VR Shipments Decreased 33% Due to a Lack of Bundling and Discounts in 2018

[MavericK]

The pricing on the Vive Pro is a joke, and Oculus hasn't really done anything to push forward. I think most people will wait for 4K (or close to it) per eye, or something like foveated rendering.

 

[Hagrid]

The pricing on the Vive Pro is a joke, and Oculus hasn't really done anything to push forward. I think most people will wait for 4K (or close to it) per eye, or something like foveated rendering.

I am hoping that Oculus will bring an awesome unit to the table on their next gen. That Pimax unit seems like it has been stalled? No idea.

Yeah, the price is pretty steep compared to the Vive/Rift in price/performance.

 

[alamox]

It doesn't really matter IMO. Once you get to a very high resolution, you eliminate the screendoor effect. So even if you don't have enough power to run games natively, you should be able to upscale them and have a higher resolution than what's out there now AND have no screendoor effect.

Upscaling uses more resources than running it in the native resolution.

 

[RanceJustice]

I've been waiting myself and was about to pull the trigger on the Vive Pro, but the price seemed insane given the modest though viable upgrades from the original Vive. Worse, it originally came out Headset only and now it seems that the "Vive Pro / 2.0" type controllers and sensors are more expensive as welll. Given that I didn't have the earlier model and that if I'm going in I'd likely want the best, it costs what...arouind $1200 for the full kit? If I recall, that isn't even marketed as an upgrade for Vive / Vive Pro users, but seems to be professional/dev focused etc. Given the years since the original Vive arrived, I figured the full Pro 2,0 Kit would be around the same price as the original Vive at its launch, around $800, all included. However the current price and lack of bundle/pack wide availability iis a real problem. Not to mention that even with that price Iit does not include the wireless module, which I am unsure if it is even released as of yet. I'm unsure how the blue Vive Pro 2.0 controllers differ from the 1.0 variant, but I was hoping the updated "Knuckles/Glove" official Vive controller would have been included and at least available by now. I am aware of third parties making some pretty neat gloves/controllers though.

Despite its improvements, I've heard that the Vive Pro still has some "screen door effect" and lacks certain "next gen" features like a wider FOV ,eye tracking and FOViated rendering. These sorts of things along with wireless, haptic glove type controllers and other elements seemingly on the horizon have also kept me wondering if I should hold off as well. Most "off brand" VR/AR headsets are usually not very high quality, but I am very curioss tosee how the Pimax lineup stacks up when it arrives. The Pimax "8K" model is actually using something closer to 2K/1440p actual panels for each eye but upscaling to 4K, which along with a lot of other neat sounding features including the wider FOV and SteamVR/VIVE full compatibility, seems like it could really be solid and a higher res experience than even Vive Pro. There's also the Pimax "8K X" model which was limited release during crowdfunding because it actually uses something close to a 4K, non upscaled panel for each eye; the limited release because only those with highest tier GPUs would be able to really make use of it at maximum. Of course all of this sounds great on paper but we have yet to learn if their panels and other hardware and/or build quality is actually up to the task. Their previous VR headset wasn't known for being exemplary compared to Vive or Oculus so its worth considering, but then again anything can happen.

I'd love to seee more developments in VR and I don't mind paying a bit more for significant upgrades or brand new tech, but sometimes things are harder to justify or have middling results. I am still interested in the Vive Pro and if I could pick it the whole set for a lower price, I';d likely do so. Either way, for higher adoption it will take time, better technology/features, and reasonable prices. Even more importantly from my perspective is openness and cross platform/Linux support - SteamVR and Vive hardware seems to be the best example of this, but I am concerned about future hardware's compatibility if Microsoft, Oculus and others are more concerned with creating walled gardens and digital fiefdoms. Hopefully good things are on the way

Edit: I just checked and it seems the wireless adapter is now on pre-order for... $300!? Wait, the 300 model is separate and is for original Vive. Vive Pro model is $350! From the look of it the additional price has to do with the cushioning/dock and how it mounts to the Pro. Apparently they require a free PCIe x1 slot for a WiGig receiver card, which is included. I can understand that bumping up the price a little bit but I thought it may be about half of current listing.

Also, looks like they dropped the price of the "Starter Kit" for Vive Pro a little bit so its only $1100... but it looks like those are black, first generation lighthouses and controllers? They used to be sold with 2.0 models which were blue (controllers at least). Hmm.. that would really be frustrating if they sell the kit with new Pro HMD but the older sensors/controllers. Maybe they just have colored them all black now and that's fine but I'd like to see more detailed specs and comparison between 1.0 and 2.0 peripherals.

Edit 2: Nope, that 1100 is the Vive Pro headset but 1.0 hardware besides it! If you want 2.0 sensors and 2.0/2018 controllers, you need to pony up $1400 and it seems to only be on the "Enterprise" side of things?! Furthermore, it still doesn't seem to come with the wireless adapter kit either.... that's just insanely expensive and frankly kind of insulting that the "vive pro starter kit" is selling the new HMD with controllers and sensors from 2015.

 

[travbrad]

That's a fairly reasonable assumption. I think there could also be a slight uptick during the holiday season, not to mention there really needs to be more games that aren't just "VR Parlor Trick" silly casual games. We need serious games. Also, less room-scale crap. Once you have full blown AAA games that people who actually play games enjoy, then you'll get that part of the population and not just the tech-adopters. That's when I'll jump anyway.

Also, having Mr. T on the front page of [H] with a headset on should help sales immensely.

It's already pretty good for any "cockpit" type games that support it just because they almost work by default, but yeah for most other games there is a bit of a chicken and egg situation. It's hard to justify devoting a lot of development resources to making a game work well with VR when 99% of the potential buyers for your game don't have VR, but it's hard to get people to buy VR when so few games actually use it well. The price is probably still too high for mainstream adoption as well, between the hardware itself and the CPU/GPU power needed. Even PS VR (which isn't as good as Vive/Oculus) essentially doubles the cost of that console.

I agree about room-scale too. It's very cool in a demo but almost no one is going to have the space dedicated for a VR room, and without a dedicated room it will collect dust for most people.

When the general public discovers VR Pron sales will surge.

Edit: mispelled "public" as "pubic"... subliminal slip? Who knows?

I'd like to think so too, but I also have a feeling most people would just stick to phone-based VR for that since almost everyone already has a smartphone. It's a lot easier to justify spending hundreds on a phone that can also do so many other things than a very specific dedicated device like a VR headset.

 

[M76]

I'm surprised it's only a 33% decrease.

I'm still not convinced vr will be mainstream. Much like racing wheels aren't.

 

[Youn]

if it's mostly due to the fat being trimmed (less crap "cardboard" shit) then this is a very good thing

it doesn't need to be mainstream to be successful. I think setups like the upcoming StarVR will continue to be developed, even if it's only really adopted commercially.

I'm hesitant to buy even an Oculus Go, even though it's super affordable. Curious to see their upcoming headset before taking any plunge...

 

[Hagrid]

It's already pretty good for any "cockpit" type games that support it just because they almost work by default, but yeah for most other games there is a bit of a chicken and egg situation. It's hard to justify devoting a lot of development resources to making a game work well with VR when 99% of the potential buyers for your game don't have VR, but it's hard to get people to buy VR when so few games actually use it well. The price is probably still too high for mainstream adoption as well, between the hardware itself and the CPU/GPU power needed. Even PS VR (which isn't as good as Vive/Oculus) essentially doubles the cost of that console.

I agree about room-scale too. It's very cool in a demo but almost no one is going to have the space dedicated for a VR room, and without a dedicated room it will collect dust for most people.



I'd like to think so too, but I also have a feeling most people would just stick to phone-based VR for that since almost everyone already has a smartphone. It's a lot easier to justify spending hundreds on a phone that can also do so many other things than a very specific dedicated device like a VR headset.

You don't really need a dedicated VR room. My space is only 65" long and 72" wide and it works great.(besides a broke TV the first time I played it)

 

[harbingerofdoom]

ill say the same thing as before.
its too expensive to go any further right now.

until it starts hitting ~200 all in *AND* is wireless, you're not really going to see much movement there.

 

[Dayaks]

ill say the same thing as before.
its too expensive to go any further right now.

until it starts hitting ~200 all in *AND* is wireless, you're not really going to see much movement there.

Yeah but 300k+ Vives and Occuluses per quarter are still wayyyy more than I thought.

I love the Vive Pro. I mean hell... my monitor is $1200. The Vive Pro gives vision/ millimeter tracking/ two controllers for the same price. It’s really cool if you think about it. It’s also by far the best on the market.

I think $200 is a bit low but I agree it needs to decrease.

 

[zalazin]

I bought the Oculus go in May and I love it. However I want a 6dof wireless VR with way better graphics thats what I'm waiting for......Santa Cruz maybe?

 

[harbingerofdoom]

Yeah but 300k+ Vives and Occuluses per quarter are still wayyyy more than I thought.

I love the Vive Pro. I mean hell... my monitor is $1200. The Vive Pro gives vision/ millimeter tracking/ two controllers for the same price. It’s really cool if you think about it. It’s also by far the best on the market.

I think $200 is a bit low but I agree it needs to decrease.

i think what you said about your monitor kind of speaks to why i think the price point needs to be down at 200 all in.
few have the kind of disposable income that they can drop a grand on a single item for gaming. mostly because its not seen in the same way as other similar purchase- i have 9 guitars for example, a good guitar is not cheap, but i see value in that. i dont see value in spending 1200 on a monitor when a 300 priced monitor will do just fine. it doesnt mean your 1200 monitor isnt worth it, im sure it is. but im not paying that price for a monitor.

same with VR- im not saying its not worth that price point to those people who have that kind of disposable income *AND* a penchant for gaming (and therein lies the real crux), but until the all in price drops to about 200 and is wireless you arent going to attract the crowd that will be okay tossing 200 at something and if they never use it they wont gripe all that much. its more of a transactional mental cost thats blocking larger sales then it is quality or technology.

at least thats how i see it.

 

[xellos2099alpha]

I got myself window mr for 200 and so far it is pretty interesting.

 

[Rizen]

I'm not buying first generation hardware. I'll buy in whenever someone gets around to releasing a real 2nd gen product.

 

[tetris42]

Upscaling uses more resources than running it in the native resolution.

My first reaction is to say bullshit, but maybe there's some gross inefficiency in the VR pipeline I'm unaware of. It's certainly not the case on normal gaming. Care to elaborate?

If I run a game at 1920x1080 upscaled to 4k, you can bet that's going to run a hell of a lot faster and use less resources than running it at 4k native. The amount of resources required to stretch an image is insignificant compared to rendering at an increased resolution natively.

 

[WBurchnall]

... there really needs to be more games that aren't just "VR Parlor Trick" silly casual games. We need serious games. Also, less room-scale crap. Once you have full blown AAA games that people who actually play games enjoy, then you'll get that part of the population and not just the tech-adopters. That's when I'll jump anyway.

So Fallout 4 VR, Skyrim GOTY VR edition, etc were not sufficient? Those aren't serious games and don't quality as AAA? Hmm....I just think it won't ever get past the parlor trick stage. They threw gamers Fallout VR and Skyrim VR, right?

What would you like next? Tomb Raider redone in VR? Assassin's Creed 6 VR edition? What VR version of an AAA game would make you buy today? which one specifically are you waiting for to jump?

I think everyone's just waiting on dirt-cheap prices like 20% of today's cost of entry with the quality of the next generation....which is probably 10+ years away. Meanwhile, 8k HDTVs are approaching the market which I'm sure do look lovely and you can sit on the couch without having to do actual exercise to game. I'll tell you, at the end of a long day of work, I'm actually kind of tired and don't mind sitting or laying down to game. If I was a teenager or child, maybe I'd want to jump, dodge or roll. However, the average age of the game is like 38 years old. How many 38+ year olds have some minor shoulder pain or minor knee pain or at least one joint somewhere from work and try to rest that sore part before work the next day rather than work it out further?

 

[zkostik]

If I may provide a completely unresearched opinion on the matter:

I think the release of the Vive Pro may have set off somewhat of a 'wait for the next version' type of mentality. Similar to how no one in the know buys an iPhone between the months of June and September if they want the next model.

So far we don't have any real idea of what the product release cycles for this type of platform are and my best guess is that the longer we stay on Gen 1 the more reluctant people are to buy in.

That and the fact that Vive Pro is pretty damn expensive for most home setups considering it can only be used for a fraction of games. I setup one at work and it is nice but screendoor effect is still pretty apparent despite resolution increase. With it out though, I wouldn't buy a regular model and yet not the Pro either due to cost. I suppose it may be the case with others who would rather put that money toward some other component that will get more general use.

 

[gunbust3r]

People figured out if you're not the 1% running a 1080 Ti the experience is going to be sub-optimal. So yeah like 10% of 1% of the market is not a lot of reach.

 

[Youn]

What VR version of an AAA game would make you buy today? which one specifically are you waiting for to jump?

lol, most people don't want remakes of old stinky AAA games we've likely already played in 2D, we want new experiences that can only be executed in VR. Something to suck us in and not let go, that spreads word of mouth like wildfire and gets people to WANT to not just dump onto the couch after a long day sitting at the office. I'm not sure we've seen that yet, besides a few shorter mini-game-ish titles.

that said, the more awesome stuff that gets onto something like Go, the better... imagine if that thing came with skyrim + new VR-only DLC included at the same 200/250 price point. Impossible? Well, geez, give Bethesda a small commission on other VR software sales for 1 year or something... a deal could probably be made.

 

[Vader1975]

That's a fairly reasonable assumption. I think there could also be a slight uptick during the holiday season, not to mention there really needs to be more games that aren't just "VR Parlor Trick" silly casual games. We need serious games. Also, less room-scale crap. Once you have full blown AAA games that people who actually play games enjoy, then you'll get that part of the population and not just the tech-adopters. That's when I'll jump anyway.

Also, having Mr. T on the front page of [H] with a headset on should help sales immensely.

Once you have full-blown AAA games.... nope. Chicken and Egg. Won't make AAA games for a small install base that isn't guaranteed to buy it at a high percentage.
This is why even AAA PC titles are somewhat limited and have become console ports more and more often. When the entire PC industry gets ports of console games... what AAA title is going to be made for a subset of that install base with multiple levels of performance and differentiation in hardware deployment. Even the PS4 setup with all the hoopla about how many sets sold isn't generating AAA titles as the install base is still to small to risk the development dollars on a "FULL BLOWN AAA TITLE".
To put it in perspective a AAA game takes 50-60 million dollars to create. (not maintain and update).

There was alot of hoopla here recently about Sony having sold 3 million PSVR's. We also know that unit isn't actually very good and is very motion sickness inducing and hard to use for more than say 1 hour. Took 2 years to sell 3 million units to 85 million PS4 owners. Lets see, I am a game maker. I need to make 50-60 million to just create the title and my world is about making money. Do I create a game for 3 million units or 85 million units... Which is more likely to make me a huge return? This is basic economics and very chicken and the egg problem. The call for tripple A games on a unproven and not high enough volume and splintered set of platforms. This entails a high amount of risk. Game publishers don't like risk and their investors don't like it even more. This is why we get so many cookie cutter FPS the don't terribly innovate due to the risk of it not being accepted. Sometimes even this doesn't work (RAGE.)

Ok so where are we then? Lower budget games. Indie titles. Small shops looking for a way to break in and be noticed. Big shops spending smaller dollars on a submarket that isn't mature yet.

Home video game machines was one thought to be a completely dying market. All the companies that had built pong clones and simple gaming titles were folding and the mighty Atari was in shambles and struggling to make money. If a playing card manufacturer from Japan hadn't stepped in and caused a resurgence that is still being felt today.. there may not have even been any console wars. Nintendo Playing Cards. Yea that was a thing. (still is actually.)

Economics and scale are a bitch when you really want something to succeed but there isn't enough market to warrent the investment necessary to help create that market. Such a pesky problem.

 

[cptnjarhead]

I for one am hoping more of my favorite games get a VR-remix.. skyrim a game i have 1000+ hours on, you would think that VR would not make a difference... well it does. Its one thing to play a game and love it, its another to actually be inside the game world. With all the visual mods, the world of skyrim in VR is absolutely amazing. I want a GTA 5 VR-Remix... sure you can use vorpX, but i would rather buy the remix. As for the drop in sales... I have not gamed much this summer, been to busy. The fall and winter are when i really get my fix.

 

[Viper16]

People figured out if you're not the 1% running a 1080 Ti the experience is going to be sub-optimal. So yeah like 10% of 1% of the market is not a lot of reach.

But is it really sub-optimal...now I only have a 970 card, and have not experienced any higher performing VR hardware at this point....and I thought the visuals were pretty good. If I get a GPU upgrade I could be totally blown away again...which would be awesome.

I think a lot of pcmasterrace has caused some of reduction in possible sales, because of the if you don't have at minimum 10xx card then it will not be good at all. Combined with that the inflation of GPU's cost during the cryptocurrency boom, I cannot imagine it helped any VR sales.

I dont think VR will boom until they get AAA titles publishers, but those wont come without the market sales of the hardware. If the game is good enough, the SDE and Lens Issues really dont matter that much.