I think the biggest downfall for a single player game is weak story and repetitive missions. If you can get past those two things you will make a killing.
And yet games that are notorious for that (ahem, every Ubisoft game) do quite well. I think people view them as good value for money, even if the content is usually not very original or interesting.
We're all sick of loot boxes, that is certainly true. I'd much rather they were never put in. However, I disagree that the game has been altered to promote their use. They feel like a feature demanded by the publisher, not the developer, and tacked on after.
In regards to your point about the design of the game, I'd point you to Shadow of Mordor, which uses the exact same system of interrogating orcs to track captains, engaging in Nemesis missions, and building an army through domination. This is just the basic design of the Shadow games, established in 2014, before loot boxes were a thing.
The ability to switch input methods on the fly is a key selling point for myself and many others.
I play difficult progression content with a mouse and keyboard at my desk and other stuff in the living room on the couch with a controller.
I press 1 hotkey to switch a game window to/from the TV including swapping audio output devices. So it takes seconds to switch from my office to living room.
Also, on the post topic: the game uses P2P client communication in PvP, so on that basis alone the game can never be competitive.
But if you already have a decent PC (med to high end), which I assume most PC games enthusiasts do, the $600 price tag starts to bring VR into an affordable range. Again, for enthusiasts. For regular folk, people that maybe haven't bought a video card in the last years, the need for a PC upgrade is a major deterrent.
Sorry for the $ to pound thing :(
It's not the US who decided to start Brexit, we have ourselves to blame here. If we swapped positions, we'd probably be doing the same thing to you :P
VR is affordable for the enthusiasts, but not all friend-groups have the power. Many will own older/weaker hardware, some will see VR as too much still. It's still too much to persuade 3 other people VR is worth the investment, they need to come to that decision on their own before they'll be willing to invest more money than a 4K console into the headset.
Spending $10 (or £10 apparently) each to get to play the headset in the same room as your friends though, all together, you've turned VR into a social experience. It's affordable, accessible to the masses, you get to walk away laughing with your friends about what you just did together.
It's not going to spur on development for RPGs and other heavy games I hope to see on the platform in the future, but it sure would ease tension around the headsets, increase the amount of usage, boost profits for developers and all-round be good for the industry.
Currently it feels as if we're stood on the precipice, still unsure whether VR is going to take off or sink. With the slightest change in sales, profits, or public opinions; VR could still get shot out of the water and collapse as a medium. If the large developers were unable to see any potential profit from making VR games, they will all stop making VR games, which will kill off the medium. I see VR arcades as a solution to avoid this. Maybe I'm overthinking, I don't have any statistics to back up these thoughts. I can be very pessimistic at times :P
Are you mentally disabled or didn't read the article? CIG didn't ask for more money, it asked for a loan in British pounds through a bank that will allow them to repay in USD so that they don't have to convert the crowding USD and EUR to GBP and don't have to pay the fee either. Plus they can do the tax rebate that way.