Joel Johnson (great name) at Valleywag has put up an interesting piece looking at the fallout of the Oculus VR - Facebook deal from the eyes of a Kickstarter backer.

The fact that everyone involved made a rational choice to sell out isn't what I find frustrating, I don't think. (I don't even particularly care that Oculus sold to Facebook and not, say, Microsoft. Ultimately a sale is a sale, even if Facebook is the worst possible partner for Oculus of any of the large technology companies.) It's that I, as a consumer, bought into the narrative that underpins almost every Kickstarter project: that without my contribution, something novel would not exist. And while that remains true—and is a reason that Kickstarter's owners continue to underline that their goal is to fund "creators" and not "products"—Oculus' sale to Facebook also highlights the disparity inherent in the current capitalist and investment structure, where small investors are excluded from returns by regulation, but investors with more capital can quickly extract more capital by pushing a quick expansion into untapped markets, even without proving that those markets actually, truly exist.

I mean, I don't even get to claim my contribution to Oculus on my taxes as a charitable deduction.

There has been a lot of knee jerk reaction to the sale of Oculus VR. Most of the reaction is based on Facebook and how the general public perceives Facebook's potential involvement in this project (Though I would point out that Facebook's involvement in other big companies such as Instagram and Whats App have continued those services with little to no interference). Reaction from backers of the Kickstarter have been largely negative and Johnson's point is particularly salient. I'm not sure that I agree with everything Johnson has to say on the issue, but I think it's fair to say this has the potential to change the nature of Kickstarter.