5 ms·

I think SteamOS is a very tough sell for gamers who run windows and steam anyway and mostly don't give a damn about linux. Even Steamboxes are much more useful

by kayoone 13y ago

I think SteamOS is a very tough sell for gamers who run windows and steam anyway and mostly don't give a damn about linux. Even Steamboxes are much more useful if you just slap windows & steam on it.

soperj 13y ago
How would it make them more useful? - legitimate question. Can you not run linux applications from SteamOS?
- the_ancient 13y ago
  S/He is probably referring to the lack of titles for Linux right now. S/He probably has an unrealistic expectation that valve should be able to snap their fingers and make a catalog they spent 10 years building all work on Linux automagically.
  - cwyers 13y ago
    That's completely unfair. It may not be realistic to expect Valve to get the same catalog for Linux gaming as is available on Windows, but Steam Boxes cost roughly the same as similarly-equipped Windows gaming PCs, so it's the same market. It's unrealistic to expect Valve to be able to deliver the full Steam catalog on Linux now, but it's equally unrealistic to expect potential users to not care about the number of games available, particularly AAA games.
    - ekianjo 13y ago
      Hey, the SteamMachines are not even out yet. Let's talk again in Late 2014 shall we?
      - cwyers 13y ago
        I mean, we can talk later, but we have some information on the capabilities of the proposed Steam Machines, the prices, and what games are available right now and what are announced (the majority of AAA games between now and the end of summer are already announced, I can't think of any that have Linux support announced alongside Windows/Xbox/Playstation). There's certainly enough information to make SOME judgement about what Valve is doing. Being openminded enough to receive new information doesn't require us to shut off our brains now.
Crito 13y ago
I think that SteamOS/Steamboxes could be a win for people who are not currently PC gamers. I do some minimal gaming in Debian on my laptop (KSP, occasional minecraft), but I could see myself getting a Steambox to do some proper gaming (I haven't played a GTA since GTA3, but the most recent looks pretty cool. If Steamboxes got that I'd get one in a heartbeat).
SixSigma 13y ago
PC sales to homes are down, think tablet / smartphone users who want a box to hook up to the TV. Valve already have the software distribution part solved and a catalogue of proven games. For users the SteamBox isn't so much of a gamble and cheap enough for people to take a punt. What's more, the upgrade path is there, imagine an XBox where you can buy next year's model and the games you already bought look better. Xbox One games are already last gen graphics, even some smartphones have better res. http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/09/console-crisis/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/09/console-crisis/ http://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/ http://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/
- kayoone 13y ago
  I don't doubt that, i just don't see alot of value in SteamOS right now. Id just get a Steambox and put Windows on it and have the same experience, just with the full catalogue of games.
jcastro 13y ago
Steam Machines are additive, they don't replace gamer's existing windows machines, they take those windows games and make them more accessible in the living room. Over time as SteamOS gets more native titles it'll be able to run those natively.
- cwyers 13y ago
  This would be a better sell if Steam Machines didn't cost as much as a full gaming PC.
  - jcastro 13y ago
    Most of the announced machines mentioned "late 2014" as their release date. That gives Valve the better part of the year to polish the OS and for publishers/developers to keep porting games. But _today_ you can run SteamOS on a relatively inexpensive NUC or used PC as a streaming client and that's probably the kind of early adopter that Valve is looking for for now. But yeah, the Digital Storm $2,000+ Steam Machine makes no sense to me, considering there's only one game for Linux (Metro Last Light) that would even come close to stressing the hardware.
    - cwyers 13y ago
      That's what bugs me so much about Steam Machines. When Valve originally announced it, there were no hardware partners announced yet, and they said they'd have three basic tiers -- a $99 or under "good" that presumably did nothing but in-home streaming, a console-priced "better," and then the "best" tier, where manufacturers could ship whatever. They announce the OEM partners and what's being built, and EVERY machine comes up in the best tier. So the idea of leveraging a $99 machine to do for Steam what Roku or Chromecast does for video streaming was put out there by Valve, and then they've completely failed to deliver on it in hardware. They're still hard at work at in-home streaming, but none of the actual Steam Machines announced seem to be built for it; you don't need most of those machines to stream Bioshock Infinite off the gaming PC you already own.

by kayoone 13y ago

I think SteamOS is a very tough sell for gamers who run windows and steam anyway and mostly don't give a damn about linux. Even Steamboxes are much more useful if you just slap windows & steam on it.

soperj 13y ago

How would it make them more useful? - legitimate question. Can you not run linux applications from SteamOS?

the_ancient 13y ago
S/He is probably referring to the lack of titles for Linux right now. S/He probably has an unrealistic expectation that valve should be able to snap their fingers and make a catalog they spent 10 years building all work on Linux automagically.
- cwyers 13y ago
  That's completely unfair. It may not be realistic to expect Valve to get the same catalog for Linux gaming as is available on Windows, but Steam Boxes cost roughly the same as similarly-equipped Windows gaming PCs, so it's the same market. It's unrealistic to expect Valve to be able to deliver the full Steam catalog on Linux now, but it's equally unrealistic to expect potential users to not care about the number of games available, particularly AAA games.
  - ekianjo 13y ago
    Hey, the SteamMachines are not even out yet. Let's talk again in Late 2014 shall we?
    - cwyers 13y ago
      I mean, we can talk later, but we have some information on the capabilities of the proposed Steam Machines, the prices, and what games are available right now and what are announced (the majority of AAA games between now and the end of summer are already announced, I can't think of any that have Linux support announced alongside Windows/Xbox/Playstation). There's certainly enough information to make SOME judgement about what Valve is doing. Being openminded enough to receive new information doesn't require us to shut off our brains now.

Crito 13y ago

I think that SteamOS/Steamboxes could be a win for people who are not currently PC gamers. I do some minimal gaming in Debian on my laptop (KSP, occasional minecraft), but I could see myself getting a Steambox to do some proper gaming (I haven't played a GTA since GTA3, but the most recent looks pretty cool. If Steamboxes got that I'd get one in a heartbeat).

SixSigma 13y ago

PC sales to homes are down, think tablet / smartphone users who want a box to hook up to the TV. Valve already have the software distribution part solved and a catalogue of proven games. For users the SteamBox isn't so much of a gamble and cheap enough for people to take a punt. What's more, the upgrade path is there, imagine an XBox where you can buy next year's model and the games you already bought look better. Xbox One games are already last gen graphics, even some smartphones have better res. http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/09/console-crisis/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/09/console-crisis/ http://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/ http://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/

kayoone 13y ago
I don't doubt that, i just don't see alot of value in SteamOS right now. Id just get a Steambox and put Windows on it and have the same experience, just with the full catalogue of games.

jcastro 13y ago

Steam Machines are additive, they don't replace gamer's existing windows machines, they take those windows games and make them more accessible in the living room. Over time as SteamOS gets more native titles it'll be able to run those natively.

cwyers 13y ago
This would be a better sell if Steam Machines didn't cost as much as a full gaming PC.
- jcastro 13y ago
  Most of the announced machines mentioned "late 2014" as their release date. That gives Valve the better part of the year to polish the OS and for publishers/developers to keep porting games. But _today_ you can run SteamOS on a relatively inexpensive NUC or used PC as a streaming client and that's probably the kind of early adopter that Valve is looking for for now. But yeah, the Digital Storm $2,000+ Steam Machine makes no sense to me, considering there's only one game for Linux (Metro Last Light) that would even come close to stressing the hardware.
  - cwyers 13y ago
    That's what bugs me so much about Steam Machines. When Valve originally announced it, there were no hardware partners announced yet, and they said they'd have three basic tiers -- a $99 or under "good" that presumably did nothing but in-home streaming, a console-priced "better," and then the "best" tier, where manufacturers could ship whatever. They announce the OEM partners and what's being built, and EVERY machine comes up in the best tier. So the idea of leveraging a $99 machine to do for Steam what Roku or Chromecast does for video streaming was put out there by Valve, and then they've completely failed to deliver on it in hardware. They're still hard at work at in-home streaming, but none of the actual Steam Machines announced seem to be built for it; you don't need most of those machines to stream Bioshock Infinite off the gaming PC you already own.