Qualcomm says Oculus Quest 2 has shipped 10 million units putting it close to Xbox Series X/S

https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/16/22785469/meta-oculus-quest-2-10-million-units-sold-qualcomm-xr2

So I guess VR didn't die then, wasn't a fad then, and wasn't destined to be niche then.

Kinect sold 30 million. ;o

Certainly not a niche, no way!! lol :P

Amazing device. Just a shame about the Facebook stuff.

Kinect grew fast and then declined fast. VR has already outlived Kinect's entire life cycle and has yet to decline on a year-on-year basis.

VR is going the long way around. It's going to continue to grow because the ceiling is much, much higher than where the tech is today, and the investment will continue to be there for it to evolve.

More than $10 billion was invested this year. Expect even more every year going forward for quite a while.

VR teh bust.

Internet guy said so.

That is cool but VR has stagnated. The hype has died and its future unclear.

Mostly just messing around here but what will be the big thing is when Augmented Reality combines with VR. That me thinks is what MS is up to and when they will jump in. :P

Eh I doubt Xbox even pass 10m.

The hype died for PCs, Mobile, and Consoles too in the early days in the exact same way as VR, and yet here we are.

Hype is not nearly as important of a metric as you think. Every new technology platform goes through a rise and lull in hype. That's why the gartner hype cycle was coined.

The future is as clear as day. It's going to be mainstream.

Only wireless VR will be mainstream. Any headset that need to be connected to another device to function will always be niche.

Yeah? Not denying that. Quest is wireless.

That's starting to happen.

https://twitter.com/GregMadison/status/1453911010914422787

Next year, Oculus will have a new headset with color passthrough among other features.

a lot of people bought one, including myself. But we haven't touched it in months. Even me, I bought it in march, rarely played it then when RE4 came out I started playing it again. It really shows how much RE4 helped the occulus. They were desperate until that point and now they're milking the shit out of RE4 with these new bundles. Thats not a big deal, because the game is that good, so milk ahead.

Theres a way to link up your pc to the headset and play the VR games there but even on PC the games selection is still limited. I heard theres a way to link up the headset with the xbox series x. If thats possible then it would be great...I want to try out a few games in VR, mainly MSFS and forza 5

@SecretPolice: What is the appeal of AR in gaming? Sure there has been a few games that have used it (thinking of handhelds) but I can't think of any good use except mini games, tech demos, and board games. I think people are more interested in other words than seeing stuff appear in their room.

10M puts it well above the Series S/X consoles but, I mean, it won't last.

@OmegaBlueUp:

Though some of it may have not been totally legit; if you saw the MS demo of MS's Hololens back a few years ago, what they showed of Minecraft was truly amazing.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=minecraft+hololens&view=detail&mid=38E5865669D04903CEC538E5865669D04903CEC5&FORM=VIRE

Well I'm sure Xbox will speed up once the supply chain is better, but the console industry has long since matured so there is a a general growth ceiling. VR is in it's early stages, so the ceiling for growth is still many times where it is today.

If I had to guess, VR will have 200 million users by 2030, 500 million by 2035, and a billion by 2040.

All that and I still don’t give a flying **** about VR. 😜

Which worthwhile VR games launched after Alyx?

VR teh bust.

It is not going to be mainstream until it solves the accessibility and social element.

Needs better software as well and lower price.

Problem see atm, Sony and Facebook are trying to cut up an already tiny pie, with people using the platform having invested signicant money.

Even as a Rift S user, I cannot play Resident Evil 4, because they went out of their way to segment their own hardware by deliberately funnelling the software.

I'm guessing they expect me and others to dol out another £300+ on a Quest 2 on top of my Rift S bought 2-3 years back, and they can ****, right, off.

From the top of my head the first thing that comes to mind is Resident Evil 4. From what i've read this, little known games VR conversion is a better than Resident Evil 8. And compared to other conversions where it's just a lick of paint, an actual justified one that alters the experience.

Unfortunately as mentioned above, an already limited library is being funnelled.

It's ok dude. You hate that game.

;)

That Walking Dead game you've been playing looks better anyway.

Is there any good VR headset yet? With "good" I mean nice quality, comfortability and somewhat future proof? Or are we still expensively alpha testing products that can be useless after a week? I think I'd rather shave my balls with a cheese grater than paying money for something that's tied to facebook.

Being solved as we speak. Yeah, it'll take the rest of the decade to make it's way to consumers, but it's coming. Despite people saying "Nope, that tech is 50 years away, 100 years away, or even impossible.

$300 is fine price-wise for mainstream adoption. At this point it's about adding features and improving accessibility and interfaces.

The problem with some of you VR enthusiast is the strange disconnect from the consumer market that blinds your view of what will succeed and what wouldn't. What are the moves for making it more accessible and resolving the social element?

@darthbuzzard: I agree $300 is a good price point. The problem around Quest 2 is ironically not the hardware itself but the company.

Some mods are really cool. People modding old games to run in VR.

I know people were modding the mafia games. Perhaps worth a look?

I hope someone ports Bioshock to VR. Now there's a world that would transport you in VR.

Guess it depends on who you ask. For "average joe", someone not looking for top of the line I'd say Rift S is (or was as it's been discontinued) the good middle ground.

Outside of that, although kinda hate to fucking say it, Quest 2 is a good option.

Aside from being cheap and decent visual quality, it's guaranteed support.

And yea, Walking Dead Saints And Sinners is dope. Not the best zombie game ever made, take something like Resident Evil 2 Remake over it any day, but as far as traditional zombie games go, def one of the better ones including flatscreen.

Donno about Mafia but Doom 3 is definitely better suited for VR.

Doesn't really fix the problem of the maps being flat and boring with the same teleport shit every 4 minutes but def better suited for a VR experience.

OG Doom and Quake also work in VR, but you need a good stomach for it. Personally, have 0 problems playing these in VR, but newcomers, yea, not a good place to start.

@SecretPolice: I remember that showing. It looked cool but even then I thought "why would people want to play that way?" and "couldn't that be done in VR in a virtual room?"

I'm not trying to diss AR. I can see some cool things there, but I see AR as very gimmicky (for gaming). And this is coming from someone that really likes VR sees a future for VR.

Nothing blinds my view. I've considered every possible angle because I've heard every complaint people have and know how they are being addressed.

Headsets are getting smaller now. The Oculus headset launching next year is almost half the size. We saw a further off prototype that was about half the size of this upcoming headset, and we saw an even further-off prototype display system that was a pair of sunglasses.

You also have the continued merging of VR/AR which can be seen in Quest 2 today where you can create persistent portals or seamless transitions between VR/AR, as well as bring real world objects (including people/pets) into VR. Right now, it's not smart enough to detect individual objects (known as object segmentation) or provide an accurate color and depth representation of the object, but we've seen a pathway to get there, especially since enterprise headsets like Varjo XR-3 gets quite close with this.

In other words, by the end of this decade you'll have either a slim visor or sunglasses form factor and be able to individually pull objects into your virtual environment so that you can be highly immersed without having to see the real world, and still get to see your family next to you on the couch.

You also have EMG sensors that as of now can be demonstrated as a way to text someone with less finger movement than typing a text on a phone. Over time, this should be able to evolve into something more akin to typing speed, but with less physical movement than you would normally perform while typing.

The optics for the headsets have improved dramatically in somewhat near-term prototypes that fix the eye strain/headache issues and improve overall clarity and even sense of depth. This will also help motion sickness quite a bit.

You mean you teleporting as a player? Or something else?

@R4gn4r0k: Enemies.

It has player locomotion though. Like Alyx can combine with traditional movement. Akin to something like Blink in Dishonoured. Can use it to move faster in terrain or combat.

Once you've used VR for while never really need to use locomotion, at least I don't.

The only genre that kinda makes the stomach churn instantly is racing. Tried Dirt and after a few minutes bit much.

A smaller headset would make it more accessible and that is a positive direction. VR and AR are two different beast. If VR is transitioning to AR or including more AR elements then it is clear that VR (full immersion) would have failed as a consumer product. Which is fine because one of the main problems with VR is the social element. VR doesn't blend into most gamers and consumers life like other devices. It is very intrusive in application. AR has a much greater chance of success than VR solely on this issue.

VR is offering a solution to a non-existent problem.

Sorry, what? VR/AR combining doesn't mean one subsumes the other. It means you get access to both usecases and get to combine the two. It was always known that VR/AR were twin technologies that complement each other. In the context I provided, you are actually still spatially anchored in VR, but are assisted with elements of AR to make it more social.

VR is not a solution to a non-existent problem. It solves the problems of online synchronous communication (voice, videochat), solves the problems of online telepresence (watching online concerts or even attending them in Fortnite doesn't get close to the feeling of being there), and improves upon the computing interfaces of a PC, making it the fastest, most productive, most versatile computing device possible, as it matures at least.

If kinect sold 30 million the quest is crap complete crap

Ouch. Wonder what that says about Xbox?

@Pedro: I have a hard time seeing the social issue you keep bringing up. Personally my PSVR is one of the highlights when I have friends over. Not only is it fun to see their reactions to things (since people can see the user's view on tv), but there are also several games where you can play with the VR user.

Also, for the other VR headsets out there that don't connect to the TV, how is the social aspect different than gaming on PC?

AR would subsume VR because it is a more practical application of the technology.

You just made up some random stuff that are not problems but passing it off as problems. This goes right back to what I have stated before "The problem with some of you VR enthusiast is the strange disconnect from the consumer market that blinds your view of what will succeed and what wouldn't."

Yet people who work on AR tech disagree. Which means you are disagreeing with the people who know best.

And I never made up stuff. I did say I've heard it all did I not? Well, a lot of people don't like the isolationist aspect of VR - being cut off from people around them. That's what this merging of VR/AR fixes.

The only disconnect is you. You have certain needs that need to be met, and think everyone else has those same exact needs, as if no one has problems with isolation in VR. Even ignoring that, I still brought up how there are solutions in the works for each of your specific problems.

I reckon that the folks who are working on Magic Leap and Hololens strongly disagree with you.

The problems you stated are really just stuff you made it. It was so insanely contrived I can't believe typed that unironically.

I never mentioned my needs, so I am not sure where you think this is about me. You continue to demonstrate the typical disconnect that folks like yourself have been known for. Soon, you all will be like Star Citizens backers. BTW, these issues are not my issues, it is VR issues and the reason that it would not be mainstream no matter how much enthusiasts like yourself believe.

They don't disagree. Hah. This is ironic because I remember how Alex Kipman, who has lead the HoloLens team from the beginning, says that even AR itself can feel isolating. He noticed this when his wife was confused about what he was seeing through HoloLens because he had the headset on and she didn't.

This is no way stuff I've made up. I have talked to hundreds of people who tell me this is a problem. And if it's not a problem, why does it even matter? If it's solved in the sense that it doesn't need to be solved, then clearly we can work on other things that need solving, which are being solved anyway.

You mentioned your interpretation of what it requires to go mainstream, to fix social/accessibility issues. Whether that is your specific needs or not, this is what you think needs fixing, and I agree, and it is going to be fixed. Happy days, no?

At this point, I have no idea where you're going with this. If all the issues you bright up are being solved over time, what is the problem?

You don't even know what you are arguing about. AR subsuming VR has nothing to do with your short story.

Sure you spoke to hundreds of people and they stated "online synchronous communication (voice, videochat), ...online telepresence (watching online concerts or even attending them in Fortnite doesn't get close to the feeling of being there), and improves upon the computing interfaces of a PC, making it the fastest, most productive, most versatile computing device possible, as it matures at least."

That my friend is tripe. But you are trying argue that these are all real problems that VR solves. Don't be silly.

It is not my interpretation, that is literally what is holding it back among other things that others have mentioned. Anyone in VR knows that these are hurdles that needs to be overcome in order for it to be mainstream but here you are participating in nonsense of these issues being my opinion. Again, don't be silly.

Working on a solution does not equate to a solution. Note the difference.

"The problem with some of you VR enthusiast is the strange disconnect from the consumer market that blinds your view of what will succeed and what wouldn't."

@Pedro: What issues are you talking about? It has already been discussed that issues like comfort and technology are improving, and I don't see the social aspect being any different than the PC gaming market.

If VR is selling multiple millions of units (topic of this thread) how is it not making mass appeal? What does it need to do in your eyes to succeed?

You're twisting my words. I said I talked to hundreds of people who complained about isolation in VR.

If you want to talk about the people complaining about problems with online synchronous communication, it's many many millions. You can look up all the surveys, studies, media coverage, and overall sentiments people have for current solutions, and people really don't like it outside of necessity. Zoom fatigue became a core term, online schooling felt bad for many students, and mental health issues due to lack of in-person connection have risen significantly in the last 18 months since the pandemic.

VR is a solution to these problems, because it is demonstratably proven to fix the shortcomings. We know that VR gives you an oxytocin release close to real life. We know that it doesn't give you fatigue the way zoom does. We know that it can not only provide a level of teaching intimacy that real life provides, but can surpass it. (Look up Jeremy Bailenson's research studies on client-side redirected eye motion for teaching in virtual environments).

Again, you twist my words. I never said these issues are your opinion and yours alone. I said I agree, and perhaps not apparent in the original comment, the VR industry agrees.

what do you mean put close? Xbox is closer to 5mil than 10mil