2 ms·
I don't use Facebook and I don't play games, but I'm curious to see if the acquisition will have a positive effect on pure VR; meaning the kind of VR Jaron Lani
by rch 13y ago
I don't use Facebook and I don't play games, but I'm curious to see if the acquisition will have a positive effect on pure VR; meaning the kind of VR Jaron Lanier talks about.
It seems like FB could actually bridge between VR, AR, and everyone else more easily than most. I can imagine attending the next presidential inauguration (virtually) because of this deal, and that wouldn't have been the case with Valve, for example.
- stan_rogers 13y agoI'm pretty much of the same mind here. A huge part of the backlash (and a large number of the comments here) seems to revolve around gaming (hardcore or otherwise). Valve, for instance, would have been okay, but EA, Sony and even Microsoft have been mentioned as better/more suitable. And I firmly believe that, while I get the appeal of gaming VR, it rather misses the larger picture. I no more want to see this sort of tech tied to gaming, even philosophically, than I want to see it become a dongle for Autodesk software (which, by the way, would be a much more meaningful application than gaming). I want holonovels and walkthroughs and avatar space for those whose meatspace experience isn't great. Many of the dreams we dreamed when ubiquitous computing meant that you got a punchcard with your bill and a handful of people owned something like a TRS-80 or an Apple ][ are on the verge of becoming very real (and not in quite the same way that strong AI has always been "almost here"). FB has an intrinsic interest in the avatar space part of that, but they're also as good a bet as anyone to diversify into the other realms.