PlayStation VR will be priced "not to make money from it " - Shuhei Yoshida

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

PlayStation VR does feel the most 'living room-ready' of the competing headsets, with Oculus and Vive a bit more specialist. Do you think Sony's history in that space is its biggest advantage?

SY: "We are bringing a console mentality and also making developers test it fully before using their content. We tend to price hardware not to make money from it but to get as many install base so that content can be sold. This is the same kind of thinking in the way we are approaching PlayStation VR.

 

Source: http://www.digitalspy.com/gaming/interviews/a677156/playstation-vr-chief-virtual-reality-games-need-their-own-rating-system/

Please be priced sensibly (take a loss Sony...). I'd like to see pricing announced in December at PSX.

[+Asmodai MVC]

 

Source: http://www.digitalspy.com/gaming/interviews/a677156/playstation-vr-chief-virtual-reality-games-need-their-own-rating-system/

Please be priced sensibly (take a loss Sony...). I'd like to see pricing announced in December at PSX.

He's stated that in the past as well.  I'm confident Sony will price it as low as they can.  I think they understand they need to make it as low as possible to build a user base and I'm sure even they wish they could price it to take a decent loss on the initial hardware the problem is that Sony overall is not doing well financially (just made a profit this quarter though!) so they really can't afford to sell it too much below cost even if they do want to.  Also I don't think the hardware is cheap, period.  So even priced at as slight loss it will likely come in in the $200-$400 range (for just the headset, not counting pack in games, the required camera, possibly move controllers, etc.)  I'm just not sure "as low as they can" will line up with what people are willing to pay.  I'm excited about it personally but it needs to gain traction with the mainstream to be a success and I'm certainly not representative of the mainstream. (I was sure the Wii would flop and can't stand motion gaming personally -Wii, Move, or Kinect- but Nintendo seemed to do pretty well for themselves with that... so who knows.)

[compl3x]

I'm still not convinced people want to put something on their head which obscures their vision and makes them deaf to everything around them (through headphones). I really dig this from a tech stand point. I mean, we are living in the future promised by sci-fi movies from the 80s but there are some real hurdles to overcome before everyone is enjoying VR in their lounge room.

I think there is the fundamental evolutionary and psychological obstacle of having our vision and hearing deprived form us. It really is a weird and anxiety-inducing thing to know you can't see or hear anything around you. There mightn't be any danger, but the human brain isn't hard-wired to be entirely rational.

Another problem is that gamers have already made it clear that when they are playing a game they don't want to be moving around using unfamiliar or motion inputs. Even though the Wii was a runaway success, it made its mark more as a novelty with motion controls than as a revolution in user input. If you think I am wrong, think about how many other consoles or system use that type of input? Sony and MS thought they might make up some ground by introducing their own systems, both of which are arguably superior, yet have all but completely abandoned them in the latest gen.

I watch eagerly to see how this all turns out. But my scepticism is in high-gear. I suggest yours should be too.

 

[President Devil]

I'm still not convinced people want to put something on their head which obscures their vision and makes them deaf to everything around them (through headphones). I really dig this from a tech stand point. I mean, we are living in the future promised by sci-fi movies from the 80s but there are some real hurdles to overcome before everyone is enjoying VR in their lounge room.

I think there is the fundamental evolutionary and psychological obstacle of having our vision and hearing deprived form us. It really is a weird and anxiety-inducing thing to know you can't see or hear anything around you. There mightn't be any danger, but the human brain isn't hard-wired to be entirely rational.

Another problem is that gamers have already made it clear that when they are playing a game they don't want to be moving around using unfamiliar or motion inputs. Even though the Wii was a runaway success, it made its mark more as a novelty with motion controls than as a revolution in user input. If you think I am wrong, think about how many other consoles or system use that type of input? Sony and MS thought they might make up some ground by introducing their own systems, both of which are arguably superior, yet have all but completely abandoned them in the latest gen.

I watch eagerly to see how this all turns out. But my scepticism is in high-gear. I suggest yours should be too.

 

This has failure written all over it. It's essentially the most inferior headset powered by weak console hardware. It even needs a breakout box for additional processing.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

This has failure written all over it. It's essentially the most inferior headset powered by weak console hardware. It even needs a breakout box for additional processing.

 

That's hardly a negative, as it makes things better

As for it being inferior to the PC headsets, duh, but if you haven't spent a lot of money on a PC, what are your other lower cost alternatives? Why does the market only need the highest and most expensive specs? If that were the case the PC only console haters would be right, and consoles wouldn't be selling like crazy like they are. But they are and the PC elitists continue to have to eat crow every time they open their mouths.

[BinaryData]

Hmm.. This is quite interesting.. I'll have to do a bit more research on this. 

[President Devil]

Fancy marketing won't save it or maybe it will as the Sony fanbase eats it up like candy already and that's why you need those slides. All I know is from my own experience and friends who I've been with to expos that the PS VR is the least impressive piece of kit in a business that is going to rapidly evolve specification wise in a very short timespace. The CV1 is already much better display wise and there's already a 4K version in development. Yes, it'll more expensive than Morpheus, but seeing this will do nothing more than tech demos because of the poor hardware powering it IMO this will damage VR more than do it good, but if people want to spend a large amount of money on a piece of kit that only works with that weak hardware, then by all means be my guest.

[+Asmodai MVC]

This has failure written all over it. It's essentially the most inferior headset powered by weak console hardware. It even needs a breakout box for additional processing.

I have no idea if it will be a failure or not but if it is I seriously doubt it will be because it's "the most inferior headset" or powered by "weak console hardware".  I've seen several reviews that prefer it to the HTC Vive because the Vive has a more limited field of view and both Vive and Oculus strap the headset on your face while Sony suspends it from a solid "headband" which is far more comfortable.  The Vive is the best on motion tracking though but I really don't see people clearing their living room so they can move all around with their vision and hearing completely blocked.  Personally I'm more interested in experiences like DriveClub, Gran Turismo, EVE: Valkyrie, etc. where you are seated the entire time and just look around via head tracking and use the controller.  It will be interesting to see how things turn out though.  Also both the Vive and the Oculus are focused on a 90fps target while PlayStation.VR targets 120Hz (they did add support for 90Hz late in the dev cycle to make it easier for Vive and Oculus developers to port their games to PS.VR.)  No doubt PS.VR graphics at 120Hz are going to look worse than Vive/Oculus graphics at 90Hz though but PS4 graphics look significantly worse than PC graphics yet the PS4 seems to be selling just fine.  Also many people are playing around with VR with things like Google Cardboard and Samsung's Gear VR which PlayStation.VR is significantly better than so it's far from "the most inferior headset".

PlayStation.VR is likely to be the most affordable and thus if VR takes off at all in the mainstream (which is a HUGE unknown at this point) then it's most likely to be with PlayStation.VR not Vive or the Rift.  If it does fail (and it certainly might) I suspect it will be because it's too expensive (even if it is the cheaper than the others) or for reasons similar to what compl3x pointed out that are common to all VR (people not liking the blocked vision/hearing, moving around, etc.) and not the console or headset specs.

Finally the whole "needs a breakout box for additional processing" is false.  It does NEED that.  The PS4 provides everything the headset requires.  As such Sony could have made it so the headset plugged directly into the HDMI out of the PS4 and it would have worked fine.  But that would mean you'd have to keep plugging in and unplugging your VR headset and TV since there is only one HDMI out on the PS4.  So Sony created a breakout box so you can plug it into your PS4 and then plug in BOTH your VR headset and TV at the same time.  Again they could have just stopped there and put not processing in the box and have it just a dumb switch and that would have worked fine as well but that would mean when someone was playing a VR game the TV would just be blank as the PS4 output would be going only to the headset.  Instead they decided to have BOTH the headset and TV work at the same time.  The issue there is that VR games don't output a single image.  The headset requires two images (one for each eye) side by side.  So Sony included some processing on the box, NOT to do ANYTHING for the VR but to stitch together the two VR images into a single image and do some other things to output the video to a TV in a format it can understand.  So yes the box does processing but it's not for VR, it's to un-VR the output the PS4 is making so that it can be sent to the TV as well.  This allows people in the room to watch what the VR player is doing and even allows for the possibility of local async multiplayer where one person uses VR and the others in the room play with them using the TV.

[President Devil]

Yes, It DOES NEED that, correctly put, as Audioboxer's slides show.

Let's just wait and see. I have a feeling most people are going to feel disillusioned by this.

[+Asmodai MVC]

Yes, It DOES NEED that, correctly put, as Audioboxer's slides show.

Let's just wait and see. I have a feeling most people are going to feel disillusioned by this.

ROFL, talk about a typo.  It does NOT need the breakout box for just the VR headset output.  Audioboxer's slides aren't specific to what the breakout box does so doesn't in any way show how it's needed for the PS4 to do VR, they are general slides on PS.VR and talk about a lot of things including controllers and the OLED screen.  The topic covered most in those slides is reprojection which is done on the PS4 not the breakout box.  The reprojection is done via "a lightweight async compute job" (3rd slide, 3rd bullet) which takes advantage of the PS4s "Asynchronous Compute Queues" (Slide 1, check mark 3).

 

[President Devil]

Nothing I've said on that matter is wrong. Even if it's only for splitting the video feeds (which it isn't as it also does the spatial audio), that is still additional processing that requires this box to be present in order to use the PSVR.

[Hedon]

Analysts predict $400-$600:

 

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/ps4s-playstation-vr-headset-to-cost-400-600-report/1100-6433594/

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Occulus pricing would be a mistake, anything over an outright disaster. $400 is the extreme top end. It's going to look daft if VR is priced higher than the actual PS4. It really has to be $349 or less.

[HawkMan]

54 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

Occulus pricing would be a mistake, anything over an outright disaster. kr3,541.02 ($400) is the extreme top end. It's going to look daft if VR is priced higher than the actual PS4. It really has to be kr3,089.54 ($349) or less.

I don't think Sony can afford to sell it at 400. They have way to much to make up for yet. 

[MikeChipshop Member]

Not sure if dreamed this or not, but i'm sure i saw it outed at $800!

Also @Asmodaii'm almost certain it 100% requires the breakout box for extra processing, either way, it's a nifty way of overcoming the console limitations.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

3 hours ago, MikeChipshop said:

Not sure if dreamed this or not, but i'm sure i saw it outed at $800!

Also @Asmodaii'm almost certain it 100% requires the breakout box for extra processing, either way, it's a nifty way of overcoming the console limitations.

Not a chance it's $800. That was pulled. Think it was on Amazon. IF anything, it might be a PS4 and PSVR bundle.

 

Think seriously guys, the inferior tech from Sony is not going to cost $200 more than the Occulus. A PSVR headset is simply not going to cost $800 to make.

[MikeChipshop Member]

2 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

Not a chance it's $800. That was pulled. Think it was on Amazon. IF anything, it might be a PS4 and PSVR bundle.

 

Think seriously guys, the inferior tech from Sony is not going to cost $200 more than the Occulus. A PSVR headset is simply not going to cost $800 to make.

Yeah, to be honest, i wasn't saying i believe it, just that i'd read that somewhere. The only way i ever imagine it coming up as that much, would be if there was a fair amount of power stuck in to that breakout box. Just got to play the waiting game for an official price announcement.

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

My guess is it will be $400. Then there will be a bundle around $600 that includes the camera and Move controllers.
I just cannot see it being more than the console* itself (*when it first launched).

I preordered Oculus already, and I will pick this up as well if it is the price range I believe it is going to be. I can dust off my Move controllers from the PS3, and I already own the camera.

[HawkMan]

22 hours ago, Audioboxer said:

Not a chance it's kr7,130.84 ($800.). That was pulled. Think it was on Amazon. IF anything, it might be a PS4 and PSVR bundle.

 

Think seriously guys, the inferior tech from Sony is not going to cost kr1,782.71 ($200) more than the Occulus. A PSVR headset is simply not going to cost kr7,130.84 ($800) to make.

I believe the Amazon listing was somewhere around 1000-1200 actually. 

[HawkMan]

23 minutes ago, DirtyLarry said:

My guess is it will be kr3,565.42 ($400.). Then there will be a bundle around kr5,348.13 ($600) that includes the camera and Move controllers.
I just cannot see it being more than the console* itself (*when it first launched).

I preordered Oculus already, and I will pick this up as well if it is the price range I believe it is going to be. I can dust off my Move controllers from the PS3, and I already own the camera.

People like you who have controllers and the camera, might be able to get it cheaper, but for most people you're probably looking at a full package price with controllers and camera though. 

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

3 hours ago, HawkMan said:

People like you who have controllers and the camera, might be able to get it cheaper, but for most people you're probably looking at a full package price with controllers and camera though. 

I don't have a camera  But yes controllers and camera will add more to the overall cost.

[+Asmodai MVC]

There are multiple news sites currently reporting the PS VR Headset by itself will cost $299.

They aren't the most well known sites however (by me anyway) and they all may just be echoing the same rumor but at least that gives hope for a more reasonable price.

There are also rumors of what essentially sounds like last gens Move bundle with upgraded PS4 camera at $129 (Move controller, Camera, and VR game... no headset).

Or a bundle with the headset and Camera and game for $350.

 

Again I'm wouldn't hold my breath on that and none of the sources I feel are reliable enough to quote directly but if you google PS VR in the last week or so you'll see multiple hits for the $299 pricing.

 

At least these rumors are in the sub $400 range though... if they pan out I'll likely pick up the PS VR headset as soon as it's available.  I can do $299 and I already have the camera and don't care about Move initially since the first games I want to play don't use it. (Most notably Eve: Valkyrie which just uses the standard gamepad).

 

[HawkMan]

31 minutes ago, Asmodai said:

There are multiple news sites currently reporting the PS VR Headset by itself will cost kr2,573.41 ($299.).

They aren't the most well known sites however (by me anyway) and they all may just be echoing the same rumor but at least that gives hope for a more reasonable price.

There are also rumors of what essentially sounds like last gens Move bundle with upgraded PS4 camera at kr1,110.27 ($129) (Move controller, Camera, and VR game... no headset).

Or a bundle with the headset and Camera and game for kr3,012.35 ($350.).

 

Again I'm wouldn't hold my breath on that and none of the sources I feel are reliable enough to quote directly but if you google PS VR in the last week or so you'll see multiple hits for the kr2,573.41 ($299) pricing.

 

At least these rumors are in the sub kr3,442.68 ($400) range though... if they pan out I'll likely pick up the PS VR headset as soon as it's available.  I can do kr2,573.41 ($299) and I already have the camera and don't care about Move initially since the first games I want to play don't use it. (Most notably Eve: Valkyrie which just uses the standard gamepad).

 

Sounds like fantasy prices. Like "wow this is what we want", but in reality fairly unrealistic, especially with Sony's economic status at the moment, while the gaming division is doing well, they can't really at this point in time start throwing away money.and while the hardware is cheaper than that of the competition to some degree, it's not nearly that much cheaper if they're not going to lose a LOT on each sale. 

[+Asmodai MVC]

10 minutes ago, HawkMan said:

Sounds like fantasy prices. Like "wow this is what we want", but in reality fairly unrealistic, especially with Sony's economic status at the moment, while the gaming division is doing well, they can't really at this point in time start throwing away money.and while the hardware is cheaper than that of the competition to some degree, it's not nearly that much cheaper if they're not going to lose a LOT on each sale. 

I'm not convinced it's legit either but I don't think it's quite as impossible as you seem to and here's why:

 

Yes Sony's economic status isn't great but PlayStation is doing great and this is the first generation of console that Sony has sold at a profit at launch.  Historically new consoles are sold at a loss at launch to build an install base and the loss is recouped because platform holders take a cut of every game sold unlike on PC. (plus peripherals like controllers and camera's tend to be sold at a large profit).  If they are really treating it like a new console as they have stated then they may very well take that same outlook and sell the hardware at a loss to get it in as many hands as possible to build a VR ecosystem. (HTC Vive may likewise sell at a slight loss since it's for SteamVR and Steam gets a cut of all software sold on Steam... Oculus doesn't have that luxury, they don't get a cut of the software for the Rift)

 

The Oculus Rift isn't being sold at a loss, it's being sold at a slight profit and it's hardware is more expensive.  Not only is that because it's higher resolution and includes a camera, controller, etc. but Oculus went nuts after DK2 with the Facebook money and got a lot of components custom engineered for the Rift which makes them substantially more expensive, more so than the simple resolution jump might indicate.  Spec wise the PS VR is very similar to Oculus DK2 which cost $350 I believe and that included the camera (which is not included in the $299 PS VR price).  As such selling the headset alone for $299 probably isn't THAT big of a loss.

 

The big unknown for me is how much that splitter box that does the 3D audio processing and TV output processing costs... that's something neither Oculus nor HTC/Valve have to do so it's a cost Sony has that others don't.  Again though I'm not saying I believe those prices... heck maybe it is just wishful thinking on my part... but it's nice to see some sub $400 rumors again instead of people talking numbers in the $400-$600 range which I think will pretty much make PS VR DOA for consumers. (I know it will for me and I have more disposable income then a lot of people).

[HawkMan]

Selling at a loss only makes sense if you expect to make massive software sales that makes up for the loss.

 

do you honestly think that the software sales that would be considered attached to PSVR is big enough to make up for a 100-200 dollar loss ? considering how little sony makes on each licensed title. 

 

also the ODK2 was sold as a developer system. low volume and it was actually sold at a loss, which the final hardware shows. 

 

and as I said before, just because their gaming division is currently doing very well for it, doesn't give them the opportunity to throw money away on this in order to hope kickstart a gaming revolution, when it's a device that is targeted at and will always live in a niche, it might be a "big" niche, but it'll always be a subset of hardcore gamers who go for it. and I don't think FPS games and such will be long for it so all those will fall of, they'd probably fall of pretty quick as they played them anyway, as it makes little sense for FPS games, it's a device for sim gamers.