If anything I think the real issue here is one of expectations. The devkits for the Rift were $300-$350 and they pretty much told everyone that that was the price point they were shooting for, and the final version would be "in the ballpark".

Obviously, that's not a promise, so they are under no obligation to honor it. And said statements were being made when things were heavily in flux as to what the final specs would be and who would provide the parts and all that.

But I can see how someone who has been following the Rift's development for years would get a bit of a surprise when the final version costs twice as much as the devkits and the only real warning people had were some vague statements from Mr. Palmer on twitter in advance. Trying to fire-fight it with "You're getting it at a huge discount!" isn't helping either, and kind of smacks of someone taking lessons from PS3-era Sony in how to do PR.

If anything I think the real issue here is one of expectations. The devkits for the Rift were $300-$350 and they pretty much told everyone that that was the price point they were shooting for, and the final version would be "in the ballpark".

A couple of friends have echoed your sentiment, and I can appreciate that it came as a shock to many.

However, for people were paying attention to the hardware market the last few years, it should have been fairly apparent that the $350 mark was a pipedream. The DK1 came close to being on budget, but by the DK2 they were already cutting corners to keep the cost down (and it's likely they took a loss on the hardware, regardless). With the further upgrades to the commercial unit, there was no way in hell they were bringing it in for that.

Once there are a body of games being developed for VR, they can probably start subsidising the hardware with game sales, but at this early stage, it is what it is.

I suspect they took a loss on both DK1 and DK2, which makes sense when you want to get the thing in the hands of devs to make games to sell the real thing; unlike the consoles however, where MS and Sony charge various things to devs, taking a loss on the hardware doesn't make sense of a commercial release (and I've seen gamers argue they should do just that) - if I want to make a game for the PS4 I'm going to have to pay Sony some moneys, but if I wanted to make a VR game then I can load up my copy of Unity, make the game, throw it on the interwebs and not pay them a dime.

If they can pair up with developers and their curated game portal, then they could very much sell the hardware at a slight loss and maintain a sustainable business. However it would be a challenge and their long term survival would rely on staying at the forefront of the field while controlling enough of the market that other companies hesitate on jumping in full force.

A really affordable 'cockpit' seat for sim setups would also go a long way toward pushing the entire tech forward for a lot of users, especially if they have one that can quickly be deployed and then folded up for compact storage.

Well, just ran the compatibility check on my systems. While they suit my needs, they fail the test. Even if I wanted to get the Rift, I couldn't afford the $600 for it and the money to get newer hardware to run it. Hell, I plan to get a PS4 in February or March, even at $350, that is a tight price for me. Guess I'll just have to start playing the lottery and hope I win.

Well, just ran the compatibility check on my systems. While they suit my needs, they fail the test. Even if I wanted to get the Rift, I couldn't afford the $600 for it and the money to get newer hardware to run it. Hell, I plan to get a PS4 in February or March, even at $350, that is a tight price for me. Guess I'll just have to start playing the lottery and hope I win.

just a page ago you were saying it's not for you anyway, so why do you care about the price point?

I'm not about to spend $600 for a clunky face mask plus the God-only-knows-what I need to upgrade my computer. Screw that!

If you think the Vive is going to be cheaper you're deluding yourself. Vive can't afford to be sold at a loss, contains the same (or similar) internal hardware, ships with additional external hardware (the two "lighthouses") and will supposedly include the controllers as well.

Both the Vive and Oculus are high-end early-adopter toys, containing brand-new tech. They haven't gotten the economies of scale yet. Plus, considering Oculus is recommending a high-end PC to even run the Rift, not many people would be able to use it even if they could stomach the price.

That's not what I meant. I wanted to wait for the Vive to compare the two. I don't expect it to be cheaper.

I don't mind paying US$600 for a quality VR solution. I REALLY object to them tacking another $100 before shipping because... I dunno, they hate NZ or something? And as for $140 for shipping... unless John Carmack is delivering it by hand, that is completely fucking extortionate.

Resolution was only 1.25 times higher than DK2, but looked twice as good (two 1080x1200 panels)! Maybe better pixel shapes/layouts? Maybe better leses to distribute more pixels to the central viewing region?

Is it high enough to get rid of the damnable screen door effect?

just a page ago you were saying it's not for you anyway, so why do you care about the price point?

Because it shows it is a niche market as you have to have the money and powerful enough computer. If I had wanted to get it I would have to spend $600 on the Rift, and then upgrade my graphics card, processor, and memory on both my desktop and laptop in order to even use it at its full power. Don't get me wrong, I bought a PS3 at $600 when it launched, but even with that I ultimately sold my N64, Dreamcast, GameCube, PS1, PS2, Xbox, and PSP as well as all the games that weren't PS1 or PS2 and I still paid $200 out of pocket to get it. The rift is going to be for the hardcore gamers who have the financial stability to blow $600 and have powerful computers. The casual gamer or console gamer can't afford it.

After the newness wears off you are stuck with the practicality of it. Is the consumer market going to be big enough to warrant spending resources on developing a game for it?

You're right, I have no interest in it as a gamer, but the pricing and uncertain variables makes me also not see it as a viable device to develop for.