That's because they're smart enough to recognise a gimmick when they see it.

I don't blame them. It'd cost a lot of money and time for something that still hasn't proven it's not a fad that'll fizzle out in 2 or 3 years.

Sony, Facebook, HTC are pretty big companies behind VR

Yeah they will. But first you have define what a commitment is to VR.

If you mean create a ground up only for VR videogame that takes advantage of Vive's room sensors, then perhaps.

If you mean take the games you already play like CoD, Assassin's Creed, Battlefield, Star Wars, etc, etc... then they would be fools not to. It's not like it take much time to patch in support for it.

There's two types of VR, most people will want to play their normal games, the normal way (no/limited motion controls), and no room sensors. Just instead of playing by watching on a TV, you'll be playing with a VR headset on.

This way solves all those problems. All one has to do is get used to wearing the headset.

You don't have to develop around the room constraints, and multiple sizes of rooms.

You don't have to make short games that aren't too repetitive, like could you imagine having to climb EVERYTHING in Assassin's Creed... that would suck.

You don't have to make special games that can only be played by people with VR headsets, thus a limited userbase to sell to.

You don't have to spend a lot of money this way, and that's the way most people (whether they know it now or not) will play VR long term. Yes you want the other stuff too, but when you want to game for a nice long session you don't want to be flailing around. Motion controls are not for long sessions, and VR isn't going to change people into wanting only short sessions.

It's accessible this way because it enhances the way you play the games you currently play.

30fps sucks. Especially on an OLED.