Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Valve In-Home Game Streaming Supports Windows, OS X & Linux

Posted by samzenpus on from the runs-on-anything dept.

MojoKid (1002251) writes "Valve has today pushed out a new update to its Steam client on all three of the major OSes that finally takes In-home Game-Streaming out of beta. Similar to NVIDIA's GameStream, which streams native gameplay from a GeForce-equipped PC to the NVIDIA SHIELD, Valve's solution lets you stream from one PC to another, regardless of which OS it's running. What this means is you could have a SteamOS-based PC in your living-room, which is of course Linux-based, and stream games from your Windows PC in another room which ordinarily would never run under Linux. Likewise, you could stream a game from a Windows PC to an OS X machine, or vice versa."

74 of 106 comments (clear)

  1. Is this basically VNC? by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

    Is there any degradation in video quality?

    1. Re:Is this basically VNC? by MatthiasF · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Most likely TurboVNC, which has OpenGL support.

    2. Re:Is this basically VNC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hardly. I tried using VNC and it's ilk to stream a simple game of Hearthstone and it was terrible. Then one day, I started playing a Steam game on my laptop. I thought the graphics were above average but didn't think much of it, and then I finally realized that I was playing a game hosted on my desktop PC when I remembered that I had never downloaded that particular game to my laptop. That's how transparent Valve made it. I didn't even know it was enabled and I was using it.

    3. Re:Is this basically VNC? by Brulath · · Score: 4, Informative

      But it prompts you to alert you that you're about to stream a game with a picture and all?

      I just tried it out on my macbook, streaming over 1gbps ethernet from a computer sitting next to it. At 2560x1440 on Beautiful on both ends it was pretty laggy - lot of frames dropped, input wasn't super great with the mouse. With Borderlands 2 I enabled performance overlay, which reported it was running at 19.9fps with "slow encode, decode" written above at 2560x1440 Beautiful. At 1080p Beautiful and Balanced it gave me 60fps when there was little change on the screen and 30fps when I spun the camera around my character constantly. Moving the mouse around on the host computer gave fairly fluid panning on the menu screen, whilst using the mac's mouse involved a lot of jerking around (more jerkiness at lower fps, but even at 60 neither game seemed to interpolate the movements at all).

      That's with mouse usage though, with a controller it might work pretty well - less precise movement. Overall pretty neat though, kinda wondering how it'd go through hamachi or similar (have aussie nbn, so 40mbit up might work if the latency isn't too bad). Tested on a Core i7 3770K with nVidia 680 SLi -> Macbook Pro 2012ish (whatever was the last iteration before the new slim model).

    4. Re:Is this basically VNC? by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      I just tried it between my desktop and laptop and I didn't notice any degradation at all, it looked really pretty. I was only getting around 25FPS, though, so it looks like H/W encoding of the stream wasn't working for some reason. Steam is supposed to be capable of using H/W encoding and decoding, but something didn't work right with my rig. On the other hand, if it did work properly I would assume that playing games like that would totally be feasible and enjoyable, and since both of my rigs are pretty much outdated I would assume it works better on newer stuff!

    5. Re:Is this basically VNC? by fa2k · · Score: 2

      Principle is the same as VNC, but the leap in technical sophistication is huge

      There will probably be degradation of quality. From bandwidth concerns alone, there's no way they could stream uncompressed 1080p@60Hz, that would require 3 Gbit. By using something like 50Mbps they could get better quality than the ~8Mbps we se on high-quality TV streams, and could spare some CPU power by encoding less efficiently (also: decoding video requires power on the client).

      In principle I'd think the clients would have problems displaying the video (this seems to be fixed if they're releasing it). Many low-end systems can't decode HD streams in real time with CPU only, and rely on hardware acceleration. There's a lot that can go wrong when displaying high quality video streams on linux: tearing, stuttering, A/V sync, etc.

      It's a neat idea, but when I move, quite soon, I'll still prefer to pull a long-ish DVI (or DP if I can get a 4K monitor) and USB cable to have my gaming rig in a different room.

    6. Re:Is this basically VNC? by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      Principle is the same as VNC, but the leap in technical sophistication is huge

      now if we could only get the same technical details into Wayland, the X diehards would stop whining about how slow it might be when running their remote displays!

      Note to Value: open source whatever it is you do and tell the Wayland guys.

    7. Re:Is this basically VNC? by doccus · · Score: 1

      Does this allow you to stream a PC based pinball to OSX? If so then I'm going to get another PC and set this up.. my Windows Boot Camp partition seems to be compromised by (possibly) that encryption virus (I got an "RCMP" notice that all my files were locked because of pxxn in my PC.. I know it's fake because I have absolutely none of that, due to my faith) , and I've lost my installs of every pinball game ever made. I have the original installation discs for many, but the tweaks to make them, compatible with Vista / Win7, and the "download only" ones, and all my no-CD patches, and all my Visual pinball is gone. All my application and document folders are "empty". I'll need to start from scratvh, and this looks like a good way to go about it.

    8. Re:Is this basically VNC? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      (I got an "RCMP" notice that all my files were locked because of pxxn in my PC.. I know it's fake because I have absolutely none of that, due to my faith)

      Faith as a guarantee of the absence of porn on your PC? Oh, I understand - as a typical person who relies on faith as an argument for anything, you keep your porn on your Mac. In the dungeon with your sex slaves.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    9. Re:Is this basically VNC? by doccus · · Score: 1

      It's not a guarantee to someone else. It's a certainty. If I had any on my computer I could possibly have been fooled, but because I do not, I KNOW it's false. My faith does not allow for any. Pehaps yours does, but I am dealing specifically with mine, and not trying to convince or prove this to anyone else, nor do I need to.

    10. Re:Is this basically VNC? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      Yeah, faith without proof. Crap in other words.

      Come back touting your faith when you've got some evidence.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    11. Re:Is this basically VNC? by doccus · · Score: 1

      Don't think you understand. I don't need more evidence than I have. I'm not proving it to *anyone but myself*. And it's not my faith I'm, fp[toving, but the consequencses of it. If , say, you don't drink, you can be sure there's none in your mug. Maybe nobody else is sure, but that's their problem...

  2. Summary not entirely accurate. by Winckle · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Likewise, you could stream a game from a Windows PC to an OS X machine, or vice versa."

    Unfortunately, the vice versa part isn't quite there yet, only Windows PCs can be the host OS at the moment. Valve do intend to patch in host functionality on Linux and OS X eventually though.

    1. Re:Summary not entirely accurate. by jxander · · Score: 1

      Is there any reason for reverse compatibility at the moment?

      Are there Steam games for Mac that don't have a Windows version?

      --
      This signature is false.
    2. Re:Summary not entirely accurate. by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 2

      Not sure, it's possible. On the other hand, there are people who want to run Linux games on Mac, or vice versa...

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
    3. Re:Summary not entirely accurate. by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 1

      Summary not entirely accurate.

      That's because the president (Gabe) needs plausible deniability.

      --
      If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
    4. Re:Summary not entirely accurate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you have a high spec Mac/Linux PC and a low spec Windows PC, I could see the reverse being viable.

    5. Re:Summary not entirely accurate. by svanheulen · · Score: 4, Informative

      I was able to stream Starbound from Linux to Windows without issue. That was during the beta though, maybe that has changed.

    6. Re:Summary not entirely accurate. by hobarrera · · Score: 1

      So the real functionality is only there if you have any access to Windows hosts, otherwise, it's just a matter of wating.
      It's a nice trick to be able to claim "supports linux" without actually making it all work on linux.

    7. Re:Summary not entirely accurate. by SplatMan_DK · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about?

      The streaming functionality is obviously more interesting when a windows-host is involved, so one can stream a Windows-game to a Linux box (for example running SteamOS on a NUC), but Steam itself works perfectly fine on Linux as does a number of games.

      What "trick" are you talking about?

      --
      My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
    8. Re:Summary not entirely accurate. by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      The common platform combinations for games on steam seem to be

      windows
      windows+mac
      windows+mac+linux

      I've never heard of a game on steam that didn't have a windows version. Apparently there is the occasional indie title that is windows+linux but not mac but they are a tiny minority. Once you put in the effort to do windows+linux doing mac as well is not a massive jump.

      So streaming mac to linux could be handy for platform compatibility in windows-free households. Streaming could also be useful to stream from a beefy PC to a less beefy one.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    9. Re:Summary not entirely accurate. by hobarrera · · Score: 1

      The streaming functionality is obviously more interesting when a windows-host is involved, so one can stream a Windows-game to a Linux box (for example running SteamOS on a NUC), but Steam itself works perfectly fine on Linux as does a number of games.

      More interesting for windows users maybe, but not for people who don't have any windows boxes at home. But for linux users, it's pretty useless.

      In truth, they offered a windows-centric feature, but managed to label it as available for all platforms. If it's not available for non-windows users, then it's doesn't really "support linux".

    10. Re:Summary not entirely accurate. by SplatMan_DK · · Score: 1

      Fine. The streaming client is available for Linux, and is officially supported on their own Linux distro. The streaming server is "planned" for non-windows platforms but is not available yet.

      Be negative about it if you must. But from a business-perspective it makes perfect sense to make things in the order they did. And you know it.

      --
      My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
  3. Missing a Trick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    No AmigaOS support!?
    They're shooting themselves in the foot!

  4. SteamBox just got really interesting by GreatDrok · · Score: 4, Insightful

    With this I can grab a little steambox for my TV in the living room and play all my steam games on that from the comfort of the sofa. No worries about having to only buy Linux compatible games as I already have a Windows PC purely for games anyway. I'll see how well this works tonight when I can stream a PC game to my Mac laptop but if it works well then I'm sold.

    This is what Sony should have done with the PS4 - let users stream from their old PS3 to the PS4 rather than rely on the PSNow solution they're pushing but I guess they don't have the flexibility of a PC to do that sadly.

    --
    "I have the attention span of a strobe lit goldfish, please get to the point quickly!"
    1. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 2

      Since the PS4 can't stream media from a PC...

      Maybe Sony could allow users to stream media to their PS4 from a PS3... from a PC

    2. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by Comen · · Score: 1

      They have been talking about this for awhile now actually, nothing new here other than it is now available.
      Sure beats the hell out of buying games for the PC and again on my consoles, that I really only use when I travel.
      Some games that you play on the PC do not play well with a controller for console like gaming, but I guess that is where the Steam controller comes in.

    3. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by exomondo · · Score: 1

      It's pretty neat feature but ultimately it isn't going to help the grow the Linux and OS X game library, if anything it will be detrimental to it as people will build a decent Windows-based games server and then just stream Windows games (since that's what the vast majority of the library supports) to low-end Linux, OS X or Windows clients.

    4. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's pretty neat feature but ultimately it isn't going to help the grow the Linux and OS X game library

      Not in the short term no. But it theoretically makes the linux based steambox a viable gaming platform, since windows gamers can add one next to the TV and play windows games on it.

      If all goes according to valves plan, a few years down the road AAA windows game developers look up and realize there's millions of these linux steam boxes around, installed, hooked up to TVs with controllers... and suddenly realeasing a linux port doesn't seem all that risky.

      Espeically if the steambox installed base is growing, while the dedicated windows gaming rigs are stagnating or declining... at some point releasing directly for steambox becomes a nobrainer.

      that's the valve dream anyway. No idea if it will take off, but they've definitely put a lot of the right pieces out there to make it succeed.

    5. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Better idea, buy a PC and skip buying potatoes.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    6. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Also: There's a degradation in video quality when you stream, according to the notes. Not major, and would still allow the game to play, but it would mean that people would notice if a game is available natively for the steambox.

      So it's a two-part system: Valve gets to let people play their games on their TV without having them have to buy new high-end computers, and the manufacturers will get some pushback to make it so the games run natively on the TV game-boxes.

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
    7. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Not in the short term no. But it theoretically makes the linux based steambox a viable gaming platform, since windows gamers can add one next to the TV and play windows games on it.

      I wouldn't agree with that, if you're going to stream games from your gaming PC then the client doesn't have to be powerful enough to run those games so you spend your money on one decent game server and cheap low-end client(s). If your living room PC is powerful enough to play those games then most people would probably just run Windows (or even dual boot) and do away with a multi-system streaming solution in the first place.

    8. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      Who gives a shit about OS X and Linux? I want a slim mini-itx box in my living room that I can use to play my games. This does that.

    9. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by rsmith-mac · · Score: 1

      This is what Sony should have done with the PS4 - let users stream from their old PS3 to the PS4 rather than rely on the PSNow solution they're pushing but I guess they don't have the flexibility of a PC to do that sadly.

      The PS3 is not well suited for the task. The PS4 has a dedicated H.264 hardware encoder - AMD's Video Codec Engine - which is what allows it to so easily stream to the Vita and Vita TV and with such low latency. The PS3 doesn't have a dedicated encoder, and heck it doesn't even have a dedicated decoder, as it does a good chunk of its H.264 decoding in software. This is why PS3 remote play to the PSP and Vita never worked well, nor would it work well streaming to a PS4.

    10. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by Confusador · · Score: 1

      Since a lot of games are cross platforms with consoles, in a year or two a cheap low-end client will probably be sufficient to run most of what's coming out.

    11. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by chuckymonkey · · Score: 1

      Where it gets even more interesting is when you have things like GPU passthrough to a VM. That's something I'm working on right now, virtualizing Windows and passing it a GPU. I have the VM bridged to the network so it has a native IP address and assign it whatever resources I think it needs to play games. This lets me have a pretty beefy server that's running Windows in a VM as well as doing all the other server tasks I ask of it like file serving, Plex, a VM for web development. All in one machine. Then my desktops/laptops are relatively low powered and let my server do all the work. What was old is new again.

      --
      "Some books contain the machinery required to create and sustain universes."-Tycho
    12. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by danudwary · · Score: 1

      Steam is works extremely well with an Xbox controller.

    13. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by vux984 · · Score: 1

      if you're going to stream games from your gaming PC then the client doesn't have to be powerful enough to run those games so you spend your money on one decent game server and cheap low-end client(s).

      Except nobody really WANTS to use a 'game server'; its merely a means to an end. That being able to play windows games on linux/steamboxes.

      The target market will definitely prefer direct support for linux/steamboxes over having to use a gaming server.

      However, the capability of using windows as a game server enables linux/steambox to get the installed base it needs to become a viable directly supported platform.

      Meanwhile we don't really know where microsoft is heading. Subscription based OS? App-store-lockin unless you buy "Ultimate with developer keys and MSDN subscription"? In OS advertising? If a viable alternative gaming platform existed and was widely deployed there might be a lot of gamers more than willing to upgrade their steambox video card to play a new game than upgrade their windows gaming server.

    14. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Yup - I spent all of a few minutes messing with this streaming from Windows to a Linux box. This linux box has decent RAM/CPU, but the video card probably cost me all of $20 (or maybe it is integrated - I forget offhand but you get the picture). It struggles just to play 1080p video.

      I found the streaming reasonably decent. It would be fine for turn-based games like Civilization, or even RTS. It might be a bit more wanting for FPS, but it probably would be usable.

      Having this feature would definitely be a selling point if I wanted to think about buying a steambox. It would mean that my windows-only games would suddenly be more playable from the living room.

    15. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Except nobody really WANTS to use a 'game server'; its merely a means to an end. That being able to play windows games on linux/steamboxes.

      By the same token nobody WANTS to run Windows or Linux or OS X, they are merely a means to an end which - in this case - is to play games.

      The target market will definitely prefer direct support for linux/steamboxes over having to use a gaming server.

      So just install Windows on your steambox and you have can eliminate the game server completely AND get the full game library.

      Meanwhile we don't really know where microsoft is heading.

      You don't know where Valve is heading with their proprietary Steam platform either.

    16. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by vux984 · · Score: 1

      By the same token nobody WANTS to run Windows or Linux or OS X, they are merely a means to an end which - in this case - is to play games.

      Missing the point. Nobody wants 2 devices to do the job of one.

      So just install Windows on your steambox and you have can eliminate the game server completely AND get the full game library.

      Those that want to go that route will just buy / build windows PCs.

      Meanwhile, the fact that they ship with linux and will have valves marketing/sales muscle behind them mean that there will likely be a huge pile of installed Linux boxes in the nearish future.

      Its silly to pretend that won't entice some development for the platofrm.

      You don't know where Valve is heading with their proprietary Steam platform either.

      Of course I don't. I am not even a huge fan of steam. I prefer to buy from GoG and HumbleBundle for the real DRM free options available (and I get most of my steam keys by that route vs directly from steam).

      But your right, its certainly possible that Steam will shoot itself in the foot and go off the rails. But if it does the cool thing about both linux and windows (at least so far) is that other competing stores can and do show up and you can use your hardware with them. If steam implodes, so what?

      But just having steam setting up its little steambox project waiting in the wings for Microsoft to shoot ITSELF in the foot may even be the pressure microsoft needs to avoid going completley off the rails itself. The real threat gamers actually theoretically could just en masse migrate off the Windows platform to "linux/valve" -- that might well be enough to keep Microsoft's worst ideas in check; and maybe even motivate them to go a bit out of their originally planned way to make sure Windows remains the best platform for games.

    17. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Missing the point. Nobody wants 2 devices to do the job of one.

      Which is why they can just use 1 Windows PC.

      Meanwhile, the fact that they ship with linux and will have valves marketing/sales muscle behind them mean that there will likely be a huge pile of installed Linux boxes in the nearish future.

      You really think people are going to pay hundreds of dollars for a steambox just to stream content from their PC to their TV? This concept is just a value-add, Valve needs to make the steambox a compelling standalone product for people to buy it.

      Its silly to pretend that won't entice some development for the platofrm.

      That's what people said about Ouya too. Just because it exists doesn't mean people are going to use it.

    18. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by JonJ · · Score: 1

      Who gives a shit about OS X and Linux?

      You're on slashdot, so I'm going to guess quite a lot of people.

      --
      -- Linux user #369862
    19. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Which is why they can just use 1 Windows PC.

      Except I need a PC in my office; and I still want to play games in the living room. I still need a total of 2 devices; but I don't want to have to involve both of them to play a game if I can avoid it.

      You really think people are going to pay hundreds of dollars for a steambox just to stream content from their PC to their TV? This concept is just a value-add,

      Agreed.

      Valve needs to make the steambox a compelling standalone product for people to buy it.

      Agreed.

      That's what people said about Ouya too. Just because it exists doesn't mean people are going to use it.

      That's worlds apart.

      The ouya is a new product, starting from near 0.

      The steambox will already as-in right now today before its even been properly released run a substantial subset of Steam's library directly. And you can get access to the rest via streaming. So any gamer who has a 100+ games and a windows gaming PC can buy a steambox and play a chunk of them directly on it, and can stream the rest from his pc.

      The PC gamer considering a steambox will ask which of my games can I use it with, and the answer will be "all of them".

      That is definitely going to help get its foot in the door. Its a reasonably compelling platform already, and its not even released.

      The ONLY thing it can do is increase the viability of linux as a direct target for game development.* The ONLY question is how well will it sell. If it sells a lot, then its a no brainer for game devs to target it.

      And I think it has the potential to sell a lot, because unlike say Ouya or other alternatives it is just a regular PC under the hood, and it will run ones entire steam library (one way or another).

      * on two fronts -- first by simply expanding the number of installed linux gaming pcs in the world; secondly by giving game developers a distro to target and some hardware profiles to provide official support for.

    20. Re:SteamBox just got really interesting by exomondo · · Score: 1

      I take your point but I still think the biggest problem in getting them into homes is going to be price.

      As you say the value proposition is being able to stream your existing library to your loungeroom which may be enticing for the average gamer who isn't too interested in anything requiring a keyboard & mouse (a control system that isn't really suited to couch play) but at the cost of a few hundred dollars that may not be particularly attractive or justifiable.

      Then there is the hardcore gamer market but realistically they're more likely to dump that extra few hundred into new hardware than a streaming device.

      Lastly you have the casual game market - the one Ouya went after - but with a relatively high price and a small library that isn't going to go well either.

      Maybe you're right and this will push Linux gaming system adoption past the tipping point, but I wouldn't hold my breath on that.

  5. Fuck yea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Valve is the best thing to happen to gaming since slided bread.

  6. Re:yo dawg by Volguus+Zildrohar · · Score: 4, Funny

    My pro tip of the day: if the machine is steaming, don't even take it out of the store.

    --
    When confronted with one problem, some think "I'll use recursion". Now they are confronted with one problem.
  7. Keyboard and Mouse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I struggle to see myself playing on the couch with a keyboard and mouse which I use for most PC games. The exception might be car racing games or arcade fighting games where a controller might come in handy. Make that a couple of controllers so a mate can join in. Game makers would need to add support back in for split screen.

    1. Re:Keyboard and Mouse by Harlequin80 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I actually approached this differently. I built an over the top gaming rig which had loads of noisy fans in it, was a power pig, and was physically large. Previously that would have sat under my desk in the main family living area and made it sound like a vacuum was running all the time. I used to use that for everything from games through the surfing the web. Now I stuck it in a rack I keep in my garage and I have a low power pc sat on my desk that is passively cooled 90% of the time. Wake on lan is configured and when I want to play games - click - wait 2 mins and I'm off.

    2. Re:Keyboard and Mouse by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Bunch of games have controller support and the steam controller should take care of many of the rest.

    3. Re:Keyboard and Mouse by aliquis · · Score: 1

      The actual Steam controller will come from Steam and was announced together with SteamOS so I'd say you can be 100% sure the Steam controller will be supported in SteamOS.

      Also the Xbox 360 controller is what most people use and while I don't know whatever the drivers work exactly the same at least it should work in Linux too.

      Personally I would want to use the Xbox One controller since I think it feels awesome, I just wish it was like 10-15% bigger.

      As for FPS one solution is of course to not play them on the TV. Personally I'd want good immersion for such a game I believe so hence really big screen or sit closer. What I want is one of those 34" 21:9 screens but with IPS and Adaptive-Sync (higher refresh rate support would be nice too.)

      I also thought about a controller of my own, which would be similar to the analogue joystick of the Wii but possibly with a flat stick or a indented ball design similar to a track ball but with springs together with some buttons for the rest of the fingers.

      The idea was to combine that with the mouse for analogue stick + mouse gaming where the mouse do the aiming.

      Why? Because there's some response time for key board presses and you can't say "walk forward and strafe a little", it's either on or off.

      So obviously analogue is much better. (I hate trying to play platform games with keyboard. Likely worse than old digital joysticks.)

      The disadvantages with the game pads vs mouse is likely that the mouse is more accurate. And the combination of keyboard + mouse gives you a hell of a lot of buttons but I'd be ok with ditching that.

      Reminds me Razer had some weird controller? Was it supposed to replace the mouse or complement the mouse? Maybe that's what I'm looking for? =P

  8. i hope someday vavle acquires EA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    and fires every mother fucking one of them with the absolute minimum severance required by law

    and the executives die of cancer

    1. Re:i hope someday vavle acquires EA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Minimum severance is zero. Severance is a "how much do we have to pay you so you promise you don't sue?" arrangement.

  9. Tried it! by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is a pretty nice feature they added. It's much better than VNC or any other remote desktop software I've tried. About my only complaint was the mouse was a bit laggy running Skyrim.

    But seeing Skyrim stream pretty much flawlessly to computer than can BARELY play 1080p videos without some chop was pretty amazing.

    +1 Steam ^.^

    1. Re:Tried it! by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      I saw the steam update, but didn't realise what it did. This sounds great! Often my wife wants to use my computer for TV and stuff, because her laptop isn't that great. Unfortunately, I can't split the sound so that she can watch netflix on the TV, while I am playing too, but this might work out well, if she can watch TV while I stream the game to the lappy.

      For some reason the lappy doesn't do a great job of connecting up to the TV screen, but I'm happy playing games on it.

  10. I tested it in beta by wbr1 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I tested from win 7 to win 7. I have my semi-big gaming/office rig, and streamed to a late model P4 with no GPU of note (chipset intel), that I used as a storage box/htpc in my bedroom. I could stream skyrim pretty much full blast well, however I did notice a reduction in quality. It varied, but there was sometimes lag (quite possibly poor wifi and the woeful nature of an old p4 struggling with windows 7) and obvious compression artifacts, but for the most part it was well playable. One side note is that when it launched on my other PC, I could hear the audio from it, so at least at that point in the beta it wasn't muting the source machine audio. If you left big speakers on 11 that could be an issues, but hopefully it is fixed now. I did not test it long as I rebuilt my main rig, and the old one became my bedroom htpc, and had plenty of horsepower to play without streaming. All in all I think a good feature with many use cases.

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
    1. Re:I tested it in beta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Playing via a WiFi connection is definitely a no-no. Through a cable you can get a latency of way under a millisecond, whereas on WiFi you typically get on average anywhere between 5 to 35 milliseconds. This would mean that even on in a best case scenario you would still get a mouse lag five times the lag compared to a cable connection.

    2. Re:I tested it in beta by hidden · · Score: 2

      Valve actually SPECIFICALLY recommends against using wifi. Good old copper wires are very much the way to go in a low latency/high bandwidth application like this.

    3. Re:I tested it in beta by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 1

      Well, on my wireless I get 2ms latency, that's usable. Depends on your wifi equipment, how many other signals are around you and such, I think.

      PING braveheart (10.0.0.5) 56(84) bytes of data.
      64 bytes from braveheart (10.0.0.5): icmp_req=1 ttl=128 time=2.27 ms
      64 bytes from braveheart (10.0.0.5): icmp_req=2 ttl=128 time=1.92 ms
      64 bytes from braveheart (10.0.0.5): icmp_req=3 ttl=128 time=1.86 ms
      64 bytes from braveheart (10.0.0.5): icmp_req=4 ttl=128 time=1.89 ms
      64 bytes from braveheart (10.0.0.5): icmp_req=5 ttl=128 time=1.37 ms
      64 bytes from braveheart (10.0.0.5): icmp_req=6 ttl=128 time=1.40 ms
      64 bytes from braveheart (10.0.0.5): icmp_req=7 ttl=128 time=1.90 ms
      64 bytes from braveheart (10.0.0.5): icmp_req=8 ttl=128 time=1.80 ms
      64 bytes from braveheart (10.0.0.5): icmp_req=9 ttl=128 time=1.98 ms
      64 bytes from braveheart (10.0.0.5): icmp_req=10 ttl=128 time=1.83 ms
      ^C
      --- braveheart ping statistics ---
      10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9013ms
      rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.374/1.826/2.278/0.255 ms

    4. Re:I tested it in beta by wbr1 · · Score: 1

      They may recommend, but I do not own my place and cannot run copper through the walls. Ergo... wifi. The source machine was wired direct to the router though.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    5. Re:I tested it in beta by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      They may recommend, but I do not own my place and cannot run copper through the walls.

      One doesn't necessarily mean the other.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:I tested it in beta by SplatMan_DK · · Score: 1

      That has slightly more latency than actual Ethernet though ...

      --
      My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
    7. Re:I tested it in beta by dj245 · · Score: 1

      I also don't own my own place, but I have found clever solutions over the years. When I lived in places with hot water heating, I would drill small holes under the radiators. These are unnoticeable if they are drilled within the safety shroud / housing of the radiator. Be extremely careful not to nick a water pipe.

      Currently the place I rent has forced hot air. My router is in the basement but I have a PC on the main level. Forced air registers are fitted into appropriately-sized rectangular holes cut into the floors. However, the holes are not perfect, and are slightly oversized. I managed to sneak a CAT6 wire through this space. The space was small enough that I had to run the wire THEN crimp a connector on the end. I was prepared (but didn't need to) drill a hole directly in the air duct- when you move out, just tape it over with silver tape. Furnace maintenance people do this drill-and-tape trick commonly when they test natural gas units for CO/CO2.

      Depending on the heating arrangement, this kind of solution may not be possible. However, in many cases, some creative thinking can find a non-destructive path for a temporary wire.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  11. Re:yo dawg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Because computers aren't supposed to emit steam.

  12. Re:yo dawg by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Funny

    Because computers aren't supposed to emit steam.

    It could be a Valve problem.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  13. A prelude to cloud gaming by DrXym · · Score: 2

    It should be pretty obvious this is what Valve is aiming with all this stuff. I'm sure some of the twitchiest games are unsuitable for streaming but the vast bulk would play just fine. If SteamOS survives at all as a platform it'll probably be as a stick like device which streams games from somewhere else.

  14. No controller support yet by Rah'Dick · · Score: 1

    The streaming part works perfectly fine, even over slower Wifi. Gamepads aren't recognized on the remote side, though - tried Sonic Generations and my gamepad didn't show up in the config.

    Sooo, Valve... could we have controller support for streaming, too? Pretty please? :-)

    1. Re:No controller support yet by IllogicalStudent · · Score: 1

      The streaming part works perfectly fine, even over slower Wifi. Gamepads aren't recognized on the remote side, though - tried Sonic Generations and my gamepad didn't show up in the config.

      Sooo, Valve... could we have controller support for streaming, too? Pretty please? :-)

      FWIW - Haven't had an ounce of grief using either a wired or wireless (with dongle) 360 pad on the client machine since back in Feb. with the beta (Win7 serv. --> Win8 client). Mind you, I do have the controller drivers installed on both machines (and in the case of the wireless pad, have a dongle attached to each -- they're $8 on amazon) -- maybe that's the trick?

      --
      But Maaa! Everyone else has a .sig !
    2. Re:No controller support yet by dpidcoe · · Score: 1

      It's because you don't have the controller setup properly on the host PC. I have a little logitech PS3 controller clone that requires the x360ce program in order for most games to recognize it. During the beta I noticed that a game that worked on my htpc didn't work when streaming it from my desktop. I added the x360ce stuff to my desktop (which has never had a controller plugged into it) and installed the controller drivers there and that fixed it.

  15. hoping for a ARM build by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    i would be really nice if there was an ARM build of the program that way you can use raspberry pi as a viewer.

    The Raspberry pi supports H.264 decoding so hardware wise it should be able to do it. Now its just waiting for the software

  16. Re:Next to the TV by SplatMan_DK · · Score: 1

    This would require working video decoding equipment for DRM protected content in an open architecture (PC) on an open operating system (Linux).

    In other words: Won't happen; sadly.

    They (Valve) could have included a DVD player and DLNA player though. I am quite surprised they didn't.

    --
    My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
  17. Any comments on the latency? by Daniel+Hoffmann · · Score: 1

    Can I play competitive FPSs well on this?

    Even if not this is still great, I can now play civ5 on my old laptop on my bed. Any information if this works well over wifi or do we need ethernet?

    1. Re:Any comments on the latency? by IllogicalStudent · · Score: 1

      WiFi at N600 speeds or better should be fine for something like civ. Latency gets annoying over WiFi anything (even AC) if you're playing a twitch shooter, but yeah, it's doable.

      --
      But Maaa! Everyone else has a .sig !
    2. Re:Any comments on the latency? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      WiFi at N600 speeds or better should be fine for something like civ.

      Given how slow Civ is on a modern gaming rig, dial up should be fine for streaming Civ in real time.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.