Oculus Rift

Jerichoholic

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Disagree totally with this. Part of the reason that people are getting so excited about this is the timing. OR is still a niche development product that currently only catering to enthusiasts. It's the work that's going on right now, refining the experience, that is so critical to the mediums future. When VR becomes a consumer product again it needs to be done right. A janky release has the potential to be fatal when it goes wide. The only other horse in this race is Sony and while reports are good, I question their level of support they're prepared to give to what is just one peripheral product in their vast portfolio.

As you say it's the work being done right now hat's so critical, but that work just got a two billion dollar injection. Palmer's already said that he can now use proper parts instead of leftover phone screens and completely expand the company.

People cancelling their DK2 orders because of this is crazy.

Branoic

Penn wrote: »

Saw an excellent post on Reddit explaining how for Facebook, this is a great deal for their consumers. However, their consumers aren't the people who use Facebook; it's the advertisers and the companies they forward on your information to.

Not enough people understand this very important fact. If a service is "free", then *you* are the product. You and all your friends and everyone else who forms a "key demographic" are packaged and sold to Facebook's customers.

Still, its handy for keeping in touch with people abroad and becoming aware of "cancer" or something, which I think is some sort of fashion trend.

Oafley Jones

Jerichoholic wrote: »

As you say it's the work being done right now hat's so critical, but that work just got a two billion dollar injection. Palmer's already said that he can now use proper parts instead of leftover phone screens and completely expand the company.

People cancelling their DK2 orders because of this is crazy.

Perhaps. But was Facebook the ideal benefactor. Were there other parties interested? I again, draw attention to Facebook's other acquisitions.

Jerichoholic

Jerichoholic wrote: »

As you say it's the work being done right now hat's so critical, but that work just got a two billion dollar injection. Palmer's already said that he can now use proper parts instead of leftover phone screens and completely expand the company.

People cancelling their DK2 orders because of this is crazy.

What's crazy is companies cancelling their potential games because of it. I'm looking at you, Minecraft.

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Perhaps. But was Facebook the ideal benefactor. Were there other parties interested? I again, draw attention to Facebook's other acquisitions.

Please go into detail about Facebook's other acquisitions and why you think it is so important to mention.

Kiith

Jerichoholic wrote: »

People cancelling their DK2 orders because of this is crazy.

I don't really agree tbh. Facebook don't exactly have a great reputation, and they have absolutely nothing to do with the gaming industry (at least the industry that Oculus Rift is aiming for). They will make changes that don't suit gamers, and for this reason alone i can understand people being pissed. Especially if they were early backers through Kickstarter.

Palmer (original owner) has come out and said that we'll never need a Facebook account to use it, and it'll never have Facebook branding (etc...) but i guess we'll just have to see in the coming months.

It's fair to say my excitement over the OC has taken a massive hit.

Oafley Jones

Deleted User wrote: »

What's crazy is companies cancelling their potential games because of it. I'm looking at you, Minecraft.



Please go into detail about Facebook's other acquisitions and why you think it is so important to mention.

Again, if you'd actual just take a look at the lists like I asked, it'd become obvious. This ties into notch btw.

Jerichoholic

Wouldn't mind Notch. There's already a Minecraft mod for it and it's amazing.

jumbobreakfast

I was as much caught up in the coolness of this new tech as I was in the excitement around watching a small garage company explode in growth. Oculus needs to come out and say why it is not creepy that they have been acquired by Facebook in order to get some goodwill back from the supporters...but maybe it suits them to get rid of tech-savvy supporters. As lmimmfn said, the benefits will mostly be in the short term. In the long term we will be milked hard.

I would love to know how Valve have taken this internally

Nody

jumbobreakfast wrote: »

I would love to know how Valve have taken this internally

Thanking the gods that it was Facebook instead of a real tech company buying them? This will open up the PC headset for them as OR is now out of the picture for most game makers and gamers (Steam box exclusive optional).

That's the biggest loss in my book; VR headsets have existed for over 20 years but what's holding it back has been lack fo things to play on them (slapping on better monitors is easy but to get them to work with the games, to get it actually add something to the games is what's hard). By jumping in bed with FB they basically make sure that they are no longer going to support the "serious" game developers (as FB is looking to compete with Google glasses and not create a PC hardware piece and in general seen as the devil).

from kickstarter to $2bn - legends cashwise.

Duggy747

Oculus painted themselves off as an independent company that is heavily community based, listening to feedback and allowing developers to come up with anything they can with the product.

Going with Facebook makes people wary because they now own them and as such Palmer & Carmack have someone to answer to now. Deadlines and milestones set by Facebook now have to be reached in order for them to make their money off Oculus and for them to receive part of their payment from Facebook.

Developing for Facebook is a major problem for some indie developers too, so like Notch's reaction, it'll be interesting if anyone else drops out as this year was going to be big year for Oculus with lots of planned support for the Rift.

Any inkling that this was going to happen so early in Oculus's life during the Kickstarter phase then they wouldn't have received nowhere near as much funding as they did.

As such, those backers feel cheated, especially since this Facebook thing was planned for months and Palmer up until recently kept throwing out the "We're an independent company / doing VR our way!" lines.

safetyboy

https://developer.oculusvr.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=7210

no happy pups over here either. I dunno whats gonna happen. I wont be upgrading my DK1 thats for sure.

Duggy747

Duggy747 wrote: »

Any inkling that this was going to happen so early in Oculus's life during the Kickstarter phase then they wouldn't have received nowhere near as much funding as they did.

As such, those backers feel cheated.

nobody (company, facebook or anyone else) knew that this was going to happen then. early backers don't have a say in a company's direction 2 years down the line... I can see your point by the company wasn't beholden to these kickstarter backers. money talks. wouldn't you take the $2bn (cash and shares) offer - bloody right you would.

stevenmu

Lots of people on Reddit cancelling their DK2 pre-orders:
http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/21d4jp/how_do_i_cancel_my_dk2_preorder/

Kiith

Who knows, maybe this could be a good thing.

There'll be a massive amount of funds available for Oculus Rift now, which should at the very least improve the production time and possibly the quality of the device itself. And the developers shouldn't be affected either, as long as it's left open source. The games being released won't stop being made, as long as there are some assurances from the OC team that things won't change that much.

Facebook can then have a fully working VR device, which they can develop their own apps for. Let them have their interactive sports stadiums and doctors (stupid idea), and keep the gaming aspect completely seperate.

Probaby not, but we can always hope.

Myrddin

While this news seems to be bad news, on the surface anyway, I don't quite understand why you'd want to cancel a DK2 order. The DK2 is just that, a DK2...it never had & never will have anything to do with Facebook...& it's still a prototype so even if the Occulus/Facebook acquisition didn't go ahead, you'd still be buying a completely separate final build down the line anyway.

I do get why people are steaming over the whole thing though, & given Facebook has a wholly different agenda to what Occulus had, I think the reaction qualifies as a bit more than a kneejerk one. The reputation, ethos, & agenda of Facebook are things proponents of Occulus, & gaming vr as a whole, have nothing in common with, so there is definite cause for concern.

johnny_ultimate

If people weren't already aware of the nature of their Kickstarter donations, this should be a fairly definitive example of what exactly you are paying for. You are not investing in return for a dividend or future stake in the company, more an expression of interest and support. You are not entitled to financial remuneration or a say in a company or product's future direction - that can suck when you see something like this (which to be fair is effectively unprecedented), but that's the nature of kickstarter.

Let's be honest, too: a vast majority of the kickstarter money was effectively a pre-order of a development kit. Somewhere in the region of $1.6 million for the main tier alone. If you got that, then you've gotten exactly what you pledged for. To be honest, I still think Kickstarter amounts to a grassroots pre-ordering platform more often than not. There'll always be people who just chip in a few euro for the support alone, but if you've gotten a development kit, then you've received exactly what Oculus said you would. It would undoubtedly be nice and encouraging if they somehow rewarded the people there from the start who gave the a vital leg-up, but they're certainly not required to do so.

It's reasonable to be frustrated about this, but you signed up to be frustrated. $2.5 million - which is not chump change, but really looks like it in the context of a transaction this staggering, especially when Kickstarter costs are taken into account - was never going to support Oculus the way they needed to in the long-term. Less than 10,000 backers were never going to be as valuable as the mass market it needs to launch into eventually. It's perfectly fair to be disappointed about the buyer, but if they were the ones with the best offer Oculus were probably crazy not to take it (although clearly don't have the same willpower as the Snapchap people!)

Kickstarter does not offer the same benefits an actual investment, and more than ever this should be kept well in mind when pledging money.

TheDoc

o1s1n wrote: »

My girlfriend always laughs when I buy things from kickstarter.

'So you're basically investing in a project to get it off the ground?'

'yes'

'Cool, do you get shares?'

'No'



I want a cut of that 2 billion Palmer!

To be fair your girlfriend is right, I find the whole idea of kickstarter utterly retarded and I can never fathom why people back stuff.

It's not that difficult to get funding for a good idea or project, so if someones on kickstarter because they can't get any funding, its because people with experience and expertise told them it was ****.

I felt the Oculus Rift was not going to be a success, and maybe just a steeping stone for bigger companies to test the water and see if it was a viable market. I still don't see VR being anything useful anytime soon.

Facebook buying it is a poor indication of where this device is going to go. As a company that generates it's inflated evaluation from essentially advertising, it doesn't take a genius to see where this is going.

The Oculus Rift is very much no longer a gaming device.

I seriously have to question Facebooks evaluation of technology companies, their purchases and acquisitions are DRIVING up the evaluations of technology firms to an unhealthy state, when few and far between make any profit, or in some cases revenue, and have any viable business plans.

Ridiculous

Duggy747

glasso wrote: »

nobody (company, facebook or anyone else) knew that this was going to happen then. early backers don't have a say in a company's direction 2 years down the line... I can see your point by the company wasn't beholden to these kickstarter backers. money talks. wouldn't you take the $2bn (cash and shares) offer - bloody right you would.

Don't get me wrong, I always imagined Oculus would be bought out / partnered with a big company and giving money through Kickstarter doesn't give you any special privilege on what the company does.

I'm not sharing the same sentiment that this is the worst thing to have ever happened but it's certainly deflated things about Oculus, seeing it more with a skeptical eye than an outright disaster.

I'll let the dust settle and see what the plans are.

Kiith

TheDoc wrote: »

To be fair your girlfriend is right, I find the whole idea of kickstarter utterly retarded and I can never fathom why people back stuff.

It's not that difficult to get funding for a good idea or project, so if someones on kickstarter because they can't get any funding, its because people with experience and expertise told them it was ****.

That's not always the case though. Look at the likes of Project Eternity, Wasteland 2, Star Citizen and plenty of other crowdfunded games as perfect examples of why Kickstarter can work perfectly. Oculus was never going to be funded entirely from Kickstarter. It had already received large sums of money from other areas, but at least in those cases (afaik), they were from investors who wanted the Rift to work as stated...for gaming.

Anyone who actually expected to get money out of this deal because they backed it in Kickstarter is pretty stupid tbh.

Sarky

TheDoc wrote: »

To be fair your girlfriend is right, I find the whole idea of kickstarter utterly retarded and I can never fathom why people back stuff.

Aside from Wasteland 2, Satellite Reign, Pillars of Eternity, Dreamfall: Chapters, Torment: Tides of Numenera, the Jack chick parody Dark dungeons and beautiful RPG books like Transhuman and Kobolds Ate My Baby?

I've backed a lot of stuff in the last year, and I'm getting exactly what I was promised.

o1s1n

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

If people weren't already aware of the nature of their Kickstarter donations, this should be a fairly definitive example of what exactly you are paying for. You are not investing in return for a dividend or future stake in the company, more an expression of interest and support. You are not entitled to financial remuneration or a say in a company or product's future direction - that can suck when you see something like this (which to be fair is effectively unprecedented), but that's the nature of kickstarter.

Let's be honest, too: a vast majority of the kickstarter money was effectively a pre-order of a development kit. Somewhere in the region of $1.6 million for the main tier alone. If you got that, then you've gotten exactly what you pledged for. To be honest, I still think Kickstarter amounts to a grassroots pre-ordering platform more often than not. There'll always be people who just chip in a few euro for the support alone, but if you've gotten a development kit, then you've received exactly what Oculus said you would. It would undoubtedly be nice and encouraging if they somehow rewarded the people there from the start who gave the a vital leg-up, but they're certainly not required to do so.

It's reasonable to be frustrated about this, but you signed up to be frustrated. $2.5 million - which is not chump change, but really looks like it in the context of a transaction this staggering, especially when Kickstarter costs are taken into account - was never going to support Oculus the way they needed to in the long-term. Less than 10,000 backers were never going to be as valuable as the mass market it needs to launch into eventually. It's perfectly fair to be disappointed about the buyer, but if they were the ones with the best offer Oculus were probably crazy not to take it (although clearly don't have the same willpower as the Snapchap people!)

Kickstarter does not offer the same benefits an actual investment, and more than ever this should be kept well in mind when pledging money.

I think the concept of the site is a big vague to be honest and has lead to some exploitation in this case.

If you paid in to get a Rift dev kit then as you said, you were basically preordering a device. If that's all kickstarter was, that'd be fine. I paid for my Rift, received one and was delighted.

However there's another element too though to the idea of 'backing' - many people donated money for free and I'm sure some people donated far more than what was required to get a dev kit. These were people who were paying in to the idea and the company and their integrity.

Fair enough, companies get bought up and that that result in them being a success. but Facebook? An organization with no real ties to what the original vision for the project was?

It just smacks of cashing in on the biggest wad offered and giving a '**** you' to all the backers.

TheDoc

TheDoc wrote: »

To be fair your girlfriend is right, I find the whole idea of kickstarter utterly retarded and I can never fathom why people back stuff.

It's not that difficult to get funding for a good idea or project, so if someones on kickstarter because they can't get any funding, its because people with experience and expertise told them it was ****.

Kickstarter is great for companies trying to launch something. It's not because someone else told them that their idea was bad that they use kickstarter it's because with kickstarter you can get money without giving away any control or equity - a no-brainer.

Magill

Brokensword is the only thing I've backed on kickstarter. Very happy with how it turned out.

This whole Facebook thing is interesting. Not entirely sure what the big crying match is about. What are peoples actual fears with this news ? Would they restrict pc OR/game development ?

o1s1n

Nice post on reddit which sums it up

This is just so silly.
A small tech startup, Oculus sets out to develop a consumer virtual reality device because it's finally possible. The tech is fast enough, small enough. Palmer Luckey has always wanted VR to be possible. The things you could do in a VR game...he could only dream. Finally, with Kickstarter, he can finally realize those dreams. Other people like him start to support the project. It gains traction. It gains fame. It gains millions of dollars in support. People begin to realize the far-reaching consequences it might have. It becomes the centerpiece of every electronics convention. News outlets that otherwise ignore gaming and its developments pay attention. The Oculus Rift comes to be seen as the next great thing in not only gaming, but maybe movies and even storytelling in general. The Oculus Rift, a crowd funded project made by just a guy with a dream, is set to redefine the way modern society functions in major ways.
And they sell it Facebook.
**** that.
The spearhead of the VR revolution in gaming and in general is no longer independent. What was once a rallying point for people who wanted to see something as amazing as virtual reality -- a thing until recently considered science fiction -- become actual reality is now the property of a profit-hungry, ad-driven stereotype of a corporation.
Never have I been so thoroughly misled. I hope I have it all wrong. I hope Facebook is just injecting cash, or that details that are not yet public entirely vindicate the sale. But I have a hard time believing that's the case. I have a hard time believing that a company whose business platform is selling the data of its users is going to acquire Oculus untouched and unblemished.

ShadowHearth

glasso wrote: »

Kickstarter is great for companies trying to launch something. It's not because someone else told them that their idea was bad that they use kickstarter it's because with kickstarter you can get money without giving away any control or equity - a no-brainer.

I just read a full statement by that Facebook dude on kotoku. Looks like they are still focusing completely on gaming aspect of oculus rift first. Then whatever Facebook wants.

It will be grand, I guess. Though I am no sure if Facebook can be trusted with this.

Nody

Magill wrote: »

This whole Facebook thing is interesting. Not entirely sure what the big crying match is about. What are peoples actual fears with this news ? Would they restrict pc OR/game development ?

Facebook stated that they are looking at advertising as they most likely way they are going to make the money back (that's 2 Bil to be made back and with 5 years of interest and risk value on top of it we're talking some serious amount of cash they want back on it) and that their focus is on mobile devices (read Google glasses by Facebook). Seeing how the team is limited and now have a new direction it's not a far leap to see PC being not only pushed back but out right cancelled or tied in with Facebook games or similar because he who holds the purse decides the direction of development and PC devices is of no interest to Facebook.

There will of course be lip service and further models for a year or two but the resources will be moved towards a new team ("who're going to be all new members, we're not changing focus, promise!") who'll suck in the resources ("To get a device on the market faster we're merging the two teams to ensure knowledge is shared, still working on PC development guys, don't worry") and lay off the old guard ("XX has decided to take up a consulting role while focusing on new areas in their life"). Why? Because this is the standard route of any such merger; Facebook don't give a flying **** about PC gaming; they care about furthering their advertising streams and get a Google glass thing out there to spam advertisement into while you walk down the street. That's why they bought them, for their technique, not for the development of VR...

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

ShadowHearth

Guys, what about those other cash investments they got before? Weren't valve supporting oculus rift too? Aint that just a huge finger to everyone, who supported this device?

J_E

Magill wrote: »

Brokensword is the only thing I've backed on kickstarter. Very happy with how it turned out.

This whole Facebook thing is interesting. Not entirely sure what the big crying match is about. What are peoples actual fears with this news ? Would they restrict pc OR/game development ?

Anything Facebook gets their hands on either involves advertising, 'social experience', data mining, or general soul-sucking.

People who backed the project on Kickstarter should have been made at least vaguely aware of this. They're not investor level, but it's so disrespectful.

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Guys, what about those other cash investments they got before? Weren't valve supporting oculus rift too? Aint that just a huge finger to everyone, who supported this device?

Support from Valve and support from Facebook are two very different things.