he just couldn't wait until 1st of april

So Valve supposedly created a better VR set, but wanted to help Oculus with the technology.
Another alternative is Sony's Morpheus.

Fuck Zuckerberg. I was pretty hyped for oculus but all of it is gone now. Oculus was actually a crowdfunded project and this must feel like a kick in the balls to all backers.

heh, Notch already cancelled oculus version of minecraft

Huh how can this be a kick in the balls to all the backers?
You don't get economy do you?

They invested in a company for 2.4million which now gets bought for 2billion. So the investors will get a multiple of their money's worth back in either cash or stock in facebook.

(it's not as simple as just dividing the 2 numbers to calculate profit but it's a "fair assumption" that the investors will have all at least 6 folded their investment (it heavily depends on the kind of deal they made though))

The only thing that might be "not part of the deal" is for the people who pre-ordered a device. They will now get it in a facebook box rather than an occulus one.

He means "backers" in the context of kickstarter "backers".

They are quite clear what you get for your money (poster -> T-Shirt -> dev kit etc), so nobody has anything to bitch about IMO (except did anyone get the BFG build? I thought Zenimax blocked the release of that? or was it just not included in the standard / source releases?).

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/15233799...o-the-game

ahhhhh....
Ok seems like "kickstarter" has a very different meaning of the word "backer" than I expected ;)

I can only see people using this if their investment is somewhat guaranteed though (aka if company x does not meet their own set requirements to the 'backers' the 'backers' should be refunded....).
I don't see that anywhere on the site though....

I wouldn't advise this sort of dealing though hehe..... I would've perhaps invested in the occulus rift company through regular investment plans though. (I didn't really like the risk though so I didn't actually search if it was possible to invest in them ;p)

I don't see a problem with this sort of backing, but you do have to see it as either just straight donating, or as buying the "reward" that you get and not as any kind of investment. I imagine much of the rage on the kickstarter comments page is probably from people who haven't backed it anyway.

BTW, the other thread is locked so I'll reply here - Armadillo is still JC's company but he put it into "hibernation mode". I believe that was because it was costing ~$1million / year to keep it going, and they weren't progressing as fast as he'd wanted (got side-tracked for a while doing "paid" jobs, but that was distracting them from their goals so started turning them down instead, hence the losses).

Maybe if he got a sizable lump of the FB money that could fund it for a while if he wanted to, but who knows who gets what from this deal - certainly not us.

Well I haven't read the kickstarters system completely... But it seems as though there should be quite a good safety for the backers.
As in for a deal like this they shouldn't have any "risk" for their reward. And ye without any risk you can just see it as buying a product (reward).

Usually backers take the risk of losing their investment or having it pay out. The larger the risk of losing the investment the larger the potential pay out should be.
This notion of backer kinda put me on the wrong foot ;)


As for JC I'm pretty confident that he has some sort of stock in occulus. Although I'm completely unaware of how large this stock is and what type of stock that would be. I just don't think that he would just be a regular employee which gets a fixed salary each month as CTO.
It "could" be that way though (that he just gets a fixed salary) but then JC should hire someone as personal advisor. But I'm pretty sure that he's either being well advised or has a lot of knowledge about these things himself.
You don't resign from the possition that he had at ID without any good advise on your financial situation hehe...

Meh. I'd rather not live a sedentary life accomplishing everything I need to while sitting on a couch with goggles on my face.

If you get the same neurotransmitter reactions from virtual reality then why not? To your brain it'll be just as real.

muscular atrophy ftw

Meh. I'd rather not live a sedentary life accomplishing everything I need to while sitting on a couch with goggles on my face.

But what is it you're accomplishing and where and how will it benefit you?

I was referring to the given examples: watching tennis, face time with a doctor.

meh

Now: Carmack back to id.

I hope facebook someday acquires the Quake license.

cenek invited you to try: Quake Life Saga

Official statement by the Occulus Rift team: http://www.oculusvr.com/blog/oculus-joins-facebook/

We started Oculus with a vision of delivering incredible, affordable, and ubiquitous consumer virtual reality to the world. We’ve come a long way in the last 18 months: from foam core prototypes built in a garage to an incredible community of active and talented developers with more than 75,000 development kits ordered. In the process, we’ve defined what consumer virtual reality needs to be and what it’s going to require to deliver it.

A few months ago, Mark, Chris, and Cory from the Facebook team came down to visit our office, see the latest demos, and discuss how we could work together to bring our vision to millions of people. As we talked more, we discovered the two teams shared an even deeper vision of creating a new platform for interaction that allows billions of people to connect in a way never before possible.

Today, we’re pleased to announce that we’ve joined forces with Facebook to create the best virtual reality platform in the world.

At first glance, it might not seem obvious why Oculus is partnering with Facebook, a company focused on connecting people, investing in internet access for the world and pushing an open computing platform. But when you consider it more carefully, we’re culturally aligned with a focus on innovating and hiring the best and brightest; we believe communication drives new platforms; we want to contribute to a more open, connected world; and we both see virtual reality as the next step.

Most important, Facebook understands the potential for VR. Mark and his team share our vision for virtual reality’s potential to transform the way we learn, share, play, and communicate. Facebook is a company that believes that anything is possible with the right group of people, and we couldn’t agree more.

This partnership is one of the most important moments for virtual reality: it gives us the best shot at truly changing the world. It opens doors to new opportunities and partnerships, reduces risk on the manufacturing and work capital side, allows us to publish more made-for-VR content, and lets us focus on what we do best: solving hard engineering challenges and delivering the future of VR.


Over the next 10 years, virtual reality will become ubiquitous, affordable, and transformative, and it begins with a truly next-generation gaming experience. This partnership ensures that the Oculus platform is coming, and that it’s going to change gaming forever.

We’ll see you in the Metaverse!

– Palmer, Brendan, John and the Oculus team

*edit 1*: Early sight of Zuckerberg at Occulus Rift headquarters (29.01.14): http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/1wf6m..._works_in/

*edit 2*: Palmer Luckey answers questions on reddit regards "The future of VR": http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/21cy9n/the_future_of_vr/

*edit 3*: Notable question on reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/21cy9...vr/cgbucep

Palmer, as a die-hard fan and supporter since the first day that the kickstarter went live, I am legitimately disappointed by this news, not to mention your response. I feel like your post does not address any of the issues that most people are having, and instead relies on PR doublespeech to avoid our questions. I feel like you have not answered any of the main issues that we are having, such as:

- Facebook is known for it's intrusive tracking of users, not to mention it's extreme focus on advertisement, intrusive logins, and focus on linking to real-life data collection. The appeal of Oculus (as compared to Sony, for example) is because it is on a PC platform, and thus allows us, the developers, freedom over what we want to do with it. How are you going to guarantee that this partnership will not cause the Rift to become "commercialized", so to speak; for example, targeted ads overlaid over games, intrusive tracking of applications or programs that we run, brickwalling indie developers from the rift, and allowing our personal information to be sold/marketed/given to facebook?

- Facebook, although undebatedly a massive company, is beginning to lose a lot of its teenage population due to the more widespread use of it by the older population. The Rift is absolutely targeted towards the gaming population, which tends to be teenage to early 20s/30s, which is the exact population that Facebook is currently losing. By partnering with Facebook, you are gaining access to a massive userbase of people that the rift is not targeted towards, which people might feel is a very bad move. In fact, it's arguable that you are actually targeting the userbase which has the highest chance of actively opposing the Rift, due to how the middle-aged/older population tends to view technology and video games, and especially the negative consequences associated with them. Can you guarantee that this will not negatively affect the Rift's health?

- The fact that Oculus has been acquired by Facebook, not partnering with Facebook. I noticed that in your post, you were very careful to use the term partnering, which suggests that you retain freedom and complete control over Oculus. However, news sites are stating that this is an acquisition, and the price point thrown around of $2b suggests that this is correct. What we fear is not that Oculus will be partnering with Facebook, but that you are selling out the company to Facebook and no longer retain control over Oculus. I can say that I, personally, support Oculus because I believed in the goals and visions that you had. However, now that you have been acquired by Facebook and no longer retain control over your own company, how can you guarantee that you will continue pursuing these goals?

I know that due to the massive negative backlash right now, chances are you will not reply to this post. However, I hope that sooner or later, you will provide us with answers to these issues, since I feel that you stand to lose a large section of your fanbase.

And here is the official answer: http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/21cy9...vr/cgby5hj

I am sorry that you are disappointed. To be honest, if I were you, I would probably have a similar initial impression! There are a lot of reasons why this is a good thing, many of which are not yet public. A lot of people obviously feel the same way you do, so I definitely want to address your points:

The appeal of Oculus (as compared to Sony, for example) is because it is on a PC platform, and thus allows us, the developers, freedom over what we want to do with it.

None of that will change. Oculus continues to operate independently! We are going to remain as indie/developer/enthusiast friendly as we have always been, if not more so. This deal lets us dedicate a lot of resources to developer relations, technical help, engine optimizations, and our content investment/publishing/sales platform. We are not going to track you, flash ads at you, or do anything invasive.

The Rift is absolutely targeted towards the gaming population, which tends to be teenage to early 20s/30s, which is the exact population that Facebook is currently losing. By partnering with Facebook, you are gaining access to a massive userbase of people that the rift is not targeted towards, which people might feel is a very bad move.

Almost everyone at Oculus is a gamer, and virtual reality will certainly be led by the games industry, largely because it is the only industry that already has the talent and tools required to build awesome interactive 3D environments. In the long run, though, there are going to be a lot of other industries that use VR in huge ways, ways that are not exclusive to gamers; the current focus on gaming is a reflection of the current state of VR, not the long term potential. Education, communication, training, rehabilitation, gaming and film are all going to be major drivers for VR, and they will reach a very wide audience. We are not targeting social media users, we are targeting everyone who has a reason to use VR.

What we fear is not that Oculus will be partnering with Facebook, but that you are selling out the company to Facebook and no longer retain control over Oculus. I can say that I, personally, support Oculus because I believed in the goals and visions that you had.

This acquisition/partnership gives us more control of our destiny, not less! We don't have to compromise on anything, and can afford to make decisions that are right for the future of virtual reality, not our current revenue. Keep in mind that we already have great partners who invested heavily in Oculus and got us to where we are, so we have not had full control of our destiny for some time. Facebook believes in our long term vision, and they want us to continue executing on our own roadmap, not control what we do. I would never have done this deal if it meant changing our direction, and Facebook has a good track record of letting companies work independently post-acquisition.

There is a lot of related good news on the way. I am swamped right now, but I do plan on addressing everyone's concerns. I think everyone will see why this is so incredible when the big picture is clear.

Yeah, I'm gonna read all that marketing bullshit.

If you can take the last 2 paragraphs at face value your worries are addressed.

Nice summary

As times have changed, the demands of the marketplace on our company have increased markedly. We recognize that competitors operating at world-class levels of performance - in quality, cycle time, cost efficiencies, and new product development - are a likely part of our future. We are now better able to understand the importance of our customers' needs, and quality has a new meaning. To become a world-class company will demand flexibility, teamwork, competencies, and focused improvements that we would have found nearly inconceivable a few years ago; and it won't be possible without the full involvement and engagement of every person in the company. World-class companies have recognized that effective leadership and management of people is absolutely critical to achieve the high levels of quality and customer satisfaction they need to compete in today's market. A company's employees are viewed as a valuable source of competitive advantage, and managers assume responsibility for designing optimal structures, systems, and practices. The following human resource policies are practiced by world-class companies: People are strategically important to the company's competitiveness. A work environment based on a set of shared values is a key element to improving quality, innovation, and productivity. Integrity is fundamental. People have a shared destiny with the company. Human resource systems and practices are designed to promote competence and commitment.

Finally someone ends it... :P

That VR thing will probably be shit for 30 more years.
All it has now is some rooms you can look around, fall and shit + some chick that can jack you off..
Is basically like doodle jump was popular on smartphones, it's simple and pretty shit but everyone played it, beacuse it was touchscreen . Once it has uuuber HD graphics like smartphones games have now, I'll be interested. For now VR doesn't interest me. Overrated

I guess with facebook buying it it instantly makes it perceived as a success to the outside world which is a big thing in getting it to take off and it was so vulnerable to failing, especially with sony getting involved.

As big as facebook is, its not going to be able to limit what happens with VR content as a seperate entity which is all fans should care about.

When PC's came out you generally had to buy them from shops, a few years down the line you could buy components and build your own, it will be the same for VR if it ever takes off.

in other words, you'll have a variety of kits to choose from in the future, at the moment it only seems a big deal because you do not yet have that option, but if VR takes off, the rift will be nothing more than the equiv of a graphics card vendor.

Software and content will always trump any piece of hardware and you can't buy or control that.

facebook buys oculus---->profit----->carmack's wallet----->"i'm going, going.....back, back...to id, id......"------>quake 5 confirmed

Suckerberg buying the company where John Carmack works? I want to go back to the 90's! :/

love how thousands dislike the post via their facebook account :D

I don't have a FB account, but I thought only "likes" were possible and no "unlikes"?

dislike verbal, as in postings.

A bit strange, I guess many developers may jump to PS4 or something now.

http://notch.net/2014/03/virtual-reality-is-g...the-world/

I don't think so. As much as I dislike facebook/google+ and the likes, I think pretty much only notch would stop having business with Oculus just for that.

Agreed, I think Notch enjoys playing the rebel a bit, that's fine he's rich and minecraft was a success so he can be that guy if he wants.

But someone else will do a better version of minecraft anyway.

https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/448631990560903169

"I suppose I will get a FB account now, so that may lead to some writing a little longer than tweet length..."

We're doomed

"At first glance, it might not seem obvious why Oculus is partnering with Facebook, a company focused on connecting people, investing in internet access for the world and pushing an open computing platform. But when you consider it more carefully, we’re culturally aligned with a focus on innovating and hiring the best and brightest; we believe communication drives new platforms; we want to contribute to a more open, connected world; and we both see virtual reality as the next step"

At least say that you accepted the deal because it was a very profitable deal for you. Don't send us that apologist BS. They screwed everyone's expectations on this.
From the c'hapter 'How to turn down a revolutionary product with big money

VR is the same as 3d, not technology wise, but it will hopefully end just as 3d movies has. I cant imagine EVER being able to use VR when just a quick glance i've had on 3d with glasses made me wanna puke within 0.5sec..

VR isnt the same as 3D. And not everybody pukes while playing with 3d glasses (played a lot of games, when you get it its pretty awesome, makes your suspension of desbelief even stronger) I felt weird some of the first times but then it got natural.

no, not the same at all i know, maybe the turning the head for the world to change makes a difference in puke factor. I just know i cant watch 3d

Bro, 3d glasses is like a retarded version of a VR display. The things that made you puke with 3d, gonna be solved or at least improved a lot with VR. The first and most obvious, when you play with 3d glasses youre seeing the 3d display but your eyes are also processing information from outside of your monitor, while on VR your brain is only processing coherent stuff.

Do you really think Carmack and Abrash gonna work on this shit for years if they think it will only be good for paper bags factories due to extensive puking? I dont. I chose to believe :D

we'll have to see. I guess you dont have a problem witn sea sickness?? :)

Never traveled by sea or air :x

But i cant even read while going in a car/bus, cause it makes me feel nauseous lol.

Motion sickness caused by discontinuity between the visual input and your physical movements is precisely why carmack has been studying and reducing the latency in the system for years.

alot of other factors than only latency though.

And I did not chip in ten grand to seed a first investment round to build value for a Facebook acquisition.

3D glasses are so immensely overrated.

They don't provide anything more than what we have now, they just give it in a different form.

3D television really looked like the true shit, and look what it is now.

3D glasses will have more succes than 3D televisions, but they won't be anything ground breaking.

They will never be true "virtual reality", because your eyes may give you some inputs, but your body is still and gives different ones.

The onyl true virtual reality requires direct brain-computer interfaces.

Depth perception makes me feel much more immersed in the game.