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

Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

thesurge.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 229 posts

Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

#21

Post by Recoil42 »

kybernetikos wrote: post #18
officemonkey wrote: post #10

I think it's because nobody understands what FB is going to do with it. Instagram definitely has location and social graph data to exploit. But Oculus? What is FB going to do with that? I think most people still think of FB as the site and advertising sales for the site. But if you see FB as a conglomerate like Google, Apple, and Sony then it makes more sense. FB is diversifying, buying up promising technology with t…

I pretty sure that they want to create something like a successful second life - i.e. a VR social network, where users have their own virtual property that they can customize and virtual spaces where they can meet. Basically something like the metaverse in Snowcrash. And I can completely see the high ups in Occulus thinking that this is a brilliant match of visions.

Okay, any reason that would succeed where VRML failed? I just don't see it.

Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

#22

Post by daenz »

I've been thinking about this Facebook acquisition for a little while, and in my mind, the only play that makes sense for Facebook is to become the login gateway to Oculus games.

For many Windows games, there's Windows Live...a social-ish, login service that you literally have to register and sign in with in order to play the game. You cannot opt out. If Facebook became this... "Sign in with Facebook"... for all commercial Oculus games, they would have a guaranteed mindshare on the future younger generations of gamers.

And becoming just the gatekeepers would more or less let them be hands-off with the actual Oculus direction as a company, which is in line with what's been said so far.

Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

#23

Post by Golddisk »

officemonkey wrote: post #10

I think it's because nobody understands what FB is going to do with it. Instagram definitely has location and social graph data to exploit. But Oculus? What is FB going to do with that? I think most people still think of FB as the site and advertising sales for the site. But if you see FB as a conglomerate like Google, Apple, and Sony then it makes more sense. FB is diversifying, buying up promising technology with t…

I think that what you mention - a tech conglomerate - is what Facebook wants to become. Of course, it's going to be hard for them to do that, at least for some years, because people are going to hear "Facebook" and all they are going to think about is the social networking portion of their business.

Of course, Google was the same way at one time back when they were known only as a search engine.

Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

#24

Post by dragontamer »

jader201 wrote: post #9

> Beyond our core community, we expected it would be positive. > If you actually understand [Facebook’s] vision of letting us be who we’re going to be, just like they wanted to let Instagram be who they are. The reason people don't get this -- or at least, why I don't get it -- and thus responded negatively, is because VR should have nothing to do with Facebook's vision, and Facebook -- or social gaming in general --…

Case in point: Facebook games are Mafia Wars and Farmville... games that represent raking in tons of money by offering very poor (but addicting) gameplay.

The core gamer audience is pissed off at Facebook as it is, and that is the audience Oculus Rift is aimed towards. If Oculus sold out to Valve, Sony, Microsoft... hell... maybe even EA or Activision... they wouldn't have nearly as bad of a reaction as with Facebook.

Because as bad as EA or Activision is... they have demonstrated an understanding of the core "hardcore" gamer audience that appreciates greater depth and vision in gameplay. Facebook however, does NOT.

Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

#26

Post by vermontdevil »

If they sold to Valve, the reaction would have been different. But it's all initial impression.

We'll see long term how it shakes out. I do admit it seemed odd to me that Facebook would be the buyer. I just don't see the connection.

Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

#27

Post by Geee »

jader201 wrote: post #9

> Beyond our core community, we expected it would be positive. > If you actually understand [Facebook’s] vision of letting us be who we’re going to be, just like they wanted to let Instagram be who they are. The reason people don't get this -- or at least, why I don't get it -- and thus responded negatively, is because VR should have nothing to do with Facebook's vision, and Facebook -- or social gaming in general --…

Don't you see it? Facebook can't currently monetize face-to-face interactions, but in virtual reality they can.

The purchase makes a lot of sense for Facebook. Facebook's business model is to monetize human interactions. Today, most of human interaction happens over the Internet (with messages and images), and in the future, it will happen in virtual environments. VR will be the ultimate platform, and Facebook wants to own that platform.

Virtual reality is not about gaming. Would you describe Matrix as a game? Facebook's wants to put everyone in the Matrix, so they can monetize us.

Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook

#28

Post by nknighthb »

higherpurpose wrote: post #4

First off, they should've expected that reaction if they sold to anyone , because: #1 it was too early, and they still had a lot of investment money #2 they've implied many times that they wouldn't sell. I don't remember if they said it directly, but they certainly made it seem that way #3 they basically decided to sell the company "overnight". That took everyone by surprise, and it made the move extremely suspicious…

> they should've expected that reaction if they sold to anyone

Pretty much any major gaming company could have gotten away with it. Even EA wouldn't have caused this much backlash.

And if they'd been bought by Valve, there would have been dancing in the streets. (Actually, the dancing would probably still be going on right now.)

Post reply on HN