PlayStation VR is beginning to feel a bit like the Vita

From EuroGamer: "The Vita might not have been ones of PlayStation's biggest successes, but it's certainly one of its more cherished pieces of hardware; its intention to offer big console experiences on the go fell a little flat (even if Nintendo did prove the concept could work some short years later with the Switch), but its pivot to independent and mid-tier studios opened up the handheld to a new breed of fascinating games. In turn, Sony offered up a captive audience to smaller developers, resulting in a love-in that's made the Vita adored by its faithful."

[fr0sty]

PSVR is doing better than ever. Each new game I get becomes even more addicting than the last. RE7 started the trend, then Doom VFR provided another solid AAA experience. Wipeout Omega Collection showed how the game was always means to be played, Moss proves that platformers can be better in VR, Last Guardian is coming to VR as is ZOE2, Ace Combat, Super Hot, Knockout League, all top quality gaming experiences either recently or soon to be released. Over 100 games so far, and it just got $100 cheaper.

It's dragging the entire VR market along, outselling its PC competition 2 to 1. It's not just doing well in the VR market, it is creating it. The most expensive and yet still one of the best selling console add ons in history.

[Dirty_Lemons]

Superhot is already out for PSVR, and it is insane. I still have to try The Inpatient and Wipeout, now we got the VR update, but I agree that it looks like it’s doing pretty well all things considered.

[JaguarEvolved]

A lot of games are scheduled to be released on the psvr this year with some very compelling titles coming out in 3rd and 4th quarter. The psvr to me is quite a good device and I think the games are getting better as time goes on. Imo vr is here to stay and the psvr has convinced me that vr is the future of gaming. I think vr will be a lot bigger next-generation because its a lot more immersive than traditional 3d-2d games. I'd like to get a vive pro vr unit but imo it doesn't have enough games I'm interested in as of yet to justify the price. The vive pro is the best vr unit at the moment but the inferior psvr just has a lot more compelling games with a lot of games announced and coming soon.

[Sam Fisher]

I hope it makes it, i thought it was a gimmick. Man was i wrong when i bought it. I can see this as a main gaming device and not just addon. I cant wait for firewall. They just need to make the moves with analog and we are great

[mikeslemonade]

The vita is already dead for 3 years. The psvr is alive. I see no similarity.

[Lexreborn2]

This type of article happens when we view success in terms of relatives instead of what it is. PSVR should only be compared to other VR devices and how VR is succeeding as a whole.

Instead articles like this look to paint a negative in their twisted perspective. I really hate post like this

[Eonjay]

PSVR is the the industy leader in VR... by a huge margin. I wonder why we never get that in context.

[MegamanXXX]

I totally agree

[Death]

PSVR is not the “industry leader”, it is the sales leader. Vive has been the leader in technology. At 2 million units sold, PSVR has sold the most in a market that has underwhelmed since launch. Yes, it is the best selling, but it isn’t selling well. Sony’s lack of support shows how the platform is doing. VR has immersion that is second to none, but it has a long way to go before it becomes a must have platform. The wires need to be cut, fidelity needs to increase and there is a dire need for content made for the platform that shows what it can truly do.

[DigitalRaptor]

@ Death

PSVR absolutely is the industry leader. http://lexicon.ft.com/Term?...

Saying otherwise because of technology, is like saying the PS2 wasn't the industry leader against Xbox and Gamecube. Whether the Vive or Oculus are better overall products than PSVR is opinion because consumers will decide what they think is a better product for them - whether it's more accessible, or is more comfortable to wear. It could considered that PSVR is more important than its contemporaries because Sony is doing more (or managing better) to bring VR to the masses and grow interest in a more profound way.

You say it's not selling well... I look at 2 million units priced at $349-399 sold in just over a year before price was slashed to $299 very recently. Considering that the parts are cheap to source and manufacture (based on teardowns that have been done on the headset), Sony is making a tidy profit on each unit sold and has made over half a billion dollars for them in just over a year.

You say Sony has not been supporting it... yet more games seem to be coming out from SIE and partners as the years go on. How the platform is doing, is making profit, and at $299 it's going to continue making them profit.

[Death]

@Raptor,

By the definition you linked it can be argued Sony is “an industry leader”, but not “the industry leader”. Sony was the last of the big three VR platform holders to release their product. Leaders usually lead from the front, not the end. They aren’t the industry leader in tech either since PSVR is the least capable of the three and it is used on a closed platform. How is PSVR leading VR on PC when it’s not even a player there? They have sold the most with the least capable, cheapest and one of the last released headsets on the market. If you want to call that the industry leader, you are more than welcome to.

[Loktai]

@ImGumbyDammit

Actually its only JUST NOW that Vive has a better headset . Vives tracking is better but
its not ideal for a livingroom setting. If you compare the overall experience the PSVR has less screen
door effect than Vive and is more or less on par with Oculus in terms of field of view etc. The new Vive which
is quite expensive and brand new is better than anything else mainstream but the REAL bottleneck here is the PS4 itself not the headset. You can see that simply by looking at different games where if the machine does not need to render a whole lot you have a much much nicer looking higher resolution world ...

So "PSVR" technology is actually fairly on par- and well above anything else in its pricerange (a used vive may come close but then you need a PC to support it that costs much much more)

[paintedgamer1984]

Wow well said... but the best will ALWAYS be put on a good and bad pedastel... haters gone hate

How about what this guy said 👇 and we praise the psvr's amazing successes when it could have failed in a flock of flames... at least SONY stepped up to the plate win lose or draw and knocked it out of the park. While ms and nintendo didnt even try.

[fr0sty]

Yeah, if I had a dollar for every "PSVR is failing" article I've seen, I'd be able to buy a few PSVRs.

[killswitch80]

bawah ah industry leader in what ..having crappy wand controllers and tracking....Vive and Rift are far better than this. The tech just doesn't match other products on PC

[Cobra951]

Proof positive that people don't read articles before forming opinions about them. You and all who agreed with you are wrong. This short piece is not negative at all. It is hopeful. Give it a read.

[Ol_Boy]

By ZOE2 do you mean Zone of the Enders 2?

[Sam Fisher]

Yes, they coming with a vr version, im fu$&ing hyped!!!!!!!! My favorite mech game

[kevnb]

this post feels like a series of straw man arguments. The original comparison is to the vita, the vita also got some support and is still getting games. Many folks love the vita even if it will ultimately be considered a failure. The psvr feels very similar to this, a device that will get some support and many will love.. but it will never be considered much of a success or something recommended to the average consumer (at least not in its current state).

[generic-user-name]

The psvr is the most successful of the big 3 VR headsets (not including mobile VR). The Vita was not the most successful handheld. The comparison with Vita is wrong and also completely ignores that VR is new and devs are still finding their feet with this tech.

[kevnb]

that's a straw man argument, it doesn't matter how well the pc focused headsets do (it would probably help psvr if the other headsets werent so incredibly niche). It also doesnt matter why most devs aren't supporting the device, the end result is the same.

[rainslacker]

The measure for success of PSVR is going to be much different than the measure of success for the Vita.

Whether it ends up like the VIta depends on how Sony handles it going forward. But for right now, Sony is supporting it, and marketing it, with no signs that they're backing off like we saw with the Vita where they didn't even bother to show it or talk about it much.

I think it's only going to be in retrospect if we can tell if it's a success for a failure. Making such a claim now is just premature.

[generic-user-name]

Last Guardian is not coming to VR, that demo was just an experience.

[Neonridr]

it might be outselling the Rift or Vive, but that doesn't paint the entire picture. I own both a Rift and PSVR. I do like what Sony has done with what they put out, but there are still major drawbacks compared to PC VR. Yes there are some great experiences, which help, but they are still few and far between. The titles you listed all released several months apart from each other, which means quite long periods of dry spells.

Remember when PSVR users where hyping up Bravo Team whenever anyone questioned quality releases upcoming? :P

I just think the forward facing only setup really hurts them. And the move controllers are definitely not an ideal option for tracking and I really hope we get some upgraded motion controllers soon.

But if you are enjoying it and think it's the best VR out there, then I am happy for you.

[_-EDMIX-_]

That's nice, you could have made the same argument against the PlayStation 1 and it became an absolute monster that cause Nintendo to go into the "on the go" Market only..

So we're simply seeing the beginning of something evolutionary , so they're going to continue to make it better over time, so understand that PlayStation 1 did not invent 3D, they were not even the pioneers of 3D even slightly but clearly they captivated the market and got majority control and became the identity of this concept going forward.

So I'm not worried with what PlayStation VR is today no different than I'm don't worry about what PlayStation 1 was when it first release of course it's not going to be anything compared to the top of the line PC, but you can't move an Industry with products so expensive only a small amount can possibly afford the actual specs to even purchase some of these computers to actually run those type of VR setups are absolutely unrealistic and out of touch with the common consumer.

Just like some of the top-of-the-line PCS were back on the PlayStation 1 first released.

PlayStation 1 move well over 100 million units so it very much propelled the concept of 3D forward more than any other company in gaming at the time.

Trust me they're going to do the same thing for VR. So something being "better" in regards to technological advancement means nothing if the price is not easily obtainable by the common person, but also has very little relevance in regards to sales.

[Neonridr]

What does any of what you just said have anything to do with PSVR and PCVR? Ramble much??

The PS4 isn't a PS1, it isn't some primitive hardware. VR looks very good on PSVR. How do I know this? Again, I actually own one (do you?). I also happen to own a Rift. So the comparisons for me are extremely relevant and valid. I am sorry that it doesn't paint Sony in a super bright light, I really do. But it's the truth. Great that it's a lower barrier of entry, that is key. Why else does Gear VR sell so well? Because it's cheap and easy. Obviously PC VR requires more tech to run, but a 4 series i5 and a 1060 isn't exactly breaking the bank either (in terms of minimum requirements).

Lots of people have gaming PCs. Thus lots of people could potentially run VR if they want to. Plenty of people have already jumped on the Vive and Rift trains, don't act like nobody is purchasing them.

[_-EDMIX-_]

Agreed if anything PlayStation VR starting to feel a lot like PlayStation 1

you know the beginning of something...

[CorndogBurglar]

Have you played that mech game yet? I can't think of the name but you are basically piloting a giant mech. That and Ace Combat make me want a PSVR.

Although I'm pretty sure Ace Combat will make me toss cookies all over my living room.

[narsaku]

Cheap as potatoes - 15 year old technology - buyout 3rd party timed exclusivity scam deals

PSVR is the JOKE of the VR industry, and the only saving grace is that it's cheap so it sells a lot.

New technology is supposed to be enthusiast until it's worked it's bugs out and is ready to reach the mainstream, that is what PC-VR platforms are doing right now. Trying to work out Foveated rendering, increased resolution, integrated wireless, proper roomscale, locomotion tweaks, increased FOV. Basically EVERYTHING VR needs to be a successful mainstream technology. Something PSVR isn't.

All Sony did was see an opportunity to low-end it's brand into another industry and sell it to the poor as a broke ass mainstream-marketed experience.

Big round of applause for Sony.

[Sam Fisher]

But the poor is what drives the cash flow tho, not the rich dummy

[Leeroyw]

I played two hours of Wipeout VR yesterday. This tech is now less limited by the hardware and being freed up by amazing software.
I love it.
And when friends come over they don't want to play my backlog of games, they want to play VR.

[sampsonon]

one word "Wipeout".

[PhoenixUp]

“its intention to offer big console experiences on the go fell a little flat (even if Nintendo did prove the concept could work some short years later with the Switch”

PSP already proved the concept console work more than a decade ago and it ended up selling 80 million as a result of it.

[Imalwaysright]

No it didn't. PSP wasn't even close to having home console quality titles and neither did the Vita. The Switch does having the 2 highest rated games of this generation, AAA games and with BotW being the most complex game made this generation alongside shadow of mordor.

[_-EDMIX-_]

Try again

the PlayStation Vita was playing games like Killzone and Uncharted Gravity Rush ,the PSP with literally playing Grand Theft Auto God of War Kingdom Hearts Final Fantasy Gran Turismo and many other big AAA properties that released on the PlayStation 2 to the point of them being indistinguishable from each other.

Keep in mind no one is trying to erase what the switches doing simply stop trying to erase what the PSP did why can't you understand both are doing similar things? You're literally trying to argue that something like breath of the wild a very popular LAST generation game made on Wii U is running on a next-generation handheld that is no different than Metal Gear Solid 1 or Final Fantasy 9 receiving a boatload of awards and then appearing on the PlayStation Portable....

Buddy I'm sorry for the God of War was one of the most complex games released during that generation and it had several games on the PSP where you literally could read the reviewers saying that it was literally identical to the PlayStation 2 version, you had multiple Grand Theft Auto games that existed on PSP that were literally identical to the PlayStation 2 counterparts so you telling me that Grand Theft Auto 6 is going to be coming out on the Nintendo switch and running just like it's running on PlayStation 4? This which is not even getting Red Dead Redemption 2 lol

So it's not really comparable because the Nintendo switch is not actually receiving the top of the line AAA third-party games that are releasing right now ,the PSP actually did.

So the Nintendo switch having 2 the highest rated games this generation doesn't actually take away from what Phoenix is actually saying..

The Phoenix is saying is that the PSP proved that concept a very very long time ago. Regardless of what you're trying to argue he is not incorrect because the PSP literally was playing the games that were releasing with literally the exact same quality that we were used to seeing on PS2.

Whereas the switch is actually not releasing with games that are the top of the line AAA games that are coming out on PlayStation 4 it's a literally just releasing Lost Generation looking games something that you would see on the Wii U which nothing is wrong with that but it can't even be comparable to the PSP to the same regard because it's technically actually not playing the top of the line AAA games that exist.

So something like Doom is not indistinguishable from the Nintendo switch to the PlayStation 4 but clearly something like Grand Theft Auto or God of War or Kingdom Hearts are literally indistinguishable from those counterparts.

[Imalwaysright]

The Vita can't be hooked to a tv so it can't provide a home console experience by default. Also how many of those games were AAA? How many needed to sell 2 million copies just to break even? How many were made by a studio with 200 plus people? How many are more complex than pretty much EVERY game (there is more to BoTW fire than propagation and cooking something that you wouldn't know for obvious reasons and its just one element in the game) on home consoles? How many were even in the running for GOTY let alone winning one GOTY award? How many Vita games can hang with the likes of Bloodborne, Persona 5, Uncharted 4, Witcher 3 etc in terms of quality like BoTW and Mario can and do?

PSP GoW close to GOW2 in terms of quality? Is this a joke? Not even close! GTA PSP games are a JOKE compared to San Andreas. Are you trying to make me laugh?

PSP and PS2? the Xbox 360 was released the same year the PSP was and even comparing the experiences that the ALMIGHTY PS2 provided (RE4, GT3, MGS3, SOTC, GOW 2 etc) with the PSP is worthy of a facepalm that could destroy this universe.

Try again.

[_-EDMIX-_]

Why did you try the strawman the argument about the PlayStation Vita? Nobody said anything about the PlayStation Vita playing on the TV in fact you're the only one that brought that up to try to straw man argue...

At the end of the day it sounds like you're really really really triggered that stuff like Grand Theft Auto God of War Kingdom Hearts Final Fantasy Granturismo Madden FIFA and so many other AAA games at the time appeared on the PSP I have no clue why you tried to bring up the 360 considering it's a completely different generation it sounds like you're just trying to strong man argue again lol

Stay mad buddy the PlayStation Portable was playing Home console games...

It was literally playing PlayStation 2 ports and Playstation 1 Ports so it is an irrefutable fact stop trying to argue about something that is factually objective.

No one said anything about Game of the Year

nobody said anything about sales

no one said anything about any of those things ,so it sounds like you're just trying to argue and chest beat about something no one's really saying....ie desperate straw man argument to avoid the fact at the end of the day those games existed on PlayStation 2 in PSP and we're basically identical and even ports from the PlayStation 2 came to the PSP you're just upset Nintendo was not the first to do it first.

Keep in mind neither is Sony you're just mad that Nintendo was not the first. You are triggered and you're just mad a lot of your post just sound like you're upset that were telling you these facts lol 😎

Keep in mind Metal Gear Solid Resident Evil 2 Final Fantasy 9 and so many other PlayStation 1 games won many Game of the Year Awards and they're completely playable on the PSP, so I don't know how you could say it's not playing console games when it's literally playing PlayStation 2 and Playstation One Ports lol

So you're basically lying about a fact that anyone could look up right now? Buddy seriously how pathetic does that have to be? You're literally trying to pretend that history never happened just to argue about something?

https://youtu.be/nneKqC5uJ4...

Review itself tells you it is basically identical to Graphics to production value to gameplay of its console counterpart I'm sorry but you could keep hating all you want the PSP was already doing what the switch is doing right now.

Trust me I know that little fact makes you very very mad 🤓

https://youtu.be/4vtwaGGUEG...

stay mad..

https://youtu.be/pEpJhEs1Nq...

#facts...

[Imalwaysright]

Are you really asking me why did I say something that is a fact? LMAO

Triggered about the nonsense you're spewing? LMAO

"No one said anything about Game of the Year" I did because it shows that the Switch not only provides experiences on par but also superior to those found on other home consoles.

"playing Home console games" How can you be this dense? It was playing games that were built up from the ground up for it. It wasn't playing home console games.

"It was literally playing PlayStation 2 " You ask me why I stated a fact and I'm going to ask you if you are a bold faced liar or just ignorant? Do you know what a port is?

"and Playstation 1 Ports" LMAO it was providing PS1 experiences in the year the 360 was released. It was providing games made for a console that was released 11 years before it. Do you know how much gaming changed in those 11 years? Simply put the PSP was not providing games with the standard that was expected from console games in 2005.

" and we're basically identical" No they weren't, "Review itself tells" Like I care. That game is nowhere near San Andreas, Ghost of Sparta is nowhere near GOW2 and birth by sleep was released in 2010. The same year as ME2, RDR and others and you're telling me that is AAA? LMAO

"Trust me I know that little fact makes you very very mad" And yet reading your nonsense amuses me.

Try again.

[_-EDMIX-_]

They're not trying to hear that fact

I love that suddenly people now have amnesia and they're trying to pretend that stuff like Kingdom Hearts Final Fantasy Grand Theft Auto God of War Gran Turismo Madden FIFA in so many franchises existed on the PSP that looked almost identical to their PlayStation 2 counterparts.

I also love that they're trying to ignore that the PSP was closer to the PlayStation 2 and even more powerful with some of its specs than the actual switches to the PlayStation 4 or even Xbox One.

So the PSP was the closest thing that we had to that concept ,the Nintendo switch is just the way weaker than the home consoles that are out right now to even actually be legitimately comparable in regards to a 1.1 comparison the PSP was just more powerful relative to the majority home consoles that were out at the time.

[Segata]

Nomad predated PSP by 9 years. It did it first.

[FallenAngel1984]

Yet it wasn’t successful like PSP

[Segata]

Fallen no but doesn't matter Nomad was the first with the idea. Before PSP or Switch.

[_-EDMIX-_]

yes it did. So I agree with you many companies were doing this before Nintendo

your correct

[FallenAngel1984]

Yeah but unlike Nomad, the PSP was the first to prove that such a concept could be successfully viable

[PhoenixUp]

@ Neo

How does that invalidate PSP selling 80 million? Is such a total something you can easily disregard? That’s one of the highest selling platforms in the industry.

[monkeyshawn60]

The PSP was an added feature. The Switch was built from the ground up to be a home console you could play as a portable.

[shinoff2183]

Ps vr will do fine. Stop with these doom articles already

[chris235]

comparing psvr to the vita? please don‘t the vita was born dead while psvr has got now more than a few killer apps. i didn‘t read the article and i hope i am getting the headline all wrong.

[hulk_bash1987]

The Vita was not born dead, it was a quality handheld for the first couple of years. It failed because it was not getting proper support from Sony and third party publishers. Outside of Japan, it failed to capture a significant market from Nintendo and was therefore abandoned all together. Besides Sony trying to rebrand it as a PS4 companion for remote play.

[Segata]

I love the vita but don't forget Kaz was booed on stage when they showed the 3G model with AT&T and the memory cards were the biggest nail in Vita's coffin.

[Tallpine]

I am surprised by how much fun Skyrim VR is, level 31 and counting. Completely changes the way I play! Doom is next when on sale!

[adamwparker]

Yep, I love chilling out in Skyrim in my freetime. I'm only currently at level 22 right now.
My friend was talking about playing it with the Dualshock and I was like "DUDE! You gotta use the motion wands!"
People who play Skyrim VR with just the controller are missing out. The full experience of actually shooting fire or lightning from your outstretched hands, and how fun/well the archery works that way.....that's immersion you don't get with playing on the controller only.

[Profchaos]

Strongly Disagree if you don't own one you can't really fully understand how good it can be for games done right.

Now with the aim controller aswel it's incredible

[Neonridr]

we need more aim controller games to be honest. I actually want the same company to make pistol sized versions as well so I can buy two and then dual wield. :P

[Einhander1971]

I thought the same until I bought PSVR it’s an incredible bit of tech.

[OB1Biker]

No they don't feel the same at all. Its actually totally the opposite feel and purpose.
Oh you mean that was clickbait?

[Kokyu]

Its amazing to see people in this comment section totally clueless to the fact PsVr isnt not doing very well. Its got 100$ cheaper that will help, yes RE7 is a quality game that provides a better VR experience than what can be experienced in normal game play but RE7 is not the norm. Moss a good platformer that is beautiful with an interesting story but like so many other PsVr titles is over priced for the experience. Moss can be completed in roughly 4hrs that terribly short compared to RE7. Doom VFR is not exactly a game whose experience gets better because of VR not to mention ita simple the previous release of Doom but with a VR mode, Wipe out Omega again not made better because of VR. Knockout league is novel at best, the last guardian in VR sure will probably be good but again its an add on VR mode not exactly going to be better because of VR. The only game that I see benefiting greatly from VR is Ace Combat. While there are good games on PsVr the majority are shovelware at best. Poorly created tech demos passed off as games. PsVr need far more games made for it instead of tacted on or ported to it stuff.

[The 10th Rider]

It did very well out the gate, so much that people raised sales predictions, then it hit a slump and didn't even meet initial expectations. It's picked back up since then thanks to a much more attractive price, but VR isn't exactly the game changer many people thought it would be.

[Kokyu]

Exactly every new tech does well out of the gate it isnt exactly the must have twch right now. People just dont want to except most game devs have no idea what to do with the tech and as its still new it will be years before its even close to successful.

[The 10th Rider]

@Kokyu,

Yeah, the total number of VR headsets sold as of March of 2017, which included Oculus, Vive, Gear, PSVR, and more, was estimated to be about 6.3 million. Kinect sold 8 million in just 60 days and most people here would consider that a failure.

I think VR may finally become a bit more mainstream during this holiday season, when we may see prices down to $100, but it's clearly got a long ways to go. I think current VR still has too many limitations to really explode in popularity.

[Benjaminkno]

I agree with this.
I think it’s great hardware, it’s just a niche market right now

[Neonridr]

The problem with RE7 is I would hardly call it a VR game. It's a FPS with head controls really. Not truly indicative of VR. Give me motion controls so I can aim my gun or swing my melee weapon around for RE8 and then we are talking :P

[Kokyu]

That sounds terrible. Motion control games all have one thing in common...they suck, the controls suck and the game play sufferes becaise they become tech demos instead of full fledged games. Devs are more interested in what they can show off instead of making an actually game. Sorry but I found RE7 to be a fantastic use of the platform and a good reboot/addition to the game series. I felt RE7 showed what PsVr could really be. Sadly most games on the platform are shoe horned VR modes on already existing game ( Im looking at you Fallout 4) or they are crap ports of PC games that are crap to begin with.

[Neonridr]

@Kokyu - I can't imagine the future of VR holding a regular controller. That is not immersive at all. Skyrim VR is a fantastic use of motion controls. So was Arizona Sunshine, Farpoint, Rush of Blood. I couldn't imagine playing any of those games with a traditional controller. RE7 was awesome, and I played it in VR because I adore horror titles. But I would have rather had the ability to aim a gun with my hand.

I get it's not for everyone, but VR is all about immersion. And hand controllers are way more immersive than a controller. Just like I prefer free locomotion to teleporting. Because teleporting breaks my immersion.

Again, play titles like Lone Echo, Superhot, Arizona Sunshine, Skyrim, etc and tell me that these games would be better with controllers instead of motion controls.

[rainslacker]

Oh yeah? What have the sales been for PSVR?

Maybe it got $100 cheaper because came out a year and a half ago? I know it may be hard to comprehend, but tech does tend to get cheaper over time.

It sold 2 million in a year. Where is the data that the sales have slumped in the past 6 months or so since the two million number was announced?

I'm not sure what Sony's projections were for the system, but as of November of last year, PSVR brought in 500 million in revenue for Sony...to which I assume that means hardware and software. If the system is doing better than Sony projected, and it's bringing in a profit, then it's probably going to be fine, and it's only your assertion, not Sony's, that it's somehow not doing well.

I get what you're saying in terms of the content, and they're valid complaints.

[The 10th Rider]

That article about revenue was BS. The $500 million figure was based on multiplying the number of headsets sold by the an arbitrarily decided average sale price. Even if the average sale price was $350, as they decided it was, it did not take into account that Sony does not get 100% of the money that a customer pays for the device at retail. On top of that it was gross, not net. Their prediction was nothing more than a wild estimate and without net profits on the device it's absolutely meaningless. The article was reported here as being false and was rightfully removed. The only reason people believed the claims was because it supported what they wanted to believe.

[rainslacker]

Sony would get about 85-90% of the revenue from hardware. There isn't much mark up on hardware. A regular console itself only has a $10-15 mark up for the retailers for instance. But they also get all the licensing fees for every copy of a game sold. For digital games, they also make a 20% of each sale. If they based it off numbers of units sold, and maybe even projected software sales, then it's probably enough to get a close approximation.

So even if the 500 million is meaningless, do the math on the verified sales numbers, and consider that a new thing like that is likely to sell a few games as well, then do more math and tell me what you come up with.

Using your $350 estimate, that's 700 million in revenue in the first year. Maybe knock off 20% if you want, even though that'd be excessively high, and that's still 560 million in revenue on the hardware alone. In one year. Unless you want to throw in some other ways Sony made less money per unit sold. Actual profit would depend on the manufacturing and distribution costs, but we're talking revenue, not profits.

One other thing about business. Sony has already written off the costs of development for PSVR a couple years ago. Same way MS wrote off that one billion for Xbox 360 RROD repairs in one year so it wouldn't affect the years after. While it's not profit, revenue is revenue.

[The 10th Rider]

@rainslacker,

The $350 estimate was the one from the article on Road to VR saying that Sony made $500 million on hardware alone, not mine.

The $500 million estimate was made by saying that Sony sold 1.5 million (at the time of November last year) and that the average sale was $350 (an arbitrarily decided number). 1.5 million x $350 would be $525 million . . . Road to VR averaged that out to $500 million.

However, I am saying that's not correct because I do not think the average sale price was $350 and it does not take into account the retailer's markup. Even if you use the figure from the article and assume that the average sale price was $350, after a 10% retailer's markup it would be $450 million in revenue. I'd say that's the absolute max at the time of the article.

Hence the article was failed because it was nothing more than an estimate, and a poorly conceived one at that.

I don't find the revenue statistic particularly useful either.

I'm sure you're right that PSVR has been profitable, but I was just pointing out that in your first comment you cited information from an article that was false.

[kevnb]

I think this is a fair comparison, arguments about how much you like it or how much other headsets sell are pointless... many people loved the vita as well.

[Mr Marvel]

I think the Vita has been far more successful. That was/is a great handheld with a decent library of games including two of my all time favourites, Dragon's Crown and Persona 4 Golden.
Are they still even releasing games for the PSVR? (I don't mean little demos and Indy stuff.)
Admittedly I'm not a good judge of PSVR, as personally I've never had any interest in it.
It's also the first piece of Playstation hardware that I don't own and I'm a huge Playstation fan.

[Team_Litt]

The writing was on the wall with the Vita and you guys ignored it. PSVR is going to go the same way.
You can bookmark my comment and call me out on it if by next year PSVR first party library isn't looking anemic and ignored.

[SkippyPaccino]

Are you serious? Sony just had a conference in December (playstation experience) announcing dozens of games coming to psvr and you're here forecasting doom and gloom 3 and a half months later?

[Team_Litt]

Yes. I am super serious. The software so far from Sony has been meh on the VR front.

[Benjaminkno]

Lol

[AnubisG]

I like to get more games like Rush of Blood on it. It's still my favorite game to play on PSVR.

[Skankinruby]

Both are excellent technology, vita was just never given a chance and lost support but that was a great little machine. And from everything I hear psvr is doing just fine.

[sprinterboy]

Yoshida mentioned psvr is like being at ps1 in the vr space, they've built and released a cracking bit of kit for a version 1.0, it's not perfect by any means but oh boy the future is bright for vr.
Imagine psvr2, I personally think with the way tech doubles every yr we will skip ps2 and go straight to PS3 level with psvr2.

Well like Elon musk said 20/30yrs from now our brains will find it difficult to distinguish reality from vr 🤯

[ILostMyMind]

I will never doubt what Elon says.

[zaherdab]

Yeo with all support and games coming out each week ... just like the vita

[CocoaBrother]

This is underneath the title on the main article page:
"(And that's a very good thing, by the way.)"

Also this:
"It's working a treat; support for PlayStation VR is strong, and over the next year there's an awful lot to look forward to."

This too:
"For now, and for the two million people already onboard with PlayStation VR, there's a raft of treats on the way - and Sony has in turn created one of the most viable spaces for new VR games that there is today"

I take it the majority of comments didn't read how the article is actually praising PSVR.

[Rhythmattic]

Your last sentence is pretty much spot on.

[trooper_]

Reading is difficult for many people around here.

[BenRC01]

Still only 1 "real" game worth playing (barring racers).. re7. Utterly stunning in VR but not enough to make me keep it. Masses and masses of shovelware is giving it a bad name. Wake me up when it's wireless, 1080p and backed by aaa devs.

[shinoff2183]

skyrim?

[BenRC01]

Nice novelty but we've played it a million times lol

[rainslacker]

Rush of Blood is really good. Short though.

[Knushwood Butt]

Whatever.

PSVR just got a price drop in Japan.

I'm about to jump in.

[howiewowwee]

The problems are that PSVR is not for many because of the physical side affects. Also I think the technology needs to be refined and streamlined. There are just too many wires/too bulky. I do like the fact that the newer model included in house earbuds. But more improvements need to be made for this to be more mainstreamed. Sony always experiments with technological gadgets since way back and if this fails it is no biggie financially for Sony Corp. If perhaps the PS5 will include VR capabilities within the console, then I think this is a big winner. In other words an 'all-in-one' console.

[rainslacker]

The side effects don't affect many. They affect some. Far from a majority. Even with those that it effects at first, they tend to be OK with it after a bit of playing.

I wouldn't call the system bulky, as it's pretty light. But you are right about the wires, which does limit what you can do with it.

I'd actually rather not have a full on VR console soon. i think the tech has some growing pains to get through before it becomes mainstream. On top of that, not everything needs to be in VR, and while I'm supportive of current ventures into the field, I don't want it to replace traditional gaming anytime soon, or it become integrated into the system to the point it affects the price or hardware for the end user like we saw with the Kinect.

[Rhythmattic]

And?
(And that's a very good thing, by the way.)

[Saranya]

I have feel like no one care about PSVR.

[Aenea]

Yoda? That you?

Anyways, that's just a you thing! 2 million people care about PSVR enough to have bought it and to keep buying games for it!

[jmc8888]

It's an add-on, not a completely different system.

Just like with anything else, not everyone is going to develop for it, because they are busy developing for something else. Busy developing what they know. Not everyone has the capacity, ability, or money to just go... oh let's create a VR game.

Also just like everything else, it gets games based on whether or not they can make money off it. Install base isn't at where it can command full from the ground up AAA games by every major publisher. They can't spend $100 million dollars on a VR only game.

So right now it's relegated to smaller studios efforts, or old games brought back, and/or some tacked on modes. Once the game developers start new projects (remember this can be a 3-5 years window), and VR makes sense to add-on, like a RE7 where you can play the main game either way, we'll see more. But it's only been 1 1/2 years. There's still a bunch of developers, who are still making the same unreleased game that they were when PSVR was ANNOUNCED, let alone launched.

Plus VR has to compete timewise with everything else. No one wants to ONLY play VR. You still have everything else you want to play, and considering most people have a backlog of 5 to 500 games, so the metric for what we judge things can't be... well it's not dominating everything. It never was supposed to. It's an add-on. You sometimes game VR, you sometimes game non-VR.

It's also funny when you look at non-VR games. About 90 percent of what comes out on any system these days are indies. Small studio efforts, and many of these are short experiences themselves. So let's not have a double standard and pretend that only with VR you get short experiences, it's kind of everywhere right now.

[uth11]

this is actually a pro-PSVR article with a confusing headline. it's comparing it to Vita in a good way

[Segata]

I think of the Switch like the Vita if Vita was successful. It's getting Vita games and games that used to be brought to Vita but now in full HD. That's cool with me as I loved Vitas Japanese support as it honestly to me was better than 3DS.

[mastershredder]

Yeah, sorry Eurogamer your opion is a moot point. Considering your location. It’s like asking a country bumpkin where all the hot clubs are.

[CocoaBrother]

If you actually read the article, the author is praising PSVR, not trashing it.

[mastershredder]

Hmmm... Yeah, well I did read it. So other moot point. Nor did I say he trashed it, but thanks for forcing that accusation in there. Cute.

[Doge]

Lmao shredder way to be salty for being called out.

[welly300]

Needs to be more user friendly... its a cable nightmare (ocd) it was a great first attempt looking forward to what comes next. Hope its been a success for sony so we get a mk2 might go back if they do.

[ILostMyMind]

All improvements will be there on PSVR 2. But i don't see a new PSVR model now.

[subtenko]

PSVR is frikkn awesome, these people dont know what theyre talking about (I can sense it here from the comment section)

The good games are starting to come out because tbh (like every console) it started off slow and half the started games were launchware

[CobraKai]

If anyone read past the headline, this article is about how the PSVR has become fertile grounds for independent developers to test new ideas, much like how the Vita was.

It has nothing to do with sales or adoption rate.

[Elda]

I got rid of my Vita due to collecting dust once Sony stop first party support for it 3 years into it's life cycle. I have no interest in PSVR but I feel the same will somewhat happen to PSVR. I haven't seen any interesting AAA first party titles for PSVR since it's release.Only time will tell if PSVR will have long legs or will it have the support of interesting AAA first party titles knowing it's only been around for 18 months.

[ILostMyMind]

How many AAA VR games are there in wild?

[rainslacker]

It's probably going to be a while before you see AAA games on the system beyond mode support in other games. This is true for all the VR headsets. Even if every PSVR user brought one of those games, it still wouldn't be enough to return a profit on an expensive game.

I think once you see more mid-tier exclusive experiences is when you know that VR is here for good. In the mean time, it's going to be something that mostly just appeals to the techie in some people.

[windblowsagain]

Because VR is a niche product and always will be until it can be produced at a decent pricepoint for most consumers. Also PS5-6 will have the right amount of power needed to do it right.

[CrystalFantasy]

PSVITA was the best handheld last gen so that's good news

[gangsta_red]

I said from the beginning that the interest for VR just wasn't there. And the games proved that point. There just wasn't enough titles of interest to justify such a high price for it and the add ons.

Sony themselves with their many studios couldn't even provide an established IP (Uncharted, TLoU, Anything) to at least entice a gamer to jump on board and sell the thing.

On top of that there were just a lot of ports that could be played just regularly without the need for the VR gimmick.

No doubt that this tech will get better in the future but even still there just doesn't seem to be an actual need to have this even for gaming.

[rainslacker]

It's got to start somewhere though. most things don't just explode on the market. Even smart phones were a thing before Apple decided to make it seem like they invented them. Now, you rarely see just a plain old cell phone.

The games are coming out. It launched strong, and it's gotten a lot of exclusive games to date, along with some decent support in add on modes for other big games.

I wouldn't expect huge expenditure for game production with the install base as it is, or what it was expected to be. The entire VR market can't support that yet. We've gotten some close to mid-tier though.

VR is a gimmick, but it's one that can grow into something much more, as it has a tangible benefit to how one plays games, and is often perceived as the future of immersion....which it has been for decades now. But if you don't start somewhere, then it'll never happen. Whether it continues depends going forward remains to be seen, and the forerunners have to keep pushing.

[gangsta_red]

Your smart phone analogy doesn't really fit because that is where technology was headed anyways. And it blew up quite quickly once they landed. I don't see this happening with VR as the novelty of it has quickly died down since it was introduced some years back.

"The games are coming out."

Yes, but are there any games that are highly anticipated? That have the same buzz as say Red Dead 2, TLoU 2 or anything similar? Games coming isn't the problem, the problem is how most are mediocre to uninteresting.

"VR is a gimmick, but it's one that can grow into something much more,"

Yeah, I said the tech will get better, but will it get to the point where it's a must have? Absolutely needed to play? I am skeptical with that, but who knows.

[rainslacker]

Smart Phones were out for years before Apple blew them up. It was looked at as something not really asked for, not really desired across the board, and only looked at as something that would probably grow as time go on. Smart phones for half a decade before the first iPhone were considered just for business people with no real practical application for the average user. VR, in general, is considered mostly for the techie hardcore, with no real practical application for the average user. What becomes of PSVR still remains to be seen to say if you are correct or not.

If you had a PSVR, or other VR games, then you'd know what would be anticipated. I'd say that it's not on the level of what we see on a traditional console, but the software is there. I'd also argue that the quality of the games is just your perception of them, and could be extended to any gaming console. There are quite a few good experiences on VR.

The tech will obviously get better if it continues. There's no real reason to argue that.

Will it get to the point where it's a must have? Who knows. All it takes is one thing to make it blow up like Apple did with smart phones.

Absolutely need to play? Is any gaming console that?

It's fine to be skeptical though. It's new territory, but as I said, it has to start somewhere.

[Christopher]

Without the current generation on VR, future VR improvements would be greatly delayed.

I also find VR a gimmick, but you can't complain about its quality and then explain how it will get better. It will get better because of what they are doing now rather than doing nothing.

[MadLad]

Nah. Sony still acknowledges it outside of Japan, and it still is more than just a JRPG player.

[Hardiman]

No it's not! It's sad that new tech like this gets so much "arm chair" hate from folks who've never played it or because it's not on their preferred console!

When risks like this are taken we should applaud it because that's how the industry evolves! PSVR may not have the graphics of Vive or Oculus but what it delivers and at the price point it has is amazing! The Vita was a great device but didn't get the proper support but that can't be said about PSVR!

[Mr_Luke]

What?!? Some weeks ago we got Moss and it's great and many games are coming. The Vita was abandoned almost right away... but of course, in a moment eveything goes right for Sony, they need to shoot this out. And since many people considered it as a DOA item, i'd say it's alive and kicking. I had a very good offer and bought one too and i was really surprised about how good and funny it is.

[C-H-E-F]

How there's new games coming out every month for this 1st party exclusive, 2nd party exclusive and 3rd party exclusive games every single month... lOl I have VR but I can't play it because I just had surgery, but sheeesh c'mon now, what kind of games do you want? Every PS4 game can't be a VR game sorry that's illogical lOl.

[Christopher]

This makes no sense. PSVR has a ton of third party support.

[maybelovehate]

PSVR is about the worst VR experience out there. They are probably single handily killing off VR by offering such a terrible product and performance. A lot of people will use a PSVR and think all VR is that low rate. It isn't.

[Aenea]

Terrible product? You can't be serious? Care to elaborate?

[maybelovehate]

The games run at very uneven frame rates and never really hit 90fps which is very important with VR. The tracking latency is also too slow not to mention inaccurate. Compared to Oculus Rift and Vive it is bad but even compared to the mixed reality devices from Samsung and Dell it falls far short of the experiences on PC.

[Aenea]

"The games run at very uneven frame rates and never really hit 90fps"

Aha, am sure you're now going to provide some links to articles backing up your claims, right?

Because every single PSVR can not and will never go below 60fps otherwise Sony isn't allowing it's release. 60fps will than be extrapolated to 120fps. There are, of course, also games that run at 90fps without any extrapolation necessary. And I know of at least 1 game running at 120fps (Trackmania). So no, the issues you describe do not exist at all.

Oh, and I can back it up too: https://www.polygon.com/201...

Also, I've never had any issues with tracking latency nor have I heard or read anything about it from others.

It sounds to me that you just think it's not good or worse or something else negative without ever trying it out for yourself or reading up about things. It's weird tho that you have such a strong idea about things which aren't true...

[maybelovehate]

I am backing it up with experience. PSVR games do not hold a consistent frame rate. Sure some of the games hit their target frame rate. Some of them with very simple graphics might even maintain it. But overall it is bad. And 60fps for VR is not good enough. My suggestion to you, is to try a good VR setsup so you can know what it feels like.

[Aenea]

"I am backing it up with experience. PSVR games do not hold a consistent frame rate."

From experience I've never ever experienced this! And many others with me. Also people like DigitalFoundry would be all over this sorta thing and that didn't happen. Look at the recent Wipeout video they made, now tell me that it's a terrible product!
What games did you test and when? If you tested it at some con with RE7 for instance then yes, that prerelease version had framerate issues, not the final product tho.

The Rift does a similar thing too BTW, only with 45fps and then extrapolating it to 90fps.

Perhaps actually try PSVR for once?

[Gwiz]

The premise of this aricle is dumb, if PSVR starts to feel like the PS Vita then what makes that their competition?.

The Vita was actually the low sales device while PSVR has that user base the Vita never had (although Japan did support it more)

[Vizigoth04]

The truth is people actually enjoy the PlayStation VR where it's at. We've gotten some pretty good titles to get us through with more down the road. The users who have given it a try have given game developers the funds to continue to experiment with VR and better more robust games. Come PS5 and PSVR 2.0 I think we'll start to see that technology tie together more and better defined. The tech is coming in we're in its infancy. Or we can have nothing and start from scratch next generation. Trying is better than not in my opinion.

[demonicale]

PSVR isn't doing too bad, but my main problem with it as their are too many "experiences" rather than any killer games for it so far. Yes we have Resident evil 7, but apart from that their really isn't anything that would make me want to buy it.

The problem with PSVR is that it's run on outdated Playstation technology. Where are the unique VR controllers?. Why are we using an outdated camera system too?. It comes across like the PSVR was rushed to the market to see how well it would be adopted before they invest more money into it.

[gigoran]

PSVR vita comparison stories are beginning to feel a bit repetitive