So I'm making a program for the rift, using Game Maker studio. It does not natively support the rift but there is a community extension, which I have even contributed a tiny bit to myself: http://www.gmoculus.comWe have standard client rendering working, but not direct-to-rift SDK rendering, which would be a much better solution because of lower latency, automatic updating with the sdk, and because we are missing a lot of features in our own rendering, like chromatic aberration.The reason we have not gotten sdk rendering to work is because neither me or the main extension developer are very experienced in c++ and certainly not directx. But I think we've got the bulk of the work done, if someone knowledgeable would step in and help I'd think they could get it working pretty quickly. So I thought I'd email oculus and see if they could help, because who knows their SDK better than themselves, and I would have thought they would be very eager to help enable as many developers as they can. Instead I got this rather template-looking rejection: Hello Gitle,Thank you for taking the time to email us, we appreciate your support.We don't currently support third-party applications or development engines, we only support Unity and Unreal.You can visit the forums to see if other developers in the Oculus community are working on projects using the same engine at:https://developer.oculus.com/forums/I would also suggest getting into contact with the developer that created the extension and working with them to integrate it more seamlessly with the Oculus SDK.I apologize I am unable to do more.Hope this helps,[***]Oculus Support I understand Oculus is busy, but I don't understand why they won't delegate some time to problems like this. Surely we can't be the only indie developers who are having a bit of trouble integrating oculus support into their programs, it seems obvious that oculus would want to focus on helping them and thus getting as many programs (and even whole engines as in this case) with rift support working as possible, in this critical product phase. Just another example I can think of is the lunar flight developer, from what I understand he's been struggling with integrating dk2 support for a long time (was incidentally fixed in the last sdk though, I hear). Are developers that are either 1) not AAA-sized or 2) not using unreal or unity basically ignored? It's a bit disappointing.

I (as a developer of rift support for another unsupported engine) honestly can't agree with your stand point.At some point, they took a decision to provide support for perhaps the two engines with the largest user base, Unreal and Unity. This alone provided support for 1000s of developers. Their main goal though is to improve their hardware and SDK for a future consumer release. It's hardly worthwhile to provide direct support for every engine developer who wishes so.Imagine how much time it would take to first have to learn the architecture of an engine before being able to help out.In fact they have written some pretty extensive documentation on how to implement the various functionality into other engines.If the documentation can't help you, the next step is to reach out to the community. Either (or both) the community around your engine and the community on these forums. Look on other engines how they implemented it. If your engine is C++ the step should be fairly small from other existing solutions

"neph" wrote:If the documentation can't help you, the next step is to reach out to the community. Either (or both) the community around your engine and the community on these forums. Look on other engines how they implemented it. If your engine is C++ the step should be fairly small from other existing solutionsWe have already done this, we've been trying to get it to work since we first got the DK2 months ago. I've even tried offering money to anyone who wants to help, but no one does.

Yes, I understand your concern. I believe the decision was made to support Unity and Unreal because they are the most popular engines out there (Unreal for big dev houses and indies now, and Unity for mostly small indies). There are probably dozens of other engines out there, and we just don't have to bandwidth to create and maintain support for each one. However, we do provide a C/C++ SDK, which should allow support in almost any other engine that interfaces with C++ or can talk to a DLL based plug-in (though you would need to create this in C++). If you don't know C++, you can see about getting help on the forum or hiring someone for the task.Hope that makes sense.

I agree with GrixM, the support for small developers is lacking. I don't expect that Oculus have people at hand to help us every time we have some issues. But I think the problem boils down to two problems:1. Lack of good documentation. The current API docs and Oculus_Developer_Guide are lacking relevant information. Many API calls are not explained in detail enough and in the most recent release there were some API changes that was not mentioned in the docs. Many times we have to guess how to solve certain issues or look at the examples and try step through with a debugger to try to figure out the small details that is responsible for our integrations not working. If you are lucky some other independent developer has posted the solution on the forum. And since the docs are lacking in detail, you often see the same questions repeat over and over again. Many forum post could be avoided with better docs. Which leads me to the second point.2. The forum is a mess. It is a mix of general questions from users who bought a Rift to play games to super specific questions for developers. Right now there are three subforums where users are posting questions about developer related issues; Reporting Issues, Oculus General Development and Community Support. You often see the same questions being posted in these subforums. The forum need better structure and moderation:* Try to separate the programmers from the users. * If someone is asking a Unity3D question in the general dev subforum, please move it to the Unity3D specific subforum. * If the same question is asked over and over again, maybe someone at Oculus should take the time to write an answer and then make the question a sticky post.* Regarding the reporting issue forum, I really would like if you split that into: Reporting issues - Hardware DK1, Reporting issues - Hardware DK2, Reporting issues - SDK 0.4.2, Reporting issues - SDK 0.4.3 etc.It is really hard to find relevant information in all this noise. TLDR: By supplying better documentation and better forum moderation a lot of the problems for small developer would go away.

@PixelminerI'll second on the documentation. I don't see folks asking for Oculus to fix their random game engine; I see them asking about Oculus' SDK and what feature that does and does not work.Overall, the SDK is an improvement but when you have situations like "Direct" mode not working as advertised for OpenGL, which by the way is the recommended mode of operation, it is very discouraging.CyberReality has been great, and I hope he doesn't take this as an attack against him in any way, but we need many more engineers/developers from Oculus on these forums. They come in and out like ghosts randomly. They should be a regular staple to the forums.Plus, they get a bonus in that they find out via direct interaction with actual users of the Rift what needs to be fixed, etc. versus having CyberReality relay everything all of the time.However on your second point, I don't think the forums are bad at all; I think the mix between actual developer questions and people who simply have the Rift and want to find out more about it is good.The important thing is that questions get answered. So far the community has been good in that way to each other.Let's leave that alone and start screaming for the engineers to log into the site more often.

Oculus unhelpful to small developers? | Meta Community Forums

27 Replies

neph
Honored Guest
11 years ago
I (as a developer of rift support for another unsupported engine) honestly can't agree with your stand point.

At some point, they took a decision to provide support for perhaps the two engines with the largest user base, Unreal and Unity. This alone provided support for 1000s of developers. Their main goal though is to improve their hardware and SDK for a future consumer release. It's hardly worthwhile to provide direct support for every engine developer who wishes so.
Imagine how much time it would take to first have to learn the architecture of an engine before being able to help out.
In fact they have written some pretty extensive documentation on how to implement the various functionality into other engines.
If the documentation can't help you, the next step is to reach out to the community. Either (or both) the community around your engine and the community on these forums. Look on other engines how they implemented it. If your engine is C++ the step should be fairly small from other existing solutions
Anonymous
11 years ago
"neph" wrote:

If the documentation can't help you, the next step is to reach out to the community. Either (or both) the community around your engine and the community on these forums. Look on other engines how they implemented it. If your engine is C++ the step should be fairly small from other existing solutions

We have already done this, we've been trying to get it to work since we first got the DK2 months ago. I've even tried offering money to anyone who wants to help, but no one does.
cybereality
Grand Champion
11 years ago
Yes, I understand your concern. I believe the decision was made to support Unity and Unreal because they are the most popular engines out there (Unreal for big dev houses and indies now, and Unity for mostly small indies). There are probably dozens of other engines out there, and we just don't have to bandwidth to create and maintain support for each one.

However, we do provide a C/C++ SDK, which should allow support in almost any other engine that interfaces with C++ or can talk to a DLL based plug-in (though you would need to create this in C++). If you don't know C++, you can see about getting help on the forum or hiring someone for the task.

Hope that makes sense.
Vrally
Protege
11 years ago
I agree with GrixM, the support for small developers is lacking. I don't expect that Oculus have people at hand to help us every time we have some issues. But I think the problem boils down to two problems:

1. Lack of good documentation. The current API docs and Oculus_Developer_Guide are lacking relevant information. Many API calls are not explained in detail enough and in the most recent release there were some API changes that was not mentioned in the docs. Many times we have to guess how to solve certain issues or look at the examples and try step through with a debugger to try to figure out the small details that is responsible for our integrations not working. If you are lucky some other independent developer has posted the solution on the forum. And since the docs are lacking in detail, you often see the same questions repeat over and over again. Many forum post could be avoided with better docs. Which leads me to the second point.

2. The forum is a mess. It is a mix of general questions from users who bought a Rift to play games to super specific questions for developers. Right now there are three subforums where users are posting questions about developer related issues; Reporting Issues, Oculus General Development and Community Support. You often see the same questions being posted in these subforums. The forum need better structure and moderation:
* Try to separate the programmers from the users.
* If someone is asking a Unity3D question in the general dev subforum, please move it to the Unity3D specific subforum.
* If the same question is asked over and over again, maybe someone at Oculus should take the time to write an answer and then make the question a sticky post.
* Regarding the reporting issue forum, I really would like if you split that into: Reporting issues - Hardware DK1, Reporting issues - Hardware DK2, Reporting issues - SDK 0.4.2, Reporting issues - SDK 0.4.3 etc.
It is really hard to find relevant information in all this noise.

TLDR: By supplying better documentation and better forum moderation a lot of the problems for small developer would go away.
tmason101
Honored Guest
11 years ago
@Pixelminer

I'll second on the documentation. I don't see folks asking for Oculus to fix their random game engine; I see them asking about Oculus' SDK and what feature that does and does not work.

Overall, the SDK is an improvement but when you have situations like "Direct" mode not working as advertised for OpenGL, which by the way is the recommended mode of operation, it is very discouraging.

CyberReality has been great, and I hope he doesn't take this as an attack against him in any way, but we need many more engineers/developers from Oculus on these forums.

They come in and out like ghosts randomly. They should be a regular staple to the forums.

Plus, they get a bonus in that they find out via direct interaction with actual users of the Rift what needs to be fixed, etc. versus having CyberReality relay everything all of the time.

However on your second point, I don't think the forums are bad at all; I think the mix between actual developer questions and people who simply have the Rift and want to find out more about it is good.

The important thing is that questions get answered. So far the community has been good in that way to each other.

Let's leave that alone and start screaming for the engineers to log into the site more often.
Vrally
Protege
11 years ago
"tmason101" wrote:

However on your second point, I don't think the forums are bad at all; I think the mix between actual developer questions and people who simply have the Rift and want to find out more about it is good.

I strongly disagree. It is hard enough to find good developer information. We do not need to pile up non-developer related threads in the dev part of the forum. Just some simple examples of threads titles in the Oculus General Development subforum:
* So how long does the DK2 take to ship, after the payment...
* Possible DIY screen upgrade for DK2 coming?

+ a lot of other thread discussing future hardware

None of these threads are developer related. These should be moved into either Oculus General Discussion subforum or The Oculus Lounge.
tmason101
Honored Guest
11 years ago
"pixelminer" wrote:
"tmason101" wrote:

However on your second point, I don't think the forums are bad at all; I think the mix between actual developer questions and people who simply have the Rift and want to find out more about it is good.

I strongly disagree. It is hard enough to find good developer information. We do not need to pile up non-developer related threads in the dev part of the forum. Just some simple examples of threads titles in the Oculus General Development subforum:
* So how long does the DK2 take to ship, after the payment...
* Possible DIY screen upgrade for DK2 coming?

+ a lot of other thread discussing future hardware

None of these threads are developer related. These should be moved into either Oculus General Discussion subforum or The Oculus Lounge.

As long as the documentation and issues with the SDK is solved, especially "Direct" mode, you can have at it.

Change the forums however you wish if we can get the core issues fixed.
Vrally
Protege
11 years ago
"tmason101" wrote:

As long as the documentation and issues with the SDK is solved, especially "Direct" mode, you can have at it.

Yes, this is most important. I am actually a bit surprised about the lack of quality of the documentation, but I guess that the Oculus devs rather share code early, than writing good documentation. But the result is a lot of confused independent developers.
Lane
Honored Guest
11 years ago
The Developer forum is not Developer-centric. I generally dislike visiting the forum and only do so if I must, I don't even maintain my game thread anymore.

Unity and Unreal are the two most common indie engines for 3d games. Supporting GameMaker directly seems like a stretch to begin with, even more so at this point in time.
tmason101
Honored Guest
11 years ago
"Lane" wrote:
The Developer forum is not Developer-centric. I generally dislike visiting the forum and only do so if I must, I don't even maintain my game thread anymore.

Unity and Unreal are the two most common indie engines for 3d games. Supporting GameMaker directly seems like a stretch to begin with, even more so at this point in time.

That's fine, but we are not really talking about supporting an engine, we are talking about support for the SDK.

As it stands now we can't get a simple OpenGL example to work reliably in "Direct" mode, which is the recommended mode.