Gabe Newell Opens the Door To Origin On SteamOS

[Something Amyss]

nice superficial attempt at avoiding monopoly status there, Gabe.

Because EA should be torn down to its roots and sold.

It is the united states government of gaming. best analogy i can think of, criminal, lazy, stupid.

Like the US government, the problem with EA is that people keep supporting it. Specifically, people who complain about it to no end, but still keep it afloat.

Aw, it hurts the relatively nice members of America when you insult their justice seeking honorable and totally not corporate run politicians...ah heck, who I am kidding? I'm American and I agree with this statement, EA is the United states government of gaming.

Honestly, in both cases, we collectively get what we deserve.

 

[Lightknight]

Uh, steam boxes are pc's. I don't know if he could even block Origin if he wanted to. He'd have to make a specific exclusion to prevent access to Origin but that'd be like Microsoft preventing users from being able to get to Google.com in a MS operating system. Bad move. Smart on Gabe's part. Besides, who the hell would buy a steam box and put Origin on it without at least also having Steam? It's even preloaded on all of them.

 

[grimallq]

I don't know if he could even block Origin if he wanted to. He'd have to make a specific exclusion to prevent access to Origin but that'd be like Microsoft preventing users from being able to get to Google.com in a MS operating system.

It's actually not that hard. A whitelist approach, some kind of software certification/licencing system that block all non approved programs. Then Valve could start piling requirements before and/or throwing incentives at potential third-party developers. Basically doing exactly what Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo are doing with their consoles.

The kind of behavior lots of ignorant people are apparently expecting from Steam Machine because it's a "console", including that Reddit guy from the article. That's why people have to be told over and over again that SteamOS is just Linux and there are no software restrictions. And that Steam Machine is just a PC so you could ditch SteamOS and install something else.

 

[A-D.]

Mass Effect was always published by EA, Microsoft just paid good money to have it be exclusive on the Xbox back then, EA eventually made a PC version tho after people kept bitching about a port. Same happened with Jade Empire by the by. Also my ironic sentiment was more towards the statement i quoted rather than anything else.

Microsoft isnt really a publisher, more so that any game which is by extension exclusive to its console is basicly "published by MS" even if that isnt actually true. Thats like arguing every game exclusive to the Playstation is published by Sony.

Microsoft doesn't publish games you say? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_games_published_by_Microsoft_Studios]

No, EA only bought BioWare two months before Mass Effect was published (by Microsoft Studios). They had nothing to do with the initial Xbox 360 release of that game. If you had the 360 version and were to boot it up you'd see the Microsoft Game Studios logo and a distinctive total absence of EA anywhere in the game.

You're right that console exclusivity doesn't necessarily mean that the console manufacturer published the game. However that is normally the case.

The logo doesnt mean Microsoft published it though, technically speaking it really just means that given that you are on their console, they basicly also do the "publishing" in the sense that it is for their console. But its not the same as for example a big publisher like EA or Activision, Microsoft usually "publishes" games only for its own platforms, which is usually the Xbox and occasionally the PC. If Microsoft were a traditional publisher, you'd see their logo on playstation games as well, which you dont obviously.

Also that list? Alot of games from that list are old, in fact alot are from way before Xbox was a thing. So they do publish, but they arent a publisher as such. Maybe its splitting hairs there but to me they arent the same kind of publisher as Ubisoft, EA or Square Enix for example.

 

[Eldritch Warlord]

The logo doesnt mean Microsoft published it though, technically speaking it really just means that given that you are on their console, they basicly also do the "publishing" in the sense that it is for their console. But its not the same as for example a big publisher like EA or Activision, Microsoft usually "publishes" games only for its own platforms, which is usually the Xbox and occasionally the PC. If Microsoft were a traditional publisher, you'd see their logo on playstation games as well, which you dont obviously.

Also that list? Alot of games from that list are old, in fact alot are from way before Xbox was a thing. So they do publish, but they arent a publisher as such. Maybe its splitting hairs there but to me they arent the same kind of publisher as Ubisoft, EA or Square Enix for example.

I don't know what you think a publisher does, but any definition I can find does not specify any requirement to distribute games for more than a single platform. A video game publisher is responsible for the manufacturing and marketing of a game.

Anyway, despite you being completely wrong about publishers needing to publish games for platforms they do not own Microsoft would still be a publisher if that were the case. I submit to you Wordament [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wordament] and Kinectimals [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinectimals], available on iOS and Android.

And yes, the logo does mean Microsoft Studios published that game. Games on Xbox consoles which Microsoft did not publish (for example: Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 3) do not display the Microsoft Studios logo but instead have the logo of whoever published the game.

Furthermore I really wonder why you felt the need to point out that a list which aspires to be a complete list of everything Microsoft has ever published contains numerous old games.

 

[Lightknight]

I don't know if he could even block Origin if he wanted to. He'd have to make a specific exclusion to prevent access to Origin but that'd be like Microsoft preventing users from being able to get to Google.com in a MS operating system.

It's actually not that hard. A whitelist approach, some kind of software certification/licencing system that block all non approved programs. Then Valve could start piling requirements before and/or throwing incentives at potential third-party developers. Basically doing exactly what Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo are doing with their consoles.

The kind of behavior lots of ignorant people are apparently expecting from Steam Machine because it's a "console", including that Reddit guy from the article. That's why people have to be told over and over again that SteamOS is just Linux and there are no software restrictions. And that Steam Machine is just a PC so you could ditch SteamOS and install something else.

Right, if they close it down software-wise then we're just looking at consoles that would be remarkably easy to hack since it's already linux based.

But this is contrary to valve's expressed vision of the pc to living room. If they did even that, it would be a failure to acheive their goal. I did not mean that they couldn't do that as in "are not capable of". Far from it.

 

[WeepingAngels]

...and if Steam Machines are a hit, EA is going to want Origin on them.

Steam is a hit, and EA isn't particularly fussed about no longer releasing on it. (They probably should be, but they're not.)

That's because they have a competing DD service. They do not have a competing hardware box.