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 544659
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Tue 11th Dec 2012 07:37 UTC 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[4]: Comment by shmerl
by Nelson on Tue 11th Dec 2012 09:14 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by shmerl"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I'm honestly surprised that all of the big players have taken a back burner approach to indie development.

Indie game development is where the future is. Success stories like FEZ and Braid are signs that its a very rich market.

If the Xbox opened up a "Game Store" with an honest to goodness try (like the Windows Store, NOT like the retarded Xbox Live Indie Games half-effort) then we could see a resurgence of that old risk taking.

I love indie gaming, and its a great tragedy that its almost been strangled to death in consoles.

Windows 8 (or iPad, if that's your cup of tea) imo is the next, best thing to indie development on Consoles.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by shmerl
by zima on Mon 17th Dec 2012 15:25 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by shmerl"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

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.

I think they are trying out ideas to a similar degree ...80s were also the times of many mediocre clones of few good games (remember the video game crash of 1983 and what brought it?)

Anyway, the present state of affairs is pretty much what we wanted, when we (nerds) wished for the mainstream to understand and appreciate games ...so, now the games have become a mainstream entertainment, with mainstream inertia and priorities of publishers.

Reply Parent Score: 2

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

RTS'es don't work without fast high precision inputs(aka mouse+keyboard)
Watch a screencast of an average Starcraft player to see his APS rate...

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[4]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Tue 11th Dec 2012 16:56 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

No, the question is do you really need $25 million budget to make a game with deep storyline and good interface? Probably not. For example take CD Projekt Red - they made Witcher 1 with very interesting story and brilliant interface. It was targeted for PC and they didn't care about consoles at that point (see https://youtube.com/watch?v=24qJXgiuO1E ).

In the Witcher 2 the story is also great, but the interface suffered a number of degradations because of their attempt to combine PC and console versions. Other than that, Witcher 2 could be on par with the first game interface wise. Only with later updates some of the annoyances in PC version were fixed. It's just an example of bad effects consoles can have on gaming.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by shmerl
by JAlexoid on Wed 12th Dec 2012 11:26 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by shmerl"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

You don't need $25mil. What you need is not being pretentious. There is a lot of that coming from a lot of indie games these days. Genuine and original - Trine1+2 and Machinarium. And know your limits.

A movie and a book aren't interactive and only provide an outsider's view into the story.

Reply Parent Score: 3

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

RE[4]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Wed 12th Dec 2012 21:16 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

Yes, price is important, but building general purpose computer is much more useful than buying limited purpose console. So it usually pays off in different ways.

Reply Parent Score: 2