus, Acer, HP, Lenovo, and and a few others all getting a bunch on the market at $399 CAD they will have to put something out in that price group. I know very few people who have used either a VIVE or the Oculus but I do know a number who have used PSVR and while not as good it does seem to be "good enough" and really that is a fine place to start.

 

[leathco016]

I would be cool with a 200 dollar headset, no frills, lower resolution, just to give VR a shot. So far the only game that is a must for me is the Star Trek game, even though apparently I already own 3 VR games since I had non-VR versions already purchased on Steam

 

[zkostik]

I made the call early...I DO NOT WANT a cheap headset, I want the best VR experience possible!

Early adopter tax does not necessarily mean best possible experience nor reasonable price. Next gen HMD will cost less and have better features/specs. IMHO there's no reason these cost so much, once the cost comes down more people will get into VR.

 

[cptnjarhead]

I see google changing this roadmap. It wont be long before they release their stand alone HMD... motion tracking, affordable with decent hardware will cause mass adoption. 1st gen, cardboard... 2nd, day dream.... now stand alone, the competition is heating up for VR. Win win for the customer.

 

[Ur_Mom]

I'd pay more for a great VR. If it's mediocre, it'll be have to be quite a bit cheaper. There would have to be a pretty good sized gap between the low end and the high end. If it's a $200 difference or so, I'll just get the better one.

Just needs more games. I'm looking to buy one for flight sims mostly, but really want to get into other VR games and experiences.

 

[heatlesssun]

I see google changing this roadmap. It wont be long before they release their stand alone HMD... motion tracking, affordable with decent hardware will cause mass adoption. 1st gen, cardboard... 2nd, day dream.... now stand alone, the competition is heating up for VR. Win win for the customer.

Yeah, Google's standalone devices to sound interesting. But they are going to be limited in what they can do with mobile CPUs/GPUs. But yeah, there's going to be a range of products from Cardboard and phones to mobile standalone to consoles like the PS VR and PCs. The PC will be the smallest segment but it be the one for the best experience and deepest content.

 

[zkostik]

Yeah, Google's standalone devices to sound interesting. But they are going to be limited in what they can do with mobile CPUs/GPUs. But yeah, there's going to be a range of products from Cardboard and phones to mobile standalone to consoles like the PS VR and PCs. The PC will be the smallest segment but it be the one for the best experience and deepest content.

Totally agree, the prices do need to come down in order for that deepest content to come about. That's one of the key reasons I'm holding off, there's just not much to use it on to justify the investment.

 

[jnemesh]

Early adopter tax does not necessarily mean best possible experience nor reasonable price. Next gen HMD will cost less and have better features/specs. IMHO there's no reason these cost so much, once the cost comes down more people will get into VR.

Actually, the price of the Vive is directly correlated to the quality of the experience. And I dont understand how you can say there is no reason to cost what they do, considering the sensors involved, the displays, the CUSTOM optics, the custom interface, the controllers and the lighthouses. That's a LOT of tech in an $800 retail device!

 

[jflail2]

If I could have the "perfect" vive in the next couple of gens (perfect res/refresh, wireless, better controllers, etc) I'd honestly pay up to $1K for it. But there'd need to be quite a few more good VR games/adaptions out at that point as well.

 

[zkostik]

Actually, the price of the Vive is directly correlated to the quality of the experience. And I dont understand how you can say there is no reason to cost what they do, considering the sensors involved, the displays, the CUSTOM optics, the custom interface, the controllers and the lighthouses. That's a LOT of tech in an $800 retail device!

Depends how you look at it. Samsung probably says the same for charging close to $900 for Galaxy S8 and then ultrabook laptops. They all say all this technology went in there so it is worth it. Right now there's only HTC Vive and Oculus Rift which are viable HMD. Not exactly a lot of competition and both are first gen, which tends to always cost more. I think it's fair to say that these do cost too much as you are not exactly seeing people lining up to buy one. These just have arbitrary prices, there are no other HMD's with established features and prices. I guess you could say this is the established price so they can now try to keep the features and bring the cost down. If you feel $800 is a good deal then I'm happy for you. High costs limits adoption rate and that limits available content. If there was a lot of contents I'd probably agree with $800 being okay for experience but with almost nothing, I'd feel like a beta tester with an $800 headset. It's just all relative but I don't feel it's worth this much, that's my opinion.

 

[jnemesh]

Depends how you look at it. Samsung probably says the same for charging close to $900 for Galaxy S8 and then ultrabook laptops. They all say all this technology went in there so it is worth it. Right now there's only HTC Vive and Oculus Rift which are viable HMD. Not exactly a lot of competition and both are first gen, which tends to always cost more. I think it's fair to say that these do cost too much as you are not exactly seeing people lining up to buy one. These just have arbitrary prices, there are no other HMD's with established features and prices. I guess you could say this is the established price so they can now try to keep the features and bring the cost down. If you feel $800 is a good deal then I'm happy for you. High costs limits adoption rate and that limits available content. If there was a lot of contents I'd probably agree with $800 being okay for experience but with almost nothing, I'd feel like a beta tester with an $800 headset. It's just all relative but I don't feel it's worth this much, that's my opinion.

Well, I think Einstein was the one who said it's all relative...but you are absolutely right. For ME, and technology enthusiast and bleeding edge early adopter, $800 is chump change for an experience I have been waiting with bated breath for over 2 decades, and I think that some of the games and experiences are so good, that it's worth every penny. Others look at the same titles and feel that there isnt much meat on the bone. I understand that. (I am still waiting for that kick ass VR MMO to be created!) But I also think that given the components in the device, $800 is a flat out BARGAIN for what you get...especially considering the MILLIONS of dollars that went into it's development...but even without R&D, you are getting OLED displays, custom optics, lighthouse tracking, motion controllers, accellerometers, a camera system...and all of the little parts and pieces to make it all work together in a consumer friendly environment. To ME, people that say "it's too expensive" dont have a proper appreciation for the hardware and what is being accomplished...but that's just me.

 

[zkostik]

Well, I think Einstein was the one who said it's all relative...but you are absolutely right. For ME, and technology enthusiast and bleeding edge early adopter, $800 is chump change for an experience I have been waiting with bated breath for over 2 decades, and I think that some of the games and experiences are so good, that it's worth every penny. Others look at the same titles and feel that there isnt much meat on the bone. I understand that. (I am still waiting for that kick ass VR MMO to be created!) But I also think that given the components in the device, $800 is a flat out BARGAIN for what you get...especially considering the MILLIONS of dollars that went into it's development...but even without R&D, you are getting OLED displays, custom optics, lighthouse tracking, motion controllers, accellerometers, a camera system...and all of the little parts and pieces to make it all work together in a consumer friendly environment. To ME, people that say "it's too expensive" dont have a proper appreciation for the hardware and what is being accomplished...but that's just me.

I'm sure the production costs very little, most is a SoC, few laser trackers and sensors, small OLED screens. I highly doubt actual parts are even $200. All of this is made in China and workers get like $1/day. The cost is to pay for R&D in first gen device which is normal as well as to cover production since production volume is relatively low. I would spend $800 on this like you did if there was anything to use it on, experience in VR is amazing, no argument there. For me too expensive if if I don't see enough benefit given the cost of the device, which now is because there's no software and you are basically beta testing a bunch of indie games. So yeah, not wanting to buy a premium priced first gen device with hardly anything to use it on. It is a cool device and all the technology, but the fact of lack of content still stands. If there were more games, I bet more people would have purchased one even for $800.