Well ones thing's guaranteed, I certainly won't be basing my opinion on anything I've read in your posts!
Oculus also have a studio. Let's not let that get in the way of anything.
You have a downer on Oculus, and Vive is the saviour of the VR, nobody can say anything to counter it and we're just idiots who believe what we read, while you have a more informed, deeper understanding with your business degree, so I'm out of here. Good luck with whatever you get, if anything.
Most of my opinions have nothing to do with my degree. In the last 8 years of running my own business, I've learned that I didn't need a degree to do it. In fact, I wish I hadn't spent the money on it. Lol. Very little of it actually has any real life practice.
And yes, they are making their own studio, but that still means they run the risk of the Oculus being limited only to their in-house games. The ideal scenario for the Oculus would be to get developers excited about developing for it, that way they can guarantee a wide arrangement of software for their hardware, and as a result, more sales/wider adoption.
In my own opinion, IF I was marketing the product for the first time, I would want as many people as possible to adopt it, and thus ensure the interested of the big game developers. I would do away with the "package", remove the Xbox 1 controller, and possibly EVE Valkyrie to lower the cost of the hardware, and depending on cost, being backed by a giant like Facebook, sell it at minimal profit, or even at cost. Removing the Xbox controller and EVE Valkyrie alone, based on retail prices would drop the price by at least $100 USD, and lowering the profit margin, perhaps even eliminating it completely, might lower it a few bucks more.
A lot more people would be willing to lay their hand on it for under $500 bucks, which would mean wider adoption, which would mean big game developers would take a huge interest in developing with it in mind.
Hell, I would have talks with CCP to maybe include a short "Demo" of EVE Valkyrie with it for free, instead of the full game. That way adopters could try firsthand what VR is like, will probably buy EVE Valkyrie, and will ecstatically boast everywhere just how "awesome" it is. New would-be adopters would be moved to check it out, and having a decent price-tag might just entice them to buy it.
I made a 100k investment into my business, and as of this year, my company is bringing in a 7-figure gross income, in a space of 5 years. I like to think that I'm fairly knowledgeable on how to go from a factory worker to running a fairly successful business model.
Like I said, if the costs are so high that they are making "no profit", do away with the bundled items to lower costs, and thus, lower prices.
In the end, I will get one or the other. Right now I am leaning towards the HTC Vive, but I might end up with the Oculus. Who knows?
Here is a prediction: Right now Oculus is taking advantage of the eager early adopters and are making an actually hefty profit on their hardware. If not the month it releases, I predict that about a month after release once the HTC Vive is in the market (depending on its price) the Oculus will be priced at $399.99
And all the people buying their "we're not making profit on the hardware" hoax will then buy their hoax of "we are actually losing money on this hardware, because we love you so much we lowered the price to our loss".
Lol :3 by the way, I hope you're not taking this as an argument, because it's not. I have a lot of experience with how a business works, how buying wholesale goods work, and how pricing works at the corporate level. Any retail price you pay expect the real cost to be no more than half that, if not less. We buy about 1m worth of different parts and goods per year between all of our contracts, and when you buy in such large volumes, the prices are ridiculously, stupidly low. If we owned our own manufacturing facilities it would actually be cheaper, since we'd be cutting out the middleman. The initial expense would be greater, that is, the acquiring of the facilities, personnel, etc etc, but in the long run, it would be much cheaper and more profitable.
Oculus is making their own hardware, so their initial expenses are much higher. If they were not backed by Facebook, then the price-tag would be excusable. After all, they somehow have to recoup the costs of its initial manufacture and have to still make money for continued operation. In this case though, Facebook has the resources to price the Oculus at a decent price-point, albeit possibly taking a small loss: but a loss that would be very much covered by increased sales and adoption.
Either way, like I said, I will be getting one or the other, but I will be waiting until both the Vive and the Oculus are released.
This reminds me of when Nvidia/AMD priced certain "flagship" cards at $800-1000 a few years ago, only to literally drop the price by $200 dollars literally 30 days later. Early adopters got screwed.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
