Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: An4ximandros on March 25, 2014, 08:07:09 pm
-
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/facebook-to-acquire-oculus-252328061.html
http://www.polygon.com/2014/3/25/5547474/facebook-acquire-oculus-vr-2-billion
-
Well that potentially demolishes my enthusiasm for it.
-
Gets harder and harder to get away from these mass info-intelligence gathering companies. It doesn't bode well, I can imagine a lot of dystopian appliances to things like this, though it might require the Rift to become modified.
If only Kickstarter backers had some kind of legal ownership of the product/company for effectively causing them to (still) exist to begin with.
Let's hope it's competitors won't disappoint.
-
lol
-
(http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/723/675/802.png) WOULD SOMEBODY TELL CARMACK TO THINK OF DEKKER?!
-
With all those glassholes running around silicon valley, it was only a matter of time before all the big players got theirs. Facebook buys Occulus Rift. Twitter brings back virtual boy. The myspace guy hits himself in the face with a Tiger handheld, etc.
-
Palmer Luckey is engaging in PR speak now...
These developers are theirs, they have claimed them as an instrument of their design.
-
Palmer Luckey is engaging in PR speak now...
These developers are theirs, they have claimed them as an instrument of their design.
I imagined evil laughter after this statement.
Also: https://twitter.com/notch/status/448586381565390848
-
Honestly? I don't care. I don't play Minecraft, and my little brother (who does) probably isn't gonna get OR anyway. Unless SCP and Squad boycott Oculus Rift because of this, I'm not going to care if Facebook has their hands in development or not. And even then, all hardcore simulators like ArmA or DCS will probably get support for OR, because it just has too much potential in for them to pass. I will be getting Oculus Rift once it's available, though it probably won't be cheap (Dev kit 2 is 350$, so I don't expect release to cost much less).
-
"...We are not a hardware company..." "...There might be advertisement..." http://www.shareholder.com/visitors/event/build3/stage/stage.cfm?mediaid=63723&mediauserid=0
Yeah... I will just quietly sink into the shadows and forget about the "O! cul us!"
-
Well I was optimistic for the Rift, and I still am. But it's now (heavily) tempered by caution. You never know, maybe Zuckerberg just wanted a chunk of the pie, and will be content to keep his invasive mitts off the Rift. That's probably the ideal situation.
Otherwise, we still have the Sony whatcha-ma-call-virtua-face-thing that showed up at GDC.
https://twitter.com/SimoRoth/status/446096306311032832
Pre-EDIT: Morpheus is currently PS4 only. Well. If that doesn't change, looks like I might be sticking with the giant LCD. LIKE A CAVE MAN.
-
http://notch.net/2014/03/virtual-reality-is-going-to-change-the-world/
-
Oh. That's where he's been posting instead of his tumblr. Dammit, Notch.
-
I don't know why there is reason to freak out... actually Im tempted to say nothing really happened here
OR would not have revolutionized the gaming I care for; It is like 3d for movies (nice to be there when done well, otherwise just an unneesary selling-point for having-a-selling-point's sake)
VR doesn't make narratives deeper or gameplay more engageing - it might just do the opposite (but the flaws and merrits of VR are a matter for another time)
-
reddit is exploding in rage over this. It's hilarious.
I don't really have a dog in this fight, since I was never interested in OR, but **** Facebook. They're going to ruin OR with "market research" and advertising; it's almost a given, because otherwise there's no fathomable reason why a social media and market research company would pay 2 billion dollars for this.
-
As long as the ads are not displayed during the game, I don't see how they'd use that for advertising (except maybe by putting a huge "OCULUS RIFT SUPPORTERS" sign on FB). As for "market research", I don't think the driver software would have to be connected to the net (since this would disallow offline play), so I don't think they have any real way of "ruining" OR. They could load the installer with bloatware and ads, but I don't think it'd be too bad.
-
wow.. I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand they need capital in the billions to really bring VR into its full potential, custom hardware, building a new software platform and large-scale developer support aint cheap. On the other hand, its ****ing Facebook!
According to a person involved in the deal who was not allowed to speak publicly because he was not authorized by either company, Facebook eventually plans to redesign the Oculus hardware and rebrand it with a Facebook interface and logo.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/26/technology/facebook-to-buy-oculus-vr-maker-of-virtual-reality-headset.html?hpw&rref=business&_r=0
ugh..
If the product is good this doesnt change my decision to buy the Rift one bit, tough.
-
i really dont get why facebook is touching this.
on twitter someone smart said something smart: the idea of the Occulus Rift is escapism, the idea of Facebook is social interaction. They both don't mix.
-
Who knows, maybe they want to reinvent Second Life?
-
you know what, **** it. im sick and tired of awesome new technology being dangled in my face and then locked down by bull****. hardware physics, nope locked down. smartphones, locked down. tablets, locked down. now vr, locked the **** down. i dont even want to know what the next new thing is because its going to be locked down. **** all y'all.
BOYCOTT COMPANIES THAT LOCK DOWN TECH
**** BOYCOTTS, STEAL THEIR STUFF, BREAK THEIR THINGS
NO! **** THAT! HUNT THEM DOWN AND MURDER THEM!
really that could have come out better
-
Worry not, no doubt there will be someone out there that will learn to hack it! :yes:
-
i really dont get why facebook is touching this.
on twitter someone smart said something smart: the idea of the Occulus Rift is escapism, the idea of Facebook is social interaction. They both don't mix.
VR has a number of possible applications that aren't escapism in a trict sense - e.g. it is used in psychological thearapy since the late 90s to simulate situations of intense stress for the patient while providing controlled envoirnment (for example to treat PTSD or phobias)
Another application is to enhance telepresence by poviding a better "display" for the output from the proxy..
OR is build around the attempt to produce a VR device ready for home use; its application for gaming has only been its strongest selling point but that is not the limit of the possible applications...
Just think of the possible evolution of facebook stalking OR will enable ;) (cause we all know what Mark Zuckerberg is about (http://uk.screen.yahoo.com/onions-extremely-accurate-history-internet-232429526.html))
-
Ahh I love this, you know how it works...first you get ppl having VR meetings, then you get ppl posting something along the lines:
"Yep you know what happens when you eat too much enchilada, it's VR #taking a #dump #time!"
[VR tag]vid[/VR tag]
-
My sentiments regarding this matter.
Oh well, I suppose I'll see how it goes and if there's any competition or alternatives. I have deep reservations about handing my money to Facebook, even if it's by proxy.
-
"Please login to your Facebook account in order to begin the Oculus Rift installation process."
-
"Please login to your Facebook account in order to begin the Oculus Rift installation process."
yeahno. count me out of this nightmare kthnksbye!
-
Please allow Facebook to login to your etc etc what spoon said.
I don't want Farmville invites while I play half life etc :(
-
Anyone been on the Star Citizen forums? Some of them are just begging* Chris Roberts to drop OR support or at least provide his stance in his next developer announcement.
Meanwhile, while I'm waiting for the Downfall Rant to happen on it, I will just say I am going to be overtly cautious on this. As much as I would enjoy a sim experience with it (imagine if you could look into the Rift to look through a submarine periscope or through the Longbow Apache's ORT to see the TADS FLIR/DTV/DVO system in full screen, man, that would have made a killing), Facebook... ehhhhh....
* Yeah, I don't think begging would be the best word to describe it.
-
Who knows, maybe they want to reinvent Second Life?
Everyone calm down. This is what Facebook have in mind, and this alone. The gaming potential for OR will not be touched - it's almost entirely peripheral to FB (Casual farmville players don't want a VR farm FFS), and it's far too difficult to insert content at that end, short of banner ads or something overlaid onto your game, which they know people would ditch by the millions, and they need millions of gamers to buy the OR and create the user base so that they can build on it. Product placement inserted into games at the developers end is far more efficient.
No, all Facebook are doing here is trying to be Google - they're spending up big investing in emerging technologies that only peripherally relevant to their core business. FB wants ground floor integration of social networking - specifically its own, of course - in what it thinks might be an emerging VR communication space. They missed the boat entirely on smartphones, and so instead they want Facebook to be the bedrock of the next generation of 3d Skype - your great aunt mildred projected as a 3d model into your lounge room. And, perhaps just as important, they want to lock out Google+ from integrating with it.
So sleep tight - us excited gamers are still important to FB. We're the thin end of the wedge who are going to start making headsets like this ubiquitous enough that FB can gradually make them profitable outside of gaming. They're not going to mess with that.
-
"they are just trying to be like google" is in NO way reassuring.
-
Watch it, google is reading us.
*posted with google chrome.
-
i dont like software people doing hardware. when that happens you get locked down technology, because they are used to the licensing model and not the manufacturing model. "thanks for your money, here some hardware, its still ours so you are technically just borrowing it. at some point in the future we may come back and ask for more money, and if you dont comply the hardware will brick itself. if you use it in a way we dont like we will come and take it away from you. the license also requires you to bend over while i put this watermelon in your rectum, oh and by the way you have to pay for the watermelon."
-
I just hopped on Kotaku and found this article on the posts that Palmer Luckey made on Reddit:
http://www.kotaku.com.au/2014/03/oculus-addresses-some-of-the-internets-biggest-concerns/
-
It appears Michael Abrash is now in with Oculus VR: http://www.pcgamer.com/2014/03/28/oculus-rift-hires-valve-vr-expert-michael-abrash-as-chief-scientist/
-
My 2 cents: Facebook made a great investiment in VR for good reasons, but i think the private development for the games integration will go on despite Oculus has been aquired.
So i'd not worry too much for this...intead i think it will push the VR market one step ahead,and this move shows that next gen games will be based on VR hardwares.
Palmer Luckey has been clear that Oculus will continue to develop...so let's try to see this as a good thing. :)
I'm pretty much positive regarding that.
-
Holy ****, HLP. Facebook data mines enough to know that you guys don't want adware on your hardware. I wouldn't worry about anything unless they do something really insane. They are for-profit, after all.
-
And now John Carmack voices his support: http://kotaku.com/john-carmack-voices-support-of-facebooks-oculus-acquis-1554809291
-
He doesn't support the move so much as accept it as not being harmful.
I wasn't personally involved in any of the negotiations -- I spent an afternoon talking technology with Mark Zuckerberg, and the next week I find out that he bought Oculus.
I found that little tidbit to be interesting.
-
Holy ****, HLP. Facebook data mines enough to know that you guys don't want adware on your hardware. I wouldn't worry about anything unless they do something really insane. They are for-profit, after all.
when has knowing people don't want something EVER stopped facebook from doing it?
-
While I do like the idea of display goggle, I just can't fathom why they made it so large. Have actually been wondering about that for a while.
-
Well, it's got a full image processing suite and display suite, headtracker, plus it has to fit well over your eyes. If you look at Smartphone-based "DIY VR googles" that a few people were making, the frames are also quite bulky, even though they're little more than fancy smartphone holders+eyeglasses set. The actual device seems to be the size of a HD smartphone, a lot of bulk you see is probably eye clearance and shroud to block external light out.
-
A bigger device means the screens are further from the eye means you can get the same resolution with a lower pixel density means cheaper hardware that poses less engineering challenges.
-
Well, that, and the fact that the eye can't reliably focus on something that is very very close, meaning plenty of clearance is needed to ensure you can see the screen properly.
-
I'd hope they have diopter control as we're all different.
-
Well, that, and the fact that the eye can't reliably focus on something that is very very close, meaning plenty of clearance is needed to ensure you can see the screen properly.
The Rift is focused at infinity because of the lenses.
-
Every lens has a minimum focal distance though. Aka standoff.
-
No, I meant that the display is ridiculously large for it's purpose, and this actually drives the size of the thing. That and the field of view of the eye-piece actually.
It would be possible to make this considerably smaller device with two separate displays, but I suppose the single large display was used due to money reasons. However, it will not work in the future if the apparent resolution needs to be increased (which seems to be the case).
The other thing I've been wondering is have they considered the user ergonomics; the more one-sided load you apply to head, the more problems might occur over long term usage.
-
as for me i have one eye that is really good, and one eye that is really bad (i thought about getting a monocle. then i realized it would cost money, and require medical insurance, of which i have neither). i have doubts that im even capable of viewing stereo.
-
guys regarding oculus rift impressions posted here:
I can assure you that if you haven't test it you can't judge anything.
-Never had an eyestrain in 1 year of Rift use
-Never had neck problems since is very comfortable and light
-Mask ergonomic is very good.
And this is just the Devkit 1 with all his limits and problems,but i can assure you i'm very happy with it and i'll wait the Consumer version for sure,i'll not buy the DK2 despite is a very good improvement from what i got...but seryously i don't feel the need to upgrade right now.
@Nuke: if in RL you see depth despite your bad eye,you'll see 3d with oculus rift too, since the device uses the more natural way your brain and eyes see stereo.
-
I thought about buying DK2, but then I've read consumer version is supposed to start shipping in July. I think I can wait a few months. :)
-
@Nuke: if in RL you see depth despite your bad eye,you'll see 3d with oculus rift too, since the device uses the more natural way your brain and eyes see stereo.
seemed to work ok when i watched gravity in 3d but still, but that was all pre rendered movie grade effects with all the visual cues thrown in there for the best possible experience. games are going to have fewer of those visual cues. i suspect it will work great in some games, and be horrible in others.
-
Never had neck problems since is very comfortable and light
I'm not talking about problems you'll find out in one year scope. The time frame I'm looking at is more like five to ten years. Think of sitting at work and what it does to you spine in a ten year time frame if little exercise is applied.
However, the center of gravity of the device is located slightly in front of one's nose, leading to lesser moment than -ahem- some other systems. Perhaps that will indeed help. However, I still remain a bit suspicious about this; the device is not exactly featherweight at 380 grams.
-
In the unlikely case of somebody getting interested in what I'm saying, I refer to this. (http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/01/05/night-vision-goggles-causing-neck-problems-in-military-pilots/) You can google more yourselves, this type of information is luckily available for general public.
Please note that in the linked article, the personnel are pilots. However, they were helicopter pilots, who also do not encounter high long term G-forces. Granted there is always turbulence, but for example the USAF AN/AVS-6 binocular weight is around 590 grams. Monocular device is probably around half of it, and that's what the ground forces typically use. The cause of neck problems typically is the uninterrupted contraction of the back of the neck muscles who are continuously working against the one-sided load. This in the long term, can lead to misalignment of vertebra.
Yeah it's not an apples to apples comparison and so on, and I don't believe that there is a significant cause of concern, but I do believe this is something that Rift users should at least be aware of. The weight of the thing is close to those things that reportedly do cause problems, and its center of gravity is close to those devices which have caused problems.
And yes, I have carried an NVG myself.
-
I think that a solution could be doing something akin to what some bigger head-mounted flashlights do. Put the electronics (and battery, in case of a wireless device) in the compartment on the back of your head, while the heavy display goes in front, resulting in a more balanced device. It also gets the cable out of the way. It might be harder to do for OR than for multi-kilo military helmets (in which you just need to shift some mass around to compensate the COM offset), but should be doable.
-
I thought about buying DK2, but then I've read consumer version is supposed to start shipping in July. I think I can wait a few months. :)
Source? as far as I know devkit 2 will ship in July and consumer version will ship like, next year.
-
One of the articles in this thread even mentions it. Though they might've meant DK2 by "Oculus Rift starts shipping in july". Well, in that case, I'll go with DK2. :) Do you know if it's gonna be any cheaper on release?
-
"...There might be advertisement..." (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9TfplGgf7Q)
-
One of the articles in this thread even mentions it. Though they might've meant DK2 by "Oculus Rift starts shipping in july". Well, in that case, I'll go with DK2. :) Do you know if it's gonna be any cheaper on release?
Devkit 2 will be $350. As for consumer version, Palmer said that FB money allows them the greatly lower the price of the Rift. If I had to guess, consumer version will be around $250.
-
Well, I guess that would be nice. I wonder what'll win out. Wanting to check out the OR or being a cheapskate... :) Well, I guess I've still got some time to decide.
-
"...There might be advertisement..." (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9TfplGgf7Q)
that's really cute.
-
One of the articles in this thread even mentions it. Though they might've meant DK2 by "Oculus Rift starts shipping in july". Well, in that case, I'll go with DK2. :) Do you know if it's gonna be any cheaper on release?
Devkit 2 will be $350. As for consumer version, Palmer said that FB money allows them the greatly lower the price of the Rift. If I had to guess, consumer version will be around $250.
there is the possibility of having custom hardware made. such as made to spec screens or asics that would have not been possible without dropping a million or two on a run. having an asic made would be useful because you could greatly reduce the part count, and thus cost, by rolling all the functionality you need into one chip.
-
I think people are getting worked up over nothing (Notch too, but that is hardly new for him). It's purely a business deal. Oculus gets the financial stability it needs to further development, and Facebook gets to further diversify its assets. Which is what a healthy company is suppose to do (never put you eggs in one basket). I'm sure the focus will always be gaming as this is the only practical use it is designed for and is the only market interested in buying.
-
I think people are getting worked up over nothing (Notch too, but that is hardly new for him). It's purely a business deal. Oculus gets the financial stability it needs to further development, and Facebook gets to further diversify its assets. Which is what a healthy company is suppose to do (never put you eggs in one basket). I'm sure the focus will always be gaming as this is the only practical use it is designed for and is the only market interested in buying.
Thank you for the sensical post.
HLP vocal minorities, stop panicking every time corporate giants do something.
-
I think people are getting worked up over nothing (Notch too, but that is hardly new for him). It's purely a business deal. Oculus gets the financial stability it needs to further development, and Facebook gets to further diversify its assets. Which is what a healthy company is suppose to do (never put you eggs in one basket). I'm sure the focus will always be gaming as this is the only practical use it is designed for and is the only market interested in buying.
Thank you for the sensical post.
HLP vocal minorities, stop panicking every time corporate giants do something.
PANIC!!!!!
What?
PANICCCC!!!!!!! :P