Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 10th Dec 2012 23:24 UTC
Games Confirming the industry's worst-kept secret, Valve CEO Gabe Newell has confirmed Valve is working on its 'Steam Box', a Steam-powered HTPC geared towards console-like gaming. It'll most likely run Linux. "Well certainly our hardware will be a very controlled environment," he told Kotaku. "If you want more flexibility, you can always buy a more general purpose PC. For people who want a more turnkey solution, that's what some people are really gonna want for their living room." Steam has 50 million subscribers, so there's a market here. As a comparison: Xbox Live has 40 million subscribers.
Thread beginning with comment 544650
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by shmerl
by Nelson on Tue 11th Dec 2012 06:19 UTC in reply to "Comment by shmerl"
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

Consoles make gaming simple. PC gaming is "My PC can run this game, if I have Graphics card Y, Motherboard Y, that supports Processor and Chipset Z with 20GB of RAM and a custom cooling rig"

Even then its a mess of Catalyst drivers, 200 different DRM schemes, a comparatively weak online experience, etc.

Consoles are streamlined. You go to the store, you buy a box. You turn the box on and pop a disk in. Bam, you're gaming.

It's an implicit guarantee. If I buy this Console, I will run this selection of games relatively well.

I think Steam's push into the living room is stupid, but I think that a standardized "SteamBox" for Linux is a good idea. An on-the-shelf Linux PC you can sell to users and say "This is Linux".

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by Neolander on Tue 11th Dec 2012 06:56 in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

I think Steam's push into the living room is stupid, but I think that a standardized "SteamBox" for Linux is a good idea. An on-the-shelf Linux PC you can sell to users and say "This is Linux".

Most likely, this will be more of an Android scenario. They will base their work on Linux, but brand it as "SteamBox" everywhere, so it's not as if normal people will be able to tell.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Tue 11th Dec 2012 07:37 in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

Unfortunately the negative effect outweighs the streamlined ease of use. Some genres (like real time strategies) were even damaged by developers paying less attention to PC gaming. Complexity of setting up a good gaming machine up is paid off with complex and deeper games with rich interfaces, instead of dumbed down consolized stuff.

That's even besides the bad idea of turning general purpose computer into an appliance which usually comes with all kind of nasty DRM.

Edited 2012-12-11 07:55 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by moondevil on Tue 11th Dec 2012 09:10 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

You can do RTS just fine in consoles.

I think the main problem is big studios only doing what might sell, instead of trying out ideas, like in the 80's.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by Nelson on Tue 11th Dec 2012 09:11 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Its definitely a trade off, and its been executed poorly at times..but I believe in the general idea of it.

With regards to the DRM situation, some of the nastiest most insidious DRM I've ever seen has probably been on the PC.

At least on Xbox it's standardized and managed by Microsoft, not some Gaming company which licenses a shitty DRM scheme from two bit developers. My experience has been downright infuriating.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by lucas_maximus on Tue 11th Dec 2012 12:37 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Unfortunately the negative effect outweighs the streamlined ease of use. Some genres (like real time strategies) were even damaged by developers paying less attention to PC gaming. Complexity of setting up a good gaming machine up is paid off with complex and deeper games with rich interfaces, instead of dumbed down consolized stuff.


I always find this argument hilarious and is usually part of the PC Gamer Snobbery.

There is nothing stopping things like Age of Empires, Rome Total War or Starcraft from being on a console with a decent interface.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by WorknMan on Tue 11th Dec 2012 13:14 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Complexity of setting up a good gaming machine up is paid off with complex and deeper games with rich interfaces, instead of dumbed down consolized stuff.


Question is, do you really need a 'complex and deep' game, along with a $25 million budget, to make it fun?

IMO, games on the downloadable services like Braid, Super Meat Boy, Geometry Wars 2, Pacman CE, Bit Trip Runner, etc are 10x better than 98% of the shit being pumped out at retail these days.

Another poster said that the story and atmosphere that the retail games provide can never be matched by indie titles. But honestly, if I want story and atmosphere, I'll watch a fucking movie. (Or better yet, read a book.)

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by JAlexoid on Wed 12th Dec 2012 11:04 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Complexity of setting up a good gaming machine up is paid off with complex and deeper games with rich interfaces, instead of dumbed down consolized stuff.

There is also the question of the price...

Reply Parent Score: 3