They have the best VR headset in the market. The only problem is that it’s also mining all your data.
Fedizen@lemmy.world 2 months ago
its like they have too much money and they’re burning it away on bad ideas. Imagine how much public housing that money could have built.
Croquette@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
Do they? I thought it was just the cheapest.
OADINC@feddit.nl 2 months ago
It’s the best for normal users (price vs performance), not for VR pros or the best experience possible.
Vash63@lemmy.world 2 months ago
That’s because they’re losing billions selling it. If it cost what it actually took to produce it wouldn’t be the best on the market anymore, they’re trying to bully out players who can’t afford to lose billions for years until they’re in total control.
Croquette@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
Is it the cheapest? I don’t follow VR much anymore.
I agree being the best is subjective, but the UX is impeccable.
Pull out the helmet, setup the guardian and you can play pretty much anywhere.
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
Ok, so it sounds like you put a lot of value on a standalone experience. So something like a Switch or phone for gaming instead of a gaming PC.
That seems to be the area they win at. They don’t have the best image, refresh rate, or tracking accuracy, but they are easy to get going with, and it’s inexpensive relative to other options.
tal@lemmy.today 2 months ago
I doubt public housing would have made a fantastic return either.
AstralPath@lemmy.ca 2 months ago
If all you care about is money, then yeah sure. If you actually give a shit about humanity the return would be absolutely immense for society.
xpinchx@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Think about it liner term… All the people struggling at the bottom now have secure housing. More money is free for nutrition, hygiene, they can get better jobs or afford schooling… Trades or higher education. More people have a chance to escape poverty and contribute production, get more money to spend, more money gets out into local economies. So and so forth. It’s a good idea.
BassTurd@lemmy.world 2 months ago
They shouldn’t have that amount of disposable income in the first place, and a good portion should have been tax money. If that money were invested in public housing the return would be massive.
flerp@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Really? You don’t think that building solid foundations for people to get on their feet and start making more money themselves, money that they can turn around and spend on more products, would have a fantastic return? The benefit for the economy would be immense but corporations can’t write that into their spreadsheets changing their bottom line so it “doesn’t count”
Savaran@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I mean, you do understand that this money isn’t just vanishing right? It’s being spent on people, manufacturing, materials. It doesn’t just vanish into nothing.
Black_Gulaman@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
yeah it gets distributed in the economy and gets absorbed in the system. at least it’s not being hoarded or funneled outside the country.
the other poster is just parroting things they do not understand.
Fedizen@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Its also drawing real resources away from other things. The real estate used on these luxury failures had other potential buyers and raises costs across the board as it competes for chip factory space, marketing, etc.
If the money was taxed out of circulation it actually does essentially vanish, increasing the value of every remaining dollar if the state budget remains unchanged - its the easiest way to reduce inflation.