>>270027613
>I don't think that's what happened at all, rather, investing in VR before oculus was bought off by facebook was a huge risk
I mean, that's consistent with what I said though? It has already been confirmed from multiple sources that Valve did not treat their VR team well before the Facebook acquisition. It's a matter of risk on why their board felt that way, indeed. I will add to that, that it's also a matter that due to the company structure where employees just do what they want, no one was cooperating with the VR team, because they didn't want to do it. You can read about that in The History of the Future. Abrash, his team, and VR, were simply just not fitting in with the rest of the culture at Valve.

But yes, I don't think many people were predicting Facebook would invest so much in the gaming aspect. Valve was mostly still looking at it from a hardware perspective. 

As for whether the gaming focus was right, they didn't really have a choice and I believe that decision making process is touched upon in The History of the Future too. And really, their investment into content is for the long term as well. The thing about their exclusives is that they're meant to be a slow ramp. Rubin has said that they are investing in content only to the point at which any one title couldn't be supported by the market. At the time, that was a handful of 5-10 hours titles. Now it's 20-40 hours of content per game assuming those after Asgard's Wrath keeps it up. So they are slowly building things up. So I'm not sure if Facebook owning at least 50% of the PC VR market share is really that bad for what they had accomplished in content. Before Asgard's Wrath, there really wasn't all that much attractive software on their store, not so much that someone would be too wooed over. Now that's starting to change slightly, but it's going to become unrelated after OpenXR is widely adopted.