The thing you're missing is that this isn't aimed at people who have PCs already, or who feel comfortable gaming on PCs, it's for people who want a system as easy to use as a console, but with all the benefits of PC gaming like the large library of games and exclusives (even excluding Windows only ones), mods, cheap prices, etc.BrotherRool said:
Does anyone even know what Steam Machines are?
- Thread starter KazeAizen
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Truth be told, I don't think the makers of these things even know what a Steam Machine is yet. They're experimenting with a new concept in it's infancy, but they don't know who or what it's target audience should be.
So to answer the title's question, I dunno.
So to answer the title's question, I dunno.
Yes, I've seen the launch libraries, however I can't go out and build my own XBone or PS4 for cheaper than they are selling me one (at least not without a few degrees in software engineering and hardware engineering), but that is besides the point. Also, unless you want to pay Valve for the right to call your machine a Steambox/Steammachine/Steamdohicky, you just have a PC with SteamOS running (which is free). I have no qualms with the SteamOS, in fact I encourage it and really would like to see it succeed so that I don't have to rely on Windows for gaming any longer, however the Steammachine is a $500+ (and some prices are waaaayyyyyy on the plus side) for a PC that runs a free OS and has a controller. 90% of the Steammachines announced thus far I can build cheaper and still run SteamOS and buy a controller (and often a Monitor or TV) without going near their prices, furthermore some of them aren't even upgradable so you will end up having to throw them out when hardware evolves as it always does.Hiramas said:
As for the Game Library, how does Steambox encourage software developers to make games for Linux? It doesn't make it any easier, and it certainly doesn't change the fact that most people will still be running Windows (not to mention Microsoft is one of those developers). Had Valve chosen a single set of hardware to call a Steambox and written custom Drivers just for those pieces of hardware, then Software devs could have utilized proper utilization to enhance their games way beyond what a Windows machine would be capable of.... However, that isn't the route Valve went. Instead they have elected to take Microsoft head on in an Operating system battle, and MSFT has been established in the gaming community since the 90s (and before if you count DoS as part of MSFT).
So yes, I fail to see how this box accomplishes anything that Valve said they set out to do.
No, I didn't discount them running Linux software, just that it wouldn't be able to run any games that didn't come prepackaged for Linux in the first place (and that would also include other software). I think you may be mistaking my discussion for the SteamBox as me discussing SteamOS. As I said earlier, SteamOS is great, it is their wannabe console I have issues with.Petromir said:
The problem is OpenGL isn't as powerful as DirectX is (though they have moved forward leaps and bounds in the past couple years, so that issue may soon be solved if they can tweak the optimization settings some). Once again though, I'm not against SteamOS, in fact I love the concept of it. I think Valve should drop the Steammachine and just focus on the SteamOS and getting that right (or if they absolutely have to keep the Steammachine, drop all of them except for the iBuyPower one for $500 and standardize the hardware for developers to actually have a reason to develop for it).
Once again, I think you completely missed my point (or misread my paragraph). The differences between computers don't matter. My point was that PS4 and XBone can get the hardware out for below the cost to build it (I.E. cheaper than it is possible for you or I to build one, even if we didn't have to worry about the software). This is why they often take a loss on their Consoles for the first 2-4 years they are around. Meanwhile, I can go build a PC with the same parts as any of the currently announced Steamboxes for less money than they are selling them for (including a copy of windows to put on a dual partition). That means, I can build an equivalent piece of hardware that will have 100% of the same functionality (and some extra, since I'll be able to dual boot Windows and play all of the games out there) for less money... So, why wouldn't I? The only reason to buy one is if you don't know anything about PCs, and if that is the case, they probably don't know that SteamOS being Linux means they won't be able to play all of the PC games that are coming out (or are already out), and I can pretty much guarantee that there will never be a point where all games are Linux compatible (since MSFT owns Windows, Xbox, and DirectX). So now we are dealing with the concept that Steambox basically tricks users into buying a PC with limited functionality compared to just buying one from a shop somewhere. So as you see, it doesn't matter than Linux, Windows, and Mac use the same parts since that is the very reason that they can't afford to be so over priced.
Large parts of the PC gaming market would happily jump ship from windows (mostly to linux based solutions, though those who have a mac for work purposes wtc would love to drop windows boots for games) if the market would let them. SteamOS therfore has to only nudge open the door before it gets swept along.
Once again, you mistake my dislike of the Steambox for the SteamOS. I will say it yet again... I love SteamOS, and I loath SteamBox. Hopefully that clears that up.
Except that is essentially no different than what we already have on the market. So they haven't found a new place, they are just selling Valve stamped Personal Computers, that is it. They haven't created the hybrid console/PC people thought they were going to do (and basically billed it as), they didn't break the mold, and they aren't even breaking any new ground since there are already gaming oriented Linux Distributions that can run Steam (and in Windows on top of that, so they are technically better currently). If they aren't innovating at all, what is the point of this whole venture. They have already redesigned the controller to be more like a hybrid Xbox/PlayStation controller and ditched the modern we want to change how you do things controller (though in all fairness, that is probably for the best).
If you know what it is supposed to be, then please tell me what the Steambox does that makes it unique, cost effective, powerful, or even makes it matter, in this current gaming generation? It is nothing more than the sum of its parts, and its parts are PC with a Linux OS. I can take those same parts and build a SteamOS computer of my own, I own my own business, so what is stopping me from making a Steambox too? If the answer is nothing but some money, then that is where the issue is with Steambox.
This gentleman here gets it. It is nothing more than an overpriced PC with a different sticker on it and a free OS instead of a paid one.TomWiley said:
Except that those people will not know what they are getting in to. They likely expect that they will be able to access all of the PC games like they did with their console of choice (though they likely understand the lack of backwards compatibility at this point). So they won't understand why their (up to) $12,000 machine refuses to play the latest greatest Call of Duty game, and the short answer is, because it doesn't have Windows. So now they have to hire someone to install windows on a Dual Boot partition so they can play all of the games available to them or learn how to work on PC's themselves, and at this point they may as well have gone ahead and learnt enough about PCs to get a decent one to start with that didn't cost them an arm and a leg. The flip side is, you will have someone with a $500 Steambox that can play Limbo, Machinarium, and Trine (don't get me wrong, those are all great games, but that is a waste of money).Mothhive said:
Either way you look at it, you are wasting money over getting what you really wanted in the first place, and that is a PC that can do all of the above, while costing less than $600 (if you don't include monitor and just hook it up to your Tele).
Welp, I don't. That's for sure.
Here's the story so far through my eyes: a reasonably tech-savvy guy, but not quite on the build-my-own-pc level.
Once upon a time, father Gaben made a list of everything good little gamers want. Some of it we already knew we wanted. Like cheaper pc's and better performance. But other things we hadn't really thought of yet, like an alternative to windows or streaming to our tv's.
Satisfied, father Gaben sent his list tothe christmas elf workshop third party hardware manufacturers and spoke: "Quickly my little helpers, make me boxes that can do everything on this list! And we shall call them... Steamboxes!"
So theelves hardware manufacturers gathered their greatest minds and discussed for many a night how to realize father Gaben's dream. After weeks of debate however, no true solution was found. Thus it was decided to have each crew design their own steambox. So that upon father Gaben's return, they would present dozens upon dozens of different steamboxes. Surely at least one of those would be the steambox father Gaben envisioned?
Unfortunately every crew pretty much just built the same pc they always do and installed steamOS and a steam controller on it.
The end... of act I.
Here's the story so far through my eyes: a reasonably tech-savvy guy, but not quite on the build-my-own-pc level.
Once upon a time, father Gaben made a list of everything good little gamers want. Some of it we already knew we wanted. Like cheaper pc's and better performance. But other things we hadn't really thought of yet, like an alternative to windows or streaming to our tv's.
Satisfied, father Gaben sent his list to
So the
Unfortunately every crew pretty much just built the same pc they always do and installed steamOS and a steam controller on it.
The end... of act I.
Think of it as: it's a generic videogame that runs Steam's own OS, so you can also say it's a computer that's only good for games from the Steam Library. There are/will be many different "boxes" by many different manufacturers and also various degrees of capacity. So, maybe my Steam Machine is good to run most games on a medium quality, but you bought the top notch Steam Box that can run everything available right now with max quality, this other dude though bought a really cheap Steam Box because he's only into indie games; and I hope some of those might be upgradable even...
After reading all that you can see why there have been complaints about the price. It can't be overly expensive or the consumer will just build a good old PC...
After reading all that you can see why there have been complaints about the price. It can't be overly expensive or the consumer will just build a good old PC...
The bad part is, it won't have access to every game on Steam, only the Linux ready games (which are only around 15% of all the games on Steam). If it had access (or manages to finishing having access) to all of the games on the Steam Library inside SteamOS, I will stop complaining so much (though I'll still complain a little about the price and the fact you can build a nice PC for that price).Milanezi said:
Or at least have designated budget, low, medium, high or whatever level of specs. I thought it was suppose to make PC gaming accessible, but they're making a bigger mess of it.Island Dog said:
It would of been nice to have the Steam machine be a list of compatible components where you can pick how much power you want and it would make for easy upgrades. Even if I hated SteamOS and got put windows on it I'd be glad not to have to bother trying to figure out if x works with y or what will (or bothering my friends about it).
Yep, you can only play the games that have Linux installers. I'm not sure about The Witcher specifically, but there are a lot of big name releases that aren't covered under that clause.Milanezi said:WHAT?!!! I didn't know that! So if I bought one I wouldn't be able to play, say, The Witcher? Damn...barbzilla said:
I agree with your overall sentiment but this made me wince slightly, you didn't mean it like this but there's too much of a perception that Linux not being like Windows is a Linux bug rather than an application developer issue. The fact is Steam OS is perfectly functional for what it's supposed to do, it just needs more software porting for it.barbzilla said:
Get a good gaming rig and understand how the parts work. The steam machines don't run windows and will not run all steam games.
Very correct, by fixed I mean a decent emulation program inside of Steam and SteamOS to run Windows based games on a Linux Distribution (at least until we start seeing the Devs really push for Linux compatibility).ForumSafari said:
It's tricky isn't it? The problem is that WINE and other compatibility layers exist but they're not perfect and publishers don't use them as a temporary transition, instead seeming to stick with them permanently.barbzilla said:
The good news is you can probably do it yourself if you have a spare Windows install, setting up PCI passthrough for a VM should preserve most of the performance.
I agree, I would just run a dual partition and keep Windows on one and SteamOS on the other (exactly like I have my PC set up now). However, if you are able to do that, you likely aren't buying a Steambox unless you are just curious. You are buying a Steambox because you don't know much about computers, and can't build one yourself, so you thought it would be a good idea... Only to find out that SteamOS doesn't support a ton of games.ForumSafari said:
However if Steam had its own built in Windows Emulator (that didn't suck as much as WINE does), it would alleviate that issue and calm me down on at least one aspect of the Steambox.
You can download it freely already.BigTuk said:
I keep going back on forth on how well it's going to do. SteamOS is, at the moment, a strictly worse version of Windows, so if this was what someone wanted, why haven't they done it already? True, Windows costs $100 but PC gamers have never been particularly budget conscious right? If you're making a $700 computer I can believe that people have been holding back because it actually costs $750
On the other hand yeah, maybe this is something that people want but didn't consider doing until someone outright sold them the idea?
You're giving up a lot of the advantages of consoles. You're giving up the guarantee that any game you buy will run like it's supposed to and that it will do that for the next 5-10 years, you're giving up optimised hardware, subsidised prices and possibly some of the simplicity. But on the other hand you gain mods, and if you're a graphics nut then you get to obssess about pixels with upgrades, you get a built in games library
...which you'll only have if you already have an expensive PC that you already play games on...
It could really go either way. I think if anything kills it off it's going to be the streaming. At the moment SteamOS is basically useless to anyone who likes AAA games and doesn't already have a gaming PC, so you're basically paying $600+ for a mild convenience. This is what will turn people off. Is the latency going to be bad? Can someone feasibly use your other PC when you're streaming? etc Will people start porting to Linux? Probably only if SteamOS has sufficient users which will only be if sufficient people want to use SteamOS which is only if AAA people start porting to Linux... etc. It's the WiiU problem again.
Yep, they're pc's specifically made for the living room and for steam gaming. They're technically consoles, though, as much as ps4s and XBOs are consoles now that everything is x86.DoPo said:
Frankly, I'd rather go console where living room efficiency is concerned but I also already have two gaming pcs, one of which is a laptop.
Several Steam Machines are confirmed upgradable and only the Alienware brand is confirmed to not be. And costs have never stopped gaming from expanding. They just look for new ways to pass it on to the consumer.wombat_of_war said:
There are a couple priced competitively with consoles, which would make them still attractive options.spartandude said:
Well, if not for the rest of the package. They come with SteamOS only (the affordable ones) and can only play non-Linux games if you have another PC to stream from, for example. You're not getting your whole Steam library unless you were already on Linux or you've got another computer you're going to dedicate. This sort of thing seems to limit the field on the Steam Machine.
That's a huuuge assumption and one that seems to be made because you want it to be true, not based on real likelihood or probability.Hiramas said:
You're joking, right? Hell, I've had games that won't run when I beat the recommended specs, and tons of games have Steam forums with dozens of "won't run" or "won't load" without any of the myriad users responding can't fix. How fortunate, then, that Steam excels in customer service....
Except there isn't a large library of games unless you want to slap Windows on it (already trodding into scary PC tech territory) or already/also own a PC running Windows you don't mind being dedicated to streaming.Mothhive said:
Speaking of....
I think they're hoping people won't know.Milanezi said:WHAT?!!! I didn't know that! So if I bought one I wouldn't be able to play, say, The Witcher? Damn...
No it doesn't work like that. The way it works is that only a game which is designed for Linux will run on SteamOS, out of steams 2700ish games, that's 300 of them and almost all of them are small indie titles.BigTuk said:
But what you can do (and what Valve has been advertising when they say 'play all your steam titles') is you can have a Windows PC somewhere in your house running a Steam game and then stream it to your SteamOS machine.