Oculus Founder Defends $600 Price Tag

sboucher said:
You still don't get it. 3D sucked, it's always sucked. It sucked back when they tried before, and it still sucked when they launched it again in 2009. The only reason it was supposed to be the next great thing was because that is what Hollywood and TV manufacturers were trying to convince people of so they can sell them over priced TV's. Most people saw it for what it was, a gimmick, and didn't fall for it. I think the fact that you were disappointed by 3d clouds your judgement on just how good VR is and where it can go.

Watching movies being a more social activity means most of us watch movies with a significant other, or your family, with popcorn and shit ya know ? PC Gamers game in single player games or online with friends, wearing a headset won't be a limitation.

VR on the other hand, does not suck. It is light years beyond simple 3d glasses with a TV.

I'm not saying the Rift or Vive is going to be mainstream in the true sense of mainstream. PC Gaming has always been a bit of a niche market. That will be Gear VR or other smartphone adapters. But these VR headsets for PC's and possibly consoles, are here to stay.
Click to expand...

the fact that 3D is still going in 2016 shows that consumers don't feel it sucks...look at box office numbers for the same movie in 3D and 2D...of the 4,100 screens playing The Force Awakens, 80% is in 3D...opening night numbers for the movie showed that the preferred choice of opening-night moviegoers was 2D, at 54.2% (which is not an overwhelming number)

* I keep using Force Awakens as a benchmark because it's the #1 movie of all time domestically (and most likely globally soon enough)

of course TV manufacturers and Hollywood wanted 3D to succeed but after the 1st/2nd gen TV's the prices were not any more expensive then a typical high end 2D set...the 3D was just another feature...plus 3D eventually became available on even lower end TV's...you can say the same about VR hardware...the hardware manufacturers like Nvidia/AMD/Intel etc are loving this...now they can sell more 980 Ti's or high end CPU's to people in a previously niche market

watching movies at home on Blu-ray/DVD is more comparable to VR gaming...and in that instance you don't always watch with family, friends etc...it can be enjoyed just as much solo...to say that the headset won't be a limitation is crazy...even the most die-hard VR fans know that it will be a major issue (same as 3D glasses)...I do think VR has much more potential in other fields such as engineering or architecture...but for serious gaming I don't think it is viable in its current form...I want to see someone play (and enjoy) Dark Souls 3 or Arkham Knight or Witcher 3 with a VR headset...unless they seriously dumb down games to be compatible with VR then it's not happening
 
polonyc2 said:
the fact that 3D is still going in 2016 shows that consumers don't feel it sucks...look at box office numbers for the same movie in 3D and 2D...of the 4,100 screens playing The Force Awakens, 80% is in 3D...opening night numbers for the movie showed that the preferred choice of opening-night moviegoers was 2D, at 54.2% (which is not an overwhelming number)

* I keep using Force Awakens as a benchmark because it's the #1 movie of all time domestically (and most likely globally soon enough)

of course TV manufacturers and Hollywood wanted 3D to succeed but after the 1st/2nd gen TV's the prices were not any more expensive then a typical high end 2D set...the 3D was just another feature...plus 3D eventually became available on even lower end TV's...you can say the same about VR hardware...the hardware manufacturers like Nvidia/AMD/Intel etc are loving this...now they can sell more 980 Ti's or high end CPU's to people in a previously niche market

watching movies at home on Blu-ray/DVD is more comparable to VR gaming...and in that instance you don't always watch with family, friends etc...it can be enjoyed just as much solo...to say that the headset won't be a limitation is crazy...even the most die-hard VR fans know that it will be a major issue (same as 3D glasses)...I do think VR has much more potential in other fields such as engineering or architecture...but for serious gaming I don't think it is viable in its current form...I want to see someone play (and enjoy) Dark Souls 3 or Arkham Knight or Witcher 3 with a VR headset...unless they seriously dumb down games to be compatible with VR then it's not happening
Click to expand...

Star Wars is Star Wars, of course lots of people went to see it. Even though it wasn't really that great of a movie. I even almost went to see it in 3D. Read it wasn't filmed for 3D, so didn't bother and saw it in 2D instead. I'm sure as hell not going to bother running out to buy a 3D TV for it though.

So again, not a valid comparison.

The retail Rift is very light, comfortable, made of fabric so it breaths well, designed so you can actually wear your glasses in it... Also difference here is time spent in the rift will actually be worth it.

Once AAA games actually made for VR come out, I won't want to bother with anything less.
 
Mathematician said:
As was mentioned even if it were a great platform, not that it is, but even if it was, it lacks any good content that will make it worth putting the silly thing on your head for any length of time. Coupled with the low red aspect and the trouble finding keys on a keyboard while wearing it means controls will always be the shortcoming of it. It will, like 3d have a niche market but its too limited for many, myself included. I tried a rift dk and it was a badly executed joke with bad resolution of about 400 effective total. Looks bad, feels uncomfortable, and is too limited in control inputs and functionality to be worthwhile to me. Give me KB&mouse and a 4k 40" screen with a decent system running it over vr any day. Its a far better experience.
Click to expand...

Close your eyes, place your hands on the keyboard and feel for the nubs on the F and K keys. Place your index fingers on those two keys and BAM you're on the home row, asdf on the right and jkl; on the left. Again, relatively few instinctively know where the keys are using that as an orientation point but it's there.

Minecraft has been announced as a launch title...last I checked that was a pretty popular title. Here's a list of confirmed launch titles though that's only 9 of the 20 that Oculus said would be available at launch. Instead of basing your entire viewpoint on an experience with a developer version of the hardware, read around about the consumer version, see if there's a local store that you can demo one once the thing launches. From all the reviews I've read from both gamers attending CES and the press, the consumer Rift is both lighter and more comfortable to wear and the screen door effect is significantly less/takes effort to see instead of effort to ignore. Also, the DK2, which I have experience with, was supposed to be a vast upgrade to the DK1, which is what I assume you tried.

Honestly, I don't plan on donning this thing when anyone is around because it does isolate you from your environment, so I don't care what it LOOKS like when I'm wearing it, as long as it's comfortable.
 
sboucher said:
The retail Rift is very light, comfortable, made of fabric so it breaths well, designed so you can actually wear your glasses in it... Also difference here is time spent in the rift will actually be worth it.
Click to expand...

Fabric covered, not made of fabric...quite a big distinction.
 
USMCGrunt said:
Instead of basing your entire viewpoint on an experience with a developer version of the hardware, read around about the consumer version, see if there's a local store that you can demo one once the thing launches. From all the reviews I've read from both gamers attending CES and the press, the consumer Rift is both lighter and more comfortable to wear and the screen door effect is significantly less/takes effort to see instead of effort to ignore.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
USMCGrunt said:
Just trying to limit misinformed readers through miscommunication, lol.
Click to expand...

lol, fair enough.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the entire shell made of the fabric? Curious what's protecting the circuitry. Might have to wait for a tear down to see for sure.
 
Oculus Rift executives have stated that: "The Oculus Rift is a sitting experience."

"We don't want people to hurt themselves," Oculus VR Founder Palmer Luckey has said

more immersive experiences, such as games that ask players to duck, dodge or climb could be limited by the liability of asking players to move while disconnected from the 'real' reality...while a tiny number of virtual reality diehards might consider building a padded room, there isn't any easy solution to this problem...there are some third parties working on solutions, such as the Virtuix Omni treadmill, which will allow players to move around a space while safely restrained in a harness...the Omni is not small or inexpensive though, and isn't going to be something every consumer picks up

yup, padded rooms and harnesses are really going to endear themselves to people :D
 
far as Im concerned, with both this and valve being over $900cdn, VR is done before it started, this is not a mass consumer product, its an ultra niche device. You wont sell these to the mainstream, onyl to the gaming elite, and thats the death of it.,
 
sboucher said:
The PS4 unit will have an external processing unit because the console isn't powerful enough to run it alone.

If the Rift were to have one, that would drive the price up even further. Also it probably wouldn't be up-gradable. You're PC on the other hand, is.

I share your excitement! I'm also excited for upcoming GPU's from nVidia and AMD. 16nm FinFet, HBM2 and all that..

You guys see that listing on Amazon for the $800 Sony headset before it was pulled, and claimed to be a mistake by Sony? Ya.. mistake huh.

Also, the HTC Vive won't be cheap either. I believe they wen't on record to say "We think people will be satisfied with their investment".
Click to expand...

I still think a mobile rift unit would be cool.
As i said previously, the consoles did not have the power to run VR on their own, so now you have your console, your VR, and the external processing unit, sounds like a cumbersome setup for the living room.
The pc is usually at a Desk and its cumbersome enough with headphones and a wired/or charging wireless controller, the living room does not seem like an adequate space for VR unless they can put the system in the headset, but that would add more weight. Last thing people want in the living room is more cables. :D
The Vive looks good, but still no system requirements yet, im sure they will be on par with the Rift. Again... its good to be a PC gamer!
I might have to dedicate my workout room to VR, put foam on the walls and make my own personal holo-deck :cool:
 
polonyc2 said:
Oculus Rift executives have stated that: "The Oculus Rift is a sitting experience."

"We don't want people to hurt themselves," Oculus VR Founder Palmer Luckey has said

more immersive experiences, such as games that ask players to duck, dodge or climb could be limited by the liability of asking players to move while disconnected from the 'real' reality...while a tiny number of virtual reality diehards might consider building a padded room, there isn't any easy solution to this problem...there are some third parties working on solutions, such as the Virtuix Omni treadmill, which will allow players to move around a space while safely restrained in a harness...the Omni is not small or inexpensive though, and isn't going to be something every consumer picks up

yup, padded rooms and harnesses are really going to endear themselves to people :D
Click to expand...

You're confusing the Oculus Rift with the HTC Vive :D

Generally, I do agree with you on that point. For now..

I'm in for the seated experience. Playing Elite Dangerous in VR was amazing even despite the limitations of the DK2. Looking forward to Racing games in VR, pretty cool stuff.

I do think 3rd person games like Lucky's tale and Edge of Nowhere will be a very immersive experience. Even though it's not first person to be fully immersed in the environment through VR will be trans-formative compared to typical monitor experiences.

Environment related, I remember a demo for the DK2. You were on a hang-glider, flying around the mountains. It was amazing and the sense of scale was massive.

Playing Elite Dangerous in VR, flying by a massive space station and looking through my canopy above. That shit brought tears to my eyes. The experience was so profound, I was like "finally, it's here". Instead of just looking at it through my monitor, I was inside of it.
 
Droc said:
far as Im concerned, with both this and valve being over $900cdn, VR is done before it started, this is not a mass consumer product, its an ultra niche device. You wont sell these to the mainstream, onyl to the gaming elite, and thats the death of it.,
Click to expand...

Well, thank our bloody exchange rate at the moment for that.. All PC parts are pretty high price right now thanks to it..
 
Droc said:
far as Im concerned, with both this and valve being over $900cdn, VR is done before it started, this is not a mass consumer product, its an ultra niche device. You wont sell these to the mainstream, onyl to the gaming elite, and thats the death of it.,
Click to expand...

LOL, name a technology that at its inception was immediately available to the masses? All new technology has always been super expensive and limited to the very wealthy until it became mainstream.

The first automobiles were over $75,000 in today's dollars and limited to the ultra wealthy until the model T came along.

How about the refrigerator? The first one cost $10,000 of today's dollars. Doomed technology, nobody will ever own a refrigerator!! That's the death of it! Done before it started!

Please, for the love of God, read some history books.
 
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/fove-vr-first-look-ces,30964.html

The eye tracking sounds interesting, even though its still in development i like the idea.

Eye tracking has another big advantage that will affect rendering performance in a big way. With the ability to isolate where you are looking, Fove has managed to get Foveated Rendering working. Using this technology, Fove is able to perform detailed rendering for the section of the scene that is actually in your focus. The rest of the scene can be toned down in quality to free up graphics resources for the important parts.
Click to expand...

Man, It's just getting better and better to be a PC gamer...
 
cptnjarhead said:
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/fove-vr-first-look-ces,30964.html

The eye tracking sounds interesting, even though its still in development i like the idea.



Man, It's just getting better and better to be a PC gamer...
Click to expand...

Agreed!

I linked this earlier in the thread.

http://www.polygon.com/2015/6/12/877...owhere-chronos

Love the idea and it sounds very promising. Definitely will help drive perceived image quality further, while keeping system requirements reasonable.
 
cptnjarhead said:
I still think a mobile rift unit would be cool.
As i said previously, the consoles did not have the power to run VR on their own, so now you have your console, your VR, and the external processing unit, sounds like a cumbersome setup for the living room.
Click to expand...

I personally think that full VR sets are better suited toward sitting. However, AR would be cool for a mobile experience. Imagine playing something like Ingress, but you can actually see all of the objects you're looking for, hacking, destroying, etc. It could also overlay suits and stats on the other people playing. So you could immediately identify them.
 
polonyc2 said:
the fact that 3D is still going in 2016 shows that consumers don't feel it sucks...look at box office numbers for the same movie in 3D and 2D...of the 4,100 screens playing The Force Awakens, 80% is in 3D...opening night numbers for the movie showed that the preferred choice of opening-night moviegoers was 2D, at 54.2% (which is not an overwhelming number)

* I keep using Force Awakens as a benchmark because it's the #1 movie of all time domestically (and most likely globally soon enough)
Click to expand...

People saying okay to 3D glasses at the movies means fuckall, no offense.
 
cortexodus said:
Shop page loaded, saw the $600 price tag, plus $30 shipping, plus $45.72 in tax, turned to my co-worker and said "ballpark $350, huh?", closed the window.

I guess VR won't be happening for me this year.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The Plystation VR just became my go-to solution this year for VR. Must more cost-efficient way to get into VR and all people who have tried the near-finished version say it's really great. Especially with the Move controllers which are already cheap. The PSVR I think is a great solution. $400 console + PSVR (however much that'll be) + 2 $60 PS Move controllers + PS Eye for $40 and you have yourself not only full vr with great developer support but also full controllers which actually work in 3D space really really well. It was already impressive back with the PS3 and with this it'll be even better. Who knows how expensive the Rift controllers will be. Probably $150 if I had to guess. $1000 rig + $600 Rift + 2 Rift controllers... No thanks.
 
zamardii12 said:
Agreed. The Plystation VR just became my go-to solution this year for VR. Must more cost-efficient way to get into VR and all people who have tried the near-finished version say it's really great. Especially with the Move controllers which are already cheap. The PSVR I think is a great solution. $400 console + PSVR (however much that'll be) + 2 $60 PS Move controllers + PS Eye for $40 and you have yourself not only full vr with great developer support but also full controllers which actually work in 3D space really really well. It was already impressive back with the PS3 and with this it'll be even better. Who knows how expensive the Rift controllers will be. Probably $150 if I had to guess. $1000 rig + $600 Rift + 2 Rift controllers... No thanks.
Click to expand...

"however much that'll be"

Not sure if serious....

I am sure it will be much cheaper with an external processing unit....:rolleyes:
 
Darunion said:
"however much that'll be"

Not sure if serious....

I am sure it will be much cheaper with an external processing unit....:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

ya, and as I mentioned before it popped up on Amazon temporarily for $800 before it got pulled down and Sony claimed it was a "mistake".

So if it is $800, plus the console, it's not really that far off.
 
Guess i will wait for a new company to come along, with a cheaper version. I can wait
 
DPI said:
People saying okay to 3D glasses at the movies means fuckall, no offense.
Click to expand...

people saying OK to 3D glasses in the theater shows that 3D is not as 'dead' as people keep claiming...people might actually enjoy it in limited spurts (2-3 hour movie) if they feel it brings value...might actually translate well for VR but I think the uptake for VR will be twice as long (maybe 6-10 years) before it hits mainstream and turns profitable
 
polonyc2 said:
agreed...exactly what I was saying earlier in this thread...games like Dark Souls, Witcher 3 with lots of fluid movement is not going to work in VR...swinging your sword around is not going to translate to VR (or translate well)...VR is going to excel in simple interactive type of games

I compare VR to a more advanced version of Kinect...I used Kinect at my friends house to play some bowling, golf etc and it was fine in those type of games...I think VR will have a similar narrow focus best suited for flight, racing and some sports and some specialty interactive games
Click to expand...

Brah do you even Liquid vr, sfr, gameworks vr, dx12, do you even?
 
polonyc2 said:
might actually translate well for VR but I think the uptake for VR will be twice as long (maybe 6-10 years) before it hits mainstream and turns profitable
Click to expand...

You might be right, which wouldn't be a bad thing. In fact, that is what companies like Oculus / Facebook are banking on.

In the meantime, pre-orders went well, development and support from other hardware manufacturers and PC builders is going great, and it is reaching beyond just gaming for its uses.

There was a lot of hype even around just the DK2. I found it rather mind boggling how well they resold on ebay. Wait until the retail version starts getting into people hands. I think people are going to be very satisfied with the product, and word / reviews will travel fast. Over time the cost will come down, making it more accessible to more people. Development will continue to push forward.. in more than just gaming. Before you know it, you'll be able to enjoy court side seats to live NBA games in VR. Hollywood will start to incorporate VR to film, you'll be able to ride shotgun with the rover on mars like you are actually standing on the planet, education will adopt VR to learning, medical... The possibilities are truly endless.
 
polonyc2 said:
agreed...exactly what I was saying earlier in this thread...games like Dark Souls, Witcher 3 with lots of fluid movement is not going to work in VR...swinging your sword around is not going to translate to VR (or translate well)...VR is going to excel in simple interactive type of games

I compare VR to a more advanced version of Kinect...I used Kinect at my friends house to play some bowling, golf etc and it was fine in those type of games...I think VR will have a similar narrow focus best suited for flight, racing and some sports and some specialty interactive games
Click to expand...

I think this is the reason why they are including that Lucky Tales game. Everyone thinks VR only works for driving or flying but by showing how cool it is for even 3rd person games, they will hopefully be able to expand people's notions about what VR is "good for".
 
Sonicks said:
I don't buy that explanation at all.

Given that they were so hush hush about the price and release date until the DAY OF the pre-orders says a lot about how coordinated their efforts were to keep that information from the public.

A year ago today, if they stated the consumer version was $600 they would have been dead in the water. Instead they kept the real details from the public and kept drumming up the hype/consumer interest in hopes that when it drops, people wouldn't think about spending that much rather than mulling it over for a year.
Click to expand...

I personally think they just misjudged what their hardware/BOM would be for the consumer version. They were ripping apart phone's for screens for DK1 and maybe DK2, I'd imagine they looked at what their current BOM for those was, tried to anticipate where the final hardware would land performance/specs wise and then calculate the potential future cost based on current trends.

They didn't just tell people $300-400 all this time to shut them up and keep them interested so they could just spring the final price at the finish line. They were overly optimistic initially and didn't meet their goal, if they could of released a device for $300-$400 that hit all the quality / performance marks they would have. They know they would lose some sales asking $650 instead of $350 but the device was coming either way. They are probably bummed about missing their mark and paid for the mistake with all the backlash.

Personally, I was ready for anything in the $300-$1000 range. It's kind of ridiculous that people think $650-$850 is wayyy too high for a first-gen technology of this magnitude when those same people probably have smart phones valued between $400-$800 unsubsidized in their pockets (we're all going to have to start paying retail for our phones in the US like the large majority of the rest of the world soon).
 
The wife and I pre-ordered both the Vive and the Rift...I have had fun with DK2 for quite awhile...looking forward to farting around with both ...guess that makes us a couple of the "idiots" referred to by the Rent-A-Center Compaq users that are hating on those that help drive the technology bus...funny thing is us bus drivers "do what we want"...ha
 
TheBlueChanell said:
I personally think they just misjudged what their hardware/BOM would be for the consumer version. They were ripping apart phone's for screens for DK1 and maybe DK2, I'd imagine they looked at what their current BOM for those was, tried to anticipate where the final hardware would land performance/specs wise and then calculate the potential future cost based on current trends.

They didn't just tell people $300-400 all this time to shut them up and keep them interested so they could just spring the final price at the finish line. They were overly optimistic initially and didn't meet their goal, if they could of released a device for $300-$400 that hit all the quality / performance marks they would have. They know they would lose some sales asking $650 instead of $350 but the device was coming either way. They are probably bummed about missing their mark and paid for the mistake with all the backlash.

Personally, I was ready for anything in the $300-$1000 range. It's kind of ridiculous that people think $650-$850 is wayyy too high for a first-gen technology of this magnitude when those same people probably have smart phones valued between $400-$800 unsubsidized in their pockets (we're all going to have to start paying retail for our phones in the US like the large majority of the rest of the world soon).
Click to expand...

There were numerous posts for a few days in /r/Oculus comparing some of the early adverts for PCs and TVs, listing those multi-thousand dollar prices for "a whole 128KB of storage!" and fun stuff like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top