Facebook to Buy Oculus... Is this real?

[GeraldT]

Sorry Bob! Corrected my false quote - it was directed at Kazioo!

[3trip]

That is true, but knowing Facefails end game, what is their motivation to move beyond that?

Regardless of what people think about Facebook it's still a business and they will want to exploit every market so even if their desire is for seated applications it's still likely that ALL avenues will be investigated to maximise the sales opportunities. Also competition from other companies such as Sony who seem to have a 360 degree solution implemented on the Morpheus will assist in keeping them honest.

I'd suspect that with a more rigid strap over the head it would be relatively easy to mount additional LEDs to afford 360 degree tracking to the Rift as well.

Even so there is nothing preventing the true VR enthusiast ie the folk on here from implementing other positional tracking methods and ignoring or supplementing the data coming from the Rift tracking.

V8griff is right, with Sony in competition, they can't afford to be outdone, they have to at minimum, put out a product that is similar, or better. Besides, the VR hardware needed to render immersive 2d images needs to render at the same frame rates, high resolution, and with the same accurate tracking you'd want in a 3d environment.

[Kazioo]

Kazioo none of those sources says anything about their business model being "like consoles". Subsidizing hardware can mean a lot of stuff. In one of them they even say "if the company finds the right business model" ... so that is pretty much saying they don't know yet.

Iribe:
"You can imagine if Microsoft and Sony can go out and subsidise consoles because there’s enough money to be made on software and other area"

"“Let’s say there was some game you played in VR that everybody loved and everybody played and we made $100 a month – or even $10 a month – at some point the hardware’s cheap enough and we’re making enough that we could be giving away the headset."


These sources were just an example. I remember even more interviews and mentions from Palmer on Reddit about making actual money on software instead of hardware. I never said that it was something set in stone. I just wanted to prove that they were thinking about this idea for a long time.

[OzOnE2k10]

I think an important point regarding the tech is - how much autonomy will Oculus be given after this deal is done? (and into the future?)

Judging by recent FB buy-outs, they have apparently left the smaller companies to their own devices for the most part?

From what Palmer has said on the subject, he seems certain that Oculus will still have the same dreams and aims as before.
They are still intent on providing the best headsets, input devices, and software that they can to give us the best VR and gaming experiences possible.

(That's the impression I got from Palmer's recent statements at least.)


What Okta said is interesting though - I never thought of it like that before...

It's not so much about Facebook itself (although we can debate some of it's business decisions 'til the end of time) - it's about the fact that Oculus started off as a company founded by VR enthusiasts and gamers FOR other VR enthusiasts and gamers.

With the FB acquisition, there is that danger that the cutting-edge VR tech could be sidelined by the more mainstream uses like social networking.

btw, please don't get me started on the iPhone thing. lol
I had an iPhone 3 for about 18 months - sure, it worked well enough, but I couldn't help but get that "style over substance" feeling.
It also felt like everything you wanted to do (above surfing a few Web pages) was tied-in to iTunes and more forced App purchases.

(yes, I have an Android phone now - FREEDOM !! )

I think people are worried that Oculus will now fall into the same trap in some way - a "toned-down" device for the masses that may possibly sacrifice some of the very best VR tech to appeal to the average users who aren't so bothered about 360-degree 6DOF tracking and super hi-res screens.

Then again, if you look at it another way - there are few markets on the planet that have pushed consumer tech as far and as fast as the smart phone market.
This is probably the main reason why we even have 6" 1080p and so-called "Retina" displays already, and much better / smaller accelerometers.

The mobile phone market is no doubt also largely responsible for the rapid shrinking of IC packages / CPUs / GPUs, and all other components.

If people will strive to buy the next greatest Oculus HMD and peripherals like they have done with smart phones, then that alone could give us all the best VR / AR experiences within a few short years.

So, nothing is set in stone yet, and I personally think it's too early to say exactly what we can expect from the Face-ulus buy-out.

I now realize that the investment can only be good for VR as a whole.
If not from Oculus themselves, then it will certainly provoke even bigger competition from the likes of Sony / MS.

We might just have to let go of the concept of the little old "parents' garage startup" Oculus going it alone against the big companies.

OzOnE.

[V8Griff]

I think people are worried that Oculus will now fall into the same trap in some way - a "toned-down" device for the masses that may possibly sacrifice some of the very best VR tech to appeal to the average users who aren't so bothered about 360-degree 6DOF tracking and super hi-res screens.

Then again, if you look at it another way - there are few markets on the planet that have pushed consumer tech as far and as fast as the smart phone market.
This is probably the main reason why we even have 6" 1080p and so-called "Retina" displays already, and much better / smaller accelerometers.

The mobile phone market is no doubt also largely responsible for the rapid shrinking of IC packages / CPUs / GPUs, and all other components.

<snip>

I now realize that the investment can only be good for VR as a whole.
If not from Oculus themselves, then it will certainly provoke even bigger competition from the likes of Sony / MS.

We might just have to let go of the concept of the little old "parents' garage startup" Oculus going it alone against the big companies.

OzOnE.

I think the first part of your post is flawed. I'd say 'the masses' are less tolerant of defects and sub standard quality than I think die-hards like us are.

Yes we have more understanding of what the technology can deliver and what is out there and as a result understand the compromises that need to be made and will wait for the developments. For example 95%+ of Joe Public would look in a DK1, see the blocky pixels, get a headache and say that's crap and move on never to return

That's why we've seen such a rapid rate of development in the Smartphone market. The majority of Joe Public don't use a fraction of the ability of their phone but demand the best looking screen and ultra high megapixel cameras yet still post blurred ,rubbish pictures on their Facebook page (ironic)

That's why I think for this to work the HMDs delivered have to be the best possible and have the instant WOW factor so that shows like the Gadget Show here in the UK go "You must have this, it's just awesome, you're really there and you don't get sick"

So I think Facebook investment is good. It will push their own development along and probably pull Sony, MS and unknown others along with it.

Oculus haven't been the 'plucky garagistas' since they got their first post KS investment of $16m imo, so all the recent furore is pathetic imo.

[OzOnE2k10]

By "toned down" and "for the masses", I meant that once the spec gets to a certain point, it's possible that the average user will be more than happy with it, and won't necessarily be interested in some of the further enhancements that us VR enthusiasts or "hardcore" gamers would want.

Yes, a consumer version has to be a very good performer and very sturdily built, but it might turn out that the tech isn't pushed quite as far in terms of body tracking, wider FOV, 360-degree tracking, super-high resolution etc. etc.

Is it fair to say that models made after the CV1 might not have quite the features as we were expecting before the FB acquisition?

True about the DK1 though. It's actually slightly better than I was thinking from all the initial videos.
It does look fairly low-res though, and the screendoor / persistence is probably worse than the resolution as you say.

Most of us on this forum couldn't have been happier when our Rifts arrived, as we knew how much hard work it must have taken to get this far.
But the average consumer is far more critical as you say, so they're expecting the CV1 to be something very special in terms of resolution, comfort, lack of motion sickness etc.

It's just that HMD development might go in a slightly different direction now given what Facebook might have in store later on.

On the other hand, yes, the public have pushed forward the smart phone tech massively, so this will also be great for VR.
You could look at it both ways really, but surely the market for Oculus will now be changing quite a bit after the FB thing?

It was a massive shock when I heard about FB tbh. It was literally the last company I would have expected, but mainly it was just that it happened so soon.
Oculus haven't even released a commercial product yet, so it really was a shocker.

I do think it will be good in the long-run, just maybe not exactly how we were expecting.

I'm trying not to be too negative about it now, as I'm realizing the benefits.
I was a tad harsh about it in the first few days, but now it makes sense (sorta. lol).

OzOnE.

[V8Griff]

By "toned down" and "for the masses", I meant that once the spec gets to a certain point, it's possible that the average user will be more than happy with it, and won't necessarily be interested in some of the further enhancements that us VR enthusiasts or "hardcore" gamers would want..

I see where you're coming from but again I'd say that Smartphones probably hit the sweetspot that the average consumer would have been happy with a few years back but in the quest for more revenue the development has continued, I'd hope that HMDs would follow the same upward curve.

After the initial 'WTF?!!' of the purchase announcement I read everything I could and took a breath. After a couple of hours I thought it could only be good to ensure that VR hit the mainstream and all teh attendant benefits,

Time will tell.

[OzOnE2k10]

Yep, me too.

I've calmed down a bit now. lol

It also reminded me of Google's evil changes to the YouTube layout recently.
Yes, it sucked for a long while (and still does in many areas), but the dust settled and many of us are still using it as before.

Although, every other week there seems to be another big change to a site, like eBay, YouTube, and you've guessed it - Facebook.
Anyway, rant over (for this post at least ).

Can't wait for my RiftUP! kit now. I'm wondering how hard it will be to add the LEDs for positional tracking to the DK1 once the DK2 arrives? hmmm

OzOnE

[Mystify]

Never underestimate the draw of bigger numbers on a spec sheet. The average consumer may not know what it means, or what is relevant, but they will think that the one with more impressive stats is better, and will get that. Which means all the competitors try to get even bigger numbers, and you have the typical pattern of rapid advancement you typically see. It is the mass markets buying into this stuff that makes it profitable, not a niche group of enthusiasts who know how to get the most actual performance out of what they are getting.

[Okta]

Never underestimate the draw of bigger numbers on a spec sheet. The average consumer may not know what it means, or what is relevant, but they will think that the one with more impressive stats is better, and will get that. Which means all the competitors try to get even bigger numbers, and you have the typical pattern of rapid advancement you typically see. It is the mass markets buying into this stuff that makes it profitable, not a niche group of enthusiasts who know how to get the most actual performance out of what they are getting.

This. Facebook and Sony may get into a pissing war pushing features that are not primarily relevant to the VR gamer.

[V8Griff]

Never underestimate the draw of bigger numbers on a spec sheet. The average consumer may not know what it means, or what is relevant, but they will think that the one with more impressive stats is better, and will get that. Which means all the competitors try to get even bigger numbers, and you have the typical pattern of rapid advancement you typically see. It is the mass markets buying into this stuff that makes it profitable, not a niche group of enthusiasts who know how to get the most actual performance out of what they are getting.

This. Facebook and Sony may get into a pissing war pushing features that are not primarily relevant to the VR gamer.

I agree about big numbers looking good. It's like folk who buy the 'top of the range' car that is plainly too fast or exotic for the one or two trips to the shops they do but are as they are seduced by the spec.

I doubt that either companiy will go the wrong way with regards to appropriate spec though. Both companies have enough experience and nous in this sphere, Carmack & Abrash for Oculus for example along with Cerney and others for Sony. So a pissing war may well be good as they try to outperform each other.

[Hannibalj2]

And this guys bought Oculus. They really care about its costumers! LOL!

http://www.salon.com/2014/05/16/faceboo ... ers_again/