@thefourfoldroot1 Short term? That's easily 1/3 of the platform's life span. If it literally even survives that, which there's a significant chance it won't because of the way Sony is making it harder to sell the thing and the way they handle things that don't sell enough in the first twelve months. So no, not a "short term" thing.
@thefourfoldroot1 "It's the thing to do" because it's trendy or cool. Trying out a headset that frankly makes you look like a dork in a retail store is none of those things. I say that with a personal fondness for VR, but it is what it is. And "cool looking" is not something that it is before you actually put it on and start playing.
A lot of PCVR games started with external tracking, and many of them still were when PSVR launched. That's why we had so many -oh, wait, that didn't help with the lack of content issue that plagued the platform for the first year or two, not even a little.
Developers who can spare the work hours to go back to their older titles that they think they'll make real money porting titles to a new audience will certainly do that. But really, how many of these small developers (because the majority of VR titles aren't made by big AAA studios) can really afford that? And judging by how much lower sales are for typical re-releases, how likely is it that this would even be financially worth their time in the end?
They tried influencers. It didn't work. The only thing that worked, was when they finally getting a library larger than you could count on your fingers and toes -AND- they dropped the price to $200 from the original $400, at a time when the economy was looser than it is now.
You keep pointing out things they "could do" that they've already done, or that are so completely cost-effecient that no one in their right mind would actually do them after considering the ideas fully. At the end of the day, Sony doesn't have any new ways to market this things -what HAS changed though, is that ideas they tried before will inarguably be tougher to try and pull off now than they were before. There is no way in which Sony has better footing than they did last time, and despite that, they've decided not to do something that could have at least acted as a hold over until the install base and new library grew.
@Serialsid I can read the words you are saying, and I understand you believe them, but your belief only demonstrates naitevity. Manufacturers say exactly this every time they launch a new platform, and historically it is accurate zero percent of the time. It is always an exaggeration on there part, without exception. It is, quite literally, actual hyperbole.
@thefourfoldroot1 "Only". They "only" need to try it. Except that the last 7 years of VR tech have demonstrated that this "only" hurdle is absolutely MASSIVE, and there's still no way around it. Until people try it, there's no way to show them how cool it is -but it's not a super easy thing to get people to try en masse.
Sure, Best Buy set up kiosks for PSVR for a little while, which was a neat gesture... But even before a global pandemic made everyone vastly more aware of germs and bacteria, most people didn't want to touch a headset that hundreds of other people jammed their faces into before them. People CERTAINLY aren't going to be any more receptive to that now than they were before.
Sure, you could try offering single use disposable barriers, but then you've turned a passive kiosk into an experience that retailers have to pay someone to keep manned, to change the pad on, and explain to customers why this is okay and just how simple it all is... You know, how SIMPLE it is, as they fiddle with trying to sterilize the hell out of a device with chemicals that are likely to make the customer's eyes watery and burn, or trying to get a protective sheet onto it. Unless the consumer is already sold on VR, that experience is only going to make them think of VR as a complicated gimmick for brief little experiences. It's not a positive impression, it's more likely to scare people away.
Besides, Sony had ONE retailer willing to effectively help them the last time around. With the overwhelming majority of VR software sales being digital (the rate of digital purchases vs physical on VR skews much further than flat console games), there's no incentive to get additional retailers to help Sony out... Honestly it's unlikely Best Buy will be willing to do it again, now that they've seen how few VR titles even reach their shelves to sell.
I disagree with your "only" statement to begin with, but even if I didn't, it's on par with saying "the only reason people aren't eating feces is because it's unappealing to them." -great, but at the end of the day, not only is there no solution in place to make it appealing, Sony will likely have even less support for that at retail than they did before.
@Serialsid That's great. How many games are "confirmed" for any given platform pre-launch? How any of them ACTUALLY come out, much less in the first twelve months of the system's launch? That number is pinnacle empty hyperbole.
@thefourfoldroot1 The exaggerations only weaken your argument. This isn't like jumping from a PS1 to a PS5. It's a regular generational leap, much like going from a launch day PS4 to a PS5. The PSVR really didn't sell all that well for the first year -not until massive price slashes dropped it to about half it's launch price -it's funny how people forget that fact. There will always be early adopters, and that's great, there need to be in order for a product to have any chance of survival. So I'm genuinely glad that there are people like you who will jump on it, after all I did say that I genuinely WANT this platform to succeed.
It's easy to see that a vast majority of the hours being played on most PS5 systems are on PS4 games. That makes absolute sense right now because next gen libraries are still pretty small without backwards compatibility. If it weren't for some games getting quick upscale treatments as "next gen versions" -which is often so minimal of a difference that it's practically just backwards compatibility anyway, the slate of released games truly built and for next gen platforms would be next to nothing. I'm not saying that to criticize Sony about the PS5 library (or MS with their XBox either, they're in the same position with that regard). But it takes time to get a decent library out there, and had the PS5 not allowed users to enjoy the pre-existing library of PS4 games, it stands to reason that vastly fewer people would have been clamoring for it, especially in that first year when there were a paltry handful of next gen exclusive titles. And that's a game SYSTEM, which is inarguably easier to sell to most consumers than a VR addon that costs as much or more than the system you have to plug it into. But that's exactly what we're looking at here for the PSVR2 -an add-on platform that will cost as much or more than the high end console it requires, to provide a feature that many consumers still don't comprehend the real benefit of, which will have hardly any titles available for it for the first 2+ years... If Sony doesn't kill it off before then.
So for the mass market, not the few early adopters, where the incentive to buy? You need a library of gameplay experiences that will keep players entertained for more than 20-60 minutes to justify that cost. And the route Sony has chosen means specifically that they WON'T have that at launch, and probably not for a long time after.
And just to be clear here: I'm not a Sony hater, I like VR, and I still enjoy my PSVR considerably on my PS5. I'm excited about the prospect of the PSVR2 doing well and being successful, what I'm saying comes from stepping back logically and separating what I "hope" happens from the realities of the economy, the VR-interested market, and Sony's own history.
@stvevan It's not a case of patching. From what a lot of devs have said over the years, External movement and Inside-Out tracking are so fundamentally different that the time involved in switching is comparable to literally rebuilding the game from scratch. And from the way Sony is touting this, the two platforms will have no compatibility and likely no connection in the storefront either... Meaning that even if the devs wanted to pour hundreds of hours into conversions out of the kindness of their hearts at no extra charge, they likely won't be able to unless you buy the game all over again on the new platform. On the one hand, I'm all for supporting the hard work of devs, but on the other hand this could have literally been avoided in the first place.
Even having all the best features available in a VR headset will be completely moot unless Sony backpedals on it's Backwards Compatibility statement this week.
It took YEARS for the first PSVR to have a library that even approached decent. They finally got there, and it's great -but the decision to make the PSVR2 COMPLETELY INCOMPATIBLE with PSVR1 games is a mistake.
I understand that they use totally different tracking, but it wouldn't have been difficult to offer some kind of modification or attachment for the newer high res headset, so that it would have lights that the old tracking equipment could use. That way players who invested in the original unit would be able to enjoy their first gen PSVR library in significantly higher quality in the improved display and PS5 hardware, and users who start with the second generation platform could choose to pick up the first gen tracking equipment and have a sizeable library available on day 1 that way, even if the old content doesn't benefit from the updated tracking systems.
As it is now, they've upset a lot of current VR customers, and they're facing down a trifecta of roadblocks. They've just burned all the people with large PSVR libraries (AKA the people most likely to be interested in the PSVR2), the new PSVR will be back at square one regarding that library so it will be a tougher sell to new consumers (because there will be just a handful of short games playable on it at all for the first couple years), all in top of the fact that they're launching this spendy new unit with a handful of short gaming experiences while we're in a global recession. I love the PSVR, and I want to see VR platforms thrive, but Sony is digging their heels in on bad ideas at a time when marketplace consumers just aren't going to go for it.
Unless Sony reverses course, we might as well call this the next Vita, because they're on track to be discontinuing it right around a year after launch. I hope they fix this.
Comments 8
Re: PSVR2 Not Looking Cheap as Impressive Features Debut in Hype-Inducing Ad
@thefourfoldroot1 Short term? That's easily 1/3 of the platform's life span. If it literally even survives that, which there's a significant chance it won't because of the way Sony is making it harder to sell the thing and the way they handle things that don't sell enough in the first twelve months. So no, not a "short term" thing.
Re: PSVR2 Not Looking Cheap as Impressive Features Debut in Hype-Inducing Ad
@thefourfoldroot1 "It's the thing to do" because it's trendy or cool. Trying out a headset that frankly makes you look like a dork in a retail store is none of those things. I say that with a personal fondness for VR, but it is what it is. And "cool looking" is not something that it is before you actually put it on and start playing.
A lot of PCVR games started with external tracking, and many of them still were when PSVR launched. That's why we had so many -oh, wait, that didn't help with the lack of content issue that plagued the platform for the first year or two, not even a little.
Developers who can spare the work hours to go back to their older titles that they think they'll make real money porting titles to a new audience will certainly do that. But really, how many of these small developers (because the majority of VR titles aren't made by big AAA studios) can really afford that? And judging by how much lower sales are for typical re-releases, how likely is it that this would even be financially worth their time in the end?
They tried influencers. It didn't work. The only thing that worked, was when they finally getting a library larger than you could count on your fingers and toes -AND- they dropped the price to $200 from the original $400, at a time when the economy was looser than it is now.
You keep pointing out things they "could do" that they've already done, or that are so completely cost-effecient that no one in their right mind would actually do them after considering the ideas fully. At the end of the day, Sony doesn't have any new ways to market this things -what HAS changed though, is that ideas they tried before will inarguably be tougher to try and pull off now than they were before. There is no way in which Sony has better footing than they did last time, and despite that, they've decided not to do something that could have at least acted as a hold over until the install base and new library grew.
Re: PSVR2 Not Looking Cheap as Impressive Features Debut in Hype-Inducing Ad
@Serialsid I can read the words you are saying, and I understand you believe them, but your belief only demonstrates naitevity. Manufacturers say exactly this every time they launch a new platform, and historically it is accurate zero percent of the time. It is always an exaggeration on there part, without exception. It is, quite literally, actual hyperbole.
Re: PSVR2 Not Looking Cheap as Impressive Features Debut in Hype-Inducing Ad
@thefourfoldroot1 "Only". They "only" need to try it. Except that the last 7 years of VR tech have demonstrated that this "only" hurdle is absolutely MASSIVE, and there's still no way around it. Until people try it, there's no way to show them how cool it is -but it's not a super easy thing to get people to try en masse.
Sure, Best Buy set up kiosks for PSVR for a little while, which was a neat gesture... But even before a global pandemic made everyone vastly more aware of germs and bacteria, most people didn't want to touch a headset that hundreds of other people jammed their faces into before them. People CERTAINLY aren't going to be any more receptive to that now than they were before.
Sure, you could try offering single use disposable barriers, but then you've turned a passive kiosk into an experience that retailers have to pay someone to keep manned, to change the pad on, and explain to customers why this is okay and just how simple it all is... You know, how SIMPLE it is, as they fiddle with trying to sterilize the hell out of a device with chemicals that are likely to make the customer's eyes watery and burn, or trying to get a protective sheet onto it. Unless the consumer is already sold on VR, that experience is only going to make them think of VR as a complicated gimmick for brief little experiences. It's not a positive impression, it's more likely to scare people away.
Besides, Sony had ONE retailer willing to effectively help them the last time around. With the overwhelming majority of VR software sales being digital (the rate of digital purchases vs physical on VR skews much further than flat console games), there's no incentive to get additional retailers to help Sony out... Honestly it's unlikely Best Buy will be willing to do it again, now that they've seen how few VR titles even reach their shelves to sell.
I disagree with your "only" statement to begin with, but even if I didn't, it's on par with saying "the only reason people aren't eating feces is because it's unappealing to them." -great, but at the end of the day, not only is there no solution in place to make it appealing, Sony will likely have even less support for that at retail than they did before.
Re: PSVR2 Not Looking Cheap as Impressive Features Debut in Hype-Inducing Ad
@Serialsid That's great. How many games are "confirmed" for any given platform pre-launch? How any of them ACTUALLY come out, much less in the first twelve months of the system's launch? That number is pinnacle empty hyperbole.
Re: PSVR2 Not Looking Cheap as Impressive Features Debut in Hype-Inducing Ad
@thefourfoldroot1 The exaggerations only weaken your argument. This isn't like jumping from a PS1 to a PS5. It's a regular generational leap, much like going from a launch day PS4 to a PS5. The PSVR really didn't sell all that well for the first year -not until massive price slashes dropped it to about half it's launch price -it's funny how people forget that fact. There will always be early adopters, and that's great, there need to be in order for a product to have any chance of survival. So I'm genuinely glad that there are people like you who will jump on it, after all I did say that I genuinely WANT this platform to succeed.
It's easy to see that a vast majority of the hours being played on most PS5 systems are on PS4 games. That makes absolute sense right now because next gen libraries are still pretty small without backwards compatibility. If it weren't for some games getting quick upscale treatments as "next gen versions" -which is often so minimal of a difference that it's practically just backwards compatibility anyway, the slate of released games truly built and for next gen platforms would be next to nothing. I'm not saying that to criticize Sony about the PS5 library (or MS with their XBox either, they're in the same position with that regard). But it takes time to get a decent library out there, and had the PS5 not allowed users to enjoy the pre-existing library of PS4 games, it stands to reason that vastly fewer people would have been clamoring for it, especially in that first year when there were a paltry handful of next gen exclusive titles. And that's a game SYSTEM, which is inarguably easier to sell to most consumers than a VR addon that costs as much or more than the system you have to plug it into. But that's exactly what we're looking at here for the PSVR2 -an add-on platform that will cost as much or more than the high end console it requires, to provide a feature that many consumers still don't comprehend the real benefit of, which will have hardly any titles available for it for the first 2+ years... If Sony doesn't kill it off before then.
So for the mass market, not the few early adopters, where the incentive to buy? You need a library of gameplay experiences that will keep players entertained for more than 20-60 minutes to justify that cost. And the route Sony has chosen means specifically that they WON'T have that at launch, and probably not for a long time after.
And just to be clear here: I'm not a Sony hater, I like VR, and I still enjoy my PSVR considerably on my PS5. I'm excited about the prospect of the PSVR2 doing well and being successful, what I'm saying comes from stepping back logically and separating what I "hope" happens from the realities of the economy, the VR-interested market, and Sony's own history.
Re: PSVR2 Not Looking Cheap as Impressive Features Debut in Hype-Inducing Ad
@stvevan It's not a case of patching. From what a lot of devs have said over the years, External movement and Inside-Out tracking are so fundamentally different that the time involved in switching is comparable to literally rebuilding the game from scratch. And from the way Sony is touting this, the two platforms will have no compatibility and likely no connection in the storefront either... Meaning that even if the devs wanted to pour hundreds of hours into conversions out of the kindness of their hearts at no extra charge, they likely won't be able to unless you buy the game all over again on the new platform. On the one hand, I'm all for supporting the hard work of devs, but on the other hand this could have literally been avoided in the first place.
Re: PSVR2 Not Looking Cheap as Impressive Features Debut in Hype-Inducing Ad
Even having all the best features available in a VR headset will be completely moot unless Sony backpedals on it's Backwards Compatibility statement this week.
It took YEARS for the first PSVR to have a library that even approached decent. They finally got there, and it's great -but the decision to make the PSVR2 COMPLETELY INCOMPATIBLE with PSVR1 games is a mistake.
I understand that they use totally different tracking, but it wouldn't have been difficult to offer some kind of modification or attachment for the newer high res headset, so that it would have lights that the old tracking equipment could use. That way players who invested in the original unit would be able to enjoy their first gen PSVR library in significantly higher quality in the improved display and PS5 hardware, and users who start with the second generation platform could choose to pick up the first gen tracking equipment and have a sizeable library available on day 1 that way, even if the old content doesn't benefit from the updated tracking systems.
As it is now, they've upset a lot of current VR customers, and they're facing down a trifecta of roadblocks. They've just burned all the people with large PSVR libraries (AKA the people most likely to be interested in the PSVR2), the new PSVR will be back at square one regarding that library so it will be a tougher sell to new consumers (because there will be just a handful of short games playable on it at all for the first couple years), all in top of the fact that they're launching this spendy new unit with a handful of short gaming experiences while we're in a global recession. I love the PSVR, and I want to see VR platforms thrive, but Sony is digging their heels in on bad ideas at a time when marketplace consumers just aren't going to go for it.
Unless Sony reverses course, we might as well call this the next Vita, because they're on track to be discontinuing it right around a year after launch. I hope they fix this.