cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

The BEST THING EVER just happened to VR

cybernettr
Level 9
This video on OpenXR got me to thinking. When we use the Rift, why do we need to see the Oculus home screen? Why does the Oculus app even have to be running in order to use VR? 

VR is not an operating system! It’s more like a dumb monitor or display screen than an OS.  Instead of using Oculus Home, why not have a choice of homes from a variety of different developers? Competition makes things interesting and it keeps the industry moving. There’s no reason why the Oculus Rift or Quest or other devices need to be tied to a particular platform. 

The future of VR can be like the Apple App Store — very closed and controlled by a single company – or it can be  more like PC gaming, with a huge variety to choose from.  Also, if you buy a lot of experiences, you won’t have to worry about being tied down to a single platform. You can move everything from one to another. 

Oculus is a hardware manufacturer, not an operating system like Apple or Windows. 

https://youtu.be/SM6SbkzDT8g

 
36 REPLIES 36

Zenbane
Level 15
Oculus isn't just a hardware manufacturer; Oculus develops an entire Software Platform:

PC Gaming itself is just an activity. Like... Walking, Running, Hiking, Swimming, or playing a musical instrument.

cybernettr
Level 9

Zenbane said:

Oculus isn't just a hardware manufacturer; Oculus develops an entire Software Platform:


 But it doesn’t have to be that way.  In the early days of computing, Apple and Microsoft both grabbed monopolies for themselves.  Imagine if, in the early days, Apple had been an open rather than a proprietary platform, maybe even Amiga and Atari survived. The computing industry would be a lot more interesting today.  

Instead, it’s stratified, with Microsoft grabbing the business side of the platform and Apple to a large degree dominating desktop publishing and, later, mobile phone games.  If you want to run apple apps, you have to buy an Apple device and if you want to run PC games, you have to run them on a PC. 

The computing industry has been around a long time now and we learned a lot from the early days.  We also have the flexibility of a lot more processing power to work with.  

VR is mostly used to play games, so there is no reason it has to be tied to a particular platform, like Oculus or Vive. In the future, we might run operating systems in VR and use it to get serious work done, but  that still gives us plenty of time to develop open source options. 

Zenbane
Level 15



Zenbane said:

Oculus isn't just a hardware manufacturer; Oculus develops an entire Software Platform:


 But it doesn’t have to be that way.


Having a platform is a good idea for a variety of reasons. Platforms spam multiple industries. Including Oil and Banking. I guess nothing actually "has to be that way." It just depends on what one's goals are. Like... we don't have to drive cars. We could just walk everywhere. But not really efficient!


VR is mostly used to play games

In it's current state, VR is marketed as a gaming platform. But this is not something that should be viewed as an absolute. VR for the Enterprise is very real, and will only continue to grow. Facebook and Oculus have both shared their vision for VR beyond gaming. HTC Vive is now more focused on Enterprise than Consumer. And Microsoft has tried to establish a foothold in VR for the Enterprise from Day 1.

Zenbane
Level 15
In the early days of computing, Apple and Microsoft both grabbed
monopolies for themselves.  Imagine if, in the early days, Apple had
been an open rather than a proprietary platform, maybe even Amiga and
Atari survived. The computing industry would be a lot more interesting
today.  


That is not the early days of computing. In the early days of computing, we had Mainframes. In fact, Mainframes are still the backbone of the global banking industry. Mainframe are platforms. So, we've had platforms since the early days.

Also, nothing is stopping anyone from making an open platform for any industry, including VR.

Morgrum
Level 11
Atari was doomed to fail because of its leadership not because of competition.
WAAAGH!

jayhawk
Level 9



Zenbane said:

Oculus isn't just a hardware manufacturer; Oculus develops an entire Software Platform:

VR is mostly used to play games, so there is no reason it has to be tied to a particular platform, like Oculus or Vive. In the future, we might run operating systems in VR and use it to get serious work done, but  that still gives us plenty of time to develop open source options. 

Not sure what a store front has to do with an operating system, but in case you haven't noticed, more and more store fronts are required now to play games on PC, and in regards to above comment, game consoles are only used for playing games, and they've had 1st party exclusives tied to a particular platform for decades. There is no rule that says PC has to be any different. What doesn't HAVE to be is beside the point. I see this complaint a lot by people accusing Oculus of holding VR back with exclusives. If anything they are growing it and helping it.

snowdog
Level 15
You crazy fools. They don't need VR for the Enterprise cos they have the Holodeck.
"This you have to understand. There's only one way to hurt a man who's lost everything. Give him back something broken."

Thomas Covenant, Unbeliever

cybernettr
Level 9

jayhawk said:

game consoles are only used for playing games, and they've had 1st party exclusives tied to a particular platform for decades. 


 Maybe, but just because it’s been done in the past, doesn’t mean it’s best for a relatively new industry that I believe is on the verge of widespread adoption.

We the users have the opportunity to shape what direction the industry goes in through our voices and our buying choices.  If “the customer is always right“ then we the customers have a great deal of power in deciding how VR is going to shape out and be delivered to us. An open standard in which games and experiences can easily be moved from one platform to another is best for all of us.

As great as oculus is, imagine, with the speed things are improving, another developer came out with a much higher FOV, higher resolution, better controllers, better pricing, greater durability, etc. Or let’s say Oculus excluded games that they thought were too violent, too sexy, too controversial, etc. We should have the right to switch to another product at will without having to worry about leaving all our purchased games behind. 

Zenbane
Level 15
Competition is best for all of us. Removing competition by removing exclusive platforms works against innovation.

If a user is concerned about switching platforms, then it is better to make that decision up front. Oculus has been an exclusive store and exclusive platform since launch. There's nothing new about any of this. So if a user doesn't want exclusivity, then Oculus is probably not the right product for that user.

Personally, I don't have to worry about leaving all my purchases behind. Since I would happily re-buy any of them that I feel are worthy of replaying should I abandon one platform over another.