Even then, the high end Valve offerings don’t have the content. Meta has been very anticompetitive with all the platform exclusives, and it’s hurting VR overall.
I mean, the Oculus exclusives are literally fully funded. They are games that otherwise wouldn’t even exist. There are no games that were going to be made for other platforms but were steered to oculus only or anything like that. So how anti-competitive can that really be? Should mario games be on other consoles? Is Nintendo anti-competitive for making first party games?
Facebook/meta is terrible, but they are terrible for real reasons, not fake reasons.
Meta has been buying up game developers so they can have a bunch of exclusives. Yes, I’m assuming that the games by the developers would have been made regardless on other platforms. That might be a big assumption given the market share of the quest.
Yes, Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, etc anticompetitive practices are bad too. They do it to try to lock out competitors, and in doing so they decrease access to the content.
With Meta this hits already established PCVR gaming users hard as they will essentially no longer get new PCVR games if Meta keeps buying up the VR game developers. It’s not like they wouldn’t be able to support steamvr through openxr/openvr.
I would argue that, once you’re large enough, you should not be able to control both a platform and the stuff sold on that platform. This goes for console-makers, but also Amazon, Facebook, etc.
Even then, the high end Valve offerings don’t have the content. Meta has been very anticompetitive with all the platform exclusives, and it’s hurting VR overall.
I don’t think VR can truly take off until it’s a standard commodity device like a TV.
All back and forward compatible like HDMI. Pair of hand trackers, head tracker, two eyes, maybe extensions for face detection or other limbs.
That way we can be done with all this nonsense exclusivity.
I mean, the Oculus exclusives are literally fully funded. They are games that otherwise wouldn’t even exist. There are no games that were going to be made for other platforms but were steered to oculus only or anything like that. So how anti-competitive can that really be? Should mario games be on other consoles? Is Nintendo anti-competitive for making first party games?
Facebook/meta is terrible, but they are terrible for real reasons, not fake reasons.
Meta has been buying up game developers so they can have a bunch of exclusives. Yes, I’m assuming that the games by the developers would have been made regardless on other platforms. That might be a big assumption given the market share of the quest.
Yes, Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, etc anticompetitive practices are bad too. They do it to try to lock out competitors, and in doing so they decrease access to the content.
With Meta this hits already established PCVR gaming users hard as they will essentially no longer get new PCVR games if Meta keeps buying up the VR game developers. It’s not like they wouldn’t be able to support steamvr through openxr/openvr.
Fuck that website’s cookie menu, that shit should be illegal
Ublock origin > dashboard > filter lists > annoyances > theres options to block cookie popups and other bullshit here
I really need to switch to Firefox mobile soon… I’m using Vivaldi currently, and while I love it addons are a game changer
Yes, what Nintendo does is also anticompetitive.
I would argue that, once you’re large enough, you should not be able to control both a platform and the stuff sold on that platform. This goes for console-makers, but also Amazon, Facebook, etc.