Renzatic on 26/3/2014 at 21:34
Honestly, I don't care that Facebook owns it, so long as they leave it alone and allow it to continue on it's normal course. Leveraging their tech to make a neato Facebook application and maybe making some profit off it is fine. Stripping it of all functionality and selling it as nothing more than an overly expensive glorified head based 3D chatroom isn't.
EvaUnit02 on 26/3/2014 at 22:49
(
http://www.gpforums.co.nz/threads/485737-Facebook-will-allow-Oculus-to-operate-largely-independently-Zuckerberg) Facebook will allow Oculus to operate largely independently - Zuckerberg
There's already the precedent of Facebook acquisition Instagram largely retaining its own ecosystem and you're free to link photos on any other SNS.
This is bloody great news. Now Occulus potentially have a sh*t load of funding to throw at R&D. The future is looking all the more grim for Sony's Project Morpheus now.
The kneejerk reactions from Angry Internet Man vocal minority are entirely expected. Mostly what they're achieving is reinforcing their image as irrational mouth breathers.
See this:-
So yeah, this means nothing for Minecraft.
As for whether or not other/future Mojang games support Rift, ATM it's not a big deal. I doubt that any other Mojang games will be socially relevant, Scrolls certainly isn't.
Muzman on 26/3/2014 at 23:43
Sony could throw Facebook's annual revenue at the morpheus if they really felt like it. But why bother. There's always their decades worth of experience and vast R&D infrastructure and manufacturing chains in consumer electronics that they don't have to lift a finger to create. They shit out 1000 things as complicated as the Rift on an annual basis.
And wait til Samsung decides to make one...
Anyway, I don't really care that much. It's a rather odd thing for facebook to buy is all. Do they think they're Google now or something?
jay pettitt on 26/3/2014 at 23:46
Quote Posted by Renzatic
Honestly, I don't care that Facebook owns it, so long as they leave it alone and allow it to continue on it's normal course.
That's a maybe. But facebook, who aren't benevolent, spent $2billion doing this. It's now for they (and oculus) to now show the world they spent all that money not eager to influence the outcome.
It's possible. But it's also not the only potential outcome.
Fafhrd on 27/3/2014 at 00:46
Quote Posted by Muzman
Anyway, I don't really care that much. It's a rather odd thing for facebook to buy is all. Do they think they're Google now or something?
There is some speculation that the purchase was motivated by Facebook wanting to be able to position something as a competitor to Glass. Google's push into wearables isn't going away, and if the consumer version of Google Glass manages to take off when it hits (which is a pretty big 'if'), facebook will be scrambling to catch up. With WOM and perception of Oculus being much more positive than for Glass, they might be able to have a valid competitor.
june gloom on 27/3/2014 at 00:48
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
Angry Internet Man
Can you stop using this term when you are the definition of such, including in this very thread?
Sulphur on 7/4/2014 at 19:29
Oculus.
SubJeff on 7/4/2014 at 23:08
We've got ZylonBlaine for that.
