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

Facebook has acquired Oculus VR for 2 Billion US Dollars

First off, let me congratulate Palmer on becoming a multimillionaire. From all indications, it couldn't have happened to a nicer and more genuine guy.

That said: Fuck. We were so close. Well, perhaps we can try again in another couple decades.

Maybe it won't be so bad.... Oh, who am I fooling.

(I don't know whether to laugh or cry at the "Well, at least we still got Sony" comments. Sigh.)
 
SparkTR said:
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.
Click to expand...

Those are social platforms. VR is the opposite of social.
 
Hendrick's said:
Wonder if Microsoft was also bidding on this, would explain the high valuation.
Click to expand...

Why would we want to sell to someone like MS or Apple? So they can tear the company apart and use the pieces to build out their own vision of virtual reality, one that fits whatever current strategy they have? Not a chance.
Click to expand...
- the designer of the Oculus Rift

They probably weren't really even in consideration? :/
 
Mark Zuckerberg: "...we're clearly not a hardware company. We're not gonna try and make a profit off the devices long term. We view this as a software and services thing, where if we can make it so that this becomes a network where people can be communicating, and buying things and virtual goods, there might be advertising in the world but we need to figure that out down the line, then that's probably where the business will come from if I have to say."

Posted already?

From the Facebook internal conference regarding OR here:

https://soundcloud.com/highway62/internal-facebook-conference

edit: I took the quote from a reddit comment, im going to try to timestamp it.
 
I don't really "get" this acquisition.

WhatsApp made sense to me, although I balk at the price they paid. This, not so much.
At least WhatsApp came with a massive and rapidly growing userbase; and was a product that outshone their own offering.

Facebook aren't a media company, nor a hardware company. They don't supply content. They have an app marketplace to an extent I suppose, but it doesn't really rely on this sort of immersion. (Ultimately Facebook is an advertising company that capitalizes on people's need to stay connected.)

So... what's the endgame?
Beant said:
Mark Zuckerberg: "...we're clearly not a hardware company. We're not gonna try and make a profit off the devices long term. We view this as a software and services thing, where if we can make it so that this becomes a network where people can be communicating, and buying things and virtual goods, there might be advertising in the world but we need to figure that out down the line, then that's probably where the business will come from if I have to say."

Posted already?

From the Facebook internal conference regarding OR here:

https://soundcloud.com/highway62/internal-facebook-conference
Click to expand...
I still don't really get it. Are they expecting people to Second Life/PS Home in Oculus and buy virtual shit while product placement is everywhere? Are they going to build this platform?
 
HANNAH HAS SENT YOU A FRIEND REQUEST

Qs21wrr.gif
 
Seanspeed said:
I read it all. VR was never going to be all about games. Oculus Rift was never going to be all about games. I think a lot of people got the wrong idea that they were mainly just interested in creating some revolutionary gaming experience, when that's really only just one of the more immediately obvious applications of the tech. It was always the goal to go well beyond gaming.

Doesn't mean VR gaming has to die, either. Once VR becomes a more established medium to experience entertainment, the gaming support will follow.
Click to expand...

This seems pretty reasonable. Tbh when I think of potential uses of VR, gaming is pretty low on my list and isn't something that I'd be interested in. VR for educational or training purposes seems to be a great idea though.
 
GetemMa said:
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.
Click to expand...

I guess you don't use any modern gaming platform. Achievements - social, PS4's entire OS - designed around the concept of sharing as you play games. Let's not get started on XBox One, Wii U and 3DS - Miiverse, steam - social is the name of the game.
 
border said:
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.
Click to expand...

Who buys a suit before they've seen what the tailor has made? And for that matter, the tailor can refuse to change?

I think you've stumbled onto why Kickstarter is a bit fucked up for large scale projects such as OR.

People who tossed money at OR did it with the faith it would reinvent interactive entertainment. It could still do that but now with Facebook with their hand shoulder of Oculus, that reinvention could look very different from what donors envisioned at the start of this whole thing.
 
Durante said:
People repeat that continuously. I think that's silly. VR has the potential to be a lot more social than excahnging a few text messages.
Click to expand...

I guess, but that's a pretty low bar.
 
GetemMa said:
Who buys a suit before they've seen what the tailor has made? And for that matter, the tailor can refuse to change?

I think you've stumbled onto why Kickstarter is a bit fucked up for large scale projects such as OR.

People who tossed money at OR did it with the faith it would reinvent interactive entertainment. It could still do that but now with Facebook with their hand shoulder of Oculus, that reinvention could look very different from what donors envisioned at the start of this whole thing.
Click to expand...

People who thought VR would be gaming-only are incredibly short sighted. Gaming will be a major part of it but the potential for VR has nearly limitless applications.

Facebook aren't stupid, they're trying to capitalize on the next revolutionary invention and have the biggest market by the time everyone else follows.

I think people should look at the big picture before going insane.
 
mugurumakensei said:
I guess you don't use any modern gaming platform. Achievements - social, PS4's entire OS - designed around the concept of sharing as you play games. Let's not get started on XBox One, Wii U and 3DS - Miiverse, steam - social is the name of the game.
Click to expand...

You're so right.

That is why I bought a PS4, a WiiU and a PC - Their social capabilities. I needed more friends.

Spot on.
 
BigEvilTurtle said:
Those are social platforms. VR is the opposite of social.
Click to expand...

It depends on perspective, a chat room in VR can be infinitely more social than on a mobile or PC because it makes you feel like you're there with other people. I think that's the end game for this (at least on the consumer side), but it'll take a while to get there.
 
wait wtf is this? what happens to people who backed this on kickstarter? are they shot out of luck?

seems like BS that you can kickstart a product then get rich of it. John is a sellout.
 
Beant said:
Mark Zuckerberg: "...we're clearly not a hardware company. We're not gonna try and make a profit off the devices long term. We view this as a software and services thing, where if we can make it so that this becomes a network where people can be communicating, and buying things and virtual goods, there might be advertising in the world but we need to figure that out down the line, then that's probably where the business will come from if I have to say."

Posted already?

From the Facebook internal conference regarding OR here:

https://soundcloud.com/highway62/internal-facebook-conference

edit: I took the quote from a reddit comment, im going to try to timestamp it.
Click to expand...
Yea, it's been posted. I listened to to conference, it's around the 29 minute mark. It seems pretty intuitive, really. Anyone, who thinks the entire business model that Facebook runs on will have a "change of heart", and create an open platform free of ad space is fooling themselves. But as I stated before, I just hope it's not intrusive. Would have loved for the VR space to experience a sort of "wild wild west" like the internet did, but I guess that was wishful thinking.
 
GetemMa said:
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.
Click to expand...

So Facebook is going to take a piece of gaming hardware that people are really excited about, and they are going turn it in to a device for people who want to stereoscopically look at farm animals they are raising in an attempt to drive online media ad revenue?

I think they are just investing in a piece of promising hardware and trying to develop a brand out of it.
 
jabuseika said:
Oculus is building a distribution platform like Steam but for VR games. There's the end game.
Click to expand...
How is that a relevant endgame for Facebook's core operations?
Durante said:
People repeat that continuously. I think that's silly. VR has the potential to be a lot more social than excahnging a few text messages.
Click to expand...
That potential really seems a long while away frankly.

The beauty of mobile and online is that it's highly accessible.

This isn't. It requires a relatively hefty entry price.

And there's quite obvious substitute in... actual reality.

Come VR with me on Facebook, we'll go to the virtual cinema, it will only cost you hundreds of dollars. Or we could go see a movie instead.
 
Des0lar said:
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.
Click to expand...

I think its great for Sony's Project Morpheus. This will open a whole new market to VR that Sony would have never been able to reach on their own. The chances of Morpheus being a success on its own are slim to none. They needed someone else to be the one to break the door down on the idea of VR to the masses. And this might do it.
Besides its not like they'll be able to use the Rift on the PlayStation. If the casuals fall in love with the experience that Rift provides them outside of games, Sony will offer a much cheaper option for gaming.
 
Hendrick's said:
Wonder if Microsoft was also bidding on this, would explain the high valuation.
Click to expand...

It's getting to be practically cliche but Zuck mentioned in the investor call trying out Oculus and once you do that - you'd probably think 2billion was fairly modest. It's going to change not only gaming but the entire electronically interactive world. Actually thinking about that exact fact - this might not be such a terrible thing. It's relatively clear that VR isn't hidden behind a wall of patents and once more people get their hands on this thing - it could easily end up driving further innovation. Facebook could end up being more of a medium for growth rather than a final destination of the product.
 
Communicating, shopping for virtual goods, 3D advertising, I can see how Oculus is worth something to FB. What incentive is there for FB to allow the rift to be a universal device? Sign into FB, every other platform is locked out?
 
GetemMa said:
You're so right.

That is why I bought a PS4, a WiiU and a PC - Their social capabilities. I needed more friends.

Spot on.
Click to expand...

Do you enjoy those things despite the presence of social media apps and software? Why is that different from social media software being written to use Oculus?
 
Sectorseven said:
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.
Click to expand...

Until you have a graphene screen that you can see through, displaying info on the go, light, 100 times harder than steel, takes little to no energy (most efficient energy distribution in material ever made) and it'd become opaque if needed. It'd be a light non clunky visor on your face. Oh and a resolution at molecular level :D

It will come..
 
GetemMa said:
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.
Click to expand...

With teens running from Facebook as a social media platform and the flop that was Facebook Home - an Android skin that "reduced" your phone to a Facebook peripheral, I'd assume Facebook as a company would be smarter than to make the Oculus Rift simply a portal to Facebook.com. Will it have Facebook integration? Definitely. Will that be the beginning and the end of the technology? Hell no. He amount of posters assuming that Facebook spent $2 billion to let people poke each other and share photos with VR goggles on is absurd. The press release alone outlines a number of ideas, none of which involve interacting with people on Facebook.

Selling a $300 device that allows you to go to a website that you can access on your Blu-Ray player if you want to is not going to work, and Facebook knows that much. They'll create new experiences that take advantage of the tech, one that you may have to log into your Facebook account to access, but will nonetheless be experiences worthy of the technology and the price tag.
 
Why is it so hard for the KickStarters to understand:
1. You are NOT an investor. They owe you nothing unless you sign up for some reward. Any monies made above and beyond ARE NOT YOURS AND NOT YOURS TO DECIDE WHAT TO DO WITH.
2. You are not an owner. You have NO official say in anything regarding the product. At all. The kickstaters may listen to you. BUT YOU HAVE NO OFFICIAL SAY.

3. You ARE a CUSTOMER, at most. A dreamer at best.
 
I just don't see it. I don't see people popping on a virtual headset to chat with a buddy. This acquisition makes no sense to me. It is the opposite of convenient. I'll stick with video calling myself.
 
ZehDon said:
Thanks for pointing that out, but I feel my point still stands: if you're going to discuss a US$2b acquisition and its potential effects on a new medium and wish to be taken seriously, calling someone "Zuck" or "Zuckers" is going to make it difficult to take you seriously.
Click to expand...

I'm sure being a 20 year old college dropout with messy hair and pyjamas who pays a homeless grafitti artist in stock options to make an office wall mural and has business cards that say "i'm ceo, bitch" is another thing that makes it difficult to take a person seriously, and yet...
 
Tagyhag said:
People who thought VR would be gaming-only are incredibly short sighted. Gaming will be a major part of it but the potential for VR has nearly limitless applications.

Facebook aren't stupid, they're trying to capitalize on the next revolutionary invention and have the biggest market by the time everyone else follows.

I think people should look at the big picture before going insane but I know patience is hard to ask for in gamers.
Click to expand...

You're creating a straw man. I don't think anyone claimed VR as a gaming ONLY tech. That is an absurdity you've just manufactured.

Just gaming as one of the main priorities. Where did we see the most about Oculus up to this point? Gaming conventions mostly.

BTW: You don't need to school me on Facebook's intentions. They are quite obvious. Thanks.
 
KoopaTheCasual said:
Yea, it's been posted. I listened to to conference, it's around the 29 minute mark. It seems pretty intuitive, really. Anyone, who thinks the entire business model that Facebook runs on will have a "change of heart", and create an open platform free of ad space is fooling themselves. But as I stated before, I just hope it's not intrusive. Would have loved for the VR space to experience a sort of "wild wild west" like the internet did, but I guess that was wishful thinking.
Click to expand...
That is obviously what will happen. It's still a PC peripheral, and it's easy to clone the hardware and/or modify the software stack. No one can stop it, even if FB tries. (I think they won't, it would just reduce the value of their investment)
 
The Oculus Rift subreddit is pretty upset over this. The stickied post made by palmer is now negative due to the downvotes. The comments in the various threads indicate that people are canceling their dev kit orders and canceling their projects.

This really isn't looking good for them.

BBqfIp4.png
 
I gather from most of the posts on here that people don't like change.

This gives oculus a chance to make better hardware, price it competitively and sell it to the masses. Oculus doing this on their own wouldn't have had a chance and would have only sold to the hardcore gamers. This acquisition will do nothing but help them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Savvy Games acquires Mobile Legends developer Moonton for $6 billion
6
190
panda-zebra replied
Super Game: Sega's mysterious billion-dollar project.
2
59
894
Hudo replied
National Videogame Museum USA Has Acquired A "Mythical" Nintendo PlayStation (Sony MSF-1)
Retro Hardware 
1
169
cartman414 replied
The Story of Nintendo Billion-Dollar Hollywood Pivot
Opinion Trailer Game Dev 
7
240
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt replied
[Arab 'insider]: Ubisoft Has Been Acquired by 'someone'
2 3
129
1K
MDSLKTR replied
Top Bottom