- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 61,626
- Reaction score
- 25,718
For comparable market saturation. You still aren't getting this.Well, this is starting to get sad. I actually like you, and I feel bad I have to keep doing this to you, and in front of your peers no less.
No, I understood completely, stop trying to squirm away from your point that "VR has to be cheaper". It's what you were arguing, and implying with the context. Saying VR has to meet those price points, or similar to succeed, or compete. You are wrong.
Doing what? You a VR engineer? You in gaming? I simply don't believe you; someone who perceives $2bn to be a big market.Been working in the industry for 20+ years, currently working with Robert Scoble, and have been apart of start ups that had rounds funded for more money than you'll ever see in your entire life.
No, I queried for a review of R&D in gaming VR as a percentage of overall R&D (not just to VR, but of gaming itself). You clearly struggle with more complex language. The implied argument, which went over your head, is that there is not as much money being pumped into this aspect of VR as there is normal investment in development of more lucrative, mainstream gaming projects. In fact, I just reviewed what I wrote. That was explicit.Ok, well, I mean you're wrong? By all means you can try to illustrate me in any way that makes you feel comfortable. In the end? You still look, and sound stupid and have no idea how this industry is operating, let alone how the R&D is attached to market value. Let's briefly explain below.
Again, whatever helps you sleep at night.
You asked for proof that R&D was happening by large tech companies, and not by non-entertainment, AI standards.
Talk about squirming. Your chart indicates that less than 50% of $2bn is dedicated to consumer electronics, and it doesn't indicate what portion of this is specifically gaming VR headsets.Not only did I link a graph that shows the vast majority of the market is in consumer / consumer electronics, but I showed you the increase of the market value, and that always correlates with the amount of R&D you'll find with said product. Honestly? I thought you'd be smart enough to reverse engineer this, otherwise I'd have just started with links like this:
http://www.iam-media.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=6b19bfa2-2030-45d0-9adc-e6c566348078
https://beta.techcrunch.com/2016/06/29/htc-vive-announces-10-billion-vr-venture-capital-alliance/
http://fortune.com/2017/01/18/facebook-mark-zuckerberg-virtual-reality-billions/
https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/20/google-buys-htc-pixel-team-1-1-billion/
https://www.roadtovr.com/google-developing-vr-display-10x-pixels-todays-headsets/
But again, I thought you weren't an idiot? I apologize.
Not that it matters. Let's do some simple math. What is $100bn divided by less than $1bn?
What does 2025 have to do with...Oh Mick, can you show anymore of your ignorance? This is an incredible market for a new "display", very few things, VERY few things in tech take off like this, and start with multibillion dollar market floors. Why are you even attempting to argue with me here? It's clear I know more, and it's clear I have a career in this field. Why are you just spouting dumb shit?
"Goldman Sachs predicted the virtual and augmented reality market could become an $80 billion industry by 2025, outpacing the TV market in annual revenue. It said the industry could pull in $45 billion in hardware revenue and $35 billion in software by then." - https://www.rt.com/business/378767-virtual-reality-market-growth/
It's hard, I know, you probably win a lot of arguments with your "rapid fire" bullshit, and constant accusations against the other persons credibility. I was under the impression it was common knowledge you aren't anymore near the VR industry, if I'm mistaken, I apologize, you still sound like a complete dolt that has no idea how to incentivize a market.
??...the price point at the moment...
Nothing, my sweet red-headed stepchild. Nothing at all.