Support NeoGAF

[Minsc]

Not when that wireless 'cutting edge of VR tech' can only deliver mobile like games it isnt.

Sony is making a lateral move, one away from cheap, experimental games and instead focusing on bring high quality AAA like experiences (hopefully). Wireless isnt everything, in fact, wireless stand alone is the current step backwards in my opinion. When standalone can deliver games that look like Horizon, GT7 and Resident Evil 8 then I'll be impressed, as it stands I'd rather have AAA quality games and wired thank you very much. (and yes, I am fully aware that Horizon isnt really AAA gameplay, but it certainly looks AAA)

I want to see Sony focus on bring AAA like games, but realistically we currently have a very unconvincing list - even if they add in RE4, some form of Wipeout and Astrobot, and even if I give you Alyx, the list of games is still way too short. They need 5-10x that amount to really give the appearance of putting effort in bringing AAA games to VR.

 

[Romulus]

We are NOT transitioing to VR.

It will always be a niche thing.

Quest 2 is selling as well as both Xbox consoles combined. That's not niche

 

[Fess]

Is it because you don't really like VR? Or because the content runs dry?

It’s the content. I love VR but eventually there is nothing to play except small experimental titles. It’s frustrating to see the industry fumble so much.
- devs are waiting for more people to buy a headset before they make bigger games.
- people are waiting for more devs to make bigger games before they buy a headset.


I actually used Quest 2 last night though! PSVR2 launch talk got me back in for a bit, but it’s oh so rare. Played some Moss 2.

 

[PixelatedBeast]

Yeah so it will never get the open market that Quest is enjoying now. Being more powerful don't mean much when games like Beat Saber are the biggest draws to VR right now.

Like I said, too early to tell. Sony makes all kinds of hardware and have adjusted to each market as it changes. They've also made a conceited effort to embrace PC gaming in recent years, so I cant rule out the possibility of Sony making a wireless headset that is PC compatible.


The audience they both go after is slightly different. Quest going after the casual audience that enjoy games like Beat Saber and a wireless convenience, while Sony is putting the onus of investment on the hardcore audience to pay for a VR experience that is currently locked to their ecosystem. Things can always change, like I never thought I would see TLOU on Pc.

 

[midnightAI]

I want to see Sony focus on bring AAA like games, but realistically we currently have a very unconvincing list - even if they add in RE4, some form of Wipeout and Astrobot, and even if I give you Alyx, the list of games is still way too short. They need 5-10x that amount to really give the appearance of putting effort in bringing AAA games to VR.

Give it time, like any new platform release it takes time to build up the first party catalog, and with a focus on hybrid games I can some being announced sooner rather than later (well, whenever the next showcase is)

 

[rofif]

I am honestly regretting selling quest 1. Oled and nice fabric all around. I liked the ski goggles fit more than halo straps.
Does it require facebook account nowadays?
The best thing about quest1 was image quality, focal distance (good for shortsighted eyesight), hl1, return to castle wolfenstein and plenty other vr ports. side quest ftw. it was terrible with pc though

I know quest 2 is better but... oled. yuck

 

[FoxMcChief]

I’m old. Every time I scroll this board I read this thread as “Map Quest …..”

Does anyone here remember Thomas Guides? lol

 

[onQ123]

What? There are plenty of valid things in the world that are a gimmick.

For example this Wine Condom that safely stores your wine...do you have one of these?

If it work as advertised it's not a gimmick

Like I said, too early to tell. Sony makes all kinds of hardware and have adjusted to each market as it changes. They've also made a conceited effort to embrace PC gaming in recent years, so I cant rule out the possibility of Sony making a wireless headset that is PC compatible.


The audience they both go after is slightly different. Quest going after the casual audience that enjoy games like Beat Saber and a wireless convenience, while Sony is putting the onus of investment on the hardcore audience to pay for a VR experience that is currently locked to their ecosystem. Things can always change, like I never thought I would see TLOU on Pc.

I'm the person who made a thread about Sony using PSVR2 as a gateway back into Portable consoles I know it's a big chance of that happening but it will be awhile because I know they wouldn't want to have a new platform to develop for so it will happen with a portable PS4 , PS5 or PS6 games will be scalable.

 

[mckmas8808]

It’s the content. I love VR but eventually there is nothing to play except small experimental titles. It’s frustrating to see the industry fumble so much.
- devs are waiting for more people to buy a headset before they make bigger games.
- people are waiting for more devs to make bigger games before they buy a headset.


I actually used Quest 2 last night though! PSVR2 launch talk got me back in for a bit, but it’s oh so rare. Played some Moss 2.

That's understandable. For me if I can buy 8-10 games a year in VR, then I'll be happy. And I'd want each game to last 3 to 10 hours. With the rare game lasting longer than 10 hours (ie GT7 and RE8). Would that sound reasonable to you?

 

[rodrigolfp]

Not when that wireless 'cutting edge of VR tech' can only deliver mobile like games it isnt.

Sony is making a lateral move, one away from cheap, experimental games and instead focusing on bring high quality AAA like experiences (hopefully). Wireless isnt everything, in fact, wireless stand alone is the current step backwards in my opinion. When standalone can deliver games that look like Horizon, GT7 and Resident Evil 8 then I'll be impressed, as it stands I'd rather have AAA quality games and wired thank you very much. (and yes, I am fully aware that Horizon isnt really AAA gameplay, but it certainly looks AAA)

You can also use the Quest 2 on PC for high quality AAA experiences.

 

[Minsc]

That's understandable. For me if I can buy 8-10 games a year in VR, then I'll be happy. And I'd want each game to last 3 to 10 hours. With the rare game lasting longer than 10 hours (ie GT7 and RE8). Would that sound reasonable to you?

That sounds like more extreme players would chew through your year in a few nights. Eight 5-hour games could be done in a week. Then a couple longer ones? That sounds way, way too slim pickings for an entire year, unless you don't use the system a whole lot. Unless you want to argue GT7 will occupy 500 hours so there you go. But I think most people would say they want to see enough releases to provide ~10 hours a week (1-2 hours / day) for the entire year, so something like 500 hours, but not all in a single game like GT7.

 

[mckmas8808]

That sounds like more extreme players would chew through your year in a few nights. Eight 5-hour games could be done in a week. Then a couple longer ones? That sounds way, way too slim pickings for an entire year, unless you don't use the system a whole lot. Unless you want to argue GT7 will occupy 500 hours so there you go. But I think most people would say they want to see enough releases to provide ~10 hours a week (1-2 hours / day) for the entire year, so something like 500 hours, but not all in a single game like GT7.

To me this sounds ridiculous. But I also have a wife and a 3-year-old daughter, so I can't game 500 hours in VR only because I want to play flat screen games too. I'd be happy with 100 hours of VR gaming a year and another 300 hours of flat screen gaming.

 

[X-Wing]

These hot takes, it's like I'm in a Twilight Zone episode.

 

[hyperbertha]

I still believe VR overall is a gimmick. Some use cases are valid like Sim Racing and Flight Simulator type of games.

Is a 75 inch screen a gimmick over a 25 inch one?

 

[Crayon]

Sometimes I think people forget that Nintendo and Sony and normal businesses that have to make money.

 

[b6a6es]

Well tbf, PSVR2 was released more than a week ago like a wetfart without any fanfare whatsoever (even sony didn’t have a dedicated Showcase for it, opting for a mediocre SoP feature 5 below average vr indies nobody’s would fork 550$ for), I doubt the hardware even broke 50K as of today

PSVR2 was sent to die as I sincerely think SIE just made the thing as an obligation from Sony Group to market/promote their VR sensors for Meta & Apple to use in their VR/AR products.

 

[Minsc]

To me this sounds ridiculous. But I also have a wife and a 3-year-old daughter, so I can't game 500 hours in VR only because I want to play flat screen games too. I'd be happy with 100 hours of VR gaming a year and another 300 hours of flat screen gaming.

I'm not far off from that, but I am on the low end of the spectrum for sure for how quick people get through games. An RPG might take me 4-6 months that other people finish in a week or two. Even still ~1 hour a night is pretty minimal and achievable with a larger number on a weekend night. So really ~500 hours a year is on the low end I'd argue. Below that is anemic. I'd put the average closer to 3 hours a day - so like ~1500 hours a year. That's what people who can beat 10 RPGs a year and a dozen other games will need to be at. I mean Elden Ring alone would be close to 100 hours. If only we could get that or something like that in VR.

 

[mckmas8808]

Well tbf, PSVR2 was released more than a week ago like a wetfart without any fanfare whatsoever (even sony didn’t have a dedicated Showcase for it, opting for a mediocre SoP feature 5 below average vr indies nobody’s would fork 550$ for), I doubt the hardware even broke 50K as of today

PSVR2 was sent to die as I sincerely think SIE just made the thing as an obligation from Sony Group to market/promote their VR sensors for Meta & Apple to use in their VR/AR products.

None of this is true actually.

I'm not far off from that, but I am on the low end of the spectrum for sure for how quick people get through games. An RPG might take me 4-6 months that other people finish in a week or two. Even still ~1 hour a night is pretty minimal and achievable with a larger number on a weekend night. So really ~500 hours a year is on the low end I'd argue. Below that is anemic. I'd put the average closer to 3 hours a day - so like ~1500 hours a year. That's what people who can beat 10 RPGs a year and a dozen other games will need to be at. I mean Elden Ring alone would be close to 100 hours. If only we could get that or something like that in VR.

But do people REALLY want to play VR games just as much as they do flat screen games? Is that really the expectation?

 

[rofif]

None of this is true actually.



But do people REALLY want to play VR games just as much as they do flat screen games? Is that really the expectation?

People think they want vr until wow factor wears off. Then it’s hot, sweaty, enemies stand in place and so on. At least this is how it goes with me.
But some real games like re8 are now in vr too

 

[Dr. Claus]

We are NOT transitioing to VR.

It will always be a niche thing.

It will absolutely be mainstream, just not this generation or the next. I fully expect VR "headsets" to be the primary way we play and consume games both 2D and VR.

 

[midnightAI]

You can also use the Quest 2 on PC for high quality AAA experiences.

Yes, you can, but then you need an expensive pc, you need to tether it to get the best out of it (it can be used wireless but it's not optimal image quality/latency), and even then, how many AAA Quest games are there considering how long it's been out? (actual games, not ones that have been forced via mods/hacks)
Half Life Alyx and ?

Reviewers complain about the lack of games for PSVR2 launch (silly) but right out of the gate it has 2 AAA games (3 if you count Horizon) and with Sony's stance on hybrid games we should see more this year.

 

[midnightAI]

Well tbf, PSVR2 was released more than a week ago like a wetfart without any fanfare whatsoever (even sony didn’t have a dedicated Showcase for it, opting for a mediocre SoP feature 5 below average vr indies nobody’s would fork 550$ for), I doubt the hardware even broke 50K as of today

PSVR2 was sent to die as I sincerely think SIE just made the thing as an obligation from Sony Group to market/promote their VR sensors for Meta & Apple to use in their VR/AR products.

 

[Azurro]

Do you actually know anybody that bought a real VR headset? Because a week is a fast time for something to collect dust when people were buying 10 games per headset purchased.

Actually my friend circle almost all of them got a Quest 2, that's the reason why I tried it and got one as well. They were all pretty obsessed with it for about 6 months, but I can barely hear anything about them playing anymore.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

And has lost meta 18 nillion dollars in 1 year.

And Xbox sales numbers are speculation without any real data.

 

[Fess]

That's understandable. For me if I can buy 8-10 games a year in VR, then I'll be happy. And I'd want each game to last 3 to 10 hours. With the rare game lasting longer than 10 hours (ie GT7 and RE8). Would that sound reasonable to you?

Wouldn’t be my main platform that way but it’s better than how it’s now at least. I played some Moss 2 now but last time was probably in the summer. It’s collecting dust no doubt.

What I truly want is some proper goodbye real world type of games, like Skyrim and Elden Ring, long ass 100+ hours games, the real deal.

But tbh the hardware isn’t there yet for that. They need to be much more comfortable, lighter and without having to have them on so tightly, and better battery life of course.

Meta wanting people to wear Quest 3 all day sounds awesome to me, not because I want to play all day but because it says they’ve cracked the discomfort problem.
But I’m highly sceptical… Is it possible that they’ve evolved it that much from their current headset? X for doubt

 

[k_trout]

my enthusiasm is the disappointment of my middle age

 

[saintjules]

Yeah so it will never get the open market that Quest is enjoying now. Being more powerful don't mean much when games like Beat Saber are the biggest draws to VR right now.

Games like beat saber being the big draw is exactly what's wrong.

I thought it was Pavlov and GT7.

 

[Amiga]

PlayStation looking like Nintendo in the 3D console era..

N64 advanced the conventions of 3D gaming. So that is a positive comparison.

PSVR2 is only an add-on that is sold on a profit. And the games developed for it are budgeted for the expected market.

 

[Henry Panic]

N64 advanced the conventions of 3D gaming. So that is a positive comparison.

3D gaming existed years before that thing.

It will absolutely be mainstream, just not this generation or the next. I fully expect VR "headsets" to be the primary way we play and consume games both 2D and VR.

Nope, VR is inherently flawed, he's right. VR as it is now will be replaced by something else.

Right now VR is a preview for what's to come.

 

[nowhat]

Quest 2 is selling as well as both Xbox consoles combined. That's not niche

But that's also not great sales!

(I kid. Just a bit.)

 

[Minsc]

3D gaming existed years before that thing.



Nope, VR is inherently flawed, he's right. VR as it is now will be replaced by something else.

Right now VR is a preview for what's to come.

This kinda makes me think the argument would also include TV / media consumption. Like if VR eventually replaces all 2D/3D gaming, then why wouldn't it also replace TV watching as well? Given gaming on a TV set would be replaced by VR? Gonna suck for LG, Samsung and all the other big TV makers.

I think one of the inherent flaws in VR is with high end audio - specifically people who buy the crazy $2500 setups with the room shaking subs. With VR you lose all that audio and get headphones. Which can be great, but it's not the same. And surround speaker systems / home theater systems aren't designed for having to pass the front channel to come out of the surrounds and so on, they're meant for fixed viewing. Often even calibrated for the exact spot you're sitting in, which goes against VR and is in favor of flat gaming. Even if the audio in VR is more reactive and possible immersive in some ways, a pair of earbuds or $100 wireless headphones isn't going to deliver what a $6000 home theater does.

 

[Fess]

I think one of the inherent flaws in VR is with high end audio - specifically people who buy the crazy $2500 setups with the room shaking subs. With VR you lose all that audio and get headphones. Which can be great, but it's not the same. And surround speaker systems / home theater systems aren't designed for having to pass the front channel to come out of the surrounds and so on, they're meant for fixed viewing. Often even calibrated for the exact spot you're sitting in, which goes against VR and is in favor of flat gaming. Even if the audio in VR is more reactive and possible immersive in some ways, a pair of earbuds or $100 wireless headphones isn't going to deliver what a $6000 home theater does.

I’m one of those nerds with a decent home-theater setup. I have not even once thought that audio is a serious flaw in VR, and I’m only using the headset speakers on Quest 2.

The biggest flaw is the lackluster AAA output in the games library combined with the multiple walled-gardens that force a serious VR fan to invest in multiple $1000+ VR setups.

Imagine if you would need multiple TVs and multiple type of blu-ray players to watch all movies. That’s VR gaming. No wonder it stays niche.

 

[Minsc]

I’m one of those nerds with a decent home-theater setup. I have not even once thought that audio is a serious flaw in VR, and I’m only using the headset speakers on Quest 2.

The biggest flaw is the lackluster AAA output in the games library combined with the multiple walled-gardens that force a serious VR fan to invest in multiple $1000+ VR setups.

Imagine if you would need multiple TVs and multiple type of blu-ray players to watch all movies. That’s VR gaming. No wonder it stays niche.

I tried a few 4k HDR steaming movies quick (action scenes with fun music playing) on Cinema mode with the headphones and they did not hold a candle the the Atmos tracks I'm used to on my system. So having VR headsets replace 2D gaming would be a tough sell, even the current flat game I'm playing on PS5 - Dragon Quest 11 doesn't sound as good to me on the headphones.

You're definitely right it needs a large number of AAA games and resources thrown at it, which will just end up pissing off people who don't want VR. But I don't care, Sony could put everything they have in to VR, I have enough flat games to last me the rest of my life anyway haha.

 

[ACESHIGH]

Can you pirate it easily? Because that's what being the PlayStation (1/2) was for a lot of people outside of the core market.

 

[Fess]

I tried a few 4k HDR steaming movies quick (action scenes with fun music playing) on Cinema mode with the headphones and they did not hold a candle the the Atmos tracks I'm used to on my system. So having VR headsets replace 2D gaming would be a tough sell, even the current flat game I'm playing on PS5 - Dragon Quest 11 doesn't sound as good to me on the headphones.

You're definitely right it needs a large number of AAA games and resources thrown at it, which will just end up pissing off people who don't want VR. But I don't care, Sony could put everything they have in to VR, I have enough flat games to last me the rest of my life anyway haha.

Yeah I have an Atmos setup too but the audio difference is not something I’m concerned about in VR. But I understand your thought there.

I agree, I would love the industry to just change page and go all in on VR. Elden Ring 2, Uncharted 5, Gears of War 6, next Tomb Raider, FFXVII, with a Moss type of diorama perspective, would be awesome.

We just need lighter and more comfortable headsets. Right now I can’t last more than about 2 hours before I need a break.

 

[onQ123]

This kinda makes me think the argument would also include TV / media consumption. Like if VR eventually replaces all 2D/3D gaming, then why wouldn't it also replace TV watching as well? Given gaming on a TV set would be replaced by VR? Gonna suck for LG, Samsung and all the other big TV makers.

I think one of the inherent flaws in VR is with high end audio - specifically people who buy the crazy $2500 setups with the room shaking subs. With VR you lose all that audio and get headphones. Which can be great, but it's not the same. And surround speaker systems / home theater systems aren't designed for having to pass the front channel to come out of the surrounds and so on, they're meant for fixed viewing. Often even calibrated for the exact spot you're sitting in, which goes against VR and is in favor of flat gaming. Even if the audio in VR is more reactive and possible immersive in some ways, a pair of earbuds or $100 wireless headphones isn't going to deliver what a $6000 home theater does.

Someone will have to bite the bullet & waste big money on making a blockbuster VR Movie

 

[Romulus]

I’m one of those nerds with a decent home-theater setup. I have not even once thought that audio is a serious flaw in VR, and I’m only using the headset speakers on Quest 2.

The biggest flaw is the lackluster AAA output in the games library combined with the multiple walled-gardens that force a serious VR fan to invest in multiple $1000+ VR setups.

Imagine if you would need multiple TVs and multiple type of blu-ray players to watch all movies. That’s VR gaming. No wonder it stays niche.

It's not niche though. Meta has continually made shitty decisions since the launch of quest 2 and that headset is outpacing most console sales. Only the 100+ million all time selling consoles have done better. The quest 2 games library is middling at best, the price was high, the comfort was bad for most, facebook required account. Still selling mainstream console numbers.

Quest 3 is half the size, double the power and launching with 41 new games with that as a focus.

It'll destroy Quest 2 sales. Will that still be niche? Lol

 

[analog_future]

 

[Fess]

It's not niche though. Meta has continually made shitty decisions since the launch of quest 2 and that headset is outpacing most console sales. Only the 100+ million all time selling consoles have done better. The quest 2 games library is middling at best, the price was high, the comfort was bad for most, facebook required account. Still selling mainstream console numbers.

Quest 3 is half the size, double the power and launching with 41 new games with that as a focus.

It'll destroy Quest 2 sales. Will that still be niche? Lol

It’s a different market, more in line with mobile gaming than console and PC gaming us here are interested in.

I guess Wii was a bit similar, sold a ton and I too loved it at first but within 2 years or so it was a shovelware dumpyard besides Nintendo’s few solid games.

But who will keep the Quest platform relevant? Meta isn’t Nintendo. I don’t see any big publisher jumping in to help. As long as it’s Steam VR compatible there will be a couple games worth playing but I don’t see it pushing the whole industry forward into VR. From a core gamer perspective it’ll be, well, niche.

 

[Crayon]

I thought it was Pavlov and GT7.

I meant two weeks ago lol. Alyx was apparently ignored for effect as well.

 

[Elder Legend]

I’m one of those nerds with a decent home-theater setup. I have not even once thought that audio is a serious flaw in VR, and I’m only using the headset speakers on Quest 2.

The biggest flaw is the lackluster AAA output in the games library combined with the multiple walled-gardens that force a serious VR fan to invest in multiple $1000+ VR setups.

Imagine if you would need multiple TVs and multiple type of blu-ray players to watch all movies. That’s VR gaming. No wonder it stays niche.

True, the price point of many of these devices also keeping it niche. However, when the tech does get a lot more cheaper I am actually not so sure if VR will ever be mainstream. Main reason being is because I know many people in real life who get easily dizzy or motion sick when trying on VR. I think that will be the main hurdle. And I am not sure if any manufacturer can come up with technology that gets rid of motion sickness for most people. I hope they can find a solution, so more people can experience VR.

 

[Romulus]

It’s a different market, more in line with mobile gaming than console and PC gaming us here are interested in.

I guess Wii was a bit similar, sold a ton and I too loved it at first but within 2 years or so it was a shovelware dumpyard besides Nintendo’s few solid games.

But who will keep the Quest platform relevant? Meta isn’t Nintendo. I don’t see any big publisher jumping in to help. As long as it’s Steam VR compatible there will be a couple games worth playing but I don’t see it pushing the whole industry forward into VR. From a core gamer perspective it’ll be, well, niche.

I don't think VR is like anything else. But we can coin consoles all day long as mainstream at certain numbers but when VR topples those numbers it doesn't count.

The previous bestselling VR device PSVR1 did 6 million in 6 years. Quest 2 did 20 million in 2 years. That's a massive increase in interest without big publishers on board. The first to second year sales didn't slow either. If anything I would say PSVR1 had more AAA games and big publishers and sold far worse, so it's not that.

 

[Fess]

I don't think VR is like anything else. But we can coin consoles all day long as mainstream at certain numbers but when VR topples those numbers it doesn't count.

The previous bestselling VR device PSVR1 did 6 million in 6 years. Quest 2 did 20 million in 2 years. That's a massive increase in interest without big publishers on board. The first to second year sales didn't slow either. If anything I would say PSVR1 had more AAA games and big publishers and sold far worse, so it's not that.

It’s not that it doesn’t count, I just don’t see the Quest success moving the needle for where devs put in their game dev investments or where gamers like us here are playing games.
How many are playing on mobile? A couple billion? Still haven’t changed the industry much if at all.

 

[Romulus]

It’s not that it doesn’t count, I just don’t see the Quest success moving the needle for where devs put in their game dev investments or where gamers like us here are playing games.
How many are playing on mobile? A couple billion? Still haven’t changed the industry much if at all.

I'm not sure why something needs to change the industry in order to not be a niche. I think it can not be either of those things and coexist just fine as a mainstream device.

In terms of mobile, how can you even quantify that it didn't change the industry much? Billions in revenue doesn't change much? That in itself contradicts the point. Not to mention all the complaints from gamers about the downfall of AAA games since around the time of mobile's emergence. It's just impossible to even estimate but it sort of goes against what you're saying when I look at it now.

 

[Davevil]

Meta Quest is the PlayStation VITA of the VR era

 

[Fess]

I'm not sure why something needs to change the industry in order to not be a niche. I think it can not be either of those things and coexist just fine as a mainstream device.

In terms of mobile, how can you even quantify that it didn't change the industry much? Billions in revenue doesn't change much? That in itself contradicts the point. Not to mention all the complaints from gamers about the downfall of AAA games since around the time of mobile's emergence. It's just impossible to even estimate but it sort of goes against what you're saying when I look at it now.

It needs to change because people aren’t staying with it. Didn’t Meta have statistics that showed that their customers stopped using it after 6 months? If we would make a poll here I bet it would show simular results. Make one if you don’t believe me.
The thing is, 20 million sold in 2 years only tell half the story. The numbers that are interesting is those that show how big the active userbase is right now, that’s how we know if it’s successful.

 

[Romulus]

It needs to change because people aren’t staying with it. Didn’t Meta have statistics that showed that their customers stopped using it after 6 months? If we would make a poll here I bet it would show simular results. Make one if you don’t believe me.
The thing is, 20 million sold in 2 years only tell half the story. The numbers that are interesting is those that show how big the active userbase is right now, that’s how we know if it’s successful.

Kinda seems like you're willing to pivot to any metric or method to prove it isn't successful.

We cannot use console numbers or even acknowledge the insane growth, we need to compare it to mobile, a device that billions already own. You kinda mentioned earlier that people on gaf aren't really the market for Quest or VR, so why would usage be high and why would that even begin to give us a mass market understanding? Quest 2 is literally in the first 2 years of its life. People bitch and moaned about ps3, ps4, and ps5 not getting games those first 2 years too.

And why would 20 million mean half the story and not most of it, or not less of it? Just seems like you have a very confident understanding of how it all works without really knowing, or using obtuse metrics that align with your thoughts. We haven't seen one hard data point on usage that's up to data but poll gaf? a hard-core gaming community when the quest is like wii you said? Thats the point you made earlier and now seems disingenuous.

 

[Fess]

Kinda seems like you're willing to pivot to any metric to prove it isn't successful. We cannot use console numbers or even acknowledge the insane growth, we need to compare it to mobile, a device that billions already own. You kinda mentioned earlier that people on gaf aren't really the market for Quest or VR, so why would usage be high and why would that even begin to give us a mass market understanding? And why would 20 million mean half the story and not most of it, or not less of it? Just seems like you have a very confident understanding of how it all works without really knowing, or using obtuse metrics that align with your thoughts. We haven't seen one hard data point on usage that's up to data but poll gaf? a hard-core gaming community when the quest is like wii? None of it adds up.

Is it successful now if people have put it away?
No.

Are the sales numbers still moving up?
Idk, are they? I’m going to guess No.

Can any game match the sales of successful console releases?
No.

Hardware sales numbers are only telling half the story because they only say people have bought the device. My take is simply that if people aren’t still using a device then it doesn’t really matter how much it initially sold. Meta got a fantastic start but they dropped the ball, maybe some of their old users will return for Quest 3 but I could just as well see someone else pick up the ball instead.

Sidenote: I actually like Quest 2, I’m just frustrated that the games output is so lackluster. Goes for VR in general. The big devs are all sleeping.

 

[Romulus]

Is it successful now if people have put it away?
No.

Are the sales numbers still moving up?
Idk, are they? I’m going to guess No.

Can any game match the sales of successful console releases?
No.

Hardware sales numbers are only telling half the story because they only say people have bought the device. My take is simply that if people aren’t still using a device then it doesn’t really matter how much it initially sold. Meta got a fantastic start but they dropped the ball, maybe some of their old users will return for Quest 3 but I could just as well see someone else pick up the ball instead.

Sidenote: I actually like Quest 2, I’m just frustrated that the games output is so lackluster. Goes for VR in general. The big devs are all sleeping.

Lots of guesses and opinions here but I agree the games could be better. Impressive that it's still managed to sell so well. They reported 10 million sales about a year ago and 20 now, no signs of slowing based on that.

 

[Fess]

Lots of guesses and opinions here but I agree the games could be better. Impressive that it's still managed to sell so well. They reported 10 million sales about a year ago and 20 now, no signs of slowing based on that.

The games library is really the problem. I don’t know how Meta can fix that but in the end I think that’s what will make or break their whole investment in VR. I’ve been using my Quest 2 the last couple days (playing the lovely Moss 2) and looking at the store is kinda depressing, it has sold a lot but calling it the Playstation of VR is completely ignoring that the big dev houses are still just sitting on the fence. I plan to get Red Matter 2 though, looked cool, but other than that I didn’t see anything really interesting.