5 ms·

It's so satisfying watching them get their just desserts after betraying their Kickstarter backers by taking the Facebook money and then going back on all their

by tk32 10y ago

It's so satisfying watching them get their just desserts after betraying their Kickstarter backers by taking the Facebook money and then going back on all their words about keeping the platform free for everybody. Meanwhile that acquisition kicked off a race among the other big players which Valve appears to be winning while having the best features. I mean, Valve isn't perfect, but they're a lot better than Facebook. Things seem to have worked out for the best for once.

WillPostForFood 10y ago
They already got their billions from Facebook, so just desserts at this point mostly affect the consumers who just got locked in, months after their purchase.
shasheene 10y ago
One thing worth noting is all Kickstarter backers get a free Oculus CV1 from Facebook (that's of course in addition to the DK1 they received after backing in August 2012). That decision takes away a lot of the "betrayal" of the Facebook acquisition - for backers it's an incredible return on investment (that was unlikely to happen if it weren't for Facebook)
- errantspark 10y ago
  Can't agree more, especially since the secondary market is quite good right now and you can very easily sell it and get a Vive. ;)
- errantspark 10y ago
  Can't agree more, especially since the secondary market is quite good right now and you can very easily sell it and turn it into a free Vive. ;)
- errantspark 10y ago
  Can't agree more, especially since the secondary market is quite good right now and you can very easily sell it and turn it into a free Vive. ;)
- justratsinacoat 10y ago
  I don't share your conviction that ROI is far more important than any ethical consideration. I seem to recall the KS pitch was full of aspirational language about a democratized future of VR spearheaded by a close-knit team of diehards who wouldn't fall prey to Big Whatever. You're suggesting that the majority of backers will be mollified by an artifact of the very forces that Oculus promised to avoid; I'm sure some of them will be.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - comex 10y ago
    Not sure you recall correctly. I checked the Kickstarter [1], and I didn't see anything along those lines in the video, the description (which doesn't seem to have been modified, per archive.org), or the first few updates. If Luckey talked about that, I think it was somewhere else. [1] https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1523379957/oculus-rift-step-into-the-game/description https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1523379957/oculus-rift-...
    - 1stop 10y ago
      The video you linked has competing companies all taking about how good it will be to integrate (valve included)... you are right there is no line like "it will be an open platform" but they heavily imply it will be an open platform
- Latty 10y ago
  I backed the Kickstarter with a friend, backing at the level to get two of the dev kits, because we happened to be living together at the time. After explaining that situation, I was told that I would not get a CV1. I never expected to get the CV1 when I backed, so I'm not angry about that, it just sucks a bit to hear 'you are getting this for free' and then get told, no you are not.
bane 10y ago
I'm reminded again about this very prescient post: http://assayviaessay.blogspot.com/2014/03/virtual-spaces-real-data.html http://assayviaessay.blogspot.com/2014/03/virtual-spaces-rea...
ericjang 10y ago
I only learned this recently, but it's actually spelled "just deserts". Although desserts (sweet confections) are often associated with rewards, the word "deserts" refers to the element of distributive justice. Source: I wrote a paper about this for a class and got a C+.
- hola_hola 10y ago
  So why the c+? Seems rather informative. Just learned something new.
- lobster_johnson 10y ago
  Deserts is an archaic word meaning "reward", i.e. a kind of noun form of "deserve".
  - madaxe_again 10y ago
    It's those things left for you - which have been deserted.
    - mrec 10y ago
      No, that usage has a different etymology. Compare: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/desert#Etymology_1 https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/desert#Etymology_1 https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/desert#Etymology_3 https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/desert#Etymology_3
  - LogicFailsMe 10y ago
    "Just Desserts" would be a great name for a bakery, no?
    - EliRivers 10y ago
      http://www.justdesserts.com/ http://www.justdesserts.com/
      - 10y ago
napperjabber 10y ago
At first I defended the Facebook buyout because it seemed like a logical move. I feel Oculus was pressured into the buyout because valve was about to kill them. Truth is, Carmarck joining the team made it all that much sweeter. If you read through the lines of some of Palmer's communications, it's obvious that there is a rift between Oculus and Facebook that no one is talking about. Carmarck, being Carmarck keeps pushing even when the top tries to push you down. Reading the tweets, it's obvious that he remains focused on the technology, which is a good sign. In the end, I think Oculus is facing a backlash because of the buyout, and their 'simular' to Origin approach rings bells of many gamers and how EA continues to alienate them. Microsoft proved it could compete with the Xbox. Oculus just needs to change its game or get away from its overlord. Blizzard had some fallout with Diablo 3, it happens. The real question for Oculus, now is, what is your next move?
- khedoros 10y ago
  > Carmarck Carmack. Only one 'r' in the name.
  - napperjabber 10y ago
    Thanks for reminding me I'm on the internet.
zamalek 10y ago
> taking the Facebook It was at that point that I abandoned the platform. Wild conjecture isn't discouraged on Reddit and, over there, the creepy Facebook user tracking was predicted well in advance. Given the comments here on Palmer's diminishing public interaction, and the quotes in the article, I don't think the founders completely anticipated what Facebook would demand. Although I now have zero interest in the platform, I still can't help but feel a little sorry for them. They clearly still believe in that vision but do not have the autonomy to follow it through.

by tk32 10y ago

WillPostForFood 10y ago

They already got their billions from Facebook, so just desserts at this point mostly affect the consumers who just got locked in, months after their purchase.

shasheene 10y ago

One thing worth noting is all Kickstarter backers get a free Oculus CV1 from Facebook (that's of course in addition to the DK1 they received after backing in August 2012). That decision takes away a lot of the "betrayal" of the Facebook acquisition - for backers it's an incredible return on investment (that was unlikely to happen if it weren't for Facebook)

errantspark 10y ago
Can't agree more, especially since the secondary market is quite good right now and you can very easily sell it and get a Vive. ;)
errantspark 10y ago
Can't agree more, especially since the secondary market is quite good right now and you can very easily sell it and turn it into a free Vive. ;)
errantspark 10y ago
Can't agree more, especially since the secondary market is quite good right now and you can very easily sell it and turn it into a free Vive. ;)
justratsinacoat 10y ago
I don't share your conviction that ROI is far more important than any ethical consideration. I seem to recall the KS pitch was full of aspirational language about a democratized future of VR spearheaded by a close-knit team of diehards who wouldn't fall prey to Big Whatever. You're suggesting that the majority of backers will be mollified by an artifact of the very forces that Oculus promised to avoid; I'm sure some of them will be.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- comex 10y ago
  Not sure you recall correctly. I checked the Kickstarter [1], and I didn't see anything along those lines in the video, the description (which doesn't seem to have been modified, per archive.org), or the first few updates. If Luckey talked about that, I think it was somewhere else. [1] https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1523379957/oculus-rift-step-into-the-game/description https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1523379957/oculus-rift-...
  - 1stop 10y ago
    The video you linked has competing companies all taking about how good it will be to integrate (valve included)... you are right there is no line like "it will be an open platform" but they heavily imply it will be an open platform
Latty 10y ago
I backed the Kickstarter with a friend, backing at the level to get two of the dev kits, because we happened to be living together at the time. After explaining that situation, I was told that I would not get a CV1. I never expected to get the CV1 when I backed, so I'm not angry about that, it just sucks a bit to hear 'you are getting this for free' and then get told, no you are not.

bane 10y ago

I'm reminded again about this very prescient post: http://assayviaessay.blogspot.com/2014/03/virtual-spaces-real-data.html http://assayviaessay.blogspot.com/2014/03/virtual-spaces-rea...

ericjang 10y ago

I only learned this recently, but it's actually spelled "just deserts". Although desserts (sweet confections) are often associated with rewards, the word "deserts" refers to the element of distributive justice. Source: I wrote a paper about this for a class and got a C+.

hola_hola 10y ago
So why the c+? Seems rather informative. Just learned something new.
lobster_johnson 10y ago
Deserts is an archaic word meaning "reward", i.e. a kind of noun form of "deserve".
- madaxe_again 10y ago
  It's those things left for you - which have been deserted.
  - mrec 10y ago
    No, that usage has a different etymology. Compare: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/desert#Etymology_1 https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/desert#Etymology_1 https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/desert#Etymology_3 https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/desert#Etymology_3
- LogicFailsMe 10y ago
  "Just Desserts" would be a great name for a bakery, no?
  - EliRivers 10y ago
    http://www.justdesserts.com/ http://www.justdesserts.com/
    - 10y ago

napperjabber 10y ago

At first I defended the Facebook buyout because it seemed like a logical move. I feel Oculus was pressured into the buyout because valve was about to kill them. Truth is, Carmarck joining the team made it all that much sweeter. If you read through the lines of some of Palmer's communications, it's obvious that there is a rift between Oculus and Facebook that no one is talking about. Carmarck, being Carmarck keeps pushing even when the top tries to push you down. Reading the tweets, it's obvious that he remains focused on the technology, which is a good sign. In the end, I think Oculus is facing a backlash because of the buyout, and their 'simular' to Origin approach rings bells of many gamers and how EA continues to alienate them. Microsoft proved it could compete with the Xbox. Oculus just needs to change its game or get away from its overlord. Blizzard had some fallout with Diablo 3, it happens. The real question for Oculus, now is, what is your next move?

khedoros 10y ago
> Carmarck Carmack. Only one 'r' in the name.
- napperjabber 10y ago
  Thanks for reminding me I'm on the internet.

zamalek 10y ago

> taking the Facebook It was at that point that I abandoned the platform. Wild conjecture isn't discouraged on Reddit and, over there, the creepy Facebook user tracking was predicted well in advance. Given the comments here on Palmer's diminishing public interaction, and the quotes in the article, I don't think the founders completely anticipated what Facebook would demand. Although I now have zero interest in the platform, I still can't help but feel a little sorry for them. They clearly still believe in that vision but do not have the autonomy to follow it through.