Ever since Facebook’s acquisition of Oculus in 2014, CEO Mark Zuckerberg has poised the move as a strategic bet on a technology that would eventually change the way we communicate. In the company’s most recent earnings call, Zuckerberg asked for “the patience of the investor community” as he reminded them about his belief in Oculus as a long term bet.

Addressing questions from investors and analysts on what’s perceived to be a slow start for Facebook’s VR plans, Zuckerberg didn’t offer up any specific sales metrics for the Oculus Rift, but pointed to Samsung’s recent announcement that 5 million Gear VR headsets have now been shipped (Oculus makes the software that powers Gear VR).

And while he did nod to the delayed rollout of the Rift and Touch controllers in 2016, he believes the company’s efforts in kickstarting VR content is “coming at a reasonable clip.” Facebook has been investing large sums of cash into VR content development—and recently committed another $250 million—some of which has controversially been used to support games exclusive to Oculus’ platform.

Early on there is this issue which is that if you’re a AAA game developer, until there’s a certain volume of units in the field, you’re not going to be able to make enough money to fund your game development just based off of people buying your content. That’s why we’re investing so much capital in content to seed the ecosystem and solve this chicken and egg problem, of you need the content in order to create the ecosystem.

Photo courtesy Mark Zuckerberg
Photo courtesy Mark Zuckerberg

His sentiment mirrored what we heard recently from Oculus’ Head of Content, who elaborated on the company’s belief that their approach is the only way to create a viable, self-sustaining VR content ecosystem.

And while Zuckerberg may be enthusiastic about the pace of VR content development, he reaffirmed his belief in a 10 year trajectory for VR (presumably meaning how long it will take to achieve widespread use), and asked investors for their patience as the company looks toward 2024, the 10 year anniversary of the Oculus acquisition.

…I don’t think that there is really a strategy to pull [VR’s trajectory] in from ten years to five; I just think it’s going to be a 10 year thing. The analogy I always use, the first Smartphones came out in 2013—sorry, 2003—the Blackberry and Palm Treo. And it took 10 years to get to a billion units.

I don’t know there was something that folks could have done to make that happen fast but I think that was pretty good. And if we can be on a similar trajectory of anywhere near 10 years for VR and AR, then I would feel very good about that. And I feel like we’re making the right bets now to plant the seeds for that. But I would ask for the patience of the investor community in doing that because we’re going to invest a lot in this and it’s not going to return or be really profitable for us for quite a while.

To his credit, that’s not spin from Zuckerberg. More than a year ago he told investors the same anecdote about the early smartphone market, and set first year sales expectations for VR headsets in the ‘hundreds of thousands of units’, which by most estimates Oculus has indeed achieved.

“Virtual reality has the potential to be the next computing platform that changes all our lives,” he told investors during a 2015 earnings call. “It’s important to also recognize that this will grow slowly, like computers and mobile phones when they first arrived. So we’re committed to Oculus and virtual reality for the long term.”

SEE ALSO
What VR Headset Makers (not analysts) Have Actually Said About Sales Expectations

And while Zuckerberg’s belief in VR as a long term bet hasn’t changed, the recent verdict of the ZeniMax v. Oculus trial could put a wrinkle in that timeline. While Facebook itself escaped damages resulting from the lawsuit, Oculus (a subsidiary of Facebook) and two of its founders were ordered to pay a combined $500 million in damages to ZeniMax. The trial was not addressed in the company’s most recent earnings call, which was held on the same day, just before the jury came to its decision.

It isn’t yet clear if the verdict will alter Facebook’s plans for Oculus and VR. So far it doesn’t appear to have had any major impact on the company’s stock price.

This article may contain affiliate links. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product we may receive a small commission which helps support the publication. See here for more information.


  • Get Schwifty!

    The fact that Oculus has not really warmed up to the idea of room scale, and lack of a real support team available by phone to me shows that under Zuckerberg the focus is likely to be “mobile VR” for social media and ad revenue mainly. I hate to say that, despite pushing money towards development and to things like asynchronous time warp on the PC currently, I don’t think they (FB/Oculus) is really that serious about the PC space really, but see it only as a launching point for Oculus branded VR as a whole but concentrated on the mobile platform.

    • Sponge Bob

      what exactly do you call “mobile” VR ?

      headset with a real smartphone inside or something that can be used anywhere without much setup cost ?

      smartphone inside headset is a DEAD concept – wrong form factor, heat dissipation,etc etc
      its only a gimmick to attract more people to spend $$$ on VR now

      read about google pixel xl cooling hacks :):)

      Plus why pay for LTE in VR headset if you only need wi-fi ?

      • NooYawker

        Mobile VR is a great introduction for most people. Plus it has sold exponentially more than a full VR setup. $800 is a lot of money, not to mention having a pc powerful enough to use it.

    • RipVoid

      Oculus explicitly said they were not going to focus on room scale months ago. You were perhaps the biggest advocate that you would still get great room scale from them. I hope you didn’t convince others to purchase a Rift with the expectation of great room scale.

      • Get Schwifty!

        Okay, let’s address the typical fanboy response to my comment (I was waiting for it):

        “Oculus explicitly said they were not going to focus on room scale months ago” – yep and I have been consistent in telling people that they first focused on seated/standing front facing play BUT they also support room scale, but not as a focus… keep the story straight. Now they need to focus on it with the market established for room scale on the PC.

        “You were perhaps the biggest advocate that you would still get great room scale from them.” Yes I am vocal that it supports room scale because people like you make false claims it doesn’t, and does it well (ask people who report it works well for them they even post here). What I also did at almost every turn was clearly state that currently a superior room scale experience exists on the Vive; what you have done is state a falsehood that I stated it was a “superior room scale experience on the Rift”, which is simply a lie.

        “I hope you didn’t convince others to purchase a Rift with the expectation of great room scale.” Me too. On the other hand, I do hope I convinced people to look past the Vive fanboy lie that Oculus “sucks at room scale” which is not correct, and consider Oculus vs. Vive as platform based on the real merits and disadvantages of both platforms.

        You sir merely blindly follow one path and are partisan and disingenuous in your comments.

        • Sponge Bob

          Honestly I don’t see why camera based tracking can be inferior to lighthouse for “room-scale”

          You still need 2 stations spaced from each other, you need LEDs or photodiodes,

          Cameras not detecting LEDs ? buy more expensive cameras with more res and use brighter LEds – as simple as that

          heck I can do it myself

          Some folks already did: https://vrtracker.xyz/

          • Sponge Bob

            in fact camera-based approach is superior to lighthouse in that it can reduce latency required for wireless transmission of position info to PC: cameras can be attached to PC via cable and Vive HMD has to transfer all that info to PC wirelessly – big difference
            But apparently Oculus sucks in tech implementaion – probably needs new CTO :-)

          • NooYawker

            Theoretically it would seem that camera based roomscale is superior. But using cheap webcams kind of ruins it. But right now it would seem light House is the superior hardware. But I’m just judging from articles so I can’t say that with any authority. Who knows which tech will come out on top. We’re all early adopters and essentially guinea pigs. I’m still wondering why the vive has these radial line in their lenses.

          • Sponge Bob

            camera based tracking is a whole industry in itself not related to VR
            lighthouse based tracking is not
            cameras get better and cheaper – resolution and fps
            lighthouse rotors can’t rotate much faster and laser has to be eye safe
            the final outcome is clear

          • NooYawker

            Well right now oculus users are getting inferior tracking from cheap webcam sensors, so the final outcome won’t help them.

          • Sponge Bob

            the current generation of both oculus and vive devices will be relegated to junk bin by next year

          • NooYawker

            Yes i can agree with that, but for today, I want the best experience I can get. And light houses give me that. Maybe my next set will be using cameras, but I’ll cross that bridge when I get to it.

          • RipVoid

            Oculus should hire you.

        • RipVoid

          Yeah right, your post history clearly shows you have been an idiotic fanboy of Oculus even when faced with clear evidence of being wrong. And I did not say you stated it was a “superior room scale experience on the Rift” (Are you meaning to quote me? I did not say that.)

          The fact is Oculus doesn’t really know how to make the Rift support room scale. You yourself admit that the recent update meant to improve it actually degraded your room scale and you may have to upgrade your system to get it to work. http://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-rift-touch-1-11-update-brings-improved-touch-roomscale-multi-sensor-support/

          Rift owners are in that unenviable technological purgatory where it doesn’t work as it should and don’t know if they should invest more, be patient, or abandon it.

          Oculus as a company is a mess too. CEO Iribe was fired, investors are impatient with VR (this article), and a half billion dollar jury verdict for shady/shoddy business practices was recently entered. Its not even clear who owns Oculus IP at the moment. Their product doesn’t meet expectations and and their business practices suck. Is this company still good for the VR industry?

          I hope they get their act together but right now Oculus is a crappy company and the Rift is a crappy product and because of your post-purchase rationalization (look it up) you can’t see it.

    • care package

      They seem pretty serious to me about the Rift. Throwing money at VR development for it. Not sure what else you need to see.

    • OkinKun

      From my position as a solo dev.. What are you talking about? Oculus HAS finally warmed up to room-scale… -_- And they’re making a lot of progress on their PC SDKs recently. You’re just a hater.

  • Secular1Humanist

    It’s been something the big voices and fans have been saying about VR all along.
    These things take time to develop. The naysayers and the doubters, I believe, will be shown wrong in time.
    There were skeptics about the train: “Rail travel at high speed is not possible because passengers, unable to breathe, would die of asphyxia.” — Dr Dionysys Larder (1793-1859), professor of Natural Philosophy and Astronomy, University College London.
    Likewise, the television. The telephone. The cellphone. The smartphone. Computers. Home computers. The internet.
    The list goes on.

    • Tim Suetens

      I agree that there were previous technologies we take for granted today, and that the skeptics of that time were wrong.

      BUT: that doesn’t prove the skeptics of today are wrong. Sci-fi also promised us flying cars. Where are they?

      • Your point on Sci-fi flying cars is moot. @Secular1Humanist:disqus was talking about existing technologies in their nascent years. You’re talking about fictitious inventions.

        • Tim Suetens

          Those inventions were considered fictitious right up until the moment they were invented. He picked those quotes because those are the examples in which people bet against it, and it came true anyway. That’s cherry-picking.

          My point is, past inventions working out is not evidence THIS particular invention will end up being the same.

          • MosBen

            Your point that the past success of products which had received skepticism is not proof that this product will succeed is correct. Your example of flying cars, on the other hand, is a really bad example. Consumer VR is a reality. You can go to a store and buy one. Consumer-grade flying cars are a science fiction idea that probably won’t ever come to fruition due to technical problems that have been known and unsolved since the idea of flying cars was created. It is definitely an open question whether consumers will buy into VR, though based on the adoption of previous technologies it would not be at all surprising if it took several years for it to happen.

      • Robert Cole

        I was born in early 70’s. The fact I am sitting in my kitchen typing this using a smartphone connected to the internet using wireless technology is mind blowing – to older readers who grew up with cabled landline phone with rotary dial and “computers” were seen as room size boxes in sci fi movies.

        I can walk next door, put my Vive on and spend hours in virtual reality….Did I say at home!! No flying cars, but getting immersive, room scale HD VR in 2016 has surpassed my expectations. And yes I was there in 1991 pumping coins into the virtuality arcade VR games…

        • Get Schwifty!

          Heck I was born in the mid-60’s… I remember when touch phones (not dial) was something new, and the first consumer electronic calculators… OMG… Three channels on TV (no one counted PBS as it was always a government tool).

    • Get Schwifty!

      The skepticism is not on the quality of the technology, but the rate of adoption. Such unrealistic number by Gypsies, er I mean analysts that VR would generate Billions of dollars in a year with millions of adopters was ridiculous put the typical financial fuddy-duddy who read that tripe every morning buys into it unfortunately then goes to work and over coffee laughs about the fools buying Vive and Oculus and Gear HMDs… and what a waste of money it is. That fool then repeats it and for a time it becomes the truth because it dampens enthusiasm in the market, then over time it changes.

  • Mermado 1936

    Its not going to be profitable until we add eye tracking… Im not gonna buy an Oculus never, this company revenues comes from selling your personal information.

    • user

      companies like fb dont sell user data, they buy and collect user data and match the data with the target group of advertisers

      • hyperskyper

        Why do they need to track every thing you do inside VR for advertising?

        • user

          i guess its their dream to give advertisers feedback on how long people look at their ads and if the pupils, heartrate and brain waves changed and then use these metrics to calculate ad prices?

          • Brandon Smith

            well that’s a common misinterpretation of the news “Facebook bought Oculus”. People heard “Facebook” and “oculus” and decided that mean that Facebook was going to make “Facebook VR” and that was the sole purpose of any of this.

            Obviously that makes no sense. As it stands, people aren’t “surfing the web” in VR and thusly aren’t engaging with anything that eye tracking would be of any use for.

          • user

            1. people will read text im vr
            2. ads are not only text based
            3. oculus is interested in ar too
            4. i didnt say ads are the only thing they are interested in
            5. ar goggles with eye tracking are already advertised for tracking consumer behavior
            6. you can ask questions to get answers. theres no need to write nonsense to trigger reactions

          • Brandon Smith

            I wasn’t respondingly only to you, although I can understand why you would obviously think that. I’m responding to the mass response that many people had when they heard that Facebook was buying Oculus and the still-lingering perception that somehow it means “Facebook VR”. There were far too many smart people who thought that the first thing Facebook was going to do was scrap the game-focus for Oculus and instead move it to being a Facebook display device.

          • user

            but thats exactly what the showed in demos: how users with ar and vr devices interact on facebook. why would it be the first thing that they release? their main social network or a messenger is only useful if your friends use it too. if they release it too early it would be seen as something boring and useless.

          • NooYawker

            People do surf the web in VR. Some people use virtual desktop to do many things on their pc through VR. FB gets it all.

        • NooYawker

          Just more data. Knowing all the sites you go to and types of apps you buy. Add that to the other data they have to you builds a more accurate profile.

      • Nairobi

        That’s misinformed user. Facebook generates data from people using their website on a daily basis which has access to your phone now as well. They sell it to marketers who then put it up on Facebook.com for you.

        • user

          is that so? where can i buy a list of names, interests and contact data from fb and how much does it cost?

          • Jargon

            Facebook owns a patent to determine your credit score based on your friends. They sell this to banks.

            https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/09/facebooks-new-patent-and-digital-redlining/407287/

          • user

            its only a patent though. it doesnt mean that they use it and it doesnt mean that the practice would be legal.

          • Nairobi

            If it was illegal to get a credit score from that then they would not have received the patent you moron. You can’t get a patent to hide solely child pornography. They have the ability to use it and are in the field.

            Hell, you seem really outdated on current events. Every big company does it. Windows 10 is an entire OS built on data harvesting. It’s the reason why it was free.

          • user

            lol. poor boy.

          • crim3

            This is of broader scope that the stupid Rift vs Vive war. No company should have the right to turn the need to send information on what you do with a product into a legal or technical requisite. You bought a product. Now, how you use it is nodoby’s business. At most, the company should be begging the user to allow the gathering of that data. Instead, the user is the one who has to find the way to opt out because it is legal for the company to imply that the user, by using their product, is agreeing tacitly to just whatever in the universe the company feels like.

          • Get Schwifty!

            I know right… the incessant whining about it I find humorous… its been going on for decades now in one form or another…

        • NooYawker

          No. Personal data is the gift that keeps on giving. FB uses your data and creates a profile and customized advertising to you. Same thing google does. But they don’t sell it, it’s too valuable to sell.

    • Get Schwifty!

      They all exploit your information I believe, directly or not-

      • NooYawker

        But only two companies built an empire on top of user data. FB and Google. It’s safe to assume they’re much more interested in mining and monetizing your personal data.

    • Buddydudeguy

      “this company revenues comes from selling your personal information.”

      You’re not THAT stupid are you?

  • Lucidfer

    As I’ve been repeatedly saying, if by late 2017 there’s not been significant growth and by late 2018 the mass market didn’t pick-up, VR is dead for another cycle, MAGIC – DOESN’T – EXISTS. There is no “infinite” windows time during which a non-successful product of that aim can wait before it’s successful.

    What’s fucking hard to understand about the fact that these VR headset are shit, meaning they are NOT even close to one true Virtual Headset as it shall be? And we’ll get there if we do, this is JUST the beginning to develop, iterate, optimise and standardise it’s technology but the problem is we haven’t started yet.

    Why is wireless the standard, and when it why isn’t inside-out AR tracking the standard? It’s like if the first smartphone had to be plugged to a computer at all time to work or had a screen that had to be operated through an exterior controller rather than tactile screen…no fucking sense yet that’s what we have as HMDs.

    • Bryan Ischo

      All of your vulgarity is not needed to make your point.

      With regards to your point, VR cannot be “dead” for another cycle. VR headsets exist and are out there and in use and will continue to be used. I think that by “dead” you mean “does not satisfy my personal needs”, which is really not a very useful definition of the word “dead”. “Dead” would be, nobody buying them, nobody using them, nobody making content for them. It does not mean “not adopted by everyone and with every feature I want”. Maybe VR headsets will remain enthusiasts’ systems with limited content, much of which is not-AAA, for a couple of years. That is not “dead”. That’s just “enthusiast-only for a couple of years”.

      • Lucidfer

        My vulgarity is called being free rather than a kool-aid hypocrite like we’ve seen too many recently, but that’s another topic.

        By dead I mean the real-world definition of a dead market ie. that if there’s no a mass proportion of adoption and growth of VR in the current years given the significant investment (thus ROI expectations) in money and interest, it WILL be dubbed as “another gadget fad” like in the 90s because market reality doesn’t give a shit about a niche of a few hundreds of thousands of amateurs continuing to sustain an underground interest for VR which I’m sure will continue to subsist if VR “dies” for this cycle.

        Let’s hope it doesn’t happen, but I’ve seen so many predictable failures like the smartwatch, the Wii U or 3D TVs which despite rational critics kept on being defended by lunatic kool-aid drinkers sometimes even past the day it did officially fail. Every time I’m seing that attitude in a market, this is a sign (explaining why is possible but long and complex) that indeed this market segment or product is ramping up to fail.

        • NooYawker

          Seriously. Why do you come to a VR site? Bored?

          • Lucidfer

            I really do wonder?

        • Lukimator

          In the 90s, consumer VR never existed. People couldn’t just buy a VR headset that didn’t cost tens of thousands. You comparing the current market with what happened before just proves you are clueless

          There are already over 1M headsets in the wild not including mobile ones. That number is just going to grow, and I doubt I’m the only one that is not going to let go of their headset

          • Lucidfer

            More bullshit and kool-aid from unimportant nobodies. The Virtual Boy only sold 800k headset in less than a year and was dubbed a failure. As for 1M headset, nope sorry there are 750k console VR headset (PSVR) and then there’s the ridiculous amount of PC VR headset including both Rift and Vive.

          • Lukimator

            The Virtual Boy was considered a failure because it was shit. Most people after trying VR are impressed so the situation is not even close

            And yes, over 1M people have headsets not including mobile as I said, unless PSVR is not a headset.

            PSVR + Rift + Vive already sold over 1M headsets, like it or not. Sorry for your loss

          • Lucidfer

            “except the ones who couldn’t see past the novelty” FFS what IQ do you have to dare saying that thing that applies to your own comment while being so unperceptive?

            You’re spitting subjective shit that don’t make one sense, discussion closed.

          • Lukimator

            Out of arguments

            Expected. Try troll someone else

          • Lucidfer

            Oh STFU I gave you argument two post before which your tiny brain passed through without refuting.

        • Buddydudeguy

          You compare Vive or Rift to a 3d tv or a Wii U. We can all safely laugh our buts off and ignore you.

          Oh and btw, there was no VR in the 90’s. Don’t gimme that VR has been around for decades crap. Whatever you’re going to come back with was not VR and it failed rightly so. The low latency, high frame rate wasn’t there. Image quality wasn’t there.

    • Sponge Bob

      Cool down

      inside-out tracking is not needed for widespead use of VR – not even relevant and one can even say tha it can slow down VR adoption because of hardware. comp resource required and associated cost
      AR on the go ? maybe. but that’s 10 years away anyway…
      I predict hi-res( 4K per eye?) dedicated headsets with wirelessly streamed content from external “PC” becoming VR “standard” in 2-3 years
      And when you have to use that external PC wtf does it make any difference to use one external tracker too ?

    • Nicholas

      You seem to have an unreasonable expectation in what current consumer technology can achieve at a reasonable price.

      • Get Schwifty!

        He’s entitled to his opinion, personally I too think his requirements are unrealistic. Its like asking currently in production for an electric car that goes 0-60 in 2 seconds, gets a 600 mile range, and tows a 1000 pound storage unit with it. Oh, and all for a scant 25,000 USD….

      • Lucidfer

        My reasonable price-point is high-end smartphone + GearVR. And the tech to back these technologies already exist, it’s called Intel RealSense or Google Tango, it’s called PSVR strap-design adopted by Xiaomi VR or BoboVR, it’s called WifiAD and WifiHD standards, already released.

        These are not high expectations these are not expectation at all, it would be like saying “if you’re waiting for an untethered smartphone with a tactile screen you have unreasonable expectation”.

        • Nicholas

          Inside-out tracking – Microsoft currently have the best in Hololens and its tracking, while good enough for AR, is woefully inadequate for VR. Cost: $3000.

          Wireless tethering is also available in the form of TPCast for the Vive using 802.11ad. Projected cost: $250.

          I’m guessing you’ll also want 4K per eye at 90fps. You’re looking at dual Titan XPs at $1200 a piece.

          If you’re happy with crappy mobile-grade VR and only 3 degrees of freedom, good for you. The rest of us will enjoy proper VR in the meantime.

          • Sponge Bob

            Why are you saying 3 degrees of freedom for mobile VR ???
            Full 6 DoF “room-scale” will be mobile VR “standard” later this year:

            https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/243372678/nolo-affordable-motion-tracking-for-mobile-and-ste

            https://vrtracker.xyz/

          • Lucidfer

            Hey, pssst…do you know that the point of TPCast and wireless is that it actually doesn’t matter what VR device, mobile or not your are using it on? In fact, did you know that VR Headset are NOT hardware device but visual interfaces replacement of screen (and interactional but obviously you didn’t even start thinking about it).

          • Nicholas

            Are you drunk?

          • Lucidfer

            Always. Is that how you fill your argumentational void loser?

      • NooYawker

        That guy comes here to rail against VR for some reason. No reason to engage him.

    • Octane Bullfrog

      Cool. You’ve been saying things. I’m sure the rest of the market hinges on your every word with bated breath.

      Chill man. It’s new technology to the masses, and a certain mass has to build. It’s not going to be your wet dream on it’s first or maybe even on it’s fifth iteration. They’re aiming for what can they produce for reasonable prices and meet reasonable expectations with.

      After that, i’m not even sure what you’re babbling about? ‘They’re not even close to one true virtual headset as it shall be’? Do you think what is in your concept of the future should be available now?

      I’m pissed I don’t have the flying car I was promised, but ffs, this stuff is moving really fast compared to what it took to get from my 286SX computer to the pentium chip. lol

    • Gus Bisbal

      How old are you? Do you know how long Email took to be a business must have? 10 years. It did almost nothing for 5 years. Its was a nice to have for 5 years and some companies didn’t even use it. WEBSITES!! took about 5 years before they were adopted buy major leading companies. You are a young man I am sure and not seen and witnesses how this actually works. Mark is right on the money. Do you remember how email started? As in were you there in corporate life when it started? If you weren’t just understand that your lack of experience makes your opinions the same as someone who says, “Look I have seen what happens in business. I have been at this company for a year” Sit down, continue to observe and learn more than you talk. It will help.

      • Get Schwifty!

        Excellent points, I had forgotten how long email took, and it was indeed about a five year cycle…

        • Gus Bisbal

          From when the university I was studying at gave people an email address and we didn’t know what the hell to do with it, and I was an early adopter. I bought a Pentium 133MHz machine which everyone said what the hell do you want to do with a machine that powerful thats ridiculous. It cost $3500 back then. From that date to when I was selling working for a silicon Valley company and just after the .com bust did email become as required as a phone line, it was 10 years. Lucidifer does not understand that buying forces for how people buy software don’t really change that much. This is just the same as 3D ( on 2D sceen ) gaming.

      • Lucidfer

        You are comparing email to VR Headsets? Good that’s how you do comparative marketing analysis….

      • Lucidfer

        Too bad I’m a young man (if I am), because part of my job is consulting on these things with the most accurate consumer behaviour or market strategies matrice possibles, and if my track record proves something, I’ve probably unlocked a few millions more budget investment in VR that you did (if that was your job). Instead of comparing email or website, how about comparing the most recent, contemporary thus contextually relevant exemple of smartphones. And don’t give me that bullshit Palms were smartphones.

        • Gus Bisbal

          Prove it, whats your name and where do you work. I smell bullshit here. I know your experience and knowledge is way more than Marks. Of course it is. Prove it. Cut the BS. What is your name, what company do you work for.

          • Lucidfer

            You know, I’m very aggressive person. And for me you’re a scum I would never disclose information too because you are the kind of person who would eat Trump’s shit because he’s president and believe Justin Bieber on quantum science rather than a Nobel Prize you don’t know off, because you’re that kind of person. You’re not worthy a second more of discussion.

          • Gus Bisbal

            You are not an aggressive person, that’s why you affirmed it. The rest is little boy talk and you can’t prove anything because I caught you making it up. My name on here is my name. I am not disclosing anything special. Knowing a persons name is not a secuity risk. You are Bullshit and you’re running away

          • Lucidfer

            I’m not running away, I’m here and I’m glad you’re not moved by insults. However the fact that you’re a unimportant nobody “with nothing to hide” is good for you…that’s not my case. But the most important point is that if you’re one those person who suck the dick of anyone with a status and would believe Justing Bieber on quantum science just because of his name, meaning you have a complete incapacity to think by your own and asses people’s arguments, is why I know you’re an unimportant nobody and why you asked me my name. If I told you my name or agency and you made researches, you would immediately STFU so their would be no fun and in fact it wouldn’t change the fact that you’re unable to think rationally by your own. You probably believe everything in the medias don’t you?

    • Buddydudeguy

      You give it one more year or so and then VR is dead eh? Thank god you have no clue what you’re talking about.

      • Lucidfer

        Oh yes, that would be terrible if I actually advised brands and corporations on VR investment as part of my job, because more than a clue it would mean I’m not a stupid kool-aid cocksucker that would try to sell you a Lada as the next big car revolution if was advertised to…

        • Buddydudeguy

          Says the guy that thinks VR is gonna be “dead” in one year. You seem triggered.

          • Lucidfer

            I never said that. I said, there’s a 50% chance scenario, so as much as the other one, that by late 2018, VR dies for another cycle like it did in the 90s. Yes absolutely, every agencies and analysts know that because that’s how market work, not by magic kool-aid. But then it seems we’re getting there on the mobile side. Will it be enough? I don’t know but as far as Oculus and Vive go, I think they’re dead.

          • Buddydudeguy

            There was no VR in the 90’s. It wasn’t ready, so your argument is null and void.

          • Lucidfer

            Oh really https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/9f/30/6f/9f306f047d73f192a3a14055bbc5a4cd.jpg

            I pity unperceptive hypocrites like you who are prisoner of their own condition to the point of being oblivious the basic irony of their sayings.

          • Buddydudeguy

            Woooooosh

            That CRAP was not VR. It was not ready and that’s why it failed. Your reading comp sucks.

          • Lucidfer

            Did you know that this crap VIRTUAL REALITY like the Virtual Boy, 20 YEARS AGO, sold 800K headset in less than a year. How many did the CV1 and Vive sell 4 Years after the DK1? How that’s right, not even 400k combined.

            Actually you probably don’t understand my point: I think current VR headset are NOT VR either, like 90s headset weren’t. I think they are the same unfinished crap relative to today’s technology and what a VR headset should be. But maybe you just try you first headset this christmas and your eyes are full of glittery amazement, until you take a step back, then 2, 3 and so on…

          • Buddydudeguy

            You are incredibly daft. Virtual boy SUCKED. It booooombed. What is wrong with you?

          • Lucidfer

            Yes it sucked, and it sold THREE times more than the Oculus or the Vive, 20 years ago. You don’t get it?

          • Buddydudeguy

            Naw man, YOU don’t get it. The Virtual Boy failed because it SUCKED. You gotta be trolling and I’m just gonna mute you now. No more notifications from you thank god.

          • Lucidfer

            I tried, it was interesting but unfruitful. Have fun growing past 24 which you’re not yet.

  • Tim Suetens

    Yeah, we’ll see. I’ve given up on VR personally. I was hyped, bought all the DK’s – but I got bored of it really quickly. I’ll just wait until the third or fourth generation (if that ever happens) and see if anything’s changed by then. For now, I’m perfectly content playing awesome games on a normal screen and jacking off to normal 2D pictures.

    • Sponge Bob

      screen resolution is the killer
      plus lots of gpu cycles are required for smooth experience
      give it another year – at 4K per eye it will explode

      • Jargon

        What makes you think 4k will be ready in a year, and even if it is how much will it cost? And in addition to the unit cost, what video cards will be necessary to power it? And how many more cords will be necessary for the extra bandwidth?

        VR is neat, but it’s not mainstream yet. The tech is early and expensive. It’s going to take at least a few years to overcome this, probably more.

        • Sponge Bob

          I remember same talk when first LCD monitors and TVs appeared …
          4K will be here sooner than you think but wireless streaming with no latency might be a bigger challenge so we might be stuck for a while with a cable to PC or some rather large gpu/battery/cooler box on our heads – both options suck

          • Jargon

            You think LCD monitors went from 1st gen to 4k in a year? It was closer to a decade.

          • Get Schwifty!

            I call three years for 4K + sufficient wireless myself, basically a Gen 3 version of Rift/Vive.

          • NooYawker

            4K at 90 fps takes ALOT of gpu power. Right now you can’t get much more than 20-30 fps on a 1080 in 4K.

      • Tim Suetens

        Personally, my biggest problem isn’t resolution. It’s the “ski goggles” feel caused by the relatively low FOV. I don’t feel like I’m truly “in” the world. I feel claustrophobic. In the real world, people don’t really turn their heads to look around. We use our eyes, or simply peripheral vision. Neither thing is possible in this generation VR.

    • hyperskyper

      Have you tried roomscale on the Vive?

      • Tim Suetens

        I own the Rift, but lack the money for the controllers or whatever upgrades one needs to get roomscale.

        • Get Schwifty!

          Right now there is a small wave of disaffected owners dumping on Ebay…. until (and if) Oculus smooths out the experience of room scale for everyone. You might find a pair for half price on there.

        • NooYawker

          VR sitting and using a Xbox controller isn’t showing you what VR is really about. I’d be bored of it too if that was the case.

    • Robert Cole

      Roomscale VR on Vive with meaty GPU running supersampling = will change your perception of what is currently possible with current VR.

      I cannot overstate the importance of roomscale with very accurate controller tracking for immersion and sense of presence.

      • Get Schwifty!

        Room scale on either platform will change your mind. Even better immersion with Touch controls… ;)

    • NooYawker

      I think there should be a good amount of content this year. I agree right now there’s only a few real games and lots and lots of tech demos.

  • Sponge Bob

    truly mobile AR is many years away – its much harder than VR
    smartphone inside some shitty fabric made daydream is nonsence
    but we are going to see hi-res dedicated headsets with streaming over wi-fi or even self-contained – and very soon
    no inside-out tracking is needed too – that is just waste of hardware and gpu/cpu cycles and $$$ (for VR at least)

    • Get Schwifty!

      I agree it is many years away, but I think that is where Oculus truly wants to be, as their bread and butter is in social media revenue, which is increasingly mobile and not predominantly on the PC. They see VR as a sort of overlay of both platforms, but I believe they see the mobile world as where the power will be, Now, when I say mobile, I don’t mean it is limited to Phones or Pads alone, but whatever counts as a “mobile device” which includes more portable PCs such as laptops where VR-on-the-go would be less likely to include room scale.

      • Sponge Bob

        room scale 360 is entirely different problem – doesn’t matter if its “mobile” or not (not talking about inside-out tracking for distant future truly mobile AR on the go) – you are in the same room anyway (unless you walk around your house wearing VR HMD – highly not recommended especially around stairs)
        problem is with computing power and where to place it and how to transfer data without latency

  • VR Geek

    I agree with Mark that this market is going to take time to hit the masses. Like most tech, it will be on an exponential growth path (see graph), which is generally not in alignment with shareholders and investors as the early years are very very slow. Here at https://MetaverseXXX.com we on this very path and despite seeing 1000% growth in 2016, we entered that year with very humble earnings. It is the trend however that we are all investing in. We are calling it a PeopleStarter, and it is working. https://metaversexxx.com/what-is-a-peoplestarter/ https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/96779c39f603c471257dcd7efe38137d24054c1c61ec719a58809787779d2204.png

  • DaKangaroo

    We’re talking in some senses about an entirely new platform of computing, when it comes to VR. We’re still in a state of flux, where there isn’t much of an open standard between devices, no universal hardware input, and the manufacturers are still rapidly changing and upgrading things. Entirely new rules of software development have to be learned for VR and people are only just starting to work out what those are.

    Any investor who thought VR was going to be all figured out and a mass market mainstream product selling like iPhones already by 2017, clearly didn’t fully understand what they were investing in. Although, that wouldn’t really be that surprising now would it?

    • RipVoid

      I doubt they expect it to be a profitable mass market and mainstream by now but for all the money that Facebook has shoveled into Oculus they probably expect to lead the market in technology, innovation, and market share. They don’t.

  • DougP

    That half a BILLION dollar judgement against them doesn’t help w/profitability either.

    Wonder if any more legal/IP claims will drag Facebook VR down further?

    So far VR has been a fiasco for Facebook.

    • RipVoid

      If Facebook hadn’t bought them this judgment would have put Oculus out of business.

  • NooYawker

    It’s a good way to get people not VR tho. Not everyone can afford a full VR setup.

  • OkinKun

    If they focus on getting lots of good games out this year, which they seem to be.. And fixing some of the glitches, I’m sure they’ll see steady growth this year.
    A price drop would do wonders for improving growth! I kinda hope we see a price drop by the next holiday season, and rumors about Gen2 hardware at the start of next year. If they do that, they’d hold onto enough hype to keep going. Maybe I’m thinking a year ahead of schedule.. lol