Valve to Release Own Console-Like PC for the Living Room

heatlesssun said:
Until the real trolls did.
Click to expand...

The article in the original post itself mentioned Microsoft, and the topic is about consoles, media centers, HTPCs, etc... so of course Microsoft (and presumably Windows 8 because of it's relevancy) will be more susceptible of being mentioned. But you on the other hand;

heatlesssun said:
Strange. I still have all of the choices in software and hardware I had with Windows 7 in Windows 8 plus a new software store that isn't available in 7. How is more choice less?
Click to expand...

comes in, and yet AGAIN shoehorning your twisted virtual reality on people just discussing the relevancy of Microsoft. The person which you responded to from the quote above didn't even mention Windows 8, he just pinpointed the probable direction Microsoft is more inclined to take, then you decided invoke your usual Microsoft knob-slobbing parade, yet AGAIN.

Yes, others have mentioned MS/Windows 8, but you started the trolling. You should really learn to ignore which you don't agree with about Microsoft or Windows sometimes, instead of trying to neutralize your cognitive dissonance at EVERY. SINGLE. mention of either.

Even I (a Linux whore :p) don't even get pissed at and argue at every mentioned of Linux; most of the time I ignore it, even if ones statement is of ignorance or fallacy. FFS Just stfu and let people discuss Microsoft/Windows without your nut-swinging parade.
 
pelo said:
rudy... you can't customize Windows. It's either Windows 8 + Metro and its respective app store or bust. The whole point of this is to get away from Microsoft... Why can't you understand this? What do you think Blizzard is thinking right now? What about Sony? Or EA with their Origin service? Do you think they'll be looking at Windows?

And studios will absolutely port over. Most gaming today isn't done on your desktop or console but rather a smartphone and tablet. In fact, most computing is done on a smartphone and tablet. Are developers going to cater to a tiny Windows market share there as well? Because you and heatless would find that idea to be dandy, perhaps? No, they go where the money is, and right now the big money is in mobile.

If a developer can make a platform agnostic game and offer it on every device and OS, then that's what they'll aim to do because that means they've got a shot at making more money. Going DirectX or Windows just doesn't make sense outside of the desktop space, and I don't need to inform you that that segment is decreasing.
Click to expand...

You can customize windows in just about any way valve would need to for a first console, there are many companies small and large who have custom versions of windows which do what valve would need, IE boot strait into steam and stay in it if they please, I believe it is called windows embedded. These are running on all sorts of dedicated hardware machines, in fact if you work in one of many industries you have probably used these perhaps not even knowing it.

You keep talking about the future which does not yet exist. Sure in another 10 years google might be so dominant with android everyone will develop for linux but we arent there yet and valve is about to try to bust into a market dominated by companies that will do anything to outsell each other including buy entire studios, sell a device at a $200 loss per person, and advertise to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. I do not know what valves financial situation is exactly but I do not think they are that rich. So they need to play on some other strengths and not gloss over certain things that could be strengths they turned to weaknesses. One such huge issue would be the library of games. Heres 2 scenarios you tell me which one seems more enticing. You can now buy the valve console and keep using all of your old steam games as well as all new ones on day 1, or you can buy the console and only valve titles will all work other titles might work some might get ported, and well we hope everyone will start making them work on our console from here on out. If this was not critically important to many people then you would never see the so many current consoles always trying to make sure their new system has backwards compatibility with old games even though it often costs them in extra hardware.

If porting is so easy and everyones going to jump on it then how come 90% of steams library is not already ported to macs? And if all you say is true about mobile phones then how come valve has not already given up because clearly they have no chance in that game as a distributor when all major platforms are pretty set with OS supplied stores? Valves steam box is not going to be about mobile gaming.
 
rudy said:
You can customize windows in just about any way valve would need to for a first console, there are many companies small and large who have custom versions of windows which do what valve would need, IE boot strait into steam and stay in it if they please, I believe it is called windows embedded. These are running on all sorts of dedicated hardware machines, in fact if you work in one of many industries you have probably used these perhaps not even knowing it.
Click to expand...

How do you remove the branding so that it doesn't say Windows? Brand identity is very important to a console; if it says Windows all over the place, then that kind of puts a damper on things.

In addition, Windows is closed-source and proprietary and offers no ability to tweak or customize the kernel. This limits flexibility when designing a tightly integrated platform.
 
nOrVow said:
The person which you responded to from the quote above didn't even mention Windows 8, he just pinpointed the probable direction Microsoft is more inclined to take, then you decided invoke your usual Microsoft knob-slobbing parade, yet AGAIN.
Click to expand...

So someone's speculation is now Microsoft's probable direction even though their lastest x86 version of Windows retains all existing desktop software distribution methods, doesn't preclude new ones on the desktop and actually adds another and that's taking away choice?
 
damicatz said:
How do you remove the branding so that it doesn't say Windows? Brand identity is very important to a console; if it says Windows all over the place, then that kind of puts a damper on things.
Click to expand...

Embedded Windows, this has been done for years on all sorts of devices.
 
heatlesssun said:
So someone's speculation is now Microsoft's probable direction even though their lastest x86 version of Windows retains all existing desktop software distribution methods, doesn't preclude new ones on the desktop and actually adds another and that's taking away choice?
Click to expand...

Microsoft doesn't stage a coup in one fell swoop. They prefer to gradually take over and lock you into their platform. There is even a term for it : Embrace, extend, extinguish.

Be under no illusion : They will be favoring Metro over the Desktop and they will gradually work on pushing people in that direction. Microsoft is nothing if not predictable in their strategies.
 
If Windows is such a good platform for a gaming company to develop a console from (Other than Microsoft themselves) what happened to the Dreamcast?
 
heatlesssun said:
So someone's speculation is now Microsoft's probable direction even though their lastest x86 version of Windows retains all existing desktop software distribution methods, doesn't preclude new ones on the desktop and actually adds another and that's taking away choice?
Click to expand...

You're completely oblivious to Microsofts history of business practices, and is something I will not argue again. To make my life easier I will quote the mighty damicatz;

damicatz said:
Microsoft doesn't stage a coup in one fell swoop. They prefer to gradually take over and lock you into their platform. There is even a term for it : Embrace, extend, extinguish.
Click to expand...
 
Sublym3 said:
Do you even want a console?
Click to expand...

Not particularly but if I was going to get one, it would be one based on an open platform like GNU/Linux or Android.

What I want, however, is irrelevant. It is what Valve wants. Clearly, Valve is trying to compete with consoles here and they can't do that if the thing is twice as expensive. A Windows license would add to that expense.
 
damicatz said:
Microsoft doesn't stage a coup in one fell swoop. They prefer to gradually take over and lock you into their platform. There is even a term for it : Embrace, extend, extinguish.

Be under no illusion : They will be favoring Metro over the Desktop and they will gradually work on pushing people in that direction. Microsoft is nothing if not predictable in their strategies.
Click to expand...

But Metro at this pointed isn't designed to do the same things as the desktop, that's not it's purpose. I see nothing to be gained for Microsoft in in essence killing the nature of it's most successful product to essentially go to total mobile distribution model where it's far behind.

Anything is possible but unless there's something in it for Microsoft I don't see how a Microsoft only software distribution model for Windows x86/x64 does anything but hurt them.
 
damicatz said:
Not particularly but if I was going to get one, it would be one based on an open platform like GNU/Linux or Android.

What I want, however, is irrelevant. It is what Valve wants. Clearly, Valve is trying to compete with consoles here and they can't do that if the thing is twice as expensive. A Windows license would add to that expense.
Click to expand...

If its proper gaming PC it will be expensive (expense is relative) regardless.

I don't think Valve wants an open platform because that would mean you don't have to use Steam, which would be counter productive for them.
 
heatlesssun said:
But Metro at this pointed isn't designed to do the same things as the desktop, that's not it's purpose. I see nothing to be gained for Microsoft in in essence killing the nature of it's most successful product to essentially go to total mobile distribution model where it's far behind.

Anything is possible but unless there's something in it for Microsoft I don't see how a Microsoft only software distribution model for Windows x86/x64 does anything but hurt them.
Click to expand...

Right now, it would hurt them. That is why they gradually transition things over to Metro. Once enough stuff is transitioned, they pull the plug.

Even Saint Thurott, His Holiness of the Order of William Gates, thinks as much.
 
nOrVow said:
You're completely oblivious to Microsofts history of business practices, and is something I will not argue again. To make my life easier I will quote the mighty damicatz;
Click to expand...

I'm very well aware of Microsoft's business history and that's why I asked the most practical question there is on this. What's in it for Microsoft? It seems to me that everyone that's taking of Microsoft locking down the software distribution for Windows x86/x64 views that as a very bad thing. I would agree and I don't see how it work in Microsoft's favor.
 
damicatz said:
Right now, it would hurt them. That is why they gradually transition things over to Metro. Once enough stuff is transitioned, they pull the plug.

Even Saint Thurott, His Holiness of the Order of William Gates, thinks as much.
Click to expand...

But how do you transition over enough stuff on a platform that wasn't even designed to do the same things? That's the problem I have with this theory after learning something about Windows RT and it's restrictions and limitations because of it's focus power consumption. You can't even write background service with Metro at this point.

Metro would have to change radically for it to support the kind of transition you're talking about.
 
With all this discussion on Windows 8 and a Valve Box I am starting to think that a Valve box is the totally wrong direction to go. Valve won't win many converts from the hardcore PC gaming crowd because we are likely to have better systems than what they can offer in the console style Valve box. Also, console exclusive titles might limit the converts from the existing console crowd. Since the future of computing is mobility not fixed systems (they are becoming the Maginot Line of the 21st century) Valve might be better served by making a Valve Tablet.

With Tablets on more of a Moore's law trajectory right now than PCs or consoles and with them starting to run out of features to add, it might be that the next big opportunity (as the tablets become more powerful) is to become mobile computing hubs. You dock them at home to play games like a console and do HTPC functions. You then take them with you on the go to do all your mobility functions. Strategically that might be a better play for Valve than the Valve Box ;)
 
kbrickley said:
With all this discussion on Windows 8 and a Valve Box I am starting to think that a Valve box is the totally wrong direction to go. Valve won't win many converts from the hardcore PC gaming crowd because we are likely to have better systems than what they can offer in the console style Valve box. Also, console exclusive titles might limit the converts from the existing console crowd. Since the future of computing is mobility not fixed systems (they are becoming the Maginot Line of the 21st century) Valve might be better served by making a Valve Tablet.

With Tablets on more of a Moore's law trajectory right now than PCs or consoles and with them starting to run out of features to add, it might be that the next big opportunity (as the tablets become more powerful) is to become mobile computing hubs. You dock them at home to play games like a console and do HTPC functions. You then take them with you on the go to do all your mobility functions. Strategically that might be a better play for Valve than the Valve Box ;)
Click to expand...

You may be right, but why the fuck would anyone want to game on a tablet when they could sit down and have a much better experience on there couch or desk?
 
The real question is, why? I see it being a niche product that some hardcore techies will have to have it, but who really wants to buy a device(console) to just play source games and humble bundle indie crap on their tv? What purpose does will this device really server over a xbox 720 or ps4, standard htpc, etc?
 
TheToE! said:
You may be right, but why the fuck would anyone want to game on a tablet when they could sit down and have a much better experience on there couch or desk?
Click to expand...

You'll be able to dock the tablet and play with your keyboard + mouse or controller or what have you. In that sense it won't be any different than your PC other than the OS and its form factor.
 
TheToE! said:
You may be right, but why the fuck would anyone want to game on a tablet when they could sit down and have a much better experience on there couch or desk?
Click to expand...

Hence the use of the term "dock the tablet" ... I am a hardcore desktop person myself and just upgraded my monitor to 2560x1440 ... with 4K monitors on the horizon I am really looking forward to desktop gaming ... however, we are in the minority and that is unlikely to change anytime soon.

With a dock that allows wireless controllers and other niceties like voice commands who is to say that a tablet couldn't be docked as soon as you walk in the door and use it as a HTPC/Console until you are ready to go out again, when it becomes a tablet once more. They aren't there yet but with the advances and competition in the mobile space I don't think it is too far away. Just saying if Valve is going to invest lots of time and resources in a project like this they should be looking at the future and mobility is likely the future ;)
 
spacing guild said:
Unless the hardware is significantly cheaper than a comparable PC, I see no reason for this. PC gamers are different from console gamers. And Valve sells PC games. I have a ton of games on Steam...I didn't buy $3000 worth of hardware to buy a Steam Box.
Click to expand...

Ding ding ding :)
 
I'm building a htpc at the moment, and while I have no plans on abandoning my powrhouse watercooled pc in my office I can like the option & social aspects of indie and controller friendly games in the living room using big picture. I'm looking for any reason to ditch my xbox 360 for very light gaming with my kids & netflix... and this is perfect for that.

Hardcore and cutting edge gaming on my dedicated PC and more casual gaming with my children on my 50" tv in the living room... along with all the other benefits of a htpc.
 
pelo said:
Did you type that up on an Android phone by any chance? Or do you own one? If you do, then you've been cozy with Linux. With that said, you should be well aware that it's also the most flexible OS which makes it a perfect choice for a console/HTPC.
Click to expand...
Because everyone knows that an Android phone makes for an excellent gaming platform and HTPC, lol!!!!

Thanks, but no thanks, I'll stick with Windows 8.
 
I don't really care if Valve does this as long as they do two things: 1. continue to develop and provide games to the PC, and 2. allow us to use our current game licenses on the Steam box.

But of course one can argue that a game developer isn't going to let you get a game for free on the PlayStation just because you already own that game on the Xbox.
 
Ducman69 said:
Because everyone knows that an Android phone makes for an excellent gaming platform and HTPC, lol!!!!

Thanks, but no thanks, I'll stick with Windows 8.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you've heard of XBMC (cross platform) or Ubuntu, Mint, Fedora, or billion other Linux-based OSes you interact with on a daily basis, whether it be your phone, car, router, vending machine, or lifelike sex-mannequin-bot. The point is that Steam/Valve have the option of tweaking it to their heart's content or going with an ready and mature distro.

And secondly, most games bought and played are on a tablet and smartphone. That's a real kick in the teeth, isn't it?

Opting to stick Windows on a console is just about the most idiotic thing you can do unless you're Microsoft. It's like Intel deciding to fab AMD's chips on the same process node. It's the same reason why Apple is steering clear of everything Samsung. You sure as hell aren't going to make a device and then pay the competition to join in on the fun. That's called stupid.
 
pelo said:
And secondly, most games bought and played are on a tablet and smartphone. That's a real kick in the teeth, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Sure, a bunch of $2 games and free stuff on a touch screen. That's not exactly what console and PC gaming is about though. I'm not saying that mobile gaming is important and growing, but it really does look to be a higher-volume, lower cost and production quality, touch oriented experience compared to consoles and PCs.
 
We're already getting to a point where tablets can run most PC and console games that most people play today, thus is isn't a matter of if but when.

You can already play CoD on a PS Vita and that uses underpowered A9 cores and a mid/lower tier PowerVR GPU. An Apple A6 can likely play any console game at console settings without any issue given enough developer TLC. If there's money there, developers will certainly cater to that market. Bear in mind that within a couple of years tablet sales are expected to dwarf PC sales. If you add a keyboard and mouse, you've now got a PC, so it doesn't have to be touch oriented. That argument is like stating you can't game on your laptop because it uses a touchpad. With peripherals you absolutely can.
 
Just to clarify, I'm not stating that consoles are goners or that PC gaming is dead, far from it in fact. There's always going to be a certain amount of appeal for a stable hardware platform and gaming experience derived from consoles and PCs, and there's always going to be Sony, MS, Nintendo (well, perhaps not Nintendo :p ) catering to that crowd. But it's most certainly a different playing field today than it was in years prior. Before we had Blackberries and dumphones and Palm Pilots that couldn't do much of anything past give you calendar notifications, while today we've got hardware that fits in your pocket that's capable of outperforming your dedicated gaming console.

For a developer, that's a goldmine. It would be stupid to overlook the huge benefits of developing with a cross platform / cross OS focus to target a broader audience. Things like DX and other proprietary APIs just don't fit the bill anymore, and neither does the dependence on MS who is essentially absent from the mobile market altogether.

I can definitely see Steam running on your tablet, PC and your dedicated Steambox. In fact, we're already seeing hints of that convergence with Sony and MS who are both attempting to make an HTPC/console and offer their gaming services through tablets and portables - Vita and Xbox app/store thing in Win8/Metro are exactly that.

If you're an independent developer, you've now no reason to dedicated yourself to a single console, a single form factor, nor a single API. "Exclusive" titles will only come from game studios owned by that respective console maker.
 
I'm not talking about technology so much, obviously Windows tablets have been able to do this for a while and I understand the improvements to ARM devices that's improving their performance. What I am talking about is the start differences in mobile and big screen gaming along with the production values in the mobile space for the vast bulk of games there.

Would console/PC big screen gaming actually be popular enough on mobile devices to support lower unit pricing to bring console/PC type games to tablets? In time it's possible but I really think mobile gaming is just a different creature. It's kind of like all the people that say that a desktop has a different usage pattern than a tablet.

I don't doubt that we're going to see lots more mobile gaming, but it's probably going to be on the $2 causal side for the great extent.
 
Is there a difference between your console $60 game at 720p and your tablet, docked with M+KB playing the same $60 game at 720p?

I think that convergence is coming far sooner than people would like to think, and as a result it's going to dramatically change the landscape altogether. The lines have already become blurred as to what a PC actually is, now it's just a matter of taking a couple of extra steps.

Consoles will still be around for those in need of a dedicated gaming box, but you really have to contemplate just what the point of that is when you can do that and more from the same computing device you're going to carry around all day.
 
It all depends on if tablet makers advertise and get the word out about docking, As of right now they have no reason to do that. The whole point of docking a tablet is to replace EVERYTHING, and that is bad for almost all tablet makers. Because almost all of them are also in the business of making desktops and laptops and phones. Hmm sell someone a phone and tablet and laptop, or just sell them say 1 phone that does it all? I have no doubt that eventually phones will be capable enough but as of right now only microsoft is attempting to do any major device convergence.And to put it lightly their market presence in mobile sucks.

I see the ultra mobile market as just pushing consoles and PCs to get better so they actually offer something better. So one of 2 things will happen, either console / PC makers will see this problem and push hard to bring the experience up, or yes they will just die as mobile devices keep moving up the chain in performance.

But lets not kid ourselves an ARM tablet doesnt have anywhere near the computing power of even a laptop. People are even surprised when they buy ULV cpus from intel at how they can well just barely play games.
 
Your laptop has 4-5x+the computing power of a console. Your average console today is a dinosaur as far as hardware goes, and something like the current A6 SoC from Apple can compare quite well with them. Mind you, there's no sign of letting up in the ARM or x86 camp either, with both sides gaining in perf-per-watt by a substantial amount every generation. Given the same amount of attention that consoles receive from developers, you can likely play many, if not most, titles on a tablet that you can on a console. Oddly enough, ARM SoCs and tablets are quite well adapted to be driving games, particularly in comparison to the x86 CPUs of yesteryear. Unlike in the x86 space where it was all about CPU throughput, in ARM and tablets/phones it's mostly about GPU gains and that coincides quite well with the inevitable convergence.

The reason the Intel ULVs stink at gaming is because they're driving higher resolutions and the drivers and games aren't optimized for that respective architecture. I mean, which game can you name that actually makes use of AVX? Developers have quit giving a shit about the desktop and its architectural and ISA improvements years ago.
 
heatlesssun said:
Sure, a bunch of $2 games and free stuff on a touch screen. That's not exactly what console and PC gaming is about though. I'm not saying that mobile gaming is important and growing, but it really does look to be a higher-volume, lower cost and production quality, touch oriented experience compared to consoles and PCs.
Click to expand...

+1

I totally agree with this. Since consumer electronics are almost exclusively used for entertainment and, like you said, touch-based gaming on a mobile device or tablet pretty much is a low-budget suckfest, they should get rid of touch devices altogether and we should all be playing games behind a desktop PC or while sitting like a buncha zombies on a sofa with a controller for our console in our sweaty paws.
 
pelo said:
Is there a difference between your console $60 game at 720p and your tablet, docked with M+KB playing the same $60 game at 720p?
Click to expand...

In my case the games that run on my desktop PCs are the same exact binaries that run on my tablets and those tablets are designed to work with keyboards and mice and controllers.

pelo said:
I think that convergence is coming far sooner than people would like to think, and as a result it's going to dramatically change the landscape altogether. The lines have already become blurred as to what a PC actually is, now it's just a matter of taking a couple of extra steps.
Click to expand...

I'm as big of a believer in convergence as there is around here but the type of convergence you're talking about is very much in the Windows 8 style and at the moment that's pretty controversial. Mice, keyboards, touch, controllers, etc. running an mix of touch and non-touch software is still not exactly the most popular idea on the planet. If Windows 8 proves to be successful with the concept that sure I would expect to see more of it.

Again, my argument here isn't about technology, it's about the types of games that people play on different devices and the inputs to those games. Will people plug in a tablet to a big screen and play games with controllers that wouldn't probably work well while the device is being used with touch?

It's a pretty natural idea in Windows 8. This app works best with keyboard and mouse, this app works best with touch. I do think that this can work but it's not eactly something that everyone is embracing now.
 
359hli1.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top