Slashdot Mirror


Minecraft Creator Halts Plans For Oculus Version Following Facebook Acquisition

An anonymous reader writes "Not one hour after the announcement of the the acquisition of Oculus Rift by Facebook yesterday, Markus 'Notch' Persson has announced that he has ceased all discussions about bringing it to Oculus Rift. 'I don't want to work with social, I want to work with games. ... Facebook is not a company of grass-roots tech enthusiasts. Facebook is not a game tech company. Facebook has a history of caring about building user numbers, and nothing but building user numbers. People have made games for Facebook platforms before, and while it worked great for a while, they were stuck in a very unfortunate position when Facebook eventually changed the platform to better fit the social experience they were trying to build.' Persson has stated that he made this decision despite initially investing $10,000 in Oculus' Kickstarter."

300 comments

  1. hej hej hej by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Cool story notch.

  2. Outrageous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    A mere millionaire daring to defy a billionaire? Now I have seen everything.

    1. Re:Outrageous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Zuck. You have billions for promises, that is fine. But Notch got a product I enjoy and never haunt me across the internet for likes. Therefore his opinion carry weight not yours.

    2. Re:Outrageous. by phrostie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Notch sells a product.

      Facebook sells you.

    3. Re:Outrageous. by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      In Soviet Russia, You Sell Out of Products!

    4. Re:Outrageous. by TemperedAlchemist · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh Crimea river.

    5. Re: Outrageous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ukraine have that!

    6. Re:Outrageous. by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Sad, funny, and true. :-/

    7. Re:Outrageous. by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 2

      Facebook sells you because you use their product for free.

      If you've paid for it directly, then you actually are the customer.

    8. Re:Outrageous. by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 2

      Negatory. TV and newspapers have long been in the business of selling you to their advertisers. Any actual entertainment or news produced as a result is simply a happy accident.

      Don't get me wrong, I'm no fb fan (don't even have an account), but bagging on them for doing what every multimedia conglomerate has been doing for decades seems a little silly.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    9. Re:Outrageous. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      You're correct. Facebook is nothing better than any other faceless media conglomerate, and worse than a considerable number of them. There's nothing 'cool' and seldom anything interesting about Facebook.

    10. Re: Outrageous. by istartedi · · Score: 1

      Ukraine your neck to see if there is another joke to be made.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    11. Re:Outrageous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FALSE!
      Much like cable TV you will pay and also be sold as the product.

    12. Re:Outrageous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That will not interfere with the all new Oculus Iris-book

    13. Re:Outrageous. by tFunc · · Score: 0

      I'd give you my mod points if I had any. Cheers to Notch for not selling out.

    14. Re: Outrageous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quit Russian to conclusions.

    15. Re:Outrageous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are not paying for the product, then YOU are the product.

  3. "What?" yelled Occulus founders by NotDrWho · · Score: 5, Funny

    "We can't hear you through all of the cash."

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    1. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Obligatory Penny Arcade: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2000/10/23/

      "Would you like to stay for dinner? I think we're having MONEY!"

    2. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by i+kan+reed · · Score: 0

      They might be able to hear pretty well if Notch climbs on top of his own pile of earned cash and yells it right in their faces.

    3. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering the OR gang only received FB stock, I'm pretty sure Notch would need a megaphone to be heard from on high.

    4. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      For how incredible it might sound to you and to americans in general (especially the most ignorant ones), the world has always been full of people who don't put money to the top spot of their priorities' ranking.

      Like one guy named Albert... ehm... Einstein, and another, some Leonardo... wait...oh, yeah...da Vinci (the surname isn't even necessary). They weren't billionaires, but "maybe" they are going to be remembered for a little bit more than suckerberg and "the guys from oculus rift", whoever they are.

    5. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they got $400m in cash too.

    6. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      That's fine: he wasn't talking to them. Nor was he talking about them in any way shape or form. A lot of people seem upset at the founders, feeling betrayed, but such people need to get over it: that's already happened. Facebook could ruin this thing before it gets off the ground, all in a shortsighted attempt to keep people from leaving facebook. That has not yet happened.

    7. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Without the surname, most Americans will think you're talking about a turtle.

    8. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry for their sad lives.

    9. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I know it's fun being smug, but you might want to remember Einstein moved to America (and died here) because of some trifling thing that had been going on over there in Europe.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    10. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who, to be fair, did not put money at the top of his priority list.

      Leonardo priority listing:
      1 - Fight Shredder, BeBop, RockSteady, and Craig
      2 - Eat Pizza

    11. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by rogoshen1 · · Score: 2

      cue the James Earl Jones AT&T commercial voice "but it will"

    12. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by amiga3D · · Score: 1, Funny

      Didn't Davinci write some kind of code?

    13. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      What does that have to do with people who don't prioritize money over everything?

    14. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2

      "Do you like my hat? It's made of MONEY!"

    15. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Unlike that whole "manifest destiny" thing, depriving Native Americans of their lands (ongoing to this day) and slaugtering those that stood up for themselves, oh, and slavery and even after emancipation continuing to deprive them and their descendants of their rights, (again, ongoing to this day), molesting weaker nations in South America since in the early 19th century like some sort of national paedophile, rampant anti-semitism and neo-Nazisim allowed in many states as "free speech" in ways that are not tolerate in the aforementioned Europe, stealth and space technology taken from, and perfected with Nazi war-criminals given shelter and succour by the US government. Oh and let's not forget, it was European enlightenment thought that invented America and that many of the USA's founding fathers were European subjects and, had they lost would have been executed as terrorists.

      And here I am, neither American or European and pretty equally appalled by them both. As a neutral observer I can say I am far more impressed by how far Europe has come since 1945 than how far the USA has come since 1776.

    16. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by crashcy · · Score: 0

      Pray tell, oh noble one, what fantastical country free of all guilt do you hail from? It must be so rewarding to assume credit for the virtues of hundreds of years of blemish-free civilization and not have to be condemned for the sins of your fathers.

    17. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On other news, Facebook is fucking Oculus Rift...

      You people butt-hurt much?
      Talking crap about shit that old (and dead) politicians did in the past?
      What does the average american has to do with his country's past business?
      Are you going to hate people just because?

      Get real, you are not a teenager anymore... are you?

    18. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "da Vinci" isn't a surname. Leonardo only had one name, Vinci is the city he came from.

    19. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Notch slaughtered whom? And then he held slaves? Wait ... I thought I was on a Notch/Oculus thread.

    20. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I didn't know Leonardo DiCaprio was a turtle.

    21. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They just end up prioritizing something else: religion, race, political view, etc.

    22. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."

      In other news, Facebook's existence tests, and fully confirms, yet another of Einstein's theories.

    23. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's exactly what most "surnames" were at that time in the Italian paeninsula. They either indicated one's father, or one's home town. They were needed to distinguish people who had the same first name, just like now.

    24. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "For how incredible it might sound to you and to americans in general (especially the most ignorant ones), the world has always been full of people who don't put money to the top spot of their priorities' ranking."

      Yes, and the people who do value money end up paying for those who dont value money. Like the fucking leaches they are.

    25. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously the usual ignorant tea-publican couldn't miss the opportunity to mess with politics. Which basically confirms what the poster was saying.

    26. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      who is Craig? Krang's friendly cousin?

    27. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      Even most people who treat money as their number one priority day to day would doubtless change if they recognized a threat to their physical existance. Einstein didn't particularly make a big deal out of money. That's actually on the record, as there are accounts of just how little he asked for a salary when he hired on at Princton. But, his day to day priorities definitely included support for doing physics, and hot babes. I'm pretty sure from the things he said about where he feared German antisemitism was leading, that he was willing to put both those things aside for the duration of getting out of Germany.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    28. Re:"What?" yelled Occulus founders by admintpj · · Score: 1

      Unlike that whole "manifest destiny" thing, depriving Native Americans of their lands (ongoing to this day) and slaugtering those that stood up for themselves, oh, and slavery and even after emancipation continuing to deprive them and their descendants of their rights, (again, ongoing to this day), molesting weaker nations in South America since in the early 19th century like some sort of national paedophile, rampant anti-semitism and neo-Nazisim allowed in many states as "free speech" in ways that are not tolerate in the aforementioned Europe, stealth and space technology taken from, and perfected with Nazi war-criminals given shelter and succour by the US government. Oh and let's not forget, it was European enlightenment thought that invented America and that many of the USA's founding fathers were European subjects and, had they lost would have been executed as terrorists. And here I am, neither American or European and pretty equally appalled by them both. As a neutral observer I can say I am far more impressed by how far Europe has come since 1945 than how far the USA has come since 1776.

      Is this for real or is this comment an attempt to impersonate Dennis the Constitutional Peasant?

  4. Unsurprising ... by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The ownership by Facebook of any technology immediately puts the taint of a rich douchebag who wants to monetize everything, invade your privacy, and sell your information.

    Fuck the Zuck.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Unsurprising ... by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm starting to wonder if he's just buying shit so no-one else can have it.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    2. Re:Unsurprising ... by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is why we can't have nice things.

      My immediate reaction to seeing Facebook was buying it was "well, there goes some promising technology". Instead, it will be used to check in with your friends on Facebook and to ensure they're monetizing everything you can do with it.

      To hell with that. I strongly suspect that's what's at play here.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:Unsurprising ... by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      karmack has some rumblings about leaving as well.

      Real advances for Occolus are dwindling. Zuck should have invested under his secret investment firm, "Evil Acquisitions inc."

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:Unsurprising ... by genner · · Score: 4, Informative

      karmack has some rumblings about leaving as well.

      Real advances for Occolus are dwindling. Zuck should have invested under his secret investment firm, "Evil Acquisitions inc."

      Carmack has already tweeted that he is not leaving.

    5. Re:Unsurprising ... by bhcompy · · Score: 2

      Carmack probably is stuck unless he wants to forego a payout(so-called golden handcuffs). Likely he has a time based contract that vests a payout over time. Leave now and lose tens of millions. Leave in 2 years and vest some/all of it.

    6. Re:Unsurprising ... by AaronLS · · Score: 1

      Man, and I was so excited they the developer iteration was 1080 resolution and only $350. If that reflects potential commercial pricing, and you look at other existing HMDs at that resolution, then that's actually pretty awesome.

    7. Re:Unsurprising ... by phrostie · · Score: 1

      Zuck is going to create the google-glass of the gaming world.

    8. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      karmack has some rumblings about leaving as well.

      Real advances for Occolus are dwindling. Zuck should have invested under his secret investment firm, "Evil Acquisitions inc."

      And here I thought Zuck was Google's "Evil Acquisitions Inc."

    9. Re:Unsurprising ... by Daniel+Hoffmann · · Score: 4, Informative

      Huh, that was exactly my reaction too. Odd how I read that IBM/MIcrosoft/Facebook/Oracle bought another tech company the first reaction I get is exactly this.

      Interestingly when I hear that Google bought a company I don't get this reaction (yet).

      Also where is Carmack? If he is still with Oculus then there might be some hope. But if they sold out without his vote, well there is something very wrong. John Carmack has being know to be someone uncompromising when it comes to tech.

    10. Re:Unsurprising ... by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      Instead, it will be used to check in with your friends on Facebook and to ensure they're monetizing everything you can do with it.

      And how, exactly, will a VR headset be used for that?

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    11. Re:Unsurprising ... by AdamThor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "My immediate reaction to seeing Facebook was buying it was "well, there goes some promising technology"."

      Everyone still loves the VR idea though. I think Notch and all the others will just be looking for the runner up product. Which all the Me-To folks are working on. Sony and Xbox are already on that train, I understand. Hopefully there will be someone to sell me one without a walled garden that they're trying to push.

      How much IP is there around the oculus? I understood the rift to be mostly an implementation of better / newer technology, not so much new invention, but I could be off. How hard will it be for others to pick up the baton?

      --
      -- "Oh. This guy again."
    12. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      karmack has some rumblings about leaving as well.

      Citation please. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.

      And it's Carmack. With a C. Not with a K, you fucking moron.

    13. Re:Unsurprising ... by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      John Carmack has being know to be someone uncompromising when it comes to tech.

      That, he may well be.

      But depending on just how many zeroes are at the end of anything he'd get ... he may well have just said "oh, fuck it, for that much money I'm in".

      And, as has already been pointed out, if it's the difference between making a huge stack and living with the 'golden handcuffs', or getting nothing ... a lot of people might do the exact same thing.

      Start getting into 8 figures, and I might blow Ballmer in the MS boardroom. Make it 9 figures, and we can bloody well livestream it and I'll throw in Gates. ;-)

      You can buy back a lot of self respect (and mouthwash) for that kinda money.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    14. Re:Unsurprising ... by slashmydots · · Score: 1

      You're right. I've been waiting for the new record holder to arise for worst corporate merger ever and this might be it. According to Forbes and everyone in the entire US, the AOL - Time Warner merger was the worst merger in US history. Facebook buying and within 24 hours ruining a popular tech project and soon completely bankrupting and canceling the entire acquisition may just beat it.

    15. Re:Unsurprising ... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      And how, exactly, will a VR headset be used for that?

      Both exactly like, and somewhat different, from how you do it on a web page.

      You really think Facebook has altruistic motives here? Or that they see a potential cash cow in the future?

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    16. Re:Unsurprising ... by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      If Microsoft had bought Oculus Rift there would be a good chance of it coming to light. With Facebook, odds are it dies alone.

    17. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bingo. Google still has a "cool" factor.

      From what I have read, Facebook doesn't have this. People tolerate Facebook, but do they really -like- FB, like how Apple has a strong supporter base? I really don't see that happening.

      Google gets their income from a number of sources, be it direct customers, advertisers, and businesses. FB only gets their income from advertisers. Because of this, I am concerned about anything FB brings out because the end user is not the true customer; they are the product, and every detail, every shred of information will be stored and possibly sold to whomever has the cash for it.

    18. Re:Unsurprising ... by FooAtWFU · · Score: 2
      No, it's not about money. It's about fulfilling his adolescent fantasies of being the guy who programs a lame facebook-branded Second Life knockoff. I MEAN, programming the Metaverse from Snow Crash.

      (Sorry, dropped out of the fantasy too early there.)

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    19. Re:Unsurprising ... by Daniel+Hoffmann · · Score: 1

      That may be, but he would probably leave (now or soon) Oculus/Facebook if it did not shown any promise. I would have grabbed the money and ran away at the earliest possible date and fund another startup.

    20. Re:Unsurprising ... by chaboud · · Score: 1

      They probably wanted to play with it, didn't want to wait for their order of the new dev kit to show up, and needed some BS excuse to justify a clearly ridiculous purchase (Worlds Chat, anyone?). They are a public company, after all...

    21. Re:Unsurprising ... by EvilSS · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And how, exactly, will a VR headset be used for that?

      Both exactly like, and somewhat different, from how you do it on a web page.

      You really think Facebook has altruistic motives here? Or that they see a potential cash cow in the future?

      Of course they see a future cash cow. Why would they not?! As for my original question, that's a dumb answer and you know it. They have no reason to spend 2 BILLION just to sell you a VR headset so you can.... what? Read Facebook posts? Most likely they, like Microsoft and the XBox, are trying to branch out into a new (for them) industry.

      I'm really amazed at the complete lack of critical thinking on /. these days. Everyone is a shill for [insert company you hate here] and every new anything is obviously an NSA plot. Get your heads out of your asses already.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    22. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interestingly when I hear that Google bought a company I don't get this reaction (yet).

      To me google is like the fickle 10 year old, they buy it, play with it for a few days then forget about it forever and lose interest, but should a new kid come along and want to play with it they'll throw a tantrum of epic proportions

    23. Re:Unsurprising ... by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      I don't think I could do that. Eventually it would eat at me until I would have to stick a pistol to my head to get the taste out. Maybe that's why so many rich people commit suicide.

    24. Re:Unsurprising ... by lonOtter · · Score: 2

      Wanting to monetize everything doesn't mean he's a Republican.

      --
      [End Of Line]
    25. Re:Unsurprising ... by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Carmack has already tweeted that he is not leaving.

      Of course he's not. He's probably locked in for 3 years as a term of the sale.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    26. Re:Unsurprising ... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      I'm really amazed at the complete lack of critical thinking on /. these days.

      Oh, we're still thinking critically.

      Everyone is a shill for [insert company you hate here] and every new anything is obviously an NSA plot.

      Except that it seems everyone is, and everything is. Or they are blindly accepting/hating what [insert company you hate here] does, or that it can/will be exploited by the NSA and their ilk.

      Get your heads out of your asses already.

      I might suggest the same. As little as 5 years ago, saying a lot of these things about the NSA was a little on the tin-foil hat end of the spectrum. Now it seems like reality is far worse than even the more paranoid ever thought.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    27. Re:Unsurprising ... by chaim79 · · Score: 1

      Interestingly when I hear that Google bought a company I don't get this reaction (yet).

      I'm at that point however. I have a Nest thermostat which I love, but now that Google owns it I'm wondering what my options are. I'd love it if I could break into it and load my own firmware, or even an opensource firmware. I think the JTAG pins are exposed as pads on the main board so I should (in theory) have some access, I just have to figure out what exactly that access is...

      --
      DEMETRIUS: Villain, what hast thou done?
      AARON: Villain, I have done thy mother.
      Shakespeare invents 'your mom'
    28. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Google still earns 91% of their revenue from advertising.

    29. Re:Unsurprising ... by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Yup! Gaming (VR entertainment period) takes the eyeballs off FaceBook. They're buying the competition and shelving the technology along with the IP.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    30. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the process he is heading towards the Google Plus of social networking as well.

      Note: For those that are hard of thinking, "heading towards" does not mean "has arrived".

    31. Re:Unsurprising ... by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      Except that it seems everyone is, and everything is.

      You seem to be confusing paranoia with critical thinking. They are not the same. Many /.'ers lately are just default to crap like that, and it takes away from the validity of things that are real threats. It's gone from a site for geeks to a site for paranoid Luddites.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    32. Re:Unsurprising ... by denmarkw00t · · Score: 1

      Bingo, my friend. As soon as I read the headline last night, my heart sunk, and my hopes for Oculus died. I want nothing to do with Facebook owning them or their technology - the moment Zuck & Crew become a part of my gaming experience, I'm moving on. I don't mind Candy Crush - I get it, Facebook integration is a big part of what they do. I don't mind it in many other phone games. I do not link my FB to Call of Duty, GTA, or anything else on a console or that doesn't run in a browser (and mostly don't otherwise anyway). The last thing I want while wearing a VR headset is to reach a new stone in Skyrim and find out that it's got ads on the outside - "Find single Orcs in your area now! Like this stone for 30 credits!"

    33. Re:Unsurprising ... by Nikker · · Score: 2

      Facebook won't last that long. I know they have cash in the bank but even they see it. They buy WhatsApp not because they never thought of making a SMS like app or integrate it into their stuff, they want the head count. Facebook was cool to my generation because you could check out all the people you knew from years gone by but it is like any popular hangout or bar, eventually people will buy their beer somewhere else.

      When you or anyone else here was younger how many would go to hangout somewhere where their parents used to hangout? The newer netizens don't want to chat up with their friends where their baby pictures are posted, it becomes, well just lame.

      They know this but for them to look strong to their share holders they need page views and a monstrous head count, the second that starts going south people will sell that paper all day long. Facebook doesn't have the legs that Microsoft does because Microsoft still has huge on going contracts to sell and support Windows. The workplace isn't going to Android / IOS anytime soon and Linux is making some slow progress but Microsoft can afford for people to hate them. Facebook just doesn't have that luxury. When their users go so will their share holders and the barrier to entry is damn low, look at WhatsApp, they have like 20 employees and a simple infrastructure.

      Facebook is like the post grad that came back for extra credits and started hanging around the freshmen trying to be cool, they burn through cash trying to show off how cool they are but rarely get to re-achieve their previous self proclaimed brilliance.

      --
      A loop, by its nature, continues. If that didn't make sense, start reading this sentence again.
    34. Re:Unsurprising ... by bennomatic · · Score: 1

      My reaction when Google buys something is, "Ewww, now Google will know how I [whatever]." Example: I had been strongly considering a Nest thermostat, but there is NO WAY I want Google to have heuristic information about the goings-on in my house.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    35. Re:Unsurprising ... by Daniel+Hoffmann · · Score: 1

      Well but at least they put the tech to good use, google docs for example started after an acquisition. Google docs is very useful in my life (but I don't put anything that I would rather keep private there).

    36. Re:Unsurprising ... by Zeromous · · Score: 1
      --
      ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
    37. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think John Carmack is that kind of person. He strikes me as someone like myself that would rather be poor than compromise his perversions with technology. We are talking about a guy that spends absurd amounts of time developing just one or two technologies as far as his bosses will let him get away with before presenting it to the world. People like that aren't driven by money. The prize for us at the end of the road isn't the cash prize, it's the cheap ass gold plated trophy that'll serve as proof and a reminder of what we've done.

    38. Re:Unsurprising ... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Maybe that's why so many rich people commit suicide.

      Is this a thing, or is my snark detector out of phase again?

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    39. Re:Unsurprising ... by jcr · · Score: 1

      I've got a Nest thermostat too, and I'm fine with keeping it for now, but the first time I see an ad on it I'm going throw it through a window at Google's HQ.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    40. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good point. I had the same reaction to this news as most people seem to be having: disappointment that a promising device has been reduced to another has-been by one of the worst companies in tech.
      Carmac was already rich so it might've been harder to buy him, but I doubt he could've stood alone against the rest of the guys who stood to become milionaires off of this. And in any case, being rich doesn't mean you stop caring about money.

      Hell, if Facebook came to *me* and offered *me* $2 billion for my hobby project, you can bet your ass it'd be sold before they even finished uttering their offer, and I can't believe anyone here would behave any differently.

      So yeah - it's sad, but hardly surprising. Fortunately, Oculus went far enough that the technology and the interest has been proven to exist, so it's a matter of time until some other company does it properly (Sony is a candidate, but they'll likely lock it to the PS. Maybe Valve).

    41. Re:Unsurprising ... by towermac · · Score: 2

      Everyone dies alone.

    42. Re:Unsurprising ... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      You seem to be confusing paranoia with critical thinking.

      You seem to be confusing levity with me giving a damn.

      It's gone from a site for geeks to a site for paranoid Luddites.

      I'm not a luddite, but I might be on the paranoid end.

      And, quite frankly, I don't see any difference in Slashdot over the last 10 years -- it's always been like this.

      Don't like it, stay on your own damned lawn.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    43. Re:Unsurprising ... by un1nsp1red · · Score: 1

      "You might assume that suicide rates would be elevated in lower-income neighborhoods and counties, and the study’s authors do point to findings that higher income generally lowers suicide risk. For example, an individual with family income less than $10,000 (in 1990 dollars) is 50% more likely to commit suicide than an individual with income above $60,000." http://business.time.com/2012/...

    44. Re:Unsurprising ... by vettemph · · Score: 1

      I think Zuck (or the more capitalist folks that he employes) sees the Oculus as an answer to Google Glass. Google has an optical thingy, we want one too. The two devices may not truly compete, but at least it is something to point at during shareholder meetings.

      --
      The government which is strong enough to protect you from everything is strong enough to take everything from you.
    45. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe that's why so many rich people commit suicide.

      Is this a thing, or is my snark detector out of phase again?

      This story Suicides are more common in wealthy neighborhoods went around a couple years ago. If you read past the headline, it means that the poorer people in the rich neighborhoods were more likely to suicide than someone making the same income in a poor neighborhood. Suicide increases from failing to keep up with the Joneses.

    46. Re:Unsurprising ... by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      here.

      For the record, I am coding right now, just like I was last week.I expect the FB deal will avoid several embarrassing scaling crisis for VR.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    47. Re:Unsurprising ... by orgelspieler · · Score: 1

      Zuck should have invested under his secret investment firm, "Evil Acquisitions inc."

      Am I the only one who heard the jingle "Zuckerberg Evil Incorporated" in their head?

    48. Re:Unsurprising ... by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Never said more rich commit suicide than poor. It's understandable why someone who's out of work, his wife has left because he's broke and taken what little he had including his kids would blow his brains out. Why in hell do people with everything going for them do it though? Mabye it's not about money.

    49. Re:Unsurprising ... by DogSqueeze · · Score: 2

      Or it could be that Carmack believes in the product will truly revolutionize gaming and interactive computing. And he really wants to be one of the key architects of this new technology. It could be that he just doesn't care about the monetatization issues... the market will straighten that out eventually, but at least he'll be there from the ground up!

    50. Re:Unsurprising ... by recharged95 · · Score: 1

      Not really. Something's brewing in the mids of SV's CEOs and VCs. Looking at Apple (wearables), Google (robotics) and now FB (wearables). FYI, M$ has been in the space for some time....

      All the SV companies are going into "stealth mode" (really hate the term) to gear up for IoTs. IoT appears to be the next cash cow all are heading towards at this point. The FB purchase just proves it. And it makes sense: data exploitation, hardware, and mobility. Stupid MBAs call that the triple play -- and the VCs are salivating over IoT like cocaine ready in their hand and hookers in their face.

      Get ready for the next high fellas.

    51. Re:Unsurprising ... by Dogers · · Score: 1

      Facebooks plans revealed:
      http://vimeo.com/8569187

      --
      I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you.
    52. Re:Unsurprising ... by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      It's about fulfilling his adolescent fantasies of being the guy who programs a lame facebook-branded Second Life knockoff

      To be fair, it would probably be hard for Carmack to do worse at SL than SL.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    53. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wanting to monetize everything doesn't mean he's a Republican.

      Wrong, that is the very definition of a Republican. They want to take as much money as they can from everyone. It's pure gluttony.

    54. Re:Unsurprising ... by GrepSoda · · Score: 1

      Only Valve can save us now.

    55. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless they are in a plane crash, then everyone dies together.

    56. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen!

    57. Re:Unsurprising ... by lonOtter · · Score: 1

      You didn't actually provide a rebuttal. I said that wanting to monetize everything doesn't mean he's a Republican, which is true. You can be a Democrat and want to monetize everything, and some corporations do this because they believe Democrats will follow their orders if they bribe them enough. So even if I were to accept your definition of "Republican," your logic is wrong.

      --
      [End Of Line]
    58. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Classy.....

      You'll never buy any class with that amount of money (or more).

      I'll leave the exercise to you.

    59. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Snow Crash predated SL by a good long time. More to the point, in Snow Crash "the street" contained a lot more than a big bag of dicks.

    60. Re:Unsurprising ... by mkiwi · · Score: 1

      Interestingly when I hear that Google bought a company I don't get this reaction (yet).

      Google bought Nest Labs, and I certainly feel a little sick about it.

    61. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's facebook's business model to sell info about you, that includes to the NSA

    62. Re:Unsurprising ... by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      I hate to be a pedant (I don't really), but monetising everything is the point of business. Facebook is given your information, either by your interaction with them directly (You make use of a Facebook account) or via a third party (tracking on websites, friends sharing details etc); It's not like they're calling your bank and asking for receipts of all the purchases you've made to offer you adverts, or opening your mail and suggesting friends based upon the contents ("Writing to your ageing grandparents? Be friends with Dignitas!").

      I agree with the sentiment; I wish they weren't so ubiquitous or underhanded in their collection methodologies, allowing a "GTFO Facebook" service; A generic cookie which either discards or bundles your data with other such cookie users. Just pointing out that you're angry at a business for doing business things.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    63. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why we can't have nice things.

      My immediate reaction to seeing Facebook was buying it was "well, there goes some promising technology". Instead, it will be used to check in with your friends on Facebook and to ensure they're monetizing everything you can do with it.

      To hell with that. I strongly suspect that's what's at play here.

      All I know is, whatever you see through a Rift will now have advertisements plastered on it.

    64. Re:Unsurprising ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

      Paranoia is defined by "unfounded suspicion". So based on your usage of the term, you are asserting that there is no founding reason to be suspicious of Facebook's motives here. You are saying that there is no historical evidence to suspect that they might use this technology as a new platform to continue their current campaign of violating users privacy and pushing advertisements.

      You are either:
      a) completely ignorant of what the word "paranoia" means.
      b) exaggerating the term greatly to suit your specific need.
      c) completely naive in regards to Facebook, and totally ignorant of their past track record.

      Yet you claim others are lacking critical thinking? You're definitely not one to judge.

    65. Re:Unsurprising ... by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Google's frog isn't that warm yet.

      And right, I really would like to hear John Carmack's own thoughts about this (John, don't you have an account here? Show up and speak for yourself!) Tho I don't begrudge him a pile of cash; he's earned it.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  5. Sincerity or Negotiating Ploy by MarkvW · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Facebook just hasn't thrown enough money at him yet.

    When they do...then we'll see.

    1. Re:Sincerity or Negotiating Ploy by Charliemopps · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Notch is already rich as hell. I don't think he cares about more money at this point. Minecraft could have already made him oodles more cash if he'd change it to a freemium model. But he's not.

    2. Re:Sincerity or Negotiating Ploy by Lisias · · Score: 1

      Facebook just hasn't thrown enough money at him yet.

      When they do...then we'll see.

      The day Mr. Zuck decides to throw money in Minecraft, it will be the day that the present owner will not risk HIS money on Facebook.

      Until there, I think Mr. Notch is right. Let Zuckerberg risk his own money on Facebook games.

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    3. Re:Sincerity or Negotiating Ploy by slashmydots · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To cancel it within 24 hours, I don't think it's about money. I think it's about principle.

    4. Re:Sincerity or Negotiating Ploy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Notch isn't born rich, he haven't figured out how to get rid of the money he gets from Minecraft yet.
      So far his ideas have been in the lines of "Oh, lets give every employee $100000 extra as a bonus this Christmas", "We need to rent a bunch of jets for the the company party at some random island"
      He isn't even close to the mindset needed to throw away money the way large players like Facebook can do.
      I'm not sure that there is an overlap between large enough sum to buy Notch and small enough sum to make sense to Notch yet.

    5. Re:Sincerity or Negotiating Ploy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Notch is already rich as hell. I don't think he cares about more money at this point.

      A general truth about rich people, that may or may not apply to Notch individually, is that they never feel they have enough money.

    6. Re:Sincerity or Negotiating Ploy by Lendrick · · Score: 1

      There was a study a while back (I wish I had the link) that found that more money can make you happy, but only if you're not already born into money. And Notch himself has said in an interview that he basically accepts that his biggest achievement is now behind him.

      The happiest people in the world aren't the ones who are driven by ambition; they're the ones who can realize that they've achieved something and then stop and enjoy life. Notch is doing what he loves to do, because he can afford to do that. He can afford to not sell out, because frankly, once you're a multi-millionaire, you can pretty much invest your money and live comfortably off of the returns for the rest of your life. I hope, on the off chance that I ever strike it rich, that I'm able to do the same thing Notch is rather than get caught up in that cycle of always wanting more.

    7. Re:Sincerity or Negotiating Ploy by mark-t · · Score: 1

      I can't help but find it ironic that an alleged general truth about a demographic seems to actually only very rarely be true when you start trying to apply it to specific individuals in that demographic... rather, it only seems to apply to the group as a collective whole.

      I'm certain there's a connection between that and the Pareto principle, somewhere. Which itself can seem ironic on the surface too, I suppose.

    8. Re:Sincerity or Negotiating Ploy by Piata · · Score: 1

      You do realize Notch rakes in $100+ million every year, right?

      2012: http://www.forbes.com/sites/da...
      2013: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/a...

    9. Re:Sincerity or Negotiating Ploy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe not, if people all could see how crap the game is before paying. A friend showed it to me the other day. I honestly couldn't articulate any word after seeing that awesome game.

    10. Re:Sincerity or Negotiating Ploy by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

      Notch is already rich as hell. I don't think he cares about more money at this point.

      A general truth about rich people, that may or may not apply to Notch individually, is that they never feel they have enough money.

      I don't think this is true at all. You're turning rich people into a cast. A cast that if you compare anyone here on slashdot to the average person in the world, we'd fall into. I'm certainly richer than 99% of Africa or China. Would I like more money? Sure... but I'm not going to sell my soul for it. Or ruin my greatest work. I have a house, a family, 2 dogs, and I can eat what I want, when I want. I'll take more money, but I'm not going to work very hard for it.

    11. Re:Sincerity or Negotiating Ploy by MildlyTangy · · Score: 1

      Notch is already rich as hell. I don't think he cares about more money at this point. Minecraft could have already made him oodles more cash if he'd change it to a freemium model. But he's not.

      You seem to be living under the false assumption that there is such a thing as "too much money".

  6. Thank you, Notch. by uCallHimDrJ0NES · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This was a wise move, and really the only way forward. Oculus now comes with the most obvious trojan in history.

    --
    Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
  7. Re: Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's why I invest all my money in Bitcoin instead of kickstarter.

  8. Temper tantrum by Editor_Laura · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Facebook might not be a games company right now, but the acquisition of Oculus certainly gives them a huge opportunity to venture in to that market. And as far as Minecraft not being social... are you kidding me? It might be a malicious kind of social, but Persson's pull out is coming off as more of a flounce rather than an educated decision.

    1. Re:Temper tantrum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Coming from a Twit, that's not a surprising response. At least notch has a shred more ethics than the parasites over at the stalker and paedophile field-day that is Suckbook.

    2. Re:Temper tantrum by 2starr · · Score: 2

      The companies you work with say a lot about your priorities. I think it's fair to send a message to Oculus that a cash grab with a company with completely different models and motivations does not speak well of their priorities.

      --

      "Let your heart soar as high as it will. Refuse to be average." - A. W. Tozer

    3. Re:Temper tantrum by Ignacio · · Score: 1

      Facebook might not be a games company right now, but the acquisition of Oculus certainly gives them a huge opportunity to venture in to that market.

      And the umpteen millions of subscribers it already has doesn't? Pull the other one, it's full of candy.

    4. Re:Temper tantrum by Jesrad · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Minecraft isn't making the social side, its userbase is. That's why the myriad videos of let's-play are on youtube, the streaming sessions are on Twitch and announced on twitter, etc. and not on some huge (and bloated) "social network" service hosted on minecraft.net

      --
      Maybe we deserve this world ?
    5. Re:Temper tantrum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Persson's pull out is coming off as more of a flounce rather than an educated decision."

      That's what she said.

    6. Re:Temper tantrum by WaffleMonster · · Score: 2

      Facebook might not be a games company right now, but the acquisition of Oculus certainly gives them a huge opportunity to venture in to that market.

      Laura, welcome to Slashdot. It is great to see such a positive outlook from a first time poster.

      And as far as Minecraft not being social... are you kidding me? It might be a malicious kind of social, but Persson's pull out is coming off as more of a flounce rather than an educated

      Sometimes it's better to pull early than live with the consequences.

    7. Re:Temper tantrum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why the myriad videos of let's-play are on youtube, the streaming sessions are on Twitch and announced on twitter, etc. and not on some huge (and bloated) "social network" service hosted on minecraft.net

      That's because the url is http://www.minecraftforum.net/forum. Scroll down to 'SERVERS' and 'SHOW YOUR CREATION' if you somehow don't think the modding and discussion sections are social enough.

    8. Re:Temper tantrum by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      Facebook might not be a games company right now, but the acquisition of Oculus certainly gives them a huge opportunity to venture in to that market.

      Think in terms of a Secondlife-like Facebook "ecosystem".

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    9. Re:Temper tantrum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "venture in to that market" is FB for "fuck this tech up". It gives FB a huge opportunity to fuck over peoples privacy in new ways. He is right (and its also his perogative)

      They have long been offering games on FB, what has come of it? how have games changed for the better over that time? well, more clones, more "free" games working on the drug principle... yeah, im sure they will make something great out of it.

    10. Re:Temper tantrum by Lisias · · Score: 1

      I don't think the problem is the "social", but the way Facebook does "social".

      Why one would use Facebook (and pay him a share of his incoming) to allow his users to play his games?

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    11. Re:Temper tantrum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those forums are run by Curse (ugh), not Mojang.

    12. Re: Temper tantrum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of Second Life's biggest draws is anonymity. Shining a big spotlight on who is behind the avatar is not going to draw in a lot of people.

  9. Good for him. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good for him. I'm not particularly happy about this deal either. Facebook is going to mangle everything the OR was supposed to be.

  10. Dan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think that's a bit short-sighted given that this technology from the get-go has nothing to do with social media. Yes it has other applications but it's primarily for games and is a separate company entity than Facebook. I believe Zuckerberg is just making a smart investment in a known future of gaming.

    1. Re:Dan by bhcompy · · Score: 1

      Think Snow Crash or Neuromancer. Hell, think of Playstation Home.

    2. Re:Dan by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Think of AOL, in truly-immersive high-def... what's not to like?!

    3. Re:Dan by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Add in some force-feedback and pop-up ads can not only jump right in front of you, but they can slap you in the face if you don't pay attention to them.

      (Somewhere, some marketing guy just began drooling at the thought of this.)

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  11. So? by ctheme · · Score: 0

    Brusk and Gifted Independent Developer who Stuck Gold voices his frustration with a major commercial acquisition that the whole tech-concerned internet is on its toes over.

    Brusk and Gifted Independent Developer who Stuck Oil tells Oculus that they won't be getting Minecraft for Christmas this year because they made a naughty capitalist decision which advances the looming surveillance state of developed nations.

    Brusk and Gifted Independent Developer who Discovered Atlantis is known for having strong and pessimistic views of the game industry which -- surprise! -- strongly favor grassroots development.

    I don't see how the complaints of Brusk and Gifted Independent Developer who Developed Minecraft and then Passed it on to an Equally Gifted Development Team add anything more to the Oculus conversation than the thoughts of any other half-informed follower of recently-emerging VR technologies.

    1. Re:So? by ctheme · · Score: 1

      Bagh, *struck. The problem with the option to proofread my comments is that, no matter how many times I try, the fact remains that I was never very good at proofreading to begin with.

    2. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      brusque

    3. Re:So? by ctheme · · Score: 1

      Both are correct, but I suppose I could have gone with the more elegant looking variant, if that's what you're suggesting.

  12. Hey editors, how hard is this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Not one hour after the announcement of the the acquisition of Oculus Rift by Facebook yesterday, Markus 'Notch' Persson has announced that he has ceased all discussions about bringing it to Oculus Rift."

    It? WHAT is 'it'?

    1. Re:Hey editors, how hard is this? by almitydave · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Not one hour after the announcement of the the acquisition of Oculus Rift by Facebook yesterday, Markus 'Notch' Persson has announced that he has ceased all discussions about bringing it to Oculus Rift."

      It? WHAT is 'it'?

      Steven King novel. Frankly, I'm not entirely disappointed that a homicidal supernatural clown isn't being brought to virtual reality. Those are nightmares I'd just as soon do without.

      --
      my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
      I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
    2. Re:Hey editors, how hard is this? by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      RTFHeadline

    3. Re:Hey editors, how hard is this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can grab it, feel it, whack it today
      If you can't, then it doesn't matter anyway
      You will never understand it cuz you whack it too fast
      And it feels so good, it's like walking on glass
      It's so cool, it's so hip, it's alright
      It's so groovy, you'll whack it all night
      You can touch it, smell it, taste it so sweet
      But it makes no difference cuz it knocks you off your feet
      You want it all but you can't have it
      It's cryin', bleedin', lying on the floor
      So you lay down on it and you whack it some more
      You've got to share it, so you dare it
      Then you bare it and you tear it
      You want it all but you can't have it
      It's in your face but you can't grab it
      It's alive, afraid, a lie, a sin
      It's magic, it's tragic, it's a loss, it's a win
      It's dark, it's moist, it's a bitter pain
      It's sad it happened and it's a shame
      You want it all but you can't have it
      It's in your face but you can't grab it
      What is it?
      There's Ted, he's whackin' it
      What is it?...
      There's Joe, he's whackin' it
      (et al)

    4. Re:Hey editors, how hard is this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually think there is a lot of potential for horror games with the Rift or similar hardware. Something like Amnesia - Dark Descent would be awesome with VR.

  13. "In discussions" by DrGamez · · Score: 1

    Is software development speak for: "literally no work has been done".

    Why is this news worthy?

    1. Re:"In discussions" by Type44Q · · Score: 2

      If you have to ask, you wouldn't comprehend the answer.

    2. Re:"In discussions" by DrGamez · · Score: 2

      I mean I get that it's an "important backer" (what percentage of $2.4M is $10k?) pulling out, but there really has been no discussion or public planning of Minecraft to the OR.

      I don't like Facebook owning OR, but at the same time I don't like people treating notch like some god of indies. I guess it was unfair to ask why this was "news" worthy.

      I should be asking: why does anyone care what notch thinks about a device he has no input on other than: "yo fuck facebook"?

    3. Re:"In discussions" by Cederic · · Score: 1

      The thing with Notch is that he did something for fun, made it a success, earned a fortune, and now he puts his money where his mouth is. He backs other independent developers - including Oculus, even though they were developing hardware not the games that need it.

      So you have a very successful developer living the dream, a very successful businessman that's a self-made millionaire and a genuine philanphropist, all of which would draw attention and admiration, all wrapped up in one slightly unreliable but interesting person.

      He may or may not be right, but he's done a fuck of a lot more than most people, and whether it's appropriate or not he sets trends. People listen.

    4. Re:"In discussions" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      he's done a fuck of a lot more than most people

      Nah. People who have done more than Notch are a dime a dozen. He didn't achieve what he did because he was a good developer -- while he was still writing code, Minecraft was buggy, had performance issues, and was horribly slow to make progress. He's written nothing worthy of note before or since, and judging by what we can see he has serious issues with actually being able to finish projects. Nor was Notch an exceptional businessman -- you can be completely foolish with money when tens of millions of people are lining up to pay for an incomplete, buggy game. Nor does he have interesting insights. I have never seen anything out of his mouth that's been anything other than banal.

      Notch lucked out. He wasn't the first to do a blocky, pixel-arty voxel sandbox game. He was just the one who happened to make the first one that was just barely featureful enough to tap into an audience no one (including Notch) had any idea existed. And much of the game's ability to have lasting appeal is purely accidental. Minecraft would've fizzled out years ago without mods. Notch and his appointed successors have proven incapable of delivering a proper modding API, even after all these years, and the game continues to have popularity in spite of all the pain this causes. If Notch hadn't happened to use Java, which is much easier to modify than other language choices thanks to the ease of decompiling bytecode to semi-readable source, it would be nowhere today.

      I don't begrudge the guy his success, but you're conflating "made a lot of money" into "this guy is a genius whom everyone respects". I doubt that Notch's trendsetting influence is as great as you imagine it to be.

    5. Re:"In discussions" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't like Notch, Minecraft, Zuckerburg, or Facebook, but even I admit the weight both Facebook and Minecraft bring to any topic. Are you really asking what is important about the guy with rights to Minecraft refusing to bring a very popular game to a very shaky new platform? You don't think, at all, that Minecraft could be the killer app to draw in numerous gamers to a new domain of tech?

  14. Don't care about Minecraft VR, but... by thevirtualcat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm glad to see that I won't be seeing "See what your friends are building in Minecraft. Connect your Facebook account today!" plastered all over Minecraft anytime soon.

    (Incidentally, f*ck you, Netflix.)

    1. Re:Don't care about Minecraft VR, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget to like us on Facebook.

  15. From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From the Oculus VR Forums (which you should really read some of to get a better balanced view of how the actual developers feel).

    spire8989 writes:

    "Hi, I'm a developer and am very happy with this news. Also, Markus is a pretty well-known hipster, this is very expected from him. For someone who seems so anti-Facebook he should really stop having an active Facebook account that he constantly updates though. If you actually read this article you'll see where he says that this will have a positive impact on social VR experiences, but he doesn't want to work with them "because he doesn't know their intentions".

    I guess you get to be picky and complain when you have an extremely popular game."

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by DeTech · · Score: 1

      I'm not surprised that the argument is more nuanced than "fb is evil, i'm out". Notch is a smart man, and he loves making games... he just doesn't want an unknown actor influencing his decisions.

    2. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by phorm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For someone who seems so anti-Facebook he should really stop having an active Facebook account that he constantly updates though

      I have no problem with using Facebook for things where I want to share things with many people with no expectation of privacy, Shared events, products I'm interested in, public life announcements, FB is fine.

      What I *don't* do is use the app on my phone (contact-stealing), allow their site-cookies, or buy other products that are NOT related to my intended use of FB.

      You can both have reasons to use FB and reasons to avoid/dislike it that aren't necessarily at odds.

    3. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Willful and naive blindness on the part of a "developer."

    4. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by slashmydots · · Score: 1

      Oh bullshit he doesn't know. Their motivation is MONEY.

    5. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I use the bus every day because there's little alternative, does that mean I want to marry the bus driver?

    6. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're dependent on Oculus doing well then you're much more likely to toe the company line. Not to mention that it's likely that many devs think having Facebook intrusions into their game will only bring them more money, regardless of what happens to the user experience. My main experience is with iOS, and if Apple started forcing ads and social crap into everyone's apps, plenty of devs would lap it up because they really don't give a shit about quality and figure maybe it'll make them more money. I'd take it as a sign I should migrate away; I guess that makes me a hipster.

    7. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      What I *don't* do is use the app on my phone (contact-stealing)

      I use the Facebook app, I just don't give it access to my contacts.

      You can both have reasons to use FB and reasons to avoid/dislike it that aren't necessarily at odds.

      I don't see how, because you are encouraging other people to go onto Facebook to read your content, people who may not be able to take the precautions you do to limit what they get from you.

      I hardly use Facebook myself, mostly just to keep track of family. I see Oculus as a separate entity from Facebook and until we see moves to the contrary, I don't see why it makes sense to expect anything else.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    8. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      If you're dependent on Oculus doing well then you're much more likely to toe the company line

      To be clear I'm not dependent on them doing well, I would just be pleased if it happened and it would bring some benefit to me.

      it's likely that many devs think having Facebook intrusions into their game will only bring them more money,

      I don't think that at all, nor do any developers I know. We just don't think that will happen.

      What makes you think it will? It's not true of Instagram.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    9. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This C&P is only +5 interesting because it takes a shot at a popular piñata.

      I'm not a fan of Notch either, but seriously, who gives a damn about what some no-name entity on another forum has to say.

    10. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by vitaflo · · Score: 1

      I guess you get to be picky and complain when you have an extremely popular game.

      Yes that's exactly what you get to be. Why this is seen as some negative is beyond me. Notch built his company from nothing and hasn't taken investment or any of the number of things most companies want to do. He has enough money to tell anyone he wants "fuck you" and has every right to as a business owner. There's nothing wrong with that.

    11. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It took zero. Zero time for the Oculus devs to no longer care about gaming.

    12. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      This C&P is only +5 interesting because it takes a shot at a popular piñata.

      That's very true.

      But it's equally true that the story is on the front page of Slashdot for exactly the same reason.

      His support does not really matter to a platform - he's just a popular figure to hold up to try and hang arguments on.

      Personally I don't care what he does either way, I just thought people should understand what other VR developers think about his statement. Developers who have been actively working with VR hardware a lot more than Notch, who it seemed like was just dabbling.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    13. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by phorm · · Score: 1

      you are encouraging other people to go onto Facebook to read your content, people who may not be able to take the precautions you do to limit what they get from you.

      Actually, it's more a case of other people not using other tools, and forcing me to use FB.

    14. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For someone who seems so anti-Facebook he should really stop having an active Facebook account that he constantly updates though.

      Maybe he doesn't mind Facebook as a user, but doesn't want to be professionally bound to it? I can completely understand. I use MS products from time to time, but you can bet your ass that as an independent company I'd be hard-pressed to sign any sort of contract with them.

      Also this:

      Markus is a pretty well-known hipster, this is very expected from him

      Ad-hominem. When some unknown guy who just claims to be a dev starts his post with a logical fallacy, you really start to wonder if it's worth reading the rest.

      And finally:

      I guess you get to be picky and complain when you have an extremely popular game

      So he's saying that most people, himself included don't like this, they just don't have the financial independence to say it out loud? Then why even attack him?
      Or is it that because the guy is rich he's not entitled to expressing his opinion?

    15. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, Markus is a pretty well-known hipster

      And that's a good thing?? Please no.

    16. Re: From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who cares what they think? They are just trying to save all the hours of their life they have invested in this crap platform.

    17. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The snark is strong with that one.

      "People who can afford to have strong personal opinions are hipsters"?

    18. Re:From the Oculus VR Forums on Markus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1

      wait, no, *like*

      Wait, no...uhhh...what is it here? Oh yeah, log in, then re-log in, then type a code despite being a 4-digit member, then maybe get to post a "yeah that's right man!" which then, these days, gets modded down to -100. Social media these days, eh?

  16. Re: I guess he is a doofus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next you'll be saying I should use Android despite the fact that it's Google tech!

    I'd rather be a doofus.

  17. Any excuse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Thing is, quite honestly, I see this as using any excuse to not do work, something Notch is very well known to do ALL THE FUCKING TIME.
    "Hey Notch, we love that space game you are making, cannot wait to play it, those new features sound great!"
    "Yeeeaaah, cancelling my space game, people like it too much.... VACATIONS"
    Is there any excuses he HASN'T used over the years?

    I'd care if it was someone of worth, but someone that got lucky with a block-building game who sits on a pile of cash doing nothing, I literally could not care less.
    If it wasn't for those interviews or 4chan /v/, his game would be nothing. (and before some tard comes out and says "b-b-b-but youtube!", there was not a single person playing the game at the time, this was WELL before that time, way before the game was even known, youtube-craft is the last and most recent boom in sales, but I am speaking the first)
    He used to update the game so much back then. Adding features all the time, one by one.
    Sudden increase in sales, makes a company, less updates, which was understandable at the time, he needed time to solidify the company. Then time went on. And on. And on. And still none of what he planned got released. Then he ditched the game entirely and threw it at Jeb to pick up the shattered community because /v/ would no longer suck his dick.
    What's that noise I hear? Oh my, the sudden rush of the Notch Defence Force.

    And on that note, I still play the game, modded only, vanilla is awful. I've even co-run a server for years now, which went through various different modpacks, most recently Hexxit. So much for that Mod API. They should have just let Bukkit have full fucking control of the thing instead of having to write a new damn API.

    1. Re:Any excuse. by Lendrick · · Score: 1

      Notch doesn't owe you any more work. He's already hired a bunch of people to continue development on Minecraft, so any obligations he might have for the Minecraft community are fulfilled. If he wants to spend the rest of his life sipping mixed drinks on an island somewhere, that's his prerogative.

    2. Re:Any excuse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He could do that, but he's instead throwing a temper tantrum. Why should I give a shit that some guy that wouldn't have released the game anyway throws a shit fit? I don't. Notch is rich and will forever live off his one game (yea! copyright in this limited circumstance) that other people run (fuck you musicians, writers, and actors you should only live off your work as long as it takes to get a torrent up!).

      But thanks for letting me know Notch is rich and therefore doesn't have to do anything to make us worship him. Now let's get over to the Valve boards and yell about Half-life 3 not being out yet!!!!!

    3. Re:Any excuse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I still play the game, modded only, vanilla is awful. I've even co-run a server for years now, which went through various different modpacks

      Well, gonna have to disagree with you there. Vanilla minecraft is far from perfrect but it is a hell of a lot of fun. Several million people seem to agree with me.

      And while there are some awesome individual mods, all the big modpacks are shit. The curators of those packs don't know the first thing about game design. 'Hey, let's add a fuckton of tedious mechanics and hundreds of new items and recipes, because gratuitous complexity always makes games better.' Sigh.

  18. Carmack fully supports the move by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Informative

    Carmack (the fact you can't spell him name right ames me dubious you understand his intent) said this on Twitter:

    I have a deep respect for the technical scale that FB operates at. The cyberspace we want for VR will be at this scale.

    If you want to understand what he means, read Ready Player One.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Carmack fully supports the move by ctheme · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Carmack appreciates impressive technologies when he sees them and has always humbly voiced his support for them. Back in the dark ages he called Ken Silverman, the developer of Duke3D's Build engine -- the supposedly direct competitor of Quake at one point -- the most talented graphics programmers that he knew besides himself. He had similar praise of Oculus VR before he joined the crew.

      No, he's isn't a saint in any benevolent sense, but when it comes to commentary on developing technologies, I tend to trust him -- personal disdain for Facebook's sociocommercial business model aside.

      Also, Carmack's next Twitter post directly communicates that he's been avoiding creating a Facebook profile up until this point. So perhaps his admiration of the company on a social level is not as strong as his respect for them on a technological infrastructural level.

    2. Re:Carmack fully supports the move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't sound like full support to me sounds more like a nice way to express displeasure.

    3. Re:Carmack fully supports the move by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Well I want to decide for myself what to plug my goggles into, and not have it be a Facebook Accessory. That's my big beef with smart phones and why I still don't have one. The idea of a pocket computer sounded awesome 15 years ago, but they're so wrapped up with the carriers and walled gardens that the appeal is lost to me. You are monitored at every step. And now that's the future of OR.

    4. Re:Carmack fully supports the move by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 0

      Carmack (the fact you can't spell him name right ames me dubious you understand his intent) ...

      That has to be one of the silliest statements I've read in a while. I've known a couple faculty researchers - absolutely brilliant guys - who were abysmal spellers. It didn't seem to affect their comprehension one bit.

      It's also worth noting you had your own spelling and grammar issues in a sentence where you chose to cast aspersions on someone for a spelling error. "him name right ames", indeed.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    5. Re:Carmack fully supports the move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Carmack (the fact you can't spell him name right ames me dubious you understand his intent) ...

      It didn't seem to affect their comprehension one bit.

      In this case, it did affect their comprehension.

    6. Re:Carmack fully supports the move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is one of the saddest attempts I have seen on /. - (the fact you can't spell him name right ames me dubious you understand his intent)

      Just wow.

    7. Re:Carmack fully supports the move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lumpy is known to be a trollish dick. Nothing new there.

    8. Re:Carmack fully supports the move by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      The idea of a pocket computer sounded awesome 15 years ago, but they're so wrapped up with the carriers and walled gardens that the appeal is lost to me.

      You should go out right now and buy a good used or non-contract cellphone, then, and never connect to a carrier with it. If you pick, for instance an inexpensive Virgin Mobile Android phone you can just pay the retail price for it and never 'hook it up' using the cellular radio. Use it with your local and any public wifi you have access to and it's yours and relative detached. If you're worried about being spied on by advertisers don't use a google branded browser with it. Firefox for Android is perfectly usable. If you don't want to 'hook up' with Google, there are other app stores you can get your andoid apps on. You can go to Amazon and download the .apk file for their app store and never connect your new pocket computer to Google at all. Right now there are low to medium-end Android phones from the Virgin Mobile brand at WalMart (that you can buy with cash) for $40.

    9. Re:Carmack fully supports the move by timeOday · · Score: 1

      I agree that things seem to be freeing up more lately. I have been waiting until contract-free Android phones were affordable. Are they really not 'locked' in some way? How do they stop you from tethering, for example? Not that they should care since I would rather pay per Megabyte transferred, but I thought Android or the phones themselves were still DRM'd at some level, not true? If so then I am glad.

    10. Re:Carmack fully supports the move by belthize · · Score: 1

      Interesting reference. Earlier today in an email discussion I wrote that I viewed FB buying Oculus the same as I would Ready Player One if Wade had lost.

    11. Re:Carmack fully supports the move by Dripdry · · Score: 1

      But this is what Valve being involved was supposed to be for, right?
      Ultimately, this pits Valve against Facebook, imo. Could be interesting, or Facebook is already preparing to buy out Valve.

      --
      -
    12. Re:Carmack fully supports the move by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

      I think FB is going to start realizing that they're quickly becoming a Pariah and that the 'social networking bubble' is about to burst. They aren't cool, they aren't liked, and the trend-setting kids are either leaving, or the exodus will soon start. That people aren't massively exhausted by the constant barrage of "SHARE THIS WITH EVERYONE ALL THE TIME!" on every page, every application, is mind boggling. I highly doubt people who are actually into playing video games will tolerate the intrusive ads needed for FB to justify their existence on the platform. Annoying banner ads on a mobile app are barely tolerated. Try putting one up on a full screen game .. let alone a VR headset. And the people who aren't into gaming wouldn't drop ~$350 on a headset. =/

      If FB bought out Valve, i think the PC master race nonsense would instantly cease to exist, and they'd all go back to xbox or PS. I would think that the only thing worse than console gaming in their eyes is companies like FB stalking them.

  19. for occulus it's the better deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it was either lots of gamers (including me) longing for buying their hardware, or selling out and get rich fast - now they won't have as much work in front of them either, because no one will want to buy a rift any more. thanks fuckerberg.

    1. Re:for occulus it's the better deal by __aajfby9338 · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Now I'm glad that I didn't act on my brief curiosity about applying for work at Oculus VR when I heard about some interesting engineering job openings that they posted a while back. I wouldn't want to work for Zuckerberg. Now that FB owns them, I have lost all interest in ever buying their products. Oculus VR is dead to me now.

  20. The Mod still works by genner · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Occulus Mod for Minecraft is pretty flawless. This changes nothing.

    1. Re:The Mod still works by AaronLS · · Score: 2

      What version of Minecraft does it support? The answer to that question does change something.

    2. Re:The Mod still works by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      the "occulus for minecraft" was not going to be occulus mode for regular minecraft, it was going to be stripped down like raspberry pi minecraft or android minecraft in order to be less visually overwhelming

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  21. Two Way Street by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    The companies you work with say a lot about your priorities.

    Exactly, and Facebook is now working with Oculus...

    Why can't you think about it THAT way? It means the same thing as what you are saying. Why can't Facebook be changing course? WhatsApp and Oculus purchases make MORE sense if that is the case, not less.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Two Way Street by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because OR didn't buy FB? Seems to be pretty clear that this transaction is about assuming ownership - not "working with".

    2. Re:Two Way Street by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Because Facebook is a huge conglomerate. The kind of corporate fucks who always climb aboard when a tech company grows the way Facebook has are firmly in control. The Zuck can sport about in his hoodie, but there are shits in the next room wearing wingtips. That's always how it works. And that sort of operation ain't gonna change because they acquired something 'cool.' Never has. Never will.

    3. Re:Two Way Street by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it IS facebook.
      What planet do you live on?

  22. Notch doesn't own Minecraft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Notch sold minecraft to work on other things he is not the one working on it anymore.

  23. Pocket change. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every now and then I buy a humble bundle for a few bucks that I never get to play, but it seemed like god cause at the moment. Anyway it's about what I get paid for working 4-5minutes so I really don't care.
    $10'000 is the same for Notch. He can give it away for fun, if it's for a good cause even if he don't beleve it will work so why not?

  24. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by EvilSS · · Score: 2

    Anyone that pays someone to make money with no expectations in return is a fool.

    Expectation: Pay money and get promised reward.

    I'm pretty sure they met the expectation for that project. As for them "selling out", well duh. The vast majority of their funding came from their VC rounds, not kickstarter. VCs are usually looking for an exit and these days want to control burn rate until they get to there. Honestly they are probably better off now with Facebook. FB will want to get the product to market, where the VCs wanted to get the COMPANY to market.

    As for all the paranoid NSA, ads in my eyes crap, it's just nerd-rage bullshit. As long as they don't close the SDK, and there is literally no logical reason for them to do that in this case, I don't see a problem. And hey, at least Google didn't aquiri-hire or Moto them.

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  25. Re: Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least you can buy pot with Bitcoin. I see no similar good coming of this Kickstarter now that they've cashed in and sold out.

  26. Yet Another Dark Age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There was Microsoft as The Borg, but the 1990s ended and the tech industry sort of forgot all about them (is Microsoft still around?). After that, it was Oracle going around trying to destroy technologies by buying them. They mostly succeeded with Java but somehow ZFS escaped. Now begin the Facebook dark ages. What techs are we talking about today, which must not be allowed to emerge?

  27. How hard to support multiple VR headsets? by UnderCoverPenguin · · Score: 2

    Oculus isn't the only VR headset. They may be the current best (I don't actually know). At least conceptually, the inputs and outputs are reasonably understood. So what makes it hard for an application that supports the Oculus headset to support others?

    --
    Don't try to out wierd me, three-eyes. I get stranger things than you, free with my breakfast cereal. --Zaphod Beeblebr
    1. Re:How hard to support multiple VR headsets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Older headsets sometimes work on any video card that supports stereoscopic 3D. The game doesn't have to support it directly but it makes a huge difference in quality of the 3D experience when the game does support it.

    2. Re:How hard to support multiple VR headsets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Valve are doing just that with the Steamworks VR API.

  28. What Carmack does next will be very telling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Carmack works on what he finds interesting. Right now VR is something that he is really passionate about. This deal almost gives him infinite resources to do that work. He doesn't need the money or the job and he will stay exactly as long as he is interested in the tech. I think he cares little how the tech is used just as long as he in on the cutting edge of developing it.

  29. Re: Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Anyone wanna trade an Oculus dev kit for pot?

  30. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You seem to be operating under the assumption facebook will continue to develop the oculus rift as intended and is not buying it simply to obtain some piece of IP they want to bastardize and use in some way to monetize its existing user base further.

    I strongly suspect the only oculus rift gaming devices to ever see market, are the ones that are already in the hands of developers and kickstarter backers we should expect this to more likely appear in some other form of social tool that in no way appeals to the original audience of oculus

  31. He never was making a VR port. by Blackwulf · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One thing to realize is that Notch really never had any plans of making a VR port of Minecraft. In the past, he has stated that because of the JAVA technology used in Minecraft, it was too difficult to do it right, and they were having a problem making the UI work. They weren't very thrilled with the way the Minecrift mod did it, and wanted to do it better, but it just wasn't possible.

    (In fact, the Minecrift mod doesn't even work with anything higher than 1.6, which means you can only use it in singleplayer or on servers that never upgraded. This is because of how much things have changed in the code between 1.6 and 1.7.)

    So, Notch actually abandoned the effort sometime last year.

    Last year: "We aren't making a Rift port because it's just too difficult with our current codebase."
    Yesterday: "We aren't making a Rift port because Facebook."

    To me, it sounds like a convenient excuse to cover up the fact that their codebase is really messy and can't do as much as they wish it could. We can blame it on Zuck now!

    1. Re:He never was making a VR port. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      As you said the idea of getting Minecraft oto the rift was abandoned a long time ago.
      What changed since then was that Notch was thinking about developing titles specifically for the rift. Now he has decided to back away from that. Not that it really makes any different, he is notorious for abandoning projects or putting them on hold indefinitely. He can afford to. (He can also afford to hire an electronics department to develop his own competitor to the rift but I doubt he is interested in that.

    2. Re:He never was making a VR port. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I think you missed the part of the story where Notch flew to Oculus headquarters and schmoozed with the guys to come up with some plans for what an oculus native version of mincraft would be like. He was in actual talks.

      Now he walks.

    3. Re:He never was making a VR port. by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      minecraft really needs a comprehensive refactoring, and maybe port it to something a little more 3D performance friendly than Java

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    4. Re:He never was making a VR port. by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      Personally, I blame Java.

    5. Re:He never was making a VR port. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except Tommaso had working Oculus support in the PC version of Minecraft.

  32. CCP Games should follow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope they discontinue production of Valkyrie i know more than a few eveonline payers that were very excited for this game but now want nothing to do with it, some have already suspended their eve accounts in protest.

    1. Re:CCP Games should follow by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 1

      CCP Games is making Valkyrie for the Sony VR machine as well.

  33. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by EvilSS · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You seem to be operating under the assumption facebook will continue to develop the oculus rift as intended and is not buying it simply to obtain some piece of IP they want to bastardize and use in some way to monetize its existing user base further.

    I strongly suspect the only oculus rift gaming devices to ever see market, are the ones that are already in the hands of developers and kickstarter backers we should expect this to more likely appear in some other form of social tool that in no way appeals to the original audience of oculus

    I'm not the only one. If you read the founders Reddit posts they also appear to be under that assumption. Also, what possible IP could facebook want from Oculus that would be worth that much to them? That just does not make sense. They are not buying a user base, like with What'sApp. Aquiri-hire also doesn't make any sense here. They bought a hardware company. They (Oculus) is already saying that they are planning to start work on custom hardware components (versus being tied to off-the-shelf parts for mobile phones), and part of the deal terms was to allow them to lower the final cost of the consumer hardware. The more likely explanation is that they (Facebook) want to branch out into an emerging tech. I don't see it any differently than Microsoft developing the XBox. Just because they are a social company doesn't mean that's ALL they can do. It would be smart of Zuck to branch out. He, like the rest of the world, has to know that social platforms have a shelf life and if Facebook wants to survive they need to start doing other things.

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  34. Time to move on by eastjesus · · Score: 1

    The Oculus Rift was an amazing design and the first practical and affordable VR tool to come out of the woodwork in a long time. Sad it has come to this. Especially sad for the Kickstarter supporters. That being said, I'm sure that much has been learned along the way. I suspect the creative people will soon drift away and, hopefully now flush with cash, can take the next step and do something even more amazing and build on what they now know. How about a 180 degree horizontal/90 degree vertical field of view in something much smaller and lighter? I remember putting on a LEEPsystems headset back in the late 1980's and the immersion was stunning because of that - anything less is like wearing blinders. I don't remember the actual specs but the field of view was around that, I'll have to dig it out - I'm sure I still have some of their old tech papers. I remember it stated that if you can see the frame around the display then it's not really virtual reality. They even had a demo film camera and viewer to show off the optics (they had to use CRT's back then and only film could show off the possible detail). It wasn't so lightweight but their lens design did the trick and seems to have disappeared into the past. The other thing they did was put most of the resolution in the center with less detail out toward the edges so that the apparent resolution was much greater than the actual. A redesign of that concept with modern displays and trackers, maybe tracking eye movements to move the resolution to where it would matter would be a huge next step.

  35. Dime's a dozen. by flyonthewall · · Score: 2

    His loss, the need will be taken by someone else in this very competitive environment. VR is coming, and playing the ostrich will only limit the bird, not the environment.

    --
    "The avalanche has already started. It's too late for the pebbles to vote." - Kosh
    1. Re:Dime's a dozen. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      To my way of seeing it, when you plunge your head into a facemask that by design blocks out the real world, you take considerable risk in referring to somebody else as the ostrich.

    2. Re:Dime's a dozen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't seriously contend that there's another game that could take Minecraft's place, right? I do not, and never have had interest in the game, but there is nothing comparable.

  36. Very hard without additions by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    So what makes it hard for an application that supports the Oculus headset to support others?

    You can easily provide a similar 3D view across multiple headsets.

    What makes it hard to deliver the same application is all of the hardware that gets added to do tracking really well and keep latency very low. The 2nd dev kit has some advanced positional tracking hardware to help keep the view in sync with what the users head is doing, and also (perhaps just as important) built-in hardware to be able to test latency.

    If you don't do all of those things, the user can get very sick, very fast. That's what makes VR so hard, is that there is very little difference between "amazing" and "OMG SO SICK YAK". So more than jet putting up to stereoscopic screens you have to do a ton of testing and hardware specific tuning.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Very hard without additions by jasno · · Score: 1

      Regardless of what you use to sense position, you're going to have to put it into an input at some point. Chances are that it will be USB provided the latency is acceptible. If it isn't USB, it will have to be some other standardized input. In any case, developers of competing glasses will have access to that same input.

      VR is just too big, and really too old and mature, to be controlled by one company. People got into a tizzy because Oculus released prototypes, but you can bet other companies had similar devices which they didn't want to prematurely demonstrate.

      I'm guessing FB bought Oculus because, like many of the folks cheering Oculus, they don't understand hardware.

      --

      http://www.masturbateforpeace.com/
  37. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course the founders are saying that, facebook probably even portrayed it to them in that way, but i severely doubt FB will enter the gaming market i am confident that this technology will end up in the IP Graveyard of a giant corporation

  38. Totally the opposite by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    Well I want to decide for myself what to plug my goggles into

    That is EXACTLY what Oculus was trying to do. The current dev kits work on OSX and Windows, iOS/Android support is also planned...

    There's no reason to think any different is true under Facebook. In fact if you think about it, almost no other company would be as likely to keep the device cross-platform as Facebook - certainly Google and Apple would have each dragged it back to their respective lairs to horde.

    You are monitored at every step. And now that's the future of VR.

    Only large multi-person VR worlds, there will be plenty of stand-alone content where you are not "monitored".

    But there was ALWAYS a big server component of any VR future to make really interesting worlds where you interacted with others. That's not coming from Facebook, that's just a natural progression and something science fiction has been predicting for decades.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Totally the opposite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is not true, no central server is needed.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Cobalt

  39. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by maliqua · · Score: 4, Insightful

    what possible IP could facebook want from Oculus that would be worth that much to them?

    Technologies that allow them to directly compete with things like google glass? the oculus is a vr console that has lower lag than any other vr headset ever made, seems to me that's the piece they wanted and its more likely to end up in augmented reality displaying us advertisements and convincing us to like things than FB going from a platform for casual gaming to producing tech geared towards hardcore gamers.

  40. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by EvilSS · · Score: 1

    Of course the founders are saying that, facebook probably even portrayed it to them in that way, but i severely doubt FB will enter the gaming market i am confident that this technology will end up in the IP Graveyard of a giant corporation

    Why? Again, it makes zero sense. They might as well burn a pile of cash and stock certificates on their parking lot. They have no IP of any real value to Facebook. What you are saying is that Facebook is going to hand them $2 billion ($400 million of that in cash), and immediately shut them down. That, versus that FB sees the potential for the VR market to be huge and that Zuck wants to get in on the ground floor of it?

    Hell, considering how much VC money they had already taken in and they were still struggling to get a product out in the face of rapidly approaching competition from Sony and others, it's probably more likely that the product will make it to market now than before.

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  41. Fell for it by SuperKendall · · Score: 0

    I've known a couple faculty researchers - absolutely brilliant guys - who were abysmal spellers...It's also worth noting you had your own spelling and grammar issues

    I knew some asshole would whine about pointing out a pretty egregious spelling error (the FIRST LETTER of a name? Really?).

    So I wondered if such a person would be so hypocritical as to complain about errors in a post where they complained about people who complain about said errors in a post...

    Turns out the answer is yes. Experiment complete.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Fell for it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's just silly. You said that if that guy can't spell his name correctly (Assuming he can't.), then he doesn't understand his intent. That's just an ad hominem. Pointing out that people can be brilliant and also be bad spellers (or make mistakes), while also pointing out that you made mistakes of your own, is perfectly valid. It is not hypocritical. If your own logic is to be believed, then you making those errors indicates that you don't understand all sorts of things.

  42. The Carmack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Poor John Carmack... You tried to pull a Michael Jordan but perhaps it's time to go back and work on id Tech.

  43. I'm ok with this... by MiniMike · · Score: 1

    I've already got enough Creepers as "friends" on Facebook...

  44. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    As for all the paranoid NSA, ads in my eyes crap, it's just nerd-rage bullshit. As long as they don't close the SDK, and there is literally no logical reason for them to do that in this case, I don't see a problem.

    I want to believe yet NSA really does spy on everyone, "smart TVs" really do record everything you watch and facebook really does sell your data to the highest bidder(s).

    As a technical matter when developers link to an SDK underlying support library would be capable of calling home to facebook injecting bullshit and or spying on the environment... it is possible to concurrently present an open interface while reeking of the consequences of selling out.

  45. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why? Again, it makes zero sense. They might as well burn a pile of cash and stock certificates on their parking lot. They have no IP of any real value to Facebook.

    I didn't realize you had the full catalog of oculus ip in front of you and could make that determination.

    yes i'm saying they see more value in the tech than the gaming market, no one would buy a gaming platform for 2b exclusively hoping to sell games and game consoles particularly right after one of the giant players in the market shows a competing product. No large/smart corporation would be like "Hey look sony's started to compete with these guys over this product they make, lets buy them and fight sony our selves perhaps our street cred will endear us to gamers and we'll be the main player in the market"

  46. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by EvilSS · · Score: 1

    Do you really think game companies would use an API that injected third-party* "bullshit" into their games that would do nothing but piss off their users? Or would they instead, just not support it or support a different company's hardware?

    *We know they will inject their own bullshit content and DRM, but that benefits them. This wouldn't.

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  47. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by maliqua · · Score: 2

    I'm not the only one. If you read the founders Reddit posts they also appear to be under that assumption.

    Ok explain to me what possible scenario they would post "Dude we're f***ing rich we sold our tech to a creativity grave yard, thanks for the support early on screw you guys i'm going home (to my new home on my private island)"

  48. Re: Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by pslytely+psycho · · Score: 2

    Sure, pot is plentiful, cheap, and legal. I'll give ya 1/2 oz of say, Girl Scout Cookies, Purple Urkle, or perhaps some Wax, Shatter, or honey oil? Maybe you prefer to eat or drink your THC, got that covered as well....

    --
    Donald Trump, on a crusade to make Nixon look respectable
  49. What motivates entrepreneurs, and were people mani by bladesinger · · Score: 1

    Oculus served their purpose; there will be good competition now. I suppose the donors got their "money's worth" in that regard.

    At the same time, this serves as a reminder of the varying motives of entrepreneurs, irregardless of their skills or strengths or vision. The difference between, say, Elon Musk, and the founder of Oculus, are astounding. One is motivated to see the technology to its end, the other is motivated by money- pure and simple.

    I'm no longer inspired by Kickstarter. I don't like how a small group of people can cash out on humanity's dime. I don't like how people who are clearly motivated by greed, no matter how exceptional they are, can deceive us and give companies like Facebook the last laugh. The founder should be proud of his achievements, but should also be ashamed of what has transpired. People on Kickstarter donated based on a charter, encompassing a vision and the expectation is to see it carried out to the end with effort and dignity. That means continue until you have achieved your charter, ie release a consumer version. From there, I don't really care- sell out, although if the this whole process of crowd-sourcing made sense, the intellectual property would be open and not privately sold. Kickstarter often serves to manipulate passionate, good-natured people who buy into a vision.

    I propose no solution for Kickstarter, but I will be more mindful of the for-profit ventures there, if I even use it again at all. I didn't donate to support an intrusive, unethical company founded entirely on shareholder equity from an over-valued IPO build its portfolio and devour promising technology. In this regard, Kickstarter is yet another way for large companies to take advantage of the natural, incredible output of human ingenuity found outside their organization with no effort. In fact, other people paid for it. Thus I am completely on the side of Markus Persson.

  50. Re:What motivates entrepreneurs, and were people m by Lisias · · Score: 1

    Oculus served their purpose; there will be good competition now. I suppose the donors got their "money's worth" in that regard.

    BULLSHIT

    The kickstarters were ripped off. Simple like that.

    They take the risks by using their money funding an idea. Now Facebook buys for themselves a successful product, and the kickstarters aren't getting any reward from that. Not a single one had agreed on a "Facebook Oculus".

    --
    Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
  51. Re:What motivates entrepreneurs, and were people m by bladesinger · · Score: 1

    Agreed. I'm just trying to recognize that many, many Kickstarter projects fail horribly. They succeeded beyond reasonable measures. The interest in VR has grown dramatically and has prompted a new look at the space.

    I'm glad that happened, so what I am trying to say is I do not regret Oculus VR existing through kickstarter.

    But I am not pleased to have been deceived, and I am sad to witness base human nature triumph over passion for innovation and technology. Could they not have taken the moral high ground, at least for a little longer? Finish what you promised, go as long as you can, if you are going to lose- and only then- sell out? I was so inspired by Oculus and their activism (I attended their convention in Boston). This decision has caused me to bounce back to reality- greed usually wins.

  52. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by wiggles · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you want to see the future of the internet, go read Snow Crash by Neil Stephenson. All these guys did - Carmack, Zuck, the Google guys - whatever, and they've all been trying to make Stephenson's Metaverse come to life ever since. Think of it as a kind of Burnham plan for the internet.

    Facebook is trying to produce the Metaverse, just like everyone before them, and the Oculus Rift will be the first incarnation of the Metaverse's headset.

  53. Facebook is like the rich nerd in a prep school by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He approaches a group of cool kids hanging out, flashes his cash, and most of them ditch him at the first opportunity. He still buys a lot of friends, though he knows it's not real friendship in the back of his mind.

  54. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by Joce640k · · Score: 2

    Technologies that allow them to directly compete with things like google glass?

    Either that or they plan to turn facebook into Second Life.

    Or both at once - you walk down the street and see facebook profiles floating over people's heads.

    Who knows...but you can bet it isn't good.

    --
    No sig today...
  55. Investing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not investing when you contribute to a Kickstarter project. It's giving.

  56. Re:What motivates entrepreneurs, and were people m by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    uh, the kickstarters didn't buy stock, they donated money. they got exactly what they payed for.

  57. Re: Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by MugenEJ8 · · Score: 1

    God I love GSC. Current faves are that and Cherry Pie.

  58. Must be nice.... by gosand · · Score: 1

    to be rich and successful enough to have principles to fall back on.
    It's always good to see people stand on principles, but it's just a lot harder to ignore the money on the table when you need it.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    1. Re:Must be nice.... by Xest · · Score: 1

      I'm not rich, but I stand on my principles. I refused to work for any Murdoch related companies even though I've had offers, and I refused to accept offers that offered anything less than 25 days leave + 8 days bank holiday per year because I believe that's the minimum any company that gives a shit about their employees should offer.

      You don't have to be rich to stand on your principles, you just have to be fucking stubborn enough to cut your nose off to spite your face.

      I agree it's much harder if you're living on the poverty line but most people aren't, for most people it's not that they're not willing to trade survival and food or heat for principles, it's that they're not willing to trade buying the latest video game next month instead of this month for their principles, which is a shit excuse.

  59. The real problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is facebook and minecraft touted so much on the internet? First of all, facebook is a bloated, grotesque, banal mess of buttons and espionage. Minecraft is a sorry excuse for a game (the survival mode). The only good that comes from minecraft are the mods, which are all fractured, poorly compatible, and in the end break the "game" even more. Really only creative mode is useful... In the end even nerds are succumbing to the madness of celebrity. It's a sad, sad, time.

    1. Re:The real problem by Kojiro+Ganryu+Sasaki · · Score: 1

      Creative mode is useless.

      The only way to play is modded survival.

      The main problem is the network model seems to suck as. 200 kB/s in some occasions.

  60. Re: Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by Giblet535 · · Score: 2

    Pot is illegal here, but I'll trade a copy of "Lawnmower Man - The Game" for DOS, a set of of MSDOS 2.00 source code on 5.25" diskettes hand-labeled by Bill Gates, and a full-height 5.25" diskette drive to read them.

    That fulfills your VR jones and your tech-cool jones in a practical way.

    Oculus DK-II only, though. That high-latency nonsense is for the birds.

  61. Re: Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exactly this! I don't get it why people are so dense.
    FB wants to make a Google glass clone.
    That's it. They don't give a shit about Oculus the gaming platform. Some IP was needed and now they have it.

    FB is also probably reason why Carmack left so this has been happening looooong time already.

  62. Drama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Jesus Christ, there is WAY too many fucking drama queens speaking up about this issue. If you feel emotion, step back and look at the issue when you're a bit calmer.

  63. Where's the (-1, Dense) choice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just saying.

  64. Bah, it's @notch by CodeReign · · Score: 1

    @notch fails at life and would have halted development due to being slightly cumbersome in the near future anyway, just like he did with all the other promised features.

    -RIP minecraft alpha.

  65. alternative to oculus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.vrase.com/ via armdevices.net

    on the other hand my eyes never recovered from being forced to use a mantis magnifying scope.

  66. Reasons by Dripdry · · Score: 2

    So the PE ratio on Facebook stock is 90. It's ludicrous.
    I saw someone on Ars rhetorically ask, essentially,"Well, why in the world would facebook want to mess with Oculus!?" and a reply seemed better served here:
    When this tech bubble finally goes floomph and pops, FB isn't going to have much of anything; I really hope a lot of you remember when this was all going on 15 years ago, because it seems to be happening again. Tiny companies with virtually no real earnings are putting out enormous IPOs. When FB crashes, they're going to panic and try to monetize the hell out of Oculus.

    I suspect that it will either get raped for the IP or spun off after the tech crash.
    For all the hoopla, I feel liek people swimming in money is clouding their ability to think rationally about this. Prove me wrong, internet, but I think Palmer Luckey just made the classic blunder (besides starting a land war in Asia): Never go in against a clueless techie-hipster billionaire douchebag when a game-changing technology is on the line.

    --
    -
    1. Re:Reasons by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure how much patentable IP Oculus has, I just played with one yesterday, it's a 7" tablet screen pressed up against a view master and held against your head with a set of ski goggles and a wiimote.

      it's really cool that they have gotten VR tech to be so affordable, but the innovation isn't at all in what the rift does it's in making it out of commodity parts at consumer friendly prices

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  67. Mark Z. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone who is around Mark Z should watch their pets. The guy wants to make animals available for sexual deviants to be able to be abuse. "Will curb other desires". He's a sicko! Good for minecraft.

  68. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by chihowa · · Score: 2

    Are you sure that they're trying to produce the Metaverse and not just the anarcho-capitalistic dystopia part?

    --
    If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
  69. Re:What motivates entrepreneurs, and were people m by BitZtream · · Score: 1

    So they (or you if appropriate) invested in some random group of people you never met, have no track record to look at, because you found a website that let you throw money at them ... and they told you how they were going to make something awesome. You didn't bother to do any due diligence background work on your own and instead basically gave money away to the Nigerian prince.

    You pretty much deserved it.

    But you didn't get ripped off and thats not what happened.

    Did the original kick starters get what they paid for? (Dev units I expect?) If so, how did they get ripped off?

    Kickstarter is not an investment website, its a donation website. Not really sure how they got ripped off other than you don't like Facebook (me either!)

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  70. Dear Notch, by BitZtream · · Score: 1

    Minecraft is cool and all, but its not THAT cool.

    And really, nobody gives a shit what you're opinion is.

    And you're a fucking hypocrite who has no problem boycotting random things while fully participating in the same thing by a different name; i.e. no Windows 8 RT mind craft because OMG LOCKDOWN@#^!@#$^&Q! yet you have absolutely no problem selling it for $20 a pop for Xbox360.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    1. Re:Dear Notch, by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      I'd really like to disagree with you, but he did build it in Java...

      That said, I'd probably have done the exact same thing and publicly cut all ties to the Oculus Rift the moment that FB bought it.

  71. VR not mature at all by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Regardless of what you use to sense position, you're going to have to put it into an input at some point.

    Only if it works. The Sony VR headset has head tracking too - but how well does it work? They aren't even shipping dev kits until June - at least that's when they claim they will be shipping.

    VR is just too big, and really too old and mature, to be controlled by one company.

    How is it big, or old and mature in any way?

    There are not even ANY products for sale at the moment. There have been brief flashes where some stuff was put out, but then the fire cooled again and there were long spells of nothing...

    I would say real VR is totally in its infancy, with almost no real rules figured out for what works especially well or what people really want or will enjoy.

    I'm not saying it's not possible to re-use a lot of what you do from one headset to another. But I am saying it's probably non-trivial.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:VR not mature at all by jasno · · Score: 1

      Tracking an object like a head is trivial if you have the money to spend on industrial sensors. The technology is there, it just needs to be commoditized. It's like what happened when the wii-mote came out and helped drive down the price of accelerometers.

      One could do it with a precision gyro and accelerometer... one could do it with a high-speed camera... with acoustic sensors... there are many ways to do it. Most of the delays happen inside the computer, so it's more of a software problem in my opinion.

      There are a lot of VR solutions, they just don't cost $200. VR has been around since the 70's/80's... Here's one from NASA in '85: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

      --

      http://www.masturbateforpeace.com/
  72. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by GrepSoda · · Score: 1

    This is good analysis in my opinion. However, I think the biggest thing folks have overlooked is the most valuable asset facebook owns:

    The largest database of human faces on Earth mappable to real people.

    Put a tiny video camera on a Rift, shrink the size to a pair of ski goggles and all of a sudden these apps start to make real sense. Look at a person, it facially recognizes them and pulls up all their "like" stats. One might even augment reality to such a point that entire environments could be overlaid with agreed upon conditions.

    Q: How many people does it take to create a reality? A: One. But two is better. (P.K. Dick)

    Zuckerberg is not an idiot.

  73. let them have it by stanley_husky · · Score: 2

    if they build it, they will come. then they'll root it to hell and back. just like anything from any current vendor. easy guys. it's not like this is something we never saw before.

  74. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by Chryana · · Score: 1

    You think Facebook will actually do something with the Oculus? You're more optimistic than I am. I think they will try to get whatever patents they can get out of it and sue whoever tries to make something similar to it, once their bank account dries up after it turns out all the property their bought for a king's ransom turns out to be worthless.

  75. Not a grassroots tech company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://github.com/facebook ???

  76. Facebook Glass. Its coming... by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    Also, what possible IP could Facebook want from Oculus that would be worth that much to them?

    I posted in a prior article that I think this is Facebook making a play for the future Google glass market. Portable computing is the big thing now (iPad,etc), and Glass is the next market. Oculus is very similar in nature to Google glass, so if you want to get into the market without playing too much catch up, you dump 2 billion in buying up someone with knowledge and patents in the field.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  77. Shocked! by AndOne · · Score: 1

    I am shocked! Shocked I say, that a company who's major VC investor sits on the board of Facebook was bought by Facebook.

    Will this kill VR? Probably not. Is this going to usher in VR sooner? Maybe. Is this the wave of the future for social media? Probably not. Most people have no idea what the Oculus is nor do they care. The average person thinks you're a dork for wearing VR but will enjoy it for its novelty for a while. I say all this as someone who backed the Kickstarter and has a DK1.

    VR is inherently anti-social and oriented for consumption of media. Most people want to hang out with their friends face to face and not in a virtual land because humans are hardwired for social contact (for the most part). Plus Facebook has an inherent asynchronous aspect that makes it appealing. It's a broadcast that people can respond to overtime. But VR demands equipment and attention. I don't see people having this commitment to VR for this sort of activity.

    I honestly don't think it's just the technology not being there that held back VR all these years. The tech to do this has probably been here for about 6 to 10 years if the will to do it had been as well. I think the future of this sort of thing is much more likely in the field of Augmented Reality. Things that enhance your day to day life and help you complete tasks or activities. VR has some appeal for gaming/entertainment, but I think the only serious task I see for it might be teleoperation of robotic systems. Most of the time you want to be able to engage the world around you, not shut it out completely.

    One last point, if VR is going to take off like people hope, we need rendering systems that can do real time photo realistic rendering of realistic scenes with serious fidelity. We're getting close, but it's still going to be a while and even then the computing power required is going to be stout.

    --
    I don't care what you say, all I need is my Wumpabet soup.
  78. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If that is their plan, I think it's very short-sighted and more than a little misguided. It smacks of idealism; blinded to the realities of how technological innovations of the scale that VR aspires to evolve when released into the wide, wide world. I don't think the unified virtual universe these guys are fixated on is possible.
    In addition, what really worries me is that guys like Zuckerberg will use their unique brand of heavy-handed techno-capitalism to try to force this universe into existence, to the detriment of everyone but their shareholders.

  79. VR+Facebook = Hilarity by triffid_98 · · Score: 1

    ...and I for one welcome the forthcoming VR editions of "FarmVille" and "Panda Jam".

    Excellent choice Mark, you're clearly appealing to a core demographic. Your stockholders will be pleased.

  80. VR1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Way back in 1994 I played Doom (yes the original) on a VR1 head set. Very limited, but promising technology that didn't seem to have too many hurdles to become main stream.

    How come it has taken sooooo long?

  81. Facebook is bringing back Secondlife in 3D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mark my words. World of Facebook coming in 2020.

  82. Re: Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That sounds the most likely. Facebook looking to make AR gear that tracks the immediate vicinity and shows profiles for people around you.
    The default feed settings are probably going to flood with " was sighted at by an facebook oculus rifter."

  83. I don't trust Facebook. by jdawgnoonan · · Score: 1

    So I now root for Sony or Microsoft.

  84. Marketing ploy? by Spiked_Three · · Score: 1

    The New Coke for the 21st century?

    Take a good product, ruin it, have consumers reject it, then bring back the old and net an increase in sales....brilliant (again).

    --
    slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
  85. Re:Kickstarter skeptics eat your heart out by mindwhip · · Score: 1

    Since the OR was mainly a "close to eye" usable screen with other stuff bolted around it I suspect that Facebook either found some patent in the bundle that will mean they get a cut of Google Glass or is something they think they need or can use to develop their own Glass equivalent... possibly along with a Facebook phone.

    I am sad.

    --
    [The Universe] has gone offline.
  86. hypocrite by SuperDre · · Score: 1

    Yeah, he also said he wouldn't do a xbox 360 version and a xbox one version.. guess what.. he did.. the man is just a sell-out like anyone else.. If the plaform attracks a good revenue you would be stupid not to support it.. And let's be honest, Minecraft really isn't a game, it's just a social gathering where you can build stuff, it really doesn't have a goal... (but that's just fine for people who love to 'play' it, so don't get me wrong)..

  87. Re:What motivates entrepreneurs, and were people m by Lisias · · Score: 1

    uh, the kickstarters didn't buy stock, they donated money. they got exactly what they payed for.

    It's not what they're saying.

    --
    Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
  88. Re:What motivates entrepreneurs, and were people m by Lisias · · Score: 1

    But you didn't get ripped off and thats not what happened.

    Did the original kick starters get what they paid for? (Dev units I expect?) If so, how did they get ripped off?

    It's not what they're saying.

    But some others agrees with you, namelly Nicholas Negroponte.

    Let's see what time has to say about it.

    Kickstarter is not an investment website, its a donation website. Not really sure how they got ripped off other than you don't like Facebook (me either!)

    Yes and no. People does donate with something in mind. And they want this state of mind enforced.

    You don't donate money to homeless if they're going to buy booze, do you? Most of us don't donate money to them even if we're sure they're going to buy food. Why?

    With Kickstart it's the same thing. The guys can be right under the Law, but they have to face the public opinion about the matter. Kickstarters are feeling ripped off, and since they were the very simple reason Oculus managed to get a 2 Billion USD company, it's God Damned Good to spend a good fraction of this money trying to explain themselves - and perhaps, giving something interesting back to these guys.

    Bad P/R can be good just to politicians.

    --
    Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
  89. cheap sunglasses http://www.easybagstrade.com by jureoiuw · · Score: 1

    Designer Bags, discount designer handbags, discount sunglasses online, Handbags Discount, cheap purses, leather handbags, cheap handbags, designer bags on sale, michael kors outlet, handbags for cheap, michael kors purses, designer bags for cheap, michael kors bags, wholesale designer handbags, leather handbags wholesale, michael kors outlet online, michael kors outlet store, wholesale handbags china, michael kors handbags sale, wholesale handbags usa, Discount Sunglasses, cheap designer sunglasses, cheap mens sunglasses, mens designer sunglasses, wholesale designer sunglasses, discount designer sunglasses, china wholesale sunglasses, cheap michael kors bags, michael kors handbags on sale. designer handbags http://www.easybagstrade.com/ designer sunglasses http://www.easybagstrade.com/ wholesale handbags http://www.easybagstrade.com/ mens sunglasses http://www.easybagstrade.com/ Handbags On Sale http://www.easybagstrade.com/ wholesale sunglasses http://www.easybagstrade.com/ cheap designer handbags http://www.easybagstrade.com/ sunglasses hut http://www.easybagstrade.com/ cheap sunglasses http://www.easybagstrade.com/ cheap michael kors handbags http://www.easybagstrade.com/ michael kors handbags outlet http://www.easybagstrade.com/