I don't even care that I was a backer, I don't understand why Facebook?

Great piece. Keep them coming, Patrick.

Great video on this topic. I also highly suggest checking out his other videos. He also name drops Giantbomb (woo woo)

Oculus Sith - The Facebook Acquisition of Oculus VR

Facebook sells your data to advertisers and the government them having access to the sort of Data they could mine from VR freaks me the fuck out no thank you.

That's why I have distanced my self from them I still have an account but rarely post they already know to much about me.

I don't know, man. If this has done anything, it's slightly decreased the chances that I'll get one when it ships. If it's good, and it delivers what I'm after, it doesn't really matter. It's just that I'm not in any kind of market that Facebook usually targets, and as such, I may not be interested in their product.

What this development does do for sure, is further convince me that I am done with Kickstarter once and for all. From now on, I'll simply wait for a finished product, and if it can't get funding through any other means, well, that's just too bad.

I haven't read a lot of the comments yet, but this is a kick ass piece Patrick. You brought up some awesome points and some good stuff to think about. My first gut reaction was "oh no" when I read the news, but maybe it should have been different.

Very good article, but I have a little more sympathy for those that are upset. The vernacular and impressions left implicitly and explicitly by Kickstarter campaigns are that you are funding someone and something that couldn't get the money any other way and will create this dream for you on a shoestring. Meanwhile using words like backer makes you feel like an angel investor - and in this case plunking down good chunks of change (hundreds to thousands of dollars) for the privilege.

But if the company uses your seed money to increase its own valuation by 100,000% in 18 months, then it is incredibly painful for people who put down what is probably a non-insignificant chunk of their disposable income. You feel like you should own 1/10,000th of the company. If an angel investor came in in August 2012 and offered the company $2.5million, he would have asked for a significant percentage equity stake. Instead, the passionate fans are left with nothing and the company walks away with billions.

It sucks.

Annoyed at the number of people who feel obligated to explain how capitalism works, or, even more condescendingly, kickstarter, in any conversations about this topic.

This was a nice read. Some people backing projects on Kickstarter do seem to have their head in the clouds. Oh, you think the laws of economics doesn't apply just because it wouldn't be fair and you will get bummed? I'm sorry, Oculus would sell out to Brazzers if they paid enough (which would be much more useful).

I'm still not sold on VR so I have no strong feelings one way or the other concerning the buyout.

@happymeowmeow said:

I totally get your sentiment, but the disappointment being expressed around Facebook purchasing Oculus has sometimes indicated that backers felt entitled to something besides their promised rewards. The condescension enters the conversation (often in poor spirit, for sure) when explaining to backers exactly what the deal entailed.

Simply put, I don't want crapbook to give any money.

I also am not part of any of the zuckerberg websites.

Luckily, I'm not a backer, or I'd be pissed even more.

Seriously, porn used to be a large driver of technology. In my (limited) experience, once Flash video and PHP frameworks reached good-enough levels, they exited quietly.

I never personally planned on using this, so it being a part of games or not has little effect on me. I'd rather not use it. Call me stubborn, but I don't mind playing games as they currently are. While the Oculus may be cooler than something like Kinect, it's not that much cooler that has me wanting it.

It sounds like people's main concern is that they don't want the "Facebook experience" influencing their Oculus Rift in any manner. And I'd agree with that. But it's worth noting that at this point Facebook is just a large company looking to invest in things, so there's no guarantee this will be anything more than a side project which they play minimal part in but could eventually bring them profitable returns. It's definitely a case of "wait and see," though. That said, I was slightly concerned after their purchase of Whatsapp, and that's been just fine so far.

As for Facebook privacy, I have no real issues with the size of my friends list. Anyone can follow me on Twitter or Tumblr, and I routinely post way weirder stuff on both of those sites than the minimal amount of things that go up on my Facebook account. I do think Patrick's list-culling theory makes some sense, but then I use the site's friend list more as an "address book" just in case I want to get hold of someone.

Great article Patrick, an enjoyable read.

To me it isn't a question of whether Luckey, Carmack and co. think they betrayed anyone. The fact is that their company breached the trust of the grassroots movement that supported them back when it was getting started. This has manifested in the internet outrage we're seeing now. I'm not sure they can earn that trust back from the majority of them.

The thing I really don't trust here is the second "," used in Patrick's title:

Facebook, Oculus, and Trust

This made me slightly ponderous for a while til I suddenly remembered morpheus. So congrats to the Oculus people for selling an unfinished product for 2 billion dollars. That's pretty crazy!

What a surprise, Patrick reads the situation wrong yet again and writes an article that is defensive and dismissive.

It's not that people think they are owed anything for contributing to the project, it is everything to do with the morals/ethics and business practices of the company that bought oculus.

Considering Oculus has yet to release a final consumer-ready product, I think all of the worry about the future of VR being in jeopardy is a tad bit premature. The jury is still out on what percentage of the population can enjoy VR without nausea, and for how long. Also, judging from the groundswell of excitement, who says Facebook has to meddle with Oculus to make tons of money? If they're smart, they'll keep their mouths shut, and allow Oculus to stay the course and make them millions.

If I learned one thing from Hayden Christensen's Shattered Glass it is that commas should always come in pairs... are you saying this isn't true? Damnit Hayden.

http://movieclips.com/CcK3-shattered-glass-movie-the-great-comma-debate/

Good piece.

I think going forward those with the most to lose from this are Kickstarter and future tech projects on Kickstarter. This will be "case zero" where people look at go "well, I'm not giving you $300 so that you can sell out to Facebook in five years and I don't get a return". Everyone will be much more aware now that they are not investors in the traditional sense and as a result I think fewer tech projects will have the same success on Kickstarter.

Awesome article Patrick, totally covered all the issues very fairly.

The Oxford Comma is the mightiest of all commas!

This.

I kind of don't think this article is on point, to be honest.

You mention the emotional reaction several times, but it sounds like (maybe I'm interpreting it the wrong way?) you write it off for being an emotional reaction in the first place. You talk about the business side of Kickstarter and what backing truly means from a financial and business perspective.

Sure, agreed. But that doesn't mean people aren't allowed to still care for the thing they put money into? Emotional reactions can be the worst reactions ever, but they are also the best and most meaningful. Saying 'that's just an emotional reaction' as if those aren't meaningful, relevant or important. While you are right that Notch gave invested in Oculus and that investment didn't give him any ownership, he is still in his right to back out and say he wasn't doing it with the intent of investing in something that turned out to be owned by Facebook.

You make it sound like just because you don't know what will happen to a product you backed, you are not allowed to be upset when it goes in a direction you don't appreciate. That's not something I could ever agree with. Just because something is written down in rules doesn't mean emotional reactions that conflict with those rules do not make sense. They totally do.

You are right about a lot of things in your article, but you describe it from the business perspective so much. You talk about backers not having ownership or equity. I think you underestimate how many backers realize they do not. They do not need to be told they don't. Some of the people I talked to about this backed Oculus and they full well realize they have no say in the matter. That doesn't mean they are out of line for still speaking up that they don't like this. Again, maybe I am misinterpreting what you meant, but you make it sound like they are, and should just accept it.

The thing is, they don't have to accept anything. That's what emotions can do. You care for something and you have feelings about it. Whether you are 'right' in written down law and business rules or not.

My issue is not with the kickstarter or even Facebook (I may not like the product but I like the company). My issue is that I am not a fan of big companies constantly acquiring smaller teams. I would have preferred to see Oculus become a big entity in its own right but then again I suppose they have done that by selling in a way.

Yo fuck notch

(Great article, thank you Patrick.)

Sorry for the confusion, the internet can do that to well meant communication.

What i meant was that i personally felt that this piece started out with useful information but then devolved into: here is why i think half the internet is overreacting and these people with ideals are just to naive to understand how business works, of course things would go this way. except that is never said. There is no here is why i think. The writing style and wording make it sound like: this is the way the world works... deal with it. To me this read like a news piece and not like an plea or an op-ed. That's the reason i said it felt like punditry: making your opinion not sound like an opinion but the facts.

Hope that clears things up. I have no beef in this whole occulus Facebook "debate" i feel like im not invested enough in the situation to think people should care about my opinion. But i did have some issues with how this article was written. And wanted to show constructive criticism on the internet can actually happen.

Oxford Commas <3

Chris Plante is wrong. If you didn't buy the Oculus, you'd have money to invest. Maybe you can't afford Apple or Google stocks, but you can still invest in plenty of fantastic stocks (that even pay dividends). Putting of immediate gratification is hard, but you'll be better off (fiscally) if you do.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/12/15/cheap-stocks-for-2014-techs-best-buys.aspx

Just don't kickstart things. It's a bad system that is turning you into a venture capitalist and you just receive a product rather than a holding in the company.

Wasteland 2 is an odd game to list along with the other 2 projects. I had to go check to see if I missed an update saying the game was released.

Interesting article, if a bit condescending. It feels like a long version of those posts occasionally seen on forums were someone rants against strawmen of potential arguments, then people rally around it, as they also disagree with the strawmen.

I have yet to see a person upset that they didn't make back a financial investment on this Kickstarter project. Finishing with a line like this:

It's easy to be upset that you're not walking home with tens of thousands in your pocket, but that was never going to happen.

is ridiculous. The long and short of it is that this company had built a grassroots movement of dedicated early adapters and interested developers, and disheartened a great many of them in one sweeping motion. What that means remains to be seen, but marginalizing their opinions as 'not understanding Kickstarter' is short sighted and self-congratulatory.

@viking_funeral: There's quiet a few people who are upset for both reasons, some want refunds, some want a cut of the $2bn and others are upset for the reason you mentioned.

I can understand the people who backed it are upset that the little guy they helped is now working with the big guy they don't like. It's like the new kid who comes to school, you make friends with him because he's alone and hasn't got any friends in the area, then one summer he becomes cool and the popular kids want to hang out with him, so he goes to hang out with them now and you feel rejected because of it. Many people who original invested in the OR saw this as a beacon and a herald. "If we all support this, if we work together, we can make something brilliant happen!". But really all they did was they made big companies like FB interested in VR space, so FB threw their big money sack around and now the "mom and pop/grassroots" idea of a company funded by gamers, for gamers is gone.

@godmil: @christoffer: Urgh.

@l4wd0g: I may be reading your post wrong, but that's exactly what Plante was saying.

I have little sympathy for those who feel burned by the buyout. Kickstarter is a cool platform but I really believe it is extremely exploitative. Without some form of return of investment promised I don't see why I should give my money away and this is the most extreme example of what can happen.

The Kickstarter element is irrelevant, you buy the ticket, you take the ride, in this case you received a devkit (Or whatever was offered in your selected bracket) What Oculus do with that investment after that is their business, however odious.

Excellent article @patrickklepek. I am not a fan of Facebook or their practices, but if the financial backing ensures that Oculus achieves their goals and puts out a quality product within a reasonable timeline then I can't complain too loudly.

It all boils down to entitlement. People feel that since they've put forth some "investment" towards a Kickstarter project they can dictate what the developer can or cannot do with their product. But who will argue with the lame and dumb when it comes to things like this when their blinded by entitlement? You just can't. All you can do is shake your head and hope for the best with our species.

i never comment on this site... more of a lurker. But this was a great article Patrick, this was really on point! Love your writing and love bombing in the A.M. Keep it up!

At some point Facebook transitioned from a way to keep track of friend to an invasive gossip who is always looking over your shoulder and eager to tell everyone what your up to. "I just posted a comment on Giant Bomb!". That's why people are creeped out by it. It has no respect for your privacy, oh and it has terrible games.

I'll be interested in seeing how this affects future kickstarters. I know I'll be skeptical of anything that isn't a "one and done" relationship. No more investing in a promise of a brighter future, cause that futures for sale.

I believe Prince dealt with these very same questions in the Batman soundtrack. Because Trust, who do ya?

This was a great article Patrick. VR was eventually going to be co opted in some way. Oculus was never going to stay small and it's not like Sony and Microsoft are mom and pop shops. The feeling of ownership when it comes to Kickstarter projects is an easy way to get yourself burned. Ultimately we have no control.

God creates man. Man creates VR. Facebook buys VR. Razor Hydra inherits the Earth.

Great article, i also use the birthday test for facebook friendship, i'm glad someone else does it haha

fuck facebook.

@brocknrolla: I'm with you.

At the end of all of this, the lesson should be don't give money to companies through Kickstarter with the expectation of being a stakeholder. This is what happens to successful corporate ventures, whether they are backed by Kickstarter or not. Backing a Kickstarter does not entitle equity. If backers are truly expecting equity or feel they have a personal stake in what they are backing, then Kickstarter is the wrong place to go.

Sadly, this will all blow over. People will still give money through Kickstarter and expect more than just their reward. Another high profile buyout will ensue and the cycle of impotent Internet rage will begin anew.

Great write up, Patrick!

I think I'm still going for the OR when the commercial version comes out. I just don't see Facebook affecting the actual hardware in a negative way. If it definitely is integrating into Facebook then I'm skipping but as of now I think it will be fine. For the record I'm not a FB fan at all.

This article could use some edits. Otherwise, pretty good writeup.

I don't like Facebook at all, but if they deliver on their promises of not interfering with the original Rift-as-a-gaming-device plan and don't implement the need to have a Facebook account, I'll still be getting one day one.