-
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
Northeastmonk
Gold Member
It makes me sick that such technology is going to the guy who thought we all needed to stay connected 24 hours a day 7 days a week via a social service. It sounds like they want to make Facebook the next "Google".
I can see it now, "Visit your friends at their home with the Oculus Rift". "Play Candy Crush in virtual reality"
I can see it now, "Visit your friends at their home with the Oculus Rift". "Play Candy Crush in virtual reality"
Of course they won't force it openly, but they will make sure the optimal experience will only be available to Facebook users.
Also, its pretty much irrelevant what Facebook says now. Its obvious where this is all heading.
Actually I see the purchase of Oculus as Facebook finally being ahead of the curve (or trying to at least), instead of lagging behind it as when they bought instagram and whatsapp.
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
The only disabled person in my extended family was blind, so yeah...
But I've had the same thought.
Mushroomer25
Member
Amazon would've been awful. They've got a console coming out, and would likely tie the Oculus technology to that.
ChrisMahoney
Banned
Companies paying for targeted ads is different than Facebook selling your information to companies.
Northeastmonk
Gold Member
John Carmack left ID to be bought out by Facebook. Times have changed. He must be making more money. If these CEOs at Facebook even care about video games. I'll just buy a Morpheus and be done with VR for good.
leatherhat
Member
I expect that facebook will tighten control as rift grows and their social VR software is created and released. Even the minimum of the rift having a facebook software overlay makes it a non purchase, facebook's record on consumer privacy is that bad.
It's naive to think that Facebook spent 2 billion USD on a company just to run it to the grounds immediately. Facebook is aware of their reputation and they also know that the sensible gaming market is the key to get Oculus out of the door. They won't jeopardize OR's success by forcing the user base in a direction they don't like. They can't afford it, since they know that there'd be a new competitor in a heartbeat eager to step into OR's shoes.
What if the VR games platform from Oculus requires a Facebook account?
crimsonheadGCN
Banned
To be fair, Google, Apple, and Microsoft are much older companies and it took Google around 7 years to start branching out beyond the search engine.
BeekleMatter
Member
Rawket Lawnchair
Member
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand... I am not interested anymore.
Northeastmonk
Gold Member
I was watching the NeoGaf documentary on how "Maybe 1 or 2 of us get the industry" and seriously... what a waste. I may not be an analyst, but this is by no means a "good thing".
Even with the Oculus acquisition Facebook can't "own" VR. Deliberately hampering the SteamVR experience for those who don't want sign into their Facebook profile would just push people to a different device.
I'm not arguing against the notion that Facebook will be integrated within Oculus software.
JetBlackPanda
Member
well see it makes sense because Facebook is totally in that space.. oh wait..
I feel like we were right on the edge of something really special. Like Genre changing entertainment and now is just been sold to the highest bidder.
Umm your quotes clearly show that they believe games come first and will be the primary driver of VR.
The Rift was never going to be only about games. Oculus never said it was only about games. Even I, as a serious gamer, never thought the Rift would, or should, be only about games.
Nothing has changed in that regard. Saying that "the future isn't as bright as it could have been" just seems silly and premature to me. Nobody knows. It may very well be brighter.
ChrisMahoney
Banned
Facebook takes privacy VERY seriously. They make sure no company can get your information. Outside of the web, marketing data is absolutely ridiculous in how far it goes. There really is like a data profile about you at lots of different big data marketing companies and they most certainly do sell it. But nobody is bitching about that; they're yelling about Facebook, of all things, where FB is like super careful about not giving any info away or tying it to anyone's identity. Meanwhile you just signed up for a credit card that straight up sells your name, address, and up-to-date purchasing history to literally anyone that wants to buy it.
There was a brief bug years ago where FB accidentally was putting the user ID in some kind of ad callback ping and it was like a total disaster to everyone that worked at FB. It was barely even reported on but FB did like an all-out apology and was really embarrassed by it.
There is no reason "facebook apps" should not become like Steam apps. Steam is a platform, Facebook/Oculus is a platform. Its incompatible in the long term.
stufte
Member
I do, because I'm not being irrational about what might or might not be.
There is zero benefit for Facebook to impose restrictions. They want to make their product, the Rift, as inclusionary as possible. They didn't impose these restrictions on their Facebook phone, and it would hurt them far more than it would help to impose them here. Facebook knows this, and there's no evidence of them doing anything restrictive like this in the past.
Which is more popular, Steam or the Rift? Because Facebook wants to sell the Rift and get it on as many eyeballs as they can. Would creating their own platform and blocking out Steam sell more Rifts or less? If the answer is less, they aren't going to do it. They're going to act according to their actual business interests, and not conspiracy theories.
Mushroomer25
Member
I do think that Oculus having a form of always-online DRM would make me less interested in the device, and convince me that data-mining is a part of the whole scheme here.
leatherhat
Member
How many times are you gonna copy paste that in occulus rift threads?
Chobel
Member
http://i.imgur.com/CTMHLyR.png
Notch canceled Minecraft VR.
Disregard this.
Was this discussed before?
Notch canceled Minecraft VR.
Numerous threads on it.
Mushroomer25
Member
Was this discussed before?
Notch canceled Minecraft VR.
Multiple times.
Was this discussed before?
Notch canceled Minecraft VR.
Yeah, it was brought up early into the thread.
leatherhat
Member
Hopefully morpheus comes to PC but even if it does there's a chance it will be tied to sony in some way. Software certification from sony or something like that.
stufte
Member
+1 for the chickenlittle team
PaperFlame
Member
I rather have Google own Oculus VR than facebook.
NSA will be collecting data of us on this device I bet.
NSA will be collecting data of us on this device I bet.
People in this thread are either hysterical, mind-numbingly obtuse about how business works, or plain stupid. Why don't we rationally look at a few points?
1. Why would Facebook purchase Oculus?: Facebook obviously sees VR as an important part of the future of technology, and sees promise in the technology that Oculus has developed so far.
2. Doesn't that mean Facebook will immediately start stamping their logo on it, ship a half-baked product, and place ads in VR Farmville?: Absolutely not. They don't have anything beyond potential yet. The goal is to create an asset that will eventually produce revenue streams. By purchasing Oculus on friendly terms, they also acquire all of the technical ingenuity that helped develop what they find to be impressive technology. It is in their interest to keep key Oculus team members happy, because, believe it or not, human capital is worth a ton of money.
3. Okay, so Oculus might be able to develop their product independently. Won't Facebook just exploit it to hell once it's finished?: No. It would be stupid to create a high-end consumer product and immediately throw out the vast majority of the public as a potential market by making a social game console. Why do people play Candy Crush Saga and Farmville? Because they're easy to access through devices people already own. Wouldn't it make sense, then, to try and create wide market use before really trying to create revenue streams through "nefarious" advertisements?
4. Isn't Facebook evil?: Facebook is no more evil than Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, Valve, or any other major tech company. You don't think EVERY SINGLE ONE of those companies hasn't data mined the hell out of everything you do when you use their services?
It's understandable that gamers dislike Facebook because of its association with social gaming, but it is no different than any other major company: it's after the bottom line, and trying to wring value from an unfinished by rushing and exploiting it isn't something that businesses do. You have to CREATE the value in the asset before you can exploit it. Look at Activision: they create value by pushing a huge, new franchise that they dump hundreds of millions of dollars into, and once that franchise carries value (intangible in the form of name recognition and goodwill, and tangible in the form of assets to lower dev costs in the future), they iterate to hell.
That's what Facebook will try do: create goodwill, cache, and a wide market through a release of a gaming Rift, followed by umpteen trillion iterations aimed at targeted markets.
1. Why would Facebook purchase Oculus?: Facebook obviously sees VR as an important part of the future of technology, and sees promise in the technology that Oculus has developed so far.
2. Doesn't that mean Facebook will immediately start stamping their logo on it, ship a half-baked product, and place ads in VR Farmville?: Absolutely not. They don't have anything beyond potential yet. The goal is to create an asset that will eventually produce revenue streams. By purchasing Oculus on friendly terms, they also acquire all of the technical ingenuity that helped develop what they find to be impressive technology. It is in their interest to keep key Oculus team members happy, because, believe it or not, human capital is worth a ton of money.
3. Okay, so Oculus might be able to develop their product independently. Won't Facebook just exploit it to hell once it's finished?: No. It would be stupid to create a high-end consumer product and immediately throw out the vast majority of the public as a potential market by making a social game console. Why do people play Candy Crush Saga and Farmville? Because they're easy to access through devices people already own. Wouldn't it make sense, then, to try and create wide market use before really trying to create revenue streams through "nefarious" advertisements?
4. Isn't Facebook evil?: Facebook is no more evil than Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, Valve, or any other major tech company. You don't think EVERY SINGLE ONE of those companies hasn't data mined the hell out of everything you do when you use their services?
It's understandable that gamers dislike Facebook because of its association with social gaming, but it is no different than any other major company: it's after the bottom line, and trying to wring value from an unfinished by rushing and exploiting it isn't something that businesses do. You have to CREATE the value in the asset before you can exploit it. Look at Activision: they create value by pushing a huge, new franchise that they dump hundreds of millions of dollars into, and once that franchise carries value (intangible in the form of name recognition and goodwill, and tangible in the form of assets to lower dev costs in the future), they iterate to hell.
That's what Facebook will try do: create goodwill, cache, and a wide market through a release of a gaming Rift, followed by umpteen trillion iterations aimed at targeted markets.
Chobel
Member
Scaramanger
Member
In all honesty I didn't have much interest in it (although strangely the truck simulator 2 vids intrigued me!) but associating with Facebook kills it dead in my eyes. I will not be giving that company any of my info.
You don't think Google data mines the hell out of every search term you enter? Google scares me far, far more than Facebook, because they happen to be 8x bigger than Facebook and have their fingers in way more pies.
Do you use the internet? Have you used Amazon? Google? Guess what... your info is out there!
Lé Blade Runner
Member
This is... Not good. Guess I will stick with Sony's VR headset in the future.
Its in their business interest, not now maybe but in the long term. Its their goal to have as many active platform users as possible. Hardware will be a low margin business. Again, its not blocking out, its just better or worse support.
There are uncountable platform wars out there, why should this one be different?
Earthanoid
Member
I agree with you, but just to play the devil's advocate, FB was really late to the game with Home. That's something that may have had an impact 1-2 years earlier, but releasing it so late when there were so many players in the mobile space already meant that Home was destined to flop. So they needed it to be as inclusive as possible to give it a chance of succeeding.
With VR they've got a good shot at being first to market now, and build a platform before anyone else. If they can get the hardware cheap enough to get it into a lot of hands, and have a compelling experience to convince people to actually buy it, they'd be in a good position to lock things down and establish a lock on a big chunk of the market the same way Apple did with iTunes.
But I don't think the hardware is anywhere near the point where that strategy would work, so it does make more sense for them to make it as open as possible to get more people involved and interested.
Mushroomer25
Member
It won't be immediate (I believe the actual sale isn't until June), but I imagine the capital influx will help them get stock out the door sooner than would otherwise be possible.
You have to remember Occulus isn't a platform. It's a peripheral, and those aren't sold at a loss. Facebook is going to keep the margins initially lean to build a userbase and let the tech get cheaper to make a future profit from the hardware. Facebook has shown no interest in establishing a platform because that's diametrically opposed to their business. It would be like Google limiting gmail to chromebooks. It makes no business sense.
It's not a platform. You still need a platform to use the Occulus Rift... or Facerift or whatever they call it. Apple did what they did with itunes because they owned the platform.