Originally Posted by Moragg
$250 seems low. The latency tester originally cost $100 for DK1 but I wouldn't be surprised if DK2's tester is cheaper.
I think $300 is more likely since they do have a lot of money invested in them and they need CV1 to be the one that makes the dough, and $300 is still okay-ish.
Personally I'm semi-realistically hoping for $350 1440p, or $275/$300 1080p.
A list of features I'd like in a VR headset (not already in DK2):
Eye-tracking and foveated rendering
Another camera for full 360degree tracking.
Wireless would be nice, but I highly doubt the lag could be brought down to anywhere close to wireless levels.
What's up with the 4k requests recently? How many people can normally push 4k with over 60fps without any dips? I'd even be worried with two MSI R9 290 GAMING's.
As for $350, you gotta think of it in terms of adaption rate. If you price it outside of the average gamers budget you won't make alot of money either. You also need to sell enough kits to prove it's worth creating games for it/support it. The investment firms are perfectly fine with a slow and steady approach.
This is very tricky grounds, gamers have a stigma against VR already. Considering a large portion remember the terrible attempts before. The goal should be like any other startup. Sell a large amount of products first, then aim for profit. Because if you can build a following, create a market, and have nearly total control of that market there is no reason to rush.
$350 won't sell. Those from OCN and such who have $500 + GPU's $200+ Mobo's $300 headsets tri $250+ 120hrz screens will buy it anyways simply because we love the latest and greatest. But the majority of gamers are running systems that maybe total $800-$1100, with a standard 60hrz monitor that cost them less than $100. They will not buy a OR.