Global VR developers report: 80% are making games and 70% believe that it is difficult to make profits but there is a lot of space

although hundreds of developers have different views on the profitability cycle of VR, 95% of the respondents believe that the VR industry will become a long-term and long-term market, which is exactly the same as the proportion of visits last year.

since VR set off the first wave of capital and public opinion between 2014 and 2015, related content has been in the spotlight periodically in the past few years.

as far as the game industry is concerned, people have also formed some inherent impressions about VR. For example, practitioners are mostly engaged in the development of game content, and their commercialization ability is weak at the current stage. What is the specific situation behind these impressions?

not long ago, UBM (which oversees GDC, VRDC and Gamasutra) released a VRDCVR/AR Innovation report with data from a survey of more than 600 people from virtual reality, augmented reality, and mixed reality practitioners (VR/AR/MR).

according to its introduction-"the detailed data in the report are designed to provide a valuable perspective for the study of this fast-growing industry." There are some interesting findings in this survey, such as the significant increase in the use of HTCVive and OculusRift, and the fact that practitioners are generally optimistic about the future of VR but also understand the initial difficulties in the current industry. "

< strong > are most VR practitioners playing games? < / strong >

for the mass industry that has the fastest acceptance of new technology, it tends to be an entertainment industry, which is typical in the gaming industry's acceptance of VR. Of all the industries, games seem to be the most closely tied to VR.

so are the facts close to this public impression? According to the survey report of

VRDC, about 78% of the respondents are engaged in development work related to games and entertainment, followed by those who focus on education and training, accounting for 27%. Brand experience, industrial / product design and health care are also more involved, accounting for 14% of 20%, while coverage in areas such as real estate and travel is significantly less.

the statistical results of practitioners are basically consistent with the current mainstream impression of the public. At present, most VR practitioners are engaged in the development of games and entertainment. Because of the diversity and vividness of its presentation forms, VR-related technology was first used in the entertainment industry, such as games, film and television. This may be compared with the revolutionary promotion brought by 3D technology to the film, television and game industry. when 3D technology was not yet mature, the film and television and game industries were also the first to test the water, and the improvement of the performance of film games by technology was obvious to all. At the same time, the demand for product performance has also reversed the progress of related technologies. VR technology has the opportunity to play the same role.

< strong > platform distribution: Vive is the most popular, MR platform starts late < / strong >

< strong > < / strong >

after knowing the development direction, the next question comes-which is the favorite development platform for VR practitioners?

"when we asked the interviewees this question, the answer they gave was roughly the same as that of last year's Innovation report." This is what the VRDC report says.

according to the survey, the most popular platform for developers is HTCVive, with 56% of respondents developing related content, followed by OculusRift with about 49%. Samsung GearVR accounted for 33% of the choice. Is the most popular mobile VR platform. The selection ratio of GoogleCardboard and GoogleDaydream of Google system is both 24%, which is significantly lower than that of the first group.

it is worth mentioning that PSVR, which is often compared with HTCVive and OculusRift, only ranks sixth, accounts for 19%, and does not enter Top5. PSVR, which is widely popular at the user level, is not generally welcomed by developers. This may also have something to do with the binding of PlayStation.

overall, Vive and Rift are becoming more and more mainstream choices. Compared with the statistical results of the previous year, the penetration of HTCVive and OculusRift among developers has increased slightly. Last year, 49 per cent, 43 per cent and 34 per cent respectively chose Vive, Oculus and GearVR. " The original text of VRDC reads like this.

the survey also mentioned MR platform MagicLeap for the first time. Before that, there was little interest in MagicLeap as a mixed reality development platform with little exposure. In this survey, about 20 developers (3%) said they were developing on this platform. From this point of view, compared with VR and AR, MR is indeed still in a more initial stage. There is a lack of sufficient foundation for both supporting platforms and developers.

in addition, from the survey data, the current platform distribution ratio will not change significantly in the future.

when asked about the release platform for the next product, the choice of the developer community is basically the same. The preference gap between Vive and Rift has narrowed to 52 per cent and 50 per cent, respectively. Samsung's selection ratio has dropped significantly, while PlayStation has remained basically the same.

it is important to note that both questions about platform preferences are multiple options, which means that a considerable proportion of developers prefer development work supported by multiple platforms. At the same time, the proportion of developers who prefer the exclusive development of a single platform is also on the rise. According to this year's statistics, about 31% of respondents said their next product will be exclusive to a single platform, up about 10% from last year.

platform preferences are distributed differently on the question of" on which platform will the next product be released exclusively ". 35% of people chose Vive, while those who chose Rift dropped to 13%, which is equivalent to GearVR. There is a significant gap between the two by Vive.

< strong > the source of funding has improved slightly, and the process of commercialization is slow < / strong >

in addition to the differences between platforms, the source of funding is also a significant restriction on the development of VR, which is also very common in small and medium-sized development teams. We have heard from time to time that many independent team members put their personal money into development. Are there serious restrictions on funding sources for mass developers, and what is the composition of them?

VRDC's statistics show that the funding sources of practitioners have improved slightly compared with last year. According to the data, about 40% of developers rely on the company's existing funds, 31% rely on personal funds, and 21% rely on customer income. In last year's statistics, 49% of developers mainly rely on personal funding, which has dropped significantly. Corporate capital and customer revenue are also up from 33% and 16% last year. These data can more or less prove the progress of the commercialization of the VR industry, but the speed of this process is obviously not optimistic.

this year, Angel Round Investment, a VR funding source, accounts for 10%, down 3% from last year, while venture capital is the same as last year's 10%. At present, the developers of the VR industry are still in the stage of needing a lot of funds to maintain operation and promote R & D upgrading. The uncertain effect of commercialization and the indifference of capital will affect the development speed of this emerging industry.

< strong > the VR industry < / strong >

most VR practitioners have a more direct understanding of the development restrictions mentioned above. Therefore, a total of 77% of respondents believe that VR/AR/MR has to go through a medium-to long-term development process in order to achieve better profitability. Only 16% of developers are optimistic that the VR industry will achieve optimistic returns in the short term. Another 8 per cent are negative and believe that VR is impossible to make a profit.

from some of the interviews provided by VRDC, some optimistic people have their own relatively formed products / services that can directly benefit developers. Those who believe that VR profits tend to be medium-term believe that "there are a large number of VR platforms at present, but the ways of experience that can be provided are generally the same and there is not much innovation." This group of developers believe that in the next few years, VR practitioners will have the opportunity to create a variety of content experiences to meet different needs. If this can be achieved, there is an opportunity to make a profit in a not-so-long period.

it is believed that the considerations of developers with a long profit cycle are close to those of public opinion such as the media. These people believe that the market of VR is far from mature, and that as an emerging industry, there is no clear paradigm or guidance, and its hardware and other elements need a long-term process of precipitation and exploration.

interestingly, although hundreds of developers have different views on the VR profit cycle, 95% of the respondents believe that the VR industry will become a long-term and long-term market, which is exactly the same as the proportion of visits last year.

another point about AR/MR practitioners' views may be different from the public impression. When asked "whether AR/MR will win more market share than VR in the long-term development", 77% of the respondents gave a positive forecast. This may become the trend of talent and capital flows within the industry in the next few years.

Edit: xiongwei