Facebook have lost 7% share value since the announcement, that's $10bn off the market cap.
http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/facebook-share-price-continue...
Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook
81–90 of 229 posts
Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Do you seriously believe this? Then there will be competitors without ads.
You can't compete with 'without ads' business model. Look around: Google search, Youtube, Facebook etc. They all had first mover advantage and there's no way someone can compete with these. These services (and companies) operate around the idea of giving away free candy and locking everyone in with network effects. This is what will happen to VR as well under Facebook's control.
Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook
#83> 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…
How will you do a face to face interaction when you are both wearing VR goggles ?
Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook
#84Yeah well, I don't buy this. However, I think Oculus could easily kill any doubts over that aquisition by promising to release an open source driver. Because that would mean that even if the Rift universe they built is beeing crapped on by like buttions, there's still the option to build an alternative open source universe using the open source driver. Personally I think that would restore my faith in the Rift.
>even if the Rift universe they built is beeing crapped on by like buttons Why do a lot of people keep repeating this? Does Google create self-driving cars to show ads on the windshields? I just don't get it. What on the earth makes you think Facebook bought Oculus to show ads and like buttons inside your games? If, if VR becomes the Next Big Thing, will the like buttons “from the old Facebook“ matter as much, or wil…
So when you get that Google self-driving car and it drives you past McDonalds when you're hungry, are you going to wonder it McDonalds paid Google for that access?
Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's hard for many to see anything under the umbrella of Facebook doing a service to gaming -- look at the direction social gaming has taken us. Yes, look at social gaming. At least inside the retrogaming communities, people who take a very long view of gaming, social gaming is not well loved. It's seen as a shackle not a new experience by and large. Even among new games, Skyrim and GTA V are hugely popular even th…
Depends on what you mean by that -- The Halo & Call of Duty franchises have been getting by on great social multiplayer experiences. (Halo also has a great campaign, but I digress...) The great experiment & test of your theory would be to see something like Titanfall only last a year or so, since it's ALL a social/multiplier experience. In theory I think social gaming has strong networking effects that have to potent…
Well remember, for every successful social game, there's a Star Wars Galaxies or Age of Conan. Or if successful, try to play Mario Kart Wii or Mario Kart DS. Suddenly tens of millions of gamers get $0 of value out of their purchase because a company has decided it's time for gamers to move on and make their next purchase.
The problem of course is that most companies don't go the way of Quake3 and let people run their own servers. Because that's hard to monetize after the initial purchase. Valve has found a way to make it work, but outside of some very rare exceptions (WoW, 2nd Life), the age of the short-lived social game is here.
It's hard to imagine, but FarmVille isn't even 5 years old.
Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the part that stuck out for me as well. They quite plainly state that they knew this would alienate their existing audience, and that they were perfectly fine with that.
And in the end, it's their choice anyway. People respond mostly negatively because of their expectations about how Facebook will monetize this. It's now up to Facebook to prove them wrong. I personally think it's not going to be as bad. Oculus has a clear path to monetization, while Facebook, with their other products, have always been struggling to monetize their user base, which lead them to implement controversial…
> "Oculus has a clear path to monetization"
"Monetization" is a bastardization of a term that was necessary to describe how non-profitable companies could somehow make money from giving away their product for free -- usually by abusing the userbase they're handing the free product to.
See the second paragraph: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monetization
I think what you meant to say is:
"Oculus has a clear product that they will sell for money, because that's how businesses that actually sell products to their customers survive".
This is a major reason why the Facebook buyout is so terrible for a product company. Facebook doesn't know how to make and sell a product that isn't their own users.
Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook
#87> 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 --…
> 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 -- should have nothing to do with Oculus' vision. Honest question: why shouldn't VR be in Facebook's vision? _Someone_ is going to create a Google Hangouts-style product that incorporates VR. I'm not excited…
> _Someone_ is going to create a Google Hangouts-style product that incorporates VR.
Are they? Why is VR inevitable?
We already went through this once in the 90s, and the same truths are still true: nobody wants to put a face-covering headset just to communicate with other people.
Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook
#88I'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 comm…
This doesn't make sense at all. Imagine the new generation goes purely VR and doesn't use the “old web” for entertainment. What would be the point of “Login with Facebook“ if those kids don't use the web anyway? This is a very narrow vision.
You sound like you've never used a mandatory social login for a game. I never go to https://login.live.com but I have an account...one I had to create to play a game. I receive in-game messages and friend requests during game sessions.
Take a look at the Games for Windows - LIVE feature set and tell me that isn't a social network that Facebook would want a part of:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Games_for_Windows_%E2%80%93_Liv...
I'm not limiting the vision of Oculus...the sky is the limit. But I think the play for Facebook's immediate involvement will be similar to Games for Windows. Social gaming data is actionable to the Facebook business.
Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I think it's because nobody understands what FB is going to do with it. 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 o…
Seriously? The only reason to own a VR problem is to stick in “sign in via some website that used to be popular in the old web“ button? What would it give them anyway? Drive up Facebook usage on the old web? I don't understand why most people think Facebook is so dumb in this thread.
You sound like you've never used a mandatory social login for a game. I never go to https://login.live.com but I have an account...one I had to create to play a game. I receive in-game messages and friend requests during game sessions.
Take a look at the Games for Windows - LIVE feature set and tell me that isn't a social network that Facebook would want a part of:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Games_for_Windows_%E2%80%93_Liv...
I'm not limiting the vision of Oculus...the sky is the limit. But I think the play for Facebook's immediate involvement will be similar to Games for Windows. Social gaming data is actionable to the Facebook business.
Re: Oculus Says They Didn't Expect Such Negative Reactions to Selling to Facebook
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Do you seriously believe this? Then there will be competitors without ads.
There are ad-less video sharing websites, yet youtube is #1. Same will happen with Oculus, targeted ads in vr.