Zathalus
Member
*If.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Xbox says the VR market is currently too small for it to chase
Knightime_X
Member
Because Don Mattrick is a snake, and detrimental to the xbox brand.So why was Xbox promising VR content and VR compatibility with Xbox One X back in 2016?
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
It was Phil Spencer that announced it as counter to competitors at the time. All PR smoke & mirrors.
Last edited:
Knightime_X
Member
Because at the time he was told to.
Phil wasn't in power at the time like he is now.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Never Phil's fault.
feynoob
Banned
Is this satire?
feynoob
Banned
Don left in 2013, and Phil took after him. In 2016, Phil had a lot of power.
The only plausible cause is the xss. Otherwise it makes no sense for them to not chase this sector. They have the biggest games that works very well with VR.
Drizzlehell
Banned
Knightime_X
Member
Ar¢tos
Member
The same way psvr2 doesn't need to sell millions and millions to be profitable, since both the hardware and software are being sold at profit.
Zathalus
Member
The messaging since 2017 has been pretty clear that they are not working on VR support. The original message in 2016 was that it would come but they pivoted a year later and the message for the past 6 years has been the exact same. It's not exactly a secret.So why was Xbox promising VR content and VR compatibility with Xbox One X back in 2016?
It's a shame as they have done great games that can benefit from it. Forza Horizon, Flight Simulator, and the upcoming Starfield and Forza Motorsport. Hellblade could be a pretty surreal trip in VR as well. But the market remains niche.
Kagoshima_Luke
Gold Member
Another year, another claim that "this is the year VR blows up!"
Still waiting.
Still waiting.
thismeinteil
Member
That's one tech I definity miss. Unfortunately, most companies chased active tech, which had to be charged and were a little heavier than normal glasses, and expensive. They should have used the same tech LG used, passive. Not only were the glasses lighter, they were way cheaper. Hell, if you watched a 3D movie in theaters, just keep the glasses and they worked.
The best part about 3D TVs wasn't the movies, though, but being able to play local co-op and both gamers having the entire TV screen to themselves. Sucks they don't make them anymore.
As for VR, they say it's niche, so shouldn't be pursued. The same argument could be made for Xbox HW, really.
Last edited:
X-Wing
Member
They already struggle to feed their consoles with content and sell their hardware at loss, imagine if they had to spread themselves out to VR.
Venom Snake
Member
Sure, who cares. Let's make Xbox fridges, it's definitely a market worth chasing. 
Fredrik
Member
Significant spec bump to play what?
I saw the unveil, there was nothing there that I was truly wowed at. Then came Apple Vision Pro and made Quest 3 look bad.
I like that everything on the Quest 2 library will work on Quest 3 though, means the move will be smoother for those who jump over. But I don’t see any hype. Same goes for PSVR2. Apple Vision Pro was cool but too expensive to get any type of mass appeal, which yet again means big devs won’t bother, and no PC compatibility. I think the whole industry will crumble. And that sucks because I really like VR, when it’s good nothing else comes close.
feynoob
Banned
They can hire extra people for that.
X-Wing
Member
And wait 5 years to have content... smart move.
feynoob
Banned
I mean you can make the game and have a vr team like RE4 remake.
brian0057
Banned
You mean aside from their innovative work on the WMR headset spec - high end, single cable, inside out tracking - for PCs? Or the Hololens AR HMDs?
I really wish they’d change their minds on VR, but it doesn’t help that the lukewarm high end VR market isn’t exactly proving them wrong.
They haven’t detailed the games specifically tailored to the new headset’s specs. We should get more info at Meta Connect 2023
The vision pro and Quest 3 are targeting dramatically different markets.
Sleepwalker
Member
My Phil is not a failure. He may be a liar, a pig, an idiot, a failure, but he is *not* a porn star!
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
I wonder where I'd be in my gaming hobby if I just went with whatever MS said at the time.
I just ignore what any company heads say and I just play the good games that get released.
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
It's just crazy. Like I'd all about the most powerful console ever, but then not really care about console and do cloud. But I'd also think SP games are dead but then release a bunch of western rpg SP games, etc. They're always on both sides of everything. They used to even talk about doing VR. They get their fanboys to sound hypocritical all the time with their nonsense.
hyperbertha
Member
Well before the cma they'll need to make sure xbox exists in that era. Why would ms give money for vr if their gaming division isn't profitable?Oh you mean in like 10 years? The CMA might want to investigate this then and shut them down so they don't maybe one day become a VR monopoly or something
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Yep.
The gimmick market doesn't need another entrant. Let the ones already there go in obscurity and quietly phase it out.
Fatal Chuck Yeager
Member
I never understood current VR fans stubbornness of not wanting the VR scene today to die so new technology can bring it back in another 5-10 years with new tech and implementation that would make the idea more appealing and more marketable to consumers. Instead we have people desperately trying to avoid the stats and pushing to save headsets that aren't in many areas much different than in 2016.
When 3D glasses were out from the red magnet lens, to the plastic white green and red, than later the plastic white blue and red glasses, then the metal blue and red glasses using lens instead of plastic covers, transparent 3D, and then glasses free, no one was desperately trying to save companies putting out their takes or implementations of red and blue white plastic glasses. No one was doing that the fans used them but knew that those were not going to be the long-term implementations of the 3D TV idea and the concept evolved over time.
But for some reason people since the hysterics from 2016 making this generation of VR seem like "this is it", are still advocating that we are almost there.
People like to go after the death of 3D TV, but when 3D TV's returned last, they shipped 2M 3D TV's in 2010, 24M in 2011, 41M in 2012, and 44M in 201 . This still ended up dying off a few years later because the use and appeal was limited. But I'm sure it will come back with a new implementation as it has several times before that will become appealing for a new age and new generation.
In comparison, VR has never sold 15m in it's best year and for most years has sold less than 10M and has been trending downward for some time.
People will bring u the Quest 2. Fair enough, but from a game developer perspective there's nothing about the Quest 2 that would make you want to put a ton of money on Virtual Reality. Meta can tout whatever number they sold, estimates suggest by now it has passed 20M, but that's just a number.
If you have 20M headsets in the wild but your MP or gaas-lite games don't have a high number of players or you aren't seeing game announcements of 3-4M copies sold, then what's the context behind that 20M? The reason for the sales were two changes compared to other headsets with the Quest was still a new thing: Price and wireless. Period.
Apple may sell a couple million just because of the brand and some businesses and art academies may do something with it on top of the hardcore fans, but there's nothing about their headset that's much different than Quest or Sony's implementation and it shares many of the same problems and has created several new ones. Also unlike what some believe, Apple isn't interested because of seeing growth, they were working on their headset against the suggestions of their own internal leadership for years so the best we got was better lends and a more comfortable strap but similar design ideology from 2016.
If you can't sell units, if you can't have games with 5M players buying MTX, if you don't have the retention for gaas, why would developers poor money on the medium as it is now? There needs to be radical change in VR but many current fans aren't seeing that.
When 3D glasses were out from the red magnet lens, to the plastic white green and red, than later the plastic white blue and red glasses, then the metal blue and red glasses using lens instead of plastic covers, transparent 3D, and then glasses free, no one was desperately trying to save companies putting out their takes or implementations of red and blue white plastic glasses. No one was doing that the fans used them but knew that those were not going to be the long-term implementations of the 3D TV idea and the concept evolved over time.
But for some reason people since the hysterics from 2016 making this generation of VR seem like "this is it", are still advocating that we are almost there.
People like to go after the death of 3D TV, but when 3D TV's returned last, they shipped 2M 3D TV's in 2010, 24M in 2011, 41M in 2012, and 44M in 201 . This still ended up dying off a few years later because the use and appeal was limited. But I'm sure it will come back with a new implementation as it has several times before that will become appealing for a new age and new generation.
In comparison, VR has never sold 15m in it's best year and for most years has sold less than 10M and has been trending downward for some time.
People will bring u the Quest 2. Fair enough, but from a game developer perspective there's nothing about the Quest 2 that would make you want to put a ton of money on Virtual Reality. Meta can tout whatever number they sold, estimates suggest by now it has passed 20M, but that's just a number.
If you have 20M headsets in the wild but your MP or gaas-lite games don't have a high number of players or you aren't seeing game announcements of 3-4M copies sold, then what's the context behind that 20M? The reason for the sales were two changes compared to other headsets with the Quest was still a new thing: Price and wireless. Period.
Apple may sell a couple million just because of the brand and some businesses and art academies may do something with it on top of the hardcore fans, but there's nothing about their headset that's much different than Quest or Sony's implementation and it shares many of the same problems and has created several new ones. Also unlike what some believe, Apple isn't interested because of seeing growth, they were working on their headset against the suggestions of their own internal leadership for years so the best we got was better lends and a more comfortable strap but similar design ideology from 2016.
If you can't sell units, if you can't have games with 5M players buying MTX, if you don't have the retention for gaas, why would developers poor money on the medium as it is now? There needs to be radical change in VR but many current fans aren't seeing that.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
THE DUCK
voted poster of the decade by bots
Yes, they tried to spin it as good news when it wasn't. The fact is psvr2 has proven that ms made the right choice from a sales standpoint. Personally I would love having ms join vr, it just doesn't make sense from a market standpoint, being a vr junkie and saying they should doesn't make it so.
The tech still needs to evolve to a level similar to the vision pro bit at psvr2 price levels - thats when vr will get some momentum with the general public.
Last edited:
UniformDeliverance
Member
I want to see Xbox getting first party games shipped on Xbox. The last thing they need is split development across different gaming mediums. This is the right call for now
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
Unless you have an entire business dedicated to it and own multiple VR studios like oculus, he’s right. Their energy is better spent keeping the lights on at Xbox.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
GHG
Member
The largest market for VR is on PC.
There were several VR games that came out of their recently acquired studios/publishers, some of which are still some of the best experiences you can have in VR to this day.
So it's a shame that it's something those developers will no longer be able to offer. If anything the overall impact is that it just causes the VR market to contract.
Out of all the major players in gaming, with their financial resources they are the ones who can afford to take the most risk in this area. It's bizarre to see people making excuses for them.
Last edited:
Kiraly
Member
Oh wow GOTCHA because companies can never reassess decisions based on market trends and researchSo why was Xbox promising VR content and VR compatibility with Xbox One X back in 2016?
You sure showed them!!!
Fatal Chuck Yeager
Member
Why would they take a risk that other companies already took a risk on and left after being burned, or are trying to make profit by selling peanuts or because there's not enough active users?
What would Microsoft's consumer VR headset hypothetically do differently than Quest 3, Apple, or Sony which are all similar to headsets we have already seen with almost all the same issues preventing mass appeal? The current format started in 2016 for VR headsets needs to be gotten rid of, and VR has to come back with a new implementation. We are not there.
GHG
Member
The thing is, Microsoft have never made their own consumer VR hardware and from a logical standpoint don't need to.
They can support 3rd party headsets, just as they did on windows with WMR.
The biggest issue is the fact that they aren't hesitating in purchasing developers who were previously more than happy to (and had plans to continue to) support VR. If you're going to do that then at least allow them to have a pathway to continue to develop for VR, even if it's only via PC.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Lmao. They were not allowed to change their minds?
Especially when they revised their VR plans before launch?
‘Excuses’, because they don’t want to participate in a risky market that’s failed to get significant traction?
For PC, certainly.
For console? Wouldn't make sense to not offer standardized hardware
Mojang made Minecraft for PSVR under Microsoft. Hellblade VR released for PSVR post acquisition.
Flight SiM 2020 received VR support on PC.
I don’t think MS is blocking PCVR moves. If Bethesda wants to make a Starfield VR, it’ll probably happen.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Hopefully ms changes their mind in a few years if VR takes off.
Gonna grab a quest 3 this year and I wish it would work on xbox but I get why MS wouldn't go near facebook.
Gonna grab a quest 3 this year and I wish it would work on xbox but I get why MS wouldn't go near facebook.
hybrid_birth
Gold Member
Please buy the Walmart Onn VR headset for $50. Now with 8 bit graphics and pixel hdr!
You should try the PSVR2. It’s really good
Quest brings a lot of convenience though. I’ll definitely upgrade from the Quest 2 to the Quest 3 when it shows up.