Oculus Rift collects user info and uses it to target ads, says report

[Percy1983]

So it doesn't do much more than steam does but thats ok?

[Biscuit]

(so far anyway)

You agree for them to take the data so they can flick the switch at any time. It doesn't matter whats happening RIGHT NOW, what matters is the potential.

[jag272]

So it doesn't do much more than steam does but thats ok?

A fair few people take issue with steam too actually, but thats a bit apples and oranges. Steam is a DRM platform and storefront, for better or worse you expect someone is watching what you buy.

The Rift on the other hand is a display device, and while its not directly associatable with a monitor, they are similar enough in nature, and laat I checked our monitors arent recording what pixels we load and sending off the info.

[spacein_vader]

A fair few people take issue with steam too actually, but thats a bit apples and oranges. Steam is a DRM platform and storefront, for better or worse you expect someone is watching what you buy.

The Rift on the other hand is a display device, and while its not directly associatable with a monitor, they are similar enough in nature, and laat I checked our monitors arent recording what pixels we load and sending off the info.

First and foremost the Rift is a Facebook product. You expect it is watching you as you would Steam IMO.

[jag272]

It's when the ad appears on the end of your nose because it hasn't been placed into the 3D world properly that we will hear the real anguish

First thing that came to mind upon reading that (First 30 seconds or so):

[GravitySmacked]

You agree for them to take the data so they can flick the switch at any time. It doesn't matter whats happening RIGHT NOW, what matters is the potential.

Maybe, but the title of the article could be construed as misleading.

The Rift on the other hand is a display device, and while its not directly associatable with a monitor, they are similar enough in nature, and laat I checked our monitors arent recording what pixels we load and sending off the info.

It not though is it, it's a platform, complete with storefront.

Anyway, a more detailed analysis of what's collected:

https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comm...ffic_contains/

[jag272]

Maybe, but the title of the article could be construed as misleading.



It not though is it, it's a platform, complete with storefront.

Anyway, a more detailed analysis of what's collected:

https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comm...ffic_contains/

Ye, I'm aware about it having a storefront, but personally I dont thin there was any reason it needed one. Seems to me facebook just want a slixe of valve's pie in that regard. Drivers and some configuration tool sure, but why does a display need a store in the first place?

[GravitySmacked]

Because they don't want to immeadiately go out of business by selling the headset at a loss? Because why shouldn't they have a store front, especially after all the R&D they've put in developing the platform?

[jag272]

Because they don't want to immeadiately go out of business by selling the headset at a loss? Because why shouldn't they have a store front, especially after all the R&D they've put in developing the platform?

I would argue they don't need to sell it at a loss however. Whichever way you look at it, the only people with sufficiently VR capable hardware, for the most part, have the expendable income to pay full price. This is cutting edge tech, nobody expects it to be cheap nor easy to run. And the question in my eyes isn't why shouldn't they have a store front, it is what need do they have for one in the first place? We frankly don't need another DRM client, thankfully the Oculus lets you utilise games from external sources anyway, so theres no necessity to use the store what so ever.

Perhaps its just me, but I don't see why a display manufacturer, regardless how cutting edge, needs a storefront for games other than just to try and get a piece of the pie all the game publishers are sharing. The only advantage I can think of is it means they can make sure only fully VR optimised games can get onto their store, as opposed to steam for example where valve frankly don't ever moderate releases anymore. But that said, whether the Oculus approved game runs as Oculus intend comes down to your own hardware, so theres not much they can do there. Conversely though, if people wish to develop VR only experiences, as they did in the development stages, and as I'm sure they will now, in that regard its a nice little accessibility option for smaller devs, in the same vein as the recent mod markets were seeing both in games such as the new Unreal Tournament, and free such as in Steam Workshop.

I'm by no means trying to just openly bash Oculus, I just personally find some of their decisions in regards to why they think a display, or even any pc accessory if we want to count it as something other than a display, needs a storefront and information tracking. It seems to me they see it as somewhat treading the line between "just a pc accessory" but also as a sort of console. Sort of like those old plug and play games you used to get on controllers.

[Ttaskmaster]

It's pretty clear that people have forgotten how to vote with their wallets.

At this point, not so - All wallets have been used on pre-orders, based on demo models to date, after which this news has come to light.

Only once these things are actually in the shops do we get to use our Wallet Vote.

I'm by no means trying to just openly bash Oculus, I just personally find some of their decisions in regards to why they think a display, or even any pc accessory if we want to count it as something other than a display, needs a storefront and information tracking.

Q: Why does Elite: Dangerous need a store? Why not just sell the game and be done with it?
A: Merchandising!!!!!

I assume Oculus will soon be selling t-shirts and mousemats and all that gubbins, as well as new/improved controllers and accessories, lens cloths, spare cables, and so on.
Top this off with selling Rift bundles that include this game or that game, or perhaps certain games at a discount, thanks to semi/fully exclusive deals with the devs/publishers and there's your business model.

Info tracking can indeed help with product improvement updates, but since the whole world is paranoid about data theft and all that, feel free to be worried, conduct investigations and all that....


I personally don't care about any of that though, as I'm still dreaming about a Vive anyway!!

[Biscuit]

At this point, not so - All wallets have been used on pre-orders, based on demo models to date, after which this news has come to light.

Only once these things are actually in the shops do we get to use our Wallet Vote.

Exactly.... don't pre-order stuff...

[Corky34]

I'm by no means trying to just openly bash Oculus, I just personally find some of their decisions in regards to why they think a display, or even any pc accessory if we want to count it as something other than a display, needs a storefront and information tracking. It seems to me they see it as somewhat treading the line between "just a pc accessory" but also as a sort of console. Sort of like those old plug and play games you used to get on controllers.

You only have to look at how much a storefront and information tracking earns companies like Google, Apple, Facebook et al to see why most large tech companies want a piece of that pie, added to that is a predictable revenue stream, no more ups and downs when a product is successful and the next one is a big flop.

[jag272]

At this point, not so - All wallets have been used on pre-orders, based on demo models to date, after which this news has come to light.

Only once these things are actually in the shops do we get to use our Wallet Vote.



Q: Why does Elite: Dangerous need a store? Why not just sell the game and be done with it?
A: Merchandising!!!!!

I assume Oculus will soon be selling t-shirts and mousemats and all that gubbins, as well as new/improved controllers and accessories, lens cloths, spare cables, and so on.
Top this off with selling Rift bundles that include this game or that game, or perhaps certain games at a discount, thanks to semi/fully exclusive deals with the devs/publishers and there's your business model.

Info tracking can indeed help with product improvement updates, but since the whole world is paranoid about data theft and all that, feel free to be worried, conduct investigations and all that....


I personally don't care about any of that though, as I'm still dreaming about a Vive anyway!!

You only have to look at how much a storefront and information tracking earns companies like Google, Apple, Facebook et al to see why most large tech companies want a piece of that pie, added to that is a predictable revenue stream, no more ups and downs when a product is successful and the next one is a big flop.

Ye without a doudbt, I'm personally less concerned with the privacy side of it and more so just fed up of everything having its own store, requiring running various different stores all at once, or opening a specific store to open a particular application. Theres no doubt its a very profitable pie, but were getting to the point where each slice of the pie has something different we want, requiring us to either have many of them running at once, or open various stores throughout the day, closing them whenever were done with them again.

That said giving say Valve the whole pie, or giving Microsoft domain over the whole pie as an OS level DRM system that 3rd party stores can validate against wouldn't really be a great choice either. Frankly though were just getting too many software storefronts thrown at is in recent years in my opinion, and that's why the Oculus storefront bothers me I think, that said it seems the HTC Vive is going the same route, atleast to an extent, people have been digging info it seems but haven't really reached any solid conclusions.

[Ttaskmaster]

Theres no doubt its a very profitable pie, but were getting to the point where each slice of the pie has something different we want, requiring us to either have many of them running at once, or open various stores throughout the day, closing them whenever were done with them again.

I have one main 'store', which is Steam and is more of a game app/launcher/thing. I open that instead of opening File Manager to launch the game .exe, but Steam comes with voice chat as well so I natter while playing... usually in the same game as who I'm nattering to.

I have to open Origin to play the few EA games I own and Uplay if I want Assassins Creed, but I've not even touched the latter in a while.

That said giving say Valve the whole pie, or giving Microsoft domain over the whole pie as an OS level DRM system that 3rd party stores can validate against wouldn't really be a great choice either. Frankly though were just getting too many software storefronts thrown at is in recent years in my opinion, and that's why the Oculus storefront bothers me I think,

that said it seems the HTC Vive is going the same route, atleast to an extent, people have been digging info it seems but haven't really reached any solid conclusions.

Yeah, it's called "Steam", isn't it?

[jag272]

Yeah, it's called "Steam", isn't it?

As it turns out ye. That's what I had always assumed was the case from the start, since Valve was involved. But yesterday/day before when the discussion started I did a quick bit of background reading and this image was getting thrown around, as apparent proof that it would in fact use HTC's own store as opposed to steam.

http://i.imgur.com/tuTthBf.png (Image is apparently far too large to embed in a post after trying)

As far as I can tell from the official release info so far it does indeed use Steam though, and most likely HTC have their own app store for other applications rather than straight up PC games. I frankly would've been surprised if Valve handed off the game DRM side of it to HTC though, but people will read into it what they want to read I guess.

Further research seems to suggest that images dates back to Jan 2016, when HTC were showing off a VR appstore called "Viveport", but apparently it didn't have any actual content in it at that time, and people took it to assume (in light of the oculus store probably) that it would be an appstore for games as opposed to utilising steam.

[shaithis]

I have to open Origin to play the few EA games I own and Uplay if I want Assassins Creed, but I've not even touched the latter in a while.

That said giving say Valve the whole pie, or giving Microsoft domain over the whole pie as an OS level DRM system that 3rd party stores can validate against wouldn't really be a great choice either. Frankly though were just getting too many software storefronts thrown at is in recent years in my opinion, and that's why the Oculus storefront bothers me I think

It's a natural progression. Valve found a niche, that has now become the norm. Companies are trying to mitigate their payouts to Valve for delivering their content.

I've given up wanting/expecting a product to be on one particular store over another.....and in recent times have actually been happier for games on Origin/UPlay as they are easier to buy games via VPN and won't hold you at ransom for doing so like steam reserves the right to do (and in many cases, does). For nattering/meeting with friends, I run a TeamSpeak channel, it saves being linked to any gaming client and/or the quality of some in-game VOIP solutions.

An Oculous store almost seemed inevitable as they try and eek as much profit as possible out of the name.....and as they have undoubtedly had the most press of any VR solution, they might as well milk it for what they can.