Valve opened up their SteamVR tracking technology for third-party development in August, and since then, 50 developers have completed the mandatory training course provided by Synapse, the first company to enter the field.

Synapse says that most of the participants have been interested in gaming specifically, but some have expressed interest in applying the technology to the automotive industry, science, sports, education, and general consumer electronics.

Synapse has received more registrations for the training course than originally anticipated, so they’ve added additional slots for the course in November and December. A representative for Synapse said that there are currently no plans to continue the course past December, so interested developers should sign-up as soon as possible to get in the remaining classes.

SEE ALSO
Valve: 300 Companies Already Planning to Use SteamVR Tracking Tech

Synapse will also be presenting a compressed version of their training course at SXSW as part of the VR/AR track in March of 2017.

synapse-stemvr-lighthouse-training-course-100012

At Valve’s annual Steam Dev Days event earlier this month, the company laid heavy emphasis on making their Lighthouse room-scale tracking technology available to companies wishing to integrate it into 3rd party products. Valve stated that claiming that those 300 licensees span multiple industries ranging from “entertainment VR to automotive to televisions and toys.” Further, Valve says we can look forward to seeing many of these products appear in 2017.

SEE ALSO
These Tiny Sensors Will Let You Build Lighthouse Tracked Headsets and Peripherals

Shortly after the announcement that the SteamVR Tracking technology would finally begin to open up to third-parties, semiconductor firm Triad Semiconductor announced that it was collaborating with Valve to create the ‘light to digital’ chips that form an important foundation of the sensors and make the impressively accurate tracking and which Valve recommends for use in products integrating SteamVR Tracking.

Newsletter graphic

This article may contain affiliate links. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product we may receive a small commission which helps support the publication. More information.


Michael Glombicki
  • OgreTactics

    So they’re already dispersing their effort and haven’t even sold 150.000 units…FFS

    • Aragon

      I assume they don’t like HTCs high price for the valve and therefore want some cheaper chinese companies to also produce vive compatible headsets.

      • OgreTactics

        It’s never about the price (although it’s a factor). Look at how much Apple customer are ready to rack-in for a crappy, uninnovative iphone just because they don’t want to have a disgustingly ugly Android smartphone.

        Virtual Headset simply are not ready product, they’re not even finished product, out of the hundreds of people I know who have a high-end headset, none of them use it regularly, and have put it on shelves where it’s taking dust only to be plugged-again for show to friends or when there’s a particularly popular experiences.

        • ummm…

          you know hundreds of vive owners? you also know their habits? those habits are that they dont use a vive that they spent at lealst 1k on? something isn’t adding up.

          • The Moose

            Yeah it happens you passive aggressive moron. People spend a lot of money on things only to not use it again for a while. Specially when products go through software slumps (VR right now).

          • ummm…

            so is VR in a slump or a growth period? wow calling me a moron. damn son. get a grip.

            edit: if you think a consumer bought the vive/rift to sit on their shevles you are nuts. IF this guy knows hundreds of people that have a vive and dont use it then they are probably in tech – and incompetent or not in the field and just have it for kicks. no end user is leaving it on a shelf.

          • OgreTactics

            Yes, I should have been more specific: persons working in companies, brands, agencies…pondering whether it’s time for investment and if they like VR. Which baffles me, but that I ended up understanding.

          • ummm…

            I could see how some may not see their moment to invest, develop in VR. But you know hundreds of these people? are you in Silicon valley and know the most cynical? anyhow, i can see how some in the industry may not see their chance to cash in just yet.

          • OgreTactics

            I’m in Paris working with several hundreds of small agencies to big brands. They don’t have time, patience and maybe even passion to deal with how bulky, unfinished and buggy VR headsets are as of now. And I understand them.

          • ummm…

            Vive la France! The more you explain the more I understand. It may sound like a dumb question, but what facilitated their purchase? Did they look to develop biz productivity programs, training programs, scientific programs etc? Is there a demand for that sort of thing? Or is there no demand and still too early of a tech to be on the radar of their clients?

            I only ask because I think your comment could help us understand how vr is being marketed, what are the applications businesses are looking for in the short term, and what the general business community feels re: the tech.

            Your original comment comes off as dismissive of the new tech, instead of recognizing the yet unmined potential such a tech has. What are the hurdles, instead of “look, hurdles – lets leave it on the shelf”

          • OgreTactics

            A 800€ new tech product that had enough publicity to be intriguing is nothing, of course they have one or several Oculus/Vive (we have them all including StarVR, BozoVR, Wearility because we’re on the creative passionate side).

            But when it comes to actually real budget situation, they look at one thing: usability, feasibility and reach. Is it practical, ergonomic and accessible enough to be used casually, is it easy or rather clear enough in terms of how you can produce experience and set-it-up or is it going to cause problems, and is the reach worth it?

            We’re looking at budget between 200.000 and 1.5 millions euros, which, even if we’re talking about innovation, future, experience and stuff is still going to be compared to similar investment in web, video, ads, events, placements etc…

            But to me the real problem is 1. The Virtual Headsets. It’s not that people don’t know how to set a Vive, it’s that nobody sees and wants to project themselves having to install 12 fucking cables, two mounted lighthouse with screws, with many additional accessories and limited usability all the while the ergonomic design is not great. 2. The rationalisation of what VR is. Not many people understand or can explain the why’s and the implications. So they just set-back on the easiest approach which is numbers: how many people would the experience reach (despite it’s ROA or return-on-attention).

          • ummm…

            I think that the growth phase will involve those that have passion for the media, and expand the human ability to tell and experience narratives. These sorts of people that are attracted to it dont mind 12 cables.

            The other group sees VR as a vehicle to generate profit, and/or as a solution to a “practical” problem.

            It seems to me at the moment, as you say, many are in the wait and see. Many dont see how this new media vehicle can be used, or made profitable. Many may only have a passing interest, and the relative newness of it is off putting.

            In the end, VR will make itself valuable – or continue to do so outside of end user consumer entertainment. When we speak about the benefits of VR we must do so with the knowledge that there will be innovators, and there will be opportunists. The opportunists wait for the opportunity, the innovators create it.

          • Get Schwifty!

            ikr… Augure wants 4K headsets today with a hundreds of AAA titles or its all a waste of time.

            On Apple: they generally make good products, calling them “crappy” is a bit absurd. Do they attempt to constantly add some extra gimmick to pimp yet another phone every quarter? No, many people try both and some opt for Apple simply because it covers all the features they want, with an experience they like and is reliable. Nothing wrong with that as a distinction in buying practices, not everyone places equal value on the novelty factor of an extra whistle. God help us if Apple hadn’t been pushing the iPhone, we’d probably be all stuck with flip phones and Blackberries still… no sign of Samsung/Android before Apple pushed the idea out there.

            Will some people buy an HMD and leave it sitting while waiting for better content, controllers, etc? Of course, but there is no question VR is in motion. Like them or not, but Sony has already sold way more than Vive/Rift combined and lets face it, it’s an even lower VR quality experience. There is no “gold standard” for what the body of combined consumers want, that is why there are variations in the market.

          • ummm…

            well in regards to the iphone, of course it was revoultionary at least in design – as the tech was out there and would have been implemented at some point – but the design and marketing was key. thats why i choose to believe that apple did not make the iphone, but jobs did. if you look at apples past, the jobs years are different from the non jobs years. this is all to say that the apple we see today is only a legacy of the apple that jobs created, in as much as they are still using his vision and design.

            I like the way you view the VR market. Is it true the PSVR has already outsold the vive/rift? If so, then great. PC has always been a smaller market, even as it surges, and if we can continue to get somewhat playable ports of AAA titles, and continue to grow the “indie” third party developers in our pc ecosystem to fill our room scale fix (nowheres near completion) then the status quo is not shaken. This could mean two things. PCs continue to lag behind console gaming as far as native support and priority, but also dont fall further behind.

            You are right, it has and will continue to be about ones particular itch and how to scratch it. Not one kill all solution.

          • Get Schwifty!

            I would agree that Jobs shaped Apple, but they do have a corporate philosophy (design and otherwise) that they still carry. That being said I don’t believe they can be as innovative and carry it through without Jobs influence. OTOH, his resistance to obvious market moves was maddening, particularly his issues with larger phones which everyone admits cost Apple market share while Samsung was just throwing ad-hoc designs against the wall to see what stuck.

          • ummm…

            well, i have a larger phone, but I would rather have the smaller iphone model. Im just not willing to pay hundreds of dollars for a premium phone when i can get a very capable android device for a 5th or less of the cost.

            Additionally, what design changes or evolutions have come after jobs’ death? i could have run that company and it would have stayed profitable, even if i just scribbled stick figures using my bum hole to grab the pencil all day long in my office.

          • OgreTactics

            You are incoherent. There is no “gold standard” yet the iPhone was “revolutionary”? I don’t think you get what I’m saying, that I’ve been repeating and has nothing to do with 4K or AAAs.

          • OgreTactics

            Think brands, agencies, start-ups…not necessary amateur/gamer Vive owners…

    • Rogue_Transfer

      The purpose of Valve(software company at heart) was never to make the hardware – but to develop the technology and have 3rd parties produce the hardware based on a common spec. in a fairly open fashion.

      Remember, it’s not Valve selling the units – but HTC.

      • ummm…

        unbelievable this is the biggest grab for cash and flies in the face of anti trust laws. when will vive share their knowledge for free instead of hiding it behind a real world paywall at synapse and sxsw. Thats why i go with the rift. free of such parasitical behavior.

        • The Moose

          You do realize rift is helluva lot more of a closed ecosystem right? Down to their games it’s all tied to their walled garden. Facebook would NEVER think of sharing their products like this.

          Valve is basically sharing it only to people who are actually in the industry. Not random internet individuals who have a little bit of an interest in hardware manufacturing.

          • Get Schwifty!

            LOL- sarcasm obviously missed there…

          • ummm…

            shhh moose, come here…..i was trolling that other guy….sssshhhhh dont say anything. Although i can see you didnt’ get the tone (it’s the interwebs) so now you are trolling me. we have concurrent opinions….sshhh dont tell anyone. now back at it…..

          • Rogue_Transfer

            A rather pointless attempt and waste of your time. :)

      • OgreTactics

        Yup, as I said, thanks for the source.