Quest开发者对Meta Horizon OS开放的反应

Meta's recent announcement that it will allow select partners to build third-party headsets based on Horizon OS has sparked a heated discussion in the XR industry.

RoadtoVR reached out to a series of VR developers and asked them the same questions about the opening of the Meta Horizon OS. (Note: Some developers choose not to answer specific questions)

Denny Unger——Cloudhead Games 负责人，《Pistol Whip》开发商

Q: Do you think this is a smart move by Meta?

A: In some ways, the strategy no longer emphasizes the details of the hardware, but instead focuses on how the hardware amplifies the content. The important takeaway here is that in the fierce XR market, a one-size-fits-all device or approach is not an ideal short-term strategy. Users are sure to be drawn to different use cases, so it's wise to be really inclined to make this or that track different (and profitable). It will be years before a golden headset that can do "everything" while removing all the friction points.

Q: Do you think this will have an impact on your forward-looking business strategy?

A: Over the next 5-10 years, as device form factors shrink and key technologies are realized, software studios sandwiched in need of parity and stability to take advantage of these meager margins toward a new mainstream dawn. All key OEMs can do is maintain "easy porting," OS parity, hardware parity, and scalability, which are critical to maintaining the health of the software ecosystem. Ultimately, if XR studios are excluded from a particular platform due to software, hardware, or financial constraints, then the hardware competition is meaningless.

Q: If you were Meta, how would you make this decision?

A: As with the console market before it, the growth of "mainstream" hardware is closely tied to consumer expectations for content, but in XR, the resources to make this happen are always unbalanced. I think Meta has made a smart decision here, not only in terms of expanding the hardware definition to support key use cases, but also in bringing the App lab from behind the scenes to the front of the stage. This should help the software ecosystem evolve in a more organic way, while still maintaining the importance of management and ensuring that quality is always passable. This combination of management and organic discovery is something that all VR storefronts should employ.

I really hope we'll see the entire highly competitive XR landscape begin to shift and redefine the importance of software in VR/MR success. If studios can make a deep investment in their teams and the software that makes this technology so amazing, we'll start laying the groundwork for a true mainstream.

Eddie Lee——Funktronic Lab 负责人，《Light Brigade》的开发商

Q: Do you think this is a smart move by Meta?

A: I think it's a win for the VR ecosystem – more devices, more industry support, more hardware competition (hopefully more players).

Q: What do you see as a developer, what do you see as the pros and cons?

A: The biggest drawback is that it's not easy to support multiple devices. Theoretically, the claim is that it should "work on a headset running the same platform", but unfortunately that's not the case, but I hope I'm wrong. When you're developing on an all-in-one VR system, you really need to compress each compute cycle and do a lot of optimization for specific hardware, especially in VR, where every millisecond counts for immersion. Independent VR development teams are already small, so adding more load and complexity will have a negative impact. Also, I'm not a big fan of supporting multiple interaction modes (gamepads, gestures, etc.) because it makes the player base more fragmented in an already niche ecosystem.

Q: Do you think this will have an impact on your forward-looking business strategy?

A: If more headsets, competition, and industry investment means a bigger VR audience, I think that's a win-win. If not, then for smaller studios, it will only mean more complexity.

Bevan McKechnie——Notdead Games 负责人，《Compound》开发商

Q: What do you see as a developer, what do you see as the pros and cons?

A: Purely as a developer, this seems like a good thing. I really enjoyed making games, but porting the game to a bunch of slightly different platforms was very time-consuming. It would be great if I could build the games just once and put them on a platform where they can be purchased and run on numerous headsets made by different manufacturers. I (and others) can spend more time making games and less time porting them, which can mean shorter development time, lower development costs, and more games.

Q: Do you think this will have an impact on your forward-looking business strategy?

A: I don't think this will change any of my current strategies. I make games and port them if I need to. As long as the other platforms continue to exist, then this step cannot be removed entirely. It would be great if this change resulted in a more consolidated and consistent development process!If not, well, I'll continue as before.

Q: If you were Meta, how would you make this decision?

A: At this early stage, we don't know too many details, but I haven't noticed any changes that seem to me that need to be highlighted immediately. I think it's fair to assume that Meta, like any company, is trying to get things moving in their favor, but if things do become more open, or at least semi-open, I'd be cautiously optimistic about a more positive outcome than a situation where one company controls everything.

But if I were Meta, I would push for more high-quality games. I don't know if it's a sound business decision, but if I had the power, I'd get them to support and fund amazing games more often and more intensely that really showcase the incredible immersion of VR. We need more high-caliber games like Half-Life: Alyx, but with more modern VR game mechanics that convince mainstream gamers that VR is the future.

Lucas Rizzotto–——《Pillow》的开发者

Q: Do you think this is a smart move by Meta?

A: Meta has always been a social product company, but over the past few years, with the launch of Quest, they have become a platform vendor. The move realigns Meta's role as a platform and allows them to return to the social business. There's a reason the system is called Meta Horizon OS, Meta's social features will undoubtedly be built into the operating system, and if your operating system is the most popular choice for VR/AR headsets, there's no better way to have the social layer of XR.

Q: What do you see as a developer, what do you see as the pros and cons?

A: The advantage is that it no longer fragments the store because of App Lab. If you look at the fine print, Meta still retains editorial control, internally distinguishing between "premium" and "non-premium" XR apps/games.

As for the drawbacks, we may see a lot of copycat products in the Quest store. In addition, this paves the way for Meta to start charging developers for store promotions, so developers may have to pay Meta 30% of the store fees to receive promotions.

Q: Do you think this will have an impact on your forward-looking business strategy?

A: I don't think this will have much of an impact on my strategy, and I hope that means that our product will be used in more headsets without having to worry about porting.

Q: If you were Meta, how would you make this decision?

A: If I were Meta, I would honestly do the same thing, and it's just another move to help them achieve market dominance and get ahead of Google and Samsung's plans.