Developers rush into the VR market together. Most issuers take a wait-and-see attitude.

it has something to do with the fact that developers choose to enter the VR market together at this time. By contrast, publishers without any support are at much greater risk. And they also have good reason to think that the current blowout of VR software and hardware is just the appearance of platform support, and the real number of VR users is actually far from enough to support publishers to make enough money. Steve, general manager of

Versus Evil, mentioned that although the size and capital of the VR market is gradually increasing, the VR platform has not yet formed enough users. According to the VR Daily, current users are not stable, and it is difficult for publishers to determine their real needs and will not consider moving into the VR industry until the market is mature.

Chillingo, an independent game publisher, also believes that publishers understand users' needs better than developers. Publishing a work is usually very different from developing a work, and the publisher must take more responsibility for marketing, data analysis and quality assurance. Once the grasp of the market is not accurate, VR works will be limited by the quality and the ability of developers to promote to the market.

in addition, due to the lack of production capacity at the beginning of the launch of Oculus Rift, coupled with the delay in delivery of Gear VR and the delay in the launch of PlayStation VR, SuperData has directly adjusted the data of this year's VR market. SuperData lowered its sales forecast for VR software and hardware by 22% in April, which may also be one of the reasons why many small and medium-sized publishers are cautious.

strong > the VR platform itself has a release effect, and some publishers are transforming into developers / strong >

part of the VR platform actually already has certain release functions. For example, SteamVR and FibrumVR platforms focus on the introduction of traffic, and some platforms even help developers to carry out activities such as publicity and joint planning through sales sharing, so as to improve the sales of works.

this also grabs the jobs of some publishers from the side. In the work of the publisher, community building is a very important part, and the role of the community is mainly to achieve the introduction of traffic. But the effect of small and medium-sized publishers is not necessarily better than the platform itself, which forces many publishers to become more cautious about virtual reality.

the community established by Scopely, a mobile game publisher, is a rare example of success. The total number of users of the Scopely community has exceeded 25 million, and it has also contributed to the introduction of traffic.

on the other hand, by examining the traditional game industry, we can find that it is actually a normal phenomenon for enterprises to have a complete development and distribution system at the same time, and the distribution and production of a work is usually very vague in the division of labor.

therefore, it is common for publishers and developers to transform each other. For example, Crescent Moon, a mobile game developer, started as a developer and gradually transformed into a publisher. And Team17, the developer of "hundred battles", has also distributed other people's works "Hay Ewe". In contrast, EA, Activision, Sony and some traditional companies that have transformed the software industry start with distribution.

under this system, orthodox developers often become outsourcing factories, and Enix outsourced all the work except planning and art to the developer ChunSoft when he completed the work of DQ (Warriors against Dragons).

as VR content is still in the early stages of development, many developers often do not have the ability and experience to issue it, and their works usually end up on the platform. As a result, the chances of VR developers turning into VR publishers are slim, whereas the latter already have the conditions to transform into the former.

publisher DeNA began to dabble in the development of VR content. They not only established the venture capital business related to VR, but also jointly developed the VR game "Protocol Zero (zero agreement)" with Samsung, becoming the first enterprises to link Gear VR.

because it is difficult to determine whether the VR works produced by small and medium-sized developers are good enough, publishers may turn to develop their own products. The issuer itself has channels, brand promotion and other advantages, such as a wider range of partners, a more complete quality risk control system, and more online and offline channels and so on. As a result, publishers are more likely to succeed after transforming into VR developers.

strong > large distributors basically have self-produced VR works, and are testing the market through works / strong >

for large distributors such as Square Enix and Capcom, they have their own works that focus on the VR market. These enterprises are more willing to test the market with their own content, and are usually unwilling to accept the works of other developers and are in a wait-and-see state.

Square Enix is trying to take advantage of the old IP "final fantasy" to enter the VR market, while Capcom has previously launched a trial version of biochemical Evil VR. In addition, the Star Wars series of EA and DICE has already landed on the VR platform, and Activision's call of Duty VR is rumored to be in production. Ubisoft, on the other hand, unveiled two VR games, Eagle Flying and Star Trek: bridge members, at this year's E3 show.

these publishers are actively developing VR-related products. In contrast, they are somewhat hesitant about whether or not to release VR content. Yosuke Matsuda, CEO of Square Enix, said in an interview with the media that they are in a wait-and-see state for the entire industry of VR, and it is impossible to invest too many resources in the early stage, especially in the release.

however, it is not only independent VR content that is not popular with large publishers. Large publishers tend to value IP rather than try to innovate. From the VR content they developed, we can also see that many works continue the old IP of the past, these contents are just the continuation of the brand for them, and the role of the expansion, DLC is not too different.

although the distribution business in the VR industry is not hot, we can see that many companies with distribution capabilities have entered the virtual reality market, but the distribution function has not yet been fully launched. Issuers, as a link between content producers and consumers, are difficult to replace in a short period of time, and with the maturity of the VR market, publishers will gradually begin to speak out.

Edit: yvette