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

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

The cost doesn't need justified in the sense that it is expensive tech and worth what it sells for. It's about how justifiable the end user feels putting out that kind of money on a fledgling experience.

 

I don't see the point in comparing VR to phones/other gadgets/PC parts, etc. Many people who can afford it may simply wage that the first adopter risk isn't worth it at the current entry price. Smartphones are pricey but we use them daily 365 days a year so the brain can justify the expense for the use we get out of them. Same goes for integral and expensive PC components like graphics cards. All games need it on your PC, not just one type/one experience (which VR caters for ~ it's a unique experience that requires unique titles).

 

Not everyone will feel that for VR till it matures in development, and when that starts to happen prices will be lower anyway.

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

Done.
My only regret is not doing it when it went up. Time to start putting my money aside to build my new PC.

[+Asmodai MVC]

Here's an interesting quote:

Quote

Luckey: Gamers are not known to be the most affluent population of people. If something’s even $600, it doesn’t matter how good it is, how great of an experience it is — if they just can’t afford it, then it really might as well not exist. We’re going for the mainstream, but time will tell what the market is.

That's from an interview with All Things D in 2013.

[+Random Stranger Subscriber¹]

People make mistakes all the time. This mistake is gonna cost the though...

i would rathet spend $600 on new monitor, video card or other important stuff.the new tech is not worth my $600 us. I will wait the wearable 3d to become mainstream (if)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

16 hours ago, E.worm Jimmy said:

People make mistakes all the time. This mistake is gonna cost the though...

i would rathet spend $600 on new monitor, video card or other important stuff.the new tech is not worth my $600 us. I will wait the wearable 3d to become mainstream (if)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You make it sound life or death. LOL What is it going to cost people besides $600?
I am not downplaying the value of money, it took me over 24 hours to decide to get it because of the price, but everything I have read points to this is the next phase of gaming. The one and only thing I can see getting in the way is if I am somehow sensitive to it. If I am, I sell it on eBay for a $100 loss and be done with it.
If I am not sensitive and I get to enjoy it, I will get to check out Virtual F**cking Reality. This has been a dream of mine since I first saw The Lawnmower man when I was 17 in 1992.

[+Random Stranger Subscriber¹]

1 hour ago, DirtyLarry said:

You make it sound life or death. LOL What is it going to cost people besides $600?
I am not downplaying the value of money, it took me over 24 hours to decide to get it because of the price, but everything I have read points to this is the next phase of gaming. The one and only thing I can see getting in the way is if I am somehow sensitive to it. If I am, I sell it on eBay for a $100 loss and be done with it.
If I am not sensitive and I get to enjoy it, I will get to check out Virtual F**cking Reality. This has been a dream of mine since I first saw The Lawnmower man when I was 17 in 1992.

fair enough.  i was just pointing out that the higher entry price vs similar (though inferior) tech might have an effect on the speed of adoption and eventual market share.

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

3 minutes ago, E.worm Jimmy said:

fair enough.  i was just pointing out that the higher entry price vs similar (though inferior) tech might have an effect on the speed of adoption and eventual market share.

Ohhh, was your first line referring to Oculus and not consumers? The "people make mistakes all the time. This mistake is going to cost them though?" I thought you were referring to consumers, that is why I opened like I did. If you are talking about Oculus themselves, it makes a lot more sense.
I still do not really agree though. It is new consumer tech. New tech is expensive. The PS3 when it first released was also $600 iirc. It hurt them initially, but once the price dropped and it was more reasonable for everyone else, they wound up being okay after several years. I think it could be the same thing here. Honestly I am not sure price is going to be the deciding factor on if VR is successful or not, I think whether it is a big enough shift in how we experience games that everyone needs it is more important. And only time will tell there. Support by developers is going to be one of the biggest deciding factors. You can have all of the technology in the world, if developers do not make media for it, it will eventually fail.
I have very high hopes for VR myself. I hope they wind up panning out, but will not be completely surprised if they do not.

[+Asmodai MVC]

2 hours ago, DirtyLarry said:

You make it sound life or death. LOL What is it going to cost people besides $600?
I am not downplaying the value of money, it took me over 24 hours to decide to get it because of the price, but everything I have read points to this is the next phase of gaming. The one and only thing I can see getting in the way is if I am somehow sensitive to it. If I am, I sell it on eBay for a $100 loss and be done with it.
If I am not sensitive and I get to enjoy it, I will get to check out Virtual F**cking Reality. This has been a dream of mine since I first saw The Lawnmower man when I was 17 in 1992.

The issue is it was repeatedly pitched as a "mainstream" device.  The people who keep saying what did you expect from new tech must not have been paying much attention to what Palmer Luckey has been saying up until the price was announced.  He's repeatedly talked about how the Rift was going to be a "mainstream" device.  He stated that the commercial version would be similar in price to the DK2, I don't think people would have blinked about a jump from $350 to $400 but $600 is a HUGE jump. He used $600 specifically as an example of an absurd price that "might as well not exist".

 

If he had sold from the get go as an enthusiast device there wouldn't be an issue.  "Mainstream" gamers don't spend $600 on GPUs and your GPU is used by just about every game you play not just a specific subset.  He made people believe he was going to bring VR "to the masses" and then he releases a product that's clearly targeting only high end gaming enthusiasts.  Even people with expensive gaming rigs are surprised the headset costs so much based off of his prior comments.  Many of them, while willing to spend more than that on GPUs, Monitors, etc. don't want to invest that much on something that may well flop and die as a fad.  Especially when they were led to believe it would cost about half what it does.

[+Random Stranger Subscriber¹]

7 minutes ago, Asmodai said:

The issue is it was repeatedly pitched as a "mainstream" device.  The people who keep saying what did you expect from new tech must not have been paying much attention to what Palmer Luckey has been saying up until the price was announced.  He's repeatedly talked about how the Rift was going to be a "mainstream" device.  He stated that the commercial version would be similar in price to the DK2, I don't think people would have blinked about a jump from $350 to $400 but $600 is a HUGE jump. He used $600 specifically as an example of an absurd price that "might as well not exist".

 

If he had sold from the get go as an enthusiast device there wouldn't be an issue.  "Mainstream" gamers don't spend $600 on GPUs and your GPU is used by just about every game you play not just a specific subset.  He made people believe he was going to bring VR "to the masses" and then he releases a product that's clearly targeting only high end gaming enthusiasts.  Even people with expensive gaming rigs are surprised the headset costs so much based off of his prior comments.  Many of them, while willing to spend more than that on GPUs, Monitors, etc. don't want to invest that much on something that may well flop and die as a fad.  Especially when they were led to believe it would cost about half what it does.


EXACTLY :)

 

 

 

[+Asmodai MVC]

Amazon Canada accidentally leaked a price for the PlayStation VR and it's not good.  The price they listed before pulling it was $1,125.35 CAD which is about $800 USD.

The price has since been pulled and Sony has come out to say: “This was an error by Amazon, we haven’t announced price for PlayStation VR.”

 

If this turns out to be true though then I can't see how VR is going to be anything but a tiny fringe this year or this console generation.  I hope it's just flat out wrong or maybe it's the price of a bundle that includes the actual PS4 ($350) + PlayStation Camera ($60) + VR Headset ($400)... maybe even PlayStation Move controllers and/or game(s) as well.

 

It's not looking good for VR this year right now though that's for sure.

 

Source

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

3 hours ago, Asmodai said:

The issue is it was repeatedly pitched as a "mainstream" device.  The people who keep saying what did you expect from new tech must not have been paying much attention to what Palmer Luckey has been saying up until the price was announced.  He's repeatedly talked about how the Rift was going to be a "mainstream" device.  He stated that the commercial version would be similar in price to the DK2, I don't think people would have blinked about a jump from $350 to $400 but $600 is a HUGE jump. He used $600 specifically as an example of an absurd price that "might as well not exist".

 

If he had sold from the get go as an enthusiast device there wouldn't be an issue.  "Mainstream" gamers don't spend $600 on GPUs and your GPU is used by just about every game you play not just a specific subset.  He made people believe he was going to bring VR "to the masses" and then he releases a product that's clearly targeting only high end gaming enthusiasts.  Even people with expensive gaming rigs are surprised the headset costs so much based off of his prior comments.  Many of them, while willing to spend more than that on GPUs, Monitors, etc. don't want to invest that much on something that may well flop and die as a fad.  Especially when they were led to believe it would cost about half what it does.

Your right. I have not paid any attention at all to what he was saying. I knew it was introduced via a Kickstarter campaign a couple of years back. Now I know it is almost available. I did not follow anything in between. So I guess anyone that did pay attention can be upset. I did not pay attention, so I am not upset. So it comes down to perspective. Mine is different than yours. I was not following, I really do not see the big deal. Since you were following, it is a big deal.

And make no mistake about it, I feel it is expensive, I never said it was not, however I am still going to take the plunge.

I am not wrong. Neither are you. We just have different perspectives.

[+Asmodai MVC]

7 minutes ago, DirtyLarry said:

Your right. I have not paid any attention at all to what he was saying. I knew it was introduced via a Kickstarter campaign a couple of years back. Now I know it is almost available. I did not follow anything in between. So I guess anyone that did pay attention can be upset. I did not pay attention, so I am not upset. So it comes down to perspective. Mine is different than yours. I was not following, I really do not see the big deal. Since you were following, it is a big deal.

And make no mistake about it, I feel it is expensive, I never said it was not, however I am still going to take the plunge.

I am not wrong. Neither are you. We just have different perspectives.

I've been following this from the very beginning.  I came VERY close to backing the initial kickstarter and while I ultimately decided not to I have friends who did.  I've been to events where the hardware was demoed, played with the kits my friends received, etc.

 

Pretty much everyone I know who has been following this from the start were unpleasantly surprised by the price.  That's not because they were naive but because he outright said things like that quote above which states his opinion that a $600 device "might as well not exist".  He didn't just say that or things like it once, or a handful of times but over and over and over to those who were listening.  That was the meat of their entire PR thrust.  So yeah if you were paying attention you're almost certainly upset right now I mean seriously how do you say a $600 device "might as well not exist" and then launch your product at $599.99... Seriously?

 

Now the internet is full of the people who were paying attention and I would say are rightfully upset about the price being told how they shouldn't be by people who haven't been paying attention at all.  How TVs and Monitors and GPUs cost more than that or Thurstmaster HOTAS setups or whatever as if it was entirely unreasonable to expect a price lower than.  Well people didn't expect that because they just picked some low number out of fantasy land, they expected a low number because the developer told us it would be low.  Now this isn't directed at you in particular DirtyLarry, I think your quote above pretty much nails it on the head.  This is a public forum though so anyone can read it and so my intent here is just to inform those who haven't been paying attention why exactly the people who have been are so upset.  If you're personally willing to spend that much that's great, there is nothing wrong with that.  There seem to be a lot of people out there however who don't seem to even be trying to grasp the perspective of those of us who have actually been paying attention all along though.

 

It's also a domino effect.  Prior to that release price there was a HUGE amount of excitement about this being a big year for VR.  If Rift isn't Mainstream like Luckey had claimed and is indeed just "enthusiest" or niche or whatever you want to call it then it isn't going to have a user base large enough to sustain quality developers.  Small user base = small development budgets and so even if you have the money to buy the hardware you're likely not going to get a ton of high quality experiences... instead you're likely to get VR tacked on to older games and R&D/Proof of concept projects which effectively makes the Rift CV1 (CV = Consumer Version) just DK3 (Developers Kit 3).  Again this wouldn't be so bad and would be perfectly understandable for a new tech if he hadn't spend so much effort making people believe they were developing a much cheaper device that would thereby create a much larger user base and attract much higher games budgets.

 

 

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

28 minutes ago, Asmodai said:

<Snipped>

No I absolutely can see why people who were following it would be upset. I am not happy about the price either, and do realize it is a risk. I say a few posts above developers are going to make or break it ultimately, and if no one owns it, developers will not create for it, so it is definitely a concern I have. FTR there is a slight chance I am going to back out completely and not pick it up at all. Only time will tell that.
I get it though, especially after you explain it.
I am just hoping the paradigm shift is enough to keep it going, but maybe not.
I take risks with technology. Hell, I own a 3DTV and have not used the 3D in over 2 years. Fortunately I am in a position to do so, so I guess you can say on one hand there is ignorance in bliss. On the other hand, I do want it to be successful and realize you need early adopters to make that happen, so I am taking the gamble (probably). Will see if it pays off.

[+Asmodai MVC]

 Wow the pricing speculation has gone nuts on these things.  I hope they're way, way off.

 

First the Rift launches at $599

Then Amazon Canada pulls a listing of PlayStation VR at $800

and the latest news from Taiwan is that the HTC Vive could be as much as $1500.

Source

 

I'm hoping the PlayStation VR and HTC Vive rumors are just plain false but if both do turn out to be true then I can't see how VR is going to be anything major any time soon.  They're not going to get enough sales at those prices to make a market large enough for any serious development efforts to turn a profit.  They'll be relegated to just an extremely tiny niche of hardware enthusiasts and prototype/side-projects for developers.  I've personally used VR and I like the tech but I'm concerned they may very well have priced it right out of the market.  I wasn't sure the general public would have bought in even at say a $400 price point... at these prices it seems to me more likely than ever it will just die as a fad like 3D TV.  Again those last two were just rumors though and I'm really hoping they're WAY, WAY, off.  I don't think Sony has announced when PS VR preorders will start but I guess we'll get the real HTC Vive cost by Feb. 29th when they start taking preorders.