Facebook to buy Occulus Rift :/

If you read what was said, atm nothing will change and not for a long time. Eventually he want's it to be used instead of Skype. So you feel like your sat in the room with friends/family, for teaching and shopping, that is when advertising would come in to pay for the service. Before that the devices have to mature a hell off a lot and come a lot cheaper. Basically as I said this is a long term investment and nothing will change anytime soon.

Again everyone's got their knickers in a twist.

On the face of it, the combination of a virtual reality headset and social media might seem like more of a dead-end move than Chris Martin and Gwyneth Paltrow's marriage. But from a legacy and empire perspective, Oculus could be a defining gadget that ushers in what the movies have always depicted.

Experiences so real you can go on holiday from the comfort of your living room, advanced teaching systems, a real-life RoboCop, sight for the blind - Mark Zuckerberg could shape the future once again.

"Mobile is the platform of today, and now we're also getting ready for the platforms of tomorrow," Facebook CEO and founder Zuckerberg said of the firm's big-money purchase. "Oculus has the chance to create the most social platform ever, and change the way we work, play and communicate."

Zuckerberg goes on to say that he sees Oculus as a "communication platform", which has us envisioning a super-advanced Skype call where it feels like you are actually with your family in the same room. He goes on to mention studying in a classroom with other "students and teachers all over the world" from the comfort of your living room.


Read more: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tech/fe...n-mean-for-virtual-reality.html#ixzz2x5NYZEh5
Follow us: @digitalspy on Twitter | digitalspyuk on Facebook
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Glaucus said:
Again everyone's got their knickers in a twist.
Click to expand...
If this were any big corporation that doesn't have a history of massively unethical conduct, there wouldn't be such a big uproar. But given it's Facebook it's natural to ask what's in it for them: and when you reply with "profit" it's not unreasonable to wonder why their business model for this acquisition should be any different to their usual one (mining and selling user data).
 
How they going to mine data and advertise in it's current form. Its a pc screen. Mot a platform.

As he says himself, they've purchased it with a very very long term goal. They have the money now, diversify or die. They are diversifying.
 
Glaucus said:
How they going to mine data and advertise in it's current form. Its a pc screen. Mot a platform.
Click to expand...
In its current form, it isn't just a PC screen. It also requires a USB connection for collection of head tracking information (without which it's not very useful for gaming). Its sensors will turn off if not regularly pinged. It delivers content via HDMI.

There's nothing stopping Oculus VR from implementing HDCP on the stream. There's nothing stopping them encrypting the USB traffic for head tracking information. If they were to do these two things they could effectively tie content developers into whatever contractual requirements they like in order to support the device (for instance, requiring a Facebook login to allow a game to access it, or to provide interfaces for display of targeted advertising in the game). They wouldn't be the first hardware manufacturer to do something like this.

I'm not saying that they *will* do it, but given it's Facebook we're talking about, the whole thing ought to be treated with a little scepticism.

Glaucus said:
As he says himself, they've purchased it with a very very long term goal. They have the money now, diversify or die. They are diversifying.
Click to expand...
I really hope this is the case. I'm just not sure I can trust the man to be honest any more. :)
 
I haven't had chance to read some of the latest replies on here but a lot of the feeling that is one here seems to be echoed around the place, I just found this:

y6O5aTg.jpg



I have seen lots of people in here saying about how they hate Facebook...as a previous poster said, I wonder how many of you here saying that do have Facebook account.

I have to say that I'm disappointed to hear that Facebook bought them and I don't have a Facebook account, so there. :p
 
cheesyboy said:
What's your point? You don't think people with AIDS think that's a bit **** too?
Click to expand...

Point is if they really hated FB as much as they claim they wouldn't have an account would they? It's a bit like a Jewish person being a member of the Nazi party, to use a better analogy than the awful one you came up with.
 
lol at some on reddit calling them sellouts, most would do the exact same thing if offered silly money for a product that is not even out yet and could fail
 
I'm more interested in why Glaucus think why they won't implement the measures he's dismissing, he hasn't come up with any compelling argument as to why not
 
Lola. How are they going to implement adverts. In content created by other people. Have you stopped to actually think about what OR is and how they could actually do it. The only way you could do it. Is say scrolling adds over the top of the game, in which case neither developers or buyers would accept and it does before it's even released, losing FB £2bn.
"without developers on board it's a dead product, and is years if not decades away from being cheap and good enough for VR communications.
 
Last edited:
so the only argument is "lololololol" and "They wouldn't be that stupid"?

Seriously, FB doesn't give a crap about alienating people if still get enough money from people that doesn't care, we've seen this time and again.

And it's not only ads, they can make money from forced DLC and extra levels, just like the rubbish situation with Android games at the moment.
 
Yes that is very much loo worthy.

What people who don't care? Atm it is only grid enough fir a relatively niche but very profitable sector. No developers, no gamers and the product is dead. Not there's enough people who don't care. there are no people who don't care in such a market.

So yes have a LOL about your ill thought out scenario.
 
To be fair i can see some of Glaucus' point. Imagine Zuckerberg sitting there like all of us thinking this VR thing looks like it could be a gaming revolution, he buys it but sits back and take his cut as it sells....the potential revenue could be astronomical and he wouldnt even have to put a FB logo on it.

I can dream anyway.
 
robgmun said:
Don't get me wrong i hope you're right, i really do. But it's unlikely
Click to expand...

How, tell me a reasonable scenario. Where they can sell it in mass and get add revenue from it?
With out the gaming sector the device is dead for years to come. It's to much in it's infantile for other markets.
Without content creators, there's no reason to buy it.

Show me a reasonable way they can Facebookafy it and I'll come along.

But no one has said that. They're just panicking going they'll wreck it. How? Are they going to.
If or when it mass marketable to everyone not just gamers. Then yes there's an opportunity. But this is unlikely to affect gamers. But the service/software you use. They advertise through Facebook, they have paid Samsung to implants adverts in monitors. Use are VR Skype like service, but it only runs though FB. Yeah that's a reasonable assumption. But doesn't affect the hardware or gaming.
 
Last edited:
Glaucus said:
How, tell me a reasonable scenario. Where they can sell it in mass and get add revenue from it?
With out the gaming sector the device is dead for years to come. It's to much in it's infantile for other markets.
Without content creators, there's no reason to buy it.

Show me a reasonable way they can Facebookafy it and I'll come along.

But no one has said that. They're just panicking going they'll wreck it. How? Are they going to.
If or when it mass marketable to everyone not just gamers. Then yes there's an opportunity. But this is unlikely to affect gamers. But the service/software you use. They advertise through Facebook, they have paid Samsung to implants adverts in monitors. Use are VR Skype like service, but it only runs though FB. Yeah that's a reasonable assumption. But doesn't affect the hardware or gaming.
Click to expand...

Are you completely and utterly unaware how the android games market works? If you do then how can you blind to how this can be translated, it only takes a little imagination.

Say OR becomes a massive hit, every developer is now clamouring to male games for it. FB now calls the shots, Games developers can be force to break up games and sell levels separate for greater income, of course FB takes a but because it owns OR

Like it or not, ads can be played before a level start (like Youtube videos these days) etc etc etc

Your naivety is the one that's lol worthy to be frank!
 
Lol. This isn't android and your average mobile gamer isn't going to be using VR. Yet more LOL worthy comments. OR won't even run on mobile platforms.

It's game devlopers with the upper hand, without them, OR have no sales.
 
Its quite simple really..

OR will get released, if there is unwanted FB bloat, the early adopters will scream about it, and OR will collapse as the bulk of the gamer/enthusiast market avoid it like the plague. On the other hand, if there is little FB bloat, then it could well become a success..

What I expect will happen, is that there will be OR, and there will be FBVR software bundled with it, I don't expect that FB software would intrude into other applications, as for one thing, that would be a legal minefield for FB as 'running ads before level start' as has been mentioned above, would usually be frowned upon by game developers.

Right now, to be honest, nobody in this thread has got a damn clue about what is going to happen, we're no better than any number of other panicky gossipmongers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom