Oculus creator: You'll understand why the Facebook deal makes sense a year from now

Palmer Luckey says he would have been skeptical about the deal, too, if he didn't know what he knows now; explains that Sony's Project Morpheus is not a competitor to Oculus Rift.

If you're not convinced that Oculus VR's decision to sell to Facebook was a good idea for the future of virtual reality, you'll become a believer a year from now. That's according to creator of the Oculus Rift headset, 21-year-old Palmer Luckey, who told Hip Hop Gamer at PAX East that he would have been skeptical about the deal, too, if he were just an average person.

"Knowing behind the scenes what's going on and what we need money to do and what we're going to be able to do with this deal, I know for myself that it's the best that we could possibly do," Luckey said. "So if people give us some time, I think they'll agree with us. A year from now, everyone--I think even a lot of the doubters, will look and say 'You know what, they really did make the best choice.'"

Luckey went on to explain what the Oculus VR sale to Facebook has allowed the company to achieve. He recalled that before the deal went through, some prospective employees were afraid to come on because Oculus VR was a high-risk start-up that could not promise stability. Now that they have the backing of Facebook, however, Oculus VR is in a position to hire anyone it needs because people no longer have that concern, Luckey said.

"A year from now, everyone--I think even a lot of the doubters, will look and say 'You know what, they really did make the best choice'" -- Palmer Luckey

He also said that selling to Facebook means Oculus VR--which will remain autonomous--allows the company to build its own custom parts instead of harvesting smartphone scraps for its virtual reality headsets. This will in turn allow for a "way better" product, he said.

Luckey further stated that Facebook and Oculus share the same dream that virtual reality will one day become mainstream. Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg wasn't shy about saying this when he announced the surprise $2 billion buyout of Oculus VR late last month.

Another benefit of selling to Facebook, Luckey said, is that now more AAA developers are getting excited about working on virtual reality games. Because Oculus VR now has stability, it means that developers understand "VR is going to be around for many years" and don't need to worry about dedicating resources to a platform that could disappear.

On the other end of the spectrum, Luckey teased that the influx of cash from the Facebook means Oculus VR can sign deals with independent studios to fund virtual reality games. The first of these deals are closing "really soon," he said.

Also in the interview, Luckey said when the Oculus Rift headsets finally do go on sale, they will be sold at cost. If they cost $200 to make, Oculus will sell them for $200, he said as an example. Of course, Oculus has not announced a release date or price for the final, consumer version of Oculus Rift. The latest development kit currently sells for $350.

Finally, Luckey addressed the other major virtual reality headset on the market, Sony's Project Morpheus. He said he does not consider this headset to be a competitor because Sony is catering only to its consumers, while Oculus is targeting a much wider audience.

"I think Morpheus is less competitive because it's for PlayStation 4," Luckey said. "They're trying to sell to their people and we're trying to sell to PC gamers and maybe mobile later on as it gets more powerful. Even if we were competing, I just think we have the best technology and the best team. But I am really excited that they're doing a pretty good job."

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Did you enjoy this article?

Sign In to Upvote

eddienoteddy

Eddie Makuch

Eddie Makuch is a news editor at GameSpot, and would like to see the Whalers return to Hartford.
407 comments
firefistace7
firefistace7

People really need to chill out. I ask all of you: have you even tried it? I bought the DK1, and it is the most amazing thing I have experienced. If Facebook fucks up, too bad, Sony will take over. VR will be the next thing, and I know this because I've used it. It isn't heavy on your face, or annoying to wear. I just leave it on my desk and plop it on. The reason 3DTV didn't work was because it wasn't amazing enough. This. Is. Find someone who owns one, and just try it, and you will see. Stop hating on tech you haven't even tried, it's just ignorant.

kalipekona
kalipekona

@firefistace7  


Couldn't agree more. I think most of these people are speaking out of ignorance. Once you actually experience VR with the Rift you can't help but be a believer. I knew VR was going to be huge after the first time using the Rift. 

SpLiTMaN
SpLiTMaN

doesn't matter how great occulus makes it in any time frame not buying end of story...when you sell your soul someone always collects it...

Bhemont
Bhemont

@SpLiTMaN  Aww, you poor thing, you must live a happy consumer free life without any products sold by the evil industry.  


/jelous!

kalipekona
kalipekona

@SpLiTMaN  


Good for you. Enjoy your inferior VR while you imagine you are "sticking it to the man". 

TheWatcher000
TheWatcher000

Well, somebody gave him the crash course in Propaganda.


"You're not upset because of the obvious, transparent reasons that even a child would know.  You're upset because you just don't understand."

Microsoft was completely just and meant no harm with their digital fascism coup attempt with the XBone.  We just didn't understand.

EA has the best interests of gamers in mind with their draconian policies and DRM schemes.  What they did with Dungeon Keeper was revolutionary and innovative, and aimed at modernizing the game and giving gamers an authentic experience in the current environment.  We just didn't understand.


Anything draconian or against the interests of the many, that benefits the very narrow few is COMPLETELY justified.  We just don't understand.

kalipekona
kalipekona

@TheWatcher000 @kalipekona  


Your comment said everything that needs to be said. You're a gamer (likely on a Sony platform) and you are using the internet (so information is being collected on you whether you recognize it or not). Those two things alone reveal what a hypocrite you are. But keep being the hopelessly naive hipster who thinks he is "sticking it to the man". You people are comical. 

TheWatcher000
TheWatcher000

@kalipekona @TheWatcher000 

No, little one, I am afraid it is YOU who doesn't understand. but what can I expect coming from a mindless drone who spews out pre-recorded talking points to make himself look like he knows something.


You don't know anything about me, what products I use, or anything else.  Unless you happen to work for the NSA, which honestly wouldn't surprise me at this point, as their little astroturfers are all over the Web.


but hey, keep on gobbling up the corporate spew and mindlessly following it like you do.


Don't let me keep you from your feel good fantasy.



TheWatcher000
TheWatcher000

@kalipekona @TheWatcher000 

I really hope no one is paying you to to post this nonsense, because they are getting ripped off if they are.


What I find so comical about little sycophants like you is that you sit around and make assumptions all day about others and state it as fact, which automatically discredits anything you have to say.


And yes, anyone with a functioning brain stem, and even some who don't (like you for example) are being spied on by something 24/7.  Congratulations, you've taken a sarcastic comment and managed to turn it into.....Oh, who knows where you were going with it.


As for me being a hipster, you assumptive assessment is so far off base that the joke is not only on you, the joke IS you.


But hey, feel free to keep talking to yourself, cupcake, as I have no more time to waste on a bottom feeding yes bot who knows absolutely nothing beyond his own arrogant assumptions.


At least someone in the conversation will actually give a shit about what you have to say.



TheWatcher000
TheWatcher000

@kalipekona @TheWatcher000 

But you know, there is one more thing. And you needn't bother responding, because I have no interest in reading your response, because it will be another dime-a-dozen robot like post that I see from people like you everyday, that's a waste of time to read or give energy to.  Just give it some though, when you're not worshiping and groveling to the corporate line.


But when the fuck did it become "hipster" to question, have concerns, or be against spying and privacy violation, whether it is done by the government or a private entity?


I don't want to assume you are like this, because I don't want to lower myself to the grade of intellectually vacant dogshit you are, but far too many people in this country seem to think that government, and even more surprisingly, corporate entities in bed with said government somehow wield supreme authority over the public.  The "I have nothing to hide" crowd gets so tiresome, because that has to be the most weak, jellyfish, and intellectually lazy cop out argument of them all.


Government is the SERVANT of the people, not the master, at least that is what ours is bound to be by the Constitution.  


And if you honestly think that government or corporations like facebook, and other companies with ties to PRISM and other draconian NSA programs are completely innocent with their activity and none of what they are doing, unconstitutional or otherwise is not subject to abuse, ulterior motive, or agenda driven machinations that subvert the rights of the people, then you really are terminally naive to the point you are a danger to yourself and others.


Maybe it isn't that people like you don't want to have freedom, rights, or civil liberties, and have them protected, and those who violate them punished.


Maybe you're just to intellectually lazy and distracted to bother or give a shit.


Now, by all means, please entertain yourself by listening to yourself talk.


Have fun.


kalipekona
kalipekona

@TheWatcher000  


No, you don't understand. You're just another mindless hypocritical person who arbitrarily picks certain companies to be the embodiment of evil in your mind while you continue to use products from other companies that are no better. 

Aaronp2k
Aaronp2k

@Mantan911 @TheWatcher000  not bs at all. he speaks the truth. government is supposed to be servant to the public. that is why we have the right to vote. also policemen are actually public servants, they only have authority over people who break the law. if you follow the law they can't make you do anything.


government is corrupt. they hide stuff from the people they are serving. anonymous hacked into the nsa server and found a document which detailed plans to tap into every computer on the world wide web which is a clear human rights violation. and who funds the nsa, and approves all their decisions? the government of course when they tax your hard earned money and bang vat on all your shopping.


you need to wake up man.

TheWatcher000
TheWatcher000

@Mantan911 @TheWatcher000 

For fuck sake, what are they teaching weak minded little jellyfish like you these days in school?  Government being the servant of the people is "conspiracy"?  How did you get this stupid and ignorant, cupcake?


Have you READ the Constitution?  Do you even KNOW what the Constitution IS?  Are you the least bit knowledgeable in even the most BASIC sense on how this country was founded? Do you even KNOW what your rights are as a citizen?  Do you even CARE?


"Piss off this web site?" tell you what junior, you need to go fuck yourself, get your head out of your ass, and go learn some history.


As for me, I will say whatever I want, whenever I want, and you will #dealwithit, like the ignorant, uninformed little bitch you are.


People like you don't even deserve the freedom or liberty your forefathers fought for you to have.  Oh, but I bet you think THAT'S a conspiracy too.  They were all TERRORISTS, right?

You are a complete joke.

adamconnell18
adamconnell18

Haha I love how the only thing people keep saying is "enjoy your island" etc. Dont be mad what he came up with is making him money, ofcourse hes rich now, the oculus is amazing. And what do you think fb will do? Drill into your skull?! Ofcourse facebook has ads and microtransactions, if there isnt a product, you ARE the product. This is completely different lol. And its proven it works for games so worst case scenario it will do exactly what it was intended to do. Who cares who the money came from.

adamconnell18
adamconnell18

@Aaronp2k remember in my comment when I said "if there isn't a product, you are the product"? Facebook is free, Oculus isn't. Think of it as buying a PC or phone, neither of which are contaminated with ads, but you don't walk down the street and get free PC's or phones, you buy them. If you're spending $350 on the rift, it's so much different. i.e. Google has ads, Android (owned by Google) doesn't.

daikkenaurora12
daikkenaurora12

We know it makes sense.  $2 billion is alot of money.  Stop trying to convince us that you didnt do it for the money when you did.

Bhemont
Bhemont

@daikkenaurora12  In the end, isn't that what it's all about, who wouldn't do it for the money?  Would you go in to the industry for free? For cookies and milk? lol no...

kalipekona
kalipekona

@daikkenaurora12  


Oh, there's no doubt that the money played a big role, but it's obvious these guys are very passionate about VR and I think they also did the deal because they believe it will help bring us a better VR headset and actualize the potential of VR. 

phenomfawaz
phenomfawaz

Lol. "Wait & See" -- one of the oldest tricks in the book. 

But doesn't work for you Palmer, sorry.

Goddammitj
Goddammitj

@phenomfawaz  Tricks? What exactly does he stand to gain from that? Either we wait, everything turns out fine and we buy a Rift (unless youre still stropping), or we wait, Facebook bends us over and we dont buy a Rift. 

For the others, its simple, I dont understand why everyone is jumping to conclusions AND THEN believing it. Make predictions all you want, but dont act like its fact.

Pewbert
Pewbert

Why, will you have your personal island in a years time?

Hurvl
Hurvl

He might no longer be the struggling visionary who's trying achieve something revolutionary against all odds, but that's not a role most people would like and especially not his co-workers. With cash comes stability and a complete focus on the manufacturing, without low finances hanging like a dark cloud over them at all times.

kalipekona
kalipekona

@Hurvl  


Don't try to talk sense to these people. Many of them are kids (or kids in adult bodies) and they don't understand economics or how the real world works. 

simsumre
simsumre

No, I already understand. You sold out to make money. The only reason why you continue to make statements is to try and save face. Just take your money and go to some island and leave us the hell alone you greedy sell out bastard.

kalipekona
kalipekona

@simsumre  


Give me a fcking break. You don't understand anything. Nobody has a gun to your head. If you don't want the Rift then don't buy it. You crybabies make me sick. 

maximo
maximo

STFU. Looks like crap to me.

Suaron_x
Suaron_x

The problem I see with Occulus VR is the heavy looking goggles you have to wear (as shown in the picture above).  Sure some gamers will embrace its if there's a good gaming experience to be had, but for the average joe...it's a non-seller. Until the product is as heavy and as cumbersome as a pair of glasses is, this product will not go past being a novelty item.  Facebook will have an impact on the device, at a minimum I expect it will require a Facebook account to operate.  Eventually that Facebook requirement will be tied to advertisements that specifically target the user upon start up.  

West123
West123

@Suaron_x  as heavy as glasses? then why didnt 3Dtv kick off? maybe its because people dont want to wear anything on their face?

rarson
rarson

@Suaron_x  

1. It's a dev kit.

2. If the experience is good enough, people will buy it even if it is mildly cumbersome.

3. Facebook's impact is down the road. I don't care if they turn it into a Facebook-only experience, as long as they release the initial product as they've already explained it to be.

GrendelSP
GrendelSP

And if we are lucky, in 10 years no one will have ever heard of either!

JonBeecham
JonBeecham

@GrendelSP So you want everyone to have Amnesia?

What a dumbass way to look at it, Inbred!


GrendelSP
GrendelSP

@JonBeecham @GrendelSP  Never heard of like musicians or movie stars are so easily forgotten. Its a figure of speech not literal, you literally, no reading between the lines trolling moron. 

DanielL5583
DanielL5583

And everyone is still paranoid and going "NOPE, DON'T WANT! FACEBOOK SOILED IT! SOILED IT!"...

This saddens me. I can understand that some are at least going to be paranoid and that there MAY be problems to come. But they now have funding, meaning they can get the parts quicker, meaning they can get the thing developed quicker, and because they have a big corporation overseeing them, they can get more big names to work on the system.

A lot of reactions to this are of complaint. It's not future sight; it's just paranoia. Nothing bad is happening now, so I don't see it being any different for the next year at the very least.

And to all those who are paranoid about Oculus being Facebook's bitch thanks to this...when the system is released, and Facebook doesn't do anything themselves to the product, then...HAH.

DarkSaber2k
DarkSaber2k

Sounds awfully similar to what Microsoft were saying when they were trying to justify Always online and DRM with the Bone.
 "We're right, you're wrong. Wait and see."

Too-DementeD
Too-DementeD

Oculus can and will become a thing now. I'm sure it's going to be much more widespread now due to the fact Facebook are behind it, but even so, that doesn't necessarily make it a better thing for the people who plan on buying it. Palmer keeps on talking about how the Oculus can now be cheaper and 'even better than before' thanks to Facebook, but really at what cost is this gonna have on the product now that Facebook have their hands all over it?

He may sit and believe that Facebook are going to leave him be, and just let his studio do their own thing (he keeps saying it's more like a partnership. heh), but when they just spent $2 billion on your company, they aren't going to let you make all the decisions that could potentially ruin them. Palmer also announced that they aren't going to force you to sign into facebook if you want to use the Oculus rift, but to me that's less than reassuring, especially considering he doesn't make the calls anymore, and because he's lied once before when he said he's never going to sell out his company.

All in all, I no longer want to get an Oculus rift but I'm sure, even though I've heard people around the internet saying they don't want it now that facebook own it, we're the minority and a vast amount of people will still buy it on the basis of it being an amazing new experience. Oculus will become as big as Justin Bieber.

rarson
rarson

@Too-DementeD  

Facebook doesn't have their hands all over it, at least not yet. Facebook isn't interested in taking the company over to start a whole new gaming experience. They're letting Oculus operate independently because they realize that they need to let Oculus develop its target market before it's viable to expand to a larger market. In other words, why the hell would they try to force this to market as some sort of Facebook device when they can let Oculus develop a user base within the gaming community?

The people claiming that Facebook will interfere aren't making any sense. It doesn't make sense for them to interfere at this point. It's not an established product yet. And Facebook has already shown that they're willing to allow their properties to operate independently, so there's no reason to assume that they're going to do otherwise.


Plus, there's these things called contracts, which surely stipulate conditions such as independent operation that are agreed upon before such deals are made.


Yeah, you may no longer want it, but plenty of rational people who understand the deal do, so despite your pigheadedness, it will become a success.

Warlord_Irochi
Warlord_Irochi

" ...while I'm enjoying the rich life and none of you remember this issue anymore"

Just be honest, come on! 99% of the population would have sold it if they were offered that amount of money.

sephsplace
sephsplace

I will judge the end product, and if they sell at cost, awesome, they truly are doing the right thing when it comes to VR, as long as the product I buy I can do with what I want, and how I chose to use it (hopefully an open way) I'm in

devilzzz1983
devilzzz1983

Still hoping other VR options step up huge cuz that is where I want to put my money.

jhcho2
jhcho2

In a year from now, Palmer Luckey will be swimming in a pool of green paper. THEN, we would know why the deal made sense (to him at least)


j/k

Micropixel
Micropixel

Sorry Palmer, but I'm not buying your creation, regardless of what company now owns it.

jakerscythe
jakerscythe

A year from now we'll hopefully all have forgotten about it.

gamingfriendly
gamingfriendly

I sometimes think these guys were forced to sell to facebook by a cretin side but thats off topic.

Bond_Villain
Bond_Villain

Give me some of that $2 billion, and I promise you, your Facebook deal will make sense to me immediately!!

sirchick
sirchick

Sony are a game developing company (and electronics of many varieties)...

FB is one of the biggest reasons we have these stupid browser microtransaction games and social integration being the biggest push in gaming at the moment (i find this bad personally because it's led to lower quality game features but plentiful social features). SimCity 2013 total social based, game play was so boring after a few hours... this is the problem... the single player game (simcity 4) was far more interesting and i wasn't bothered by other players etc.

Because of all this social crap, its allowed things like FarmVille/Candy Crush to be big and thus make big companies cash in on it. Then we end up seeing games like Dungeon Keeper ruined!

RollerCoaster Tycoon 4 another ruined franchise fallen to this microtransaction nonsense.... 

If your going to buy a VR headset:

Sony's - company focuses on gaming for gamers, not focussed on social nonsense like FarmVille games. As long as it works on multi platforms and not just PStation products its the obvious choice so far, they also know their shit when it comes to screen displays given they make decent TV's (not quite as good as samsung imo).

Microsoft, not know for the screen technologies like sony with their televisions, but have the budget, and they are very likely to be platformed for PC as well as their console (unknown for other platforms), this is also a possible choice, their kinect did a lot for science experimenting  - could be the same with their plans of their VR.

Then there is the OR with FB .. .a company that has zero knowledge of gamer's mindsets, simply chases money trends. Heck they even been looking into making a FB bank... Even if OR is awesome technically, its going to end up supporting a company with the wrong idea of where the gaming market should be going... FB will push the gaming industry into the world they want it to be .. all socially connected in the cloud.


I for one want at least some of the gaming market not part of the social cloud, where i can escape and immerse myself without pokes and notifications that someone just levelled their farm to level 40 whilst taking a shit in a hotel on a business trip.


Any one else remember playing amazing immersive games which didn't require playing with others to enjoy it... it was a long time ago.

sirchick
sirchick

@pixeljunkie69 @sirchick  that wasn't quite what i meant. I meant that Facebook's idea of how the game industry will develop is seen as all this small games with microtransactions and social integration.

Investing in the OR simply enables FB to push further into the game industry, the last thing i'd want is FB buying big gaming companies, and integrating all their social stuff into games that a lot of people wouldn't want.

I didn't suggest that browser games would be on the OR, that would be a bit silly :P

rarson
rarson

@sirchick  

If you think Sony focuses only on games, then you're an idiot. How much money do you think they make on movies? More than games? Definitely. That's probably why they've had personal theater viewers out for years now and nary a head-mounted gaming display.

You have no clue what you're talking about.

pixeljunkie69
pixeljunkie69

@sirchick  Yeah, consoles are hardly cutting edge gaming machines, that still belongs to PC. Also, why would you be playing farmville VR or cloud hosted games when all the major AAA game engines - e.g. CryEngine, Unreal Engine 4 and Unity have just integrated Rift support?  Your concerns make no sense.

sirchick
sirchick

@rarson @sirchick  at no point did i mention they make just games, they are an electronics, movies, music, gaming company.... but not social networking.


Think you seem to be reading some make believe thing that i never claimed. At no point did i say they only do gaming. I said they focus on gaming for gamers... unlike microsoft who tried to make their console for an audience gamers simply didn't agree with. My point was sony knows what gamers want....


And everything you said has no real counterpoint to what i was saying.....


If anything you further proved my point that looking into Sony's VR headset is probably a more sure fire bet than FB's attempts with the OR.

But for some reason you seem rather heated and throwing insults for no real reason, i can only conclude you have invested in the OR camp - did you perhaps invest in the kickstarter by any chance and thus have to defend anything that possible considers a rival to be a better option...

Of course just speculating here... :)

kalipekona
kalipekona

@sirchick  


You sound like a Sony fanboy, nothing more. You didn't make a single sensible point. 


I'm not going to get into a big debate with you since this article is old and you will probably never read this. But I will bet that the Oculus Rift will be the superior VR headset and will not suffer any of the ridiculous negative scenarios you imagine. 

sirchick
sirchick

@kalipekona @sirchick  at which part did i not make a sensible point? LOL

My point was Microsoft and Sony already exist in the markets the VR belongs in they know the tech already.. 


FB on the other hand is new to it all, I don't know why they are trying to get into the gaming market at all to be honest..

It would not surprise me if OR is marketed for other things than gaming, where as Sony and Microsoft will aim for gaming specifically that was my point, its often sure fire bet as a gamer to buy the product aimed for the intentional use of gaming.


It would also not surprise me even slightly if FB makes an app market for the OR like android and iOS.


I don't own a single Sony product or console from MS or Sony, but i would still be more likely to follow their projects over the OR, at least they know gaming a lot better.

rarson
rarson

@sirchick  

What do you think Playstation Network is? Why does PS4 support TwitchTV? Have you even seen the controller? There's a SHARE button on it! These are social functions.

If you're talking Microsoft versus Sony, as far as their focus on games goes, then sure, I agree with you: Sony treats their gaming business like a gaming business, where Microsoft treats their gaming business like an entertainment ecosystem.

But then you add Oculus into the discussion and conflate their association with Facebook to some kind of "Sony is more for gamers" argument. Well, my point is that saying that because Facebook has bought Oculus, that Oculus isn't for gamers is like saying that because Sony Computer Entertainment's parent company does lots of other things, many of them much bigger than their gaming business, Sony isn't for gamers either. Comparing SCE to the parent Facebook company is an incongruous argument.


I haven't invested in anything, yet. I'm probably going to buy a dev kit sometime this year just to get playing with it. I just like the Rift as it is and I'm tired of people making baseless assumptions because of the Facebook deal.


How could Sony's headset POSSIBLY be more of a sure bet? Let's examine the evidence to the contrary:

1. Morpheus is Sony-only, meaning at best, it will work with PS4, maybe PS3, stretching Vita, and really stretching, PS Store-supported cell phones. Rift, on the other hand, will support PC to start, with mobile and other devices to come. While Rift doesn't explicitly support any console yet, the fact that it's not a first-party device means that they're not self-precluding it from supporting anyone else's console, unlike Sony.

2. Rift development kits have been in developer hands for over a year now. There's already a wealth of experiences (albeit some of them not true, full games) that are available for the Rift, while Sony only has a few devs working on games. To Sony's credit, they tend to wait until a market is established to release new hardware, but that also puts them behind the curve. Software support will probably be in the Rift's favor.

3. Oculus has been working for years now on solving many VR gaming-specific idiosyncrasies, such as low-persistence displays. While Sony has experience with head-mounted theaters, these devices are drastically different than a VR HMD. I'm quite sure that Sony is capable of solving these issues, but how long and how well they're able to do it is a relevant question.

4. Oculus has been attracting top talent across the board, and the stability of the Facebook deal only strengthens this.

5. Sony's market cap is $19 billion. Facebook's is $150 billion. Oculus now has way more money to put into their device than Sony does.


I'm not counting Sony out, and I hope their device is a success. Competition is always a good thing. However, I fail to see any reason why Sony's product will be better than Oculus'.

sirchick
sirchick

@rarson @sirchick  well 5 is irrelevant, all the money invested doesn't mean you'll get a good product at a good price.


The PSN i don't feel is primarily aimed at social, its still gaming focussed... no matter how you look at it, so gaming is still the core point.


OR has been going for a while now and its not perfect even the 720p ones, and so other companies know what to do to, out do it. 

If sony's is only for sony products then i would agree - might as well rule it out, but this is unknown for now.

The question is who is going to be able to mass produce at affordable prices, i still feel sony and microsoft have the edge here, they already own production lines so they can save costs.

I doubt highly $150 billion from FB will be invested into the OR product range, thats far too much money..unless they are aiming to make a full VR body suit or something crazy like that.