Page 14 of 65 FirstFirst ... 1012131415161828 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 644

Thread: The VR thread

  1. #131
    You've said it best before. It's plain, unadulterated hubris.

  2. It's a shame, because their hardware is really good. I love the Rift headset, and Touch looks like a much better hand-controller solution than the Vive wands. And yet, I'm still buying stuff on Steam when I have the option.

    Exclusivity can't be the ONLY thing that keeps you in a marketplace. It should just be what gets people in the door, and then they stay because they WANT to. That's the part Oculus doesn't get. No one wants to stay in a marketplace with a hardware lockout when there's one that doesn't right across the street.

  3. #133
    Exclusivity keeps me out. I will never visit the Oculus store, even if they add Vive support. I have never bought anything from Origin either, though I have redeemed a few codes from retail packages. At least EA is developing those games.

  4. I mean Valve doesn't put their first party games on any other store either. Steam exclusivity doesn't bother most because PC gamers pretty much all already use Steam as a de facto standard, but it's not like they don't do it. Because Oculus is a newcomer going against this juggernaut that already has over 100 million users, there's really only two options for bringing people in: 1) You have some unique content that the other marketplace doesn't, or 2) You lock Oculus hardware IN, and don't allow those customers to shop elsewhere. I'm glad they didn't go with the second option (I certainly wouldn't have bought one).

    Oculus has said that they intend to add support for more headsets in the future, and also that Vive support wasn't added because they couldn't get low-level access to the hardware to do it right without cooperation from Valve. I don't know how true it is, but if it is, solving that should be their top priority. Or just say "Fuck it" to supporting the full feature set and do it through OpenVR. I get why they don't want to do that, but it's turning into a PR disaster if they don't.
    Last edited by Frogacuda; 16 Jun 2016 at 10:27 AM.

  5. Quote Originally Posted by Frogacuda View Post
    I don't really know who makes these sorts of high level decisions. I get the impression that it is no longer Palmer Luckey, who has become uncharacteristically silent since things started going in this direction. He left Reddit, and has gotten very quiet on Twitter.
    He is the CEO, his company paid $2bn for OR. There is zero chance that he doesn't have the final say on any of the important decisions.

    What probably happened is that some underling thinks this is the right decision, made a recommendation to Zuck with a powerpoint of pros/cons (mostly pro). He replied "Okiewhatevrs".
    Last edited by kingoffighters; 16 Jun 2016 at 12:33 PM.

  6. Pinball FX, Pinball Arcade, Stern Pinball Arcade, and I guess now we got Zaccaria pinball:


  7. Quote Originally Posted by kingoffighters View Post
    He is the CEO, his company paid $2bn for OR. There is zero chance that he doesn't have the final say on any of the important decisions.

    What probably happened is that some underling thinks this is the right decision, made a recommendation to Zuck with a powerpoint of pros/cons (mostly pro). He replied "Okiewhatevrs".
    Whether or not he has final say doesn't mean he is or wants to be involved in every decision they make. It's impossible to say.

  8. Wilson's Heart has been getting a lot of raves at E3. This looks like the kind of VR experience I've been waiting for. Long, involved, immersive, and unique. I'm really looking forward to it.

  9. #139
    This is a better reply top your post in the Robinson thread, but it makes more sense in the larger context here:

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabe Newell
    We don't think exclusives are a good idea for consumers or developers. There's a separate issue which is risk. On any given project, you need to think about how much risk to take on. There are a lot of different forms of risk—financial risk, design risk, schedule risk, organizational risk, IP risk, etc... A lot of the interesting VR work is being done by new developers. That is a triple-risk whammy—a new developer creating new game mechanics on a new platform. We're in a much better position to absorb financial risk than a new VR developer, so we are happy to offset that giving developers development funds (essentially pre-paid Steam revenue). However there are no strings attached to those funds—they can develop for the Rift or PlayStation VR or whatever the developer thinks are the right target VR systems. Our hope is that by providing that funding that developers will be less likely to take on deals that require them to be exclusive.

    Make sense?
    Link

  10. There's a key difference here: Valve is still investing in a way that anticipates a return, so the scale of their investment is still based on the size of the market. That's why without seeing actual numbers, I think it's pretty apparent that the amount Valve is putting in to funding outside development is minuscule compared to what Sony and Oculus are doing.

    What I was trying to say about Sony and Oculus is that they're bringing a level of money to development that the market itself doesn't necessarily justify. They're ok to lose money on games because they're trying to grow the size of the market itself and they know they need games FIRST to do that. Their platform ambitions are the very reason for dumping this money into development.

    I like Valve, I'm glad they're backing VR, and I will continue to buy VR games on Steam when I can. I'm just saying we wouldn't see a lot of these big games without Sony or Oculus dumping money on people.
    Last edited by Frogacuda; 16 Jun 2016 at 10:02 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Games.com logo