In their defense, they probably saw this solution but decided against it because it doesn't fit into a nice, efficient workflow. If they make us jump through hoops to get it to work, that's just not professional or complete on their end. It's also a recipe for a support nightmare. Also, they only promised Unity support, not Free/Pro. Also, it's up to communities like us to fill in the blanks where Oculus can't tread, and guess what? We've done that!Evenios wrote:Way to go Oculus for not bothering to figure that out you guys were smart enough to create a low cost VR headset but not smart enough to figure out how to get Unity Free to work with the Rift
sounds like a load of bull to me.
To be fair to them, Oculus isn't the ones screwing us over here. They can't just MAKE the engine work with the Rift if the functionality isn't there. I'm guessing they pushed REALLY hard on Unity to try and get their stuff working for release, but in the end Unity just said "Sorry guys, can't do it, BUT... 4-month pro trial? *wink wink, nudge nudge*". I'm sure Palmer and the rest of the team at Oculus are stressed out enough about this turn of events, but they were smart enough to draw the line. Now they won't tank or get tied up in support cases which gives them more time to deliver the next Rift and a new SDK.Evenios wrote:we'll see. kinda hard to be (fully) happy for a company that technically kind of screwed us over a bit with the last minute "ooh btw Unity Pro is required thing because although we are smart enough to come up with the first low cost real VR solution were not smart enough to figure out how to get Unity Pro to work even though it looks like someone on the forums is going to be able to with a 3rd party driver..".
If we're so unhappy, what we should do is support them and push on the faulting company(Unity) ourselves. Get the support we need to make the games we want and not have to jump through hoops.