Newell to Kotaku: "our hardware will be a very controlled environment"

I've written a ton about this. I'll try to make it short for the moment in this post. Some background that a few of you will probably know from my posts - I'm not only a gamer, but a Linux desktop user. I find that Linux is my preferred OS, and I'd ideally spend all of my time there if all the games (and very few applications) that I enjoy fully "work" there. I find Free and Open Source software, as well as open development APIs and other standards to be preferable to proprietary offerings. I'm against DRM, the "consolization or tivoization" of hardware and software, categorized by reducing its functionality specifically to retain exclusive control of how users make use of the hardware they have purchased.

Now, specifically in regards to Steam's box and this quote....

I'm worried about this. At best, the SteamBox could be basically a prefab SFF/HTPC, built on standard, modular hardware, that runs on a customized Linux distribution with Steam for Linux preinstalled, alongside CrossOver (which is basically the paid version of WINE that allows even Windows software to play on Linux) and other great entertainment-focused software. This would be great. Hell, I'd even think it to be acceptable if it included Windows instead of Linux (or perhaps, dual booting), if Valve wants to ensure their entire catalog runs on the SteamBox. Either way, users could upgrade the hardware provided the space was sufficient if they wished, and the software would be capable of customization for those who wish it, ideally without compromising any of the Steam functionality or being impeded by walls placed by Valve (ie those who wish to install Desura or manually bring their HumbleBundle games onto the SteamBox' Linux distro, are able to do so - provided they flick the "I know what I am doing and wish to have root access and to add additional repositories" switch somewhere.

However, it could also be something much worse - more "consolized". Proprietary hardware. Software that is Steam-locked. This is what I'm worried about. I don't want Valve to become "corrupted" by the "console mindset" that generally is comprised of "You have control of them, squeeze them for all they're worth. They won't seriously complain, they'll just keep opening their wallets no matter what you do". Much of the worst in DLC, DRM, overpriced games, privacy violations, and more customer-exploitative practices come from publishers that have noticed that the "Xbox generation" is willing to take such abuse and it is profitable to do so. Worse, I'm worried that any ethos they pick up from being entangled in the console mentality will be implemented company-wide. It is absolutely imperative that they think of this new SteamBox as a "PC in the Living Room" rather than a "console" because comparing themselves to the other consoles in terms of openness and accessibility is worthless and will skew the perspective since the "consoles" are so extremely proprietary. Saying "We'll, we're more open than the X360" isn't saying much, for instance.

There is so much potential for this to go wrong, but it could also go right and be a great step forward for PC, especially Linux, gaming and a blow to conventional consoles that is sorely needed.
 
Last edited:
Xaeos said:
I've written a ton about this. I'll try to make it short for the moment in this post. Some background that a few of you will probably know from my posts - I'm not only a gamer, but a Linux desktop user. I find that Linux is my preferred OS, and I'd ideally spend all of my time there if all the games (and very few applications) that I enjoy fully "work" there. I find Free and Open Source software, as well as open development APIs and other standards to be preferable to proprietary offerings. I'm against DRM, the "consolization or tivoization" of hardware and software, categorized by reducing its functionality specifically to retain exclusive control of how users make use of the hardware they have purchased.

Now, specifically in regards to Steam's box and this quote....

I'm worried about this. At best, the SteamBox could be basically a prefab SFF/HTPC, built on standard, modular hardware, that runs on a customized Linux distribution with Steam for Linux preinstalled, alongside CrossOver (which is basically the paid version of WINE that allows even Windows software to play on Linux) and other great entertainment-focused software. This would be great. Hell, I'd even think it to be acceptable if it included Windows instead of Linux (or perhaps, dual booting), if Valve wants to ensure their entire catalog runs on the SteamBox. Either way, users could upgrade the hardware provided the space was sufficient if they wished, and the software would be capable of customization for those who wish it, ideally without compromising any of the Steam functionality or being impeded by walls placed by Valve (ie those who wish to install Desura or manually bring their HumbleBundle games onto the SteamBox' Linux distro, are able to do so - provided they flick the "I know what I am doing and wish to have root access and to add additional repositories" switch somewhere.

However, it could also be something much worse - more "consolized". Proprietary hardware. Software that is Steam-locked. This is what I'm worried about. I don't want Valve to become "corrupted" by the "console mindset" that generally is comprised of "You have control of them, squeeze them for all they're worth. They won't seriously complain, they'll just keep opening their wallets no matter what you do". Much of the worst in DLC, DRM, overpriced games, privacy violations, and more customer-exploitative practices come from publishers that have noticed that the "Xbox generation" is willing to take such abuse and it is profitable to do so. Worse, I'm worried that any ethos they pick up from being entangled in the console mentality will be implemented company-wide. It is absolutely imperative that they think of this new SteamBox as a "PC in the Living Room" rather than a "console" because comparing themselves to the other consoles in terms of openness and accessibility is worthless and will skew the perspective since the "consoles" are so extremely proprietary. Saying "We'll, we're more open than the X360" isn't saying much, for instance.

There is so much potential for this to go wrong, but it could also go right and be a great step forward for PC, especially Linux, gaming and a blow to conventional consoles that is sorely needed.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you may be right on a prefab SFF/HTPC.

However, if Valve and Gabe say it'll be a closed system, I wonder if that also means hardware as well besides the hard drive.

Also, I forgot about Crossover. That would not surprise me if Valve uses that for backwards compatibility with DirectX-only games.

But, I can understand your fears of it being very closed off. Back in March when this was first rumored, I actually would like to see this still open to external installation of other games not found on Steam. Desura is a great option especially when some Indie Bundle Games can't be added to Steam.

So, I hope that an external 3rd. party option is kept in place and left open for us in the end. But, I'm afraid, they might just close it off and have it Steam-only.
 
I don't think Valve will be pushing for Linux support if they wanted to make a console because consoles don't need Linux.
 
It could negatively affect us, we dont know yet. Sort of like people who said the xbox would not negatively affect PC gamers, because MS would be investing more in gaming. But it did because MS started to see PC gaming as a competitor to xbox and not as lucrative. Now that they are losing control of the market through smart phones and tablets they might be changing their tune but MS turned one of the major selling points of the OS, PC gaming into the enemy.

So valve, who knows they could go down the same road. Imagine in 5 years or so valve starts wanting to take up a more traditional console model and get rid of the PC side of things. Imagine a ton of people complaining about how they get killed in CS with their controller and valve says ok we are going to make an option to only play against others on the console.

I think we all hope that only the good will come out of it, IE more people pushed to PC gaming but just as easily it could go the opposite way as it did with microsoft.
 
Last edited:
I just hope that Valve realizes the biggest (IMO) reason consoles kill innovation, and that is because they lack new technology. Sure, when they are released they might be sporting a fancy processor or GPU, usually high end but not quite enthusiast quality. Then the same technology remains in the system for 5...6...7+ years and by that time it is simply old.

What consoles need to do is follow the android model. Have a new $200-300 iteration of the console available every year or so, maybe right before christmas and make it just that much better than it's predecessor, but at the same time make games backwards compatible as well as leaving some room for improvement (better textures, higher framerate, etc.) so that future versions of the consoles can make better use of the games.

Also, integrating the cloud (which steam is known for specifically) would make playing games on different iterations or generations of the steam box that much more worth it. Give people a reason to upgrade and give developers a reason to keep innovating and making cooler games. Also, streamlining the steam box with linux would be great. If developers start writing code for linux on a regular basis then it would make porting games from steam box to a regular linux OS a walk in the park compared to going from, say, PS3 to PC. Then, publishers won't even have to think about porting their games over from steam box to PC, it will practically be sitting there right in front of them just screaming for extra profits. Also, if someone can take their PC experience, and then hop over to the living room and continue it from their couch, then it gives them all the more reason to buy a game versus having to think about what platform they want to get it on. At that point all they have to do it get it and play!
 
I think that is what we all hope but look most people dont want to spend alot of money on a console because they know, its just a console. And that could be one of the big mistakes here, I am willing to invest alot in PC gaming because my computer doubles as the device I do just about everything on, shopping, entertainment, games, and serious work and organization. But you cant do most of that on todays consoles so people especailly parents wont be wanting to dump $1000 into these devices and if they dont cost a decent amount they wont be pushing any limits,

Also alot of people see what we consider the negatives of consoles as positives. IE everyone is stuck with the same old hardware, so sure its not as pretty but you dont have to worry about another guy getting the leg up on you in a game because he has a smooth 120 fps.

So at the end of the day this is why I think valve trying to jump into linux right away is a bad deal. Its going to hurt alot of the reasons they could push for paying more for this console. It wont be running office or all your windows programs, many of your games will not work on it, and depending on what distro they work from it may be pretty much just a console. But it will probably cost more if they cant afford to take a loss on it.
 
Xaeos said:
I don't want Valve to become "corrupted" by the "console mindset" that generally is comprised of "You have control of them, squeeze them for all they're worth. They won't seriously complain, they'll just keep opening their wallets no matter what you do". .
Click to expand...

Bit late for that.
 
I don't understand how so many of you are up in arms about this. Basically it's a "locked down" computer. It makes it easy for a dev to program for a specification to get a desired result. You still will have Steam on PC. Just use your PC as the console?

If it's anything like the PS3 linkage with Portal, it means you buy a game here, you can play it there. But if a developer's game doesn't run in Linux, sorry, it's not going to work on SteamBox. The only "negative" is a game developer will have to meet some standards to ensure a game can be bought by a larger audience. So no, most likely a game such as Dawn of War or Company of Heroes wont by on SteamBox because it's a controller environment. Doom 3 EE would be (random game).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top