Steam Box out of steam already?

photofinish

!4 different boxes with different specs sounds like a train wreak already?

Jonny7

The manufacturer can put whatever specs into the machine they like

Higher specs = more performance = higher price

and vice versa

ShadowHearth

Steam machine - its just a sticker on prebuilt PC.

dreamers75

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Steam machine - its just a sticker on prebuilt PC.

Do you put your intel stickers and amd stickers on your pc too ? :pac:

Creamy Goodness

I'm really disappointed by steam machines. I think it's a really lazy approach.

I think it was hyped way too much for what they are, the restrictions on what constitutes a steam machine is too loose. They sold it as 3 different tiers but manufacturers can do what they like really.

dreamers75

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

I'm really disappointed by steam machines. I think it's a really lazy approach.

I think it was hyped way too much for what they are, the restrictions on what constitutes a steam machine is too loose. They sold it as 3 different tiers but manufacturers can do what they like really.

Well if your posting from a PC you sort of have one now. Never thought it would be anything else.

Someone with 75 million users doesnt funnel them into a new machine. They give them options.

marco_polo

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

I'm really disappointed by steam machines. I think it's a really lazy approach.

I think it was hyped way too much for what they are, the restrictions on what constitutes a steam machine is too loose. They sold it as 3 different tiers but manufacturers can do what they like really.

I think they are mostly there as a vehicle for the promotion of SteamOS, I don't really think Valve are in there so much for the hardware sales.

Creamy Goodness

dreamers75 wrote: »

Well if your posting from a PC you sort of have one now. Never thought it would be anything else.

Someone with 75 million users doesnt funnel them into a new machine. They give them options.

I don't think steam machines are solely for people who have a gaming pc, they're either a second pc for gamer's who have a pc, or something for casuals to get into the steam catalogue.

marco_polo wrote: »

I think they are mostly there as a vehicle for the promotion of SteamOS, I don't really think Valve are in there so much for the hardware sales.

It's a master stroke by valve, they actually didn't have to spend a huge amount of money on this, sure they built an OS based on a OSS OS and built a controller but didn't sink piles of cash into hardware.

I dunno I guess I just expected to be excited more by it. Now it's just a bit meh really.

Mickeroo

Hardly a train wreck on those grounds since they made it clear there would be many different machines with different specs from day one.

Tipsy McSwagger

In Valve We Trust

dreamers75

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

I don't think steam machines are solely for people who have a gaming pc, they're either a second pc for gamer's who have a pc, or something for casuals to get into the steam catalogue.

Its another use for my 2nd HDMI output + Xbox wireless controller.

its good for me, i seriously doubt i would ever purchase one of those machines. I would even hesititate at buying for a Steam OS Licence if one existed.

jaykhunter

I love Valve's games and I enjoy using Steam, but I think even if they had 2 or 3 options, it'd still fail. A specifically spec'd out PC is what a console is. For much cheaper. With exclusives.

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

I don't think steam machines are solely for people who have a gaming pc, they're either a second pc for gamer's who have a pc, or something for casuals to get into the steam catalogue.

That must be the smallest demographic ever. If you're casual you're much likelier to just get a console. If you wanted a PC they're shilling 14 different options - which is just as bad as picking out parts yourself...i.e. just sort a gaming rig yourself.

Anyway I hope Valve don't lose much over this but I can't see it being anything but a flop. I'm weary of installing a non-MS OS but I'm interested in that controller though.

Creamy Goodness

I don't think Valve will lose a lot of money on this. I think the only place they really would have spent any money would have been on the controller.

Making steam compatible with linux (steam os) was probably one of their famous side projects that gathered (huh huh) steam.

I think steam machines will be a flop but the huge win will be that game developers will see that creating games in OpenGL (Windows/OS X/linux) as opposed to DirectX (Windows) will give them a wider audience and their be more choice for us that don't have Windows.

dreamers75

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

I think steam machines will be a flop but the huge win will be that game developers will see that creating games in OpenGL (Windows/OS X/linux) as opposed to DirectX (Windows) will give them a wider audience and their be more choice for us that don't have Windows.

For indie games./games my phone can run.

Im not sure we will get something to push our gaming machines from it, hope im wrong tho.

titan18

Looks like it's a long game for them, not going to match the hype of competing with the Xbox One and PS4, but considering it'd constantly be updating and more and more games will be designed for it, in 5 or so years, it could be a case where PC games are being developed for it instead of just Windows. If it works out for them, they'll probably be the most dominant company in gaming, if not, they'll still have Steam and their own games.

The_Valeyard

Im actually holding off on the Xbox One & PS4 until I get a look at the Steam machines.

Fnz

Calling these "Steam Machines" rather than PCs, is to make a distinction without difference, and that's a problem. Simplicity should have been their selling point.

The Steam Machine (if they care about it) could well see success over the long term, but they missed a trick by announcing 14 options prior to launch.

Jonny7

As a long time computer builder - these are a bit meh, but they will be successful

1. Building an equivalent PC, same size and cooling will be a little cheaper, but takes time and knowledge - a large amount of people have neither

2. They actually look good

3. Apple has shown over the years that people will pay extra for form, factor and simplicity

4. The whole concept is obviously not ground-breaking, I already have a HTPC that plays movies, music and games in the living room on my big-screen - it's great, but fiddly.. now I enjoy the fiddling but most people don't.

5. It's Steam

Jonny7

Fnz wrote: »

The Steam Machine (if they care about it) could well see success over the long term, but they missed a trick by announcing 14 options prior to launch.

The opposite - it's about choice, some want a cheap Steambox other's want more powerful - why is this even a topic I don't know

If they wanted a failure - they'd have released just one spec which would have been disastrous from a PC gaming POV

nesf

dreamers75 wrote: »

For indie games./games my phone can run.

Im not sure we will get something to push our gaming machines from it, hope im wrong tho.

At first I was thinking, there are so rather resource intensive OpenGL titles out there, though they aren't the norm, but then I was wondering why the hell you'd lock down a good gaming rig with SteamOS, it's not being pushed as a replacement desktop more as an addition to your collection, e.g. being able to stream off your powerful desktop to a smaller box next to the PC and enjoy games that would require a much bigger and louder PC box beside the TV if this option didn't exist.

Tipsy McSwagger

To be honest I would have loved if they had come up with something that let's me play games on my tv in the sitting room direct from my PC in the spare room.

nesf

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

To be honest I would have loved if they had come up with something that let's me play games on my tv in the sitting room direct from my PC in the spare room.

http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/valve-steam-os-in-home-streaming-launches-into-beta-17-01-2014/

They're working on it.

Tipsy McSwagger

nesf wrote: »

http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/valve-steam-os-in-home-streaming-launches-into-beta-17-01-2014/

They're working on it.

It says streaming between 2 home computers in different rooms which is no good to me.

nesf

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

It says streaming between 2 home computers in different rooms which is no good to me.

Well, the idea is having a small, cheap and quiet PC next to the TV and have it running games on the TV at 1080p without having a big noisy gaming rig beside the TV (you can have the heavy and noisy lifting being done on a PC in another room). It's possible that this streaming method (which is hardware agnostic on the host machine) might be able to run on lower powered set-top boxes but I don't know it's still in early beta.

Tipsy McSwagger

nesf wrote: »

Well, the idea is having a small, cheap and quiet PC next to the TV and have it running games on the TV at 1080p without having a big noisy gaming rig beside the TV (you can have the heavy and noisy lifting being done on a PC in another room). It's possible that this streaming method (which is hardware agnostic on the host machine) might be able to run on lower powered set-top boxes but I don't know it's still in early beta.

I was hoping for a small box (like vita tv) that streams the games from your PC to the tv. It would have wireless controller/kb&m support.

ShadowHearth

jaykhunter wrote: »

I love Valve's games and I enjoy using Steam, but I think even if they had 2 or 3 options, it'd still fail. A specifically spec'd out PC is what a console is. For much cheaper. With exclusives.



That must be the smallest demographic ever. If you're casual you're much likelier to just get a console. If you wanted a PC they're shilling 14 different options - which is just as bad as picking out parts yourself...i.e. just sort a gaming rig yourself.

Anyway I hope Valve don't lose much over this but I can't see it being anything but a flop. I'm weary of installing a non-MS OS but I'm interested in that controller though.

I dont understand why people only refering exclusives as some sort of Console only thing. Pc got more exclusives then all consoles put together. In some cases such complex exclusive games that consoles could only dream about due to their hardware and control limitations.

For what it is right now, steam box is just Meh product. The thing I feared happened at its best. To make it even worse a lot of thse steam boxes dont make sense spec wise and are overpriced just because they got fancy case and Steam Sticker on them.

imitation

As a big PC gamer, im pretty on the fence about the steam box, its likely I will get more bang for my buck from my self builds.
i like the idea of streaming to my TV, but surely a 90 quid android stick would be able to do this rather than an expensive PC, which wont perform like my main pc anyway. It will be great for people who dont want to self build. The problem though will be how to classify these machines, users will be paying for the cheapest possible unit and then wondering why crysis or whatever doesnt run. There should be some sort of numbering or level indiication, otherwise people will get stung, and go back to consoles where its straight forward.

nesf

imitation wrote: »

As a big PC gamer, im pretty on the fence about the steam box, its likely I will get more bang for my buck from my self builds.
i like the idea of streaming to my TV, but surely a 90 quid android stick would be able to do this rather than an expensive PC, which wont perform like my main pc anyway. It will be great for people who dont want to self build. The problem though will be how to classify these machines, users will be paying for the cheapest possible unit and then wondering why crysis or whatever doesnt run. There should be some sort of numbering or level indiication, otherwise people will get stung, and go back to consoles where its straight forward.

Well from the Beta forum people have been successfully streaming to 7 year old laptops so I don't think we'd need to put an expensive PC beside the TV.

Pushtrak

ShadowHearth wrote: »

I dont understand why people only refering exclusives as some sort of Console only thing. Pc got more exclusives then all consoles put together. In some cases such complex exclusive games that consoles could only dream about due to their hardware and control limitations.

I always think these posts would go down a lot better if examples of exclusives would be posted. Its like, PC has exclusives but we prefer not to talk about it. Er, ok. People on PC know about the console exclusives, but the same isn't true the other way around.

2Mad2BeMad

Why 14 though?
I mean seriously, aren't some of these machines bound to have very similar specs as well as power? only difference been the case holding it all together.

I'd understand if it was like 3-4, least then you could have a low,mid,mid-high and high powered machine

I think he said the price ranges up to 2grand. So that's me as a customer gone anyway haha, although I might buy one of the lower budget ones just to try out the joypad and see how well it works.
But in all honesty I can't see this selling great at all. Its basicly a pre built pc

Lone Stone

As a pc gamer and console gamer i find the whole steam very confusing, at first i thought it would be a console equivalent experience based around steam and then i see its like a million different steam machines that look like they would cost a hell of a lot more than a console, so that rules out most console players even thinking about it. And i would be put off seeing a better spec'd steam box's if i was buying a steam box because then im just buying a crappy version of a steam machine, and who wants to buy an inferior product eh no one.

I mean when you buy a console you know everyone's is the same spec, and pc gamers would probably either know what they need or know some one who knows, yea bleh it has confused my mind. Who is the target audience for this ?

super_furry

They're basically gimped PCs. Unless there's an obvious price enticement, which there doesn't seem to be, I don't really see the point - especially with a hobbled and restricted OS.

imitation

Thats the problem with these steam boxes, who are they targeting ?

PC gamers are already going to have a desktop/laptop, so a steambox is a huge amount of redundancy for these users. They'll need to keep both sets of devices, because if you want to play many games seriously you just need a keyboard mouse & office chair. Likewise power users aren't going to fire up word on there steambox.

Console games on the other hand will have to pay just as much as a console. The huge library is tempting, but what happens when they download a game that just doesn't want to work on steam os, or doesn't work with a controller, I'm willing to bet there is plenty.

I also have wider concerns about SteamOS, although I think its a fantastic idea and competition is just what is needed.

Considering the steam application is 10 years old, most of the major duh "shoulda been in for ages" improvements have been in the past 2-3 years (installing to other disks, throttling bandwidth) and is imo clunky and a bit slow. Developing an OS around this adds another layer of complexity, are they up to it?

Another elephant in the room is DirectX, which Microsoft have spent many years and dollars on just to make sure something like SteamOS doesn't happen. So many new & old games run on it, and I doubt Microsoft are going to even let them use WINE if at all possible in SteamOS. It will also be a battle to see if developers Can be arsed to use OpenGL over DirectX, I'm guessing its easier to port a DX game from XBONE to PC than it is to Port OpenGL from PS4 to PC.

I wouldn't discount them completely, but the whole online game shop gig kind of fell into there lap because they were way ahead of any possible competition. This time they will have to wedge there way into a market with plenty of strong competition already in place.

nesf

Pushtrak wrote: »

I always think these posts would go down a lot better if examples of exclusives would be posted. Its like, PC has exclusives but we prefer not to talk about it. Er, ok. People on PC know about the console exclusives, but the same isn't true the other way around.

There's a vast library of strategy games that many/most solely console owners have never experienced. You get the odd strategy game on consoles but they are unfortunately unusual (Skulls of the Shogun is a good example of a console strategy game but it somewhat shallow compared to what's been done with hex-based games on the PC, not that I don't like the game!).

Examples? Eh, where to start?? I mean we're talking about 15 years of back catalogue here. Exclusives isn't the correct word here, the genre itself is practically non-existent on modern consoles other than the odd indie or FF:Tactics type game. Of course this isn't a genre for everyone and that Steam Box controller will never work for RTS games in multiplayer (you would get destroyed).

nesf

Ok, I'll give examples because I'm bored: :P

Do you want to command armies? Cool, at what scale? Will you command entire empires in a grand strategy game like Hearts of Iron II or would you prefer squad based turn based with the Close Combat series? Ok what about a more traditional base building RTS? Try Company of Heroes. Want to a serious RTS (i.e. ammo counts for units, cover *matters* etc) at company/battalion level? Try Wargame: Airland Battle. Want a RTS and a turn based game? The Total War series, though it has its problems with some parts, will cover you for months and months of play (should I bother mentioning the mod support for PC games?).

But you're not interested in wargames, you want to command a country, no problem we can look at another grand strategy game like Europa Universalis IV. Learning curve too steep? No problem, try a 4x game like Civilisation or if you want a Fantasy setting Fallen Enchantress or a space setting Galactic Civilisations. Too slow paced but want to keep the scope? No problem, try a 4x/RTS hybrid like Sins of a Solar Empire.

Sick of poor AIs in games in general? No problem, try the indie game AI Wars, it's harder than probably any strategy game you've ever played at the higher levels.

How about a hex based wargame, hard like the ones from the early 90s? Battle Worlds: Kronos recently came out after a Kickstarter campaign. Ever wanted to build spaceships? Try Kerbal Space Program (warning it's addictive :P). I probably should mention tower defence games like Defence Grid and Sol Survivor (the latter came out on XBox as well I believe).

Finally you get the quirky indie stuff, sometimes extremely difficult like Eador: Masters of a Broken World.

Anyway, a small selection of some of the "exclusives" on the platform (most of these would be unplayable with a controller).

Magill

Pushtrak wrote: »

I always think these posts would go down a lot better if examples of exclusives would be posted. Its like, PC has exclusives but we prefer not to talk about it. Er, ok. People on PC know about the console exclusives, but the same isn't true the other way around.

I dunno, im sure most non casual gamers would have heard of games like League of legends, World of Warcraft, Civilization, Starcraft, Dota2, Team Fortress, DayZ, Football Manager etc.

Obviously there are a lot of casual gamers on console tho, most of those probably don't go to gaming websites and forums so they're just not as informed. Whereas i honestly don't think you get many "Casual" gamers in the same sense on PC.

Obviously the marketing strategies are really different as well.

nesf

Magill wrote: »

Whereas i honestly don't think you get many "Casual" gamers in the same sense on PC.

You do, they're the very low specs running indie games crowd normally. Plus Sims people etc.

Fnz

Jonny7 wrote: »

The opposite - it's about choice, some want a cheap Steambox other's want more powerful - why is this even a topic I don't know

If they wanted a failure - they'd have released just one spec which would have been disastrous from a PC gaming POV

As I've said, they've enticed PC gamers, by producing PCs. This solves no problem. All the complexities of figuring out component nomenclature and deciding which Machine has the 'best' GPU/CPU combo are still present.

This does almost nothing to widen the appeal of PC gaming. The software, and controller, can be used on any regular PC so why does this hardware exist?

nesf

Fnz wrote: »

As I've said, they've enticed PC gamers, by producing PCs. This solves no problem. All the complexities of figuring out component nomenclature and deciding which Machine has the 'best' GPU/CPU combo are still present.

This does almost nothing to widen the appeal of PC gaming. The software, and controller, can be used on any regular PC so why does this hardware exist?

The hardware exists for people who couldn't (or couldn't be bothered) building their own machine. Sure many (it's no longer most and hasn't been for a long time) PC gamers could build a little SteamOS box and stream to it or whatever but the ordinary consumer just wants a pre-made box with all the stuff put in properly. There will be a "secondary market" if these take off of basically people advising you on what Steam Box fits your needs best. For most PC gamers it'll be a thin box that they can stream to, for most console gamers it'll have to be something a lot beefier.

That said, this is a lot simpler than building a custom PC where you need to weigh up each component against each other (cutting back on CPU spend for a better GPU or whatever). Here you just get to choose between bespoke boxes, sure you pay a premium for this but that's always going to be the case if you dodge the more technical approach of building your own PC to your own standards.


All that said. I haven't seen anything that would make me want one over a console unless I was already heavily invested in PC gaming and had a library of games all ready to be on the TV.

Reekwind

nesf wrote: »

The hardware exists for people who couldn't (or couldn't be bothered) building their own machine

As opposed to walking into a PC World and saying 'I want a PC that plays games'? I've played games on the PC for almost twenty years now and the closest that I've come to 'building' a PC is picking specs on the Dell website

So I've already got the basic hardware (in the form of a PC) without having to assemble it myself. Why should I buy a Steam Box?

nesf

Reekwind wrote: »

As opposed to walking into a PC World and saying 'I want a PC that plays games'? I've played games on the PC for almost twenty years now and the closest that I've come to 'building' a PC is picking specs on the Dell website

So I've already got the basic hardware (in the form of a PC) without having to assemble it myself. Why should I buy a Steam Box?

Because a Dell box is too big and noisy to sit beside many people's televisions? Well, there's probably some extremely overpriced slim Alienware model that'd do it for more than the price of a SteamBox I assume.

Fnz

nesf wrote: »

The hardware exists for people who couldn't (or couldn't be bothered) building their own machine. Sure many (it's no longer most and hasn't been for a long time) PC gamers could build a little SteamOS box and stream to it or whatever but the ordinary consumer just wants a pre-made box with all the stuff put in properly. There will be a "secondary market" if these take off of basically people advising you on what Steam Box fits your needs best....

That said, this is a lot simpler than building a custom PC where you need to weigh up each component against each other (cutting back on CPU spend for a better GPU or whatever). Here you just get to choose between bespoke boxes, sure you pay a premium for this but that's always going to be the case if you dodge the more technical approach of building your own PC to your own standards.

There are already solutions for those not wanting to build a PC. Pre-built PCs offered by Dell/Alienware and the like make the Steam Machine offering seem like a solution in need of a problem. If there's a reduction in complexity here, it seems insignificant.

nesf

Fnz wrote: »

There are already solutions for those not wanting to build a PC. Pre-built PCs offered by Dell/Alienware and the like make the Steam Machine offering seem like a solution in need of a problem. If there's a reduction in complexity here, it seems insignificant.

No. These are not equivalent. Really. The design specs for a desktop machine and a TV/Living Room accessory are rather different.

Fnz

nesf wrote: »

Because a Dell box is too big and noisy to sit beside many people's televisions? Well, there's probably some extremely overpriced slim Alienware model that'd do it for more than the price of a SteamBox I assume.

Aesthetics can be important for the living room. Home Theatre PCs have been a thing for a number of years now. I'd hope, by now, there are non-garish option for the living room.

I would like to see a comparison between similarly specced Stream Machines/pre-built PCs.

Fnz

nesf wrote: »

No. These are not equivalent. Really. The design specs for a desktop machine and a TV/Living Room accessory are rather different.

I personally don't think aesthetics and acoustics are the things people find intolerable about PCs. It's the (real and perceived) lack of simplicity.

nesf

Fnz wrote: »

Aesthetics can be important for the living room. Home Theatre PCs have been a thing for a number of years now. I'd hope, by now, there are non-garish option for the living room.

I would like to see a comparison between similarly specced Stream Machines/pre-built PCs.

HTPCs are very weak machines compared to a stand-alone SteamBox, something similar to a HTPC though could stream from a more powerful PC elsewhere in the house.

Fnz wrote: »

I personally don't think aesthetics and acoustics are the things people find intolerable about PCs. It's the (real and perceived) lack of simplicity.

There definitely is that, consoles are simple plug and play and the SteamBox is trying to do the same for you with a simple OS and pre-built machine. Like I said earlier, I don't see the attraction of these for console gamers really, consoles already do the simple, fit in in the living room and entertain you thing pretty damn well. Sure if you want to play Civ V you might want a Steam Box but if you want to play Civ V style games rather badly it's unlikely you won't have a PC of some kind around the place to play them on.

Aesthetics and acoustics are important though, there's a reason that modern consoles fit so neatly beside our blu-ray players and TV decoders etc. People have an expectation of a small neat quiet thing that entertains them, this is an interesting engineering challenge.