Sony sold just under 500,000 PSVR headsets last quarter alone: "PSVR Dominates Newly Resurgent VR Gaming Market"

It's the lower spectrum of high-end VR headsets. Samsung Gear represents low-end. PSVR is the LOWEST of high-end, followed by Oculus and Vive, both of which have higher resolution than PSVR. Basically, the media refers to the PSVR among the high-end (or higher end) VR competitors, so I just run with that. I don't care to call it anything. It's just a matter of categorizing it. There are plenty of examples of PSVR being referred to as "high-end" by the media. People like i_p_daily get tripped up over definitions like this because they are overflowing with salt, ever so quick to fumble for quotes from Sony or anybody else stating that the PSVR isn't high-end, when ultimately it doesn't even matter outside of simple definitions. Anyway, a simple google search will reveal what I'm talking about. There are countless examples. Here are just a few from the top of the list:

http://vrborg.com/best-headphones-for-psvr

Quote: "PlayStation VR is a high-end virtual-reality headset that has found its place in over one million homes worldwide."

https://uploadvr.com/sony-isnt-entirely-comfortable-psvr-market-lead-current-margin/

Quote: "With over one million units sold, Sony’s PlayStation VR (PSVR) is thought to be the current leader in high-end VR, possibly topping Oculus Rift and HTC Vive sales."

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-07-12-is-high-end-vr-a-dead-end

"Oculus looks to be bringing up the rear among the three major high-end VR options on the market, despite being a first mover and having the significant financial backing of Facebook. Through the first half of this year, tracking firm Superdata put the Rift's installed base at just 383,000 units, compared to HTC Vive's 667,000 units and PlayStation VR's 1.8 million."

http://variety.com/2017/digital/news/sony-playstation-vr-version-2-1202577817/

"Sony’s PlayStation VR has by far been the most successful high-end VR headset."

@joshrmeyer: Rift software won't even work on Xbox One. It's useless to do it. Rift games and apps use Win32. Xbox One consoles do not they use UWP.

@daniel_su123: how many xbox games are on uwp?

Excuses? I beg to differ. It looks like one of it's kind for a console VR at the moment, but comparing it to those of Ocolus Rift & HTC Vive was doomed from the start as far as anyone's concern.

Even if you consider that sony's psvr has comparable image quality with the rift and vive you cannot just forget about the tracking and the support for only one camera. As a headset it may be high end, but as vr setup it's mid end. Which is also the reason why it's cheaper and has more sales.

That sounds okay. It's likely leading the VR platforms too. But that's like saying that you're the best mini-golfer.

It's all just arbitrary definitions to me. Resolution, controls, libraries, etc. etc. The only reason I even use the term "high-end" is to separate the PSVR from low-end. Call it mid range if you want. Doesn't matter to me. The main purpose of calling it anything is to let the general public know what you're talking about--and not talking about. Here is a clear example of what I mean:

A few weeks ago my girlfriend asked me for a suggestion on what she should get for her husband for Christmas. She wanted to get him something video game related, but she doesn't know anything about gaming. Since I know what her husband likes, and have a pretty good feeling that he'd love VR, I suggested a PSVR (they already own a PS4). She didn't even know what a PSVR is, so I tried to explain it to her. She asked me, "You mean like that Samsung thingy?" (she's used one before). I told her no. It's better than the Gear, which is pretty low-end. "Low-what?" She asked. So, I made a distinction between the Gear and the PSVR/Oculus/Vive, saying that the latter are all higher-end VR headsets just to make the distinction. I could have said PSVR is middle range, but what would that even have accomplished? It gets even more confusing to non-gamers when you bring PCs and consoles into the conversation, as well when you consider that the PSVR has no direct console VR competition. So, the simpler the better. She doesn't game, and furthermore doesn't know the first thing about video games. She also doesn't care about any of that. She just wanted to know what was what so that she could get her husband a good gift.

In other words, outside of this forum, as in among the general public, nobody cares particularly about precise definitions of "high-end", "low-end", "whatever-end". They just want a simple distinction. I don't personally consider PSVR high-end. Again, I just use that term to separate it from low-end, which isn't even really VR when it comes down to it.

A piece of hardware that is exceeding Sony's own expectations, and at times selling out of stock is somehow a flop? Let me ask you this. Did the first consumer available smartphones sell millions in the first year? No. Did the first PCs sell millions? No.

My point is, everyone working on VR is already aware that the market is going to grow slowly. All companies know what they're getting into; they're financially prepared. Oculus and Sony in particular have gone out and said that this is a long journey and they will continue to support VR for a long time.

Sales are exactly where they are expected to be, or slightly ahead in Sony's case. Analyst predictions are never to be taken seriously. They do this with every form of tech, and they always get it wrong. When people thought VR was going to sell tens of millions in it's first year, that was the analysts saying that; not Sony, or Oculus, or Valve.

Okay. Go strap a 3D TV to your face and grab some Wii motes.

Do you get positional tracking? No.

Do you get head tracking? No.

Do you get a true sense of depth or scale? No.

Do you get 1:1 motion tracking? No.

Do you get advanced haptics? No.

Do you get all of those with VR? Yes.

3D TVs and VR are worlds apart. They aren't comparable whatsoever.

Try a VR headset (high-end), and you'll see exactly what I mean.

Man i love PSVR threads, they make my day.

Just a little prodding (pun intended) and the cows go crazy.

Trying to make high end into a "in the eye of the beholder" thing, to other cows accusing me of being salty by qouting it's head of development, and yet using several qoutes to say it is lol.

Keep'em coming it's making work go faster.

AKA "I have a pathological obsession with the PSVR, and cannot go five minutes without saying something bad about it."

Get therapy.

All high-end talk aside, let's just say it's great news like PSVR is doing well in the VR gaming world, I want to see VR gaming grow over time and as of now, PSVR is still a nice alternative if you want something simple and a budget wise, PSVR is for you. And it's VR exclusive gives it an edge over HTC Vive & Ocolus Rift.

I agree! When I'm in VR high-end talk is the last thing on my mind. ;)

Not many at the moment, they only recently opened it up to more processing power to be taken seriously. But I expect all VR games and apps will need to use UWP, like on PC for Windows MR.

Glad we agree it's not high end, now excuse me as i'm told that I need to get some therapy for telling it like it is LOL.

So, a $400 console add-on isn't even on the "high end" of the spectrum. lol.

Hey sweetie! Feel free to actually, ya know, talk to me directly instead of pussy-footing indirectly. Coming into my threads again and again and again and quoting me (again, indirectly) without having the balls to actually press that reply button under my name isn't really a good look. ;)

I do like my PSVR, I really do, especially for exclusive cockpit style games. But please don't call it highend. There is a huge gap between the PsVr and my HTC Vive connected to a PC rocking a 8700k and a 1080 Ti. RoomScale is a huge difference and the tracking on the Vive is much better. The PsVr is mid-tier at best. I do however really like the screen they used for it.

What's the attach rate for VR games? because ultimately the big publishers aren't going to pump money into VR if the current owners of VR tech don't buy games.

@blueberry_bandit: No no no no mr bandit. Sony expected 2M plus in the 1st few months not an entire year later. Don't forget, this isn't a stand alone device. This is a peripheral and support is dependent on how many are sold in relation to the main console. 2M with a 67M base is extremely low and considering attach rates for most consoles might be 5% or less for most games we're talking no incentive for devs to support it.

@kingtito:

Sony never said that. Only analysts have said that. Sales expectations are being met on every major VR headset. No one expected all the AAA companies to jump on right away. The VR community will continue to grow as prices come down, and support will continue for many years.

I wonder if VR can make this look any better as it's not a good look :(

@sonny2dap: The PSVR fanbase gets behind most VR games. There is a really dedicated following. A lot of them actively post over on the official (kinda) PSVR reddit. The devs post over there too. Bethedsa has an awesome VR community thread going on, for instance.

@blueberry_bandit: Yeah, I have no idea why lems are still saying that a random firm's sales prediction is/was the same as Sony's, when we all know that's not true. Pure lem desperation I suppose.

@i_p_daily: And yet you still don't have the guts to hit that reply button, lol. Posting memes and snickering in the background of all my threads makes you come across as pretty wimpy, dude. ;)

Sure they did and does it really matter? We're talking about 2M in 1 year with an attach rate of less than 5% and only getting smaller. History indicates that peripherals don't maintain support with such paltry attach rates.

Sure they did? Really, dude? You're really just making stuff up now? Post a single piece of evidence showing that Sony said the PSVR would sell "2M plus in the 1st few months". One single piece. And no, posting links to a sales firm not associated with Sony does not count.

I'll save you the effort, sweetie. You're not going to find that evidence, so you might as well just continue making sh_t up.

@commander said:

@i_p_daily said:

@joshrmeyer: No salt, but plenty of laughter, it must suck that you cows can't tell the difference, but the fact cows don't know what high end means i'm not surprised LOL.

@reduc_ab_ said:

@commander said:

Even if you consider that sony's psvr has comparable image quality with the rift and vive you cannot just forget about the tracking and the support for only one camera. As a headset it may be high end, but as vr setup it's mid end. Which is also the reason why it's cheaper and has more sales.

It's all just arbitrary definitions to me. Resolution, controls, libraries, etc. etc. The only reason I even use the term "high-end" is to separate the PSVR from low-end. Call it mid range if you want. Doesn't matter to me. The main purpose of calling it anything is to let the general public know what you're talking about--and not talking about. Here is a clear example of what I mean:

A few weeks ago my girlfriend asked me for a suggestion on what she should get for her husband for Christmas. She wanted to get him something video game related, but she doesn't know anything about gaming. Since I know what her husband likes, and have a pretty good feeling that he'd love VR, I suggested a PSVR (they already own a PS4). She didn't even know what a PSVR is, so I tried to explain it to her. She asked me, "You mean like that Samsung thingy?" (she's used one before). I told her no. It's better than the Gear, which is pretty low-end. "Low-what?" She asked. So, I made a distinction between the Gear and the PSVR/Oculus/Vive, saying that the latter are all higher-end VR headsets just to make the distinction. I could have said PSVR is middle range, but what would that even have accomplished? It gets even more confusing to non-gamers when you bring PCs and consoles into the conversation, as well when you consider that the PSVR has no direct console VR competition. So, the simpler the better. She doesn't game, and furthermore doesn't know the first thing about video games. She also doesn't care about any of that. She just wanted to know what was what so that she could get her husband a good gift.

In other words, outside of this forum, as in among the general public, nobody cares particularly about precise definitions of "high-end", "low-end", "whatever-end". They just want a simple distinction. I don't personally consider PSVR high-end. Again, I just use that term to separate it from low-end, which isn't even really VR when it comes down to it.

@ArchoNils2 said:

I do like my PSVR, I really do, especially for exclusive cockpit style games. But please don't call it highend. There is a huge gap between the PsVr and my HTC Vive connected to a PC rocking a 8700k and a 1080 Ti. RoomScale is a huge difference and the tracking on the Vive is much better. The PsVr is mid-tierat best. I do however really like the screen they used for it.

Dude, you have like the biggest chip on your shoulder. The only reason to place "high-end" next to PSVR, as I've said, is to distinguish between low-end. Call it midrange if you want. Who cares. The only people getting upset about this are PC VR fanboys and salty lems. There is no denying that the PSVR is in direct competition at this point with other high-end headsets, which the gaming media openly reports again and again and again. So, here, again, just a few links from the top of the list when you google PSVR+"high-end". Enjoy.

http://vrborg.com/best-headphones-for-psvr

Quote: "PlayStation VR is a high-end virtual-reality headset that has found its place in over one million homes worldwide."

https://uploadvr.com/sony-isnt-entirely-comfortable-psvr-market-lead-current-margin/

Quote: "With over one million units sold, Sony’s PlayStation VR (PSVR) is thought to be the current leader in high-end VR, possibly topping Oculus Rift and HTC Vive sales."

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-07-12-is-high-end-vr-a-dead-end

"Oculus looks to be bringing up the rear among the three major high-end VR options on the market, despite being a first mover and having the significant financial backing of Facebook. Through the first half of this year, tracking firm Superdata put the Rift's installed base at just 383,000 units, compared to HTC Vive's 667,000 units and PlayStation VR's 1.8 million."

http://variety.com/2017/digital/news/sony-playstation-vr-version-2-1202577817/

"Sony’s PlayStation VR has by far been the most successful high-end VR headset."

They really didn't. Link me to an article stating that they did; you won't be able to find it.

VR is different to most peripherals. It's the only gaming peripheral that fundamentally changes things from the ground-up. As such, it's one of the most complicated forms of tech in terms of hardware development. This means that everyone's expectations were set at a reasonable level. 2 million in 1 year for a device that costs $400-500 depending on bundles is not bad.

Sony, Valve, and Oculus are not worried about sales. They realized going in that it would be a slow rollout. That's why they have a long roadmap planned out. Oculus in particular are very vocal about this. They want 1 billion users of VR within 10 years. They get that we can't get there until we have a cheap standalone headset that delivers somewhat high-end VR experiences. That's why they're working on 2 standalone headsets. Oculus Go releases next year for $200 which is a really good price point, and comes with a 3DoF controller. Then the Santa Cruz (working title I assume) releases in 2019, which will be 6DoF and be identical to PC VR minus the processing power.

Also, take a look at smartphones. It took a decade for them to gain traction. And no, iPhone was not the first smartphone.

Tech takes a long time to have mainstream appeal. VR is still in it's early days and will get there eventually. Also, some people miss the point of AR, as if it's in competition with VR. Not the case at all. AR and VR are twins, and compliment each other. The end-goal is a hybrid headset / glasses that can do both on the fly. And I don't think anyone here can disagree on the potential of AR. It's the inevitable end of the smartphone industry. People already embrace AR on 2D screens, so it's pretty clear that it will be accepted en mass when it's potential is objectively better than a smartphone in every way. Then you just need a VR add-on built in, and there you go, billions of VR users.

Note, this is all a decade+ away; I'm not saying it's going to happen in the next few years.

He knows this, but won't admit it. So, he just makes crap up and hopes you won't ask for actual proof, because there is no proof. Sony never made that prediction.

Does it really matter? What's my point? Small attach rate == eventually no support. It's been proven in past when it comes to peripherals and that goes double for Sony. You going to refute that? I know you're blinded by Sony's PSVR because you're A) a cow and B) in love with a peripheral. You're biased and that is a fact.

@blueberry_bandit: It doesn't matter if it "changes the game" since all a dev cares about is bottom line. A low attach rate is eventually going to lead to lack of support. You might be right but history would say otherwise.

@reduc_ab_: You're missing the point but I guess you would since you seem to have so much emotionally invested. Name 1 peripheral Sony has continued to support with a low attach rate?

I've been lurking and watching this thread for days now. The amount of salt and butthurt over PSVR selling well is unreal lol.

? At least there's no shortage of salt for my popcorn.

Missing the point that you are just making stuff up and saying it's true then not showing a single speck of evidence to validate your claim? Dude, that's not a hard point to miss. You're saying Sony made a prediction they did not make. You are flat out lying, and getting more and more emotional with every response.

But that's not really anything new for you. Have a nice day! ;)

@quadknight said:

I've been lurking and watching this thread for days now. The amount of salt and butthurt over PSVR selling well is unreal lol.

? At least there's no shortage of salt for my popcorn.

Seriously. I've just got to pat myself on the back. My threads seem to trigger salty lems (and a hermit or two) like no other. It is endless entertainment, lol. They simply can't help themselves.

And let me make this very clear. I do not wish for the PSVR to fail nor do I wish VR to fail in general. I like VR and bought the Oculus when the retail version 1st came out. All I'm saying is going by Sony's history for supporting peripherals it has a high chance of being discarded. For continued support the PSVR would have to have an extremely high software attach rate or why would devs bother?

You and I both know Sony's reputation for supporting peripherals. You're just being willfully ignorant. You have very thin skin for someone that frequents SWs. Toughen up sunshine

Uh, dude. Look at the move controllers/ps camera. That wasn't exactly a huge hit. And what did Sony do? They invested in the production of a $500 peripheral that supports the--you guessed it--move controllers/ps camera. If that's not some serious support, I don't know what is.

You're losing this argument. You're really good at that, at least. :)

Uh girl look at those. There's virtually no support for either and are only now being used because of the PSVR. That was a piss poor example but keep trying cow.

Like I said, you're biased and in love with the PSVR. You might not be willfully ignorant.....just ignorant. Sony's history is on my side little one, your hopes and dreams aren't.

? I think other than Xbone not having VR support part of the butthurt is that Move controllers outlasted the Kinect lol.

Kinect flopped out of existence and is no longer in production while Sony found a way to make use of the Moves again. Kinda shows the lack of commitment MS has this gen. If anything MS are the kind of guys to cut and run when things aren't looking so hot.

Owning you is like the simplest thing to do because you just don't think when you type. It's so adorable.

Yes, Sony creating a $500 dollar peripheral that supports the move controllers/camera absolutely smashes your argument. And then there's the fact that, ya know, the PSVR has well over 100 games at this point, many of them exclusives. Oooh boy. You're a hoot, sweetie.

I'm saying that a piss poor example for the move and camera being supported. Prior to the PSVR they were dead. Nice try though.

Give it time cow, Sony will discard the PSVR once they figure out it's not going to sell as much as you hope. You really shouldn't invest so much in a peripheral.

Seems to me Sony's history has you scared. It would explain why you feel the need to post a positive PSVR thread every other day.

So, let's sum up here. You make a statement about Sony's PSVR sales prediction, which you pull completely out of your ass, and then, when asked, you of course do not provide a single shred of proof because you can't. The proof does not exist, and you know it. So you have to just be quiet and take the L.

Then you try to turn things around by asking me to prove that Sony supports peripherals that aren't huge hits. I provide said proof, pointing out that the moves/camera were given new life by the PSVR. And in response, you say that proof is not good enough, because you can say nothing else. You have no ground to stand on due to the fact that your argument is destroyed.

In conclusion, you have failed miserably. Best to quit while you're behind. Oh, and, again, have a nice day! Here's a warm hug for you! **hugs** :)

Actually my statement was about continued support for a peripheral with a low attach rate. YOU decided to focus on the "2M expected sales in a few month". That really doesn't matter because 2M in a year with a low attach rate is the focus. Why would I need to provide proof for something that doesn't matter when my entire point has nothing to do with the 1st few months? Perhaps you re-read what I've been saying for a while now.

And you failed at that. You tried using the move and camera as proof of continued support when in fact it's considered part of the PSVR which WASN'T the original intent of those peripherals. EPIC fail little one

Says the cow that cries whenever someone doesn't have glowing thoughts on the PSVR. Cries when someone talks about it's shit sales and low attach rate. Maybe you should get a grip, grow thicker skin and see what Sony is really about......money. History proves it, your hopes and dreams don't.

Sorry, but no amount of salty lem essay writing is going to change these two simple facts:

1) You made up a false "fact", were called out, and then could not provide a single shred of proof.

2) You tried to save face by asking me to prove that Sony has supported a peripheral that is not a huge hit, and I provided two clear examples, the move and the ps camera, both of which have been given new life by the PSVR.

So, again, in conclusion, you have failed miserably. Take a deep breath, sweetie. I can hear you hyperventilating through the computer. :)

Sony have said they will support VR for many years to come. This isn't like any other peripheral. Kinect / Motion controls or even handheld systems are not nearly as big of a deal as VR in the grand scheme of things.

Pick the top 20 biggest tech companies in the world. Guess what almost all of them are working on? AR and VR. This is far bigger than gaming.

What makes you think Sony will let there one and only VR die anytime soon? This is the only one console that has a VR device on the market and yes, we know MS is working on there own VR but how long will it get to the gaming market? As I have said it time and time again, VR is gonna take a long time to hit mainstream and why should Sony give up now? We all know MS is getting themselves into VR realm, when MS announce there own VR device, I'm sure your gonna support them. Heh, how ironic. Face it Kingtito, VR is the future!

*Sony is really about......money*

Of course Sony is in it for the money, just like both MS & Nintendo are.

@reduc_ab_ said:

@commander said:

@i_p_daily said:

@joshrmeyer: No salt, but plenty of laughter, it must suck that you cows can't tell the difference, but the fact cows don't know what high end means i'm not surprised LOL.

@ArchoNils2 said:

I do like my PSVR, I really do, especially for exclusive cockpit style games. But please don't call it highend. There is a huge gap between the PsVr and my HTC Vive connected to a PC rocking a 8700k and a 1080 Ti. RoomScale is a huge difference and the tracking on the Vive is much better. The PsVr is mid-tierat best. I do however really like the screen they used for it.

Dude, you have like the biggest chip on your shoulder. The only reason to place "high-end" next to PSVR, as I've said, is to distinguish between low-end. Call it midrange if you want. Who cares. The only people getting upset about this are PC VR fanboys and salty lems. There is no denying that the PSVR is in direct competition at this point with other high-end headsets, which the gaming media openly reports again and again and again. So, here, again, just a few links from the top of the list when you google PSVR+"high-end". Enjoy.

http://vrborg.com/best-headphones-for-psvr

Quote: "PlayStation VR is a high-end virtual-reality headset that has found its place in over one million homes worldwide."

https://uploadvr.com/sony-isnt-entirely-comfortable-psvr-market-lead-current-margin/

Quote: "With over one million units sold, Sony’s PlayStation VR (PSVR) is thought to be the current leader in high-end VR, possibly topping Oculus Rift and HTC Vive sales."

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-07-12-is-high-end-vr-a-dead-end

"Oculus looks to be bringing up the rear among the three major high-end VR options on the market, despite being a first mover and having the significant financial backing of Facebook. Through the first half of this year, tracking firm Superdata put the Rift's installed base at just 383,000 units, compared to HTC Vive's 667,000 units and PlayStation VR's 1.8 million."

http://variety.com/2017/digital/news/sony-playstation-vr-version-2-1202577817/

"Sony’s PlayStation VR has by far been the most successful high-end VR headset."

You can find a bunch of quotes online that refer to the psvr as a mid range headsets as well, or even to mid/high end.

The internet doesn't really agree on this, and it's understandable. It has more similarities with the oculus rift, vive and mixed reality devices than with the vr phone solutions, but the difference is still quite big.

The fact that you called it high end isn't even the point of the discussion here, the point is that you threw the psvr on the same pile as the oculus and the vive, even in your last reply you said there's no denying the psvr is in direct competition with the oculus and vive and that's simply not the case. The price difference is one thing but for a lot of people the ease of use that comes with console is a major reason to opt for the console solution. Heck, these are mostly people that already opted for a console in the first place, which makes the whole endavour even less expensive than the pc headsets.

Then you have people who take vr that seriously they go for the full experience. and that means roomscale and 360 degree tracking for the motion controllers. It also means flawless tracking for motion controllers and the headset. People that opted for the oculus or the vive, once they realize what the exact differences are between the headsets, don't think about the psvr. Just like people who want to game in 4k and 60 fps don't even think about buying a console.

That the reason why the psvr has more sales than the oculus, the vive and the mixed reality devices, the psvr doesn't have any real competition at the moment.

@commander said:

@reduc_ab_ said:

@commander said:

@i_p_daily said:

@joshrmeyer: No salt, but plenty of laughter, it must suck that you cows can't tell the difference, but the fact cows don't know what high end means i'm not surprised LOL.

@ArchoNils2 said:

I do like my PSVR, I really do, especially for exclusive cockpit style games. But please don't call it highend. There is a huge gap between the PsVr and my HTC Vive connected to a PC rocking a 8700k and a 1080 Ti. RoomScale is a huge difference and the tracking on the Vive is much better. The PsVr is mid-tierat best. I do however really like the screen they used for it.

Dude, you have like the biggest chip on your shoulder. The only reason to place "high-end" next to PSVR, as I've said, is to distinguish between low-end. Call it midrange if you want. Who cares. The only people getting upset about this are PC VR fanboys and salty lems. There is no denying that the PSVR is in direct competition at this point with other high-end headsets, which the gaming media openly reports again and again and again. So, here, again, just a few links from the top of the list when you google PSVR+"high-end". Enjoy.

http://vrborg.com/best-headphones-for-psvr

Quote: "PlayStation VR is a high-end virtual-reality headset that has found its place in over one million homes worldwide."

https://uploadvr.com/sony-isnt-entirely-comfortable-psvr-market-lead-current-margin/

Quote: "With over one million units sold, Sony’s PlayStation VR (PSVR) is thought to be the current leader in high-end VR, possibly topping Oculus Rift and HTC Vive sales."

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-07-12-is-high-end-vr-a-dead-end

"Oculus looks to be bringing up the rear among the three major high-end VR options on the market, despite being a first mover and having the significant financial backing of Facebook. Through the first half of this year, tracking firm Superdata put the Rift's installed base at just 383,000 units, compared to HTC Vive's 667,000 units and PlayStation VR's 1.8 million."

http://variety.com/2017/digital/news/sony-playstation-vr-version-2-1202577817/

"Sony’s PlayStation VR has by far been the most successful high-end VR headset."

You don't have to repeat yourself, I've read your quotes and you can find a bunch of quotes online that refer to the psvr as a mid range headsets as well, and even some that refer to the lowest of high end, or even mid/high end. The internet doesn't really agree on this, and it's understandable. It has more similarities with the oculus rift, vive and mixed reality devices, than with the vr phone solutions, but the difference is still quite big.

The fact that you called it high end isn't even the point of the discussion here, the point is that you threw the psvr on the same pile as the oculus and the vive, even in your last reply you said there's no denying the psvr is in direct competition with the oculus and vive and that's simply not the case.

From the very beginning the psvr has been in another price segment than the vive and the oculus. But it's more than that, it's also on another platform. The price is one thing but for a lot of people the ease of use that comes with console is a major reason to opt for the console solution. Heck, these are mostly people that already opted for a console in the first place for normal computergames, which makes the whole endavour even cheaper than it already was.

Then you people like myself who take vr that seriously they go for the full experience. and that means roomscale and 360 degree tracking for the motion controllers. It also means flawless tracking for motion controllers and the headset, which is not the case on the psvr because of the single camera and light tracking. These are people who are not scared to get their hands dirty because setup isn't always a breeze, and it takes some serious cash as well, especially if you don't own a game pc already.

People that opted for the oculus or the vive, once they realize what the exact differences are between the headsets, don't think about the psvr. Just like people who want to game in 4k and 60 fps don't even think about buying a console.

That the reason why the psvr has more sales than the oculus, the vive and the mixed reality devices, the psvr doesn't have any real competition at the moment.

"You don't have to repeat yourself"

Says the guy that is revisiting the same argument over and over again, lol. Dude, give it a rest. The gaming media refers to the PSVR as a high-end headset to lump it competition-wise with the Vive and Oculus. It doesn't even matter. Call it midrange VR. That's perfectly fine. I'm not getting hung up on definitions, and I have no idea why you are so much. The PSVR is leading the VR headset market by a longshot. There. No mention of high-end this or that. Happy?

Sheesh. Write me another essay why don't ya. Or maybe post a few more gifs.