Steam Console

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

But you're willing to buy this thing even if it means not playing most of what is currently on Steam and only playing stuff that comes out in the future that's Linux compatible?

[Waldorf and Statler]

It depends on a lot of factors. Worst comes to worst I still have my laptop to play old games I care about that it can run. But a large part of my decision depends on whether developers I care about will support it with no-second thoughts when it comes to big releases and what the hardware quality/sale price ratio is. If at the end of the day I'm better off getting a regular console by the big three, so be it.

[FredEffinChopin]

Meant to bring this up last night:

 

I'm curious to find out if they will be developing a controller. If they want people to be able to get up & running out of the box, I'd imagine that would be a key feature. If not, then a kb/m. Maybe something with a Steam Linux key on it. There needs to be some sort of out-of-the-box way to interface with the thing; one of those, if not both.

 

Edit: Since they have a picture of the Logitech F710 on Big Picture part of the site, I wonder if they might deal with them to get one in the box. I like mine, but if we're designing a console of sorts, I think they can do a bit better, while keeping that compatibility. I'd prefer lower and softer triggers.

Edited December 11, 2012 by FredEffinChopin

[Waldorf and Statler]

I would assume it'd be compatible with the big gamepads, like the 360 controller. But I remember seeing Valve had patented a controller design where you could move around the joysticks/buttons to your preferred location.

[FredEffinChopin]

Thanks for the heads up. That either went under my radar when it happened, or I forgot it. If this is what the final product looks like, I'll probably stick with my F710, since I'm more accustomed to having the high & outside face button/control pad location. If it's more like this though, and with the ability to flip the analog and control pad, it could be an improvement. But yeah, I'm betting there will be nothing less than the compatibility that PCs have, and since Xinput is the standard, any controller they include will likely be labeled similarly. Those are cues built into games, I doubt anyone would suggest replacing them.

[Waldorf and Statler]

I love how basically most controller now are using the 360's body. It really is the most comfortable.

[TheMightyEthan]

Yeah, it's like how car seats and office chairs are all basically shaped the same (except for the really really cheap ones). They're all trying to fit the same human body, and there's really only one way to do that well.

[Waldorf and Statler]

Not sure if that's sarcasm but in case it is, there are other controller designs so it's not like I'm stating the obvious. If it's not sarcasm, I agree.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Yeah, it's like how car seats and office chairs are all basically shaped the same (except for the really really cheap ones). They're all trying to fit the same human body, and there's really only one way to do that well.

 

Implying all bodies and hands are the same. Try shoving a fat ass into a racing seat or a little kid into a regular sized seat. There is no one fit solution.

[TheMightyEthan]

@WaS: Not sarcasm.

 

@FDS: While true, the default anything is always going to be designed to be as comfortable as possible for the largest number of people possible, which narrows the design considerably. There will always be outliers, and products to cater to them.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Even hands are pretty different. Just think of mice: Claw vs. ergonomic vs. what other types of grips people like.

[deanb]

Maybe I shouldn't have said the word open-source. Maybe should've just explained Valve's previously stated disgust to how extremely closed say Microsoft and Sony (especially Microsoft) are with their consoles. Gabe went towards the ps3 in mind for Portal 2 to try that Steam-PS3 merger. It never went on from there but hey, at least they attempted it. Microsoft, like Valve, wants to run shit on their own. Mods are near impossible on a console. Sure the PS3 had some mods but compare installing mods on a console vs a computer.

That's more a case of closed versus open platforms, than open source. They can match up but it's not a rule or anything (Android is OSS, and open paltform, iOS is closed source n closed platform, Windows is closed source, and currently open platform-ish). As already covered by FDS they've only had one game on PS3 since Portal 2 so it's not really time yet to call if it's a failed merger or not (We'll likelly see more of it come PS4/Source 2).

 

 

I'd actually be pretty surprised if this thing is running any kind of full version of Windows. There are a few things that I think Valve are attempting to accomplish with this move, but I think one of the key goals is (I'm hoping, here) to get out a piece of hardware that can run (a) any game at (b) high-ish settings (since Gabe mentioned he expects this thing to compete with the Xbox 8 and PS4), if not highest. The reason consoles are able to squeeze so much out of their hardware is that they don't have huge OSs constantly hogging resources and doing other things in the background. I'd imagine the idea here is similar; it won't be a drastic departure from the norm in the hardware department, but will have a unique OS that is primarily used for interacting with Steam, and can also do a few other things like run their FPB (first-person browser), and whatever types of applications might release on it. Without that kind of isolated environment, there seems to be even less reason to create a Steambox than people are perceiving so far. Why even call it anything different at that point; it's just a custom pc. Someone correct me if I'm spewing nonsense.

 

I think it's going to be a game-changer though. I know that a lot of PC guys scoff at the idea that their gaming platform of choice is difficult for a lot of consumers to hang with, or more expensive (to enter), but it just is; especially so on the latter if one wants those games to looks as pretty as possible while maintaining performance. While throwing a PC together isn't the hardest thing in the world, it's easy even for experienced people to hit unforeseen bumps in the road during the process. All the hardware and software variables can make it a troubleshooting nightmare, too. Ignorant as I sound (and am, in ways) on the topic, I've built and upgraded my fair share of PCs in my time, and the reasons I name have been contributors to why I've mostly neglected them as a gaming platform, and opted for consoles. With some exceptions, until recently when I have went all-in on it

As already stated, it would have to run Windows or it wouldn't run the Steam catalogue. Ever noticed the first time set-up: Microsoft DirectX, Microsoft CV redistributable Microsoft .NET Framework. Most PC games are heavily tied to the Windows environment, and porting over 1,500+ games to Linux is just not going to happen. Most don't even bother updating their games to match newer versions of Windows.

It's also covered the OS isn't why they can squeeze out extra performance, it's the same hardware for 5+ years (which is why despite the OS/FW getting more bloated over time the games look better n better). The OS on PC is the reason PC games require higher specs, especially RAM, than their console counterparts. Going over to Linux, and putting in all the stuff that makes video games run, isn't going to be particularly much slimmer than Windows. You can actually turn stuff on and off within Windows if not needed.

As for building computers: You don't have to personally do it yourself. I've built plenty for mates. It's not really a requirement of PC ownership and I really doubt using Linux is going to make the PC use much simpler either. If anything the linux community would likely make troubleshooting even worse.

 

There's a Russian OS, ReactOS, that's built to copy Windows all reverse engineered and stuff, I think they're working on bringing it on par with XP at the moment. There's huge legal issues around reverse engineering Windows to make a clone though, one you can kinda ignore in Russia but not if you're a few streets down from Microsoft themselves. That leaves WINE for Linux, a suitable solution for personal use, but trying to have it as a core of a major gaming catalogue not so much since if you mess about with it yourself and find it doesn't work so well, well no loss. But if you're selling games that rely on WINE running it perfect parity of native Windows then it becomes a lot more troublesome.

 

They're likely showing the Logitech controller because the main controller to show (and the one it's definitely built for) is the Microsoft Xbox 360 controller for Pc, and well. Microsoft.

 

Until there's more on this from sources other than an interview with Kotaku I'm not planning on spending too much time speculating on what they're planning. Most of the suggestions are infeasible/counter-productive/pointless to make them seem realistic options. Of course it'll be a couple years until we see anything come of it should it be an object that is coming.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Also remember that this is on Valve time so it's more likely to compete with the Sontindeo Nipponimation and the Microsoft Ultimate Home Media Center Ad Delivery Device 2 (that also plays games) than the next-generation.

[Waldorf and Statler]

It shouldn't take that long considering it's only the first one. ONCE IT'S THE THIRD ONE HURRR HURR HERP DERP

[Thursday Next]

Why is anyone interested in this? Just build an HTPC and install Steam if you're ok with an underpowered PC plugged into your telly. I don't see any benefits to this unless it is silly cheap.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Just build

 

Well there's your problem.

[deanb]

Who are you quoting?

[Waldorf and Statler]

Why is anyone interested in this? Just build an HTPC and install Steam if you're ok with an underpowered PC plugged into your telly. I don't see any benefits to this unless it is silly cheap.

 

Advantages of consoles with the library of Steam. If it is dirt cheap even more so. Guaranteed run of game on your rig without fear of upgrading or lagging, probably a better big screen UI. Valve already said this is meant for those people who want simplicity in their gaming and unless a friend is willing to shop around for parts with me, help me install them, and slowly teach me about graphics cards and compatibility and shit like that, it seems like too much of a hassle if I can just buy a thing that I know for sure will play upcoming Steam games for cheaper. Highly doubt it'll be tricked out or Ultra settings, but they should at least look as good as the high settings of a regular computer.

[madbassman39]

And Madbass why would it only appeal to those not interested in PC gaming? I'm interested in games in the PC, problem is when I have to shell out $800+ to build a decent gaming PC and then have to update it. My friends spent around $1500 And they don't have to update in a while, but if they release something that can play PC games meant for Steam at a fraction of that price, and it guarantees playing certain games more than decently until the next update it could save quite a bit of money.

 

I miss wrote what I meant to say. I didn't mean appeal to those who are not interested in PC gaming as much as appeal to those who aren't interested in shelling out the cash to enter the world of PC gaming. If this was an option 2 years ago, I would probably have jumped on this instead of waiting 2 years until I had the financial ground and luxury to purchase myself a mega-machine.

 

@Thursdaynext: That is why I am so interested, and seemingly pessimistic about this machine. Even as FDS says the problem is build, for 600 dollars you can buy (with enough searching) a pre-assembled machine that is equal or even better than an xbox 360 as far as gaming is concerned.

 

I think I have given the wrong impression all around making it seem like I'm really doubting the legitimacy and business practices of Steam, but I really am trying to figure out the reason behind the market room for a Steambox. I don't doubt its there, but who are they targeting? Why? How will they make this a success? Is it even intended to be a success?

 

My biggest question is: What advantages does the Steambox have over a desktop PC that is hooked up to your TV? I don't doubt Steam could sell this at cost or even at a loss, but I don't think Steam would jump into a market that they could already potentially have and sell a a loss.

 

Again this is all speculation on my part, and really I am very interested in hoping for the best what this Steambox could be. This coud potentially be a game changer, and (probably not) be a console killer. If Steam is successful, EA might make an Originbox, Ubisoft might make a Uplaybox, Activision might make a Call Of Duty box. I doubt thats going to happen, but I wouldn't doubt that these companies are watching with this option in mind and doing market research.

[TheMightyEthan]

Just build

 

Well there's your problem.

 

Yeah, this thing would obviously just be intended to compete with consoles, not so much targeted at the kind of people who are comfortable and willing to build their own PC from scratch.

 

*Edit* - whoa, several more posts made, may edit again.

Edited December 12, 2012 by TheMightyEthan

[Waldorf and Statler]

Maybe I'm just lacking reading comprehension today but I don't see what is so confusing. I see it as: People want to play PC games+can't afford expensive rig or people with consoles interested in Steam+Steam deals are potential buyers. I think this is a similar argument we as a forum were having when the Ouya was announced where I found myself in your side of the argument. I didn't see the point because it wasn't marketed for me specifically. If you already have the rig and the know-how of PC hardware this is really of no use for you besides knowledge on the way gaming might end up going for the future. It affects me and people like me with underpowered machines,maybe in university, who can't afford expensive rigs.

[madbassman39]

That might be my problem is its not marketed towards someone as me, but we really don't know who its marketed to either.

 

At the end of the day WaS I think you are right, they want to hit a market that want's to get into the PC gaming scene but can't/won't. We just don't know that as fact yet.

[FredEffinChopin]

As already stated, it would have to run Windows or it wouldn't run the Steam catalogue. Ever noticed the first time set-up: Microsoft DirectX, Microsoft CV redistributable Microsoft .NET Framework. Most PC games are heavily tied to the Windows environment, and porting over 1,500+ games to Linux is just not going to happen. Most don't even bother updating their games to match newer versions of Windows.

It's also covered the OS isn't why they can squeeze out extra performance, it's the same hardware for 5+ years (which is why despite the OS/FW getting more bloated over time the games look better n better). The OS on PC is the reason PC games require higher specs, especially RAM, than their console counterparts. Going over to Linux, and putting in all the stuff that makes video games run, isn't going to be particularly much slimmer than Windows.

 

The first part is more or less the answer I was looking for. That doesn't really bode well for compatibility on the Steambox though, if the quote about running a new version of Linux is not some sort of mistake. It also raises questions about why they are bothering to even develop a custom OS.

[TheMightyEthan]

I'd be shocked if they actually developed a custom OS, I'd expect it to be more like a Steam Big Picture environment running on top of Windows. It may not look like Windows to the user, but it's got to be there.

[madbassman39]

I'd be shocked if they actually developed a custom OS, I'd expect it to be more like a Steam Big Picture environment running on top of Windows. It may not look like Windows to the user, but it's got to be there.

 

I would even go as far to say that you probably wont be able to access windows on this machine. It just runs windows secretly, in the background. Probably customized enough so somethings that are memory eaters that allow windows to run certain things to be turned off. I don't know much about programming, but it is my understanding that Windows has a lot of processess running that are not essential to running Windows itself, but essential to running Windows as a full experience. Maybe those will be eliminated in the programming?

 

Also, because the Xbox uses Direct X, does it run a heavily optimized version of Windows?