It’s sort of like how YouTube ran at a loss for a long time. The idea is to get ingrained in the market and make up the money later.
Right now Meta has the best VR / AR that is easily accessible. If some new idea or technology catapults VR into a more popular position, then Meta is in a prime position to take advantage.
Will that happen? I don’t know, but Meta seems to think so.
I don’t think the technology is there yet. As long as people need to wear big bulky goggles and headsets it’s not going to take off. Make something that’s about as cumbersome as sunglasses and less than $1000 and there might be mass adoption.
It depends what the tie ratio / attach rate is for the device and whether owners maintain usage of the device or whether it’s a novelty that wears off over time and the device gathers dust.
I agree that the tech isn’t there, but unless we figure out some new physics it’s going to be impossible to put enough battery, computing power, and cooling capacity in something the size of sunglasses. So the tech for VR like we really want is at least 20 years away, if not more.
There are a lot of problems keeping VR from going big and I think Meta’s strategy of cornering the market is one of them. They think if they get all the exclusives they’ll be the next iPhone but I think instead they’re fragmenting an already tiny market which really needs a bunch of impressive experiences (and there still aren’t a ton right now, even after years of VR development). I feel like the reverse would win them more users - they should win on hardware AND software but make their software available for any VR headset to use. Because right now they need to help create a market for VR because there really isn’t one worth cornering yet.
They just announced that they opened up the OS for other manufacturers to use. I know Asus/ROG is supposed to have a headset in the works using the OS.
??? You don’t need a specific room. Quest doesn’t need any beacons or wires.
I don’t like Facebook, never had a Facebook account and refused to buy their VR until they removed the Facebook account requirement 2 years ago.
But the hardware is excellent for the price. Facebook is selling the hardware at a loss and making it up in software sales. So you are hurting Facebook by buying their hardware and using it with Steam.
SteamVR is a software store. It has nothing to do with whether the hardware needs beacons in the room or wires.
You can play SteamVR racing sims at your desk. If it’s a standing game, you push a button and then draw virtual borders on the floor wherever you are to define the play space.
That would be Valve‘s Deckard, I suppose. Would be nice if that would materialize at some point soon.
But even a „windows equivalent“ HorizonOS would be an improvement in the standalone headset space if that meant I could choose between HMD vendors and carry over all my software.
See also: Meta’s recent opening of their vr headset OS to other hardware manufacturers.
They don’t give a shit about profit at this stage as long as they control it and can use it to suppress the development of any kind of competitors.
The index is better overall and I love mine, but I can’t help but feel jealous that someone can just grab their quest, put it on and get into VR immediately. I have to cart my PC downstairs, turn the base stations on, find the index and wire it all up, troubleshoot why Windows has decided to mess up the drivers and now nothing works, and maybe half an hour later finally get into a game or completely give up and try again another time.
The quest gains a lot in portability and ease of setup, and that does result in a lot of other features being sacrificed but to most people the downsides don’t matter as much.
It’s sort of like how YouTube ran at a loss for a long time. The idea is to get ingrained in the market and make up the money later.
Right now Meta has the best VR / AR that is easily accessible. If some new idea or technology catapults VR into a more popular position, then Meta is in a prime position to take advantage.
Will that happen? I don’t know, but Meta seems to think so.
Too bad the company is absolute garbage. I’m not even willing to look at their ‘products’ anymore.
Particularly with articles like this around:
https://observer.com/2024/03/meta-facebook-compete-snapchat-class-action-document/
Yep. I will never use any VR product by Meta. Mark can go zuck himself.
Meta is the only reason I’m staying away from their AR/VR headsets. If it was any other company, I would have jumped in by now.
I don’t think the technology is there yet. As long as people need to wear big bulky goggles and headsets it’s not going to take off. Make something that’s about as cumbersome as sunglasses and less than $1000 and there might be mass adoption.
March 2023 they sold 20M Quests. Half as many as PS5. That counts as “taken off” in my book.
Wow, I’m shocked it’s that high. I’ve never heard of someone using one.
Everyone in my family has one. We play ping pong. It’s cool, you feel like you’re in the room with someone even when they are many miles away.
Having said that, I believe most of the users are minors. Whenever I log into a multilayer game, there are children taking.
Besides ping pong, there’s Best Saber and 3d jigsaw puzzles. Outside of that, I haven’t really had much fun outside of occasional shooting / archery.
It sucks that it’s owned by Facebook of course. I deleted my Facebook over 10 years ago now. I had to set it up with my girlfriend’s Facebook account.
This reads like a joke. 50 years of technological development and people are just playing hi-tech pong.
I bought vr for simracing…I use vr for Beat Saber
I play putt-putt with my sister and we’re both in our fifties.
Daily active users are a much better indicator of success.
Halo infinite had a peak player count if 272,000. Now it sees DAU of only 3,000
It depends what the tie ratio / attach rate is for the device and whether owners maintain usage of the device or whether it’s a novelty that wears off over time and the device gathers dust.
VR is already great today, and lots of us are enjoying it. I know several people with VR systems.
I agree that the tech isn’t there, but unless we figure out some new physics it’s going to be impossible to put enough battery, computing power, and cooling capacity in something the size of sunglasses. So the tech for VR like we really want is at least 20 years away, if not more.
Idk man, if you let go of the requirement of wireless and standalone, we’re already there.
https://www.bigscreenvr.com/
So I’m expecting there to be a lot more headsets like that next gen.
I’m waiting for more Bigscreen Beyond class weight headsets. 127 grams.
But it’s tethered and the headset itself is ~1000, and you need the stations and controllers as well.
There are a lot of problems keeping VR from going big and I think Meta’s strategy of cornering the market is one of them. They think if they get all the exclusives they’ll be the next iPhone but I think instead they’re fragmenting an already tiny market which really needs a bunch of impressive experiences (and there still aren’t a ton right now, even after years of VR development). I feel like the reverse would win them more users - they should win on hardware AND software but make their software available for any VR headset to use. Because right now they need to help create a market for VR because there really isn’t one worth cornering yet.
They just announced that they opened up the OS for other manufacturers to use. I know Asus/ROG is supposed to have a headset in the works using the OS.
So they want to be the Microcrap of the VR world?
Nah I’m good, let me know when we get a Linux of the VR world
Steam VR not good enough for ya?
Its probably great but when you need to set up a specific room, it makes it inaccessible for most people
??? You don’t need a specific room. Quest doesn’t need any beacons or wires.
I don’t like Facebook, never had a Facebook account and refused to buy their VR until they removed the Facebook account requirement 2 years ago.
But the hardware is excellent for the price. Facebook is selling the hardware at a loss and making it up in software sales. So you are hurting Facebook by buying their hardware and using it with Steam.
Sorry, was referring to Valve Index. Did not realize you can use SteamVR on on the Quest
Meta Horizon OS is running on Linux under the hood lol
That is not what I was referring to. Meta loves to invade our privacy like Microcrap
Sadly SteamVR needs a large open space to work effectively which makes it inaccessible to the vast majority.
SteamVR is a software store. It has nothing to do with whether the hardware needs beacons in the room or wires.
You can play SteamVR racing sims at your desk. If it’s a standing game, you push a button and then draw virtual borders on the floor wherever you are to define the play space.
That would be Valve‘s Deckard, I suppose. Would be nice if that would materialize at some point soon.
But even a „windows equivalent“ HorizonOS would be an improvement in the standalone headset space if that meant I could choose between HMD vendors and carry over all my software.
See also: Meta’s recent opening of their vr headset OS to other hardware manufacturers.
They don’t give a shit about profit at this stage as long as they control it and can use it to suppress the development of any kind of competitors.
YouTube still runs at a loss
Valve index better
The index is better overall and I love mine, but I can’t help but feel jealous that someone can just grab their quest, put it on and get into VR immediately. I have to cart my PC downstairs, turn the base stations on, find the index and wire it all up, troubleshoot why Windows has decided to mess up the drivers and now nothing works, and maybe half an hour later finally get into a game or completely give up and try again another time.
The quest gains a lot in portability and ease of setup, and that does result in a lot of other features being sacrificed but to most people the downsides don’t matter as much.
Its not just YouTube. Pleant of companies lose money on their product Loss leader