Palmer is Leaving Oculus - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=bitches;52042590]"Walled garden", really? How is selling games to Vive users and giving them to their own customers for free a walled garden? [/QUOTE] EVE: Valkry, that one robot shooting game (by Eric) are all rift exclusive IIRC. At least without some hacky third party tools. [QUOTE=bitches;52042590] Also, nice job misrepresenting my argument about software control. It isn't about secrets, it's about [I]retaining the ability to make any software change you want without approval[/I].[/QUOTE] Your arguments are all over the road, first it's about how Valve won't let them touch their platform (Valve does as OpenVR is totally open on GitHub), then it's about control (email Joe, or someone at Valve, like the rest of us do), now it's about code access again. Maybe if Oculus put in a concerted effort Valve would give them package manager access on the SteamVR appid.

[QUOTE=glitchvid;52042625]EVE: Valkry, that one robot shooting game (by Eric) are all rift exclusive IIRC. At least without some hacky third party tools. Your arguments are all over the road, first it's about how Valve won't let them touch their platform (Valve does as OpenVR is totally open on GitHub), then it's about control (email Joe, or someone at Valve, like the rest of us do), now it's about code access again. Maybe if Oculus put in a concerted effort Valve would give them package manager access on the SteamVR appid.[/QUOTE] Epic's Robo Recall is for sale on the Oculus store for Vive users despite being free for all Touch owners. It's also open source; any Vive users who don't want to pay for it can compile the Unreal Engine project themselves to play for free. Yet, the game was totally funded by Oculus. What does that say about your walled garden argument? Total control and code access are the same argument. It's not my fault you don't understand the conflict of interest in letting Valve control Oculus software updates.

[QUOTE=bitches;52042654]Epic's Robo Recall is for sale on the Oculus store for Vive users despite being free for all Touch owners. It's also open source; any Vive users who don't want to pay for it can compile the Unreal Engine project themselves to play for free. Yet, the game was totally funded by Oculus. What does that say about your walled garden argument? Total control and code access are the same argument. It's not my fault you don't understand the conflict of interest in letting Valve control Oculus software updates.[/QUOTE] I stand corrected on a Robo Recall, however was that decision before or after they got flack for locking off the Vive from their API? Anyway, I've already addressed your various assertions in previous posts, you just keep dodging or ignoring them and I don't have the patience to keep repeating the same fundamental counterpoints.

[QUOTE=glitchvid;52042712]I stand corrected on a Robo Recall, however was that decision before or after they got flack for locking off the Vive from their API? Anyway, I've already addressed your various assertions in previous posts, you just keep dodging or ignoring them and I don't have the patience to keep repeating the same fundamental counterpoints.[/QUOTE] If SteamVR support for Rift users is any indication, two competing developer API standards is a mess to coordinate support for. That's why Oculus and Valve are [I]working together[/I] to make a new unified standard. "Open"VR is only a temporary solution before the fruit of their collaboration shows itself throughout the year. VR is brand new and you're acting like all of the problems have to be solved today. Robo Recall released only a month ago; it's just another recent example of Oculus's good will towards the VR industry, with more money in VR game funding than anyone else is putting in. "Oculus should just submit updates to valve" is not a fundamental counterpoint to "Oculus needs to retain control over its own software updates".

[QUOTE=Paul-Simon;52041640]I don't get why these argument about which HMD is better is even necessary. So much misinformation and pure hatred in this thread. Like god damn, feels like I've walked into a 2008 thread about XBox VS PS3. They're both good HMDs and will both provide [B]excellent[/B] VR experiences, and they both have certain flaws - But none big enough to ruin the experience. The Vive can easily be used for sitting experiences, and the Rift can easily be used for room scale experiences. The Vive requires power outputs, the Rift requires USB outputs. The Vive has big controllers that work well for some things, the Rift has small controllers that work well for other things. The Vive has slightly wider FoV, the Rift has slightly sharper image. The PSVR has the best head-mount and is the most comfortable though ;)[/QUOTE] This right here. I've used all three ecosystems and they all have tradeoffs that make the "best" one just a matter of preference. Honestly it's not even the technical differences that make any of them stand out, as on a purely functional and specs level Oculus and Vive are close enough that it doesn't matter. Pushing any one ecosystem as the best is asinine and the fanboy "my VR ecosystem can beat up your VR ecosystem" attitudes that have come to characterize VR discussions benefit nobody. What it really comes down to is logistical/ergonomics/economical preferences. Questions like do you mind having to use a ton of USB ports? Do you prefer having audio built into the headset? Do you wear glasses? And so on. If I had my way, I would combine all three, because I don't think any one of them does everything the better. My ideal headset would have the PSVR's ergonomic design (I find it most comfortable, and it works best with my glasses), with the Lighthouse system (less USB cables and don't have to worry about running long USB cables from my computer to the sensors), with the Rift's built in audio (I hate having to fiddle with picking up headphones and adding more steps to the process of taking it on/off), general build quality, and Touch style controllers.

[QUOTE=glitchvid;52042387]Aside from when a select few developers make that decision (of their own volition), SteamVR is an open platform. So the answer is plug in the Rift and it's tracking accessories, then open any SteamVR game.[/QUOTE] Yeah I mean stuff like Google Earth VR, which (intentionally) won't even launch for my Rift even though I'm sure it would work just fine.

[QUOTE=Paul-Simon;52043391]Yeah I mean stuff like Google Earth VR, which (intentionally) won't even launch for my Rift even though I'm sure it would work just fine.[/QUOTE] They brought Tilt Brush to Rift + Touch recently. I'm sure Earth is coming *sometime* soon, but the way Google works is mysterious. I agree that it's BS the Rift doesn't have it.

[QUOTE=bitches;52042364]anything can be worked around but it's worth noting that Oculus has been contributing to development of web VR and Khronos industry standards so that they [I]can[/I] support other headsets without compromising their ASW optimization performance guarantees; they sell "Oculus-Ready" PCs that are supposed to be guaranteed to work smoothly on any Oculus store games despite a low cost. Oculus has been selling software for [I]months[/I] to Vive users that they give away free to their Rift customers, so the anti-Facebook DRM scandal is a farce. Meanwhile Valve demands that Oculus give up control over their own software development so that only Valve can decide what a VR developer API should look like, which isn't good considering SteamVR is a buggy mess for Rift users.[/QUOTE] Why are your views and comments so needlessly one-sided? :/ You just cause lots of opinionated arguing from both sides - you've been doing it for such a long time. Would be nice if you toned it down a bit, because that would seriously increase the quality of VR related threads.

[QUOTE=Paul-Simon;52045441]Why are your views and comments so needlessly one-sided? :/ You just cause lots of opinionated arguing from both sides - you've been doing it for such a long time. Would be nice if you toned it down a bit, because that would seriously increase the quality of VR related threads.[/QUOTE] is it really one sided to respond to claims that facebook is the evil boogeyman of VR?

[QUOTE=bitches;52045807]is it really one sided to respond to claims that facebook is the evil boogeyman of VR?[/QUOTE] I do not understand why you feel you can continually reassert this strawman and expect anyone to be convinced. Not a soul here has blamed Facebook for VR's problems. People have said Oculus is a walled garden and that is due to the simple fact that Steam's VR system works for both major VR headsets, and Oculus's only works for the Rift not counting the 3rd party hack that is Revive. On top of that, Oculus tried an actual DRM scheme before and only stopped after an insane amount of community backlash. That is what people are referencing when they bring up DRM. I'm sure everyone here knows that DRM was removed, but the question remains: Will it ever come back? Everything going on with Kronos is good, but it's not out yet and until then we have to deal with this mess along with more and more exclusives that need Revive to work. For those unaware, Oculus's exclusivity agreement is for a period of 1 year.

[QUOTE=1/4 Life;52045838]I do not understand why you feel you can continually reassert this strawman and expect anyone to be convinced. Not a soul here has blamed Facebook for VR's problems. People have said Oculus is a walled garden and that is due to the simple fact that Steam's VR system works for both major VR headsets, and Oculus's only works for the Rift not counting the 3rd party hack that is Revive. On top of that, Oculus tried an actual DRM scheme before and only stopped after an insane amount of community backlash. That is what people are referencing when they bring up DRM. I'm sure everyone here knows that DRM was removed, but the question remains: Will it ever come back? Everything going on with Kronos is good, but it's not out yet and until then we have to deal with this mess along with more and more exclusives that need Revive to work. For those unaware, Oculus's exclusivity agreement is for a period of 1 year.[/QUOTE] It's pretty obvious that Oculus won't lock out Vive headsets after selling games for them. One year? Nice made-up figure. [url=http://store.steampowered.com/app/471660/]Guess what Oculus-funded game released for both headsets at the same time?[/url] This is the sort of thing I'm talking about with anti-facebook/oculus scaremongering. Everyone threw a fit that this game was delayed from its beta looking state for nearly a year that was about to release on steam, but the truth of it was money for the developers to make the game better and multiplayer and launch on two platforms at once to maximize fleeting new-game-popularity sales.

[QUOTE=bitches;52046638] One year? Nice made-up figure. [URL="http://store.steampowered.com/app/471660/"]Guess what Oculus-funded game released for both headsets at the same time?[/URL] This is the sort of thing I'm talking about with anti-facebook/oculus scaremongering. Everyone threw a fit that this game was delayed from its beta looking state for nearly a year that was about to release on steam, but the truth of it was money for the developers to make the game better and multiplayer and launch on two platforms at once to maximize fleeting new-game-popularity sales.[/QUOTE] On the 1-year figure, see Superhot and I Expect You To Die. The game you mentioned clearly got a different deal without exclusivity. If you want to disprove the 1-year, find a game that was exclusive for any period of time and then released on Vive before the 1 year mark. Why would you even bring up one that wasn't exclusive unless you were trying to be dishonest? Additionally, there's plenty of other ways outside of exclusivity they could use to get a return on investment from these games. Valve offers to advance you money from the sale of your game if you're working on a SteamVR release, regardless of the headset it's intended for. Oculus could simply use their 3rd party exclusive library as a source of good press/ads and Oculus store revenue instead. And no, it's not obvious. They could very well flip the switch any time. The Oculus store still warns me it can't find my headset every time I launch it, and I still get errors launching Oculus games from time to time due to "entitlement" issues with the store.

[QUOTE=1/4 Life;52046728]On the 1-year figure, see Superhot and I Expect You To Die. The game you mentioned clearly got a different deal without exclusivity. If you want to disprove the 1-year, find a game that was exclusive for any period of time and then released on Vive before the 1 year mark. Why would you even bring up one that wasn't exclusive unless you were trying to be dishonest? Additionally, there's plenty of other ways outside of exclusivity they could use to get a return on investment from these games. Valve offers to advance you money from the sale of your game if you're working on a SteamVR release, regardless of the headset it's intended for. Oculus could simply use their 3rd party exclusive library as a source of good press/ads and Oculus store revenue instead. And no, it's not obvious. They could very well flip the switch any time. The Oculus store still warns me it can't find my headset every time I launch it, and I still get errors launching Oculus games from time to time due to "entitlement" issues with the store.[/QUOTE] [url]https://uploadvr.com/touch-and-vive-come-to-obduction/[/url] No temporary exclusives coming to the Vive in under a one-year made-up figure with no source? :thinking: [url=https://www.reddit.com/r/superhot/comments/4o82a5/dev_log_2_they_taped_a_hydra_to_dk1_you_wont/d4aqm8j/]The SuperHot devs in particular said that the SteamVR API lacked a feature they needed, at least at first.[/url] Valve's funding is lesser for developers and an illusion besides. Just about any serious game on the Oculus store has its funding; [url=https://www.pcgamesn.com/valve-vr-funding]how many developers can you show successfully getting Valve to do the same?[/url]

[QUOTE=bitches;52046784][URL]https://uploadvr.com/touch-and-vive-come-to-obduction/[/URL] No temporary exclusives coming to the Vive in under a one-year made-up figure with no source? :thinking: [URL="https://www.reddit.com/r/superhot/comments/4o82a5/dev_log_2_they_taped_a_hydra_to_dk1_you_wont/d4aqm8j/"]The SuperHot devs in particular said that the SteamVR API lacked a feature they needed, at least at first.[/URL] Valve's funding is lesser for developers and an illusion besides. Just about any serious game on the Oculus store has its funding; how many developers can you show successfully getting Valve to do the same?[/QUOTE] I stand corrected then. Sounds like later exclusivity agreements are only 6 months? At least they're learning. I don't trust the SuperHot dev's statements regarding OpenVR, especially since Revive has worked fine in that game since launch. We can see what's said after their exclusivity deal ends. As far as games Valve has directly funded through their VR support program; we can't know for certain due to Valve's NDAs, but Onward is a great and well known example.

[QUOTE=1/4 Life;52046802]I stand corrected then. Sounds like later exclusivity agreements are only 6 months? At least they're learning. I don't trust the SuperHot dev's statements regarding OpenVR, especially since Revive has worked fine in that game since launch. We can see what's said after their exclusivity deal ends. As far as games Valve has directly funded through their VR support program; we can't know for certain due to Valve's NDAs, but Onward is a great and well known example.[/QUOTE] You go from unsourced "one year" to an unsourced "6 months". The game had major FPS issues at launch and no Touch controls; is it any surprise that they waited to fix both problems before introducing it to a new platform? It's as Oculus said: they don't tell anyone how long to keep their game exclusive to the Oculus store, except when Oculus's own developers helped make it entirely on the Oculus budget. Revive runs [I]through[/I] the Rift API. It doesn't replace it. It still relies on Oculus API features. You're ignoring any evidence for what you "don't trust" to reaffirm your position; it really drives my point about your scaremongering.

[QUOTE=bitches;52046829]You go from unsourced "one year" to an unsourced "6 months". The game had major FPS issues at launch and no Touch controls; is it any surprise that they waited to fix both problems before introducing it to a new platform? It's as Oculus said: they don't tell anyone how long to keep their game exclusive to the Oculus store, except when Oculus's own developers helped make it entirely on the Oculus budget. Revive runs [I]through[/I] the Rift API. It doesn't replace it. It still relies on Oculus API features. You're ignoring any evidence for what you "don't trust" to reaffirm your position; it really drives my point about your scaremongering.[/QUOTE] You have a source on Oculus's statement? Oculus even advertises their games as "exclusives". I don't trust anyone that signs an exclusivity agreement.

[QUOTE=1/4 Life;52046851]You have a source on Oculus's statement? Oculus even advertises their games as "exclusives". I don't trust anyone that signs an exclusivity agreement.[/QUOTE] Again with the aimless "I don't trust" that lacks any actual argument. Oculus advertises the games it funded 100% as exclusives, as far as I'm aware... yet even so, look at more actual evidence: Robo Recall is branded as an exclusive title but is still explicitly sold to Vive customers, even with a free option to compile the source on your own. [quote=https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/20/oculus-interview/]When you’re looking at some of these other things, where sometimes you have devs come to us and say, ‘Hey, we need help finishing our game,’ or ‘we want to make this game bigger and better,’ we ask if those guys launched on Oculus first if we’re going to help them fund that. We don’t ask them to stop developing for other platforms. We don’t tell them they can’t launch on other platforms. In those cases, they are going to be coming out on other platforms aside from Oculus in the future.”[/quote]

[QUOTE=bitches;52046871] Oculus advertises the games it funded 100% as exclusives, as far as I'm aware... yet even so, look at more actual evidence: Robo Recall is branded as an exclusive title but is still explicitly sold to Vive customers, even with a free option to compile the source on your own.[/QUOTE] "still explicitly sold to Vive customers" is a fallacy. It's sold on the Oculus store for Oculus users, and if you use the revive hack Oculus has agreed not to look for the time being. The "free option to recompile the source on your own" is Epic doing what Epic does: Releasing the source code for a UE4 game with a small amount of demo content. It's nice, but it's hardly a gesture of good-will toward removing exclusives. Superhot VR is advertised as an exclusive right now. I won't address you disliking who I chose to trust as that's my decision to make. If you want to convince me I'm wrong in not placing my trust in them you're welcome to try. [editline]Edit:[/editline] I read the article you linked to and it's clear that he's being deeply disingenuous. Every bit of his wording leaves "timed exclusive" open, which is their current go-to.

[QUOTE=1/4 Life;52046903]"still explicitly sold to Vive customers" is a fallacy. It's sold on the Oculus store for Oculus users[/quote] Already forgetting earlier parts of the argument? Robo Recall is FREE for all Touch owners. You're objectively wrong. [quote]I won't address you disliking who I chose to trust as that's my decision to make. If you want to convince me I'm wrong in not placing my trust in them you're welcome to try.[/quote] You're welcome to trust whoever you want, but that doesn't make an argument in a debate about VR ethics.

[QUOTE=bitches;52046964] Robo Recall is FREE for all Touch owners. You're objectively wrong.[/QUOTE] Haven't forgotten a thing. This is because previously Vive owners were getting copies of Lucky's Tale for free. This time around Oculus made it a coupon code based on touch ownership to avoid giving the game away. The store still does not mention the Vive once and actively dissuades Vive owners by throwing Oculus service errors during use. Surely you should know this better than I?

[QUOTE=1/4 Life;52046980]Haven't forgotten a thing.[/quote] "sold on the oculus store for oculus users" yeah sure [quote]This is because previously Vive owners were getting copies of Lucky's Tale for free. This time around Oculus made it a coupon code based on touch ownership to avoid giving the game away. The store still does not mention the Vive once and actively dissuades Vive owners by throwing Oculus service errors during use. Surely you should know this better than I?[/QUOTE] so who do you [I]think[/I] the game is currently SOLD for? it doesn't take a genius to see that they're trying to embrace sales from the Vive community as much as they legally can, without losing control over their own software API

[QUOTE=bitches;52046995]"sold on the oculus store for oculus users" yeah sure so who do you [I]think[/I] the game is currently SOLD for? it doesn't take a genius to see that they're trying to embrace sales from the Vive community as much as they legally can, without losing control over their own software API[/QUOTE] Putting something on paper and implying it are two different things. One you support, the other can be taken away at any time. "it doesn't take a genius to see that"

[QUOTE=1/4 Life;52047002]Putting something on paper and implying it are two different things. One you support, the other can be taken away at any time.[/QUOTE] so you don't trust Oculus because they implemented DRM when people were pirating Lucky's Tale, then proceeded to implement a coupon code system to their brand new storefront, allowing for the removal of the DRM then you look at Oculus's multi-part effort to create an independent VR API standard in collaboration with Valve and come to the conclusion that Oculus, whose existence depends completely on VR, intends to harm the VR industry by funding games for it... and to top it off, you still think they don't want a unified API standard genius

[QUOTE=bitches;52047016]so you don't trust Oculus because they implemented DRM when people were pirating Lucky's Tale, then proceeded to implement a coupon code system to their brand new storefront, allowing for the removal of the DRM then you look at Oculus's multi-part effort to create an independent VR API standard in collaboration with Valve and come to the conclusion that Oculus, whose existence depends completely on VR, intends to harm the VR industry by funding games for it... and to top it off, you still think they don't want a unified API standard genius[/QUOTE] I think Oculus intends to use whatever tactic makes them the most money and does not care about any other VR user unless it hurts their bottom line.

[QUOTE=1/4 Life;52047018]I think Oculus intends to use whatever tactic makes them the most money and does not care about any other VR user.[/QUOTE] that's a great way to avoid outright confirming your belief that they're working against VR API standards (despite how game sales are how Steam and Oculus make most of their income, necessitating sales to both platforms), despite months of collaborative planning of a true mutual API [editline]2nd April 2017[/editline] I'm using sources and evidence, and the best you argue against it with are non-committal answers about how you "don't trust" them.

[QUOTE=bitches;52047023]that's a great way to avoid outright confirming your belief that they're working against VR API standards (despite how game sales are how Steam and Oculus make most of their income, necessitating sales to both platforms), despite months of collaborative planning of a true mutual API[/QUOTE] Yet another strawman. "genius." On a subject I talked about earlier in this thread no less. [QUOTE=bitches;52047023]I'm using sources and evidence, and the best you argue against it with are non-committal answers about how you "don't trust" them.[/QUOTE] Correct, we call that a difference of opinion on something objective in nature. I do not trust them because they have not earned that from me.

[QUOTE=1/4 Life;52047041]Yet another strawman. "genius." On a subject I talked about earlier in this thread no less. Correct, we call that a difference of opinion on something objective in nature. I do not trust them because they have not earned that from me.[/QUOTE] guilty before innocence; feelings over fact?

[QUOTE=bitches;52047103]guilty before innocence; feelings over fact?[/QUOTE] Guilty of what? A strawman?

[QUOTE=Zang-Pog;52042094]I find it really sad that even in the early stages of VR we already have people divided into tribes, flinging shit at each other. Things like exclusive software, fanboyism and other dumb shit like that DRM that was thankfully worked around quickly are going to be the death of the VR business before it even got properly started[/QUOTE] Thank facebook

[QUOTE=phygon;52047803]Thank facebook[/QUOTE] Pretty sure their involvement made Oculus a lot more capable, and I'm very thankful of that.