If there’s a problem with the device you will get no warranty because the 1 year will have expired before you even tried it. 
2 Likes
So the stretch goal was contingent on this? I don’t remember that being posted on the kickstarter page.
The fact is there is a “cheap” eye tracker ( compared to how much they cost during the kickstarter) but pimax wants us to pay for it
I just want to get this straight, are you saying that Pimax originally planned on using SMI’s single digit dollar eyetracking and because SMI didn’t release it thats why the price has now gone up?
Thing is, the final cost of the item is NOT OUR PROBLEM !
We paid to support a product that didn’t even exist, with promises of additional hardware if we met specific goals. Pimax didn’t honor that, they now want to make us pay for those attained goal rewards. That’s breaking the promise, that’s shady business practices.
1 Like
If we are talking about „getting this straight“: you claimed you know that Pimax had the intentions to not deliver the eye-tracking solution at no charge at the time of the Kickstarter campaign.
If you don‘t believe me, revisit your posts (and please don‘t edit them now).
I just called you out on this bs claim.
And excuse me for bringing up 2+ years old articles, but you were educating us on what Pimax thought at the time, so who on Earth would bring up recent articles to show the environment which formed their thinking and decision making?! It seems that you, at last, understood this and edited it out again. Well, one step forward, so no hindsight bs any longer.
At the time it was believed, see subject article, that even high-quality eye-tracking for VR would become available cheaply, SMI being one of the options.
Today we know this has not materialized, the Rift S, Index and Cosmos all were released w/o that capability. In 2016 there was a different expectation.
And we are, with all due respect, talking about a stretchgoal added for free, not about a core element of the headset which when not purchased makes the entire headset unusable.
But carry on claiming that they never intended to provide eye-tracking for free, to me it reflects more on your insight into the whole eye-tracking subject than on Pimax though.
I’m not editing anything, I just want to understand why you posted the SMI article and quoted the bit about eye tracking costing a few dollars. SMI were bought by Apple in June 2017, Pimax announced the eyetracking for free 28th October 2017, so obviously there was no expectation from Pimax of being able to use SMI’s “few dollars” eye tracking, its a nonsense argument.
The article you posted is now 4 years old, it was already 2 years old when Pimax announced free eyetracking so it just bears no relation to anything to do with Pimax. Nowhere in the kickstarter info does it say “assuming we can make eyetrackers for single digit dollars”. It was a bait and switch pure and simple.
Stick to your opinion, but I wont buy that kind of conspiracy crap which would mean a company which already managed to successfully fund its KS campaign adds a stretchgoal for free intending to not deliver it anyhow - from the start. That was your claim.
I cannot see any scenario where that would have made sense to them. Even if Pimax were pure evil they still would want to harm others - not themselves.
Your claim lacks any substance which would make it seem probable as a scenario.
Nad for the last time I will point out that at the time there was a belief that eye-tracking would be available for low cost (attention, SMI is not the only company on this planet allowed to come up with eye-tracking solutions, and Chinese companies may even expect to see the tech be copied soon by local companies when somebody has achieved a breakthrough).
It‘s about the expectation in the industry that this technology has broken the barrier to become available commercially for consumer products, which then failed to really happen. That doesn‘t mean that it has to be SMI who the would buy it from, funny to bring this argument - it‘s not a proprietary tech like lighthouse tracking, and even here we see that Pimax are exploring alternatives with the Artisan.
Was it not great from Pimax to offer stretchgoals like eye-tracking without having secured contractually from a supplier that they can deliver it ? Perhaps.
Would other KS campaigners have done it differently - err, in my experience the performance of the main promise often is way behind what Pimax did, let alone any stretchgoals. So not sure I would single them out here.
Would any of the above bring me to the conclusion that they did it with intent, from the start ? No.
But then again, I don‘t believe that Elvis is alive and neither that Aliens are amongst us, so perhaps we are just too different. I don‘t like conspiracy theories until I see actual substance which makes it a more than only very remotely possible scenario.
Overuse of hyperbole doesn’t stop it being a bait and switch, which is still illegal in most countries regardless of original intention.
Your argument just makes no sense because it was already 2 years out of date when the kickstarter happened, its not even vaguely a valid defence.
Pimax have proven repeatedly that they have chosen to prioritise profits over honouring statements made during the kickstarter, its just another cash grab like all the other “misscommunications”.
The fact that you’ve gone full bore in to ad hominem attacks only goes to prove how faulty your logic is.
1 Like
As my dear mama would always say. “Profit over peasants”. You will do well to remember this.
It’s just 2 to 3 very vocal people here who demand Pimax to operate on a net loss regarding these trackers - even though they have stated clearly that the stretch goal couldn’t materialize as promised.
That’s part of the Kickstarter experience.
By the way, you did not pay extra. You want free stuff.
Realistically, what do you expect, for them to operate at a loss? What do you think, how the Pimax employees feed their children? Really guys… get a grip! @geoffvader @peteo @Wildcopper
3 Likes
Yes, many kickstarters do operate on a net loss because they use the seed funding to fund R&D and then sell the actual product for a large mark up to make a profit on the project - that is the known risk the company takes when choosing to fund their project via kickstarter), given the many other ways that backers have been screwed over by pimax, free eye trackers is really the least they could do. I’d still be willing to bet that the eyetracking is not costing pimax $99 and that is actually still a cash grab.
Looking through the 200+ posts in this thread, its quite a bit more than 2 or 3 who were unhappy with the change in Pimax’s position. I mean, without actually polling all 5000 backers you have no idea what the proportion is.
From when Pimax announced free eye tracking to when the kickstarter closed they generated an additional $1.7 million in funding, so yes, quite a lot of people did pay “extra” as they may not have even backed at all before that.
What I really like is that the pimax fans want to bury this topic, but keep posting in it which keeps it alive and at the top. Some people just can’t help themselves I guess.
2 Likes
I think we’ve had enough of this. Move on guys.
4 Likes
Agreed. I think the compromised new Backer Price fixed this.
As for “Bait & Switch” maybe that could be a valid point. Instead of giving those the option of the $99 R&D Wide FoV Eyetracker with Prescription Lens adapter compatibility.
They should send those folks the off the shelf eyetracker as shown I think it was in May KS Update with a clip. How good it works won’t matter or that it blocks FoV.
It’s because of people like you that companies can continue that kind of promise breaking. No matter what you say, it’s bad business practices, it’s not honest.
2 Likes
And honorable mention to „Wow, you’ve really gone full fanboy haven’t you.“ which seems to have disappeared again.
Geoff, my criticism of your original post was not about all of the fog you are throwing up above, but about your claim that you know for sure that Pimax deliberately announced that stretchgoal during the KS campaign with no intention from the start to ever live up to it.
That is a very strong claim, as it would effectively mean that they acted with cirminal intent. This is a claim, which at least in Germany can make you personally liable to civil damages and criminal charges if Pimax suffered tangiable reputational damages as a result of your statements and went after you (and you cannot prove at court that your claim is true).
I get the distinct impression that you must be quite young and frankly have no idea what you are saying, and the connotations of claiming that somebody is a criminal.
So please consider if you really wanted to claim that Pimax are effectively criminals, and if you do, for God’s sake stand by your claim like a man - and finally provide evidence of it. Or suck it up.
But don‘t dish out statements and then try to hide behind this kind of fanboy claim etc…
Man, this kind of posts just get me very annoyed. Yes, we get it, you are unhappy with the eye-tracking surprise price tag, and guess what, I was not exactly pleased with it too. But instead of starting to slash out calling them criminals because I feel safe hidden behind my keyboard I actually start to consider the whole situation and which factors may have played a role and which options they had.
Goodness grief.
Sorry for the rant, I know I will regret it tomorrow…
3 Likes
Ok guys, should we close the thread, move your posts to a group PM, or will you stop insulting each others?
5 Likes
Well for those of us who will not give pimax more money, we had the coolest, most expensive stretch goal, and the one which led to my decision to back, taken away and offered nothing in return. All whilst they’re spending their time and our money designing other stuff instead of delivering on any stretch goals.
It’s this inappropriate behaviour that led to my decision to not give them anymore money in the first place.
6 Likes
This devolved long ago into a insult contest. The topic has 200+ posts and has clearly been exhausted.