• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Facebook has acquired Oculus VR for 2 Billion US Dollars

I think it's fascinating that people still think that way even after Sony jumping on the bandwagon and then this $2B deal.

I could understand (though not agree with) this lack of imagination when it was just a few geeks on kickstarter, but now?
Lack of imagination has nothing to do with it, because I can easily imagine all the things that VR needs to make it really immersive and attractive to a mainstream market (wireless, untethered, non-cumbersome headsets, better periphery awareness, a whole new paradigm in I/O systems - haptics, discrete motion tracking, etc.) which I still just don't see happening anytime in the next 10yrs. For the next 5-10yrs all I see them really accomplishing is maybe a minimalist headset that finally doesn't need to be tethered, with decent battery life that can actually be sold to consumers at a reasonable price.

This all just feels like a massive gold rush over the equivalent of the Pong years of videogaming...
 
Android is open still, and that's just a piece of software. The Rift is a piece of hardware that would suit Facebook working as the next level of media. Whoever pushes VR will be in the history books forever, like the Lumiere Brothers creating the first theater for open consumption of film. Zuckerberg is recognizing how huge VR will be, something that I thought MSFT would grab a part of with the Fortaleza and IllumiRoom projects.

Android isn't particularly open.

If Rift remains only as open as Android that would be exactly the sort of disaster that many of us are afraid of.
 
0Gdbs.gif
 
Oculus just shot themselves in the foot.

I don't know how much the rest of you know about the culture of the Virtual Reality R&D space (I'm an expert), but honor and shame are huge parts of it. It's not like it is in Social Networking where you can become successful by being an asshole. If you screw someone over in VR, you bring shame to yourself, and the only way to get rid of that shame is repentance.

What this means is that some people, after hearing about this, is not going to want to purchase Oculus for Farmville or Half-Life, nor will they purchase any of Oculus' products. This is HUGE. You can laugh all you want, but Oculus has alienated an entire market with this move.

Oculus, publicly apologize and cancel Facebook's aquisition or you can kiss your business goodbye.

Bushido VR
 
How could the device possibly change to support Facebook's business goals? It's a hardware display technology, there's not really any opportunity to embed any sort of social networking feature in it.
Facebook's entire business model is making money by making the consumer the product, and aggregating ad revenue/sharing data. For Facebook (a public company) to spend $2 billion up front, and agree to spend addition funding, you can bet they'll monetize the Rift somehow. They're not a charity. But who knows, it might not be too intrusive.
 
I'm coming to the realization that if this is the foundation that VR is built on, I will probably never put on a VR helmet in my life :(

Hopefully an open and safe platform will be available at some point.
 
Ah fuck it, this thread is going around in circles of stupid. Until we see what happens, this is just a clash of misinformation from all sides. See you all in 6 months.
 
I'm sure I've played as much as more games as anyone, and even I can see that VR is more than just games. A garage dev was just given the money to make the perfect experience, and everyone is melting down. I expected more frankly.

Nowhere in that post did I ever say that VR is JUST games. And you still havent explained why you came to a gaming enthusiast message board only to be surprised you found people laser focused on the gaming aspects of this technology.

Because confirming only the negative is irrational.

As is only confirming the hypothetical positives. Im glad we agree. Your shock is still just as strange to me however.

I don't think there are any fundamental patents, thank god. Just mindshare, technology and talent.

Yeah, patent wise there's nothing there. OR could crash and burn under facebook and VR would still be just as viable so long as someone pursued it. Its not the end of the medium at all.
 
One of the worst things is I bet alot of people are going to stop developing for the dev version for the time being until they see where the pieces land.

well... we might get other companies (like Nvidia for an example) making their own VR devices if they see loys of developers are not willing to work with Facebook.

imagine dat 3D Vision VR with a built in G-sync :P
 
Yes... a device you strap to your head to virtually be places won't have any social networking applications.....

Of course it does, but they'd be optional and software-based. The Rift is a "dumb" hardware device. It's recognized as a display like any other monitor.
Short of requiring some sort of proprietary driver that overlays ads on the screen, I'm failing to see any way Facebook could force integration with the product.
 
May have been said, but: How revolutionary would it be if Ock Rift monetarily rewarded all of the micro-investors that helped KickStart it based on their investment? It would fundamentally change Kickstarter and investments even more than crowd-funding has.

Not happening. Funding a project on Kickstarter is charity at best, and a scam at worst.

If you don't get what you were expecting, we'll if that isn't just too fucking bad.
 
I hate this company. I really do. I always try to stay away from it. Tried instagram nope they bought it, tried whatsup, they bought it too.. Now the biggest dream of my gaming life , guess what ? They bought this one too ...
 
I think what troubles me most about this acquisition is that Zuckerberg really doesn't see Oculus as a gaming platform:

After games, we're going to make Oculus a platform for many other experiences. Imagine enjoying a courtside seat at a game, studying in a classroom of students and teachers all over the world or consulting with a doctor face-to-face — just by putting on goggles in your home.

But this is just the start. After games, we're going to make Oculus a platform for many other experiences. Imagine enjoying a courtside seat at a game, studying in a classroom of students and teachers all over the world or consulting with a doctor face-to-face -- just by putting on goggles in your home.

This is really a new communication platform. By feeling truly present, you can share unbounded spaces and experiences with the people in your life. Imagine sharing not just moments with your friends online, but entire experiences and adventures.

Facebook sees Oculus almost like an iPad: a device that supports gaming, but not a gaming device. I can't imagine a scenario where this doesn't affect resource allocation by the company, among other things.

So yeah, in the hands of a gamer or game-centric company Oculus would be in a much better position as a gaming platform. Whether it will now include target advertising or whether Facebook will keep it wholly open is irrelevant to this basic fact: Oculus is no longer a gaming platform. It will never be the gaming device it could have been because its focus has changed.

It's not all doom-and-gloom, but the future ain't as bright as it could have been either.
 
Is there a single example of where getting bought by Facebook or Google has led to something better than pre-acquisition? Apple has OSX, iPhone, Siri and iTunes. Google, well Android was an acquisition right?
 
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?
I know that due to the massive negative backlash right now, chances are you will not reply to this post. However, I hope that sooner or later, you will provide us with answers to these issues, since I feel that you stand to lose a large section of your fanbase.

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.
I hope he is not lying.
 
Amazon making console. Facebook buying Oculus. Goodbye gaming, prepared to be milked to eternity.

That is a worrying thought

He may not be, but he might be naive.

Time will tell.

I have to believe he understands enough to see what he is doing and what is best for, what may well be his legacy. He must know what the long term facebook goals are and likely sees them as a compromise but one that is inevitable as much as we would want to deny it
 
Where did this "Sony jumping on the bandwagon" and "taking Rift's unpatented tech" narrative come from?

Hasn't Morpheus been in development since 2010?
 
If it were Apple who bought Oculus VR, I'd be far more worried. But for now I'm remaining neutral.

At least Apple makes sense, because of their existing relationship with high resolution display manufacturers. What does FB bring to the table in this relationship other than cash?
 
I used apps from outside Google's store before I was rooted. Can you not do that anymore?

You don't seem to be getting what they mean by open. Android isn't free sofrware. (Think GPL and GNU/Linux systems and how they compare to how open android is. Windows is another 'closed' system.)
 
Ok, so we all agree this is worse that 9/11, the Holocaust and "Star Wars: The Phantom Menace" combined?

<stolen from elsewhere. not apologizing.>
 
Lack of imagination has nothing to do with it, because I can easily imagine all the things that VR needs to make it really immersive and attractive to a mainstream market (wireless, untethered, non-cumbersome headsets, better periphery awareness, a whole new paradigm in I/O systems - haptics, discrete motion tracking, etc.) which I still just don't see happening anytime in the next 10yrs. For the next 5-10yrs all I see them really accomplishing is maybe a minimalist headset that finally doesn't need to be tethered, with decent battery life that can actually be sold to consumers at a reasonable price.

This all just feels like a massive gold rush over the equivalent of the Pong years of videogaming...
People know a lot more about closing down a platform and leveraging the power of an established brand and consumer network these days than they did when Pong was released. The first company to really establish itself in VR stands to profit on a scale which makes this investment look insignificant, and they know that.

At least Apple makes sense, because of their existing relationship with high resolution display manufacturers. What does FB bring to the table in this relationship other than cash?
What do you need other than cash for manufacturing? Apple doesn't do that themselves either.
 
1 Toy Story November 22, 1995
2 A Bug's Life November 25, 1998
3 Toy Story 2 November 24, 1999
4 Monsters, Inc. November 2, 2001
5 Finding Nemo May 30, 2003
6 The Incredibles November 5, 2004
DISNEY ACQUISITION
7 Cars June 9, 2006
8 Ratatouille June 29, 2007
9 WALL-E June 27, 2008
10 Up May 29, 2009
11 Toy Story 3 June 18, 2010
12 Cars 2 June 24, 2011
13 Brave June 22, 2012
14 Monsters 2 June 21, 2013
15 Planes August 9, 2013
16 Inside Out June 19, 2015
17 The Good Dinosaur November 25, 2015
18 Finding Dory June 17, 2016
19 The Incredibles 2 TBA
20 Cars 3 TBA

Yeah acquisitions don't change anything...
In 3 years top, OR will be a former of its shelf.

It's almost like Pixar's formula got tiring? I mean the first 5 movies are all "find yourself" films. There's only so many times you can crank out that same drivel. Not to mention, Pixar is kind of Disney, and it's all Lassiter's fault.
This is not the same thing.
 
Your buying a product. That's all that matters to you. That's not remotely the same since it's tangible or at least finished good. An exchange of money has occurred with you obtaining what you want. With kick-starter you are essentially a giving money to a charity not with the rules and regulations of charity but you are simply gifting money.

Your hoping they produce what you want, that's all it really is. You provide money they give you hope, that's how the transaction goes down, Some people are ok with that some aren't. Personally if I'm interested in a project doing well I prefer to do it the od fashioned way, investing and keeping an eye on my investment.

You receive something for the money you give them. Why is this so difficult? They make t-shirts and sell them to you for $20. They take the profit from that and apply it to their project. You buy that t-shirt because you want that profit to fund the thing you're interested in. That's the transaction. If you don't want to do that, fine! No one suggested you had to. But people who don't actually know what they're talking feel the need to let everyone who is fine with that know they're stupid, because reasons. It comes across as an insecurity.
 
Just because Apple called that VR in the mid-'90s doesn't make it so.

They showed this to the press at CES running on a Rift. They talked about iton the Endadget HD podcast. They were impressed.

Not sure what a mid 90's quicktime codec that stitched static images together has to do with has to do with it.
 
I hope he is not lying.

He has 2 billion reasons to stretch the truth. All you can do is wait for a retail product and see what happens. If you have to have a Facebook account and buy games from the Facebook game store with your Facebook digital currency, people are going to shit bricks.
 
He's just young and likely very naive.

He doesn't understand he is literally not in control anymore. The VCs that handled this took advantage of him. It's like he never bothered to watch The Social Network. Irony. Or he is just putting on a good face for the public while happily counting his money.
 
So yeah, in the hands of a gamer or game-centric company Oculus would be in an infinitely better position as a gaming platform.

Exactly how many game-centric companies have 2 billion dollars lying around to buy Occulus? Activision? Maybe Nintendo?
 
Oculus just shot themselves in the foot.

I don't know how much the rest of you know about VR culture (I'm an expert), but honor and shame are huge parts of it. It's not like it is in 3D culture where you can become successful by being an asshole. If you screw someone over in VR culture, you bring shame to yourself, and the only way to get rid of that shame is repentance.

What this means is the VR public, after hearing about this, is not going to want to purchase Oculus Rift for PC(mostly porn), nor will they purchase any of Oculus products. This is HUGE. You can laugh all you want, but Oculus has alienated an entire market with this move.

Oculus, publicly apologize and cancel the deal with Facebook or you can kiss your business goodbye.
 
The existing OR team has always been working to reduce the pricing for the hardware. They've developed two products, a piece of hardware and an API to develop things for that hardware. You make it sound like electronic components don't get cheaper over time

Facebook wants this to hit the mainstream casual audience. They are not going to buy a peripheral like this for $300+ when they already have substitutes in the form of TV's, ipads, iphones etc. that they can view their content on. Yes it is a revolutionary step but the pricing has to be right. OR could exist with its hardware specs and price as something for PC enthusiasts. I don't believe that is where FB wants it to be though

It's great that electronic components get cheaper over time but I don't see that happening for many years with a sustained userbase that illicits some type of economy of scale

Holy shit, what kind of publicly-traded, international company would ever ever expect to turn any kind of profit by trying to sell $300 hardware platform to gamers? That would never happen

As it exists it is not a platform, it is a perhiperal, it is a screen/controller combo

You still need a platform to drive it


I already posted this

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=105768971&highlight=#post105768971
 
Mark Zuckerberg owns the company, owns his people, owns even Palmer. Now he feels free and everything is great, but someday FB will come in his office and tell him to do things that he never wanted to do.
 
At the end of the day, no one can convince me that won't lead to some kind of invasion of privacy, advertising, or additional monetization. We've seen stories of tracking information on the software side through Facebook, Skype, yahoo, and Microsoft. And we've seen stories of tracking information through the hardware side. In every case, it's vigorously denied right up until it is leaked that they're lying. Facebook's entire business model is built on doing this as aggressively as possible.

I don't have a Facebook account, and I won't be buying on OR. Even if, by some miracle, there's no negative repercussions from this; why would I want to put money in Facebook's pocket? I don't.

Morpheus was really revealed at the exact right time. If Sony was smart, they'd find a way to capitalize on this tomorrow. They aren't perfect either, but I trust them a hell of a lot more than Facebook.
 
Top Bottom