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

Minecraft creator says he’s canceled talks for Oculus Rift version

thenextweb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 369 posts

Re: Minecraft creator says he’s canceled talks for Oculus Rift version

#181

Post by fchollet »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #172
fchollet wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "scale" JC is referring to is not hardware production. It's the virtual reality. Millions of people interacting in real time in a virtual universe in which they are actually present . Think of it as similar to the scaling challenges of MMORPGs. Only much worse.

I don't think that's true. There is no scaling involved with virtual reality except the hardware, because the hardware enables the platform. "Virtual reality" isn't a single application, it's a bunch of applications created by developers.

No, it is factually true. JC on Twitter: "I have a deep respect for the technical scale that FB operates at. The cyberspace we want for VR will be at this scale."

https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/448631430533246976

Re: Minecraft creator says he’s canceled talks for Oculus Rift version

#182

Post by ktsmith »

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #150
cwyers wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google would buy Oculus to integrate it with existing product lines, either Android or wearables. Microsoft would buy it for the Xbox. Apple would buy it to make it part of the iOS line. Facebook by far seems like the weirdest of the possible major buyers, because they have by far the fewest obvious complements to Oculus, but by the same token, that makes them the most likely company to be buying Oculus to expand int…

Yeah, Facebook is one of the few major tech companies who can buy Oculus and let them operate independently, since they don't have a stake in anything much related to gaming or VR. This means they are one of the companies least likely to screw with the Oculus vision, and I see that as a very good thing for virtual reality.

Carmack wants to build the Metaverse. Facebook wants to own the Metaverse. I don't see this as a good thing.

Re: Minecraft creator says he’s canceled talks for Oculus Rift version

#183

Post by wtallis »

fchollet wrote: post #169
ekianjo wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> scaling crisis for VR. That's supposing Facebook knows how to scale production of electronic items... apart from the cash, they have no relevant experience about that. If it had been Google or Microsoft there would already be people who know how to make it scale to mass production.

The "scale" JC is referring to is not hardware production. It's the virtual reality. Millions of people interacting in real time in a virtual universe in which they are actually present . Think of it as similar to the scaling challenges of MMORPGs. Only much worse.

Ok. But how much realtime stuff has Facebook done? (IM doesn't count.) Do they have any credible experience with anything more specifically relevant than just running large data centers?

Re: Minecraft creator says he’s canceled talks for Oculus Rift version

#184

Post by joeevans »

aeturnum wrote: post #98
waterlesscloud wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And ridiculous.

The backlash is a bit silly, though I also find the acquisition surprising. I suspect that companies with any sort of capital investment in a rift-based-game will continue development. That being said, Oculus owned by Facebook is a different sort of animal than independent Oculus. Previously, they had to sell the public on a $2-300 VR gaming headset or die. Now they have a lot more wiggle room. Personally, I feel mor…

Yay! Now I can have a unit for $70... so long as I finally sign up to Facebook to be able to use it!

Uh. I think I'd rather pay $1000 than do that.

Re: Minecraft creator says he’s canceled talks for Oculus Rift version

#185

Post by Schwolop »

qq66 wrote: post #165
Crito wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trick is that "social gaming" does not mean what many seem to think it means. Watch a live stream of Scott Manley having some beers and flying some kerbals to the Mun? Sure, I'm on board with that. Receive a notification that my mother has topped her previous high score in [who cares]Ville? No. No not at all. I've seen absolutely no indication that Facebook understands that "social gaming" should not mean "annoyi…

Why is what you want the only thing that is worth doing? What about the people who do care that their mom topped their previous score in [they care]Ville?

Whoever those people are, I don't want them in my "friends" list.

Re: Minecraft creator says he’s canceled talks for Oculus Rift version

#186

Post by sillysaurus3 »

fchollet wrote: post #181
sillysaurus3 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's true. There is no scaling involved with virtual reality except the hardware, because the hardware enables the platform. "Virtual reality" isn't a single application, it's a bunch of applications created by developers.

No, it is factually true. JC on Twitter: "I have a deep respect for the technical scale that FB operates at. The cyberspace we want for VR will be at this scale." https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/448631430533246976

If Oculus's plan all along was to create a giant MMO powered by Rift headsets, then this is the first I've heard of it. Interesting. I think a bunch of smaller apps created by developers has a better chance of being successful.

EDIT: By "giant MMO" I mean "metaverse from Snowcrash," not "video game."

Re: Minecraft creator says he’s canceled talks for Oculus Rift version

#187

Post by yen223 »

burntroots wrote: post #125
bduerst wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It blows my mind how much people will throw their money at Kickstarter projects for the simple feeling of goodwill or novelty knick knacks (bumper stickers, buttons, etc). $10,000 should have bought some small amount of equity, even if it was only non-voting and non-dilutable.

I'm curious how you feel about open source, then. Specifically, node.js. Donating hours of your time working on something that eventually got sold for lots of money that you won't see a dime of. Sounds similar.

Most open source licenses have some form of guarantee that the code will always remain open, so there's that.

Re: Minecraft creator says he’s canceled talks for Oculus Rift version

#189

Post by rhizome »

avar wrote: post #146
gfodor wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, we're going to disagree on this: > There are no non-legal aspects of financial transactions. When you give someone money they're going to try to retain that money and not give it back to you to the best of their legal ability. There really isn't a non-legal aspect involved in it unless you're a sucker who's willing to get screwed over. This isn't really true, if you plan on doing business for more than one tr…

Don't get me wrong. I'm disappointed in Oculus too, and I'd be even more disappointed if I'd actually invested in them. I'm just saying that people need to learn the hard lesson that when they're "investing" in something like Kickstarter they're not actually "investing" in the general sense. They're making a donation with little or no string attached, at best it's a "you give us money and we send you some doodad in t…

when they're "investing" in something like Kickstarter they're not actually "investing" in the general sense

I'd say they are only investing in the general sense, but not the specific one. Because, as we've seen with the Kickstarter failures and flake-outs, regardless of the HN-conventional definition of the word, the donors are certainly and legitimately invested.

Re: Minecraft creator says he’s canceled talks for Oculus Rift version

#190

Post by Fomite »

bentcorner wrote: post #173
blhack wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best thing? There is really no other company you could think of who would be a better partner? Like google? Or Microsoft?

I'd like to think Berkshire Hathaway would have been a good fit. They could expand into an entirely new technology sector, Buffett seems like an insanely smart guy who would get along with Carmack, and BH seems to be focused on making companies succeed in their own fields instead of folding them into existing lines of business.

Buffett is notoriously reluctant to invest in companies he doesn't understand, or which lack existing revenue streams. He's not in the business of funding startups.
Post reply on HN