Playstation VR Priced at 44980 yen / $400~

[Jtbrig7390]

There is a reason the PS4 and Xbox One where sold at cost and not at loss. PS3 and 360 both lost Sony and MS their asses, and took a long ass time to be profitable. That is no longer a sustainable business model.

Let alone the fact you expect that to happen with an experimental trip into new technology that may very well amount to nothing and has no proven market... lulz. Sony should lose money on a product that is not guaranteed to be a success? What weed are you smoking? Sounds like some good shit.

Fun fact: The xb1 with the kinect sold at a loss. It was around $20 loss on each system. It then sold at a bigger loss after it dropped the price and kinect. I stated mu opinion don't really care who likes it.

Bottom line is if the psvr does need to get into alot of hands or it will flop just like many other systems have.

[Tech614]

Fun fact: The xb1 with the kinect sold at a loss. It was around $20 loss on each system. It then sold at a bigger loss after it dropped the price and kinect. I stated mu opinion don't really care who likes it.

Bottom line is if the psvr does need to get into alot of hands or it will flop just like many other systems have.

Back up your information. The XB1 BOM with the Kinect was $457

http://press.ihs.com/press-release/d...price-ihs-tear

Cool story when you throw out facts that are wrong without trying to even prove them.

You think Sony should lose their ass on a hardware piece with no proven market- laughable.

[Poppincaps]

I have no problem with you critcizing the price of Playstation VR Jtbrig. My problem lies in that your complaints come across as entirely entitled. The fact is that Sony is struggling. The Playstation is keeping them afloat but their other platforms aren't doing the well. So, if the Playstation VR team went to Kaz Hirai and said that they needed to sell an unproven platform at a loss, I guarantee he would say, "Fuck no."

Basically Sony is not in a position to take a gamble like that.

[oplawlz]

30 fps vr? /shudder
Sounds vomit inducing.

[Jtbrig7390]

I have no problem with you critcizing the price of Playstation VR Jtbrig. My problem lies in that your complaints come across as entirely entitled. The fact is that Sony is struggling. The Playstation is keeping them afloat but their other platforms aren't doing the well. So, if the Playstation VR team went to Kaz Hirai and said that they needed to sell an unproven platform at a loss, I guarantee he would say, "Fuck no."

Basically Sony is not in a position to take a gamble like that.

I get your point trust me I do. I personally am not going to spend $400 on somthing that may be the vita 2.0. If they want to sell it at a profit then fine. But if not enough of them sells then that isnt going to matter much now is it.

$400+ is alot to ask for what may be a short lived gimic.

- - - Updated - - -

Back up your information. The XB1 BOM with the Kinect was $457

http://press.ihs.com/press-release/d...price-ihs-tear

Cool story when you throw out facts that are wrong without trying to even prove them.

You think Sony should lose their ass on a hardware piece with no proven market- laughable.

I remember wrong then so myfault. But with it at $350 and the kinect dead they have clearly lost a fuck ton of money. As a matter of fact I dont even think microsofts gaming divison has gained them a decent net return since they still get requested to shut it down.

Edit: Well this was fun to read now that I was able to get on my PC.
http://learnbonds.com/122889/microso...box-one-sales/

With marketing for big titles like Grand Theft Auto V and Destiny reaching over $100M, and dev costs going up and up, we can be pretty sure that Microsoft ate through $335M in costs in the twelve months through June.

We know that in 2014 through May Microsoft spent about $35M on TV ads in the US alone. The holiday period is much more costly for game ads. That means costs in the US, for TV alone, likely broke the $100M barrier. Globally the firm likely spent much more, leaving it with less than $200M for everything else.

Developing backwards compatibility isn’t cheap, and neither is putting together the hardware needed to run the servers that let the Xbox One go online.

Until the firm reveals something that suggests otherwise that’s the best supposition to move forward on. Despite an estimated $36.50 gross profit on each console it makes, each Xbox One likely loses money for Microsoft.

That link also touchs on the point I was making. If Sony wants to sell it at a profit then fine go ahead. Don't be surprised tho if people are not wanting to drop $400+Tax+cost of extra shit on what may be a short lived gimic. There is a reason the other VR headsets (Oct and Vive) are selling at a loss.

I hope it does well I really do, But dropping more on this headset then I did on my Ps4 is a outright no.

[Tech614]

But if not enough of them sells then that isnt going to matter much now is it.

Considering the preorders are selling out within minutes of going up, seems they are selling more then they thought and demand is out weighing supply.

This was always going to be a niche product, the difference between this and the Vita is just that. It's experimental, and Sony isn't going balls to the wall with a bunch of AAA releases that could have been ps3/ps4 games like they did with the Vita. Sony knows it's a niche, until proven otherwise and is just trying to attract more people to the niche with a cheaper price point and cheaper product then competitors.

Sony said they are selling it at a cost, which means they aren't making much on every unit sold at all. Which means your laughable price point for it would be losing them nearly $100 or more with each unit sold. Expecting that is hilarious as hell.

If PSVR gets near 15 million sold like the Vita did, Sony likely considers it a massive success. The fact you compared it to the vita is laughable and you should realize the difference in expectations between the 2.

You come off sounding like Sony is pulling an Apple and selling something that costs $300 to make at $800 price points. They're not, they're breaking even and making a slight profit when you buy a game for the platform.

[Jtbrig7390]

Considering the preorders are selling out within minutes of going up, seems they are selling more then they thought and demand is out weighing supply.

This was always going to be a niche product, the difference between this and the Vita is just that. It's experimental, and Sony isn't going balls to the wall with a bunch of AAA releases that could have been ps3/ps4 games like they did with the Vita. Sony knows it's a niche, until proven otherwise and is just trying to attract more people to the niche with a cheaper price point and cheaper product then competitors.

Sony said they are selling it at a cost, which means they aren't making much on every unit sold at all. Which means your laughable price point for it would be losing them nearly $100 or more with each unit sold. Expecting that is hilarious as hell.

If PSVR gets near 15 million sold like the Vita did, Sony likely considers it a massive success. The fact you compared it to the vita is laughable and you should realize the difference in expectations between the 2.

You come off sounding like Sony is pulling an Apple and selling something that costs $300 to make at $800 price points. They're not, they're breaking even and making a slight profit when you buy a game for the platform.

Not arguing about this, I stated my opinion and we will see how it plays out. I may get one but good chance I won't.

Never said they are pulling a apple. They could sell it at a slight loss (Or outright break even) and make it cost less. If they don't want to fine its there product. But like I said I am not willen to spend $400 on what may be forgotten in a year. I am also not spending more on something then I did my ps4.

Also where have you seen they keep selling out on pre-orders thats the first I have heard about that. This does explain tho why in 3 years of the Ps4's life there is less exclusive titles then ever. They got many devs working on this thing.

Hope it does well I really do. Also no they do NOT want this to be a niche product and thats been quite clear. The Rift and Vive are niche product's. Sony is releasing a entry level VR set that is clear they want as many to own as possable.

[RuneDK]

Any cheaper then $400 and it would be complete trash that gives you nothing but headaches anyways.

As it is, it still feels far to budgety to make VR even half way decent. Hell this is coming from a person who has tried the latest build of OR as of Jan and thinks that is garbage as well and it's assuredly has to be better then this.

I'm just hoping for this to bomb quick to get Sony's funding away from it as I think it's a complete waste to the gaming industry and playstation owners as a whole. I think it will bomb worse then the Vita, my only worry is how long Sony tried to hang on supporting it. While I'm fine with the enthusiast market of OR/Vive for early adopters, Sony wasting PS4 money on a budget solution to things that are already not there is quite sad.

I honestly can't wait for VR to crash and burn like every other fad tech before it. Until the consoles can fully utilize it without having to sacrifice much graphic fidelity(which will be never most likely) it won't take off. And can't wait to hear all the bitching about people wasting money on it.

- - - Updated - - -

Back up your information. The XB1 BOM with the Kinect was $457

http://press.ihs.com/press-release/d...price-ihs-tear

Cool story when you throw out facts that are wrong without trying to even prove them.

You think Sony should lose their ass on a hardware piece with no proven market- laughable.

We're arguing about them losing money regardless per system sold....really? Also you may want to re-read the article...after manufacturing they lost about $28 per console which pretty much puts what Tech said as right...and you caused an argument for no reason. while yes the BOM was 457...it just isn't the BOM that goes into total cost to make something...the manufacturing cost is also really important to add into that...

[Tech614]

they lost about $28 per console

Manufacturing is estimated at $14, which means the console’s total cost of $471 is only $28 less than the retail price of $499.

No, in fact if you read properly the BOM+Manufacturing was $28 cheaper then the MSRP.

You can factor in retailer cuts, but then you also have to factor in game purchases and XBLG purchases which far out weight what they might lose in the retailer cut.

Take your own advice and re-read the article...

[Jtbrig7390]

We're arguing about them losing money regardless per system sold....really? Also you may want to re-read the article...after manufacturing they lost about $28 per console which pretty much puts what Jtbrig7390 said as right...and you caused an argument for no reason. while yes the BOM was 457...it just isn't the BOM that goes into total cost to make something...the manufacturing cost is also really important to add into that...

I think you ment what I said

Like my post above stated after you factor in everything they lost money on each sell. They have also yet to make ANY money in there console/gaming division.

- - - Updated - - -

No, in fact if you read properly the BOM+Manufacturing was $28 cheaper then the MSRP.

You can factor in retailer cuts, but then you also have to factor in game purchases and XBLG purchases which far out weight what they might lose in the retailer cut.

Take your own advice and re-read the article...

Like I said above

Well this was fun to read now that I was able to get on my PC.

http://learnbonds.com/122889/microso...box-one-sales/

With marketing for big titles like Grand Theft Auto V and Destiny reaching over $100M, and dev costs going up and up, we can be pretty sure that Microsoft ate through $335M in costs in the twelve months through June.

We know that in 2014 through May Microsoft spent about $35M on TV ads in the US alone. The holiday period is much more costly for game ads. That means costs in the US, for TV alone, likely broke the $100M barrier. Globally the firm likely spent much more, leaving it with less than $200M for everything else.

Developing backwards compatibility isn’t cheap, and neither is putting together the hardware needed to run the servers that let the Xbox One go online.

Until the firm reveals something that suggests otherwise that’s the best supposition to move forward on. Despite an estimated $36.50 gross profit on each console it makes, each Xbox One likely loses money for Microsoft.

That link also touchs on the point I was making. If Sony wants to sell it at a profit then fine go ahead. Don't be surprised tho if people are not wanting to drop $400+Tax+cost of extra shit on what may be a short lived gimic. There is a reason the other VR headsets (Oct and Vive) are selling at a loss.

I hope it does well I really do, But dropping more on this headset then I did on my Ps4 is a outright no.

[Tech614]

I think you ment what I said

Like my post above stated after you factor in everything they lost money on each sell. They have also yet to make ANY money in there console/gaming division.

- - - Updated - - -



Like I said above

http://learnbonds.com/122889/microso...box-one-sales/



That link also touchs on the point I was making. If Sony wants to sell it at a profit then fine go ahead. Don't be surprised tho if people are not wanting to drop $400+Tax+cost of extra shit on what may be a short lived gimic. There is a reason the other VR headsets (Oct and Vive) are selling at a loss.

I hope it does well I really do, But dropping more on this headset then I did on my Ps4 is a outright no.

OR and Vive are selling AT COST, not AT LOSS. The PSVR is selling AT COST. You do realize what this means right? It means they aren't losing money on each hardware sold, but also aren't making much therefor getting profits from the software sales. The same model the PS4/XB1 used.

The model the 360/PS3 used was to lose $100+ on every system sold and hope and pray you turn a profit years later. That model collapsed and is no longer viable.

Then again, it's not surprising you of all people are arguing the price of a piece of hardware sold at cost after white knighting an indy game being sold at $60 That's what you do, complain when it's against your agenda and promote when it's for your agenda.

For the record is it even worth while to respond to your strawman argument of marketing costs and everything else potentially losing MS money when that was never the argument? I don't think so. You claimed the XB1 was sold at a loss, it was not the end, facts I provided prove that, the end.

[Deleted]

30 fps vr? /shudder
Sounds vomit inducing.

Yep plus really low res. Same as Oculus demo kit but that had horrible screen door effect.

[Jtbrig7390]

Then again, it's not surprising you of all people are arguing the price of a piece of hardware sold at cost after white knighting an indy game being sold at $60 That's what you do, complain when it's against your agenda and promote when it's for your agenda.

For the record is it even worth while to respond to your strawman argument of marketing costs and everything else potentially losing MS money when that was never the argument? I don't think so. You claimed the XB1 was sold at a loss, it was not the end, facts I provided prove that, the end.

First off my link proves that the XB1 does not sell at a profit and infact cost's Microsoft money but clearly you ignored that.

Second you decide to take a childish shot at me because I feel that the group for No Man Sky should sell at whatever price they wish. That is my stance on that and its also my stance on the PSVR. I said above Sony is welcome to sell the headset for whatever price they wish, In the end it is there product to do whatever they want.

I am also saying they should sell it at a loss even if its small to lower the price. Doing so will get the system in more hands then the current pricetag. I mean ask yourself what will people likely buy this holiday season, The PSVR or more games or Nintendos new system.

The HTC Vive and Rift are Niche products that is a give. Sony does NOT want the PSVR to be a niche product. But hey keep taking childish shots at me and ignore facts thats what your good at tech.

You say strawman but everyone else says fact I guess its a strawman when it doesn't fit ur argument now does it. Guess what $350 is lower then $457 and Microsoft lost there ass on the Kinect 2.

Edit: Also

Then again, it's not surprising you of all people are arguing the price of a piece of hardware sold at cost after white knighting an indy game being sold at $60

Why should a idle game not be able to sell itself at $60????

What is the guidelines that needs to be met before they can sell there title for $60.

[Remilia]

Yep plus really low res. Same as Oculus demo kit but that had horrible screen door effect.

Aside from the fps thing which everyone keeps perpetuating for some reason without reading up on it, the Vive and Rift have worse screen door effect than the PS VR because of a certain aspect with Rift/Vive's display. Vive and Rift's display are worse for VR than PS VR despite having a higher 'resolution'. You could also search it up and find other people's experience with it that PS VR has better display and no 'screen door' effect.

No current VR headset is good enough to be titled as "virtual reality". But comparing the ones that we have, remember that the others are using diamond PenTile displays which have 66% of the sub-pixel resolution of normal RGB stripe displays. So the Sony one actually have comparable if not more subpixels even if if has fewer "pixels". You can easily calculate this multiplying the number of pixels of PenTile displays by 2 and the number of pixels of RGB displays by 3.

Yeah, 2160x1200 Pentile is 5184000 subpixels vs 1920x1080 RGB strips is 6220800 sub pixels, which really lends that the pentile set up is worse and the biggest issue is that people always note is the 'screen door' effect, which really needs those extra sub pixels to make it less visible. While having a higher 'resolution' / pixels, doesn't mean it has more substance. The DPI isn't high enough for the pentile set up to not be visible at that viewing range, aka in your face.

Yeah... I forgot that OLED comes in Pentile form. Sony's Display is a RGB subpixel tile, where as Vive and Oculus are pentile, which is actually a bad thing in for VR since it's viewed so close. Pentile is a way to 'artificially' increase resolution while using less sub pixel. An RGB subpixel tile is simple, RGB strips to make up one pixel. Pentile however is has 2 large red / blue sub pixel and 4 green sub pixel to make up 4 pixels, so it's using 1/2 a red / blue and 1 green to make 1 'pixel'. And pentile is quite honestly, shit. In all technicality Sony VR has actual more pixels.
It's not strange that Sony has an RGB lay out though since they've already delved into and developed OLED technology before. Where as HTC and Oculus have to go through Samsung or LG for the tech. Samsung being the more prominent in small form factor displays with pretty much all of em being pentile at this point iirc.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10149/...-oculus-rift/2

[Tech614]

Guess what $350 is lower then $457 and Microsoft lost there ass on the Kinect 2.

Ignoring the rest of your useless rant, MS didn't sell the system at $350 until almost a year later(meaning all of the parts where cheaper), without kinect($117 of the BOM in the $457) bundled. Guess what, that didn't cost $457 to make. Nice try, but you lost this one, time to move on.

MS lost R&D money on Kinect 2, they did not lose money on Kinects they didn't have to manufacture because they where no longer bundled. AKA they did not lose money on Xbox Ones sold. Do you understand now? If not I won't even bother to reply.

TLDR: JTbrig wants Sony to lose money on an experimental product trying to enter a niche market. Why? So he could afford one. /debate. I'm done with your salt and false claims.

[Jtbrig7390]

TLDR: JTbrig wants Sony to lose money on an experimental product trying to enter a niche market. Why? So he could afford one. /debate. I'm done with your salt and false claims.

Your the only one making false claims kid.

First off I can afford one if I wanted it. I am just not going to spend $400+ on what may be a short lived gimic. Also guess what smart ass they did manufacture the kinects and even started to sell them by themselves.

I love how you ignored my link that proved you wrong. Thats all you do in this thread and other game related threads. You get proven wrong and ignore it then bitch and moan fallowed by childish insults.

Do you really think that within a year the parts dropped so much they could sell the XboxOne for $350 and recieve a profit? Not counting what it cost them to bundle them with games. Once more....THEY DIDN'T MAKE SHIT on the XboxOne and my link above proved it.

But hey keep being you man, Ignore facts and say lalalalalaala. I said Sony should sell it at a loss so its abit cheaper and will get into more hands. I am not holding a gun to there head and telling them to do it.

You do realise if it doesn't sell well it will fail right? Like you said this is a experimental product and they need to get it into as many hands as they can. Make it $350 for the headset and $400 for the bundle. Anything higher is going to be a massive turn off.

Good chance I won't buy it at $400 but depending this holidays lineup of games I mite change my mind. But hey done having this argument with you. You ignore facts and act like Mr Know It All when clearly you don't know jack shit.

[DeadmanWalking]

Your the only one making false claims kid.

First off I can afford one if I wanted it. I am just not going to spend $400+ on what may be a short lived gimic. Also guess what smart ass they did manufacture the kinects and even started to sell them by themselves.

I love how you ignored my link that proved you wrong. Thats all you do in this thread and other game related threads. You get proven wrong and ignore it then bitch and moan fallowed by childish insults.

Do you really think that within a year the parts dropped so much they could sell the XboxOne for $350 and recieve a profit? Not counting what it cost them to bundle them with games. Once more....THEY DIDN'T MAKE SHIT on the XboxOne and my link above proved it.

But hey keep being you man, Ignore facts and say lalalalalaala. I said Sony should sell it at a loss so its abit cheaper and will get into more hands. I am not holding a gun to there head and telling them to do it.

You do realise if it doesn't sell well it will fail right? Like you said this is a experimental product and they need to get it into as many hands as they can. Make it $350 for the headset and $400 for the bundle. Anything higher is going to be a massive turn off.

Good chance I won't buy it at $400 but depending this holidays lineup of games I mite change my mind. But hey done having this argument with you. You ignore facts and act like Mr Know It All when clearly you don't know jack shit.

Just for once try to have an intellectual discussion with someone you disagree with by using facts as talking points instead of stooping to calling people 'kid' as a back handed insult. You only undermine yourself.

[AlissyFauntson]

Looking forward to VR but I'll get in when the prices on everything are down. Eventually it'll be a common household thing imo.

[Jtbrig7390]

Just for once try to have an intellectual discussion with someone you disagree with by using facts as talking points instead of stooping to calling people 'kid' as a back handed insult. You only undermine yourself.

I gave him a link showing him he was wrong and he ignored it. At that point there is no intellectual discussion to be had.

Its Tech he thinks he knows everything about everything in the gaming forums. Don't get me wrong there is times I am wrong and ill admit as much. But when he comes off as a selfcentered child there is just no point anymore.

[draykorinee]

If you can watch porn on it, it will sell. Personally thats the only reason I would want a VR headset, I like google glass because the kids can enjoy star wars or some crap on it. This whole VR gaming is 3Dtv to me, I'll sit and wait to see if it succeeds before putting any money in to it.

Its Tech he thinks he knows everything about everything in the gaming forums. Don't get me wrong there is times I am wrong and ill admit as much. But when he comes off as a selfcentered child there is just no point anymore.

Honestly, the gaming forums are a better experience without Tech, its not that he's not knowledgeable, its that he's got a horrible attitude to go with what he says. When he's wrong he'll quickly sweep it under the rug and NEVER admit it.

He claimed Xbox didn't sell at a loss, you showed a link it did, and he'll not acknowledge it. (I don't know if it did, I'm not making that claim)