seeing how marketing calls strapping a tv to you face and holding 2 wii remotes "virtual reality" i cant help but to wonder what this will be called
Comment has been collapsed.
noveltyvision
why walk in a first person shooter when you can teleport.
Comment has been collapsed.
I sometimes think that Gabe lives in a paralell dimension where Steam machines and VR really took off.
Comment has been collapsed.
VR is doing fine though, better than ever in fact.
With the release of the Oculus Quest 2, the whole VR space got a huge boost... and now there's serious talk that Apple might be joining in soon as well. None of this would be happening had it not been for Vavle's contributions to the development of VR. Not only to the development of the tech itself, but Half-Life: Alyx too. It showed just how good a VR game can be - and it is absolutely fantastic. Almost worth the price of VR for that game alone.
Steam Machines though, oof...
Comment has been collapsed.
VR is surely 'better than ever', but it's a long way off from being mainstream. So yeah, I just said that it didn't really take off and I don't think because it's not a complete failure my statement is wrong.
Comment has been collapsed.
Estimated by a third party I should have said, and I believe it. It sold out immediately when it launched, and when stores got new stock, it was all gone well within a day for the longest time. Now availability is a bit more reliable but it took quite a while.
Besides, when is something "mainstream" then? Seems pretty arbitrary. PSVR sold something like 5+ million units to date. The Vavle Index sells like 200k units a year. There's millions and millions of VR headsets out there by now. It isn't as niche as it used to be.
Comment has been collapsed.
It sold out immediately when it launched, and when stores got new stock
That's the oldest marketing strategy in the book though. "Oh no it's all gone already! You'll have to wait for yours while we make new ones" "But now I waaaaaaaaaaaants iiiiiiiiiit!!"
Besides, when is something "mainstream" then? Seems pretty arbitrary
It is. It's usually defined by a ratio though. There are literally billions of gamers worldwide. Millions and millions not being a very clear figure, it's hard to define a ratio
I'll give you 26 million units worldwide (privately owned)
Rough estimates of the gaming population count people who own gaming-only devices (like consoles) as well as people who play once a week or more on their PC and does not count Android gamers for example and the estimate is 2.7 billion gamers.
That means VR headset owners account for less than 1% of the gaming population (0.96% to be exact) , and that's not discounting the fact that most people who own headsets probably own more than one because they love shiny new things and can afford it so they're more than likely to buy new models when they are released.
So mainstream, no. Growing? sure. At a fast rate? Yes. Does that mean it's the future? In its current state, no. Even if they did sell another 10 million in the next 2 years, that would still remain marginal.
It sure does sell companies on the stock market though, hence the "future is now" announcements like Gabe's, based in zero reality but innovation sells stocks.
All the stats come from Statista, an independent source, which I used mostly because most other VR stats I see seem to come from sellers or people trying to sell VR to the stock people so it's not very reliable and I thought having both stats from the same source was only fair.
Comment has been collapsed.
FWIW, I find it's almost impossible for people who already have a negative outlook on VR to be objective about the financial side of it, even after contextualizing their observations. You have a medium in it's infancy and people want to compare it to other mediums that have DECADES more and then opine that it hasn't overtaken them as some sort of measure for success. It's like looking at gaming in the 70s and having a negative outlook because they didn't compare to books and movies (and they wouldn't, the same way VR will never as well).
The basics of it you already know. There's no "Model T" of VR yet but we're still seeing progress, we keep seeing advancements, you have iterations of VR sets with improvements (something that didn't happen meaningfully in prior decades that tried VR), design teams tailoring VR specific experiences as design methods for our other more established mediums don't produce the same results in VR, continued investments in both $ and time, etc. VR doesn't need to be disruptive in order to be a success, it just needs to be profitable and there will be plenty of VR companies that don't make it to the future decades (see the list of consoles from the 70s and 80s that didn't make it through) that people will be distracted by as some sort of failure for the medium.
Comment has been collapsed.
1,801 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by rashidnemar
36 Comments - Last post 25 minutes ago by Street77
544 Comments - Last post 54 minutes ago by tlo
59 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by adam1224
450 Comments - Last post 9 hours ago by klingki
7 Comments - Last post 13 hours ago by xXSAFOXx
16,297 Comments - Last post 15 hours ago by SebastianCrenshaw
13 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by VahidSlayerOfAll
7,985 Comments - Last post 2 minutes ago by WaxWorm
59 Comments - Last post 9 minutes ago by softbearcas
6 Comments - Last post 14 minutes ago by CheMan39
103 Comments - Last post 15 minutes ago by CheMan39
8 Comments - Last post 16 minutes ago by VahidSlayerOfAll
10,777 Comments - Last post 29 minutes ago by CultofPersonalitea
Valve (the company that used to make games) is busy again. Several games in the making and also this.
Comment has been collapsed.