3 ms·

I agree, it's a long term play, and their chance of winning over hardcore console users is zero at this time. However, they will be directly competing with cons

I agree, it's a long term play, and their chance of winning over hardcore console users is zero at this time. However, they will be directly competing with consoles for space under the television. As for solving your problem with hardware confusion, they could have manufacturers ship Steam Machines with some kind of rating system. Remember how Windows had those performance ratings for memory, processor, etc? They could do something very similar. You look at a Steam Machine, it says processor 5.7, memory 4.5, graphics, 5.1. Then you look in the Steam game library and see a certain game recommends graphics 4.5 or greater. Or this indie title plays great on anything 3.4 or higher. You use those numbers to guide your purchase. Changing hardware will come to their advantage though. Xbox and Playstation will ramp up over the next few years, and we'll see some improvements and major titles heading their way. However, what's happening 5-6 years from now? Xbox and Playstation are dated, Steam OS has the bugs worked out, and Steam Machines are available with the latest advances in hardware. Where are you going to buy Call of Duty now, for your 6 year old console, or pickup a Steam Machine that can run it twice as fast, at Ultra HD resolution? That's going to be a big plus for Steam, and if people are buying in 5 or 6 years from now, they're less likely to jump on the next console launch, since they already have powerful hardware in their living room. Another huge plus for Steam in the living room is Oculus Rift. If it's released below $300, and exclusive to the PC and Steam Machines, they have a unique experience the consoles can't offer. Nothing is short term, I think Steam Machines will make a crawl the first few years, but I think they're going to be pushing to replace consoles, and I think they might succeed. Cheap games, big sales, Oculus Rift, low cost or high performance hardware to choose from, and eventually an open store available for anyone to publish towards. Edit: Oh, one other huge advantage. They're backed by every hardware manufacturer they get involved. Dell is going to be dropping flyers in every mailbox around the world, with a couple of pages showing off their Steam Machine line-up. Dell wants money, and if Steam Machines succeed, they get rich as well. PC sales are down, they'd love another piece of hardware to sell. Get every other hardware company doing the same, and that's a lot of free marketing.

ekianjo 13y ago
I also think, like you, that OcculusRift will be the big game changer that may spell the doom for the consoles (because are far from being powerful enough for these kind of things). As for the ratings system, sure, it's possible but it does not mean it's not confusing for consumers, and it adds another barrier to adoption - that's basically NOT mainstream. And you mentioned Windows performance ratings as a reference, but that's a failed example since nobody ever used these numbers anywhere. If they go for categories/benchmarking, then they will need to have a kind of authority in place to attribute such numbers, and Valve's message so far is very against centralization. So I don't expect them to lead such efforts. If they ever did, I believe they would make it simple: SteamBox Level A to play these games only and do streaming, SteamBox Level B to play all GPU intensive games... etc... EDIT; I don't think Dell will get rich, and neither most of the hardware manufacturers involved for that matter. SteamOS is no more no less than an Android OS-like for the PC, and that will push prices down for manufacturers which will fight hard to make small margins on large volumes. It will only be profitable for very few players.
- kenrikm 13y ago
  The current consoles are plenty powerful for this type of thing, don't forget they are basically just gaming PCs in compact cases this generation and share almost the exact same hardware (Xbox One and PS4).
  - ekianjo 13y ago
    Really ? Even the Occulus Rift co-founder mentioned they are far away from where they need to be. WHen you want to do virtual reality, you need constant 60 fps (or more, ideally) in order to give a good impression of movement in all directions. XBone and PS4 are already struggling to display a SINGLE 1080p screen at 60 fps already, let's not dream too much. They are massively underpowered, and the AMD APU is notorious for being mid-range in terms of performance at best in 2013. Give it one more year and even the cheapest gaming PCs will be more powerful than them.
    - kenrikm 13y ago
      One of my coworkers has a Occulus dev kit.. I'm pretty sure it's just a single screen in there so 1080p Occulus would only require a single 1080p stream as far as I know, which current consoles are more then capable of.
      - ekianjo 13y ago
        It's not just about rendering a single screen, it's about rending two different scenes even if it's one screen.

ekianjo 13y ago

I also think, like you, that OcculusRift will be the big game changer that may spell the doom for the consoles (because are far from being powerful enough for these kind of things). As for the ratings system, sure, it's possible but it does not mean it's not confusing for consumers, and it adds another barrier to adoption - that's basically NOT mainstream. And you mentioned Windows performance ratings as a reference, but that's a failed example since nobody ever used these numbers anywhere. If they go for categories/benchmarking, then they will need to have a kind of authority in place to attribute such numbers, and Valve's message so far is very against centralization. So I don't expect them to lead such efforts. If they ever did, I believe they would make it simple: SteamBox Level A to play these games only and do streaming, SteamBox Level B to play all GPU intensive games... etc... EDIT; I don't think Dell will get rich, and neither most of the hardware manufacturers involved for that matter. SteamOS is no more no less than an Android OS-like for the PC, and that will push prices down for manufacturers which will fight hard to make small margins on large volumes. It will only be profitable for very few players.

kenrikm 13y ago
The current consoles are plenty powerful for this type of thing, don't forget they are basically just gaming PCs in compact cases this generation and share almost the exact same hardware (Xbox One and PS4).
- ekianjo 13y ago
  Really ? Even the Occulus Rift co-founder mentioned they are far away from where they need to be. WHen you want to do virtual reality, you need constant 60 fps (or more, ideally) in order to give a good impression of movement in all directions. XBone and PS4 are already struggling to display a SINGLE 1080p screen at 60 fps already, let's not dream too much. They are massively underpowered, and the AMD APU is notorious for being mid-range in terms of performance at best in 2013. Give it one more year and even the cheapest gaming PCs will be more powerful than them.
  - kenrikm 13y ago
    One of my coworkers has a Occulus dev kit.. I'm pretty sure it's just a single screen in there so 1080p Occulus would only require a single 1080p stream as far as I know, which current consoles are more then capable of.
    - ekianjo 13y ago
      It's not just about rendering a single screen, it's about rending two different scenes even if it's one screen.