Good enough
Unofficial data (which I'm using as the companies themselves haven't shared sales figures with us) suggest that the Vive, despite being more expensive, is trouncing Oculus. Games research firm SuperData estimated that 420,000 Vive headsets were sold in 2016, compared to 250,000 sales for the Oculus Rift.
The lower end of the market is far more positive for Facebook. The Samsung Gear VR runs the Oculus VR experience, and that is by far and away the most popular device for VR on the market today, according to SuperData. But the hardware is all Samsung's and, for the most part, the headset itself (a simple plastic frame with lenses) has been given away with many smartphones.
The hope that the Gear VR might act as a kind of gateway drug into pricier VR experiences has yet to come to fruition.
Or maybe it has, just not for Oculus: the middle ground in VR is Sony's PlayStation VR, $399 and works with the PlayStation 4. It's more powerful than the Gear VR, but less powerful than the high-end headsets. But here's where Facebook should be worried - it seems to be good enough for most gamers.
And it's "good enough" that makes Facebook's strategy all the more precarious. Who is the Oculus Rift for, exactly? Super serious gamers are gravitating to the HTC Vive. Moderately serious gamers are happy with PlayStation VR. And at the budget end, the Gear VR, while popular now, faces a clear and present threat from Daydream, Google's new VR ecosystem which is far more open.
While Gear VR insists you have a Samsung smartphone, Daydream is designed to eventually work with any sufficiently powerful Android device (and it wouldn't be too tricky to make it work with Apple's iOS, either).
This compatibility comes at a price, mind - the Daydream View headset is far less comfortable, in my experience, than the Gear VR. But it's comfortable enough, and the little handheld controller provides a far more intuitive way of navigating the VR world than tapping blindly at the side of your head, a la Gear VR.
Here comes Hugo
So what are the next steps if Facebook is to get on top of this? I'd ask Palmer Luckey, but he's hard to reach at the moment - hidden away from public view after controversy surrounding his support of Donald Trump which involved funding a hateful trolling group.
He still works at the company, but Facebook and Oculus have repeatedly refused to tell me what his job actually is. (Palmer, if you're reading... my Twitter direct messages are open!)
The only public appearance he has made since that debacle has been to turn up in court where Facebook (unsuccessfully) defended against claims Oculus illegally used intellectual property belonging to games publisher Zenimax in the early days. A $500m bill for damages awaits, unless Facebook can win on appeal.
Unofficial data (which I'm using as the companies themselves haven't shared sales figures with us) suggest that the Vive, despite being more expensive, is trouncing Oculus. Games research firm SuperData estimated that 420,000 Vive headsets were sold in 2016, compared to 250,000 sales for the Oculus Rift.
The lower end of the market is far more positive for Facebook. The Samsung Gear VR runs the Oculus VR experience, and that is by far and away the most popular device for VR on the market today, according to SuperData. But the hardware is all Samsung's and, for the most part, the headset itself (a simple plastic frame with lenses) has been given away with many smartphones.
The hope that the Gear VR might act as a kind of gateway drug into pricier VR experiences has yet to come to fruition.
Or maybe it has, just not for Oculus: the middle ground in VR is Sony's PlayStation VR, $399 and works with the PlayStation 4. It's more powerful than the Gear VR, but less powerful than the high-end headsets. But here's where Facebook should be worried - it seems to be good enough for most gamers.
And it's "good enough" that makes Facebook's strategy all the more precarious. Who is the Oculus Rift for, exactly? Super serious gamers are gravitating to the HTC Vive. Moderately serious gamers are happy with PlayStation VR. And at the budget end, the Gear VR, while popular now, faces a clear and present threat from Daydream, Google's new VR ecosystem which is far more open.
While Gear VR insists you have a Samsung smartphone, Daydream is designed to eventually work with any sufficiently powerful Android device (and it wouldn't be too tricky to make it work with Apple's iOS, either).
This compatibility comes at a price, mind - the Daydream View headset is far less comfortable, in my experience, than the Gear VR. But it's comfortable enough, and the little handheld controller provides a far more intuitive way of navigating the VR world than tapping blindly at the side of your head, a la Gear VR.
Here comes Hugo
So what are the next steps if Facebook is to get on top of this? I'd ask Palmer Luckey, but he's hard to reach at the moment - hidden away from public view after controversy surrounding his support of Donald Trump which involved funding a hateful trolling group.
He still works at the company, but Facebook and Oculus have repeatedly refused to tell me what his job actually is. (Palmer, if you're reading... my Twitter direct messages are open!)
The only public appearance he has made since that debacle has been to turn up in court where Facebook (unsuccessfully) defended against claims Oculus illegally used intellectual property belonging to games publisher Zenimax in the early days. A $500m bill for damages awaits, unless Facebook can win on appeal.
Post a Comment