Rift Now Ahead Of Vive In Steam Survey

[Anonymous]

Am surprised that nobody has posted this or mentioned it tbh.

More troubles for HTC, and if the Vive Pro is too expensive they won't sell too many of those to consumers either.

Perhaps they should have cut the price of the Vive to match the Rift, delayed launching the Vive Pro until next year and upped the resolution from 1.5K to 2K..?

Details here:

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

WVR: 5.38%
Vive: 45.38%
Rift: 47.31%
DK2: 1.95%
DK1: 0% (why include that in the figures? lol)

And things are going to get worse for HTC when Oculus cut the price of the Rift again later this year. My money would be on either another Summer Of Rift permanent cut to $299/£299 or $349/£349 and if they don't cut the price this Summer they'll certainly do that before Christmas.

Personally I'm putting this marketshare drop to several factors:

1) HTC released the damn thing way too early. It was basically a late prototype released as a consumer version, their Crescent Bay equivalent.

2) The licencing of Valve's technology is too expensive which is making it difficult for them to drop their price apart from just ONE price cut from $799 to $599 in two years. The Vive is just too expensive, HTC have done the eact same thing with their phones and look to be doing the same thing with the Vive Pro.

3) Software. They're far behind in the software stakes, and Valve must bear a large part of the responsibility here too. The Lab was great, but it was basically a collection of good tech demos. And since the Vive launched, with the exception of Fallout 4 VR, the bundled software has been pretty poor compared to the ridiculous amount of VERY high quality free software with the Rift.

4) Competition from the WVR headsets at a MUCH cheaper price.

I'm sorry to say that it's looking unlikely, imo, that HTC will be able to keep their doors open and keep their lights on during the next 2 years which is disappointing because a) We don't want to lose a major VR player in the game and b) I've always really liked their phones. 😞

Now play nice everybody and try your best not to get banned or this thread locked, and feel free to go off topic...talk of food origins, nationality and anything else that's off topic that isn't offensive is very welcome here lololol 😄 😄 😄

[Anonymous]

Three10Thirty said:

Can't we all just get along and grow together!  We are only humans with low life expectancy, and will deteriorate without experiencing the full potential of what this technology can be if we are chasing statistics and profit. I just wish they'd play nicely together and stop creating barriers. Share technology and solutions! 

Bloody hippy! 😛 😄

And to paraphrase Douglas Adams, the last bloke that said, "Hey man, why don't we all just be nice to each other for a change?" got nailed to a tree 😮 😄 😄 😄

I think that sales of the different headsets is quite important tbh, particularly now that other manufacturers have started to release them. Unfortunately I think it's only a matter of time before HTC go bust and we lose one of the biggest VR manufacturers. We need competition for VR to move forward at a decent pace. If HTC do go under it could leave Pimax as the only competition that Oculus has for high-end VR.

[OmegaM4N]

I don't get involved in the whole who's faceless corp of choice is better then the other faceless corp of choice, but i do know one thing, if i am looking at two devices that do the same thing i will always go for the cheaper, and even moreso when it is half the price of the other vr headset, and if and when i can get one of those third party MR/AR headsets without external sensors cheaper than a rift, then i will be off onto that bandwagon, i mean i love the rift but if i can get the same expereince or close to it, cheaper and without external sensors, i will be off like a rat up a drain pipe......so it is just unfortunate that here in the UK and i suspect the EU, these third party vr's headsets seem to be only avaliable through third party dealers, hence why they all seem to cost the same as the rift or even more.

[Anonymous]

Well personally for my purchases it's a balancing act. Obviously the price of a headset is a big factor, as it is for anyone that isn't rich lol, but I won't pay for the cheapest thing if it isn't anywhere near as good as a more expensive thing.

With the WVR headsets, even if they were cheap here in the UK as they are in the States, I wouldn't get one because they're not high-end headsets. They're mid-range headsets due to the tracking. If they all launched at the same time with the prices that they are right now I'd still get a Rift, even if it was a little more expensive than the WVR headsets.

[BeastyBaiter]

Agreed, facebook, google, valve... they are all the same to me. I bought the best headset within my budget at the time, which was the Rift. If it were today, it would be between the Rift and the Odyssey. I'd like to upgrade HMD's at this point, but so far nothing has been offered that's substantially better. I had an Odyssey for a day but was disappointed and returned it. Only headset I know of in the works that might meet my desires is the CV2, but Oculus has said nothing about it so far.

[Anonymous]

I'm pretty sure that we'll get a teaser of the CV2 at F8 in May. No real details, but a little announcement at the end of Zuckerberg's keynote that it's coming next year and will be either 2K or 4K resolution.

And I really hope that they don't adopt Pimax's wonky maths the way that HTC have done!

[Hiro_Protag0nist]

Atmos73 said:

When you work it out and assume Oculus has sold 1million Rifts it works out at 2% or 20,000 units more than Vive. Rift could of sold 70,000 to Vives 50,000.
Not a lot of difference really considering the Rift is one third less. HTC makes money from the DAS too so the difference is even smaller overall. The conclusion is Vive might sell less units but makes more revenue per unit. 

I like your spirit Atmos but who gives a damn about how much profit the manager's are making - i want to know that when i go to play an online game there'll be a load of other players there.

We know that a lot of those Vives are in the warehouse experiences and other business user's hands - that also makes a difference.

[falken76]

Atmos73 said:

When you work it out and assume Oculus has sold 1million Rifts it works out at 2% or 20,000 units more than Vive. Rift could of sold 70,000 to Vives 50,000.
Not a lot of difference really considering the Rift is one third less. HTC makes money from the DAS too so the difference is even smaller overall. The conclusion is Vive might sell less units but makes more revenue per unit. 

You're delusional.  The bottom line is most people shop by price and at 1/2 the price the Rift is clearly the better deal and it will only continue to outsell the vive from here because.... well ultimately it comes down to this.  $400 is cheaper than $800.  Then you add on that it's a better overall system with a better integrated store, then it's a no brainer.  It seems that Oculus is going the route to make their money off of software sales, so revenue per unit wouldn't be relevent to them, repeat purchases from their user base is their business model.


"The conclusion is Vive might sell less units but makes more revenue per unit."

To the consumer the conclusion is very close, but the consumer would conclude that Vive sells less units BECAUSE they cost more per unit.

[falken76]

Atmos73 said:

Facebook are still making a 3 billion loss on Oculus plus 500 million loss in court cases.

Then there’s losses in all those exclusives. 

Oculus make like zero profit on Rifts and most Rifters buy from the Steamstore you included.

Oculus will stop funding games once the store is a viable business so says Justin Rubin’s. 

Oh please, Facebook will be fine until the day advertisers realize that their ad program is a huge scam, until then everyone is throwing money at them.  Was there anything official that confirms that Facebook is not only not making anything, but that they consider the aquisition cost an actual loss?  You're ascribing the aquisition as a loss and that's 3 billion of what you claim.  The 500 Million... Has that been paid, is it on appeal?  Does Oculus release their numbers that confirm that they make nothing on their hardware, or hinted at the fact that they are going to stop funding games once the store is a viable business, and if that is their plan, what difference does it make?  I guess it would be their definition of "viable" that would make the difference on weather it matters or not if they continue funding games.

What Loss on exclusives?  Do they release figures on those as well and claim they're not doing as well as they should?  As far as I knew, Zuckerberg was very clear that this was an endevor that was going to take the better half of a decade with the plan they're going with.  It's a little early in the plan to say they're obviously going to pull out and ditch it all.

It's good to know that the good old flame wars of the BBS days are still holding strong these days.  Same debate different players.

[Anonymous]

Zenimax haven't received a penny from the defendants yet, they've launched an appeal. This going to drag out for YEARS.

As has been mentioned several times before, Zuckerberg is in this for the long haul, not to make a quick buck. VR is the future in terms of gaming, entertainment, sports, music and most importantly social media. By the time things REALLY get going and VR headsets are as common in households as tellies that $3b that Facebook paid for Oculus and the $500m that Facebook have used to fund developers so far is going to be a bargain.

And as has already been pointed out several times these figures are skewed in favour of the Vive too, which means that HTC have A LOT of problems at the moment.

[falken76]

My bad, I'm out of the loop, you see, I don't frequent forums for the Vive because I don't have one.  Either way the equation still works the same way, It costs more money so the consumer still sees the same thing.  Two items that provide nearly an identical experience and one is more expensive than the other.  The consumer will always chose the cheaper option.  The few that don't do not represent the majority for sure.