Support NeoGAF

[Linkup]

"We are already working on our own VR game platform/launcher, but we are not going to force everything to go through it. Facebook has no interest in changing that, they believe in what we have been doing all along."

FB believes in fat stacks of money like any other company.

Who actually believes that FB is going to stand behind Oculus and is simply going to watch them run a online VR game store and not have their hands deep into it?

I guess the question I should pose is how does this not eventually end up a closed system where you now have a system/computer in the Rift and it boots up Facebook OS so you can browse their FB VR shop? Why keep it completely open when you can force others to go through your service? I certain think the first consumer version has to be open simply because they can see the backlash against it. Then if it takes off the small group of early adopters can get lost in place of the much larger and profitable group, business.

I think it's a valid fear that this could end up a closed platform done the line, but at the same time their should be more choices by then anyway. Kind of like if you don't care for Apple you can still pick up plenty of decent Google devices.

 

[MaLDo]

In my opinion, which is awakening the anger about this news is that many people had the inner feeling that Oculus was their company.

We, gamers, were the owners of Oculus. Gamers have managed to pull ahead Oculus. We have gotten $ 2.4 million to build the devkit1. We have attracted 75 million from investors ...... We have been sold to facebook

The problem has been obviously, in the perspective of that people. This news affects them emotionally.

Because rationally seen, things can not be more interesting.


I also find it amazing how many people are interested in shifting the new responsibility to sony.

Sony is owned by players. Morpheus is our last hope. Save us from facebook.

I have already put this slide before, but I will do again

Medium, not peripherical. What is a problem now for Oculus.
Games are only one type of content. What is a problem now for Oculus.
Social experience. The devil's word when is associated with Oculus.

So, that NASA demo or sony talking about sharing experiences and social VR is good thing only in Sony's hands. I can't understant that logic.

 

[Calibus]

As long as there are options to circumvent Facebook's intrusive policies, then I am okay with this.

 

[NullPointer]

In a thread where people are accusing Facebook of all kinds of dastardly things.

From what I've read people are accusing Facebook of wanting to make VR into a Facebook powered or oriented platform, or otherwise accusing them of extending their "you are the product + ads" business model over to the OR.

 

[RoadHazard]

What the fuck is FB going to do with Oculus? Nothing Facebook has ever done (beyond the actual platform itself) has had any value whatsoever to me. All those apps and crap, just useless. Maybe it will all be fine, I don't know, this is just a very weird place for Oculus to go IMO. From being every hardcore gamer's wet VR dream to... a Facebook product?

Save us, Sony.

 

[Boken]

In my opinion, which is awakening the anger about this news is that many people had the inner feeling that Oculus was a company that was theirs. We, gamers, were the owners of Oculus. Gamers have managed to pull ahead Oculus. We have gotten $ 2.4 million to build the devkit1. We have attracted 75 million from investors ...... We have been sold to facebook

he problem has been obviously, in the perspective of that people. This news affects them emotionally.

Because rationally seen, things can not be more interesting.


I also find it amazing how many people are interested in shifting the new responsibility to sony. Sony is owned by players. Morpheus is our last hope. Save us from facebook.

I have already put this slide before, but I will do again

Medium, not peripherical. What is a problem now for Oculus.
Games are only one type of content. What is a problem now for Oculus.
Social experience. The devil's word when is associated with Oculus.

So, that NASA demo or sony talking about sharing experiences and social VR is good thing only in Sony's hands. I can't understant that logic.

im finding you hard to understand, but i believe what youre saying is that this is good.

that oculus rift can now do what morpheus just dreams of.

i agree.

What the fuck is FB going to do with Oculus? Nothing Facebook has ever done (beyond the actual platform itself) has had any value whatsoever to me. All those apps and crap, just useless. So, yeah.

Save us, Sony.

hey its almost like..... they're diversifying! :O

 

[Bsigg12]

What the fuck is FB going to do with Oculus? Nothing Facebook has ever done (beyond the actual platform itself) has had any value whatsoever to me. All those apps and crap, just useless. So, yeah.

Save us, Sony.

Let them continue to do their thing and fund them, that's what they're going to do. This is a long term investment. Gamers are the only ones who will buy the Rift if it has to be tethered to a computer to work. Facebook wants what's coming down the line in 5-10 years.

 

[-COOLIO-]

What the fuck is FB going to do with Oculus? Nothing Facebook has ever done (beyond the actual platform itself) has had any value whatsoever to me. All those apps and crap, just useless. So, yeah.

Save us, Sony.

nothing facebook has done, except for facebook, has been any value to you?

 

[cyberheater]

the funny thing is that no one can properly articulate their absolute disgust for facebook.

data collection? google and MS do that too yet we use their stuff all the time.

that screen cap of mike zuckerburgs convo? we all say stupid shit in private chats. facebook is run by hundreds of people. there's no gremlin at the top reading your messages for shits and giggles.

the worst a service like facebook could do for you is not be interesting enough that you want to use it. or be so addictive that you cant stop using it. im not a huge facebook fan or anything but it has its place. i check it a few times a week and use it for event planning.

i can understand hate for tech companies like EA, comcast, ATT, etc. but the facebook hate really seems so misplaced to me. i frankly wonder if it's based on high school / college experiences or a lack thereof.

they're big open source supporters and give their acquisitions a lot of breathing room. As far as acquirerers with a ton of cash go, who would be better other than valve?

Yes. I agree. It all seems very odd and misplaced. So what if folks don't like Facebook. It has it's purpose and folks don't have to use it.
On the other hand. That huge sum of cash for the Occulus Rift will ensure that all the correct technology goes into it and it ends up a much better product at a cheaper price. It's a win win for the consumer.

 

[optimiss]

No, they are not even remotely "completely different" things.
They are extremely similar things. Ignoring minor details, VR isn't much more than HMD with positioning sensors.

Hahah I love how you gloss over the most difficult part of producing a good VR experience like it is nothing.

Sony's previous HMDs used tiny LCD screens that covered a very small percentage of the visual field. The idea of using mobile screens was born at Oculus and it a completely different strategy than Sony had previously pursued in the commercial space.

 

[RoadHazard]

nothing facebook has done, except for facebook, has been any value to you?

I mean beyond the base platform, where I can connect with people I know and talk to them. All the tons of crap they've since piled on top of that is just junk IMO.

 

[MaLDo]

im finding you hard to understand, but i believe what youre saying is that this is good.

that oculus rift can now do what morpheus just dreams of.

i agree.


hey its almost like..... they're diversifying! :O

Yes, I just added quotes for better comprehension.

 

[Nymphae]

I think this is potentially a very smart move for fb.

So many people sayng "why would they be interested in vr, they don't make games."

Vr is going to be huge for things outside of gaming as well. They're buying the company when its relatively cheap and still easy to aquire.

My first thought was,oh ok someone at fb read Ready Player One, and they want to be in control of that ecosystem when it inevitably happens. So many people connecting to a virtual world though one device, if they can get in on that early they are in very good shape.

 

[fade_]

Changed his opinion where? Did you read the article?

Besides, Carmack has been confirmed to have been working on mobile VR implementation well before this announcement was made. There's also nothing to suggest that Oculus are now going to be working on Angry Birds VR as their main priority.

I'm thinking more along the lines of having a facebook operated steam/origin like program to play most VR games where you have to sift through Facebook's bullshit to get to some nice exclusive content that they bought. Basically having to go and deal with the "Walmart of gaming" to play what you want. If you dont think this is their endgame then why do you think they spent $2 billion dollars? Also mobile VR has nothing to do with this. Carmacks goal was to eventually build a standalone VR implementation that doesn't require any extra hardware.

 

[SaberEdge]

Going to re-post my thoughts from last night since they got buried by more over-reactions:

Here is what is going to happen with Oculus.

They are going to release the consumer version of the Rift like they normally would have but in a better time frame than we all expected. The tools will be available for all developers to make VR content or incorporate VR into their current games. So if they devs behind games like the Witcher 3, Mass Effect, Star Citizen want OR support they can build it in no problem.

The new piece that comes in, and this is where being backed by Facebook will help, is that Oculus will release a platform similar to Steam or the Apple App store where VR specific content can be published and sold. This is different from your traditional PC games because these games/apps/experiences will only support VR. So stuff like the roller coaster demo, the underwater demo, a concert app, a museum app, all of that will go on here and if desired can be sold to users. Facebook provides the infrastructure and social media hook ins and they get a share of every app sold on this platform.

That is the future for Oculus and I see this deal as a means for them to get there sooner.

Yep, this is what will happen. And there won't be adds popping up in our field of view as we explore virtual worlds either.

 

[fade_]

Oh no, Oculus finally has the resources to do what they always wanted to.

syduck:


People don't seem to understand where this money is going. It doesn't go into someone's pockets, this is resources that will benefit Oculus.

I don't think people are mad that they got money I think they are mad where that money is coming from and how it will influence the product in the future.

 

[KHarvey16]

If you dont think this is their endgame then why do you think they spent $2 billion dollars?

What kind of reasoning is this? Do you think the strategy you've outlined is the only conceivable way for them to make money? Why?

I really can't get over how much completely ignorant speculation is passed off with such confidence. It's passing through the frustration zone and becoming entertaining.

 

[fade_]

What kind of reasoning is this? Do you think the strategy you've outlined is the only conceivable way for them to make money? Why?

I really can't get over how much completely ignorant speculation is passed off with such confidence. It's passing through the frustration zone and becoming entertaining.

Because Zuckerberg basically stated this is what he's planning to do? All I see in your posts is condescension. Why don't you enlighten us on how you think they will monetize the product?

 

[Stet]

Because Zuckerberg basically stated this is what he's planning to do? All I see in your posts is condescension. Why don't you enlighten us on how you think they will monetize the product?

Gee, I don't know, license the hardware to whoever wants to use it so it won't be focussed just on a niche gaming market?

 

[More_Badass]

What the fuck is FB going to do with Oculus? Nothing Facebook has ever done (beyond the actual platform itself) has had any value whatsoever to me. All those apps and crap, just useless. Maybe it will all be fine, I don't know, this is just a very weird place for Oculus to go IMO. From being every hardcore gamer's wet VR dream to... a Facebook product?

Save us, Sony.

Oh no, what is Microsoft doing making a console? Nothing Microsoft has done is useful for a game console. All their browsers and software have nothing in common with the products and hardware that Sony and Nintendo offers. Such a weird place for Microsoft to go.

- said some Gaffer in 2001

 

[stufte]

Because Zuckerberg basically stated this is what he's planning to do? All I see in your posts is condescension. Why don't you enlighten us on how you think they will monetize the product?

How they'll monetize it? They'll sell the hardware...

 

[EternalTruth]

With this acquisition VR is finally getting the interest/support it deserves...

 

[fade_]

How they'll monetize it? They'll sell the hardware...

Facebook doesn't plan to make money selling VR headsets. "We're clearly not a hardware vendor," Zuckerberg said. "We're not going to try to make a profit selling the devices, long-term. We view this as a software and services thing."

 

[Faith]

Facebook doesn't plan to make money selling VR headsets. "We're clearly not a hardware vendor," Zuckerberg said. "We're not going to try to make a profit selling the devices, long-term. We view this as a software and services thing."

Hospitals, schools, companies etc.

 

[kartu]

Hahah I love how you gloss over the most difficult part of producing a good VR experience like it is nothing.

Sony's previous HMDs used tiny LCD screens that covered a very small percentage of the visual field.

Sony's HMZ-Tx series HMDs aim to create "200 inch screen" experience as they were aiming at "really big TV" / "kinda cinema at home".
Apparently that wouldn't be applied to the VRs as is.and would not make sense on the prototypes we saw labeled as 2010/2011.

The idea of using mobile screens was born at Oculus and it a completely different strategy than Sony had previously pursued in the commercial space.

What are "mobile screens"?

 

[KHarvey16]

Because Zuckerberg basically stated this is what he's planning to do? All I see in your posts is condescension. Why don't you enlighten us on how you think they will monetize the product?

He said they'd develop other uses for it. Why is it that when Facebook talks about the software they'd like to create for this device it's different than any other company creating non-gaming software for VR? My PC plays games and also lets me write documents. Some of the software I use is ad supported even. So what?

 

[Faith]

What are "mobile screens"?

Displays normally used for smartphones.

 

[kartu]

Displays normally used for smartphones.

Ahaha, I hope OP was sarcastic...

 

[NullPointer]

Facebook doesn't plan to make money selling VR headsets. "We're clearly not a hardware vendor," Zuckerberg said. "We're not going to try to make a profit selling the devices, long-term. We view this as a software and services thing."

And continued:

"We view this as a software and services thing where we can make this a network where people are communicating and buying things and virtual goods, and there might be advertising in the world, but we need to figure that out further down the line then, that is probably where the business will come from."

 

[Takamura-San]

NOOO!

My day... is completely ruined

 

[Lunar15]

The lack of foresight in this thread is kind of funny. I'm not saying this deal will pan out or that it will be profitable for Facebook or anything like that. By all means, it could be one big flop or Facebook could ruin occulus with all sorts of bad stuff.

What I'm talking about, however, are all the comments that boil down to "Oh, facebook is a social networking website, what do they want with virtual reality tech!?" As if big companies only do one thing for the rest of their existence. Clearly these guys have plans and occulus is one part of it. Is that plan any good? Will it work? That, I don't know. Probably not. But just taking the thing a company is currently doing and extrapolating it to new ventures is really shortsighted.

Also, people who are upset about kickstarter, please read things before giving anyone money. You gave a set amount of money and got something in return. They got plenty of funding outside of Kickstarter, but no one had any problems with the $90 something million raised through venture capital. You're just trying to make a silly argument out of nothing.

 

[Kurdel]

He said they'd develop other uses for it. Why is it that when Facebook talks about the software they'd like to create for this device it's different than any other company creating non-gaming software for VR? My PC plays games and also lets me write documents. Some of the software I use is ad supported even. So what?

I don't think we can reason with people offended by this.

It reminds me of talking with an angry pessimistic teenager: the longer it goes on, the more you loose. Not that the concerns raised are invalid, it's just that they are insignificant in the grand scheme of VR tech and the short term future of Occulus.

At least there are other consumer VR solution for those concerned, I guess...

 

[Sidewinder]

NOOO!

See what you did there Facebook? Shame on you!

 

[Cromat]

No. Oculus finally has the resources to do what Zuckerberg always wanted to do.

This guy just pumped 2 billions into Oculus. I find it amazingly naive to think that he did this without having an agenda.

So what? He's not Saddam Hussein

Did I miss something? Why are Facebook villains while Sony/Microsoft/Google/Apple are not?

 

[ido]

Heard the news yesterday as it broke, and I've been quietly reading everything I can about it.

I think it will be a good thing. I spoke briefly with Palmer on facebook(wow), and I really am confident that this will only be a good thing for us enthusiasts.

The subreddit has been absolutely abysmal, though. I cannot believe all of the people that are claiming to have canceled their preorders.

I cannot fucking WAIT to get my DK2. I ordered 2 of them to have one to tinker with.

Hype still very much alive for me.

 

[gogoud]

Oculus ar glasses that connect via Bluetooth to a pocket sized lte modem that connects to your Facebook account. It has real time status updates, face recognition and when you visit your favourite store you're automatically checked in for your status and are flooded with daily deals. 5% discount to early adopters.

I like that fb bought or. More money for r&d. More ads for people to get to know or. Bigger market.

 

[Seanspeed]

No. Oculus finally has the resources to do what Zuckerberg always wanted to do.

This guy just pumped 2 billions into Oculus. I find it amazingly naive to think that he did this without having an agenda.

No one said that he isn't looking to gain from this somehow. :/

But this *can* actually be a mutually beneficial thing. In fact, it might actually be Oculus who get the better of the deal in the short-term. Long-term is harder to say, but so long as VR gets popular, we get games and all sorts of new experiences, I'm quite happy. Surely there will be other VR competitors down the line if things on the Rift become lousy. I'll wait til we actually have evidence of them ruining anything before freaking out, though.

 

[Deuterium]

Okay Gaffers, I am looking for feedback from anyone who has been looking closely into Oculus VR and their technology. I own Facebook, and I am thinking of bailing. Zuckerberg has been spending money like crazy, and I no longer have the same confidence in his corporation that I used to have.

Question,:

I am trying to wrap my mind around how Oculus could possibly be worth $2,000 million dollars, to Facebook.
Does Oculus VR hold (or have pending) any key "game-changing" patents in VR technology that sets them head and shoulders above others? If yes, then Facebook's acquisition possibly makes some sense. They now own these patents, and at the same time, have blocked their acquisition by competitors such as Google, MS, Samsung, Sony, Apple, etc.

Thanks in advance.

 

[bigboss370]

NOOO!

 

[TyrantGuardian]

Did I miss something? Why are Facebook villains while Sony/Microsoft/Google/Apple are not?

They are. The promise of Oculus was for many people the fact that it was a privately owned company.

 

[moggio]

So what? He's not Saddam Hussein

Given time, he could be.

 

[Stet]

Given time, he could be.

lol the fuck is this shit

 

[Ryuuroden]

I think it's incredibly unrealistic that ads will be shoved in your face for every piece of software, forced on you by the hardware itself.

Developers are making the games, not Facebook. I think it would be near-suicide for the hardware to force ads on the users, against developers' wishes, especially with such an emerging market.

My biggest concern is that Facebook completely reworks the API, and forces a walled garden approach instead of this being an open platform.

I'm still keeping my preorder until either:

• A walled garden is confirmed (or some other huge gutting of the system is confirmed)
• Sony announces Morpheus will be open instead of dedicated to PS4
• Carmack leaves. He's my test canary.

I highly highly doubt that facebook will move away from open platform. In the first place chaining any hardware in todays world does not make fiscal sense. I think tech companies are overall moving away from the walled garden approach when it comes to emerging technologies and the ones that still do it only do so because they have the monopolistic ability to do so. With something like this you want to grab as much as the market as possible and that means have as many 3rd parties developing product for it. This is how google has been managing to push its way into areas that were dominated by microsoft and apple

Not related to your post but I have to say I am pretty amused by the comments from others about sony saving gaming/vr etc when they have been transforming these "dedicated" gaming consoles into multipurpose media social platforms that you can play games on...... seems to me that facebook and sony have the same goal, just approaching from different starting points.

 

[Otakumegane]

NOOO!

Oh this also means no more 1st person Visual novels from Japan either.

Fuck.

 

[Seanspeed]

Okay Gaffers, I am looking for feedback from anyone who has been looking closely into Oculus VR and their technology. I own Facebook, and I am thinking of bailing. Zuckerberg has been spending money like crazy, and I no longer have the same confidence in his corporation that I used to have.

Question,:

I am trying to wrap my mind around how Oculus could possibly be worth $2,000 million dollars, to Facebook.
Does Oculus VR hold (or have pending) any key "game-changing" patents in VR technology that sets them head and shoulders above others? If yes, then Facebook's acquisition possibly makes some sense. They now own these patents, and at the same time, have blocked their acquisition by competitors such as Google, MS, Samsung, Sony, Apple, etc.

Thanks in advance.

Good question. I think mostly, they just have the know how and the right people. They're farther along than anybody else and will be primed to make the biggest splash when it hits. Others down the road will be copy-cats. Or simply:

Early bird catches the worm.

 

[paperspace]

What the fuck is FB going to do with Oculus? Nothing Facebook has ever done (beyond the actual platform itself) has had any value whatsoever to me. All those apps and crap, just useless. Maybe it will all be fine, I don't know, this is just a very weird place for Oculus to go IMO. From being every hardcore gamer's wet VR dream to... a Facebook product?

Save us, Sony.

How is any of this relevant?

Come on, think at least once before clicking Submit Reply.

 

[Ganondolf]

No. Oculus Rift never wanted any of the console makers to buy them. It wouldn't make any sense for them. They didn't even want to put the system on the consoles because of the static nature of consoles.

so they did not want the console makers to buy them but was happy to sale to facebook.

its business and they wanted to get bought out ay a big company and there is no way on earth they would have gone with facebook instead of Sony or Microsoft (if either made the same offer).

 

[EternalTruth]

The Oculus Rift and VR has caught the attention of the mainstream media now...
The VR Boom is about to begin!

NBC News: http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/what-you-need-know-facebook-buys-oculus-vr-n62576
BBC News: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-26745044
ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/oculus-rift-gaming-headset-facebook-bought/story?id=23065367

 

[Deuterium]

Good question. I think mostly, they just have the know how and the right people. They're farther along than anybody else and will be primed to make the biggest splash when it hits. Others down the road will be copy-cats. Or simply:

Early bird catches the worm.

Hi Seanspeed,

Understood, and valid point. However, patents can't walk away from a company if they no longer like it's policies, direction, culture, or leadership. People can.

 

[SilentRacoon]

Given time, he could be.

Are you serious?

The Oculus Rift has caught the attention of the mainstream media now...
NBC News: http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/what-you-need-know-facebook-buys-oculus-vr-n62576

BBC News: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-26745044

The only thing people achieved whining at this aquisition, is giving free publicity to facebook, this will no doubt help them reach the mainstream market way faster.