• Install Base's 1-year anniversary - Let's talk and celebrate!

    Check out the thread here!

  • Manga Sales | Discussion Thread

    We have created a thread to talk about manga sales. Check out the thread here!

PlayStation VR2 launches on February 22nd, 2023 | $549,99 / €599,99 / £529,99 / ¥74.980

Pronouns
he/him
I think this price will be a tough pill to swallow for most consumers and will definitely diminish sales of PSVR2. Although the software seems to be more of an issue with no PSVR1 backward compatibility and very little announced in terms of big system selling exclusives. With how dominant Quest 2 is as a VR platform and how many devs Meta is picking up it seems Sony is really being left behind in VR software development. But I do disagree with the posts about VR being a permanently niche thing. The Quest 2 has sold over 15 million units since its launch and that is an incredible amount to sell so quickly. If companies can find the right price for the product I think VR very clearly has major sales potential, even if it will take some time for it to fully reach it.
 

Celine

Archivist
¥74,980 recommended retail price

xVivIRm.jpg


Yes, I wanted to use that thumbnail from SumoPrimeTime in some way.
 

Turenne

Member
Pronouns
HE/HIM
Another bad part about this is that it is NOT backwards compatible with PSVR1 games. Which is silly at this price point. I guess people with the first PSVR will just have to keep it around if they want to play PSVR1 games.
...how could it possibly be BC with PSVR1 when they both leverage such different tech???
 

Jorge

Member
Pronouns
he
That shit ain't nothing but dead on arrival at that price. The transformation to Arrogant Sony is now complete.
Dont know about arrogant Sony and it will have tons of day 1 buyers, after that? Who knows.

I do think they are expecting quite too much from their VR venture.
 

Turenne

Member
Pronouns
HE/HIM
That shit ain't nothing but dead on arrival at that price. The transformation to Arrogant Sony is now complete.
Considering the tech that goes into this - FOV rendering, haotic feedback, oled HDR - what exactly did you expect the price point to be?
 

KtSlime

が あらわれた!
Member
...how could it possibly be BC with PSVR1 when they both leverage such different tech???
The underlying tech can usually be abstracted in such a way that the software is compatible if not completely unaware of the difference. Them not doing that is, in my opinion, short sightedness on their part, hopefully they did it this time so when they replace the technology again with the PSVR3 (if there is such a device) everything will work.
 

enpleinjour

Member
Pronouns
He/Him
I don't know if we can call this a pivot on Sony's part when they are still maintaining a separate discrete ecosystem of games that requires its own development pipeline and output. They just moved it from handhelds to VR, which to me seems like it was a misguided move, because the bestselling VR system to date has sold as much as Sony's worst selling portable (and the way Sony approaches VR, they are hobbling their own market potential for it even further by tethering it to their console, rather than making it a standalone thing).

So in that regard I agree with fiendcode; if Sony were going to do a second ecosystem, a portable would have been a better business decision than VR.

You're missing the timeline of VR. The big players, Sony, Valve, Apple, Meta, Google, all know how numerous different sectors will progress over time (optics, computer vision, display screens, chips, controls). They are simply laying the groundwork for their future brand/presence here. None of this is meant to or predated on breaking into the mainstream or even gaming mainstream. And in most cases, the cross pollination of the research means it pays off multiple times for multiple products.

Unlike handheld gaming whose core functionality has already been sold to public in its final form: a weaker home console with portability. And the crux for Playstation is the weak hardware that will not be able to play the majority of games as the gen continues, especially their graphically high end exclusives.
 

Phantom Thief

Life Will Change
Moderator
Pronouns
He/Him
You're missing the timeline of VR. The big players, Sony, Valve, Apple, Meta, Google, all know how numerous different sectors will progress over time (optics, computer vision, display screens, chips, controls). They are simply laying the groundwork for their future brand/presence here. None of this is meant to or predated on breaking into the mainstream or even gaming mainstream. And in most cases, the cross pollination of the research means it pays off multiple times for multiple products.
A notable portion of the industry putting their strength behind some new tech is in absolutely no way indicative of inevitable success for that new tech - particularly when said new tech includes a dramatic new paradigm such as VR does.

Remember 3DTVs, and 3D in general? That had the backing of not one, not two, not three, but FOUR separate industries - Hollywood, video games, TV manufacturers, cinema chains. They pushed it for all it was worth. We had the biggest movies pushed in 3D, more than half of all screens and showings in all multiplexes switched to 3D projections, 3DTVs were pushed for all they were worth desperately for years, and Nintendo and Sony both hopped on board the 3D trend and made it integral to their flagship platforms. How did that go, exactly? At the time it could have been seen as skating to where the puck is, but no matter how much these gigantic cross industry players tried to brute force it into mainstream acceptance, they simply could not spend their way into overcoming audience apathy. You flat out cannot pay money to make people care about something they don’t care about because they perceive no value in it (either inherently, or because functionally the perceived friction associated with said thing is far more than the perceived benefits, making it a net loss to attempt to engage with it). It cannot be done.

We don’t even need to go back to 3DTVs, just look at cryptocurrency and NFTs. Look at the Metaverse! Every major tech company desperately latched on to the buzzword bandwagon, we had car makers getting in on the far. How did that go? How is the Metaverse going?

VR in its present form presents far too much friction for any appreciable portion of the common populace to take to it in numbers that would make the current volumes of investment in that area by several of these tech firms worth it. You cannot overcome the visceral antipathy people have at the prospect of putting a headset on and shutting themselves off from the rest of the world at this present moment in time. It can’t be done.

This is neither to say that there will never be a market for VR, nor that there is zero market for it at the present. In the future, changing social trends and/or advancements in tech may well cause VR to see dramatic uptake. In the present moment there is obviously SOME market for VR - a few dozen million units of hardware sold’s worth, if nothing else. But it is a shockingly small slice of the pie being crowded by, as you yourself point out, a lot of big players. No one will come away happy from this. Facebook literally bet their entire company on it, and gave it the best shot they could. They even managed to, in very large part, insulate this push from the general negativity associated with their brand. If you want to know how that went for them, one just needs to have a look at their current share price, and also the reasons for said price.

EDIT: We don't even need to look outside of the games industry for examples of this. Look at cloud gaming! Sony, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Nvidia, Square Enix, Capcom, Ubisoft, Bethesda, very literally every major player is pushing it, even Nintendo has some engagement with it. And no matter what you do, you cannot overcome the apathy that is borne when the perceived friction involved with something is greater than the perceived benefits.
 
Last edited:

mariodk18

Forum Namer
Member
I don’t see a universe where this does better than PSVR1. Less games, more expensive buy in cost, and minimal added value to the gaming experience. Not to mention the motion sickness. Hell, I get sick after an hour of playing Splatoon 2! I shudder to think of even spending $500+ and not even be able to stomach using the thing.

It’s just such an opportunity cost too. You could buy about 8 full priced PS5 games for the price of the unit and a game. Not sure what they’re expecting.
 

Turenne

Member
Pronouns
HE/HIM
I don’t see a universe where this does better than PSVR1. Less games, more expensive buy in cost, and minimal added value to the gaming experience. Not to mention the motion sickness. Hell, I get sick after an hour of playing Splatoon 2! I shudder to think of even spending $500+ and not even be able to stomach using the thing.

It’s just such an opportunity cost too. You could buy about 8 full priced PS5 games for the price of the unit and a game. Not sure what they’re expecting.

Do you think they are pricing this based on the research and tech that has gone into it perhaps? It's priced the same as PSVR1 - once you add on the the add-ons - while having much better tech and convenience of usage.

The price is fine; the hardware and tech within have already gotten rave reviews - the issue currently is the software, which is just Horizon: COTM right now. They really need some more captivating games - at least Half-Life: Alyx and GT7 VR. Right now the price looks daunting due to the lack of "must have" software - that is the worry imo.
 

meatbag

Member
Do you think they are pricing this based on the research and tech that has gone into it perhaps?
They probably are. Sony seems to be specifically targeting the niche VR/tech enthusiast demographic with this device. And these are the sort of people to shell out the big bucks, so Sony is focusing on getting more money out of a smaller customer base.
 

Turenne

Member
Pronouns
HE/HIM
They probably are. Sony seems to be specifically targeting the niche VR/tech enthusiast demographic with this device. And these are the sort of people to shell out the big bucks, so Sony is focusing on getting more money out of a smaller customer base.
Yes, and from what I've seen the VR heads are enthused about it, and not surprised by the price considering the tech.

The software is where they need to get the larger audience - that means stuff like GT7 in VR, RE8, or going further to stuff like Spiderman VR.
 

Person

Member
Pronouns
He
I don’t think we see much first party software, tbh. A few third-party deals for VR games and add-on modes for non-VR games, but I doubt they’d waste a significant amount of first party resources on software for such a tiny audience.

They will let 3rd party carry it.
 

mariodk18

Forum Namer
Member
The only issue that matters is software. Well in the case of VR, I should say the first issue. Because it’s not just a console or handheld. It’s something you wear and that can induce motion sickness. Those are the other issues.

Price is further down the list. Vita was certainly priced fairly for the tech inside, but what killed it was the lack of software and to a lesser extent, the highly expensive proprietary memory.
 

hubertuss03

Member

It looks really fair priced tbh.
PSVR 1 was 399$ without camera and move controllers.
Camera - 59$ iirc
Move Controllers - 99$

Some time later was bundle PSVR+ Camera + VR Worlds for 499$.
549$ for PSVR 2 with Sense controllers and advanced technology inside compared to outdated PSVR 1 looks good.
If software will be on good level, PSVR 2 will be healthy imo
 

enpleinjour

Member
Pronouns
He/Him
A notable portion of the industry putting their strength behind some new tech is in absolutely no way indicative of inevitable success for that new tech - particularly when said new tech includes a dramatic new paradigm such as VR does.

You mean the two biggest computing platforms on Earth? This isn't some side project or even a tangentially related product. This is an extension of their core OS and a new computing paradigm.

You're also getting the technological roadmap confused. VR and AR are distinct for now, but the long term advancement of core technologies and fundamental aim is their convergence and the cross-pollination is already there.

So while we say VR for now, really what many in the industry say is Mixed Reality, XR or AR/VR.

Success is defined differently for each of those companies, and on different timescales.

Remember 3DTVs, and 3D in general?

3D TVs are not a computing paradigm.

VR in its present form presents far too much friction for any appreciable portion of the common populace to take to it in numbers that would make the current volumes of investment in that area by several of these tech firms worth it.

For now, yes , but as I just mentioned, every one of these tech companies already has a multi-year roadmap in how the fundamental technologies scale and evolve and are not releasing products now expecting mainstream adoption.

This is simply laying the groundwork and building a brand. If you're basing current products and adoption to future products and adoption then you are going to be way off until you have a clear idea on what that end product is going to look like.

In the present moment there is obviously SOME market for VR - a few dozen million units of hardware sold’s worth, if nothing else.

The current VR market is worth $10B. Even in its niche, largely secluded to gaming, it is still notable.

Facebook literally bet their entire company on it, and gave it the best shot they could.

Facebook is one of the worst positioned companies in VR/AR. They have no OS marketshare, no platform marketshare, they have a toxic brand, a poor history in design and innovation and they had very few gaming studios till recently.

The company is majority owned by a delusional CEO, meaning it can be as financially reckless as he sees fit, not beholden to the value of any shareholder.
 

Turenne

Member
Pronouns
HE/HIM

It looks really fair priced tbh.
PSVR 1 was 399$ without camera and move controllers.
Camera - 59$ iirc
Move Controllers - 99$

Some time later was bundle PSVR+ Camera + VR Worlds for 499$.
549$ for PSVR 2 with Sense controllers and advanced technology inside compared to outdated PSVR 1 looks good.
If software will be on good level, PSVR 2 will be healthy imo


Well said. These reactions to the price of the hardware are completely overblown.

What they've shown of the software side on the other hand...
 
Well said. These reactions to the price of the hardware are completely overblown.
I agree, but only to an extent. For existing PS owners, price is about the same yeah but for people entering the ecosystem to play VR, the entry barrier is way higher (because the PS5 is significantly more expensive than the PS4 was). I'll have some effect.
 

Agent42

Member
Sony is changing; needs to take more profit per hardware and peripheral sale. Games sales are going down. The profit stream needs to be the hardware.
 

It looks really fair priced tbh.
PSVR 1 was 399$ without camera and move controllers.
Camera - 59$ iirc
Move Controllers - 99$

Some time later was bundle PSVR+ Camera + VR Worlds for 499$.
549$ for PSVR 2 with Sense controllers and advanced technology inside compared to outdated PSVR 1 looks good.
If software will be on good level, PSVR 2 will be healthy imo


Pretty much exactly what I said earlier in the thread. But of course, expecting someone to acknowledge that would assume they're coming from a place of good faith, and we know that's not always the case. And if they legitimately don't know these details (as let's be honest most people talking are not invested in high end VR), then it just shows an ignorance of the market. It was only a couple of months ago that Facebook/Meta raised the price of the Quest 2 by $100.

The biggest hurdle with the announcement was not the price - it is the software.

I wonder if they have shown their entire launch lineup?

For their sake, I hope not. Then again, there's two schools of thought.

The current lineup isn't going to make anyone previously not interested in VR change their mind, but like with the PS5 maybe supply is such that they know what they have will sell to the enthusiast crowd regardless, and aren't really worried about showing their full hand. Perhaps the biggies are being saved for when supply becomes more fruitful. (I know they have 3 million units ready to go, but that will sell out regardless).

The other side of the coin, however, is that regardless of that initial shipment flying out the door you want to create the sense of excitement that only big software can bring, whether you have the hardware ready to go or not. This is why the PS5 has the demand it has still to this day, with no hardware on the shelves.

I'm of the mind of the second option, I think they need to lay their dick - so to speak - on the table. They need a full-on State of Play/PS5 Showcase prior to this thing coming out that showcases at least one heavy hitter aka Astro Bot Rescue Mission 2-calibur and announces other bells & whistles like fan favorites being patched or updated for PSVR2.
 

BTB123

Can't wait for TotK
Member

It looks really fair priced tbh.
PSVR 1 was 399$ without camera and move controllers.
Camera - 59$ iirc
Move Controllers - 99$

Some time later was bundle PSVR+ Camera + VR Worlds for 499$.
549$ for PSVR 2 with Sense controllers and advanced technology inside compared to outdated PSVR 1 looks good.
If software will be on good level, PSVR 2 will be healthy imo

So the PSVR1 was also overpriced then. No wonder it only sold 5M units.
VR is way less popular than consoles, it has less dedicated fans. While for those dedicated fans that price may be acceptable for people that never owned a VR headset yet it is more likely to be a turn off. Hence why I don't see the VR market grow much.
 

Person

Member
Pronouns
He
I think it’s both true that the PSVR2 is fairly priced and that it is not attractively priced for mainstream success. Consoles themselves could be fairly priced but outside of Nintendo are usually not, because consumers ultimately don’t care if it’s fair or not that it costs Sony or Microsoft more to manufacture a console, if the price is too steep then that’s that and fair doesn’t enter into it. The price here isn’t too steep for the small intended audience of luxury consumers, but for everyone else it is.
 
I think it’s both true that the PSVR2 is fairly priced and that it is not attractively priced for mainstream success. Consoles themselves could be fairly priced but outside of Nintendo are usually not, because consumers ultimately don’t care if it’s fair or not that it costs Sony or Microsoft more to manufacture a console, if the price is too steep then that’s that and fair doesn’t enter into it. The price here isn’t too steep for the small intended audience of luxury consumers, but for everyone else it is.

I agree. I don’t get where the ‘arrogant’ or ‘greedy’ sony thing comes into play here. They are most definitely taking a loss on this, as similarly spec’d units are twice the price and I’m almost positive Quest 3 will be priced at around 500 for the base model. This is the upper echelon of VR hardware, its gonna cost a lot especially after everything else going on in the world that caused parts to go up in price.

It’s probably waaaay too expensive for the casual market but it’s not ‘overpriced’ for what it is, it’s most definitely underpriced. Either way it probably wont do vastly bigger numbers than PSVR1 without good software
 

hubertuss03

Member
I wonder if they have shown their entire launch lineup?

The biggest hurdle with the announcement was not the price - it is the software.
"It's exciting to see how game developers are taking advantage of the PS VR2's headset features to design the next generation of VR games. We're expecting more than 20 titles at launch, and we can't wait for February when PS VR2 launches so players can give it a try. We'll have more details on our launch game lineup in the future, so stay tuned."

More than 20 titles at launch.
They announced 11 games yesterday + Horizon VR and RE Village VR. Still few unnanounced. Big question: smaller or bigger games...
 

hubertuss03

Member



After The Fall also with free upgrade for current owners.

Also, according to PSVR2 without Parole, tons of devs working on PSVR 2 upgrades.
 

Person

Member
Pronouns
He
"It's exciting to see how game developers are taking advantage of the PS VR2's headset features to design the next generation of VR games. We're expecting more than 20 titles at launch, and we can't wait for February when PS VR2 launches so players can give it a try. We'll have more details on our launch game lineup in the future, so stay tuned."

More than 20 titles at launch.
They announced 11 games yesterday + Horizon VR and RE Village VR. Still few unnanounced. Big question: smaller or bigger games...

Road to VR has a comprehensive list.

 

MOKU

Member
This is far to expensive for a myriad of reasons, and will never achieve true market penetration. Sony already knows this though, and are fine with it.
 

BoktaiFan

Member
Pronouns
He/Him
I agree. I don’t get where the ‘arrogant’ or ‘greedy’ sony thing comes into play here. They are most definitely taking a loss on this
These are not mutually exclusive. They took a loss on the PS3 as well. That doesn't negate their arrogance there.

The arrogance comes from the fact that they are pricing this high in the current environment. Maybe it does nice bells and whistles, but Sony is the one who designed it! They chose to put them there and up the price range!
 
These are not mutually exclusive. They took a loss on the PS3 as well. That doesn't negate their arrogance there.

The arrogance comes from the fact that they are pricing this high in the current environment. Maybe it does nice bells and whistles, but Sony is the one who designed it! They chose to put them there and up the price range!

I’m sure they had no idea the state of the world would be in right now. I bet if they had foresight this probably doesn’t get made at all, which would have been unfortunate. These things take years of R&D to get into a produceable state.

But there’s only so much any company is willing to lose to manufacture, distribute, and market new hardware. Even Microsoft is talking about raising prices and we know what their financial situation is. It’s just not realistic to expect something like this to be priced the same or less than the previous iteration which wasn’t very sophisticated tech at all
 

BoktaiFan

Member
Pronouns
He/Him
It’s just not realistic to expect something like this to be priced the same or less than the previous iteration which wasn’t very sophisticated tech at all
That's really not the consumers problem though. If consumers think it's overpriced or they are being arrogant that will play out like it did with the PS3.

Meta has shown you can make a lower cost headset if you want, would have all the same features? No, but again Sony chooses those features! If the consequence of that is consumers thinking they are arrogant then really that's the bed they chose to make.
 
That's really not the consumers problem though. If consumers think it's overpriced or they are being arrogant that will play out like it did with the PS3.

Meta has shown you can make a lower cost headset if you want, would have all the same features? No, but again Sony chooses those features! If the consequence of that is consumers thinking they are arrogant then really that's the bed they chose to make.

Meta Quest is 400 & 500, its not that much cheaper and has far less tech in it. It’s like comparing a series S to a Series X, the former is cheaper for a very good reason.

It’s already a risk going all-in on VR again. I don’t think pricing the hardware competitively is a sign of arrogance. The only other similar high end VR cost over 1000 dollars and thats before factoring in needing a good pc to use it.

The Quest and PSVR are not direct competitors
 
Last edited:
I don't think talking of Sony's arrogance adds much to the discussion.

The term is pretty charged and there are ways to lay down your thoughts better
 

enpleinjour

Member
Pronouns
He/Him
These are not mutually exclusive. They took a loss on the PS3 as well. That doesn't negate their arrogance there.

The arrogance comes from the fact that they are pricing this high in the current environment. Maybe it does nice bells and whistles, but Sony is the one who designed it! They chose to put them there and up the price range!

You can't be arrogant if you are providing so much value for the customer by taking a loss. PSVR2 specs without Sony taking the loss would be likely close to $1000, at least $750.

There's also value through the customers eyes which changes over time. PS5 was selling out in minutes at the price of $550 because gamers are now willing to spend more on what they see worth.

Just like how iPhone's were considered unbelievably expensive for a phone at $499, the avg selling price of an iPhone is now $900+.
 

mariodk18

Forum Namer
Member
So if PSVR1 only did 5M lifetime, why are some people expecting PSVR2 to blow through 2-3M at launch like nothing?

I believe that everything indicates that this product will sell worse. Being fairly priced is not the primary reason people buy things. Lots of things are fairly priced, but it doesn’t mean they fly off the shelves.
 

EnergyDrink

Member
Pronouns
he/him
Another sign the videogame industry, having cocooned themselves in echo chambers away from the general public, lack constructive feedback on what information people want so they can make an informed decision. As a result they put out tone deaf press releases / blog posts that raise more questions than answers, failing to address basic questions any bystander would know should've been answered. Be it smaller companies like Granzella & NIS with R-Type Final 3 Evolved not having a paid upgrade path for PS4 owners of R-Type Final 2/3, failing to give a clear answer when people like me asked for clarity. In this case, a major corporations like SIE has, to give a few recent examples, offered near total radio silence on BC issues, poor emulation.


To which we can add the PSVR2 release date announcement, as it really should've been made clear by SIE the moment PlayStation Studios began porting games to PC if PSVR2 would be PS5 only, work on PC at launch or at a later date. Alternatively, will first party PSVR2 games be ported to PC VR headsets like Valve Index? Why aren't they confirming if they'll be patches for PSVR first party games like Astro Bot Rescue Mission to make them fully playable on PSVR2? Will the Oculus VR games Insomniac Games developed such as Edge of Nowhere & Stormland be ported to PSVR2 & if not why not? Half Life Alyx on PSVR2? PSVR2 content for each PS Plus tier? If they don't wish to announce it all in one go, set out a roadmap between now & launch.
Sony will not announce that Alyx (or any other famous VR game) will not be released on PSVR2, or that no patches for old games are planned. That would be anti-marketing.

That they did not announce any of these things made it very clear that these ports/patches most probably will not happen.

Some people out there really hope it will happen despite this very clear message and want "clarity" but the silence is clear enough.
 

EnergyDrink

Member
Pronouns
he/him
For VR enthusiasts, PSVR2 is amazing value:
  • 4k 120HZ OLED screen is the cutting edge.
  • Inside out tracking
  • Haptic controllers
  • Eye tracking
However, not everyone is going to value VR like that.



I wonder if they have shown their entire launch lineup?
VR enthusiasts already could buy headsets with similar or better tech for their VR PC. Non-Enthusiasts or mildly VR interested would buy something like Quest because it has many advantages over PSVR2.

Negative points that will make many VR enthusiasts overlook PSVR2:
- very small game library
- even launch library has ports they already played on other hardware
- tethered
 

enpleinjour

Member
Pronouns
He/Him
VR enthusiasts already could buy headsets with similar or better tech for their VR PC. Non-Enthusiasts or mildly VR interested would buy something like Quest because it has many advantages over PSVR2.

Negative points that will make many VR enthusiasts overlook PSVR2:
- very small game library
- even launch library has ports they already played on other hardware
- tethered

Completely wrong. There's no PC VR that has these features, let alone all of them for $549:
  • 4K 120Hz HDR OLED
  • eye tracking
  • foveated rendering
  • inside out tracking
  • haptic controllers and headset
The screen alone would result in a near $800 PC VR device.

The Valve Index is $1000, has smaller FoV, requires base stations, has no eye tracking, uses LCD screens and has 1440 resolution.
 

Person

Member
Pronouns
He
You’re missing the forest for the trees. He didn’t say identical, but similar. And yes, it’s similar to what VR enthusiasts have access to. But let’s entertain the idea that it’s not similar. Which one of those do you think is big enough for people already invested in the PC ecosystem to abandon their PC libraries, buy a PS5 + PSVR2, with a 20+ games library instead of just… waiting a bit for the next refresh of PC VR hardware?

That’s the nature of technology, the latest to market get to have better hardware than what has been previously released, and makes them the most attractive upgrade option if they’re in the same ecosystem. But this would not be the case here, this is not a means to upgrading one’s VR setup, but an invitation to switch to a whole new and unproven software platform.

Value propositions are not built on specs lists.
 

Aostia82

Member
I disagree with the "arrogant" take (unlike in the past, with PS3).
I think they decided to develop a high-end product, with high-end tech, for high-end-tech enthusiasts
it is priced properly for the tech, at the same time it is priced high for the mass market

the idea of developing a high-priced/high-tech accessory for a niche of the market it's not arrogant imho
of course, if they would expect to sell 50 millions of this VR set, they would be arrogant (and delusional) but clearly it's not the case

PSVR1 sold 5.5 millions, right? I don't think they are aiming to improve significantly over that target
 

KR_EP

FEEL LIKE A PILOT. BE A LANDING HERO.
Member
We don’t even need to go back to 3DTVs, just look at cryptocurrency and NFTs. Look at the Metaverse! Every major tech company desperately latched on to the buzzword bandwagon, we had car makers getting in on the far. How did that go? How is the Metaverse going?
SIE ought to sue Facebook for its ropey PlayStation Home knock off. Speaking of which, Granzella are bringing PlayStation Home back with R-Type Evolved 3 on PS5 (more on that later).
EDIT: We don't even need to look outside of the games industry for examples of this. Look at cloud gaming! Sony, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Nvidia, Square Enix, Capcom, Ubisoft, Bethesda, very literally every major player is pushing it, even Nintendo has some engagement with it. And no matter what you do, you cannot overcome the apathy that is borne when the perceived friction involved with something is greater than the perceived benefits.
Good point & it speaks to my post (see below) about game companies & management in a bubble surrounded by yes men/women, much like Facebook, making foolish, costly decisions.
Sony will not announce that Alyx (or any other famous VR game) will not be released on PSVR2, or that no patches for old games are planned. That would be anti-marketing.

That they did not announce any of these things made it very clear that these ports/patches most probably will not happen.

Some people out there really hope it will happen despite this very clear message and want "clarity" but the silence is clear enough.
Oh yee of little faith. Lets not write off PSVR2 just yet, instead think of how they can improve messaging, marketing & address the issues people are raising. Besides, it's not anti-marketing to state clearly what a consumer product does & does not include or to set out a clear roadmap for when future details will be made public. It reinforces my initial point about hubris:
'Another sign the videogame industry, having cocooned themselves in echo chambers away from the general public, lack constructive feedback on what information people want so they can make an informed decision. As a result they put out tone deaf press releases / blog posts that raise more questions than answers, failing to address basic questions any bystander would know should've been answered. Be it smaller companies like Granzella & NIS with R-Type Final 3 Evolved not having a paid upgrade path for PS4 owners of R-Type Final 2/3, failing to give a clear answer when people like me asked for clarity. In this case, a major corporations like SIE has, to give a few recent examples, offered near total radio silence on BC issues, poor emulation.

To which we can add the PSVR2 release date announcement, as it really should've been made clear by SIE the moment PlayStation Studios began porting games to PC if PSVR2 would be PS5 only, work on PC at launch or at a later date. Alternatively, will first party PSVR2 games be ported to PC VR headsets like Valve Index? Why aren't they confirming if they'll be patches for PSVR first party games like Astro Bot Rescue Mission to make them fully playable on PSVR2? Will the Oculus VR games Insomniac Games developed such as Edge of Nowhere & Stormland be ported to PSVR2 & if not why not? Half Life Alyx on PSVR2? PSVR2 content for each PS Plus tier? If they don't wish to announce it all in one go, set out a roadmap between now & launch.'
I could also have included PlayStation Classic, propriety memory cards for PSVita or the closure of Studio Liverpool only to effectively rebuy the studio back later with Firesprite. As to why I brought up Granzella & NIS, bear with me, held a livestream to announce R-Type Final 3 Evolved without having workshopped all the obvious questions people would ask. So I emailed them, got a boilerplate non-answer, so I replied & escalated. They responded today, while not fully addressing my query, at least they're looking into a paid upgrade option with NIS. Constructive feedback is in the interest of companies, large or small as they can learn from it, take positive steps & implement reforms to anticipate such issues going forward.
 
Last edited:
Sony will not announce that Alyx (or any other famous VR game) will not be released on PSVR2, or that no patches for old games are planned. That would be anti-marketing.

That they did not announce any of these things made it very clear that these ports/patches most probably will not happen.

Some people out there really hope it will happen despite this very clear message and want "clarity" but the silence is clear enough.



 
I mean, the Sony audience clearly sees value in these products. So far, they've responded to the PS5 price increase with a "please and thank you!" Sony is going to sell more consoles than ever despite the violitile market were in and heading towards.

Obviously Sony marketing has been poking around for the perfect balance of profit and marketability. But for now, the intended audience hasn't been largely affected by inflation and budgeting. Pocketbook be damned, people are buying. We'll see how it translates to PSVR.
 

enpleinjour

Member
Pronouns
He/Him
He didn’t say identical, but similar. And yes, it’s similar to what VR enthusiasts have access to.

It's not even similar...?

A 4K 120Hz, 110 FoV, HDR, OLED screen is lightyears ahead of anything on the PCVR market at $549.
Even the 2022 Meta Quest Pro, a $1500+ device, has less FoV, 1800 resolution, Mini-LED, 90Hz and no HDR.

Which one of those do you think is big enough for people already invested in the PC ecosystem to abandon their PC libraries, buy a PS5 + PSVR2, with a 20+ games library instead of just

PSVR2 is such a generational leap in many aspects that PCVR enthusiasts may buy a PS5 just for it. These are enthusiasts that are willing to spend $1000 on the VR system alone.

The equivalent high end PC and PCVR system would result in $1500-$2000.

Not to mention, VR gaming enthusiasts are going to experience high end PSVR games like RE8, RE4R or Horizon, something PCVR has not gotten in years.

waiting a bit for the next refresh of PC VR hardware?

They've already been waiting 3 years, and even if the Valve Deckard comes next year (doubtful), PSVR2 would beat it by a year+ and be hundreds of dollars cheaper.

That’s the nature of technology, the latest to market get to have better hardware than what has been previously released, and makes them the most attractive upgrade option if they’re in the same ecosystem. But this would not be the case here, this is not a means to upgrading one’s VR setup, but an invitation to switch to a whole new and unproven software platform.

Value propositions are not built on specs lists.

I think this is a fundamental misunderstanding of VR. The hardware is the biggest roadblock in VR, any generational leaps in hardware has huge quality of life and immersive implications on the entire ecosystem. Software is dictated by the hardware, when the biggest sell in VR software is ease of use, immersion, control and comfort.

Everything is severely constrained by hardware in VR.
 

reksveks

Member
Pronouns
He/Him


Suspect that display is probably not a high priority for pc vr users; price and form factor probably are the more important things. The one thing that I can see appealing for pcvr users is the eye tracking but honestly there is a chicken and egg adoption issue.

The other issue is that I suspect that the pc vr users will definitely just wait to see how quickly they can get it working on pc.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom