This is a political article disguising as a technological one. It quickly fulfills Godwin's law and keeps a double standard in Internet campaigning, something both parties are doing (see: Correct The Record).
Disagree. When tech figures who would otherwise be hero-worshipped are caught supporting extremist politics or otherwise nakedly trolling, out in the wild -- that's always in the interest of the HN community to know.
Again, I disagree. When major industry figures are found to be supporting extremist politicians by either covert or overt means, then pointing this out isn't "riding a high horse" -- it's due diligence.
Your spin vs. my spin is a boring, meaningless game, but it would probably help your play if you use a phrase that has a more applicable definition to the activity you're spinning.
This is the problem I'm talking about. HN should be above political discussions like this. Look, I'm sure we'd have a great exchange on politics; but this should be neutral grounds for all of us.
One of the things that makes HN great is that we're united by our passion for technology and if politics ever surfaces it should be because it has a direct impact on technology (like when Brendan Eich left Mozilla).
Luckey's political controversy makes a single appearance, amongst the higher-than-expected price, the platform lock-in, and the custom connectors, all of which are tied to the slow defection of developers from the platform, which has in turn resulted in a paucity of apps for the system at launch. No offense, but -- this being the hottest phase of an overheated election season -- I think your antennnae are a bit overly sensitive here.
The technical issues were discussed months ago when they surfaced, they're not something that happened last week or even last month. I'm 100% certain that the trigger for this article's publication is political disagreement.
Even as someone who prefers the Vive in terms of overall experience, I think this article glosses over quite a few points and misrepresents the facts to the point where it shouldn't even be on HN for discussion. There are far less biased articles surfacing in the wake of Oculus Connect that don't for example, highlight Luckey's political leanings in the subtitle.
For one, the crux of the article is that the Rift is expensive. And sure, for some people, it definitely is. However, it's unfair to say that Oculus is a "$1,500 to $2,500 gaming platform" and shortly compare it to the $800 price point of the Vive which does not include the also required "$500 and $1,500" computer. Similarly, it seems wrong to compare either the Rift or the Vive to Google's Pixel because well, they're targeting different segments of the market with vastly different experiences. In addition, the article neglects to mention that a big announcement today was Oculus lowering the minimum specs of a VR headset with their new software that (from what I understand) interpolates frames. In fact, Oculus will be selling $500 dollar prebuilt systems which brings the minimum buy-in to experience VR on the Oculus considerably lower.
The rest of the article proceeds in a similar fashion; Oculus has quite a few interesting titles announced not even including the free title by Epic Games (makers of Unreal and the Unreal engine and definitely a well known studio) given out with the Touch. In particular, I'm excited about Luna because it was made by quite a few people from thatgamecompany (Journey). Similarly, having non-game media by OK Go (known for their virally popular experimental music videos) and Disney (no other introduction necessary) is huge for both the platform and VR in general. Yes, it's lacking a few big players like Bethesda, but I think the future lineup is far from as barren as the article so blindly suggests.
12 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 34.3 ms ] threadI don't think this is worthy of HN.
This is the problem I'm talking about. HN should be above political discussions like this. Look, I'm sure we'd have a great exchange on politics; but this should be neutral grounds for all of us.
One of the things that makes HN great is that we're united by our passion for technology and if politics ever surfaces it should be because it has a direct impact on technology (like when Brendan Eich left Mozilla).
> Bankrolling Trump trolls costs a lot, yo
Regardless of what's right, that certainly feels like it's taken a side.
For one, the crux of the article is that the Rift is expensive. And sure, for some people, it definitely is. However, it's unfair to say that Oculus is a "$1,500 to $2,500 gaming platform" and shortly compare it to the $800 price point of the Vive which does not include the also required "$500 and $1,500" computer. Similarly, it seems wrong to compare either the Rift or the Vive to Google's Pixel because well, they're targeting different segments of the market with vastly different experiences. In addition, the article neglects to mention that a big announcement today was Oculus lowering the minimum specs of a VR headset with their new software that (from what I understand) interpolates frames. In fact, Oculus will be selling $500 dollar prebuilt systems which brings the minimum buy-in to experience VR on the Oculus considerably lower.
The rest of the article proceeds in a similar fashion; Oculus has quite a few interesting titles announced not even including the free title by Epic Games (makers of Unreal and the Unreal engine and definitely a well known studio) given out with the Touch. In particular, I'm excited about Luna because it was made by quite a few people from thatgamecompany (Journey). Similarly, having non-game media by OK Go (known for their virally popular experimental music videos) and Disney (no other introduction necessary) is huge for both the platform and VR in general. Yes, it's lacking a few big players like Bethesda, but I think the future lineup is far from as barren as the article so blindly suggests.