Exclusive partners for social VR experiences handeled outside of the OR devs is the future probably.
Think online Netflix parties in a VR theather
Seriously it makes the most sense
Oculus Rift Development Kit 2 announced, up for preorder (based on Crystal Cove)
- Thread starter DieH@rd
- Start date
Think online Netflix parties in a VR theather
Seriously it makes the most sense
Agreed.
OverdriveOtaku
Member
A simple patch can make sure that happens. Facebook will ruin this thing.
And huge constraints and expectations that didn't exist before.
This.
Trust in modders then.
I'll worry when there's tangible reason to. As it stands, I see absolutely no reason for Facebook to gut Oculus and alienate the current user base before the release of the DK2 and CV1, and at that point, the precedent of the headset being an accessory will be set and most of the standards will be in place. If, for some reason, Facebook wants to start ruining things after that (the ideas that people have in the other thread sound so completely steel-beams-wouldn't-melt-like-that absurd, lol), someone else will surely take the lead all the same.
I don't see this negatively affecting Oculus or changing their course in the next two years. I don't think much will change - but I think we'll have to wait a while to get a better idea. The WhatsApp deal still hasn't closed. In the analyst call they really made it sound like a long term bet.
I'm definitely not going to cancel my DK2 order over it. It changes nothing about it.
I'm definitely not going to cancel my DK2 order over it. It changes nothing about it.
..... I really and I mean REALLY don't think they would ever do this and can not understand the thought process that goes into thinking they would do that.
It would be like slapping ads onto a monitor that can some how get ads even though it's not connected to the internet.
Will I still gets these magic ads when I'm offline using the Oculus?
Its not becoming online only and they are not going to "patch" in ads.
"Team,
As you may have heard this morning, Oculus has agreed to join Facebook.
Facebook shares our vision for connecting a billion people through virtual reality with the power of shared presence."
Right off the bat.... that's all they bloody care about
jk/sarcasm
On a serious note, I am very keen to see John Carmack's views on the situation when he has chance to do his quakecon/oculuscon speech.
There are some interesting things to think about concerning the PC. Assuming we are not going to get facebook branded PCs, the directions this goes could increase PC growth and gaming as a whole. But beyond that, it will be important to see if VR with an Oculus product is allowed to exist outside of a Facebook mandated connection. As a business, facebook main revenue is through ad revenue and data. How that effects a VR experience is... quite frankly beyond me.. I don't know what it means
One question:
Why do the people think this is bad news for gaming?
Oculus VR continues to be Oculus VR, and they create just the hardware and the code of the headset. With this new owner/partnership the hardware will be better and produced earlier, and the code continues to be under the Oculus License for the developers.
Nothing has change (yet).
Am I wrong?
Why do the people think this is bad news for gaming?
Oculus VR continues to be Oculus VR, and they create just the hardware and the code of the headset. With this new owner/partnership the hardware will be better and produced earlier, and the code continues to be under the Oculus License for the developers.
Nothing has change (yet).
Am I wrong?
but you'll get advertisements in your headset this is 100% certain
Can you even articulate why?
Pop
Member
Not if you pay $4.99 a month ad free experience.
Yeah because no content and a userbase of 50.000 is much better than lots of content and millions of people using OR for gaming and other things.
Enthusiast focused over mass consumer focused. I doubt Bob cares for anything over 1080p and 75Hz. He just wants his media experiences and it to be $199.
Counterside is building a sustainable base with media creation and then getting the sweet premier stuff later. Hopefully.
stufte
Member
You wanna put real money on that?
A porn company getting Oculus would guarantee to get great video quality in the long run at least!
I hope the acquisition at least means they have the resources to manufacture and distribute CV1 on a large scale so I get a shot at trying it. (Importation Laws + Niche Product = No chance here) If they decide to screw up the device in some way, I hope there will be competing devices that enter the space on PC.
At worst I see them just not going in the interest of enthusiast specs or achieving perfect "presence" on the long run.
I hope the acquisition at least means they have the resources to manufacture and distribute CV1 on a large scale so I get a shot at trying it. (Importation Laws + Niche Product = No chance here) If they decide to screw up the device in some way, I hope there will be competing devices that enter the space on PC.
At worst I see them just not going in the interest of enthusiast specs or achieving perfect "presence" on the long run.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
the geeky crowd hates facebook (you can come up with your own reasoning for this)
up to now, that crowd kind of took an ownership over the rift by being first adopters or by planning to be first-adopters in the case of the consumer version.
the geeky crowd feels betrayed now.
that's really all there is it too this i think.
Jazzkokehead
Member
I was super excited for the Oculus Rift, but this has more or less killed nearly my entire interest in the project. Although it's easy to put a positive spin on it now, I don't believe it will end well in the long run. We've been here before - I remember when Zenimax bought id Software and being assured that would be for the best by various people at the studio, including John Carmack. I believed it at the time, but that ulitmately ended with Carmack leaving, and - as far as anyone on the outside can tell - the studio in a complete mess. I can't help but feel we'll see a similar situation here - I'm inclined to believe that money and business interests will end up being put first, and crush a project that seemed to previously be largely driven by the passion of the people behind it.
I was kidding. I think most of the reactions to this shown in the other thread are absurd.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
it would make more sense to compare this to other facebook acquisitions and facebooks commitment to open source projects.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
i'll make a friendly bet with you that the occulus rift gets upgraded rather than downgraded. they might also have a cheaper 1080p, 75hz version. but theyll launch with a version that is better than dk2.
That's my hope. Two models. One for high end VR, one for more affordable VR. This should be more than possible now.
evil solrac v3.0
Member
or we could also have different SDKs....
and I bet 9 out of 10 have a facebook page and are using it to convey how annoyed they are that Facebook bought Oculus.
I think that enthusiasts are a lot more forgiving than Bob when it comes to VR.
I think my DK1 is awesome but Bob would put it down after 10 minutes and would never touch it again. VR needs to be flawless to reach the "unwashed masses".
Anyway, down the line you know there will be entry level products and premium ones for those willing to pay.
Personally, I just got confirmation that VR is really the revolution I saw coming when I backed Palmer's Kickstarter.
No. The way DK2 is built (and presumably CV1 will be built) that isn't even technically possible.
Again, this changes nothing about DK2, probably very little about CV1, and potentially everything about the long term future of Oculus. However, at that point we'll hopefully have many competitors in the VR hardware field.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
which acquisitions are you thinking of?
edit: and even if there were an example like that. plenty of people leave when they're contractually allowed to after a payday. if palmer and his team are passionate, then they'll hang around. if not, then they would have cashed out when VR got big anyway. though palmer and carmack dont strike me as the hit and quit it kind of dudes to be honest.
stufte
Member
hah ok. You'd never know by the direction most of the comments in here are heading.
I'm the one.
I posted this in the other thread, but that one is moving so fast that I doubt anyone will read it.
Anyway, it's my reasoning why I don't think much will change for Oculus HW in the short term:
Anyway, it's my reasoning why I don't think much will change for Oculus HW in the short term:
- VR is uncharted territory, Oculus doesn't really have a stranglehold on it any more than any other company.
- The basic Luckey/Carmack HMD design is easy to reproduce and probably not protected by any fundamental patents, as shown by Sony and hobbyist-built devices.
- Middle-ware engines can easily abstract software stack details of HMDs as long as they have the same basic feature set (6 dof tracking, stereoscopic high-FoV screen)
I think this belongs here
Palmer Luckey actively answering questions
Q Palmer, as a die-hard fan and supporter since the first day that the kickstarter went live, I am legitimately disappointed by this news, not to mention your response. I feel like your post does not address any of the issues that most people are having, and instead relies on PR doublespeech to avoid our questions. I feel like you have not answered any of the main issues that we are having, such as:
A I am sorry that you are disappointed. To be honest, if I were you, I would probably have a similar initial impression! There are a lot of reasons why this is a good thing, many of which are not yet public. A lot of people obviously feel the same way you do, so I definitely want to address your points:
The appeal of Oculus (as compared to Sony, for example) is because it is on a PC platform, and thus allows us, the developers, freedom over what we want to do with it.
None of that will change. Oculus continues to operate independently! We are going to remain as indie/developer/enthusiast friendly as we have always been, if not more so. This deal lets us dedicate a lot of resources to developer relations, technical help, engine optimizations, and our content investment/publishing/sales platform. We are not going to track you, flash ads at you, or do anything invasive.
The Rift is absolutely targeted towards the gaming population, which tends to be teenage to early 20s/30s, which is the exact population that Facebook is currently losing. By partnering with Facebook, you are gaining access to a massive userbase of people that the rift is not targeted towards, which people might feel is a very bad move.
Almost everyone at Oculus is a gamer, and virtual reality will certainly be led by the games industry, largely because it is the only industry that already has the talent and tools required to build awesome interactive 3D environments. In the long run, though, there are going to be a lot of other industries that use VR in huge ways, ways that are not exclusive to gamers; the current focus on gaming is a reflection of the current state of VR, not the long term potential. Education, communication, training, rehabilitation, gaming and film are all going to be major drivers for VR, and they will reach a very wide audience. We are not targeting social media users, we are targeting everyone who has a reason to use VR.
What we fear is not that Oculus will be partnering with Facebook, but that you are selling out the company to Facebook and no longer retain control over Oculus. I can say that I, personally, support Oculus because I believed in the goals and visions that you had.
This acquisition/partnership gives us more control of our destiny, not less! We don't have to compromise on anything, and can afford to make decisions that are right for the future of virtual reality, not our current revenue. Keep in mind that we already have great partners who invested heavily in Oculus and got us to where we are, so we have not had full control of our destiny for some time. Facebook believes in our long term vision, and they want us to continue executing on our own roadmap, not control what we do. I would never have done this deal if it meant changing our direction, and Facebook has a good track record of letting companies work independently post-acquisition.
There is a lot of related good news on the way. I am swamped right now, but I do plan on addressing everyone's concerns. I think everyone will see why this is so incredible when the big picture is clear.
Follow more responses here (click context for erm context)
Palmer Luckey actively answering questions
Q Palmer, as a die-hard fan and supporter since the first day that the kickstarter went live, I am legitimately disappointed by this news, not to mention your response. I feel like your post does not address any of the issues that most people are having, and instead relies on PR doublespeech to avoid our questions. I feel like you have not answered any of the main issues that we are having, such as:
- Facebook is known for it's intrusive tracking of users, not to mention it's extreme focus on advertisement, intrusive logins, and focus on linking to real-life data collection. The appeal of Oculus (as compared to Sony, for example) is because it is on a PC platform, and thus allows us, the developers, freedom over what we want to do with it. How are you going to guarantee that this partnership will not cause the Rift to become "commercialized", so to speak; for example, targeted ads overlaid over games, intrusive tracking of applications or programs that we run, brickwalling indie developers from the rift, and allowing our personal information to be sold/marketed/given to facebook?
- Facebook, although undebatedly a massive company, is beginning to lose a lot of its teenage population due to the more widespread use of it by the older population. The Rift is absolutely targeted towards the gaming population, which tends to be teenage to early 20s/30s, which is the exact population that Facebook is currently losing. By partnering with Facebook, you are gaining access to a massive userbase of people that the rift is not targeted towards, which people might feel is a very bad move. In fact, it's arguable that you are actually targeting the userbase which has the highest chance of actively opposing the Rift, due to how the middle-aged/older population tends to view technology and video games, and especially the negative consequences associated with them. Can you guarantee that this will not negatively affect the Rift's health?
- The fact that Oculus has been acquired by Facebook, not partnering with Facebook. I noticed that in your post, you were very careful to use the term partnering, which suggests that you retain freedom and complete control over Oculus. However, news sites are stating that this is an acquisition, and the price point thrown around of $2b suggests that this is correct. What we fear is not that Oculus will be partnering with Facebook, but that you are selling out the company to Facebook and no longer retain control over Oculus. I can say that I, personally, support Oculus because I believed in the goals and visions that you had. However, now that you have been acquired by Facebook and no longer retain control over your own company, how can you guarantee that you will continue pursuing these goals?
A I am sorry that you are disappointed. To be honest, if I were you, I would probably have a similar initial impression! There are a lot of reasons why this is a good thing, many of which are not yet public. A lot of people obviously feel the same way you do, so I definitely want to address your points:
The appeal of Oculus (as compared to Sony, for example) is because it is on a PC platform, and thus allows us, the developers, freedom over what we want to do with it.
None of that will change. Oculus continues to operate independently! We are going to remain as indie/developer/enthusiast friendly as we have always been, if not more so. This deal lets us dedicate a lot of resources to developer relations, technical help, engine optimizations, and our content investment/publishing/sales platform. We are not going to track you, flash ads at you, or do anything invasive.
The Rift is absolutely targeted towards the gaming population, which tends to be teenage to early 20s/30s, which is the exact population that Facebook is currently losing. By partnering with Facebook, you are gaining access to a massive userbase of people that the rift is not targeted towards, which people might feel is a very bad move.
Almost everyone at Oculus is a gamer, and virtual reality will certainly be led by the games industry, largely because it is the only industry that already has the talent and tools required to build awesome interactive 3D environments. In the long run, though, there are going to be a lot of other industries that use VR in huge ways, ways that are not exclusive to gamers; the current focus on gaming is a reflection of the current state of VR, not the long term potential. Education, communication, training, rehabilitation, gaming and film are all going to be major drivers for VR, and they will reach a very wide audience. We are not targeting social media users, we are targeting everyone who has a reason to use VR.
What we fear is not that Oculus will be partnering with Facebook, but that you are selling out the company to Facebook and no longer retain control over Oculus. I can say that I, personally, support Oculus because I believed in the goals and visions that you had.
This acquisition/partnership gives us more control of our destiny, not less! We don't have to compromise on anything, and can afford to make decisions that are right for the future of virtual reality, not our current revenue. Keep in mind that we already have great partners who invested heavily in Oculus and got us to where we are, so we have not had full control of our destiny for some time. Facebook believes in our long term vision, and they want us to continue executing on our own roadmap, not control what we do. I would never have done this deal if it meant changing our direction, and Facebook has a good track record of letting companies work independently post-acquisition.
There is a lot of related good news on the way. I am swamped right now, but I do plan on addressing everyone's concerns. I think everyone will see why this is so incredible when the big picture is clear.
Follow more responses here (click context for erm context)
Kinda think a QA thing from Palmer deserves its own thread
stufte
Member
niche technology is dead technology. dead technology is UNSUPPORTED technology.
Fushichou187
Member
POVD v2.0, everybody.
http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/25/why-facebook-bought-oculus/
[Update: As for exactly how Facebook will monetize Oculus, CEO Mark Zuckerberg said on the call to investors, "We're clearly not a hardware company. We're not going to try to make a profit off of the hardware long-term...but if we can make this a network where people are communicating, and buying virtual goods, and there might be ads down the line...that’s where the business could come from."]
I'm not sure what to think...
[Update: As for exactly how Facebook will monetize Oculus, CEO Mark Zuckerberg said on the call to investors, "We're clearly not a hardware company. We're not going to try to make a profit off of the hardware long-term...but if we can make this a network where people are communicating, and buying virtual goods, and there might be ads down the line...that’s where the business could come from."]
I'm not sure what to think...
Ads..ads everywhere even when your gaming..nope fuck this not going to buy it.
I'm waiting to see what exactly will happen. Don't want to get too far ahead of ourselves.
The word is might be ads. Without knowing the goals Oculus VR need to hit, it could be related to implementing communications with the OR, or it could be Oculus VRs own roadmap. In other words, don't delve too deeply into what Facebook says in front of investors, as things will undoubtedly change as well as implementation of supposed ads down the line.
mercenar1e
Member
calling it now, OR hardware will be tied to a facebook account and the advertisements will be glorious.
Krisprolls
Banned
It was the good time to sell, especially at this price. Zuckerberg really overpaid for this.
Morpheus would have killed this thing real fast since Sony will have both more AAA content due to 1st party studios AND a bigger potential installed base.
It's not like it was extraordinary tech or anything. It's basically a screen on your head, it's certainly easy to duplicate. 2 billions ? No way...
Another stupid Facebook move...
Morpheus would have killed this thing real fast since Sony will have both more AAA content due to 1st party studios AND a bigger potential installed base.
It's not like it was extraordinary tech or anything. It's basically a screen on your head, it's certainly easy to duplicate. 2 billions ? No way...
Another stupid Facebook move...
stufte
Member
Can't wait to quote you in a few years when this and the other threads are hilarious in hindsight.