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

31–40 of 229 posts

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

#31

Post by Golddisk »

dragontamer wrote: post #8
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 are in a bad position overall however. Sony Morpheous looks like it has taken all the good ideas from Oculus. And with Oculus selling out to Facebook, the "indie" community may not be as supportive of the platform.

I think that other companies announcing their plans for VR is one of the reasons Oculus sold to FB, especially so quickly. They see themselves needing the backing of a big tech company if they want to be able to compete with companies like Sony or Microsoft.

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

#32

Post by Shorel »

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…

What are they want to do with it?

.hack//Sign, Sword Art Online and Ready Player One

That's what they want to do.

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

#33

Post by doesnt_know »

Kickstarter is all about directly funding unique concepts and products by independent entities. The whole point is to avoid the "traditional" investment model. Or I suppose more accurately, fund what the "traditional model" wants nothing to do with.

If I was a backer, I would probably want the Oculus to fail now, just out of spite.

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

#34

Post by bstar77 »

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 --…

> Beyond our core community, we expected it would be positive.

How can you go in understanding that you are going to upset your core community and expect anything other than a negative response?

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

#35

Post by dragontamer »

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…

This is more of a statement of why Facebook's stock dropped by 15%. Investors are baffled by this purchase by Facebook.

Outrage on the Oculus Rift side has to do more with the indie "spirit" that it gained by starting off as a Kickstarter company.

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

#36

Post by madaxe_again »

Recoil42 wrote: post #21
kybernetikos wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Because there's a big difference between laughable polygon-hell at 0fps and simulated presence.

Anyway, their principle interest is probably AR anyway. Everyone else is tumbling into that space.

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

#37

Post by dragontamer »

Geee wrote: post #27
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…

This is what people fear from Facebook.

Selling out to Microsoft or Sony would have been "monetize by making awesome games". Selling out to Facebook means virtual reality ads will penetrate everywhere you walk.

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

#38

Post by rch »

I don't use Facebook and I don't play games, but I'm curious to see if the acquisition will have a positive effect on pure VR; meaning the kind of VR Jaron Lanier talks about.

It seems like FB could actually bridge between VR, AR, and everyone else more easily than most. I can imagine attending the next presidential inauguration (virtually) because of this deal, and that wouldn't have been the case with Valve, for example.

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

#39

Post by LoganCale »

dragontamer wrote: post #35
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…

This is more of a statement of why Facebook's stock dropped by 15%. Investors are baffled by this purchase by Facebook. Outrage on the Oculus Rift side has to do more with the indie "spirit" that it gained by starting off as a Kickstarter company.

Equal outrage is because lots of people want absolutely nothing to do with Facebook.

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

#40

Post by ianstallings »

Maybe if you replace "Facebook" with "Walmart" the comparison will be easier. Because that's what FB is, the Walmart of the Internet. It sucks and it could be so much better, but it's packed with "content" and everyone still goes there reluctantly. When you have high hopes for a new player in the game the last thing you want is them buddying up to a company whos whole strategy can be summed up as "find the lowest common denominator".

Is this judgement a fair assessment? Of course not. Facebook is just our whipping boy.

Post reply on HN