Cautiously optimistic. Looking at it as a 3DS replacement I'm excited for more powerful mobile games and the possibility of multiplayer with those stupid tiny controllers.
@liestochildren: I think their opinion was very well thought out. Yeah Palmer was free to express his opinions and support his candidate. At the same time he represents Oculus and should know that politics is extremely divisive. So he should have known the way he went about supporting his candidate was likely to offend some of his developers. So the free market has spoken. Will this sink Oculus? No probably not, but it does need all the support it can get. Also stay away from reddit political threads, you seem to have made your mind up this election so you can ignore the election til voting opens. Politics is bad for mental health, but good news video games are good for mental health.
I'm torn. I'm primarily a PC game who usually gets a console once it drops down in price for the exclusives but I wouldn't want to invest in the discounted old model when future games will not run as well on it. Good news is that unlike last generation just about everything comes out well supported on PC now. So while I would love to play Bloodborne, Until Dawn, or Uncharted I'm gonna wait. Hopefully Nintendo makes some exciting games for its new console because exclusives are the only thing that will drag me away from steam.
I always feel bad for a few of my software dev friends who get into a month long crunch and disappear missing parties, hangouts, and life generally. To each their own but I can't imagine giving up my freedom and life experience sitting in a cubicle staring at a screen and straining to make someone else rich. I don't understand the mentality some bosses have of I was miserable when I was your age so let's keep the cycle going. Even worse is watching incredibly intelligent but only educated in a specific area be financially successful with their skill start to assume that everything they think must be correct because look how much money I made. You can literally show them study after study about how they are wrong and they only believe their own garbage more. Then again I'm a hypocrite who is going to have to do a medical residency.
Also to the 60's era NASA comment; my grandfather, his brother, and two of his cousins were engineers working for either GE or NASA from Mercury to Apollo and some through Skylab. The only people crunching were the astronauts a few months from launch and they still made time to sneak out to titty bars often in "borrowed" training space suits. They didn't force people to work insane hours because they didn't want components to fail from tired engineers misreading a slide rule. Even during missions they kept rotating mission control. The reason people often slept a mission control was just because it was an exciting time and they spent their free time with the best seats to history.
It's that simple. People just feel entitled to things without having earned them. You are NOT entitled to job stability because you have a job. If the business owner wants to sell it or move it somewhere else, it's THEIR business and THEIR decision. You are NOT entitled to a stable 40 hr work week or a certain wage because you have a good job. You are entitled to whatever the business owner is willing to give you for the value of the labor you provide them. If you want better conditions, increase the value you provide and become irreplaceable to them.
You have a just world viewpoint which frankly isn't reality. Nobody is special and irreplaceable no matter how skilled or famous you become. You do not wish for a free market but an anarchist one. The reality is resources and capital at some point must be considered shared between the people/laborers of the community and the business owner/shareholders. If it isn't then we are on the road back to feudalism and kings. You are literally describing a system by which you have to dedicate your life to being the best serf you can be. At what point do you think it is no longer worth it? How much are you going to spend in time and money on education and training so you can be a better asset and better exploited by your employer? Capitalism isn't supposed to be free rein. The business owner relies on the resources of, paid for, and often built by the community. Is forcing people to follow certain rules that may hold them back to not screw over other people wrong? No it is the fundamental basis for society. Owning or running a business does not give you free rein over that company, it never has. No person is an island. Regulations and prevention of individuals gaining to much power over the society has lead to the greatest advancements of mankind. When you ensure that the majority of your workforce is well compensated you are ensuring that the velocity of money continues. That those workers are now your and hundreds of other companies consumers. This used to be the fundamentals of the American economy. When capitalism was regulated so people were forced to have a living wage it thrived unlike ever before. Unfortunately time and inherited wealth has blinded the modern nation to this concept. Now people think that the entire system was built on merit. That merit will ensure your survival. That if you work hard you will be rewarded which is just a fallacy. It hasn't collapsed everywhere but we certainly are starting to see the cracks. People don't deserve to suffer because a few short sighted business leaders don't understand economics of scale.
Unions are great. People who are against unions are for low wages, no overtime pay, and no benefits. In a society where the owners and shareholders can form a government acknowledged collective for a business (a corporation) why can't the labor? Unions built the middle class of the United States.
hodor's comments