>>397693530
>Much harder than flat. VR is very new, so you cannot just steal ideas and shit out your "pixelated metrodivania number 589", so you are basically on your own.
Yeah, that's quite an interesting point you make. It seems VR consumers at the moment are a lot more savvy in terms of judging what's a good value proposition for software than the supersaturated flat market. I think this was figured out years ago already when most oculus games launched just shy of full price flat games or less because they rightfully released that just getting people in the door to the platform was a hard enough challenge. Kids and thirdworlders will always flock to apps that are free and don't respect privacy or data, or have ways to monetise users. This will only get worse as platforms like VRchat grow and even as Web3 fuckery evolves. Don't count out all that cryptobro virtual property shit. They'll be back next bull to shill the same shit devoid of tangible value to suckers.

VR development seems like a tough workload. There's a great amount of room to do something truly innovative but it seems like the dev costs are high and the pressure is real. It kind of resembles the flat industry back in 1993 onwards where the entire development paradigm shifted to 3D and suddenly there were a lot of really difficult technical hurdles to solve. A lot of developers hit brick walls and couldn't hack it, but those that did changed the industry. Consumers didn't know/care just how hard it suddenly got because they remain ignorant from those facts. Consumer expectations will always be sky-high and ignorant.