According to IHS Technology's games analyst, PlayStation VR will get 64% of market share in 2016 with 1.6 million units sold by the end of the year.
I think they can make 2M! The price is just great, Sony did it once again after PS4's 399€. They're the best in terms of hardware.
The price is great and release date is great as well. I was thinking Rift or PSVR.. Now I can get both because they are far apart and PSVR price helps.
I'm confused, do I only have to pay 399? Or are those xbox one fans correct when they say you have to pay 399 plus another 410 for the camera, and headphones? Can I just get the 399 PSVR, and have enough to play games?
They have already sold out on amazon.com
The price is nice, it looks nice, and they seem pretty open about marketing. I can see the PSVR doing very well
It has the recipe for success for sure. This will likely serve as the gateway for millions to get into VR and, for many, will lead to them investing in better hardware eventually. I think the PS VR will be the most important VR product for that reason.
^^This^^ "Will serve as the gateway for others to get into VR"! At this point I don't think price can be looked at as a discouraging factor to turn people away from VR! In fact it should have the total opposite effect. By using Sony's VR as the entrance priced gateway, it almost a given that PC's VR will thrive as well even at a higher price point, because gamers are automatically going to want what is perceived as the complete better experience. It's a WIN/WIN scenario that will push VR foward.
Conflicted on this. I want PSVR to do really well, but I don't want it to destroy the competition. Ideally we'd be better off with VR becoming an open standard, and PSVR undermines the chances of that happening.
Are they in direct competition with Occulus and others though?
That's the same old PC gamer and console gamer thing that's been well-trodden recently. There are definitely distinct markets, with some overlap. That's not really what I'm getting at though. TVs use open standards dictated by the likes of HDMI. You get an HDMI device, plug it into any TV, and you get the result up in front of you. So long as content creators and hardware manufacturors stick to standards, they will work across the range. VR could/should be the same deal. I should be able to buy a VR headset from Sony, Oculus, Samsung, whoever really, and use it with whatever hardware offers VR output. That can only happen if various aspects (picture ratio, field of view, stereoscopy, input handling etc etc) are agreed upon. If the most dominant player in the VR space aren't open to that then it is far less likely to happen, and that sucks. On the other hand, Sony have obviously invested a tonne of effort and resource into an innovation that I'm really keen on, so if it doesn't succeed then that'd also suck.
Well, it may not be direct but it's still a form of competition.
@Volkama- VR is new tech. What previous tech has had open standards on its first iteration (that didn't die in a standards committee while others rushed to market?). Usually there are several competing standards at first, the market usually eventually rallies around a single standard, if needed
The potential issue I'm seeing thus far is that VR has no real killer apps in sight, and without them it becomes incredibly difficult to sell people on this tech. It will be written off as a mere fad if nobody goes all-in, and I can't help but feel that no one has managed to crack what makes a great VR game yet and we're a long way off. So long, in fact, that people will lose interest before any traction is gained.
@Uth11 that doesn't really contradict what I said. It's new tech, and ordinarily you'd expect the various players would converge to find a standard (typically via consortium), or the dominant player would win out and naturally dictate the standard. In isolation, Rift/Vive are probably on track for one outcome or the other. But thus far PSVR is a closed platform and it's success could well prevent any standardisation coming about. Unless Sony's longterm goal is a controlling stake in the VR industry at large, beyond Playstation. Which is quite possible, actually. @LightofDarkness, agreed on the killer apps, there are only a handful of games I'd see myself playing more than once or twice. The tech is obviously in it's infancy and devs are still figuring out basics like how best to move around and interact with the world. They'll get better with experience. Also the more people adopt VR, the more we can expect development budgets to inflate to enable bigger games.
It's a good thought, but I don't think they will really compete with each other. There's a lot of people who don't own a PS4 that will want VR too.
VR is headed in different directions whether we like it or not. A PC gamer isnt going to buy a PS4 just for VR, and a PS4 gamer wont be picking up a PC for VR anytime soon either. They were 2 different demographics to start, and they will stay that way for the foreseeable future. The best we can hope for is developers making games for multiple headsets. Once the initial game is complete, they just have to scale it to the HMD and let the headset do all the fancy math. http://www.pcgamer.com/why-...
I'm sure I'm not the only one that has a PC and a PS4, and would like to use the same headset across both (plus any other consoles that might eventually support VR).
Oculus/Facebook and HTC/Valve will be just fine. I think the success of all three would be great for the tech.
Theres no competition they already won guarantee 2+ million units will be sold JUST YEAR ONE.
You have Sony wrong in this case. Remember that Sony is still also an electronics company. If the PS VR and VR in general becomes successful I can see Sony making a stand alone VR headset that that work with TV's and other platforms/devices. We are still in the early stages of. I think they only reason why the PS VR is not open is because it relies heavily on the PS4. Sony didn't want to make an expensive VR that can be use on other platforms with the complexities that come with that. If anything the success of PS VR will help the industry a alot.
399$ is a right price imho.
Agreed, let hope they can get some great games for it
Perfectly fair, I agree.
Yeah, except it's not really 399$ since you have to buy the camera separately.
Many PS4 owners already have the camera and is the same if I say: Oculus is not really $600 since you have to buy a capable PC.
Is it the "right" price though? Really? I mean, it's only 1080p...something Oculus DK2 did 2 years ago for $50 less (and it included a camera no less). It's proprietary as far as we can tell so far so no PC usage...PS4 ONLY. The $399 pricetag is JUST the headset. No camera, no controllers. So yeah, give the tech that's in it (nothing special if we're not going to be deluded) and the fact that you still need other hardware to fully utilize it $399 is pretty steep. Should have been $299 and I see no reason, hardware wise, why it couldn't be and still remain profitable. The $399 price tag in my opinion exists because everyone else is so expensive. Oculus is $600, Vive is $800, so Sony though, "Well, $400 is still lower than them so why not?". I mean, it'll sell like hotcakes I'm sure, but saying it's the "right price" I don't think it right.
So if Oculus could do it for $349, then why isn't the market flooded with $349 Oculus devices? Because it was a dev kit, designed to get it into developers hands, and consumer-level build quality and making a profit were not the objectives.
@uth11 "So if Oculus could do it for $349, then why isn't the market flooded with $349 Oculus devices?" Because the new Oculus is using much higher end hardware. Look at the Razer OSVR. $299.99 with nearly the same hardware as the PSVR if not better. Just an example of course. Just because there aren't cheaper consumer Oculus devices doesn't mean there can't be or won't be. "Because it was a dev kit, designed to get it into developers hands, and consumer-level build quality and making a profit were not the objectives." My point is that a much smaller company with less connections (let alone their own display manufacturing) was able to produce something with the same resolution panel 2 years ago for $50 less while providing more hardware. Also, it was great quality, have you ever handled one? There's nothing cheap about it at all. Regardless, it's my opinion that $399 is a lot of money for what you're actually getting. If you don't agree that's fine.
You know how something is the right price? When it sells like hotcakes. We will see. But, it's pretty much the market that determines whether or not something is the 'right' price. If $399 is too high, then the units won't move and Sony will have to adjust to the market by lowering the price or incentivizing the purchase.
@OOGLY PSVR and Camera is all that is needed to experience VR. every VR game must be compatible with PS4 controller. plus 60% i'd say of the people who are truly planning on buying this, like myself, already paid for all the addons to it. my camera was a day one purchase. move, 2 days later :)
At that price as long as they have quality games people want to play, itr will do very well.
What I'm interested to know now is the price of VR games. I'm happy to shell out £390 for the PSVR + Camera bundle, and Thumper and Battlezone have got my attention.
Playstation VR is gonna do extremely well I think. And that price is a good start
I have a question. Which is better execution/quality wise? PSVR or Oc Rift? In other words, which is the most advanced?