Why is Oculus the only one still trying to make VR cheaper? (Oculus Quest and Oculus Rift S)

This video is brought to you by Dashlane. Protect yourself from password leaks with
the link down below. I am told VR is cool again, wait not I am told it is dead, what is it? The story of the current wave of VR is fascinating. After an absurd wave of hype after the release
of the Oculus rift and HTC Vive you could not attend any tech conference without seeing
a dozen VR headsets everywhere. Everyone tough this was the next big thing,
it would revitalize PC and Phone sales, it was going to be the biggest change in gaming
since the jump to 3D. Years later things have cooled down a litte bit,
to the point that some analyst rushed to say VR was done. “Virtual Reality: for $600 you can buy the facebook Oculus. Porn and Gaming might take of here but that’s it. For a lot less money I can stare at my phone at the back-seat of a car and get nauseous all on my own” Non-Gaming VR existed before the Oculus hype
but even after giant technological improvements it still maintains a bit a niche position,
mainly stuff like virtual training. But even on conferences on workplace VR, gaming
is always the thing that attracts the most organic attention. In the gaming world AAA interested has slowed
down, although not completely disappeared, smaller studios have picked up the slack and
now the software has matured, with properly popular killer app titles popping up and yet
VR sales have not yet exploded into the mainstream. If you are subscribed to this channel you
have likely been screaming at your screen this whole time. VR is TOO DAMN EXPENSIVE. And I keep wondering, why are most of the
new headsets not tackling this? But Alex, you can buy a headset in Wallmart
for like $40 and you can just build a headset your phone. You have done this. Well, clearly I got ahead of myself. Let’s talk terminology and what I mean by
VR. VR movement can be classified by Degrees of
Freedom. First, we have 3 degrees of freedom. The tracking or Rotation Movement using Rolling,
Pitching and Yawing. This allows the tracking of the orientation
of a headset or device but not its position in space. That means that a device with 3 degrees can
track you look around but it will always position you in the same spot. 3 degrees will not track your position in
a 3D space. 3 degrees is easier to track. Most smartphones can already do this and so
this is what you get on cardboard VR or Samsung VR, or the Walmart headset. Old Wii remotes and now Nintendo joycons basically
do 3 degrees of freedom with additional accelerometers to extrapolate motion. But they can not track position. For full tracking, you need 6 degrees of freedom,
which adds tracking on the 3-dimensional movement. Now you can not only see rotation but also
position on a 3D space in real time, and the same with the controllers. This… is really hard and therefore currently
expensive. What options are there for budget-limited
gamers? Most of the unique killer apps of VR require
some level of 6 degrees for headset and hand controllers so that eliminates cardboard and
phone VR, which is only 3 degrees. There are ways of emulating six but it is not super good. PlayStation VR connected to PC is something I
have been experimenting with but the setup is a bit of a pain, requiring something like a Kinect sensor to
be able to do full 6 degrees of freedom with the controllers which raises the price and more important
the complexity on the setup. Still, this is something that I plan to explore
in the future, just not today… So that leaves us with PC headsets. I have made videos about the past about older
Windows Mixed Reality headsets which, if you are lucky, can be found for bargain prices,
do full 6 degrees and are easy to configure. While their tracking is not at all on the
level of the expensive headsets it does good enough for most games so this is usually my
recommended entry point. Problem is these headsets are cheap because
they were not a commercial success and retailers are trying to get rid of them and the few next-generation WMR headsets are very,
very pricey. So, what is going on with the next generation? HTC is still marketing their original Vive
headset as the gamer solution, and it is still expensive enough that they offer a payment
plan for it, a silent recognition of this cost issue. Their near headsets are either enterprise
or pro… with a pro price tag attached to that. And their upcoming consumer headset is unlikely
to be much cheaper. Valve generated some excitement with the announcement
of a new headset with some crazy futuristic features… that cost a thousand dollars. Even some of the weird experimental headsets
can be ridiculous expensive and that leads me to Oculus. Oculus recently released two new headsets:
both retailing for $400. While still pretty pricey it is lower than
the original retail price of the first consumer Rift headset $600 (and that was without controllers)
so there is progress being made in the front of reducing the price. I started asking around to see if I could
get my hands on these two new headsets to test them for a follow up to my VR video but
in the meantime, I just could not get the obvious question out of my head: Why is Oculus the only big player in VR who
actually seems to be trying to reduce cost? The more I researched the weirder the story
of Oculus’ current direction got, so seeing that I was so terribly out of my scope considering
I have only owned one 6 degrees PC headset in my life I decided to send some emails and do some
calls. *SKYPE INTENSIFIES* Ok, so my name’s Mike and I run a Virtual
Reality dedicated channel where I test the latest headsets, give you guides, check out
the latest games so you can get the best out of your Virtual Reality experience. Mike is a prominent member of the VR YouTube
community a growing vertical inside YouTube and therefore deeply familiar with the details
of every headset. Of the two headsets released the Rift S is
the closest to what I expected to see. Something that you connect to your PC to play
steam games and being primarily a PC gamer it was the first thing to capture my attention
so before getting my hands on one I wanted to know how it was different from previous
generations. Yeah, so the rift S, I actually got one right
behind me here. I actually got my hands on it a few days earlier
before they announced it to a release just recently at Facebook F8, so I was very fortunate
to get one sent early by Oculus, but how it differentiates itself between the original
rift is that it got inside out tracking, so you don’t need to set up external sensors
anymore, all the tracking is done by the headset itself using the five cameras that are around
the headset. So, the price point of the Rift S is $399
US dollars. When the original Oculus Rift released around
three years ago, it started off about $600 and then a year later you had to buy the controllers
additionally for an extra $200 dollars so, it was a really expensive bundle. Eventually that did come down in price and
was around $399 dollars, and occasionally went on sale for $350 so it was coming at
a quite good price point, bearing in mind that it’s a slight upgrade over the original. How was the reduction in cost possible? Mike had some thoughts on this matter as well. So, with the rift S, because you have inside
out tracking, they don’t have to manufacture these sensors anymore. And each rift originally shipped with 2 sensors
and then you could buy additional ones if you wanted to have back coverage in your play
space. So, I think that probably saves a lot of manufacturing
costs, the other key thing with the Rift S is that it uses a single panel display behind
the lenses, so it runs an LCD panel 1440×2160, and the original rift was using dual panels
so it used dual oled panels which are 800x1280p each. So, by using a single panel, they must have
reduced costs there. Now while researching this topic there is
one aspect that unexpectedly captured my attention. The reaction to the announcement of the new
headsets was not entirely positive, as people maybe expected something a bit more ambitious
rather than something cheaper. Mike had a more precise take on that. I think there was just a lot of confusion
with the community around the announcement, because there wasn’t a big presentation or
a keynote around this headset. It was just a case of- press had access to
it early and they were just dropping the specs on the release date, you know, the embargo. Which was around GDC, so the thing is everyone
on Reddit, sort of, the Oculus community, they saw all the specs and that’s all what
they really got, they didn’t get anything else, so it’s just comparing a spec sheet
to the original rift and of course the original rift had been out for three years so everyone’s
expectations was that they were going to get a true second generation headset. Whereas really what the Rift S is, is more
of a slight bump increase, you know, a more of a 1.5 incremental upgrade. So yeah, there was a lot of confusion around
the specs because you know, when you look at the rift S it runs at 80 hertz and whereas
the original oculus rift runs at 90 hertz, the resolution isn’t a dramatic leap forward
in terms of the resolution of the original oculus rift and also that you’re losing
some sort of tracking volume when you got inside out tracking because using external
sensors, you can track when your hand is behind your back for example, whereas the Rift S
struggles with that so a lot of people saw it as almost a downgrade than a slight upgrade
and there was a lot of confusion around that. However, the really interesting bit was seemed
to be the reaction inside Oculus. You see… I had been focused on the Rift S but Oculus
released another $400 dollar headset: the Oculus Quest. The Quest is a standalone headset equipped
with a Snapdragon processor. Games ported to the Quest work entirely in
the contained system without the need of cables or a connected PC and if you look at how much
Facebook talked about this specific headset it was very evident
that this is one they wanted to be the star of the show and the one were they engineering
resources are going towards. You know, if you look at the keynote from
F8, it definitely seems like, you know, the Rift S is the Quest’s ugly brother, you
know, no one really cares about that headset so much, you know, the limelight was solely
on the quest you know and that is Oculus’ main focus right now and they’ve kinda brought
this Rift S out just to sort of hold this place in the market. Because, you know, you got Valve coming out
with their Index which is, you know, $1000. And what they’re saying is that we can produce
a headset for $399 that can give you a comparable VR experience but at a massively reduced cost
and you don’t have to worry about setting base stations like you do with the index,
you can just get into VR- room-scale VR straight out of the box and start enjoying yourself. When you look at the Quest, like you say,
both the Quest and the Rift S is $399, when you look at the Quest which is made in house,
you know, it really feels like a premium product and- with all the technology that’s crammed
into that headset, you know, it’s got a Snapdragon 835 processor in its heart, it’s
got this amazing inside Oculus tracking system that must have cost a lot of money to develop,
you- I can’t imagine them making any money on the $399 price whereas, when you look at
the Rift S, it may have been designed in house by Oculus Rift, but it was manufactured and
designed in partnership with Lenovo. And, I think they’re probably squeezing
some margins there and making some money on the hardware. They must be selling the Quest at a loss to
get that mass market introduction there. And this in itself is interesting because
the direction Facebook has turned Oculus towards has caused quite a bit of Internal Turmoil. Two of the most prominent Oculus founder was
the hacky techy guy that was working on the technology to improve VR Palmer Luckey and
the entrepreneur Brendan Iribe who pushed Luckey to dream bigger. After the very large Facebook acquisition,
Palmer Lucky left the company for… no particular reason and Brendan Iribe left later for what sources
claim was a disagreement regarding the direction of Oculus. Yeah, absolutely. An article was released by Tech Crunch who
kinda leaked a source close to Brendan Iribe, who had left Oculus and we had no details
as to how he left and the rumor was that- he quoted- that he didn’t want to be involved
in a race to the bottom, with this new Rift S and that he wanted to focus on a next generation
Rift for the enthusiast market. So, it seems like Facebook’s vision was,
you know, we need to make a headset that’s cheap and accessible to the mass market whereas
his vision was we need to appease the enthusiast market that made us what we are today. The idea that Iribe, an original co-founder
of the company was leaving because he instead wanted to work on a bigger, more advanced
and possibly more expensive Rift 2 when gaming VR seems to be so limited because of the cost
seemed very weird. I could not help but wonder if some people
inside Oculus were falling to a version of enthusiast trap. The enthusiast trap is a term that I heard
from Tech Alter to explain why often companies end up doing things that seem to betray their
core enthusiast audience and… actually it makes more sense if he explains this directly
as well. For every YouTuber there is an older video
that consistently pops out in your analytics and you are always like: Why does this years
old thing is always being watched. And I am willing to bet that for you “Why
enthusiast brands will betray you” pops up very often in your analytics. Can you summarize the enthusiast trap for us? Sure, so the content of the enthusiast trap
is that tech companies, especially ones that produce a product that enthusiasts would really
like, so that would be for example companies like Oculus, or companies like Apple or companies
like One Plus. They start off by focusing on enthusiast users
and this appears to be a fantastic strategy at first because if you target enthusiast
users, you don’t need very heavy advertising, you don’t need to buy billboard ads and
TV ads and stuff, the enthusiasts would just find you as soon as you have a cool product. They will do the marketing for you by word
of mouth, they’ll do their youtube videos, they’ll go on reddit to talk about you. They might even give you free money in the
form of Kickstarter before you even launch your product or they’ll get invites to your
product, they’ll jump through hoops to get to you and they’re willing to deal with
even beta hardware, so this is at first a very attractive proposition. But then, companies that follow this path
fall into an enthusiast’s trap is what I call it. Where they really quickly outgrow the enthusiasts
market because the enthusiast market is not a very sustainable one in the long run, If
you think about it they’re a small audience, this audience is extremely demanding, they
always have to be up to date and you always have to provide the best possible product
experience. They’re very cost conscious so if there’s
a competitor that offers the same thing that you do but for $5 less the enthusiasts are
very aware of that and they’ll switch ASAP. At that point, when they realize that they’ve
kinda outgrown this market, which happens very quickly, the company has a dilemma which
is: Do they stay with the audience? Which is difficult because it might be too
small on the long term. They kinda remain insignificant in the grand
scale of things or do they leave that audience behind and start focusing on more mainstream
users in which case, that is again, difficult because you leave your core user base behind
and enthusiasts will get angry. The people who feel betrayed on the trap are
usually the audience and there is always some degree of that since Oculus was bought by
Facebook but on this particular case, it does seem that the feelings were coming from inside
the company itself. Yeah this is actually very interesting because
as you said, it’s usually the users who are revolting. Although I’ve seen some negativity towards
Oculus going to a race to the bottom, I think it’s been overall a positive message, people
tend to seem to like the Quest as it opens up new experiences and stuff, but it’s clear
from the reporting that the founders feel kind of betrayed by feeling forced into this
path that they don’t want to take. I think you see this through out Facebook
actually, so the three big acquisitions that Facebook has had which is Oculus, Whatsapp
and Instagram, you see a very similar story in all three of them where the founders all
recently left Facebook and it all seems to be because their vision for their product
is clashing with the vision for the product that Zuckerberg has. Zuckerberg is under extreme pressure from
all sides because of his platform being involved with elections and political stuff, we all
know about that, because there’s a constant push for being extremely profitable and I
think he’s kinda become a little paranoid in wanting to keep control as much as possible
as he feels the people are calling for him to leave the company or for his company to
be split up, I think he’s doing the opposite, he’s reasserting his dominance and he’s
pushing all the critical voices or all distrustful people in the company who would want to move
the company to a different direction. And actually for all three companies, for
Whatsapp for example, apparently the founder left because he wanted to focus more on privacy
and he didn’t want to mix his stuff together with the Facebook platform. For Instagram, the founders left apparently
again because they wanted to keep their cut from relatively clean and pure and not mixing
together with all the Facebook stuff and then for Oculus, as we talked about. I think, all three cases are very similar
because, the founders have a strong product vision and they want to keep the integrity
of the product that they envisioned. Whereas Zuckerberg wants to make as much money
as possible. He wants to reach a huge audience and they
want to push as many of them as possible so I think it’s quite coming from the top
of Facebook, yes. So it does seem like the idea of a stand-alone
headset combined with a culture shock between Oculus and Facebook lead to both the change
in direction and the exit of the founders. But there is one last person I wanted to talk
to before moving on. Hello, my name’s Blake Harris, I’m the
author of console wars which is a book about a battle between Sega and Nintendo in the
early 90’s and most recently I wrote a book called “The History of the Future”. The History of the Future is a novel that
chronicles the history of Oculus until the Luckey’s exit. In the process of working for this video, I read it on its entirely to get a more in-depth
perspective on how Oculus came to be and its culture and afterwards Mr Harris (the author
himself) agreed to give me some opinions on the current Oculus Quest dilemma and the clashes
inside Oculus I’m glad you noticed that because to me-
there’s this great commercial here, one person on the phone is talking about Frog
Insurance like, you know, for the animal that goes ribbit, and the other one is saying Fraud
Insurance for like fraudulent activities and they both are saying different things but
they say to each other “I think we’re saying the same thing”. “Just to be clear, you are saying FROG protection
right?” “Yeah FRAUD protection” “FROG protection”
“FRAUD protection” “FROG” “FRAUD” “FROG” “FRAUD” “I think we are on
the same page” “We are totally on the same page” And that’s how I felt a lot when researching
this book and I had the benefit of hindsight when I’m going through these old emails
and listening to these conversations because between Palmer Lucky, Brendan Iribe and Mark
Zuckerberg, the one thing they all had in common was incredible passion for VR, but
in terms of their vision they really did have pretty different visions, but they would always
show these different visions and see it as “oh, we’re saying the same thing”, even
though they really weren’t. And so, to your point you know, Palmer’s
vision was so grounded in affordability. The number one thing is that anybody should
be able to use this and do whatever they want with it, you know, modify it, his history
with mod-retro sort of explains that background. Brendan’s very much an aficionado of Apple
products and Apple products have closed systems, they’re more expensive than, you know, android
devices and they’re beautiful. Those are all good things but they’re not
typically affordable, and then Mark’s vision is sort of in between those things and it’s
focused more on what you’re able to do with it than the actual hardware. It was always very interesting that because
they had the passion for it, they all wanted to be on the same page but they really weren’t
as much on the same page as they seemed to think they were or as they seem to accept
at the time. Are you familiar with the tech crunch article
written about this? Um, a year and a half after Palmer was fired
from Facebook, Brendan also left Oculus and Facebook on terms that, you know I think it
was a mutual departure but it was clearly the result of Brendan not being happy with
the direction and Facebook’s sort of not really seeing things the same way and there
was that Tech Crunch article. And I’ve also spoken to Brendan since his
departure, and for him it kind of really go back to what I was saying earlier that he
comes from that Apple school of thought that products need to be pristine and beautiful
and really high-scale and high-brow and Facebook with Oculus Go, especially at the time, even
before Quest, really wanted to make it as cheap as possible and as affordable as possible
and that really clashed with Brendan’s vision for it. I should mention to help also explain where
Brendan was coming from that so many times when we would speak during my writing the
book, so many times we would speak while he was still at Oculus. He always felt that there was only one chance
to make a first impression, so if you’re trying to reach the mainstream audience, if
you have a product that isn’t amazing and perfect, then you’re gonna lose them forever
and so that’s why I even mention in the book that he was particularly not into the
google cardboard because that was the epitome of being affordable “VR” but it was definitely
an experience that I don’t know if anybody was excited to go back to. Whatever you think of Brendan or his vision,
I think the one thing you could say is that every product he’s ever put out it’s sort
of beautiful and really user friendly so I think it was only a matter of time before
that became a bit of a problem. Ok. So in that article one of the things the community
at large has discussed the most is this quote that Iribe was not interested on a Race to
Bottom in terms of performance. Would this quote refer to the Oculus Quest
and the direction of facebook putting resources towards of stand alone VR and the cancellation
of the Rift 2? No, I think that I understand why that quote
has gained a lot of traction and I think that that does reflect the perspective that Brendan
has shared with me since his departure, but I know he was really excited for the Quest,
like in his mind the Quest was very different than the Go and it was almost like two different
directions with Go and with Quest. He really did see Quest as this in between
piece between mobile VR and PC VR. Um, and the quest really does represent probably
what the shared vision between Brendan and Palmer more than anything, whereas the Go
is a little bit more affordable and Brendan saw that as a direction that could be getting
cheaper and that could be what’s going out to the mainstream and he saw that as a bad-
you know, as a race to the bottom. One more thing I would add is that Brendan
always expressed the importance to me of 6 DoF, so um you know, there’s even a line
in the book that Brendan wasn’t very excited about the Samsung product. The Samsung gear VR product and it’s sort
of condescending about it. The book implies that’s his opinion of mobile
VR, and he has told me since then and it is consistent with what he said, he said it wasn’t
mobile VR that was the problem, it was 3 DoF VR that was the problem. So, I think that because the quest has 6 DoF,
like that is not the race to the bottom in Brendan’s opinion. It seems to me at least that the new Oculus
headsets are the only ones trying to push the idea of making VR more accesible from
a cost perspective. Why do you think Oculus/Facebook is the only
company trying to do this? Is it a lack of tecnology? Is it a matter of ideology? Is it the fact the Facebook is the only company
with pockets deep enough to get there? Perhaps the simplest way to say this is that,
as the book makes clear, neither Palmer nor Brendan, especially John Cormack and Mike
Abrash, none of these people were power Facebook users, none of them were big Facebook fans
when they made the acquisition so the acquisition to them was not “oh, this Facebook is this
company who we love and agree in so many ways”. It was really about getting Facebook’s resources
to deliver this grand vision and so much of that is based about what you just said about
having deeper pockets so in my opinion the reason why Facebook is the only company that’s
trying to put out a $500, $400, $300 headset that has 6 Dof tracking and that can be the
kind of headset that a kid would open on a Christmas morning and fall in love with VR. It’s because they are the only ones who
have the money and are willing to make the investment and lose billions of dollars until
the point where it starts to become profitable. Obviously, HTC can’t do that based on their
investor calls. I don’t know the exact situation that they
are financially but they can’t subsidize the industry for several years. Valve could a lot more so than HTC but that’s
not really their brand and they also know their audience better, it’s hardcore PC
gamers largely and they’re gonna cater to that audience and give them the best of the
best, of the best. You know, I kind of think it’s very interesting
that the oculus Quest came out at a time when neither Brendan nor Palmer are still at the
company because part of the acquisition to Facebook was to get to this point where they
could put out a headset like this that could be this cheap and this technologically superior
and I guess the sacrifice they made was, I mean there have been many sacrifices to get
there and obviously personally they’re no longer with the company so that was a big
sacrifice. But I think, it’s not a surprise to me that
they’re both very happy with the Oculus Quest and I think that if you had told both
of them that back in 2014, “alright 5 years from now Facebook is gonna put out Oculus
Quest and they show the specs, but you guys aren’t going to be with the company”,
both of them probably still would’ve done it because they cared that much about getting
quest out there because it’s the only headset that seems to be capable of doing what you’re
describing, you know, that’s beyond the enterprise and beyond the hardcore gaming
audience and it really is trying to bring the cost down and attract new VR users and
enthusiasts. After all those trials and tribulations, it
does seem the current state of VR comes down to a clash between a vision of getting the
product right from the very start with all the cost implications of that or an iterative approach that risk burning out
people but could lead to that key product that jumps the industry back into the mainstream. But products speak louder than words so what
do the products say? I managed to borrow a Rift S for a brief test
and was surprised in several fronts. My only real point of comparison is the cheap
windows mixed reality I own and in that sense, the obvious spec improvements are evident,
such as a slightly better field of view, better ergonomics and the much, much superior tracking
but there are some details that disappointing me. Particularly that it was a bit… inconvenient. When I talked with Mike about the barrier
that is limiting VR adoption he had some interesting words to say: I think it’s price and accessibility. So, what people don’t want to do is they
don’t wanna spend time and effort setting up sensors running extension cables across
your room and adding PCI to USB cards to their PC’s to bump up the USB ports. They don’t want to do that, they want it
very easy and they want it to work on sort of relatively mediocre hardware and I think
that’s that Oculus is trying to do with the Rift S. And I am inclined to agree with him. Initially, I had not even considered the idea
of an Oculus or a Vive because of the price but ultimately I stuck with my cheap Windows
Mixed Reality in the long run because there was no way I was going to make VR a recurrent
part of my gaming routine if I had to setup based stations on my very tiny living room. One of my favourite aspects of my headset
is how I just have to plug two things into my PC and I am playing in a matter of minutes. The Rift S uses a superior version of the
same inside out tracking idea which means no base stations needed, but the headset only works over display port,
does not play well with HDMI adapters and is straight up incompatible with the way many
laptops are wired. I could not get it to work on any laptop I
own which is a huge inconvenience. Now the minimum requires of the Oculus Rift
S are not terribly bad, a GTX 1050 Ti is somewhat accessible but I have tried proving that if you have some
resistance to a certain type of motion sickness you can get away with some eyebrow rising
low specs for VR and I was interested to see if the Rift S would follow suit. Since I could not use my laptop I put together
a budget system with a entry level CPU and GPU. I have noticed in the past that some of the
best VR titles out there are extraordinarily well optimized To the point that you can easily get away
with playing on something more modest, and the Rift S did not prove to cause an exception
here as my modest GPU could keep up with the very high framerates. Just like with regular gaming you will need
better stuff for heavier games… but I could not shake of the bad feeling from not being
able to make this work on my laptop due to port issues. By contrast, I managed to make an appointment
to try the Oculus quest myself and wow… just. I seriously did not expect it. Not only is tracking the best that I have
personally tried but after playing around with VR without a cable to accidentally step
on I am having a hard time going back. And most people I spoke with were of the opinion
that was the right direction. I think that the Quest, I think it is the
form factor that is the most valuable in the consumer market in my opinion, like the self-contained
inside out tracking as soon as it becomes powerful enough I think, to me it seems to
be the form factor that I know I would want to use. I think Oculus Quest is the first headset
what we have that is quote on quote affordable and I imagine- you know, $400 is a lot of
money so I’m not gonna say that it’s cheap but it is the kind of thing that has a very
similar price to a console and it doesn’t require a PC. I think up until this point it has been very
hard, it has been a very hard sell to the mainstream audience because even when the
rift goes down in price an the Vive goes down in price, you still need the PC and that’s
not only very expensive to the average person, but it’s also kinda confusing. I’d like to think that the Oculus Quest
is the first thing that out of the box is a somewhat affordable experience that the
mainstream audience could really get into. During my time with the Rift S, my favourite
experience was to share it with others. When done well VR is not only a new dimension
of gaming but for a pathway for new different people to discover the joy of gaming. When started on this video my eyes were on
the Rift S alone. Being able to access games from several sources
beyond the Oculus store and custom beat saber songs was too important. But after some of the setup issues and trying
out VR without wires I am inclining more towards the quest as a consumer, specially now that
it seems to be getting custom songs and PC streaming capabilities. For VR I might just want something that works
and I am willing to bet this is an important things for many other people outside the super
hard core VR entusiast crowd. So both of these headsets are still too expensive for me to recommend as budget options But the only one that seems to have a chance to improve this and get VR into the mainstream is Facebook and that is a scary thought. I can’t say enough nice things about Oculus
Quest, I don’t know if I would recommend it to people though! Because, because of the Facebook aspect. I don’t know what data they’re collecting
so I think that’s a valid concern. But, just in terms of a piece of hardware,
and obviously the software that underlines it, I’m 100% blown away and so impressed
by it and I do hope it’s a very popular item this holiday season and that it helps
bring it to a more mainstream audience. It’s definitely the best chance VR has had. Honestly, I understand the sentiment. Even ignoring the constant scandal just on
this year alone my facebook and separate Instagram password have leaked online which is can always
be a panic-inducing situation for anyone. Lucky for me the damage was contained because I use Dashlane. Dashlane is like swizz army knife of internet
security. It protects your passwords, secures your internet
browsing with a VPN and alerts of you of major leaks… all in one software and cheaper than
the 3 software you would usually need for all that. With Dashlane pro you autogenerate strong
passwords and store them in encrypted storage that only you have the password to so no need
to worry about Dashlane getting hacked. It includes a VPN that you can use to secure
you’re connecting on public wifi or to access region locked software as I did for PUBG lite and it has this dark web monitoring software
which keeps saving my life because Facebook CAN NOT. STOP. LEAKING. MY PASSWORDS EVERYWHERE. Where was I? Oh yes. Go to www.dashlane.com/lowspecgamer for a
free 30-day trial or use the code “lowspecgamer” for 10% off discount on an annual subscription. Thank you to Dashlane for warning me every
time my passwords get leaked and for sponsoring this video and you for watching.

100 thoughts on “Why is Oculus the only one still trying to make VR cheaper? (Oculus Quest and Oculus Rift S)”

  1. The price of VR headsets it Will kill the industry. Because you need a good computer and others stuffs… 200 dulllazzz and everyone Will buy it..kkkk

  2. It's a situation like, do you want more people giving you less money, or less people giving you more money? The difference between these choices, and why the former is better, is that you'll have a constant influx of less money from the more people, causing you to reach, an even surpass the amount of money that the total of less people with more money, have given you whereas you'll run out of the less people, so you'll only get a set amount from them.

    Essentially, you'll make more money in the long run if you're product is a bit cheaper, because there are more people in the world with less money, than people with more.

  3. It was annoying how they didn't mention how OLED was overpricing their products with their monopoly on the tech, also, screen burn.

  4. I opted to get a second hand Oculus Rift + touch bundle. Of course if you go this route make sure to check that the seller is reputable and includes images of the actual device. But yeah I think the fact the "enthusiasts" will be upgrading to other headsets soon will also drive down the price.

  5. Honestly, VR is a downstream kinda market, valve makes the amazing But expensive stuff, and oculus makes more acessible stuff.

    Because oculus expands the market, and valve pushes the limits.

  6. right regarding easy setup, wireless, powerful, 6DOF. A full blown gaming PC is not mass appealing especially in comparison to a PSVR price point. But the latter is already old tech with well know drawbacks but with amazing games available. My only concern regarding Oculus Quest is just performance but Oculus already achieved a level of game quality that is enough to enthuse people. I'm happy that we are reached that level for VR!

  7. Also drift.

    Drift will happen because nothing is there to "confirm" the absolute position (ie the oculus sensors) and thus the Joycons are awful Wii Remotes for pointer games.

  8. Definitely getting a Quest once they emulate Go apps and games. Oculus said they would do this later this year.

  9. My question is: if the Oculus Quest is the future of VR and what is expected to get there masses on board to finally experience, and want VR. Why is it the ONLY mobille 6DOF headset? I feel like its a huuuge advancement to make 6DOF mobile and that every VR company would be rushing to push out a copycat…but why hasnt that happened?

  10. I don’t get why oculus is putting out 3 products that are all non-enthusiasts.

    And I personally feel like there’s too many companies focused on budget VR. All the VR I can find at Walmart is budget options, which seems to be a large reason why most people think VR is a passing fad.

    If our only experience of smartphones was the budget options and large companies like Apple and Samsung weren’t focused on putting out high end quality products, flip phones might still be mainstream

  11. I am very glad that oculus is making more affordable headsets that still hold up in quality. I see many people at an enthusiast level complaining about oculus appealing to general consumers, but I have seen so many people get into VR recently with the release of the Rift S and quest. I would not like it if oculus went and focused exclusively on the enthusiast market, it feels like people complaining about this are often disregarding general consumers who do not have the budget to afford a $1000 headset and do not care enough about VR to justify spending that much. The lower price and quality bring interest to VR as it is easier to get into, easier to setup, and the price is far more justifiable to those interested.

    Enthusiasts are not the only people in the market. Not everyone is able to afford to drop $1k on a headset while also needing a high end computer for it. I feel some may argue semantics with me like "oh you can get a computer on a budget if you do X, Y, and Z", but a general consumer is not going to go to those lengths to get into VR, they will not care enough to justify that. VR will not grow by every company focusing on enthusiast consumers, competition at the general consumer level is highly beneficial to the market as it is actively drawing in new users, which benefits the market by providing new users able to provide a larger audience for VR developers.

  12. As an Oculus Enthusiast, I love what Oculus is doing, making it easier for VR to reach the masses and for more people to join this amazing community. Better tech will come with time, but I love the people I meet in VR, and the more people I can meet with this amazing platform, the better.

  13. Though the Rift S is aimed at trying encourage consumers to VR, the technology has to overcome many factors going against it. I mainly sim race on triple screens. I would very much would like to get into VR but a proven reliable technology with the spec that would suit at a reasonable price is still not quite there yet, 3-5 years maybe needed still. The type headset that would suit my niche market (I don't speak for everyone) is a large FOV (170+), high resolution crystal-clear image with minimal/obsolete SDE, Inside-out Tracking, good speakers, hand-tracking and WiFi/ Bluetooth connection. I imagine this type of headset wouldn't be aimed at the "average consumer" like Oculus/Facebook is targeting, but the cost for this type of headset needs to be reasonably-priced. This is where the technolgy will eventually end up if VR stays around.

  14. I just traded my Xbox one x for a Oculus Quest.

    After owning a gear VR and a Oculus "go" and getting bored of them very fast, the quest is leagues better IMO. I keep going back to play games, my nephews (7-17 years old) can't wait to play it when I see them.

    I think this is finally the headset that goes mainstream (after a small price reduction).

    10:30pm "rec room" paintball games are a blast!

  15. Valve is developing their flagship VR title which is HL:VR, so maybe this will change something

    And Valve Index is expensive because it is really high quality and in my opinion it's the best VR headset

  16. I tried a dell windows headset and had a terrible experience. Hoping to have better luck with the second hand oculus go I just bought…

  17. Standalone VR is the key to the future. Most people won't have powerful PC's and will want an all in one experience. The key is to make the experience powerfull, immersive, and much cheaper. When the platform is purchasable for a wide consumer base, you'll see Triple A publishers and bigger companies latching on.

  18. News just came in. Oculus Quest sell more headset in 4 month than the Rift ever did in 3 years. Look's like the strategy work.

  19. WMR is pretty damn cheap.

    Also, Valve isn't doing it because Oculus is doing it for them. They are the high end market, and Oculus is handling the accessibility market.

    One is focusing on advancing technology, and the other is focusing on widening the market. They actually complement each other.

  20. 15:46 If the supposed betrayal is being felt by consumers, what about having a diversified product portfolio – with a mix of enthusiast and commodity-grade offerings? Have one team focus on making the product that gave the company their name in the first place, and another for making the product that will bring in the broader audience.

  21. because they want to make low end vr accessable to everyone, they want more people to be intrested in the idea of vr so more higher end vr can be made in the future. around half of the vr consumors are oculus because its cheaper, which is good as its keeping allot of the vr community alive but keeps newer people coming in. then if people really want the higher end they can go for vive or index. its just simple marketing really.

  22. i never considered buying vr til quest. now i own it and considering buying high end pc vr headset plus upgrading my pc to high specs. do you see where i am going to? quest is just an appetizer

  23. Good work on the video. Lots of detail went into this. Just recently bought Samsung Odyssey+ for $299.99. Got to say yes it has some quirks and slight tracking annoyances. However, the small problems are by far outweighed by a few hundred dollars. The screen is really nice though (90hz) for $299 especially when comparing PSVR. Biggest issue is that it murders your forehead and you will want to purchase a $20 dead strap for the unit from studioformcreative. Also I have to restart PC to get it to connect with my PC. I think this issue isn't as common though. Lucky me. The primary reason I didn't buy the Oculus though is its ties with Facebook.

  24. facebook is doing the right thing. before there can be any ideas about enthusiast products VR first needs to become fashionable. it needs to attract the masses and become popular. VR need to achive the status of people thinking "everyone needs to own a device" and when it becomes normal and accessable than future VR devices can become enthusiast with exclusive features and at a pricepoint of 1000€ but for now sony and oculus are doing the right thing by selling cheap.

  25. Even most current high tech isn't actually good enough for good VR experience. Still they try to make them and when they have to use newest tech there, it is also expensive. VR would only get cheaper when our tech level is high enough that you don't have to use the most expensive tech to make a VR headset. It might work out in 20 years or so.

  26. Because the tech isnt quite there (need high res and refresh for it to be enjoyable and avoid motion sickness) and they prefer high margins with lower sales numbers. Done. Imho.

  27. Why are you only talking about Oculus being the only one's make afordable VR? What about Samsung? I have the Odyssey plus and I love it.

  28. Honest who want vr to keep getting worse, HTC are just idiot's who don't know how to price anything. Vr has barely begun and oculus is already cutting corners.

  29. I’m not a fan of government actions, but Facebook needs to be broken up, the fact that the VR platform we’ve all wanted for years is here, but we are hesitant to even try it because it’s controlled by Facebook, should tell people how sketchy Facebook is.

  30. VR is the future of entertainment. There is no doubt about it. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool, like those who mocked the TV and CD. It will just take time.

  31. honestly i just flat out ignored VR until i could get the best without compromising on quality with so many options it came down to looking at the top of the line at the time.

  32. Obviously, everyone is trying to position themselves and get as large a piece of the pie as possible on the upcoming explosive gaming market. Nintendo Wii showed the public's hunger for console games, entertainment, news, and video in an all-in-one platform. Big companies are betting that VR will be the medium of choice to deliver what people want . . . CONTENT. Content is why you see Oculus capable of playing streamed content such as Netflix or Amazon Prime. (IMO what Amazon envisions is an entire family placing on their VR headsets to spend the evening "at the mall," shopping and going to a movie.

    I suspect the analysts are right, low cost VR is the way of the future. Heck, it is quite possible that professionals will practice their trade via streamed VR. You can visit your therapist, doctor, or lawyer via a VR headset. Social gatherings will be via VR headsets rather than going over someone's house. Mass market VR is the future.

  33. my mum said spending £400 on the rift s because she still believes its a gimmick anything i can do to change her mind apart from showing her when i get one

  34. Its honestly fantastic, I just bought my first PC VR headset (Vive) and plan on sticking with it. But I feel Quest is doing gods work by bringing more players into VR. I was playing pavlov just the other day with a bunch of Quest users who were competing just fine. I really hope this accessibility bring tons more people and therefore projects to VR but also hope that games remain super cross platform. Especially multiplayer ones!

  35. Isn't it ironic how the VR community went from "The Oculus headset is too expensive! It was supposed to cost around $300 USD!" to "We are not interested in a cheapass $400 USD headset!".

  36. WMR headsets routinely go for $200-250 on ebay and the like and have had great tracking now that software has been ironed out. first six months were rough though, and the headsets vary in quality. do not get acer's offering. it's crap. dell's is really nice.

  37. I run a VR lab at my Univ. We have many different HMD's and I personally like the Quest. To date however, I have had 4 people in my lab who've come back later to say they returned the Quest. Using a PC VR system spoiled them too much.

  38. This was extremely well made and insightful. Highly recommended. Great job. It took great insight and talent to produce this! Five stars!

  39. Well, there's always Microsoft. It may not be very good, but WMR headsets go for as low as $150 and are pretty great if you haven't experienced the Vive/Rift yet.

  40. The issue is with cost is that when doing pc vr you already have to have an at least 600 dollar gaming pc, hundreds of dollars in other accessories too, and the extra 400-1000 dollars for a headset is a bit overbearing for a niche product.

  41. ever since i watched Ready Player One, the idea of every person can afford a VR device is almost impossible. How cheap can this device finally be to make it more accessible to the masses? Only time will tell..

  42. 17:00 Somewhere in this video, long video, should be the facts about big companies that destroy lil guys.

    FB is Big Brother as well.

    And does Virtual Reality make people crazy? Or should I say, disobedient?

    too much freedom?

    How long has VR been around?

    Since 1900s. lol

    Conspiracy Conspiracy!

    You know it is a conspiracy. Cause everything is.

  43. Do you really need an expensive high end gaming pc for VR? If you take the Oculus Quest and give it the memory and power to run the best VR games on steam and the oculus store, I can imagine you don't need a powerful pc. If companies like Sony would make a VR console just for all VR games, this would be the future. I don't care how good your 2D display is, immersive gaming cannot be beaten.

  44. And not forgot that, for example, here in Brazil, the only easy way to get a VR set, is with Playstation VR, most of the VR equipment need to be imported, and because of the price, our taxes could be a absurd.

  45. Facebook releasing a vr entertainment gadget at a lower cost than others in the market space for use in your personal space… that is covered in sensors to capture footage and sound in all directions. mmmmHmmmmmmm.

  46. all good but the 835 is crappy and cheap compared to the 845 or even 855 that was out at the time. 😀 that's where their margin is. the 2 year old SOC.

    Oh, and guess what, almost everyone is leaking your password 😀 Google, Epic, Twitter, you name it. Several major websites and services leak.

  47. Piénsalo nadie lo compraría y con la tecnología que te ofrece quien no las querría sobre todo con la resolución y la precisión que tiene al manejo es brutal ?

  48. If you have not personally used the quest you can’t really talk meaningfully about it. It’s like a blind man talking about colors. I own the rift, ps great, and quest.

  49. I will never be convinced that the index is really worth 1000 dollars. It’s a fine headset, but no headset is worth that much

  50. I am dumb founded by the oculus rift founders their key concept was decent vr cheap and accessible. I think they are just butthurt they couldn't do it.

  51. Of course if theres only 1 vr brand making cheap vr headsets will make most money because many people want vr but cant afford over 1000€. there is much more people have less money to buy cheap worse headsets and less people who can afford 1000 e for vr headeset.

  52. They aren't, Sony is too, there are reports that the PSVR2 will come in 2 models next generation, one an entry level cheap tethered version & a higher quality wireless version.

    If anything VR needs to be treated like how consoles are launched, they typically cost as much if not more to produce then they sell for & the profit is made from software sales, its all about that install base. Its why PSVR has outsold everything in VR.

    Once gen 2 VR starts in around 2021 ish then we'll start seeing all the producers copying each others features that work. So across the board I expect the PSVR headband, WindowsMR inside out tracking, Quest wireless (this time with real PC/PS native connectivity) & a price point that's in the $350-550 range.Vive priced headsets will still exist but they will remain the minority as they are now, the price is ludicrous.

  53. The oculus sells it cheaper because they make it cheaper with cheaper qualities. Just look at the exterior design. It's also because it's owned and backed by a multi-billion dollar mega corporation called Facebook <— the main reason I won't get an Oculus.

  54. this video poses a very simple question as though its something complex. Answer: You get what you pay for. Better image quality and refresh rate on the Index, Better tracking on the index. Oculus devices are a mass market "good enough" product. If you want MORE than what an Oculus provides, you are going to end up paying for it. Personally I like the fact that there is a company out there offering BETTER hardware for vr experiences, though again, I wish it wasnt a solid Grand for the setup. The oculus product line is great for casual vr in my opinion. My main issue with Oculus is its connection to facebook and giving facebook control of cameras in my home. I was part of the Oculus kickstarter and still have my original Oculus Devkit, but Facebook's involvement has soured me to giving those people any access to my household. I have no alexa or google home or anything, and refuse to give a company who has ZERO qualms with invading my privacy any ACCESS to my privacy.

  55. No, HTC isn't giving us hardcore PC gamers what we want, we want:

    – No screendoor effect
    – +150' FOV
    – Less light glare/godrays

    But what do they do? They increase the screen resolution of the displays and focus on technology instead of the end user experience. sigh

    The analysis is spot on for HTC – they are rushing to feed an unsustainable market based on a few high paying customers.

    I can currently afford ANYTHING on the market, but here is the deal – I'm not an idiot. I know that in a year or two, there will be cheaper more capable products, and hopefully they have released a better HMD that give us gamers what we want, no screen-door, high FOV and better lighting.

    When you create a large market for VR and make sure that developers flood it with games, consumers buy more VR capable games and make an investment, and if they want to enjoy their games with better technology, they will buy new headsets and the more adoption == the more sales.

    It's simple fucking market economics – and Facebook/Oculus is the only one understanding this.

    My next HMD will probably be a Rift S – not because it fulfills my wildest dreams of FOV, but because it addresses two of the other problems i listed.

    If HTC have any dreams of me replacing my Vive with the barely better Pro, then they need to stop snorting crack and reduce the price by 70%. Keeping my gaming rig capable of playing the latest games will already cost me a pile of cash.

  56. This is a problem that has already been solved by phone companies for years. I don’t understand why these companies think they have to go one way or the other. Just look at apple. Every time a new generation of phone comes out, they put out many different models with different sizes, resolutions, storage, performance, and PRICE. Gotta have high and low end products. Why limit yourself by only going one way?

  57. As in what the video said – there are two groups – people that want to see more from technology pushes and those that just want to spend little as possible to get into VR. Both have a big voice and both have money they want to spend if you can give them something that best fit their needs. The problem is Oculus is only supporting one side right now rather than both as we see with other companies releasing a line of products instead (apple – Pro->S->E). If they would've done like a Quest Basic and a Quest Pro – you would have less concerns over all as it would be clear in what products customers could aford and what the technology can provide for a little extra bump if you already have the hardware for it.

  58. "Why is Oculus the only one still trying to make VR cheaper?" so Zuch and his master can spy on even more of you, the more homes with their cameras in the better right?

  59. It's the choice between buying a product outright or buying a subsidised product paid for through information obtained from its users via spyware. Oh right, it's information being 'leaked' when it comes to public attention… except it's right there in the TOS.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *