13 ms·

Well, they're doing a very poor job with the Oculus store, why would this one be any different? I'm not saying they don't have the money or technical talent, b

Well, they're doing a very poor job with the Oculus store, why would this one be any different? I'm not saying they don't have the money or technical talent, but clearly the politics of Facebook are morally onerous to gamers. Everything about the Rift should have been a slam dunk. It had the mindshare, pr, capital, early adopter advantage, etc. Hell they even have John Carmack. Now its the red headed stepchild of the VR wars. Oculus went from a gamer friendly company to what seems to be something run by a bunch of milquetoast MBA's with zero interest or experience in gaming. Cut-throat deals like exclusives, contradictory and anti-consumer policies, confusing PR (why is Luckey yelling at people on reddit?), inability to catch up (no motion controls yet?), etc have hurt the brand and the Vive seems like the go-to for VR right now. In a couple months the PSVR will be out, with motion controls. Where exactly does that leave Oculus? As the has-been of the industry? I can't see Facebook winning over the PC gamer crowd. Casuals have mobile, they're not installing this thing. Beating Steam means beating Steams street cred which its been carefully building for over a decade. I just don't think companies like Facebook have the culture to win here. The types of people who can work a monopoly well in the social media space are pretty much the worst kinds of people you want in the gaming industry, and Oculus's failures are proof of that.

onewaystreet 10y ago
> Oculus went from a gamer friendly company to what seems to be something run by a bunch of milquetoast MBA's with zero interest or experience in gaming Oculus isn't a gaming company and Facebook didn't buy it for it to be one. Facebook sees VR as the next big social platform. > Oculus's failures are proof of that The Rift has outsold the Vive 10 to 1. And the Gear has sold over a million units.
- FeepingCreature 10y ago
  > The Rift has outsold the Vive 10 to 1. Cite? That'd require a million Rift CV1s sold, which seems excessive.
- aphextron 10y ago
  >The Rift has outsold the Vive 10 to 1. And the Gear has sold over a million units. Completely false. Vive has outsold CV1 2:1 so far. Best approximate numbers right now are 50,000 Rifts to 100,000 Vives.
  - onewaystreet 10y ago
    Where are you getting that 50k Rifts number from? Every estimate on Rift sales has it at around 500k.
    - c0nfused 10y ago
      The last numbers I saw were here: http://www.roadtovr.com/htc-vive-sales-figures-data-100000-steamspy-data/ http://www.roadtovr.com/htc-vive-sales-figures-data-100000-s...
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
  Unlikely. All the numbers I can find suggest Rift and Vive within 50% of each other - either way, depending who you ask. Is anyone really interested in social VR? Converge crashed and burned, and competitors like vTime are more or less just Second Life without the building. FB thinks having immediate access to the social graph will change that. I'm not convinced - because it's hard to make Avatars that don't look comically uncool, and to be compelling, the interaction needs to offer a lot more than Facetime/Skype++ in some fake locations.
r00fus 10y ago
It's sort of like Facebook's face-plant with their Facebook phone and Android launcher. Facebook could have been the built-in contact list that updated itself (a huge feature for even a basic phone), and combined with FB messenger and photos, could have done 90% of what many of it's users (e.g. my wife) would want. They completely failed then walked it all back. Remember when Zuck declared that Android was their main OS [1]? How's that working out? [1] http://gizmodo.com/5937344/facebook-for-android-is-so-crappy-zucks-reportedly-forcing-his-crew-to-use-it http://gizmodo.com/5937344/facebook-for-android-is-so-crappy...
- fossuser 10y ago
  Wouldn't that have required people putting their phone number on Facebook? This is something basically nobody I know does other than me. I'm not sure why - seems like an obviously useful thing. Is this where people arbitrarily decide to draw their privacy line?
Jordrok 10y ago
This. Facebook as a company has no idea what it's doing when it comes to gaming. Remember when Farmville was king and social gaming on Facebook was going to be the future? Facebook is a platform for advertisers, but users are the ones who buy games.

onewaystreet 10y ago

> Oculus went from a gamer friendly company to what seems to be something run by a bunch of milquetoast MBA's with zero interest or experience in gaming Oculus isn't a gaming company and Facebook didn't buy it for it to be one. Facebook sees VR as the next big social platform. > Oculus's failures are proof of that The Rift has outsold the Vive 10 to 1. And the Gear has sold over a million units.

FeepingCreature 10y ago
> The Rift has outsold the Vive 10 to 1. Cite? That'd require a million Rift CV1s sold, which seems excessive.
aphextron 10y ago
>The Rift has outsold the Vive 10 to 1. And the Gear has sold over a million units. Completely false. Vive has outsold CV1 2:1 so far. Best approximate numbers right now are 50,000 Rifts to 100,000 Vives.
- onewaystreet 10y ago
  Where are you getting that 50k Rifts number from? Every estimate on Rift sales has it at around 500k.
  - c0nfused 10y ago
    The last numbers I saw were here: http://www.roadtovr.com/htc-vive-sales-figures-data-100000-steamspy-data/ http://www.roadtovr.com/htc-vive-sales-figures-data-100000-s...
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
Unlikely. All the numbers I can find suggest Rift and Vive within 50% of each other - either way, depending who you ask. Is anyone really interested in social VR? Converge crashed and burned, and competitors like vTime are more or less just Second Life without the building. FB thinks having immediate access to the social graph will change that. I'm not convinced - because it's hard to make Avatars that don't look comically uncool, and to be compelling, the interaction needs to offer a lot more than Facetime/Skype++ in some fake locations.

r00fus 10y ago

It's sort of like Facebook's face-plant with their Facebook phone and Android launcher. Facebook could have been the built-in contact list that updated itself (a huge feature for even a basic phone), and combined with FB messenger and photos, could have done 90% of what many of it's users (e.g. my wife) would want. They completely failed then walked it all back. Remember when Zuck declared that Android was their main OS [1]? How's that working out? [1] http://gizmodo.com/5937344/facebook-for-android-is-so-crappy-zucks-reportedly-forcing-his-crew-to-use-it http://gizmodo.com/5937344/facebook-for-android-is-so-crappy...

fossuser 10y ago
Wouldn't that have required people putting their phone number on Facebook? This is something basically nobody I know does other than me. I'm not sure why - seems like an obviously useful thing. Is this where people arbitrarily decide to draw their privacy line?

Jordrok 10y ago

This. Facebook as a company has no idea what it's doing when it comes to gaming. Remember when Farmville was king and social gaming on Facebook was going to be the future? Facebook is a platform for advertisers, but users are the ones who buy games.