5 ms·

I was one of the people dooped into believing this was going to happen because I assumed a huge investment from Google meant something and they were so secretiv

I was one of the people dooped into believing this was going to happen because I assumed a huge investment from Google meant something and they were so secretive because it was that good, like Steve Jobs was so secretive. At least we can look at tangible VR at this point but those sales are lagging as well. Overall, I'm bummed out but I still hold onto the hope we'll have 3d holograms coming out of phones or contact lenses that overlay huge arrows on the road for driving directions.

ghaff 10y ago
You have to squint pretty hard to see VR today as any sort of success. It's mostly the province of a gamer niche that's willing to overlook shortcomings, some of which will be inherently hard to overcome, and general lack of content.
- zardo 10y ago
  How is that not a success? They have hundreds of thousands of units out, developers of all sizes working on content, and an enthusiastic (and paying) community of users. That's a pretty good launch for a new consumer tech category.
  - lokedhs 10y ago
    Do you remember the enthusiasm just 6 months to a year ago? Did you see how media was was proclaiming that VR was the next big thing, and I even recall that line repeated on the Motley Fool podcast. Then the devices came out, and you hear nothing anymore. Sure, there are a bunch of people who bought it, but when none of the vendors are even releasing sales figures, you know it's disappointing. With the recent news that Oculus is closing their demo stations because no one is using them suggests that things aren't going too well. VR is probably not as bad as 3D TV in terms of a flop, but I don't think anyone can call it a "success" unless your expectations are very different from that of most people.
    - ghaff 10y ago
      This year's CES was probably the point where a lot of people realized that, whether or not there's a glorious future coming, it's not there today. https://www.cnet.com/news/vr-disappoints-at-ces-2017-lenovo-oculus-htc/ https://www.cnet.com/news/vr-disappoints-at-ces-2017-lenovo-...
    - zardo 10y ago
      If most people buy into the ridiculous hype, then yes, I do have much lower expectations. Or at least, much slower ones. Selling hundreds of thousands of $800 units is $80M in revenue, not a bad start for a new technology starting out in the "consumer goods, luxury entertainment" market.
MegaButts 10y ago
VR sales aren't just lagging, they're bad enough that no company will give official numbers for sales. The current estimates for sales are roughly an order of magnitude less than the previous expectations (admittedly dictated by analysts and media), and there is a lot of obfuscation from companies to make it seem better. They will tout the Samsung Galaxy Gear numbers, but what they won't tell you is how many of those were given away (probably the vast majority) vs how many were sold - and that's at a $100 price point. I really, really want VR to improve and become a commodity in the near future, but most people I talk to think it's dumb even after they try it. I think VR is at least 4 years away from being a serious part of gaming (and that assumes a lot of things go right), and I honestly don't know how many years before it finds other consumer applications.
edblarney 10y ago
It's true. But one 'killer app' could change it all. VR needs it's 'Halo' :)
- AstralStorm 10y ago
  Not strong enough, which is why not everyone owns a console. (compare with phones or even PCs) Something like a spreadsheet or communication would be just the thing.
  - edblarney 10y ago
    Vendors would be perfectly happy to get game console-like penetration, moreover, they would have a viable business and an industry.
- Bartweiss 10y ago
  A lot of people talked about Superhot VR as that leap, and it doesn't seem to have driven many sales for people who didn't have VR already. If anything, I've talked to more people who tried Gear VR and decided it was cool enough to upgrade to a non-terrible VR product. I suppose Superhot could have sufficed without a non-VR alternative, but I rather doubt it.
  - Spazer 10y ago
    The sad thing is Super hot could have been the game to beat on VR, but they partnered with Oculus and released as an Oculus exclusive. This split the market right down the middle with many Vive owners now refusing to buy the game at all even when it does come to the Vive. The worst part? The Oculus version of the game works perfectly on the Vive through ReVive so it's not like they had to do much extra work to get the game working.
- camus2 10y ago
  Resident Evil 7? The gaming press say it's a great experience in VR.
  - 10y ago
maverick_iceman 10y ago
Secretive doesn't imply good, e.g. Theranos.
- kerbalspacepro 10y ago
  I would say secretive implies "not good." Everybody hears about the inventors of perpetual motion machines or cold fusion that refuse to divest their secrets until they get an investment or patent.
ocdtrekkie 10y ago
If the technology is "that good", it'll be hard enough to replicate that they won't need to be all that secretive.
sebringj 10y ago
At least Sony is positive about this.

ghaff 10y ago

You have to squint pretty hard to see VR today as any sort of success. It's mostly the province of a gamer niche that's willing to overlook shortcomings, some of which will be inherently hard to overcome, and general lack of content.

zardo 10y ago
How is that not a success? They have hundreds of thousands of units out, developers of all sizes working on content, and an enthusiastic (and paying) community of users. That's a pretty good launch for a new consumer tech category.
- lokedhs 10y ago
  Do you remember the enthusiasm just 6 months to a year ago? Did you see how media was was proclaiming that VR was the next big thing, and I even recall that line repeated on the Motley Fool podcast. Then the devices came out, and you hear nothing anymore. Sure, there are a bunch of people who bought it, but when none of the vendors are even releasing sales figures, you know it's disappointing. With the recent news that Oculus is closing their demo stations because no one is using them suggests that things aren't going too well. VR is probably not as bad as 3D TV in terms of a flop, but I don't think anyone can call it a "success" unless your expectations are very different from that of most people.
  - ghaff 10y ago
    This year's CES was probably the point where a lot of people realized that, whether or not there's a glorious future coming, it's not there today. https://www.cnet.com/news/vr-disappoints-at-ces-2017-lenovo-oculus-htc/ https://www.cnet.com/news/vr-disappoints-at-ces-2017-lenovo-...
  - zardo 10y ago
    If most people buy into the ridiculous hype, then yes, I do have much lower expectations. Or at least, much slower ones. Selling hundreds of thousands of $800 units is $80M in revenue, not a bad start for a new technology starting out in the "consumer goods, luxury entertainment" market.

MegaButts 10y ago

VR sales aren't just lagging, they're bad enough that no company will give official numbers for sales. The current estimates for sales are roughly an order of magnitude less than the previous expectations (admittedly dictated by analysts and media), and there is a lot of obfuscation from companies to make it seem better. They will tout the Samsung Galaxy Gear numbers, but what they won't tell you is how many of those were given away (probably the vast majority) vs how many were sold - and that's at a $100 price point. I really, really want VR to improve and become a commodity in the near future, but most people I talk to think it's dumb even after they try it. I think VR is at least 4 years away from being a serious part of gaming (and that assumes a lot of things go right), and I honestly don't know how many years before it finds other consumer applications.

edblarney 10y ago

It's true. But one 'killer app' could change it all. VR needs it's 'Halo' :)

AstralStorm 10y ago
Not strong enough, which is why not everyone owns a console. (compare with phones or even PCs) Something like a spreadsheet or communication would be just the thing.
- edblarney 10y ago
  Vendors would be perfectly happy to get game console-like penetration, moreover, they would have a viable business and an industry.
Bartweiss 10y ago
A lot of people talked about Superhot VR as that leap, and it doesn't seem to have driven many sales for people who didn't have VR already. If anything, I've talked to more people who tried Gear VR and decided it was cool enough to upgrade to a non-terrible VR product. I suppose Superhot could have sufficed without a non-VR alternative, but I rather doubt it.
- Spazer 10y ago
  The sad thing is Super hot could have been the game to beat on VR, but they partnered with Oculus and released as an Oculus exclusive. This split the market right down the middle with many Vive owners now refusing to buy the game at all even when it does come to the Vive. The worst part? The Oculus version of the game works perfectly on the Vive through ReVive so it's not like they had to do much extra work to get the game working.
camus2 10y ago
Resident Evil 7? The gaming press say it's a great experience in VR.
- 10y ago

maverick_iceman 10y ago

Secretive doesn't imply good, e.g. Theranos.

kerbalspacepro 10y ago
I would say secretive implies "not good." Everybody hears about the inventors of perpetual motion machines or cold fusion that refuse to divest their secrets until they get an investment or patent.

ocdtrekkie 10y ago

If the technology is "that good", it'll be hard enough to replicate that they won't need to be all that secretive.

sebringj 10y ago

At least Sony is positive about this.