Facebook Buys Oculus Rift For $2 Billion

[HawkMan]

So, because he stands to make money from his investment his opinion is irrelevant? Remember at this point he already made that money and whatever he says from here on doesn't affect that. As such that part can be ignored from his post anyway.

It's also not the first time he's called out Notch for being a pouty brat, as well as the two blowfish.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

So, because he stands to make money from his investment his opinion is irrelevant? Remember at this point he already made that money and whatever he says from here on doesn't affect that. As such that part can be ignored from his post anyway.

It's also not the first time he's called out Notch for being a pouty brat, as well as the two blowfish.

 

Not irrelevant, but hardly impartial when he has financial gain on the table with the merger.

 

He's got a cheek to say Notch acts like a brat with his outburts and rants pretty much telling people to STFU and agree with him - See how he called out anyone not pro-DRM last year. Minecraft is Notch's creation and how is anyone wrong to not want to support something out of principle? Are you trying to argue and say every dev should support every company regardless of said companies ethos/business plan? Perfect world that eh, everyone global opinion aligning to support such a move.

[Lord Method Man]

Cliff B had to open his mouth, as if I needed even more evidence that this deal is rotten.

[HawkMan]

Not irrelevant, but hardly impartial when he has financial gain on the table with the merger.

 

He's got a cheek to say Notch acts like a brat with his outburts and rants pretty much telling people to STFU and agree with him - See how he called out anyone not pro-DRM last year. Minecraft is Notch's creation and how is anyone wrong to not want to support something out of principle? Are you trying to argue and say every dev should support every company regardless of said companies ethos/business plan? Perfect world that eh, everyone global opinion aligning to support such a move.

Notch is free to not support anything out of principle. The thing is what he did was obvious. He used the whole buyout as a reason to spout some anti FB bile, when it was obvious he was never going to support the OR with minecraft even before the buyout. Oh sure he said he might give so e resources to porting the pi edition. But if you actually read his post it was obvious this was mere lip service and he had no intention of doing so, from his baseless and proven wrong comments that it's unplayable on the OR. Making a special pi edition for the PC instead of just adding OR support to the regular edition makes no sense, since they both run on the PC, using the OR is optional for those who have one, and it would be the same amount of work, possibly more work to make the pi edition. So once you read behind what he wrote you see he had no intention of ever supporting it.

More so, he chooses to ditch support just because a company he for some reason don't like(yet probably indirectly amounts to the majority of sales of his game through people posting) downs the hardware maker IS petty. And Cliffy is well within his rights to point out he is petty. As you notice, NONE of the other thousands of developers who got their DK. And DK2's have dropped support.

As for Cliffy post about DRM, it was less in support of DRM and more I support of a digital future where sharing is key and where DRM is a necessity.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

Notch is free to not support anything out of principle. The thing is what he did was obvious. He used the whole buyout as a reason to spout some anti FB bile, when it was obvious he was never going to support the OR with minecraft even before the buyout. Oh sure he said he might give so e resources to porting the pi edition. But if you actually read his post it was obvious this was mere lip service and he had no intention of doing so, from his baseless and proven wrong comments that it's unplayable on the OR. Making a special pi edition for the PC instead of just adding OR support to the regular edition makes no sense, since they both run on the PC, using the OR is optional for those who have one, and it would be the same amount of work, possibly more work to make the pi edition. So once you read behind what he wrote you see he had no intention of ever supporting it.

More so, he chooses to ditch support just because a company he for some reason don't like(yet probably indirectly amounts to the majority of sales of his game through people posting) downs the hardware maker IS petty. And Cliffy is well within his rights to point out he is petty. As you notice, NONE of the other thousands of developers who got their DK. And DK2's have dropped support.

As for Cliffy post about DRM, it was less in support of DRM and more I support of a digital future where sharing is key and where DRM is a necessity.

 

I think you're really over reacting to this tbh. Just because you dislike something doesn't mean you're "anti" that company/product. He voiced his opinions and explained why he's not releasing Minecraft on OR. He's not leading a campaign to shut down the company or gather support from other devs to stop their work.

 

Someone else brought up his thoughts towards Win8 receiving a Minecraft build for its store which he said would never happen. Does that mean he's anti-Windows now too, ignoring that probably a sizable chunk of players are playing MC on it to begin with? Come on be reasonable. He wouldn't even release 360/X1 versions if he was "anti" anything Microsoft.

 

You seem to have a really unhealthy relationship with indies, Hawkman, I don't understand what the need for it is. If you don't like them or their games just ignore them. You're the one coming across as "anti" when you resort to personally insulting them.

 

And again, why are you trying to debate and specualte on something you have absoultely no knowledge of? He said they talked about bringing it to OR and now he's not going to. That's all there is to it. The rest of your conspiracy theory or reading between the lines is irrelevant.

[trooper11]

Cliffy's opinion, which is every bit as valid as Notch's, will be attacked and ignored mostly because you earned money from the sale.  But then I wonder, Notch said he invested a big chunk of money into OR himself, so has he also made money from the sale?  I don't know the details of these investments, but if Notch has also earned money, well then it seems like Cliffy and Notch are on much more equal footing then it first appeared.

 

As far as which viewpoint is 'right', I don't really think either is outright wrong or right.  Notch made a very public deceleration about FB when he announced his pulled support.  He is smart enough to know that if he says that on Twitter or wherever else, its going to be a big deal and will spread quickly.  So obviously he made a public statement like that for a reason and that reason would be to speak out against FB.  If he has a real problem with FB, then no wonder he would react this way.

 

I don't think his reaction was wrong, but if he was really passionate about OR (he invested $10k, no small amount), you would think that he would at least consider not making such a public statement that will clearly damage the OR guys. He must have decided that his issues with FB far outweighed his excitement/support/loyalty for the OR team to even give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

So then there is Cliffy's response.  He clearly has also been excited about OR since he invested in it.  Unlike Notch though, his excitement/support/loyalty for the OR team outweighs any concerns there might be with FB itself.  So he feels that if you were a strong supporter before this, there is is not enough 'bad' to suddenly wipe away all of that support.  Its not shocking then that he would react this way to Notch.  He sees a guy that clearly supported the OR team, come out and just throw that all away over what Cliffy sees as a small number of minuses compared to the high number of pluses.  Cliffy probably feels that he needs to defend the OR team that he supports so much.

 

So yeah, I'm not going to jump on either one of them, but this is a case of two guys that are coming to this news from different sides that you can't just dismiss as ignorant or misleading. 

[HawkMan]

What does this have to do with indies ? Why are you bringing up indies, Mojang and Notch are hardly indies anymore and haven't been for a long time, technically they can be called it, but not I spirit of indie. Also why are you talking about MS in all of this ?

I don't have an issue with indies. I have an issue with bratty kids who throws a tantrum because someone else got their toy. This is not the first time Notch has thrown a tantrum over spam all stuff.

And reading between the lines is always relevant. But you don't even have to do that. He stating things straight out. He should act his age and of he don't want to develop for a FB owned device, then says so in a grown up manner, not by throwing a tantrum. Him and the blowfishes are the ones giving the so called indies a bad name.

[HawkMan]

Cliffy's opinion, which is every bit as valid as Notch's, will be attacked and ignored mostly because you earned money from the sale. But then I wonder, Notch said he invested a big chunk of money into OR himself, so has he also made money from the sale? I don't know the details of these investments, but if Notch has also earned money, well then it seems like Cliffy and Notch are on much more equal footing then it first appeared.

As far as which viewpoint is 'right', I don't really think either is outright wrong or right. Notch made a very public deceleration about FB when he announced his pulled support. He is smart enough to know that if he says that on Twitter or wherever else, its going to be a big deal and will spread quickly. So obviously he made a public statement like that for a reason and that reason would be to speak out against FB. If he has a real problem with FB, then no wonder he would react this way.

I don't think his reaction was wrong, but if he was really passionate about OR (he invested $10k, no small amount), you would think that he would at least consider not making such a public statement that will clearly damage the OR guys. He must have decided that his issues with FB far outweighed his excitement/support/loyalty for the OR team to even give them the benefit of the doubt.

So then there is Cliffy's response. He clearly has also been excited about OR since he invested in it. Unlike Notch though, his excitement/support/loyalty for the OR team outweighs any concerns there might be with FB itself. So he feels that if you were a strong supporter before this, there is is not enough 'bad' to suddenly wipe away all of that support. Its not shocking then that he would react this way to Notch. He sees a guy that clearly supported the OR team, come out and just throw that all away over what Cliffy sees as a small number of minuses compared to the high number of pluses. Cliffy probably feels that he needs to defend the OR team that he supports so much.

So yeah, I'm not going to jump on either one of them, but this is a case of two guys that are coming to this news from different sides that you can't just dismiss as ignorant or misleading.

Crowd funding is not an investment, which is what got the whole crowd funding movement and several companies using crowd funding in problems before since the oversight bodies think it's abuse of those that fund who invest, without the benefits of an investment,

So notch didn't invest, he "gave" them money for a few small favors and goodies. CiffyB actually invested in the company.

[PsYcHoKiLLa]

Excellent editorial on this, a lot of very good points made.

 

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

What does this have to do with indies ? Why are you bringing up indies, Mojang and Notch are hardly indies anymore and haven't been for a long time, technically they can be called it, but not I spirit of indie. Also why are you talking about MS in all of this ?

I don't have an issue with indies. I have an issue with bratty kids who throws a tantrum because someone else got their toy. This is not the first time Notch has thrown a tantrum over spam all stuff.

And reading between the lines is always relevant. But you don't even have to do that. He stating things straight out. He should act his age and of he don't want to develop for a FB owned device, then says so in a grown up manner, not by throwing a tantrum. Him and the blowfishes are the ones giving the so called indies a bad name.

 

I don't know, you brought them up. You're throwing around insults about indies who have absolutely nothing to do with the story (Jonathan Blow and Phil Fish), which you've done in the quote above again. Why is it necessary? It's you being anti-indie as far as I can tell wanting to push an opinion across which isn't even relevant to the topic. We're talking about FB and OR. If either dev posted something like Notch/Cliffy did then fair enough but they haven't.

 

And as for MS, I didn't bring them up either, I already explained someone else brought up MC on Windows 8 controversey. My point is he isn't being anti anything, he has decided against releasing something because he doesn't like a company's ethics/operations. That's not throwing a tantrum which again is why I said you're over reacting. You're belitting their opinions and justifications to something lower because you don't like/agree with them. Just let it go and stop trying to turn it into something more than it is.

 

There's no debate about Mojang being indie, it's just a fact. Top tier indie sure, but indie all the same. Again, nothing to do with the topic at hand though. Just pointless bickering.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Cliffy's opinion, which is every bit as valid as Notch's, will be attacked and ignored mostly because you earned money from the sale.  But then I wonder, Notch said he invested a big chunk of money into OR himself, so has he also made money from the sale?  I don't know the details of these investments, but if Notch has also earned money, well then it seems like Cliffy and Notch are on much more equal footing then it first appeared.

 

As far as which viewpoint is 'right', I don't really think either is outright wrong or right.  Notch made a very public deceleration about FB when he announced his pulled support.  He is smart enough to know that if he says that on Twitter or wherever else, its going to be a big deal and will spread quickly.  So obviously he made a public statement like that for a reason and that reason would be to speak out against FB.  If he has a real problem with FB, then no wonder he would react this way.

 

I don't think his reaction was wrong, but if he was really passionate about OR (he invested $10k, no small amount), you would think that he would at least consider not making such a public statement that will clearly damage the OR guys. He must have decided that his issues with FB far outweighed his excitement/support/loyalty for the OR team to even give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

So then there is Cliffy's response.  He clearly has also been excited about OR since he invested in it.  Unlike Notch though, his excitement/support/loyalty for the OR team outweighs any concerns there might be with FB itself.  So he feels that if you were a strong supporter before this, there is is not enough 'bad' to suddenly wipe away all of that support.  Its not shocking then that he would react this way to Notch.  He sees a guy that clearly supported the OR team, come out and just throw that all away over what Cliffy sees as a small number of minuses compared to the high number of pluses.  Cliffy probably feels that he needs to defend the OR team that he supports so much.

 

So yeah, I'm not going to jump on either one of them, but this is a case of two guys that are coming to this news from different sides that you can't just dismiss as ignorant or misleading. 

 

No, he invested in Kickstarter - That is a donation, not a buy in to own a % of the company or future deals.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

...

So you already know their plans?

Don't try to act like you're on the board of Facebook, making all the decisions for future unannounced projects.

I'm saying it because they've already said they're not a hardware company and their future plans for it involve having it based around social media with the possibility of putting advertising in it.

[spaceelf]

I'm saying it because they've already said they're not a hardware company and their future plans for it involve having it based around social media with the possibility of putting advertising in it.

http://techreport.com/news/26229/updated-oculus-headset-may-get-facebook-rebrand-price-cut

Update: In a statement to TechCrunch, Facebook has denied the allegation by the Times' source. The rumored redesign is "not true and not in the spirit of our relationship [with Oculus]," Facebook says.

[HawkMan]

I don't know, you brought them up. You're throwing around insults about indies who have absolutely nothing to do with the story (Jonathan Blow and Phil Fish), which you've done in the quote above again. Why is it necessary? It's you being anti-indie as far as I can tell wanting to push an opinion across which isn't even relevant to the topic. We're talking about FB and OR. If either dev posted something like Notch/Cliffy did then fair enough but they haven't.

 

And as for MS, I didn't bring them up either, I already explained someone else brought up MC on Windows 8 controversey. My point is he isn't being anti anything, he has decided against releasing something because he doesn't like a company's ethics/operations. That's not throwing a tantrum which again is why I said you're over reacting. You're belitting their opinions and justifications to something lower because you don't like/agree with them. Just let it go and stop trying to turn it into something more than it is.

 

There's no debate about Mojang being indie, it's just a fact. Top tier indie sure, but indie all the same. Again, nothing to do with the topic at hand though. Just pointless bickering.

I brought up blowfish because they are the other two childish people that Cliffy has public ally taken out as not acting their age.

And last I checked ,even if you include Mojang, 3 people don't make the indie scene, there's thousands of other devs there who don't act like spoilt brats. So no just because I mention 3 brats who can't act their age doesn't mean I hate indie. And as I said a proper studio the size of Mojang who even has publishers to some degree is not really indie.

To be the spirit of indie you need to be a fairly small team. To many devs today are acting under the indie umbrella while they shouldn't be, they're just using up the name for goodwill. Either way that's beside the point.

I'm saying it because they've already said they're not a hardware company and their future plans for it involve having it based around social media with the possibility of putting advertising in it.

But this is like two different things what they do and what everyone else does. This isn't what the Rift will do, it's what THEY will use the rift for. While game developers will still use it for the same thing they have been working in for over a year or two now. It's just another rift "game".

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

I brought up blowfish because they are the other two childish people that Cliffy has public ally taken out as not acting their age.

And last I checked ,even if you include Mojang, 3 people don't make the indie scene, there's thousands of other devs there who don't act like spoilt brats. So no just because I mention 3 brats who can't act their age doesn't mean I hate indie. And as I said a proper studio the size of Mojang who even has publishers to some degree is not really indie.

To be the spirit of indie you need to be a fairly small team. To many devs today are acting under the indie umbrella while they shouldn't be, they're just using up the name for goodwill. Either way that's beside the point.

But this is like two different things what they do and what everyone else does. This isn't what the Rift will do, it's what THEY will use the rift for. While game developers will still use it for the same thing they have been working in for over a year or two now. It's just another rift "game".

 

Someone is a spoiled brat because they don't like a company/companies ethos? Gosh, Neowin must be full of them then... right??? right?  :/ I forgot we live in a time when a developer HAS to release his or her game on every platform, even if they have reasons for not wanting to. You know, because a game pretty much solely made by 1 individual (at least initially) is really owned by the man, and not by that individual.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

Minecraft On Oculus Rift Would Have Been A Free Demo, Notch Says

 

Patricia Hernandez

Filed to: Minecraft

Yesterday 7:24pm

 

After news broke that the Oculus Rift version of Minecraft had been cancelled, many people couldn't help but wonder, just how much of the project was there to cancel, exactly? Was there something there to cancel, even?

 

Yesterday, Palmer Luckey?co-founder of Oculus VR?took to Facebook to comment on the cancelation, and he made it seem as if there wasn't much there to cancel in the first place.

 

"[Markus "Notch" Persson] had the Rift for a year and had not even tried the Minecraft mod (which is really good), much less done any exploration work," he wrote on an article posted by Michael Moffitt. "I think Notch is a super cool guy, but it is really easy to 'cancel' a project that was never started as an out."1

 

We reached out to Markus Persson to ask about these allegations, and here's what he had to say about the Oculus Rift version of Minecraft: 2

 

I haven't done any Minecraft development at all for a long time, but I've built several prototypes of games for the Oculus Rift. I never play ANY mods for Minecraft because they make me feel weird feelings about second guessing my work. A lot of the mods do things better than I ever could.

Other developers at Mojang have played the mod, and the mobile Minecraft development team has worked on an Oculus Rift prototype of the game. The last thing I said to the oculus people before I left was that I would love for us to make a free version of Minecraft ("Minecraft VR Edition" perhaps?) to help promote VR, even if I don't think a game with as much GUI as Minecraft is ideal for VR.

 

A comment on Twitter also reinforced this idea:

 

@therealcliffyb also, the "ball i'm taking home" was a potential free version of Minecraft designed to promote VR.

? Markus Persson (@notch) March 27, 2014

 

So there you have it: there was indeed at least a prototype of the game, and the finished product might've been free, had it ever been released. If only! Of course, in spite of all of this, Minecraft fanatics still win out in the end: there are Minecraft mods for the Oculus Rift.

 

http://kotaku.com/minecraft-on-oculus-rift-would-have-been-a-free-demo-n-1553257705

 

-------------

 

Facebook Stock Closes Down 7 Percent Following Oculus Acquisition

by Mike Futter on March 26, 2014 at 05:10 PM

 

Yesterday, we learned that $2 billion buys you talent and the most promising virtual reality startup in the market. Today, we discovered that Facebook investors aren?t sure what to make of that.

 

Following yesterday?s surprise purchase of Oculus VR for $400 million in cash and approximately $1.6 billion in stock, investors shed shares dropping the value by 7 percent to $60.38 (down $4.51). Facebook CEO and Oculus leadership claim the partnership is designed as a long-term strategy, partially necessitated by an as yet undisclosed timeline for a consumer head-mounted display.

 

Both parties have relationships to smooth over, with Facebook in need of immediate retail investor cultivation and potential institutional investor trouble that has yet to emerge. Oculus touched off a wave of discontent that will take time to assuage, especially among developers that backed the company?s Kickstarter in 2012.

 

For more on Oculus, check out our interview today with CEO Brendon Iribe, founder Palmer Luckey, and vice president of product Nate Mitchell.

 

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2014/03/26/facebook-stock-closes-down-7-percent-following-oculus-acquisition.aspx

[T3X4S]

Unlike

[Athernar]

Cliffy's opinion, which is every bit as valid as Notch's, will be attacked and ignored mostly because you earned money from the sale.  But then I wonder, Notch said he invested a big chunk of money into OR himself, so has he also made money from the sale?  I don't know the details of these investments, but if Notch has also earned money, well then it seems like Cliffy and Notch are on much more equal footing then it first appeared.

 

Oh not at all, I personally will ignore it not because he's got financial ties - but because CliffyB is an washed up has-been of a console dev who's opinion has no value or relevance to the PC space.

 

Notch is an overrated hack of a developer too, but even he is far more relevant than Clifford ever was or will be.

[vcfan]

Minecraft is Notch's creation and how is anyone wrong to not want to support something out of principle?

if he was a struggling dev just trying to get a crumb, i bet those principles wouldnt exist.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

if he was a struggling dev just trying to get a crumb, i bet those principles wouldnt exist.

 

Lots of them do, look at 360/X1 losing indies to PS4 because of the restrictions MS used to impose. Are they all in the same position as Notch and raking in money? Nope.

 

Even those who were successful like Jonathan Blow said he has spent all his money he made on his new game but he won't release for X1. Some people have principles and stick to them. It's not always about $ for them.

[vcfan]

Lots of them do, look at 360/X1 losing indies to PS4 because of the restrictions MS used to impose. Are they all in the same position as Notch and raking in money? Nope.

 

Even those who were successful like Jonathan Blow said he has spent all his money he made on his new game but he won't release for X1. Some people have principles and stick to them. It's not always about $ for them.

i have a hard time believing someone would risk not being able to put food on the table, or risk losing having a roof over their head over principles.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

i have a hard time believing someone would risk not being able to put food on the table, or risk losing having a roof over their head over principles.

 

I'm sure many of them do live hard lives with either rubbish living arrangements and/or diets, but that doesn't mean you need to give up your principles to survive either. For many of them it's also a path they've chosen because they hate the way the AAA business works and I guess that sums up exactly what they'd give up to do what they like. That's getting off the subject a little too much though.

[spaceelf]

Oh not at all, I personally will ignore it not because he's got financial ties - but because CliffyB is an washed up has-been of a console dev who's opinion has no value or relevance to the PC space.

 

Notch is an overrated hack of a developer too, but even he is far more relevant than Clifford ever was or will be.

CliffyB has been a part of more awesome games than Notch has even dreamed of, and he's one of few that will call others out for being full of ######.

 

I value his opinion over most devs today, though I don't go out of my way to read it.

[theyarecomingforyou]

CliffyB has been a part of more awesome games than Notch has even dreamed of, and he's one of few that will call others out for being full of ####.

 

I value his opinion over most devs today, though I don't go out of my way to read it.

It really doesn't matter how many games he's worked on, he's still an obnoxious individual and I don't have any interest in his opinion.

[Athernar]

CliffyB has been a part of more awesome games than Notch has even dreamed of, and he's one of few that will call others out for being full of ####.

 

I value his opinion over most devs today, though I don't go out of my way to read it.

 

His crowning achievement is Beefcakes of War, 'nuff said.

 

He's a generic console shlock dev, not interested at all in his ability/talent at producing mass-market drivel. Console gamers can keep him.