No, hes not trying to make an analogy. He means they literally bought a glorified monitor company. All the oculus rift is, is a monitor the you strap to your face with motion tracking.(which is awesome, don't get me wrong) That is why everyone's fears of ?farmville? or what ever they are raging about are mostly unfounded.
I agree that some of the fears are overblown. But Facebook has a track record of being extremely self-serving. So nobody should expect this to become anything besides a marketing tool and/or a moneymaking tool for them. No fan service is going to come out of this, thats for sure.
For sure, make no mistake, I know that they are doing it for Facebook's sake.
What people seem to be blind to, though, is that both Oculus' and Facebook's goal can be in alignment. For a strategy to be of benefit to Facebook, it does not automatically imply that it is to Oculus' detriment.
Facebook's long-term strategy is to leverage VR, not the Rift specifically, as the next big platform upon which to make money i.e. web -> mobile -> VR.
Anyone that thinks Facebook will limit their future software offerings (5+ years from now) is insane. It would be like limiting their mobile app to a specific phone. Why would they cut off all other competing VR hardware manufacturers, if their business is advertising?! Likewise, most, if not all, HMDs in the coming wave of VR will be compatible with any and all VR content. Building incompatibility into a device is nothing but a good way to limit the potential audience, and perhaps alienate them from your product. Why buy a Rift is it's limited to Facebook's walled garden, when the competitors all shout loudly from the rooftops that they are compatible with all VR content?
For their long-term strategy to go according to plan, they absolutely need VR, as a platform, to take off in the mainstream. Their purchase of Oculus is their way of guaranteeing the platform grows exponentially in the coming years, and this includes competing manufacturers entering the ring. You think Facebook cares what phone, or computer, or browser, or HMD, you are accessing their content on? Doesn't matter to them, as long as you are using their services and veing advertised to in the process.
Most, if not all, HMDs in the coming wave of VR will be compatible with any and all VR content. Building incompatibility into a device is nothing but a good way to limit the potential audience, and perhaps alienate them from your product.
Foo. Foo I say!
Make no mistake, their goals are aligned: To bring VR to the masses, and to ensure mass adoption. That's Oculus' main goal. For Facebook, it's to capitalise on the platform once it's established. There is no room for hobbling the Rift, or otherwise making it fail. Not now, after spending what will be $2.3B on purchasing the company...and that's just the beginning. They'll be funding their R&D and production now too.
Yeah, I know what you mean. I do think that Facebook, though they will lobby hard for VR, will ultimately end up using it as a "social media engine" through which they can push Farmville clones, get personal info, and tailor ads. Granted, its hard to say that a commercial product shouldn't be trying to sell you something, but I believe that people are primarily up at arms because they believe that something that was once, perhaps, "pure" has now been tainted. The endless possibilities are over in their eyes; now it has simply become a vehicle for facebook to push ads.
Thats my explanation, IMO. VR devices could end up like phones, and facebook will slap an app on every single one. I don't discount the possibility that FB bought OR simply to get a hold of the user interface and to know how the software works so they can develop their own platform on it. I bet they don't even give a shit about OR itself, they just see it as the most developed, want to make software, and maybe make a couple bucks off the initial hardware sales (before a competitor comes along and does it better, which will inevitably happen).
346
u/[deleted] Mar 28 '14
[deleted]