By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Valve is making a huge mistake with the Steam Machine

Tagged games:

Xenostar said:
pezus said:

Steam OS is a full OS. Why would you want Windows if you can do most things on Linux anyway? 


The same reason the mass market currently is not running linux PCs, the software support is lacking and the userbility is hurrendous when compared to windows. 

This OS may make playing games slightly easier, but with a massivley limited linux catalogue, no exclusive games and hardware that is just as expensive as buying a normal PC as the manufactures will be in it for making profit off the hardware as im sure Valve wont be sharing there cut of the software sales. 

You know Valve is working on it though. The library won't seem limited down the road and I'm sure Steam OS will be way more user friendly than the usual linux OS. It's designed for gaming in the living room after all and you know Gaben always means business when he does something. But of course the hardware will profit. Still, One and PS4 are close to profiting and they are high-powered, streamlined gaming machines but not nearly as expensive as powerful PC rigs.



Around the Network
Lyrikalstylez said:
I could care less, I'd rather get a Wii u than this pile of steaming ....... Well you know lol


So you care quite a bit.



________________________________________________________________

landguy1 said:
SvennoJ said:

1. Valve is going after a market that is already used to all games being digital. There won't be any backlash this time as it is not removing features (trading, lending, etc) that people were used to having. Plus people will expect the cheap prices to continue, as opposed to console digital games that have always been more expensive then a physical copy.

2. Some exclusives will come (HL3?), PC exclusive games might get some extra optimization for the Steam hardware. Anyway it won't matter that much when you can get the same AAA games for $10 or less.

3. The average user on Steam doesn't have a very strong PC and doesn't spend thousands of dollars to keep up with the latest GPU's. The average user plays games on their home office PC or laptop. A simple box to put under the tv would be appealing to the average user.

4. Steam is a very well established name and already offers many of the features of psn and xbox live, for free.

To your points:

1.  Agreed, no one is expecting anything else from this.

2.  As a steam user, I have never run into the $10 AAA title.  Maybe 2 years old stuff is that way, but then only if it sucked to begin with.

3.  This is mostly correct, but that actually would support the idea that the Steam boxes will fail.  Most users don't want to buy a special box/pc to play games, they use what they already have.  So, why would they bother to buy a special box that is more complicated to learn and won't have all the same stuff as a regular PC?

4.  Steam is well established, but only with people outside the casual crowd.  Most casual gamers are more interested in IOS or Android apps.  Still free and very cheap.

Most 2 year old games are $10 or less in sales. And you don't have to wait that long, Tombraider was on for $12.49 just recently.

It all depends on price wether the Steam box will be a success. Sure the average user is not going to fork over $600 dollars to have dedicated box under the tv.
The point of the whole thing is to make it less complicated, why would it be more complicated then a regular pc? It appeals to me for 2 reasons, it's not associated with work which a pc is for me, and I would expect that everything that runs on it will have been certified for use on TV with a controller, like a console. No need to find and copy ini files from the web to get Anti chamber to use a controller, or get stuck with a horrible control scheme in Mirrormoon for example. (fun game though)

I don't know if the casual crowd doesn't use Steam. Do casuals only play on facebook and mobiles?



we already have PCs for steam...steam box is unnecessary and nobody will buy it to replace their PC



DieAppleDie said:
we already have PCs for steam...steam box is unnecessary and nobody will buy it to replace their PC


it cant replace a pc. it only does games. I think that is why it will fail. steam on pc's is great because it kills 2 birds with 1 stone. Have a work machine, and a game machine, vs just a game machine



Around the Network
DieAppleDie said:
we already have PCs for steam...steam box is unnecessary and nobody will buy it to replace their PC


^^^Essentially what you said!^^^



HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Every single one of you will look like fools in 3 years. Valve = genius.

And they're not trying to "dethrone" anyone really. There's just a lot of space in the living room for what they're offering. As a Linux fanboy (yeah I said it) and a major admirer of Valve (though I don't do Steam really), I have to say that I will certainly be getting one.

I mean, it's a better buy than a PC for the living room since it will do everything the PC does already.

Can't believe the users here aren't aware of Valve's midas touch.

Not to mention that they have the most loyal fanbase out there.



I can literally customize every single aspect of my living room with Linux running EVERYTHING. FUCK YOU WINDOWS. Useless OS.

Once you've sat on the couch with a controller (xbox or ps3 you choose) and download a game for $15 which is $60 on consoles and you're playing it at MUCH better graphical settings then you'll KNOW that this isn't some ruse. This is real.

Don't be afraid of change people. Playstation isn't going anywhere... The Xbox however... Might just be displaced.



Dr.Grass said:
HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Every single one of you will look like fools in 3 years. Valve = genius.

And they're not trying to "dethrone" anyone really. There's just a lot of space in the living room for what they're offering. As a Linux fanboy (yeah I said it) and a major admirer of Valve (though I don't do Steam really), I have to say that I will certainly be getting one.

I mean, it's a better buy than a PC for the living room since it will do everything the PC does already.

Can't believe the users here aren't aware of Valve's midas touch.

Not to mention that they have the most loyal fanbase out there.

I use steam all the time. it is my gaming plat form. but a steam box is useless to  me. A pc with windows and steam (and that i build myself) is prefered to another fragment in the os field. I made my choice to stick with windows for it all. steam on windows is great, but with out its of no use to me atleast.



thranx said:
DieAppleDie said:
we already have PCs for steam...steam box is unnecessary and nobody will buy it to replace their PC


it cant replace a pc. it only does games. I think that is why it will fail. steam on pc's is great because it kills 2 birds with 1 stone. Have a work machine, and a game machine, vs just a game machine


Ummm. Really? Where'd you get that?

As far as I'm aware you can do anything on God's green earth with it.