Tim Sweeney, founder of Epic Games and creator of Unreal Engine, has a unique position in the virtual reality industry. As an active supporter of VR and head of one of gaming’s most important VR-compatible game engines, when Sweeney speaks, we tend to listen.

In a recent interview with Glixel’s Chris Suellentrop, besides giving his predictions of where VR is headed in the next 12 years and some of the acculturation society will go through to integrate VR into daily life, Sweeney dropped some surprising information about just how successful the HTC Vive headset has been in comparison to the Oculus Rift. He says that out of the approximately half-a-million PC VR headsets sold to date, HTC Vive “is outselling Oculus 2-to-1 worldwide.”

Sweeney hasn’t qualified those numbers with any specific source, and neither Oculus or HTC have given specific numbers publically, so we only have his word to go on. Still, the question remains—why? According to Sweeney, the biggest factor is Oculus’ walled garden approach to software. And if it’s continued, Sweeney says, it could mean trouble for Oculus.

HTC Confirms Each Vive is Sold at Profit, "Much More" Than 140,000 Units in Sales

“When you install the Oculus drivers, by default you can only use the Oculus store. You have to rummage through the menu and turn that off if you want to run Steam. Which everybody does. It’s just alienating and sends the wrong message to developers. It’s telling developers: “You’re on notice here. We’re going to dominate this thing. And your freedom is going to expire at some point.” It’s a terrible precedent to set. I argued passionately against it,” Sweeney says.

See Also: Latest ‘Revive’ Update Lets You Play 35 Oculus Home Games on HTC Vive
Oculus Home

“But ultimately, the open platforms will win. They’re going to have a much better selection of software. HTC Vive is a completely open platform. And other headsets are coming that will be completely open. HTC Vive is outselling Oculus 2-to-1 worldwide. I think that trend will continue.”

Thanks to Valve’s OpenVR API, most commercially available VR headsets have access to Steam’s VR library including Oculus Rift, HTC Vive and OSVR. The same however is not true for the Oculus Store, which only officially supports the Rift (unless you install Revive—but that’s another story).

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

“Any software that requires human communication is completely dysfunctional if it’s locked to a platform. And everything in VR and AR will be socially centric. Communicating with other people is an integral part of the experience. Look at the top mobile communication apps. They’re all multiplatform: Instagram, Facebook. They are only useful if you can communicate with all of your friends. If Apple had the most awesome chat platform ever, but it only ran on Apple devices, guess what? It wouldn’t succeed. Because half of your friends have Android devices.”

While Sweeney points to Oculus’ closed-platform approach, there’s certainly other variables that could lead to an install-base lead for the Vive. For one, Oculus doesn’t ship to China, a massive potential market where VR is growing rapidly, and one which HTC is pursuing aggressively with deals to put the Vive in thousands of VR arcades across the country. To our knowledge, Oculus also doesn’t have a Rift offering specifically for enterprise customers. HTC on the other hand offers the Vive Business Edition, which comes with dedicated enterprise support and a warranty that covers commercial use.

But what about Epic Games’ upcoming Oculus exclusive Robo Recall (2017)? Sweeney advocates for an open platform, but the studio is clearly intending to profit from Oculus’ closed-app marketplace. Sweeney responds:

“Yes. It’s funded by Oculus. It was a budget that could never be funded just on the basis of sales. So that enabled us to do some cool things. My view is that the Oculus store, which is an awesome store, should run on all PC and VR devices. Oculus would do best if they tried to bring users into their store by supporting HTC Vive and Oculus Rift and any other PC hardware that comes out. I think if they don’t do that, they’re going to pretty quickly fail, because you’re not going to want to buy a multiplayer game that you can’t play with half of your VR friends.”

We spoke with Oculus’ Head of Content Jason Rubin at Gamescom 2016, and he maintains that Oculus’ penchant for exclusive content “is the only way to viably jumpstart the market.” Check out the full article to get Rubin’s take on it.

Newsletter graphic

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. More information.

Well before the first modern XR products hit the market, Scott recognized the potential of the technology and set out to understand and document its growth. He has been professionally reporting on the space for nearly a decade as Editor at Road to VR, authoring more than 3,500 articles on the topic. Scott brings that seasoned insight to his reporting from major industry events across the globe.
  • RationalThought

    It’s unfortunate……Love my Oculus and have been with them since the DK2 but the Vive is awesome in it’s own right. Valve and HTC’s open platform was the way to go. Oculus needs to stop fighting the current and go with it…..or drown.

  • Taun

    FB & Oculus need to invest the money to support alternate headsets. Do it in a tiered way so it’s easy to know which games are compatible with your non-Oculus headset. I have a Rift & Touch controllers, but I want those Rift exclusive games to be Oculus exclusive instead, i.e. support Vive, OSVR, & the upcoming Windows headsets on your own software.

    Also, they need to make it easier to make links for outside software available through Oculus Home, similar to how Steam lets you create links for non-Steam games.

  • Homie

    I can’t help but notice. Why does every Oculus Home screenshots are all the exact same screenshot? It even still has the beta label on it. It’s so strange.

    • benz145

      Because Oculus hasn’t released many official shots of Oculus Home, and capturing one from the actual rendered environment is difficult.

    • KUKWES

      Because it’s in beta still lol

  • Doctor Bambi

    I really respect and admire Tim, but I also think he has a tendency to say inflammatory things to prove his points. Even when they are not completely backed up with evidence.

    While his concerns about Oculus’ closed system are somewhat valid. Open markets are not without their own vices. Each have their strengths and weaknesses and actually need each other to keep the entirety of the industry as vast and vibrant as possible.

    • Cl

      I dont see the issue with making games oculus store exclusive, but allow other HMD users to buy from there. Then people will have to go on their store to buy it and in order to sell more headsets they have to make a competitive headset.

      Making people buy a specific headset to play their games wont “jumpstart the market”. Maybe they mean their own market and not the VR market.

      • Doctor Bambi

        It can’t jumpstart the market on its own, but it’s an important component.

        The concept of opening the store to any and all headsets sounds like a great idea on paper, but it opens a whole new can of worms when it comes to compatibility and software support. It results in frustration that impacts everyone from developers (struggling to support every headset) to consumers (upset that their chosen headset has specific issues).

        By honing in and supporting a specific set of hardware. Oculus is able to focus on crafting the best possible user experience for that hardware. Oculus is essentially setting a standard. This is what a high end virtual reality platform should be. Now other competitors in more open markets can take that standard and innovate on it quickly, but it all essentially hinges on that initial reference point.

        At the end of the day I think there’s a sort of checks and balances between open and closed systems. Closed systems make sure open systems are providing a high enough quality experience. While open systems make sure closed systems don’t stagnate in innovation.

        • J.C.

          I get your point on the ease of support, but that about as dumb as saying “our store only lets you play games if you have a Razer mouse and keyboard”. CURRENTLY, it’s better for devs to get Oculus financial support for exclusives. In two years? It’ll be a way to lose money, and they won’t do it. The oculus store will HAVE to support other headsets, unless Oculus thinks VR will never be profitable.

          Oculus needs to figure this out well before that turning point, as halfassed support is as good as no support. If there’s a platform that’s got proper support for all headsets (Steam), and one that only supports ONE properly, no one’s going to use that store.

          • David Barrett

            Or as dumb as saying “You can only play XBox One games on this store – not PS4 games!!!”…… oh – wait a minute….

            A keyboard is a keyboard. They can change the lights and layouts etc, but they all send the same signals to the PC. As much as I’d like it to be, VR headsets are not just displays – they have different control methods, different tracking technology etc.

            Yes – you can now pretty much play any VR games on steam with a Rift – except most of the time they don’t run properly if not optimised for the rift.

          • J.C.

            But your analogy is broken. If there was a store for Xbox and another’s for PS4, and YET ANOTHER that sold those games and they worked across both platforms, who would buy from the specialized stores? Why not play games where you have the largest possible group to play with, where you can play a game on your PS4 against your Xbox-owning buddy?

          • A Hyena

            To some extent, I feel like VR needs to reach a point where it would be as easy as just getting a new mouse & keyboard where it’s a simple plug & play despite what ever brand you get, but I suppose that might be a few more years until the technology stabilizes into a basic foundation they can all branch off from

        • Bryan Ischo

          I think your point about supporting other VR devices “opening a whole new can of worms” is a severe reach. Steam has had no problem supporting multiple headsets from what I’ve seen. It’s not even a very difficult problem as far as I can tell. With Facebook’s money, I am sure Oculus could easily support other headsets with great quality and minimum problems.

          Not supporting other headsets is a conscious choice not based on technical issues.

          • Doctor Bambi

            Maybe so, but I think there’s value in the concept that, if I buy this headset, I can have peace of mind that it’s going to work with every piece of software on the store. Furthermore, that software will be designed with that specific hardware in mind. The moment you start introducing new headsets onto the platform, you have to start making sacrifices to the overall user experience.

    • Craig Arend

      Compare the history of Silicon Valley versus Boston Route 128. The Valley embraced what Alfred Marshall calls External economies of scale. Route 128 sought In House tech acceleration. The pattern of external economies of scale out performing an internal economy of scale repeats itself over and over in tech.

  • OgreTactics

    The Vive is bulky and cabled up to not practicality. The Oculus is cool but very limited. Cool, they barely 400.000k both, GearVR/MobileVR remains the only viable platform for serious budgets and ads.

    • Nein

      Oculus is also cabled up to impracticality. Oculus just isn’t very consumer fiendly. About half a year ago they had a huge backlash when they implemented hardware DRM so NOTHING would work unless you had the Oculus store.

      I think the biggest reason behind this is the different approaches that both Facebook and Valve are coming from. Valve is a very successful company with lots of time and money to “experiment” on technology, like VR. Facebook is $2B in investment debt with VR and thus are more aggressive and play it safer with VR.

      • user

        i assume that fb doesnt really care about $2b and lets oculus experiment as much as they need.

        • StarLightPL

          Yeah I also found it funny to see words “facebook” and “debt” used in the same sentence :D It’s a moonshoot project, and it will end well for them as soon as they work out how to integrate that seamlessly into the portal and the userbase grows. At that point they probably will stop to care about oculus store customers at all.

      • Get Schwifty!

        My god, it must be a generation raised on wireless that hates cables…. I guess being a bit older the idea of having wires around and plugging things into a PC just isn’t the big a deal, I really am amazed at how a few cables is “impracticality” *rolls eyes*

        • OgreTactics

          Nope! Well yes, I fucking hate cables. But NOPE, this has NOTHING to do with liking cable. This has to do with the fact that a head-mounted-device should NEVER have cable unless it’s charging. Would people use smartphone if they had to be plugged somewhere, in fact to another machine to be operational? Nobody fucking would, because it’s conceived this way to make sense.

          • Darth Kal-El

            You are a gobshite.

          • Bryan Ischo

            I can see your ire is up by the introduction of swearing and hyperbole in your post. But it’s quite obvious that the early VR headsets are being released with less than ideal feature sets because it’s the only way to jumpstart the market. And something is better than nothing. If you hate cables so much, then pretend like VR doesn’t exist until commonly available headsets have the feature set you want. And you won’t have to be frustrated and angry, just patient.

          • OgreTactics

            I don’t understand what profession, degrees or curriculum people lack off to not have basic graps on market development and consumer behaviours rules. It’s not about being impatient, it’s about the fact that you can kiss VR good bye in 2/3 years and wait for another cycle if there’s no “ideal” headset release before. It will NOT pick-up by some random magic, or point, there are marketing adoptions matrices that describe the unfolding of events. Smartphone, laptop, pc, console, music player etc…did not wait 10 years with “less than idea tech”, developing at a “steady pace” for it to be suddenly exactly what it’s supposed to and be mass adopted.

            The scenario today is similar to VR in the 90s: amateurs contempt with the somewhat VR they get because Palmer Luckey had a great but incomplete initial idea think that it’ll somehow be adopted on the long-run because “magic” and “these things take time”. It can be compared to Palm vs iPhone. Palm NEVER picked up or would because they shit non-sense products, while the iPhone is exactly what it’s supposed to be and therefor it has sold 3 billions in 10 years. Oculus/Vive/Gear are Palms that are going nowhere unless there’s a boost on the conception of what a VR headset is supposed to be.

          • Bryan Ischo

            Except that smartphone, laptop, pc, console, music player, etc, ALL went through an evolutionary process, where every single one of those technologies started out as a high cost device for enthusiasts and over the course of many years worked their way into a price, feature set, and form factor that allowed them to be mass adopted.

            I’m not sure why you think VR needs to spring up out of nothing to be a mass adopted technology overnight (which is what ‘2 or 3 years effectively is when discussing these issues), because none of those other technologies did.

          • OgreTactics

            To each device it’s success story. But let’s take the most contemporary (because current market rules apply even harder and faster) and best exemple: the iPhone.

            When Palm were released, they’ve always been a failure adopted by a range of corporate people because it was the only portable thing that took note and read emails. It never picked-up and ruined the Palm company until it completely disappear under the PDA form. Because it was crap, I hope I don’t have to describe that.

            Then in 2007, the first iPhone is realeased, costs 600$ yet sold 6 millions devices, and in barely 9 years it’s now found in the pocket of 3 billions users which is huge. Is it magic? Did they “wait” for it to “steadily grow” we don’t how or where, with a random and unlimited amount of time because people would just be “patient”? Nope, but why?

            Because what is smartphone today? It’s exactly, semantically, word by word: a mobile connected computing interface operated through a wide multi-touch screen in a pocket-sized slate. What was an iPhone 10 years ago? A mobile connected etc…pocket-size slate. The iPhone was conceived “perfectly” from the day of release and this is the ONLY reason why it’s successful. It could have taken 2/3 years if it wasn’t from the get go although it means it wouldn’t have reach it’s current stated and critical size market yet, but only if it became this “perfect” device that make sense before the momentum window closes and people are just dubbing the iPhone a useless gadget.

            Well, VR headset have been around for 4 years now, NO LESS, EVERYONE I know invested in VR was already aware or had one, the problem is that from the initial but incomplete great idea from Palmer Luckey which was to use one of those smartphone screen with DOF sensors and lenses, these headset haven’t evolve and currently they are “Palms”. So the point I’m making unless you’re a science denier is that unless it become a “perfect” device that makes sense for what it’s supposed to be (wireless, 3 second put-on/away design and most importantly integrates the single component that suddenly inside-out body/motion/head tracking, environment tracking, hand interaction, and most importantly see-through AR and it’s millions of capabilities potential) by late 2018, then VR is dead for this cycle and dubbed yet another fad because that’s how market and consumer laws work.

          • Bryan Ischo

            iPhone was preceded by other smart phones that were not as widely adopted. There was the Palm Treo line, also the Blackberry, possibly others. Your entire argument is predicated on the notion that the iPhone somehow emerged fully formed as the first smartphone and is an example of creating a successful new product category that is immediately widely adopted, but it’s a flawed argument because the iPhone was not the first smartphone. In fact “smartphone” is just another name for “mobile phone with additional features”, and as an evolved form of the mobile phone, the product category on which it was based was developed over multiple decades.

            Wikipedia says that “in 1999 the Japanese firm NTT DoCoMo released the first smartphones to achieve mass adoption within a country.” That was 8 years before the iPhone.

            Also, the high end consumer VR category has not existed for 4 years. More like less than 1 year, maybe a year and a half if you count the GearVR, but I don’t consider that “high end”.

          • OgreTactics

            Okay let’s argue semantics (which are important): either there was NO smartphone before the iPhone, or the iPhone and all subsequent smartphone are something else even though they’re called as such.

            What Wikipedia calls smartphone was simply one those teen flip-phones with a tiny LCD screen that had the first internet service (almost working like a Minitel). This is NOT a smartphone but if you will a proto-smartphone. But maybe we can take it the other way around: this was the first smart-phone- and the iPhone simply is something so beyond that it shouldn’t even have that name retrospectively and be called a pPC like a pocket-personal-computer or a smartoperator.

            My point is there was NO smartphone as we mean it today, before the iPhone. But you’re right it didn’t get there suddenly, like any technology, science or even philosophy, there was other technology prior to that. But the FIRST smartphone that is the iPhone was “perfect”, as I described it’s definition hasn’t change in 10 years because it was already what it’s supposed to be to make sense, and because it was such from the beginning it sold 6 millions first year and now 3 billions.

            This is a unique exemple of something “perfect” right away, because Steve Jobs. But my main point is that VR right now, doesn’t make sense as it is and will NEVER pick-up as such, because it’s not a real product (and it took me time after fiddling with all the headset to realise this). Now obviously the direction towards such a product is here: TPCast and the Oculus prototype show that they’ve understood the essentiality of wireless, Tango and Intel RealSense show that they know the solution has to be an inside-out tracker, the PSVR design recently adopted by LG shows they’ve understand that this design cue is important.

            But we don’t have have 10 years, no market, especially this one, works like this. In fact we’re underestimating how bad the initial sales of VR headsets (high-end) are. Even my internal (in-agency) sale projections were a bit off although I’m very good for such product with a bit of pessimistic tendency (obviously) yet, I though the Oculus would at least sell 200k and Vive would 300k which was already low and far from the hysterical “analysts” projections. And in fact, that’s what the core of prediction is about: it’s not about signals matrice numbers or abstract marketing matrices, it’s about the product and it’s sense. With the way VR headset were conceived then prices, there was NO way they sell more than a few 100k, yet lots of people in the industry are work by “hopefull magic” because maybe if we’re super optimistic and hypocrite this will suddenly convince millions of people.

            So my underlaying fear is about the fact that if VR, that has been around in terms of consumer “rumours” for at least ” years, and as a consumer market for a year and half, people won’t wait for another 3 years for a first VR headset that makes sense and people will want to buy and more importantly use like they casually use any other devices…and you’re right that these takes time: AR or inside-out tracked VR are the main and biggest point of these headset and the technology is complex to develop. So why isn’t there any Tango Daydream out there yet, why and how are the RealSense Windows headset, why didn’t Oculus and Vive iterate shit from the original DK1 and are not already wireless and inside-out tracker (meaning hand interactions amongst other thing)?

          • Bryan Ischo

            So you seem to be agreeing that products evolve. You seem to believe that the iPhone and its ilk represent the ultimate conclusion of the mobile phone evolution, but I suspect that someone reading this 10 years from now will disagree.

            Now that we agree that products evolve, I think we can agree that current consumer VR tech, which is very early in the product development of consumer VR, is somewhere in the Palm Treo phase. For some reason you are convinced that VR cannot follow the same evolutionary process of other consumer tech, which is: starting with expensive and narrowly useful versions that appeal mostly to enthusiasts, and over time developing a suite of features and a cost reduction that eventually brings the technology to the masses. You are saying that VR is unique in that if it doesn’t immediately produce a completely evolved version that has mass appeal, it will fail.

            All I’m saying is that every tech you mentioned is more evidence that VR is following the same pattern as other tech. Eventually we’ll have our “iPhone” equivalent for VR. It might be 10 years off just like the iPhone was 10 years off from the start of “smartphones evolution”. I don’t want to wait 10 years any more than you do, but I’m realistic in realizing that this is just the way things have to be.

            The pace of advancement in VR is actually kind of breathtaking. We haven’t even had our wired headsets for a year and wireless solutions, which many people thought were technically too difficult to solve at the moment, are already around the corner. We’ve had two generations of “touch controller” tech already (Vive wands, then 6 months of additional development for gen 2 i.e. Oculus touch), and with the promise of a possible third generation (Vive’s prototypes) around the corner. We have several types of tracking solutions available, each with their strengths and weaknesses, and with new inside-out solutions touted almost weekly (not delivered yet, but surely they’re just around the corner too).

            What we don’t have is the promise of significant price reduction, in the form of cheaper headsets and peripherals themselves, or in the form of reduced CPU/GPU requirements allowing much cheaper rendering engines (i.e. computers) to be used. This is because you can’t BOTH advance tech significantly, AND reduce prices at the same time. We’ve established a price point for high end VR (under $1000 for the headset + peripherals, plus $1000 – $1500 for the computer), and now all tech advancements are done at the rate at which they can be developed while satisfying those pricing goals.

            Once all of the tech gets invented and refined, then price reduction will be possible. And at that point, we’ll have an opportunity for true mass adoption. But even still, before we get there, we have significant issues to address with some pretty difficult problems like motion sickness vs. the desire for most people to play games that have motion.

            I’m optimistic. VR is not going to fail. The efforts in the 90’s were clearly way, way ahead of time and not practical – flat screen LCD tech back then didn’t even allow displays with more than like 320×200 resolution, which of course is completely inappropriate. You should not judge the current state of VR by the state of VR back in the 90’s and claim that we’re going to repeat what happened then, because in the 90’s VR was just a gimmick, clearly just a gimmick, PROVABLY just a gimmick, but today, it’s REAL, provably so, by the HTC Vive that I have in my garage and that produces a very compelling experience TODAY.

          • OgreTactics

            1. You misunderstood my point because we disagree on this: the Palm is NOT a step towards the iPhone. that would be like saying drones are step from a 70s remote toy car or an iPad is a step after the calculator.

            There are 2 different products, one that never took off, had the chance in it’s market to stall until it completely fail, the other is a completely new kind of product, that worked right away because it was perfectly conceived. It’s both a question of time (or context if you will) and initial conception of the product at the core of it, which is why the Super Nintendo was super successful from the get-go and the Wii U miserably failed despite being release well after the first consoles.

            So in other terms, if the iPhone was released with somewhat reduced screen sized, with no camera or not tactile screen and had to be constantly plugged to a wall to be powered or operate, and need to be kept in bag, have to be strapped on the hand…it’s exactly what VR Headset right now, why they don’t make sense as consumer products and will never pick-up in that state. And if anything, hopefully in 2 years (because beyond that it means VR will have failed, become a fad and investment will fall) we will laugh at how far from an actual usable and practical VR headset the first consumer version were.

            Now the second point I seem to have trouble passing through is that: if the iPhone had to wait in that state for more than 2/3 years it would’ve been abandoned, if the first Parrot drones were conceived in a way that they’re like new remote helicopter toys but you can control them with your smartphone except they don’t have quadcopter stabilisation and cameras (which was the whole point of it), this company would have failed etc…simply because with a paradigm shifting technology such as VR that has already been there and failed in the 90s, then has been there again for 4 years now and garnered so much hype because of an abstract potential everybody states but are unable to rationalise, explain or describe, if people who use VR and let their GearVR or CV1 take the dust after a few month of usage (which is the case of almost allo my VR-equipped colleague even those currently on project production), including our clients, and those who tried one, were impressed but never were further invested for the same reasons as us and no headset is appealing enough to use it, and overall people who have heard about VR, maybe tried it but then no further so any incentive or interest in it…there is a timeframe windows until that interest and attention completely wanes out, and the more time goes forward the less people are impressed even if you just bring the same Vive, with the same bulky design and external tracking, just being “wireless” is not going to convinced the millions more people necessary to jump start any contemporary device market.

            2. And that’s why I judge VR by the same market and consumer behaviour rules that apply today but in a context that is way faster and harder. What you may see as breathtaking advancements makes for me no more sense that it did in the 90s (well a bit more, but nowhere enough to call that a real device product). And price has never been a factor, the first iPhone, again the best exemple, cost 600$ (700€) and still sold 6 millions and exploded in sales even though price grew. People buy incredibly expensive commodities even in clothing, because the perceived value matches the thigh price. VR is NOT expensive, it’s simply a badly conceived product which is why nobody is buying it, and worse those wealthy enough to buy it because it’s a cool house cocktail gadget leave it dusting on the shelves after a few month everywhere I look…

            So before being about price or even time, it really is about the fact that as impressive VR HMDs might look like from amateur point-of-view, and god was I impressed when I first tried the Unreal living room coaster and then Senza Penzo (way more impressive than basic Oculus/Vive demo today)…but then taking a step back, and another one, and a few more to observe, analyse and rationalise what is VR, how it is made and how the market work, I can simply state: VR HMDs is even not a real, practical and usable device the way it should be yet, and that alone means it’ll not pick-up. And then as I explain, with all the investment, buzz, momentum interest in it, people won’t wait beyond 3 years more for it to be an actual product, which as I stated for the iPhone, doesn’t have to ultimate in it’s functionalities, specs or quality, but has to be a “perfectly” conceive product that make sense for what it’s supposed to be and do.

          • Get Schwifty!

            I see the point you are making, but there is a caveat… the first round of iPhones didn’t get taken up by the broad market, they were like the current HMD’s v1.0 consumer devices. There were a lot of issues in the first generation, but people could see them when someone else showed it to them. The problem here is we have an inferior technology, ie the Gears etc in the mobile market as the example of VR…. it’s nothing but a cheap novelty in many people’s eyes and then you tell them its like $800 to get into “true VR” and they aren’t interested because many people are PC-illiterate these days thanks to phones and pads, and cannot fathom what goes into home PC-based VR as being anything special for the price. Its going to take the VR-Cafe concept I think to truly get people to see it… the fact that every large mall in America doesn’t have a stand in the middle somewhere doing constant free demos for either HTC or Rift is the problem. Most people have no clue of the impact until they see it for themselves….

            I honestly think VR is past the “dead in 2018” range, the investments and uptake by industry who recognizes clear use is already far enough I don’t think VR will go on hold again. OTOH, where I think Oculus is missing the boat is that PC-gaming is vital as an anchor point, and they don’t seem to be really serious about it compared to HTC. Not all tech takes off in a 3-year cycle. Honestly, do you think at this stage HTC or Oculus is going to close shop?

          • OgreTactics

            Well the first iPhone was “perfect” in it’s conception which is why it sold 6 millions at 600$, not 200k, but it was imperfect in configuration, optimisation and precise defining. It’s true. But the first generation of VR HMDs, which again barely iterated from the original DK1 is FAR from being even a basic conception of what VR is supposed to be.

            Here’s how we followed the thing in my agency: the DK2 was impressive and fun, and wow Senza Penzo (where are the other Senza Penzo’s btw…?) but eventually by rationalising what VR “is” and thus how it should be to be an actual practical everyday product like any other device people use, in order to sell budgets for experiences or ads and convince people, we realise that the idea of VR is so familiar yet abstract that very few people rationalise or can explain what VR is, thus how it should be. And when the final consumer version were announced, we had our sale projection and we were almost on point: because of the way VR HMDs were conceived and spec’d, it simply would sell as little as the product makes sense for people to buy.

            And the conclusion was: obviously VR HMDs should NEVER have cables, a head mounted device projecting you in a virtual space should NOT be tethered, it should NOT have a strap that makes it so daunting to put and use because when you’re going to use a device nowadays and repeat the movement thousands of time, it should take more than 3 step of a few seconds (like opening your laptop lead, pushing your PS4 controller button to get it out of pause, take your smartphone out of the pocket and unlock it etc…), but more importantly it is imperative for it to not only be untethered, from cable or machine but also additional component like external tracker, for it not to occlude your environment which nobody wants to work with or play more than a few hours, which should never use anything that your hand and maybe a small remote because being immerse in a virtual environment but having your hands reach into the real world stumbling in the dark to find a controller or keyboard etc…means it should have had an inside-out tracker like Leap or Tango or RealSense from the beginning.

            The fact that people are PC-illiterate, that it cost 700$ which they have no problem spending for smartphone or clothes, or it doesn’t have demos should NOT be factors in consumer device adoption. In fact that’s why the GearVR far outsold the other HMDs although being inferior: it’s not about the price, people still bought a 700$ smartphone with it. It’s because the complete untetethering, portability and versatility of a smartphone far outweights the supposedly more advance or powerful capabilities of Oculus/Vive that are a heavy, strapped, tethered, unoptimised nightmare…

            So do I think they are going to close shop? I don’t think I do my job which is to ponderate the different prospective scenarios, or rather the probability between one hand and the other, which despite my feeling or wishes are government by very mechanical causalities based on always proven market, consumer behavior and conception rules. Again, the Virtual Boy which was crap still sold 770k in less than a year and it was 20 years ago, the iPhone which was a perfect conception sold 6 millions in it’s first year, the iPad which is good but a lesser conception sold 15 millions because it was way beyond any other tablet or slate devices, Palm never sold more than 100K per model because it’s crap, the Wii U barely sold 14 millions in 4 years because from the get go it was badly conceive (another on point projection we made in the previous agency I work in, again because the initial conception told us everything we need to know about how people are going to react, in the fact the Switch is going to sell way more for exemple, but maybe not even beyond the 3DS if it doesn’t get a few things right along the way). It’s the same for VR: the way they’re conceive initially bounds their faith by rules of the market and people’s inconscious cognitive reactions to the sense the way these device conception translate in real life use and presence.

            2016 was already the big year of VR which was featured in every magasine, if this year despite the many VR “saloons” and fun gadget like there was numerous in the 90s we don’t have a product that is an assured break-through which millions of people are going to want to buy and use, the momentum and attention span will already have greatly reduced, and beyond that companies and brands will simply disinvest because that’s how market work, and no magic PR bullshit like those people who pretended with irrealistic numbers that it would sell 100 millions the first year, then finally 1 millions per devices, but finally barely 150k, is going to change that if their simply is not VR headset conceived the way it makes sense for the majority of people to adopt. But we’re getting there (TPCast, Tango, Real-Sense, PSVR design etc…) it’s just a matter of when and on-time….

          • Get Schwifty!

            While I don’t work in your line of work, my gut tells me VR is not going to die in 2018…. maybe 2020 or so if the market just doesn’t take root. What I sense is an awful lot of people who have experienced sense the potential and realize its a potentially huge money maker and are willing to give ample time for the market to evolve. The real punch has to be in mobile though, I hate to say that as I have no desire for mobile VR myself, but its what it will take to get the masses to become VR aware.

          • OgreTactics

            Well to me the probability is 50/50. I hope that by 2018 we will have at least one mobile VR headset integrating Tango Daydream which simultaneously adds the capability for inside-out environment tracking, and so see-through AR and it’s millions of capabilities, object tracking (which means object scanning, surrogate, using a keyboard in VR by mapping the key even if it’s off etc…) and so motion, head and body tracking, as well has hand (and voice) interaction etc…then if there’s a PSVR-like foldable design, and an integrated TPCast WirelessHD or Wifiad component for cross-device pairing (because VR Headset are not supposed to be computing device, just visual and interactional devices that replaces screen+keyboard/controller+mic/camera). That’s the only way a Virtual Headset makes sense as a consumer or pro device that has practicality and use.

            So we’re really not far from that, but somehow manufacturer are finding excuses and have been finding excuses since the crescent bay prototype, and what I can tabulate is that late 2018 really is the limit past which the whole market, industry and consumer interest will have waned.

      • OgreTactics

        Oculus is the simplest and lightest PC solution. I don’t like that it has DRM but it doesn’t change how more convenient than the Vive it is. Still, it’s costly and cabled.

    • chtan

      They cabled up even more compare to Vive. Just imaging 3 sensors + 1 DMD + controller. All must tethered back to PC, LOL.
      Yet the tracking is abysmal and don’t forget that their 360 is still in beta!
      Their supports are currently flooding with touch tracking issue, HMD cable problem and multiple sensors instability tickets. People even complain about touch quality issue with a few days of use, the trigger button failed.

      • Get Schwifty!

        It would be nice if you quit this false meme that the tracking in Rift is “abysmal”, you did the same thing on uploadvr.com and I had to correct you there as well, It’s just not. You base your comments on reading through the support forums… well, naturally people there are going to be there because they have an issue in the first place – go figure. This is skewed thinking, and simply incorrect. As I said before, if the tracking were even half as bad as Vive fanatics want to think no one would use their Rift+Touch setup, and the Rift would be pilloried in the press, neither of which is happening.

        I know exactly of many of the posts you are referring to, and the HMD cable problem is a very small minority, no worse than HTC Vive, the tracking issue is due to a software overlap bug on the sensors which they probably will work out, and a tiny percentage of folks have trigger button issues, not too surprising for new hardware. Some folks are having sensor issues, but many, many more are not. I think you and I can both rationally say that there is no way that 100K+ users are all posting on the support forums with issues, if it were even a tenth of that the forum would be humongous which in reality it is not.

        It’s okay to be a Vive fanboy but get your facts straight and stop the FUD, and remember all the people who post on the forums who have little nor no issues.

        PS: It’s worth noting that many people with sensor issues on the support forum are often using PC’s not truly rated for the Rift, nor are they putting the sensors in positions officially supported either…. neither issue you bother to point out.

        • Narabel

          And like every single article on this site, the Shwifty Oculus Defense Force comes in whenever someone talks smack about it.

          Must be tough having to constantly justify $600.

          • Get Schwifty!

            LOL do you note my kudos to Vive and knocks equally on Oculus? Facts are facts… I praise and criticize equally. If you fact check this you will see I’m pretty fair. Sorry if I have to run in and throw cold water facts on top of the Vive fanboy orgies that seem to be the norm at R2VR these days.

            FWIW, I likely will be adding a Vive to my home VR environment at some point, so I am hardly an Oculus apologist. And no offense, but $600 is chump change for tech.

        • mm

          Schwifty you should get a job as a spokesman for Oculus for real….sheeezsh

          • Bryan Ischo

            That’s why I blocked Schwifty. The comments section is so much easier to read now!

          • mm

            lol, good idea, I’ll think I’ll do the same.

          • Get Schwifty!

            My point is people keep spewing assertions without looking at all the details… OTOH, if it makes you feel better I have the same problem trying to point out deficits in Oculus vs. Vive as well in Oculus forums… some folks there refuse to accept that Vive is clearly now established as the market leader and outselling Rift. My whole defense of Oculus is its better than people want to give it credit for, but that doesn’t change the fact there are issues. I just want people to keep things in perspective.

          • mm

            I don’t think anyone says it’s crap or not good it’s just that Vive is soo much better because they released everything together and it’s not freaking a $200 ‘Beta’ experimental crap. How can you release something half-done and charge that much? They really shot themselves in the foot. The Vive is ugly I wanted the Oculus to work for me, but I’m into room-scale games like Onward and Doom VR. I’ve been sitting down playing games for years and it’s getting boring. I play only one sit down VR game and that is racing.

          • Get Schwifty!

            The point is its not so much better… its a couple degrees better and that’s the entire issue. Easily 95% of the Vive posters here have never once used a Rift, but are damn sure somehow by repeating crap they hear that the tracking on Rift is horrid… but the problem is, it’s not nearly that bad and people are enjoying them all the time.

          • mm

            Well I have used the Oculus and the picture is fine the comfort is fine but the nose hole freaking blows… Also it feels cheap compared to the Vive. The Vive looks and feels like the price it is. The Oculus cost more for a good setup and it should be much cheaper because it is not as good or as many features. How do you know 95% havent used it?? You assume alot. You have no clue. I’ve used it and then heavily decided to get Vive and soooo glad I did I;m having a blast. I couldn’t imagine VR gaming in one direction that would make me not even want to use my VR!

          • mm

            Have you seen the new peripherals coming out with the new tracker hardware???

            Have you heard about Vive Arcade???

            Oculus is in trouble unless they follow all the shit that Vive is doing!!! The word is spreading fast to get Vive and support the open VR system not Facebooks greedy ass closed crap!!

  • burzum

    While I’m happy with the Oculus hardware and also with the 360° and roomscale tracking I’m not happy with Oculus as a company for the reasons the article names.

    I’m not buying anything in the Oculus store, I have Steam. I don’t want your fugly Store. It has not 1/4 of the features Steam has nor do I like it’s user experience. Good that the article tells me that I can turn it completely off. Will try that now. :)

    If the next iteration of the Vive is going to be similar to the Rift in terms of weight and lenses and controllers (I really like the Oculus touch) I’m going for the Vive. As a client and developer (not VR) who supports open source you’ve clearly lost me Oculus.

    • Dave

      The Oculus Store is a store in development. It’s stable and does what it does no fuss. I don’t think what you’ve said is reason not to support Oculus Store – it’s a shame you’ve taken that view. I would say I’ve got an even split accross SteamVR and Oculus Store titles.

      • burzum

        It’s redundant, simple as that. It’s not better than Steam VR, it’s the opposite. I don’t like to have Origin and Uplay either. Plus a ton of other accounts some games / developers / publishers want. My dream would be an standard API for these stores that can be used with a client interface that I like. But this won’t happen for obvious reasons. But how is it a shame to not like it? If you like it fine, I can’t understand why but OK. :)

        I’m eager to try Superhot VR but the developer has decided to stay at least for some time in Oculus walled garden. No buy for me as long as they’re exclusive. And I’m pretty sure I’m not alone with that.

        • user

          the worst thing is when you buy a game on steam and after you start it they make you log into uplay aswell! :D

          • Rob

            PLus you do not own anything you buy from Steam and they can take it away anytime, for any reason.

        • thatdude

          Is there a reason you cant use a 3rd party app to run it? To my knowledge you can play rift games on the vive and vice versa

          • burzum

            It’s not about running the games, you can run some Steam games as well without Steam, depending on the game. Steam at least allows me to add non-steam games to my library and start them via Steam. My point is that I would like to have choice where I buy games and not being forced to have a felt amount of 1000 accounts on all these stores and publisher websites.

      • Raphael

        Wow… defensive and missing the point entirely. Oculus is a closed system only supporting oculus hardware. The shame isn’t anything written in this article… he speaks the truth. You just don’t agree with it because you seem to miss the bigger picture. It’s not about how the store looks or runs… it’s that oculus have closed their system off (walled garden) which is the opposite of what Palmey said it was gonna be back in the cardboard duct tape days.

        • Kalle

          You can’t really compare a such new store as Oculus home with Steam, Steam which almost have a monopoly due to it’s huge market share. Don’t get me wrong, I like Steam and have around 150! games on it. But I also remember how it was when it was introduced. Everyone screamed and raised their voices against the DRM platform. But now when Steam is market leading it can and has to be more open, because if it wouldn’t, Valve would be accused of using its “monopoly standing” and target for lawsuits.

          Oculus on the other hand actually need users using their store, therefore locking down users to the platform with some timelimited exclusives. It’s just sad that it doesn’t support OpenVR yet. But also, we have no clue on how that discussion is going between Oculus and Valve. And who is being unreasonable. Best thing we can do is guess.

    • Ned Hoon

      Meh Steam is OK but for ease of use the Oculus Store is way better when using the Rift.If a title is available from both I will usually take the Oculus option over Steam but each to their own.

      • Rob

        I use Steam because you do get the diamond in the ruff games. But you have to research to find them. I agree their VR interface needs work. Oculus needs to work on interacting with friends on theirs. Earth VR on Steam is quite amazing though.

        • TheVillasurfer

          I keep trying to play Google Earth VR on my Rift through Steam. I just can’t wait for the day that I try and it doesn’t tell me that it’s only currently available for Vive! :)

    • Rob

      Steam is better for talking to friends, Oculus is more Clean and streamlined. But Steam in VR is clunky as hell. Plus for every good VR game on Steam there are 300 bad ones.

      • Darth Kal-El

        You have such a hardon for Oculus it is pathetic.

        • Rob

          Hmmm, I had a DK2, then a Vive, and and Oculus. My son has the Vive, I use the Oculus for comfort reasons. My erection is for the truth, not biased information.

          • Darth Kal-El

            Another lie from the twat.

        • James Friedman

          Steam is terrible for VR, I would rather purchase a game via Oculus than Steam. The games just work better with zero issue. I have to constantly mess with the tracking and the stupid floor in steam. It might be fine for Vive users but for Rift it’s not.

  • Dave

    Some decisions Oculus have made are typical of a company finding it’s
    way and using what means it can to recup a heavy investment. Oculus have
    paved the way for other companies to come through. Having said this I
    quite agree with the article. Having a walled SDK solution here doesn’t
    help developers a great deal where we want the takeup to be pushing VR
    forward not holding it back. However I do have a soft spot for Oculus
    for the early development work when it seemed others steered clear. Now
    it seems a convergence of technologies and everybody is on board – go

    • Mei Ling

      The problem with making your product open for everything is that you’ll end up with a lot of crap and a few shining gems. HTC are beginning to realise this and have setup an in-house software development team for “first-party” experiences which may spell trouble for Oculus’s closed ecosystem. At this point Oculus is a far more stable platform to get good quality software titles and they are indeed the “Apple” of virtual reality; it’s easier to use in terms of usability, ergonomics and user experience, less difficult to find good quality games with good production values and has very strong support and updates. Whether or not this approach will help them in the long term remains to be seen.

  • user

    at least it survived longer than the facebook phone :D

  • Fran

    He is very inconsistent about openness. HTC is locked into Windows, and Oculus uses both Android and Windows!

    • Darth Kal-El

      Android is a joke when it comes to real vr games.

  • Rob
    • KUKWES

      If those are accurate then he is way off.

      • Rob

        Either way, he is off on his estimates by all accounts. Plus his article seems biased.

        • Daniel Gochez

          Biased? maybe. What I find funny is that he could be bashing Oculus while being paid by them to make Robo Recall. That takes balls. I guess he is confident he has the best engine so he can be a bit blunt and bash his clients like that.

          • Rob

            I got the impression he was unhappy about something. He was a little brutal and over the top on things like turning on the 3rd party option.

          • DougP

            Re: “I got the impression he was unhappy about something.”

            Something factual or actually said? Or…your fanboy imagination?

          • Rob

            The whole paragraph about 3rd party being off by default. It is one little option to turn it on, not hard to do.

          • thatdude

            How old are you man? How much time do you devote to taking all these comments personally?

          • DougP

            Re: “comments personally?”
            *personally* – I don’t think that means what you think it means.

            Are you like 12yo? Injecting your worthless, childish, ad-hominem ramblings? Shouldn’t you be in bed by now?

          • DM

            Wow you really do come across as some kind of angry insult magnet in every comment! It’s amazing how often you get triggered.

          • DougP

            It is amazing how stupid the general public seems to be & how they don’t tend to want to address facts/source information – but “think” with their feelings.
            I think it’s why people like thatdude get upset & lash out – knee jerk reaction to reject rationale thought/discussion.
            Reminds me of the “thinking” involved in the US presidential election.

          • thatdude

            i’m not upset lol. i was reading through the comments, trying to get both sides of the argument. unfortunately, you constantly pop up. you have an incredibly condescending way of speaking to people, which is what made me comment in the first place. all you did was put emphasis on the fact that you’re very unpleasant with that response lmao. what facts and sources are there to address? i was talking about YOU. not the rift or vive lol. you go around calling people fanboys but i’m childish lol

          • thatdude

            that response sums you up pretty well. lmao you sound like an immature 40 year old man

          • Get Schwifty!

            I suspect you are correct by the tone…

          • DM

            I think he words things badly which blows issues out of proportion and aims at the worst possible outcome. I can’t read what he says without it being in a hectoring rant voice in my head.

            He’s ranting about a setting that takes 5 seconds to switch off.

          • Get Schwifty!

            I know right…. talk about biting the hand that feeds you…

          • DougP

            Re: “I know right…. talk about biting the hand that feeds you…”
            I know right… I mean if you got money from them to produce something, you should fall in line & lie about the marketplace….coz “you owe them!”…I mean, right?

            Let’s not let things like facts/figures get in way of money!

          • Get Schwifty!

            My point was by being a business partner there is an expected decorum to these things, maybe you don’t work close enough to business but making disparaging public remarks (right or wrong) about someone you have contracted with is highly frowned upon and poor business practice in most cases, especially when its something you knew before the contract.

            The correct approach is to wait until you no longer are in a contract position. And yes, when someone is giving you money to partner with them there is a relationship there and to a degree representation of one another. This guy knew Oculus way of delivering software, which you may either agree with or not. if he was unhappy he should (IMNSHO) have declined the contract or kept his mouth shut until he was no longer under contract.

            OTOH, he was all too happy to take it and then in the middle of it start criticizing; I think that’s poor business behavior personally and so do a lot of other folks.

        • Darth Kal-El

          You are pathetically uninformed.

          • Rob

            Yeah, I guess all that reading from multiple sources is bad.

          • Darth Kal-El

            Only you didn’t. You just read outdated information. Typical for your kind.

          • Rob

            I did read your comments to other users… and you like to call people fan boys and insult others mostly…. I will use your words… “typical for your kind”. You are dismissed.

        • user

          theres no proof that he is wrong

    • benz145

      I’m not saying Sweeney is right or wrong, but the data in your link is very old and it’s just analyst estimates, filtered through a report by Fortune… from 2015… 10 months before the Rift or Vive even launched.


    • Cl

      I think these stats are correct. http://uploadvr.com/superdata-headset-sales-analysis/
      He is still wrong on his claim though.

      • benz145

        Those are also analyst estimates, and the PSVR figure specifically has been massively revised since that article was published(which goes to show why they are just estimates). See here:


        • Rob

          I just hope the VR industry is not dominated by Phone VR.

          • Matt R

            That is one sentiment we can agree on.

          • beestee

            That is one hope that is doomed to be broken. Gaming in general is already there. Let’s just be happy somebody wants to keep making hardware and software for better experiences.

    • Rogue_Transfer

      That link has forecast stats. There were just guesses: “The statistic shows forecast unit sales of virtual reality headsets in
      2016 by product.”

    • Darth Kal-El

      Facts prove the Vive is the sells market leader in VR but a loser Occulus fanboy like yourself cant stand the real facts. You have to pull up something that isn’t even about sales. Pathetic.

      • Bryan Ischo

        Enough with the unwarranted personal attacks.

        • DougP

          Enough with the lying by quoting something known to be false.

          Personal attacks can be prompted by people deliberately lying/misleading people.
          So let’s address the root cause here – Oculus/Facebook fanboyism leading to spreading lies.

          • Bryan Ischo

            Well for what it’s worth, Rob comes across as genuinely believing what he’s posting, not “lying”, which implies knowing that what he’s posting is false. Furthermore, these “facts” are up for debate as there is no clear cut data available. Finally, your commentary is peppered with unnecessary personal attacks which really make it tempting to just ignore you, which I expect most rational people will be inclined to do.

            EDIT: well reading down further seals the deal for me. Welcome to my blocked list.

          • DougP

            Re: “Welcome to my blocked list”
            Sounds like a good place to be.
            As you sound like someone who doesn’t want actual *facts* to get in the way of your (factless) opinions.

            Re: ” Rob comes across as genuinely believing what he’s posting, not “lying”, which implies knowing that what he’s posting is false”

            Why would you say Rob comes across as believing this?
            When just below this he wrote:
            “I am sure they are not accurate.”
            After being called out for posting that?

            He admitted he knew they were false.
            How exactly is that NOT lying? [ you just stated the definition here ]

          • yag

            Yeah, this is the kind of article which attracts the raging fanboys like flies to a turd. Thankfully user blocking is now available on Disqus…

      • beestee

        FWIW, GearVR has sold 5 million units.

    • OgreTactics

      Do you realise these stats are completely false? Referencing statista for numbers is like referencing reddit for a definition…

      Also Sweeney is absolutely right, but how does that translate? Ridiculous numbers for both the Oculus and the Vive…

      • Rob

        I am sure they are not accurate. I am also aware oculus has not released numbers. But my point is the article is not factual in some areas.

        • Get Schwifty!

          And you are entirely correct… though I suspect the numbers of 2:1 are pretty close, and a developer is likely to have a good call on this. The problem is the title is a bit like “Man asks neighbor: have you stopped beating your wife?” It is designed to raise questions without substantiating the inferences and assumptions made inherently in it.

          • Rob

            He did not quote his source. But some people use Steam as a method of getting user data, which can be accurate if it is a game like No Man’s Sky which you had to use Steam for. An Oculus player will show up on steam. Is he counting Steam VR game sales as Vive sales? No one knows as he did not give information on his data.

        • DougP

          Re: “I am sure they are not accurate. ”
          That’s funny… then why quote “stats disagree”.

          Re: “But my point is the article is not factual in some areas.”
          Yeah…that really wasn’t your point at all now was it? You quoted *stats* as if refuting what the article stated… admittedly knowing they were false.

          Just misleading people or outright lying as you’re upset that industry insiders, with way more information than you (an obvious fanboy w/chip-on-shoulder over a pro Vive article) is contradicting the imaginary world you want to live in?

          • Rob

            My reply was in response to someone stating it was based back in 2015. Either way, the numbers have yet to be released by Oculus. So it is all guess work. So for someone to say something is selling 2:1 is equally guess work. As for Fanboy, I hope the Vive does well, I hope the Oculus does well because I want the future to be bright for VR. I never rip on the Vive. Sorry I do not fall into your box. I have never understood fanboy attitude towards an object.

          • DougP

            You deliberately quoted something inaccurate/misleading, as if it contradicts/corrects the article.

            Re: “So for someone to say something is selling 2:1 is equally guess work.”
            False equivalencing…
            No, it’s not *equally* anything. This is a high-up industry insider, way more privy to info/tracking than you/your source.

            Re: “I have never understood fanboy attitude towards an object.”
            Me neither. Which is why I didn’t understand the mental gymnastics you’ve gone through to defend/promote the Rift…when the evidence doesn’t justify it.
            Keep your brand loyalty, I’ll use facts/evidence to draw my conclusions.

          • beestee

            Does it really matter who says it without real sales numbers? I agree that Tim has insight to offer a well educated guess and that he is likely not far off, but it is still not fact and it takes either a little helping of brand and/or Tim Sweeney loyalty to claim that his guess is as good as factual, hard sales numbers.

            I am genuinely interested in all forms of VR succeeding, but it really feels like we are overall behind where we should be in total sales of PC VR gear for it to continue beyond gen 2 or 3. All Tim was trying to prove is that the market is too small to succeed with a closed approach, and he had to use his educated insight to make that point…but it still doesn’t make it fact.

            The fact that there is a perceived brand loyalty for either product at this point is simply because the products are so similar. 2:1 is probably about right, but when you are talking merely in a few hundred thousand units combined, the market is still very small.

            Whoever wins this game today, are they really winning anything? Lenovo’s el-cheapo PC VR headset will probably outsell Vive and Rift combined and take the top spot promptly, then what does it really mean to be on top, does it mean that the product is better?

          • DougP

            While I agree with much/most of what you said…

            Re: “Does it really matter who says it without real sales numbers?”
            Well, yes – it does! An industry insider (very high-up in massive company with VR experience) who’s making games for both platforms platforms (& being paid to write exclusives for the company whose sales he’s calling out as lower)…. or some random fanboy on a discussion forum.
            Yes, it matters. I’ll put a lot of weight to the industry insider.

            I want to see VR succeed. Competition is a good thing. Too much fragmentation is NOT.

          • beestee

            This also assumes that Tim Sweeney himself is not biased.

            Gabe Newell is an industry insider with what I would consider greater clout on this topic than Tim Sweeney, but I would trust his opinion far less since he obviously has skin in the game.

            I don’t know Tim Sweeney well enough to know that he isn’t biased towards one product or another, so when I see a claim like this without facts to back it up, I still refuse to view it as fact.

          • DougP

            Re: “Gabe Newell is an industry insider with what I would consider greater
            clout on this topic than Tim Sweeney, but I would trust his opinion far
            less since he obviously has skin in the game”

            So not from Valve (PC game distribution/Vive) or from leader in game industry?
            It sounds like you might only accept what Oculus tells you? Or nobody at all?

          • beestee

            I have no reason to trust any insider opinions from Oculus either…basically anyone that has significant risk to consider when they state an opinion.

  • Fitness Gal

    VR is dead


    5+ years from now

    stop wasting our time with shit hardware and shit software

    we know you want to sell stuff but dont push shitty VR on us

    shame on you sweeney

    i guess you couldnt resist taking money from Facebook

  • Raphael

    There was a time a few months ago when I nearly ditched my Vive to return to Octopus… What brought me to that point was the release of ASW boosting performance massively and doing it very well. I also felt that valve didn’t have the promotional skills to keep Vive prominent. Oculus have a very good PR VR education setup and have done a lot to educate people on VR. Valve have been by comparison dormant. However I think HTC are doing all the right moves to create a strong infrastructure.

    I’m pleased I didn’t rush back to Octopus just because of ASW. A friend a mine now has 4 oculus sensors having been disappointed with the performance of 3. His room scale is still smaller than mine and he has USB cables everywhere. I’ve tried CV1 and the weight isn’t much different to Vive. It’s just that the vive weight is at the front… The new strap should improve things.

    Oculus is a very closed platform and the opposite of what Palmey said it was gonna be.

    • Get Schwifty!

      In fairness, Palmer didn’t make that policy did he? Just saying, at the end of the day that decision was handed down so its unfair to lay it all on him. BTW, the four sensor setup is not officially supported, so it’s really an unfair point at this stage. As with three, they are both “experimental” meaning they are effectively in beta at this point. Not ideal I know, but in all fairness to Oculus they make this very clear, but then everyone rushes out (including me) to try it and then many of the folks (unlike me) act like this disclaimer doesn’t matter when it doesn’t work as well as they want and turns around all butt-hurt as they work out the tracking issues some folks are having.

      Now, again in fairness, Oculus can’t persist with this “experimental” disclaimer for much longer either. I’m giving them up to the point that Vive releases their new controllers… if they haven’t got it worked out by then I will probably pick up a Vive myself, so I certainly wouldn’t say I am biased, but people have to consider all the facts and not cherry pick the ones to support their arguments and ignore the rest (chtan below is really bad about this for instance).

      One other factor here is simply Facebook… they (for now) have a very strong commitment to VR, while HTC, a company not really doing all that well in past years has thrown its big hopes onto VR, so its not surprising they are very robust about it, the future of the company to a large extent depends upon it, and unfortunately this same sense of urgency is not present in Oculus being managed by Facebook which views VR as a sort of meta-technology drawing in folks from different spheres… PC-gaming is just one segment, whereas with HTC its the bread and butter currently. Now the one thing in Oculus under Facebook is it has a personal interest of Zuckerberg… and he could very easily at the snap of a finger change the direction entirely. Wouldn’t surprise me one bit to see Oculus decide to change gears to go with a Lighthouse-style based setup or another approach entirely on their second go-round. This flexibility I don’t perceive is true in HTC due to their being more of a hardware-only shop, whereas Oculus is more software based. Not saying one is better necessarily than the other, but they have their advantages and disadvantages.

      • Matt R

        I own both and I have Touch so I was willing to give them both an equal shot. I much preferred the Rift’s weight and built in headphones. But HTC has addressed both these with the new strap. Add to that the awesome prospect of wireless from the third party partners funded by HTC, which according to all the reports and reviews so far actually works very well. Throw in the trackable pucks and they really have pulled it out the bag. The more modular design and superior tracking has paid off. I will be interested to see how Oculus responds but considering the numerous reported issues with tracking the headset and the touch controllers I don’t see the constellation system tracking 16 objects at once like the Lighthouse system can.

        • Get Schwifty!

          I agree on all points, this is why I am planning on picking up a Vive as well once the controllers are upgraded off the wands.

    • Bryan Ischo

      Rift lenses are markedly better though.

      • DougP

        Opinion stated as a fact.
        I’ve seen more people reviewing both HMDs who preferred the Vive lenses. Not to mention other vastly superior features/function.

        • ✨EnkrowX✨

          In my experience with both, the lenses on the rift provided a better experience. The fresnel rings on the vive were very distinct, which hurt the VR immersion at times.

          Aside from roomscale, what feature does the vive have that the rift does not?

          • DougP

            In my experience with both, the lenses on the vive provide a much better experience. The rift lenses hurt immersion for me.

            Oh yeah, and many reviewers agree with me.
            So – anecdotal much?

            To be a bit more specific – some things will look better/be less effected on one vs the other ….so comes down to preferred games (for example: space games w/lots of black & white stars, god rays, etc).

            Re: “Aside from roomscale,”
            Ummm…ok, so you mention “immersion” in your 1st sentence & then seem to disregard what’s considered the most important factor for immersion, by minimalizing roomscale.
            Yeah, room-scale.
            Next-up – Facebook’s push for: 1) setated 2) 180-degree experiences
            Bleh…. after demo’ing for many dozens of people in multiple countries. After people have played around in Vive room-scale / 360-degree games, you can always tell when the gamer is shocked by playing a game that’s designed for multi-platform (Rift/PSVR), as suddenly they’re turning around in 360-degree space, expecting the action to be from all sides….& they’re disappointed & disoriented that suddenly their “VR world” is cut in half.
            Yeah….it’s important & less immersive.

            Need more? Oooh, I know. How about a forward facing camera? I can dodge/move a pet/kids that enters the playspace, have a drink, re-orient myself without removing the headset.

            Wireless –
            Pre-orders went up in China. Few months away for rest of world.

            3rd-party trackable *puck* –
            Already add-ons such as guns, bats, hand controllers demo’d. Just an extension of the “open approach”.
            Slap that std tracking puck on other devices & not locking people in.
            3rd party peripherals are an important feature.

            Most important feature –
            Doesn’t come with “fragmented base” – games that support either xbox controller or Touch, 180 or maybe 360, etc.
            Built-in fragmentation, messing up dev’s design decisions for forseeable future, is a “feature” I did NOT want. Glad the Vive didn’t come with that. ;)

          • ✨EnkrowX✨

            Yes, it is anecdotal. Are you trying to say that my experiences are entirely invalid just because I came to a different conclusion?

            Out of everything listed, the only HMD feature that the vive has is the camera. Everything else is an expensive accessory or something software related.

            Roomscale isn’t completely tied to immersion. I tried both the vive and rift before buying any VR HMD, roomscale on vive was no more immersive than seated rift. It all has to do with how the game utilizes VR; I think that many vive games are not using VR in an immersive way that adds to the experience.

            Sure, wireless is cool, but thats a 250$ addon.

            Admittedly, I forgot about the camera. The three people I know with vives never have to use it.
            Having a drink depends more on the container and situational awareness. I’ve had no issue with drinking from glass bottles in oculus video.

            Tracking puck is another addon which costs money, and then you have to buy a peripheral, and the peripheral has to be supported by software. How well that will ultimately work remains to be seen.

            I don’t think the gamepad is a problem, it’s nice to have as an officially supported control alternative, just like the remote. Motion controls aren’t perfect for every game, app, or situation.

          • DougP

            Re: “Are you trying to say that my experiences are entirely invalid just because I came to a different conclusion?”
            When did I say that?
            I simply pointed out that others, a great many (perhaps majority?) including reviewers, came to the opposite conclusion.
            Re: “Everything else is an expensive accessory or something software related.”
            What expensive accessory? I haven’t seen pricing on any of the devices using the new puck yet.

            Re: “Roomscale isn’t completely tied to immersion. I tried

            both the vive and rift before buying any VR HMD, roomscale on vive was no more immersive than seated rift. ”
            Think you’re in the minority here again.
            Near universally, objective technology reviewers online have described the Vive’s push & support for “room-scale” (/360-degree) as “true VR” “full immersion” “game changing”, etc.

            To say seated Rift experience without motion controls is no more immersive than 360-degree room-scale….well, I just don’t know what to say to that. For very limited & specific *experiences* such as cockpit (seated design) gaming: 1) flight 2) driving…. sure, but then again those games also *should* be played with one of those expensive add-ons – steering wheel or flightstick.
            For all of the rest of the games….well, see previous comments on the many reviews who describe standing+360 / room-scale as the ultimate differentiator.

            And….no – fragmentation on control scheme & game design, split between ancient 10yo+ controller tech vs tracked motion controls does not equal a good thing (for gamers, vr market in general, and mostly not for game devs).

            Since anecdotal seems the norm here – yeah, ALL of the Vive owners I know actively use the camera. Besides *seeing* things in the room, it works really slick for chaperone boundaries, bringing the real world edge/objects into view.

          • ✨EnkrowX✨

            You keep mentioning reviews and reviewers, care to share your sources?

            Theres pricing on wireless at the moment, which is about 250 bucks. That isn’t cheap.

            There are many people who play games like EVE Valkyrie with just the included gamepad-in fact, thats how some of the top players on PC play. If I could link you to month old discord comments, I would. Just like how I’m saying motion control isn’t an end all, neither is sim equipment.

            The flexibility provided by not always being motion tracked is nice. More control options at no extra cost is hardly a bad thing.

          • ummm…

            rift or vive wasn’t cheap…for me, maybe you got it on discount. Plus, the rift hardware suite is more expensive in the end.

          • Joshua Johnston

            So… don’t use motion tracking? And you can use an Xbox controller (or any other controller) with any Vive game that supports the controller. No limitations.

            There is absolutely zero sense in you saying “The Rift has a 360 controller.” as a benefit, other than the fact they bundle one in. Whoop-de-do. I suspect that if someone wants a VR headset, they’ve already got a controller kicking around.

          • ummm…

            can you adjust the screen distance? i can keep going….lets not get into a pissing contest.

          • ummm…

            i guarantee you that when i scroll down to the responses to your comment I will find people turning themselves into pretzels to minimize your arguments.

          • TheVillasurfer

            If Rift doesn’t have ‘room-scale’, then how come I can walk around my entire room, just like on a Vive. Have you ever used a Rift with the Touch Controllers in a big space? I don’t have any rooms large-enough in my house to need to go any bigger, and I have large rooms; so your roomscale argument is nonsense.

            Most apps I run on the Rift are played with 360 degrees. RecRoom, Altspace etc etc. In fact almost EVERY app I use allows 360 vision and perfect functionality. What are you talking about?!

            ‘ I can dodge/move a pet/kids that enters the playspace, have a drink, re-orient myself without removing the headset.’…>Well guess what, so can I, with my Rift.

            I agree that for developers, Oculus have done themselves no favours. But the amount of envy and anger I’ve seen from Vive users since the far-superior Touch controllers were released, is hilarious! both products are absolutely amazing. Just enjoy them instead of continuing a pointless Rift/Vive war.

          • deez

            rift is garbage

          • Raphael

            Wireless sensors, greater and more precise room scale, taller field of view. Ability to increase FOV by moving the lenses closer, matrix cam. Quite a nice range of differences actually. I’m an ex DK2 user and I loved the year that I spent with it and I appreciate the work Palmey and team did to educate the masses about VR. But the cv1 usb tethered cams are a big reason why I was put off staying with octopus.

            Octopus has more optimised drivers and ASW is very good. The dual element lens looks better on very dark high contrast scenes like Elite Dangerous. Octopus is a closed system though and that’s a huge negative.

          • ✨EnkrowX✨

            Sure, the sensors are wireless, but they still have to be plugged into power, which isn’t always an easy thing to figure out.

            Is that what the grey rings were for? I’ll play with them the next time I get a chance then.

            I don’t think being closed is much of a problem, but I also don’t use steam.

          • Raphael

            it’s very easy to connect a laser box to a wall socket and extend the power lead if necessary. Not so easy routing very long usb cables. A friend a mine has 4 octopus cams because 3 turned out to be useless. That’s 4 long cables and very messy. It’s not a good system at all.

            A closed VR system isn’t a problem for you… it’s a problem for oculus as it alienates people.

          • DougP

            The other issue I have is running out of USB 3.0 ports.
            I already HAVE quite a few USB peripherals plugged in.
            4x cameras requiring an additional gaggle of ports is problematic.
            Not to mention, it’s less elegant from a cable management/run standpoint….and even sucks PC cycles processing all that video.

          • ✨EnkrowX✨

            How easy the lighthouses are to plug in depends on each individual room. Sometimes it just isn’t going to be easy.

            3 and 4 camera setups are experimental, and not officially supported. The supported config, 2 front facing, does not have an issue with running wire over distance.

          • Raphael

            It’s easier than trailing usb over long distances. I think cv1 is great for portable VR for someone who wants to take their PC VR away with them. I have a friend who set his up in a hotel while he was working away from home.

          • DougP

            Re: “How easy the lighthouses are to plug in depends on each individual room. Sometimes it just isn’t going to be easy.”
            Any modern home, designed/built to most modern code/standards has an outlet on at least 2x walls, particularly in the configuration of the Lighthouses – opposing corners. This exactly matches where minimal power outlets should be.
            Have no idea the mental gymnastics required to say “isn’t going to be easy”…as compared to running ultra long USB extension cables up over a ceiling & back to a PC.

            Of course by your same logic “forward facing” / 180-degree the Vive could still be easier/more elegant solution – just ONE Lighthouse near desk/computer.

            But we’re talking 360-degree / room-scale here. The Vive’s clear winner for: 1) cost 2) elegance/performance 3) scalability 4) ports/cabling/burden to install

          • DM

            How hard is it to run a few thin USB cables round a room? IMO the Rift sensors themselves are more intrusive than the cables.

            Hell, any modern living room with a 5.1 sound setup and tv box or hifi already has multitudes of cables.

            My usb extension cables run round a door frame and along the floor behind a sofa right now, and just need tidying once I install my 3rd camera at the rear.

          • ummm…

            probably not that much harder than it is to set up a vive…albeit setting up the wires are uglier and retrograde.

          • ummm…

            what is going to happen again is that we will turn ourselves into trolls talking sense to them. if they want to get less for more, let em.

          • DougP

            re: “turn ourselves into trolls talking sense to them. if they want to get less for more, let em.”
            You’re absolutely right on both points.

          • ghrondo

            is octopus merely a cute name or is it meant to evoke their desire for monopoly ?

          • Raphael

            consciously it’s a cute name but I suspect subconsciously the octopus likes a game of monopoly.

          • MrGreen72

            It’s meant to let us know he’s a troll.

          • ghrondo

            and are you the originator of this pet name?

          • Raphael

            I am indeed the originator although I don’t intend to copywrite or restrict usage.

          • CaptainHappy

            I’ve been playing 360/room-scale games (RAW DATA for example) with 3 sensors and it works very well – what issues was your friend running into? (Edit: worth noting that I also successfully played roomscale with 2 sensors in opposing corners, 3 all but eliminates occlusions issues though.)

            Unless I’m standing right in the corner without a sensor, entirely blocking the controllers completely with my body the tracking is excellent. Even this isn’t really a problem as it’s only happened once… when I was testing the tracking limits during setup.

            I think Oculus is more trouble to setup though. You really have to get the sensors in the right place or you will not have fun. There’s a bit of tweaking involved.

          • ummm…

            occlusion isn’t the issue. its the conical tracking volume, isn’t it?

          • CaptainHappy

            My play space is 2x2m. Even with just the two sensors, their cones of vision were enough to cover the area fully from the floor to the top of my reach. I think it helps that the cameras are further back than the edge of my space.

            The only problem with 2 is that you encounter occlusion too often if you like to utilise your full play space. 3 is good enough 99.9% of the time. Still an extra £79 over the cost of the Vive for the same thing. Personally, I’m sold by the Touch controllers at the moment, they just feel right to me.

          • ummm…

            well its not occlusion if i read you right. it IS the conical tracking space problem. you are getting too close to the camera and are losing your tracking, not occluding.

          • CaptainHappy

            No, I get issues if I’m too close to the corner WITHOUT the camera (literally in that corner, facing that corner so my body is blocking the controllers – headset tracking remains fine). The cameras are far enough outside the permiter of my space that I don’t get too close to them. I wouldn’t want to punch them when playing Superhot ;)

            I think you need to be around a 10-20cm away from the camera to avoid the issue you’re referencing but in my scenario it’s never been an issue.

          • ummm…

            oooooooooooooo i see. my bad. yeah that sucks. can’ they be mounted a la lighthouses and pointed down at a 45 degree? or do they have to be perpendicular to the ground?

          • CaptainHappy

            No worries. It does suck that occlusion is possible but yeah, with the 3 sensors it hasn’t happened whilst actually gaming so it’s not a huge deal.

            They can indeed be mounted and angled. Ceiling or wall is fine but I’ve got mine on tripods so they can be moved easily.

          • James Andre

            actually the problem is occlusion… you need to have 2 sensors that can see the device being tracked. If you have only 2 sensors and turn your back to one and your body is blocking the other it can be seen and that is why the problem is occlusion. I have 3 sensors and I actually have the setup 2 in front on the wall and one in the middle of the back wall and I don’t have any issues.

          • TheVillasurfer

            Indeed. Hey I just realised, my housemate also has a Rift so I’m going to go and try a 4-sensor set-up for the first time. I can’t believe I didn’t think of this before! AWEEESSOOMMEEEEEE.

          • TheVillasurfer

            No it’s occlusion.

          • TheVillasurfer

            Exactly! It’s almost as if these Vive users have never used a Rift with multiple sensors. Hmm.

          • TheVillasurfer

            I only use TWO sensors, and putting them corner-corner in my room (3 metres apart) and bypassing the ‘advised set-up’ makes for great ‘roomscale’ use. No problem.

          • DougP

            Re: “but they still have to be plugged into power, which isn’t always an easy thing to figure out.”
            Waaaaay easier to find & plugin power than a monstrously long USB cable (which… = “plugged into power”).

            The Oculus’ cameras aren’t powered by rainbows & unicorns after all. hehe ;)
            Seriously, the USB solution is very problematic: longer runs, cables with issues over that distance, extensions, and running out of USB 3.0 ports!

          • ✨EnkrowX✨

            Yes, the rift sensors need to be plugged in. But for the only officially supported configuration, 2 front facing cameras, all you have to do is put a camera on each end of your desk.

            How do you run out of USB 3.0 ports? I have more than I know what to do with.

          • DougP

            Re: “2 front facing cameras”
            Well, we were talking room-scale & 360-degree tracking (as well – wireless, which is all about 360-degree!)… you’ll want at least 3x cameras for this!
            Note: for many/most room-scale fans, you’re also talking a larger room, so 4x cameras have been deemed optimal for larger space/less occlusion.

            I have no idea how many USB 3.0 ports your motherboard supports, but you’re talking (4x camera) 6x USB ports used up by just the Rift? And I’ve got a top tier x99 mobo.
            Note: as far as I understand you’re not going to want to try to run the cameras through the likes of a hub.

            I completely get that the Rift is a great option for VR users more inclined for seated+180-degree experience. Heck, if I was only (/mostly) interested in cockpit games (flight/space or racing) I could see going with Rift. But for more room-scale + 360-degree experiences & a less fragmented market (xbox vs motion control, 360 vs 180) the Vive’s a better option/has more features.

          • ✨EnkrowX✨

            If we’re talking strictly roomscale, the rift isn’t designed to be a roomscale system. There is functionality for it, but it is not officially supported.

            If roomscale is somebodies most wanted feature, they should just get the thing designed for it.

            Aside from mobo, there are also case 3.0 slots, and some may have additional 3.0 slots added in the rear expansion slots. Even if it takes six, what else needs 3.0 anyway?

          • DougP

            Re: “what else needs 3.0 anyway?”
            High speed SD->USB 3.0 card readers & ext HDs.
            I, like many, do photo/video editing on my PC(s).
            As well, 3D animation & graphics.

            My recording devices use SD cards, as well I collect/store video to ext HDs. My storage *medium* is all USB 3.0.
            So don’t want the port to be a limiting factor.

            That aside, I’ve go other USB devices hooked up to 3.0, some of which could possibly be moved (but don’t have many 2.0 ports even) – 3D input devices (for 3D modelling), scanners, gaming keyboard & (wireless) mouse, printers, etc.

            It’s a bit flippant to just assume everyone has an extra 6x USB (3.0 or otherwise) ports free. That is a LOT of ports.

          • Get Schwifty!

            It’s five ports… 4 if you run four cameras and one for the HMD… are you counting a game pad as a sixth?

          • ummm…

            at the same time enkrow – the seated vive experience is just as rich, and sooner than later – untethered.

          • Joshua Johnston

            The fun part is that if you get a Vive, you have roomscale *and* every single feature of the Rift except a controller everyone probably already has one of anyhow.

            My only issue with the Vive is the fresnel lens flaring, but if you get the headset positioned properly on your head instead of positioning it too high or too low on your face, that becomes extremely minimal in all but extreme circumstances of really bright things surrounded by dark things, right at the edge of your vision.

            PC front-of-case USB ports frequently have lower power delivery capability than board mounted ports, because they split the power capacity in half instead of actually providing full power to each port. Also, who the hell wants to have cables sticking out the front of their computer that connect to wires that run all around your room? That just sounds like the most gigantic pain in the ass possible. In my home office/gaming room, I couldn’t use the Rift’s trackers if I wanted to, because the places to mount them are too far away. With the Vive, I just give them power and ta-da, I have a working roomscale environment. So simple.

            Also, what else uses USB 3.0?

            External hard drives, some cellphones and tablets, some keyboards (example: Corsair K70 RGB which works with a single USB 3.0 port, or dual 2.0 ports.) flash storage adapters and memory sticks, WiFi adapters, and more.

            The Rift is defined by two things. Facebook, and limitations compared to the Vive. Every single thing you list as a positive for the Rift with the exception of weight, and with the possible exception of lens design, is completely worthless as an advantage because the Vive can do *the same exact things*, but better.

          • ummm…

            lol, the sensors have to be plugged in. lmfao. cmon dude. if represent the pro rift argument so poorly.

          • TheVillasurfer

            I own a Rift and use Steam similtaniously. It works fine. I didn’t have to change any settings. What are people moaning about?!

          • TheVillasurfer

            Personally I prefer tethered products to wireless. They’re far more reliable, and those who can’t deal with a few wires, well, I mean, COME ON FFS! They’re only wires!

          • Raphael

            The far more reliable doesn’t apply to oculus and usb sensors. A friend a mine is now in the process of ditching his octopus with 4 cams because he has endless usb issues even using the oculus recommended usb add on port. Why does he have 4 cams? Because he had severe tracking issues with 3. Meanwhile Vive laser tracking is flawless over a big area with just two sensors, Your information is a bit dated. You can’t apply bygone era wireless experience to everything forever more.

            I’ve had zero tracking issues with my Vive.

            Vive wireless tracker is also getting excellent feedback.

            Of course not everyone with octopus has tracking issues but the 360 room scale is experimental for CV1.

          • TheVillasurfer

            But that’s just one guy’s experience. I don’t have ‘sever tracking issues’ and I’m using only 2 sensors, in opposing corners of the room; playing apps where I move throughout roughly a 2.5mx2.5m space. My friend has the same set-up and the only issue he’s ever had is the hmd’s hdmi connection cutting out, but this was purely because of the hdmi/usb adaptor he was using.

            However I don’t think Oculus will last long unless they change a few things business-wise. But even if I agreed with you that the Vive can provide a more-stable/reliable roomscale experience than the Rift (enough to make a real difference), then I certainly still wouldn’t see the Rift as an inferior product; quite the opposite.

          • Raphael

            I don’t see the rift as an inferior product. The two products both have good points. Looks like rift has better VR controllers (touch) and other things going for it. I owned dk2 for a year and I loved that. If I had a cv1 I’d certainly make use of it. One of the reasons I changed to Vive was because cv1 pre-order was still more the away from delivery even though I pre-ordered Vive more than a month later. Also lack of touch at the time further alienated me. But that was then. Rift is a complete product now.

            I suggested to my friend he turn off usb power saving.

          • ummm…

            read the article. and btw – i think VR is roomscale, but that is me.

          • James Andre

            Definition of VR.
            the computer-generated simulation of a three-dimensional image or
            environment that can be interacted with in a seemingly real or physical
            way by a person using special electronic equipment, such as a helmet
            with a screen inside or gloves fitted with sensors.
            roomscale isn’t mentioned its just one of the ways to interact…

          • ummm…

            i can give you the defintion of citizen throughout history, and you may see that definition change over time given social, economic or cultural changes. I was making a commentary on consumer applications in light of current tech, consumer demand, greatest usability, and future proofing. While i can use a “virtual reality” device to play “virtual reality” programs I find that roomscale is a key component to my definition of “virtual reality” What was the edition of dictionary you used? Was consumer vr present when that occured? Also neither oculus nor rift come fitted iwth “gloves fitted with sensors”. Does that mean that by YOUR defintion they aren’t vr?

          • James Andre

            Did you miss the “or” before the gloves? That means vr doesnt have to be headset its how you interact with the “virtual” world and oculus has roomscale now too so both are vr unless you are saying only the matrix is vr. If that is the case then freeze yourself and come back in 100 yrs.

          • ummm…

            it also doesn’t say and/or. it says or. so vr can be just gloves. lol. dont play words games with me. you also just proved the temoporality of your definition (also didnt cite the dictionary) by saying in 100 years vr will be different. So you cite a past defintion, that is grammatically humorous, to define a present moment and a possible future. All i said was roomscale is VR, and you know exactly what i mean. So does oculus, as they just cobbled together a solution because they realize the importance. Go back 100 years – find those gloves lmfao.

          • James Andre

            Thats why i said pointed out or and said it doesnt have to be a headset moron. One day it maybe holograms. I dont have to cite anything look it up on Google. It is the current definition. Roomscale has major limits it will work for now until they come up with something new. Btw the gloves are on the way….

          • ummm…

            so vr can be holograms (which sounds like ar) but not roomscale? lol. i think we are missing each others points – or neither of us have one. your getting aggravated. namaste mf’er ;)

          • James Andre

            It should be “you are” goodbye

          • ummm…

            lol, grammar police. the last bastion of those that slum around in comment sections and find themselves outwitted and hollow. night sweetums.

          • Ability to use any headphones I like. More sensors that will enable infinitely more experiences based on what’s been announced so far. Based on precedence, even if Oculus keeps up, it will be many months behind in a market where months is eternity.

          • TheVillasurfer

            1) You can remove the (incredible) headphones from the Rift and attach any headphones/earphones that you desire.

            2) You can use up to x4 sensors on the Rift, which you don’t need to screw to a wall (making it far less-portable than the Rift).

          • 1) Not “attach” unless you know of an accessory I don’t AND are willing to pay the price while the Vive provides the 3.5mm jack AND earbuds, solving both issues.

            2) “Can use up to x4” Are you in marketing? That sounds a lot like some BS a marketer would try. a) I don’t want to buy, setup, manage, worry about 1 sensor more than I need. b) With Vive, 2 lighthouses (neither requiring a cable to the PC or the other) I get tracking as near to perfect as I could hope for under $10k and I get that setup in the origninal box for $800 ($700 if you catch a sale). With Rift, even after spending the same $800, you have 2 sensors that don’t come anywhere near providing the same tracking or space. Even Oculus makes this VERY clear so you have to spend $880, have 3 USB cables back to the PC. c) Both the Rift cameras and Vive lighthouses use the exact same mounting method so I’m not sure why you’re trying to differentiate the 2. https://support.oculus.com/help/oculus/1712159742364822/?ref=hc_fnav

          • Nashoba Darkwolf

            wait… so you dont know how to plug in a 3.5mm female to male extender (cost less than 10 USD) into your computer to use your preferred headphones? Also what kind of “ear buds” are you using? Certainly they are not true IEMs or a decent pair of real cans because those require a decent amp and dac to run correctly. Even though I have love my Senn HD598s and HD650s I could never use them on the vive and get the full richness of sound because the vive lacks both an amp and a dac to power them properly. You might be able to get away with good quality if you use a cheap pair of “ear buds” but so far not much out there that can provide good sound quality that will work with that jack. Oh and sorry Beats and apple products dont count for good sound quality. Ditch your shitbuds and get a real set of headphones. Even the Senn IE80s are a good and cheap choice. Just make sure you have the proper sound card, dac/amp, or system to run them with.

        • Bryan Ischo

          Opinion stated as opinion. [Personal attack redacted, it was inappropriate, my apologies]

          I found the Rift lenses to be markedly clearer when looking towards the peripheries. The Vive has some awesome features but it’s not better at everything. In my experience the Rift lenses are better because of the better clarity further out to the edges (god rays versus vive rings is a push in my opinion).

          • DougP

            Re: “personal attack redacted”
            Appreciate that.
            My point was just that you wrote this *statement*:
            “Rift lenses are markedly better though.”
            I said, opinion stated as a fact….& you questioned that (rudely, redacted).

            So…. thought experiment …. IF you were writing that as a if you were claiming it was a fact – how exactly would you have written it differently?

            God rays vs rings –
            Agree it’s probably a near push.
            I own over 200 Vive games & have played hundreds of hours since April, demo’ing for dozens of people.
            I have noticed the rings like 3 or 4 times.
            Again, this is anecdotal & subjective (to a degree)…. but I was calling into question your “opinion” that the Rift lenses are “markedly better though”, again sounding like a objective fact, when:
            1) countless reviewers disagree – calling out that the lenses of ea do something better/worse
            2) even if Rift lenses were better (reviewers/owners indicate they aren’t) – saying markedly better is also just silly & unfounded

            I’ve been using VR since early days, from Rift DK1 through to google cardboard & GearVR & Vive.
            There have been various advantages/disadvantages at different stages. Right now lenses are about the same as far as customer satisfaction is concerned, including coming from people such as myself who own/use both HMDs.

          • Andrew McEvoy

            For me, Oculus is great for a seated experience, which lets be honest sometimes you just need to sit your arse down and not be standing all the time. I know you can set this up with the Vive too but that’s a pain as you need to set up either roomscale or seated, so I leave that roomscale.

            When I bought the Vive I was really just expected the wow factor to be mainly due to the hand controllers and the interaction with your vr environment that this promised. However when I actually tried it out I was blown away by what roomscale actually brings to the table (as described above by many a poster). This is what VR is all about I felt. I have a holodeck in my sittingroom!

            So all in all if Im recommending what headset to get to a friend I say Vive if you want a true VR experience, but if you dont want to be standing all the time (many people dont) then CV1 is for you. They are both excellent at the end of the day so you cant lose! :)

        • AndyP

          Sample size, selection method: bias/representativeness?

      • ummm…

        i understand that this is an opinion and not a “Fact”. Plus is all operates on your word “markedly”, which isn’t qualified. Now, we can talk about specs, but in the end the application and experience of those specs are negligible as far as immersion and overall enjoyment – but i only have this opinion from lots of questioning and use.

    • DougP

      Glad to hear you stuck with Vive, for the reasons stated.

      Re: ” I’ve tried CV1 and the weight isn’t much different to Vive. It’s just
      that the vive weight is at the front… The new strap should improve

      I don’t really understand the HMD weight issue.
      Perhaps some people are just very/overly sensitive to something sitting on their face?
      Or maybe those exposed to experience such as sports with something on their face ( example: skiing, scuba diving – both I’ve done quite a bit of ) who don’t even notice the HMD once *immersed*.
      Then again…I’ve had quite a few kids with smaller (i.e. non-adult) faces/heads wearing it comfortably as well. As young as a tiny 7yo girl who spends hours in Tiltbrush.
      Dozens & dozens of people using the Vive & no one has ever complained or even commented on the weight/presence of the HMD.

      I dunno… I see this mentioned a lot, mostly from Oculus fanboys grasping for something to claim is ‘better’, when from my practical observations – weight/weight distribution is mostly a non issue.

      • mm

        I totally agree my daughter is 9 and uses Tilt Brush and Rec Room for hours with no complaints.

        • DougP

          Glad to hear it.
          I’ve really been shocked by all of the talk of HMD weight/ergonomics, as no one has ever complained or even mentioned the Vive to me.

          Myself…the HMD just *disappears* once it’s on & I’m *IN* the VR
          environment. I’d previously credited this to the fact that I’m an avid
          scuba diver & used to something on-my-face that I just
          tune-out/forget about to be immersed (pun not intended) in my
          When I saw my neighbour’s tiny little (just turned) 7yo playing Tiltbrush for 2hr sessions, I came to the conclusion that weight/ergonomics has been way overstated as an issue/concern.

      • Joshua Johnston

        The new Vive strap makes a huge, huge difference. I got mine in today, and it was worth every penny. It really does remove a bunch of weight and strain from the back of your neck.

        I’ve read several comments and articles referencing the weight of the Vive as uncomfortable after a while, but at the same time most of those also acknowledge at the end that it’s really not something terrible. My only issue with weight that came as any kind of a showstopper was the combination of the Vive and my wireless headphones. That kinda messed my neck up for a night once.

        I would say the biggest physical problem remaining with the Vive is honestly the need for some more comfortable padding. The stock padding seems to get smelly pretty quickly, and the third party padding I have just isn’t quite right. I’ll be trying other types eventually.

        • DougP

          Re: “I’ve read several comments and articles referencing the weight of the Vive as uncomfortable after a while”
          Just find this shocking to read.

          Have Vive since last April, demo’d for several dozens of people (many children) & one of the most prolific users is a 6yo (now 7yo) tiny girl – she spends over 2hr at a time in Tiltbrush with no complaints.
          Maybe some people are just extra *sensitive*?

          Regardless, options are a great thing.
          I like Vive’s “a la carte” approach: alternate headstrap (/headphones), add-on/modular peripheral *puck*, wireless, etc.
          Let’s people pick&choose what options are important to them.

          For myself, I use a high-quality over-ear headphone & don’t want to sacrifice audio quality/let ext sound in, so the integrated headphones are not desired. Understand some don’t care about quality as much & prefer integrated.

          Re: pad replacement
          VR Covers – they make a cloth cover which goes over the default Vive foam.
          I use these for big group demo sessions & recommend them.
          I have 4x of them (think they come with 2x in ea order – I’d not realized & ordered 2).
          So I swap them out every few people & wash after ea session.
          I also have their 6mm foam replacement, which is easy to clean by just “wiping down” (it’s faux leather).
          Check those out – great for VR *hygiene*. ;)

      • Get Schwifty!

        The weight and ergonomics are mentioned frequently in almost every comparison review by the press… its not just “Oculus fanboys”. The whole point of the strap redesign was to help address the issues surrounding the fit. My suspicion is that most people haven’t actually tried both… I can think of at least two developers who post here regularly who both agreed the Rift was more comfortable. The reality is the Sony hanging-style design clearly is better than either….

        • Matt R

          The Rift may be lighter but I really hate the foam surround on the rift compared to the Vive. Can’t wait for the new strap and the wireless

          • Get Schwifty!

            That’s one of those purely personal things… I hear of just as many complain about either headset in terms of the actual contact points. I’d like to see all of them get some kind of extra adjustments to fit your face.

        • DougP

          Re: “who both agreed the Rift was more comfortable.”

          I suppose it’s all a matter of degrees.
          I’ve read MANY reviews, many of which were ‘professional’ tech industry, & the most common/generalize way I can describe (summarize) this is:
          “the Rift is marginally more comfortable…but once inside VR any difference *disappears*.” or “even if the Rift is lighter/slight more ergonomic, it’s worth the minimal (nearly unnoticeable) *sacrifice* for the Vive’s better tracking/room-scale/etc”.

          Understand what this new strap is designed for. But … it’s an *option*. Options are always a good thing.
          For myself:
          1) I’d not consider it as I use very high quality over-ear headphones & don’t want to pay for something I’m not going to use.
          2) I honestly don’t even notice the Vive when it’s on (/once *immersed*) [ note: I’ve tried both ]
          As well, as I mentioned, I’ve put several dozens of people into VR for hundreds of hours of use since last April …. & no one has ever commented/complained or even brought up the weight/comfort/fit – just described how they were *moved* from reality into VR once donned.
          And….I’ve had many children using the system, including a friend’s 6yo, now 7yo, who’s played hours (over 2hr at a time) in like Tiltbrush & never had an issue with fit/being tired/affected by weight/ergonomics.
          So point being – I think the whole topic of Rift being marginally more ergonomic is over-rated / over commented on.

          Also – my other point I was bringing up is that I think some people are just more *sensitive* to some things than others when it comes to “immersing in VR”.
          One, very physical, is motion sickness.
          Another seems to be just having something on their face.
          I’ve been into the sports of skiing & scuba diving – so I’m *used* to having something strapped to my face & putting pressure on it. [ side note: I’m also a scuba instructor & getting people through the “claustrophobic” feeling of a mask on their face, is a frequent training challenge ]
          I wonder if people who have done sports/activities where they’re using something against their face are less inclined to even noticing the HMD, once immersed.

          Again – I’ve tried both. Think the topic is over-rated ( Rift fans, frequently stretching for something to call-out as “better” ) & question who actually notices/is bother. And – options are great! I love Vive’s very *modular* approach they’re taking: alternate straps (/headphones), tracking *puck* for peripherals, wireless, etc.

          • Get Schwifty!

            You have to be either blind or or childish to be unwilling to admit the merits of a given platform you don’t use or endorse. And Not sure about you, but i rarely see Rift fans making a big deal out of it, I think you are just hypersensitive to the subject. It scores a few points over Vive on that point currently, why does that bother you so? I have news for you … the Vive is not perfect *gasp*, neither is any platform on the market. If it were, it wouldn’t be changing…. come on down out of the tree man.

          • DougP

            Re: “You have to be either blind or or childish to be unwilling to admit the merits of a given platform ”
            Good thing I’m none of those things as I’m not unwilling to “admit merits” of a given platform.

            As for you…well… since your tossing out uninformed ad-hominems:
            You’d have to be VERY ignorant to make the rest of your claims [ hint: you’re wrong, they’re false ]

            Re: “given platform you don’t use or endorse”
            I’ve been involved in VR for a long time, going back to early days. So don’t make (incorrect!) assumptions & statements about me/what I own & use. I’ve owned/used Rift since earliest DK1 (have you?!) & through to google cardboard & (gasp!) Oculus GearVR & yes (gasp again!) Vive. Actually owned & toyed with VR going back a great many years before all of this… but that stuff was hacked together toy’ish stuff by comparison.

            Re: “why does that bother you so?”
            What bothers me if people spouting BS as facts & preferences/opinions as truth.

            Re: “he Vive is not perfect *gasp*”
            Good thing I never said it was, never would. I’ve not said that back during my Oculus DK days, nor would I say it about any of the mobile VR.
            So catch your breath & don’t be upset over an imaginary statement.

            So I’d have to ask YOU – why does it bother you so that someone can: 1) hold a contrary opinion about some aspect of Rift 2) bring up facts with refute myths surrounding Oculus/Palmer (a proven liar, arguably pathologically so) 3) dare to challenge/question some claimed (frequently imaginary) benefit of Rift 4) point out an obvious superior quality/feature/performance of Vive

            Your “blind or childish” sounds like a bit of *projection* there.

      • TheVillasurfer

        Yeah, I’m sure what people say is absolutely true, but personally I’ve never had issues with the Rift headset, since I (early-on) realised that it’s important to pull the back of the hmd as far down as it goes; making the headset really comfortable. I don’t notice it, it’s not uncomfortable and it doesn’t feel heavy. Unlike you, I’ve never been skiing etc and I don’t wear glasses – I’ve just never had this issues that a lot of people have. Maybe my head evolved with VR in mind :)

    • CMcD

      Ever since the touch has come out I keep going back and forth with both head sets to see which I prefer so that I can sell one or the other. Rifts slightly lighter head set allows me to play longer than the vives slightly heavier head set, and by longer I’m talking about legitimate gaming marathons similar to what I’d typically only do on flat screen tv. I like the rift lenses better and I’ve replaced the rift foam with memory foam from vr covers . Com …. I keep coming back to the rift, even with a slightly smaller room scale, those controllers are just delicious and frankly make the vive controllers feel unnecessarily bulky and bloated. I like the rift lenses better too. That said competition is good and the market will eventually speak, the market is just too small now for either vive or rift to do anything other than follow their own instincts for better or worse.

      I’ll end with this, remember when Facebook was “exclusive” before it went mainstream and was everywhere and on everything. I wouldn’t be surprised if mark zuckerburg, for better or worse is simply trying to follow that same formula. In a few years when there are multiple companies making their own vr headsets oculus will go the facebook route of being open to everyone and not just current college students. I agree that the oculus store should eventually be open to every single HMD at some point, it’s just a matter of time.

      • Raphael

        I will get rid of the neoprene foam on my Vive. Controllers… well I don’t need tiny… I actually like the lightsaber sized wands the vive has. I’m sure touch is great and I will try it when I visit a friend. Room-scale… Vive wins big-time. Bigger roomscale and laser precision. A friend a mine now has 4 octopus sensors because 3 was a fail for his room-scale. Those ugly USB cables trailing across the floor not good either. I’ve tried CV1 via my friend on my PC… Elite looks better on it.

        Comfort… I’m someone who can wear any VR headset for as long as I need. Typically elite would be played for some hours as it’s not a short burst game. Summer is a different matter though… that Vive neoprene has to go.

        Oculus ASW is great.

        Ultimately though as with phones and computers it comes down to personal preference. Each system has strengths and both systems are very good. If Vive doesn’t develop at the same pace as Octopus in the future, I can always return to Palmey (my father).

  • While oculus has adjusted prices lately, you still get more bang for the buck with the vive.

    That said, both are too expensive to build a market for which it’s worth developing.

    The Playstation VR is much more reasonable, and it outselling rift and vive combined should be a clear message. That said, it’s suffering even more from its closed ecosystem, as it keeps out any hobbyist and opensource dev, who might be interested in building content.

    • Get Schwifty!

      Curious what price people think VR is worth? Are people expecting to get Holodeck experiences for like $200? Personally I think $600-$800 to be a steal, I remember when high end VCR players could be upwards of $400 in some cases, and this was only in the mid 90’s.

      • To develop and publish great games, you need a market that is big enough, so you will have a return of your invest, which means the wide public needs to be able to afford the cost of the setup – which with the oculus/vive is more like 1700 atm (as most households do not own a new high end pc), which is way above what joe average is ready to pay for a mere entertainment system.

        • Get Schwifty!

          You have to assume they own a computer and are into gaming, which means they probably already have about 800 already invested. I don’t believe rolling the price of the PC in is rationale; no one without a decent PC is going to ever desire a PC-based VR system in most cases.

          I personally believe the next step will be console-like; HTC and Oculus partner with someone to create an entire bundle, maybe not in V2.0 but in v3.0. A console style PC platform with controllers, HMD and sensors in one pre-built package. This might very well be the thing to finally make the ill-fated Steam Machine take root.

  • Burstup

    Sweeney’s statement does not match my experience. Whenever I use the BigScreen app, the number of Rift users is about the same as Vive users.
    In the game Werewolves Within, out of 8 players usually 5 or 6 say they’re on
    PSVR, one or two on Rift and maybe one on Vive. In Altspace and Rec Room it’s usually an equal number of Rift and Vive users. Several of my RL friends bought either the Rift or they have both the Rift and Vive. I also use them both – and in my opinion the Rift with Touch controllers is more fun (lighter weight, more comfort, better controllers, the Oculus store always works while Steam VR is still buggy and unstable).

  • Get Schwifty!

    I suspect Sweeney is probably correct in this assessment… I made the very same call on the Oculus support forums (and of course was shouted down for it) but its probably correct, and a large reason was the delay in putting Touch on the market in a front facing configuration (i.e. no 3rd sensor). I still think even with that the sales would be about 60/40 in favor of Vive, they’ve done a smash up job in keeping the focus on them with announcements timed at key points to blunt Oculus’ movements and keep the loyal spun up. What will be interesting to see is if the management changes at Oculus amount to a new invigoration or if the marching orders continue down from Facebook causing them to move less quickly.

    On reality is that HTC would not be pushing the way they are were it not for Oculus in the market as well…. I realize there are some folks who buy into the “Oculus bad, Vive good” myth, and there are a few other (ahem) agendas in the mix, but no question Oculus is helping to push Vive along merely by the threat of competition. I doubt seriously the revised Vive controllers would have appeared this soon had it not been for the development of Touch.

    • DM

      This pretty much sums up my view of the pc VR situation right now.

  • I am not sure the bean counters at Oculus are even interested in competing with the games industry and the many other HMD startups appearing, hear me out:

    The statistics in this article are not rocket science. Many high end PC gamers have large steam libraries already so that is the incentive to get the Vive when spending a large sum on a peripheral that is similar to another. Oculus know this and half compete to get their name out there (and cause a stir etc) and are more interested in understanding this new technology, gaining IP and brand awareness etc at this stage as (I predict) their long term goal is ultimately integration with Facebook and its millions upon millions of users.

    If in the future a “Facebook VR” takes off, with a budget and officially badged “FaceBook VR Headset” then it wont matter about other HMDs of which Vive will have many competitors over the years.

    Oculus/Facebook will lead social VR and social gaming which, if they get it right will rake in billions for them. They control advertising, marketing and the platform so ultimately they win regardless of competition.

    Facebook has 1.79 billion monthly active users.
    Steam has 125 million monthly active users.

    Just my 2p :)

    • Get Schwifty!

      I believe you are correct, I have been saying things similar for months but you put it together better than I, good post. As you said, the key point is “if they get it right”. I believe we will see a Vive-dominated PC-gaming environment as a subset, and a FB/Oculus dominated “social gaming” world on the PC among other platforms. The wrong interpretation that so many in the PC gaming community make is assuming that PC-gaming is the center and effectively all there is to VR… it’s most definitely only one slice of the pie.

      • Agreed. They have pioneered a great hardware product to start it all off and the global VR snowball is now thundering along.

      • A Hyena

        Most social vr games I’ve come across seem to make more use of vive though from what I’ve see, mainly do to it having those fancy little controllers that the oculus had to play catchup to. I’m sure said games will have support for oculus version of em eventually too, but yeah

        • Get Schwifty!

          We’re talking true social media, not current tryouts like AltSpace…

          • A Hyena

            I’m talkin about more than just Altspace

            Rec Room, High Fidelty, that still WIP Sansar from LindenLabs

            was some others but those are the first few other names I can recall currently, but yeah, just from what I’ve seen, they seem more tailored towards the Vive, most likely due to the controllers it has, course as I said, I’m sure the oculus touch will get worked into the mix eventually too

  • Sam Illingworth

    “If Apple had the most awesome chat platform ever, but it only ran on
    Apple devices, guess what? It wouldn’t succeed. Because half of your
    friends have Android devices.”

    You mean iMessage?

    • Get Schwifty!

      What is success though, plenty of folks use it…. even if not with their Android friends… doesn’t make it a “failure”: because its not the most used platform. This is a bit like saying Ford Focus is a “success” because there are more of them around then Ferrari’s…. Holding 30% of a market is actually considered pretty successful believe it or not, 15% is the typical minimum to be considered a player.

      • Sam Illingworth

        Indeed, I use iMessage far more than any other system. I wish it worked on Android though.

    • Konchu

      But to be fair iMessage works in an ingenious way making in indistinguishable from SMS messages. AKA if you are on a apple device it will talk directly to apple devices but will SMS to Android devices. That is why iMessage works Facetime is pretty successful in the Apple eco system and would make a better candidate to compare the closed system. But I don’t Feel FaceTime will ever live up to its full potential in the ios only world.

      If Facebook had there crap together they build the ultimate interface to interact in VR regardless of platform. He who invents that will be the Facebook of VR.

  • Konchu

    I agree with Sweeney here, they really need to get official support for 3rd party headsets. A walled garden cannot survive. I am not opposed to buying apps in the Oculus Store as a Vive user(and have) but its as is and is just one shenanigan by Oculus and those purchases going away. It doesn’t help I have a little concern in their longevity if they fail I could lose all my purchases. Steam on the other hand is not going anywhere in the foreseeable future.

    With Facebook being a public company I hope they understand the need to reach out to all users. If only Mac users could use Facebook it would not have done as well right. And VR is arguably an extremely potent social game changer. My hopes is that the Oculus store is simply in Beta and they are keeping it closed till good standards solidify.

    I do appreciate what Facebook/Oculus has done pouring money into VR even in this current walled garden. But they need to bring down the wall.

    • Get Schwifty!

      Walled garden is an overstated concern though… its only other HMD users that can’t use Oculus exclusives, thats it. The analogy here would be Android users with a clear majority of users and software development upset they cant get a small number of apps in the Apple store but Apple users can use either Android apps or Apple apps. Whats perplexing is how upset Vive owners are about this… if Steam is truly the best software delivery mechanism and therefore Vive is safe from threat from Oculus, why does it matter? It’s only one thing… fear. Fear that somehow Oculus under Facebook will succeed and they will be left either with a Vive that has crappy software options which shouldn’t be the case if users are not supporting the Oculus platform, or they will be forced to give up their favorite VR toy for a lesser one, i.e. a Rift. Oculus cannot “stop” VR adoption, which is the only other conceivable fear here, hinder it perhaps, but not stop it.

      The irrational fear of a walled garden approach needs to stop so people can think more clearly. It makes little sense for a leading hardware vendor (HTC) with a leading product (Vive) with a commonly accepted software delivery mechanism (Steam) to have users who are in such snit about Oculus support for exclusives.

      PS: the concern over Oculus store stopping and you losing your apps is a bit off, you have the software. The “cloud” of the store is not your personal repository, your system is your personal storage, you would only lose your apps if you failed to keep them.

      • DM

        The problem is jealousy and perception. Walled gardens are always “bad” regardless of reasons or logic in pc gaming land, and I guess vive users and getting tired of the bloated vr shovelware on steam and want access to some of the Oculus exclusives.

        IMO for content you can’t beat Oculus right now, and that’s due to the open nature of Steam (good) and the exclusivity funding of Oculus (corporate greed bad) and this makes it easy for everyone to point fingers at Oculus.

        Personally I’m happy I went with Oculus, the market right now makes the Rift the clear winner for overall available content. I don’t care if Lighthouse is simpler if I have a real lack of polished good quality content to use on it. I’ll put up with a 3 camera setup and slightly more complex setup process.

        • Get Schwifty!

          It really is a much better experience than many people want to give it credit for.

        • J.C.

          It’s neither. In the end, Oculus will be forced to support OpenVR, or die. You’re only thinking of it as “two headsets”. Think about the wild variety of motherboard manufacturers, and imagine a store only supported people with MSI motherboards, while another supported any motherboard. Which one would survive as the market expands?

  • wowgivemeabreak

    If reports that Oculus has reached out to Valve to get the Vive native support with Oculus home games and Valve has declined (probably because they don’t want to miss out on a cut of the game sales) then why is that on Oculus? Maybe people should be targeting their displeasure at Valve rather than just blame Oculus for all this.

    I use both Steam Vr and Oculus Home and much prefer Oculus Home for setting the headset up (I feel Steam’s set up system sucks in comparison) and I also prefer the layout of Home when I am using the headset. I prefer Steam’s store page over Oculus’ store page though.

    Oh and it’s pretty lame to bring up some 2 to 1 stat when you have no numbers to back it up. I guess though that’s what this world has come to where you can just whip out anything you want and imply it is fact without actually having evidence and people should trust you because of well, just because.

    Another thing, I am sure the main reason for the Vive outselling the Rift is the fact it came “complete” from the start while the Rift had to wait until December and the Touch controllers. Seeing figures going forward would be much more useful.

  • Michael Hayes

    so oculus cannot be a success because it is not an open platform? how many people complaining about this own an Iphone..or a xbox..or a playstation? sure it is annoying sure but is far from a business killer. if they keep improving a releasing quality content then they will continue to exist and grow..just as the vive will..

    • Get Schwifty!

      Stop making sense… ;)

      • J.C.

        But he’s NOT making sense. Xbox and PS4 succeed because there’s only one store for each.
        Here’s Oculus, trying to lock their store down to specific hardware, while Valve doesn’t. It only can work in the short term. They will HAVE to support OpenVR, because when there are 7-10 headsets on the market, and Steam supports them all while Oculus supports ONE…no one will buy their games on Oculus’ store. If another vendor makes an incredibly better hardware set, you have to decide to give up your Oculus purchases to use the new hardware.

  • Foreign Devil

    I’m not sure what he is talking about in that first part. . .I don’t have to alter Oculus system files to load up Steam. . Just load up Steam and switch to VR mode and put on Rift headset.

    • Get Schwifty!

      You have to turn on “Allow Outside Sources” in the Oculus Home settings. Personally I think this should just be on by default, the whole issue reminds me of some of the objections people used to have about asking users to do anything to access something else as restrictive. Personally I don’t think its that big a deal, but the very idea offends a lot of people.

  • AndyP

    All part of the fun of being early adopters! Vive wands are awful; Rift sensors are painful (though fixable with 3 and some 3D printed ceiling mounts); closed is poor for all non-Rifters (at least); headset cable is “doing my head in”…. BUT it’s still totally amazing owning a holodeck! The rate of progress for VR has been startling lately and would not have happened without (the dreaded) FB and Vive. I hope they are listening to the (constructive) criticisms – if so, the prospect of gen 2 is mouthwatering (though my bank manager doesn’t agree).

    • Rob

      Great Post! I agree totally. VR is just starting and if the Vive and Oculus do well we are in for great things. I am no fan of FB or Steam (which I consider the FB of gaming), but I still want both to do well. I am mostly interested in how VR will do in other industries like medicine, education, and travel. Pay per view concerts and such.

      • AndyP

        Thanks. Does anyone remember how LONG it took Quake 1 and 2 to
        load on a PC, when it loaded at all?! After some perseverance, my Rift works
        perfectly in room scale: now I’ve tidied up the cables, installed some 3D
        printed mounts (from EBay), added 3.0 cards, messed with setup. All the problems can be fixed with the skills, patience and money early adopters have always needed. I’m so bored of the childish zero-sum arguments though.

        I was talking to a history/archaeology Prof just yesterday about VR. He
        was really excited about people visiting heritage sites and being able to put on a headset to see what it was like in the past; plus the prospect of kids being transported through time and space from their classrooms.

  • ph0m

    I vote with my wallet and I vote for open platforms. Exclusivity is divisive and polarizing. I’m all about unity. We have enough segregation in this world. As the makers of open platforms are aware, it is very possible to succeed in capitalism with an open and generous philosophy rather than a fear-based aggressively competitive one. I use a PC because of the diversity and flexibility offered by an open platform. As a consumer I will boycott anything that attempts to turn it into a closed platform. As a developer I would sooner make my work public domain and go broke than sell out to an exclusivity deal.

    • Get Schwifty!

      Open doesn’t necessarily mean level though ;)

  • beestee

    Why is Viveport a thing if Vive/Steam is a perfectly sustainable and “open” VR nirvana?

    What makes the Rift a “closed” platform and Vive “open”? Both can access SteamVR, and both now have their own storefronts as well.

    Why wouldn’t Facebook/Oculus want to sell software to all VR headset users like Steam does?

    Maybe Facebook/Oculus need something that they are not getting from Valve/HTC to make the Vive work with Oculus Home…Valve’s intention is very clear to me, support all hardware so that they can skim their 30% off the top of all software sales. Why wouldn’t they put some hurdles up that keep Vive users walled into Steam as much as possible? Maybe HTC is getting wise to Valve’s long game, that they are simply a stepping stone for Valve to become the defacto storefront for VR games just as with all other PC games. Thus the birth of Viveport.

    There are a lot of politics involved in this situation and it really isn’t one party at fault for the reason things are the way that they are. This article exposes these politics pretty well in my opinion:


    • Get Schwifty!

      The mere fact they are in bed with each other is a problem for Oculus. Would you really trust Valve to really promote Oculus on par with Vive? That is the core issue for them to deal with establishing a brand. OTOH, I believe Oculus is too focused on establishing a brand at Facebooks direction rather than competing in the gaming world well… that is unfortunate.

  • Macchendra

    VR with accurate tracking allows for room-scale and is a completely different beast than than “VR in your chair”. “VR in your chair” can be done with any 3D game, but is still nauseating and using an xbox controller to interact is a pale imitation. So, given that, when comparing game selections, I don’t count “VR in your chair” selections with the possible exception of racing and flying. Sure Vive has a lot of single dev indies, but a lot of them are innovating in room-scale interaction, which is an unexplored area. The “VR in your chair” games are not really venturing into new territory. They are just the same old story with a different monitor.

  • MainFragger

    I know that when I bought my vive, one of the deciding factors was it actually came with the controllers and the lighthouses. I’m sure that made a pretty huge difference for a lot of people.

    About the argument below. I have to admit, I have mixed feelings on the fresnel lenses on the Vive. Sometimes they magnify and make things look bigger (in a good way) but other times they blur a bit at the edges, or have light reflections in the ring that are distracting. I DO wish I could find and/or try the Vive with lenses that are not fresnel lenses..

  • Nashoba Darkwolf

    Oh man all the vive users are going nuts in these comments to defend their system with whatever rubbish they can sling at oculus. Funny how Rift users never really call out the vive like the vive users do the oculus (meaning stoop that low).

  • WCM

    Its selling 2-to-1 for a bunch of reasons.
    Not being open platform.
    Not selling in China.
    And oh.

    The Vive is basically better in every way I can think of at least a little.
    When Rift Cant even make a headset that I can WHERE GLASSES In, some one needs to be fired.

  • Drake Dan

    Everything about the oculus is amazing except the poor tracking, and anti-consumer practices they keep pulling. I wish I got a vive because I haven’t played a single oculus home game. Also the vive tracking is way better, and doesn’t get occluded as easily.