[quote="Stryker_66"]Facebook is social media, not a game company. [/quote]Totally, though they've already had considerable influence on the gaming world. By enabling and popularising social games like Farmville etc., they helped make the free-to-play model as huge as it is today.
And though some positive examples of free-to-play games exist, most range from annoying to obscenely unethical.
So, maybe there is reason to be concerned with them getting their hands on VR? :-|
Stryker_66 said:Facebook is social media, not a game company.
Totally, though they've already had considerable influence on the gaming world. By enabling and popularising social games like Farmville etc., they helped make the free-to-play model as huge as it is today.
And though some positive examples of free-to-play games exist, most range from annoying to obscenely unethical.
So, maybe there is reason to be concerned with them getting their hands on VR? :-|
At least we will play FarmVille in VR...NOOOOOOOOOOO
[img]http://i.imgur.com/SxrAa7Y.jpg[/img]
[img]http://knickerblogger.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/please-god-no.gif[/img]
Hearing that Instagram and Whatsapp are still run more less independently gives me some faith on this deal. There's a lot to gain with FB big pockets to push VR into mainstream, but I really hope they let OR do their thing. When people finally get to try gaming in 3D with VR, I'm sure many people will never be able to play your average 2d game the same way ever again.
Hearing that Instagram and Whatsapp are still run more less independently gives me some faith on this deal. There's a lot to gain with FB big pockets to push VR into mainstream, but I really hope they let OR do their thing. When people finally get to try gaming in 3D with VR, I'm sure many people will never be able to play your average 2d game the same way ever again.
All hail 3d modders DHR, MasterOtaku, Losti, Necropants, Helifax, bo3b, mike_ar69, Flugan, DarkStarSword, 4everAwake, 3d4dd and so many more helping to keep the 3d dream alive, find their 3d fixes at http://helixmod.blogspot.com/ Also check my site for spanish VR and mobile gaming news: www.gamermovil.com
[quote="Stryker_66"]Facebook is social media, not a game company.[/quote]
I think this is why Oculus will remain independent, and why their independence is best for everyone involved. Sure, companies like Zynga have done well with free to play games on Facebook.com, and people tend to want to draw a connection here, but I think that's almost entirely irrelevant to Facebook's play for VR here.
Stryker_66 said:Facebook is social media, not a game company.
I think this is why Oculus will remain independent, and why their independence is best for everyone involved. Sure, companies like Zynga have done well with free to play games on Facebook.com, and people tend to want to draw a connection here, but I think that's almost entirely irrelevant to Facebook's play for VR here.
[quote="Milamber*"]Facebook's stock has dived nearly 7% since the OR announcement, which is a loss in market capitalization of 11 billion dollars...[/quote]See!? Just as much as 'we' fear Facebook messing up our (3D/VR) gaming 'they' fear Oculus Rift messing up their hair ... :)
If everything goes right with VR & it takes off then I will believe Oculus was worth 2 billion. I don't see that happening considering no one wants to play 3d games because they don't like to wear glasses in their house. Do you think they are going to like wearing a VR headset?
Zuckerberg tried it out & wanted a new toy. Then the FB Brass started to think of all the other possibilities BESIDES GAMING.
If everything goes right with VR & it takes off then I will believe Oculus was worth 2 billion. I don't see that happening considering no one wants to play 3d games because they don't like to wear glasses in their house. Do you think they are going to like wearing a VR headset?
Zuckerberg tried it out & wanted a new toy. Then the FB Brass started to think of all the other possibilities BESIDES GAMING.
I believe VR is worth more than 2 billion. How else are you gonna get VR if you don't strap something to your face. We aren't at the point where we can connect directly into the brain (matrix like). Yes many people complain about the glasses with 3d tvs and movies, but hopefully that train of thought will disappear as new generations come into this world and people become openminded. But we will see where it goes. I would love the ability to be able to interact in a virtual world, go to work, go watch a movie and many other things without needing to spend the extra money and time on gas and travel.
I do believe that many of those who complain about the glasses, just don't want to spend the money to purchase the tech. at 300 bucks for a consumer version I think it will be worth it for the Neysayers to actually try it out.
Just my 2 cents. Still not happy about Facebook though.
I believe VR is worth more than 2 billion. How else are you gonna get VR if you don't strap something to your face. We aren't at the point where we can connect directly into the brain (matrix like). Yes many people complain about the glasses with 3d tvs and movies, but hopefully that train of thought will disappear as new generations come into this world and people become openminded. But we will see where it goes. I would love the ability to be able to interact in a virtual world, go to work, go watch a movie and many other things without needing to spend the extra money and time on gas and travel.
I do believe that many of those who complain about the glasses, just don't want to spend the money to purchase the tech. at 300 bucks for a consumer version I think it will be worth it for the Neysayers to actually try it out.
Just my 2 cents. Still not happy about Facebook though.
Intel Core i9-9820x @ 3.30GHZ
32 gig Ram
2 EVGA RTX 2080 ti Gaming
3 X ASUS ROG SWIFT 27 144Hz G-SYNC Gaming 3D Monitor [PG278Q]
1 X ASUS VG278HE
Nvidia 3Dvision
Oculus Rift
HTC VIVE
Windows 10
[quote="eqzitara"][quote="Schmeltzer"]I think it's a brilliant move. If you put aside the natural dislike for facebook and think about what this means...
I think the long-future of VR is in much better hands with Facebook than Sony.
Btw: I hate facebook, don't have an account.[/quote][quote="eqzitara"][quote="Schmeltzer"]I think it's a brilliant move. If you put aside the natural dislike for facebook and think about what this means...
I think the long-future of VR is in much better hands with Facebook than Sony.
Btw: I hate facebook, don't have an account.[/quote]
Not sure where that conclusion is drawn from but I'd like to hear an explanation. Facebook only cares about numbers and do pretty shady/invasive things. Not to mention the gaming side of facebook[read notch's post].
---------------------
TBH, they better use alot of that money for contract deals requiring Oculus Rift implementation into game. Otherwise they are going to see ALOT less games then they were expecting. I really think getting in bed with facebook will certainly have an effect on indie scene.[/quote]
I've read yesterday what Facebook wants with VR [b]in the long run[/b] (making a lot of money with mainstream VR) and what Oculus [b]wants in the long run[/b] (the best VR possible, especially for gaming).
And these 2 goals can co-exist perfectly. As a matter of fact, I think FB's goal actually helps achieving Oculus' goal. Palmer understands that imho.
In order for Oculus to reach it's goal they had to find a [b]bigger[/b] party. And FB jumped in. It would have been great if Valve would have bought them, but they didn't.
So, everybody should be happy. But they are not. And that's where it really get interesting...
Before yesterday Oculus was really cool. Too cool if you ask me. People who hadn't tried the OR themselves, were telling other people how cool the OR was. But let's face it: the devkit IS cool, but it is really not good enough to REALLY be cool.
Facebook is concidered [b]NOTt[/b] to be cool (yup, I hate FB too). And that's where the real probem lies. Now that FB has acquired Oculus,it is impossible for most people to keep finding Oculus cool because in their mind FB = Oculus now. The love turns into hate. And in order to be able hate Oculus they make up all kinds of horror-stories which, if you think about without loosing your head, are unlikely to happen. Because if the horror stories were true, they would serve neither FB or Oculus.
Let me give you an example of this irrational behaviour/thinking. There is an Dutch gaming website, that hates 3D and hates the OR. In all this time they hardly mentioned the OR, and if they did it was almost allways with the words like "gimmick, you'll get sick, you look stupid wearing these goggles" etc. But yesterday they made an special breakingnewsbroadcast screaming at everyone HOW DARE YOU FB!!! STAY AWAY FROM OUR OCULUS!!! IT IS NOW OCULUS R.I.P!!!
For crying out loud, they hate FB so much, that they are willing to pretend that they were OR supporters in the first place, which they obviously were NOT!
Most people find being cool way more important than having great VR.
Almost nobody really thinks about the possibilities that Oculus and VR have now, because they are so afraid that your grandmother can play Farmville with the rift in the future (really, who cares...).
But what I see is this:
1. The best OR you can think of think of (custum build parts), better than the Consumer Version that you would get with the initial investors, who by the way, also would like to see profit, and a lot faster than FB.
2. For the cheaper price
3. With tripple A titels
4. Better indie-support (because now thay can hire enough people to do this properly).
5. Sooner
6. Financial stability for OR, freedom to make the the right descisions. Palmers clearly states that they have more freedom now than they had with the other investors (but of course he lies, because he is FB now, right?)
But what people only want to believe are the horror stories. I am not saying that there is a risk that they will become true in some extend, but even if they do, there will allways be competition where you can turn to.
What I'm basicly trying to say is: why not keep supporting Oculus? There will be enough time to abandon them once the horror stories become true (which I think won't or definately not in the extend people are thinking)
(and now I'm wating for a lot postings here where people explain to me all the evil things that FB hase done in the past :-))
Schmeltzer said:I think it's a brilliant move. If you put aside the natural dislike for facebook and think about what this means...
I think the long-future of VR is in much better hands with Facebook than Sony.
Btw: I hate facebook, don't have an account.
eqzitara said:
Schmeltzer said:I think it's a brilliant move. If you put aside the natural dislike for facebook and think about what this means...
I think the long-future of VR is in much better hands with Facebook than Sony.
Btw: I hate facebook, don't have an account.
Not sure where that conclusion is drawn from but I'd like to hear an explanation. Facebook only cares about numbers and do pretty shady/invasive things. Not to mention the gaming side of facebook[read notch's post].
---------------------
TBH, they better use alot of that money for contract deals requiring Oculus Rift implementation into game. Otherwise they are going to see ALOT less games then they were expecting. I really think getting in bed with facebook will certainly have an effect on indie scene.
I've read yesterday what Facebook wants with VR in the long run (making a lot of money with mainstream VR) and what Oculus wants in the long run (the best VR possible, especially for gaming).
And these 2 goals can co-exist perfectly. As a matter of fact, I think FB's goal actually helps achieving Oculus' goal. Palmer understands that imho.
In order for Oculus to reach it's goal they had to find a bigger party. And FB jumped in. It would have been great if Valve would have bought them, but they didn't.
So, everybody should be happy. But they are not. And that's where it really get interesting...
Before yesterday Oculus was really cool. Too cool if you ask me. People who hadn't tried the OR themselves, were telling other people how cool the OR was. But let's face it: the devkit IS cool, but it is really not good enough to REALLY be cool.
Facebook is concidered NOTt to be cool (yup, I hate FB too). And that's where the real probem lies. Now that FB has acquired Oculus,it is impossible for most people to keep finding Oculus cool because in their mind FB = Oculus now. The love turns into hate. And in order to be able hate Oculus they make up all kinds of horror-stories which, if you think about without loosing your head, are unlikely to happen. Because if the horror stories were true, they would serve neither FB or Oculus.
Let me give you an example of this irrational behaviour/thinking. There is an Dutch gaming website, that hates 3D and hates the OR. In all this time they hardly mentioned the OR, and if they did it was almost allways with the words like "gimmick, you'll get sick, you look stupid wearing these goggles" etc. But yesterday they made an special breakingnewsbroadcast screaming at everyone HOW DARE YOU FB!!! STAY AWAY FROM OUR OCULUS!!! IT IS NOW OCULUS R.I.P!!!
For crying out loud, they hate FB so much, that they are willing to pretend that they were OR supporters in the first place, which they obviously were NOT!
Most people find being cool way more important than having great VR.
Almost nobody really thinks about the possibilities that Oculus and VR have now, because they are so afraid that your grandmother can play Farmville with the rift in the future (really, who cares...).
But what I see is this:
1. The best OR you can think of think of (custum build parts), better than the Consumer Version that you would get with the initial investors, who by the way, also would like to see profit, and a lot faster than FB.
2. For the cheaper price
3. With tripple A titels
4. Better indie-support (because now thay can hire enough people to do this properly).
5. Sooner
6. Financial stability for OR, freedom to make the the right descisions. Palmers clearly states that they have more freedom now than they had with the other investors (but of course he lies, because he is FB now, right?)
But what people only want to believe are the horror stories. I am not saying that there is a risk that they will become true in some extend, but even if they do, there will allways be competition where you can turn to.
What I'm basicly trying to say is: why not keep supporting Oculus? There will be enough time to abandon them once the horror stories become true (which I think won't or definately not in the extend people are thinking)
(and now I'm wating for a lot postings here where people explain to me all the evil things that FB hase done in the past :-))
[quote="Schmeltzer"]In order for Oculus to reach it's goal they had to find a [b]bigger[/b] party. And FB jumped in. It would have been great if Valve would have bought them, but they didn't.:-))[/quote]
This kind of news would of excited me. Valve lives and breathes games. Half Life was with out a doubt an important advancement in gaming as it relates to player experience.
[quote="Schmeltzer"](and now I'm wating for a lot postings here where people explain to me all the evil things that FB hase done in the pat :-))[/quote]
My outlook has nothing to do with FB being evil, it is a simple fact that FB is social media and the games they provide are dumbass social in nature. Money will dictate the day and FB's direction with VR is towards the masses and not just gamers. You know how that goes when you try to please everyone. There has to be interest from FB users and I can only imagine the applications for their user base.....oh oh...what new techno hipster thing is going to come out of this....I am going to cry...lol
Having said that, I love the optimism in your perspective and I can tell you that I am on your side and I want to be wrong :)
Facebook's future is what will matter to the shareholders and the masses, not the gamers...
This could be someone else's opportunity though, it'll be interesting to see how this plays out....
Schmeltzer said:In order for Oculus to reach it's goal they had to find a bigger party. And FB jumped in. It would have been great if Valve would have bought them, but they didn't.:-))
This kind of news would of excited me. Valve lives and breathes games. Half Life was with out a doubt an important advancement in gaming as it relates to player experience.
Schmeltzer said:(and now I'm wating for a lot postings here where people explain to me all the evil things that FB hase done in the pat :-))
My outlook has nothing to do with FB being evil, it is a simple fact that FB is social media and the games they provide are dumbass social in nature. Money will dictate the day and FB's direction with VR is towards the masses and not just gamers. You know how that goes when you try to please everyone. There has to be interest from FB users and I can only imagine the applications for their user base.....oh oh...what new techno hipster thing is going to come out of this....I am going to cry...lol
Having said that, I love the optimism in your perspective and I can tell you that I am on your side and I want to be wrong :)
Facebook's future is what will matter to the shareholders and the masses, not the gamers...
This could be someone else's opportunity though, it'll be interesting to see how this plays out....
[quote="Stryker_66"][quote="Schmeltzer"]In order for Oculus to reach it's goal they had to find a [b]bigger[/b] party. And FB jumped in. It would have been great if Valve would have bought them, but they didn't.:-))[/quote]
This kind of news would of excited me. Valve lives and breathes games. Half Life was with out a doubt an important advancement in gaming as it relates to player experience.
[quote="Schmeltzer"](and now I'm wating for a lot postings here where people explain to me all the evil things that FB hase done in the pat :-))[/quote]
My outlook has nothing to do with FB being evil, it is a simple fact that FB is social media and the games they provide are dumbass social in nature. Money will dictate the day and FB's direction with VR is towards the masses and not just gamers. You know how that goes when you try to please everyone. There has to be interest from FB users and I can only imagine the applications for their user base.....oh oh...what new techno hipster thing is going to come out of this....I am going to cry...lol
Having said that, I love the optimism in your perspective and I can tell you that I am on your side and I want to be wrong :)
Facebook's future is what will matter to the shareholders and the masses, not the gamers...
This could be someone else's opportunity though, it'll be interesting to see how this plays out....[/quote]
I would have loved it if Valve had bought Oculus. Everone would (except sony and Microsoft). But the thruth is: they would never have bought it for 2 billion and pumped that amount of money and resources into Oculus.
Facebook did it because they can afford the money, and don't need the shortterm profit.
And in the end of the day money will allways dictates the way, even for Valve. I bet Valve is interested in money as much as FB is, except they happen to like gaming too.
And as far as pleasing the masses goes: in order to make money with VR in the mass-market you better make sure your VR is up to it. People are not gonna watch advertising if it makes you them (allthough watching advertisments make you sick anyway imho).
>> it'll be interesting to see how this plays out....
Couldn't agree more!
>> I love the optimism in your perspective
Which is kinda funny, because I'm not an very optimistic person in general, lol!
But the way I see it, is that if in 1 or 2 years time, a REALLY good OR is available in your local store where you can try it out, and it looks and works REALLY well and doens't have the name FB on it, people will pretend to forget it's actually from FB really quick.
Me personally am not gonna deny myself a great VR gaming experience just because it's made possible by facebook. Life is too short! (dammned I'm optimistic again :-))
Schmeltzer said:In order for Oculus to reach it's goal they had to find a bigger party. And FB jumped in. It would have been great if Valve would have bought them, but they didn't.:-))
This kind of news would of excited me. Valve lives and breathes games. Half Life was with out a doubt an important advancement in gaming as it relates to player experience.
Schmeltzer said:(and now I'm wating for a lot postings here where people explain to me all the evil things that FB hase done in the pat :-))
My outlook has nothing to do with FB being evil, it is a simple fact that FB is social media and the games they provide are dumbass social in nature. Money will dictate the day and FB's direction with VR is towards the masses and not just gamers. You know how that goes when you try to please everyone. There has to be interest from FB users and I can only imagine the applications for their user base.....oh oh...what new techno hipster thing is going to come out of this....I am going to cry...lol
Having said that, I love the optimism in your perspective and I can tell you that I am on your side and I want to be wrong :)
Facebook's future is what will matter to the shareholders and the masses, not the gamers...
This could be someone else's opportunity though, it'll be interesting to see how this plays out....
I would have loved it if Valve had bought Oculus. Everone would (except sony and Microsoft). But the thruth is: they would never have bought it for 2 billion and pumped that amount of money and resources into Oculus.
Facebook did it because they can afford the money, and don't need the shortterm profit.
And in the end of the day money will allways dictates the way, even for Valve. I bet Valve is interested in money as much as FB is, except they happen to like gaming too.
And as far as pleasing the masses goes: in order to make money with VR in the mass-market you better make sure your VR is up to it. People are not gonna watch advertising if it makes you them (allthough watching advertisments make you sick anyway imho).
>> it'll be interesting to see how this plays out....
Couldn't agree more!
>> I love the optimism in your perspective
Which is kinda funny, because I'm not an very optimistic person in general, lol!
But the way I see it, is that if in 1 or 2 years time, a REALLY good OR is available in your local store where you can try it out, and it looks and works REALLY well and doens't have the name FB on it, people will pretend to forget it's actually from FB really quick.
Me personally am not gonna deny myself a great VR gaming experience just because it's made possible by facebook. Life is too short! (dammned I'm optimistic again :-))
Great posts Schmeltzer!
[quote="Stryker_66"]My outlook has nothing to do with FB being evil, it is a simple fact that FB is social media and the games they provide are dumbass social in nature.[/quote]
For a number of reasons, I'm not worried about this. First is what Zuckerberg has said [url]https://www.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10101319050523971[/url]:
"Immersive gaming will be the first, and Oculus already has big plans here that won't be changing and we hope to accelerate. The Rift is highly anticipated by the gaming community, and there's a lot of interest from developers in building for this platform. We're going to focus on helping Oculus build out their product and develop partnerships to support more games. Oculus will continue operating independently within Facebook to achieve this.
But this is just the start. After games, we're going to make Oculus a platform for many other experiences. Imagine enjoying a court side 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."
They say Oculus's plans for gaming won't be changing, and Facebook's ideas for VR are outside of gaming.
Second reason I'm not worried, is VR can't really be casual. You strap a device the size of a book on to your face and you're fully immersed. People who play casual games like Candy Crush aren't going to do that. It's just not a platform for stupid games.
Third reason I'm not worried, developers make games, not Facebook. Facebook.com is the platform for some casual games, but Facebook doesn't make them. Of course Oculus will be working with developers, but according to Zuckerberg's post I quoted above, there's no indication that they're changing course.
Fourth reason I'm not worried, Facebook the company is bigger than facebook.com the social network. They're working on a lot of things, and it won't all lead back to supporting facebook.com. I think they acquired Oculus in order to expand what they do, rather than mold Oculus to fit what they're doing right now. That's smart because facebook.com as we know it could easily be gone in 10 years.
Stryker_66 said:My outlook has nothing to do with FB being evil, it is a simple fact that FB is social media and the games they provide are dumbass social in nature.
"Immersive gaming will be the first, and Oculus already has big plans here that won't be changing and we hope to accelerate. The Rift is highly anticipated by the gaming community, and there's a lot of interest from developers in building for this platform. We're going to focus on helping Oculus build out their product and develop partnerships to support more games. Oculus will continue operating independently within Facebook to achieve this.
But this is just the start. After games, we're going to make Oculus a platform for many other experiences. Imagine enjoying a court side 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."
They say Oculus's plans for gaming won't be changing, and Facebook's ideas for VR are outside of gaming.
Second reason I'm not worried, is VR can't really be casual. You strap a device the size of a book on to your face and you're fully immersed. People who play casual games like Candy Crush aren't going to do that. It's just not a platform for stupid games.
Third reason I'm not worried, developers make games, not Facebook. Facebook.com is the platform for some casual games, but Facebook doesn't make them. Of course Oculus will be working with developers, but according to Zuckerberg's post I quoted above, there's no indication that they're changing course.
Fourth reason I'm not worried, Facebook the company is bigger than facebook.com the social network. They're working on a lot of things, and it won't all lead back to supporting facebook.com. I think they acquired Oculus in order to expand what they do, rather than mold Oculus to fit what they're doing right now. That's smart because facebook.com as we know it could easily be gone in 10 years.
Valve? Haven't we've waited for VR long enough already, without it being sucked into the crawling miasma of Valve Time? Let me point out that there are two forms of Valve Time.
Valve Time (software version) = Valve makes games that take yeeeeeeeears to produce, but are great when they finally arrive.
Valve Time (hardware version) = Valve boasts of all sorts of hardware projects over the past decade, yet has never managed to release anything. Everyone assumes they would make great hardware simply because they happen to make great games. But the hard evidence for this is non-existent, because they've never managed to walk the walk.
They're a software company with a totally unproven track record in hardware, apart from many fanciful promises and dead ends. No thanks. I'd choose Facebook over Valve, or even [shudder] Apple.
[quote="Milamber*"]Facebook's stock has dived nearly 7% since the OR announcement, which is a loss in market capitalization of 11 billion dollars...[/quote]Is it unique to facebook though? I don't know how Wall St is going, but I know that my (Australian) stocks fell significantly over the past few days.
Valve? Haven't we've waited for VR long enough already, without it being sucked into the crawling miasma of Valve Time? Let me point out that there are two forms of Valve Time.
Valve Time (software version) = Valve makes games that take yeeeeeeeears to produce, but are great when they finally arrive.
Valve Time (hardware version) = Valve boasts of all sorts of hardware projects over the past decade, yet has never managed to release anything. Everyone assumes they would make great hardware simply because they happen to make great games. But the hard evidence for this is non-existent, because they've never managed to walk the walk.
They're a software company with a totally unproven track record in hardware, apart from many fanciful promises and dead ends. No thanks. I'd choose Facebook over Valve, or even [shudder] Apple.
Milamber* said:Facebook's stock has dived nearly 7% since the OR announcement, which is a loss in market capitalization of 11 billion dollars...
Is it unique to facebook though? I don't know how Wall St is going, but I know that my (Australian) stocks fell significantly over the past few days.
http://www.oculusvr.com/blog/introducing-michael-abrash-oculus-chief-scientist/
With Abrash jumping on-board, even the most emotional skeptic should stop and reconsider things. The short to medium term is great for Oculus. And as Carmack says, if they screw up horribly a couple of times, Facebook should step in and start dictating things. But until then, they just seem content to be assembling a dream team of big brains. Let the big brains create a jaw dropping product. Been a great week for VR:)
With Abrash jumping on-board, even the most emotional skeptic should stop and reconsider things. The short to medium term is great for Oculus. And as Carmack says, if they screw up horribly a couple of times, Facebook should step in and start dictating things. But until then, they just seem content to be assembling a dream team of big brains. Let the big brains create a jaw dropping product. Been a great week for VR:)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWtfHiQx50U
The interesting stuff starts at: 30:25
If you still don't get why it was a good deal, well, I give up :-)
Or maybe you should read this:
http://time.com/39577/facebook-oculus-vr-inside-story/
[quote="Airion"]Second reason I'm not worried, is VR can't really be casual. You strap a device the size of a book on to your face and you're fully immersed. People who play casual games like Candy Crush aren't going to do that. It's just not a platform for stupid games.[/quote]This is what I am worried about though. Think about Kinect and Wii and all that. People said the same thing about those, and they did catch on with the casual audience (and only that audience) for a little while, as a fad. I remember when Sony announced PSmove and they showed off demos similar to what they showed for Morpheus. I was intrigued by the potential, but then nobody ever even tried to use it for anything but casual games.
Especially with Oculus telling developers not to port their games, that games have to be specially made for VR. That's like telling everyone to treat it as a Wii/Kinect. Which will mean 3rd rate games. Though, the big difference here is that the Rift will have indie devs on it's side, and I'm sure some great things will come out of that. But I've used the Rift quite a bit and I think it works fine for traditional games. Every game should be in VR. If a few people get tummyaches then screw em, lol.
Airion said:Second reason I'm not worried, is VR can't really be casual. You strap a device the size of a book on to your face and you're fully immersed. People who play casual games like Candy Crush aren't going to do that. It's just not a platform for stupid games.
This is what I am worried about though. Think about Kinect and Wii and all that. People said the same thing about those, and they did catch on with the casual audience (and only that audience) for a little while, as a fad. I remember when Sony announced PSmove and they showed off demos similar to what they showed for Morpheus. I was intrigued by the potential, but then nobody ever even tried to use it for anything but casual games.
Especially with Oculus telling developers not to port their games, that games have to be specially made for VR. That's like telling everyone to treat it as a Wii/Kinect. Which will mean 3rd rate games. Though, the big difference here is that the Rift will have indie devs on it's side, and I'm sure some great things will come out of that. But I've used the Rift quite a bit and I think it works fine for traditional games. Every game should be in VR. If a few people get tummyaches then screw em, lol.
And though some positive examples of free-to-play games exist, most range from annoying to obscenely unethical.
So, maybe there is reason to be concerned with them getting their hands on VR? :-|
All hail 3d modders DHR, MasterOtaku, Losti, Necropants, Helifax, bo3b, mike_ar69, Flugan, DarkStarSword, 4everAwake, 3d4dd and so many more helping to keep the 3d dream alive, find their 3d fixes at http://helixmod.blogspot.com/ Also check my site for spanish VR and mobile gaming news: www.gamermovil.com
I think this is why Oculus will remain independent, and why their independence is best for everyone involved. Sure, companies like Zynga have done well with free to play games on Facebook.com, and people tend to want to draw a connection here, but I think that's almost entirely irrelevant to Facebook's play for VR here.
[MonitorSizeOverride][Global/Base Profile Tweaks][Depth=IPD]
Zuckerberg tried it out & wanted a new toy. Then the FB Brass started to think of all the other possibilities BESIDES GAMING.
I do believe that many of those who complain about the glasses, just don't want to spend the money to purchase the tech. at 300 bucks for a consumer version I think it will be worth it for the Neysayers to actually try it out.
Just my 2 cents. Still not happy about Facebook though.
Intel Core i9-9820x @ 3.30GHZ
32 gig Ram
2 EVGA RTX 2080 ti Gaming
3 X ASUS ROG SWIFT 27 144Hz G-SYNC Gaming 3D Monitor [PG278Q]
1 X ASUS VG278HE
Nvidia 3Dvision
Oculus Rift
HTC VIVE
Windows 10
This kind of news would of excited me. Valve lives and breathes games. Half Life was with out a doubt an important advancement in gaming as it relates to player experience.
My outlook has nothing to do with FB being evil, it is a simple fact that FB is social media and the games they provide are dumbass social in nature. Money will dictate the day and FB's direction with VR is towards the masses and not just gamers. You know how that goes when you try to please everyone. There has to be interest from FB users and I can only imagine the applications for their user base.....oh oh...what new techno hipster thing is going to come out of this....I am going to cry...lol
Having said that, I love the optimism in your perspective and I can tell you that I am on your side and I want to be wrong :)
Facebook's future is what will matter to the shareholders and the masses, not the gamers...
This could be someone else's opportunity though, it'll be interesting to see how this plays out....
I would have loved it if Valve had bought Oculus. Everone would (except sony and Microsoft). But the thruth is: they would never have bought it for 2 billion and pumped that amount of money and resources into Oculus.
Facebook did it because they can afford the money, and don't need the shortterm profit.
And in the end of the day money will allways dictates the way, even for Valve. I bet Valve is interested in money as much as FB is, except they happen to like gaming too.
And as far as pleasing the masses goes: in order to make money with VR in the mass-market you better make sure your VR is up to it. People are not gonna watch advertising if it makes you them (allthough watching advertisments make you sick anyway imho).
>> it'll be interesting to see how this plays out....
Couldn't agree more!
>> I love the optimism in your perspective
Which is kinda funny, because I'm not an very optimistic person in general, lol!
But the way I see it, is that if in 1 or 2 years time, a REALLY good OR is available in your local store where you can try it out, and it looks and works REALLY well and doens't have the name FB on it, people will pretend to forget it's actually from FB really quick.
Me personally am not gonna deny myself a great VR gaming experience just because it's made possible by facebook. Life is too short! (dammned I'm optimistic again :-))
For a number of reasons, I'm not worried about this. First is what Zuckerberg has said https://www.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10101319050523971:
"Immersive gaming will be the first, and Oculus already has big plans here that won't be changing and we hope to accelerate. The Rift is highly anticipated by the gaming community, and there's a lot of interest from developers in building for this platform. We're going to focus on helping Oculus build out their product and develop partnerships to support more games. Oculus will continue operating independently within Facebook to achieve this.
But this is just the start. After games, we're going to make Oculus a platform for many other experiences. Imagine enjoying a court side 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."
They say Oculus's plans for gaming won't be changing, and Facebook's ideas for VR are outside of gaming.
Second reason I'm not worried, is VR can't really be casual. You strap a device the size of a book on to your face and you're fully immersed. People who play casual games like Candy Crush aren't going to do that. It's just not a platform for stupid games.
Third reason I'm not worried, developers make games, not Facebook. Facebook.com is the platform for some casual games, but Facebook doesn't make them. Of course Oculus will be working with developers, but according to Zuckerberg's post I quoted above, there's no indication that they're changing course.
Fourth reason I'm not worried, Facebook the company is bigger than facebook.com the social network. They're working on a lot of things, and it won't all lead back to supporting facebook.com. I think they acquired Oculus in order to expand what they do, rather than mold Oculus to fit what they're doing right now. That's smart because facebook.com as we know it could easily be gone in 10 years.
Valve Time (software version) = Valve makes games that take yeeeeeeeears to produce, but are great when they finally arrive.
Valve Time (hardware version) = Valve boasts of all sorts of hardware projects over the past decade, yet has never managed to release anything. Everyone assumes they would make great hardware simply because they happen to make great games. But the hard evidence for this is non-existent, because they've never managed to walk the walk.
They're a software company with a totally unproven track record in hardware, apart from many fanciful promises and dead ends. No thanks. I'd choose Facebook over Valve, or even [shudder] Apple.
Is it unique to facebook though? I don't know how Wall St is going, but I know that my (Australian) stocks fell significantly over the past few days.
With Abrash jumping on-board, even the most emotional skeptic should stop and reconsider things. The short to medium term is great for Oculus. And as Carmack says, if they screw up horribly a couple of times, Facebook should step in and start dictating things. But until then, they just seem content to be assembling a dream team of big brains. Let the big brains create a jaw dropping product. Been a great week for VR:)
The interesting stuff starts at: 30:25
If you still don't get why it was a good deal, well, I give up :-)
Or maybe you should read this:
http://time.com/39577/facebook-oculus-vr-inside-story/
Especially with Oculus telling developers not to port their games, that games have to be specially made for VR. That's like telling everyone to treat it as a Wii/Kinect. Which will mean 3rd rate games. Though, the big difference here is that the Rift will have indie devs on it's side, and I'm sure some great things will come out of that. But I've used the Rift quite a bit and I think it works fine for traditional games. Every game should be in VR. If a few people get tummyaches then screw em, lol.