Slashdot Mirror
Valve 'Comfortable' If Virtual Reality Headsets Fail (bbc.com)
VR headset developer Valve is "comfortable" with the idea that the technology could turn out to be a complete failure. Gabe Newell, head of the game studio, made the statement in an interview with news site Polygon. From a report: Valve is co-developer of the Vive VR headset with phone firm HTC. Mr Newell said, so far, interest in the technology was in line with its expectations and that some VR games had already sold well. In the rare and wide-ranging interview, Mr Newell said the advent of VR had much in common with the development of PCs in the 1980s. In both cases, he said, people bought technology without knowing why and discovered afterwards what they were good for. For the PC, he said, it was spreadsheets and businesses that drove the initial success. With VR, people were only starting to discover compelling uses as they experimented and took risks with the technology.Mr Newell said there were now about 1,300 VR-based applications on its Steam gaming service and about 30 of those had made more than $250,000 in revenue.
Valve failed.
I never really dug PC games, I've always enjoyed playing casually on console more. However, with Steam creating a pretty good, bonafide controller experience, I've gotten myself a little set-top machine. With Steam you pay more for hardware and less for software. I really like the Steam platform. I hope they can make the transition to SteamOS someday, and I could ditch windows.
Couldn't this article and the question asked to Newell be slightly rephrased along the lines of, "Is Valve relying on the success of its VR headset as its primary driver of growth?" The answer appears to be "no," which seems like the prudent business strategy to me.
Honestly, I don't see how VR could fail. It's a incredible feature for a lot of game (Try Elite Dangerous with a X52 joystick and I dare you to tell me otherwise).
Right now (and I emphasize on that), the only drawback is, well, money for both the consumer and the developer.
The specs needed to support VR is insane right now. Top that the +1000$ bucks for the VR and you'll scare more than a few. The cost for AAA game too is problematic as cannot use fixed cam to render only a part of the games. Top that the small number of people that can afford the VR and it's already unprofitable unless you're making a game that can play with or without VR.
I say, give it some time and, sooner or later, the VR will boom.
Elok
No, what he's saying is they make a tidy profit on every single one of those 700$ face-huggers. It makes no difference whatsoever if not a single more were ever sold. It was already a success.
They probably went into VR because if VR became the dominant way of playing games, it would eat their existing business. It's similar to why they made SteamOS as an insurance policy against Microsoft locking them out of the Windows platform.
I think it's safe to say now that VR won't replace PC gaming on a monitor, certainly not any time soon. But since their existing business is doing fine and they didn't invest more than they could afford, it doesn't matter for them if VR fails or becomes a niche product.
Personally, I think VR becoming a niche product is the most likely outcome. People buy expensive steering wheels or flight sticks to get more immersed in their favorite games and, for certain genres, VR can do the same.
If you read the Valve employee handbook, failure is an accepted part of trying. They are not afraid to fail.
http://www.valvesoftware.com/c...
You can see the quote in context here: https://youtu.be/kMpQWSqQFK0?t...
He's simply saying he VR is interesting and worth an attempt even if it fails. He also announces in the same interview that Valve is currently developing 3 distinct VR games. Not small "The Lab" experiences but full games. That doesn't sound like the actions of a company who believes VR is dead.