Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Virtual Reality is going to change the world

notch.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 221 posts

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#21

Post by jiggy2011 »

mambodog wrote: post #12

VR will be like the web. Eventually it will belong to all of us. Once it gets off the ground, no single company will be able to ruin it. Just like touchscreen smartphones, initially we had the iPhone which is relatively locked down and controlled by a single vendor, but now we have cheap, commoditised hardware of acceptable quality. More importantly, the real 'platform' for smartphones is the web, which is as open as…

I dunno, patents + network effects can give one a pretty damn good head start.

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#24

Post by davorb »

mjfl wrote: post #8

This seems to be an unpopular opinion, but I don't believe all the hype about VR. You are never going to be able to get sufficiently passable virtual reality to make up for the hardware hassle. If I want to have a conversation with a friend, I just want to see his/her face, I don't need the whole room simulated for me. Oculus will be a flash in the pan, and it's purchase by Facebook is just another example of the com…

> You are never going to be able to get sufficiently passable virtual reality to make up for the hardware hassle.

Here is a video of a grown man crying like a small girl. If that doesn't convince you, I don't know what will.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fl7fz__6B-4

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#25

Post by TrainedMonkey »

jiggy2011 wrote: post #19
TrainedMonkey wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Think about when Microsoft got into gaming and created Xbox. Now imagine if they didn't." All of Halo series would be on PC.

It was originally a Mac title!

AFAIK Mac is a type of Personal Computer. As long as games would not be locked to console with joystick being only option I would be happy.

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#27

Post by smacktoward »

skore wrote: post #4

For a guy who is otherwise rather easy going, Notch can be incredibly pragmatic and strident. Here, he has cut to heart of the issue. > And I did not chip in ten grand to seed a first investment round to build value for a Facebook acquisition. > Don’t get me wrong, VR is not bad for social. He is right - "social", especially in the way Facebook is doing it at the moment, is terrible for VR. Terrible for any technolog…

> And I did not chip in ten grand to seed a first investment round to build value for a Facebook acquisition

He really puts his finger on one of the reasons why this deal feels so weird here, I think. Nobody who contributed to the Oculus Kickstarter did so because they were hoping Oculus would get flipped to a mega-corp. They didn't do so because they wanted the Oculus team to have a big, splashy VC-style exit. They did so because they wanted the Oculus product. And the history of products that have been swallowed by mega-corps, after the swallowing, is not encouraging.

It's an outcome that strikes directly at the heart of the Kickstarter ethos. Everybody wins in this deal -- except the people who donated to the Kickstarter. Those folks... well, they kind of end up looking like suckers.

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#28

Post by kissickas »

mingmecca wrote: post #6

Even though Notch writes that he wants to utilize VR for games and not 'social', I'm open to all the experiences that VR can provide, gaming or otherwise. But I think the bigger issue here is I just don't want Facebook involved at all. Because all roads for Facebook lead to ads, and that is the last thing I want tagged to my eyeballs when I'm trying to enjoy my VR experience. Even on the desktop/mobile side, I'd glad…

I agree. People are hating on social VR here, I think, just because they are upset to see the facebook acquisition and don't know how else to disparage the deal.

Don't get me wrong- I'm extremely upset about it due to facebook's clearly evil history - I don't know how anyone could deny this, given user exploitation and tracking[0] - and the fact that Oculus Rim values the combined ideas of virtual reality and augmented reality (which I don't think should be combined) as 1/10th the value of Whatsapp is beyond me.

However, is souped-up video conferencing really such a terrible idea? I wouldn't go to a 10-year high school reunion on Oculus, but I definitely would reunite with my college buddies every few weeks if we had something less lame than Skype or Google Hangouts to do it on.

[0] http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2011/11/facebo...

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#29

Post by Mikeb85 »

xpose2000 wrote: post #3

I can see the avalanche of negativity coming, and I understand why. However, I don't think we should automatically assume it's a negative thing like Notch did. Facebook can try to ensure that the games are geared towards social interactivity that benefits their platform, but in the end, the developers truly pick the direction. Anyone can buy a dev kit and see what they can build with it. Maybe Facebook wants Oculus R…

> Think about when Microsoft got into gaming and created Xbox. Now imagine if they didn't.

Maybe Sega would have released the Dreamcast 2...

Re: Virtual Reality is going to change the world

#30

Post by GBond »

skore wrote: post #4

For a guy who is otherwise rather easy going, Notch can be incredibly pragmatic and strident. Here, he has cut to heart of the issue. > And I did not chip in ten grand to seed a first investment round to build value for a Facebook acquisition. > Don’t get me wrong, VR is not bad for social. He is right - "social", especially in the way Facebook is doing it at the moment, is terrible for VR. Terrible for any technolog…

> And I did not chip in ten grand to seed a first investment round to build value for a Facebook acquisition.

The Kickstarter angle is interesting.

I'd be peeved as well if I was a supporter and this happened. Aren't KS Projects by implication a "Project for the People" first and foremost? Should KS Backers at least get a small return for making a $2 Billion exit possible?

Post reply on HN