6 ms·

IIRC, Valve wants to make games for VR, they don't want to make VR.

soperj 12y ago
This is why they let Jeri Ellsworth go with all the IP to CastAR.
polskibus 12y ago
That's the current state, but surely if they patented the no-nausea bit of tech, they wouldve earn millions just licensing it. It makes me wonder whether the Valve claim in the story is accurate or perhaps there is another story behind the official one.
- angersock 12y ago
  So, that's likely absurd, right? The "no-nausea" bit is more likely a combination of factors: low-latency, head tracking with thus-and-such a precision, field-of-view tweaks, etc. It'd be like patenting the ideal air-to-gasoline burning ratio: it's just a fact of life.
  - jacquesm 12y ago
    > It'd be like patenting the ideal air-to-gasoline burning ratio: it's just a fact of life. That never stopped people from trying to patent such facts of life, often succeeding and making tons of money with it or forcing competitors out of the field. Patents are like swords, use or abuse, to some only winning matters and they count their wins by their pocket-books.
  - wmf 12y ago
    My impression is that Valve contributed two qualitative improvements: replacing accelerometer/gyro with optical tracking and replacing LCD with OLED and blanking the OLED between each frame to reduce persistence.
    - angersock 12y ago
      The first is a very obvious step in improving absolute pose estimation--one implemented in various videos around the time the devkit came out. The other seems like a natural evolution of display technology.
- rasz_pl 12y ago
  Valve didnt invent this tech. Short flashy exposures of the display is pretty much standard in gaming monitors and everyone knows it is _the_ thing to do to minimize motion blur (LightBoost). Using camera to extract absolute position instead of drifty relative mems trackers is also no brainer. This is what N originally did with Wii remote. N also got sued at least four times over this exact technology.

This is why they let Jeri Ellsworth go with all the IP to CastAR.

That's the current state, but surely if they patented the no-nausea bit of tech, they wouldve earn millions just licensing it. It makes me wonder whether the Valve claim in the story is accurate or perhaps there is another story behind the official one.

angersock 12y ago
So, that's likely absurd, right? The "no-nausea" bit is more likely a combination of factors: low-latency, head tracking with thus-and-such a precision, field-of-view tweaks, etc. It'd be like patenting the ideal air-to-gasoline burning ratio: it's just a fact of life.
- jacquesm 12y ago
  > It'd be like patenting the ideal air-to-gasoline burning ratio: it's just a fact of life. That never stopped people from trying to patent such facts of life, often succeeding and making tons of money with it or forcing competitors out of the field. Patents are like swords, use or abuse, to some only winning matters and they count their wins by their pocket-books.
- wmf 12y ago
  My impression is that Valve contributed two qualitative improvements: replacing accelerometer/gyro with optical tracking and replacing LCD with OLED and blanking the OLED between each frame to reduce persistence.
  - angersock 12y ago
    The first is a very obvious step in improving absolute pose estimation--one implemented in various videos around the time the devkit came out. The other seems like a natural evolution of display technology.
rasz_pl 12y ago
Valve didnt invent this tech. Short flashy exposures of the display is pretty much standard in gaming monitors and everyone knows it is _the_ thing to do to minimize motion blur (LightBoost). Using camera to extract absolute position instead of drifty relative mems trackers is also no brainer. This is what N originally did with Wii remote. N also got sued at least four times over this exact technology.