cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Steam Hardware Survey - February 2024 results included

RuneSR2
Grand Champion

steamvr-2.jpg

Latest results:

dyko7ca98u34.jpg

These results are compared, at least for the Rift, to August when Rift peaked at 0.35 %. Since August 2018 Rift has decreased about 6 % (from 0.35 to 0.33). Vive also decreased.  

Compared to other HMDs we see from April to September (note that this image hasn't been updated to October yet):

bboc0nqusboe.jpg

When updated to October I'd expect:

Rift = 45 %
Vive = 42 %
WMR = 8 %
Vive Pro = 3 %
Rift DK2 = 1 %

Source: https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam

BTW - some history:

April 2018:

Oculus Rift 0.20%
HTC Vive 0.18%
Windows Mixed Reality 0.01%
Oculus Rift DK2 0.01%
Oculus Rift DK1 0.00%
Unknown 0.00%


July 2018:

Oculus Rift 0.32%
HTC Vive 0.31%
Windows Mixed Reality 0.05%
HTC Vive Pro 0.01%
Oculus Rift DK2 0.01%
Oculus Rift DK1 0.00%

I guess it's more or less a stand still since July for Rift and the original Vive... I don't think the Odyssey+ has had any impact on the WMR results above, the Odyssey+ is much too new - if it'll have any impact, it won't be before the Steam Hardware Survey November 2018 results. 
 
SteamVR_feature.jpg

Oculus Rift CV1, Valve Index & PSVR2, Asus Strix OC RTX™ 3090, i9-10900K (5.3Ghz), 32GB 3200MHz, 16TB SSD
"Ask not what VR can do for you, but what you can do for VR"

550 REPLIES 550

I'm a simmer too but not everyone is, I'm concerned about VR take-up as a whole, it's been how many years now? and we're still not getting AAA titles at anything like the rate that's needed to sustain it.

Without the software, headset manufacturers won't continue making headsets forever... or continue to develope new and better ones in the future, at least not at the rate that we want.

 

People want ever better headsets, and if theyr'e like me, at reasonable prices but the two things, software and hardware aren't seperable and they won't be sustained by simmers alone.

RuneSR2
Grand Champion

Maybe we can also see the effect of Alyx wearing off - thus many may now have completed the game (and current great workshop mods). Alyx may also have set the bar way too high - making all other new VR games feel mediocre at best. 

There have been several persons saying the VR seems empty after Alyx, and I'm not necessarily disagreeing - but I don't think I have to "lower my standards" after Alyx. I consider Alyx an extremely rare AAA VR production which is far from my usual norm. And I do love the quality I'm getting from normal VR games and apps. 

That said, of course Lone Echo 2 is something to keep up my great VR mood - and I'm not yet worrying about what comes after Lone Echo 2, lol. 

Oculus Rift CV1, Valve Index & PSVR2, Asus Strix OC RTX™ 3090, i9-10900K (5.3Ghz), 32GB 3200MHz, 16TB SSD
"Ask not what VR can do for you, but what you can do for VR"

I was trying to find stats on what the average hours spent playing Alyx, I think average play-through time is something like 15 hours??? don't know how many time people play it throught though.

 

I never got further than the first hour. As a HL fan it wasn't quite what I was hoping for, but I probebly set my sights too high... I spent well over a 100 hours in HL2 in total, and played through it many times... it was more free roaoming imo but I will commit to playing through Alyx fully some time soon. Fallout VR is huge for me, several hundred hours in that. I'm saving Skyrim VR as it holds the promise of a lot of hours of play, so I don't want to use it up until there's a real VR drought.

 

Simming in VR maybe accounts for an hour or two a week for me now... would be much more if FS2020 performed better (which it may do with the next update) or if we'd had a new quality racing sim in the last couple years.

 

F1 isn't going to come to VR until take-up improves. That's a title that would pull-in a shed-load of non-VR people I think. Maybe not the kind of interest that FS triggered but still would be big news.

Anonymous
Not applicable

I guess it depends on what kind of volumes are needed for it to be profitable enough for a company to continue to develop VR headsets. For instance there are some what I call boutique manufacturers that have been successful for the last several years developing and selling flight sim peripherals to the PC gaming market. Same with racing gear setups.

Thrustmaster for instance has been around for many years and still seem to be doing quite well in their flight and racing gear for PC enthusiasts. Then there are the boutique guys like Virpil, VKB, WinWing that have been doing it a while for flight simmers.

Yeah I know Facebook is looking at a much larger scope and good for them and for VR, but maybe some of these other companies will continue to cater to the lesser markets for VR. I hope they do anyway.

 

In addition to Oculus I have a HP, Valve, and Vive headset. I don't think these guys are needing to achieve the kind of numbers Facebook is looking to, else they probably already might have dropped out of it.

 

As the old saying goes, once you let the genie out of the bottle you can't put it back, and Alyx will have let a lot out of their bottles. ha

CV1/Vive-knuckles)/Dell Vr Visor/Go/Quest II/ PSVR.

Boutique manufacturers will always be around and small scale headset manufacturers were around before Oculus in fact.

They don't contibute to the industry in the same way though and don't promote developer involvement beyond any company they can partner with.

 

I think everyone, even people happy with boutique should be routing for larger consumer take-up because they benefit from it too in the form of good software.

 

If Alyx is an example of that sofwtare, it wouldn't have existed if headsets hadn't shifted from boutique to consumer. I doubt that Index, Vive or Pimax headsets would exist without Oculus headsets beginning and contributing to consumer VR.

 

Thrustmaster is an example of controller manufacturer and as such doesn't rely on games being developed for it at all. All it needs is driver support which they do for themselves and the kit will work in any existing game. Imagine if a company like Thrustmaster had to create the sims that enable its controllers to work... would they continue to exist?

Anonymous
Not applicable

Well if the game developers are not making the games that use TM sticks and wheels, then there would be no need for them. Best I can tell PC flight and racing games are doing quite well.  As well as VR amongst them that continues to grow. With each advancement in image quality/resolution more of the flight and racing sim folks buy into it. And those games do not require a headset developer to fund them.

 

No that's not how it works, developers don't make games for TM controllers, they make games for controllers. It's then up to controller manufacturers to make their controllers and the drivers that allow them to work in the games. Even games that don't have controller support can be made to work with controllers using software that emulates keystrokes and mouse movement, I have Logitech and Pinnacle software that does just that.

 

So controller manufacturers can make small-scale, high quality controllers or they can make mass market cheaper controllers and they will all work on all games that support controller input, it's not manufacturer specific, as well as any games that don't have controller input, using emulation. My TM Pendular Rudder will work on all my flight sims, past and present, they would even work on sims that only accepted keyboard and mouse input if I chose to try that.

 

My point was that no single controller manufacturer has to rely on games being developed for their device. All, games do that. Regardless of how boutique their device is.

 

VR isn't like that, VR needs games developed for it, and many game developers won't do that unless there is a sufficient VR userbase for them to make money on a par with how much they would make if they set their software engineers working on a non-VR game.

 

If you buy an expensive headset that targets the smaller market, you still rely on the mass market headsets driving developer interest, that's why I think everyone should be encouraging more VR adoption and not just saying I have the games I want so that's OK or saying boutique headset manufacturers will always survive because they will if manufacturing controllers, they won't if manufacturing VR headsets... unless there's a mass market headset manufacturer that is driving adoption forward which in turn increases developer interest.

Anonymous
Not applicable

I never said they were only making games for a specific brand of controllers. That first sentence was just an example.

I think the point has been lost now so never mind.

 

Well, you said 'if developers weren't making games that use TM sticks' and my point was that they don't, they make games for controllers, it doesn't matter who the manufacturer is.

 

But ok putting all that to one side.... what about my main point, that all headset manufacturers depend on game development?

 

Provided that at least one headset manufacturer focuses on VR adoption, other headset manufacturers that focus on smaller so-called enthusiast markets can survive, becasue the general VR adoption promotes software development that sustains their headsets too? To be blunt, I think the so-called enthusiast market is riding on the coat-tails of mainstream adoption. It's the same with many technologies, once it gets past the initial early adoption stage which pretty much exclusively means enthusiast use.

 

CD's intially would have been an enthusiast tech, but they wouldn't have survived long term, without record companies putting content on disc, which in turn relied on mainstream adoption.

 

And that was why I made the point of saying we should all be routing for VR adoption, regardless of whether we currenlty have the games we as individuals want or the particular headset that we as individuals want.