John Carmack Speaks On Oculus/Facebook Deal

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

Alterego-X:

Strazdas:

Um what?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Facebook
Facebook has a pretty known history of its aquisition. Not a good one. In fact, id personally say its worse than EA aquisitions. EA ones at least try to push out at least one last game before deing and getting assimilated.
There is no denying Facebook practices are evil, whether their philosophy is that or not is irrelevant, because its the actions that matter.

In fact, your examples show that you are the one who has little knowledge of the companies you claim to make a point with.

There are only two aquisitions on that list that are even remotely similar to Oculus or to the EA aquisitions in scope, and in thei subject being a pre-existing revered brand with it's own business culture, and those are Instagram and WhatsApp. Both of which are still running as rather autonomous platforms. What's so evil about that?

Its not scope thats in question here. Its previuos facebook aquisition practices. And those are evidently leaning towards assimilating aquisitions and/or killing them.

Instagram is still running, however facebook tried to integrate it and failed as its userbase rebelled against it.
WhatsApp is something we cannot comment on in retrospect due to it being a new aquisition. Thats like saying there isnt facebook logo on Oculus on day 1 that means its not going there.

Strazdas:

Its not scope thats in question here. Its previuos facebook aquisition practices.

Aquisition practices are handled differently depending on scope.

EA also aquired plenty of small studios like JAMDAT Mobile or PlayNation, and guess what, no one gives a shit about those.

There is a difference between openly angling for obtaining a patent, a talent, or an asset, that happens to be held by a minor corporation, and the kind of fusion between two separate established brand identities that works better as diversification into two separate areas unless/until it is screwed up.

If Coca Cola bought an obscure independent plastic bottle manufactury, I would full expect them to integrate it into themselves. If they bought Kellog's, I would expect them not to mess with cereal manufactury too much, because so obviously not just separate brand identity, but a separate process to boot.

Strazdas:

Instagram is still running, however facebook tried to integrate it and failed as its userbase rebelled against it.

Now you are either just making stuff up, or you have read some headlines about Instagram's ToS change controversy, and misremembered it as something about Facebook integration, which is exactly the kind of shallow understanding that I'm talking about.

Karadalis:

Baresark:
Some people need to set aside their anger and read. He wasn't part of the negotiation. He is their lead tech guy, he doesn't have much say in who buys the company or how the product is funded. He also confirmed Zuckerberg's desire to hold the current course. Everyone should know that if this thing was only ever about gaming, well it would be a niche product always and forever. The concept of Virtual Reality was always intended for a lot more than gaming. Just as gamers, we want to see it go far. And it will only if it gets major backing from a company such as Facebook. I'm not gonna lie, I wanted Valve involved in this, but I know they can't match Facebook's offer.

Stop....

He is a tech guy that has no idea how business is done and doesnt like to get involved in such things...

But hes preeeeeeeeety sure Mark "shady" Zuckerberg is willing to stay the course?

Facebook allready kinda sorta laid out their plans to turn the OR into a social media plattform made for add revenue and not a gaming periferal.

How is that "staying the course" ? Look John might be the go to guy if you want to discuss technical stuff about the OR but he clearly has no idea about business or what Facebooks real plans are. A simply "oh sure we wont change the course" from mark zuckerberg means jack shit if its not written on paper and signed by the guy himselfe.

Zuckerberg OWNS the company now.. he can do whatever the hell he pleases both with the company and the product. Heck he could dismantle the whole company only leaving key personal and transferring the whole thing to another department if he so wanted. (the feasability of such a thing might be non existant but hey... he threw 2 billions at the OR guys to get his hands on a new toy)

It doesnt matter what Carmack thinks or says... he has as much influence about all this as the guy sitting right next to him in office... none what so freaking ever.

From the sounds of it he wasnt even really involved in the talks and was left in the dark till the buyout happened. So hearing from him how "great" of a chance this whole deal is... yeah.. im sorry Carmack but dont say stuff you have no idea about. Youre a great techie but you have no business sense as you have explained over and over and over back in your ID days.

Whatever happens to the OR now it will not be what the company originaly intended it to be. Otherwise Facebook would have never gotten involved.

You seem to think that him having discussed the goals of the platform and having a feeling about the direction he thinks it may still be going in as being the same as brokering a deal with Zuckerberg... which he didn't do. His opinion was the Zuckerberg plans to let it remain on the current course. Zuckerberg has also said that he plans on the letting the company run independently at this point. He can, of course, change his mind anytime he wants, but so far he hasn't.

The only thing that stated these changes, that I have seen, was confirmed false. Facebook has made no legitimate announcements about changing anything as of yet, but they can at their whim, of course. I also think that JC would bail if the direction changed as he wanted it used for games himself. He wouldn't be sitting there saying that it looks good for gaming still.

I don't know how familiar you are with how corporate works, but a man in his position would not be needed for negotiations. No one in his position, in any company ever, has ever been involved in sale negotiations. Also, why would he be told it was happening? So far as we know, it has no bearing what so ever on him.

Also, this was never ever ever ever going to get a consumer model till it was bought out by someone. It was not gonna happen. They have been conducting themselves in a way that invites buyout. Constant news flashes about what is happening in development, Riftcon (which is fuckin' stupid for something that doesn't technically exist for anyone but a small minority of the fanbase), constant updates about "who's supporting the OC now". I knew it was coming, anyone who knows the smallest thing about business knew what was coming, but guys like me were hoping for someone like Valve. But so far, Facebook has not stated anything about changing it.

Also, say it does become utilized for some sort of social networking. If you still got your gaming device, would it even matter? It wouldn't matter to me. Zuckerberg can do whatever he wants, but if look at the short track record of the things him and Facebook have acquired, none of them have been changed post purchase. Instagram, for instance, has not been changed to look like Facebook. It's still Instagram, and still almost completely useless to people like me. It's like I said, everyone seems a bit too mad and freaked out to actually look at what is going on. I may eat my words, but there is no reason change years of R&D in gaming and throw all that away, and it doesn't look like it's changing as of yet. So why don't we just wait and see and stop freaking out about it.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here