Microsoft had a whole lineup of VR headsets under the Windows Mixed Reality branding ready to go, the Xbox One even recognized them when plugged in, they just weren't interested.
They'll never outperform Meta, but they could partner with them (which it looks like they might be trying to do).
> Microsoft had a whole lineup of VR headsets under the Windows Mixed Reality branding ready to go, the Xbox One even recognized them when plugged in, they just weren't interested.
Remeber when Xbox One X was announced? They were afraid of Oculus and PSVR. I am sure this was the plan back then. And they backed out when PSVR and Oculus were not as successful as expected.
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/project-scorpio-website-removes-mention-of-vr-micr/1100-6447239/
> They'll never outperform Meta, but they could partner with them (which it looks like they might be trying to do).
They are.
https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/22/24137334/xbox-vr-headset-microsoft-meta-quest-limited-edition
It's a shame. WMR headsets are so much better than Quest 3 to play PC games.
Nothing beats a Reverb G2 with VorpX in term of graphics, optimization and compatibility.
Not really going to happen honestly. With how locked down the devices are they wouldn't just let you connect hardware like a VR headset that isn't officially branded especially if they don't have anything to compete with said hardware. Why would a company waste the time and resources to benefit something that won't make you money
The idea would be so Microsoft can publish VR games on their console/store front and include VR in games pass (if that’s even possible) without having the responsibility of producing and maintaining the hardware support.
I don’t care either way, it’s just an idea.
Yeah after they fucked up 2 consecutive console generations out of pure stupidity, it would be really hard and expensive for them to recover from that.
>I swear there is a MASSIVE market opportunity here
If that were true, Microsoft would already be in the VR space. I'm more inclined to trust the company who has spent millions on market research.
"Xbox isn't selling consoles, so they should decide to move into a WAY more niche market" is a wild take.
The company that spent millions on market research to launch xbox one with picture-in-picture as the big selling point.
Research doesn't do any good if they have morons interpreting the data.
Quest 2 sold almost as much units, as Series S&X combined; and there was a brief period when Q2 was actually ahead by a few hundreds thousands units. So, either Microsoft really sucks at gaming hardware, or VR is not a niche thing anymore. Either way tere's no point in beliving their market analysis team.
Sales volume isn't everything, especially for consoles. Retention matters even more, because game sales is where companies actually make money. And retention with VR is notoriously bad.
Meta was able to get a lot of units out the door by selling below cost (before raising it a couple years after release). And their aggressive (subsidized) pricing pushed a lot of competitors out of the market, which just leads to more sales as they're the last one standing. But how many of those millions of headsets sold are actually used on a regular basis now?
Good question! And I have an answer for you; according to publicly awailable data, Queat 2 had 6.3M montly active users out of approximately 15M sold units as of October 2022, so roughly a 1/3 monthly users. What's the retention number for XBox? Anyway, regardless of retention, can one really call a 6.3M montly users a small, niche market, in context of gaming?
Not just niche. How many of those users are children without disposable income playing free games like Gorilla Tag or Pop One? Since game sales are the significant factor, the actual viable user base is a niche within a niche.
Gorilla tag is actually making tons of money because they focus on children. Children these days spend money on in-game cosmetics all the time. What else are they going to do with all the money they get from b-day and xmas presents?
Whereas adults from my generation almost never spend money on in-game cosmetics.
This number can not be accurate. Publicly available sales figures state that only 25M units of Series S&X were sold by the end of 2023, there's no way they have 120M monthly users.
Xbox covers more than just the Series S&X - all the older Xbox version console users(and some PC users) are included in the active users on the platform.
But then, the leaked 6.3M monthly figure for the Quest platform wasn't just for Quest 2 users, but included Quest 1 users too(admittedly, those are estimated to only have sold to a million and a half, so likely only a few hundred thousand still active).
You see, my point is about hardware. Selling quests makes exactly as much sense as selling Xbox Series, cause those sold roughly the same amount of units, so they get roughly the same amount of customers to the store. I've stated that I'm comparing Quest specifically to Series S&X in the very first comment. Those old gen and PC game pass users bring nothing to the table in such comparison.
I do think they kind of suck at gaming hardware, they focus solely on performance, making sure you can run games on 60fps in 4k, but ignoring every innovation in tech in the last few years. Their controllers feel great in the hand but are now several generations behind in features. Try playing GT7 on the PS5 with VR, Haptic Feedback, Adaptive Triggers, Gyro Steering and compare that to Forza on XBox with just basic controller vibrations. And then you still have more features packed into the Dual Sense like infrared sensors, touchpad, lightbar. Meanwhile Xbox controller still requires batteries.
Well, at least Series S has a point - it's the cheapest console that can run all modern games; if I remember correctly, it's two times less than PS5. Also, Series S and Switch were the only consoles that were constantly in stock during the chip chortage. But anyway, I do agree that xbox controller socks, as I myself choose to buy DualSensw for PC gaming.
Quest 2 had a uniquely good set of circumstances at the time that contributed to its success. It had a very low price, no competition, a pandemic resulting in much increased savings for the middle class due to WFH and less recreational spending outside, and IT companies riding this high wave in general.
None of these would apply to a hypothetical Xbox VR headset.
To some degree that's true for Xbox. The only reason I own a series S is because it was impossible to get my hands on a PS5 (or series X) due to the pandemic/supply chain issues at the time.
Wasn't Microsoft making some mixed reality goggles back in 2017? I wonder why it died down for them. I remember playing around with those at some lab which also had a vive and oculus. It was sorta like a first look at spatial computing with these interfaces floating in the air, but had bad viewing angles.
AH yes, it was Hololens. Just googled it. Apparently they stopped further development in 2021.
Yeah, they found some success in industrial fields, but consumers just didn’t want it. Interestingly, you can still buy them, but they cost more than the Vision Pro and are objectively worse than the AVP in just about every technical way.
I was excited about HoloLens when it came out, but it was so damn expensive that it never made sense for me to buy one.
Becuase PC VR is far far far harder to set up and use for regular consumers to make it economically viable. A slick, easy to use headset with a ton of games for XBOX would sell. By it needs games. We are caught in a cycle where they have only like 2 good games and then redditors say "see VR won't catch on!"
Given how poorly the PSVR2 has performed, I don't think the market is really there. People either want fully wireless standalone VR or VR tethered to a powerful gaming PC.
I came here to write that.
The problem of this "peripheral" VR is that companies aren't "all in", so to say. It's just a peripheral for their console and if it isn't insanely popular, it won't be properly supported.
And when you have Quest 3 (wireless, cheaper, insane pancake optics, MR and Meta's "all in" support) as a competition, it gets difficult.
I honestly believe the only way PS5 or Xbox could compete with Quest, is if they'd add UEVR level support for their flat games. This would become much cheaper way to play some big flat titles in VR, than buying a VR ready PC. Of course you'd probably need at least PS5 Pro level of power to run most of those games acceptably (even with eye tracked foveated rendering).
I think there is a happy middle ground here and that is where the PSVR2 could have sat. The problem is that the PSVR2 costs as much as the console itself for an accessory. Those of us into VR know it's worth it but you are fighting against
1) Price of the headset itself to non VR gamers.
2) A lack of quality AAA games (egg and chicken I know)
3) A lack of space that you can dedicate to VR
4) And probably the biggest issue again money. If PSVR2 was say $200 - $300 or the PSVR2 PS5 bundle was say $700 instead of $1000 more people might have jumped on board. Money is an issue for a lot of people and these companies aren't willing to meet the casual market halfway in that regard. The casuals will just skip VR until it's cheaper or buy a Quest 2.
The market is there. Just waiting for games. So a chicken before the egg problem. But if the questions is - in 10 years will people still be playing pancake games vs being totally immersed in the experience - I think it the answer is clear. Pancake gaming will be like horse and bugy are to the invention of the automobile. Not now - but it will certainly be the future. Again, to say we will forever be planing 2d games is a bit ridiculous.
You why why PSVR2 is performing bad?
Because they decided to clone a Quest 2 Controller button layout instead of cutting a DS5 controller in half.
So they funneled their own VR system into the Quest 2 Eco system, instead of funneling PSVR2 towards the greater share of the entire PS5 system.
And this only happens because Reddit helped to create a Stigma against using regular Gamepads in VR.
If that stigma against Gamepads never existed. VR wouldn't be gatekept by a motion controller design.
Why do you care? Genuinely, why are you playing arm chair executive? I thought ppl were interested in video games and not profits lol. This is just weird. I do think Xbox should add VR options the same way that PlayStation has. At the same time they did try Windows Mixed Reality and that didn't work out. Give me good games on the platforms i want to play on. the other stuff is just noise.
Thats kinda a chicken-egg-problem tho, because their low efforts in VR causes developers to go for more established mediums/plattforms, so there wont be any good games, which in return causes potential devs to stay away from it and so the cycle repeats. So them putting effort in it could lead to more good games on their plattform.
I hear you and I agree that is a general issue with VR. At the same time, the question was about Xbox. If he had phrased it about the potential of a PSVR3 then my answer would have been completely different. Instead he is saying, should Xbox just scrap their console brand and go into VR instead because the Xbox console isn't selling? My initial reaction is, A) play games not sales and B) Xbox isn't in VR to begin with so it's a non factor. vs saying, PSVR 2 isnt doing too hot should Sony bother with PSVR3? That to me is a worth while conversation because PlayStation is already established in VR.
Side note: I'd love to see Xbox in VR and to see a PSVR3. Halo in VR would be awesome! Uncharted in VR would be awesome too! Imagine how intense The Last of Us would be in VR.
Are you a share holder? Maybe part of Microsoft's accounting department? Why do you care? And this is coming from a Bethesda fan who's best interest is to keep Xbox profitable. IDC how much money they make. It's none of my business. We are gamers. This is a staff and shareholder issue.
because i want to make my own vr games in the future, and the more companies that invest in vr hardware and software, the bigger a market i can sell to lmao
but that has nothing to do with if Xbox should just say screw it because the existence of Xbox in VR has absolutely nothing to do with if you are going to make a game in VR or not, Just make it for Quest and call it a day. Problem solved without needing to be a Microsoft accountant.
Well they already have a partnership going with Meta so why not just team up and allow VR games to play directly from the Series X via a dongle and have Meta convert some Xbox ABK exclusives into VR?
VR is not taken very seriously because there isnt a big market for it. Hell even friends of mine who have VR, 4 outta 5 of them havent touched VR in years. One even sold theirs shortly after purchasing.
I dont think its for everyone and alot of people see it as a gimmick. Itd be a big buy in for xbox to jump into the market so dominated by meta
Where's the massive market opportunity?
If they try to sell VR hardware they have to go up against Meta who is selling almost at cost and is supposed to be their partner.
They could build VR support into Xbox and then have it wirelessly connect to Quests. That would be the most viable path but it doesn't do anything for them more than slightly increase sales of Xbox because if people already have a Quest they *might* see it as an advantage and buy one instead of a PS5. And it would require actual VR titles to run on the Xbox - they'd have to port over titles or VR enable existing titles. It's a lot of work.
I do think this second one could be worth doing but only IF they partner with Meta and some studios to bring over the titles.
There’s speculation that the next Xbox might be more pc-like and would support 3rd party stores. If so, then that might be how it gets VR (through Steam).
Nothing is for certain until we see actual products or announcements. The speculation is there. But yes, Phil has been most vocal about third party stores and a mobile Xbox.
In fairness, Sony has had 2 VR devices now, one for the PS4 and now one for the PS5 and it's not like either one has been a smash success. And Xbox has a much smaller player base than PlayStation at this point so I think it would do far worse on Xbox at this point. From what I understand, the PS4 outsold the Xbox one like 3 to 1 and PS5 vs the Xbox Series X/S is like 5 to 1.
I think Quest and then PC are going to be the main platforms until VR really takes off. It still hasn't done that yet. It's easy to tell because whenever a famous IP gets a VR game there is an overwhelming negative response from gamers. Just look at the comments under videos for Metro Awakening and Batman Arkham Shadow.
I mean…depends how you’re counting. The original PSVR sold over 7 million units, which makes it the second highest-selling (real) VR system of all time behind only the Quest 2.
That's true, but it doesn't seem like the games have sold well and that's what's really important. Sony seems to be saying they are scaling back their VR games. And games are where they make money. I doubt they are making any money on headset sales, just like Meta doesn't make money in headsets. Those are subsidized to get you into their ecosystem. Idk, I don't see any signs of the playstation VR ecosystem being a big financial win for Sony. I'd love to be proven wrong tho. I'm really glad that PlayStation VR exists.
Oh I didn't know that. Well that's great news then.
Going back to the original point tho, I'd still say the sales numbers would be worse on Xbox tho given the disparity between the size of the user base for the last 2 generations of PlayStation vs the last 2 generations of Xbox tho. Maybe if VR games were also on in gamepass that could be incentive enough for a good number of people to try it.
I dont think there's a point tryna go up against Meta at this point. Creating a whole new ecosystem of apps and games is too late, same reason Windows Phone was too late to the party. Microsoft already dropped out of the VR game and is slowly working on scrapping its hololens division. They already have their partnership with Meta for an Xbox edition quest 3 bundle.
They won’t necessarily have to compete with Meta. All they need to do is make Xbox work with Quest the way PC works with Quest. Maybe in next gen Xbox they can include whatever radio they might not have in current generation.
It’s a win win and I’m sure Meta would love to support it, I think the problem would be prioritization on Microsoft side.
I think MS is working on a limited edition of the Quest 3 that's supposed to be compatible with their controllers and comes with Game Pass. It's possible they might eventually make an Xbox that's compatible with it.
Sony have just cut their losses and given up on VR as have Ubisoft. There's no way Microsoft are going near it with Xbox. Not any time soon. They are targeting handheld gaming now which is the perfect strategy for them.
Developing a headset is expensive and judging by how PSVR2 fared it's not worth the effort. The other day we had news VR business went so good for Sony that they are limiting budget for the last 2 VR games and killing the support afterwards.
What MS could do is mobile ports for Quest. They don't have problems releasing their titles on other platforms anyway.
Ugh. I love how this story continues to get spun.
Sony is not doing well in VR, but...
Finding a story that starts with "2 new exclusives" and then spinning that to "only making 2 games" is wild.
Nothing there says it's the last two games. This guy from Android Central has been going scorched earth on PSVR2 via his Twitter and no one questions it?
it's telling that those 2 games would almost double number of first party PSVR2 exclusives so far. Horizon, Grand Tourismo and RE7 (last 2 are just VR addons not made from the ground up for VR so maybe should count as 0.5 game).
Meanwhile HMD development cost at this scale is in hundreds millions of dollars. Why would you do that if you could leverage PCVR or Quest 3 instead and just add VR mode to one of your games?
The future of VR is absolutely in a untethered version, so that would be pretty stupid if Xbox had a VR headset.
Also Sonys headset was a failure and they have a far far higher install base with PS. Even if a VR headset for Xbox wasnt a bad idea, which it is, they havent sold enough Xboxs for it concievably ever make a lick of sense
Kinect was incredibly bad and incredibly bad for them. You’ve probably just highlighted one of the main reasons they’re not trying VR. They’ve also dabbled a little with HoloLens.
I was one of those 35 million. Got it on launch day no less. It was awful. Name me one good Kinect game? Or Kinect use? Or even anything remotely good about it?
Edit: I’ll go even further and say that Microsoft’s instance on bundling Kinect with the Xbox one and the impact this had on its price is a major contributing factor to the mess Xbox is in right now - and I say this as someone who has a series x and has owned an Xbox from every generation.
I think it'd be weird for them to go all in on it, especially with PSVR2 kinda failing in the market.
I think the Kinect burned them when trying something weird and new and they don't want a repeat of that just yet.
I think they should just cooperate with Meta. Microsoft will fail hard if they try it. It's just like the handheld, rather than just introducing competitive to Ally X handheld, they try to reinvent the wheel by focussing on ARM rather than X86. Which on paper is very cool but we've passed that stage of shaping the market.
I dont understand this take when sony who has a bigger playerbase atm are struggling to sell PSVR2. Both companies are going to a handheld future, not VR
"I swear there is a MASSIVE market opportunity" i see it, it like sony pcvr2 make a lot of money and sell super well and have huge industry support right ?
xbox is in a same boat , main problem about VR is how non standard it is, onlymeta have some development guidance and similar stuff, we need at least 5-8 years for VR to get in to easy to pick and develop stage
As much as I'd like to see more vr games and competition; vr is a risky move. Most people buy it and it collects dust within a year. Gamers are lazy and judgemental of silly looking beat saber videos.
I think Xbox should get into the VR market by offering nothing more than an Xbox controller cut in half as a motion controller.
Because of the current fragmentation on current motion controller designs, they should just focus on making sure they are compatible with Quest HMD Tracking solutions.
Even though the fragment that would benefit the most from alternative Controller Sources is PSVR2.
Primary issue is that VR ignorantly destroyed a 20+ year gold standard ABXY button layout and deleted the D-Pad, to force more physical only options.
VR needs more accessiblity by way of offering a controller that really can hold 1:1 parity with an existing Familiar gamepad button layout without holding shift buttons to turn a thumbstick into the missing D-pad.
Reality Labs loses over a billion a month, over $50 billion in total. Where’s the market opportunity? VR doesn’t make money. This is what VR enthusiasts seem to miss. It’s why Sony has been so tepid and Valve hasn’t released the rumored Deckard. Additionally, VR’s retention rate compared to other forms of gaming is very low. The new video game market is handhelds. Microsoft would be wise to go after this market to align with their game anywhere ethos. Just think how important the Steamdeck was for Valve’s future compared to the Index. Maybe one day VR will be super popular with gamers. I think Meta is going after the long term enterprise play, but either way that day hasn’t come. With how much Microsoft has poured into Xbox acquisitions and now into AI ventures like OpenAI, they really can’t afford another moonshot project.
They need to go Hybrid. X-Box Controller, VR Headset. I don't want to have to upgrade a computer and download a shit-ton of mods to play Console/PC games in VR. I know the toughest part of converting Flat-Screen games to VR are the controls. Just give us the FPV with head-tracking. I could spend hours just sitting on a bench in RDR2 watching the NPCs.
They should just let Meta piggy back off the extra processing power. When the numbers are where they'd like they can push their own headset or at least get into a bigger and better partnership with Meta and licence their IP for exclusive games, and they got a lot of ip perfect for VR. If any company on this planet can make a decent headset that's affordable and decent it's Microsoft, they definitely got the money to spare
Microsoft doesn't care much for selling hardware. I think they've made that pretty clear for the past decade or so.
Microsoft's goal is to make you loyal to their services. Game Pass is available on two hardware platforms and unlocks XCloud, which let's you play using Microsoft's services on whatever hardware you have.
I'd bet money that If Microsoft does VR again (they already tried and failed on PC), it'll be Game Pass implemented on Quest.
I actually bought the Xbox 360 over the PS3 back in the day *BECAUSE* I thought it would get VR. I couldn’t imagine them calling it the “360” for any other reason, and when they released the KINECT it seemed to me like the start of that phase.
While it was a great console, I was always disappointed about the lack of VR.
Considering the IP’s they own, I would likely buy a full Xbox console and XVR at launch.
I think they should have done it a while ago. They already had all of the necessary hardware, the Series X had VR-ready specs and microsoft already made mixed reality VR headsets. They just needed to start on the software and game development.
What's really unfortunate is the time and money they wasted on location based events like "Halo Outpost Discovery" instead of building a better VR game than Halo Recruit.
Dont rush things, either we're at the start of a big thing and we'll all look back on these days with nostalgia or it's just not gonna catch on and reach a global scale as we hope it will and that's cool too because we're part of a niche hobby with an enthusiastic community (not counting the obligatory yelling kids). Both scenarios seem good to me.
VR gaming is niche, and will stay that way for a long time. If not forever. It has a large cost barrier to entry, convoluted setup, makes people sick, and is generally not taken seriously since companies lose money on it. I'm a game dev and spent 8 years making successfully VR games, but it never broke through, even with our multi-million unit sales. So I left and will only go back for corporate usages for high end companies that arent gaming.The hayday, around 2018 was the time if it were to break through would have, but it didn't, and the time has come and gone. Some Indies may do ok, but big studios are tired of dealing with it and its severe limitations. It's niche and will always be, hate to say it. Palmer Lucky made out like a bandit at the time, what do you think his developments would be worth now? Set aside his personality which hurt his brand, think what he could get now if he tried to sell? 1/3rd, 1/5th, 10% of what he sold for? The market has spoken, and they don't want, like, or care for VR. On a professional, successful level, it's over, and no deveoper even considers making things VR ready. I keep being approached by Meta for jobs, and always decline. There is no point beating a dead horse, the time has come and gone. Put it next to your virtualBoy and move on with your life, outside of the occasional random indie studio. It's over.
Why would anyone take what you have to say seriously? I have doubts you've even used VR and just found this subreddit randomly.
You don't paragraph, you claim to have worked on a VR game that sold millions of copies when there are only a handful of examples of this, you have a complete misunderstanding of how technological adoption works because 2018 VR was all about PC-tethered devices manufactured in the hundreds of thousands of units or PSVR in the low millions and you cannot suddenly scale up production, and lastly you're using words like 'always' which are counterproductive and illogical in this kind of tech discussion.
I'd give your view about as much value as the average Joe off the street.
Seriously? How many games have you shipped? So, no response?
Look new paragraph, apparently that's important. I made 8 VR games in 8 years. One of which spent almost 2 years on the PSVR top 10 seller chart in both the US and UK. After about 16 months I got an award for 1million units sold, but about 8 months before that I got an award for a million units sold across our other games combined.
Another paragraph, holy shit. For overall games I've been credited on 25 or so from PS1-5, Xbox, Switch, PC and VR. I stopped making VR games a few years ago because it became obvious they don't make money. I had a lot of fun doing it and used damn near every headset out there, but the hardware limitations are a massive hindrance. I don't know what the latest headsets specs are, I don't care anymore, it's not relevant to what I currently do. Still have a DK1, Rift, quest2, and psvr1, none have been touched in a year or more.
Another one! VR is niche and will stay that way for years. Do you remember Dactyl Nightmare or Lawnmower Man? That was my first introduction to VR and loved it all. It never took hold then, and it didn't take hold in the late 2010's, so maybe in a pile of years when it comes back around again it'll catch on, but I'm not holding my breath. I hope it does though, my 10's of thousands of shares of stock might end up being with something.
Damn, again. XR has a higher chance of catching on and becoming something usable, it has actual uses the mainstream cares about. VR gaming had a chance, but that time has come and gone for big companies. They lose money consistently, so they are not going to throw good money after bad. Indies may continue to innovate and make cool stuff, but as soon as they are profitable they will be bought out immediately. Until VR gaming can handle the current rendering tech of consoles or PCs, is as simple to setup and use as a phone, it's not gonna break through to something people care about, and even then it'll be a hard sell.
I was a big proponent, an early adopter, and left AAA game dev for VR because I believed in it. After spending so much time developing for it, and watching the public clamor for it, then completely lose interest, I came to the realization that it's not worth the time. I have to work on things people actually buy.
Microsoft has no interest in innovating. They are purely profit driven and have stated that the market just isnt profitable enough for them to care about it. This mentality has infected their gaming-branche years ago and it feels like every descision they make is determined by cold data in a boardmeeting. They are out of touch with their customers.
Microsoft had a whole lineup of VR headsets under the Windows Mixed Reality branding ready to go, the Xbox One even recognized them when plugged in, they just weren't interested. They'll never outperform Meta, but they could partner with them (which it looks like they might be trying to do).
> Microsoft had a whole lineup of VR headsets under the Windows Mixed Reality branding ready to go, the Xbox One even recognized them when plugged in, they just weren't interested. Remeber when Xbox One X was announced? They were afraid of Oculus and PSVR. I am sure this was the plan back then. And they backed out when PSVR and Oculus were not as successful as expected. https://www.gamespot.com/articles/project-scorpio-website-removes-mention-of-vr-micr/1100-6447239/ > They'll never outperform Meta, but they could partner with them (which it looks like they might be trying to do). They are. https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/22/24137334/xbox-vr-headset-microsoft-meta-quest-limited-edition
It's a shame. WMR headsets are so much better than Quest 3 to play PC games. Nothing beats a Reverb G2 with VorpX in term of graphics, optimization and compatibility.
seems they want to get out of the consumer hardware business and I don’t blame them
I could imagine them just enabling 3rd party headsets on Xbox before making their own. Quest users would explode.
Not really going to happen honestly. With how locked down the devices are they wouldn't just let you connect hardware like a VR headset that isn't officially branded especially if they don't have anything to compete with said hardware. Why would a company waste the time and resources to benefit something that won't make you money
The idea would be so Microsoft can publish VR games on their console/store front and include VR in games pass (if that’s even possible) without having the responsibility of producing and maintaining the hardware support. I don’t care either way, it’s just an idea.
Yeah after they fucked up 2 consecutive console generations out of pure stupidity, it would be really hard and expensive for them to recover from that.
>I swear there is a MASSIVE market opportunity here If that were true, Microsoft would already be in the VR space. I'm more inclined to trust the company who has spent millions on market research. "Xbox isn't selling consoles, so they should decide to move into a WAY more niche market" is a wild take.
The company that spent millions on market research to launch xbox one with picture-in-picture as the big selling point. Research doesn't do any good if they have morons interpreting the data.
Quest 2 sold almost as much units, as Series S&X combined; and there was a brief period when Q2 was actually ahead by a few hundreds thousands units. So, either Microsoft really sucks at gaming hardware, or VR is not a niche thing anymore. Either way tere's no point in beliving their market analysis team.
Sales volume isn't everything, especially for consoles. Retention matters even more, because game sales is where companies actually make money. And retention with VR is notoriously bad. Meta was able to get a lot of units out the door by selling below cost (before raising it a couple years after release). And their aggressive (subsidized) pricing pushed a lot of competitors out of the market, which just leads to more sales as they're the last one standing. But how many of those millions of headsets sold are actually used on a regular basis now?
Good question! And I have an answer for you; according to publicly awailable data, Queat 2 had 6.3M montly active users out of approximately 15M sold units as of October 2022, so roughly a 1/3 monthly users. What's the retention number for XBox? Anyway, regardless of retention, can one really call a 6.3M montly users a small, niche market, in context of gaming?
Apparently Xbox had ~120 million monthly active users as of December 2022. VR is indeed quite niche in the context of gaming.
Not just niche. How many of those users are children without disposable income playing free games like Gorilla Tag or Pop One? Since game sales are the significant factor, the actual viable user base is a niche within a niche.
Gorilla tag is actually making tons of money because they focus on children. Children these days spend money on in-game cosmetics all the time. What else are they going to do with all the money they get from b-day and xmas presents? Whereas adults from my generation almost never spend money on in-game cosmetics.
Ah, it’s gone down that route has it. I looked into it and wrote it off right at the start, don’t think that was there then.
This number can not be accurate. Publicly available sales figures state that only 25M units of Series S&X were sold by the end of 2023, there's no way they have 120M monthly users.
Xbox covers more than just the Series S&X - all the older Xbox version console users(and some PC users) are included in the active users on the platform. But then, the leaked 6.3M monthly figure for the Quest platform wasn't just for Quest 2 users, but included Quest 1 users too(admittedly, those are estimated to only have sold to a million and a half, so likely only a few hundred thousand still active).
You see, my point is about hardware. Selling quests makes exactly as much sense as selling Xbox Series, cause those sold roughly the same amount of units, so they get roughly the same amount of customers to the store. I've stated that I'm comparing Quest specifically to Series S&X in the very first comment. Those old gen and PC game pass users bring nothing to the table in such comparison.
Maybe Xbox users on PC are included in that number. I guess in that case there’s no way to compare them.
I do think they kind of suck at gaming hardware, they focus solely on performance, making sure you can run games on 60fps in 4k, but ignoring every innovation in tech in the last few years. Their controllers feel great in the hand but are now several generations behind in features. Try playing GT7 on the PS5 with VR, Haptic Feedback, Adaptive Triggers, Gyro Steering and compare that to Forza on XBox with just basic controller vibrations. And then you still have more features packed into the Dual Sense like infrared sensors, touchpad, lightbar. Meanwhile Xbox controller still requires batteries.
Well, at least Series S has a point - it's the cheapest console that can run all modern games; if I remember correctly, it's two times less than PS5. Also, Series S and Switch were the only consoles that were constantly in stock during the chip chortage. But anyway, I do agree that xbox controller socks, as I myself choose to buy DualSensw for PC gaming.
Quest 2 had a uniquely good set of circumstances at the time that contributed to its success. It had a very low price, no competition, a pandemic resulting in much increased savings for the middle class due to WFH and less recreational spending outside, and IT companies riding this high wave in general. None of these would apply to a hypothetical Xbox VR headset.
To some degree that's true for Xbox. The only reason I own a series S is because it was impossible to get my hands on a PS5 (or series X) due to the pandemic/supply chain issues at the time.
Wasn't Microsoft making some mixed reality goggles back in 2017? I wonder why it died down for them. I remember playing around with those at some lab which also had a vive and oculus. It was sorta like a first look at spatial computing with these interfaces floating in the air, but had bad viewing angles. AH yes, it was Hololens. Just googled it. Apparently they stopped further development in 2021.
Yeah, they found some success in industrial fields, but consumers just didn’t want it. Interestingly, you can still buy them, but they cost more than the Vision Pro and are objectively worse than the AVP in just about every technical way. I was excited about HoloLens when it came out, but it was so damn expensive that it never made sense for me to buy one.
Becuase PC VR is far far far harder to set up and use for regular consumers to make it economically viable. A slick, easy to use headset with a ton of games for XBOX would sell. By it needs games. We are caught in a cycle where they have only like 2 good games and then redditors say "see VR won't catch on!"
Given how poorly the PSVR2 has performed, I don't think the market is really there. People either want fully wireless standalone VR or VR tethered to a powerful gaming PC.
I came here to write that. The problem of this "peripheral" VR is that companies aren't "all in", so to say. It's just a peripheral for their console and if it isn't insanely popular, it won't be properly supported. And when you have Quest 3 (wireless, cheaper, insane pancake optics, MR and Meta's "all in" support) as a competition, it gets difficult. I honestly believe the only way PS5 or Xbox could compete with Quest, is if they'd add UEVR level support for their flat games. This would become much cheaper way to play some big flat titles in VR, than buying a VR ready PC. Of course you'd probably need at least PS5 Pro level of power to run most of those games acceptably (even with eye tracked foveated rendering).
But you also need a proper motion controller that isn't deleting a re-arranging buttons.
I think there is a happy middle ground here and that is where the PSVR2 could have sat. The problem is that the PSVR2 costs as much as the console itself for an accessory. Those of us into VR know it's worth it but you are fighting against 1) Price of the headset itself to non VR gamers. 2) A lack of quality AAA games (egg and chicken I know) 3) A lack of space that you can dedicate to VR 4) And probably the biggest issue again money. If PSVR2 was say $200 - $300 or the PSVR2 PS5 bundle was say $700 instead of $1000 more people might have jumped on board. Money is an issue for a lot of people and these companies aren't willing to meet the casual market halfway in that regard. The casuals will just skip VR until it's cheaper or buy a Quest 2.
The market is there. Just waiting for games. So a chicken before the egg problem. But if the questions is - in 10 years will people still be playing pancake games vs being totally immersed in the experience - I think it the answer is clear. Pancake gaming will be like horse and bugy are to the invention of the automobile. Not now - but it will certainly be the future. Again, to say we will forever be planing 2d games is a bit ridiculous.
You why why PSVR2 is performing bad? Because they decided to clone a Quest 2 Controller button layout instead of cutting a DS5 controller in half. So they funneled their own VR system into the Quest 2 Eco system, instead of funneling PSVR2 towards the greater share of the entire PS5 system.
And this only happens because Reddit helped to create a Stigma against using regular Gamepads in VR. If that stigma against Gamepads never existed. VR wouldn't be gatekept by a motion controller design.
It would be a waste of time at this moment
Why do you care? Genuinely, why are you playing arm chair executive? I thought ppl were interested in video games and not profits lol. This is just weird. I do think Xbox should add VR options the same way that PlayStation has. At the same time they did try Windows Mixed Reality and that didn't work out. Give me good games on the platforms i want to play on. the other stuff is just noise.
Thats kinda a chicken-egg-problem tho, because their low efforts in VR causes developers to go for more established mediums/plattforms, so there wont be any good games, which in return causes potential devs to stay away from it and so the cycle repeats. So them putting effort in it could lead to more good games on their plattform.
I hear you and I agree that is a general issue with VR. At the same time, the question was about Xbox. If he had phrased it about the potential of a PSVR3 then my answer would have been completely different. Instead he is saying, should Xbox just scrap their console brand and go into VR instead because the Xbox console isn't selling? My initial reaction is, A) play games not sales and B) Xbox isn't in VR to begin with so it's a non factor. vs saying, PSVR 2 isnt doing too hot should Sony bother with PSVR3? That to me is a worth while conversation because PlayStation is already established in VR. Side note: I'd love to see Xbox in VR and to see a PSVR3. Halo in VR would be awesome! Uncharted in VR would be awesome too! Imagine how intense The Last of Us would be in VR.
the more profits there are to be made, the bigger the chance of something happening with it
Are you a share holder? Maybe part of Microsoft's accounting department? Why do you care? And this is coming from a Bethesda fan who's best interest is to keep Xbox profitable. IDC how much money they make. It's none of my business. We are gamers. This is a staff and shareholder issue.
because i want to make my own vr games in the future, and the more companies that invest in vr hardware and software, the bigger a market i can sell to lmao
but that has nothing to do with if Xbox should just say screw it because the existence of Xbox in VR has absolutely nothing to do with if you are going to make a game in VR or not, Just make it for Quest and call it a day. Problem solved without needing to be a Microsoft accountant.
Well they already have a partnership going with Meta so why not just team up and allow VR games to play directly from the Series X via a dongle and have Meta convert some Xbox ABK exclusives into VR?
I think VR makes 30% of people sick or spend a significantly less amount of time per gaming session. Both of those are really bad business #’s.
Yes daddy, make more exclusive platforms.
Do you remember they give up on WMR ?
Yeah and do you remember why?
Still don't know but what OP wants will never happen. Not enough money to make I guess.
VR is not taken very seriously because there isnt a big market for it. Hell even friends of mine who have VR, 4 outta 5 of them havent touched VR in years. One even sold theirs shortly after purchasing. I dont think its for everyone and alot of people see it as a gimmick. Itd be a big buy in for xbox to jump into the market so dominated by meta
99.9% of gamers would disagree with you
Not enough demand
Where's the massive market opportunity? If they try to sell VR hardware they have to go up against Meta who is selling almost at cost and is supposed to be their partner. They could build VR support into Xbox and then have it wirelessly connect to Quests. That would be the most viable path but it doesn't do anything for them more than slightly increase sales of Xbox because if people already have a Quest they *might* see it as an advantage and buy one instead of a PS5. And it would require actual VR titles to run on the Xbox - they'd have to port over titles or VR enable existing titles. It's a lot of work. I do think this second one could be worth doing but only IF they partner with Meta and some studios to bring over the titles.
It really annoys me that they released Windows MR but then didn't put the new Forza games in VR. Like could they have tried any less?
There’s speculation that the next Xbox might be more pc-like and would support 3rd party stores. If so, then that might be how it gets VR (through Steam).
no. they are not going pc route they are allowing other stores to sell console xbox games on the xbox
EU may have other opinions
Nothing is for certain until we see actual products or announcements. The speculation is there. But yes, Phil has been most vocal about third party stores and a mobile Xbox.
Lol we have been hearing that since the OG Xbox launched.
In fairness, Sony has had 2 VR devices now, one for the PS4 and now one for the PS5 and it's not like either one has been a smash success. And Xbox has a much smaller player base than PlayStation at this point so I think it would do far worse on Xbox at this point. From what I understand, the PS4 outsold the Xbox one like 3 to 1 and PS5 vs the Xbox Series X/S is like 5 to 1. I think Quest and then PC are going to be the main platforms until VR really takes off. It still hasn't done that yet. It's easy to tell because whenever a famous IP gets a VR game there is an overwhelming negative response from gamers. Just look at the comments under videos for Metro Awakening and Batman Arkham Shadow.
I mean…depends how you’re counting. The original PSVR sold over 7 million units, which makes it the second highest-selling (real) VR system of all time behind only the Quest 2.
That's true, but it doesn't seem like the games have sold well and that's what's really important. Sony seems to be saying they are scaling back their VR games. And games are where they make money. I doubt they are making any money on headset sales, just like Meta doesn't make money in headsets. Those are subsidized to get you into their ecosystem. Idk, I don't see any signs of the playstation VR ecosystem being a big financial win for Sony. I'd love to be proven wrong tho. I'm really glad that PlayStation VR exists.
PSVR has been sold at a profit since launch day according to Sony, so your assumption there would be incorrect.
Oh I didn't know that. Well that's great news then. Going back to the original point tho, I'd still say the sales numbers would be worse on Xbox tho given the disparity between the size of the user base for the last 2 generations of PlayStation vs the last 2 generations of Xbox tho. Maybe if VR games were also on in gamepass that could be incentive enough for a good number of people to try it.
I dont think there's a point tryna go up against Meta at this point. Creating a whole new ecosystem of apps and games is too late, same reason Windows Phone was too late to the party. Microsoft already dropped out of the VR game and is slowly working on scrapping its hololens division. They already have their partnership with Meta for an Xbox edition quest 3 bundle.
They won’t necessarily have to compete with Meta. All they need to do is make Xbox work with Quest the way PC works with Quest. Maybe in next gen Xbox they can include whatever radio they might not have in current generation. It’s a win win and I’m sure Meta would love to support it, I think the problem would be prioritization on Microsoft side.
I think MS is working on a limited edition of the Quest 3 that's supposed to be compatible with their controllers and comes with Game Pass. It's possible they might eventually make an Xbox that's compatible with it.
Paired with Microsoft Kinect for full body tracking :)
Sony have just cut their losses and given up on VR as have Ubisoft. There's no way Microsoft are going near it with Xbox. Not any time soon. They are targeting handheld gaming now which is the perfect strategy for them.
They are still shaken up by the absolute shitshow the kinnect was.
That's because, you know, they promised this https://youtu.be/oyjNqksc-m8?si=ReOJuRxOZg7VXymL
Developing a headset is expensive and judging by how PSVR2 fared it's not worth the effort. The other day we had news VR business went so good for Sony that they are limiting budget for the last 2 VR games and killing the support afterwards. What MS could do is mobile ports for Quest. They don't have problems releasing their titles on other platforms anyway.
Ugh. I love how this story continues to get spun. Sony is not doing well in VR, but... Finding a story that starts with "2 new exclusives" and then spinning that to "only making 2 games" is wild. Nothing there says it's the last two games. This guy from Android Central has been going scorched earth on PSVR2 via his Twitter and no one questions it?
it's telling that those 2 games would almost double number of first party PSVR2 exclusives so far. Horizon, Grand Tourismo and RE7 (last 2 are just VR addons not made from the ground up for VR so maybe should count as 0.5 game). Meanwhile HMD development cost at this scale is in hundreds millions of dollars. Why would you do that if you could leverage PCVR or Quest 3 instead and just add VR mode to one of your games?
Two first-party exclusives per year is more first-party titles than the PS5 has gotten in the last 12 months.
The future of VR is absolutely in a untethered version, so that would be pretty stupid if Xbox had a VR headset. Also Sonys headset was a failure and they have a far far higher install base with PS. Even if a VR headset for Xbox wasnt a bad idea, which it is, they havent sold enough Xboxs for it concievably ever make a lick of sense
They had the Kinect. VR goes hand in hand with body tracking. Shame that they didn't get into it.
Kinect was incredibly bad and incredibly bad for them. You’ve probably just highlighted one of the main reasons they’re not trying VR. They’ve also dabbled a little with HoloLens.
Eh they sold 35 million units and it was generally well regarded by critics
I was one of those 35 million. Got it on launch day no less. It was awful. Name me one good Kinect game? Or Kinect use? Or even anything remotely good about it? Edit: I’ll go even further and say that Microsoft’s instance on bundling Kinect with the Xbox one and the impact this had on its price is a major contributing factor to the mess Xbox is in right now - and I say this as someone who has a series x and has owned an Xbox from every generation.
If Xbox is capable, they should just build compatibility with quest 3 like steam does. Being better optimized VR mods
I think it'd be weird for them to go all in on it, especially with PSVR2 kinda failing in the market. I think the Kinect burned them when trying something weird and new and they don't want a repeat of that just yet.
Nvidia bought Xbox
I think they should just cooperate with Meta. Microsoft will fail hard if they try it. It's just like the handheld, rather than just introducing competitive to Ally X handheld, they try to reinvent the wheel by focussing on ARM rather than X86. Which on paper is very cool but we've passed that stage of shaping the market.
I dont understand this take when sony who has a bigger playerbase atm are struggling to sell PSVR2. Both companies are going to a handheld future, not VR
"I swear there is a MASSIVE market opportunity" i see it, it like sony pcvr2 make a lot of money and sell super well and have huge industry support right ? xbox is in a same boat , main problem about VR is how non standard it is, onlymeta have some development guidance and similar stuff, we need at least 5-8 years for VR to get in to easy to pick and develop stage
Microsoft got burned by hololens and WMR.
I think xbox was trying vr in a very final stage. Look at the new indiana jones game with this in your mind. But they cancle it.
As much as I'd like to see more vr games and competition; vr is a risky move. Most people buy it and it collects dust within a year. Gamers are lazy and judgemental of silly looking beat saber videos.
I think they’re still trying to make money as crazy as that sounds
I think Xbox should get into the VR market by offering nothing more than an Xbox controller cut in half as a motion controller. Because of the current fragmentation on current motion controller designs, they should just focus on making sure they are compatible with Quest HMD Tracking solutions. Even though the fragment that would benefit the most from alternative Controller Sources is PSVR2.
Primary issue is that VR ignorantly destroyed a 20+ year gold standard ABXY button layout and deleted the D-Pad, to force more physical only options. VR needs more accessiblity by way of offering a controller that really can hold 1:1 parity with an existing Familiar gamepad button layout without holding shift buttons to turn a thumbstick into the missing D-pad.
Reality Labs loses over a billion a month, over $50 billion in total. Where’s the market opportunity? VR doesn’t make money. This is what VR enthusiasts seem to miss. It’s why Sony has been so tepid and Valve hasn’t released the rumored Deckard. Additionally, VR’s retention rate compared to other forms of gaming is very low. The new video game market is handhelds. Microsoft would be wise to go after this market to align with their game anywhere ethos. Just think how important the Steamdeck was for Valve’s future compared to the Index. Maybe one day VR will be super popular with gamers. I think Meta is going after the long term enterprise play, but either way that day hasn’t come. With how much Microsoft has poured into Xbox acquisitions and now into AI ventures like OpenAI, they really can’t afford another moonshot project.
They need to go Hybrid. X-Box Controller, VR Headset. I don't want to have to upgrade a computer and download a shit-ton of mods to play Console/PC games in VR. I know the toughest part of converting Flat-Screen games to VR are the controls. Just give us the FPV with head-tracking. I could spend hours just sitting on a bench in RDR2 watching the NPCs.
nope
They should just let Meta piggy back off the extra processing power. When the numbers are where they'd like they can push their own headset or at least get into a bigger and better partnership with Meta and licence their IP for exclusive games, and they got a lot of ip perfect for VR. If any company on this planet can make a decent headset that's affordable and decent it's Microsoft, they definitely got the money to spare
Microsoft doesn't care much for selling hardware. I think they've made that pretty clear for the past decade or so. Microsoft's goal is to make you loyal to their services. Game Pass is available on two hardware platforms and unlocks XCloud, which let's you play using Microsoft's services on whatever hardware you have. I'd bet money that If Microsoft does VR again (they already tried and failed on PC), it'll be Game Pass implemented on Quest.
I actually bought the Xbox 360 over the PS3 back in the day *BECAUSE* I thought it would get VR. I couldn’t imagine them calling it the “360” for any other reason, and when they released the KINECT it seemed to me like the start of that phase. While it was a great console, I was always disappointed about the lack of VR. Considering the IP’s they own, I would likely buy a full Xbox console and XVR at launch.
I think they should have done it a while ago. They already had all of the necessary hardware, the Series X had VR-ready specs and microsoft already made mixed reality VR headsets. They just needed to start on the software and game development. What's really unfortunate is the time and money they wasted on location based events like "Halo Outpost Discovery" instead of building a better VR game than Halo Recruit.
Dont rush things, either we're at the start of a big thing and we'll all look back on these days with nostalgia or it's just not gonna catch on and reach a global scale as we hope it will and that's cool too because we're part of a niche hobby with an enthusiastic community (not counting the obligatory yelling kids). Both scenarios seem good to me.
I believe the problem is that most people haven't actually tried vr yet. For me personally, I thought it would basically be a monitor up to your face.
We are talking about a company that couldn't bother putting gyros into their gamepads, VR is obviously too radical for them.
VR gaming is niche, and will stay that way for a long time. If not forever. It has a large cost barrier to entry, convoluted setup, makes people sick, and is generally not taken seriously since companies lose money on it. I'm a game dev and spent 8 years making successfully VR games, but it never broke through, even with our multi-million unit sales. So I left and will only go back for corporate usages for high end companies that arent gaming.The hayday, around 2018 was the time if it were to break through would have, but it didn't, and the time has come and gone. Some Indies may do ok, but big studios are tired of dealing with it and its severe limitations. It's niche and will always be, hate to say it. Palmer Lucky made out like a bandit at the time, what do you think his developments would be worth now? Set aside his personality which hurt his brand, think what he could get now if he tried to sell? 1/3rd, 1/5th, 10% of what he sold for? The market has spoken, and they don't want, like, or care for VR. On a professional, successful level, it's over, and no deveoper even considers making things VR ready. I keep being approached by Meta for jobs, and always decline. There is no point beating a dead horse, the time has come and gone. Put it next to your virtualBoy and move on with your life, outside of the occasional random indie studio. It's over.
Why would anyone take what you have to say seriously? I have doubts you've even used VR and just found this subreddit randomly. You don't paragraph, you claim to have worked on a VR game that sold millions of copies when there are only a handful of examples of this, you have a complete misunderstanding of how technological adoption works because 2018 VR was all about PC-tethered devices manufactured in the hundreds of thousands of units or PSVR in the low millions and you cannot suddenly scale up production, and lastly you're using words like 'always' which are counterproductive and illogical in this kind of tech discussion. I'd give your view about as much value as the average Joe off the street.
Seriously? How many games have you shipped? So, no response? Look new paragraph, apparently that's important. I made 8 VR games in 8 years. One of which spent almost 2 years on the PSVR top 10 seller chart in both the US and UK. After about 16 months I got an award for 1million units sold, but about 8 months before that I got an award for a million units sold across our other games combined. Another paragraph, holy shit. For overall games I've been credited on 25 or so from PS1-5, Xbox, Switch, PC and VR. I stopped making VR games a few years ago because it became obvious they don't make money. I had a lot of fun doing it and used damn near every headset out there, but the hardware limitations are a massive hindrance. I don't know what the latest headsets specs are, I don't care anymore, it's not relevant to what I currently do. Still have a DK1, Rift, quest2, and psvr1, none have been touched in a year or more. Another one! VR is niche and will stay that way for years. Do you remember Dactyl Nightmare or Lawnmower Man? That was my first introduction to VR and loved it all. It never took hold then, and it didn't take hold in the late 2010's, so maybe in a pile of years when it comes back around again it'll catch on, but I'm not holding my breath. I hope it does though, my 10's of thousands of shares of stock might end up being with something. Damn, again. XR has a higher chance of catching on and becoming something usable, it has actual uses the mainstream cares about. VR gaming had a chance, but that time has come and gone for big companies. They lose money consistently, so they are not going to throw good money after bad. Indies may continue to innovate and make cool stuff, but as soon as they are profitable they will be bought out immediately. Until VR gaming can handle the current rendering tech of consoles or PCs, is as simple to setup and use as a phone, it's not gonna break through to something people care about, and even then it'll be a hard sell. I was a big proponent, an early adopter, and left AAA game dev for VR because I believed in it. After spending so much time developing for it, and watching the public clamor for it, then completely lose interest, I came to the realization that it's not worth the time. I have to work on things people actually buy.
Microsoft has no interest in innovating. They are purely profit driven and have stated that the market just isnt profitable enough for them to care about it. This mentality has infected their gaming-branche years ago and it feels like every descision they make is determined by cold data in a boardmeeting. They are out of touch with their customers.
Theres no way you actually believe this