technology Why do people hate it when Oculus is acquired by Facebook?

[~Rule 63~ Lyeco 527]

What is wrong with Oculus now?

Why do you think it's ruining the Oculus?

I heard so many hate comments about it's acquisition

Do you think Facebook will make it sh*t?

I am actually ok with the idea because I can't spend $299 for a whole headset. With this idea, almost everybody can use the Oculus Rift. I want even the poor people in rural areas to try VR not just in Urban side.

So guys can you tell me why?

Edited April 14, 2014 by LyecOctavia

[Rye_B_P 53]

What is wrong with Oculus now?

Why do you think it's ruining the Oculus?

I heard so many hate comments about it's acquisition

Do you think Facebook will make it sh*t?

I actually ok with the idea because I can't spend $299 for a whole headset. With this idea, almost everybody can use the Oculus Rift. I want even the poor people in rural areas to try VR not just in Urban side.

So guys can you tell me why?

 

 

Different companies have different mission objectives.  Sometimes when another company buys and/or sponsors a product, they have "a saying" of what that developer/creator/producer can do with said project.  Think of it of how when your company is in the stock market and you have share holders, who sponsor you.  If you do something that they do NOT like, then they pull their support and money.  

 

People are afraid that Facebook will misdirect Oculus, and turn it into a major "advertisement" for Facebook, where they would do nothing but push advertisement ads in your face and make it all about social networking and not enough about the games, in which Oculus was advertised to do.

 

So I would say people are afraid that Facebook will "ruin" Oculus in the long run and change what the experience is all about.

 

At least that is my take on it.  I don't want to judge too soon.  I want to see how well they perform. before passing judgement.  

Edited April 14, 2014 by Rye_B_P

[Dattebayo 2,850]

^^Pretty much that.

 

FAcebook, any way you look at it, only wants to makes money.

True, that's most companies, but Facebook has it's own brand of "sell-your-viewing-information-to-ad-companies" type of evil.

[AnonBrony 1,469]

What Rye said. But I would like to add that Facebook is not a gaming company. It's a social media company. Why a social media company like them wanted to buy a device meant for video games is very uncertain, and people do not like this uncertainty. If a company like Sony or Microsoft were to have bought it, people would of been more okay with ithat since they know companies like that will use the device for what it was meant for: video games.

[Dattebayo 2,850]

What Rye said. But I would like to add that Facebook is not a gaming company. It's a social media company. Why a social media company like them wanted to buy a device meant for video games is very uncertain, and people do not like this uncertainty. If a company like Sony or Microsoft were to have bought it, people would of been more okay with ithat since they know companies like that will use the device for what it was meant for: video games.

My theory: the device remembers what you play, sends that information to FBHQ.

They then sell/use that information to customize what ads pop up when you use certain things, like Facebook and it's affiliates.

[The Elusive Cinder 1,328]

I actually ok with the idea because I can't spend $299 for a whole headset. With this idea, almost everybody can use the Oculus Rift. I want even the poor people in rural areas to try VR not just in Urban side.

 

I don't understand this part.

 

£300 is not a lot of money for the amount of tech inside a VR headset. It's a paltry sum - existing VR technology costs into the thousands.

 

Facebook buying Oculus doesn't suddenly reduce the cost of parts and labor - perhaps a small return through upfront funding and bulk orders - getting better contacts and so on, but you're not going to be seeing substantial price changes.

 

All it means is that when your knee deep in the dead, broadsword in one hand and magic spell in the other as you peer up at the bloodmoon with a dread sense of awe and foreboding... **JENNY HAS POKED YOUR SHEEP ON FARMVILLE!** ... sorry, where was I?

Edited April 14, 2014 by Cinderscribe

[~Rule 63~ Lyeco 527]

Different companies have different mission objectives.  Sometimes when another company buys and/or sponsors a product, they have "a saying" of what that developer/creator/producer can do with said project.  Think of it of how when your company is in the stock market and you have share holders, who sponsor you.  If you do something that they do NOT like, then they pull their support and money.  

 

People are afraid that Facebook will misdirect Oculus, and turn it into a major "advertisement" for Facebook, where they would do nothing but push advertisement ads in your face and make it all about social networking and not enough about the games, in which Oculus was advertised to do.

 

So I would say people are afraid that Facebook will "ruin" Oculus in the long run and change what the experience is all about.

 

At least that is my take on it.  I don't want to judge too soon.  I want to see how well they perform. before passing judgement.

 

How does it turn into a major advertisement?

I agree that it needs to be seen a final product first before being judged by others.

You know, I mean try the finished. And then differentiate it from the older version. And see if Facebook ruins it or made it better

[Rye_B_P 53]

All it means is that when your knee deep in the dead, broadsword in one hand and magic spell in the other as you peer up at the bloodmoon with a dread sense of awe and foreboding... **JENNY HAS POKED YOUR SHEEP ON FARMVILLE!** ... sorry, where was I?

 

Clinderscribe said it best.... Although I think that is more of  a "Can I disable those annoying Facebook notifications?" Issue.

 

How does it turn into a major advertisement?

I agree that it needs to be seen a final product first before being judged by others.

You know, I mean try the finished. And then differentiate it from the older version. And see if Facebook ruins it or made it better

 

What Clinderscribe has said, is what the major opinion is.   As for what I meant by advertisements is similar to what Clinderscribe has said.  

 

 

So being FaceBook is a social networking company as other people in this thread has said.  Their "mission" is to use whatever asset at their disposal to make money, through advertisements.   In Clinderscribe's example, many people feel that Facebook will get rid of the "game" part and turn it into a GIMMICK of sorts. 

 

 

"Ohhh look at how COOL it is to browse FaceBook through this new technology!"

 

 

"Ohhh look at my new coffee table, that is also a touch screen tablet!  It looks cool!, I can browse FaceBook in such a cool looking way!"

 

 

See what I mean?  People fear that FaceBook will just turn this project, which looks like it is making a dent into improving virtual reality, into another Gimmick that people will like for a while and forget.  Hence pushing it as another excuse to "advertise" their company service, though another Gimmick.  Much how Google pushes how you can look through the SAME apps on it's device, which you could easily already do on your phone, tablet or PC.

 

 

WE can browse Facebook, on the PC, we can get FaceBook updates through our tablets, phones and now in new cars.  Why would we need more advertisement in this new technology?  That's what I mean by FaceBook using it as an advertisement, to gain more people to make accounts, and try to use the information given in advertisements, so they can expand their profits.  That's how most social networking sites make their money.

 

 

I think I answered your question, if not, let me know if I can better explain it to ya.  

Edited April 15, 2014 by Rye_B_P