Oculus Rift available for preorder for $599.99, shipping in March

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

 

Pricey!

[+Asmodai MVC]

I mentioned this in the other post about the free version for Kickstarter backers but yeah, that's pricey.  It's about $100 more than I was expecting and significantly more expensive than $349 DK2.  Maybe they'll sell an unbundled version without the Xbox One controller and games for less for people who already have Xbox One controllers and don't care about those specific games.  Anyway if this is around what the HTC Vive and PS VR cost then VR is probably DOA this round...  maybe the Oculus Rift 2 will be more affordable in a year or two?

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

7 minutes ago, Asmodai said:

I mentioned this in the other post about the free version for Kickstarter backers but yeah, that's pricey.  It's about $100 more than I was expecting and significantly more expensive than $349 DK2.  Maybe they'll sell an unbundled version without the Xbox One controller and games for less for people who already have Xbox One controllers and don't care about those specific games.  Anyway if this is around what the HTC Vive and PS VR cost then VR is probably DOA this round...  maybe the Oculus Rift 2 will be more affordable in a year or two?

I have no doubt the technology is worth it, but for me it would involve also upgrading my PC on top. I have an aging GTX 580.

[FiB3R]

Sooooo tempted, but that is a lot of scratch :'(

[+Asmodai MVC]

Just now, Audioboxer said:

I have no doubt the technology is worth it, but for me it would involve also upgrading my PC on top. I have an aging GTX 580.

I'm not saying I think they are including a huge markup or anything.  I suspect they're selling them for very near cost (maybe even a slight loss) but I just think $599 is way out of the range most people are willing to pay.  Heck I think $599 is out of the range most would pay even if it didn't require any sort of PC upgrade.  It's really a hard sell for people who haven't gotten a chance to try it so they're going to have to set up kiosks or something to try to convince people to spend this much.

 

I was hoping the PS VR would come in at around $250 for the headset only and $300 bundled with the camera and a demo game.  That seemed reasonably in line with DK2 pricing but based off of this pricing that's probably a pipe dream.  I suspect it will be less than the Rift but probably closer to $499 then.  If they did manage to get it out for around $300 though that would be huge because that would make the total price of a new PS4 and PS VR about the same as the Rift (excluding the PC required to run it.)

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

2 minutes ago, Asmodai said:

I'm not saying I think they are including a huge markup or anything.  I suspect they're selling them for very near cost (maybe even a slight loss) but I just think $599 is way out of the range most people are willing to pay.  Heck I think $599 is out of the range most would pay even if it didn't require any sort of PC upgrade.  It's really a hard sell for people who haven't gotten a chance to try it so they're going to have to set up kiosks or something to try to convince people to spend this much.

 

I was hoping the PS VR would come in at around $250 for the headset only and $300 bundled with the camera and a demo game.  That seemed reasonably in line with DK2 pricing but based off of this pricing that's probably a pipe dream.  I suspect it will be less than the Rift but probably closer to $499 then.  If they did manage to get it out for around $300 though that would be huge because that would make the total price of a new PS4 and PS VR about the same as the Rift (excluding the PC required to run it.)

It's not as powerful as the occulus and Sony can afford to take a little hit to be made up via software sales. This has to be sold at some sort of profit, or around break even. I'm hoping $349 tops for Sony, but $299 would be ideal.

 

Either way this will take a little pressure off of Sony, and sadly might make them go $399 which is too much IMO.

[FiB3R]

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/247607504/teslasuit-feel-what-you-play

 

The future is expensive

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

Damn. Damn. I thought there would be no doubts at all I would be in with VR on Day 1, but now I have some doubts. I absolutely would need to build a new PC to get on board, and if I am going to build a new PC specifically with VR in mind, I would make sure it handles it extremely well and did not just meet the minimum specs, so for me, to get on board is going to cost realistically around $2250 give or take.

So for once in the past 10 years, I think I am probably going to sit Day 1 out and get in on it a bit later on...

Unless I can convince work there is a possibility we can utilize VR down the road, which actually is not as far fetched as it may initially sound.

Edited January 6, 2016 by DirtyLarry

[imachip]

Yeah I'm out, that's far too expensive unless they put the high price up there for a limited time due to a shortfall in production.

 

I've purchased a DK2 kit from them, it would be more ideal if they offered a discount (don't expect to get it free like the Kickstarters), but some reduction in that large retail price would be appreciated.

 

I'm sure they'll be some early adopters but I can see this frighten VR games companies as it'll be even more niche than they expected...

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

1 minute ago, imachip said:

Yeah I'm out, that's far too expensive unless they put the high price up there for a limited time due to a shortfall in production.

 

I've purchased a DK2 kit from them, it would be more ideal if they offered a discount (don't expect to get it free like the Kickstarters), but some reduction in that large retail price would be appreciated.

 

I'm sure they'll be some early adopters but I can see this frighten VR games companies as it'll be even more niche than they expected...

If Sony can come in a decent bit lower then you wouldn't need to worry much. Console titles would scale to perform much better on a PC quite easily and porting costs wouldn't be much.

 

I still think this will sell quite well at this price, there's enough well off PC gamers to throw their cash at it  Considering the most involved PC gamers probably have rigs worth thousands as it is.

[+Asmodai MVC]

8 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

It's not as powerful as the occulus and Sony can afford to take a little hit to be made up via software sales. This has to be sold at some sort of profit, or around break even. I'm hoping $349 tops for Sony, but $299 would be ideal.

The PlayStation VR headset is not that different from the Rift headset in power.  The Rift has a 2160x1200 OLED display that targets 90Hz.  The PlayStation VR has a 1920x1080 OLED display that targets 120Hz (but supports 90Hz as well, this was added late in development to help devs port 90Hz Rift games to the PlayStation VR).

 

The big difference between the Rift and PlayStation VR isn't how powerful the headsets are, it's how powerful the device that drives them is.  The PC driving the Rift is significantly more powerful than the PS4 driving the PlayStation VR... this shouldn't effect headset price though.  Additionally the PS VR has a splitter box that processes the signal produced by the PS4 for the headset and converts it to something presentable on the TV at the same time.  That's something Oculus doesn't have to do at all and does effect the cost of the PS VR.

 

Sony overall is struggling financially, they can't afford to take hardly any loss at all as a company.  Oculus is owned by Facebook now who is far more financially capable of absorbing loss than Sony is.  I'd agree with you if Oculus was independent, as a little start-up they couldn't afford to take a heavy hardware loss but Facebook/Oculus is an entirely different beast.

[+Asmodai MVC]

10 minutes ago, imachip said:

Yeah I'm out, that's far too expensive unless they put the high price up there for a limited time due to a shortfall in production.

 

I've purchased a DK2 kit from them, it would be more ideal if they offered a discount (don't expect to get it free like the Kickstarters), but some reduction in that large retail price would be appreciated.

 

I'm sure they'll be some early adopters but I can see this frighten VR games companies as it'll be even more niche than they expected...

I don't think it would be a horrible idea if they let DK2 owners "trade in" their DK2 for something like $200 credit toward the Consumer Rift.  Just out of curiosity would you, as a DK2 owner, take advantage of something like that or is that a no go for you.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

14 minutes ago, Asmodai said:

The PlayStation VR headset is not that different from the Rift headset in power.  The Rift has a 2160x1200 OLED display that targets 90Hz.  The PlayStation VR has a 1920x1080 OLED display that targets 120Hz (but supports 90Hz as well, this was added late in development to help devs port 90Hz Rift games to the PlayStation VR).

 

The big difference between the Rift and PlayStation VR isn't how powerful the headsets are, it's how powerful the device that drives them is.  The PC driving the Rift is significantly more powerful than the PS4 driving the PlayStation VR... this shouldn't effect headset price though.  Additionally the PS VR has a splitter box that processes the signal produced by the PS4 for the headset and converts it to something presentable on the TV at the same time.  That's something Oculus doesn't have to do at all and does effect the cost of the PS VR.

 

Sony overall is struggling financially, they can't afford to take hardly any loss at all as a company.  Oculus is owned by Facebook now who is far more financially capable of absorbing loss than Sony is.  I'd agree with you if Oculus was independent, as a little start-up they couldn't afford to take a heavy hardware loss but Facebook/Oculus is an entirely different beast.

From this pricing through it's clear Occulus/FB didn't want to take a loss, even if they hypothetically could.

 

Sony's finances have been much better as of late, I still think people think we're in the PS3 era. The Playstation branch anyway, IIRC it's been in the black since 2014. If the PS branch is allowed to act independently then I don't see why they wouldn't take a small loss on the hardware, if the PS4 and software sales are still as crazy as they are. I'm not talking $899 PS3 to $499 type of loss, like $10~50 if it means hitting a much preferred <=$349 price point.

 

Although with PSVR you're going to need the camera and move controllers, so whatever price point Sony put the headset at, it's not going to be cheap overall. It's just going to be suicide if they go near this pricing, as why get the poorer experience if there's not much in it?

[roosevelt]

I own the DK2 and VR experience is quite fun in all kinds of areas. However, I don't see myself shelling out $600 bucks as a gift just yet :P... 

 

The graphics are still not that good. The images appear grainy and needs major improvement.

 

If the graphics were true 1080p or 4K... I can easily shell out $600 bucks but just not yet.

[imachip]

6 minutes ago, Asmodai said:

I don't think it would be a horrible idea if they let DK2 owners "trade in" their DK2 for something like $200 credit toward the Consumer Rift.  Just out of curiosity would you, as a DK2 owner, take advantage of something like that or is that a no go for you.

Yes I would, as the DK2 becomes essentially obsolete.  If you're developing games for the rift (not me personally but their purpose), you would want to ensure that they work with consumer grade hardware.  I would of thought some sort of offer to current owners would be a 'no brainer' as you'd want to encourage further development of software titles to entice consumers to buy.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Palmer is getting some flak over this

 

I guess they're only shipping out of warehouses in the US, and not shipping units from global warehouses to help other countries. Pricey!

 

On the note of pricing, really wondering how much Vive is going to cost now. Isn't it even more high end?

[FiB3R]

Ouch!

[+Asmodai MVC]

3 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

On the note of pricing, really wondering how much Vive is going to cost now. Isn't it even more high end?

Not as far as the image.  Both are 2160x1200 OLED displays targeting 90Hz.  The biggest hardware difference is in the way they detect player motion/positioning.  Oculus uses a camera, sort of (but not exactly) like PlayStation VR.  Vive uses towers and sensors in a more advanced mechanic that would work with multiple headsets using a single set of towers as well as towers all throughout the house allowing you to move around more.  I personally don't think it has much advantage for home use but it's really cool tech and I could totally see it being adopted for gaming centers like how we have paintball or laser tag now.... just with VR. 

 

The other big difference is of course API.  Oculus has their own and Vive is using SteamVR.  If this stuff takes off you can expect other companies besides HTC to release SteamVR headsets (like maybe LG, Asus, etc.) as the technology actually belongs to Valve not HTC.  HTC is just making the first device much like they made the first Google Nexus device for Android.

[Vandalsquad]

6 hours ago, Audioboxer said:

Palmer is getting some flak over this

 

I guess they're only shipping out of warehouses in the US, and not shipping units from global warehouses to help other countries. Pricey!

 

On the note of pricing, really wondering how much Vive is going to cost now. Isn't it even more high end?

 

Confirmed at over $1,100 including shipping to Australia  Then since it's over $1,000 tax free threshold add another 10% at customs. DOA gimmic atm here.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

12 hours ago, Vandalsquad said:

 

Confirmed at over $1,100 including shipping to Australia  Then since it's over $1,000 tax free threshold add another 10% at customs. DOA gimmic atm here.

Ouch.

 

I don't think VR is a gimmick, but these prices are hard to swallow for something that is impressive technically, but far from proven in how rich and impressive the games will ultimately end up being.

 

I want to buy into VR, but I really don't want to be an early adopter at these prices.

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

After giving it some more thought, I am in. I need a new PC anyway. I really want to experience Adr1ft. I believe I will place my preorder later today, it is now saying expected ship date is June. That gives me 5 months to build a new PC, so I will wait until the first week of June to get all my new components. Will put aside $400 a month the next 5 months and be fine.

[+Asmodai MVC]

21 hours ago, Audioboxer said:

From this pricing through it's clear Occulus/FB didn't want to take a loss, even if they hypothetically could.

That's not what the Oculus CEO says:

 

 

21 hours ago, Audioboxer said:

 

Sony's finances have been much better as of late, I still think people think we're in the PS3 era. The Playstation branch anyway, IIRC it's been in the black since 2014. If the PS branch is allowed to act independently then I don't see why they wouldn't take a small loss on the hardware, if the PS4 and software sales are still as crazy as they are. I'm not talking $899 PS3 to $499 type of loss, like $10~50 if it means hitting a much preferred <=$349 price point.

I'm not saying they can't take any loss at all.  I'm saying they are less able to absorb a loss than Facebook.  Also the PlayStation branch isn't allowed to act independently because they're losing so much money in other areas they need to take the profit from the PlayStation branch to shore up those loses.  Sony is NOT doing well overall.  They fairly recently sold off their PC business.  Their mobile phone/tablet business is struggling and many alanlysts say they should spin off.  Their camera's and camera optics division is doing well but that's based primarily on the fact they're used by Apple so if Apple ever switches suppliers they're likely in serious trouble there as well.  Their movie and music businesses aren't doing so well either.  PlayStation (and the Apple dependent camera sensors) is pretty much the only part of them that is doing well and if it wasn't for the fact that other divisions were using the PlayStation profit to stay afloat they very well may have gone bankrupt by now.  No one is saying the PlayStation division isn't doing well, but it doesn't get to keep it's profit all to itself as Sony as a whole IS struggling and needs it to say afloat.  PlayStation is doing well but they can't afford to take a huge cut in PlayStation division profit or they won't have enough to shore up their other divisions.

 

 

21 hours ago, Audioboxer said:

 

Although with PSVR you're going to need the camera and move controllers, so whatever price point Sony put the headset at, it's not going to be cheap overall. It's just going to be suicide if they go near this pricing, as why get the poorer experience if there's not much in it?

I don't think you're going to need the Move controllers for PSVR any more than you need the Oculus Touch for the Oculus Rift.  Certain types of games will need them but many won't.  I have no plans to buy the Move controllers out of the gate and doubt they'll be bundled.  The main games I'm looking forward to playing don't require them and just use the gamepad instead (EVE: Valkyrie, DriveClub and/or Gran Turismo Sport, etc.)  I also already have the PlayStation Camera and a gamepad comes with the console so Sony can have a headset only package for PlayStation VR that Oculus doesn't have as people don't already have the camera for it (though they could make a cheaper package without the Xbox One controller and games.)

 

I don't claim to be representative of the PlayStation community but for me personally If the PS VR is $400+ it's DOA.  If it's <$300 then it's a day 1 buy for me.  That $300-$400 range is the gut check area where I'm not sure about.  I have a six figure income though which I doubt most gamers have so I assume I'm likely willing to pay more than the average PS gamer.  Plus I have friends with Oculus Dev kits and have actually used VR so I'm pretty sold on it conseptually at least.  I recognize it's a hard sell for people who haven't experienced it because you can't just show someone pictures or a youtube video and have them really understand what it's like.  It's something that REALLY needs to be experienced.  Whenever PlayStation VR launches Sony is going to need to have demo units for people to try in all the Best Buy's and GameStops in the U.S.

[spaceelf]

1 hour ago, Audioboxer said:

Ouch.

 

I don't think VR is a gimmick, but these prices are hard to swallow for something that is impressive technically, but far from proven in how rich and impressive the games will ultimately end up being.

 

I want to buy into VR, but I really don't want to be an early adopter at these prices.

Yeah at 600 I'd get a hell of a lot more out of upgrading my computer and monitor, heh.

[+Asmodai MVC]

Here's another thing to keep in mind.  The reason Palmer Luckey didn't want to have a console tie-in is because he wants to iterate the tech faster than the console lifecycle.  In other words he wants to release a Rift v2 before the PS5 and Xbox Two come out and not be tied to a 5-10 year product lifecycle.  So odds are good that there will be a Rift v2 in two years or so and as with most PC gamer tech it's a good bet that games that come out after that won't support the older hardware anymore.

 

So you're $600 investment in VR may very well become obsolete in 2 years or so when the next version comes out.  I'd be much more willing to may $600 if I KNEW it would be good for 5+ years but by their own admission they intend to iterate quickly.  Now it's not like the games that come out for the Rift v1 are going to stop working when the Rift v2 comes out and I'm sure smaller devs and indies will continue to target v1 even after the v2 but the premier VR titles (I hesitate to say AAA because I don't think the user base will be large enough for there to be any truly AAA titles) are likely to target the latest and greatest hardware.

[+Asmodai MVC]

There's an interesting story on eurogamer with some quotes from Palmer about the price (including the tweet I already embedded above)

They seem to be sourced largely from Reddit but I can't go directly to the source right now as Reddit is blocked where I work.

 

Some interesting quotes though:

 

First about the bundle's effect on the price:

Quote

The Xbox controller costs us almost nothing to bundle, and people can easily resell it for profit,

...

A lot of people wish we would sell a bundle without 'useless extras' like high-end audio, a carrying case, the bundled games, etc, but those just don't significantly impact the cost.

Then he goes on to try to justify the cost:

Quote

It is expensive, but for the $599 you spend, you get a lot more than spending $599 on pretty much any other consumer electronics devices - phones that cost $599 cost a fraction of that to make, same with mid-range TVs that cost $599. There are a lot of mainstream devices in that price-range, so as you have said, our failing was in communication, not just price.

This completely ignores the fact that when you buy a phone or a mid-range TV you KNOW you're going to use it a lot.  They're not new technologies whose future is uncertain.  TVs in particular will likely be used for many years.  Phones maybe not so much as people do tend to upgrade them fairly often but in the U.S. at least the majority of them are not bought outright.  Historically they've been subsidized by the carrier for around $200 up front and while that practice is going away now it's being replaced by what is effectively a 0% interest 2 year loan.  So again the majority of people aren't just dropping $599 all at once for a cell phone and they are pretty darn certain it's going to get a great deal of use... the Rift not so much.  Also the $600 TV and Smart Phone is the core device not just an IO device.  They don't require at $1000+ PC to drive them as the Rift does.  Maybe the Rift IS a great deal at $600 but these comparisons he's making are absurd.