Oculus Rift May Force Game Prices Higher

[Andy Chalk]

Oculus Rift May Force Game Prices Higher

Oculus Rift executives say the heady experience of virtual reality may command higher prices than conventional games.

Those who have had the good fortune to play with Oculus Rift VR headsets seem awfully impressed by what can be done with it, and numerous videos floating around on YouTube attest to its immersive qualities. But there may be a downside for gamers in the form of higher prices for high-end VR experiences.

"There will be some who make casual, simpler experiences - maybe bite sized. There are going to be Indie developers that make bigger experiences. And there are going to be bigger teams that make really big experiences," Oculus CEO Brendane Iribe told GamesIndustry. "And some that we've seen early prototypes of... Well, we've seen some that, boy, would I pay a lot to get that experience in virtual reality."

"In VR, suddenly objects have value - and scale and size and depth and I think there will be opportunities for developers to monetize them," added Director of Developer Relations Aaron Davies.

Pricing will be up to developers but Iribe noted that "they'd better deliver if they're going to charge more than $50 or $60 for a game." Davies, however, said that instead of just jacking up prices, some studios may take a different approach, perhaps akin to the free-to-play model.

"The whole concept of charging a premium is somewhat outdated," he said. "It's not to say it's going to be upfront. It could be this is going to be an experience you get dialed into. We'll see how it monetizes. ... If you create content or an experience that someone is passionate about, you're creating a lifestyle for them. And they'll pay for that."

Source: GamesIndustry International [http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-01-13-oculus-games-may-command-a-premium-price]


Permalink

 

[Roxas1359]

And now I can see companies hiking up prices by doing a slap-dash Oculus Rift support feature, and then they'll blame it on the Rift entirely for it, making it a good excuse to place the blame on.
You know, like how fast food restaurants raised prices of food and blamed Obamacare for it, even though Obamacare was both not fully implemented nor had even started yet.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

So how much did it cost to port TF2 to Oculus Rift?


Now divide that cost by the 1 - 5 million games you need to sell to earn a profit.
THATS how much more the game should cost.

I know companies want to run at a profit, so they might want to increase the value slightly higher for profits' sake, but consider that Valve released this support for absolutely free and even included extra view types and stuff (the guy at the beginning of the video admits they are there but says he prefers the vanilla view)

Valve was able to swallow up the porting process with no expense passed on to the consumer, so if a game tells you it needs to increase the price by 1 dollar solely for Oculus Rift, and they are expecting 3-5 million sales, that'll be 3-5 million dollars extra profit for them.

If they increase it by 5 dollars, that'll be 15 - 25 million dollars extra profit.

If it's 15 dollars that'll be 45 - 75 million dollars extra profit.

For a game expected to sell 3 - 5 million copies, for work which Valve managed to complete for free.
I await with bated breath the first announcement of "We have to increase prices by 'X' to cover this new complex technology."

 

[Boris Goodenough]

Oh VR, how I hated you back on Descent 2, made me twist my head almsot clean off I hope you have become better, and lighter and more comfortable...

 

[NWJ94]

Yes, because is there is one problem this industry has its that games are just to darn cheep. 60 dollars is a such a steal, thank God the good companies put micro transactions in the game so I can pay more and make up the difference.

 

[Pyrian]

Heh. Here's a guy trying to convince money men to invest in working with his product by telling them they can charge more. Great.

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

New Technology? More expensive than old technology?

Colour me surprised.

Now it's time for my boring pseudo-rant segment!

Sitting here in my grumpy old man chair:

"I still think this won't be all that, this will just be an added luxury that regular game devs will not make proper use of, just like with motion controls, and just like those controls, they will slowly slide into obscurity"

Once we start entering the world of VR, we should stop talking about games and more about virtual experiences, because if the Oculus Rift does take off, then games will take a step back as a new medium and VR will be the new kid everyone ostracises.

As for gaming, I doubt it will be more than a novelty: using a controller to play the game still breaks the illusion of VR, not to mention scripted events, visual glitches and unique aesthetics.

But we have a long way to go with that yet (omni-mills/VR arenas, enhanced motion sensing and new controls).

 

[Callate]

Has anyone done any real studies about how people feel after using the Oculus for, say, a three hour stretch? "Ooh, cool" VR games are one thing, but if you're talking about some $60+ AAA experience, you're also presumably taking about at least six to eight hours of playtime, possibly much more. "Ooh, cool" can become unnerving and/or nauseating after more than an hour of play, especially if they indulge in the kind of slap-dash quick 3D conversions some people here have suggested. Zooming along at thirty miles an hour a couple of feet off the ground becomes a lot more unsettling in full VR 3D, methinks.

 

[Alterego-X]

What is the device supposed to cost? Because higher prices on games to justify a costly peripheral... I just don't see it catching on.

The Devkit was $300 and they are aiming for the same ballpark.

Below $500, I can definitely see it catching on as a gaming peripheral, but higher than that would be too much for gamers, so that would cost them a few million sales, if it would only catch on everywhere else in entertainment, science, and communication.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

Really, what is the cost to develop or convert a game to the Rift system? Many 3D movies have been shot mostly or entirely in 2D and post converted to 3D by the special effects team probably don't cost near as much as what studio execs say. Even those shot in 3D or CGI films rendered in 3D probably make quite a the profit off their stupid surcharge if they stay at the theaters for more than a week. I my opinion neither method is worth the extra $3.50 or the eye ache from your eyes forcing themselves to adjust to an unnatural focal point.

Hopefully, most publishers don't see Rift capable games the same way movie execs see 3D: a near baseless excuse to raise the price of a unit by 25%. It might actually be a new, better experience that would be worth paying $5 extra on a title, but it's extra hardware for the user to buy and a new tech that needs to be proven to the world. Oculus can't afford to let publishers put up a giant pay wall that stops people from trying the Rift out. And they shouldn't jack up prices if it becomes popular. I watched the 3D surcharge go up on movies as they got more popular and I was simultaneously happy and sickened that some people turn down paying extra for eyebleed-o-vision and some just give out they money without even asking if it's worth it. If someone invested in certain hardware, psychologically, they would be inclined to pay more on title that used the hardware to justify the purchase of said hardware. I know some of the greedier bastards on the publisher boards know this and are waiting to strike.

 

[HorrendusOne]

So the jist of it is the Director of Developer Relations is trying too sell off the idea of VR developing to devs by telling them they should charge more money for already over priced games?

 

[Razhem]

Last time I checked, one of the big reasons 3D flopped so hard was having to wear stupid headwear to use, what makes this thing so amazing to compensate for the whole stupid headwear snag?

 

[dragongit]

So, avoid games with Occulus Rift Support then? Gotcha. I'm susceptible to migraines as it is. 3D movies and playing the 3Ds are already painful if I play or watch for more then 2 hours. Having screens less then 2 inches away from your eyes will probably bug the shit out of me.

No thank you. I think the Rift is a cool idea in and of itself, but it's not for me. And the higher game prices makes it even less appealing.

 

[Tiamat666]

I don't get it. What exactly is the justification for higher prices? Once you have the Oculus Rift support coded into the game engine or library, there is practically zero extra cost for it involved. Everything else are neat gameplay ideas, just like they are being produced today.

 

[XMark]

Last time I checked, one of the big reasons 3D flopped so hard was having to wear stupid headwear to use, what makes this thing so amazing to compensate for the whole stupid headwear snag?

That was only one of the multitude of reasons that VR flopped so hard before. The other reasons were:
Extremely low-resolution LCD screens
Horrible refresh rate
Very small FOV
Headwear was way too bulky and heavy
Laggy head tracking
Primitive graphics
Low Framerate
Horrible controls (they hadn't really figured out control schemes for 3D games yet)

From what I've seen of the Oculus, and graphic and display technology in general, every one of those issues has been dealt with, so I'm pretty optimistic about it. I haven't had an opportunity to try out any of the dev versions yet, though.

 

[Scars Unseen]

News Flash: Games will continue to sell at the price the market is willing to pay. That's the whole reason that microtransactions and DLC exist in the first place: to fool people into paying more money than they normally would(with rare occasions of genuine value added in return).