Sounds like the trading card system, so other users.
Not a bad idea if I'm honest.
I think it will be big, but I'm not sure about smart phone big.
Just have to wait and see in a few years.
This is still perplexing to me.
This idea that somehow there is a market that is ready to buy a FaceRift with ads, designed with the singular purpose of stealing your information, and no games except Farmville.
Who are these people? Seriously. Go ask non-gamers if they will buy a $300+ device they have to strap to their head to use Facebook.
There is NO VR industry. VR gaming is all that exists for the foreseeable future.
So...you're saying OVR is cancelling the Rift? Not sure what you are implying but the Rift is being developed and FB (for all their evil plans) probably doesn't want to waste the investment.
Curious about that disagree.
You are right it looks much better than it ever did, but it's still only capturing a fraction of the motion we (humans) instinctively notice.
IMO taking a more "stylized" and exaggerated approach to facial animation is better than trying to make it 1:1.
Personally we have a long way to go before we can trick something humans have developed for hundreds of thousands of years. The human face and all ...
As far as I know glasses are/won't be an issue (at least not a major one). Headaches/motion sickness may be an issue. Though I have heard a couple accounts of gamers prone to that not having a big issue with it.
Its probably pretty high on the to do list, so I wouldn't count yourself out.
@Orange Juice
Wrong, they can't see the future and had no idea someone would buy them out.
Facebook only got interested around GDC.
People are upset they lost their "little guy" that's all. They had ZERO obligations to do anything beyond providing KS rewards and ultimately developing the Rift. KS isn't a license to tell businesses what to do in the future.
Are you say the Dev Kit 2 is going to be "Facebooked"? or a future CV2?
1. Altering the DK2 would be suicide financially. Worst possible idea.
2. Doing to a future CV could happen. Though they will probably have to separate devices for that. The PC gaming market wants what it wants. By then there will be competitors.
Generally its not a good idea to make a product no one wants.
Show me the market for what you are talking about.
Let's say they do create this Second life thing, why would they make the Rift only usable for that? Why are you assuming that gaming wont remain a focus?
FB has many plans for the Rift and want to do ALL of them. There is absolutely no indication that they want to create a closed system yet.
The ONLY group, for at least the next couple of years, that can use and buy a Rift are GAMERS. ...
But would you buy it if there was? I wouldn't. In fact I haven't read a single post of anyone saying
"Well, as long as I have to sign in to my Facebook account, take my money!"
That was like the first things Palmer denied. I guess you could say he's lying, but the fact remains its not a popular feature AT ALL right now.
"Game designers are also jumping ship after the acquisition at this point."
More like one game designer, who really just cancelled a free charity project that had just been talked about. Had actual money been involved well, Notch might have hesitated. Game developers, the actual serious ones, would not and should not have been as hasty as Notch. They have, potentially, a massive opportunity here.
IMO I'll take an actual Rift over the "idea...
If you donated to kickstarter you got the reward promised. Be that a newsletter, a shirt, poster, or a dev kit. So on the kickstarter side, obligations fulfilled. End of debate on that unless that reward was NOT fulfilled.
On to the "vision" part, again the priority is still games (has to be) so the "vision" is intact. Unless that changes the debate is over.
Those who backed them but hate Facebook so much as to feel soiled by this deal...W...
@papashango
"But I'm disappointed that the consumer level tech that was created is now in a corporations hands that make their money through advertising. If they change their vision on what Occulus should be and it fails they will simply sit on those patents."
1. The CV1 has not been created yet and the only market willing to buy it is gamers.
2. Facebook uses Ads to make money because until now, that's the ONLY product they...
That would be illegal or at the very least against the rules.
You aren't investing or even kickstarting a company, you kickstart projects.
As long as they provide the rewards promised, which they have, they have nothing to say.
Having a knee-jerk reaction is not cause for a refund.
Yes, Kickstarter kick-started a gimmick that now has a shot at revolutionizing not ONLY games but media itself.
Damn them! Death to Kickstarter!! for doing exactly what its supposed to do.
If you decide to put your project on Kickstarter just make sure to NOT expand on your vision in any way. You don't want to upset the folks who have a knee jerk reaction.
Wasn't aware the Rift was only capable of one thing.
Show me the market for "social VR". There might be one in the future, but where are all the FB users saying " Boy, the only thing that would make using Facebook better, is strapping something to my head!"
The Rift isn't very mobile either.
Seriously, consider who is ready right now to buy a Rift, then you'll know their direction.
How does Oculus hiring Valve's VR expert sit with you?
@3-4-5
Tell me you're joking?
Those people don't but smart phones that strap to your head.
My wife is that market, and I can tell you getting her to wear a Rift is not going to be easy no matter how much to Facebook it up.
They got their newsletter, poster, or shirt.
And unless OVR has officially announced they are scrapping the Rift completely, everyone got what they wanted.
Their Kickstarter wasn't for the company. It wasn't for the company to not be bought out. IT WAS FOR THE RIFT.
Whatever emotional investment was made on their end is meaningless and on them.
Might want to take a bit of your own advice.
Think! Is it worth buying a tech product then:
A. Refocusing it toward a market that literally does not exist.
B. Not sell that product just for laughs.
C. Jeopardizing that product's future (and the investment) by making changes to it so that the small market (that they need) doesn't buy it.
Think! How does any of that make any sense?
I ha...
Valve stopped working on its own VR HMD so if that's what you wanted to be involved with then you go elsewhere.