The Vive gets a $200 price drop

[captain cactus]

Sauce: https://blog.vive.com/us/2017/08/21/htc-vive-announces-price-drop/

 

Quote

Starting today (8/21), we are reducing the price of Vive by $200. The high-end, PC-based consumer Vive that is in market today, and will be for the foreseeable future, will now be available for $599.  All Vive purchases come with a free trial to Viveport Subscription, where consumers can choose up to 5 titles per month to experience, and copies of some of the most popular pieces of VR in Google’s Tilt Brush, EverestVR, and Richie’s Plank Experience.

So, yay I guess? After the Rift's price drop Valve/HTC had to follow of course. It's still an expensive piece of equipment though.

[Cela1]

I was tempted by Oculus' $400 deal... but I'm still waiting for a v2 of the vive with better pixel density and the knuckles controllers.

 

(and maybe a slightly lower price )

[GoldForest]

10 minutes ago, lots of unexplainable lag said:

Sauce: https://blog.vive.com/us/2017/08/21/htc-vive-announces-price-drop/

 

So, yay I guess? After the Rift's price drop Valve/HTC had to follow of course. It's still an expensive piece of equipment though.

You saw my post and made this one didn't you?

[Tiwaz]

can you use the vive just as the headset for games like simulators to look around in the cockpit, etc.?

[GoldForest]

1 minute ago, Tiwaz said:

can you use the vive just as the headset for games like simulators to look around in the cockpit, etc.?

If the game supports VR, yes, you can use gamepad and Vive together. Or in the case of flying games, joystick/HOTAS and VIVE.

[desertcomputer]

Wow i can now buy at under 1k :0 999 AUD. 

[GoldForest]

2 minutes ago, Sampsy said:

Wow. So now it will only be really really overpriced rather than really really really overpriced. 

Any price Drop is good price drop. 

 

[Majestic]

6 minutes ago, Sampsy said:

Wow. So now it will only be really really overpriced rather than really really really overpriced. 

Which means it's only a partial steal!

[smartroad]

14 minutes ago, Tiwaz said:

can you use the vive just as the headset for games like simulators to look around in the cockpit, etc.?

Yeah you can. I play Elite Dangerous on occasion and it is great in there with a HOTAS that has enough buttons for all the bindings you'll need LOL I have the Saitek X-55 which is serving me well thus far.

 

23 minutes ago, Cela1 said:

I was tempted by Oculus' $400 deal... but I'm still waiting for a v2 of the vive with better pixel density and the knuckles controllers.

 

(and maybe a slightly lower price )

Problem with increased pixel density is the proportional (or is that exponential?!) increase in graphics power needed LOL The Vive would actually look better if they could get rid of the space between the pixels, that would go a long way to improving the apparent quality without needing to increase the number of pixels. Doubt it could be done though.

 

Although I agree, once the GPUs have enough compute power for 2 x 4k screens at 90+FPS that would be AMAZING  

[smartroad]

Can I ask for my money back for paying the higher price?

[porina]

18 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

If the game supports VR, yes, you can use gamepad and Vive together. Or in the case of flying games, joystick/HOTAS and VIVE.

It comes down to game support. At a basic level they can use the display instead of a monitor, but could support whatever controls they like.

 

As an early buyer of Vive I'm a little surprised the pricing has held high for so long. I get the feeling they have a bit better developer support over Rift, so I think even if they don't make it in consumer space long term they will remain a niche for specialist business uses. The interesting point will be how MS' attempts to push pricing down will impact things longer term.

[smartroad]

6 minutes ago, porina said:

I get the feeling they have a bit better developer support over Rift, so I think even if they don't make it in consumer space long term they will remain a niche for specialist business uses. 

I have thought that as well. When ever you see a business using VR it is more often then not the Vive.

[GoldForest]

4 minutes ago, porina said:

It comes down to game support. At a basic level they can use the display instead of a monitor, but could support whatever controls they like.

 

As an early buyer of Vive I'm a little surprised the pricing has held high for so long. I get the feeling they have a bit better developer support over Rift, so I think even if they don't make it in consumer space long term they will remain a niche for specialist business uses. The interesting point will be how MS' attempts to push pricing down will impact things longer term.

Well, from what I've heard everyone says that Vive is way better in most ways. So HTC/Steam didn't feel threatened by Oculus with that fact that people would be willing to pay more for a subjectively superior product. That's how I see it anyway. Oculus isn't that much of a competition with their anti-consumer practices, I.e. Exclusives. I can name on one hand the amount of Vive exclusives while I need to ask a friend to hold up theirs to help count RIfts. And then there's OSVR. No controller, and I've heard nothing about it other than, it exist. And LG hasn't even launched Dev kits of their VRHS. Steam and HTC are just not scared in my opinion, thus no competition. I've only heard rumors about the LG VR headset, but it sounds like it's going to have a denser screen. 3XXX by 1440 I think. Not much bigger than now, but still better density right?

[Sakkura]

Store-exclusive games are not anti-consumer, and the VR market would be in trouble without Oculus funding those games.

 

It's mostly Valve fanboying, irrational Facebook hate, and outright FUD that has made the Vive more popular than the Rift. Won't hold up forever though, as more players enter the market. Acer and HP launched their Microsoft-affiliated headsets just a few weeks ago.

 

I hope HTC are still going to have a decent margin on the Vive with this price cut. They really need the cash, and I think they deserve some success for taking the leap into VR.

[GoldForest]

29 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Store-exclusive games are not anti-consumer, and the VR market would be in trouble without Oculus funding those games.

 

It's mostly Valve fanboying, irrational Facebook hate, and outright FUD that has made the Vive more popular than the Rift. Won't hold up forever though, as more players enter the market. Acer and HP launched their Microsoft-affiliated headsets just a few weeks ago.

 

I hope HTC are still going to have a decent margin on the Vive with this price cut. They really need the cash, and I think they deserve some success for taking the leap into VR.

Any and all exclusives are anti-consumer, because they force the consumer to get that person's product to play that game. 
I'm happy that Oculus funded games, but exclusivity needs to die on all platforms. 
And it's not store-exclusive, it's platform exclusive. If it were store exclusive, the oculus store would let their games run on VIVE or OSVR. 
Yes, I know there's revive, but that doesn't make the exclusive non-anti-consumer for that fact that the devs still don't openly put it on the other platform. 
The only reasons for exclusivity would be PC exclusives that the consoles just can not run.

 

[Sakkura]

14 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

Any and all exclusives are anti-consumer, because they force the consumer to get that person's product to play that game. 
I'm happy that Oculus funded games, but exclusivity needs to die on all platforms. 
And it's not store-exclusive, it's platform exclusive. If it were store exclusive, the oculus store would let their games run on VIVE or OSVR. 
Yes, I know there's revive, but that doesn't make the exclusive non-anti-consumer for that fact that the devs still don't openly put it on the other platform. 
The only reasons for exclusivity would be PC exclusives that the consoles just can not run.

 

It's a store exclusive, like most major games on PC are.

[GoldForest]

Just now, Sakkura said:

It's a store exclusive, like most major games on PC are.

Then I can go buy a game off the Oculus store and play it on my vive without downloading revive? 

[GoldForest]

28 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

It's a store exclusive, like most major games on PC are.

Even Oculus themselves call their exclusives, platform exclusives. https://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-on-platform-exclusive-vr-content-its-the-only-way-to-viably-jumpstart-the-market/

 

Also most major games on PC? Are you talking about games that are exclusive to the PC?

[Sakkura]

1 hour ago, GoldForest said:

Even Oculus themselves call their exclusives, platform exclusives. https://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-on-platform-exclusive-vr-content-its-the-only-way-to-viably-jumpstart-the-market/

 

Also most major games on PC? Are you talking about games that are exclusive to the PC?

Platform as in software platform? Anyway, that's an old interview. Also he basically proves his point - the majority of high quality VR content has come from funding, by Oculus or Sony (for PSVR).

 

Most major games on PC are store exclusives. EA games are on Origin, Blizzard games are on battle.net, Valve games are on Steam etc.

[PlayStation 2]

6 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Platform as in software platform? Anyway, that's an old interview. Also he basically proves his point - the majority of high quality VR content has come from funding, by Oculus or Sony (for PSVR).

 

Most major games on PC are store exclusives. EA games are on Origin, Blizzard games are on battle.net, Valve games are on Steam etc.

Hell, you wanna go even further, there's a ton of games that are only available on Steam. His point wanes once you get that out of the way.

[GoldForest]

13 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Platform as in software platform? Anyway, that's an old interview. Also he basically proves his point - the majority of high quality VR content has come from funding, by Oculus or Sony (for PSVR).

 

Most major games on PC are store exclusives. EA games are on Origin, Blizzard games are on battle.net, Valve games are on Steam etc.

Rift isn't software tho, it's hardware. 

[Misanthrope]

4 hours ago, smartroad said:

Problem with increased pixel density is the proportional (or is that exponential?!) increase in graphics power needed LOL The Vive would actually look better if they could get rid of the space between the pixels, that would go a long way to improving the apparent quality without needing to increase the number of pixels. Doubt it could be done though.

And the problem in turn is that the price is basically restricting this to tech enthusiasts. The larger audience has been waiting for a better price line and it wouldn't make sense to say "Ok we've done it: better resolution and not just 399 starting price....but now you need to replace your 200 bucks 1060 with a 700 bucks 1080ti"

 

If anything the gen 2 headsets need to wait until 1060 levels of performance are even more affordable so people can pair a 300-400 headset with a 500 rig and do at least as good as today's offerings. Basically keeping all that's needed for VR for under 1k.

[mynameisjuan]

14 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

And the problem in turn is that the price is basically restricting this to tech enthusiasts. The larger audience has been waiting for a better price line and it wouldn't make sense to say "Ok we've done it: better resolution and not just 399 starting price....but now you need to replace your 200 bucks 1060 with a 700 bucks 1080ti"

 

If anything the gen 2 headsets need to wait until 1060 levels of performance are even more affordable so people can pair a 300-400 headset with a 500 rig and do at least as good as today's offerings. Basically keeping all that's needed for VR for under 1k.

I still never understand this argument since the cost of the VR system is not the real problem.

 

You are running two high res screens at 90fps and in order to do that you need a high end system. There is no getting around that no matter what the cost of the VR headset is. $600 right now is not a bad price for the headset. If you need to spend another $700 on a GPU, sorry but that is not HTCs fault. Basically you want to build a system with a 1080, at least a top end i5, say 8GB of ram and everything else PLUS a headset for less than 1k....good luck with that. 

[Misanthrope]

Just now, mynameisjuan said:

I still never understand this argument since the cost of the VR system is not the real problem.

 

You are running two high res screens at 90fps and in order to do that you need a high end system. There is no getting around that no matter what the cost of the VR headset is. $600 right now is not a bad price for the headset. If you need to spend another $700 on a GPU, sorry but that is not HTCs fault.

You don't understand how a product that hasn't become a mainstream success cannot compete with prices that are beyond what the regular public is willing to pay?

 

Where have you been for the past 30 or so years? Why do you think we even have a videogame entertaining industry at all today? Low and mid-spec gamers is the answer: the ones that made the consoles a run-away success in the past because of their lower price points. PC gaming has had a Renaissance lately because of free to play games or popular, accessible to all games like MOBAs that run smoothly even on 100 bucks graphics cards.

 

If you want to say that VR doesn't needs mass adoption to be successful that's fine with me. That might even be what Valve aims at. But it's definitively not why giants like Samsung, Facebook and Sony got into VR they just wanted the next Wii and everybody failed to predict one of the key aspects that made it such a viral success: affordable price.

[mynameisjuan]

8 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

You don't understand how a product that hasn't become a mainstream success cannot compete with prices that are beyond what the regular public is willing to pay?

 

Where have you been for the past 30 or so years? Why do you think we even have a videogame entertaining industry at all today? Low and mid-spec gamers is the answer: the ones that made the consoles a run-away success in the past because of their lower price points. PC gaming has had a Renaissance lately because of free to play games or popular, accessible to all games like MOBAs that run smoothly even on 100 bucks graphics cards.

 

If you want to say that VR doesn't needs mass adoption to be successful that's fine with me. That might even be what Valve aims at. But it's definitively not why giants like Samsung, Facebook and Sony got into VR they just wanted the next Wii and everybody failed to predict one of the key aspects that made it such a viral success: affordable price.

 

The problem is your argument is based on nothing to do with the Vive. The problem with VR is not just the price of the headset but even more importantly, the higher cost of the system needed. Even if the Vive was $100 people would still say VR is too expensive because you still need top of the line hardware as a minimum. 

 

It will be a while before GPUs that perform similar to a 1080 will be down to a reasonable price where you can build a system and a headset for less than a 1k. But this will most likely never happen. Devs will continue to develop games to take advantage of current hardware. So when a 1080 is equivalent to a 1360 or whatever, games will now have improved graphics and you will still need to buy a $500+ card. 

 

Its a dog chasing its tail and you are yelling at the cat for it.