To respond to your points in order...

I'm not sure if you're talking just about tethered VR here or all VR in general, but either way 0.00001% of enthusiasts is way beyond exaggerating and with PSVR selling just shy of 5 million units alone it's a completely redundant point. It might not be in every home but it's far from a niche little toy that no one see's the value in.

While FOV isn't great on a lot of headsets, it's certainly not a major issue, and doesn't cap out at 105 either. There's a few contenders on the market that reach 120 on their devices and that will only increase as the technology does. There's a lot more that can be done to combat motion sickness besides just FOV and I see this being explored in various games and apps that I have experimented with, some that reduce it to comfortable amounts, others that completely remove it from the experience.

The price IS a legitimate issue, and one that is slowly being addressed but not as quickly as I'd hope for myself. Dev support is limited but again "not there" is an exaggeration as there are hundreds of mind blowing and incredibly involved games produced for gamers to get lost it.

As for your last point, very few headsets need a living room worth of space to be enjoyable. The HTC Vive feels like the headset you're targeting here, but even with that there's thousands of games and apps that provide excellent experiences from your computer desk or couch. I've only played a few open space VR games but I much prefer the titles that allow me to sit down and experience things at my own pace, the last thing I want to do after a long days work is put a headset on and dance around the house.

These might have all be borderline valid points at one moment in time, but they're quickly becoming those VR myths you read about in forums made up be people who aren't interested in or do not have the funds for virtual reality.

I still feel that we don't have the talent/budget from developers to truly make VR worthwhile for anyone but that 0.00001% of enthusiasts who are into new tech.

The 'FOV' issue is a major one.  I find it both amusing and laughably-bad that with as long as VR has been available to the public that nobody thought to offer one that has an adustable FOV...ideally anywhere from 75 to 155 would be a good range.  Capping out at barely 105 is not going to help many people who are new to VR and suffer from simulation sickness.

Also the price point makes these pricy peripherals completely pointless.  The dev support isn't there (mostly niche budget indie titles) and there are no 'killer apps' that aren't just ported from other systems.

Finally, on a purely practical level, not everyone has the living space required to enjoy these in the comfort of their home because their homes are either small apartments or otherwise have too many breakable items around to make it worthwhile.

Motion controls are far easier to sell because it doesn't require a complete loss of visual awareness of one's surroundings.

Google Stadia will fail.  It will fail because ISPs and the USA networking infrastructure cannot support fluid low-latency gameplay over the internet for action/twitch games that rely on that split-second response time.  Imagine if you are playing an FPS, you press the 'fire' controller button, but the avatar on screen only fires the gun about a half-second later.

That's cloud gaming in a nutshell.  If Google wants to try to sell this to the overseas market then they may have to make deals with local ISPs and give up a significant portion of their profits to do so.  Net cafes are already entrenched in South Korea, Japan, and China.  They won't give up their oligopoly that easily.

I'd say the EU is likely the best region to try this out, but there's a hostile political climate over there that prevents meaningful change.

Time for the USA govt to invoke 'eminent domain' and sieze the infrastructure, then sell it to any ISP willing to rent the lines from them.  Do like the EU and you have hundreds (if not thousands) of regional providers.

NetEase literally ripped off 'Stick Fight' videos on YT, threw in some multiplayer, and try to claim it as their own.  How absurd.

In fact the videos on YT are literally called 'Stick Fight' as well.  Wish they'd sue NetEase and win ;)

Riddle me this, how does something both 'innovate the genre' while simultaneously being a shameless clone of another game (Enter the Gungeon)?  It makes no sense to me.