Support NeoGAF

[Miguel81]

I wonder how much damage this will cause to kickstarter funding. I know most people here are sensible, but other sites are pure madness.

 

[call_kotaku]

I thought Sony was the company trying to patent stuff for VR?

In any case I think what Oculus would want to protect is their SDK, since most of their components are (or were up to the Facebookaton) just off the shelf parts or otherwise just generic.

If Oculus wanted a patent war I'm sure they'd be suing Sony right now, because the Morpheus design is pretty obviously derived from the basic Oculus setup, especially compared to their earlier stuff based on their HMZ.

 

[Deuterium]

I thought Sony was the company trying to patent stuff for VR?

In any case I think what Oculus would want to protect is their SDK, since most of their components are (or were up to the Facebookaton) just off the shelf parts or otherwise just generic.

If Oculus wanted a patent war I'm sure they'd be suing Sony right now, because the Morpheus design is pretty obviously derived from the basic Oculus setup, especially compared to their earlier stuff based on their HMZ.

Suing them for what, exactly? As far as I can tell, Oculus VR only has the one patent (see previous post), and it is so generic as to be a joke.

 

[benjipwns]

I apologize in advance if this has already been posted...

However, it looks like Oculus has only one patent, and it appears to be so ridiculously generic, that I don't see how it could be enforceable. In fact, I don't understand why the USPTO even granted the patent.

Here it is:

http://tinyurl.com/lbat3ku

In typical Patent filings, the "Claim" is usually quite specific. In fact, Claims are usually quite detailed, including any and all supporting information. The more specific and delineated the claim, the better chance the patent assignee has in maintaining enforcement through legal action.

In Oculus' case, it is just the opposite:

CLAIM: "The ornamental design of a virtual reality headset, as shown and described."

The rest of the patent filing consists of drawings of the headset. Nowhere is there any claim for proprietary technology. I find this most unusual. Facebook certainly didn't purchase Oculus VR for their patent.

Define "typical" because...or do you mean from a serious company/project?

 

[ChrisMahoney]

please. morpheus was in dev since 2010. it just wasn't public like oculus. yes, oculus was out there first "publicly", that does not mean they pioneered vr in a big way. in hindsight, all the things sony was doing was to prepare for morpheus. gaming in 3d, move, the original eyetoy, the cyclops headgear, etc. when you combine all those together you get the morpheus.

we will be going on this same path regardless of oculus being kickstarted. not because of morpheus or oculus or spartacus, but because vr has always been the goal of interactivity in games. remember virtua boy? we just came to the point that the tech is there so vr can be a viable device, much like how 2d games back in the 16bit era were doing pseudo-3d until the tech was there (affordable for consumers) to actually render vectors and polygons. this is the same thing. even in this forum there's been talks of vr way before oculus even popped up. why? it's the next logical step.

Proof it's been in deep development since 2010? I would think a hardware corporation as large as Sony would be ahead of Oculus in development if they've been developing VR since 2010.

 

[Deuterium]

Define "typical" because...or do you mean from a serious company/project?

Well, the latter. I am not saying Oculus isn't a "serious" company. I am just a bit perplexed by how utterly generic their patent is. I really can't see how this patent secures any form of technological, intellectual property.

 

[syko de4d]

Suing them for what, exactly? As far as I can tell, Oculus VR only has the one patent (see previous post), and it is so generic as to be a joke.

There could be other Patents pending that are not public at the moment. Oculus always said their have some patents, it was always a little mysterious. We will see was the future holds.

 

[benjipwns]

Well, the latter. I am not saying Oculus isn't a "serious" company. I am just a bit perplexed by how utterly generic their patent is. I really can't see how this patent secures any form of technological, intellectual property.

I've seen some pretty high estimates at times of how many approved patents in the system are garbage, vague, generic or duplicates. Especially regarding computers and the like.

Basically if you fill out the paperwork properly they sorta just let it through until an actual challenge comes up.

It might not stand up, a lot of these don't once somebody actually looks at them.

 

[John_B]

Facebook is paying two billion now for a potentially huge platform that easily could be worth ten times as much later.

I honestly don't think that Facebook has any grand schemes with Oculus VR for now, other than letting them advance the tech and grow the platform. They can't interfere much without souring that process, so they will just add big bags of money to the mix.

Now what happens when Oculus takes off and becomes a huge platform? That should be a big worry. Facebook very likely won't be trying to make money from providing great games to their customers, but instead make money from adds.

 

[tino]

Valve said they have no plans to produce and sell their own VR HMD

I am sure they would change their mind if Amazon/Samsung put 1 billion cash in front of them without saying a single word.

 

[Boken]

Facebook is paying two billion now for a potentially huge platform that easily could be worth ten times as much later.

I honestly don't think that Facebook has any grand schemes with Oculus VR for now, other than letting them advance the tech and grow the platform. They can't interfere much without souring that process, so they will just add big bags of money to the mix.

Now what happens when Oculus takes off and becomes a huge platform? That should be a big worry. Facebook very likely won't be trying to make money from providing great games to their customers, but instead make money from adds.

or you know, they can create a VR app store and just make money like normal people

 

[Polk]

When they just started out, 12.5 million valuation for an unproven but promising tech idea would've been reasonable in the private equity world. They have no sales data to really project a future growth plan. Again though it is just fun with numbers and I think too many people on here will take it seriously.

The kickstarter folks might have gotten something out of it, like a headset, so its fine. I'm just laughing at crowdsourcing. And yes, crowdsourcing is exploiting a resource. You can determine on your own if it was a good or bad one.

Well you should substract amount of money "investors" got back in product ie. developement kits from that $2,5M because it was their real "investment".

 

[Triple U]

I apologize in advance if this has already been posted...

However, it looks like Oculus has only one patent, and it appears to be so ridiculously generic, that I don't see how it could be enforceable. In fact, I don't understand why the USPTO even granted the patent.

Here it is:

http://tinyurl.com/lbat3ku

In typical Patent filings, the "Claim" is usually quite specific. In fact, Claims are usually quite detailed, including any and all supporting information. The more specific and delineated the claim, the better chance the patent assignee has in maintaining enforcement through legal action.

In Oculus' case, it is just the opposite:

CLAIM: "The ornamental design of a virtual reality headset, as shown and described."

The rest of the patent filing consists of drawings of the headset. Nowhere is there any claim for proprietary technology. I find this most unusual. Facebook certainly didn't purchase Oculus VR for their patent.

I haven't been able to find one reason why Oculus is/was valued at 2 bln. No cash, other than VC money. No assets, other than working prototypes. No patents.

There must have been some bidding war or something.

 

[SomeOneInaHat]

Cliffy's blog post about the whole thing

http://dudehugespeaks.tumblr.com/post/80832803371/riftbook

 

[Phil4000]

http://dudehugespeaks.tumblr.com/post/80832803371/riftbook
Haha gotta love Cliff's comment on Notch at the end, I completely agree...

"p.s. Notch, your cancelling Minecraft makes you look like a pouty kid who is taking his ball and going home. It’s a bratty and petty move and it saddens me greatly."

 

[Log4Girlz]

http://dudehugespeaks.tumblr.com/post/80832803371/riftbook
Haha gotta love Cliff's comment on Notch at the end, I completely agree...

"p.s. Notch, your cancelling Minecraft makes you look like a pouty kid who is taking his ball and going home. It’s a bratty and petty move and it saddens me greatly."

That's a workout in itself, imagine lugging around some solid gold ball.

 

[Triple U]

http://dudehugespeaks.tumblr.com/post/80832803371/riftbook
Haha gotta love Cliff's comment on Notch at the end, I completely agree...

"p.s. Notch, your cancelling Minecraft makes you look like a pouty kid who is taking his ball and going home. It’s a bratty and petty move and it saddens me greatly."

Huh? Notch parted 10k into Oculus, that's no chump change. And he stands to gain nothing from this move. Notch has reasons to be mad.

Meanwhile Cliff's blogpost that's prefaced with "fuck you bitch Im gettting paid" is supposed to be some vindication?

 

[Doc Holliday]

I haven't been able to find one reason why Oculus is/was valued at 2 bln. No cash, other than VC money. No assets, other than working prototypes. No patents.

There must have been some bidding war or something.

I think luckey showed zuckenberg stuff we haven't seen yet. The same tech cliffy was going nuts about a few weeks back.

 

[Miguel81]

Huh? Notch parted 10k into Oculus, that's no chump change. And he stands to gain nothing from this move. Notch has reasons to be mad.

Meanwhile Cliff's blogpost that's prefaced with "fuck you bitch Im gettting paid" is supposed to be some vindication?

It's easy to tell who are the the CA's in this thread. That comment before about "sucking the corporate cock" would have been funnier if it wasn't true.

 

[Codeblue]

Cliffy's blog post about the whole thing

http://dudehugespeaks.tumblr.com/post/80832803371/riftbook

p.s. Notch, your cancelling Minecraft makes you look like a pouty kid who is taking his ball and going home. It’s a bratty and petty move and it saddens me greatly.

Calling a colleague pouty, bratty, and petty in a forced jab could be described in the same terms. Super odd considering it was incredibly unprofessional in an otherwise informative and unrelated post.

Notch is doing what he wants to do, supporting the companies he wants to support. He's putting his money where his mouth. To say that he's being petty would be to say that anyone who has ever boycotted anything is being petty. He even linked to a VR mod, so it's not like he's barring Minecraft from Oculus, just saying he won't do business with a company he doesn't want to support.

 

[Reallink]

When they just started out, 12.5 million valuation for an unproven but promising tech idea would've been reasonable in the private equity world. They have no sales data to really project a future growth plan. Again though it is just fun with numbers and I think too many people on here will take it seriously.

The kickstarter folks might have gotten something out of it, like a headset, so its fine. I'm just laughing at crowdsourcing. And yes, crowdsourcing is exploiting a resource. You can determine on your own if it was a good or bad one.

He may very well face some legal troubles from his pre-KS backers as it's somewhat lesser known that he accepted funding from people directly on the MTBS forums months before the KS'er was a thing. I'm assuming there's little to nothing in the way of a formal contract or agreement (certainly for the first few transactions) and obviously those people could claim any number of things.

I don;t htink doesn't have reasons to be mad, not any really good ones anyway. No matter what Rift team would do, he still wouldn't gain anything for his 10K. So what is he exactly angry about?
Dude has lots of money and could have actually invested in the company instead of donating through Kickstarter. If he did that he would be reaping profits from it right now. He can only blame himself for missing out on this chance.

To be fair, he may very well have tried to at the time. Surrounding the KS, Palmer was hounded by requests from individuals wanting to invest in the company, but their blanket response has always been that they weren't accepting any. No doubt that also includes some number of the outraged people Cliffy's shitting on from his pile of cash.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Huh? Notch parted 10k into Oculus, that's no chump change. And he stands to gain nothing from this move. Notch has reasons to be mad.

Meanwhile Cliff's blogpost that's prefaced with "fuck you bitch Im gettting paid" is supposed to be some vindication?

I don't expect cliffy to call out Rift when Epic sold a nice chunk of itself to Tencent

But he's right about the Kickstarter bitching

 

[leadbelly]

One billion nine hundred and ninety nine million, nine hundred and ninety nine thousand, nine hundred and ninety nine US dollars!

 

[Wiktor]

Huh? Notch parted 10k into Oculus, that's no chump change. And he stands to gain nothing from this move. Notch has reasons to be mad.

I don;t htink doesn't have reasons to be mad, not any really good ones anyway. No matter what Rift team would do, he still wouldn't gain anything for his 10K. So what is he exactly angry about?
Dude has lots of money and could have actually invested in the company instead of donating through Kickstarter. If he did that he would be reaping profits from it right now. He can only blame himself for missing out on this chance.

 

[Doc Holliday]

I don;t htink doesn't have reasons to be mad, not any really good ones anyway. No matter what Rift team would do, he still wouldn't gain anything for his 10K. So what is he exactly angry about?
Dude has lots of money and could have actually invested in the company instead of donating through Kickstarter. If he did that he would be reaping profits from it right now. He can only blame himself for missing out on this chance.

Doesn't sound like he cares about the money.

 

[fade_]

His statement of Facebook having a "multi billion user reach" helping is hilarious. 99% won't have a device powerful enough for Oculus for quite a while. Also his claim of Instagram being the same is true...but for how long?

http://adage.com/article/agency-news/instagram-inks-ad-deal-omnicom-worth-100-million/292037/

Looks like change might be a slow burn. Like boiling a frog.

 

[Aaron]

I don't expect cliffy to call out Rift when Epic sold a nice chunk of itself to Tencent

But he's right about the Kickstarter bitching

Notch shouldn't be calling them out either considering the check Microsoft cut him for limited Minecraft console exclusivity.

Looks like change might be a slow burn. Like boiling a frog.

Aside from conspiracy theories, when is change ever done that way in business? If and when Facebook changed Oculus, it'll be abrupt and obvious.

 

[Codeblue]

Notch shouldn't be calling them out either considering the check Microsoft cut him for limited Minecraft console exclusivity.

Except Notch never called anyone out on anything. He just said he didn't want to work with a company he disagrees with.

 

[fade_]

Aside from conspiracy theories, when is change ever done that way in business? If and when Facebook changed Oculus, it'll be abrupt and obvious.

Facebook has been a master at it with its constant privacy tweaking over time. It wasn't the personal data monster it is now at its inception.

 

[Triple U]

It's easy to tell who are the the CA's in this thread. That comment before about "sucking the corporate cock" would have been funnier if it wasn't true.

exactly

I think luckey showed zuckenberg stuff we haven't seen yet. The same tech cliffy was going nuts about a few weeks back.

And it would still qualify as a working prototype. As an independent valuation, there is nothing about OR that equals 2b.

 

[Aaron]

Facebook has been a master at it with its constant privacy tweaking over time. It wasn't the personal data monster it is now at its inception.

No. Unless you're talking about pre explosion Facebook when it was limited to certain colleges. There have always been privacy concerns with Facebook. They have adjusted their TOS in alignment with those concerns and shifting of laws. Every company involved with personal data does this. I work at a hospital, and we have updates on handling patient records sometimes every few months. If you didn't realize your personal information was at risk by posting it on Facebook, you were the fool. Same as your search history and Google. Just because people didn't talk about it right away didn't mean it wasn't that way from the start.

Did you really think Facebook started as this benevolent free service where you could connect with friends? Targeted ad were the very obvious plan from the beginning.

 

[fade_]

No. Unless you're talking about pre explosion Facebook when it was limited to certain colleges. There have always been privacy concerns with Facebook. They have adjusted their TOS in alignment with those concerns and shifting of laws. Every company involved with personal data does this. I work at a hospital, and we have updates on handling patient records sometimes every few months. If you didn't realize your personal information was at risk by posting it on Facebook, you were the fool. Same as your search history and Google. Just because people didn't talk about it right away didn't mean it wasn't that way from the start.

Did you really think Facebook started as this benevolent free service where you could connect with friends? Targeted ad were the very obvious plan from the beginning.

Yes I was talking about college student only facebook but that's not my point. They also make small tweaks that don't amount to much but over time are big changes. For example changing the fact that you can't make yourself unsearchable to other users. The privacy concerns weren't as numerous/bad as they are now basically. They slowly made it worse over time as they got hooks into more people. It didn't happen overnight.

 

[troushers]

More importantly, they needed an ecosystem. IF their system is going to be (hopefully) a dedicated system instead of a (ugh) peripheral they need their version of whatever the app store would be. Your device is only as good as the store and community around it; if users can’t say shut up and take my money, if developers can’t post their work then the device will ultimately flounder.

Facebook acquisition is terrible for their ecosystem. It's driving away some of their most enthusiastic early adopters, and for what? Some vague expertise from facebook? Where is facebooks amazing ecosystem, especially in gaming? They've squeezed their facebook developers so much, and changed the goalposts on what they are allowed to do so much that major devs are struggling. It's hardly dynamic, or without its problems, so I'm not sure what CliffyB is on about here.

Facebook can assist with this sort of thing, as well as having a multi billion user reach.

Oh, advertising. That thing that doesn't work all that well with VR.

Making a social network that stays relevant is extremely difficult, as we’ve seen over the years. We’ve all wondered - where’s the next Facebook? Every time some sort of potential app or service comes along that challenges them in any sort of way Facebook flexes their financial muscle and snatches it up.Here’s the thing about kids and teens - when it comes to social networking and apps their departure is the proverbial canary in the coal mine. If your network is losing the kids, then the teens are next, followed by the adults, and then grandma has no one left to poke. By purchasing WhatsApp and Instagram Facebook has kept its head above water, and by purchasing Oculus they’ve shot back into hyper relevance. Worried Facebook is going to ruin Oculus? Check out Whatsapp and Instagram…turns out they’re working just fine since their acquisition.

You see, I'd draw different conclusions from the same set of facts. Facebook is struggling to stay relevant, and so is purchasing other people's users to keep the merry-go-round going, which isn't cost effective in the long run. They are unable to change the serious deficiencies in their own company that is driving away the demographic they value most. They are unable to penetrate overseas markets like whatsapp, so they had to buy them out. Their software development in-house were unable to conceptualise and produce a free lightweight messaging app that worked as well as whatsapp.

When cliffy is saying Whatsapp have done great since their acquisition, when it is only 6 weeks ago it happened, you know the guy is struggling with reality. Anecdotally, my entire circle of friends of about 20 people are switching over, in ones and twos, to telegram, which saw 8m more downloads after news of the acquisition broke. How much erosion of the whatsapp userbase has there been? Cliffy doesn't know - so why is he pretending everything is fine?

I doubt notch is the only developer that switched from enthusiastic to not interested. I'm sure a bunch of them felt less strongly, but still switched from fully committed to wait and see.

 

[Nerokis]

Seriously, while I found it odd that Notch cancelled Minecraft VR discussions in such a ridiculously knee-jerk way, what's with Cliff Bleszinski feeling the need to insult him again and again?

Otherwise, his tumblr post is solid enough.

 

[Miguel81]

Seriously, while I found it odd that Notch cancelled Minecraft VR discussions in such a ridiculously knee-jerk way, what's with Cliff Bleszinski feeling the need to insult him again and again?

Otherwise, his tumblr post is solid enough.

Envy? Notch is a great name for womanizers.

 

[Brohan]

I for one think this will definitely help VR become mainstream, so i have no problems with this at all.

 

[Cygnus X-1]

Cliffy's blog post about the whole thing

http://dudehugespeaks.tumblr.com/post/80832803371/riftbook

Good stuff, but I'm not convinced.

2 billion $ offer is and remains in my opinion the determining factor. It's the kind of offer that makes you being able to accept any compromise. What remained to be done afterwards was just to justify it - which can be done in one hundred different ways.

 

[Aaron]

Yes I was talking about college student only facebook but that's not my point. They also make small tweaks that don't amount to much but over time are big changes. For example changing the fact that you can't make yourself unsearchable to other users. The privacy concerns weren't as numerous/bad as they are now basically. They slowly made it worse over time as they got hooks into more people. It didn't happen overnight.

I think the mistake is believing there are levels of privacy. Once a company has your information, there's always a risk something bad will happen with it. Those risks haven't gotten better or worse since Facebook opened to the public. They have never been some hush hush secret just because the majority of people signing up didn't stop to think about it. Facebook didn't gradually come into this intention. This was their goal from the beginning. They've just been working on getting better at it. If this is the boiling frog, this a frog that got into water that was already boiling because it's a frog. It doesn't have a clue what 'boiling' is.

Good stuff, but I'm not convinced.

2 billion $ offer is and remains in my opinion the determining factor. It's the kind of offer that makes you being able to accept any compromise. What remained to be done afterwards was just to justify it - which can be done in one hundred different ways.

'You' as in yourself. You're projecting a little here. Luckey rejected a 1.5 billion offer before this one. Either he was driven by greed all along, and this was always going to be the end result, or he was holding out for a deal that allowed him to commit to VR as he wanted to.

 

[Absinthe]

Cliffy's blog post about the whole thing

http://dudehugespeaks.tumblr.com/post/80832803371/riftbook

The one thing that bothers me with this post is this:

"More importantly, they needed an ecosystem. IF their system is going to be (hopefully) a dedicated system instead of a (ugh) peripheral they need their version of whatever the app store would be. Your device is only as good as the store and community around it; if users can’t say shut up and take my money, if developers can’t post their work then the device will ultimately flounder. Facebook can assist with this sort of thing, as well as having a multi billion user reach."

Why does Oculus need an ecosystem? What is the comment "your device is only as good as the store and community around it" supposed to mean when you have Steam on every gaming PC in existence. Steam already provides this ecosystem and I see no reason to create another one only to force an install of Facebook's version of Origin.

It seems like he is trying to convince us that Oculus as a peripheral (ugh, in his words) is a bad thing. Personally I see nothing wrong with Oculus being another way to enjoy games with Steam as the center. Why create another "app store" other than to make money off of developers and further dilute the PC ecosystem.

 

[Boken]

The one thing that bothers me with this post is this:

"More importantly, they needed an ecosystem. IF their system is going to be (hopefully) a dedicated system instead of a (ugh) peripheral they need their version of whatever the app store would be. Your device is only as good as the store and community around it; if users can’t say shut up and take my money, if developers can’t post their work then the device will ultimately flounder. Facebook can assist with this sort of thing, as well as having a multi billion user reach."

Why does Oculus need an ecosystem? What is the comment "your device is only as good as the store and community around it" supposed to mean when you have Steam on every gaming PC in existence. Steam already provides this ecosystem and I see no reason to create another one only to force an install of Facebook's version of Origin.

i dont see why we have to settle with steam

and realise that what they're going for is more than just gaming. steam is for games, thats fine enough - but lets say OR wants to sell a virtual tour of the louvre etc. that sort of thing just doesnt make sense on steam anymore.

edit: responding to your edit, it is because its meant to be MORE than gaming. thats just the bottom line

 

[SparkTR]

'You' as in yourself. You're projecting a little here. Luckey rejected a 1.5 billion offer before this one. Either he was driven by greed all along, and this was always going to be the end result, or he was holding out for a deal that allowed him to commit to VR as he wanted to.

Luckey was never the determining factor, Oculus already 'sold out' way back during the Series A funding round in early 2013 (according to this post). Whether Facebook or a series of investors, they were never in complete control of Oculus VR.

Those companies that remained (mostly) independent over the years (Valve, Telsa) did so on the back of a millionaire founder (Gaben and Elon Musk). Oculus never had that luxury so they were always at the hands of opportunists with varying ideals. Facebook is the most stable Oculus has ever been, but I want to wait and see what happens.

 

[Triple U]

i dont see why we have to settle with steam
and realise that what they're going for is more than just gaming. steam is for games, thats fine enough - but lets say OR wants to sell a virtual tour of the louvre etc. that sort of thing just doesnt make sense on steam anymore.

edit: responding to your edit, it is because its meant to be MORE than gaming. thats just the bottom line

You're right. Why side with steam when you got Faccebook? Can't get candy crush saga on steam.

 

[hooijdonk17]

I really don't get all the people who try to play this down and pretend it's not terrible news..

This is the equivalent of Microsoft buying out 3dfx in 1995.

 

[mrklaw]

Didn't realize he was actually an investor on Oculus; good post though. But that doesn't calm all the fear that a company like Facebook might change the trajectory of the Rift to suit THEIR needs. As a gamer, if that happens, it won't likely match mine.

Sure, but cliffy gives two examples of previous acquisitions where their trajectory hasn't changed. Of course it is a risk, but assuming they were going to be bought out by someone, Facebook is arguably the least likely to mess with the plan short term compared to eg Apple or MS would have.

 

[Miguel81]

The one thing that bothers me with this post is this:

"More importantly, they needed an ecosystem. IF their system is going to be (hopefully) a dedicated system instead of a (ugh) peripheral they need their version of whatever the app store would be. Your device is only as good as the store and community around it; if users can’t say shut up and take my money, if developers can’t post their work then the device will ultimately flounder. Facebook can assist with this sort of thing, as well as having a multi billion user reach."

Why does Oculus need an ecosystem? What is the comment "your device is only as good as the store and community around it" supposed to mean when you have Steam on every gaming PC in existence. Steam already provides this ecosystem and I see no reason to create another one only to force an install of Facebook's version of Origin.

It seems like he is trying to convince us that Oculus as a peripheral (ugh, in his words) is a bad thing. Personally I see nothing wrong with Oculus being another way to enjoy games with Steam as the center. Why create another "app store" other than to make money off of developers and further dilute the PC ecosystem.

Think for yourself. Being a genius doesn't mean you have common sense.

 

[Nerokis]

I really don't get all the people who try to play this down and pretend it's not terrible news..

This is the equivalent of Microsoft buying out 3dfx in 1995.

It's been less than 48 hours. In the very short time we've had to process this news, or for the implications of it to unfold, a variety of perspectives have been shared. It amazes me you already so take for granted its terribleness that anyone with an alternative point of view must be "playing it down"/"pretending."

 

[hooijdonk17]

Everyone is entitled to their naivete, and I respect your right to be amazed. I also reserve my right to laugh and say 'told you so' later down the line.

 

[Boken]

You're right. Why side with steam when you got Faccebook? Can't get candy crush saga on steam.

i understand the mentality where you have to "side" with something, but im merely pointing out that steam isn't necessarily the best and that we can always do better - or at the least, more relevant.

 

[Nerokis]

Everyone is entitled to their naivete, and I respect your right to be amazed. I also reserve my right to laugh and say 'told you so' later down the line.

A variety of the more pessimistic predictions could easily play out in the end. Certainly, though, the potential to be right doesn't cancel out the need to be reasonable.

 

[MisterHero]

I wish I had $2 billion to invest on future technology.