Valve Wants to Make PC a Better Entertainment Platform

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry, can't play without a keyboard and mouse.
Sorry, don't want to have a dedicated gaming device that does nothing else.
Sorry, if I wanted a console, I'd buy PS4 or Xbone.
 
Google for more information.

They aren't preventing you from using a KB+M... the controller is for your traditional console kiddie.

It's not a "gaming device that does nothing else". Hulu and Netflix will probably show up. You can also load Windows onto the machine.

I don't understand why people can't grasp the concept. It's not difficult to understand at all.
 
The point of having an OS and a certification (what makes it a Steam Box?) is that the developers will come to depend on some aspects of it. If developers find it hard to port the game for the PC and have decent controls (so called Consolitis), will they make games for Steam Box that work as well with both types of controls? Seriously doubt it. If Steam Boxes ship with controllers, games will be optimized for controllers and nothing else.
Hulu and Netflix were not the kind of things I was thinking about. I don't want to have one device for work and one device for games. If a Steam Box doesn't run Adobe and Autodesk software, it in fact does nothing else except play games.
And how can you load Windows onto the machine. Don't games need Steam OS to run? Do you mean booting with multiple OSes? How is that convenient?

This is crap, Valve is basically trying to compete with Microsoft and Sony and Nintendo (only give manufacturers and users some leeway on the exact specs of the consoles), and PC gaming is as good as dead if Steam Box takes off.
 
It's really no different than PC gaming has been. PC's have a wide range of hardware (MB, GPU, CPU). PC gaming still exists. And guess what, many games are already configured for KB+M or a controller. The SteamOS gives developers better access to the hardware to make better use of the resources.
What's wrong with booting multiple OS's? Windows 7 and 8 both boot in less than 30 seconds (especially with a decent SSD). So you're playing a game and decide to get some work done, you shut down SteamOS and boot into Windows. 30 seconds later you load whatever piece of software you want and continue on your merry way. It would probably take you 30 seconds to shut down your console, get up off your couch and move to where your desktop is anyway.
 
"Sorry, can't play without a keyboard and mouse.
Sorry, don't want to have a dedicated gaming device that does nothing else.
Sorry, if I wanted a console, I'd buy PS4 or Xbone."
1 You can use a kb/mouse.
2 Install Windows and its a PC, play steam like you always have.
3 Then buy one.


"If a Steam Box doesn't run Adobe and Autodesk software, it in fact does nothing else except play games.
And how can you load Windows onto the machine. Don't games need Steam OS to run? Do you mean booting with multiple OSes? How is that convenient?"

If dual-booting is inconvenient for you, just install windows and play games as you always have on steam big picture while still having access to all your other programs. Its a PC, its their Steam OS+ controller that make it different.
 
I just don't see how this is an attempt to make the PC a "better entertainment platform." You take this Steambox and SteamOS will run a small fraction of what an existing PC does, with no exclusive content, and likely slightly faster - and all under Valve's careful watch. If you ask "what does this do that a PC doesn't already?" you'll come up with a very short list, contrasted to a very long list of things current PC's do that anything with a Valve OS on it won't.

What does this lead me to believe? This is Valve's PR spin on them wanting to have a bigger piece of the PC pie, moving up from just a service they control completely to an operating system that they control.

SteamOS will be great for certain types of gamers who want to squeeze every last drop of power out of a machine for the games that SteamOS does play. Steamboxes will *possibly* be a good console alternative for people who want to play PC games. Making the PC a better entertainment platform though? Not really. The PC already does far more than SteamOS/Steamboxes will do, so I'd consider it more a step back for all but a very select group of gamers. Nice angle for Valve to sell it on though.
 
why is it so hard for people the get the concept behind this. IITS STILL A PC. its not proprietary hardware like a console , you can load a new vid card , cpu or even a new main board into it . you can install windows on it you erase the steam OS if you hate it or you can just run it as a full Linux system ITS NOT A CONSOLE, but it is a good step towards making PC gaming viable competition to the consoles.

(and before you blast me like an idiot , I don't mean competition powerwise I mean competition market wise. and Any PC fan would be an idiot to not acknowledge the fact that consoles definitely hold the bigger market share in gaming than PC.) and yes I play PC games almost exclusively so this is not just a console fan boy spouting fanboy BS. This is just a fact of life.
 
1. Do you think every game available for Steam OS will also be available for Windows?
2. Do you think developers who were/are reluctant to make PC games will be more or less likely to make PC games if Steam Boxes take off?
3. If they do make games for PC and Steam OS, what makes you think those games will be better ported to the other OS than those made for Xbox or PS4? The problems are usually connected to controls/UI and limitations of consoles.
4. What makes Steam Box a PC? That it runs a flavor of Linux? So does Android.
5. What's wrong with booting multiple OSes are those 30 seconds. I'm playing Hearts of Iron or making a mission in Arma3 on one display, while a video is playing on YouTube on another display. I get an email so I pause the game and read the email, then do something about the email, then just continue the game. Switching between games and other things takes half a second on Windows, but would take minutes (save/exit game + shut down + BIOS checks etc + boot) with dual booting. I got an SSD years ago because I don't want to wait for five seconds while a web browser loads, I'm certainly not going to wait 45 seconds to switch between OSes so I can do a few minutes of work.
 
@stevejnb

what you are not understanding is the fact that the steam box will be designed as a way to entice developers back to PC development. more developers = better entertainment potential. further more the steam box is a PC not a pc like device. it will do EVERYTHING a PC does or can do.
 
" IITS STILL A PC"
The fact that you can upgrade components doesn't make it a PC. There are various definitions of PC, but Steam OS looks like a Linux-based 100% console OS. The fact that I can install Windows on it doesn't really make it more viable as a PC, I already have a computer with Windows on it, so I don't need another one.

Steam Box is 100% console, and a clear attempt for Valve to compete with Xbox and PS. The fact that there's some leeway with customizing components actually detracts from its value as a gaming machine. Why does anyone think Valve can make an OS that is better at gaming than Windows? Do they have the track record? Does Linux have a good track record for gaming? No and no.

This is only about getting another console onto the market.
 
No Steam OS exclusives. http://www.gamespot.com/articles/half-life-3-will-not-be-exclusive-to-steam-os/1100-6415953/
 
No Steam OS exclusives. http://www.gamespot.com/articles/half-life-3-will-not-be-exclusive-to-steam-os/1100-6415953/
 


Oh no, I get that a Steambox is literally just a PC that comes pre-loaded with SteamOS and not Windows. Thing is, while it's possible to load Windows onto it, let's be real - a vast, vast majority of the people who dual boot machines are not going to buy some branded machine for their primary rigs any more than many people are buying $5000 Alienware machines and dual booting them with Linux. The people who do crap like that tend to build their own machines because they are enthusiasts and don't need or want someone to build them a machine at a markup. Valve knows this, which is why SteamOS is meant to appeal to the dual-booting-rig-making-PC-enthusiasts, and the Steamboxes are meant to appeal to the plug-and-play-buy-and-forget-console-gamers. It's not so much what the Steambox is capable of so much as who it's intended for and who will likely be interested in it that I'm making reference to. I mean, heck, you could put Linux on a PS3 last gen, but very few people took that option seriously. Steamboxes are an attempt to break into the living room, not onto the computer desk. SteamOS is more for the computer desk effort.

As for the whole "entice developers back to the PC"... Are you sure about that? Last time I checked, most of the developers listed that were interested in it were ones who were already developing on the PC. And think about it from a developer perspective... If you build a game for Steambox first rather than Windows, you immediately cut out a vast, vast, VAST majority of gamers your games could potentially reach. To me, this screams that developing games for Windows, which has hundreds of millions, maybe even billions, of potential gamers on it, seems a lot more likely to draw a developer in than a few paltry hundred thousand - or if they're lucky a few million - SteamOS users. What's more, you can develop a game under Steam's roof for Windows, but it seems unlikely you can develop a game for SteamOS that isn't on Steam - which immediately closes that door for developers who don't want to be under the watch of some major DRM company.

I'm curious to hear your case, but you've got a bit of talking to do to convince me that this SteamOS/Steambox thing is anything more than Valve's attempt to get total control of a gaming platform rather than some idealistic attempt to make things more wonderful for devs or gamers.

Could you further explain, Demon, how the Steambox is going to significantly entice developers to develop for the PC again? As far as I can tell, the biggest thrust in that direction this gen is the PS4 and XBOX One going x86 and using PC hardware.
 
If steambox takes off that makes Pc's dead? I think not. Every time a new console comes out they always say the same thing this is the end of the pc. Well PC are still here. Every new gadget smart phone, laptop, tablet com out they say the PC market is dead. No the environment just changes a little. When online streaming came out they said TV is dead no it just changed. When DVR came out they said Tv was dead nope it just changed. The only thing that dies is if a company does not adapt. Case and point Blackberry and Blockbuster. Even Apple died once to be rescued by Microsoft. I won't get into why Apple sucks and what not thats another story. Cd, records, and takes supposedly dead since mp3 and streaming and lets not forget about Rado supposedly dead as well. None of them are dead. In fact you can still buy tapes which is hilarious. I prefer records though. I am a digital guy. I build my own pcs and laptops. Yet I still love listening to a good record now and then. How many people still love old games from the Atari and NEs days. Will they all end up in a museum sure. Will they stop being sold by brick and mortar places sure. Yet you can buy everything on the internet still to this day. Will brick and mortar places go away of course not. They just need to adapt. Look at Target. They were on the doors of bankruptcy and one tv commercial and rebranding year later they were the hip version of Walmart. Unlike Sears and Kmart which hasn't figured out how to change with the times. You have to adapt to survive and if your not willing to adapt you go the way of Circuit City.
 
@ferooxidan You are obviously some teenager, but I will reply for others' benefit.

1. Every game on Steam will be available on Steam OS if you have a Windows PC handy, and you can just stream it to a TV or whatever. Anyone who wants to play games on their TV already has a console.

2. Again, if you have a Windows PC handy. Then again, you could just run a HDMI cable to your TV and play your Steam games that way.

3. The reason ports are bad is irrelevant - the point is many ports are bad, and if Steam Boxes further reduce the PC gaming market, ports will be even fewer and worse.

4. The fact that you can replace hardware doesn't make it a PC. A Linux server is not a PC. For most purposes, even a Linux desktop is not a PC, or is a very unattractive PC from a market standpoint.

5. I already have a Windows PC, why would I buy a Steam Box?

As I said, this is for others' benefit. Please don't bother replying, I feel my IQ dropped a few points from reading your post.
 



My answers to these... questions... in red.

Finally, the biggest thing that people aren't paying attention to.

1) Steam OS isn't designed to be your primary OS. It's designed to either keep your games on a separate OS so you don't get distracted from work as easily as the above poster, or to be put on a separate PC to be used as a console-but-so-much-better.

2) How are people missing that it can stream games from your normal PC to the steam box? That means even a dinky little thing with Steam OS on it (based on linux so it needs even less hardware) can be running games with the full power of your gaming computer, but in the living room... without moving a large, heavy, noisy computer every time.

I am, for sure, going to be not building a steam box, but putting Steam OS on my HTPC, so that I can, say, play multiplayer matches of games using multiple controllers on the TV, rather than my computer setup.
 


This is simply false. To get a game on Steam working on SteamOS, it either has to be ported to work on SteamOS, or be made on the ground up for it. A handful of devs have committed to this, but the number still constitutes a tiny, tiny fraction of Steam's total library. What's more, not all future developers have committed to making games for SteamOS, so even some - probably most - new games won't have a SteamOS version for quite a while.

Yeah, as it stands, a tiny fraction of Steam's own library will actually run on SteamOS, whereas 100% of them run on Windows.
 
Also, if this is done right, people/companies will be able to release other applications for it (like what is already being done within steam for windows) such as those that are already available for other linux distros.

This is a gaming OS first, but it also has a load of potential even in the productivity category (or any category) if it's done right..similar to a phone model with an app store or any other linux distro.

I think some of the haters might be surprised in the end. Maybe not, but one can always hope.
 


Then the library of Steam OS games (those that don't require streaming from a Windows PC) will be tiny.




It's not about laziness, it's about time and money. Many developers simply can't afford to develop for all platforms.




That would make a Steam Box even more pointless. Anyone who wants a consolesque (nice word) experience already has plenty of choice of mature and well supported platforms.




I don't think that makes it a PC any more than a Linux server is a PC or Android installed on a desktop x86 computer is a PC. There are plenty of definitions of PC, but if it's a dedicated gaming OS that I can't do work on it, then it's a console.




I do. And I don't play that many shooters. Some games I play Windowed even.
I like having one device that does it all, and don't want PC game developers diverted to yet another console (which is what Steam Box is).




I just tried rebooting Windows on i5-3570K with a Samsung 830 SSD and 8 gigs of RAM and it took 45 seconds. It would take even longer if I had to save/exit a game.




This is actually the only point I wholeheartedly agree on.





So another OS just for games? Sounds like a console.




So it's like an HDMI cable? Amazing!

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom