Tin foil hat machine go!Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstBlood
Printable View
Tin foil hat machine go!Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstBlood
Ceiling Facebook is watching you masturbate.
How often do you Google (no one uses Bing) or post on Facebook about sodas or chips or whatever else may be sitting around that could be recognized and then advertised? There is no question that smartphones are a more valuable tool to compile data, but there are holes that cameras in houses can absolutely fill in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
edit: Interestingly, apparently there were rumors floating around GDC of Oculus VR being acquired, but the buyer wasn't Facebook. It almost had to be Google, Amazon, or Microsoft, right?
It bears mentioning that Cyanogenmod is the only mobile OS with robust privacy features. The issue stretches far beyond Apple or Google, it's every app you use.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Obviously. You can't eliminate the data collection, but you can limit it and have some control over who has access to it.
Anyway, I think Facebook's long game is probably AR, not VR, but it's becoming apparent that VR is going to take off first, and Facebook wants to pick a winning horse rather than play catch up later. I don't think tracking you head movements in Star Citizen offers a very compelling data set to Facebook, but once it means a camera strapped to your face that you walk around with, then they have something very valuable.
What, like Google Glass? Nobody likes that shit except king dorks.
Wrong, biometric analytics is one of the key data points for the future. Being able to see how consumers react to content including ads is huge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Google is already implementing this for Glass where they can see if a user is looking at an ad or not. The next range of consumer devices will contain more NUI and know more about you.
For consumers, this will become a battle between convenience and privacy.
Can anyone here please explain to me why you care if some company knows what brand of soda that you drink? I wish I only ever saw ads for shit I might actually like. If I never knew things like Wayans Brothers films and Hyundais existed I'd probably be happier. I'll gladly let Hulu know what I like so that the 15 commercials I see during every episode of whatever I watch on Hulu can all be for the WWE Network or video games.
Skynet = GoogleQuote:
Originally Posted by Korly
Yeah, but I think they're thinking that as that technology gets more sophisticated, to where it can convincingly blend imagery with real life, it's going to be more compelling to people. Then, of course, there's also social VR, which I'm sure will be a thing, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
And, of course, it seems likely that the Rift is going to be a successful consumer product, as well, so I get Facebook's angle there, but the bigger question is really what Oculus gets out of it. Facebook doesn't really offer much on the hardware side of thing. Marketing, perhaps?
I agree. FB knows if it doesn't acquire a bunch of different business with their hugely inflated stock, they will be the next myspace.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Uh, relatively unlimited funding and freedom with FB's developer driven culture, their equity holders get to exit and make bank....pretty obvious to meQuote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
But funding for what? It seems like they already had the funding they needed to attract the talent they wanted.
I honestly don't get the sale at all. From the outside, it looked like Oculus had all the success they could hope for. Investors lining up to give them money, a new tech that people were actually excited for that they were the only serious contender in creating, and complete control due to being independently owned. $2 billion is a lot of money (depending on when they cash out the stock, of course) but I just don't see how it's worth becoming someone else's dog.
James
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BjmqUgcIEAAexOw.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by James
$$$$$
To scale their business, even with $93 million in funding to date, device production and R&D costs a ton. Then you have the manpower costs especially with the kind of talent that they require.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
There's a lot of bookkeeping and other shit I'm sure the Rift guys were sick of dealing with, and more than happy to unload to a company with much more experience like Facebook. It's win all around for those guys. Facebook gets in on the ground floor with new tech, and won't miss out again like they did with mobile gaming.
I don't like facebook one bit so this is kinda shitty news, but I can understand any large developer wanting to get in on VR as early as possible. It has loads of potential in fields outside of gaming too.
I think social VR apps are going to be huge. If i knew anything about programming I'd focus all of my time on VR chatrooms and virtual stores where everything is customizable. There is so much potential there, especially when you look at drivel like Habbo Hotel and Second Life.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
A few articles have been written about Kickstarter backers and this deal. I think this is the first big payout for a Kickstarter company. Comments on the backer page are pissed to say the least.
Kickstarter claims they are not a store and it's clearly not an investment opportunity. So what is it? I would have invested in OR in a heartbeat; but that's a rich mans game. Dirty proles like us can't even play. Instead we get to play pretend in exchange for more consumer junk.
Notch said they were in talks for a sort of Oculus port of Minecraft in the vein of the console versions/pocket editions. He said that with the announcement of Facebook buying them, he has scrapped all plans and cancelled the project.
He was also a little bitter (As he should be, I guess) about fronting them 10k and them selling out after 2 years.
It's Pay Pal with only the "send gift" option enabled.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Kickstarters are for suckers, in this circle, we call them passionate fans.
I heard Ben Kuchera on NPR this morning. Strange and troubling times.
Shoulda bought shares with his investment instead of "Visit Oculus for a Day." He'd be sitting on a fuckload of facebook stock right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chux
Anyway, he and others are overreacting. Facebook is not interested in recording your head movements while you play Minecraft. Their angle is much further down the line, and it's on the software side, not the hardware side.
Kickstarter is a way to vote with your dollars and get shit done. People that backed Oculus did so because they believed in mass-market consumer VR, and because of them, that's going to be a reality. If Facebook took that away, or fundamentally changed the Rift as a product, I'd get their ire, but right now it's just a lot of anti-corporate horseshit, same as we've seen for every KS-financed game that finds a publisher.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
There's really no reason to rag on Kickstarter for this. The backers got their rewards, everyone got what they were promised. Then the company went stupid, but that happened after promises were fulfilled so while disappointing it's not like there's reason to complain about the Kickstarter side of things.
James
The problem is that Kickstarter dumps all the risk on the people doing the funding with none of the upside.
Yeah, but in the old fashioned days, people bought shares in corporations and then became shareholders. If all those Kickstarter backers had backed Oculus the old fashioned way, they could have voted against this acquisition by Facebook. Or they could have at least shared in the payout.Quote:
Originally Posted by James
I think backers and supports of the Rift do have a reason to be upset. They wanted to support a group that was bringing this tech to gaming and do it because they wanted to see it done. And that group kind of just sold out to a giant corporation that doesn't think the same thing.
Even if the Rift continues unaffected for a while, it's silly to think that this isn't going to affect the product. Facebook is going to tweak it to try and get what the can out of it and the goals for the project are no longer what Kickstarter backers originally funded.
I understand why these people would be upset, but I also think 'oh well'. They got what they originally paid for, and if they feel betrayed, maybe they shouldn't have expected more than they were promised. You put your faith in something and got screwed, you can't blame Kickstarter for that.
But they didn't, and it was never presented this way. They're upset because of loss of potential income, and loss of "indy vision" imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by sleeve
This doesn't really bother me that much, but it is still pretty weak. Although in hindsight you would expect something like this every once in a while
I do blame Kickstarter because of the dumb structure they set up. You set up this system where people are made to feel like they are part of something from the ground up, but they're really not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darmonde
I know none of the backers expected equity so I doubt many are that upset. Most of the comments on the KS board were the usual anti-corporate BS you see on any fan site.
Really, though, people who invest in a company early on should expect it. The fact that KS subverts this is the whole problem.
I agree, but I don't think that's what Kickstarter was when it started. It used to be for a guy who made something neat, and hey, I think people would pay 5 dollars for this, if I can get 100 people then I can make it. But then companies started using it, without quite breaking any rules, and it gained mainstream acceptance. You can feel like a part of the process but really, people just see it hitting all these news site, and they wouldn't be talking about it unless it was legit, right? So tons of people who have no idea what they're paying for start throwing in money and now its an easy target. But really, if you're putting money down its probably your fault if you don't look into the details.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
KS blew up into this giant stupid corporate marketing garbage, and it wasn't about to say 'no, we don't want this money'. Kind of like the Oculus I guess!
I've always thought Kickstarter was fucking stupid, and this seems like a sort of neener-neener moment.
But if the Shenmue 3 thing really happens...
Fuck Shenmue, and fuck you.
I even put it in big letters.
Chux, what do you have against playing Forklift simulator 3000?
Yea this is a good point. It's like KS wasn't designed for this stuff. It's so some hipster in Williamsburg can make his art project without starving on the street.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darmonde
Eventually this will probably be true. But I don't think we'll see it affect the first Rift release, and once that happens, the world will either be changed or it won't. From there they can fuck up all they want, but it won't change the fact that VR is a product people want and companies are going to service that market. 3DFX fucked up but it didn't make 3D cards go away. Same thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darmonde
As long as the Rift makes it to market relatively uncorrupted, it'll succeed or fail on its own merits and VR will either be the thing that backers hoped, or it won't, and none of that will have anything to do with Facebook.
Ew, as what, Professionally Wrong Hack?Quote:
Originally Posted by A Robot Bit Me
I assumed he just meant NPR coming out of his speakers.
My real concern is that it seems like Facebook is only interested in the hardware as a means to an end. I think this is good in the short term, because they're not going to fuck with the hardware too much, and they understand the value of just building a base and getting the thing into people's hands, but are they going to be committed to iterating and continuing to maintain an edge in what is likely to be a very comeptitive marketplace? Probably not. Zuckerberg said it himself in his conference call, Facebook is not a hardware company, and that isn't where they plan to make money on this.
An authority on the Rift. They were doing a story on the FB purchase which for some reason talked more about motion sickness than anything else. Kuchera was brought on to say that you might get a bellyache from Rift but you might not get a bellyache from Rift. Then there was a Beastie Boys instrumental bump and I was asked to insert some money into my radio.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzo
It was a pretty cutting report.
:lol:
I don't know why people from Kotaku have jobs.
Note: I don't mean jobs as game writers. I mean any job.
I'm really disappointed if they get paid.
I never visit Kotaku. I only know what it is from you guys talking about it.
Fuck VR headsets anyways. It's 2014. Where's my hologram gaming?
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingoffighters
http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/-lyTasMAYic/hqdefault.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by EvilMog
That stupid game took one dollar of my Street Fighter money in 1992. I will never forgive it.
I bought it for PS2 to experience that terrible childhood memory again.
After reading and listening to what everyone involved is saying about this, I think it's pretty clear that their angle is to establish a digital distribution platform tailored to the Rift, but the Rift will still be compatible with other software. They're going to moneyhat some exclusives and integrate the social features with Facebook, and it might be annoying and people that boycott Origin will probably add it to their list as well, but I don't think it's going to really impact the product itself as a piece of hardware. Steam will still have their own gamer-centric VR presence, and I'm sure others will crop up as well.
I don't know that Facebook is interested in the hardware long-term, beyond getting a userbase. In some ways, it may even be to their advantage to establish an open standard, because it will allow others to enter the hardware market and expand it further. The flip side of this is that they're also probably not interested in tampering with the hardware in the short run. Their first commercial headset will probably be a better product than it would have otherwise been because of this buyout.
So long as the Rift remains at heart a video display device, much like a tv or monitor you just happen to strap to your face, I've got no problem with it. Oculus VR: A Facebook Company is way less exciting than Oculus VR: Independently Owned Startup Company, but so long as the final product is good I'll be happy enough with it.
James
http://www.oculusvr.com/blog/introdu...ief-scientist/
lol, Abrash left Valve for Oculus. Awesome.
Money talks.
I was just coming to post that as well. The number of baskets in which to put our eggs is dwindling.
Oculus seems like pretty good basket though. Carmack and Abrash? Like old times
Leave it to Yoshi to turn this into a bad thing. All the best minds in the world working to solve VR's problems.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
These are exciting times. Whatever the Facebook acquisition means for the long-term future of the company, I have no doubt that it will mean amazing things for VR in the next couple years. The scrappy underdog VR kit that seemed so cool a year ago now seems oh so close to something much more profound, and it's only because of big money behind them that they're going to be able to do that in time to launch their first product.
My hope for Oculus was always just that they'd break down the commercial barriers before someone with real hardware engineering resources like Sony or Samsung came along and blew it away. Now it seems like Oculus might have the real edge they need to do it right the first time.
It's not necessarily a bad thing, but it's definitely getting closer to a boom or bust scenario. Don't get me wrong; I hope everything you are saying come to fruition.
We've never had a brain trust like this working on VR together. Of course Oculus largely had access to the fruits of Abrash's research already but it can't hurt to bring him into the tent especially because Valve isn't going to make their own consumer VR anyway.
Thing is, even if Oculus goes the wrong way at some point, others will follow and they'll likely at least be able reproduce a lot of what they did. I think it's going to become a very competitive space. It might take others a while to catch up, just like it did with the iPhone, but it'll happen.
The thing you're missing Frog is they have one shot at making this work. Occulus is the big name right now, and if they fuck it up it won't matter how good Sony's rig is. This gimmick has been tried before, and it went bust. People are waiting on this bubble to burst as well. So no, there won't be anyone else to pick up the pieces if they fuck up. Not for a while anyway. Just look at 3D and how many times that's been around.
I strongly believe Oculus Rift will fail to become a big trend—it is a part of a new wave of startup technology that is really really cool but lacks practical application to give it legs.
I believe 100% differently than you. The immersion of VR will be huge, with plenty of room for practical application in the sim genre alone.
James
It's a technology that has sparked the public's imagination for decades, the inspiration for countless novels and movies... it IS the application. The mere sensation of being somewhere impossible is appealing enough that people will want it, and it's doubtless that once the medium is better understood, there are quite a lot of more practical applications as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbacca
The barrier of entry will probably be high for a few years, especially because of the need for high-end graphics processing power, and early products might leave a lot to be desired, but I really think it's going to be the true starting point this time. It's not going to fade away or be a fad like last time.
Everyone always says that.
I just don't see the masses strapping on that big thing to play the Nintendo tapes.
There are so many applications for this outside of games, you're crazy if you think this will be a gaming fad that doesn't pick up.
All the more reason that a better-funded, more aggressively specced and priced product is going to be the right choice. Luckey hinted yesterday that the consumer Rift is going to be specced well beyond Abrash's guidlines for presence (which he said were 2 years out). Compare this to another scenario where investor's need for returns forces them to put out an underbaked product and sell it at a profit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Error
Yep, no practical applications for VR you guys.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbacca
This is the level of vision that makes him wildly successful.
I don't see it either. I'd like to be proven wrong (even though I have zero interest in it myself, I recognize that having more options is A Good Thing), but I just don't envision anyone other than diehard tech nerds shelling out for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by icarusfall
I also don't understand why I need a hunk of plastic strapped to my head to be "immersed" in anything. Get off my lawn, I suppose.Quote:
Originally Posted by James
Because the difference between looking at a screen a foot or more away, or a tv several feet away, and a screen that tells your brain "I am here!" is immense.
Not trying to be snippy, but that's the whole thing right there. Your brain saying "I am here!" has value, even when you know it's a trick and there's a giant chunk of (very light) plastic strapped to your face. It's a system that works.
James
This is why Abrash coined the term "presence" to distinguish what VR does from the widely over-used term "immersion." VR, when done correctly, can give you the sensation of being somewhere else on a sub-concious level. It's a phenomenon that no other medium can even come close to doing, even huge simulators with wrap-around screens. It's much more than looking at a picture of a screen, or even a 3D one, it's that sense that everything is all around you; it's the holodeck. It makes things possible that are simply not in any other way.Quote:
Originally Posted by No One
Obviously, the public isn't really going to meet this device with varying degrees of skepticism, but conceptually it's almost universally appealing. The key is really just finding ways for people to actually try it for themselves and see what it feels like. I don't know how they're going to go about that.
I just noticed this will have a booth at PAX East. I'm kind of curious to try it out.
Corey Coleman just checked into Oculus Rift Presented by Facebook and Mountain Dew. Tell your friends about this experience?
You will be getting said message since you had to bitch out and let your silly JOB run your life. :P
What the fuck, both you and Mike cut me deep at almost the same time.
Assholes IMO.
I'm picturing a single display unit badly calibrated at Best Buy that every mall-goer for the last six months has tested out and put back unsanitized.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
James
Man up and call in sick to work on Thursday and Friday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chux
My boss just had a heart attack yesterday, I'm not going anywhere.
So is Chux the new boss?
Rule with an iron fist imo.
Granite dick IMHO.
Absentee manager
This is less a comment on oculus than some sociology, but I think it's worth thinking on: Do we need a device that will makes us even more disconnected from being alive? You strap this on and you're no longer part of the conversation in the room. You're furniture.
People like to escape their routine lives. Like with every other type of escape, you should exercise moderation.
Speaking of moderation, as much as I'm excited about VR, I have to wonder how harmful it will be on the eyes. It seems like it might be worse than staring at a PC monitor or a book due to the closer proximity.
The kind of people who would buy this right now are probably headphone-wearing dudes that already, when not hanging out with others, go to pretty big lengths for immersion and close themselves off in some kind of dedicated PC area. I know that describes me, lol.
The type of people who post pictures wearing their Google Glass with pride IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tain
I use my PC and wear headphones and like to watch movies in the dark and all that but I can't get behind Glass. I can't imagine talking to people while wearing it without feeling like a total goob, and it's really clunky from what I've tried even if I wanted to.
I'll wear a doofy-ass headset for the sake of entertainment, but I'll wear it when I'm not in public and don't have to be interacting with anybody.
I wear my headset when playing PC games, but only when I know I'm not going to be needed for anything. Generally after Lily has gone to bed, and when Steph is doing whatever she does at night. I'd assume the same would be said for the Oculus.
I can't wait until we're all using a VR headset unwittingly doing our best impressions of Ray Charles.
A couch potato, if you will? Surely this sort of concern is absolutely new territory.Quote:
Originally Posted by icarusfall
all they need, and Oculus did show off a prototype photo in a presentation, is a VR unit with two out facing stereoscopic cameras that would broadcast to the display.Quote:
Originally Posted by MechDeus
You could then switch between VR and AR seemlessly and we'd all be wearing them everywhere. Suck it furniture!!
I can't imagine VR becoming mainstream any time soon.
It will be the hot new toy until the novelty wears off, and then become dormant again until the technology advances enough to make it worth it for someone to give it another go.
Oh boy first person platforming.
VR demos really aren't much better than Dactyl Nightmare, are they?
I don't think gauging depth will be as big of a problem in VR. Looks like it could be fun.
Jumping Flash! clone plz.
Yeah really, being able to... ya know, look down whenever you want would work really well for that sorta thing.
Also some fakeass sonic rollercoaster would have been so much better than the shit they showed us at pax.
Shit. Jumping flash. YES.
Yeah that PAX demo was fucking horrible.
I still want one though after trying it.