6 ms·

With the mediocrity of "next-gen" consoles from Sony & MS, I pray to the gods that Valve is successful in this endeavor. Console stagnation harms all gaming.

kayoone 13y ago
Exactly. I think its quite worrisome that some of the launch titles dont run 1080p natively for performance reasons. If thats the basis for game development in the next 5-7 years it will be limited right off the bat considering 4K displays might be quite wide spread amongst enthusiasts until then. I also believe the consoles wont be able to go another 7 years without someone really disrupting their market, its long overdue.
archagon 13y ago
I sort of disagree. One of the benefits of the stagnant last-generation consoles is that us PC gamers didn't have to upgrade our hardware nearly as often. (And STILL, many games simply wouldn't run acceptably on hardware many times more powerful than Xbox/PS3, even at low settings.) I wish developers focused more on performance over flashiness. As far as I'm concerned, Super Mario Galaxy is still one of the best looking games ever made, and it was essentially running on Gamecube hardware.
cushychicken 13y ago
I'm extremely interested in how Valve will grow into a hardware company, especially given it's frequently-vaunted history of utterly flat management structure. Personally, I have a hard time seeing it work well; hardware is a whole different ballgame from software, and I can envision their internal organization (from what little I know of it) not being very conducive to HW development. That being said, I DEARLY HOPE I'm wrong.
- MrUnknown 13y ago
  I work at a company that has a "flat" management structure. You probably use a product that has one of our products several times a day and not even know it. While we are not a hardware design company, we do design and manufacture plenty of products you make use of every day. Mostly known for GORE-TEX. I don't believe the management structure would cause any major issues. Generally a team is created to handle a project, and people not in that team really have no major say in what is going on.
  - mst 13y ago
    Plus, flat management structure doesn't mean flat team structure - when a group of people work on a task at shadowcat, there's generally one person who acts as effective lead for that project, whether we get around to writing it down anywhere or not.
    - MrUnknown 13y ago
      yep! There are "semi-equivalents" to a traditional structure. Teams have one or more Leaders that make or help make decisions for the rest of the team. Once you get larger you do run into the case where a team is created that can force decisions upon another team to a certain degree. Such as if IT decides that your password should start containing two numbers instead of one, that decision affects everyone who uses those services. Don't like it? You need to get funding and support to setup your own IT for your team which most likely will not get support.
- jcastro 13y ago
  Other than the controller it sounds like they're not getting into the hardware business: - http://games.on.net/2013/11/steam-controllers-will-only-be-made-by-valve-no-partnerships-or-licenses/ http://games.on.net/2013/11/steam-controllers-will-only-be-m... This seems smart to me, control the quality of the controller (as that seems to be the central point of the experience anyway), and since the box itself is just a PC let the existing boutique builders build the boxes.
  - cushychicken 13y ago
    I didn't realize the controller was the only component they'd be making. I agree, that seems smart - especially with how slick they look. I got the impression their foray into hardware was into a more console-like machine.
PhasmaFelis 13y ago
I kinda think that ridiculous upgrade treadmills harm gaming more. Remember the mid-90s, when a bleeding-edge box was obsolete in a year? I don't think it's fair to blame consoles entirely for the slowing rate of hardware progression--we've just reached a point of diminishing returns, where it takes more and more hardware improvement for less and less visible benefit. Compare the difference between, say, Quake and Half-Life 2 versus Half-Life 2 and Crysis 3--about the same amount of time between each. But whatever it is, I do think reduced hardware development is good for the vast majority of gamers. The tiny group that is "hardcore", demands bleeding-edge graphics, and has thousands of dollars to burn every year might whine, but for the rest of us, the playing field is getting more level. I like pretty graphics as much as the next guy, but it's gameplay, not shaders, that make gaming fun.

kayoone 13y ago

Exactly. I think its quite worrisome that some of the launch titles dont run 1080p natively for performance reasons. If thats the basis for game development in the next 5-7 years it will be limited right off the bat considering 4K displays might be quite wide spread amongst enthusiasts until then. I also believe the consoles wont be able to go another 7 years without someone really disrupting their market, its long overdue.

archagon 13y ago

I sort of disagree. One of the benefits of the stagnant last-generation consoles is that us PC gamers didn't have to upgrade our hardware nearly as often. (And STILL, many games simply wouldn't run acceptably on hardware many times more powerful than Xbox/PS3, even at low settings.) I wish developers focused more on performance over flashiness. As far as I'm concerned, Super Mario Galaxy is still one of the best looking games ever made, and it was essentially running on Gamecube hardware.

cushychicken 13y ago

I'm extremely interested in how Valve will grow into a hardware company, especially given it's frequently-vaunted history of utterly flat management structure. Personally, I have a hard time seeing it work well; hardware is a whole different ballgame from software, and I can envision their internal organization (from what little I know of it) not being very conducive to HW development. That being said, I DEARLY HOPE I'm wrong.

MrUnknown 13y ago
I work at a company that has a "flat" management structure. You probably use a product that has one of our products several times a day and not even know it. While we are not a hardware design company, we do design and manufacture plenty of products you make use of every day. Mostly known for GORE-TEX. I don't believe the management structure would cause any major issues. Generally a team is created to handle a project, and people not in that team really have no major say in what is going on.
- mst 13y ago
  Plus, flat management structure doesn't mean flat team structure - when a group of people work on a task at shadowcat, there's generally one person who acts as effective lead for that project, whether we get around to writing it down anywhere or not.
  - MrUnknown 13y ago
    yep! There are "semi-equivalents" to a traditional structure. Teams have one or more Leaders that make or help make decisions for the rest of the team. Once you get larger you do run into the case where a team is created that can force decisions upon another team to a certain degree. Such as if IT decides that your password should start containing two numbers instead of one, that decision affects everyone who uses those services. Don't like it? You need to get funding and support to setup your own IT for your team which most likely will not get support.
jcastro 13y ago
Other than the controller it sounds like they're not getting into the hardware business: - http://games.on.net/2013/11/steam-controllers-will-only-be-made-by-valve-no-partnerships-or-licenses/ http://games.on.net/2013/11/steam-controllers-will-only-be-m... This seems smart to me, control the quality of the controller (as that seems to be the central point of the experience anyway), and since the box itself is just a PC let the existing boutique builders build the boxes.
- cushychicken 13y ago
  I didn't realize the controller was the only component they'd be making. I agree, that seems smart - especially with how slick they look. I got the impression their foray into hardware was into a more console-like machine.

PhasmaFelis 13y ago

I kinda think that ridiculous upgrade treadmills harm gaming more. Remember the mid-90s, when a bleeding-edge box was obsolete in a year? I don't think it's fair to blame consoles entirely for the slowing rate of hardware progression--we've just reached a point of diminishing returns, where it takes more and more hardware improvement for less and less visible benefit. Compare the difference between, say, Quake and Half-Life 2 versus Half-Life 2 and Crysis 3--about the same amount of time between each. But whatever it is, I do think reduced hardware development is good for the vast majority of gamers. The tiny group that is "hardcore", demands bleeding-edge graphics, and has thousands of dollars to burn every year might whine, but for the rest of us, the playing field is getting more level. I like pretty graphics as much as the next guy, but it's gameplay, not shaders, that make gaming fun.