Steam Machines Don't Have A Chance Against The Xbox One/PS4

If Valve could do anything right Steamboxes could dominate.
Sadly, Valve can't get out of their own way.

BRING ON DREAMCAST2 !!!!
 
We must buy them to make this beard man happy :D

38e.gif
 
DPI said:
In this thread: small picture thinking.

All Valve is doing is diversifying here. Not sure why people get so upset like its all-or-nothing or that they have to choose sides. Valve isn't abandoning Windows, or making SteamOS exclusive games - they have stated and reiterated that their future titles will still include Windows.

However Valve also realized that it's not smart for their company's future to be tied solely dependent on another corporation - one with its own ever-changing interests and marketing priorities - which for the past 15 years has not really included PC gaming. The move to Linux democratizes PC gaming and more importantly the API, and breaks Microsoft's 15 years of holding PC gaming hostage with a proprietary API for the sole purpose of customer lock-in while they continued pouring all their real focus and attention on their console product.

At the same time Valve sees an opportunity to expand into the arguably stagnant console space. Its not going to be an overnight megaseller with advertising on the sides of doritos bags and happy meals. They're playing the long game, so this is really just planting a small tree in MS & Sony's collective console backyard. Let's face it, oldgen and newgen consoles are trash that hold back PC gaming and graphics because developers build their multi-platform games around lowest common denominator. We see this on games today more than ever- just about everything is a "console port" and everyone here complains. The cycle will never be broken as long as the binary console status quo remains. How many more years are we going to go around and around complaining about shitty console ports before we stop the madness by embracing something with the ability to actually break the cycle? The previous gen consoles being able to carelessly coast for 7-8 years unchallenged and all the while having a chilling effect on PC graphics is a fucking disgrace.
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%. This doesn't do anything but give people more options at more pricepoints. Valve also seems quite dedicated to this. I was a little worried at first when looking at the Linux filter on Steam. However, (seemingly just in the past couple of months) the amount of SteamOS/Linux supporting games jumped up significantly. Not just little indie studios either. Pretty much top-down. Not everything has jumped, but enough to make me take notice. That in no way means less support for Windows or MacOS either. Just additions.

Also, these are PCs. Anyone worried about resale, can still go buy a physical copy (for as long as that remains a thing,) plug in a USB optical drive (if your Steambox or Steam Machine doesn't have one) and play the old fashioned way. Seems silly these days. Especially with the price of games during the big sales. How much resale value do you need off a $60 game that you paid $9.99 for?

This opens many doors and shuts none. I don't see how that's bad.
 
If it makes it into department stores, like Fry's and Bestbuy, it will beat it on paper and in practice. If it's sold well, (i.e. up-gradable) it will blow everything else out of the water.
 
DPI said:
I can only dream how "fine" things would be for Windows gaming had Steam never come along. No heights we would not soar.

fN35tWR.jpg
Click to expand...

You're not making any sense. How did Steam prevent this? Steam still runs on Windows if you didn't realize. And I suppose, 1 and 2 percent on Linux/OSX. But you get the point. Just about everyone using Steam still uses Windows. How did Steam make Windows/gaming better? If Windows was so problematic for games then Steam would never have taken off.

Steam itself is suffering feature creep and is absolutely blown out of the water by Origin when it comes to game download speeds. Which to me is far more important than the abundance of social features like unlocking emoticons or having the store page stuffed with curators. Valve needs to get back on track for PC gaming and make a sold out option in the store, a way to select game/patch versions ect.

frenetic_ferret said:
It's completely possible to remove the stuff people don't want from a PC...
Click to expand...

True, but if you do that, then you're back at being a console. If I can't mod my game ect., then what difference is it from an Xbox?

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If Valve wanted to offer a more traditional hardware style console (no upgrades), but with free online play, lower costs for developers, cloud based game saving option, the ability to carry over game licenses to newer versions of the console (should be easy if they are essentially using PC hardware), lower or eliminate peripheral fees, ect. then I think they would have a big chance at grabbing the Xbox/PS crowd. Most people don't care about upgrading and don't want to play against people who get higher frame rates (faster systems). But tell them they can get the same experience but cheaper games & free online play? I think that has a big chance.
 
Last edited:
Flogger23m said:
You're not making any sense. How did Steam prevent this? Steam still runs on Windows if you didn't realize. And I suppose, 1 and 2 percent on Linux/OSX. But you get the point. Just about everyone using Steam still uses Windows. If Windows was so problematic for games then Steam would never have taken off.
Click to expand...

You do realize that dancing around with strawmen and hyperbole and inventing a side of an argument that never existed makes trying to have a discussion relatively pointless. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Flogger23m said:
How did Steam make Windows/gaming better?
Click to expand...

"Why is the sky blue"

We're done here.
 
DPI said:
You do realize that dancing around with strawmen and hyperbole and inventing a side of an argument that never existed makes trying to have a discussion relatively pointless. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
Click to expand...

Your cute image makes zero sense. I play plenty of non-Steam games and Microsoft/Windows doesn't prevent those games from working. Steam didn't do a thing to "save" PC gaming, and PC gaming was doing fine before it came along. And it would have continued to do fine had it never been invented.

DPI said:
"Why is the sky blue"

We're done here.
Click to expand...

So basically you're full of shit and backtracking. Got it.
 
Flogger23m said:
Your cute image makes zero sense. I play plenty of non-Steam games and Microsoft/Windows doesn't prevent those games from working. Steam didn't do a thing to "save" PC gaming, and PC gaming was doing fine before it came along. And it would have continued to do fine had it never been invented.



So basically you're full of shit and backtracking. Got it.
Click to expand...
Since it has gone over your head: the image is illustrating all the issues with Games for Windows Live. Your strawman is trying to devolve the conversation into hate for Windows, when nothing was said nor implied that the operating system GFWL runs on is the problem.
 
I think if they can turn the steam OS into a relevant tool for their games not to mention port as many games over as possible and add a super easy htpc component they would definitely have something. Not everyone who plays steam games plays graphically intense blockbusters especially living room htpc users. I would certainly throw the OS on a htpc and bash away with friends in BattleBlock Theater or what not.
 
Flogger23m said:
Steam didn't do a thing to "save" PC gaming, and PC gaming was doing fine before it came along. And it would have continued to do fine had it never been invented.
Click to expand...
I disagree, pcgaming wasn't so fine and dandy before steam was present it was a bit of a mess and discouraging experience for many.

How quickly you forget waiting in download queues for hours just for a single game patch off some thirdparty website full of popups and shit. If your game didn't work good luck finding a fix off some dead support forum. Steam made pc gaming easier, more successful and even brought pc communities closer together as a whole. In that respect it could be seen as a 'savior' of pc gaming.

Personally i don't think this initial attempt at the steamOS or steam machines will be all that successful. Releaving microsoft of its direct(x) control over pc gaming allowing for more OS competition is more important long term goal then making pc console boxes.
 
I think Steam Machines will be a rousing success.

Think about the barriers to PC gaming. For the general public, a PC operating system is too complicated to install and configure. Plus, the cost of a proper gaming PC is too high.

Steam Machines solve the former by moving the user away from Windows and into the user friendly and simplistic Linux environment. And the latter is addressed by reducing the cost of the machine down to a mere $1200 - give or take a few hundred dollars.

And what about the gulf between KB+mouse users and controller aficionados? We all know they cannot play with each other as the controller people will get "rekt", as the kids say. Well, with Steam Controller, every one is on equal footing. Now, all players will struggle to line up meatshots on bots that are practically standing still. Problem solved!

You don't need a dank GFWL maymay to see that the Steam Universe will be the center of attention in the living room come this fall.
 
I wanna see your average console user get his hands dirty in linux whens something breaks.
 
Nettwerk said:
I wanna see your average console user get his hands dirty in linux whens something breaks.
Click to expand...

Your actual point aside, I do too. :D However, I think if it's used as intended more or less, it probably won't break.
 
crusty_juggler said:
I think Steam Machines will be a rousing success.

Think about the barriers to PC gaming. For the general public, a PC operating system is too complicated to install and configure. Plus, the cost of a proper gaming PC is too high.

Steam Machines solve the former by moving the user away from Windows and into the user friendly and simplistic Linux environment. And the latter is addressed by reducing the cost of the machine down to a mere $1200 - give or take a few hundred dollars.

And what about the gulf between KB+mouse users and controller aficionados? We all know they cannot play with each other as the controller people will get "rekt", as the kids say. Well, with Steam Controller, every one is on equal footing. Now, all players will struggle to line up meatshots on bots that are practically standing still. Problem solved!

You don't need a dank GFWL maymay to see that the Steam Universe will be the center of attention in the living room come this fall.
Click to expand...

except that the public doesnt want to buy a steam machine for gaming. Why would they versus a true console? Im just asking the question. I can't think of one reason an everyday joe gamer would buy it over a x1 or ps4.
 
crusty_juggler said:
I think Steam Machines will be a rousing success.

Think about the barriers to PC gaming. For the general public, a PC operating system is too complicated to install and configure. Plus, the cost of a proper gaming PC is too high.

Steam Machines solve the former by moving the user away from Windows and into the user friendly and simplistic Linux environment. And the latter is addressed by reducing the cost of the machine down to a mere $1200 - give or take a few hundred dollars.
Click to expand...

I firmly believe that they will not be successful. Why do I think this? Turn to history.


Remember the 3DO? It launched at $699 in 1994 dollars (which would be just over $1,100 today, roughly the price point of Steam machines). It flopped harder than Butterbean doing a cannonball in a swimming pool from 30' up.

Neo Geo? Also launched at $699 in 1991 ($1,200 today, with games being equivalent to $345-515). If it wasn't for the fact that the AES was mostly a carbon copy of the arcade hardware, it would have disappeared from the market about as fast as the 3DO and Jaguar did. Only the rich kids could afford it, selling 390,000 units worldwide. Normally, this would be considered a MASSIVE commercial failure.

Genesis + 32X + Sega CD? ($199 + $149 + $299 = $647, $1,020 in today's dollars) Ask Sega how that combo worked out for them in the end.

The PlayStation 3 floundered in the market for two years at it's $599 price point (almost $700 today, the low end of Steam machine pricing) until backward compatibility was ditched and the 1st generation slim model was launched at $299.


Bottom line: people want easy and cheap. That's why the Wii was the market leader until the last couple years of its life when casual interest tailed off, and also why the XB1 sold like gangbusters last holiday season (it was $50 cheaper than PS4 and many came bundled with games, a win-win for parents). Steam machines may be the former, but a box with hardware worth its salt will definitely not be the latter.
 
Last edited:
I can't wait for it to fail. There is absolutely no need in the market for another console and further competition for PC gaming.
 
I don't think Valve was ever trying to compete against the Xbox One/PS4. They know it’s going to be a slow sell no matter what. Get it out on the market now, get the name and idea in peoples minds. Then when PS5 and the Xbox One Two are being rumored they’ll make their big push.
 
KickAssCop said:
I can't wait for it to fail. There is absolutely no need in the market for another console and further competition for PC gaming.
Click to expand...

Why would you want it to fail? It's not hurting anything at all by existing. It's not competition to the traditional PC, it's supplemental. The more people play ANY type of PC game, the better for PC Gaming as a whole.
 
Eh, I was attempting to be sarcastic and humorous with my post. I didn't include a winking smile because I hate smilies.

Anyway, it's amusing to watch people continually move the goalposts on Steam Machines.

First, Microsoft was supposedly shaking in it's boots, fearful that Valve would take over the living room. You even had people wondering whether MS would fall into financial collapse upon being one-upped by Steam Machines. Now those same individuals are saying that Valve never intended to take on MS, and opining that the true measure of success is whether Linux gaming will be viable a decade from now when the PS5 and Xbox Infinity launch.

Then, the target audience kept shifting. Steam Machines aren't for console gamers looking to join the Master Race anymore. Now, they're for those who already own a gaming PC and who wish to supplement that machine. I don't know about you guys, but as I sit behind my custom gaming rig I built with love and a 3mm Philips head screwdriver, my mind wanders as to what could possibly make that machine better. I know! An overpriced, pre-built gaming PC that runs Linux! With touchpads!

The reality is, Steam Machines were DOA. They're a solution to a problem that only exists in the mind of the CEO of Valve. Gabe had a hysterical reaction upon seeing an app store in Windows 8 and neither the yes men who surround him, or the Valve disciples who shower praise on anything he does, had the sense to tell him to relax. It's sad that Valve seemingly gets it's business advice from a cadre of sympathetic tech bloggers, celebrity developers and Reddit posters. Everyone who doesn't fall into those categories was shaking their collective head at Steam Machines a year ago and Valve ignored them.

PC gaming isn't under attack, it doesn't need saving and MS isn't embarking on some far reaching conspiracy to undermine your gamer rights, or whatever.
 
Nettwerk said:
I wanna see your average console user get his hands dirty in linux whens something breaks.
Click to expand...

Do PS4 owners have to "get their hands dirty" with FreeBSD when something breaks? No? Alrighty then.

SteamOS will obviously be refined over time to cater to casuals and non-technicals, that's the goal.
 
J3RK said:
Why would you want it to fail? It's not hurting anything at all by existing. It's not competition to the traditional PC, it's supplemental. The more people play ANY type of PC game, the better for PC Gaming as a whole.
Click to expand...
This is not how the industry works. Next thing you know the 4 PC exclusive options are also taken out from the games since most people are sporting their stupid tough to upgrade steam boxes that can't take the new levels of detail since their GTX 780s are already outdated after 2 years.
 
4saken said:
TBH i just dont really see the point of the steam machine. SteamOS aside and the merits of trying to bring unity to the PC market in terms of compatibility, controller support, etc, what is there actual market?
I dont see myself replacing my gaming rig or htpc with one for any reason.
Click to expand...

Mostly it is a hedge garnished with the ability to push a set of somewhat standardized peripherals. Valve does not have confidence in MS continuing to support gaming on the PC platform in a reasonable way.
 
KickAssCop said:
This is not how the industry works. Next thing you know the 4 PC exclusive options are also taken out from the games since most people are sporting their stupid tough to upgrade steam boxes that can't take the new levels of detail since their GTX 780s are already outdated after 2 years.
Click to expand...

And what do you call laptops? Which probably 85%+ of PC gamers actually play on? I'm with you on having a nice customized, self-built (with love, damnit) system with exactly the hardware you want. We however, are actually in the minority. And if anything, a Steambox will raise the LCD/Median hardware up a bit. I even have a nice gaming system in my living room already. Not as nice as my "real" desktop, but it's pretty decent for playing the odd game that I prefer a gamepad with.
 
Hey if the PS4 doesn't start pumping out better games then say Destiny.....
Right now I think consoles are in Limbo everyone owns one but there isn't much more to keep you entertained for a few days...

If Bloodborne sucks I'm going to be depressed and play Pillars of Eternity which is going to be the better game of the two.
 
KickAssCop said:
Source of 85% PC gamers playing modern games on laptops.
Click to expand...

I said probably. I don't have a direct source, but take a look at the types of hardware represented in things like Steam surveys. That's either a lot of really outdated desktop hardware, or it's people dabbling on their laptops, maybe students trying to game on them, etc. These are all guesses, but there seem to be a lot of people out there that game on PCs that aren't running the type of hardware that people that visit [H] run. I know I personally know a lot more people with laptops than desktops, and they casually game on them.

That's not to say that there aren't metric tons of high end PC players out there, but I think there's many more tons of lower-end hardware users. Maybe some of them want to take the next step, but don't want to build a PC. I think for little niches like that, Steam Boxes could be useful.

I don't see them as replacements for good PCs, I don't see them as replacements for the popular consoles of the moment, but I see them filling in little gaps, and maybe bringing more people into PC gaming in those gaps.

I guess we'll see how they do. I'm not saying they'll do well, but I can't see any reason to hope they fail either.

I'm also not saying that Valve saved PC gaming or anything like that, but that said, I wouldn't buy my PC games any other way now. So they're doing something right.
 
KickAssCop said:
Source of 85% PC gamers playing modern games on laptops.
Click to expand...

J3RK said:
I said probably. I don't have a direct source, but take a look at the types of hardware represented in things like Steam surveys. That's either a lot of really outdated desktop hardware, or it's people dabbling on their laptops, maybe students trying to game on them, etc. These are all guesses, but there seem to be a lot of people out there that game on PCs that aren't running the type of hardware that people that visit [H] run. I know I personally know a lot more people with laptops than desktops, and they casually game on them.

That's not to say that there aren't metric tons of high end PC players out there, but I think there's many more tons of lower-end hardware users. Maybe some of them want to take the next step, but don't want to build a PC. I think for little niches like that, Steam Boxes could be useful.

I don't see them as replacements for good PCs, I don't see them as replacements for the popular consoles of the moment, but I see them filling in little gaps, and maybe bringing more people into PC gaming in those gaps.

I guess we'll see how they do. I'm not saying they'll do well, but I can't see any reason to hope they fail either.

I'm also not saying that Valve saved PC gaming or anything like that, but that said, I wouldn't buy my PC games any other way now. So they're doing something right.
Click to expand...

I have observed this in my neck of the woods. 90% of people want laptops for portability, bar none, and don't know or care about what they need to game, other than a $4000 boutique PC. For gaming, they think a console is the only realistic option, since all their friends are using them, and are under the misconception that it takes a rich person to get into PC gaming.
 
Right now I consider my PS4 a paperweight along with the millions of other PS4 owners...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top