Oculus Rift price drops to $400

How cheap does a VR headset and motion controller have to be before you’ll consider purchasing it? Facebook is hoping the answer to that question is right around $400, it seems, as the company is dropping the price of the Oculus Rift and its associated motion controller to $400 for the moment. That makes this the cheapest VR headset on the market, at least for as long as the price cut lasts.

The price drop in question is officially just a temporary drop to see how the headset performs, but it may well become permanent if this is what finally motivates people to buy headsets in large numbers. The Oculus Rift previously cut prices back in March, so this is a rather quick turnaround on further drops; feel free to add your own doom-and-gloom explanation in the comments, if you like. Let’s not forget that Oculus lost a founder and has been embroiled in legal troubles for most of the year.

Source: Fortune
SHARE THIS ARTICLE
Code of Conduct | Edit Your Profile | Commenting FAQ | Badge Reclamation | Badge Key

LEAVE A COMMENT

32 Comments on "Oculus Rift price drops to $400"

Subscribe to:
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most liked
Reader
Korbenik

and then theres still the idea that I would much rather have an affordable connect IR motion detector that detect movement in every pixle to reconstruct into a motion control device they use in movie to create motion profiles more quickly then animating. Being able to have a 360 degree camera with IR sensing like the connect to me IS the next cutting edge step. AR and VR hardware hype will pass way before anyone even comes out with a game. And at that point I would expect any in current development to involve IR cuepoints as well as another option because for companies that get to see engines before theyre released to the public its just the obvious path.

Reader
Korbenik

The device is too cheap. The Idea that VR is the next cutting edge future device is bull.
AR is the next best thing.
Currently the device you think first about is the google glass or even better the hololens
A device that costs 3000 to 5000 dollars built by the richesst companies able to provide research and development costs.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/hololens/buy

However there is another company that specilizes in only designing AR devices that is a serious contender that can make assurtions that it can do even better then expensive devices like the hololens in some areas.

The meta 2 – a device that only costs 1000 dollars with a future development plan.
https://buy.metavision.com/

But even the meta 2 is not good enough. The goal is to eventually as they explain be able to use AR in a small device thats as normal to wear as reading glasses.
These things wont happen this year but they hope to get to that level in the next 1 – 5 years.

But currently the log horizon, dot hack, and sword art fans want an mmo thats got the quality of a truely caprica vision where you can tell little difference between real life and the game world. With full movement or providing alot more lifelike scenerios.
However content creators don’t currently have anything remotely close to that dream.
And there isn’t even currently a triple a budget game that costs 100 to 500 million dollars made by a reputable company with experience.
Even if they were games take 3 to 5 years to develop.
The hardware will probably get to that more worthwhile realistic point way before the software companies become available.
But because of the extremely high price to entry from research and development
These devices are not currently being made to fullfill your mmo dreams instead they’re made to sell to businesss that could assist in training for projects or doctors that would have the funds to buy devices in the multiple thousand rangers.
Its not a consumer product
Its a gimicky toy
I’m not too sure many consumers are willing to shell out 400 dollars for a prototype that isn’t truly what they want.

Reader
Reselect Name

Isnt the real problem there is no games for it?

Reader
Robert Mann

For the current stuff? I won’t. Give it 5-10 years, and maybe.

Reader
Utakata

I’m still waiting till I can buy them in the dollar store, either in Elvis or Elton John flavors. <3

Reader
Loyal Patron
Rottenrotny

Aaaaaaannnnd still not interested.

PurpleCopper
Reader
PurpleCopper

seems kinda desperate. The Oculus is the bastard middle child of the VR family.

Vive has better quality, and the PSVR is cheaper.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Jack Pipsam

Only one I’ve ever considered was the Gear VR because it was cheap, even that hasn’t swayed me so far.

Reader
Danny Smith

Honestly the price aint the issue. The term “falling for the VR meme” exists for a reason. Without tactile sensation its a monitor on your head and effectively a wiimote in your hand. I’ve had about as much faith in it as i did the project natal reveal of the kid with the skateboard going “xbox…scan!” and we all know how that went.

Until we get devs making real videogames instead of tech demos on a level comparable to the numbers of at least a handhelds first party output then its just going to remain a gimmick that people get super butthurt about when people “be haters” for their monetary investment.

Show me a wave of good games and i’ll be interested. Right now its probably got more uses 5 years from now in medical and industrial applications, not as another form of the great wagglan scourge.

Reader
MeltWithYou

I like the idea of VR/AR contacts or glasses that are, well, basically regular glasses…once it gets there, ill jump on board. Yea i know i know, scifi at this point, but maybe one day.

TBH, i haven’t seen anything id consider mind blowing come out of the VR industry to drop 400 for the novelty of owning one. I wish it was the hot thing. I wish it was mind blowing.

Reader
Malcolm Swoboda

Its not too scifi as long as it can network with more powerful computers. And that’s not at all impossible. Now, signals so close to your eyes for so long… I dunno.

Reader
Dreema

How cheap does a VR headset and motion controller have to be before you’ll consider purchasing it?

Probably free as I find the whole VR craze to be a lot of boring hype. If someone gave me one completely free of charge, I’d probably use it a couple of times just to see what all the fuss is about, but actually paying money for it? No thanks. Not to mention that $400 is a heck of a lot of money. Maybe when the price drops to a tenth of that, I’ll have a look and see what it’s like.

Reader
Schmidt.Capela

How cheap does a VR headset and motion controller have to be before you’ll consider purchasing it?

About $100 for me. Because I doubt I would use it for anything besides flight/space sims and driving games, and those aren’t even close to being the main game genres I play.

Reader
Arktouros

You don’t need to drop the price when your product is actually selling. It’s why HTC didn’t lower their prices the last time and I’d be surprised if they lowered them this time. Oculus has basically zero commercial presence and is trying to race to the bottom where they’ll have to compete with the PSVR that does their product well enough, is cheaper and runs on a cheaper rig over all.

Racing to the bottom of price accomplishes or helps nothing. There’s always going to be hold outs who expect it to be cheaper and even then you’ll still run into the real VR issues such as play space limitations and lack of quality content on the device. Expecting people to buy a device in the hopes that it’ll attract quality developers for it is putting the cart before the horse. Imagine Nintendo trying to sell the Switch and then saying, “Oh, well if enough people buy the Switch we’ll develop a Zelda game for you in 3-5 years.” it just wouldn’t happen.

There’s just really nothing compelling in VR currently worth the price or the effort that the money couldn’t or wouldn’t be better spent saving up towards a Gen 2 headset where we’ll likely see better titles released.

Reader
Bryan Turner

Oh boy! Let me know when the item drops to the price of an entry quality LCD Monitor and the Rig required to run it drops to roughly $300 which is what a spent at New Egg for my last build your own PC.

If I had money I’d be playing on a Counvil dropping $60 plus a week on new games, as opposed to spending $15 to $30 a week on various subscriptions and cash shops.

Reader
Patreon Donor
Kickstarter Donor
Loyal Patron
Stormwaltz

VR seems well along the path scouted by 3DTV — it’s a technological dead-end. And I don’t think price is the root issue. People will happily shell out for TVs bigger than they need, or the latest marginally-improved console hardware.

What kills VR, I think, is that it’s ultimately an experience for one person alone. Like 3DTV, it’s people sitting with their heads encased in hardware, unable to interact with those sitting right next to them. It’s a fundamentally isolating experience, antithetical to the sort of casual, living room socialization that make television and console gaming an activity for friend groups and families.

Reader
Arktouros

What are you even on about? Technology wise it’s a dead end? It’s literally gated by technology because trying to display higher and higher resolutions requires better graphics cards and processors that are even available today on a mass market level.

3DTVs encase people’s heads in hardware? It’s glasses dude. I wear glasses all day and somehow I manage to interact just fine. While social experiences are important, you can have shared social experiences in VR in new ways. Programs like Big Screen let you actually virtually LAN party up with others.

Reader
Patreon Donor
Kickstarter Donor
Loyal Patron
Stormwaltz

Fair. My comment about encasing your head thing was more about VR and earlier models of 3DTV, which had bulkier, expensive glasses. That’s the first thing I think of re: 3DTV — that I’d have had to shell out to buy a bunch of extra pairs of glasses so everyone in the family could watch (we have three kids)… and then pay even more if we wanted to invite friends over. The glasses-based tech seems to be dead, as no one’s making them anymore. Maybe the next approach will be more successful.

I considered it when Oculus was on Kickstarter. But like I said, I have kids. I’ve long since learned that I can’t disappear into a world that completely replaces my sight and hearing; I’m on call even when people are supposed to be asleep. That’s why I think VR is a dead-end; as a head-encasing, all-encompassing sensory replacement, it makes it easier to communicate with someone on the other side of the continent than with the person next to you. I think that’s a big social hurdle to overcome.

Augmented Reality using Google Glass style wearables seem far less problematic to me.

Reader
Schmidt.Capela

3DTVs encase people’s heads in hardware? It’s glasses dude. I wear glasses all day and somehow I manage to interact just fine.

AFAIK those that already use prescription glasses are way less bothered by the need to use 3D glasses. Kinda like myself, I’ve been using glasses just about every waking moment since I was a small child, so things like protection glasses and 3D glasses never bothered me.

Also, while I wouldn’t call VR a technological dead end, there are too many kinds of experience for which VR is simply worse than traditional monitors with traditional controls. One of the reasons I don’t care about VR is that roughly 90% of the games I play are better controlled with keyboard+mouse, and VR makes using keyboard+mouse simply atrocious.

Reader
Arktouros

I found that to be a big issue with a lot of people who theorize about VR. They think in terms they’re already used to. They think of an RTS game and they go, “Clearly Mouse and Keyboard for this.” while I’m sitting here playing a VR RTS game able to scale and move the battlefield or point and click where I want units to go very organically. It’s surprisingly natural when done right but trying to convert a 2D experience to a VR one just doesn’t work usually.

miol
Reader
miol

Well, James Cameron with his new Avatar 2 film will introduce new 3D theaters without the need of 3D glasses, since that well known technology’s only hurdle, (its ~1/3 of initial resolution), has been finally compensated enough with affordable higher resolution projectors!

So 3DTV (3D-glasses free at some point in the future) isn’t a dead end either! ;P

http://www.inquisitr.com/4322065/avatar-2-movie-will-be-3d-but-will-not-require-3d-glasses-james-camerons-dream-come-true/

Reader
Patreon Donor
Veldan

Well, the biggest part of the cost was never the device, but rather the cost of the PC required to run it. So to me, while a step in the right direction, this doesn’t change anything.

Reader
Patreon Donor
Schlag Sweetleaf

$

ocu-worthless grift.gif
Reader
Armsbend

At this point, Oculus would be the last VR apparatus I bought out of the group. So, I wouldn’t pay anything.

Reader
RJB

Sony VR is mine

Reader
KumiKaze

With this price drop I am very tempted. Since Oculus is owned by facebook now, I am not too worried about the lawsuits.

Like others have mentioned though, I think the tech will only get better in future iterations.

Reader
Melissa McDonald

This is out of necessity. HTC’s Vive is pretty much whomping it in sales. The reality is that this is still essentially first-generation hardware. It’s approximately 1.5 megapixel resolution. A couple of weeks ago a company called VARJO announced their 70-megapixel VR visor, approximating the resolution of human eyesight. That is a very big leap. I’m holding out. My Samsung Gear VR rig may lack the horsepower of a core i7 PC, but it is about same resolution as the Vive and Rift. Gear VR has its own dedicated sensors, and it IS an Oculus product, so it’s actually pretty darn cool, and there are hundreds of hours of apps and experiences available now. I don’t think it can be beaten for the price.

But the greater issue is that the Rift and Vive are tethered with HDMI and USB cables, and tethering is anathema to VR experiences where room presence and moving around bodily is the killer feature. Both companies are set to release their wireless units perhaps by end of the year, even. Gear VR being cordless is also pleasant although it lacks room presence.

Simply put, wait for the next generation of hardware unless you have a Samsung phone, then give Gear VR a try, it’s inexpensive and pretty compelling.

Just keep in mind, we are still in the first hardware generation. These are like Flex/X2 56.6 kbps modems. Gigabit is coming :) it’s honestly amazing to me how far it has progressed, and how quickly.

Reader
Patreon Donor
Veldan

Hey Melissa, I need a new phone soon because my old one is… well, old, and I was going to get a € 250 one. However, for € 450 I could get a galaxy S7 instead and enter the world of gear VR. I would only pay the extra money for that though. I don’t need a powerful phone for anything else, because I got a powerful tablet that is superior for non-VR apps.

So I want to ask you as gear VR owner… is it worth it, paying a few hundred more to get access to the most affordable VR device (except the inferior cardboard)? The whole internet seems to agree that it’s worth getting a gear VR if you already have a compatible phone, but it’s hard to find opinions on whether it’s worth spending on beyond that.

Reader
Michael18

Or more like:

View post on imgur.com

Reader
FreecczLaw

As long as there aren’t more good and interesting games that are made for VR I won’t buy regardless. I guess it might become a vicious circle where developers won’t make games without a bigger market, but honestly with how many updates to gear where everything is always so expensive they will have to make the first move for me to dip my toes. I do really like the idea of VR though so I hope it happens soon.

Reader
MesaSage

Lowering the price is a start. They’re still ahead of the content curve. Get some compelling content out there and people will have their reason to buy. I mean, besides porn.

Reader
Oleg Chebeneev

Im still waiting for nextgen device with crystal clear resolution. Meanwhile, playing with my 3D Vision 2 setup

wpDiscuz