Oculus Quest Cross Buy

JonJonXD

I really hope that the Quest offers up a cross buy system for those of us that have already invested a ton of money into our Rift game libraries.

I will honestly buy a Quest day one if the games I buy that are cross platform are honored on both.

I do want to check out the Quest, but it's hard for me to essentially double dip in software.

Zenbane

It will likely be cross-buy with GO:

https://forums.oculusvr.com/community/discussion/comment/661222/#Comment_661222

Just stick to Quest exclusives (like Vader Immortal) and you'll be fine. Anything PCVR worthy will be on Rift anyway.

LuluViBritannia

There will also probably have a solution to "stream" PCVR games into the Oculus Quest, like ALVR:

https://github.com/polygraphene/ALVR

If they manage to do it, we could access the Rift library with the Quest. Honestly, this will be the one factor that will make me decide to buy the Quest or not. I already know Virtual Desktop will officially work with the Quest (the dev is already working on it), so I'm already half-convinced that I'll buy this headset anyway xD.

JonJonXD

LuluViBritannia said:

There will also probably have a solution to "stream" PCVR games into the Oculus Quest, like ALVR:

https://github.com/polygraphene/ALVR

If they manage to do it, we could access the Rift library with the Quest. Honestly, this will be the one factor that will make me decide to buy the Quest or not. I already know Virtual Desktop will officially work with the Quest (the dev is already working on it), so I'm already half-convinced that I'll buy this headset anyway xD.

If this is the case then I'd consider it as well.

I love the idea of just taking this with minimal setup into an empty room and just jumping into the game. I also am pretty over being tethered as I haven't had that much luck with ceiling hooks that don't get caught.

LuluViBritannia

I feel you, buddy ^^.
For me, it's the increase in resolution and the different lenses that is appealing. I mean, I am tolerant about resolution, but as we keep hearing about new headsets with more pixels, now I kinda want that too xD!

Bad_Mr_Frosty

https://uploadvr.com/oculus-quest-go-cross-buy-possible/ 

I’ll pass on the quest. I have so many apps for the Go. I won’t buy them twice

Zenbane

Unfortunate that it won't be Cross-Buy, however I'm more interested in the Quest Exclusives anyway. Plus the mobile aspect of Quest with Touch Controllers is too alluring for my goals in VR for the Enterprise.

ten_six

No cross-buy = no buy. i was going to get Quest day one but to have to then rebuy my existing Rift library for it? That's a cheap shot to your early adopters, Oculus

Zenbane

Uh oh, I see a trend starting!

CrashFu

Is there anything stopping them from at least offering Bundles in the store, that include different platforms' versions of the same game?  All Oculus devices use the same Oculus Account, after all, and with the way Oculus store bundles work that'd at least mean getting an automatic discount when buying something on multiple platforms  (if any given game's developers have agreed to have those bundles available in the first place)

Seems like a bad business choice not to, right?  I mean, I have to imagine that most people will never bother getting more than one version of a game, when they could instead buy two completely different games with that money.  With a discount, some might actually be tempted, for whatever reason.

DaftnDirect

I think the question is, how many PCVR games would realistically be capable of being run on a stand-alone headset? even with all the settings turned down, considering the stand-alone in question will have a pixel count quite a bit higher than the Rift.
I've always been under the impression that the vast majority of games for the Quest will have to be designed and tested with that headset as the target to ensure acceptable performance. The potential problem of people buying Rift games and complaining about performance or some other incompatibility I think would be huge.

The exceptions are apps like video streaming, like Amaze 3D for example which should be fine, but most of those are free so no big deal.

As I say, I'm expecting Quest to be a very different experience than the Rift. Less graphically intensive but more emphasis on freedom of movement. I'm hoping the games offer a different experience too, to take advantage of that.

LuluViBritannia

I think the question is, how many PCVR games would realistically be capable of being run on a stand-alone headset?

Can't say for now, but let's not forget to take into account that the Quest runs at a lesser refresh rate, which will make the games way less demanding ^^. According to ALVR devs, they were able to run Elite:Dangerous on an Oculus Go :

https://github.com/polygraphene/ALVR/wiki/List-of-tested-VR-games-and-experiences

Elite:F*ckin:Dangerous! On a mobile chip.

Also, if performance issues really are the reason for separating Stores, there is an obvious and easy way to prevent them while having a single Store: forbid the installation of an app on incompatible devices.

The software already knows what device it is installed on. The devs would just have to specify the target devices (PC and/or Quest and/or Go), and if someone tries to install an app on the wrong device, the software would simply not allow it. That way, if a dev wants to make a cross-platform game, they can. And the users wouldn't have to buy the same apps several times.
Easy peasy.
My point is, performance issues aren't really the problem.

Now of course there's the issue of "porting an app". A port requires work, and work requires to get paid. If we allow cross-buy, that would mean the users wouldn't have to pay for the port.
I understand that point of view. However, how much is that worth? Frankly, reducing graphics takes only a few clicks in Unity. Most of the work is automatic...

Anyway, the least we can say is it goes against their plan to make a uniform Oculus platform. Making one store per device just doesn't fit this idea...
On a personal note, I don't really mind this issue since I trust 3rd parties to find a way to rectify this xD.

Shadowmask72

I have to agree with Zelator on this one. It's all about the exclusives for me. Plus I am sure there will be lots of free content to mess around with as well.

SkScotchegg

I bought Rift and GO and will also buy Quest and CV2, so I'm massively invested in Oculus here but I do agree that the store should be shared for games across one platform. Don't make us buy the same game three times please.

For example, you already have to buy the game "Virutal Virutal Reality" twice, once for Rift and once for GO, if you want to play it on Quest then that will be the 3rd purchase? So a game that was once £15 would therefore cost you £45 for three different HMD's. I think that's asking too much.

They could even draw a line in the sand and say "ok from this point onwards, you buy each game once and it works on all three HMD's but past games before Quest release you still have to re-purchase".

But it would also be extra sweet if they backdated it to the old library too. Hopefully they make a decision and keep us updated soon.

EDIT:

LuluViBritannia said:

There will also probably have a solution to "stream" PCVR games into the Oculus Quest, like ALVR:

https://github.com/polygraphene/ALVR

Oh Wow, I didn't know about this ALVR application, thanks for sharing, I can't wait to get home and try set it up tonight for my GO, is it really easy to use?

Neokin

LuluViBritannia said:

Now of course there's the issue of "porting an app". A port requires work, and work requires to get paid. If we allow cross-buy, that would mean the users wouldn't have to pay for the port.
I understand that point of view. However, how much is that worth? Frankly, reducing graphics takes only a few clicks in Unity. Most of the work is automatic...

I don't think porting an app is "only a few clicks". For people interested, I recommend this panel from OC5:
Porting Your App to Oculus Quest

Zenbane

Porting an app doesn't take a few clicks, but reducing graphic requirements most certainly is a few clicks; at least in the Unreal Editor. I've gotten far enough in my little tutorials to see how that works! lol

Mradr

Then the real question is - is the price to port if you own already worth the price again to pay to play it on Quest if you already own it on the Rift? Aka, it wont take as much time to port than it does to make it in the first place - so is the product price to reflect that for the people that already own the title in the first place? Could something like that happen instead? Etc etc.

I wonder if a subscription might be a better focus for Quest? This way you get access to a ton of titles - but wont have to repay for titles you already own on the Rift.

JonJonXD

 This isn't a new concept and has been exercised in the past (PS3/PS4/VITA).

At the very least, give us a heavy discount to get it on the second platform (Virtual Console between Wii and Wii U).

If I can get a lot of the games from my Oculus library onto the quest for dirt cheap, then that's a bit different than me re-buying games at the same price.

Even then, I would want the Quest for better room scale (no tether).

LZoltowski

Can you play all the games you bought on a Wii U on your Switch?

Quest is an entirely different platform. Games can be ported but require significant development. One is ARM and the other is x86. I have not seen many ports of games that are free. It's a little bit like expecting the games you bought on Xbox to work on your PC for free, they both play games and are from Microsoft, right?

Oculus does NOT make games, they are a front end shop. It's up to the devs and they have to incur additional development costs.

LZoltowski

One major point also that many of the games are from indie studios, it would be financially nonsensical to miss out on extra revenue. Triple A studio?, maybe. But not your average indie dev. 

JonJonXD

LZoltowski said:

Can you play all the games you bought on a Wii U on your Switch?

Quest is an entirely different platform. Games can be ported but require significant development. One is ARM and the other is x86. I have not seen many ports of games that are free. It's a little bit like expecting the games you bought on Xbox to work on your PC for free, they both play games and are from Microsoft, right?

Oculus does NOT make games, they are a front end shop. It's up to the devs and they have to incur additional development costs.

Very valid points for sure.

I guess I am not seeing this as an entirely separate platform, but rather another device in the same eco system.

I always think of Sony with this, as before the Vita failed, they did a fairly good job with cross-buy on that platform, and many continued that even after it was deemed a flop (the indies). Part of what makes that successful is a good dev kit to allow for easier porting between each platform, if at all possible.

The real question becomes, do we invest in the new mobile based platform, or continue to hold out for CV2?

I personally consider the quest to be VR next gen, so I may just have both, but we will see.

Zenbane

JonJonXD said:

I guess I am not seeing this as an entirely separate platform, but rather another device in the same eco system.

That is a bit too much wordplay though. It is a separate device in the same ecosystem, but developers do not code to an eco-system, they code to a platform. And the devices reside on separate platforms. An eco-system can have multiple platforms just as it has multiple devices.

LZoltowski

Zenbane said:

JonJonXD said:

I guess I am not seeing this as an entirely separate platform, but rather another device in the same eco system.

That is a bit too much wordplay though. It is a separate device in the same ecosystem, but developers do not code to an eco-system, they code to a platform. And the devices reside on separate platforms. An eco-system can have multiple platforms just as it has multiple devices.

Yup, a little bit like the Apple App store ecosystem, there is a Mac App store for macs and an iOS App store for ipads and iPhones, they share the same ecosystem, even log in, billing etc .. but are two entirely different platforms.

Mradr

LZoltowski said:

Zenbane said:

JonJonXD said:

I guess I am not seeing this as an entirely separate platform, but rather another device in the same eco system.

That is a bit too much wordplay though. It is a separate device in the same ecosystem, but developers do not code to an eco-system, they code to a platform. And the devices reside on separate platforms. An eco-system can have multiple platforms just as it has multiple devices.

Yup, a little bit like the Apple App store ecosystem, there is a Mac App store for macs and an iOS App store for ipads and iPhones, they share the same ecosystem, even log in, billing etc .. but are two entirely different platforms.

Not 100% true though - there are some cross platform apps that works for both tablet and phone for example. Same for MAC and tablet. They do split their phone and MAC though for some strange reason, but then again some apps companies if ask will honor a cross platform request if ask. Honestly - at the end of the day I feel like its going to come down to what does the application maker want to do with their program. I do hope they will play fair and maybe not charge as much if you already own the application on one device. It would make the most sense while still giving a value to having it on both system.

LZoltowski

Mradr said:

LZoltowski said:

Zenbane said:

JonJonXD said:

I guess I am not seeing this as an entirely separate platform, but rather another device in the same eco system.

That is a bit too much wordplay though. It is a separate device in the same ecosystem, but developers do not code to an eco-system, they code to a platform. And the devices reside on separate platforms. An eco-system can have multiple platforms just as it has multiple devices.

Yup, a little bit like the Apple App store ecosystem, there is a Mac App store for macs and an iOS App store for ipads and iPhones, they share the same ecosystem, even log in, billing etc .. but are two entirely different platforms.

Not 100% true though - there are some cross platform apps that works for both tablet and phone for example. Same for MAC and tablet. They do split their phone and MAC though for some strange reason, but then again some apps companies if ask will honor a cross platform request if ask. Honestly - at the end of the day I feel like its going to come down to what does the application maker want to do with their program. I do hope they will play fair and maybe not charge as much if you already own the application on one device. It would make the most sense while still giving a value to having it on both system.

 iPhone and iPad are still the same platforms.. same CPU/Hardware, same OS just different form factor.
.And yes as I stated from the start many moons ago, it's all up to the devs.

Zenbane

Mradr said:

Not 100% true though - there are some cross platform apps that works for both tablet and phone for example. Same for MAC and tablet.

Wrong. They are not "cross-platform" in those cases because it is the same exact platform residing on different devices.

In any case where the same app works on two different platforms (this is true "cross-platforms") then it is the Dev's who coded to the two different platforms.

Mradr

I made apps for MAC OS - it really isnt that hard to cross platform it on on their devices really. Its like one switch honestly when you compile the code. As for MP - at least the screens I have seen - the apps are split between tablets, phones, and computers. Tablets giving their own category seems to have been split off from phones meaning apple doesn't 100% see it as the same platform. Even though the same code/application works fine of both devices no problem. Ive seen companies still charge for both devices but still allow it to be install in the same hardware at not extra cost aka phone to phone but charge from phone to tablet.

Correct I am using the term loosely here because they use the same code across their devices mostly. 

Zenbane

Mradr said:

I made apps for MAC OS - it really isnt that hard to cross platform it on on their devices really.

Cross device is not the same thing as cross platform. You are creating synonyms where they don't exist. The Oculus platforms are not OS's, they are software platforms that reside atop an existing OS.

Mradr

Zenbane said:

Mradr said:

I made apps for MAC OS - it really isnt that hard to cross platform it on on their devices really.

Cross device is not the same thing as cross platform. You are creating synonyms where they don't exist. The Oculus platforms are not OS's, they are software platforms that reside atop an existing OS.

I am not talking about. I am talking about cross device that run the same code. Much like how apple does it.

Zenbane

Mradr said:

 I am talking about cross device that run the same code. Much like how apple does it.

Cross device running the same code is typically the same platform, but you are still talking about an OS which is not what this topic is about.

Oculus SDK's across the various platforms are different. And they are not an OS.

Mradr

Zenbane said:

Mradr said:

 I am talking about cross device that run the same code. Much like how apple does it.

Cross device running the same code is typically the same platform, but you are still talking about an OS which is not what this topic is about.

Oculus SDK's across the various platforms are different. And they are not an OS.

I've already stated across other threads there is a differences between GO - Quest - and CV1 platforms that wouldn't allow such a cross over to happen easy enough. There are is a lot of that has to happen to make it work between. So I think you two are trying to create a problem where there isnt one:)