11 ms·

For a guy who is otherwise rather easy going, Notch can be incredibly pragmatic and strident. Here, he has cut to heart of the issue. > And I did not chip in t

by skore 13y ago

For a guy who is otherwise rather easy going, Notch can be incredibly pragmatic and strident. Here, he has cut to heart of the issue. > And I did not chip in ten grand to seed a first investment round to build value for a Facebook acquisition. > Don’t get me wrong, VR is not bad for social. He is right - "social", especially in the way Facebook is doing it at the moment, is terrible for VR. Terrible for any technology that has such an incredible potential to change the world. This acquisition makes one thing very clear: VR does not need social. Social needs VR.

bduerst 13y ago
My guess is that when Oculus Rift found out about Sony coming to market, they knew they needed someone with deep pockets to speed up their implementation. They were probably in talks with a number of other companies, but Facebook jumped the gun and made an offer they couldn't refuse, in order to prevent their "competitor" from getting it. </speculation> I wonder if FB is going to use OR to rebirth Facebook games, or maybe make their own foray into the gaming industry.
- kamkazemoose 13y ago
  I'd be surprised if the Sony news had anything to do with this. These sorts of acquisitions don't happen overnight, they've likely been talking for months, doing due diligence and other research into the deal.
  - jeroen 13y ago
    Techcrunch says the deal was made in 5 days. Discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7469885 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7469885
    - ekianjo 13y ago
      The deal was made in 5 days, it does not mean they were not in touch before.
      - bps4484 13y ago
        They were almost certainly in touch before, but the deal being done in 5 days means that the sony announcement could have been the event that pressed the oculus team at look at an acquisition more seriously.
        ekianjo 13y ago
        I think it's the other way around. Because of Sony's involvment, I'd say investors from probably many large companies were pressed to buy stake in Occulus Rift ASAP to make a dent in the VR market should it become big. Facebook probably had the biggest offer on the table and that's the end of the story.
        threeseed 13y ago
        I doubt it was just money. Facebook has also shown that when they acquire companies they generally leave them alone. That is so much more important to a startup than just money.
        deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
    - satori99 13y ago
      Zuckerberg was spotted in the Occuls VR offices a month ago. http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/1wf6mg/so_no_way_to_confirm_this_but_my_friend_works_in/cgbt8au http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/1wf6mg/so_no_way_to_...
  - neolefty 13y ago
    Normally yes. But wasn't the Instagram deal done very quickly too?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
smacktoward 13y ago
> And I did not chip in ten grand to seed a first investment round to build value for a Facebook acquisition He really puts his finger on one of the reasons why this deal feels so weird here, I think. Nobody who contributed to the Oculus Kickstarter did so because they were hoping Oculus would get flipped to a mega-corp. They didn't do so because they wanted the Oculus team to have a big, splashy VC-style exit. They did so because they wanted the Oculus product. And the history of products that have been swallowed by mega-corps, after the swallowing, is not encouraging. It's an outcome that strikes directly at the heart of the Kickstarter ethos. Everybody wins in this deal -- except the people who donated to the Kickstarter. Those folks... well, they kind of end up looking like suckers.
- arasmussen 13y ago
  Who ever said those people aren't going to get the product? Why do you think the product will get swallowed up? > "Oculus will continue operating independently within Facebook" --Mark Zuckerberg
  - smacktoward 13y ago
    Yes, just as every CEO of every big company that has just acquired a smaller company has ever said, back unto the dawning of the world. Nothing is ever going to change, until suddenly it all does.
    - to3m 13y ago
      See, for example: http://www.gyford.com/phil/writing/2013/02/27/our-incredible-journey.php http://www.gyford.com/phil/writing/2013/02/27/our-incredible...
      - mcphage 13y ago
        That is a seriously depressing tumblr.
        13y ago
GBond 13y ago
> And I did not chip in ten grand to seed a first investment round to build value for a Facebook acquisition. The Kickstarter angle is interesting. I'd be peeved as well if I was a supporter and this happened. Aren't KS Projects by implication a "Project for the People" first and foremost? Should KS Backers at least get a small return for making a $2 Billion exit possible?
- batoure 13y ago
  I feel like 2014 will be the year of the big Kick Starter lawsuits where funders who feel betrayed by the projects they kicked in on turn angry. There have been number of movies funded that promised "downloadable versions" only to put those behind really awful drm websites on requirement of deals made with big companies to get the movies into theaters.
- ekianjo 13y ago
  > Should KS Backers at least get a small return for making a $2 Billion exit possible? No. You know exactly what you buy (or try to buy) when you support a Kickstarter project. There's no equity in the companies you support. Not at all.
  - devcpp 13y ago
    Legally, you're right. But if you were one of Oculus's founders and you were not a hypocrite, this would be a good way to promote Kickstarters like yours. Disclaimer: I have never used Kickstarter myself, and this one more data point against doing so. But I'm just pointing out what would be right.
sfaruque 13y ago
New word learned - Strident stri·dent strīdnt/Submit adjective 1. loud and harsh; grating. "his voice had become increasingly sharp, almost strident" synonyms: harsh, raucous, rough, grating, rasping, jarring, loud, shrill, screeching, piercing, ear-piercing
RandallBrown 13y ago
Is he pragmatic enough that he'll eat his words and release Minecraft on the Oculus Rift if it gets popular and Facebook doesn't actually ruin it?
ekianjo 13y ago
> He is right - "social", especially in the way Facebook is doing it at the moment, is terrible for VR. Terrible for any technology that has such an incredible potential to change the world. It's not just that. VR is not going to be a product that appeals to masses. I don't think it will change the world. It could impact the world of gaming, potentially, and only CERTAIN areas of gaming only. There are several reasons for that. First, it's a peripheral. You'll need to convince people to buy another 300-400 USD of gear on top of a powerful computer OR a PS4. The PS4 may be winning on the market, but peripherals have a bad History of not selling very well on consoles. Even the Kinect, which sold relatively quite a lot on Xbox360, failed to deliver anything really revolutionary. For PC gamers, you'll probably need a very powerful graphics card to make full use of it, and we already know that this kind of market is already a small minority in terms of PC users. There are several issues with VR as well: it's not something you can use to replace the screen completely. You'll probably feel dizzy, nauseous, tired after some time with it. Your eyes will end up hurting. It will work well with cockpit-like simulators (and there aren't many of them left anymore...) but not so well with FPS where camera movements have to be extremely fast. There are other games (3rd person view ones, top view games) where using an Occulus won't really make sense anyway. As for social applications, I don't know. It's already possible to do videoconference in pretty good quality but few companies actually use it, and still fly people all over the world because they find it works better to have face to face contact to solve issues and discuss projects. I'm not too sure the benefits of VR will outweigh its disadvantages in the everyday world. And this is coming from someone who badly wants a consumer Rift for gaming.
- qq66 13y ago
  Your characterization of VR applications seems limited to near-term applications of current or immediate-term technologies. What about when the device is $20 instead of $400? When it doesn't make you nauseous? When it's so close to face-to-face contact that you can replace 10 or 20 percent of your business travel?
  - ekianjo 13y ago
    > When it doesn't make you nauseous? When it's so close to face-to-face contact that you can replace 10 or 20 percent of your business travel? That's what I am saying, we are FAR from being there. If we even get there.

by skore 13y ago

bduerst 13y ago

My guess is that when Oculus Rift found out about Sony coming to market, they knew they needed someone with deep pockets to speed up their implementation. They were probably in talks with a number of other companies, but Facebook jumped the gun and made an offer they couldn't refuse, in order to prevent their "competitor" from getting it. </speculation> I wonder if FB is going to use OR to rebirth Facebook games, or maybe make their own foray into the gaming industry.

kamkazemoose 13y ago
I'd be surprised if the Sony news had anything to do with this. These sorts of acquisitions don't happen overnight, they've likely been talking for months, doing due diligence and other research into the deal.
- jeroen 13y ago
  Techcrunch says the deal was made in 5 days. Discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7469885 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7469885
  - ekianjo 13y ago
    The deal was made in 5 days, it does not mean they were not in touch before.
    - bps4484 13y ago
      They were almost certainly in touch before, but the deal being done in 5 days means that the sony announcement could have been the event that pressed the oculus team at look at an acquisition more seriously.
      - ekianjo 13y ago
        I think it's the other way around. Because of Sony's involvment, I'd say investors from probably many large companies were pressed to buy stake in Occulus Rift ASAP to make a dent in the VR market should it become big. Facebook probably had the biggest offer on the table and that's the end of the story.
        threeseed 13y ago
        I doubt it was just money. Facebook has also shown that when they acquire companies they generally leave them alone. That is so much more important to a startup than just money.
      - deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
  - satori99 13y ago
    Zuckerberg was spotted in the Occuls VR offices a month ago. http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/1wf6mg/so_no_way_to_confirm_this_but_my_friend_works_in/cgbt8au http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/1wf6mg/so_no_way_to_...
- neolefty 13y ago
  Normally yes. But wasn't the Instagram deal done very quickly too?
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

smacktoward 13y ago

> And I did not chip in ten grand to seed a first investment round to build value for a Facebook acquisition He really puts his finger on one of the reasons why this deal feels so weird here, I think. Nobody who contributed to the Oculus Kickstarter did so because they were hoping Oculus would get flipped to a mega-corp. They didn't do so because they wanted the Oculus team to have a big, splashy VC-style exit. They did so because they wanted the Oculus product. And the history of products that have been swallowed by mega-corps, after the swallowing, is not encouraging. It's an outcome that strikes directly at the heart of the Kickstarter ethos. Everybody wins in this deal -- except the people who donated to the Kickstarter. Those folks... well, they kind of end up looking like suckers.

arasmussen 13y ago
Who ever said those people aren't going to get the product? Why do you think the product will get swallowed up? > "Oculus will continue operating independently within Facebook" --Mark Zuckerberg
- smacktoward 13y ago
  Yes, just as every CEO of every big company that has just acquired a smaller company has ever said, back unto the dawning of the world. Nothing is ever going to change, until suddenly it all does.
  - to3m 13y ago
    See, for example: http://www.gyford.com/phil/writing/2013/02/27/our-incredible-journey.php http://www.gyford.com/phil/writing/2013/02/27/our-incredible...
    - mcphage 13y ago
      That is a seriously depressing tumblr.
      - 13y ago

GBond 13y ago

> And I did not chip in ten grand to seed a first investment round to build value for a Facebook acquisition. The Kickstarter angle is interesting. I'd be peeved as well if I was a supporter and this happened. Aren't KS Projects by implication a "Project for the People" first and foremost? Should KS Backers at least get a small return for making a $2 Billion exit possible?

batoure 13y ago
I feel like 2014 will be the year of the big Kick Starter lawsuits where funders who feel betrayed by the projects they kicked in on turn angry. There have been number of movies funded that promised "downloadable versions" only to put those behind really awful drm websites on requirement of deals made with big companies to get the movies into theaters.
ekianjo 13y ago
> Should KS Backers at least get a small return for making a $2 Billion exit possible? No. You know exactly what you buy (or try to buy) when you support a Kickstarter project. There's no equity in the companies you support. Not at all.
- devcpp 13y ago
  Legally, you're right. But if you were one of Oculus's founders and you were not a hypocrite, this would be a good way to promote Kickstarters like yours. Disclaimer: I have never used Kickstarter myself, and this one more data point against doing so. But I'm just pointing out what would be right.

sfaruque 13y ago

New word learned - Strident stri·dent strīdnt/Submit adjective 1. loud and harsh; grating. "his voice had become increasingly sharp, almost strident" synonyms: harsh, raucous, rough, grating, rasping, jarring, loud, shrill, screeching, piercing, ear-piercing

RandallBrown 13y ago

Is he pragmatic enough that he'll eat his words and release Minecraft on the Oculus Rift if it gets popular and Facebook doesn't actually ruin it?

ekianjo 13y ago

> He is right - "social", especially in the way Facebook is doing it at the moment, is terrible for VR. Terrible for any technology that has such an incredible potential to change the world. It's not just that. VR is not going to be a product that appeals to masses. I don't think it will change the world. It could impact the world of gaming, potentially, and only CERTAIN areas of gaming only. There are several reasons for that. First, it's a peripheral. You'll need to convince people to buy another 300-400 USD of gear on top of a powerful computer OR a PS4. The PS4 may be winning on the market, but peripherals have a bad History of not selling very well on consoles. Even the Kinect, which sold relatively quite a lot on Xbox360, failed to deliver anything really revolutionary. For PC gamers, you'll probably need a very powerful graphics card to make full use of it, and we already know that this kind of market is already a small minority in terms of PC users. There are several issues with VR as well: it's not something you can use to replace the screen completely. You'll probably feel dizzy, nauseous, tired after some time with it. Your eyes will end up hurting. It will work well with cockpit-like simulators (and there aren't many of them left anymore...) but not so well with FPS where camera movements have to be extremely fast. There are other games (3rd person view ones, top view games) where using an Occulus won't really make sense anyway. As for social applications, I don't know. It's already possible to do videoconference in pretty good quality but few companies actually use it, and still fly people all over the world because they find it works better to have face to face contact to solve issues and discuss projects. I'm not too sure the benefits of VR will outweigh its disadvantages in the everyday world. And this is coming from someone who badly wants a consumer Rift for gaming.

qq66 13y ago
Your characterization of VR applications seems limited to near-term applications of current or immediate-term technologies. What about when the device is $20 instead of $400? When it doesn't make you nauseous? When it's so close to face-to-face contact that you can replace 10 or 20 percent of your business travel?
- ekianjo 13y ago
  > When it doesn't make you nauseous? When it's so close to face-to-face contact that you can replace 10 or 20 percent of your business travel? That's what I am saying, we are FAR from being there. If we even get there.