Facebook May Rebrand Oculus Rift, Import Interface - Update
- Thread starter Alex Co
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Have you ever heard of a social thing called: "Second Life"? Think that, but in VR.Daaaah Whoosh said:
Facebook's user base is slowly eroding and looking around for the next big thing, like with any other trend before it, so they proactively buy things up left and right, to stay relevant, as well as assimilating potential challengers to their position, or components thereof.
...or in terms of a nice kitchy little novel called: "Ready Player One": IOI just bough Gregarious.
Hopefully they get the message from the widespread backlash, and take it as incentive to prove their good will by keeping their paws off Oculus just about entirely -- I have my deep doubts about that, though.
This one's easy, if a bit long-winded. Do keep in mind though that no particular reason will apply to every single person, but rather each person has their own combination of reasons why they hate Facebook.Story said:
The first big issue people have with Facebook is FB's traditional business model. Facebook has been primarily reliant on advertising, social games such as Farmville that are more often than not virtual Skinner Boxes (which have a particularly nasty rep in the hardcore gaming scene), and selling user info. Any attempt to make the Oculus adopt this business model even slightly would automatically ruin the OR in it's entirety for a lot of people.
The next major problem people have with FB is that it's quite arguably the single worst non-government related company out there when it comes to respecting people's privacy (this one is the main reason I personally refuse to use Facebook). Whether it's Germany banning FB's "like" button for failing to adhere to privacy standards, having an infamously sketchy-as-fuck TOS (at least in the past - I have no idea what it's like now), Facebook making all user info public regardless of whether or not people actually want that info public, the CEO and founder's supposed numerous anti-privacy quotes, or the aforementioned selling off of any and all user information that it sees fit; Facebook has certainly earned colossal amount of ire from a lot of people, especially in this post-NSA Scandal day and age.
Another common issue with Facebook is the whole social-networking thing itself. Some people just straight up don't care for social networking. For others, Facebook's reputation for being a place that causes drama and where posts can unwittingly cost one their job make it seem unsafe to use. For both of these groups, even the mere possibility of it being forced upon them in order to use a product that they have been anticipating or may have even helped fund is enough to be heavily upsetting.
Finally, Facebook is not a gaming company, nor has it ever cared about non-social gaming before unless they could use it to get people to use Facebook itself. The Oculus Rift, on the other hand, has been designed primarily around hardcore gaming from the outset and is a major reason why it's Kickstarter was so successful. In other words, Facebook's track record makes it very easy to believe that gaming could (<- keyword here) cease to be the main focus and/or that Facebook accounts could be mandatory for the OR, both of which would completely kill said people's interest in an otherwise extremely promising product. Once again, that alone is enough to be upsetting for many, especially with all of the above reasons in mind as well.
Hope you've enjoyed this ride on the USS Text Wall. Please feel free to return whenever you plan your next essay-long trip! XD
Captcha: "take a vay-cay" o_0
This is starting to make me think of Google+ and YouTube. Force the social media on everybody why don't you?
At least I use facebook. Not for anything other than conversations and organising outings with close friends, though. I'm not into that whole status bullcrap. Well...not any more.
*flashbacks*
Even then all I'll use is the odd fan page. I like those, I post in them. Sometimes. At least I don't already own and use an Oculus, this doesn't annoy me nearly as much as Google's antics for that reason. At least I get the pleasure of sitting back and watching the chaos unfold.
At least I use facebook. Not for anything other than conversations and organising outings with close friends, though. I'm not into that whole status bullcrap. Well...not any more.
*flashbacks*
Even then all I'll use is the odd fan page. I like those, I post in them. Sometimes. At least I don't already own and use an Oculus, this doesn't annoy me nearly as much as Google's antics for that reason. At least I get the pleasure of sitting back and watching the chaos unfold.
When reached for comment about whether they plan to continue working with developers to integrate VR support in more video games or offer any compensation for kickstarter backers the Facebook rep reportedly made a jerk-off motion before mooning the camera on the way out.
Can... can we just take a step back people?
This is leaked information with no credible basis in fact. A leak from an un-named individual could just as easily be a hoax as a real deal. Remember all those leaks about the "PS4" and "Xbox 720?" Yeah.
Facebook has given no proof that they mean to dismantle anything the Occulus stood for, or add anything for that matter. There's been no mention of it from the company. Facebook doesn't have a record of doing such a thing with previous buyouts. And if the leak is true, it doesn't say that these features are necessary for using the Occulus.
We all need to collectively stand back, untwist our panties, and wait for a credible shred of evidence before we start condemning Occulus for having the gall to take a buyout. How dare they want money and resources!
This is leaked information with no credible basis in fact. A leak from an un-named individual could just as easily be a hoax as a real deal. Remember all those leaks about the "PS4" and "Xbox 720?" Yeah.
Facebook has given no proof that they mean to dismantle anything the Occulus stood for, or add anything for that matter. There's been no mention of it from the company. Facebook doesn't have a record of doing such a thing with previous buyouts. And if the leak is true, it doesn't say that these features are necessary for using the Occulus.
We all need to collectively stand back, untwist our panties, and wait for a credible shred of evidence before we start condemning Occulus for having the gall to take a buyout. How dare they want money and resources!
if you look back at facebooks corporate history, they don't deserve the benefit of the doubt. Facebook is toxic.Rabid_meese said:
I don't have a problem per se with a buyout, I have a problem with the company it was sold to. I will never support anything this internet cancer has its fingers in.
While it's all very well to get angry at Facebook and the Oculus guys, I think we all know who's really to blame:
Damn you Rockstar, for inspiring yet another real life tragedy.
Zuckerberg* must have seen the Lifeinvader Docker and thought "I've got to get me some of that... just need to make it interface with people's eyeballs rather than their cock to be more marketable... sod it, I'll just use the Oculus Rift".
*[small]As an aside, why does Firefox's spellchecker insist that "Zuckerberg" isn't a proper word and suggest that the only correct alternative in the entire English language is "cocksucker"? Is this an Easter Egg?[/small]
Damn you Rockstar, for inspiring yet another real life tragedy.
Zuckerberg* must have seen the Lifeinvader Docker and thought "I've got to get me some of that... just need to make it interface with people's eyeballs rather than their cock to be more marketable... sod it, I'll just use the Oculus Rift".
*[small]As an aside, why does Firefox's spellchecker insist that "Zuckerberg" isn't a proper word and suggest that the only correct alternative in the entire English language is "cocksucker"? Is this an Easter Egg?[/small]
I'm sorry, but why should I be outraged at that? Because it's no longer a dedicated gaming device?dunam said:
The whole reaction to this announcement is people kicking up a massive stink over nothing.
I decided to come out of Escapist retirement to share my view on the topic
*hoping I don't get banned for lack of content*
*hoping I don't get banned for lack of content*
Yes, I did.dunam said:
To both. There is a lot of circle-jerking hatred going on about the Facebook buyout.
Zuckerberg himself said that Facebook and Occulus will be operating independent of eachother. They're not interfering. Sure, there will be extra features for the Rift - such as some Facebook game support, but that doesn't mean the focus is shifting from its initial stance. The little snippet of "40% of time spent on PC's is gaming, and another 40% is social media, so lets fuse them" seems to be the crux of many peoples Anti-Facebook buyout.
Which is a misquote. Here is his actual quote "[On mobile,] what we see is that about 40% of the time that people spend overall is in gaming," Zuckerberg said. "And about 40% is also spent in social communications. About half of that is in Facebook. What we basically believe is that unlike the Microsoft or Sony pure-console strategies, if you want to make this a real computing platform, you need to fuse both of those things together."
Eek. That sounds pretty damning, doesn't it? Well, lets read something else that Zuckerberg posted...
"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."
What can we infer from all of this? That Facebook bought Oculus because it thought VR is the next big thing. The Rift, which is already being worked on, isn't changing in the slightest. Facebook and Oculus are working independent of each other. And Facebook's track record for this kind of thing has been fairly good - Instagram didn't change a bit after the Facebook buyout.
There is no doubt that Facebook is using Oculus to help them build some social media VR powerhouse. But there is zero proof that its coming at the expense of a Rift. In fact, all evidence points to Facebook being hands off for the Rift - aside from throwing them extra money and engineers, and driving the price point of the final headset down.
If you want to listen to Zuckerberg talk about how he wants to do to it what was done to mobile and be the new social media device, with ads, shopping, etc, datamining not spoken about but easy to read between the lines, just listen to this interview:
http://www.shareholder.com/visitors/event/build3/stage/stage.cfm?mediaid=63723&mediauserid=0
http://www.shareholder.com/visitors/event/build3/stage/stage.cfm?mediaid=63723&mediauserid=0
I feel some branding would be fine, but it has to be something that can be ignored or not even seen (internally) when worn.
I don't have a Facebook account, and never will. This being the case, I will no longer give any of my limited supply of craps to Oculus Rift. I'm out. Thanks for being yet another sell-out to shatter my hopes upon the rocks of corporate shores. The untold number of dead hopes and dreams over the years could have made a nice reef, had it not been for the pollution. Sigh.
I accept that and agree completely. Well, I use social media, heavily (involved in gaming circles, pursue amateur games development, have a job as a software developer, etc) - but I agree with your stance.MinionJoe said:
Legislation is falling behind at an increasingly-rapid rate. And it's unlikely to get any better, so I applaud being cautious.
That said, I don't understand the "i'll never have a facebook account because facebook is toxic" I've seen from others here. As you said, they're all pretty similar in that regard and none of them are adequately covered by law. I think it's just a cool thing to hate on, perhaps, moreso than any other platform.
Did Facebook also announce that they weren't going to release the Rift? Because it sounds like they're still doing it but with more money and an intent to reach an even larger audience which is what a product this revolutionary should do.dunam said:
No one put in $250, that wasn't a pledge level. You had the $1 through $75 pledges that were the posters and shirts and such. But then there was a jump to $275. Now, those people got the early dev kit, VR Doom 3, and access to all that stuff that was produced over the following months and years. The $300 mark got them the fully assembled version and all that stuff which is the exact price of the original dev kit.
So they literally bought the dev kit. They absolutely got something cool that they wanted but the point of the kickstarter was to get these devices into the hands of developers. They stated in the campain that they wanted developers to be the ones buying the dev kit and that the $75 and lower levels were just for people who believed in the project and wanted to support it. Even the newest kit is $350 and that's because they added a Leap Motion for better head tracking.
So, no one got burned and everyone is still getting what they want. All this bitching is just over the name facebook because it adds some uncertainty to the product. I say ***** when it comes out or when we learn details that actually negatively impact us in some way. But a company willing to pour billions into the product is only a positive.