Sections

Oculus Rift bought by Facebook for $2 billion

Tuesday, 25th March 2014 21:38 GMT By Brenna Hillier

Oculus Rift has a new owner, with social network Facebook unexpectedly agreeing to splash out a cool $2 billion on the virtual reality headset manufacturer.

oculus_rift

Facebook won’t plonk down cash for the relatively young company, instead planning to hand over $400 million plus 23.1 million shares of Facebook stock, valued at $1.6 billion. A further $300 million in cash and stock may be paid out if Oculus Rift meets certain milestones.

Oculus will maintain its headquarters in Irvine, California, and will continue development of the Oculus Rift headset as an independent division of Facebook.

The transaction is expected to close in the second quarter of 2014, and is a “definitive agreement”.

“Mobile is the platform of today, and now we’re also getting ready for the platforms of tomorrow. Oculus has chance to create the most social platform ever, and change the way we work, play and communicate,” Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerburg said of the deal.

“We are excited to work with Mark and the Facebook team to deliver the very best virtual reality platform in the world. We believe virtual reality will be heavily defined by social experiences that connect people in magical, new ways,” Oculus VR CEO Brendan Iribe said.

“It is a transformative and disruptive technology, that enables the world to experience the impossible, and it’s only just the beginning.”

In a press release announcing the deal, Facebook acknowledged VR is still “nascent”, but said that it plans “to extend Oculus’ existing advantage in gaming to new verticals, including communications, media and entertainment, education and other areas”.

“Given these broad potential applications, virtual reality technology is a strong candidate to emerge as the next social and communications platform,” it added.

Zuckerburg discussed the deal in an open letter.

“Our mission is to make the world more open and connected. For the past few years, this has mostly meant building mobile apps that help you share with the people you care about. We have a lot more to do on mobile, but at this point we feel we’re in a position where we can start focusing on what platforms will come next to enable even more useful, entertaining and personal experiences,” he wrote.

“This is where Oculus comes in. Oculus’s mission is to enable you to experience the impossible. Their technology opens up the possibility of completely new kinds of experiences.”

Gaming is just the start of Oculus Rift’s potential, Zuckerburg said.

“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,” he added.

“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.”

Oculus co-founder Palmer Luckey also published an open letter.

“When Facebook first approached us about partnering, I was skeptical. As I learned more about the company and its vision and spoke with Mark, the partnership not only made sense, but became the clear and obvious path to delivering virtual reality to everyone,” Luckey wrote.

“Facebook is run in an open way that’s aligned with Oculus’ culture. Over the last decade, Mark and Facebook have been champions of open software and hardware, pushing the envelope of innovation for the entire tech industry. As Facebook has grown, they’ve continued to invest in efforts like with the Open Compute Project, their initiative that aims to drive innovation and reduce the cost of computing infrastructure across the industry. This is a team that’s used to making bold bets on the future.”

The partnership “accelerates” Oculus VR’s vision, Luckey said, allowing it “to execute on some of our most creative ideas and take risks that were otherwise impossible”.

“Most importantly, it means a better Oculus Rift with fewer compromises even faster than we anticipated,” he added.

“This is a special moment for the gaming industry — Oculus’ somewhat unpredictable future just became crystal clear: virtual reality is coming, and it’s going to change the way we play games forever.”

Oculus Rift initially came to attention via a high-profile and very successful Kickstarter campaign. It later went on to attract multiple big rounds of funding, nabbing $16 million in May 2013 and a further $75 million in December 2013, intended to help push the long-awaited consumer model out the door. At present the headset only supports PC, but Android support is expected at the very least.

The company has attracted some major industry players, including legendary id Software tech guru John Carmack, who apparently parted ways with the DOOM developer he helped found over Zenimax’s reluctance to embrace VR, and former EA senior vice president David DeMartini.

Multiple projects, ranging from small indies to triple- titles, are on board, including but not limited to EVE Valkyrie, Hawken, Strike Suit Zero, Half-life 2 and Team Fortress 2. As well as establishing a publishing arm, Oculus had plans to develop games in-house.

The news follows on from Sony’s bid to enter the VR space with Project Morpheus, which was announced at GDC, and was hailed by some commentators as the beginning of VR’s mainstream validity. Valve has also been experimenting in the space, apparently to great success.

Latest

101 Comments

Sign in to post a comment.

  1. Legendaryboss

    The Fuck?

    #1 4 months ago
  2. wlodi

    Unexpected, but with this company behind it, Rift will be on market really soon. More information from Zuckerberg himself: https://www.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10101319050523971

    #2 4 months ago
  3. Tiucaner

    Well… what does that mean? Facebook HUD on Oculus? :P

    #3 4 months ago
  4. AlchemyFire

    Virtual reality stalking girls summer pics albums

    #4 4 months ago
  5. fearmonkey

    W>>>T>>>>F

    #5 4 months ago
  6. dizzygear

    Good job. I just lost all interest in this thing.
    Sony and VALVe’s headset suddenly became allot more intresting.

    #6 4 months ago
  7. Vahramas

    Zuckerburg?

    #7 4 months ago
  8. CycloneFox

    @dizzygear: +over 9000

    #8 4 months ago
  9. DoubleM

    What’s with the negativity? This could be a good thing for the VR industry. Facebook has an audience of one billion people; If they can make VR a mainstream thing, then they’ve paved the way for Sony, Valve or Microsoft to make VR a necessity for games.

    Look at it this way: All electronic devices in the world have native Facebook apps. Even my shitty six-year-old phone has a Facebook app. Facebook has the power to make every device in the world support Oculus; and that’s a good thing.

    #9 4 months ago
  10. polygem

    someone should buy facebook and then burn it in hell

    #10 4 months ago
  11. diego-rbb-93

    We are only on march, but I give this the WTF Prize of the Year 2014 right now.

    #11 4 months ago
  12. Dark

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bjm1l21CEAADYd_.png

    #12 4 months ago
  13. dizzygear

    @DoubleM
    Given Facebook’s dodgy advertising practises there is no way in hell that i’m gonna strap a device made by them directly to my eyeballs.

    #13 4 months ago
  14. diego-rbb-93

    @dizzygear Oculus VR was the only and principal known partner to work with VR Valve´s tech as they arent going to ship it by their own. :/

    #14 4 months ago
  15. salarta

    Well fuck. It’s not April 1st, so this must be true.

    I like the blatant marketing speak spewed by Luckey. Real actual-thought-by-an-actual-human-being model remark there.

    Oculus Rift was promising when it had the potential to be a big game changer on several platforms, a third party integrating into PC, Microsoft, Sony, etc forms of use. Now it’s as good as dead. It might still be successful at the very, very beginning, but through Facebook, the Oculus Rift will be seen as pure gimmick.

    The future of VR is currently all riding on Sony. And before this announcement, I thought they would only be secondary to Oculus Rift’s impending success.

    #15 4 months ago
  16. salarta

    More news: Notch has canceled the Oculus Rift version of Minecraft due to the Facebook buy.

    http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/25/minecraft-creator-cancels-the-oculus-rift-version-because-facebook-creeps-him-out/

    #16 4 months ago
  17. russdude13

    VR NewsFeed… Great, so now we quite literally have FACEbook

    #17 4 months ago
  18. kisame

    April is coming yeah yeah we know

    #18 4 months ago
  19. Michael Ireland

    Hahahahaha!

    #19 4 months ago
  20. salarta

    @Michael Ireland You’re having a field day with this, aren’t you? :P

    On the bright side for anyone hoping for VR, Sony’s still around. And this just proves all the more how wrong Pachter was, and how important it is to have more than one player in the market. If you have only one player and that one player does something monumentally stupid, the whole potential market is dead.

    #20 4 months ago
  21. Michael Ireland

    And now when the technology flops and doesn’t end up being the “future evolution of gaming and entertainment as we know it”, everyone will just blame Facebook for the fact that it failed instead.

    #21 4 months ago
  22. polygem

    @Michael Ireland

    :)

    #22 4 months ago
  23. Obernox

    http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/173/576/Wat8.jpg

    #23 4 months ago
  24. Michael Ireland

    @salarta I think it’s fuckin’ hilarious! I quite literally spat my water on my iPad in laughter and surprise when I read the headline.

    #24 4 months ago
  25. ChristopherJack

    Was expecting them to sell out but was also expecting someone more like Google to buy them. Let’s see how this acquisition will affect them in the long run.

    #25 4 months ago
  26. Michael Ireland

    The future of Occulus Rift gaming is looking bright!

    https://twitter.com/petermolydeux/status/448598904989556737

    Hahahahahahaha! Oh man, this is just… I’m wiping the tears from my eyes.

    #26 4 months ago
  27. salarta

    @Michael Ireland I honestly thought it had to be an April Fools’ prank when I saw the headline. I literally checked the date just to see how close we were, because I can easily see sites pulling their pranks early to catch people off guard.

    I find it a bit funny as well, because I’m not someone that’s dying for VR to happen and Sony’s announcement appears to have come with absolute perfect timing to keep the potential market from immediately dying. However, I’m definitely disappointed the same way I would be with promising video game franchises, because it had a lot of potential and now it’s all dead in the water. So it’s kind of a sad funny.

    #27 4 months ago
  28. Michael Ireland

    Microtransactions in virtual reality. I can’t wait.

    Virtual Reality is the future guys!

    #28 4 months ago
  29. Obernox

    @26 http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/353/137/f2f.gif

    #29 4 months ago
  30. salarta

    @Michael Ireland More likely whoever’s using it will be in the middle of playing Draw Something or Words With Friends when a picture of the latest changes to their grandma’s mole pop up in front of them, paired with the refreshing splash of a Coca Cola graphic beneath it.

    #30 4 months ago
  31. salarta

    Most accurate representation of this situation I can think of so far: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiZNSzWIaLo

    #31 4 months ago
  32. DoubleM

    Zuckerberg’s explanation for this deal: http://tinyurl.com/ptl27fp

    #32 4 months ago
  33. Michael Ireland

    @Obernox Hahahaha.

    @salarta God that’s a depressing thought.

    #33 4 months ago
  34. Obernox

    @salarta :D

    #34 4 months ago
  35. Michael Ireland

    @DoubleM Pretty much sums up exactly why I believed this technology was doomed to failure from the beginning.

    Man, it’s feels so good to be validated right now.

    #35 4 months ago
  36. salarta

    @Michael Ireland I’d argue that your validation only comes as a result of unexpected circumstances, not your previously espoused expectation that VR itself isn’t viable, and it’s only partially validated since Sony is still forging ahead. :P

    #36 4 months ago
  37. Prometheus

    Where were you when virtual reality died?

    #37 4 months ago
  38. salarta

    @Prometheus I was at home playing Mortal Kombat. :P

    The attempts at VR in the 90s were never going to work, because the technology flat out was nowhere near ready. Today, we’re at the point where it’s viable. It won’t be the best, most amazing VR experience you can possibly imagine, but whatever comes out of it from Sony and any other companies that will soon enter that marketplace will be a start.

    #38 4 months ago
  39. Michael Ireland

    @salarta Which almost nobody will buy and will die a slow death because peripheral devices are never successful as anything more than a short term gimmick.

    First you need a machine, then you need the device, and then you need a game to be comparabilite with, which not all devs will support because of the limited attach rate of a technology that most people don’t want to begin with.

    Limitations within limitations within limitations. It barely had a future as a valid piece of gaming technology. Now it has none.

    @Prometheus Sitting on my couch, spitting water on my tablet, laughing at how right I was.

    #39 4 months ago
  40. salarta

    @Michael Ireland If by “first you need a machine” you’re saying the person first needs to buy a Sony product, then that’s an assumption. It would be a reasonable assumption, but still a big one, and Sony allowing the PS4 controller to work with a PC shows they’re willing to make such products workable with at least the PC if not all other devices out there.

    I think it’s still a perfectly viable product, even if the only group providing it turns out to be Sony. We know Sony is committed to this base concept because they’ve been making and selling the personal viewers for years now and hardly anyone even knows about those, largely because right now the price of those is way too high for the average person.

    I also think Sony is in a very good position to make a killing because of this situation. Sony is beating Microsoft in console sales, and they’ve shown a commitment to supporting indies. The latter is critical because I’m certain many of the devs that were developing stuff for Oculus Rift are considering the possibility of switching over to the PS4. That will mean a lot of games ready to go. I’m also certain that one or more of Sony’s first party devs would want to make something using their VR headset, considering that Sucker Punch used the touch pad and motion controls of the Dual Shock 4 when the game really didn’t need it.

    #40 4 months ago
  41. Kyl Every1

    @polygem Lets start a Kickstarer to raise the money to do just that, we can even start a facebook page to get follow.. Oh wait… nm that second part.

    #41 4 months ago
  42. Michael Ireland

    I take back what I said about Kojima. He’s actually a clairvoyant genius; http://imgur.com/qh1RRUU

    #42 4 months ago
  43. cjmayberry

    http://psvrforum.com and http://reddit.com/r/PlayStationVR

    One more reason to pick Playstations VR headset over Facebook VR

    #43 4 months ago
  44. salarta

    @Michael Ireland I know you’re bringing that up just to joke, but I think Kojima was trying to get across several messages with MGS2, and I was always disappointed that people hated on the game essentially for starring Raiden instead of Snake.

    #44 4 months ago
  45. eathdemon

    I hate to break it to people, but the rift could never come to market without being bought. they did not have the resources to set up the manufacturing deals needed to do so. if it was not Facebook, it would have been Google or Microsoft. there would be the same QQing there is now.

    #45 4 months ago
  46. antraxsuicide

    @DoubleM You’re the only commenter I’ve seen who understands what this means. Great post.

    In my opinion, trusting the future of VR to a company (Sony) that’s so close to a Chapter 11 filing, they can smell the ink, is ridiculous. Sony is cutting staff left and right, they’ve sold their major buildings, and they can’t physically keep up development if they can’t raise capital. That’s why they announced Morpheus; they need the investor boost, because the investors are a month away from swallowing a $1.1B loss. And it’s certainly not the first one they’ve seen.

    Then look at FB. They’ve given the OR crew 2 BILLION DOLLARS. That’s some fantastic capital for a start-up company. And like Double M pointed out, FB makes a product sell. Quite frankly, OR was probably doomed to a niche market before this announcement. Now every grandma from here to Timbuktu is going to hear about it. Morpheus? Less than a tenth of that audience if they’re lucky (assuming the PS4 sees Nintendo Wii levels of sales).

    To be honest, Sony will be lucky to see their company exist in 5 years. FB will be fine for at least a decade.

    #46 4 months ago
  47. antraxsuicide

    @eathdemon I was typing my post when you posted yours. You make the 2nd person who knows what they’re talking about haha

    #47 4 months ago
  48. Dragon

    My initial reaction as I saw this news just after waking up-
    http://i.minus.com/iAVAnzdJjaY9a.gif

    Second reaction, oh man, funny how Occulus getting bought by Facebook somehow invalidates the entire notion of VR. To date, none of the “It will surely fail” guys ever gave a tangible objective proof about why VR will fail. And now somehow a multiple billion dollar company buying a VR startup dooms VR?
    Hilarious. I am waiting for objective facts regarding that. VR will be much more than games, and, to be fair, largest social media site acquiring it opens some tantalizingly great ideas for the future.

    And btw, I definitely wont be surprised if MS paid a part for this deal. Facebook is probably the closest Silicon Valley giant to MS.

    #48 4 months ago
  49. Dragon

    On a side note ,Facebook is a very new company in terms of age, hence it has hardly any history of developing lasting tech. This gives it the first opportunity to do so. Question is, can they commit cash to this project for a long terms (ie. 10-20 years or so)?

    #49 4 months ago
  50. Hyperx64

    “Kickstarter company now worth $2 Billion dollars.”

    http://youtu.be/s4mjUTBXnPQ?t=3s

    #50 4 months ago
  51. Dragon

    Off topic, but just adding just how much potential VR has.

    “Oculus or both speak in glowing terms of virtual reality’s future applications not just for entertainment but in a wider sense – as a simulator, educational tool, for training – even for therapy.

    Virtual reality can change the way we think about not just videogames, but virtual interactions as a whole. Yes, these are prototypes and yes, these are early days for the medium, but in Project Morpheus and Oculus Rift, we’re seeing not just the rebirth of virtual reality, but the starting point for something much, much bigger than videogames.”

    http://www.edge-online.com/news/sonys-dazzling-project-morpheus-demos-show-that-virtual-realitys-future-is-bigger-than-videogames/

    I seriously hope money is pumped in, and I don’t care who does it. This is transformative tech, make no mistake about it. The possibilities are endless.
    Your TV looks nothing like the one JL Baird made.

    On a lighter note,
    http://kotaku.com/the-internet-reacts-to-facebook-buying-oculus-rift-1551579758
    _______________________________

    There is a good story about when Michael (how ironic) Faraday first show his work on relation between electricity and magnetism to a group of journalists. It has very simple, something that is a middle school science project now, showing induction using few magnets and wire.
    Afterwards, a journalist asked – “Of what use is this?”
    Faraday answered – “Of what use is a new born baby?”
    And fyi, every motor, every electronic device you see around you work on this basic principle.

    There are challenges, just like there were to every other innovation. You can either believe in the power of minds to come up with a solution, or you can just be an objective (lol) negative nancy till the end.
    Choice is yours.

    #51 4 months ago
  52. Imperius

    This device just died for me… I hope Sony gets good support for Morpheus.

    FB the killer of good games and good things…

    #52 4 months ago
  53. gomersoul

    This couldn’t have gone any better. I’m smug now………….. Really smug. The people picking up that 2 billion are laughing even harder than Michael Ireland! Massive gamble for Facebook, good job they have deep pockets

    #53 4 months ago
  54. Stardog

    The only laughable thing is everyone hyping up Sony’s Morpheus headset. The only thing Sony can possibly do is release something half-assed and ruin VR before it even gets going.

    There is ZERO chance their tech will ever be as advanced as Oculus, because Oculus/Valve are still solving some of the huge issues with VR as we speak.

    If they had been bought by Sony/MS you’d be saying the same thing you are about Oculus now — this huge company will ruin it, so how can you back the Sony headset?

    The only people backing this Morpheus headset are the uninformed changelings who actually think Facebook are the developers of Farmville.

    #54 4 months ago
  55. polygem

    @Kyl Every1
    and this guy could bring the vessel with the facebook in it straight to hell to let it burn. the prophet of it all…or not.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTwHp5-Wnuw

    #55 4 months ago
  56. Legendaryboss

    @Michael Ireland I knew you’d enjoy this.

    #56 4 months ago
  57. Ekona

    @Dragon VR does have massive potential, you’re right. So does Move and Kinect though, and we’re hardly reaping the benefits of those either.

    If OR wasn’t dead in the water before, it really is now. Unless FB can use their billions to release the hardware for cheaps and get it in every home, of course…

    #57 4 months ago
  58. Fin

    Soooo, can anyone articulate in non-circlejerk terms why this is a bad thing?

    #58 4 months ago
  59. Rockstar Vienna

    I hate Facebook

    #59 4 months ago
  60. Gekidami

    *Gets funded on Kickstarter to be independent*

    *Starts to look interesting, the tech looks like it might catch on*

    *Gets instantly bought up by massive corporation*

    lolKickstarterbackerslol

    #60 4 months ago
  61. Dragon

    @Fin,
    That is impossible. Most of them hate facebook, and then a few minutes later… back to Facebook.
    I don’t use facebook much. Its just a easy tool to keep track of old friends who I don’t meet now due to various factors.

    Really though, I would also like to know about getting 2 FUCKING BILLION DOLLARS for a new exciting tech that never had such big backing before (except Sony) is a bad thing. Money matters more than negative internet nancies.

    #61 4 months ago
  62. Fin

    @Dragon

    +1

    #62 4 months ago
  63. _LarZen_

    This is a good thing. But as usual gamers have the mentality as a 6 year old child.

    #63 4 months ago
  64. silkvg247

    Amazed at the negative reactions to be honest.

    So if facebook bought out Logitech would that mean you could only use logitech keyboards, mice and cameras on facebook? Sigh. I think people are missing the point. Facebook want the tech so they can brand it, and use it for their own social VR projects, and reap the profits once it’s commercial. It will have no impact on the tech being used anywhere else i.e. games. In fact it’s in facebooks best interest to ensure that the tech is as widely used as possible, in as many games as possible, so that more headsets are sold!!

    90% of the negative posts are “I don’t like facebook, I can’t explain why, but my dislike of the company means this is the worst news in the world”. I’m not seeing any logic. Worried about ads? Really? So facebook are somehow going to change the graphics that are rendered by a game so that there are ad overlays? That’s some weird fuckin tech voodoo right there. All the headset does is render what would normally be rendered to your monitor, to a dual bubble headset display instead.

    If anything this acquisition will allow accelerated development of the tech due to a massively increased financial backing. Oh no.. we’ll get the tech sooner. Also, the devs (I’m looking at you Notch) are being equally ridiculous.

    Stop, and think.

    Nobody was betrayed. They kickstarted a project, it took off, and now it’s going further still. Which is what we all wanted.

    #64 4 months ago
  65. polygem

    money is ugly

    #65 4 months ago
  66. Michael Ireland

    @Stardog They’re both going to fail. The tech is not going to work. People are simply not going to pay the cost of the device just so they can spin their head around in a stupid looking mask in a handful of games.

    People are closed off from each other enough as it is. It doesn’t need another excuse.

    #66 4 months ago
  67. Fin

    @Michael Ireland

    Alright, your railing against the tech is starting to get irritating.
    You think it’s going to fail, you don’t have to say so in every fucking article.

    #67 4 months ago
  68. Dragon

    @Fin,
    In another thread, he said it was his “objective” opinion. I asked for that “objective” part to be backed up by some tangible data to suggest VR will fail. I am still waiting for the answer.

    “People are closed off from each other enough as it is. It doesn’t need another excuse.”
    Feels more like a personal preference that wants VR to fail based on ethics and no any “objectivity”.

    #68 4 months ago
  69. Kreion

    @_LarZen_

    The problem is that it’s not necessarily a good thing…Occulus Rift was what people hoped to be the next step forward in gaming and how you experience it. Facebook is the lowest of the low when it comes to Gaming and little to nothing to do with the people who were most interested in Occulus Rift.

    It’s the same as most people disliking the ‘share to Facebook’button when that’s on a game – since in reality people just don’t do that. Facebook is just something that’s so far removed from gamers that them buying up the people who really started to develop it is disappointing to a lot of people

    I won’t say that it will definitely be worse because of it – but let’s face it – why would anyone trust Facebook with ‘the future of gaming’?!

    #69 4 months ago
  70. Michael Ireland

    @Fin Every user has as much right to a negative ones a a positive one.

    If you don’t like my opinion, you are fully free to ignore it. Nobody is glueing your head to the screen and forcing you to read my words. It’s very easy to scroll past it.

    You care more about my opinion than I do.

    @Dragon The relative short term success of other peripheral tech in the past, which has only succeeded for a small while (Wii Balance Board) or not caught on at all (Kinect, PlayStation Move).

    #70 4 months ago
  71. Michael Ireland

    @Dragon The “closed off remark” is a personal opinion, but it doesn’t have anything to do with my evaluation of the tech as a viable consumer product. It was just a random observation.

    #71 4 months ago
  72. Dragon

    @Kreion,
    FYI, Rift got private funding of 70 million $ from venture capitalists who absolutely no other motive than to make money out of the deal.
    By that logic, Facebook at least has “games” on its service.

    #72 4 months ago
  73. Dragon

    @Michael Ireland,
    Do you realise that Move and Kinect sold over 20 million units EACH? That is a failure? Not for Sony and MS.
    And VR is something that isnt even comparable to those things. They are literally gimmicks in front of VR.

    Oh, and it definitely seems something more than simple opinion stating when someone goes it every single page to do that, and then more pertinently, types things like “hahaha” and nothing more on multiple pages regarding that topic.
    Quite ironic how someday in the past we used to laugh together on salarta’s obsession with everything Square Enix.

    #73 4 months ago
  74. jonnymelamet

    Despite all of the negativity from around the internet, this appears to be a win-win situation.

    For OR, they have the funding to complete their work without worrying about running out of funds etc. Meanwhile, Facebook is diversifying. This means that if, for any reason, the website begins to fail, the company will have an alternate for of income.

    Minus the Facebook colouring on the actual visor, this sounds like a good business decision for both parties.

    #74 4 months ago
  75. Michael Ireland

    @Dragon They were short term successes, yes, but that doesn’t make them “the next evolution in gaming”.

    I’m talking about a complete paradigm shift for gaming as we know it, which is what everyone is convinced this will be.

    I never said it wouldn’t carve it’s own niche. In fact I’ve stressed constantly that it likely will. But that’s all it will be. A niche. Most people won’t care.

    #75 4 months ago
  76. polygem

    this site has become a tag team internet wrestling festival.
    what´s the problem with posting an opinion on every single article where that said opinion matters?
    now it´s all obsession, love letters etc etc…weird – because – i always thought this is about a bunch of guys talking about games.

    #76 4 months ago
  77. Legendaryboss

    @polygem Attention Seeking 101: Bring up a claim (Catalyst, love letters) not being used/dormant. Attention Seeking 102: Get called out on in it.

    Failing to see that repetitious opinion across multiple articles will get called out at somepoint. The problem has been stated, your just overlooking it.

    #77 4 months ago
  78. polygem

    gaming is going more and more mainstream and if a corp like facebook buys into something that might shape the future of gaming (or not-who knows-but that´s the goal) – i find that extremely disturbing.
    life isn´t all about the money. i don´t understand that attitude. fuck that capitalistic nonsense. huge lie anyway.
    it´s always sad to see the younger generation praying to the dollar. it´s sick if you ask me.

    #78 4 months ago
  79. polygem

    @Legendaryboss
    YOU use those term. i just quote them.

    #79 4 months ago
  80. polygem

    @polygem ´termS

    #80 4 months ago
  81. Legendaryboss

    @polygem Use as in Used? If it isn’t present in the article your commenting on then your just attention seeking (twice now) and it doesn’t support your point. And if you (Noone else) keep bringing it up your just proving my point.

    Quoting from where? Where is it before post 76?

    #81 4 months ago
  82. salarta

    @Fin I’ll be straightforward and honest, I think a portion of the backlash to Facebook acquiring Oculus Rift is actually a result of associating Facebook with Zynga. Zynga owns things like Draw Something and Farmville, and frankly, that’s all Facebook has offered anyone in terms of the gamespace: letting other companies create games through Facebook, most of which are exploitative and terrible but not things Facebook themselves created.

    If Facebook had a track record of either developing major video game elements or doing well to support people making games, I think the response would be different. As it stands, Facebook doesn’t. This is the closest they have ever come to the video game aspect, and Zuckerberg’s remarks are highly suggestive that he wants priority to go on pushing Oculus Rift as a way for Facebook to create another Second Life, not a way to improve video games.

    Does Facebook wanting to implement VR make Facebook acquiring Oculus Rift into a bad thing? Yes and no. Facebook wanting to implement VR doesn’t necessarily mean that the Oculus Rift team cannot supply the headset for video games. However, it’s a given that since Oculus Rift is now owned by Facebook, Facebook will be trying to push it first and foremost as a new Second Life. VR is not ready for a Second Life angle. A Second Life angle would be way too ambitious for the tech at this point, essentially ending up like Playstation Home. In addition, the average person is NOT going to spend even $200 (being generous on pricing) for a headset like this just to do a Second Life sort of thing. $200 is something a hardcore gamer would use, assume the risk, and by letting others use it, create interest in others.

    All of that set aside, there are two reasons Facebook is disliked within the tech sphere. One is the collusion with the NSA, and definite expectations that if nothing else, Facebook will try to get information about people out of the Oculus Rift that they can, if not give to the NSA, then sell to third parties or use for themselves to develop ads. The ads don’t have to be on the Oculus Rift. They can be on other things like Facebook itself. The point is, there’s a definite expectation that the Oculus Rift will be gathering data that Facebook will then take advantage of.

    The second issue in the tech sphere is that Facebook sucks for supporting apps, especially video game ones. One of the most thorough posts I saw on reddit about this issue was a guy stating how Facebook has essentially no support to speak of when shit hits the fan. Game breaks? Tough luck, the developer needs to find out what broke it, and many times it’s an unknown change to the API that Facebook never bothered to announce. There is absolutely nothing revealed thus far about how support for the Oculus Rift will work out, especially if Oculus Rift use turns out to require some sort of Facebook interaction, whether that means something as intrusive as ads (maybe possible, maybe not) or as simple as having to use a Facebook login.

    #82 4 months ago
  83. piss4sucks

    lol goodbye pc vr not like it had any chance of being good anyway

    pc = casual fucks who play half life and games from the 90s and farmville this is basically a match in heaven for you but you are ungreatful as usual i bet if you could pirate a headset you all would you pc beggars

    #83 4 months ago
  84. Michael Ireland

    @Legendaryboss I post my opinion because it’s what I think and I’m a member of the community. It’s not negative purely for the sake of being negative.

    What someone thinks of my opinion is entirely up to them. If people want to reply to it, that’s that’s choice.

    #84 4 months ago
  85. Fin

    @salarta

    I can see where you’re coming from, but your entire comment is based on subjective speculation, most of which is wrong.

    |letting other companies create games through Facebook, most of which are exploitative and terrible but not things Facebook themselves created.

    Eh?
    This is a bit like complaining about Apple for allowing Flappy Bird clones on iOS devices.

    |However, it’s a given that since Oculus Rift is now owned by Facebook, Facebook will be trying to push it first and foremost as a new Second Life.

    Eh?
    “After games, we’ll make Oculus a platform,” the Facebook CEO vowed.
    http://gamasutra.com/view/news/213898/Oculus_Facebook_weigh_in_on_2_billion_surprise_VR_deal.php

    |One is the collusion with the NSA

    Eh?
    http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/13/technology/security/mark-zuckerberg-nsa/

    |if Oculus Rift use turns out to require some sort of Facebook interaction,

    Eh?
    http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/21dvlz/palmer_i_will_continue_to_support_oculus_but/cgc3lcz

    Basically, there is no info on how the Rift will evolve in the future, what will change, or even IF anything will change, but hey, feel free to take existing rumours and extrapolate them out to future business practices.

    #85 4 months ago
  86. Dragon

    @Michael Ireland,
    Your definition of niche requires some serious adjustment. 20 million is niche? There are billions of PCs compared to just few million next gen consoles, are they niche too?
    You are convincing no one with that.

    Oh, and great job avoiding a reply to my last para. Funny how people do a 180 when its about themselves.

    FYI, I too have serious concerns about the potential negative impact of VR.
    http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic/the-future-is-virtual-an-opinion-on-the-future-of-vr/
    Its just that I don’t let those concerns of mine hamper the development of a tech that would have revolutionary impact in the future, of which games would just be a part.

    #86 4 months ago
  87. karma

    Talk about selling your soul.. I think this just set true virtual gaming back about tens years. I very much doubt it’ll be used for the types of gaming experiences that I had in mind.

    Also I feel bad for the those that kickstarted it. Hope they get some recompense, because I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t have backed it had they known it would end up in the hands of Facebook.

    #87 4 months ago
  88. Michael Ireland

    @Dragon Yes, I consider 20 million niche, because the technology is never going to supported as a legitimate gaming device if it isn’t shifting the games as well, and there is almost nothing being released for either.

    Console and PC gaming are a niche. Mobile gaming is the one that is mainstream. The future is leaving that technology behind, and there is a generation of children growing up right now that will barely care.

    #88 4 months ago
  89. Legendaryboss

    @Michael Ireland Positive or negative, the logic still stands.

    #89 4 months ago
  90. Dragon

    @Michael Ireland,
    “Console and PC gaming are a niche. Mobile gaming is the one that is mainstream.”
    So, by your logic, support for PC and consoles should cease too, since they aren’t mainstream.

    Like I said, thanks for proving my point that your logic is a bit screwed by personal preferences.

    And again, great job dodging the question about 180s. Pick and choose people to support based on the topic, 180ing while at it, right?

    #90 4 months ago
  91. Michael Ireland

    @Dragon Console and PC support is nowhere near as high as the support for mobile devices are, and the pie is getting smaller.

    When did I ever say it should cease? I just said it’s not the “revolutionary future of gaming” it’s being branded as. It’s a vaguely interesting piece of technology.

    Most people will get bored of swinging their head around in a limited number of genres within a few weeks. Game sales will bottom out after a few months as people move on to the next gimmick, and it’ll be barely be given a second thought after that.

    “Like I said, thanks for proving my point that your logic is a bit screwed by personal preferences.”

    Sales of PCs are plummeting year on year. This is an objective fact.

    The largest PC digital retailer only had about as many registered users on their service as the individual consoles do on there’s. This is an objective fact.

    The game sales for “peripheral” products always stagnate after the short term interest of the product had worn of. This is an objective fact.

    It’s not a subjective opinion that mobile platforms are bringing in billions of dollars and hundreds of millions of potential consumers at record speeds, while consoles and the PC are struggling to even reach 100,000 million after almost 10 years. It’s an objective fact.

    It’s a niche technology within a niche platform relying on niche genres to promote a niche concept.

    #91 4 months ago
  92. Gekidami

    Someone on Neogaf pointed out that when this hit Kickstarter the promise was for a pure gaming focused device. Now that its been picked up by FB that isnt the case any more in fact Mark Zuckerberg has said that to make it viable they intend to integrate networking and virtual goods to buy:
    http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/25/why-facebook-bought-oculus/
    So really gaming wont be the only focus and as far as the business side of things go, it isnt the main one.

    So has the original idea, the one that people backed it for, pretty much been blown away? People on the backer page arent happy, thats for sure. And this is why i dont like Kickstarter, too much BS, to many chances for things to fail to deliver or change, way too easy to get scammed. And you have no rights yourself, because as backers you’re giving donations, you’re not buying shares.

    #92 4 months ago
  93. Fin

    @Gekidami

    Did any of the backers not receive what they were promised?

    #93 4 months ago
  94. Gekidami

    @Fin
    They were promised a device made for gamers with games as its main and sole focus, according to Zuckerberg that promise has flew the coop. They were also backing a device by an independent company, thats not the case any more. I’m pretty sure if people knew in advance the thing they were backing was going to get picked up by one of the richest companies in the world, they might not have been so willing to put their money down.

    #94 4 months ago
  95. Gekidami

    @Fin
    And to add to that (and fuck the lack of the edit button), i doubt they would have backed it if they knew in advance the business plan was going to be based around buying virtual goods and ads. And i’m not just saying that because “lolFacebook”, Zuckerberg outright said he wanted that stuff in there to investors.

    #95 4 months ago
  96. antraxsuicide

    @Gekidami If people are mad because the device they paid for is going to have more features than they thought, they’re too stupid to be allowed to purchase said device.

    #96 4 months ago
  97. salarta

    @Fin I’ll preface my replies to this by saying I was kinda rushing my comment. Might be parts of it that I might have changed my view on if I spent more time looking it over first.

    You’re right, it’s not Facebook’s fault that it’s dominated by games like those made by Zynga. I think I was mainly trying to get at how Facebook is heavily associated with those games because those are the only ones that got popular, and Facebook themselves have never bothered to make anything truly worthwhile that works through Facebook games-wise.

    In regards to Zuckerberg’s remarks, if you look only at that sentence you quoted and the preceding paragraph, it doesn’t sound so bad. But the majority of talk from Zuckerberg is in its use as a “communication platform,” not something made for video games. The phrasing can be interpreted in many ways, but based on his topics and how much he discusses each, Zuckerberg’s remarks highly suggests trying to push Oculus more in the direction of “you can pretend to go to a movie, or a basketball game!” kinds of VR. It’s easy to say “Facebook won’t make the Oculus team change focus,” but the reality is that when you have jobs and funding stream on the line, anything goes. Unless they have an agreement in writing that explicitly draws lines that prevent Facebook or its shareholders from doing certain things, the Oculus team could very easily be pressured into towing Facebook’s line. Realistically, not any time in the next 2-3 years, but beyond that, all bets are off.

    When I mentioned the NSA, I was referring to Facebook’s willing work with the NSA. Zuckerberg’s complaints were about the NSA hacking Facebook, essentially a breach of trust and breaking any civil terms of agreement between the agency and Facebook. You would react differently if someone asks you for a piece of candy compared to that same person sneaking into your house and stealing more of it just because they’re not satisfied with what you willingly offer.

    What Luckey claims today is absolutely no guarantee to what Facebook might demand or what Luckey himself might let happen in the future. Unless there’s some definitive documentation that says “Facebook will never be integrated into Oculus Rift in any way other than maybe for share functions,” it can still happen.

    Speculation isn’t fact, but educated speculation can anticipate future problems and set things in place to solve them when/if they happen. Or barring that, allow a person to make the best decision based on what’s likely. The business world itself operates on speculation, including Facebook’s acquisition of Oculus Rift. Facebook didn’t buy it for the lack of current existing consumer business, they bought it because they speculate that VR will be big when it’s available to consumers.

    #97 4 months ago
  98. Fin

    @Gekidami

    This is, quite frankly, completely moronic reasoning. You don’t back a Kickstarter based on future possibilities, you back it based on the goals. The Kickstarter hit its goals, the backers got what they “paid” (tenuous) for. That’s it, that’s the end of their agreement.
    If a company makes an awesome Kickstarter game, gets picked up by a publisher, and then makes more games, the people who originally backed (do not use the word invested) the Kickstarter are entitled to something? Fuck off.

    @salarta

    Good points.

    #98 4 months ago
  99. Fin

    @Gekidami

    Oh whoops, I misread the investors bit.

    #99 4 months ago
  100. TheWulf

    This is a sad day. On the upside, however, it gives a new startup the chance to scoop up all of the interest that the Oculus will lose now that they sold out, and you know that would happen.

    The most completely amazing thing that would happen right now is if Carmack declared he was going it alone to do his own VR startup, with the kind of forward thinking tech and amazing coding you’d expect from him. That would be incredible and it would knock everyone else down flat, there would be no competition. That’s an ideal world scenario, though, so it’s unlikely.

    Still. Carmack would become one of my heroes again if he had the balls to do that. And I can dream, can’t I?

    #100 4 months ago
  101. TheWulf

    @91

    I’ve already pointed this out, but I’ll point it out again.

    People said that the Internet and smartphones were going to be gimmicky fads that would pass once the novelty wore off. Those people were imbeciles, because they lacked the critical capacities (the foresight, the intellect, and the imagination) to see how those technologies could evolve over the long term.

    They looked at the device as it is in the here and now and their response was ultimately: Wut? Hur hur. That’ll never catch on!

    And what are you doing, hmm?

    The problem with a commercial, all ready branded technology is that it’s not going to evolve much, that’s its final state. VR technology doesn’t belong to one company, just as smartphones didn’t, so it’s like the smartphone rather than the Wiimote. It’s not a stagnant device that’s a locked moment in time. Saying that is like saying that the humble gamepad would never evolve beyond the initial rectangular blocks we got with the Master System and NES.

    Now we have 360 pads.

    Give it ten years and we’ll see who’s laughing. But I can guarantee you it’ll be me.

    #101 4 months ago