![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Six Months With a Steam Machine
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
I think we'll see that Valve is going to require that a system ship with SteamOS if it wants to be marketed as a Steam Machine. There are certain legal realities that OEMs will have to comply with. I don't think they can ship Steam (the application) pre-installed w/o some kind of license agreement from Valve, as it is not a free distributable. And I'm sure that the Steam trademark couldn't be used in sales and promotional items without Valve's permission.
There was a bit of a fallout with the Xi3 Piston guys over some of these issues.
Valve is going to require the SteamOS and Steam controller to be marketed as a Steam machine. Problem is, they left everyone standing when they decided to delay the controller this year, after forming business partnerships with everyone and a dozen companies building models to sell. In other words, Valve's indecisiveness kind of screwed OEMs. Since some of them like Alienware already built the damn things, better to sell them and recoup some of the cost then have your business model rely on Valve Time. That's why they will be shipping with Windows 8. They won't be "official" steam machines, but they will have the same form factor.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
It doesn't make any sense for Valve to require SteamOS on a Steam Machine. Platform sales isn't where Valve makes its money but game sales. Requiring SteamOS on a Steam Machine artificially narrows the potential customer base and number of games that Valve can distribute to these devices. And Valve has been tooting the horn of openness with this platform. On top of the obvious economic reasons not limit the hardware that hasn't been how this platform is even being marketed.
CreepyUncleGoogle
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
- Messages
- 6,871
I just wanna say that most of what you've been saying in this thread seems reasonable AND I think it's awesome that you're posting about it.
I like the idea of Linux because, since I've started using it on a daily basis, it's been a fantastic experience and really a refreshing change from Windows, but I agree that it isn't yet ready to be an entertainment-focused operating system. It can be and there's a lot of effort to make it work. Thanks to DOSBox and Wine (combined with POL) there's a bajillion games that work on it, but native Linux games that don't rely on a translation layer of some sort need to exist in large numbers in order to encourage more people to move over to things like SteamOS. Developers are reluctant to go there because of costs so there's this while chicken and egg thing when it comes to games.
For me, it's not that important since I don't really play many games, but games are ultra important for a lot of people and are one of a few reasons why even at no cost to the user, Linux a mainstream OS except in phones (but it's disgusting what Google's done to Linux to make it worthy of their spying and data collection needs). So yeah, there's a long way to go and if Windows 9 isn't a revolting mess to most people, Valve will have missed their chance to gain a foothold before Microsoft's next release. Of course, if Windows 9 does some stupid subscription-cloud-thing, then maybe there's still a chance. I guess a lot of the Steam Machine's longevity is in the hands of the nearest competitor's upcoming release.
Like many people you're missing the point that SteamOS is being developed for a console OS, not a desktop replacement OS. So there is no "missed opportunity to gain a foothold" -- people weren't suddenly going to build or buy a livingroom Steam Machine with SteamOS just because they were unhappy with Windows 8. Conversely, Windows 9 bringing back a start menu isn't going to make any difference to Valve's longterm SteamOS play. Windows is still going to cost money, so SteamOS running on Steam Machines will be able to hit the lower pricepoints of conventional consoles. And as we saw with Microsoft's Xbone/Kinect debacle that cost them the newgen console war for the foreseeable future, pricing is everything.
Doesn't make sense to anyone that only sees the world through a Microsoft, Microsoft, Microsoft lens.
Only initially. Until the platform reaches a critical mass with enough publishers and developers on board. And let's be honest, that's what you're really afraid of. Because there's no other reason to frantically reply to every single like its a heatless AMA every time SteamOS comes up (see first two pages of this thread).
Seriously, if SteamOS is as insignificant and likely to fail as you and some others are insisting, why so nervous?
CreepyUncleGoogle
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
- Messages
- 6,871
Oh...I did misread the intent if Steam Machines are supposed to be console replacements. Sorry about that. I guess I'm gonna mark that off my list since it's probably not practical to use one as a word processor and stuff too.
I was really hoping that sooner or later, there'd be an Xbox with an Office suite too. It so lame that they won't do that, but I guess laptops are better for that kinda thing anyway since consoles really don't move around from place to place as well and I really like having my little novel machine all huggable and lap-put-in-able.It does, you're just not thinking long term enough. You're thinking quarter to quarter, like most businesses. Valve is aiming 5-10 years down the road or longer with this. Valve doesn't want a future where Microsoft essentially controls PC gaming via the OS, the way it largely is now. If you're only looking at profits over the next quarter or year, it won't make any sense, I agree. It's risky and it's something a publicly traded company would never do, but the potential payoff for the entire gaming ecosystem is enormous.
There's a lot of valid criticism over Valve's "flat" management strategy regarding whether it's effective for actually getting anything done. I don't think too many OEMs got stuck holding a bag of goods though. My understanding is that they made a bunch of prototypes for the Steam Dev Days conference just to show off some concepts and what could be done. If there were OEMs that went ahead with large-scale production without getting any kind of firm launch date from Valve, they were just engaged in poor business strategy.
This Alienware box is going to ship a Windows PC (likely w/o Steam pre-installed) w/ an Xbox controller. What even makes it a "Steam Machine"? Sounds to me like they're just trying to cash in on "Steam Machine" press to market their product more effectively. It's not really Steam Machine related at all.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
This makes no sense. Regardless of how well Steam Machines and/or Steam OS do, there's no many in those for Valve. The OS is free and the OEMS make the money from the hardware. The money for Valve and developers comes from game sales regardless of the platform the game is sold on.
Afraid of what? And how many times have you chimed in about Windows 8, that great catastrophe. What made you so vocal about something you considered a failure. A failure that only out numbers current Linux users on Steam according to Steam's own survey 20 to 1.
I don't care one way or the other. If it's successful great. If not then so what? But this thing has a lot of challenges ahead of it and those challenges won't be overcome by anti-Microsoft folks simply ragging on Windows. Really, when I see you going around having to explain the point of this device to people who now at least technically what it is, I have to wonder what average consumers are going to think. It's a console? Ok, cool. What's better about it than a PS4 or Xbox? Because it's open and upgradable and runs desktop Linux?
Just to clarify what I meant: Valve has said that they won't lock down a Steam Machine to prevent the end-user from installing whatever OS they want to, like the guy did in this video. But I do think they will require OEMs to ship with SteamOS if those OEMs want their product to have the Steam Machine moniker.
Much like if an OEM wants to ship an Android device, it has to actually run Android. You can't ship an Android-marketed smartphone that runs Tizen. To me, that doesn't make any sense.
The fact that you can't play your 1980s game library on a Linux system isn't that big of a deal for this console. Steam Machines will be shipping with about a thousand more titles available than PS4 did on its launch day. Nobody looks at PS4, etc. and complains that it's too narrow because it's not running Windows. And with just about all of the new engines having Linux support I think the newer games going forward will have SteamOS compatibility and, in time, could actually be the target platform.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
While Valve ever make money on Steam Machine hardware? No, that goes to the OEMs. Will Valve ever make money on Steam OS? No, it's free. Valve will never directly make one penny on Steam Machines and/or Steam OS whether they sell 1 or 1 billion.
Now of course if they sell 1 billion, the platform for selling their games becomes much larger and indirectly sure they can make money. But still, whatever the platform was running has nothing to with it. The money for Valve and developers is all in the games sold. It's just that simple.
I suspect it will -- in short time -- have far greater graphical abilities at probably competitive prices too. I know we're up a bit against a wall at 1080p (though I'd wager PC hardware can do better graphics at 1080p then this console generation). But if adoption of 4k TVs picks up, a PC is going to be a far more compelling living room gaming solution than something designed 2-3 years ago.
Being upgradeable is somewhat important IMO since I think we're close to approaching the point where only the GPU is the main gaming bottleneck. I admit that few people are going to want to swap in a new motherboard and CPU and all of that... but slipping in a new video card is pretty easy.
Again man, you're not thinking long term enough. What if any of the following happens:
-Gaming remains with Windows, but then MS has a string of really shitty releases, causing people to not want to be on the PC compared to other forms, PC gaming starts to take a decline because it's married to bad versions of Windows and many people in the future don't want to be on the new Windows. That ends up hurting Valve
-Microsoft integrates software commerce into their OS more, requiring that Steam
(and other vendors) pay a percentage tax in order to advertise effectively on Windows, Valve loses some of that money
-Hard to imagine I know, but ANY scenario where Microsoft does something to the OS that negatively affects PC gaming.
Point is, Microsoft is a potential vulnerability for Valve. Windows 8 woke them up to that. If they can foster an independent escape route from that, that's a good thing for everyone (except MS I guess), gamers and Valve alike. So even if they don't profit directly from it in the short term, it could create far more security for their company in the long term. It's like paying for security at a store, you can never how many items WEREN'T shoplifted because you paid to have security. We can't know how many potential problems Valve is avoiding by trying to get out from under Microsoft BEFORE there is a problem. If you still don't get it, I don't know what else to say.
microsoft is on a cloud hosted trajectory. in X years they want us all subscribing to their service which IMO is a much more honest cost model than software licenses which have no inherent tangible value.
as long as steamOS can browse the web and or contains a full blown web browser that can access microsoft's services they will give fewer fucks.
honestly you could argue microsoft should get the fuck out of console hardware all together and instead put their full support behind valve and steam thus guaranteeing a large cross market for their services. however, egos and greed will prevent that from occurring.
keep the underlying hardware open and keep the distribution and DRM tied to a service that for the most part, just works. this also keeps the microsoft haters somewhat at bay since microsoft will never have to earn these guy's trust. valve has earned that trust, microsoft just sells games on it.
anyway, i wager microsoft already has a contingency that embraces steam in the event xbox live ends up getting crushed by steam. however likely the outcome i imagine when this much money is in play that someone is paid to think about this shit and have a plan just in case *shrug* probably have one for sony online too or origin who knows.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
But Steam Machines are on the way with Windows. If OEMs are pleased with the sales and response of those machines I can't see why Valve would tell them they can't do what some are already doing. That wouldn't seem to have any benefit for anyone.
An Android device has to run Android. Of course. A Steam Machine doesn't have to run Steam OS, it just needs to support Steam. Totally different situations.
Mostly titles people have already played though.
It's all going to boil down to market share. As many anti-Microsoft folks point out correctly, Microsoft's market share and phones and tablets is so low that they can't get enough developers on board. And to add to that, Valve and developers are already supporting these well established platforms. So here comes a new one, based on an OS that in nearly 2 decades has been largely irrelevant on the desktop, oh but its a console. A console that no one ever heard of play games that many heard of long ago.
The smart thing here for Valve is to not at all tie the success of the Steam Machine to Steam OS. It serves no purpose to them to do that. What difference does it make to Valve or developers?
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
Don't you think that Valve would love to be able to host all of games in the cloud with 100% platform independence? All the hardware necessary would be a cheap internet connected dongle, Steam Controller and TV? They already support local streaming. Of course we've been down this road before with OnLive and other services that weren't successful and with the issues like net neutrality solid internet game streaming may never get there. But it certainly would benefit Valve and developers enormously if it ever become viable for high-end gaming.
Red Falcon
[H]ard DCOTM December 2023
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
- Messages
- 12,456
Valve doesn't want to get tied to Microsoft, it's that simple.
If Microsoft ever goes south, Valve will be independent of them with SteamOS.
Also, not having to pay Microsoft for licensing and additional royalties cuts down on costs in both the short and long term, for both Valve and their customers.
Having an in-house OS which Valve can modify, also means that it does not have to wait for Microsoft to fix bugs/issues/etc, which, I have seen many times, never get fixed.
While Microsoft may have the largest OS share, I agree with what others here are saying, that Valve is looking to a 5-10 year plan.
I do see this succeeding, as a majority of games are being released on Linux and OS X, not just Windows.
Valve is going places and is one of the few corporations I actually trust, especially when it comes to games and other software.
Microsoft on the other hand, has let us down more times than I can count, and their focus isn't the games, gamers/customers, or the long run, it is simply to make the most profit in the short-run; kind of reminds one of EA and Apple.
If Microsoft ever goes south, Valve will be independent of them with SteamOS.
Also, not having to pay Microsoft for licensing and additional royalties cuts down on costs in both the short and long term, for both Valve and their customers.
Having an in-house OS which Valve can modify, also means that it does not have to wait for Microsoft to fix bugs/issues/etc, which, I have seen many times, never get fixed.
While Microsoft may have the largest OS share, I agree with what others here are saying, that Valve is looking to a 5-10 year plan.
I do see this succeeding, as a majority of games are being released on Linux and OS X, not just Windows.
Valve is going places and is one of the few corporations I actually trust, especially when it comes to games and other software.
Microsoft on the other hand, has let us down more times than I can count, and their focus isn't the games, gamers/customers, or the long run, it is simply to make the most profit in the short-run; kind of reminds one of EA and Apple.
I don't think there are any Windows machines being officially marketed as Steam Machines, are there? I mean can I buy a product called "Our Little Steam Machine" that runs Windows? I'd be surprised if they could use that trademark. I'm referring to official products, not just informal references to Steam Machine appearing in articles.
But Valve gets to decide what criteria must be met in order to use the "Steam Machine" trademark. Their requirement could be something as inane as the product must have Bob's Magic Calculator installed, but regardless it's Valve's call. If they decide that a constitutive element of a Steam Machine is SteamOS, and not the Steam client, then they have the right to make that judgment.
I think establishing SteamOS makes a huge difference for Valve. Their current platform is 100% dependent on Windows and they have 0% control of Windows. From a plain business perspective this is just incredibly bad policy.
The same is relatively true for PC game developers as well. They have huge dependence and no control.
No, they're not.jwcalla said:
They're not saying they can't MAKE them and sell them, they're saying they can't have the branding "Steam Machine" or "Steambox" whatever, without those parameters. They want to have some level of standardization in it.heatlesssun said:
I just answered this for you in my previous post. Seriously, it's all laid out.heatlesssun said:
Just to clarify since there's some confusion:
Steam machine / Steambox = Living room system endorsed by Valve, loaded with SteamOS, using the Steam controller. These are not out yet. The only ones in the field are the betas like in the original post
Living Room Gaming PC = Functionally similar to a Steambox, but running Windows instead of SteamOS. This is what some OEMs are selling because Valve kind of screwed them delaying the Steambox releases. It doesn't take much to convert a Steambox to this.
Steam machine / Steambox = Living room system endorsed by Valve, loaded with SteamOS, using the Steam controller. These are not out yet. The only ones in the field are the betas like in the original post
Living Room Gaming PC = Functionally similar to a Steambox, but running Windows instead of SteamOS. This is what some OEMs are selling because Valve kind of screwed them delaying the Steambox releases. It doesn't take much to convert a Steambox to this.
forget net neutrality, you're too far up the stack. until the laws that govern the speed of light from point A to point B through a fiber optic cable are manipulable, or quantum entanglement is solved in a manner that allows near instant 'interweb like' communication (for computers), there are many types of games that just can't be played 'in the cloud' due to latency.
it takes X time to go Y distance. that is immutable law (until someone proves otherwise). anything that relies on near instant communication will be governed to an extent by distance. here distance is a measure of time and instant is measured by a perceptible passing of time. argue all you want about what this number is ... it is. 15ms while being a measurable amount of time is largely imperceptible to humans. Some special humans have exhibited ability to perceive lots of stuff but to my knowledge 15ms isn't something anyone can reliably perceive or even train to perceive, our brains just aren't that fast or more specifically the processing of information often has delays as the brain waits for more info.
long winded short .. cloud gaming can't work as a whole, yet, and may never provided some very difficult problems aren't first reconciled.
You know, most of us were like "wtf, how is that controller going to even work?!" when it was first shown.
Pretty sure I didn't hear many "Wow! That's going to revolutionize gaming!" posts.
Most of us, even those of us that want Steam OS to take off gave it more of a wait and see approach.
Steam OS itself suffers from what is holding Linux back, lack of familiar software. (And I use Linux)
Are there substitutes?
Yes.
Problem is you're releaning everything all over again, which is a big reason Windows people stay Windows people, Apple people stay Apple people and Android people stay Android people.
Pretty sure I didn't hear many "Wow! That's going to revolutionize gaming!" posts.
Most of us, even those of us that want Steam OS to take off gave it more of a wait and see approach.
Steam OS itself suffers from what is holding Linux back, lack of familiar software. (And I use Linux)
Are there substitutes?
Yes.
Problem is you're releaning everything all over again, which is a big reason Windows people stay Windows people, Apple people stay Apple people and Android people stay Android people.
This is spot-on. It may seem like mixed messages that Valve is sending by stating that "Steambox can be Windows too", but it's really only a stopgap, not their longterm vision. Just like in-home streaming from a Windows PC to a low cost living room PC is a stopgap, not the longterm vision. They seem to understand the value of not taking their existing customer base for granted, least not in the way Microsoft has taken Windows gamers for granted and bet everything on Xbox.
If Valve didn't believe SteamOS was crucial to their longterm success in branching out into the console space, they wouldn't be working so hard behind the scenes partnering with developers and publishers, punching out developer tools to make SteamOS development easier, hammering Nvidia, AMD and Intel to improve their OpenGL support. They could easily just say "okay NVIDIA has hands down the best OpenGL support, let's punt and make NV cards a requirement for retail launch and then worry about AMD and Intel down the line" but they're taking the longer but higher road and trying to support all three majors from the outset.
CreepyUncleGoogle
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
- Messages
- 6,871
I don't even see the point in making a Steam Machine with Windows. I get why they're doing it, but if that became the way things were for full production models, they would be no different than any other PC with an add-in graphics card. So yeah, having a different OS is pretty important.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
http://www.alienware.com/Landings/a...UF&cid=279055&lid=5278303&acd=123098073120601
So it's not a Steam Machine, but it runs Steam? And it's Steam OS and Steam Controller ready? But you if choose to install Steam OS as which point it would be a Steam Machine like anything else called a Steam Machine it won't run as many games as a than when purchased, like a Steam Machine?
Say what you will, that's going to pretty damned confusing to folks.
So it's not a Steam Machine, but it runs Steam? And it's Steam OS and Steam Controller ready? But you if choose to install Steam OS as which point it would be a Steam Machine like anything else called a Steam Machine it won't run as many games as a than when purchased, like a Steam Machine?
Say what you will, that's going to pretty damned confusing to folks.
A Windows based Steambox is Valve's "let's promise to stay friends if we ever break up" text to Microsoft.
And if you've ever been on the giving or receiving end of that in a relationship, you know it's really just code for "in 48 hours, probably even tonight, one of us is going to be spitting on our hands and engaging in sexual looseness, stealing, lying, cheating and murder. And it is not going to be pretty."
Apparently it's an "Alienware Alpha Console" and it "boots directly into an exclusive user interface" that you can then use to launch (presumably installed post-startup) Steam.
Red Falcon
[H]ard DCOTM December 2023
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
- Messages
- 12,456
Well, that device comes with a license of Windows, so installing SteamOS wouldn't really make it a "true" Steam Machine, but a whitebox or unofficial Steam Machine.
Regardless, Valve does not want to be tethered to Microsoft or Windows in any way, shape or form.
Right now, yes, Valve is at a disadvantage, but 5-10 years from now, if 95%+ of games being released are multi-platform/OS, then it will be very lucrative to Valve, and to gamers in general.
Red Falcon
[H]ard DCOTM December 2023
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
- Messages
- 12,456
That would depend on the game, regardless of what system it is on.
At least with a PC/Steam Machine, the individual would have the option of using a controller or a mouse and keyboard, and not being locked into using just one or the other, unlike consoles.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
I'm always a little skeptical whenever the "5-10 years" argument arises when it comes to Linux on PCs. It's not a new argument and for some reason it seems as though anything that competes against Windows always has "5-10 years" but in two years Windows 8 is a failure because it only supports 20 times more Steam clients than Linux.
Not trying to dig into you personally at all. If I could predict the future, I wouldn't be responding to messages in a place like this. Nor anyone else that does. But the idea of this device is all over the place.
It's a console, yet a PC that can run Windows. If it runs Windows it's not a Steam Machine though it runs all the games a Steam Machine can using Steam. But if it runs Steam OS it is a Steam Machine because it runs Steam. However it won't run as many games as the thing not called a Steam Machine that runs Steam because it's running Steam OS.
I'm not sure why you're so hung up on the fact that's it's based on Linux. What does it matter? If Valve had selected a BSD would it really make that much of a difference? Is the PS4 going to be relegated to failure because they based the system on FreeBSD? Do I get a full-blown Windows on Xbox One?
If PS4 can be successful with BSD, why can't a Steam Machine be successful with Linux? What about BSD makes it above any level of scrutiny in your eyes?
Red Falcon
[H]ard DCOTM December 2023
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
- Messages
- 12,456
That's ok, I understand.
This really isn't about Linux overcoming Windows, we know that will most likely never happen, or at least, the chances are less than 1%, even in the long term.
This is, however, about games making a transition from Windows-only to 100% multi-platform/OS.
Once that happens, it won't matter if Windows has a majority of the market share, if AAA games are running on Linux, then that's all Valve needs for Steam Machine to take off.
The biggest plus, is that SteamOS will be totally controlled by Valve, so there won't be any royalties, licensing/bribing issues, and they won't have to wait on Microsoft for support or fixes.
Valve will be totally independent, and yet, their users will still be able to install Windows, or whatever OS they want, on their Steam Machine.
The positives weight greatly in favor for not only Valve, but also their customers and gamers in general.
This isn't about Linux one-upping Windows, this is about Valve and gamers being able to break free of Microsoft's grip and do as they please.
why is it that some folks can't accept reality. The linux kernel powers more critical day to day computing tasks than the windows kernel by not by simple multiples, nay friends, linux out muscles microsoft by POWERs.
Current industry darling buzzwordy bullshit
Phones and tablets
Android
iOS
Microsoft is a foot note of a footnote's joke in this space.
'the cloud'
AWS
rackspace
pretty much every cloud offering not named azure
all these are linux linux linux linux and more linux. whats running on top? irrelevant it wouldn't be possible without linux.
Azure is making some in roads, lots to still shake out in this fight. VMware now doing their own 'azure' thing ... interesting times in this space. However, linux or more specifically open source running under a linux kernel absolutely crushes this space though, currently.
Social media and retail:
amazon
ebay
etc
etc
Linux, everywhere. Microsoft is nowhere to be seen in modern startup technology companies. Nowhere.
Gaming:
New round of consoles!
only one running a microsoft kernel though.
take all that into account. linux has all the momentum and cannot be 'killed' by microsoft. If microsoft doesn't execute the current 5-10 year plan flawlessly they could very well end up a shell of their former selves. Highly unlikely but they better execute well none the less. Lots of mind and market share to lose, and their customer base doesn't use their product by choice per se ...
You are trying WAY too hard to be a brick and make it needlessly complicated, especially the filibuster in that last paragraph. Its really very simple: transition strategy.
Trying to make the case that SteamOS wont take off or isn't needed and Windows should have the monopoly on PC gaming forever because Linux isnt popular on desktops is a dead end, beat to death, irrelevant argument to pin your case on so consider a different attack angle. In fact I'll help you, I can think of a few potential showstoppers. Valve's apparent hippie corporate culture and not moving fast enough, not executing fast enough in this new console space theyre planning to enter and where many of the customers are younger and with goldfish attention spans, this market moves too fast for "Valve time". And meanwhile they've got hardware partners eager to enter a potential new market segment- some of them facing diminishing sales in the Windows PC segment - chomping at the bit to be first movers with building Steam Machines, trying to get in at the ground floor incase things really take off. Then there's the herding cats that is trying to get driver support from Intel and AMD so Steam Machines don't have to be Nvidia only at least initially. Then there's the fact they won't own the hardware and don't seem to want to, which has sent a confusing marketing message especially after they built their own round of Steam Machines and sent them to testers.
Bottom line they face a lot of challenges, but diversifying their distribution platform to not be 100% at the mercy of the whims of another corporation - one with its head literally and figuratively 'in the clouds' and no longer remotely interested in the type of content Valve distributes - is a natural progression and evolution of PC gaming that needs to happen. One man's opinion.
Red Falcon
[H]ard DCOTM December 2023
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
- Messages
- 12,456
Exactly, Valve doesn't want to be tied down to a proprietary OS.
They want something that is flexible, open-source, and that they can manage in-house without having to rely upon any other 3rd party company.
Once this is in full swing, we will have glorious gaming times!