Oculus Rift

But without high rest screens, 1080p isn't high enough as per the reviews, that close to the eyes you can still see pixels. It'll never become used and FB lose all investment from a failed product. Do again that scenario doesn't wok. Unless FB are silly enough to lose all investment.

There is no mass market, casual user. atm and for the foreseeable future it is gamers. Using games from developers.
Again are people going to plug low rest OR into a phone to see a 3d thumbs up.
 
Last edited:
I own a devkit1, a devkit2 on preorder and avoid using Facebook.

I'm also sure VR will get better faster if the smartest people have 2 billion dollars to throw at the problem.

This is a good thing. This changes the dynamic from using mobile screens that meet certain specs to defining the specs on LCD panels and waiting for them to become available.

Facebook have accelerated things.
 
Last edited:
Well 1440 is the current CV1 estimate, but I have seen discussion of two versions of the Rift, a gamer version and a 'social experience' cheaper version. Not sure if thats official. I have no doubt there will be more money in the social version. Lets not kid ourselves OR is leaving the games to Sony and concentrating where the PC has the advantage - social networking.

The unfortunate thing in all this is that for a bit there, this promised real innovation in an industry where innovation is driven by gaming. SSDs, GPUs, CPUs dont perform generational leaps so that your office computer can run excel quicker. Social networking has to cater to the lowest common denominator by definition to appeal to the widest audience possible. What has FB brought to us but a greater tool for the NSA to listen in on and demographics to better sell you ****.Theres a lot of feeling that OR slammed into a FB brick wall here.

Id love to be wrong, but other than a fervent hope that 'nothing has changed, its just going to get done quicker!' ive seen no convincing evidence to that effect, whilst theres plenty of evidence that FB monetises everything it touches. Im hoping Palmer announces something stunning, until then no cancellation email yet.
 
kohlditz said:
I own a devkit1, a devkit2 on preorder and avoid using Facebook.

I'm also sure VR will get better faster if the smartest people have 2 billion dollars to throw at the problem.

This is a good thing. This changes the dynamic from using mobile screens that meet certain specs to defining the specs on LCD panels and waiting for them to become available.

Facebook have accelerated things.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. They wouldn't be able to do it properly or compete with the big boys (Sony especially) if it weren't for major backing like this.
 
I dont believe a facebook purchase could be called a good thing, but theres bound to be positives if theres significant money invested in this, budget strings dont need to be so tight and decisions they might have held off on maybe they'll be more free to pursuit.
The problem is, what is the bad thing which is allowing the good things, because this isnt a donation, theres no warm fuzzy feeling in Zuckerberg's heart right now, theres a plan to make money and turn around the Facebook future he's seeing.

Devlish said:
Well 1440 is the current CV1 estimate, but I have seen discussion of two versions of the Rift, a gamer version and a 'social experience' cheaper version. Not sure if thats official. I have no doubt there will be more money in the social version. Lets not kid ourselves OR is leaving the games to Sony and concentrating where the PC has the advantage - social networking.

The unfortunate thing in all this is that for a bit there, this promised real innovation in an industry where innovation is driven by gaming. SSDs, GPUs, CPUs dont perform generational leaps so that your office computer can run excel quicker. Social networking has to cater to the lowest common denominator by definition to appeal to the widest audience possible. What has FB brought to us but a greater tool for the NSA to listen in on and demographics to better sell you ****.Theres a lot of feeling that OR slammed into a FB brick wall here.

Id love to be wrong, but other than a fervent hope that 'nothing has changed, its just going to get done quicker!' ive seen no convincing evidence to that effect, whilst theres plenty of evidence that FB monetises everything it touches. Im hoping Palmer announces something stunning, until then no cancellation email yet.
Click to expand...

Bloody hell, 24hrs on and already the nerds have decided exactly what the future is for the product!?
A) Sincerely, Get a grip :D
B) Oculus is hardly going to abandon a market it can strongly appeal to, has developers and gamers all eager to buy already, and do a complete 180 and decide the future of VR is socialising on facebook.
C) What portion of the world grew up watching stuff like Tron and thought one day we'll be able to sit and chat in a virtual world?! The 'need' for VR in social circles is pretty much zero, voice chat was cool, likewise video conferencing, but how many people are thinking sticking a VR helmet on their head would be a real goal. VR socialising starts and ends with internet sex!
D) PC's advantage is social networking? I'd imagine the ratio of people who depend upon a PC to do their socialising is 1 in 20 at a push. Mobiles, Tablets, thats where almost all of it stems from, hardly from their PC.

Zuckerberg isnt buying this with the intention of dumbing it down and refocusing its attention on facebooking it. Sure, they'll try and use it to facebooks advantage, but it hasnt got the market interest which has turned it into a 2 billion dollar purchase because of its appeal or need to the social networking market. Gaming & Entertainment will far outnumber any social aspect (beyond social gaming), and im sure theres far greater professional industry uses for the hardware, VR medical training, VR Real Estate, and then theres the VR Sex industry again :D


Im not at all convinced theres any plan to wedge Facebook into the Rift, they'll definitely exploit facebook to promote and push the product to people, and i couldnt give a hoot about that (its advertising) but i highly doubt facebook would be a requirement, or be forced into the product usage. This isnt an exclusive item, they wont be the only player in the market, so if they want a strong foothold they dont want to alienate their audience because it'll just give people a reason to go elsewhere for their VR tech.

I hate Facebook, and everything about social media, its pathetic how its infiltrated everything. But you dont make a 2 billion dollar purchase and then dump the hype potential customers have for the product by giving them reasons not to buy it. You use your influence to make people want one, you enhance experiences and push push push. You dont say we'll make a bland product for a slowly dying website which hasnt expressed any desire for VR, and roll the dice.
 
Those fairy wishes with no qualified basis in reality I was on about earlier? Here we go. No offense but theres plenty of people out here in reality who make the connection between Zuckenberg growing his empire and this newly acquired part of that empire and think this is not a good thing nor are the two going to be 'seperate entities'. You talk about mobiles/tablets - well anyone who has followed Oculus knows thats where a large part of its early development is headed. There was even talk of a running prototype on a mobile, something im sure played a part in the acquisition, if not now a priority.

I really doubt that Tron, Ready Player One or the Matrix are going to convince anyone to include gaming in that future. From a gamers point of view its a disaster, but from a non-gamers point of view not so much. Hence that mass nerd raging.

The simple fact of the matter is that there is a **** ton of money in VR and i have no doubt it will be successful. Gaming in any serious manner (again hardly a Facebook forte) will take a back seat to the experiences you mention but meh, there we go. Im sure we'll fit in somewhere.
 
Ill add an edit - seems to me reading through this thread people are confused about what the rage is all about. Nobody is mad about this being the end of VR, gamers are mad that this is the end of VR as a gaming device.

Simply put, theres no money in PC games. Our icons of industry are ecstatic when they get $40 million in crowd funding. The biggest game developments to date take several years and cost 200 million to develop. They might hit sales of 1 billion if they hit the top 10 best selling games of all time. They almost certainly wont. When considered with the 2 billion investment this suggests monetisation will have to happen elsewhere.

The Facebook deal signals a fundamental shift away from a device that was on a trajectory to be the premiere gaming peripheral into the entrtainment and social hub that it was perhaps always destined to be. We will see many new and wonderful things, theyll just be tightly controlled experiences designed to produce a return on investment. Thats disappointing but im sure theyll be amazing.

The nerd rage comes partly from a feeling of loss but also a feeling that the corporations have taken over that future. As one of the many comments i have read over the last couple of days said, 'IOI have taken over OASIS'. The day before yesterday the future was meant to be the Wild West, now its Disney. Still a fun place to go to im sure.
 
nitram100 said:
Maybe we will get the consumer version sooner than expected with 2 billion behind it?
Click to expand...

more like delayed. Spending more time in R&D, getting more AAA companies onboard.

Oculus badly needs some serious developer backup. You can mass market a device like the Oculus if you have nothing of significance to show. Facebook, and their money, can maybe grease the wheels with software publishers and distribution.

Sony don't care, they have the PS4, they have the electronics R&D and production, marketing, and they can wait as long as they want (and have done so since Oculus showed up).

I would have preferred them make deals with Valve, Microsoft, even Samsung or Google who already market handheld devices and have some logistics, production and distribution know-how.

One good thing is that it will should remain an open platform. With Microsoft, or Apple, you just know they'd locked that thing tight. I'm also worried about the patents, and how Facebook may force them to cash-in or lock down their fancy technologies. ATM, they just don't care and are happy to share their findings and crowd-source the development. I don't think that will last with Mr Big Bucks and his shareholders onboard.

Meh, will see. VR is here to stay anyway.
 
Last edited:
Been reading a lot of threads on a lot of sites about this, and the one fear that keeps coming back is that it is the end for OR in serious gaming.

I don't see why. Facebook don't make games, they provide a platform for games makers to reach a wide audience and monetise their games away from a one off purchase. However how many people still play facebook games compared to how many now play mobile app games? Would be interesting to see how that has changed over the years (of course they are still facebook integrated to a large degree).

The rift is a hardware device, and the team that are developing it are not likely to be making the next farmville. People are scared that facebook are going to get involved and say to Frontier developments that you can't develop for our device anymore? Nonesense surely. The rift could become a device with multiple applications, one of which is serious gaming. I'm sure that was the plan all along.

All the Facebook acquisition changes is the stigma attached to it, the fear that your auntie might come round, see you playing Skyrim on the rift and ask to check her virtual farm.... :D

I've as much reservation about Facebook as a company as the next guy, but I refuse to let it ruin my excitement about VR and about this device.
 
I'm in two minds about this at the moment. I backed Oculus in Kickstarter and while I don't use my headset that much it is still very good fun to use and show to people. Even when I use it now I still think this IS THE FUTURE !

So on one hand it’s a good move, more investment into the project could see better design, cheaper, might actually produce a 1080 model this year. Could spur more development in software for it etc.

However I can't help but think facebook.....facebook. Will that alone simply put off game developers from wanting to code for the Rift. Will facebook insist that anything on the rift will have to integrate with facebook (ala status updates X is playing Y game now) Will they actually still keep it gamer focused or just concentrate on this “Social VR” (which ironically sounds like this old fashioned concept called GOING OUTSIDE !). oh and VR Farmville does not count as gaming.....

As a backer I am a bit annoyed but not surprised that another company bought it. Will be interested to see the direction it goes in though.
 
Madeddie said:
Not sure what all the fuss it about DK3 that is in the pipeline looks much better than the DK2 release :D

oculus-rift-facebook.jpg
Click to expand...
Brings a whole new meaning to the word 'facebook'.
 
So i have my DK2 on pre order but was wondering if anyone could answer this question.

During Eurogamer I had my first go on Oculus, it was called HD Prototype. Would this be the same as the DK2 in terms of resolution, latency ?
 
nitram100 said:
So i have my DK2 on pre order but was wondering if anyone could answer this question.

During Eurogamer I had my first go on Oculus, it was called HD Prototype. Would this be the same as the DK2 in terms of resolution, latency ?
Click to expand...

DK2 is better than the HD Prototype, it has positional tracking (like the "Crystal Cove" prototype they showcased slightly later) amongst other improvements.
 
Has there been any news on shipping yet, I try not to follow it too much as I know it is probably still a way off and I will get all disappointed :confused::confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom