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

“Oculus removed the headset check from the DRM in Oculus Runtime 1.5”

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 164 posts

Re: “Oculus removed the headset check from the DRM in Oculus Runtime 1.5”

#71

Post by wmeredith »

gthtjtkt wrote: post #11

They deserved the backlash for implementing it, and I hope the Rift continues to suffer now that people know Facebook's true intentions. Not to mention how poorly they treated early supporters after the buyout, e.g. stocking Rifts on retail shelves before they'd fulfilled orders for all backers, then telling backers who complained to get a refund and go buy one from a store... They're only doing the "right" thing bec…

How do people not yet know Facebook's true intentions? They are incredibly untrustworthy. They've shown this time and again.

Re: “Oculus removed the headset check from the DRM in Oculus Runtime 1.5”

#73

Post by marknutter »

tetrep wrote: post #35
Klathmon wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never got the quest for punishment for actions like this. They did something bad, the community reacted negatively. If they fix the problem, rewarding them is going to make sure it sticks around. Continuing to "punish" them for something they fixed only sends the message that the fix was pointless and that it would have been better to ignore the problem like so many other companies (including Facebook themselves) d…

I think for this it is twofold: 1. They're only doing this because of the community reaction/outrage. I want to be able to trust a company to at least appear to have my interests in mind, I don't want to have to be ever vigilant, ready to "freak out" whenever they do something bad in order for them to respond and actually fix it. They're showing that they only care that we noticed them doing shitty things, not that t…

> They're only doing this because of the community reaction/outrage.

Well duh. If the community was delighted about it or didn't care then was it really a bad thing? What do you expect a company to do, get everything right the first time no matter what, or suffer punishment? It seems they're damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Re: “Oculus removed the headset check from the DRM in Oculus Runtime 1.5”

#74

Post by squeaky-clean »

faide wrote: post #44
gthtjtkt wrote: post #11

They deserved the backlash for implementing it, and I hope the Rift continues to suffer now that people know Facebook's true intentions. Not to mention how poorly they treated early supporters after the buyout, e.g. stocking Rifts on retail shelves before they'd fulfilled orders for all backers, then telling backers who complained to get a refund and go buy one from a store... They're only doing the "right" thing bec…

I don't understand the exclusivity outrage. It seems entirely fair to me for a platform holder to expect something in return for funding development of a game. Consoles have had exclusives since time immemorial and no one seems to bat an eye when it happens. What makes this case special?

This isn't "Halo is Exclusive to Xbox only". It's "Halo is exclusive to Samsung 4k Ultra HD TVs".

Re: “Oculus removed the headset check from the DRM in Oculus Runtime 1.5”

#76

Post by marknutter »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #21
jonny_eh wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jeez, you can't even give them some credit for doing the right thing?

Doing the right thing in response to backlash suggests that you would rather do the wrong thing, but couldn't get away with it. There are several other VR vendors; this provides at least some motivation to favor another vendor.

So by your logic, nobody can ever legitimately apologize for something or change their behavior without being disingenuous. Everybody loses, no matter what they do.

Re: “Oculus removed the headset check from the DRM in Oculus Runtime 1.5”

#77

Post by icelancer »

marknutter wrote: post #73
tetrep wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think for this it is twofold: 1. They're only doing this because of the community reaction/outrage. I want to be able to trust a company to at least appear to have my interests in mind, I don't want to have to be ever vigilant, ready to "freak out" whenever they do something bad in order for them to respond and actually fix it. They're showing that they only care that we noticed them doing shitty things, not that t…

> They're only doing this because of the community reaction/outrage. Well duh. If the community was delighted about it or didn't care then was it really a bad thing? What do you expect a company to do, get everything right the first time no matter what, or suffer punishment? It seems they're damned if they do and damned if they don't.

I expect Palmer to come out and issue a public statement about how they violated the trust of their consumers, the lessons they've learned, and what steps they are now taking to mend the relationship that they've damaged.

Just like, you know, how you'd treat another human being you hurt.

Re: “Oculus removed the headset check from the DRM in Oculus Runtime 1.5”

#78

Post by marknutter »

vonklaus wrote: post #22
jonny_eh wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jeez, you can't even give them some credit for doing the right thing?

No. This was a loss in the court of public opinion. If I sue my landlord and win, I do not give him/her credit for paying me the damages assessed by the court. In fact, in the above analogy, I would in fact take a debit...

Dude, they were not legally obligated to do this. In fact, they could have easily ignored the vocal minority and focused on the larger consumer base. But they went out of their way to change their decision based on the feedback from the vocal minority which both shows great self-awareness and guts (since we all know the vocal minority is not always right, especially in terms of the bottom line).

Re: “Oculus removed the headset check from the DRM in Oculus Runtime 1.5”

#79

Post by marknutter »

johnward wrote: post #41
Klathmon wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never got the quest for punishment for actions like this. They did something bad, the community reacted negatively. If they fix the problem, rewarding them is going to make sure it sticks around. Continuing to "punish" them for something they fixed only sends the message that the fix was pointless and that it would have been better to ignore the problem like so many other companies (including Facebook themselves) d…

If you don't continue to punish them it sends the message that it's OK to do bad things if you back pedal. This is basically Facebook's strategy on everything including privacy. Let's say they want to implement some new feature that they know will impact user privacy. They push two steps further than that they really want. Then when users backlash, Facebook takes one step back. Everyone is happy and Facebook gets mor…

No, it sends a message that you shouldn't bother with the customers you can't please no matter what you do, and just focus on the ones who don't get so emotional about stuff like this.

Re: “Oculus removed the headset check from the DRM in Oculus Runtime 1.5”

#80

Post by pg_is_a_butt »

marknutter wrote: post #79
johnward wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't continue to punish them it sends the message that it's OK to do bad things if you back pedal. This is basically Facebook's strategy on everything including privacy. Let's say they want to implement some new feature that they know will impact user privacy. They push two steps further than that they really want. Then when users backlash, Facebook takes one step back. Everyone is happy and Facebook gets mor…

No, it sends a message that you shouldn't bother with the customers you can't please no matter what you do, and just focus on the ones who don't get so emotional about stuff like this.

No, it sends a message that you are still a fuckerberg who thinks your users are "dumb fucks"... and you are.

fuck a zuck

Post reply on HN