Slashdot Mirror
Windows 10 App For Xbox One Could Render Steam Machines Useless
SlappingOysters writes: The release of Windows 10 has brought with it the Xbox app -- a portal through which you can stream anything happening on your Xbox One to your Surface or desktop. Finder is reporting that the love will go the other way, too, with a PC app coming to the Xbox One allowing you to stream your desktop to your console. But where does this leave the coming Steam Machines? This analysis shows how such an app could undermine the Steam Machines' market position.
Those vapors could be bad for you.
I am not your blowing wind, I am the lightning.
To all retailers that have warehouses full of Steam machines ready to be sold like hotcakes.
Oh wait...
Steam machine is just that: steam.
Great move by Microsoft.
No one has gotten streaming one machine to another to work anywhere near as well as just running on native hardware.
Yeah I'm sure all those Steam Machines will be completely useless, because every game is on Xbox for a reasonable price.
They probably mean redundant. Having an alternative doesn't make something useless.
Can Steam Machines run Windows 10?
E.C.P.
is only what, $50 compared to $350 for an Xbox One? If you're looking for PC -> TV streaming that will be far more economical than buying an Xbox.
Steam Boxes have always had questionable value, they aren't going to be as efficient as consoles and do you really want that gaming PC in your living room?
"Finder is reporting that the love will go the other way, too, with a PC app coming to the Xbox One allowing you to stream your desktop to your console."
I understand it's not normal to RTFA, but to not even read the summary?
now let me play games on my PC via my xbox one. Kerbal space program, dont starve, etc... Then it's competition.
Literally the second sentence in the summary.
According to Phil Spencer, the head of Xbox, that's coming too in an incoming Xbox update in the near future, and with it Keyboard and Mouse support for the console.
No, the whole point of Steam Machines is so that Steam can survive Windows. If the best streaming experience for Steam winds up being through Xbox One, I don't think they will care all that much. Steam Machines exist primarily because Windows 8 onward aren't a level playing field. Applications sold through Windows Store get special APIs (like a UI toolkit that isn't a horribly bad abomination) that non-Store apps aren't allowed to use. And Steam can't sell applications using the Windows Store APIs since those kinds of applications are installed by the TrustedInstaller account, which has privileges above and beyond normal administrative accounts in Windows. I have seen no indication that this situation has changed in version 10.
How could this possibly affect Valve?
Did you even read the summary? They announced an app for XBox One that lets you stream you PC games to your console.
Will. If I wanted to stream PC games to another box and I had the choice between streaming to a box that plays exactly those games and nothing more (a steam machine) or plays all those games and some console exclusive games (an XBone,) I'd go with the latter every time.
As is my gaming desktop is already hooked up to my TV so I'm not in the market for either, but if I were it would be a no-brainer, especially if they're around the same price or the XBone is cheaper.
Why exactly do people expect this to take off? I don't want an xbox one and frankly would not be that interested in streaming any game to another machine. Considering Microsoft's rather big flops of Windows 8, Windows phone, and hell even the Zune, I anticipate this to have poor appeal to the masses.
Steam machines were predicated on a functional SteamOS, which has spent a year in beta. barring that, Valves pet project of running steam on linux ran arground when AMD graphics drivers for linux were revealed to be completely useless. nvidias blob seemed to work well but Valves blockbuster titles on linux remain seriously limited when compared to their Windows ecosystem. maybe this windows 10 feature will be enough to spur additional development resources into the platform, instead of just treading water in the linux pool.
That having been said, microsofts sharing technology isnt about to kill Valves distribution model. Valve distributes titles like Dont Starve and other inexpensive, very fun indie games to a multitude of platforms that are not consoles. MS is also banking on a large assumption that PC gamers and console gamers are inextricably intertwined...the "pc gamer master race" meme is enough to think otherwise. Windows 10 is a free upgrade, but if you're already a steam gamer the games still run. if you're a console gamer, an upgrade to windows 10 might not be in your wheelhouse if youre an ardent call of duty madden or fifa enthusiast (that PC might be ancient.)
Finally, Redmonds XBox is the revenue jumper cable that keeps cringe-worthy projects like phone and surface alive. Its not something thats going to find cross-platform marketshare outside of their usual blockbuster exclusives. console gamers and windows 10 gamers already share titles by virtue of Microsofts initiative to port their big titles between platforms and in some cases those platforms offer enormous advantages that the other does not. Playing xbox from a PC means, for example, some titles lose half their framerate or adopt other console-specific eccentricities the player might not want.
Good people go to bed earlier.
I expect only a minority of people have their game consoles hard wired, and trying to stream high definition real-time video over WiFi in a moderately populated area is probably going to be painful.
I'm not sure I understand why this would make steam machines useless. The main value of a steam machine, as I see it, is that it allows you to have the convenience of a console in what is essentially a generic gaming PC. That is, it has a controller and a GUI aimed at connecting it to a TV and not using a keyboard or mouse, but it's not a locked-down console. It's just generic hardware that will play all of your PC games, and those games don't become obsolete and unplayable when you upgrade to the next generation.
The article says:
if you can use your Xbox One to play your PC on your TV, then your Xbox One can use Steam and effectively become a Steam Machine.
So what they're saying is, if you have a PC running Steam (which is really all a "Steam Machine" is) and an XBox One, then it's kind of the same as having a Steam Machine. Yes, it is... because you're starting with the scenario where you have a Steam machine. It's like saying, "There's no reason to buy a car, since if I already own a car and I buy a bicycle, it's like owning a car!"
Look, you shouldn't assume that I want an XBox. I can get a PC with better graphics and avoid being locked into Microsoft's ecosystem. I can install game mods, my games don't all go unnecessarily obsolete with every new generation of PC, Steam often has very good sales, Steam doesn't make me pay a monthly subscription for online services, and I can use that PC for other things if I like. To me, the only thing that would want me to buy a console at this point is if there were an exclusive game that I really wanted to play, and I've found that I can live without it. I don't want an XBox, so it doesn't make sense to me to say, "If you buy a Steam machine and an XBox, then it's like having a Steam machine!" I'll just buy a Steam machine, thank you, even if it's not a branded "Steam Machine".
....Does it play steam games? No? Then steam has nothing to worry about. Most of us will buy a steam machine to add to our console collection, anyway. Speaking for myself, I usually wind up buying all three major consoles at some point, usually once the price has gone down a bit. Adding one more isn't that big a deal.
Why would a streaming XBox make a steam machine irrelevant?
The $50 streaming device from Valve makes the XBox+App irrelevant: Steam Link Streaming Box
Love sees no species.
I know it doesn't apply to everyone, but a 35' HDMI cable rendered all steam machines useless in my household and a few others that I know of.
I'm planning to at some point get an AIO or laptop, install SteamOS on it and run my Steam games. Running Steam games on Windows - sometimes, in the middle of a move, it randomly leaves the application and goes to the Windows desktop. Don't like doing that
Well they are taking a bloody long enough to come out with it. It should be called IceOS not SteamOS.
There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
Game streaming isn't steam machine's killer feature but a temporary workaround for games that don't have native linux port yet. So anything else matching it wouldn't make it any more or less useful than it already is.
I guess Gabe Newel wasn't born when the 3DO came out and learned nothing from its failure.
Plus, I don't have an XBOX.
Valve shouldn't even bother to release it.
It's too expensive, it's too underpowered, and it the game selections is comparatively weak.
Honestly, why would I buy a SteamBox instead of a PS4? To play a bunch of low-budget indie games? Those are fun, but I can already play those on my PC.
Somebody at Microsoft trying to breed a FUD strategy ("Don't buy SteamBoxes now, there's better 'planned in Microsoft's pipeline', it's gonna be much better: you'll see once it's there (eventually) you won't regret this, you're going to like it !).
Hmm..... I'm sure I've heard such stratgies before....
Where did it come from last time? Oh, yeah, from microsoft!
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
SteamOS today can access non-game linux apps directly from the steam interface such Blender. If the non-game apps on Steam aren't enough, enable and go to the GNOME desktop and do your job there.
The point of Steam Machines is to get rid of Windows and MS... so how does Windows 10 help with that?
Also... you can already plug your video card into your TV. You've been able to do that for over 10 years with a $10 extra long HDMI or Display port cable.
If you want it wireless, there are devices that do that for about $100
If you want a real "Stream" or shared desktop, Chrome Cast can do games now and the dongles $29
Also... this story hit a day or two ago... on pretty much every "Pay to play" tech website out there at the same time. In other words, this is a paid Microsoft commercial we've been duped into reading. Thanks Slashdot, you're really going down the tubes.
Sorry, the xbox app is not a steam killer it's just a streaming app. People run PC Games because #1 they are cheap, #2 they can run at higher settings.
How can a 350$ game console render a free SteamOS useless?
I don't understand this whole fixation on "streaming"... connect your PC to your living room TV and be done with it.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
...Microsoft is utterly uninterested in cannibalizing Xbox and have been absolutely incompetent at PC gaming. See all their previous botched "we mean it this time" Games For Windows initiatives. Maybe they should name it "Plays For Sure" this time around.
Microsoft abandoned Games for Windows Live because it could not compete - even plugged into exclusive AAA-rated games, people hated it and then developers started REMOVING it from games that already had it.
Let's not even mention that many of the old Microsoft games are on Steam already. They could have easily made those XBox / Windows exclusive, but then they'd have precisely zero of the profit they see now.
Sorry, but MS is not a threat in the gaming arena. With Desura dead and Origin what it is, there's only one serious player and a handful of minors when it comes to PC gaming. Steam already has all the features necessary to stream to or even run on consoles (it already does, no?), and there's more tiny cheap devices to do just that en-route.
I bet Steam make more in a year than Games For Windows Live ever did.
Try hitting CTRL+ALT+F1
One of the big differences between several games for PC and their ports to Sony and Microsoft set-top boxes is lack of support in the latter for the backtick/tilde key. To put it memorably, you can't get a console on a console.
generally if you have a "gaming computer" you're going to want to use it directly over any other device even if streaming were perfect.
True for single-player or online play, not so much if the game supports local multiplayer. At this point, you'd want to either A. put your gaming PC in the living room or B. stream the game from your gaming PC to the device connected to the TV. Otherwise, you're all stuck crowding around a desk.
If Microsoft created a render server (think OnLive on the LAN) where I can have a box stuffed full of GPUs, and machines on the LAN send it the graphics commends, and get real time streaming video back, then I'd be worried about Steam machines.
This setup? Not so much.
Sell a USB steam stick which works with the controller and allows remote / cloud play (i.e. from another PC in the house or Valve's own servers) and some other stuff like Netflix, Youtube etc. MSRP, maybe $80. Very few people are going to buy a full blown PC running a custom Linux in order to play a subset of games.
I admit to not knowing much about the steam machine, but at least at superficially it bears little resemblance to the 3DO (were *you* born when it came out?). A significant problem with the 3DO was an incompletely spec'd system. Its been too long and I'm too old to remember the name of it, but one of the better 3DO games suffered from this. Naturally, my console was made by a manufacturer that used a CD drive that was unable to load files above a certain size. Which meant that at a certain point the game hung/crashed (I forget which) trying to load a level. The game vendor released a level skipping code (likely left in from dev/testing) to keep customers okay.
That right there was a symptom of a significant problem. In theory each 3DO console was equivalent regardless of the backend manufacturer. But it was, regrettably, only theory.
The 3DO (which had great games) suffered from being the "new kid in town" without any master. You had the 3DO company which licensed the hardware/logo, but they had no overall control. Atari fought hard against the 3DO with the jaguar and won a Pyrrhic victory. Nor should it be forgotten that the games were distributed via normal CD-ROM resulting in widespread piracy. Now, piracy is generally just a part of business (no matter how much they might complain), but what was different about the 3DO was that it was trivial for Americans to personally pirate the games rather than "alternate distributors" largely limited to overseas outlets.
For a similar story, compare to CDi (I met a guy who had one and he loved it, but Philips was nuts trying to get into the console business). They didn't have the hardware fragmentation issue, but were definitely fighting an uphill battle as a new comer.
Steam isn't about to be blind-sided by any piracy issue. They are not a new comer to the market and do more than the 3DO company ever did. They are using commodity hardware rather than a hybrid design (mixing commodity with custom).
Maybe the steam machine will be flop. But if so, it will have nothing to do with the 3DO's failure (or CDi)
Steam Machines where useless even before Windows 10.
Functionally the majority of the Steam Machines are over priced pre-built PCs. For those wishing play PC games on their big screen you're better off streaming through a laptop, Chromecast, building your own machine or even buying a XBox One since its cheaper than most of the Steam Machines https://www.vg247.com/2015/03/06/steam-machine-prices-from-480-all-the-way-up-to-5000/
That Steam Machines don't require an XBox One. I don't own any of these current gen consoles and never will. I have a much more powerful HTPC than an XBox One that runs Steam OS, has enough ports for an 8 man couch multiplayer session, has 2TB of disk space, with a better graphics card, better ram, and complete open-ness to install whatever I want.
The existence of a rival product does not make another product useless.
Unless of course it's a social network or something.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Well, except for those of us who would never own a M$ console...
They announced an app for XBox One that lets you stream you PC games to your console.
Huh, no. It's the other way around.
- The thing anounced, that's coming is a way to stream games from the Xbox to windows 10 powered devices like tablets, laptops and/or desktops.
- The reverse direction PC tower streaming to living-room console (the same as stream) doesn't exist yet. It's not even being really developed yet.
For those who haven't been around for the last ~3 decades, that's usually MS-marketing speak for "We didn't see that one comming, but we'll pretend we're consider to evaluate public interest for that. Let's pretend that we'll make one to see if we can catch back the lost attention. If press and general interest seem to catch on, tell everyone that we actually did develop it and that we're about to publish it, any time soon.".
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.. That bloated poor excuse for a OS will replace the Steam Box? HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA.
Yes, I was 16 when the 3DO came out. Also, I know that some great franchises, like NFS, started on 3DO.
From a business and financial standpoint, the 3DO and Steam machine are pretty much identical.
On the hardware front, company A creates the design, builds a prototype, and licenses the technology so companies B, C, D, and E manufacture it and assume all the risks and costs in the supply chain (manufacturing, sales, etc.) while company A laughs all the way to the bank to cash the licensing fee checks.
On the software front, company A builds a middleware in which games will run, and sells licenses so that companies W, X, Y, Z can write games for said machine while assuming all risk and costs associated with game development. Meanwhile, company A laughs all the way to the bank to cash those licensing fee checks. At least, Valve also has its delivery system to avoid inventory and shipping expenses.
No wonder hardware builders that signed up for this never went past the prototype stage.
Great! Now I can buy FF Type0 on the XBone for $37 and play it on my pc, instead of buying it for $10 less!
Oh wait...
Great! Now I can stream my XBone games to my linux machine!
Oh wait...
I don't really know how Microsoft could undermine Steam Machines in anyway other than installing Windows 10 on the Xbox and getting rid of Xbox only development.
Who the hell is 'finder.com.au' ?
How exactly does this affect the steam box, who's entire purpose is to be a home console pc hybrid. the streaming feature is great, but a secondary addon and not the sole reason to own this device.
Without reading TFA I'd also wonder what they mean by "stream". Stream video streams over to other devices? Who cares?? Unless we're talking the same game streaming that the steambox will offer (steam already does for some users I believe) in which you can stream the game to another device and PLAY it on that device.
I'd have to assume MS is going after that angle too.
Steam = tested architecture, stable community
MS Games = a shit show from day 1.
I know where my money is going (neither)
Originally they would specify three different configurations of hardware, giving software devs a target to test for. Now the specs are up to third parties, negating the advantage of being sure a Steam game would work upon release.
They could have consoleized PCs, giving people a plug and play experience with games that were tuned with default settings giving a guaranteed level of performance for the three teirs of boxes people could choose. Not only that, it could give developers a specific testing environment for their native Linux/SteamOS versions, and could have simplified things by providing a similar base of hardware for devs which could then more easily resolve issues.
Twinstiq, game news
The hardware is basically just a PC. Lot's of companies already build PCs. Lot's of people build their own PCs. Building a PC is not a risky business venture.
The software is just a linux application. As long as you don't right your games in a relatively platform independent way (e.g. don't use directx), then porting the game to other platforms including steamos should be relatively easy. Even if you didn;t bother making a platform independent game, there are companies who basically only port games as their business model.
People don't (or at least shouldn't) develop games for a "said machine" anymore. There are certainly still risks associated with game development, but it should no longer be related to the machines(s) the game is running on.
A lot has changed since the 3DO came out. Both in hardware and software
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
How is tying up a Console and a PC better than having one machine with a larger library?
Nvidia supports streaming from the PC to all kinds of stuff. Moonlight(formerly limelight) is an open source android client for Nvidia geforce experience streaming and works well on my 19 dollar Fire Stick attached to my TV, and on both my samsung phones. Steam big picture mode works great.
Are you saying that one player in a two player game is going to be on the PC and the other on the XBox?
No, I'm saying that both people are going to be in the same room, looking at the Xbox's monitor.
If this is split screen gaming you're talking about
Not all shared-screen gaming is split-screen. Bomberman, Smash TV, and Street Fighter aren't split. Rampart is split, but only to the extent that each player fires from his own territory on one side of the river to his opponent's territory on the other.
WTF would you want to play that on a gaming PC without two controllers (e.g., a DualShock or XBox controller paired with the PC).
You're right that two players would need two controllers. I'll assume this streaming solution also forwards XInput to allow use of the Xbox's controllers with the PC game.
Honestly, I don't get why you would want to stream the game either direction locally unless one set of controls was better
Perhaps streaming is easier to do in some households than packing up the gaming PC and moving it into the TV room.
I can get XBox games on my PC right now, for the most part. They're in Microsoft store, they're on Origin, et cetera.
I go to Steam because it's easy to find funky stuff and there's always a sale.
The XBox app won't change that.
StoneCypher is Full of BS
then porting the game to other platforms including steamos should be relatively easy
that is a massive simplification of the game development process.
and yet it is not an over-simplification.
A SteamBox has nothing to do with W10. There is no reason to own an Xbox one except for exclusive titles, of which MSFT only has a few. The SteamBox means MSFT is not pushing ads at you, not collecting your data, not sharing your WiFi passwords and no micro-transacting your Solitaire.
Utter and complete BS.
Not after playing with Win10 for the last day and a half. This isn't running smooth at all, the app store is down more than it's up (fair enough, everyone will be hitting it hard for updates, but even so, timeouts for this? odd for MS to not have the machine/bandwidth, unless it's others trying to mess MS about). At this point, to just have a box that plays games without having to fix windows permissions/dcom/registry tweaks, and connect upto the gaming rig that's doing nothing but run steam? I'm tempted.
Waiting for an amusing sig.
A lot of people are sick of Microsoft's stranglehold. While I like the xbox, I'm looking forward to steam machines as they provide a decent alternative. I think a lot of other gamers feel the same way. The last thing I want is the ugliness of Metro on my TV! Also sick of the endless upgrade cycle with microsoft. Oh you want to buy a console good, a few year's later they disable it from being able to play games online, the backwards compatibility sucks or isn't even there.
However, steam machines look like they'll provide a good alternative. Good multiplayer games, an online service that's very unlikely to go away and no forced upgrade cycle.
But the consoles today are essentially the same price as a mid-range PC
I see a PlayStation 4 console for $400. Which $400 "mid-range PC" can run games in comparable graphical detail to a PS4? Does the $400 include a graphics card and a lawfully made copy of Windows? Or are you planning on using integrated graphics and Steam OS instead?
Windows 10 as an alternative to something? I don't think so.
It's OK Bender, there's no such thing as 2.
Do you have an application that is stealing focus? There's a reg hack for that. Disable applications from stealing focus should be a search term that will bring up the required hack. There's a GUI way to accomplish this but I can not recall it.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
No, sometimes, while playing, it suddenly goes into the desktop, even though I didn't press the 'Windows' key
I'd try the reg hack anyhow. It can't hurt and some applications are pricks. Actually, when I think about it... Hmm... I think they took the reg hack out in 7 - anything newer is *supposed* to have a value of "0." Not the brightest move on Microsoft's part.
There is still a way around it and you can try it if you want - it can not hurt. It is in a strange place.
Control Panel
Ease of Access
Ease of Access Center
Make mouse easier to use
Uncheck activate window by hovering over it...
The cursor may be effecting things beyond the application due to piss poor design - this is not unknown and not entirely a rare bug in 7, 8, and 8.1. You can try it and hope for the best. It is checked by default - no idea why - and is silly. It may very well be the cause but may take a minute before you are sure if it is fixed.
I do not have the entire registry memorized... Really, I do not... ;) Anyhow, I can no longer recall a method of using the registry to change it after 7. I think the focus stealing was in Vista though. Lacking anything better, I would give the above a shot. It can not hurt.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
let me guess, you love to play games, and fancy yourself a geek because you know the specs of all the latest graphics cards ... but know nothing about software development or game development.
the proof is in the fact they games aren't ported unless there's an obvious revenue stream. if it was "easy" as setting some constant to "LINUX" they'd do that and make a few extra $. or, maybe all those game development studios and everyone employed therein are idiots and just waiting for someone with your insight on game development to enlighten them.
For $500.00 you can get a decent laptop with a good graphics card, a speedy processor, 500Gb platter hard-drive and 6 Gigs of ram (source: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/lenovo-15-6-laptop-amd-a8-series-6gb-memory-500gb-hard-drive-black/2996026.p?id=1219567191659&skuId=2996026). Or, for twice the amount you can get a Steam Machine with an i3 processor, half the ram, and a poor graphics card (source: http://www.dell.com/us/p/alienware-alpha/pd?oc=dkcwa01&model_id=alienware-alpha).
Face it, Steam took a great concept, but failed to create high standards of quality in components. Greedy manufacturers tried to create cheap desktop systems and hoped because of the Steam logo folks wouldn't notice. Now Steam is synonymous with crap consoles.
I don't really understand why you'd by a Steam Machine for streaming from another PC instead of the cheaper Steam Link
For people who live alone, I agree. But if you buy a Steam Machine, you can play Linux-compatible games while the primary PC is in use for non-Steam applications by another member of the household, and you can stream Windows-only games while the PC is available. A Steam Link allows only the latter use case.
plug your video card into your TV. You've been able to do that for over 10 years with a $10 extra long HDMI or Display port cable.
In a previous comment, adolf complained that that solution is prone to ground loops.
I have been a software engineer for almost 11 years, writing high level code to kernel modules, and even some assembly. I write code that works on windows, linux, realtime/safety critical systems.
the proof is in the fact they games aren't ported unless there's an obvious revenue stream.
Lot's of games are just designed to be cross platform from the start, so they don't require a separate porting effort. They just need to be designed at an abstract enough level to allow tools like unity to do the platform dependent parts.
if it was "easy" as setting some constant to "LINUX" they'd do that and make a few extra $
It's as easy as designing games in a platform independent manner to begin with.
Furthermore a lot of games already run in linux, and getting those games to run in steamOS is pretty trivial.