Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Valve To Demo Prototype VR Headset, "Steam to Support and Promote VR Games"

Unknown Lamer posted about 10 months ago | from the where's-my-missle-command-3d-port dept.

Displays 55

An anonymous reader writes "The itinerary for Steam Dev Days 2014 lists two talks by Valve's internal virtual and augmented reality researchers, Michael Abrash and Joe Ludwig. Abrash's talk, titled 'What VR Could, Should, and Almost Certainly Will Be within Two Years' will feature a demonstration of Valve's secret prototype VR headset that is 'capable of stunning experiences.' Ludwig's talk 'Virtual Reality and Steam' will discuss how Valve will be adapting Steam to VR to 'support and promote Virtual Reality games.' Rift inventor and Oculus co-founder Palmer Luckey will also be taking to the stage at Steam Dev Days to speak on best-practice for VR development." There's a hint that they might be showing off a head mounted display featuring a low persistence display, which would be great news for those of us that get the urge to hurl when playing Doom on a conventional display. If you missed it you might want to check out the slides and notes (PDF) from Michael Abrash's GDC2013 talk on VR.

cancel ×

55 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Stop Messing Around Gabe.... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45459781)

HL3

Re:Stop Messing Around Gabe.... (5, Funny)

Azure Flash (2440904) | about 10 months ago | (#45459989)

VR
V = 22
R = 18
V - R = 6
Two letters in VR: 6 / 2 = 3

Half-Life 3 Confirmed

Re:Stop Messing Around Gabe.... (4, Funny)

jones_supa (887896) | about 10 months ago | (#45460455)

Also, VR [www.vr.fi] is the state-owned railroad company in Finland. And railroads were a quite recurring theme in HL2. Pure coincidence? I think not!

I want the rom / hdd dumps of wolfenvr (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45460107)

blank stone vr as well

Low persistance has upsides and downsides. (5, Informative)

Ruedii (2712279) | about 10 months ago | (#45459787)

Low persistance displays are a tricky issue.

They obviously don't have the issues that high-persistance displays have of holding frames for too long. However, they have another annoying effect, commonly referred to as the strobe effect. This has to do with each pixel being lit for only a minute duty cycle on the display. This causes bad flicker at low refresh rates.

Early low persistance displays obviously were not very good on this issue. This is because the displays used very slow technologies such as oscolating mirrors.

By the details I've read on their blog, I'm pretty certain Valve has gotten down that they need a high refresh rate to get the VR to work right. They have identified strobe effect as a problem, and have identified that while the traditional 60Hz rate, while tolerable, is far from ideal for low persistance displays. They seem to believe they can push the refresh rate high enough to deal with strobe effect. I have confidence that they can.

Higher refresh rates also have other advantages for gaming as Internet router designs improve and ping times drop, the latency produced by interpolation becomes more substancial, and the best way to reduce it is to push more physical frames. If you are pushing more physical frames, there are clear advantages to pushing more visual frames to match.

Re:Low persistance has upsides and downsides. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45459925)

I'm all for fast refresh in general. I went to a 120hz monitor a while ago and for fast motion gaming it makes all the difference in the world. Many of these are sold as "3D" monitors, but "3D" gaming with silly glasses on is at best a gimmick. The real draw is that these monitors can do 120hz. (And require dual-link DVI to push twice as many frames!)

These are good as you can get for an LCD anyway. CRTs are superior when it comes to latency and motion blur, but I'm done sitting in front of a heavy pile of high voltage analog electronics coupled to glass bubble that has to be filled with lead to prevent it from irradiating me with x-rays.

Recently upgraded to a 144 hz Asus gaming monitor. Worth every peny.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236313

Re:Low persistance has upsides and downsides. (2)

Daniel Hoffmann (2902427) | about 10 months ago | (#45459999)

I don't think we are nowhere near low enough on the internet latency thing for the delay that going to a high refresh rate would make any difference on lag. High refresh rates are still nice though for completely unrelated reasons.

Re:Low persistance has upsides and downsides. (2)

Smauler (915644) | about 10 months ago | (#45460707)

By the details I've read on their blog, I'm pretty certain Valve has gotten down that they need a high refresh rate to get the VR to work right. They have identified strobe effect as a problem, and have identified that while the traditional 60Hz rate, while tolerable, is far from ideal for low persistance displays. They seem to believe they can push the refresh rate high enough to deal with strobe effect. I have confidence that they can.

The fundamental problem with VR is the disparity between the visual effect and movement. You can get VR to 100% picture perfect accurate, and it won't feel close to real, because you can't move.

I personally think most of the nausea found with 3D games, and VR, is probably due to this effect. It won't be cured by making the video better.

Higher refresh rates also have other advantages for gaming as Internet router designs improve and ping times drop

Yeah... they do, but only marginally. Also, ping times have not been dropping. Contention is a factor. I very much doubt I will ever see as good a gaming performance as playing Quake online with an ISDN and _single digit pings_, on a CRT. In fact, I very much doubt you could even achieve the low latencies I got back then, unless you spent tens of thousands now. Current monitors mostly have more than single digit lag on their own, 120hz sets often increase input lag. The main lag with monitors is input lag, not refresh rate, and the input lag is caused by the software processing.

Re:Low persistance has upsides and downsides. (1)

mobby_6kl (668092) | about 10 months ago | (#45461579)

Have you tried the Rift? While you're correct that just having a perfect picture won't get you the full experience of jacking into the Matrix, it actually does go a long, long way toward making the experience extremely immersive.

A lot of our sense actually depend on our vision to work properly - for instance, you'd think that an airplane pilot would be able to tell which way is up based on what their body feels, but actually losing visibility of the outside world is a good way to completely mess up the perception of position and direction. With the inner ear not providing data one way or another, having realistic, lag free video works pretty well for making you feel like you're experiencing whatever is being shown.

Re: Low persistance has upsides and downsides. (1)

Sigg3.net (886486) | about 10 months ago | (#45462303)

Did Q2 CTF:II on dual ISDN on a Quake server my ISP ran back in the 90's. Jedi Knight DF2 suffered badly under the same condition.
Bonus: no annoying phone calls while playing!

We need to clone Carmack who recognize gameplay over bling.

take it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45459803)

all my money!

After beating off right before someone comes home. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45459947)

Competing? (1)

DaTrueDave (992134) | about 10 months ago | (#45459961)

So, is Valve planning on introducing a product that competes with Oculus Rift? Or are they working cooperatively?

Re:Competing? (2)

Daniel Hoffmann (2902427) | about 10 months ago | (#45460011)

Valve wants to sell software, they are pushing open platforms that you can buy from anyone as long as you buy the software as well.

Re:Competing? (1)

Lennie (16154) | about 10 months ago | (#45461761)

Actually, they give away free games (software) as well.

They are a platform, they just want to grow their audience.

If I remember from a presentation by Gabe he said:
You get 10 times more players on a free game and 10% more profit.

It was on one of these talks:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Td_PGkfIdIQ [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhgOqyZHBIU [youtube.com]

Re:Competing? (1)

Lennie (16154) | about 10 months ago | (#45461909)

A free to play game gets 10 times more players and revenue goes up by a factor of 3.

"The profitability tends to go up a lot more than a factor of 3"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Td_PGkfIdIQ#t=30m43s [youtube.com]

Re:Competing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45466149)

I wish instead they would spend their time fixing the problems with Steam. It sucks not being able to play the games you own.

Re: Competing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45467407)

Open platforms? How about instead they start working on all of the problems with Steam. Not fixing bugs that prevent us from playing the games we own is criminal.

Re:Competing? (3, Informative)

Baloroth (2370816) | about 10 months ago | (#45460037)

Kinda both. TFA mentions that the Oculus guys were shown a hands-on demonstration of Valve's headset and plan on implementing some stuff they learned there in the Rift. I have no doubt they'll be sort-of competitors, in that people are unlikely to buy both, but Valve's position on hardware so far has been to let other people handle the manufacturing and only do prototype and design work themselves, so it remains to be seen if Valve even directly produces a VR headset. They are, however, producing at least a prototype version of their own set.

However, competition is good. It'll drive anyone who makes VR headsets to produce a headset better (at least in some ways) than the other guys, and give consumers a bit of choice. Plus highlight problems that one set has that others don't, and maybe give everyone some ideas how to fix those problems. Provided, of course, games are intercompatible with all sets on the market (otherwise you just get fragmentation which in practice can be worse than a monopoly).

MMORPGs -- LOTRO, WoW, etc. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45460055)

I want LOTRO on VR! You know the first MMORPG to manage VR is going to make a killing!

CastAR (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45460061)

Hugh? Can someone explain, why they fire their VR/AR team and then introduce this a couple of months later?

Re:CastAR (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45460159)

CastAR does AR and VR. Valve probably didn't see AR as being anything but a niche toy and wanted to focus on VR. So CastAR splits off to do their own thing. Valve sticks with dedicated VR.

Re:CastAR (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45460251)

Thanks for the explanation.
But wouldn't that be extremely stupid and nearsighted to do for Valve? AR's definitely coming...

Re:CastAR (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45460387)

Who knows, I'm not Valve nor do I know anyone there, so that's just my speculation. Maybe they just thought it wasn't good enough for their needs.

Re:CastAR (1)

tibman (623933) | about 10 months ago | (#45460993)

There were competing projects within Valve. One was AR the other was VR. VR won and the AR team was let go. It turns out that the AR project can also do VR with a small attachment though. But i have the feeling there was politics at play and not just the technical merits of each project.

Re:CastAR (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45461651)

AR's definitely coming...

I see your unfounded assertion with my own: AR's definitely not coming.

Re:CastAR (1)

grumbel (592662) | about 10 months ago | (#45461979)

AR is coming, but it's still years away from being practical, so Valve focuses on VR instead which is right around the corner. Also CastAR isn't really suited for general purpose AR, as it needs a special surface to project on. So it's probably an evolutionary dead end in the long run. Finally CastAR seems overall more focused on the toy/boardgame market then on the gamer market and Valve is mainly interested in gamers.

Re: CastAR (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45463767)

CastAR supports 3 modes. Projected AR using the retro reflective surface. Traditional AR overlay with the AR/VR clip-on. And full VR with he clip on and a cover blocking external light. The latter 2 modes ought to be just fine for the same things Rift and Valve's device want to do. Also the retro reflective AR could be useful in playing an online boardgame with other people who have their own setup. Less expensive than plane tickets to most if the people I know that would be interested in playing on a regular basis.

Re:CastAR (2)

tibman (623933) | about 10 months ago | (#45460949)

Not sure but i'm very thankful that Gabe let Jeri have the tech.

Re:CastAR (1)

iampiti (1059688) | about 10 months ago | (#45466493)

As far as I remember Jeri Ellsworth didn't quite fit in Valve's culture, so that might be a factor. She made a video about it when she was let go. I might be on her Youtube channel

DooM-hurlers, get your old CRT out! (3, Interesting)

foobar bazbot (3352433) | about 10 months ago | (#45460103)

... featuring a low persistence display, which would be great news for those of us that get the urge to hurl when playing Doom on a conventional display.

Note that many CRTs (basically all modern color CRTs and most modern monochromes) are low- (not zero-) persistence, with phosphor decay on the order of microseconds to tens of microseconds. Some of the visual effects are bound to be very different with a exponential or power law decay than with the sharp cutoff of scanning devices, but it does suggest ways for some of us who aren't in secret VR prototype labs to experiment with some of the stuff he's talking about.

I'm not about to do this now, but back when I was about 12 and could do such things without getting dizzy, I tinkered with motion perception by making programs that would scroll an image horizontally across a CRT, lay on my belly across a swivel chair with my feet in the air, and spun myself by pushing off the legs of the chair with my hands to get a near-constant speed that synced with the monitor.

If I didn't have better things that needed doing, I'd strap a CRT display and an LCD onto a lazy susan, together with an Eee or such to drive one of them (swap plugs to repeat experiment with low- or high-persistence), and spin it instead of myself. (It's kinda sad that I do have better things that need doing, and yet I'm posting this on /. instead of either doing them or doing visual perception experiments...)

Re:DooM-hurlers, get your old CRT out! (1)

t0qer (230538) | about 10 months ago | (#45460205)

You probably wouldn't even need that much these days. An android tablet capable of taking panoramas. Take pano, then load up the gallery, then lay on your chair again.

Re:DooM-hurlers, get your old CRT out! (2)

olau (314197) | about 10 months ago | (#45461685)

I was waiting for the moment you would suggest to strap the old CRT onto your head for the Only True VR Experience.

Re:DooM-hurlers, get your old CRT out! (1)

antdude (79039) | about 10 months ago | (#45462399)

Where can we still buy new top quality CRT monitors for computers? I dislike LCDs, LEDs, etc. :(

Re:DooM-hurlers, get your old CRT out! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45462959)

Yeeaaahh nothing says "Top quality" than flicker, shitty color, an image that has a different aspect ratio at the top from that at the bottom, a slight humming noise, and a curved view of what's supposed to be a flat image.

Oh, and image burn in that rivals plasma if you view letter boxed/pillar boxed content (or static content) for too long.

CastAR (1)

jhb146 (459905) | about 10 months ago | (#45460127)

I wonder how this will compare to the CastAR that they let Jeri Ellsworth walk out the door with...

They weren't targeting the same games, but the hardware for the CastAR is impressive.

Re:CastAR (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 10 months ago | (#45460505)

My expectation is that they can coexist.

Re:CastAR (2)

tibman (623933) | about 10 months ago | (#45460975)

I'm very excited for CastAR and helped with the kickstarter. I have no doubt that Jeri will deliver something great.

Her story about how she was let go is pretty good. She did not want the AR project to die and sounded pretty emotional in meeting with Gabe. He told the layer to let her have it. What company does that kind of thing?!

Makes sense (1)

aiadot (3055455) | about 10 months ago | (#45461057)

I really don't think Oculus VR as a company has a future, at least not as the mainstream VR king they keep picturing. Not because VR is not the future, we all know it is, but because they lack what really matters for the commercial success of a product in the mainstream tech/gaming industry: marketing, content and first party support. And on top of that their device is nothing but rehash of 90s tech with modern components. Back in 2008, when I was in college, I built in a single weekend a VR google prototype for a school project using a jailbroken iPhone and those zoom lenses that came with Metal Gear Ac!d for the PSP. If a nobody like me could do that, the only reason we don't see other PC peripheral manufactures like Logitech, Razer, Asus, Madcatz, etc making their own VR googles is because they lack the content and marketing to make it a profitable product. If by any chance Oculus end up being the only company in the field, VR is going the way motion controllers went on the PC: total oblivion. Only years later with the Wii, is that motion controllers actually became something that devs were willing to spend time with.

Said that, IMO, as a PC, console and handheld gamer there are only two companies capable of making VR a mainstream reality: Valve and Sony.

Sony because they already have experience making non-VR HMDs since 1997. With the push they've been making with the high-end HMZ and the huge success that was the launch of the PS4, alongside the many related patents on the subject, there are solid rumors that there is a PS4 VR google in the cookings(can't wait for E3 2014). Why is that a good and important thing? First, because the PS4 is a affordable and mainstream and somewhat powerful gaming platform. For $150 sony could easily deliver a peripheral capable of a enjoyable experience. Second, they have decent first party content. Their biggest system seller, Gran Turismo, is IDEAL for VR. Third, with the PS Move and Camera, they'll be the first and probably only company to provide a plug and play and "full body" VR(and AR) experience. With all that and the already 1 million users they've got during the PS4 launch it'll be much attractive for 3rd parties to support VR(instead of being a niche product on a already not mainstream platform).

As for Valve, on the other side of the spectrum, not only they are by far the most popular publisher on the PC with their own first party content and good marketing strategy, but they are their own hardware platform and standards, most of which are based on the Open ideology. With their VR prototype, there is a chance they'll be licensing the design to OEM just like the steam machines along side creating an standard protocol for VR headsets(open source head-tracking API and screen sizes/lenses specifications). That would allow the creation of headsets on all sizes and shapes(after all as a wearable device that is important) and for all price ranges. You could buy a cheap single screen 720p headset for $100 or a high-end dual screen 1440p headset for a $1000 dollars. Extra features such as eye-tracking, AR cameras, vestibular stimulation, etc, could all be an option if you have the money. This one device with one not so cheap price with a proprietary API strategy that Oculus VR is adopting is completely against the PC vision/mentality.

I think Nintendo could also do something VR related, but they dropped the ball with the WiiU. The natural evolution of motion controllers is VR not tablet games. That is the opposite of VR.

Re:Makes sense (1)

mobby_6kl (668092) | about 10 months ago | (#45461731)

The difference between your hack, the many existing head-mounted displays and the Rift is how serious they're taking a) the FOV and b) latency. These two factors are critical to making the VR feel like something more than a display strapped to your head. This is also why I don't see this working with the PS4 very well either, unfortunately. For the Rift and, really, any VR, to work well you need high resolution, high framerate, and low latency which is not something the consoles are very good at.

As for content, I think this type of VR proposition is way better off than 3D TV/video stuff, as most 3D games can easily be adjusted to render the scene twice with a slightly different camera position. You don't really even need the official dev support for this, as this is something that can be done on the driver level for any DX/OpenGL game.

I'm not really sure about the Oculus API policy but Valve hasn't been particularly "open" about anything either so far. In any case, although the Rift might start off with a single model, that doesn't have to be always the case, it just makes sense to start with one unified offering rather than immediately confusing the market with a bunch of versions.

Anyway, what makes it difficult for me to predict how this goes is a fundamental part of the experience - you have to strap something to your head and isolate yourself completely from the real environment, which is a rather dorky proposition that not everyone would accept. Anyway, even if none of the mainstream games support the Rift/Valve VR, a high resolution and low latency HMD is something I'd definitely want anyway.

Re:Makes sense (1)

aiadot (3055455) | about 10 months ago | (#45462089)

The FOV in my hack was actually quite big. Not as large as the current OR but much bigger than the one in the sony HMZ. I understand my weekend hack it doesn't compare a product being developed by a 50 employee multi-millionary company, but I'm still pretty sure any decent hardware maker out there could easily make an OR clone. Heck, I'm pretty sure I could do that if I start pumping money and time in the project.

In almost every VR thread I see this huge focus on specs. Overall I agree that the smaller the latency, the higher the resolution and FOV, the better, but there is minimal spec line which most people are willing to accept. Not everything needs to be "the best". As a matter of fact the most successful products are hardly the most hardware advanced products(that is specially true in the game industry). Things like cost, marketing and support play huge roles.

If sony(or even MS) gets a singe 1080p(roughly as many pixels there are on a 720p screen on each eye) device with rotational and positional tracking and sell it for around ~$150 for their console, which is basically a OR consumer version for half of the price, and make sure they support it good marketing and games running at around 30 fps, I guarantee you it'll sell like hot cakes. Pixilation might be a problem if they go with the OR like FoV, but I don't think such wide FoV is necessary for the "next gen" consoles. As long as it's more immersive than playing games on a TV, it's good for now. Plus in 5 years they'll have another marketable excuse to sell a better device.

A console VR google won't satisfy the needs from the enthusiasts, but it's what is most likely to a create a healthy VR industry and the much needed lowest common denominator. While adding support for the OR API is a no brainer, making truly immersive games with VR in mind not easy. If consoles don't get VR and the industry still uses them as leading platforms, save for a handful of exclusives, the PC will not get many high quality VR titles either. Another thing is exposition. Unless you're a hard-core PC gamer or tech enthusiast, most likely you have no idea what the OR is. On the other hand everybody and their gran'ma know what a Nintendo or Playstation is.

BTW, I'm not really judging the OR for having only one model, but the current overall lack of competition in this field. The only other consumer product out there is the HMZ which is a completely different category of HMD. HMDs sound something so obvious to me to expect from computers that it's surprising that noone else is doing it. My only regret is not making a kickstarter based of my hack back in the day, but instead of using an iPhone I'd use a custom board.

As for the dorkness problem, while I agree both OR prototypes are some of the ugliest things I've ever seen, screens will get smaller and maybe in a couple of years HMZ like devices will be the norm. The "head mounted" aspect doesn't sound like a huge problem as I see people with those huge ass headphones and nobody complaining. Plus gaming, in particular PC gaming is something you do in private. The bluetooth headset shame we hear about shouldn't be an issue for VR headsets, that is Google Glass' problem.

Re:Makes sense (1)

Fri13 (963421) | about 10 months ago | (#45461903)

I really don't think Oculus VR as a company has a future, at least not as the mainstream VR king they keep picturing. Not because VR is not the future, we all know it is, but because they lack what really matters for the commercial success of a product in the mainstream tech/gaming industry: marketing, content and first party support. And on top of that their device is nothing but rehash of 90s tech with modern components.

The problem is that you don't seem to understand they have not yet released consumer product. They are only so far offered developer versions what are not final ones. They are focused to developers and there are new models released as well and under development (like including higher resolution).

Just being offered those to developers and not consumers, they have a very well known product and wanted one even. All what they need to do is to get it released for consumer for fair price (like 139-179€) and they have a hit in their hands.

There is just enough markets among simulator players (DCS fans etc) and many FPS gamers would sell their other hand to get so nice experience playing CoD (and other crap military FPS).

Ben Krasnow (1)

Bitsy Boffin (110334) | about 10 months ago | (#45461069)

A recent video from Ben Krasnow http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfqtKJAnJHg [youtube.com] about a quickly hacked togethor "seat input device" mentioned that this has relation to his work on VR stuff at Valve.

OT: I want to use Android Phone as a VR device... (1)

unique_parrot (1964434) | about 10 months ago | (#45462035)

...would be cool for testing!

Pictures should be streamed via WLAN, including sound for headphones output.

Could be an incredible immerse experience on a shoestring for everybody (with a smartphone).

SteamMachines + SteamOS + VR + Half Life 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45463333)

SteamMachines + SteamOS + VR + Half Life 3

This is what I call next-gen... not watching NFL stats.

And when will Steam support logging in? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45465901)

It's a shame how much money so many of us have spent on games that we are not allowed to play.

Re:And when will Steam support logging in? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45465941)

Have you tried opening port 8080 out? I couldn't play any of my Steam games for years and of course Valve's support was completely useless. I was only able to get refunds for two of the games via chargebacks. Valve wouldn't refund a single penny even though I was never able to play two of the titles. After years of hassling with the software from those crooks, I finally got it to work the day after I replaced my DSL router. Then it quit again after I setup the forwarding on port 8080. That's how I found the reason Valve had decided not to allow me to play. They are crooks. They could have either refunded my money or admitted to their port 8080 policy. Instead, they simply tried to keep my money.

Steam. Never. Again.

Re:And when will Steam support logging in? (1)

tibman (623933) | about 10 months ago | (#45466413)

How is firewalling yourself Valve's problem?

Re:And when will Steam support logging in? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45466453)

They could have displayed an error message instead of simply giving a vague, unhelpful error.

"vague, unhelpful" is a great term to describe Valve. They can make some great games. Too bad the rest of their stuff is so broken that most of us can't play.

Re:And when will Steam support logging in? (1)

tibman (623933) | about 10 months ago | (#45469585)

They could have displayed an error message instead of simply giving a vague, unhelpful error.
I can agree with that. But i don't think it is a very strong criticism because nearly every application gives a useless error when it can't reach beyond your router.
Too bad the rest of their stuff is so broken that most of us can't play.
You are the first person i've ever seen say this. I've heard of people who did not want to play but certainly not "can't". Exceptions being when authentication temporarily dies or is under maintenance. No service can have 100% uptime though. So that is a weak criticism as well.

I'm not saying your problem with Valve doesn't have merit. It is very real. But it is a problem that is specific to you. Your firewall does not prevent other people from playing steam games, just yourself. It has also been very common since the beginning of online pc-gaming to have to have very permissive firewalls. Especially if you are hosting.

Re:And when will Steam support logging in? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45470037)

> No service can have 100% uptime though.

  You should check-out:

http://www.reddit.com/r/steam

Valve looks like they're trying for 100% downtime at the moment.

Re:And when will Steam support logging in? (1)

tibman (623933) | about 10 months ago | (#45478333)

Looks like steam auth was offline for 5 minutes.

Re:And when will Steam support logging in? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45498251)

So maybe it was five minutes this time. What about all of the other times? What gives Valve the right to decide to not allow me to play the games I own? I paid money. They are crooks for not allowing me access to what I paid for.

Nerds with headaches. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45467953)

Please techno press: Dont spend all the VR press coverage time talking about how you were dizzy and sweaty. You're always dizzy and sweaty. No one cares.

Not long now... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45473751)

SAO here we come!

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>