Meta is pulling the plug, not on a single feature, not on a prototype, but on entire studios. Twisted Pixel, Sanzaru Games, Armature – names that rarely make headlines in the classic AAA discourse, but were essential for the VR market.
And while Meta talks about "shifts" and "wearables," an uncomfortable truth remains. If even the world's largest VR investor is losing faith, what does that say about the future of the medium? For PS-VR2 This development is more than just a footnote; it is another warning sign.
Meta capitulates, and calls it strategy.
Officially, everything sounds controlled. Reality Labs is being streamlined, with around ten percent of the workforce to be laid off, and resources being shifted from the Metaverse to wearables and AI. In practice, however, Meta is now closing precisely those studios that have developed content exclusively for VR for years.
Twisted Pixel, founded in 2006, is responsible for cult titles such as 'Splosion Man, most recently with Marvel's Deadpool VR One of the few larger VR projects with brand power. Sanzaru Games, also launched in 2006, only Asgard's Wrath, Dann Asgard's Wrath 2A game that Meta itself positioned as a system seller for Meta Quest 3. And now? Studios shut down, developers laid off, and entire projects put on hold or even disappeared. This is a retreat from a dying market.
Why this directly affects PS VR2
While Sony continues to rely on third-party developers, PS VR2 suffers from another, almost equally dangerous problem: strategic silence. No first-party announcements, no clear roadmap, and little communicative support. The impression is growing that VR is treated internally more as an add-on than a core strategy. And this is precisely where Meta's move becomes toxic.
Because VR thrives on a fragile trust: the belief that platform owners will invest long-term. When Meta – the very corporation that burned through billions to make VR mainstream – publicly shifts its focus, it acts as justification for everyone else to also hit the brakes. The underlying message: If even Meta no longer fully believes in it, why should we?
The domino effect for developers
For third-party studios, this sends a fatal signal. VR productions are expensive, risky, and difficult to recoup. The installed base of PS VR2 is limited, and MetaQuest relies heavily on bundles and subsidies. If first-party backers also drop out, there's hardly any argument left to justify larger budgets.
What follows is predictable:
- even less ambitious projects
- More ports instead of new developments
- More experiments, less risk
In short: exactly what VR has been trying to leave behind for years.
VR is dying faster and faster.
To be fair, VR might not disappear completely, but it's practically on its deathbed. only recently discoveredThere are certainly dedicated studios and plenty of technical potential. But the market is shrinking back to a status that many thought had long been overcome: a market for enthusiasts, not for breakthroughs.
Meta's decision is therefore not a single stab in the back, but another blow to an industry that is already bleeding. For PS VR2, this comes at a particularly bad time. The hardware is powerful, but the ecosystem is fragile. Without clear investments, without visible flagship projects, and without a clear communication commitment, exactly what Sony wanted to avoid is looming: a loss of relevance through stagnation.
The uncomfortable question for Sony
Meta has made its decision. Openly, brutally, and consistently. Sony, on the other hand, remains silent as always, and that's precisely what's dangerous. Because in the current VR climate, silence is interpreted not as calm, but as retreat.
If PS VR2 is to remain more than just a prestige project, it needs a counter-signal now. Not sometime in the future, but now. Otherwise, Meta's withdrawal will retrospectively become a self-fulfilling prophecy, also for Sony's VR future. And then this move wouldn't just be the next blow to VR, but one the industry has inflicted upon itself.
"Bad omen for PS VR2" doesn't surprise me, better games, end of story.
Many people probably don't like VR, or have never tried it. Therefore, they can't really judge it. I don't want to play VR games every day. But some games are better in VR.
Resident Evil 4 without VR would never have been so successful.
We've already discussed this topic; the Resident Evil 4 remake was mostly consumed as a non-VR version. Again, compare the number of units sold to the number of PS2 VR headsets sold, and you'll have the result. Furthermore, Separate Ways and Mercenaries mode don't work in VR. And if I had the choice between a VR mode in single-player only or more content but no VR, I would always choose more content in Resident Evil.
"units sold"
As I already said, it's a matter of taste.
But! Resident Evil 4 got better, which is why the VR version is GOOD.
For the record, I don't just want to play VR games, VR is only cool in/for some games.
I played Rocket League in VR back in the '90s (it had a different name, of course). Naturally, it was an eyesore, obviously, it was the '90s.
For me, VR is just an accessory/extension.
But I wouldn't want to miss it.
Because it's an experience.
Resident Evil 4 remake in VR is even more action-packed than without it because you can use two pistols simultaneously. Of course, you're entitled to your subjective opinion, but for me, VR is and will remain a niche product. This is particularly evident in the Resident Evil 4 remake, where you can only play the main story in VR; the other content is completely inaccessible. It's like if, for example, you could only play the main story on a future PS6 handheld and not the DLC because, I don't know, it wasn't optimized for mobile gaming. Capcom doesn't need VR to make good Resident Evil games; on the contrary, in my view, it's a waste of time and money. These resources would be better invested in new IPs, sequels to old ones (Dino Crisis, DMC, Capcom vs. ...), Resident Evil sequels, and further remakes. Even the first-person perspective seems like a waste to me. Sure, it's always good to have options, but I'll be playing Resident Evil 9 in third person, whether it's Leon or Grace. For me, the first-person perspective is outdated. It can be immersive in individual scenes, but for an entire game, it's not the perspective I want to play. Third-person makes more sense to me, especially because of the skins, battle system, etc. And besides, VR can't really take off because there are genres like fighting games that rely on you being able to see your character's actions. From a competitive standpoint alone, VR can't be universally successful; a game like Tekken or a sci-fi game just doesn't work in VR.
And as I wrote to Hans, I'm playing Dying Light: The Beast, so if any game is suitable for VR, it's probably this one. But since Techland isn't doing it, the cost-benefit analysis doesn't seem to be in a healthy balance, and it's not profitable. Even the VR mode for Resident Evil 4 Remake came later; the priority is clearly on non-VR content. And given the current financial situation of the market, I don't think many developers will, want to, or can afford to take this risk. Handhelds, in that sense, are also a risk. They won't deliver standalone game content, regardless of whether it's Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft. The goal will be to make the library currently available for regular consoles compatible with mobile devices. The days of dedicated handheld-only games are over, and the same is true for VR.
Google gemi
"The Resident Evil 4 Remake (2023) has sold extremely well and is the fastest-selling game in the series, with over 10 million copies sold worldwide by April 2025."
"There are no exact official sales figures, but studio estimates and reports indicate that over 2 million PSVR2 units have been sold."
Resident Evil 4 Remake was released on PS5 and other platforms including PS4, PC, Xbox Series X/S, iOS, and Switch. A second version is forthcoming, and none of these platforms officially support VR. Even if the PS5 version sells 5 million copies, only 2 million of those will actually use the VR version, assuming every VR owner also bought Resident Evil 4 Remake. The other versions lack VR support, meaning people bought the game for other reasons, not specifically for VR. The game is successful even without it; it doesn't need it because the gameplay, graphics, and scope are all excellent. And yes, a few women probably only bought the game because of Leon.
It's been tried many times, but the technology is simply too cumbersome. Furthermore, given the social media culture and so on, there's a great deal of reservation about intrusive technology. In times when many people want to get rid of or restrict their smartphones, hardware that gets even more involved with their bodies understandably struggles. It's a fascinating experience, but companies like Meta have lost the necessary trust, and accessibility has always been a problem.
You're right about the meta aspect, but the other arguments don't hold water for quest 3.
Unplug, turn on and start playing anywhere, no matter where you are.
The Quest 3 is incredibly accessible and suitable for everyone. I was against it for a long time, even because of the meta, but the Quest 3 is the best VR headset, at a fantastic price, with incredibly fairly priced games that are already ridiculously cheap in sales.
Anyone who still doesn't want VR is to blame themselves.
Or perhaps it's because people don't want to isolate themselves, which is necessary for VR.
People isolate themselves for gaming on PC, console, and mobile phone… and social media also isolates people… that argument doesn't hold water xD It's like reading a book alone. It's actually advantageous to wear your headset and just be "away" for a while.
I keep hearing that it's too expensive, too blurry, etc., doesn't have any games, or makes you feel sick. All of those points are untrue, except for the nausea, and you get rid of that very quickly because it's just a matter of getting used to it, and you can, for example, use a fixed point to counteract that if you want. 🙂
Most of the time, people who speak negatively about VR are those who have never actually used it themselves, or who only briefly tried it back then with the "inferior" headsets like a PlayStation VR (1) headset... VR has developed enormously, and what a Quest 3, for example, can do is simply amazing.
Well, you have to remember that the nerds of yesterday who isolated themselves for gaming are now family men, and gaming has become mainstream, something you experience together. I think VR will never work for that reason. Look at the MetaQuest, it was wireless, even affordable in some cases, and yet it still didn't catch on. The fact that all the publishers are focusing more on third-person games than first-person perspectives doesn't help either. Sony is the best example; they even have a VR headset themselves, but only two games that can be played in first-person: GT7 and the Horizon spin-off. I don't think VR will disappear, but it's just not suitable for the mass market.
I already get nauseous from regular first-person shooters. I'm currently playing Dying Light: The Beast, which is fun, but if I had the choice, I'd switch to third person immediately. Shooting and running are okay, but climbing and the parkour elements are really exhausting.
Meta is huge, and if their metaverse is shut down, the games will naturally fall too, because they alone are simply too insignificant for the corporation.
As a sim racing enthusiast, I naturally hope that the VR niche grows slowly rather than shrinking. I'm especially hoping for PSVR3.
Are there any reliable figures on the overall VR gaming situation? VR gaming in general isn't doing well. VR sim racing, however, isn't doing badly. It's just perhaps not enough for Sony to stick with it.
While YouTubers quickly dismissed PSVR because it wasn't suitable for creating good content, I know many Gran Turismo players who now swear by it. It's simply operating below the general awareness threshold.