5 ms·

I'm anxious to see how much Valve has learned since the launch of Steam a decade ago. Steam is great now, but it sucked pretty hard when it first came out. I re

I'm anxious to see how much Valve has learned since the launch of Steam a decade ago. Steam is great now, but it sucked pretty hard when it first came out. I remember the genuine shock I felt at having the friends functionality actually work the way I expected it to after about 4 years of pure shit. I have no doubt this will eventually be awesome, only question is how long it will take.

winslow 13y ago
Ahh yes I remember friends list being offline for a solid year if not more. It sure has come a long way.
gagege 13y ago
I remember almost not installing HL2 when it first came out, because I didn't want to install Steam. Back then, the concept of being locked in to a certain launcher felt so wrong. I didn't do anything with Steam (besides having to use it to install the Orange Box) again until that first massive sale they had back in 2008 or 2009 (Can't remember what year that was).
pekk 13y ago
You can use Steam today to see how much they have learned about how to run Steam. I don't see what this has to do with that.
- Chestofdraw 13y ago
  Steam today shows their software nous, hardware is a very different thing.
gcb1 13y ago
steam for still sucks in the way requires full control of my box to games. i only run it in a vm or spare machine, limit the games i can use. if that box is any good, it will be very good for people with a minimum security concern for their main computers
- simoncion 13y ago
  > steam for still sucks in the way requires full control of my box to games. What? I run Steam as a non-Administrator user on Windows, and a non-root user on Linux. Would you elaborate on your objections?
  - jamesgeck0 13y ago
    The DirectX installer (and other dependencies) that most games want to run the first time they load requires admin access. A few games want to run the installer every time the game runs if the user isn't running as an admin. You can skip dependency installation sometimes, but other times games will crash until you take care of it.
    - simoncion 13y ago
      I was really hoping to hear from the OP, but I'll address this tangent. These installers would be an issue whether or not one was running Steam. If you were installing from a disc (heh) rather than using Steam, all that installation stuff would have happened while you were running the installer on the disc (with Admin privs). So yes, installers that potentially install stuff under %PROGRAMFILES% and %SYSTEMROOT% will require admin privs. Unless you change permissions on the associated directories and registry trees, there's no way around that. AFAICT, Steam itself (and, indeed, many games sold through Steam) does not require admin privs. Maybe I'm wrong about this. That's why I asked the OP for clarification.
Anonymous823 13y ago
Well, they've overcome the number one challenge, that's getting something launched. Valve does one thing great, and that's rolling out consistent updates and features, so I have faith they'll improve the platform if it gains traction. In 2014 though, I think the biggest impact on their success will come down to marketing. Will people know what this device is? Will hardware manufacturers be able to get these units selling? Will people be raving about playing Steam games from their couch and telling all their friends to pick one up? They're going to be a small player in the console world. I can't picture them stealing Xbox and Playstation users. Those Battlefield, Call of Duty, NBA, Madden, etc., fans make up a huge part of the console market, and I think they're incredibly loyal to their console, while being very unfamiliar with Steam. The Steam Machines might have a market with PC users looking to casually game in the living room, and they might have a market if they can offer cheaper hardware and lower game prices than consoles. Offering better visuals would be another huge plus. If someone visits their friend's house, and says, 'wow, why does XYZ game look so much better on your television?', that's going to drive some sales, since you always have a group looking for the best of the best. It's a long road, and I think everyone is watching to see how this plays out. Valve is probably the only company that can make this happen at the moment, so it's exciting to see them taking a chance, and I applaud them for that.
- ekianjo 13y ago
  They are not inin the game to compete with consoles. Their strategy is for the long run, to be free of winfows influence should windows one day become a closed system. obviously they dont have any of the marketing muscle needed to go mainstream and thats not their market anyway.
  - Anonymous823 13y ago
    They better be in the game to compete with consoles, because they're going to be, whether they want to or not. If their long term plan is to simply run Big Picture Mode, and that's it, they'll fail, and never be more than a niche device used by a few PC gamers. The average person would much rather buy an Xbox or Playstation since they can use them for watching movies, Netflix, etc. Why buy a Steam Machine, if I need to buy something else to do the rest of the job in the living room? And if I'm spending a few hundred on an Xbox or Playstation, why bother with a Steam Machine for a couple of extra game titles? They have a chance to make Steam Machines a huge success. If they pigeon hole themselves as strictly being a gaming device, and not a media device that competes with consoles, they should change the name of their UI, because they're missing the big picture. However, I think you're wrong. Yes, they want a backup plan if they get kicked to the curb by Microsoft. However, if that was the only case, they'd be focusing on making Steam OS an actual operating system. Why spend the resources on a gaming controller, and Steam Machines? Why not go hard on a Linux OS that's a viable alternative for gamers? Their core audience is PC gamers, so why not make an OS for PC gamers, and skip the living room hardware all together?
girvo 13y ago
Bring back WON!

winslow 13y ago

Ahh yes I remember friends list being offline for a solid year if not more. It sure has come a long way.

gagege 13y ago

I remember almost not installing HL2 when it first came out, because I didn't want to install Steam. Back then, the concept of being locked in to a certain launcher felt so wrong. I didn't do anything with Steam (besides having to use it to install the Orange Box) again until that first massive sale they had back in 2008 or 2009 (Can't remember what year that was).

pekk 13y ago

You can use Steam today to see how much they have learned about how to run Steam. I don't see what this has to do with that.

Chestofdraw 13y ago
Steam today shows their software nous, hardware is a very different thing.

gcb1 13y ago

steam for still sucks in the way requires full control of my box to games. i only run it in a vm or spare machine, limit the games i can use. if that box is any good, it will be very good for people with a minimum security concern for their main computers

simoncion 13y ago
> steam for still sucks in the way requires full control of my box to games. What? I run Steam as a non-Administrator user on Windows, and a non-root user on Linux. Would you elaborate on your objections?
- jamesgeck0 13y ago
  The DirectX installer (and other dependencies) that most games want to run the first time they load requires admin access. A few games want to run the installer every time the game runs if the user isn't running as an admin. You can skip dependency installation sometimes, but other times games will crash until you take care of it.
  - simoncion 13y ago
    I was really hoping to hear from the OP, but I'll address this tangent. These installers would be an issue whether or not one was running Steam. If you were installing from a disc (heh) rather than using Steam, all that installation stuff would have happened while you were running the installer on the disc (with Admin privs). So yes, installers that potentially install stuff under %PROGRAMFILES% and %SYSTEMROOT% will require admin privs. Unless you change permissions on the associated directories and registry trees, there's no way around that. AFAICT, Steam itself (and, indeed, many games sold through Steam) does not require admin privs. Maybe I'm wrong about this. That's why I asked the OP for clarification.

Anonymous823 13y ago

Well, they've overcome the number one challenge, that's getting something launched. Valve does one thing great, and that's rolling out consistent updates and features, so I have faith they'll improve the platform if it gains traction. In 2014 though, I think the biggest impact on their success will come down to marketing. Will people know what this device is? Will hardware manufacturers be able to get these units selling? Will people be raving about playing Steam games from their couch and telling all their friends to pick one up? They're going to be a small player in the console world. I can't picture them stealing Xbox and Playstation users. Those Battlefield, Call of Duty, NBA, Madden, etc., fans make up a huge part of the console market, and I think they're incredibly loyal to their console, while being very unfamiliar with Steam. The Steam Machines might have a market with PC users looking to casually game in the living room, and they might have a market if they can offer cheaper hardware and lower game prices than consoles. Offering better visuals would be another huge plus. If someone visits their friend's house, and says, 'wow, why does XYZ game look so much better on your television?', that's going to drive some sales, since you always have a group looking for the best of the best. It's a long road, and I think everyone is watching to see how this plays out. Valve is probably the only company that can make this happen at the moment, so it's exciting to see them taking a chance, and I applaud them for that.

ekianjo 13y ago
They are not inin the game to compete with consoles. Their strategy is for the long run, to be free of winfows influence should windows one day become a closed system. obviously they dont have any of the marketing muscle needed to go mainstream and thats not their market anyway.
- Anonymous823 13y ago
  They better be in the game to compete with consoles, because they're going to be, whether they want to or not. If their long term plan is to simply run Big Picture Mode, and that's it, they'll fail, and never be more than a niche device used by a few PC gamers. The average person would much rather buy an Xbox or Playstation since they can use them for watching movies, Netflix, etc. Why buy a Steam Machine, if I need to buy something else to do the rest of the job in the living room? And if I'm spending a few hundred on an Xbox or Playstation, why bother with a Steam Machine for a couple of extra game titles? They have a chance to make Steam Machines a huge success. If they pigeon hole themselves as strictly being a gaming device, and not a media device that competes with consoles, they should change the name of their UI, because they're missing the big picture. However, I think you're wrong. Yes, they want a backup plan if they get kicked to the curb by Microsoft. However, if that was the only case, they'd be focusing on making Steam OS an actual operating system. Why spend the resources on a gaming controller, and Steam Machines? Why not go hard on a Linux OS that's a viable alternative for gamers? Their core audience is PC gamers, so why not make an OS for PC gamers, and skip the living room hardware all together?

girvo 13y ago

Bring back WON!