This is worrying, HTC aren't exactly doing brilliantly and I'd like to see some more proper headsets, not these gimped smartphones glued to your face.
Still not all that friendly to setup and use. I think only consoles will be able to raise market penetration short to mid term.
I actually think PSVR is the most likely to hit it off since the PS4+PSVR combo is much cheaper consumer friendly option.
For only 300€ I bought an Acer WMR headset with better res than the Vive, no funky sensor setup required, and no fiddle adjustments needed to get it to focus with my eyesight. I put it on and it just works.
If the Samsung WMR ultra set were available here I’d happily have bought that instead, but they stupidly refuse to sell it in Europe.
I really think MS might be on to something here, I only hope the fixed specs don’t make it too unappealing for manufacturers to support.
I'm still waiting for "virtual monitors" in AR/VR so my entire office wall becomes a giant screen.
VR displays need to be far higher resolution for that to work. Your monitor is likely only 2,000-4,000 pixels wide and doesn't completely fill your vision. Even Vive Pro is only 1,440 pixels wide and is expected to fill your vision. We need a minimum of double the resolution, and would probably need triple or more to make it work well.
In this situation, I read text on my 4k monitor while I put charts and graphs and notifications and iTunes and my time tracker on my wall. That frees up my real screen for the stuff I need a high resolution for, while the low-res stuff is off to the side. If I need to look at it, it will flash to catch my attention anyway, and then I can turn my head.
The obvious path for a company with resources would be to focus on catering to enthusiasts while R&D gradually develops better, cheaper headsets.
Another piece of evidence would be that "Enterprise" is featured prominently on the Vive website.
I don't think VR will really take off until it gets to the sunglasses form-factor phase.
The DK2 totally had those issues and the PSVR is a sub standard experience but hey each to his own I guess.
However, when anything glitched (frame drops, tracking errors, etc.), I'd get sick. Even worse, any game with artificial motion (such as walking with the trackpad), would make me SUPER sick very fast. Teleporting was generally OK, but still not great.
I say this as someone that thinks VR will be a huge success, but it's definitely still early.
Unlike OP, I think gen 2 alone is going to make huge strides in making VR closer to mainstream.
A great application could accelerate that.
I don't think there is any sort of "advances" that can prevent some people from being uncomfortable with "virtual" motion. It is unnatural and that's not going to change.
That's kind of the whole point isn't it?
I want to be immersed an isolated while I'm experiencing VR.
My favorit way to think about this is DooM from -93. It had tons of tech limitations but dint stop me and other geeks from enjoying it. Today FPS games are several magnitudes more advanced, and accessible for the average joe in his couch.
It needs to be good before it can be cheap.
$400 too expensive? PS4 cost $350-$500 and has sold over 80 million units.
What VR fans want is VR so good it knocks your socks off and is therefore as or more compelling than a video game console. What the cheap VR sets get you is a basically a mostly useless viewmaster that's interesting for 30 minutes and then put in a drawer somewhere. I'd argue the cheap VR sets damage VR more than help as the experiences are so poor people try them and are unimpressed and write off VR as not interesting where as that's far less true with the top devices with full 6DOF input controllers and room scale VR.
There's a minimum spec for great VR. We aren't there yet. Features needed. Higher res, wider field of view, mouth and eye tracking for facial features, full hand tracking (gloves), lighter headsets, and I'd add in feet tracking as well having played some feet tracking games and seeing how useful they are.
The PlayStation brand has roughly two decades of solid hits and great sales, and cultural credit. People know what they're getting into. VR has no such claim to fame (outside of fantasy scifi) and nowhere near the same volume to push costs down.
Not to mention, the volume of units sold has actually nothing to do with the point the OP was making, which was that it's still expensive. And I hate to break it to you, but: the PS4 -- or any $400 gadget -- is still expensive for many people, even in places like America. But it's not expensive for privileged tech users like you and I.
But the PS4 actually does stuff by itself - the VR headsets (at $400) do -nothing- without extra hardware to drive then, no?
Going off https://kotaku.com/a-useful-tool-checks-if-your-pc-is-ready-..., you'd be looking at another $400+ just to drive it at the minimum specs.
If we had acceptable quality for $10k / set, I imagine we would see a lot more competition and growth.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/samsung-hmd-odyssey-vr-hea...
Played warthunder with a rift and it was a blast, but wanted better resolution before I bought one. Watching movies was ok, but the screen door effect needed fixed. This has anti-screendoor, might be worth it...
The janky hardware and wires hanging off all over the place is one problem, the second is the quality of the games. Judging by what I played, there just isn't a lot of depth. A less expensive headset means more users and a larger market for VR games. This will lead to more in-depth gaming experiences.