Okay, I looked into it a little bit more, and I think I have a better say in this than before. For one, Oculus VR should still be operating independently, according to somebody who works at the company. Two, money doesn't fall out of the sky, and progress would have probably taken longer, considering the company has to manufacture many models and do more research into this. Clearly, Facebook has a lot more money, and it can hopefully come out cheaper, better and sooner. Three, they didn't even release a post-acquired version of the Rift. A little bit too quick to judge, don't you think? And four, what many people were saying about ads always popping up in the middle of a game, it not being used for actual gaming, Facebook having plans to use this to track info of people, etc. is: A: Said by people who are using Facebook, the bigger place between it and the Rift to have these "threats", (Notch, in my opinion, was the only one who was legitimate, since he probably wasn't using Facebook to begin with) and B: Very likely not gonna be done, you think a company would be this stupid to waste money to make a product nobody would want? Not a Facebook or Oculus VR fanboy, but lighten up, guys; yes, this might be worse, but on the other hand, it might be better. We don't know, we'll just have to wait until the consumer version is released. Thing is, though, that we can't make a final opinion before we've seen the real deal, considering they didn't even ship the second developer kit.
Normally, in relation to other issues, I would agree with you that people are overreacting - but in this instance, I think it is completely justified.
Oculus needed money to get off the ground, yes... but sooner or later it would have gotten it. Or one of the other brands developing similar technology would have. VR is going to happen, whether the first groups to do it have funding or not. The demand is simply too high for it to be ignored as an avenue of profit. For this reason in particular, any group with the money - be they a corporation or otherwise - would at least give it some thought once the baby steps were out of the way. Facebook just jumped the gun and took it ahead of the competition.
Whether OR still winds up operating independently of Facebook or not may not even be relevant... the fact that Facebook now owns it - and therefore has the final say on what is or is not added in terms of software and general content - is what worries me. Even if the dev team for OR still operates independently, they'll probably still wind up having to conform to Facebook's business standards or risk being fired and replaced by someone with more pliable morals.
And lastly, whether or not the people complaining about this use Facebook or not is beside the point - with Facebook, you can avoid disclosing your personal information to them by using a secure browser (ie. not Chrome or IE) and simply not adding any information outside of a name to your account when you make it, and keeping anything even remotely personal off and away from it. Anyone wanting to use an Oculus headset has to disclose their name and at least one correct and secure means of contact - along with bank details if they use a card to pay for it - in order to get and use the headset. Same thing for any data mining company, as I said before - it just so happens that the one whose data mining practices have received the most media attention was the one to have bought OR, which is why there's so much backlash over it.
As for companies being stupid enough to waste money on something like throwing ads into their games... have you seen the internet lately? Have you looked around when you go to the shops? Your local universities? Your cities? Everyone is doing it. Advertising is pervasive, all the more so because advertisers take indifference and passive hostility to mean that people aren't noticing their products, and will pay attention if they cram them that little bit further into our... let's say lives. Facebook is possibly the most blatant example of this. They are, in fact, stupid enough to do it, because advertisers don't care whether you like them or not. They just want to pester you into buying their product, and because they can legally make themselves a public nuisance with no repercussions, they're quite happy to exploit that allowance in every way possible. The fact that Facebook has so much money to throw around just makes it that much worse.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To touch Divinity, one must be prepared to brave Reality.
I suppose this is as good a thread as any to post this question/observation.
It's old news that Notch wanted nothing to do with Rift once SpaceBook purchased the company. The same old news category is that Notch sold the company to Microsoft. He would therefore have no decision making power should MS decide to embrace the Rift.
I'm no fan of Spacebook, nor of MS, but I enjoy to play Minecraft and would like to see it via the Rift. Even anaglyph glasses are a bit of fun.
Any leads/rumors about this out there in the 'net?
The occulus is already pretty big (in popularity), even though there are only developper-fucussed prototypes released. As soon as (or maybe even before) the occus isofficially released (talking about the consumer version here), I'm pretty sure that if Minecraft doesn't support it natively, there'll be a mod that will do it.
I agree that it's a bit sad. However, I think Notch is right in saying that he doesn't want to work with social, he wants to work with games. I wholeheartedly agree with this decision, although it kind of stinks that we won't be seeing an Oculus Rift compatible Minecraft version anytime soon. But, on the other hand.. the Oculus Rift may sound cool, but it seems to me that it may give you headaches, dizziness, etc., if you use it too long. Maybe Minecraft is better off without it.