Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Can Valve's Steam Machines Compete Against the Xbox One and PS4?
Nerval's Lobster writes "Valve has announced SteamOS, Steam Machines, and a Steam controller — the components necessary for it to create a viable living-room gaming experience. Valve's strategy with these releases seems pretty clear: create a platform based on openness (SteamOS is a Linux-based operating system), in contrast to the closed systems pushed by console rivals such as Sony and Microsoft. If Valve chooses to release Half-Life 3 in conjunction with its Steam Machines' rollout, it could help create further buzz for the system, given the years' worth of pent-up demand for the next chapter in the popular FPS saga. But can Valve's moves allow it to actually compete against Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony on equal terms? What do you think?"
Like the Neo-Geo did, for a brief while.
Valve may last longer though, it's got a stronger basis behind it and years worth of invested development.
Yes
Yes it can
That's a lot of vapor.
I eat only the real part of complex carbohydrates.
Maybe. Especially on the TV.
Xbox didn't get foothold until all of those "Only on XBOX" TV ads for multiplatform games.
Yes, it can compete.
No. No one knows if it will.
Yes, it is a stupid question.
The average Nintendo gamer is going to be quite different than the average Steam gamer (though I realize there are fans of both). So it doesn't feel like it's going to be one of those things where someone says, "Should I get GTA V on Steam or Super Mario 3D World on Wii U?"
As far as XBox One and PS4, those are closer to Steam's audience, but in the age of having multiple consoles, I don't see it cutting into their sales much.
Outsell either of those 2? No. Sell a good chunk, and added with people who installed the Steam OS and run their own hardware, total in the millions, help push Nintendo out of the hardware business, and put themselves in a good spot for the generation after this coming one? Sure, that's a possibility.
...that Half-Life is popular enough among the console crowd to be the system's killer app. It's lost most of its mainstream brand recognition by this point, and today's market no longer has an absence of story-based FPSs.
HL3 will sell like HOTCAKES among nostalgic PC gamers, but I just don't see it moving SteamBoxes among people who are console-only.
No
If the price for the console is right (read reasonably less than the competition), the hardware isn't lame (no red ring of deaths, no overheating, good controllers), the game selection is there (fps, rpg, fighting (Tekken et al), etc) and game quality (no horrible control layouts, stuttering, lousy gameplay); I believe they have a shot, now, before the new consoles get established in the market. The ability to upgrade the console and have a better experience sooner than the competition certainly will be draw, as well.
I think Valve actually wants to approach this by introducing a number of different machines at different spec levels, but all running Steam OS. Then, like how Steam operates now, they sell licenses to a wide variety of games (and possibly applications) that have different levels of system requirements.
The end goal is to reach out into a wide audience of different levels of gamers, from the casual to the hardcore, from puzzle game fans to FPS fans, etc., and to provide different kinds of devices geared towards each audience.
There's a danger of segmentation, of course. But I think the way Valve is approaching this is quite brilliant. The PS4, XBone, and Wii platforms have the advantage of being "do-it-all" machines, but they're also prohibitively expensive (at least in the cases of the PS4 and XBone) and might not be interesting to casuals, fans of games requiring lesser resources, or even hi-end gamer enthusiasts. Valve is taking a page from Android and casting a wide net.
Cheaper, similar power, and with the advantage of a far wider library at release which is only going to explode moving forward.
Freedom from the shackles of Windows.
Throw in a few Valve exclusives (or even just rumors, like filing for a trademark on "Half Life 3" in Europe), a unique new controller, and serious tech news buzz...
I think this generation is going to be defined almost exclusively by Steam Machines and the PS4.
Personal desktop computers are falling out of favor with the general populace, replaced by smaller devices which can do almost everything a PC can do....except playing big, blockbuster games. Current consoles play games, but they lack the ability to handle the same kinds of games a computer can--they don't do well when games need complex keyboard based input, and they don't have the same sort of access for indy games. Valve is aiming to fill the gap here, with a console targeted to play PC games. Steam allows them to make money on distribution even if people can in theory buy third part games--we know they will still love to use steam.
I think we need some actual specs before we can make such a judgement.
Based on what we've been told, im assuming its going to work more or less like a normal PC currently, switch in and out hardware as you please, but we dont nessisarily know that for sure yet. There might be 'options' but it may be limited to whats supported by the OS or something. I think its safe to say this will change the landscape, in my opinion for the better.
Weather or not they can compete is really really hard to judge right now. What games will be coming out and supported on it? We dont know. What hardware will work and currently does work? We dont know. Is support mainly geared at PC type games or will we be getting effectivly a third console option? We dont know (though it sounds like its mainly a PC port of sorts, as opposed to a SteamMachine only release of a game).
I'd say with good support we should see them compete well, and make more profit even if they fail to sell more machines and games overall. If I had to guess, that would be my guess of how it will play out.
It's not a question of if they can compete with established living room giants, It is if there is a niche for it to carve out. Valve has got great inroads with the PC gaming community. I don't see Steam Machines displacing consoles but I definitely see them as a way for Valve to carve out a place in the living rooms of their current clientele. SteamOS to throw on the old box in the living room, Steam Machines for the pre-built crowd wanting something that fits in with their other equipment.
That's what I think!
Price
This is what drew me to Steam, this is what keeps me buying from Steam while my ps3/wii/etc gather dust.
If they keep up the constant sales and fairly good games on the Steam Machine like they're doing now on PC, yes, yes they can.
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
Valve has already won. I've owned a computer since the 1980's, and gamed on computers non-stop since then. I already have a steam library of over 1,200 games. I have never owned a console. Although once in my youth I saved up $100 to buy an Atari 2600, but then blew it all playing Defender at the arcade. Living room is for television. Man-cave is for gaming on triple 30" monitors with a custom water cooled desktop computer that the consoles could only dream of powering, with a library of games available that puts the consoles to shame. Not to mention the portability of steam games. I can install and play them on desktop, on my Alienware m17x r3 laptop in a hotel room or back seat of a car, or on my Alienware m11x r3 laptop on the tray table as I fly across the country in an airplane ... one account, many devices. It's nice. Consoles lose in terms of power (can't run triple 30" monitors), price (five game bundles for $5 are frequent), selection (thousands of games), convenience (download easily), sharing (share games with friends with the new steam family share plan), and portability (try gaming with a console in the back seat of a car?).
Please clarify 'premium'. Marketing bullshitters have made it totally meaningless.
I know little of the Neo Geo, but I vaguely recall it was expensive.
Agree that they'll probably last a while. Valve's been going strong for a while now, and if anyone can leverage the existing world of PC gaming to make a 'console', it's them. I wonder what the uptake rate will be like.
It depends on what you want out of your gaming experience.
Old curmudgeons like me who want to play video games offline and without needing a network connection won't want this.
And I'm sure lots of people will want the kind of gaming experience this platform has to offer.
I guess it depends on how much people trust Valve and want their stuff. And how many people Microsoft annoyed with the XBone announcements.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
I own an Xbox 360, a Wii, I owned a Wii U (but was so underwhelmed I brought it back).
I've had several consoles over the years, but I keep going back to PC gaming. My 360 collects dust - it's not worth paying the online tax to even watch netflix on it. The Wii is used for Wii Fit only. My 4 year old son prefers the games on the computer. I don't know why - he just does - with one caveat - they work with a controller.
I was looking at possibly the XBone for the living room - but it won't play 360 titles - and the entry price is very high considering I'd have to restock the titles at ~$60 a pop.
Now that Steam has announced SteamOS, Steam Machines and the Controller - I can kill many birds with one stone. I can buy a modern console for the living room. I can keep my current library of titles (that I've been building since 2006). My son can have a controller that's the same for both devices. I can stream old games, hopefully though there will be enough native releases - because that will be a key point to most people. Now that Steam will offer Family Sharing/Controls, I can finally stop buying for 2 accounts and just focus on building one library. For myself, this is a great solution.
Now, will people who exclusive use PS/Xbox switch? I don't think so easily. First, you have the Madden crowd - good luck getting EA to budge on releasing sports games for the PC again. Then there are the exclusives and the kinect. I know Kinect is a failure to a lot - but it is a great family device and one of the only things I fire the Xbox up for all anymore is stuff like Sesame Kinect...
But - as these machines proliferate - I can see more and more people picking them up. This is pure speculation - but I imagine they will refresh the hardware frequently - like phones and tablets. Being and Open System - I can see many of it's own exclusives - whether whole titles or features in a title. The idea of being able to self-upgrade is phenomenal. I imagine over time these machines will become more than just different form factor PC's - and may offer some sorely needed innovation in the market... SteamOS makes that possible - kind of like an Android for Consoles - just even more open.
The worse case scenario is it doesn't pan out great, and not a lot of manufacturers fizzle out on the idea and SteamOS/Machines become a footnote - but the damage is already done - because a game optimized kernel will exist with opitmized graphics drivers - something sorely lacking for Linux for many years... So even a short term failure could lead to greater things down the road.
I prefer a developer-friendly, open source environment for my gaming, when I do it. Of course, some of my favorite things are modding them and programming them - there's such a huge kick in things like putting a "Best of Both Worlds" Borg Cube into Homeworld, or writing a GURPS-like skill system for a MUD. I personally think that people that merely consume content instead of creating even a little of it somewhere are missing out.
As such, Steam's making the first console platform that even comes close to what I want. I think they're going to have a good shot at raiding the other console's home turf.
Both Xbox / PS are very limited with that.
Of course they can compete. Can they earn a significant share of the market? Probably not at first but then it took Sony years to catch up to Nintendo and then Microsoft years to catch up with Sony. Since SteamOS is free it can proliferate rapidly if it can actually deliver what it is promising. For the uninitiated who just want to hook a console up and have it work the SteamBox while pricey is a good option and not much more than the original PS3 but without all the pesky restrictions. Valve has been moving in this direction slow and deliberately for the last year. They aren't rushing into anything.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
"Does Nintendo really think they can compete with Atari, Magnavox, Intellivision, and Coleco with their upcoming 'NES'? Can they really elbow their way into this crowded market full of entrenched and experienced companies?"
--
"Does Sony really think they can compete with Sega, Nintendo, NEC and Neo*Geo with their upcoming 'Playstation'? Can they really elbow their way into this crowded market full of entrenched and experienced companies?"
--
"Does Microsoft really think they can compete with Sony, Nintendo, Sega, 3D0 and Atari with their upcoming 'Xbox'? Can they really elbow their way into this crowded market full of entrenched and experienced companies?"
Yeah, I think history says it can be done.
Depends on how many Steam library games will eventually work under their Linux OS. If a large portion of my library becomes playable, you bet I'll build or buy a steambox.
The first rule of targeting gamers with a product is to never, ever ask their opinions on anything, because every answer will be either "give me everything in the world for free" or some bizarrely misspelled racist, sexist retarded screed.
I kinda took it differently. When they announced this an Alienware equivalent doesn't come to mind. Instead I get the same picture as the $300-400 budget gaming PC's that I've always built. When the parts are bought in bulk I'm willing to bet that an OEM could assemble a small equivalent set-top box for even cheaper and have a fairly capable system to compete with the $400-500 Sony and MS offerings.
I'm kinda envisioning the Steambox being offered at more of a $250-300 price point. If you want a monster rig you can still build it yourself and run SteamOS.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
Can Sony compete against Nintendo and Sega?
Can Microsoft compete against Nintendo and Sony?
Can Valve compete against Sony and Microsoft?
I think the answer is yes, it can compete. History shows that if the new person knows what they're doing and has support of developers, they will do just fine.
First we rage when the Xbox One has always on DRM. Now you guys cheer for a console with always on DRM*. Which is it?
* Yes yes it isn't every day. Try playing your games for a week without internet, or longer like our deployed service folks do.
When you say you knew that Neo-Geo was expensive I feel as though you were being coy about what premium meant. Neo-Geo was arcade quality games in your home.
...I assume anyways, so they won't die if this isn't a hit right off the bat. Sort of like MS and the original XBox, with a steady stream of software revenue they can afford to give the console time to catch on.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
If I were Gabe, I would use HalfLife 3 as the hook to jumpstart the Steam Machine install base, much like Sony used the PS3 as the BluRay hook. That was Sony's lone storage format win in a couple decades, even if they didn't win the last round of console wars.
Steam will have to get a much more stable product. Seems it tries to self-update on a weekly, occasionally daily basis on my machine. I can't see the average gameboy putting up with having to wait while his Steam Machine updates yet again. "Continuous Integration" may be good for a development/integration approach, but it is neither appealing nor particularly effective as a software delivery approach.
I wouldn't call it the "Premium" market, but I'm pretty sure Valve/Steam has a much different market than the console titles.
The Steam Machine seems like yet another settop box that would allow you to remote into your gaming computer from your entertainment center. All of the PC people probably already have their gaming PCs plugged directly into the biggest monitor they have, so I don't think this will help that market segment much. But I can see it making inroads on the console community... though probably not much more than the OnLive "remote cloud-hosted gaming" service.
I wonder if having a hardware console will help bring big name publishers (mainly EA) back into the fold. It pisses me off to no end that to play ME3 or various other games I need to have the damn Origin client installed. Much as I dislike EA as a corporation, having their AAA titles made available on Steam/Linux would definitely do a lot for both the Steambox and Linux gaming in general.
SteamOS has a unique problem that no other ecosystem has to deal with: In order to leverage steam's strength, the size of the community, they had to do two things. First, ensure that the catalog of games is playable on the TV, and second, that this userbase can interact with the steam community on PCs. If the system can't do this, it requires a huuuge shift of users in order to make it successful, which requires the kind of investment microsoft did with the XBox.
The second bullet point above leads to an interesting problem if they go down the path of interoperability with PC clients: controllers and mice. PCs have several genres that are unplayable with a controller, and the mouse and keyboard combo offers a significant advantage in almost every kind of competitive gaming and multiplayer. I hope that their controller bridges the gap, and chances are it might.
The touchpad-based movement is a huge change from a joystick. Precision movement on a touch-style pad like that is the only way a controller could handle snap turns and accuracy that muscle movement on a mouse pad offers. The way its set up, I'd expect it to work sort of like the Thinkpad nib. If it works and people adopt it, it will allow people to play things like RTSes, turn-based games like Civ, and a host of other options. Yeah, hotkeys are another important point, but one more easily overcome than the massive gulf that currently exists between the mouse and the analog joystick.
There are other factors that will tie to its success, but I think the future of the system ties to its interoperability with the PC gamers. If it doesn't, its just going to be an also-ran.
The thing I like best about a Steam box is that I already own several hundred Steam titles.
And no matter what, my Steam games are there. New computer, laptop, Steam box...my games are there.
What's Sony's policy on moving games from your PS3 to your new PS4? If I remember correctly, not every Playstation game has required Internet registration and activation.
You are welcome on my lawn.
When you say you knew that Neo-Geo was expensive I feel as though you were being coy about what premium meant. Neo-Geo was arcade quality games in your home.
More than merely arcade quality, it was identical to arcade hardware, plus extra circuity to modulate audio and video suitable for consumption by TVs, and some superficial physical changes to keep arcade operators and home users from being able to run the same cartridges.
"Yeah, I think history says it can be done."
History also says there are a lot of dead console compaines, let us not forget Sega was pushed out of the console business. MS and Sony were already huge companies with tonnes of money to establish themselves in the console market. Sony got lucky that Nintendo in the 90's didn't understand the importance of technology (and to some extent it still doesn't).
If I were Valve and entering the console market I'd be snapping up developers to make exclusives. Half-life 3 is not enough for anyone to get a steambox. Without software why would anyone get a steambox?
Agreed that a disrupting product can always upend the market place. I think the story is off base in asking if Valve can compete "...on equal terms." I don't think Valve is looking to compete on equal terms, nor does it matter if they can't. The question is simply if Valve can be profitable with this strategy. Much like tablets don't compete on equal terms with home PCs but still manage to make serious inroads into their market share, Valve can be successful without going toe-to-toe with MS and Sony.
(Note that I'm not saying a Steammachine compares to an Xbox the same way a tablet compares to a PC in terms of power, etc. I'm just using that as an example of two dissimilar products existing in the same market space.)
If developers can write good games for the platform, it will succeed. Hardware specs are not as relevant, and few will purchase because SteamOS is "open". It's up to Valve to ensure that there are good games at release.
Bad questions.
Atari, Magnavox, Intellivsion, and Coleco had taken a big hit from the video game crash, they weren't entrenched or successful in the market, heck back then Magnavox was already just a nameplate for Phillips who hardly cared about the video game market anyway.
Sony was a 800-pound gorilla coming into a market with decades of electronics experience behind them.
Microsoft was an 800-pound gorilla coming into a market with buttloads of cash and only two market competitors to worry about.
"Does Nintendo really think they can compete with Atari, Magnavox, Intellivision, and Coleco with their upcoming 'NES'? Can they really elbow their way into this crowded market full of entrenched and experienced companies?"
The bottom fell out of gaming in 1983. The entrenched and experienced companies were all twisting in the wind when the NES arrived. A lot of the secret to Nintendo's success in the west was distancing itself from existing video game systems that plug into a tv and billing itself as a toy you plug into the tv. The loss of a joystick was also great in pushing this image, although a feature of the original Famicom and not a change made for the exclusive benefit of taking market share. They also had a great PR machine that drove customer demand while simultaneously strong arming their partners and retailers: no discounting, no consignment, hardware lockout to enforce licensed developers only and bill it as a "quality" seal.
"Does Sony really think they can compete with Sega, Nintendo, NEC and Neo*Geo with their upcoming 'Playstation'? Can they really elbow their way into this crowded market full of entrenched and experienced companies?"
When you consider that Sony's Playstation is less of a from-scratch built platform than it was really a spin-off the SNES, the analogy doesn't make sense. A better analogy for the period for a from-scratch platform from the time period might be 3DO, which you mistakenly placed in your following section. As far as the competitors? SNK's NeoGeo never really hit any big numbers for home use, and NEC's position was obliterated from the west, and they were so desperate in Japan that they began to encourage out-and-out pornographic games on their PC-FX platform.
"Does Microsoft really think they can compete with Sony, Nintendo, Sega, 3D0 and Atari with their upcoming 'Xbox'? Can they really elbow their way into this crowded market full of entrenched and experienced companies?"
By the time XBox was out, The only real players on the market were Sega, Sony, and Nintendo, and Sega was on it's last legs as a hardware maker. 3DO and Jaguar were already jokes and dental x-ray machine covers. Microsoft still hasn't make dime one on their gaming division, their existence in the market is due mostly to Microsoft's deep pockets.
Yeah, I think history says it can be done.
It can be done, but none of the moments of opportunity are here for Valve to make it the way you suggest. Steambox merely going to wind up a slightly better funded Ouya, a more fondly remembered than OnLive, and a money maker only for ebayers that will hoarde and sell it in 20 years.
More Twoson than Cupertino
Everything I've read so far is underestimating Valve imo. Keep in mind what they've done in the past, how they've been basically the single bastion of decent game programing left in the market now... how nearly every game they come out with changes the industry in one way or another. Valve IS innovation when it comes to gaming. If they were a publicly traded company I'd be all over their stock.
I doubt the steambox will be what we expect. None of Valves products ever are. They are releasing hardware requirements for free... the OS is free... do you really think this things a console? Is something so outdated their goal? I seriously doubt it. Within the next few years I expect to see T.V.s come with Steam per-installed. No console what-so-ever. You just pick up your Steam controller and viola, away you go. In the near term, you can get a set-top-box to upgrade your older TV or just install it on your PC. In the long term I expect to see Steam become the primary Media center on most TVs as it pushes out Microsofts offering as it's pricey.
This is going to be just like Android. Valve wants control of the market so they are giving the hardware manufacturers hardware specs, a free OS and promising to maintain it for them in return for access to your living room.
Compact PCs tend to be more expensive and less flexible. Unless you are talking about a compact form factor that you can already build your own boxes with now, I would expect Steam boxes to be MORE rather than less than your typical extreme bargain bin machine.
Anything much bigger than an Asrock or Zotac is going to have trouble getting much traction in living room.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
If Valve came out and said "Good news! Halflife 3 (or Halflife 2 Ep 3) is ready for release! It's a Steambox exclusive!" that would certainly sell a lot of boxes, but I know a lot of people would be really unhappy about it. I would be grumbling all the way to the store to buy the box.
I guess they kind of did the same thing with Steam itself and Halflife 2, but Steam is free software so at least you weren't out of pocket for it.
I read the internet for the articles.
There are some distinct differences between Value's situation and the examples you provided.
1. All three of those successful consoles from outsider were price competitive within the existing market. If you look at the literal pile of failure consoles throughout history they were all substantially more expensive, and so far what we know about the Steam machine says it will be substantially more expensive.
2. All three of those successful consoles from outsiders were presented as a singular hardware model by a single manufacturer there was no significant hardware differences from one model NES to the next or one Xbox to the next, Valve is planning on developing more of a spec and opening hardware development and marketing up to multiple hardware manufactures... a strategy used by several consoles in the past (most notably the 3DO) to great failure.
3. All three of those successful consoles from outsiders launched with a strong list of exclusive titles that you couldn't get on any other platform. Valve finds themselves in the situation where anything developed for the Steam Machine will also be available on PC, without the machine, this inherently makes their hardware less valuable as there's literally NOTHING it can play that couldn't also be played on a PC or elsewhere.
In general the three factors that historically have contributed to a successful console (by a new entrant into the market or otherwise) has been price competitiveness, and desirable exclusive games, as well as a desirable feature set (such as the PS2's DVD player or the Wii's waggle controls, or the 360/PS3's ability to play games in HD). So far the Steam Machine seems to be missing the mark on most points.
Then again, the iPod looked like a turd on paper when it was released and that thing sold like gang-busters so who knows, stranger things have happened.
Collector's Edition
The 3,000-odd library of titles on Steam aside from a potential release of HL3 says your second point is moot.
Simply having a console, a platform, and a controller doesn't put you on equal footing with Sony or Microsoft. Sony has 13 first party studios making games for the PS4. Microsoft has about 20 first party studios. These companies are spread out over Asia, North America, and Europe. They have a similer number of second party support. (companies that make exclusive games not owned by Sony and Microsoft) Nintendo is organized a bit differently. They have several groups in 4 divisions that make games. PC gaming has some built in edge with 3rd party developers. I would say Steam has a better chance than Amazon or Apple.
Sega's a bit of a special case. I have read stories that Sega made the classic mistake of partnering with Microsoft for Dreamcast development.. guess what M$ did? Stole all the fruits of their research, left them with a dud platform that most Dreamcast devs didn't use, and released the original XBox to cut the Dreamcast off at the knees soon after its launch.
Valve is specifically keeping their platform free of any 'inside-job' sabotage by supposed 'partners' from the entrenched competition.
Between Microsoft, Sony, and Valve, there is only one company that has not yet screwed over customers, intentionally broke their products, or drove people to expensive upgrades by planned obsolescence. I think it would be wise to chose that company.
All of the PC people probably already have their gaming PCs plugged directly into the biggest monitor they have
What makes you think that? The biggest monitor in the typical household is in the living room, and I gather from other users' comments like those linked here that the majority of people are unwilling to move the gaming PC into the living room. Living room PCs are beyond the lowest common denominator.
I kinda took it differently. When they announced this an Alienware equivalent doesn't come to mind. Instead I get the same picture as the $300-400 budget gaming PC's that I've always built. When the parts are bought in bulk I'm willing to bet that an OEM could assemble a small equivalent set-top box for even cheaper and have a fairly capable system to compete with the $400-500 Sony and MS offerings.
I'm kinda envisioning the Steambox being offered at more of a $250-300 price point. If you want a monster rig you can still build it yourself and run SteamOS.
Add to that the economies of scale they get from all sides...
The games they sell will also be sold to Linux Desktop users, and Windows PC users, so a larger market on day one. It also means a much larger catalog of games than any other console has EVER opened with.
The console itself is open, and can be used for other purposes. (Like xbmc, or whatever) This means a larger market than just game players.
The game delivery platform has much lower barriers to entry, and you already see tones of inde delevopers there. This will increase it as now they have a cheap console to design to. (Baseline hardware is never a bad thing.)
The 3,000-odd library of titles on Steam
In order to run on a Steam Machine without also hogging a Windows PC for the duration, a game has to be ported to desktop Linux. I was under the impression that less than 10 percent of the Steam library was ported to desktop Linux, though I'd appreciate links to sources that correct this.
All they would have to do is partner with blizzard and put WOW, D3, and SC2 on the SteamOS along with every popular title currently on Steam.
Plus aim to reach every other MMO hitting the market.
there's literally NOTHING it can play that couldn't also be played on a PC or elsewhere.
Except for games designed around couch multiplayer. Several other Slashdot users have repeatedly reminded me that the majority aren't willing to connect a PC to a living room TV. Nor do people already own gamepads. This leaves people having to buy gamepads and having to crowd around a comparatively tiny PC monitor in order to play a game together. The Steam Machine avoids this by shipping with a Steam Controller and coming in a consumer-electronics-style case.
Does Nintendo really think they can compete with Atari, Magnavox, Intellivision, and Coleco with their upcoming 'NES'?
In 1983, store shelves had become filled with me-too shovelware for the Atari 2600, and people stopped buying video games altogether after having dropped upwards of $60 (inflation adjusted) on something that's no fun. After a recession in the North American video game market through 1983 and 1984, Nintendo elbowed its way into the market by using lockdown to reassure retailers that the NES wouldn't have the same sort of me-too shovelware that the Atari 2600 had. Valve is doing the exact opposite.
Valve is not entering the console market in the traditional sense. It is taking off the shelf hardware and applying some glue to tie it all together. Its not a new product, its a remix of what we already have. This is not a 3DO/Neo-Geo situation. Everything that works today will be able to be integrated with Steam OS machines too.
Good-bye
Nah they are going to be like that Piston machine. $1000 and above. PC makers have no desire to cut their margins.
You are very wrong about it being another OUYA. This Valve initiative is more about gluing together off the shelf stuff then re-inventing the wheel. Valve can only grow from these initiatives, there is no downside other then the sunk cost of developing Linux, which they see as essential for survival.
Good-bye
What's funny is that today the arcade carts are worth a lot less than the console carts.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Its target audience is the huge number of PC gamers who are sick of the keyboard and mouse and just want to sit on their couches with a controller for once.
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
I bought the PS2 and PS3 because at the time, they offered backward compatibility. To this day, I can run PS1 and PS2 stuff, awesome games like Crash Bandicoot and Maximo. With the PS4 they're telling me that the media library of titles I spent a *lot* of money on will not run on the new hardware. My reaction to that is simply to not buy a PS4. Instead, I bought a couple more used, working copies of the original (meaning, have those that have the PS2 hardware in 'em) PS3s to keep in a very low use state for the likely day when the one I'm using dies. I'm *really* tired of having to start all over again, and this time -- I'm just not gonna do it. The (considerable) up side is that PS3 titles and PS2 titles can be had for pennies, and I'll never run out of "new" games to try. And my favorite game of all time isn't a PS title anyway -- MechAssault -- so phhbbbbt.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
So Nintendo are responsible for the Playstation and SEGA are responsible for the Xbox. Funny how things turned out.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
When you consider that Sony's Playstation is less of a from-scratch built platform than it was really a spin-off the SNES, the analogy doesn't make sense.
It's not like the steam box is from scratch either - it's based on PC hardware and existing dev stacks.
Consoles are for geeks who know that computer games have a history of trashing the computer they're run on. My consoles keep me from ever even thinking about buying another computer game. My experience with computer games -- as opposed to dedicated consoles -- was almost entirely bad. Since I stopped running them, I've enjoyed unprecedented stability. Furthermore, I've never seen a console harmed in any way by a game, so there's that.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Why run Nesticle in DOSBox, an emulator in an emulator, when much better NES emulators such as FCEUX and Nestopia are ported to desktop Linux? It got to the point where some newly produced NES games have to detect Nesticle (which takes four lines of 6502 assembly language) and throw up a warning screen that Nesticle's inaccuracies may affect game performance.
If Valve allows more freedom for the end user than the current big 3 they have a good chance at making a good dent in the market.
What they have going for them in their favor is:
A good number of game developers not happy with the direction Microsoft is going with their OS and console.
They also already have an established relationship many of the biggest game developers today.
Unhappy xbox fans of the direction the console is going. Sony has some of this problem also but not as wide spread as the xbox.
Already have a large Library of titles that could be used.
I think Valve has a good chance here to really smash the big 3 players. Nintendo was out of the race before it even began. That leaves Sony and Microsoft. Valve at the moment have the only console that at launch will run every movie file you have lying around. That alone is a massive thing. How many people bought into the PS3 as a media system idea, only to have their hopes crushed by the terrible DLNA support? The Steambox will work with XBMC, and once people start getting it in their homes and it actually lives upto the hype, this system is going to go big. Would not surprise me if in a few years time they take the living room just on usability. Valve should hire 5 people to work on XBMC full time, to get stuff like airplay and tv tuner support finished and polished.
Consoles aren't for geeks. They're for average folks. Folks who don't want to have to upgrade stuff. This Steam box is basically a PC that runs an embedded (Linux) OS. It'll still require upgrades, compatibility issues, inconsistent performance, etc.
And Sony never has to upgrade the console. Like when they did it and took away the ability to dual boot Linux. The PS3 is basically a purpose built PC that runs a locked down Linux, and still requires upgrades, and has compatability issues with early titles. (PS2) The Xbox is basically a purpose built PC that runs a locked down Windows, and still requires upgrades, and has compatability issues with early titles. Your phone is basically a purpose built PC that runs a locked down Linux, and still requires upgrades, and has compatability issues with early apps.
Are you seeing a theme here?
The Steam Machine seems like yet another settop box that would allow you to remote into your gaming computer from your entertainment center.
This is where you missed the bigger point. The Steam machine can have different iterations and the most popular won't be just "streaming machines", the streaming option is there to answer to two things: "But I wanna play my windows games!" "Or I'd love to keep my battlestation PC in it's room, but occasionally game on the couch and I don't want to pay for two gaming pc's!"
The most promising is a self contained gaming system which will use Valve's optimized operating system - SteamOS (based on Linux) with new "AAA titles coming soon" and with the bonus of running any steam games you currently have that already have Linux ports (of the 3,000 games on Steam currently 300 are ported and the number is growing). As they have shown, PC gamers will get more bang out of their buck using their OS than Windows since the whole package will be optimized for gaming.
Now, don't compare it to your PC. Put yourself in the shoes of someone who owns a PS3/XBox360, doesn't own a gaming PC, and has $400 burning in their pockets for the next console release. What does a Steam Machine offer them?
* Cheaper games
* More launch titles (300 so far + the unannounced AAA titles)
* More precise FPS controller
* Ability to stream games from their gaming PC (if they have one)
* No monthly fee to play games online
* Ability to use any controller they want - system is open and PS3 and Xbox 360 controllers already work with it.
* Choice (and competition) of hardware providers
* Ability to mod into a full fledged PC (remember the Sony other OS debacle?)
* Upgradeable
* Easier game acquisition. Why run to the store to get your game? Fire up Steam, click on the game, click buy, tell it "yes" to install, enjoy!
* Game modding!
* More/better patches for their games
* More peripherals
Georgia Tech, the leader in Chia(tm) technology.
300 titles at launch would still be better than any other console in the history of videogames.
Any other? The Wii could be upgraded to run every GameCube game for about $30.* It printed money. The Game Boy Advance had every Game Boy and Game Boy Color game, and the DS had every Game Boy Advance game. They too printed money. On the other hand, the Atari 7800 had every Atari 2600 game. It bombed.
* Playing GameCube games on a Wii required a used controller and a used memory card.
Do we really need to ask this with every new console?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I agree. It's a false choice to say require SteamBox to compete w/ Xbox and PS to be considered a 'success'
It's possible for SteamBox to be a roaring success and still not compete on Nintendo/Xbox/PS market's scale!
I think one of the problems is business people do not understand the scale of the gaming audience. You hit on it with identifying there are different audiences for platforms. Sure, EA or Xbox marketing people can throw sales numbers and 'oh yeah, we now how big the market is' but that's a reductive approach.
The pie grew exponentially and also into new markets...but they use the same playbook, dividing up the pie the same way.
I think in some way mainstream gaming companies don't want Steam or Valve to success precisely because it shows how bad they are at their job. If Valve had even a small percentage of EA or Nintendo's resources gaming would be much different.
I'm not a huge Steam/Valve apologist...in fact I'm very critical of them in many...well almost all areas...but that's just b/c I believe they could be better not b/c I dont' think the concept is economically viable.
Thank you Dave Raggett
Where, on Planet Hateboi? Everything else at the time used tiny flash storage or bulky computer hard drives, and used either slow USB 1.1 or slower parallel for transfers.
Tell me more about how Valve developed this new "Linux" operating system.
c++;
Of course, some of my favorite things are modding them and programming them [...] Steam's making the first console platform that even comes close to what I want.
I thought it was the second, the first being OUYA. How does Steam's greenlight process compare to OUYA's sandbox process?
Yes yes it isn't every day
That's the point. Xbox One was supposed to refresh receipts every day. Steam does so every couple weeks. That and the Steam sales are apparently a big enough difference.
With 54 million accounts (according to Wikipedia), they all ready are.
I can't see the average gameboy putting up with having to wait while his Steam Machine updates yet again.
Funny you mentioned the Game Boy. Both the Nintendo DSi and the Nintendo 3DS, the successors to the Game Boy line, get operating system updates. I don't own one, so I can't tell you how frequent they are.
Im pretty sure they are hammering away at the windowing system for sure. Working with nvidia for driver support etc. It costs money. Honestly its the only place i see them actually outlaying sunk cash for this project.
Good-bye
A painfully apparent fact to indie game devs is that Steam is a walled garden
Has there been news either way as to whether software from "unknown sources" can be installed on a Steam Machine?
All you need right now is an HDMI cable and a controller for your pc.
So if any of them are sick of not having a controller* it's there own fault.
*Which is less responsive then a keyboard,
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
But the question is can it, not will it.
Yes it can, I have no idea if it will.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Please clarify 'premium'. Marketing bullshitters have made it totally meaningless.
I know little of the Neo Geo, but I vaguely recall it was expensive.
Agree that they'll probably last a while. Valve's been going strong for a while now, and if anyone can leverage the existing world of PC gaming to make a 'console', it's them. I wonder what the uptake rate will be like.
Marketing speak aside, I would expect
- a good Steam Machine (Steam Engine?) to play current gen games at 1080p with high details settings
- a mid level Steam Machine to either play current gen games at 720p or play them at 1080p with dialed down details
I would also expect a mid level machine to play last gen games reasonably well at 1080p
- an entry level Steam Machine to play last gen games at 720p with mid to high level details
I'm not much of a game freak (well, I was, but I have a baby now), but I would totally buy an entry level or even mid level machine that would run Steam on top of Linux, and would let me play Counter Strike and a bunch of other games fairly well. Especially if I can get the thing up and running in a minute or so, so I can realistically play a game in an half hour time window - those precious windows of time. Maybe I will spend less time on the pot reading my tablet.
Huge bonus points if I can run this as an audio server/player when I am not gaming - run Logitech Media Server and/or Foobar or provide some other mechanism to play high bitrate mp3s, FLACs, and WAVs (and do optical/coax out). I know most people will say HTPC instead of media server but I actually think Roku does a stellar job and I find myself streaming movies and TV shows from Netflix or Amazon Prime on Roku and that's sufficient for me. Don't really need terabytes of space and the whole HTPC thing. But I guess I might be a minority.
Actually, it would be really nice if Valve made this more like a Roku - an easy to use and navigate OS that would run Steam but would also let you play other apps (say, for audio and HTPC).
"Valve is not entering the console market in the traditional sense."
That's spin, they made a controller, an operating system and will be selling 'steam machines'. Not only that they have "gaming in your living room" in BIG GIANT LETTERS. Aka that's a console. That is what the 'living room' bit is all about.
I've been saying this for years and years that console manufacturers should move to a semi-closed upgradeable PC-based platform and away from proprietary systems that are hopelessly outdated and not upgradeable. And now we have it, courtesy of Valve and Steam. Whether or not it replaces consoles will depend upon publishers and game developers porting to the new system, and I fully expect Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo to play dirty pool to try and make that not happen. Time will tell.
It *IS* the future, but as we all know sometimes the old dogs need to be dragged into it, kicking and screaming.
As a throwback to the Mac vs. PC and Mac/PC/Linux Parodies. ... at least for now"
Wii character looks like a person painted on balloons.
Xbox1 character is immedieately obscured by a paywall saying to pay MS for content it doesn't even provide.
Have the rest of the conversation being between PS4 and Steam with both telling Wii to go play.
Then Steam telling all of its features and PS4 responding "I have that too,
Then have PS4 cop to removing other OS in PS3 and Steam simply responding "Uncool"
* Ability to brag about how your "pcbox" is slightly better than someone elses "pcbox"
The future of casual gaming is likely to be ARM devices (including future laptops and desktops). Valve's Steambox only makes sense if its main intent is another AAA gaming platform that leverages Steam and complete independence from Microsoft.
Xbox One = AMD 8-core CPU and AMD GCN GPU
PS4 = AMD 8-core CPU and AMD GCN GPU
These two next-gen consoles will be the main focus of AAA gaming for at least the next 8 years. For Valve to have a successful, relevant platform means they need the same but (year on year) better. So Valve needs x86 CPU cores (4+), and this is an obvious given. BUT since Valve also needs to be Linux (SteamOS) it needs a GPU programming environment that can be the equal of the consoles when accessing resources of the same ability.
This means SteamBox also needs AMD GCN and the use of the Mantle driver/API to stand *any* chance of replacing current Windows based gaming PCs. Whereas the next-gen consoles are likely to keep their original hardware specs across the years, the SteamBox can follow the usual PC trend of significantly better hardware every two years or so, while keeping complete compatibility with existing games.
Steambox needs to be the 'indy' console, NOT another PC platform. If Valve doesn't lock down the ideal hardware as matching that used in the new consoles, AAA games developers face a chicken and egg situation with Steambox ownership numbers. In other words, they'd go to the trouble of supporting yet another platform only if the numbers are already there. With AMD GCN, and Mantle, on the other hand, ports from the new consoles to the Steambox will be almost free. Remember, if Steambox does NOT use GCN, it can't use Mantle, and is left only with OpenGL/OpenGL ES, the API of choice ONLY for casual games. DirectX is not possible on SteamOS. Most important Windows PC games are DirectX. Games companies are NOT going to make yet another port of their game to OpenGL just to please Valve.
Changing hardware standards always scare and annoy people, but may be essential for the future of a given form of computing. Contrary to the lies spouted by many technical sites, AMD's GCN does NOT have to describe the intimate transistor designs on a GPU, any more that x86 does for Intel or AMD (who are both fully x86 compatible with very different chip hardware designs). And contrary to the lies, GCN does NOT stifle future GPU innovation (did x86 prevent Intel from going 386->486->pentium->pentium pro/pentium2->pentium3->pentium4 etc ?). However, it is obvious that most people would be happier with a GCN future if Nvidia could produce compatible parts too in 2014+.
Steam distribution and services are not enough to make SteamBox successful against consoles and the Windows platform. SteamBox MUST be a much more compelling platform than the Windows PC out of the gate, and this requires Valve choosing GCN just as IBM chose x86 all those years ago. A most useful immediate consequence of this will be cheaper Steamboxes using AMD's combined CPU+GPU on a chip, especially the early 2014 Kaveri part. Kaveri comes close to the chip of the Xbox One (more CPU power, close GPU power, much lower memory bandwidth), and if Steambox was a success, AMD could build Valve a single chip with the same performance of that in the PS4, using the same GDDR5 memory.
"Steam Machines" -- the new name for the company's "Steambox," a living room gaming console for playing PC games -- will become available next year "made by different manufacturers," including Valve itself." http://www.engadget.com/2013/09/25/valve-steambox-annnouncement-2/
Xbox may not be the best analogy, but the point still stands: Valve doesn't have to hit a homerun with this to be successful, they can easily weather a slow start. Even if some of their partners bow out, presumably some will hang around and give the project a chance to grow legs. As for the deep pockets comment, many start ups have to make money pretty quick to cover development costs and expenses. Valve isn't under that kind of (heh heh) pressure.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
If Steam really did release Half Life 3 on the steambox, and it was even half-decent, they would make more money then even Gabe could possibly imagine. Even better if they included with it something like Garry's Mod, then no one could compete with Steam. Easily, Valve would be the new Nintendo. Pulling something off like this just shows how competent they are and that they can do the job better than anyone else. The problem is, it's unclear that they're getting enough practice actually releasing games vs. creating interfaces. Steam is really ugly, has very bad customization, although has great deals on games if you wait on it. In a perfect world, Steam would make a great game like Half Life 3 and succeed in that ambition. Afterwards, they should really clearly state that their next ambition is being a platform with a good user interface. So far so good, but all things must come to an end of course and someone else will have to take the torch. But for the time being, Valve is looking great.
Yes, but they arent sinking billions into hardware like MS and Sony has to. They are sidestepping some of the larger risks on launching a 'traditional' console, especially the financial ones. This isnt a risk for Valve except for their reputation. If it falls flat on its face, Valve loses very little.
Good-bye
If I had any faith at all in what Valve was doing in the console market, it surely died when I saw that hilariously retarded controller
* Upgradeable
I think I know what you meant but I don't think a console "upgrade" has ever been truly successful. Whether you're talking sega cd/32x/32xCD, that tubo graphics cd thing (turbo duo was it?), that high resolution attachment for the wii remotes...or possibly the kinect. It just fragments the user base.
Maybe if they had some ridiculously easy parts upgrade system/method. Easier than installing toner/ink cartridges in a printer in other words (power off, open panel, pop out old, pop in new, close panel/power on). Anything short of that and it's too hard...
I don't know if this steam box will ever be as easy to work with as a console made specifically for the one purpose. But for the extra effort I bet you'll get a lot. Which is why I'd much rather buy or build a steam box and utilize my game library than buy an xbone/ps4.
"UNIX is very simple, it just needs a genius to understand its simplicity." -Dennis Ritchie
I agree with your overall point, but...
"Does Nintendo really think they can compete with Atari, Magnavox, Intellivision, and Coleco with their upcoming 'NES'? Can they really elbow their way into this crowded market full of entrenched and experienced companies?"
It wasn't a crowded market. The North American video game industry had collapsed when the NES came out.
"Does Sony really think they can compete with Sega, Nintendo, NEC and Neo*Geo with their upcoming 'Playstation'? Can they really elbow their way into this crowded market full of entrenched and experienced companies?"
Sony entered the market at a time when Nintendo was both unpopular with developers (due to restrictive policies) and behind on hardware (due to sticking with cartridges). Sega was trying to come back from a series of hardware blunders when Sony undercut them by $100. The Neo Geo was never a serious competitor, and the TurboGrafx-16 only sold well in Japan. Sony is also a hardware company, and spent quite a lot of money ($1 billion?) to design custom hardware for the PlayStation.
"Does Microsoft really think they can compete with Sony, Nintendo, Sega, 3D0 and Atari with their upcoming 'Xbox'? Can they really elbow their way into this crowded market full of entrenched and experienced companies?"
3DO was from the previous decade. Not sure where you're getting Atari from. Microsoft basically threw monopoly money at the XBox, even buying Bungie so they could have a decent launch title. There were also lots of existing developers used to making games for a Microsoft platform (DirectX). Even then, the sales were pitiful next to the PS2, especially in Japan (which mattered more back then). The GameCube did about the same, and was the start of Nintendo's journey towards low-cost party game consoles. The XBox 360 was where Microsoft really got going.
Yeah, I think history says it can be done.
Under the right circumstances, with the right company, yes. And I think Valve has a serious shot at this. But it's not trivial. Half the companies you listed were utter failures in the market.
On the other hand, the market is different today. From the NES to the PS2, there was always a clear winner in sales and third-party support in each generation. But the latest generation was closer to a tie between the PS3 and X360 (please don't start talking about the Wii). We're now in a world where cross-platform games are the norm and two consoles can co-exist on equal footing. Hopefully there's enough room for Valve to push the industry in a different direction from where Sony and Microsoft want to take us.
Visit the
I was looking to build a new gaming PC and wouldn't mind finally cutting out MSFT. All I need is most of my existing games in my account to work on SteamOS.
Steam should push for linux everything, dump money into making devs do it. backport games. and if games are linux binaries, steamos will effectively play games on any iteration of the console as long as its compiled for x86(/64). now that sony and microsoft are on x86 as well they should really look at their next gen and keep it too. intel and amd will continue to push for lower power, higher performance, and everyone knows how to code for them. unless there is a new architecture that wipes the floor, i see no reason to deviate. sure the ps3 was boss. all that bandwidth and cell awesomeness, but too much work porting games to really use the hardware to its fullest. i see the consoles being x86, and the steambox as a benefit for pc gaming. i dont care how well the steam machines do in particular. games will be more likely to be running on linux than before, steam already pushes controller support for games that can, and now any game that isnt an exclusive of one console will take little work to port over (on the hardware side).
"I'd love to keep my battlestation PC in it's room, but occasionally game on the couch and I don't want to pay for two gaming pc's!"
This is exactly what makes a steam box interesting to me. I typically prefer to play on the PC, but it would be great to be able to play in the living room for games that the whole family might enjoy (the Lego games for example). If I can use my current htpc machine to run SteamOS, then all the better. The fact that the steambox is just a PC means I can use all the same controllers and hardware I'm used to and it can get hand-me-down upgrades from my main gaming PC. Should my wife thinks this week's "So you think you can dance" is more important than watching me play Mark of the Ninja, then I can just move me and my controller to the PC in the other room and everyone gets to do what they want. None of that is available on the XBox or PS, and I would have to re-buy a game library at $40-60/game instead of the ~$8/game I typically pay on Steam.
it might be bigger, but chances are it has less pixels.
"Maybe if they had some ridiculously easy parts upgrade system/method. Easier than installing toner/ink cartridges in a printer in other words (power off, open panel, pop out old, pop in new, close panel/power on). Anything short of that and it's too hard..." have you tried upgrading a pc it's really not much harder (especially for something like a graphics card) and a damn fair bit easier than some god awful toner/printer designs.
Rocket Surgeon.
So they're working up an Ubuntu variant. When my kid asked me to install Steam on his Ubuntu laptop to play Euro Truck II, which Valve claims runs on Linux, I went ahead, figuring "they're in this space, it should work." Well, almost. Filed a trouble ticket with them Sunday, and as of today, Wednesday, there's no response. I clearly told them which module simply crashes. The game is pretty useless without that working. If they think they understand how to build games for Ubuntu, or want to understand it well enough to succeed, they need to take bug reports seriously. Obviously they don't. So they'll, sadly, fail.
If no response from them by the time a week's over I'll have to ask for a refund and contest it with my credit card company. At least I didn't use PayPal!
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
Would that be Wayland then? Or Xorg? Is Valve working on Mir serendipitously? Have they contributed any patches back to the community to improve the SteamOS/Steam on Linux experience? NO? Then STFU. Valve has used Linux to contribute to Valve. I've seen NO reciprocity in that arrangement. What Nvidia has announced to date is to the benefit of nouveau and the broader linux community, Valve is quite a ways down on that list.
As long as it isn't 600 quid... count me in! Unlike the new Xbox which is some media playing device or other, I'm interested in the games!
Any clue on the prices for a SteamBox? If they can sale it around the $100 to $200 mark I think it will have have the potential to be highly competitive.
If you're trying to fit two to four people around a monitor, pixels don't matter quite as much as inches. Case in point: During the fifth generation, people played GoldenEye on N64 despite each of four players getting about a 144x112 pixel window. And during the sixth generation, people played console-style games on a PS2, Xbox, or GameCube and SDTV even though PCs accepted USB gamepads and had more pixels.
Obligitory: No.
As far i noticed, steambox is not just a machine sold by valve, but any machine with the SteamOS connected to a tv. Probably the box itself wont sell that well, but the "custom PCs with steamOS", those will.
Now, don't compare it to your PC.
But it is a PC and everything in that list is already done.
* Choice (and competition) of hardware providers
* Upgradeable
Depending on what you're upgrading that can actually be a negative in the long run, while it is nice to be able to upgrade the HDD the ability to upgrade the CPU/GPU/RAM means developers just make that a requirement rather than optimizing their code for the existing hardware. The graphics quality of console titles gets better over time because they get better at optimizing for the concrete set of hardware they are targeting, they know the CPU/GPU clocks, instruction sets, memory size, cache size, bus speeds, latency, shader model, etc... and can rely on those numbers rather than them being unknowns. It's much harder to provide a consistent user experience when you are targeting thousands and thousands of different hardware configurations.
The console market in '84 was abandoned by Atari et al. Everyone in America assumed computers would dominate (As Will Shatner said, "Why buy a videogame?").
Sony and Microsoft were both juggernauts with more resources than Valve. The original Xbox was a colossal failure that would have shut down anyone else.
Valve isn't entering an untapped and ignored market and they can't lose $5 billion up front. OTOH they have to do something. Microsoft with Win8 has signaled they want to squeeze Valve out of the distribution market. I'm not sure what they're going to do. Companies targeted by Microsoft don't have a good track record of survival...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Have they contributed any patches back to the community to improve the SteamOS/Steam on Linux experience?
Yes. They contributed quite a lot of improvements to SDL (and even hired Sam Lantinga), as well as a bunch of work on OpenGL drivers. That's all that I know about, but there's probably more. Valve is extremely aware that making games work better on Linux is good for Steam and SteamOS.
Incidentally, there is probably no "windowing system" on SteamOS as most Linux users understand it. In that respect, it's no different from other consoles.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
as well as a bunch of work on OpenGL drivers.
Which OpenGL drivers did the work on?
It was also ~$600 for they system and $100 to $300 per game while the 'non-premium' systems were $100 to $150 with games costing $20 to $50.
In the case of Steam, it is likely that the steam box will cost less than the XboxOne or the PS4, and the games are cheaper too.
$400? Source please. The Piston already costs $1000. While I think steamOS will make it cheaper, I doubt it will come even close a proprietary similar spec'd game console. The only company that can make a SteamMachine with a competitive price and "modern" specs is Valve itself, simply because they can recoup the costs with the software sales. But if they do that, 3rd party hardware makers won't stand a chance, so what is the point of making an open architecture?
Hardware doesn't make money in the game business unless you have either compelling exclusive like nintendo or a unique device with no competition like OculusVR, as they sell the rift for nearly 2 times production costs, let's see what will happen when sony releases the heavily RUMORed PS VR googles. Sony seems to recently be breaking even with PS3(and futurely 4) and Vita sales, but they usually are sold at a loss in order to stay competitive as they can sustaining themselves by mainly selling content.
Consumer market is a harsh mistress. Unless you can "distort reality" and convince costumers to pay premium extra, unique features of your product, your doomed to fight the lowest price war. Most consumers don't care about features, brand, specs, just price. Many great products die because they are perceived as over-priced by the mainstream.
IMO, Steam Machines are not really Home consoles, but a complement to the PC gaming experience. PC gaming and Console console gaming are two completely different things with different needs, audience and expectations. While there is some overlap between both types of gaming, it's not enough to call it competition and the fact there are plenty of PC and console gamers(like me) is more than enough proof of that. At least not for the immediate future. Steam Machines are devices to expand your PC gaming experience beyond your Man cave/battlestation setup. Not to replace console gaming.
Actually, I misread that. They provided specific feedback to NVIDIA to get them to fix the drivers.
(Part of me wanted to make a joke about Black Mesa, but I realised it was too dumb.)
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
Oh yeah, cool. I thought perhaps you meant they had been working on Nouveau or Intel or AMD's Open Source drivers or something.
As long as the steam machine doesn't fail like the Xbox RRoD then I think it has a shot!
I'm kinda envisioning the Steambox being offered at more of a $250-300 price point. If you want a monster rig you can still build it yourself and run SteamOS.
Offered by who though? Sure if Valve were a hardware maker they could make up the profit margin with software sales but I doubt any of the existing OEMs are going to want to go through the process of designing, building and supporting such hardware with virtually no profit.
"it's THEIR own fault"
This post is great! I would also like to add:
* Share your Gaming Library with up to 10 Friends/Family
* Buy a game once and you can play it on any platform Steam supports (Linux/SteamOS, Windows, Mac OS X) if that game has been ported to that platform. (If you buy PS4 or XBox game can only play it on that system.) No longer have to buy a whole new game collection every 5 years.
* Potentially better/faster console hardware/gaming
* Ability to stream games from their Steam Machine to their gaming PC or 2nd Steam Machine (if they have one)
* More Indie developer friendly than Xbox or PS4
* Ability to hack Steam Controller
What is there to design? It is a PC, solved problem, get on with it. Low-ish end PCs that the GP is describing don't take much effort to put into small enclosures either.
Possibly they sell the same PC with Windows too. If there are too many returns, stop installing SteamOS, change the labels, and back to windows. If SteamOS is easy to install from within Windows to its own partition, like Ubuntu, OEMs can keep selling windows PCs, and users can make them Steam PCs.
Low risk for OEMs as no dedicated very distinct product line is required.
Low risk for Valve as there isn't much recoup required as it is not a loss leader. So they can sell cheaper games, supply some free games, charge developers non-exorbitant rates.
So low risk for developers.
Low risk for gamers - potentially cheaper, multi-purpose.
Chances for success will depend on execution, of course, but low risk is one battle won already.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
"The PS3 is basically a purpose built PC" That runs on a radicaly different cpu/gpu architechture compared to x86.
No longer have to buy a whole new game collection every 5 years.
why are you doing this?
Without software why would anyone get a steambox?
Did you just accuse Steam of not having any software?
brb My dumbfuck meter just broke.
Hello, everybody, the good shoping place, the new season approaching, click in. ( http://www.sheptrade.com/ ) (Discount Air jordan shoes) $36, (Air Max shoes) $35, (Nike shox shoes) $36, (Handbags) $39, (Sunglasses) $16, (wallet) $18, (Belt) $17, (T-shirts) $20, (Jeans) $37, (NFL/MLB/NBA)Jerseys $25, ( http://www.sheptrade.com/ ) ( http://www.sheptrade.com/ )
Don't forget that size is a function of viewing distance. The 24" TFT on my desk is "bigger" than the 50" flatscreen in the living room unless I start sitting on the coffee table instead of the couch...
But not how you might expect. More than 30% of all clients on the Internet are Windows XP boxes. These are people who didn't want to move to Windows 7 and definitely do not want Windows 8. A lot of them run games on those computers and may try setting up or modifying their machines to give Steam a try. If it works for them, it becomes a viable place to jump to as the Windows environment becomes more and more hostile and they are pushed closer to the edge of the no-more-support cliff.
""Does Microsoft really think they can compete with Sony, Nintendo, Sega, 3D0 and Atari with their upcoming 'Xbox'?"
Microsoft was only competing with Sony and Nintendo in 2000, Sega 3D0 and Atari were already out of the hardware business as far as i know.
I think what's meant is the freedom to obtain and use games that happen not to be released on Steam yet. How many games in the Not on Steam sale are ported to desktop Linux?
I do not see how the Steam Box will compare with the Xbox One and PS4 any more than the PC itself as the Steam box is exactly that only it will have a lower price than many gaming PC's, use Linux, be mod-friendly, and be tailored towards connecting to your home theatre setup while also trying to revamp the paradigms of controller design (I especially hope that works out as well). What this MAY do is encourage more developers to create Linux ports which isn't as common as it could be. I just hope this does not turn out to be another Ouya scenario with a relatively low selection of upcoming noteworthy titles.
Don't forget that size is a function of viewing distance.
Minimum viewing distance in turn is a function of how many bodies are in front of the monitor. It takes a bigger monitor for four players than for one.
That's weird, I thought the problem they were all currently having is that they were killing each other on the margins and there was no money in building any more.
If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
You forget one very important thing; Valve doesn't sell boxes. They sell Games. Actually they sell Distribution of games. So what they most of all need is a platform on which they can sell, distribute & run those games. The hardware is much less of an issue - It's the OS.
Hence all the hubbub about with GabeN talking shit about windows as a game platform, because microsofts closed garden store model would eat valve's part of the pie.
Really? Downvote without any kind of rebuttal? You know it's the fucking truth -- it doesn't matter how open the core OS is if there are controls in place to prevent your access, and controls are what consoles are all about. Remember when FOSS on the PS3 was a big thing? Remember when Sony shut that shit down, bricking consoles all over the world? Remember your recourse? I'll give you a hint: nothing.
You crack that box open, and you'll be violating the TOS. Circumvent anything that is meant to prevent you from modifying code, and you'll be violating the DMCA. Call that "open" if you like, but it's intellectual dishonesty of the highest order, and silencing those who make that known will never change the facts.
Are you saying split-screen is still a thing?
Street Fighter series, for example, doesn't need to split the screen to have more than one player per box. Nor does Rampart, an early arcade RTS, or the Dead Ops Arcade mode of Call of Duty: Black Ops.
Valve has seemed happy to not really put any money towards marketing up to this point, spread mostly by word of mouth in the gamer community. You can walk up to any console gamer and they can name any of the current gen consoles yet I can still find a few who have no idea what Steam is. Despite this Valve has still had no problem finding success because if you have built your own gaming computer they are best option for a game marketplace and have little competition in that arena on the PC.
However, consoles are all about the show, the exclusives, and the tv adds help. So far the new Steam OS seems to still be unheard of to many gamers, especially if you prefer consoles and don't log in to steam or slashdot daily. Valve has some competitors in this arena that are going to ready to compete. While I think Valve has the platform to shake up the industry they will have to make people aware of what they have to offer.
Just another ecosystem play.
Outside of Kinect, I can't think of a console upgrade that actually worked in the marketplace (XBox HD-DVD, XBox external HD, PS3 Move, PS2 external HD, PS2 Network, I'm sure I've forgotten some). All of those are in the "plug into console, plug in power, reboot" sort of upgrade. No way is a general user cracking a $350 console to upgrade anything.
(Sidebar: I'd be interested to see the percentage of PS3 hard drive upgrades, which requires about an hour, removing 10 screws, and a large-ish USB stick.)
So now the console provides 1080p on your living room TV. Tremendous, except that a typical Steam PC (http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey) is dual or quad core, 2.5GHz, 8G, running 1080p or dual 1080p. Generally, anyway, and the PC is more likely to be upgraded over time. Now, I'm taking over the living room for an inferior gaming experience?
$350 might not be enough, and the stock console is going to age very quickly. HL3 better be exclusive for an extended period (and AWESOME), and even then, it's going to be uphill.
ceci n'est pas un sig.
>> Can Valve's Steam Machines Compete Against the Xbox One and PS4?
Linux-based open platform that I can also upgrade the HW myself and install/run anything I like on?
In my book its already won by a mile, and its not even out yet.
In my case I dont even need more hardware, I can just install SteamOS on my existing MythTV box, reinstall MythTV, install a bunch of steam games, and I'm done. Now my DVR has also become a next gen console for exactly $0. Apparently SteamOS will even be able to stream Netflix. Finally netflix on Linux,
Furthermore this saves me the $400+ that would have gone on a PS4. That is extra money that can now go on steam/linux games. Whats not to like?
Possibly but in 2-3 years the consoles will be old and dated. The Steam OS hardware will then push past the consoles coming out this year and price vs performance will pay off if enough quality games are available. Minecraft with mods, skyrim with mods, GTA with mods, etc...
The controller really looks interesting also. I'll definitely want to play with it a bit before buying it if possible.
ARM processor variants would be even more interesting.
Hey may not do this. But many people do.
How do you think GameStop keeps such a healthy inventory of used games?
But now thanks to the magic of upgrades and PC game modding, games you already own on the SteamBox *can* look/run better as the years move on (without having to wait for the re-released collection edition for the new console).
Georgia Tech, the leader in Chia(tm) technology.
"openness" from the company that's played hard ball making DRM loved by the sheep of the world.
Well the $400 is what the consumers would have (at a minimum) due to the console launch prices. Remember though that they'll have to plunk down $60 for a game if these releases are like the last gen (no pack in games).
I'd guess the Steam machines will have a target price of $400 to $500 (then again there will be different hardware vendors, so there will be *choice*). I don't see $100 extra being a hard up-sell considering the benefits I pointed out above (particularly cheaper games, more launch titles, free online play, and the option to turn it into a full fledged PC).
I wouldn't be surprised if Valve didn't already set a minimum spec for Steam Machines which makes a great target for developers (your game should be playable/enjoyable with a PC with these specs but can obviously have features enabled for higher versions of the Steam Machine.
I am hoping they give the machines benchmarks to reach and assign them levels (so at launch they sell Level 1 Steam Machines for $400, Level 2 $500, etc) so that years down the line (think 3-5) they can release higher levels and just update game requirements with a blurb like "Minimum Steam Machines Level 2, works best on Steam Machine level 5". Steam Machine Level 0 could be a box that can only play old ports, simple indy games, and is mainly intended to stream from a high level machine or a home gaming PC.
Regarding the hardware profits, that's for the partners to worry about. Valve just wants to sell games. That's where they make money from. And surely the hardware vendors are stoked to find a way to save the fledgling PC hardware business.
These builds are substantially cheaper than the piston and closer to the $400 mark above . Surely a hardware company buying parts in bulk can squeeze an even better deal.
Georgia Tech, the leader in Chia(tm) technology.
What is there to design?
A PC in such an enclosure, are these currently available for around that price?
Low risk for OEMs as no dedicated very distinct product line is required.
Well that's the question, what do they already have that is decent that they could just install SteamOS on? Even the crappy (spec-wise) Dell Zino its most barebones configuration and that's with no keyboard/mouse or controller.
If the SteamBox is successful, it will give a significant incentive for developers to port/make their games available on Linux. Here's hoping...
It can be done, but none of the moments of opportunity are here for Valve to make it the way you suggest.
I do not think this will be a factor. To begin with, there is a HUGE opening right now. The XBox One was initially going to be this huge spygin platform in your living room and Sony.... *shiver* their motives are almost as hostile as Microsoft's. Seriously, there is a huge opening for a new player that is at least semi-ethical.
A lot of the secret to Nintendo's success in the west was distancing itself from existing video game systems that plug into a tv and billing itself as a toy you plug into the tv.
Absolutely wrong. Are you in management or something? The reason for Nintendo's rise to domination was fun games and the possibility for much deeper gameplay than any other systems had offered up to that point. As examples, I give you Super Mario Brothers and Zelda. Both games were fun and both games were far deeper than anything you could get on any other system at the time.
Eventually there was an explosion of high quality games for the NES that grabbed people's imagination and sucked them in for hours on end. Some were more casual that you could play for a short time like Tetris or Thunder and Lightning and some required hours just to fully move around a small part of the entire world like Wizardry or Adventure of Link.
In the end, it was the high quality games made possible by the capabilities of the system itself that vaulted the NES into history as the game console that saved gaming. It had nothing to do with how expectations were managed. Managing expectations might have opened the door but had zero effect on the apocalyptic sales.
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
"The PS3 is basically a purpose built PC" That runs on a radicaly different cpu/gpu architechture compared to x86.
Well, seeing as how all of the major operating systems (Other than apple) run on multiple cpu archtectures now, what is your point? The PS3 can still run Linux, just not dual boot.
What's the price again for a 150 feet HDMI cable? And 150 feet of USB cable for the controller (the number of wireless or bluetooth repeaters needed is going to cause way too much lag).
It needs to go all the way from the PC in the basement to the TV in the living room.
They did a lot of work on the Intel drivers - that's where they got the 350% (or something like that) improvement in performance over the Windows drivers - and as a user, I've noticed the rate of driver improvement increase shortly after the 350% announcement.
that is all coming from the community that pegged the ipod, iphone and ipad as crappy products yet parades the superiority of desktop linux. see any disconnection from the general populace's views?
Let's assume for a moment that Slashdot is disconnected from what the majority really want. What source would you say is better connected?
ask yourself why these people prefer pc games.
A larger selection of moddable and indie titles, for one thing. Smaller developers have had a very difficult time getting their works onto consoles. See, for example, the case of Robert Pelloni.
you have just made it exactly what a console is
The key difference here is that consoles run only software approved by the console maker, whereas PCs lack that limit.
even if you have a steambox it still requires you to buy gamepads. people don't carry around xbox, playstation and wii controllers now
But it's still affordable to buy extra controllers in case a party breaks out. It's not affordable to buy extra gaming PCs in case a party breaks out.
because a normal person who wanted to do that would, oh i don't know, plug it into the tv!
My point is that people have a mental set against plugging a PC into a TV.
so what do you do in your above spontaneous scenario?
The same thing I've done since the late 1990s: plan for such scenarios and put some extra controllers in a drawer.
Not exactly sure why you were downvoted but they are offering the OS free. You can download it, just like any typical linux distro. If modifying a distro was a violation of DMCA then we are all in big trouble : ) PS3's problem was they didn't want people to have access the hardware. They didn't want the system changed to play cloned discs. Piracy was a really really big concern for them. Steam, not so much. They add a small hurdle and don't even pretend that it prevents piracy. Consoles have always been locked down. PCs have rarely ever been locked down.
http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
"anything developed for the Steam Machine will also be available on PC"
Some might view that as a plus - play the same game on your desktop, laptop or tv.
What do you mean by "such an enclosure". Does SteamOS detect enclosure and refuse to run if it is not the correct enclosure?
To start with, I see nothing wrong with ASUS CM1735-US006S "http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883220265", the first entry in newegg for the original post's mentioned range of $300-400. If Steam likes nvidia, look for nvidia GPU.
From your suggestion of Dell Zino, I guess you are thinking about small PCs from the start. That might need redesign which implies some "risk" for the OEM. BUT it is not necessary to take that risk. Any OEM can test the waters, e.g. ASUS can start with CM1735-US006S. If it doesn't begin to work, ditch it. If it begins to work, do a small redesign effort. Bite as much as you can swallow. Low risk, as I said.
Even if OEMs don't install SteamOS, the end users can install it. To begin with, at least.
It is not necessary to give the mostest elegantest solution to get much more profits than Valve is getting now. Non-too-elegant solutions win, or at least compete, in the technology sector all the time.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
It appears we were both on a different track, with the term 'steambox' I was thinking more the console-replacement product targeted at the living room rather than just any desktop PC with SteamOS installed. If you're the average person buying a low-end PC would you really dedicate it to gaming by getting it with SteamOS or just get it with Windows and install Steam? I would think most people would do the latter so it probably wouldn't be worth OEMs to have different SKUs and do hardware testing and driver install/maintenance for low-end boxes that they probably wouldn't sell many of anyway.
In adition of the 2 other OpenGL mentioned areas
(Work on Intel drivers ; collaboration with NVidia on their drivers)
Valve has also contributed to develop a few OpenGL Debugging extension that the base Mesa lacked (Mesa is only mostly uptodate 3.x - the debugging extension are 4.x which Mesa severly lacks)
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Mesa Classic is modular, Mesa Gallium3D even more so.
Work that Valve has done will automatically benefit indirectly any opensource drivers.
(Not only Nouveau, Intel and Radeon, but also Lima, Etnaviv, etc. once they reach that point of development)
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]