cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

HTC finally gives in! The Vive price cut has arrived

Zenbane
MVP
MVP
This news just came in...

HTC Vive Now $599, Gets A Permanent $200 Price Cut

all that technology came at a premium price that has, until right now,
remained at $799 for the Vive headset, two motion controllers, and two
base stations for tracking. Other than a few flash sales and minor
discounts it’s been stuck at that price.

The updated package, priced at $599 for everything mentioned above, includes download codes for Richie’s Plank Experience, Everest VR, and Tilt Brush on Steam, as well as a one-month subscription to Viveport. The Viveport service has over 200 apps available, but you can only pick five to get access to over the course of a single month. It’s sort of like selectively renting content.


Interesting news considering it wasn't very long ago that HTC executives explained why a Vive price cut was unnecessary. Those reasons seem to still apply today, giving rise to insight that perhaps HTC feels the pressure from the aggressive Oculus pricing in order to remain viable (and alive) in the high-end VR Market.

From E3 2017:

“we haven’t dropped the core price of the Vive because we think it offers the best room-scale [experience], hands down.”

O’Brien elaborated further on HTC’s perspective on the Vive’s price, saying that there are certainly price-sensitive customers who are looking for the lowest cost option, but there are also ‘value-sensitive customers who are willing to pay more if they feel they are getting better value out of their purchase;’ the latter is where a large portion of VR early-adopters fall, he said.


Sources:

https://uploadvr.com/htc-vive-now-599-gets-permanent-200-price-cut/

https://www.roadtovr.com/htc-explains-vive-price-cost-lowered-cut-discount/


*EDIT*
Latest damaging articles/discussions:

https://forums.oculus.com/community/discussion/comment/552854/#Comment_552854

465 REPLIES 465

BeastyBaiter
Superstar

Zenbane said:


ED does not model a real spacecraft or even plausible spacecraft


If that were true then it wouldn't work perfectly with the same Flight Controllers used for DCS. All you are doing is proving that you don't know what either "spacecraft" nor "plausible" really mean. Besides, the fact that you think Lucky's Tale is a better simulator than Elite Dangerous essentially reveals that you may not really own a Rift, a PC, or even any games.



Do you really think the ability to use a joystick has anything at all to do with whether the physics engine in a game is based on real world physics or not? My Lucky's Tale jab may have only been a joke, but is not entirely inaccurate in this case. It too can be played with a joystick, specifically the analog sticks on the Xbox and touch controllers. I'm rather tempted to see if it will respond to my X-55, perhaps tomorrow.

I know I'm wasting my time with this, but you do realize that the spacecraft in ED, even with flight assist off, do not obey Newton's laws right? The laws are pretty simple, basically things in motion stay in motion unless something else stops them, force = mass * acceleration and for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

If the spaceships in ED are plausible, then they must follow those rules (and a whole bunch more but let's not confuse things). If it fails any of those 3 rules, it is not plausible. Rule 2 is easy to test. To do so, give any spacecraft in ED full power (this applies a force). Since the mass can be assumed constant or decreasing, that means it must accelerate until the force is removed. If at any point you stop accelerating while under power, ED violated Newton's second law and thus is not a plausible spacecraft. Every single ship in every possible configuration in ED does this. Thus they are not plausible.

And yes I am aware there is a tiny amount of drag in space due to cosmic dust and such, but at 500 m/s (1800 km/h) it is not significant, even if assuming your inertial frame of reference is a stable orbit around a planet.

Zenbane
MVP
MVP


Do you really think the ability to use a joystick has anything at all to do with whether the physics engine in a game is based on real world physics or not?


Refer to the appropriate definition of "simulation" to assist you with your confusion, since you clearly think "tit-for-tat direct real world reflection" has anything to do with the simulation of processes:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/simulation

ED is a simulator, as clearly stated on its Wiki Page:
Elite: Dangerous is a space adventure, trading, and combat simulation video game
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elite:_Dangerous

That wiki definition is valid even based on your standards, because, and I quote:
"There is more than one dictionary out there "
-BeastyBaiter

My Lucky's Tale jab may have only been a joke, but is not entirely inaccurate in this case.

It's about as accurate as claiming that a Liquid is a Solid.


It too can be played with a joystick, specifically the analog sticks on the Xbox and touch controllers.

The character, Lucky, in the game, Lucky's Tale, does not have pitch, yaw, nor flight thrusts that the player can control to navigate him along the X/Y axis. Something you'd know if you actually played any of these games.


I know I'm wasting my time with this, but you do realize that the
spacecraft in ED, even with flight assist off, do not obey Newton's laws
right?

You are still rejecting the appropriate and official definition of "simulation."



BeastyBaiter said:
If the spaceships in ED are plausible


Whether or not they are plausible has no bearing on the requirements for process simulation.

Aside from that, your logic is highly flawed as you are still trying to conclude that:
If Simulator A is less plausible than Simulator B, then Simulator A is not a Simulator.

Which goes back to the earlier example:
If 2 is a lesser number than 3, then 2 is not a number.
😄

bigmike20vt
Visionary
something tells me i am going to regret sticking my oar in here ;)......

EDs
simulation of the milky way is superb...  The stellar forge is
incredibly impressive and the amount of calculations to work out planet
surfaces and composition is stunning..... is it the best one out there? i
think perhaps the space engine guys would like to fight alongside FD
for that crown... but it IS a simulation.

fly to sol and park up in space and take a time lapse and see the
planets orbiting accurately, hell, fly roughly over where you live on
earth and look at the star constellations, they are so accurate its
uncanny.. no skyboxes here, the star formations accurately update when
you jump from system to system, this is all pure, detailed simulation.

EDs economy and
background sim (clue is in the same) is meant to be a simulation but to
be honest it does not work very realistically

AS for the game
which is played inside that simulation.....................  some
aspects are simulatoryish.... in the same way that forza or Granturismo
is a simulatoryish racing game, or simcade.

with FA off there is a
definite "nod" to neutonian physics, with lore writing in speed limits
which are automatic safety constraints which limit speed (done because
Frontier and 1st encounters WERE more accurate full neutonian flight
characteristics and most people did not like them compared to the
original game and because muiltiplayer and networking would not cope with the potential speed differences between 1 player stationary and one travelling at 100s of miles per second in the same instance). but look at the dev camera view and you will see even with FA off, it is your engines which are causing the flight not to handle more neutonian like...

sound has a "nod" to realism..... our ships
computer makes all the sound effects, break the canopy and the sound you
hear is quiet and muffled and is just stuff which vibrates through your
suit........ not 100% realistic but how many people want a practically
silent game?

I wish ED was a bit more simmy to be honest, and in
some areas it was at launch, but many complained and the game is getting
steadily streamlined "aka dumbed down" with each release.

i do
not think it is right to call ED a full blown space ship simulation game, but it is a very good SPACE simulation... but to
write the whole thing off as not a sim at all, is totally unfair and
ignoring some incredible feats in the game imo.

Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR 🙂

HiCZoK
Protege
I really wonder if I should have got vive instead of oculus.

I really like my oculus but tracking can be a problem with only 2 sensors fron facing setup. I have no way of setting it otherwise.

That said - oculus is said to have better screen, be more comfy, lighter and have better controllers

Zenbane
MVP
MVP

HiCZoK said:

I really wonder if I should have got vive instead of oculus.

I really like my oculus but tracking can be a problem with only 2 sensors fron facing setup. I have no way of setting it otherwise.

That said - oculus is said to have better screen, be more comfy, lighter and have better controllers


I still only have 2 sensors (setup for Front-Facing), and yes, when you turn your back to them the tracking gets whacky if you place your hands in front of you (blocking the sensors).

Others have recommended a front/back setup with the 2 sensors, although I've yet to try it myself. I do plan to get that 3rd sensor very soon. It is long overdue.

bigmike20vt
Visionary

HiCZoK said:

I really like my oculus but tracking can be a problem with only 2 sensors fron facing setup. I have no way of setting it otherwise.

That said - oculus is said to have better screen, be more comfy, lighter and have better controllers


perhaps i am miss reading you... light house is good but its not magic. if you are saying you CANT put 2 sensors at a diagonal setting which is the best way to get 360 degree tracking from the rift with 2 cameras... then surely you wont be able to set light house optimally either?

if you put both light house units front facing, and you turn your back fully occluding the wands.... will you not get the same problem?

worse perhaps because its my understanding is the vive does NOT have tracking sensors on the BACK of the hmd, so whilst in the rift 2 forward facing cameras give you 360 degree hmd tracking, the vive hmd would presumably suffer from occusion as well as your wands if the light house was set up incorrectly?
Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR 🙂

Anonymous
Not applicable
Everything that @bigmike20vt said.

It's basically a space trucker simulator tbh. If Euro Truck and American Truck Simulators are sims then so is Elite Dangerous.

pyroth309
Visionary

HiCZoK said:

I really wonder if I should have got vive instead of oculus.

I really like my oculus but tracking can be a problem with only 2 sensors fron facing setup. I have no way of setting it otherwise.

That said - oculus is said to have better screen, be more comfy, lighter and have better controllers


Yea to me (Just my personal opinion) the Rift feels like an incomplete experience without the 3rd sensor. When I run 2 for simming (I use the usb extension for my 3rd sensor to hook my HOTAS into for flight sims) I can definitely tell a difference in the tracking when turning and reaching. I'm so used to spinning around in circles and never losing tracking. 

Anonymous
Not applicable
I've not tried a 2 sensor set up, I thought with the sensors in opposite corners you should still be able to achieve 360 degrees of tracking. I made sure to pick up a 3rd sensor when i first bought my Rift and not really had any problems with tracking as long as I stay in my boundary grid and don't cuddle my controllers too much.

My first VR experience was with the HTC vive and I was told I'd need a 3 sensor setup to get comparable tracking quality on the Rift.

vannagirl
Consultant

Lucky's Tale is closer to a flight sim than Elite Dangerous


9ue5uxw60mgb.jpg

Look, man. I only need to know one thing: where they are.