Measuring Oculus sales through mobile app downloads, lol...
I have 2 Oculuses and have the app downloaded on 5 devices at least.
Anyway, I feel like the popularity of Oculus is pretty limited. Unlike consoles, you have to be pretty physically active to play most games on it. I do think it's an excellent fitness device, though.
I think Google made a huge mistake discontinuing Cardboard/Daydream. They should bring it back. It really doesn't make that much sense to have another device when phones already are more or less as powerful as an Oculus anyway. Not to mention that the Quest runs on Android to begin with.
> I think Google made a huge mistake discontinuing <insert great products here>.
Google collectively as a company suffers from some kind of mental illness whereby if 20% of the world's population doesn't immediately love their product, it's considered a massive failure and abandoned in short order, instead of lovingly worked on until improved enough to be truly popular.
The success of any Google product is directly linked to ad revenue. If it doesn’t get more people giving up more of their data, to improve Google’s ad revenue stream, it’s killed.
Well Zuck has said that Oculus Quest 2 sales are over 10 million devices, and the graph claims 2020 + 2021 is 12 million devices.
Considering then that the Quest 2 came out October 2020 it doesn’t seem like the graph can be far wrong. As the devices are very close to each other on the graph though it’s hard to say if the headline is correct.
I didn't check to see how the data was collected on the chart, but might this count app downloads per person rather than raw download numbers? I might have an app installed on multiple devices, but I'm still using the same Google account.
It uses app downloads as a proxy for device sales - which was OP's criticism (as you noted, this could be multiple app downloads per device), but in reality the numbers for app downloads seem to approximately tally back to the publicly disclosed figures anyway.
There was also an FTC filing associated with the Quest 2 face interface recall that disclosed US sales numbers in the millions as well. 10M devices is a reasonable number.
Phones need to have high refresh rate displays to be usable for VR without contributing to motion sickness. That's becoming a standard for the high-end phones now, but a lot of people still have phones with 60 Hz displays, which is just not enough for VR.
120Hz is already on many mid range phone brands such as Realme. Won't be long before thats common. What is the cost of the Oculus headset? If phones will be capable within 2 years and you don't need another device do you think Oculus will ever be more than a temporary solution? I suspect phones will crush that market as they did compact cameras.
Daydream/Cardboard's positioning was for very light use, in short bursts. A lot of viewers could get away with no straps nor bother with micro adjustments for that reason.
It was perfect to check a YouTube VR video for instance. There needs to be more to VR than that, but I think it was still nice to have.
I do think that going with a dedicated device is a better approach. Imo, the screen/hardware is only a small part of a quality VR headset. Those optics probably don't come cheap, so a 'brainless' VR headset probably won't cost that much less than the Quest. Add in the problems with non-uniform phone sizes, small phone batteries/throttling under load, and the fact that the devs can't target a single HW config in what is a very performance sensitive application, I don't think the bring-your-own-phone approach can compete.
Oculus already tried the phone route and abandoned it because of the inherent limitations of not controlling the whole hardware stack. Let's look at first mobile Oculus headset, the Oculus GO which was binary compatible with content made for GearVR;
- Performed better than GearVR with a far slower SoC than the Galaxy handsets because the thermal solution could be designed around the headset.
- Cost $200 vs the $1000 for a Galaxy handset + GearVR
- Was more comfortable with higher weight because of better
distribution across the headset instead of being concentrated in the front where the phone attaches.
- The display was sharper with lower resolution than GearVR, because you design the panel differently for headset than a handset.
The short summary is that both your head via the headset and your hands via the controllers are tracked.
The result is that to dodge items in the game you must make the corresponding movements like ducking, tilting, bending, etc in reality.
Many games like super hot and pistol whip take advantage of this. The result is that playing oculus games is much like exercising.
Other games like audio trip and synth riders explicitly make it exercise focused.
I own most of the oculus games and I’d say audio trip on cardio mode is probably one of the most physically demanding. Unfortunately it’s not super popular so there aren’t a lot of songs.
You can see some of the fitness ratings for VR games here: https://vrhealth.institute/vr-ratings. From personal experience, the boxing game Thrill of the Fight was a brutal workout - after ten minutes, I was sweating and panting. I saw the same from fairly fit individuals as well. Also big fan of Pistol Whip for fun lower body workouts (lots of squats while evading bullets).
Depending on the game, you can expect to burn between 5 and 11 calories per minute using the on-headset tracking, at one point I was consistently burning 1k calories per day at a healthy weight. Both hands and your head are tracked, allowing games to detect leaning or squatting out the way of attacks, as well as physically moving around the play space. Many experiences involve swinging swords or fists, which is also cardio.
The common example is Thrill of the Fight; it's a (shadow)boxing simulator. Users have reported over 3k calories burned from this in a day[0][1]. It's intense exercise, and you quickly build a heavy sweat.
TL;DR: It's much more intense than I'd imagined. Imagine playing badminton, but in a smaller area.
Cycling on an indoor bike at enough effort to burn 600 calories an hour will leave me covered in sweat that makes wearing glasses hard. How comfortable is the Occulus headset when sweaty? does it stay on with violent movements you might do in shadow boxing?
I also sweat a lot. To wear an Oculus headset and most VR headsets comfortably, it’s enough to just have a silicon cover. There are also plenty of accessories and mods to counter sweat.
It stays in place and is comfortable with the 'elite strap' accessory, can't say for the default one it ships with. IMO it should be standard. Brow sweat is a problem, but new units all ship with foam + silicone rather than just foam padding so at least it's cleanable.
There is also an actively ventilated face pad from "BoboVR" that I've found to help a lot with the eyepieces fogging up, which they otherwise will do, especially with the snap-in prescription lenses from FramesDirect. (Those need ventilation holes too, though; they'll fog up in the space between the prescription lens and the stock one. I haven't taken a pin vise to mine yet, but intend soon to, as that's the only place I still have fogging problems with the fan running.)
The Quest 2 stock strap sucks. You really need an "elite strap" or something like it. For Beat Saber or anything even vaguely like it, you also want knuckle straps for the controllers, so you don't have to worry about holding on to them or about failing to hold on to them.
The stock strap doesn't feel secure to me, even with headphones over it - I get shy about moving my head for fear I'll lose the headset. The "elite strap"'s knob-tightening mechanism holds everything much more firmly in place.
If you wanted to know how many oculuses that were sold wouldn't you just ask your retailers how many oculeses they sold? I mean measuring downloads would give you ame order of magnitude measure of sales but not a very accurate number.
The implication here is the demand for Oculus is higher than for Xboxes. But Xbox has been extremely difficult to buy this past year, where an Oculus is readily available.
Still an interesting data point, but misleading on its own.
Yeah, the Xbox Series X sells out everywhere the minute supply becomes available — I've been casually trying to buy one for a while now. The Quest 2 certainly sold well, but the comparison is just a comparison of supply, not demand. Oculus sold more Quest 2s because it manufactured more Quest 2s (because the components were less in short supply this year).
It's somewhat weird that the PS5 has had so many more units though.
Maybe the demand for new gaming experiences is being satisfied by Oculus due to lower costs and better availability. Maybe it's not misleading at all if Meta starts to eat the share of dollars/hours.
Only time will tell if people will continue to use them beyond their initial novelty.
I agree with you and it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Personally, I purchased an Oculus Quest 2 and a Valve Index about nine months ago because I couldn't find a Playstation or Xbox system in stock. I wasn't expecting much from either system (especially the Quest 2, since it is basically a cell phone with goggles and a couple of hand controllers) but they've both grown on me. I love the Quest's portability and the Index's screen resolution and adjustability are excellent. Meta's customer support for warranty issues has also been excellent (much, much, MUCH nicer than Sony's). I've also found a lot of games I like, such as:
I've enjoyed both VR systems to the point that I haven't bothered to check the availability of Sony's or Microsoft's offerings recently. I'm enjoying what I have.
I don't know why Sony and Microsoft never seem to be able to predict the market and create enough products to meet demand, but they always seem to struggle with this (I know there's a global chip shortage at the moment, but Sony especially has had this problem for years). Now that decent enough competitors exist, Sony and Microsoft might find their marketshare eroding due to their inability to satisfy market demands.
I wonder if it’s an another anecdotal that shows Oculus’ struggle without core gamer support and under almost a declaration of war from Carmack, that they had to resort to comparison against Xbox. Surely they’ve got no support from me, and while I’m not an important person, I can’t be extremely unique either.
I think this narrative is biased by your perspective as an enthusiast PC gamer (the PCMasterRace type of person). Oculus selling a console-like, works out of the box offering makes a lot of sense in pushing VR towards the mainstream. The existence of stuff like AirLink also points to strong demand from PC gamers as well. The only people complaining are the PCMR crowd who either dislike the focus on mainstream users (filthy casuals amirite?) or the fact that it's made by Facebook (somewhat valid, I suppose).
The market success of Quest 2 in comparison to Oculus PC-only headsets and the Index+WMR ecosystem makes it pretty clear which is the more appealing option to most people.
yeah, I'm a huge PC Master Race type, and even I'd never recommend to someone to start with PC VR right now. It's a LOT better, but it's not so much better that it's worth paying 3x retail price for a high end GPU right now.
If you can stomach forking over all that tracking data with Mark Zuckerberg's promise that he isn't going to use it to get better at hacking your lizard brain, the Quest 2 is an otherwise unambiguously great product.
My Index is fantastic, but setting it up is usually a 10+ minute process (dig out and hook up the tracking cubes, get Steam and SteamVR patched and working again, clear a space next to my gaming PC). Meanwhile, last time I had a Quest, I could just put it on and use it in my back yard at night, or clear some space anywhere in the house and use it there. Practically no setup or BS involved.
It would not be unreasonable to e.g. fire someone for making these sorts of statements. Most people exist outside of your 4chan-adjacent subculture and probably wouldn’t be very understanding of someone identifying themselves as a member of the master race.
So long as you append the "PC" part to the name, no one will associate it to the Nazi thing. "PC Master Race" is pretty casual and more importantly unserious internet term that's just become a self-deprecting name for PC gamers.
> So long as you append the "PC" part to the name, no one will associate it to the Nazi thing
Except for the more than 99% of non-gamers who don’t hang out on boards like /v/?
I’m not accusing anyone of being a Nazi, just pointing out that outside of a very specific subculture this is a very risky joke (and not a particularly funny one in any context).
You probably wouldn’t call people -fags (newfag, macfag, eurofag, etc…) either, even though “master race” carries far worse connotations than “fag”.
I’m not trying to criticize anyone, just offering a friendly reminder that letting these injokes leak outside of 4chan or reddit can have unfortunate consequences since most people won’t be as understanding as you or me.
Perhaps one direction I can spin that along is that those forums support free, open, and (albeit to a limited degree)civil discussions on highly politicized or sensitive matters, moreso than parts of the web that operate tied closely or even firmly grounded to real world identities. I only have had experiences in other *chans, though.
I have never seen that term be used in a self-deprecating way. Also, I'd want any mature community to introspect on whether it really needs to co-opt Nazi terminology.
The only way someone on HackerNews is going to get fired for being a member of the Glorious PC Gaming Master Race[1] is if they work for Sony or maybe Apple
Maybe true for people working on/for startups. If you work for some bigco? Good luck explaining your “master race” jokes to HR. It’s not gonna go over well, even at FAANG.
People say it all the time at my FAANG job. Some whiny loser tried to call in HR and the cancel squad over it on slack, and it went literally nowhere, didn't even get anyone in the "cancel everyone" channel worked up
> GP compares gamers to right wing ideologues. QED
It really doesn’t, there’s no suggestion that gamers are similar to right wing ideologues.
The comment just points out the fact that a specific group of gamers has decided to borrow Nazi terminology for the name of their group, it does not imply that the gamers and nazis are similar or even somehow comparable.
It’s not a comparison, simply an observation that the “modern technology movement” has deliberately chosen to borrow Nazis terminology. I’m not comparing them to the Nazis in any way.
This is an understandable mistake, Godwin’s law is frequently abused.
The man himself has frequently criticised people for abusing his “law” in the way you’re doing now.
Well, I guess it’s up to you how you want to delineate the appropriateness of the terminology, but a less mathematical application is still appropriate.
I do not mind focus on casual users, in fact I used to shove VR in any context I could. But the moment Facebook announced their current plan, I stopped advocating VR entirely.
I don’t suggest possible VR integrations anymore, I don’t go into VR development, I don’t bring up VR compatibility when speccing a PC, I don’t mention use cases in VR for every tangential technologies, I mostly behave as VR was a 3DTV.
Who’s still talking about Quest 2 anyway? Q1 sold like hotcakes in Japan, coincidentally where I am from, and Oculus/Facebook was proud of it that they said extra stocks are assigned for Japanese market when Q2 launched - I don’t see them. And that launch happened after the announcement to shut down Oculus accounts and services.
I think Q2 will and needs to be extinguished even if it will risk jeopardizing VR as a whole, and that will be possible by PCMRing, and I am sure that is what is happening.
I tried buying a series X for 4 month with no luck. Everything which shows up online is sold out within seconds. So yes - the supply chain issues are very real.
Maybe 4k or 8k gaming won't be sustainable due to production costs, but what I'd call 'high-res' is even more viable today than it was 5 years ago. Be careful of moving goal posts. Top-end hardware has always been and will remain silly money. I agree there is a broader market now, but think it is in addition to the existing 'gamer' market and you are not going to see Ubisoft, EA or Rockstar pivot away from the obscenely profitable markets they dominate.
I see my children not giving a crap about graphics. Their favorite games being Roblox and Minecraft. And Fortnite lately because they play with school friends over discord. I think I'm from another age, of Doom and Quake, when changing computers every 4 years was mandatory. Maybe one day videogames will even be more than just a time sink, who knows.
not only did they not propose or suggest a specific solution - nor are obligated to with their observation - they also left the door open for “many platforms”, therefore allowing a vr headset to be just one platform
I doubt this. My understanding is Oculus sold about 10m in 2021; Microsoft will have sold north of 10m XBox Series X this year alone. With previous gen models still on sale and many stores only moving Series S at present due to supply chain constraints, I expect this number is a few million more total XBoxen sold beyond the 10m+ Series X this year.
Add to that over 20m Nintendo Switch and 20m various PlayStation models (plus all the popular (S)NES, PSone, Genesis, etc mini consoles) and consoles are selling well over 50m consoles a year. The home console market hasn’t been this diverse and healthy in a while.
And I would also like to buy one. But as far as I understood a Facebook account which I refuse to create is required for that. I found conflicting information on that - would someone maybe care to competently clarify on that?
Do you need a Facebook account or not to use an OQ2?
As a matter of fact I still have an Oculus account from Go days and I just checked - it's still active apparently.
Enhance Your VR Experience With a Facebook Account
To access social features, you need to log in with a Facebook account by going to Facebook Settings in the Oculus app.
What Happens if You Don’t Log In With a Facebook Account
You can use your Oculus account until January 1, 2023, but you will not have access to social features with your Oculus account. Starting January 1, 2023, we will end formal support for Oculus accounts, and you will need to log in with a Facebook account to access full functionality on the Oculus platform.
Still have very very fond memories of the Go. Virtual virtual reality and Wander f.x. were amazing experiences. But I sold the device in anticipation of a newer model and having been can't waiting now for it since several years ago. So that's due.
They’ve already announced that Facebook forced logins were being phased out weeks ago. This is old news. Soon the only thing you’ll need is an Oculus/Meta account.
But Meta is Facebook, right? I find it impossible to believe they would not still be connected internally somehow; after all, Facebook doesn't have the best track record keeping walls around user data.
While I understand the enthusiasm to embrace this due to how good Oculus is, I'm kind of stunned how ready every one is to believe a single sentence from one of the most distrusted people on the planet. Don't forget that the whole reason this is a problem is Facebook broke a commitment made at the time of Oculus acquisition that there would not be a requirement for a Facebook account in the first place. So why are we trusting this now?
Until it actually happens, and until we know exactly what the caveats are (maybe it will be just as bad or even worse than having a Facebook account) - there's very little reason to take any action based on this information.
The key things that need to go are the real name requirement and the arbitrary account banning (often for reasons out of users control and with no recourse) causing loss of past Oculus purchases.
"As we’ve focused more on work, and frankly as we’ve heard your feedback more broadly, we’re working on making it so you can log into Quest with an account other than your personal Facebook account."
On the whole FB account, does it require you to actually do anything with it? Can it literally just be an e-mail and random password, which only logs into the Oculus. If so, what's the problem?
You tell me if that is even true ... I haven't had an FB account in many years. From what I read (mostly here on HN) is that you may be able to create an FB account with an e-mail address. But after a while you'll be pushed / forced into providing a mobile phone number, a profile picture and some people (here) even write about having to provide an ID. Also you have stay actually active on it or you risk it being closed suddenly. That's what I learned. I don't know if that is true. And if the games you bought are attached to that account they will be gone.
There was a period in the last decade when most high-end TVs had 3D functionality. It required extra glasses, but it just felt so cool.
I had a couple guests over a couple fun evenings, but just like other cool feeling pieces of tech - like my Xbox Kinect - the glasses are in a box somewhere.
This feels again exact like that: cool at first sight, but the novelty wears off quickly and I realize I don't want more imersion or more escapism. I just want better quality media on simple devices.
Yes, but, as an owner of a VR headset I have to say it still isn't "there" yet in my opinion. I have exactly one game that I keep it for (Beat Saber), and have only ever played one other game that I think actually made VR feel like a good idea (SUPERHOT VR). The hardware (a Rift in my case) is a constant pain to deal with. Have to avoid tripping on the cord, have to keep the sensors happy so everything doesn't freak out, had to buy special prescription inserts because these things are just not designed for people with glasses, my office is apparently not quite big enough for a lot of room scale stuff, etc. Oh, and you need a pretty darned good video card to drive this thing, which is getting ridiculously expensive thanks to the cryptomining fuckheads.
My sister has a Quest 2, which at least seems to eliminate some of the setup headache and the need for an expensive PC and all the cables, albeit at the cost of some visual fidelity, but she still doesn't use it very much. And personally I will never buy another VR system from Facebook.
I tried a wired Oculus (I think?) setup at a friend's house a few years ago for an evening, and it was fun but yes I could see the novelty wearing off quickly. Especially given the setup at the time would have been well over $1000 (once you consider upgrading to a powerful enough PC).
I considering getting a Quest 2 this year, as the price is a lot lower that what my friends setup would have cost, but after looking at a few "Top VR games" videos on YouTube I decided it wasn't for me. The videos were full of FPS and fighting games, which I can understand in VR would be a completely different experience and fun if you enjoy that, but that really isn't my thing. If more casual games come out then I could see it becoming more mainstream, but right now it does seem a bit of a fad.
I've had the Quest 2 for only about a month, but still don't own an FPS. I was impressed with the amount of non FPS games such as boxing, mini-golf, and table tennis.
Aside: The relatively low friction involved in starting game play has me playing this far more than I ever did with my rarely used X-box One. It remains to be seen whether this lasts beyond winter here in the northeast US.
I can't play fast-paced FPS games either due to RSI, but luckily there are plenty of more casual games as well. I recently bought Demeo (table top game) to play with my brother, and it was pretty fun. :)
And the Wii was different to motion controls of the past, but you don't exactly see that flourish these days.
It's not really about the improvements in technology, rather than the inherent limits in its use cases - there's only so many games and media experiences that truly benefit from VR, and as a rule, they're designed for VR from the beginning.
Without a doubt, VR is a huge leap and a drastically different and exciting medium, but that doesn't mean it's ever going to be more than gimmick worth a couple evenings' entertainment to most people.
Kinect technology is still here. Alexa, Google home, and Siri have been relatively successful. Also I believe Apple AR uses something similar to Kinect’s scanning tech.
3D movies actually look great in VR. That might be a way for it to be popularized again.
I would wait to make a final judgement on VR until Apple ships.
It's amusing to talk to Quest owners in VRChat. They talk about as a mark of shame, and inevitably want to upgrade to a "real" headset. If nothing else I suspect the Quest drives a number of regret purchases into the Index, so it does have some marginal utility!
I think it depends on the person and what they want out of a VR. I own both a Quest 2 and a Valve Index and I find I play the Quest 2 a lot more than I do the Index, simply because it is easier and more portable. The games don't look as nice, to be sure, but they're not terrible either.
(NOTE: I'm not saying I like the Quest 2 more than the Index. That isn't the case. The Index is an amazing system and the best VR experience I've had. I'm just saying I use the Quest 2 more often due to convenience, so, for me, it has its place.)
My Quest 2 has really grown on me and I'd buy a Quest 3 without any hesitation. Having said that, I only use the Quest 2 to play single-player games. I have no interest in online multiplayer games nor in VRChat. If those features are important to you, perhaps the Quest 2 isn't a good option.
Same here. I bought the Quest 2 after I couldn't get my hands on a PS5. Amazing tech but I still find it uncomfortable after playing for longer than 15 min. The more I need to move my head during a game the worse it is. I also find the fitness games the most fun and best fit for VR. Eleven ping pong is amazing. I also like boxing but I stopped playing it as I always feel shitty afterwards (Stride was the worse game for me). I tried RE4 which was fun, but I think for story games I'd enjoy playing more on the Xbox or PS, since I will be able to play it for longer and the quality of the graphics is more important than the immersiveness. I'm sure others have different opinions. Any games you recommend?
As someone who is considering upgrading to a quest 2, I'd like to know more. Everything I've read about it says it's close to top of the market in terms of visual quality and comfort. I presume I'd have to use it tethered with steamVR, just like my current acer headset... though I'm equally sure that undemanding titles should be OK untethered.
So what gives? Why do users in your circle regret it? And where does the vr community hang out, so I can learn more?
You can use it wireless with Steam VR using Virtual Desktop. If you have the right setup, performance is close to wired.
As a current Index and former Vive Pro, I can tell you that my Quest 2 has the most game time because of one thing: wireless. The other issue is Steam VR doesn’t have nearly as many people on multiplayer.
VR Chat is interesting, but most people in VR don’t spend a good portion of their time there.
Only VR Chat and one game take advantage of full body tracking. I wouldn’t focus to much on it.
You're likely coming at it from the angle of already having a powerful gaming PC. A lot of people buy them hoping to end-run around that. The Quest can let you do that, but the promise turns out rather empty when people find out VRChat is much less capable without a PC.
The other obstacle is full body tracking. Turns out this just works much better if you have lighthouses to begin with, plus a headset that uses them.
Both. The Quest is practically a second-class citizen in VRChat. It can't run many models or worlds unless it's PC linked and running on desktop hardware.
Yeah, but the PC is quite a large fraction of the cost of going from nothing to full Index system. If you don't already have a good gaming PC then the Quest alone can't help you, and once you have one you might as well get a system that can also easily do full body tracking.
To be clear, the people who can run these models and worlds are also tethered to a PC. So the quest isn’t any worse than the competition. The complaint here seems to be that it isn’t better enough to justify… well something I’m sure
This is 100% anecdotal and I'm sure other people have different experiences and ultimately it may not be directly relevant to the fact being pointed out in this linked tweet, but...
As a gamer with a lot of gamer friends (split among PC & console, though more console than PC, I play on both) I know quite a few people (close to 10) who bought both VR headsets (some Oculus, some not) and Xbox Series Xs over the past year and a half.
Every single person I know including myself used the VR headset a lot for about 2 weeks and then barely touched it except for occasionally pulling it out to show friends/family. Meanwhile we all play games on the Xbox nearly nightly.
I love a good VR game but it just feels like though the headset hardware is pretty close to "there" that its still really difficult to deliver good experiences in a flexible way due to input/tactile feedback (or lack thereof) concerns. So most people that try out VR will play a lot of beat saber, tool around with a shooter like Arizona Sunshine, and then go back to playing traditional non-VR games.
Most gamers who try VR will do that, sure. They do like their comfort zone. Most people, though? That's a different question.
Who ever said VR was, or even should be, for people who identify as "gamers"? It's a wholly different interaction style, and there's no obvious reason why anyone should expect "gamer" games already highly optimized for their existing platforms to fit it. Aiming a gun precisely in VR is a pain in the ass, but you just can't do anything that feels like Beat Saber anywhere else.
Too, the "gamer"-identified market is both deeply saturated and extremely whiny, typically demanding an endless stream of trivial iterations on existing franchises while broadly spurning on this ground alone anything that dares to attempt novelty. EA and Ubisoft are exactly what the "gamer"-identifying market deserves, and also the world leaders in being EA and Ubisoft. Try to disrupt that and you just rehash Windows phones vs. Apple and Android.
And, in both cases, why should this be something you want? Look at the Wii, which had no more use for "gamers" than they had for it, and profited handsomely by that disdain. If I were trying to get a VR studio off the ground, that's the kind of lightning I'd be chasing - try to win by doing something new, and happily leave the "gamer"-identifying niche to the more-of-the-same it so loudly insists upon.
This is true of most consumer electronics. As another anecdote - I haven't played computer games for 15 years, but the Quest 2 is a complete game changer, the level of immersion breathes real life into games. I now play 1-2 hours a day, every day and have done for nearly a year.
This is exactly what I did with my Playstation VR a few years ago. I played it for a couple of weeks and then only turned it on to show friends and family.
Today, though, I only play games on my Quest 2 and Valve Index. I don't even own a console anymore. Admittedly, this is partially due to console availability issues, but now that I've been using my VR systems for almost a year, I find I'm not really motivated to buy a console.
Maybe this is just a case of "settling" because neither the Playstation or Xbox systems are readily available. I'm not sure. Perhaps I'll feel differently when I can actually go to the store and impulse-buy a console, but for now, I'm content with VR.
I'm pretty sure the reason is that VR is not just regular games but in 3D. Instead the games have to be different in many aspects. Most people cannot play with those goggles for longer than half an hour. You have to address that. Also rendering 3D with comutation constrained to what's in the goggles is placing serious limits compared to rendering (3D projected onto) 2D using a much heavier hardware requires game development to rethink the entire design of a game.
Chris Dixon is dishonestly pumping Web3 as if it exists today. He has a huge financial incentive to do so because of A16Z putting $2B into a crypto mandated fund.
Mark my words, retail investors and speculators with everything to lose will get sucked into buying the tokens people like him promote and be left with nothing of utility.
"Web3" as it is being proposed now is essentially an unregistered securities offering. The SEC is asleep at the wheel and A16Z is taking full advantage of it, as is their capitalistic right. This is the 2017 ICO craze rebranded.
The Xbox has been hard to buy for plus Microsoft have been pushing PC gaming again lately. Thus I know of a few Xbox fans that have decided to shift back to PC gaming as a result.
Compare that to the Switch which is selling significantly more than the Oculus, has the worst support for “VR” out of any of the listed, and is the lowest end hardware (bar the Oculus) too and the real conclusion one can make is that graph is that casual gaming is still a massively lucrative industry.
That's pretty awesome, VR needs better content, and if it was a chicken and egg scenario, this might be it. I haven't touched my Oculus headset in a few years because the content is so stale, but hopefully we start seeing more interesting games.
their "app store" is quite possibly the worst most frustrating experience I've ever had.
SOME apps you can buy as gifts, others you can't and there seems to be little rhyme or reason to it. the search engine is completely useless not showing anything anywhere near what you are looking for.
The interface requires a shit ton of scrolling before anything useful shows up on the screen... It made me want to send the two i bought for my kids back.
I think enough people have Xboxes (one/X/whatever) at this point, an entire secondhand untracked market, and Oculus is still fresh enough, that this feels like a silly headline to even discuss. Team it up with supply chain and availability issues. I got an Oculus this year. I have multiple Xboxes already and zero need to upgrade to another iteration of them right now.
Really? It would be nice if VR was gaining that much traction, but you dont get that general impression. I wonder how close we are to a major price reduction in the hardware that would help demand no end, but also VR versions of some big or iconic titles like GTA V or Skyrim.
Why would anyone buy a new Xbox? Most people I know still have regular HD TV's, and six year-old Xbox one or PS4 will do just fine for most of their needs.
There are very few games that won't work -- or have performance issues -- with the previous generation. Most are just the regular FIFA/NHL/Madden stuff, with the occasional overhyped mishap like CP2077.
It's the same situation as with the Xbox 360 -- as long as the previous generations can play the currently popular games, people won't upgrade. Hell, in the Microsoft Store, it's still remakes of 360-era games like GTA V and Skyrim that are being used to advertise the new consoles. No thanks my 360 still works fine! :D
Agreed, in a lot of cases it makes little sense to upgrade. That's true just about always when you don't have a 4k TV.
When you do have a 4k TV and it's large enough, a PS5 can look a lot better. Especially versus the regular PS4 (rather than the PS4 Pro).
But historically the Playstations are known for upgrades every 6-7 years (from 1994 to 2000, to 2006, to 2013, to 2020), and then a support of about 3-4 years after, for a 10-year lifecycle.
The PS5 has been out for a year, making a PS5 exclusive at this time that's totally specialised for the hardware makes little sense. There's 14 million PS5s out there, and 115 million PS4s.
But the big games are in the pipeline that utilise the PS5 hardware specifically, and after a while these new games won't run on 4 anymore, or will, but will look a lot better on the 5 or be very slow on the 4.
Paying scalper prices makes no sense at the moment, but the PS5 will eventually take over the 4. If you can get one at retail prices, I'd rather have one sooner than later, if you're switching some day anyway. The loading-time improvements are quite nice.
Oh, I'm sure we'll get there at some point, but until we get new games instead of remakes, there's little reason for it.
The thing with the supply chain issues is that they keep many gamers on XB1/PS4. Until the target audience grows, we're stuck in circle with FIFA N+1 and the game of the year 2011 ported to yet another platform.
I flagged this post. Not credible enough for HN front page.
Really ridiculous. Surely no one can believe Vr headsets out sold Xbox consoles? Who here honestly actually believes the concept that VR headsets are outselling xboxes? No one.
Where’s the actual proof?
And even if it’s true it’s just because of the chip shortage which makes it meaningless.
Oculus Quest 1 and 2 are standalone VR headsets, which means that the single device is everything you need to play games. You don't need PC, but if you have it you can also use headset to play PCVR games through Steam – with wire or wireless if you have capable wifi.
Even though XR2 chipset in Quest 2 is weak in comparison to beefy PC with NVIDIA RTX 3090, the games are optimized for it and runs smoothly at 90/120Hz. A lot of games are made in low-poly style exactly because of poor hardware, but some games can pull off some pretty decent looking graphics (Eleven, Climb 2, Robo Recall, etc.). I expect that graphics will get much better (HL Alyx better) on standalone VR headsets with Apple's take on this segment.
The GPU shortage was my deciding factor for buying a Quest2. Simple games like Beat Saber are indistinguable from PC, it's a marvel of optimization. My GTX1060 stuttered more than the Quest mobile chip.
I have 2 Oculuses and have the app downloaded on 5 devices at least.
Anyway, I feel like the popularity of Oculus is pretty limited. Unlike consoles, you have to be pretty physically active to play most games on it. I do think it's an excellent fitness device, though.
I think Google made a huge mistake discontinuing Cardboard/Daydream. They should bring it back. It really doesn't make that much sense to have another device when phones already are more or less as powerful as an Oculus anyway. Not to mention that the Quest runs on Android to begin with.