A significant portion of compensation at Valve is determined in a similar way. It's detailed somewhere in their employee handbook IIRC: http://www.valvesoftware.com/company/Valve_Handbook_LowRes.p...
To quote from the Valve Handbook :
> We value “T-shaped” people. That is, people who are both generalists (highly skilled at a broad set of valuable things—the top of the T) and also experts (among the best in their field within a narrow discipline—the vertical leg of the T). This recipe is important for success at Valve. We often have to pass on people who are very strong generalists without expertise, or vice versa. An expert who is too narrow has difficulty collaborating. A generalist who doesn’t go deep enough in a single area ends up on the margins, not really contributing as an individual.
Where you choose to be deep should be an area of interest to you and which the market values.
Of all the gaming companies, Valve makes the most sense to be this heavily invested in VR--given their stake in the PC-industry.
Or maybe too many devs thought VR was the coolist project to work on and moved to it. (Valve is known for their flat structure http://www.valvesoftware.com/company/Valve_Handbook_LowRes.p...)
And valve's handbook is short, 37 pages of common sense English, cover and blank pages, and some great full and half page illustrations in a pdf . It seems Zappos requires a translator, proprietary HR software, and at least one consultant along with whatever they call training.
I guess they never bothered to read Valve's employee handbook.
While Valve isn't perfect either, their system appears positively utopian when contrast with Holacracy.