Jimquisition: So, That Facebook And Oculus Rift Thing...

[nightazday]

Given that you've given a few notable examples, what do you think Nintendo would do if it acquired the Oculus Rift?

Anyway, this episode is amazingly topical given the short time frame. Bravo, Jim Sterling, and thank God for you.

You think they would after the virtual boy?

 

[Lightknight]

They've been dropping for a few weeks now. Look at monday, they dropped $3 then too.

Yeah, but they were on the upturn by the time of closing.

You really can't tell from day to day. Had it been an ultra sharp drop then sure, but it was only a few dollars more of a drop than on Monday like I said. So maybe this was temporarily bad for them but it sure doesn't seem like it's had much of any kind of impact.

The people leaving are probably just investors who think Facebook continues throwing good money after bad and don't think the Rift is a good investment. I happen to think that they finally made a good investment here but it'll depend entirely on how they use it and what the market competition eventually starts to look like. I don't know if $2 billion was an appropriate valuation of the company but I'm glad the rift just shot up to the big time investment league because we'll likely get a much more powerful and more affordable consumer version than we'd ever have gotten without this influx of money. We just need facebook not to ruin it from a software perspective.

But even then, come on, we'd just buy it and root the damn thing to use like we wanted to anyways.

 

[SkulduggeryPelican]

I guess the easiest answer to that question is "because them doing their thing with the hardware won't get in the way of me doing my thing with the hardware." While it is entirely possible that Facebook will happily sponsor F2P social gaming shit stains on the Rift, that in no way prevents me from using it for using it for the kind of games I was planning on using it for already(except, apparently, Minecraft).

Unless facebook decides for example to tie the Rift SDK to a license enforcing all content made for the Rift to be accessed through a facebook VR portal. There is nothing saying that will happen, but it is one of many things that are very much within their capability if they think that gives them the most value for their 2 billion.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

Somewhat valid points, but...

Yeah, and here's another thing...

The Rift assumes you have binocular vision. Some people have strabismus - also known as monocular vision. Such as, you know, myself. I couldn't use the Rift even if I bumped into a Good Samaritan version of Scrooge McDuck who gifted me the headset, all of the compatible games and a beastly rig. Some people are PHYSICALLY unable to use the hardware.

Pair that with the fact that a monitor already does the job the Rift does, and that immersion is oftentimes granted more by smart art design or general lore - or sometimes with smart gameplay. You can play stunningly awful games in glorious 3D if you so choose; that doesn't redeem them at all.

I'm one of the people who's been sitting in the sidelines scratching his head at the 3D craze in monitors and movie theaters because of one teensy handicap. Why bother with 3D if the only thing directors use it for is extremely cheesy depth-of-field effects? Why bother with it in a game if it doesn't positively affect your performance in the least - and is even likely to give you headaches? Why bother with any of it, when making sure you're even able to enjoy that runs you thousands of dollars?

So I hear people wail about Notch letting the Minecraft-Oculus deal fall through, and I just don't get it. Minecraft is *exactly* the type of game that has nothing to gain out of being in 3D. You're looking at voxels draped in pixel art, even if you use these voxels to recreate the Sagrada Familia or the Millennium Falcon!

If anything, I keep thinking the Rift needs to be put to use in the medical field far more than for games or, God forbid, the social media sphere. My brain sees the world as a flat plane and has learned to compensate for the actual distances of objects. I act as though I can see everything in 3D, but there's a lot of guesswork involved. Show me a distant intersection and I might not be able to tell you which streetlight is closer. On the other hand, pushing my lazy eye to receive a slightly different image from the active one seems to trigger it intermittently.

I wouldn't want Rift tech for my games or my social browsing, much less my movies. I want Rift tech in my glasses in order to *maybe* re-educate my brain as to the existence and purpose of my lazy eye.

 

[PunkRex]

Think I'm kidding?

Spoiler: I'm not

Spoiler: No really, I'm not

Spoiler: Why would I want to make something like this up?

[If the pictures are too small, just right-click and select "copy image URL". Then paste it in a new tab and you'll be able to see it full-size.]

Spoiler: Why are you even still clicking on these?

You may not be but I think he is, although even if that post is serious it's still the funniest thing i've read in a while.

OT: I knew the Rift was popular but the back lash to this is surprising. I thought it would proberly go away like most VR stuff does.

 

[Pete_alreadyinuse]

Somewhat valid points, but...

Yeah, and here's another thing...

The Rift assumes you have binocular vision. Some people have strabismus - also known as monocular vision. Such as, you know, myself. I couldn't use the Rift even if I bumped into a Good Samaritan version of Scrooge McDuck who gifted me the headset, all of the compatible games and a beastly rig. Some people are PHYSICALLY unable to use the hardware.

[...]

So I hear people wail about Notch letting the Minecraft-Oculus deal fall through, and I just don't get it. Minecraft is *exactly* the type of game that has nothing to gain out of being in 3D. You're looking at voxels draped in pixel art, even if you use these voxels to recreate the Sagrada Familia or the Millennium Falcon!

I have strabismus and I also have a rift (or rather I sold it and ordered the new version now but I had one) it works perfectly fine. (Not a lazy eye though I can consciously switch between my eyes and both work fine. Also, I don't get motion sick at all, maybe not having stereoscopy makes you less vulnerable to some things that can cause motion sickness or maybe I'm just lucky.) You get two separate pictures for your eyes, with strabismus you don't get the stereoscopic depth information but still see them normally. 3D isn't the main point of the rift it is a freebie (okay my lack of stereoscopy might make me undervalue it). For me it is about the head tracking and the high FOV and not seeing anything else.

And there is a rift mod for minecraft called minecrift reports where quite positive. Minecraft has minimalistic graphics sure, but you can look tilt your head back and look up at a gigantic structure you made, it might be a pixelated mess but it is still impressive.
I really recommend trying an HMD when you get the chance whether it is a Rift a Morpheus or some new competitor. (Assuming you heard the new competitor got the tech right.) Descriptions and video are a sadly a poor way to get the point of an HMD across

 

[Shdwrnr]

I was watching this and talking to my wife and had a revelation: Facebook didn't do this to have anything to do with Occulus Rift, it did it to get at the patents and hardware and allowing them to use it to circumvent the R&D portion of creating their own version of Google Glass.

With that hypothesis in mind, I now have no problem at all with the whole situation based on Facebook's (albeit minor) record of not ruining the things it buys.

 

[Do4600]

I think you're underestimating the potential backlash. So far it's overwhelmingly negative. Even if the people working on the Oculus Rift say everything is fine(like John Carmack), and even if the people working on games for the Oculus Rift say everything is fine, people still won't buy it. Facebook might as well be a flesh eating bacteria when it comes to the success of the technology. The rift will initially be a niche product and requires hardcore enthusiasts to sell to, and guess what? The people you are trying to sell to all hate facebook. Hardcore Pc gamers tend to be tech enthusiasts, they also tend to want freedom, privacy and security when it comes to networks and computers, most of these people see Facebook as a hazard, a place that owns whatever you put into it and a place where nothing can be deleted and everything might as well already be in the hands of the NSA. They also hate farmville with a fiery passion that could melt steel. As a matter of fact I think the more hardcore a PC gamer is the more they hate the kind of business facebook is doing.

I have a fiend who is more hardcore than I am, we're waiting for Star Citizen, he's going to drop $5000 on a computer when it's released, I told him yesterday that the rift was bought by facebook the first thing he said was,"Well, I guess the rift was a waste of time, we'll have to wait for another solution." To him, it's already dead, he was going to buy it day one. He was really close to buying a developers kit.

That's the problem, it's not that Facebook will change it, it's that it doesn't matter if facebook changes it, facebook being involved at all will kill it as a device for gaming. It's dead already and it's not even alive yet.

 

[gamegod25]

Honestly I'm completely indifferent toward Oculus Rift just like other tech fads such a 3D and motion controls. Its impressive on a technical level and a cute toy but that's all it is. Facebook can do what they like because I had zero interest in ever using it myself anyway.

 

[Andy of Comix Inc]

I find it fascinating that people are struggling to separate Facebook the company from Facebook the service. I mean, yeah, sure, I guess that makes sense, but I find it unreasonable that Facebook would buy a PC headset and then turn it into a Facebook headset. Because that wouldn't even slightly help Facebook at all. What they might do is try to broaden the scope; they aren't going to close it off even more, though. Think about what advantage Facebook as a corporation has to own this technology and I think you'll find it really isn't compatible with their pre-existing services.

 

[Therumancer]

My basic attitude is that we're looking at the Langsdell type patent trolls of tomorrow getting ready today. The bottom line is that Virtual Reality will at some point happen assuming someone can figure out a way to interface with the human brain that's safe enough for a consumer product. What we're calling VR right now isn't real VR of course as goggles and such don't come close to "fake but as good as real", but do represent an intermediary step that will probably last a good while at some point. By having control of things like "Oculus Rift" it puts companies like Facebook that are thinking in the long term into a position to declare whoever makes it viable the producers of a derivative product. This allows them to demand a share of the profits, or perhaps more likely, produce their own version under the label they own without needing the permission of whomever made the final steps that put it over the edge. Of course I suspect things like this are going to ultimately slow down the rate of innovation because as time goes on people are going to become more wary of the patens, IPs, and copyrights companies hoard and sit on just waiting for an opportunity to swoop in on someone like a vulture.

I imagine this isn't a popular theory, but that's my guess, since I honestly don't see "Oculus Rift" becoming more of a niche product (as Jim points out) and it will be amazing if Facebook makes back it's 2 billion dollars, never mind manages to actually take that next big step now.

Truthfully the company I would have liked to see get their hands on it probably would have been Google, since Google is already working with those "Google Glass" sets which are basically smartphones you wear as glasses. Right now they make people nervous, but I feel they are a common sense evolution of technology on a lot of levels and will catch on more as the technology is perfected. Oculus Rift has some interesting ideas as well and blending the two together could very well create some interesting hybrid technologies for gaming and general use, even if gaming isn't exactly Google's thing.

To put things into perspective, as an initial niche product, an early step towards VR might be to create some kind of visual overlay for playing paintball, laser tag, and the like, allowing you to see the generic set where you have your little wars as some kind of actual space battlefield or war zone for example. Not to mention how the weapons themselves could be linked to the goggles. Now granted this is running around and spazzing out even worse than a Wii, but as I said it would be a niche thing for hobbyists that are already spending a ton of money, and itself could pioneer technologies where you could say do the same thing in some kind of suspension harness in a virtual world (ie an overlay you react to, without actually having to go anywhere) like certain retro science fiction movies.

To be honest when I think of Oculus Rift combined with Facebook, all I can think of is a different means of video conferencing. They really don't have any other technology or plans that seem like a good fit off the top of my head. At the best it seems they might try and create a product competing with the "Glass" market in what is already a highly niche audience without even trying to take it in directions like the whole "overlay for paintball or lazer tag" idea.

 

[Karadalis]

What i find funny about this Jimquisition is...

If i remember correctly he spend an entire different episode lambasting the "It could be worse..." crowd that allways pops up when some shady company scheme is to defend...

And now he does it himselfe... with the same arguments... that he decried in the past.

So far only a couple of people here picked up on that.

You did it Jim... you started your own religion... you can contradict yourselfe and most people wont even notice no more... infact they will just nod their head and say "well if you look at it that way..."

Awesome.. simply awesome.

 

[wAriot]

I'm willing to bet that 99% of the people that says "I'm uninterested in this", "this was just going to be a gimmick", "it is just a toy", haven't used it.

I seriously can't emphasize enough how good that device felt to me. I've literally never met anyone, or talked with anyone that I've the certainty they used the Rift, that was disappointed or indifferent. Even the non-gaming apps, like being able to watch a video in your computer as if you were in a cinema, they are amazing.

And honestly, it makes me kind of angry that people just hand waves the OR, "it's just another Virtual Boy" (why are you posting in this thread, anyway?). No, it's not. It's far from it. It would have been a breakthrough in technology, the next step not only in gaming, but in how we use most technology.

Now? Well, who knows. It depends on what Zuckerberg plans to do with it, and how people receives it. At the very least, I'm pretty sure that even if the OR ends up being a commercial disaster, it will open the doors for many other similar devices, maybe even better ones. So hopefully, not everything will be bad.

 

[Lightknight]

I'm willing to bet that 99% of the people that says "I'm uninterested in this", "this was just going to be a gimmick", "it is just a toy", haven't used it.

I seriously can't emphasize enough how good that device felt to me. I've literally never met anyone, or talked with anyone that I've the certainty they used the Rift, that was disappointed or indifferent. Even the non-gaming apps, like being able to watch a video in your computer as if you were in a cinema, they are amazing.

And honestly, it makes me kind of angry that people just hand waves the OR, "it's just another Virtual Boy" (why are you posting in this thread, anyway?). No, it's not. It's far from it. It would have been a breakthrough in technology, the next step not only in gaming, but in how we use most technology.

Now? Well, who knows. It depends on what Zuckerberg plans to do with it, and how people receives it. At the very least, I'm pretty sure that even if the OR ends up being a commercial disaster, it will open the doors for many other similar devices, maybe even better ones. So hopefully, not everything will be bad.

I've heard amazing things as well. There are videos all over the place of people enjoying it.

A lot of people had issues with the original prototype though. It's all fun and games until you get a headache and throwup. But that was a hurdle and they've since overcome it. I'd like to try the DK2 sometime. It touts having finally removed that problem which is a huge success if true but I don't doubt it as other people are saying that it alleviated the problem too.

I'm excited to see the consumer release. I've been itching to buy the DK1 and DK2 but have managed to hold back.

 

[Wisq]

Regarding Jim's assertion that Facebook has a "pretty decent history of not really messing with the things it buys": No, no they don't. See [a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Facebook"]a list of Facebook's acquisitions[/a]. How many do you recognise? How many have Wikipedia pages (meaning they actually went on to do anything notable), and how many are more than just stubs? How many of those pages say "is" instead of "was" in the first sentence?

Of the 39 company acquisitions prior to 2014 (i.e. not counting domain names etc.), I count a total of three that meet the above criteria. And one of those companies is reported as winding up their projects so they can focus on Facebook instead. That's not really the kind of success rate you can point to as "not really messing with the things it buys". In fact, I would venture to say that this sentiment is based solely on Instragram -- which Facebook tried to mess with, but failed.

I'm willing to bet that 99% of the people that says "I'm uninterested in this", "this was just going to be a gimmick", "it is just a toy", haven't used it.

I seriously can't emphasize enough how good that device felt to me. I've literally never met anyone, or talked with anyone that I've the certainty they used the Rift, that was disappointed or indifferent.

Well, while I can't offer you the certainty that I used it (other than my word), I was indeed a little disappointed. The 3D effect was decent, but it began to fog up almost immediately, and the pixellation was immediately obvious; I felt like I was looking through a screen door.

These are things that I've no doubt they can fix by release, but keep in mind that those of us who lived through and took part in the 1990s VR craze are going to be a little less amazed and a little more cynical when everyone tells us that VR is amazing and here to stay (this time). The technology has improved, and the cost and weight has decreased, but you're still ultimately strapping something onto your head, and I'm not sure how much I would continue to use it after the initial thrill wore off.

For comparison: My gaming computer is right near a not-super-quiet air conditioner, and I have a high quality headset on the desk right next to me (with all the Creative headphone surround effects enabled), while my speakers are just a simple pair of stereo speakers. Yet for all that I love good audio and I know that I could get so much deeper immersion if I just put the headphones on, I still tend to leave them off. I put them on if I'm doing voice comms, or if I'm really keen on immersing myself, but the rest of the time, convenience wins over strapping stuff onto my head. Same goes for putting on my TrackIR (when it's supported), or setting up my high quality driving wheel and real hydraulic pedals, or my massively programmable HOTAS stick + throttle + rudder pedals setup, or etc.

And so I tend to agree with Jim here: These technologies arrive, they're a big fad for a bit, and then they fade away and things go back to normal. Flat 2D screens, basic controller/KB+M input. Until the day when we're all wearing smart contact lenses and permanently living in augmented reality, I'm not sure we'll ever move away from that most basic setup.

 

[nevarran]

There you go, miniature Jim.
You're fired, Sterling!

 

[Strazdas]

i wonder why are you punching dogs in 7 days to die in a video about VR. also wow you scavanged your old videos with this one, i like.

Oculus while not a true VR is as close as it gets right now, and i always wanted true VR (like the one in Caprica) to be around. too bad now that has no chance of sucess. Facebook IS worse company than videogame ones. You mention Instagram as an example, whne instagram is in fact terrible service. While granted it was so back when Facebook bought it, thats still hardly a good point. Also Zuckberg has already said enough to deduct that they will interfere with Oculus.

P.S. you go about how you would want valve to take it over (actually valve is working on its VR set too) and then attack origin uplay and the like. Thing is, Origin lately has become better than Steam, so yeah, i would love if Origin had been the buyer. It looks like EA done one thing right with Origin - they hired actual gamers to run it.

Gonna post it here, because hey why not.

Jim, is there any way you can enlist (in credits) the titles of the games you are showing through the episodes? Some of them are recognizable, some are not, but seems interesting/odd/insane/worth further look. It's a small thing but clears things up and will save some time for your viewers to do other stuff, like building you a shrine or prepare some sacrifices. Probably both.

if you follow jim on Youtube, he uses a lot of footage from those videos, so there are titles there. of course its mor work than just reading them up, but the channel is worth viewing anyway.

 

[VoidOfOne]

This whole thing reminds me of the time when it was announced that Bayonetta 2 was going to be a Wii U exclusive.

-Lots of hate responces
-Little understanding of the issue from many people
-Suicide threats...

Yeah, just another day on the internet.


P.S.

No way is Origin remotely better than Steam. Or even the same. Or even just okay.

 

[karamazovnew]

Some people seem to forget about one small but important community of PC gamers: the simmers. Patient people who are either strafing Russian tanks in their A-10C, tearing the wings of unfortunate B17s in War Thunder, landing for the 156th time in Hong Kong or spinning around on the Corkscrew on Laguna Seca. People who have already spent a LOT of money on things like custom joysticks and wheels, people who have put up with triple screens and Track IR. These guys hear the phrase "VR is an old gimmick, who cares about this Rift thing?" and they just die a little inside, slowly, painfully.

 

[AvangionQ]

The thing about VR goggles, the primary concern is probably hardware weight ... anything more than a few ounces, it's not going to be comfortable, it's not going to sell.