
Popularity of Sony’s PlayStation VR Surprises Even the Company - Tiktaalik
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/26/business/sony-playstation-vr-sales.html
======
donum
Reading the comments I realized there are currently three main issues:

1\. VR costs a lot

2\. The technology needs to be better (higher resolution)

3\. There's not a lot of VR content available yet.

Two weeks ago, Gabe Newell and his SteamVR team talked openly about these
issues in an interview. [1]

They say:

\- The price will go down and the tech will become better. He said VR will be
a new reason for CPU/GPU manufacturers to up their game again. (2018/2019)

\- Valve is currently making three different full VR games (2017/2018)

\- There should be an open VR standard

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMpQWSqQFK0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMpQWSqQFK0)

~~~
stephengillie
VR needs a GoldenEye moment. VR needs the kind of revolutionary blockbuster
that Doom was, to make people sit up and take notice. Something that really
pushes the possibilities of the technology, and pushes us into a new era of
gaming, the way FarCry pushed the limits of video technology.

Instead, it's not quite getting dumped in the sand the way Atari dumped ET in
1982, but it's not far off - major supporters are giving half-hearted
statements, and the biggest application I've heard about receiving VR
investment is a desktop replacement - not exactly something from which I'd
expect a compelling VR experience. So far, my most mind-blowing VR experience
has merely been Google Earth.

Where are the Wii-game clones? Where are the DDR-clones and, like, retro
arcades? Where are the games that have co-op in the same space? Why can't you
invite your friends into your Google Earth, to look at the same scenes?

We're roughly a year out, with multiple platforms, and almost every game is
still a tech demo. Where are the news reports of people breaking their TV with
their Vive-mote? - Nobody has been so preoccupied with a VR game that that
they flung the controller into the TV yet. I'm worried that investors were so
preoccupied with whether or not they could make money off of this, that they
didn't stop to think if they should make it fun. How many consoles have
successfully gone their first year without a compelling release, and later
recovered?

~~~
yAnonymous
>VR needs a GoldenEye moment

It really doesn't. Anyone who has used VR knows how amazing it is. The main
issue for games is getting the controls right.

The way I see it, sticking to a controller or keyboard/mouse and using the VR
as a kind of stationary surround monitor is the best way to go for gaming.

Dual controllers and physically moving around in a room have too many issues
and don't feel natural for games. It's great for tech demos, but I can't
imagine playing through an 80-hour game like that. It's like the Nintendo Wii
controllers that are only good for party games.

~~~
dkonofalski
I think this sounds a lot like a "back in my day" kinda comment you'd hear
from someone that's really averse to something different. Arizona Sunshine is
one of the coolest games I've ever played and, even though it's not 80 hours
long, is amazing for something running on 1st gen hardware. I can't wait to
see what happens with VR in the future and would gladly play games with dual
controllers and standing.

~~~
yAnonymous
It's a comment and personal opinion from someone who works with the technology
and has first hand experience. Make of that what you will.

I'd like a completely immersive experience, but current VR simply can't offer
that.

To get there, full body tracking is required so that controllers are not
needed anymore, and some kind of treadmill that allows you to walk in VR while
physically staying in the same position, to avoid running into walls, having
to re-adjust the connectors etc.

And even then, holding an object in VR when your hands are really empty or
holding a controller feels weird.

------
DigitalSea
I got the PSVR as a day one pre-order. I was so excited, I preordered months
before its release (when they first announced it). I had it for 2.5 months and
then I sold it. It was cool at first, but the technology just isn't quite
there. The limiting depth of field, limited choice of decent games (Rush of
Blood was great) and Wii style graphics for a few of the experiences
(especially Playstation VR Worlds).

It's a fun platform, but it definitely has the gimick aspect to it. I've
experienced Oculus Rift, HTC Vive, Gear VR and PSVR. In all honesty, nothing
has really wowed me just yet. I believe we'll need 4k VR for the technology to
truly take it up a notch, it's getting there. My favourite is definitely the
Vive, just peripherials and the resolution is great.

No doubt, the PSVR 2.0 is going to be amazing and I will buy that again.

~~~
psyc
I have a PSVR and I think it's simply amazing. Room scale and better visuals
will be great, sure. But PSVR as it is today is already what I've been waiting
25 years for.

~~~
musha68k
Same here :) I've extended experience with all major VR headsets and I
actually prefer the PSVR because of Sony's top-notch vertical integration.

That said, I get the general criticism for the current state in VR ("low"
resolution yadda yadda) and PSVR in particular (lack of full room control /
limited motion tracking yadda yadda). _I really don 't mind_ as _presence_
works across the board _today_ and I actually love the "subtractive" design
and simple controller based experiences of most PSVR titles.

In any case, even with the most high-end graphics card on a 4K+ display and
the most ambitious titles, games still look _very_ far from photo realistic
(ask any non gamer to watch you _play_ and evaluate).

It will take us still a very long time to get to that somewhat questionable
goal, especially in VR where all those "shortcomings" get even more
pronounced. We will probably need completely new paradigms in game development
as well as whole new classes of technology in general.

So, it's still called "playing" right? Let's continue using our imagination
while enjoying the most creative efforts of our time in ever more engaging
ways.

REZ and BattleZone VR alone.. my 14 year old me still can't believe that this
exists and is available for normal people for essentially a summer holiday
amount of work :O

All that considered, VR clearly is not for everyone. Many people can't get
used to it for lots of reasons. One should also _always_ get enough sleep and
take breaks even when accustomed to VR – it _is_ taxing. Another reason why I
prefer more "simple" arcade style experiences actually, 20 min bouts of highly
enjoyable escapism after which I get back to real life yay ;)

------
jxcole
There is a known strategy in politics to intentionally book rooms for speeches
that are too small for the number of people who will show up. That way the
next day the newspapers will talk about how people were standing in the aisles
just to see the politician.

You have to wonder whether Sony is using the same strategy to generate more
long term interest in a product that was "sold out" and "scarce".

~~~
AlphaSite
A million sold is a lot for a $300 peripheral.

~~~
kabdib
Sheer quantity shipped is not a guarantee that a platform will be viable.

The Kinect sold ten or twelve million in the first couple of months. (That may
have been the number manufactured, but it still sold in the many-millions on
launch).

That didn't help it succeed. There are a bunch of reasons why it didn't, and
why it was eventually all but deprecated from the Xbox One. I believe that
user interaction design driven by management-imposed ideology, rather than
user testing, was a big factor.

~~~
dageshi
As you say, Kinect was dumb for a whole host of reasons, PSVR on the otherhand
is broadly compatible with Oculus and Vive in the sense that the games made
for one can be adapted to the other that means the potential market isn't just
limited to PSVR only. I think that fact moves it firmly out of kinect
territory.

I also agree and said at the time, adding $100+ to the price of the xbox one
for a peripheral which most people wouldn't use was incredibly fucking dumb.

~~~
MegaButts
> PSVR on the otherhand is broadly compatible with Oculus and Vive in the
> sense that the games made for one can be adapted to the other

This is actually one of the big problems in developing content for VR, because
it's _not true_. There are different levels of immersion in VR, and you cannot
take a game that is full immersion which includes 360 roomscale tracking with
hands, to the most limited VR which is front facing tracking without hands.
One is being able to walk around and touch things with your hand, the other is
sitting in a chair and not being to touch things. Yes, you can use the most
basic immersion on any VR system, but my understanding is most people don't
want to bother with it because it's boring. One thing the Vive did correctly
in my opinion is offering the highest immersion to every buyer - there were no
optional wands, they were included (whereas you have to buy them separately
for the Rift). 360 tracking is out of the box, whereas with the Rift you need
to buy a 3rd sensor for that to work (and they're still having so many
problems Facebook has even admitted it's not working properly). The PSVR does
not support 360 tracking at all right now, it's intended as a sit down
experience.

I see a lot of potential in VR, but I'd say it's 2 generations away from
becoming "mainstream" in the sense that there is an active community for it
and it's profitable, but it's always going to be a subset of the gaming market
(talking solely about VR for gaming, the focus with Facebook is clearly to
focus on mobile). Right now it's way too expensive, the resolution is bad, it
requires high end video cards to just barely eke out 90 fps when you want 120
fps, and most importantly there is a serious lack of content.

Like another commenter said, VR right now is in the Palm Pilot stages. It's
cool and there are early adopters, but it has a long way to go before we're in
the iPhone era.

~~~
iamdave
_This is actually one of the big problems in developing content for VR,
because it 's not true._

What isn't true? There are absolutely games on the market that have been
ported between PSVR, Occulus and Vive platforms.

~~~
MegaButts
If you make a game that's designed around 360 tracking and utilizing your
hands, you can port it to the Rift but only a small fraction of the users
would have the necessary hardware and setup for it to work, and you
fundamentally could not port it to the PSVR. Right now there are so few VR
_games_ that everybody is mostly making tech demos, and it's a bit of a
crapshoot how well they work on each piece of hardware as a lot of stuff gets
figured out. As more developers commit to the Vive (which polls show is the
case) it seems likely that the full experience games won't be ported at all. I
foresee a lot of forks within VR gaming, which is bad considering it's seeing
much slower growth than many had hoped.

What I suspect will happen is the Vive will dominate for PC gaming (which I
suspect will be a niche market), Oculus will dominate mobile (I think this
will take 5-10 years and they will be heavily competing with Apple who is
leapfrogging VR entirely for AR which I think will be a far bigger market and
the true next computing platform), and the PSVR will slowly fade into oblivion
the same way that nobody uses a Kinect anymore.

~~~
iamdave
Would you be willing to clarify what your exact position on this is, so that I
don't respond to the wrong statement and we end up talking past one another
(because I _think_ we're in agreement to an extent):

Is it untrue that PSVR games can be ported to other VR platforms (this is what
I was responding to initially and asked for clarification on) or that there
are legitimate technical and market hurdles involved in porting from PSVR to
other VR platforms?

My initial comment was that it _is_ true because that exact phenomenon is
happening, there are multiple titles out that exist across all three major VR
platforms and we're about to have more (Good lord almighty will Elite
Dangerous hurry up and come out for PS4 already...); so my disagreement starts
and about ends there because I thought that's what you were arguing?

Is that no longer the case as you're now talking about demos, and market split
between Vive vs PC vs VR and the technical challenges needed to port games
among platforms? If this is the case, I-in fact-agree with you.

Again, I just want to make sure I know exactly what I'm responding to.

 _As more developers commit to the Vive (which polls show is the case)_

Would you mind sharing those polls? This is something I'm very interested in
as the whole VR space right now has really got me wanting to get back into
game development-which was a hobby in high school making 2D platformers-so I'm
curious what about the Vive is so attractive to other developers.

~~~
MegaButts
More developers are interested in working with the Vive from polls -
[https://uploadvr.com/htc-vive-gdc-state-of-the-
industry-2017...](https://uploadvr.com/htc-vive-gdc-state-of-the-
industry-2017/) \- and admittedly it's anecdotal but everyone I know is
exclusively interested in the Vive (ignoring my friends that work at Facebook,
but they're not game developers).

Yes, games made for PSVR can be ported to the Rift and Vive. _However_ games
designed for the Vive that take advantage of its capabilities _probably_
cannot be ported to the other systems. Basically, the Vive can do more stuff,
and if you design you game around that it doesn't port well (or potentially at
all) to the other headsets.

------
greggman
Apparently people have managed to get PSVR to work with Windows and OSX even
going so far as to get a few Oculus games to run

[http://vrheads.com/do-you-really-need-ps4-playstation-
vr](http://vrheads.com/do-you-really-need-ps4-playstation-vr)

I've been trying to get one since they shipped in October. I'm in Japan. They
have a raffle every 2 weeks or so to decide who gets to buy them at list
price.

------
danso
I bought PSVR last year and have purchased most of the games that have come
out since. I've never used the other VR systems so don't know how PSVR
compares, nor have I ever owned a HD TV (I play off a monitor) so the low-res
doesn't deeply bother me. But the truth is is that while there are great
experiences, there aren't many great _games_.

By great experiences, I mean, games that make you go "Wow" for the first 10
minutes, but after you've completed the game, there's not much reason to go
back. The VR games aren't often designed with replayability or player freedom
in mind. This coupled with the fact that putting on the headset is
substantially more work than just picking up a controller means I've barely
used the VR setup compared to just playing regular PS4 games.

Maybe things will change after the popular success of Resident Evil 7. But the
problem with RE7 is that a pants-shitting experience is not the gaming for
everyone. I don't blame developers in general for not putting the effort in
making great, polished VR games -- the audience just isn't there in comparison
to the 50 million PS4 systems in general. For PSVR to become truly successful,
Sony had to throw money at developers to make games that will be loss leaders
at first.

Right now, PSVR is mostly shovelware and ports from other VR platforms. One of
only developers to build a AAA-game for PSVR, RIGS, was supported by and then
shut down by Sony [0]. I don't have a lot of faith that VR won't go down the
route of PSMove, PS Camera, Xbox's Kinect, and other such unsupported
peripherals.

edit: A couple of other things to point out. I haven't used Rift or Vive but
the general consensus is that PSVR tracking is inferior. That has to be
another disincentive for developers to make distinctive, polished games. Right
now, the most fun VR game is Fruit Ninja, but that allows for sloppy tracking
and is a fairly simple game. The challenge of translating player gestures, and
also not making the player super-sick, are the kind of challenges that require
first-party support/investment by Sony...third-party indie developers can't do
it on their own.

All that said, for games that can be played fully as either VR or non-VR --
this includes RE7, Rez, and Bound -- the VR experience is so much more
superior that you can't imagine playing the non-VR versions.

[0] [http://metro.co.uk/2017/01/12/sony-shuts-down-rigs-
developer...](http://metro.co.uk/2017/01/12/sony-shuts-down-rigs-developer-
guerrilla-cambridge-6377707/)

~~~
blhack
I have to be honest: Vive (which is the most advanced consumer VR tech
available right now) is about the same. My mate and I bought a VR setup (we
didn't have a PC before this) around Christmas of last year.

It's mostly a lot of things that feel like demos. Nothing that I could see
myself losing hours into, like skyrim[1].

The one game that feels really close is Arizona Sunshine. It is a zombie
fighting game, and there is a minigame on it called "horde mode", where
progressively more zombies come at you from all directions and you have to
shoot them.

Essentially that game is a really good[2] combat simulator.

That said, I don't regret the purchase _at all_. VR is an incredible gift to
share with people.

[1]Time enjoyed isn't time lost. Skyrim is a beautiful world to explore.

[2]Arizona Sunshine feels like you are actually developing a shooting skill
while you are using it. Not exactly the skill that I would have set out to
develop, but definitely interesting.

~~~
friedman23
The demos can be so compelling sometimes that they make me believe in VR as a
product. The content needs to catch up however. I think when Fallout 4 VR is
released is when VR will begin to be worth the cost of entry.

------
avar
The reason I'm not buying the PSRV is that it's really hard to figure out if
it'll even work for me vis-a-vis the tracking camera.

I have a projector setup, so the PSRV camera has some propriterary cable
running to it that I'd need to buy a third-party extension cord for, and who
knows if that'll work.

Even if I have that I can't find any information on Sony's site about where
it's acceptable to mount the camera relative to where you're standing. Is it
only OK if it's directly in front of you, how about at a 45° incline etc?

Then, if I get all of that right I don't have a lot of floor space in front of
the projector (maybe 2x2 meters), they don't say how far you're expected to
move around in the games you can buy.

~~~
iamdave
_how about at a 45° incline etc?_

It works. I have mine on my mounted tv, which sits roughly at that angle from
where my seat is. The PS Camera can tilt and swivel down so it doesn't need
directly parallel vision.

Edit: The biggest knock I have (and this might be a problem with Occulus and
Vive but I don't own either to know) is the issue of screen drift. Some games
- like Eve Valkyrie - switch from a 2D/flat loading screen to fully rendered
3D environments.In those loading areas I may pull off the headset to check my
phone or take a sip of water, put it back on and have to reorient the screen.

It's not a burdensome task to adjust, just press and hold options and it pops
back into place. It's also not a terrible amount of drift that it impacts
gameplay, but it is something I've noticed occurring with a frequency that's a
little nagging.

------
camus2
Well, in order for VR to be successful you ACTUALLY need good VR games. It
seems Resident Evil 7 got a fair amount of positive reviews. I believe the VR
mode for that game is currently supported only on PS4.

~~~
iamdave
Eve Valkyrie is also a full game worth talking about. Well, kind-of full. You
don't get that "here's 30 minutes of an experience, now back to the start you
go"; the multiplayer aspect of the game is amazing, but single player could
have used a bit more attention.

Overall though, the immersion, the unique control scheme for space
dogfighting, upgrading and improving your ships, it's doing a VERY good job
holding me over until the PS4 port of Elite Dangerous comes out.

~~~
rocky1138
Eve Valkyrie is good but without supersampling it is hard to see ships at a
great distance away due to the screen-door effect. Alas, I've got only a GTX
970 graphics card, so supersampling is out for me.

------
karmakaze
I had trouble taking the article seriously when it repeatedly called the PSVR
premium, coming off like a PR piece. It's strictly on the mainstream/low-end.
Also, it didn't mention how much of the sales were in Japan other than to say
'especially', which doesn't often reflect reception elsewhere.

~~~
supercoder
Premium when compared to those stupid bits of cardboard you put your phone in.

------
timothycrosley
Personally, I think the biggest problem with VR is that it's downright
dangerous. I tried a professionally setup and monitored demo of HTC vive
inside of a Microsoft store, and walked into the wall. They needed somebody
with you to help make sure you didn't get tangled in the wires - during a 15
minute demo! And people still did, repeatedly. Until there aren't cords and
something like the Omni treadmill comes around to handle movement without
physically moving - I just think it's not practical or safe as a technology
for games other then flight and driving simulators.

~~~
robertfw
If you walked into a wall, they must not have had the chaperone settings setup
properly, either miscalibrated or not appearing brightly enough.

I have a 2.5m x 2.5m space, with walls an inch or so past the edge of the
space on two sides. There's only been a small handful of hits, and those were
mostly at the beginning. My experience, both for myself and watching my
friends try things out, is that the wire is annoying, but it's not dangerous.
I think part of the problem here could be that it's best to play without shoes
on - it's easier to tell when you are standing on the cord, which is when you
can get the most tangled up. Obviously people are not taking their shoes off
for store demos.

Wireless is definitely going to be a massive improvement, but I think saying
it is dangerous is a bit of a stretch.

~~~
timothycrosley
I could def see being shoeless helping things out. However, by definition most
of these VR systems are wired into a computer on or near desk. I could easily
see someone tangle and then trip over the wire and then hit their head on the
desk.

~~~
timothycrosley
In fact, just google "VR Injuries" and you'll see way more examples then say
happened with the nintendo wii, pre strap, a change they made because they
concluded without it the wii was too dangerous and lawsuit prone. The original
wii has nothing on current state VR. If it became any where near as widespread
as the wii did with it's current implementation, there would certainly be a
few more entries to the Darwin awards...

------
wenbert
Is it just me or is VR involves a lot unnecessary effort for the user?

ie: I don't want to walk around. I want to sit comfortably without straining
my arm or walking into walls.

~~~
lebek
For non-games I agree. I'm working on a VR design tool and I've given myself
the constraint that user are sitting in a swivel chair with elbows on armrests
most of the time. I'm hoping that it'll give enough room to do interesting
stuff without straying too far from keyboard-level laziness.

For games, I've been playing VR archery since I got the Vive almost a year ago
and I still love it. It is tiring but so are traditional sports and people do
those.

------
cdevs
I have it , it's awesome BUT...it's pretty exhausting to use - like once a
week. Resolution is low but then again there are these holy cow this is
amazing get lost in what your seeing because of the depth of certain things
and the awesome head tracking. Definitely needs more content I check every
week for some new experience no matter how small.

------
skywhopper
They compare sales to the iPhone's first three months which they call a huge
feat, but at the time iPhone sales were actually considered somewhat
lackluster until Apple switched to standard subsidy pricing. Only then did the
iPhone become a phenomenon. A million units in four months is still
impressive, but please get the historical references right.

~~~
musha68k
The iPhone was a general "internet" device _and_ a "phone" and the PSVR is a
"video game" — nytimes is comparing apples with oranges ;)

------
dghughes
I remember the 3D VFX in the 1990s and thinking that in a few years it will be
cheap and everywhere. Nope.

------
kleiba
That actually surprises me as well. I would have thought that VR was going to
be like 3D-TV: hyped very much for a certain amount of time but then mostly
forgotten again. And I'm still not sure VR won't go down the same route.

~~~
godzillabrennus
I thought that till I tried it. The experience is impressive, not at all like
the gimmicky 3D TV.

~~~
kleiba
My skepticism mostly comes from reflecting on how I'm currently experiencing
video games most of the time: together with a friend, sitting on the couch in
front of the TV in the living room. This is a social setting: when we play a
game together, we don't just look at the screen, we talk to each, look at each
other, get up and get a drink from the kitchen, etc. And most often, we spend
a few hours doing exactly that.

I know that not everyone shares my feeling, but somehow I have troubles
imagining doing the same with VR headsets on. I don't really want to be
completely removed from this social setting, completely emerged in the VR
environment -- I want both, plus the ability to switch between them quickly.

Don't get me wrong, I think VR is a super cool technology. My point is that I
just don't think it plays well with the social setting of a bunch of buddies
hanging out together.

------
partiallypro
I'd like to see the usage numbers. Ownership is great for Sony, this
generation, but on the next? I'm thinking of Kinect when I hear this. Kinect
broke records on the 360 for sales. Once the Xbox One was launched, with the
Kinect bundled (which was reasonable seeing as the Kinect v1 sales were
amazing), people scoffed. I honestly don't think VR is going to be where it
needs to be for a while. It's going to be great for therapeutic uses, but for
general consumers, I am just not convinced that it's more than a gimmick item
you show to your friends but never really use much. There will be exceptions,
but I think usage numbers would back me up.

~~~
musha68k
Have you tried PSVR yourself? If so, which games?

------
jcoffland
Humans finally get inexpensive VR and what's the first popular VR experience?
A game where you kill other humans with guns. Oh we're going to be fine, just
fine.

------
Fifer82
I am too poor to access a rift or htc, the PSVR seems like it would soil my
experience. Like those 720 HD ready TVs.

How do HN people feel about VR?

~~~
drewrv
I love my vive but VR isn't quite ready for prime time yet. It's clunky and
overpriced and there's a limited library.

It feels like we're in the "Palm pilot" stage of the technology. Eventually an
"iPhone" will come out, but there are technical and UI hurdles to overcome
before that can happen.

That being said, it's also an exciting time to get involved. VR owners get to
experiment with different play styles and UIs and be part of a small dedicated
community. Game devs hang out on /r/vive and accept feedback and ideas. And if
you already know how to code, getting started in VR development is pretty
easy.

~~~
andybak
Yep. If you've got an ounce of "early adopter" in you then it's a fantastic
time to be involved. There's tons of great content if you're prepared for the
odd rough edge and the lack of decent curation.

------
exabrial
I would be happy if we [USA] never bought another drop of oil from the middle
east until they learn a few lessons about human rights. And actually,
exploitation of domestic resources has dramatically reduced our dependency on
foreign oil.

/Firey opinion off, apologies

~~~
hamandcheese
I believe you are in the wrong thread :)

~~~
exabrial
Yes, I was replying to Saudi oil? How on earth

