COG: Five years ago, Phil Spencer and Xbox's dismissal of VR gaming could be understood. In 2021, it's just poor business strategy.
Finally secured? Xbox was going to get Starfield and Fallout regardless of buying the publisher. They just decided to take them away from PlayStation. Their patience with game pass is to implement an online only digital future as they always wanted. Those sly dogs. Staying on the software side just means VR doesn't fit their services model. Which is funny because you can't play VR games on a headset without "SOFTWARE." And Sony sold PSVR at profit day one since some gamers love the words, "day one." It's profitable. You're grandma doesn't have to be targeted. I laugh when gamers worry on if casuals are playing. Must be that "Kinect" effect. There are those that think VR is "niche." Yet ignore that it's growing not just gaming, but in other sectors from business, entertainment, education, instruction, construction, real restate, medical, etc. Motion control gaming and 3D TVs didn't grow into these areas. But VR has. When gamers say they just want to sit on a couch and play, you can do that with VR. Sony even encourages it if you want. Oculus did a survey that found lots of its gamers do sit and play. And, developers like Ninja Theory were more than capable of making VR and flat games at the same time. Same with Bethesda. Microsoft not joining the game will just be like Zune and Windows Phone. "Hey! We're here. Are we late to the party?" Yes. Yes you will be if you wait. I see many Xbox fans on VR gaming sites that bought a PS4 or Pro and PSVR because Microsoft DIDN'T. They bought an Oculus Quest because Microsoft DIDN'T. Or PC headset. But it's Microsoft's choice to stay behind. Even though I'm expecting a mod to fail this as old news. When in actuality, it's new comments made by Phil Spencer himself that they're not adding VR to the Xbox platform anytime soon. Which will push more Xbox gamers to buy the next PlayStation headset or Oculus revision or PC. Microsoft will lose out on sales and royalties or even adding those VR SOFTWARE games to game pass as a perk.
You are reading more into this than what is the realistic conclusion. VR is too niche, and is still not ready for mainstream games. I’d rather them focus on games.
Stubborn? No, Xbox does not need to do VR just because Sony is doing it. If VR was so great you wouldn't have to beg Microsoft to do it. No Xbox should do VR when they have something compelling to add to it, until then Xbox should focus on consistently delivering a minimum of 3 AAA 1st party quality releases per yr.
@4Sh0w I agree.
I would too, but instead MS is more focused on selling services. Watch them take every major tent pole franchise and turn it into a Destiny-esqe type game to milk gamers on gamepass for next 10years. Gotta keep those subs rolling right. Then will it be about the games? Or just unfinished product releases with never-ending season passes…
They have not focused on games in a decade… and what they did release was niche per the what was being offered by the competitors. They are printing money. That is it. If you do not want vr to be niche, you support it. Pure and simple. If Microsoft was not so burrowed into the media aspect to paint a positive light to be an equal product, then the reality would be a niche gaming console with mainstream AAA games available. The issue with vr games for Microsoft is that they would have to make games to support it.. and since they have a hard time just making games for a console, they would not spend the money to do said things for vr. It is a waste of money for them. The wool is pulled over your eyes if you think anything will change. Microsoft is 80% hype… 10% a gaming company The current status of Microsoft buying up developers is not new. They did it before… And the only thing to come from it was the rights to game engines or tools while said developers were dissolved. Why? Microsoft gets paid while doing next to no work themselves.
Gamepass and PSNow sucks THEY BOTH LAGGY AS HELL!
I find it funny when Xbox gamers talk about "options" in gaming like useless features as great but then somehow push VR away because good guy Phil is against it. If they do end up doing it, watch the fans turn into hypocrites as we have seen over the years and then be "for" VR. I'm not begging for them to do it. I'm watching them as they lose another generation to Sony because they refuse to move forward. VR isn't something to replace regular gaming. It adds to gaming in a positive way. More immersion. If they don't do it, Sony will still provide VR for consoles and lead the way as the market leader in gaming. That's why Microsoft continues to be 3RD in gaming. They're not leaders. They follow after others then join in too late but act like they were always there.
Quote : VR is too niche, and is still not ready for mainstream games. I’d rather them focus on games. ....... VR games are games too. And in recent years few GOTY ones too
Apple are planning on releasing something VR or AR related in Q4 2022. That's when we will see if this tech is ready to be mainstream or if it'll forever be a bunch of floating hand shovelware Apples glasses may become the next AirPods and Sony will hugely benefit from it. Or they might he the next HomePod and life will carry on as normal
Its true. They're having a torrid time releasing consistent quality software without spreading themselves even thinner with vr. Concentrate on making better mains before you move to the side dishes
They need to actually focus on making games instead of PR statements and just buying studios already in production of games for their console then.
@ gamer Remember the PS 3D graphics they also was called a niche that wouldn’t be mainstream 🤷🏿 Sega and Nintendo didn’t got into it till after they saw Sony dominating them. Oh and btw 90% of PlayStation games was 3D while the others was the other way around
Niche? Not ready. What garbage. Right now, right this minute, you can have some of the best gaming experiences in VR. I mean, gaming that you cant do on a flat screen. But if you mean VR is not ready because it will have less pixels than the flat version of a game, well, then VR will never “be ready” because by nature VR games are more costly to run than flat games. I think a lot if people say this stuff to make excuses for MS.
@gamer7804; I agree I’m happy someone spoke up. VR just isn’t there yet, let PS be the ones to change that while Microsoft focuses on delivering quality games.
If MS announced VR tomorrow, all of a sudden VR “is there”. As if “quality” is exclusive to non-VR? As if MS been the one with the “quality l” games so far?
I don't understand discussion pieces like this. Not everyone needs to do the same thing, nor does everyone need the same business focus. Xbox focus is getting GamePass into the hands of as many people as possible. Their console is only a means to an end, and to not destroy the relationship they built with their fans. Let them pursue this and continue to evolve PC gaming features along the way.
"Not everyone needs to do the same thing" Under that logic MS never should have entered the console market because everyone else was making consoles. And the whole point of Game Pass, as a service at its full potential, is to make consoles irrelevant. Put games on everything from phones to TVs. Also, what has MS done for PC gaming lately? What standards have they set or exceeded?
"Under that logic MS never should have entered the console market because everyone else was making consoles." -huh, that makes no sense, so because Microsoft entered the console market 2 decades ago they must continue to enter every other gaming market niche or do the same as their competitors do, becuase umh, err you say so? No, these are separate independent BUSINESS DECISIONS, not knee jerk reactions to appease what looks like mostly calls from sony loyalists. "Also, what has MS done for PC gaming lately? What standards have they set or exceeded?" -Oh I dont know how about tech, establish a gaming service & make their 1st party games available on pc day 1...what exactly else do they need to do for pc gamers? Their doing a helluva lot more for pc than the competition.
@Godmars290 "Noot needing" to to do something" dosn't translate to "you shouldn't".
@4Sh0w: ??? MS, as a PC company, has always been PC leaning. OG Xbox was more about bridging console gaming to PC gaming, where the 360 was more about porting PC titles to the console than its own games. When MS showed off their own AAA games, it was on a bleeding edge rig rather than more modest scaled 360 or XB1. The EXACT reason why they as soon downplayed a titles graphics or the thing released as a mess. Their repeated flaw is that they don't think about their own hardware. Its also why Sony and Nintendo, who do consider their hardware, outperforms them on a regular basis. @thornintheside: Meh. "They shouldn't" have put out Kinect when they did. Focused more on game performance than acquiring user data.
GodMars, that's Xcloud not GP get it right
4Show huh, that makes no sense, so because Microsoft entered the console market 2 decades ago they must continue to enter every other gaming market niche or do the same as their competitors do, Microsoft entered a niche with Kinect they entered a niche with XBOX LIVE they entered a niche with GAME PASS all of those was NICHE at one time. -Oh I dont know how about tech, establish a gaming service & make their 1st party games available on pc day 1 Valve say HI with the BIGGEST PC STORE AND SERVICE 🙄You are right Microsoft don’t do niche /S
Godsmars "MS, as a PC company, has always been PC leaning. OG Xbox was more about bridging console gaming to PC gaming" So...Is that a bad thing? "Their repeated flaw is that they don't think about their own hardware." -How?...other than RROD mess, theyve made great hardware, in fact imho Series X hardware is the best console hardware of the big 3. Also if you mean in terms of prioritizing their own hardware in regards to sales by keeping software exclusive, then OK so?, thats just a difference in business strategy between the other console manufacturers because of their "PC leaning" history as you said yourself, right? Im sure Microsoft wish they sold as many consoles as Nintendo & Sony BUT you conviently ignore Nintendo is all but out of the pc gaming space, while Sony only has their toes in for an extra buck while Xbox is all in, so obviously they are willingly sacrificing some hardware sales in order to propel & profit off of the pc market. Thats the trade off. Again each company is doing well with their different strategies, either way I/Consumers dont make a dime whatever either company hardware sales are. So. 1Victor "Microsoft entered a niche with Kinect they entered a niche with XBOX LIVE they entered a niche with GAME PASS all of those was NICHE at one time." -Are you trying to prove my point for me? Despite Microsofts promises Kinect (which I would have loved if they succeeded) failed because Microsoft did not ADD anything compelling to the motion control niche genre, so the lesson stands dont just chase a trend unless you can innovate. XboxLive was a very good decision as clearly there was a large, hungry market/fanbase for online gaming and of course Microsoft had the tech & was well suited to start a compelling online gaming service, now with Gamepass Microsoft are building on their online gaming success while not repeating past bandwagon mistakes with VR...btw theres nothing wrong with WAITING, plenty of success stories that weren't the 1st to do it.
@Godsmar290 "Under that logic MS never should have entered the console market because everyone else was making consoles." Clearly you don't know why Microsoft entered the market, and to compare this to adopting virtual reality is asinine at best.
@4Sh0w: ""Their repeated flaw is that they don't think about their own hardware." -How?" OG Xbox - Failed to buy key components outright. As result production costs never decreased, which meant every system sold at a loss throughout the console's life. Xbox 360 - Several design and early material issues, lack of quality control, resulted in RROD among other problems. XB1 - Launch model designed around Kinect. Released underpowered compared to PS4. Series X - Simply no thought given other then "Be more powerful than the PS5." "Nintendo is all but out of the pc gaming space" Nintendo was NEVER in the PC gaming space to begin with. They've only been about "electronic entertainment." Its why they dominated handhelds till mobile became a thing, yet even then remain a major presence. They also might be a gen - or two - behind MS and Sony in terms of system power and online infrastructure, yet from "3rd Place" they've outsold the PS5 and Series X. @Sitdown: "Clearly you don't know why Microsoft entered the market," They saw Sony dethrone Nintendo, greatly expand the market, and thought they could do better. They haven't.
As someone who has a proper VR set-up, it *is* niche. Yes it's growing, but it's growing way slower than anyone anticipated. Would I like to see Xbox get into VR? Absolutely. But I'm not surprised they aren't getting in yet. It's too niche a market to pour significant resources into.
My guess is there is no XBOX VR because Microsoft is not interested in developing the hardware. To me, it is clear they would like to transition away from hardware of any kind as their focus because it hasn't been a big moneymaker for them. They are more interested in subscriptions. Everyone has their own opinions about that, as I am sure you do, too. Make what you will of that. That said, do I think XBOX will have VR at some point? Yes. Chances are, they'll pair up with an established VR developer.
MS already stated they're making another console after X. It's like every generation y'all say this is their last or their slowly phrasing out console, when that's never ever the case.
Lightning77, Are you reading what you want to read? Read what I wrote again. I clearly said the following: "My guess is there is no XBOX VR because Microsoft is not interested in developing *the hardware*. To me, it is clear they would like to transition away from hardware of any kind **as their focus** because it hasn't been a big moneymaker for them. They are more interested in subscriptions.* 1. I specifically said they are not interested in developing THE HARDWARE. I did not say they are not interested in developing hardware. It is clearly a very specific case I'm talking about. To simply say hardware is general; to say "the hardware" is specifying VR hardware. 2. I, once again, said in no uncertain terms that they would like to transition away from hardware of any kind AS THEIR FOCUS. It is clearly the case, which is why they're aggressively pushing game pass, Xcloud, and PC day one releases. That doesn't mean the end of Xbox consoles—it means the hardware is less of a focus for them. How is this being misinterpreted? I have no idea what the next Xbox will be, only that there will be two. There is a reason they named their consoles the Series models. All new console hardware will be within those families: the S line and the X line.
Wow, what a take on something so small. Why dont Nintendo just make a VR headset while we are at it. Microsoft should make a handheld, and T.Vs. for good measure make a movie studio. Sony should realese anothe PSP and a full blow operating system for PC. Good God man, it's just a market that they are not putting out hardware for, however they DO support VR applications on windows and MS flight sim is VR enabled. Take a chill pill, they make a lot of shit already and just hitting a stride at their core base, Sony is already and has been comfy in the console space for a while now..no need for MS to fight a VR battle when they are behind in Their core gaming market. Beside PSVR sucks compared to the competition on the market..PSVR2 might be a different story, but I dont know one person who owns a PSVR, not saying it didnt do well..but its definitely not a Sony bread and butter type thing..if they never made another one only a small handful of people would give a shit.
Worth 2 TRILLION but does less than a 100 billion dollar company. I like your excuses. Do the math. They should be doing bare minimum or better than Sony but has gotten their ass kicked every generation with their fans continuing to make excuses. Nothing matters now that they have been dominated again and again. Scared to even announce numbers anymore. Microsoft gets puffed up as having all this money but you excuse them when they don't do something like VR. More excuses. I remember when fans were jumping up and down during 360 era until Microsoft lost. Then made excuses during Xbox One getting destroyed by Sony. Nintendo isn't competing in the same space. They gave up for portable gaming that happens to plug into a TV. Microsoft is the one competing but doesn't admit it because in comparison, they are losing. They tried to be Sony and failed. So now, they are trying to pick up the pieces. PSVR doesn't suck. It's sold more than most others combined and has one of the top library of games. It's just old in tech. Only ignorance of the platform would compare something more than 5 years old to what's there today in VR. I guess individuals like yourself would compare Switch to Gameboy Advance and say GBA sucks. How intelligent of you. PSVR didn't need to sell 100 million. Just succeed at profitability and selection of games. It did both. Microsoft just wants your subscription. They don't care about gaming. Just using games to sell subscriptions. They are doing everything they can to turn gaming into a reoccurring payment. And your fell for it.
Lol he wrote about literally about nothing. Imma kill your entire post in just 1 sentences. You need hardware to run software, so your post make 0 sense. Lol
"Their patience with game pass is to implement an online only digital future as they always wanted." Such a hypocritical fanboy response. We know you love Steam and only stream your TV/Movies.
@Apocalypse As of 2020 they only sold 5 million PSVR. That's less than 5% of PS4 owners all these years since launch. Is that what you would call a hit, a must have item, or a system seller?
I think MS as a business is doing just fine without your two cents....
VR will always be a niche product, including for gaming. They're heavily invested in AR which is much more usable and has a chance for a significantly broader audience.
You say they're invested in AR, yet for as long as both AR and VR have been around the presence of both have been equally absent on the Xbox. Hell, the PS EYE supported AR far in excess than anything MS's done.
Microsoft has its own VR/AR platform on PC with a bunch of hardware manufacturers. Xbox isn't supporting VR/AR, but that doesn't mean MS isn't.
@porkChop: If Xbox, as MS's biggest/recognized entertainment platform, is doing jack with AR/VR, then MS isn't doing anything with AR/VR. If they are through 3rd parties, that just means they're going along with those 3rd parties. Are literally just going through the motions. most likely till one of those 3rd parties comes up with something innovative, at which point MS will swoop in to claim credit buying out that 3rd party if necessary.
@Godmars290 MS has recently entered 22bn contract to make some hololens-type product for the army. I guess someone should've told the army that MS isn't serious about it since MS isn't incorporating AR on their gaming platform??? Maybe you should consider the idea that everything isn't centered around gaming.
Thorn in the side, Microsoft made a deal with the military. I don't think it was the AR headsets they are concerned with. It's the monthly payment of services that support those headsets. They didn't make anything special over Amazon or other AR companies. It's the Windows platform that most likely won the government over as it's already an OS in use. Headset sales are a one time purchase. But monthly software services, updates, etc are a lifetime profit generator. And Microsoft knows it. And that's all they care about: SERVICES.
@thornintheside: Thank you for stating why MS is more focused on providing paid services than gaming or entertainment? How they can put out broken hardware, barebone games, and stay in consoles where other companies that don't have fat government contracts would have folded and closed shop?
@Godmars290. TIL Xbox only survived because of government contracts.
You're not very clever if you think AR will make it but VR won't.
Nintendo recently made a mario racing game using AR.
I see both AR and VR as niche products. They are really good, but both are niche. Their biggest problem is cost and form factor. Neither are overly comfortable and neither is at a price where the masses will buy them.
Sounds like the same people who were against console gaming like Pong and Atari, television and other products as niche and a fad. Look where we are now. The same type of individuals downplaying an upcoming platform. Only to find out later how much those things changed everything. Good thing gamers like myself bought game consoles back then and ignored the naysayers. We wouldn't have what we have now.
@ApocalypseShadow I have no doubts that VR and AR will grow, improve, and hopefully become mainstream. It is all about improving the experience and reducing the cost. Both are happening. I am not at all against AR and VR. I am waiting for a really good product.
I remember the presentation of xbox one x and the fallout 4, and phil says were gonna experience full game VR experience and not just demo. Aahh those days feels like yesterday!
I remember too. They were lied to about VR to sell One X. Then backed out. We've seen Microsoft do that more than once of misleading, misdirecting and outright lying to sell Xbox. Not adding VR will hurt them much sooner than they think when Sony shows what's possible. Should be interesting to watch.
You mean that halo lens that I think got canned haven't heard anything about that since beginning of xbone and Minecraft. Anyways Sony with the VR/console, nintendo with handheld and MS with whatever they got going seems fine with me. 3 companies with different paths they all win in there own way I guess.
Still kicking.. but it's more used for enterprise. https://www.cnet.com/tech/c... https://www.insight.com/en_...
Half Life Alyx will be a PlayStation console exclusive thanks to this thinking.
i do think VR will be bigger this gen, with a massive CPU/GPU boost and the ability to load games in seconds you can load up a shooting gallery, instantly, and have some arcade fun, maybe drive a train or truck or maybe a lifeguard simulator, you can keep an eye out for sharks / people drowning have a game of volleyball, or maybe an actual VR level added to uncharted, diving for treasure etc etc, and why not have gran turismo and gta fully playable in VR as well
''i do think VR will be bigger this gen, with a massive CPU/GPU boost and the ability to load games in seconds'' Still not enough. A really good VR(comfortable/affordable/acce ssible) is atleast a full console generation away. This gen will be another decent/passable VR.
I really don't see VR being passible,.. Hell even 6 year old psVR has some of most immersive games I've ever played.
@LordoftheCritics Quote : VR(comfortable/affordable/acc e ssible) is atleast a full console generation away. ..... PSVR launched 5 years ago and has great games and it is a comfortable, affordable and accessible. WTF you are blabbing about. Welcome to the past
@gravedigger Oh wow PSVR. What is that? Sounds like we finally got there. Cant wait to play Guild Wars 2 for 6 hrs straight on it.
Nope. It's here today. Affordable(Oculus Quest 2). Comfortable(PSVR). High quality(Index). The next headsets will be beyond passable. Way better than before. As an example, everything PSVR is/was won't be an issue on the next. This isn't PS4 VR when PS5 is many times more powerful. Higher quality graphics from PS5, fast SSD that can throw gigs of data in seconds that most PCs don't have, controllers with Dual Sense haptics and analog sticks, possible eye tracking that even PC headsets don't have today. Big push towards making hybrid games that work in and out of VR like RE7. Unreal Engine 5 middleware and meta human quality characters. Lol. Passable. Sure buddy. Xbox could have the same but will miss out.
I think one of the bigger challenges is the movement problem and the cable clutter from the needed equipment and the number of peripherals needed(helmet, controllers, sensors). I could be wrong tho, I haven't followed VR tech for a while, maybe they solved some of that stuff.
@ApocalypseShadow ''Nope. It's here today. Affordable(Oculus Quest 2). Comfortable(PSVR). High quality(Index).'' Ah yes lemme just wear all of them on my head. Not a single VR solution exists thats quality in all departments. Quest requires facebook access 24/7 and quest link is terrible. Eye adjustment is horrendous. Still has issues. PSVR is incredibly sub par compared to all the new ones and has a limited PS library only. Index has many issues, dont even get me started on this. Also ppl who imagine the next PSVR is going to be high graphics/high performance etc etc GOOD LUCK Even a rtx 3080 needs adjustments when playing No Mans Sky at ideal VR frame rates and high res. And high end Next gen games will need to be massively toned down and adjusted to fit a stable VR performance on the new consoles. We are not really there yet. Do your research, I have done mine.
The real negative for the Quest 2 IMO is the requirement of a Facebook account connection in order to operate the device. We are for sure agreed on that, @Lord. However, I'd suggest that it's the only drawback. I'm not a fan of Facebook, but for accuracy I want to mention that the IPD adjustment issues you've mentioned are non-existent. The Quest 2 officially supports IPD ranges from 61mm to 6mm, which is roughly equivalent as supporting 95% of adult IPDs. In actuality, it suppports greater than this too. A friend of mine that owns the system has an IPD of 72mm and says the experience is great. As for the adjustment process, it's definitely less intuitive than the previous slider (you grab and slide the lens inside to one of three positions), but it's worth pointing out that IPD adjustment is done just once for each user (so if you don't share the device you literally will never need to do it again). In my opinion, the greatest drawback of VR for social use is in how isolating it is for the user. As someone who's worked in the AR/VR industry for the past decade, I've been in a lot of rooms where people talk about potential futures. One of those futures that is highly desirable for the OEMs and VCs to consider is that VR will eventually replace screens for certain activities (gaming, entertainment), and I truly don't believe it. Here's why: I'm sitting with my wife for an evening after work. I'm playing Rocket League on the PS5 on the TV. She's watching some true crime show on her laptop, with her switch in hand playing a farming simulator like starred valley. We are each engaged with our own activity, but on the same sofa, and with access to human perception, we are together. She'll comment on a great goal. I'l laugh about the absurdity of the real life murder story she's engrossed in. The dog might be sleeping by us, enjoying some scritches from me each time there's a break between games. Now imagine that one of us in in a VR device. Suddenly, we're not together anymore. The VR wearer is entirely removed from the social setting, unable to see (and to a large extent, hear) the other person. It's an entirely different experience. I'm definitely very bullish on AR/VR, and XR as a whole. However in my opinion, these technologies will revolutionize new forms on engagement and won't serve to replace activities that people already value because these activities are substantively different from one another. For clarity, there is a time that users will want to be submerged in virtual content and that use case is real. I'm just trying to illustrate some of the problems with the existing business proposition for VR, today.
MS is listening to the Xbox community that says it want nothing to do with VR
Microsoft does alot of things, listening to their fans is not one of them.
Nobody is asking for it. That’s why. I could care less. Sold my psvr. Never use my quest and honestly wonder why I even bought it.
I never got into VR as well. I rather/love to be on my couch or bed playing video games on my 65 in 4k hdr Samsung Qled.
I'm a huge supporter of VR since day 1 when many people claimed VR was a gimmick back in the Oculus Rift days. The VR market is growing, but still very small. MS doesn't need to be early on the VR front right now, because no one is really demanding it on the Xbox. Ms is not missing out on anything if they wait for the market to grow much larger before deciding to enter. The games that have been out for the last 3 yrs are uninspiring aside from a few gems like HL Alyxx
There’s no money in it. The attachment rates are low, most experiences rely on the same limited mechanics etc. it’s cumbersome to use. I had a psvr and I sold it. I have an oculus quest 2 and I never use it. I also have a Vive for my PC and literally the only time I use that is for the occasional flight simulator flight, but even then it has limitations - whether it being hard to see the many keys you need to use, or feeling around for buttons on the flight controllers etc. I have all this vr stuff and I wouldn’t miss it if it all disappeared tomorrow. The market share is miserable compared to other game markets so nobody wants to risk huge investments on new innovative big budget things. Even the percentage of PlayStation