But couch co-op is people interacting with each other in real space. Your example with the cell phones was people sharing real space without interacting.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Facebook has acquired Oculus VR for 2 Billion US Dollars
- Thread starter ShogunDarius
- Start date
GetemMa
Member
Apples and Oranges.
Instagram, WhatsApp, and many of their previous acquisitions were directly competitive social networks that threatened to slow the momentum Facebook had built. Most of which were easily integrated into Facebook.
Oculus is virtually unknown on the street and its future success is up in the air. Only tech geeks know anything about OR. More importantly OR is unique. It's a factor that can differentiate Facebook services from anyone elses by offering experiences that no one else can offer.
Are you assuming that Facebook sunk 2 billion dollars into a company that isn't even 1 foot off the ground so they share the technology like an open platform? I don't believe it. Not for one second. They will leverage this as a Facebook technology. OR will be a social network device first and a gaming device a distant 2nd or 3rd.
TheOohChild
Member
I think it is ridiculous to think that OR will be reduced to a Facebook peripheral.
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
What was that about Palmer not being hopelessly naive?
He has more control now? Really, kid?
I suppose you could say that the PS4 isn't outdated since it's only been out for a few months...but the hardware inside of it is outdated, and that's what matters. Surely you understand this.
ShinMaruku
Member
Nobody has that. I am sure there are limits even to Exon Mobile's divisions spending money.
Why would you need to sign into facebook to use a PC peripheral?
Very bad, Not only do they have massive amounts of money now, OR is going to be the device for EVERYONE, while Morpheus is only for gamers. Well at least there is a possibility, that Facebook won't hinder Sony from making a PS4 social VR Facebook app, that works just as well as OR does.
Nocturno999
Member
No, it should be used only for Half Life 3 and the Witcher 5.
Really? The company who is a very successful HARDWARE + SOFTWARE company who entered many new markets and completely turned them around. I mean come on. Out of these companies, they would be the best to buy Oculus. And Apple isn't any more proprietary than any of these companies. Sony is a good gaming company, and Sony games only exist on Sony devices.
They're two COMPLETELY different things...
So far as I know Sony has not yet commented on whether or not it will be PS4 only. And it's basically a given that Microsoft will come out with some sort of Kinect Vision VR clone as well and I'd safely bet the house on it being at the minimum Windows
8
Apple is experienced in hardware, and they certainly have no hesitation to launch a product at a high price point. They also have an existing relationship with Samsung which OR was targeting as their supplier for the CV1. Apple has also ramped up their games support in the last year, with many Steam games and other AAA games having native OSX support. And if you want to talk about how horrible i-devices are to use on Windows... Well, they are horrible on iMac too... That's more incompetence on their end than maliciousness. Certainly if you think Apple would have fucked it up, you gotta lend the same courtesy to FB.
GetemMa
Member
If Facebook becomes the center of most OR usage, almost all of OR users will have it connected to outdated hardware, soooo............
Normal people don't have gaming rigs. They have $500 laptops or tablets.
ZehDon
Banned
What?
What?
Also, "Facebook" the name of a company. The company has a social platform also called "Facebook". It's where it got its name from. Much like Coca Cola has a drink called Coca Cola. If you think they're going to allow the Rift to distance itself from the Facebook brand, you're in for a shock.
"Zuck"? Also: what? Do you understand how VR works?
Firstly, "Zuckers"? How many pet names do you have for the man? "Zuck-a-by-baby" is the CEO, but answers to the Board of Directors. He doesn't micro-manage the company and, in relative terms, had little to do with this acquisition. This is a business move, not a vision from your favourite human being.
Your also presenting a wonderful world where we can project 360 degree stereoscopic video from a single source to multiple output carriers while still retaining individual outputs to control the directional feed of the video.
While 360 video is indeed being developed, for the immediate future - say, 5-10 years - we're reliant on VR being powered mostly locally rendered images, due to the nature of the technology. Remove head-tracking and movement from the footage, and you kill the platform. Watching a doctor perform surgery POV in VR? Nope. Crystal clear NFL from the sidelines for US$50.00? Hahaha! Virtually every application you just listed is outside the realms of possibilities for the foreseeable technological future. Gaming and other locally rendered experiences are the driving force of this medium for at least a decade.
This merger doesn't grant Facebook control of the necessary patents to prevent competitors from entering the market. This purchase gives Facebook a substantial control of the birth of the VR platform. Sharing VR experiences via the Facebook social website? A public company doesn't spend $2b on a pipe-dream. And it's certainly not what Facebook bought OR to do, anyway. They're interested in controlling an emerging medium, to profit from it via their advertising business. It's a gamble, but the pay off is simple: pop Up ads in VR space. That's it. If you get in early enough, you make it standard and control the advertising space. And if you also happen to sell those ads...
Based on the press release I'd say that Facebook sees a big future in VR. If we use VR devices for entertainment, education, medical purposes, tourism, and more, then this will be even more revolutionary than the smartphone. If that's the case, $2 billion is a bargain.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Winnie the Pooh didn't "bomb" in the box office; it was a quick and cheap project produced for a fraction of the budget of a typical children's film, targeted at an extremely young audience (hence the run-time), which met expectations at the box office and as was intended for the film, earned profit through post-cinema sales outlets and driving merchandise. This is their business model with Pooh more broadly, and reflects the fact that they do a large number of DTV and a large number of theatrical projects, all of which are fairly small in scope and budget. Moreover, there's absolutely nothing to suggest it impacted Disney's 2D versus 3D strategy; the more relevant discussion point would be the modest performance of Princess and the Frog and issues with multiple projects in development.
Not every project--not even every Disney project--is designed to make $500+ million.
Why are people who clearly don't follow Disney having Disney arguments in here?
TheChewyWaffles
Member
I feel bad for people who want to act as VC's with only nominal rewards.
Thanks, I'll see how this all plays out and I will seriously think about it. I want noting to do with Facebook and even VR won't get me to open a FB account.
Why? Does it fill some kind of hole in your life?
Custom low latency, 1440p, up to 90hz OLED incoming. Man if they can deliver an all custom unit at a good price now, that would be fantastic.
mugurumakensei
Member
They are, but I was responding to the poster above. For the purposes of a connected world, Oculus will likely come much closer to that reality than Google Glass.
Betta Lines
Member
At the moment, the Rift is effectively a screen. Certainly for the first iteration (and probably for several revisions beyond), it will remain a screen that you strap to your face that requires a computer to give it data. There is no walled garden to enable. It's a screen, like a tv or a monitor (and partially an input device).
What I think Facebook has in mind is creating VR social experiences that can run on PC in the same way that you run Second Life on PC, or Home on PS3. Those (with the incredible graphical quality you'd expect 5 or more years from now) would be very compelling in VR. It is those things that you'd log into with your Facebook account, and where you'd get the ads, in virtual shop windows, etc.
If it eventually requires a login to even run anything, that will be at a stage where we'll be mostly comfortable with that (in the same way that most of us are comfortable with logging into Steam), or there will be rival headsets on the market that don't require a login for those against the idea.
Yeah I think everyone is really overreacting. I don't use facebook myself but let me tell you this. Very few people at my job knew what Oculus Rift was until today.
Jesus christ those downvotes...come on now.
xaosslug
Member
think before you post 101. x-D
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
Wonder if Microsoft was also bidding on this, would explain the high valuation.
daaamn
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
I appreciate seeing Carmack's stamp of approval. We'll see how long he lasts.
No one really knows. Speculation everywhere. People generally pissed off on all sides.
He needs to change his twitter to FB_AA_Carmack.
Mushroomer25
Member
The fact that Instagram & WhatsApp were competitors, makes the motivation for total Facebook integration more lucrative. But instead, FB made the wiser decision to let them grow naturally, providing them capital to do so faster.
OR has zero functionality as a part of existing "Facebook technology". I can see them using it to create a VR-focused version of Facebook, but that is at least a DECADE away from being a realistic product. Right now, the only way to profit from the Rift is to keep on the current path. Develop a product for gamers, and let it trickle down to the masses through word-of-mouth. Once you've establish a brand, THEN you start working the non-gaming angles. That's how Facebook makes money from this. That $2B will pay out end-over-end in a few years - and guarantees Facebook a role in the VR future.
Sectorseven
Member
You can't wear VR goggles in public in any practical sense though. You can't really even multitask with them. The whole concept feels counter intuitive to what makes social and mobile so appealing.
GetemMa
Member
Why?
There is a reason Facebook can spend 2 billion dollars on a fledgling tech company. They are a massive company with a capital M.
Hundreds of millions of people spend their lives on Facebook and chronicle everything about it.
Being "reduced" to a Facebook peripheral means a huge number of people will be interested in OR.
Rather, the reduction would have been being a PC gaming peripheral.
It is just that the software result from being a social device will look a lot different from being a gaming device.
As a gamer, this news isn't great.
Dangoesforth
Member
Just had to make this, I think this is a bad move personally by Oculus, but hope the best for those working there.
Kickstarter is paying in advance for a product that has not yet been built.
It has nothing to do with "investing" or "equity" or being a "VC".
If you need a tailor to make you a suit, you are that tailor's customer. You give him the money, he makes you the suit. You don't demand shares of his business as a return.
DurielBlack
Member
So now I can have Facebook on my face while I Facebook.
I can only assume they are going to ruin this somehow.
I can only assume they are going to ruin this somehow.
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
I doubt there was a bidding war. This looks like an inside con job.
Going by prior acquisitions, Facebook generally don't screw around with what they purchased. Instagram and WhatApp aren't worse off after they were bought by Facebook, so in that regard I think this isn't the worst thing. But being bought out at all isn't ideal, I wanted them to go it alone until at least the CV1 released.
The "I'm coding right now, like I was last week" part is pretty comforting to me.
I'm honestly a lot more confident after reading Carmack's few tweets than Palmer's long answers. Carmack has been through this before, he understands exactly what's going on and what will happen in the future.
Seriously, Apple is the one company which would have been worse than Facebook.