Microsoft Exec: Valve is not a Console Competitor

mechalynx

Führer of the Sausage People
Mar 23, 2008
410
0
0
albino boo said:
Valve is small compared to the console kings. The market values Sony at $ 162 billion, Microsoft at $66 billion and the estimate of value of valve comes in at $5 billion. The big boy already have world wide physical distribution networks setup, Valve use EA to distribute physical media.
Oh, crap. Is that true? Well, if they're only distributing...
 

Zombie_Moogle

New member
Dec 25, 2008
666
0
0
Timothy Chang said:
"There's a certain level of technical and production competency that people have to get through because we're trying to curate great experiences.

"We're trying to make sure that what exists upon our service on our system is done to a quality level and has interest for people who are likely to use it,"
"Steel Battalion: Heavy Armor" is all anyone needs to say in response
 

IronMit

New member
Jul 24, 2012
533
0
0
Valve should of released their affordable steam box 12-18 months ago.

Console players fed up with 28 fps 720p with no AA or good lighting would of switched.

Now they will have to compete against heavily subsidised hardware of consoles hoping the average gamer will be attracted by their cheaper software
 

Edl01

New member
Apr 11, 2012
255
0
0
Same thread as always when steam is brought up, a bunch of people exclaim why Microsoft is wrong while another bunch of hipster plebs explain why Steam is the worst thing to happen to PC gaming ever because of added Facebook integration or something like that.
 

kailus13

Soon
Mar 3, 2013
4,568
0
0
Part of the reason that I'm primarily a console gamer is that my internet isn't that great, so this system doesn't seem to have any advantages over my PC.
 

Slash2x

New member
Dec 7, 2009
503
0
0
Legion said:
SonicWaffle said:
Legion said:
Well I sure as hell hope he isn't thinking of the Xbox when he says that. The Xbox is nothing more than a console of convenience. It is straightforward and allows to to just buy a game, get an online account, no fuss.
There's a strong argument to be made that this is what the average consumer wants. I know it's why I own a 360, and will be buying the new Xbox rather than investing in a gaming PC, and I'm probably what the people who care about such things would call a hardcore gamer.

I'm a frequent gamer with enough of an investment in the hobby that I not only visit forums like this one but write articles for a different site about video games, and I prefer a straightforward no-fuss machine, so what do you think the average Joe Sixpack who is looking for nothing more than a way to play CoD or pass the time after work will prefer?
I don't disagree. Personally unless the PC version has a lot of mods available, or works better using a mouse (strategy games for example), I prefer to buy a console version because it's so much simpler. Put the disc in, wait for 20 second and straight into the game.

The point I was making is that Microsoft do not offer a quality product, they just offer a convenient one, that doesn't really have any better alternative. The PS3 after all is more or less the same thing except the controller and a few different exclusives. Which one you own is often more down to what one your friends have than anything special about the consoles themselves.

Microsoft on the other hand, are trying to act like their sales are down to them doing something right, as opposed to other people simply not doing better.
Ironically I think that a Microsoft product has made Steam my go to game platform. The wireless Xbox 360 dongle... I purchase a games on Steam because my PC has graphic capabilities to spare, then I use the Microsoft controller. I do not even turn on the Xbox unless I want to watch Netflix, and that is just because the bluray player remote irritates me... I think Steam could really put a hurt on the console market with a product you could play on different systems with multiple controller types....
 

Weaver

Overcaffeinated
Apr 28, 2008
8,977
0
0
This attitude is what's going to let Valve just roll over the console market in a few years.
 

AzrealMaximillion

New member
Jan 20, 2010
3,216
0
0
The Steam Box has a few major disadvantages. For one, let's be honest, its exclusives that really have people chose one console from another. The Steam Box would need some exclusive games specifically for it. And I mean exclusives that are not available on Steam's PC store. The Steam Box seems like a lot of wishful thinking without something to set it apart from the other consoles.

Secondly, if the PS4 is going to have all of its games available for download, then what's the point of getting a Steam Box? The only advantage seems to be the sales that Steam is known for. But if you can't games that are on other consoles, then why not just use Steam on the PC? I won't be able to get any Final Fantasy, Halo, Mario, or the Last of Us on the Steam Box. It just seems to be a PC for your living room.

Speaking of which, thirdly, Valve just released the Big Picture feature. It effectively puts Steam on your TV. There's literally no need for a Valve console. It wouldn't bring anything needed to the table in terms of a console.
 

Vivi22

New member
Aug 22, 2010
2,300
0
0
Timothy Chang said:
Even though he "loves Gabe" and acknowledged that Valve is pursuing some innovative avenues, he stated that Valve is no competition.
Famous last words.

Someone at Microsoft needs to remember what happened every time they didn't take a new or refocused competitor seriously in the past. They already lost the PC digital game store/service sector to Valve years ago with the dismal failure of Games for Windows Live. They were beaten in the MP3 player market before they even had a product on shelves. They lost the cell phone and tablet markets to Apple and Google despite having the lead on them by a few years. They lost ground in the OS sector because they fucked up royally when Vista launched and Apple did a lot of things they wanted to do better (even if I generally dislike OSX's UI and it being a closed system, feature wise they beat Microsoft to market on quite a few things).

Now they're doing okay in the console market. Not beating everyone else, but they gained a lot of ground compared to the original Xbox. And they're talking as though they're ready to pull a Nintendo/Sony and underestimate the new guy? Because that worked out very well for the N64 and PS3. Or, you know, Microsoft for the last ten years or more.

Simply put, they can't afford to simply act like any new competitor isn't a threat. Because if the history of Valve and Microsoft is anything to go by, Valve could be in the lead in a couple of years while Microsoft scratches their heads wondering what the fuck happened.
 

romanator0

New member
Jun 3, 2011
183
0
0
FloodOne said:
The gamer community is schizophrenic.

You do realize there will be no physical media on the Steam Box, right? No used games, and decent internet connection with a solid bandwidth cap will be requirements. Everything that people have slammed the console makers for will be default settings for the Steam Box.

So yeah, go ahead and root for the Steam Box to be a wild success, but in ten years time, when you can't buy used games or trade in crappy games to recoup some of your cash, remember that you had a hand in changing the market in a bad way.

Captcha- Instantly Skip

You know, I think I will...
And your proof for this is where? I use Steam and haven't had any problems with using physical copies of games on it and a functional offline mode really helps considering my unstable internet connection. So unless you have a quote of someone somewhere from Valve saying this stuff then I find it highly unlikely that the Steam Box is going to not support physical media or require a constant connection when the current version of Steam doesn't do these things.
 

Mr. Omega

ANTI-LIFE JUSTIFIES MY HATE!
Jul 1, 2010
3,902
0
0
I've been saying that Sony and Microsoft have been rapidly turning their consoles into extremely limited gaming PCs (even more than a console is inherently). Glad to see Microsoft is confirming my suspicions they'll be continuing that route until they smack headfirst into the giant Steam logo-shaped brick wall.
 

iniudan

New member
Apr 27, 2011
538
0
0
albino boo said:
gigastar said:
that any ventures necessitated "great fortitude", "deep pockets and a very strong balance sheet".
Id say Valve has those. Gabe certainly is not a stranger to pushing into new markets, and i doubt the people behind Steam have much want for cash.
Valve is small compared to the console kings. The market values Sony at $ 162 billion, Microsoft at $66 billion and the estimate of value of valve comes in at $5 billion. The big boy already have world wide physical distribution networks setup, Valve use EA to distribute physical media.
I don't think you understanding the way valve is working is basically steambox will be like ultrabook for Intel, they don't need a wide distribution network, for OEM already have it. OEM will just have to fill the restriction which give them right for the steambox branding and to distribute steam software on it, maybe a % of game sales to subsidize price also. (that last one come from how Google work with Android official partner, except in their case it right to distribute google software they give)
 

iniudan

New member
Apr 27, 2011
538
0
0
AzrealMaximillion said:
And I mean exclusives that are not available on Steam's PC store. The Steam Box seems like a lot of wishful thinking without something to set it apart from the other consoles.
That never gonna happen, steambox is just a platform to put a gaming HTPC in the hand of those that don't buy gaming PC or doesn't build their own hardware.
 
Apr 5, 2008
3,736
0
0
In fairness, the exec is right; as of this moment Valve aren't a competitor. But I think this Steambox is Valve's attempt at the "living room" gaming market and I've never known them to do things badly. I think Gabe is gonna give Microsoft a rude awakening.

If it's open source, has an accessible file-system, incorporates existing steam games and friends lists, plays PC games with pad OR KB/Mouse and accepts optical discs of some form for media playback/offline installs, I think they're gonna have a winner. And I'll probably be among the first to buy it.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
I'm not at all sure I want someone at Microsoft to be the arbiter of what third-party project is and isn't a "great experience" that they're willing to "curate".

Oh, I'm aware that there has to be some kind of quality control. But given that Microsoft seems increasingly determined to exert control over what their consumer pool does and does not do with their products, I'm less and less certain we can count on them to make such choices with our best interests in mind.
 

Yopaz

Sarcastic overlord
Jun 3, 2009
6,092
0
0
SonicWaffle said:
anian said:
SonicWaffle said:
They've given me a console which has worked non-stop for over four years and will play whatever game I put into it without giving me the hassle of trying to alter settings or hunt for patches. The fact that they could be doing it better doesn't really matter to me so much when I weigh it against the fact that they're doing it at all.
Yes, because games on XBox don't get patched...ever. The only "hunt" you have to do is usually the good hunt where you find a better or faster software solution to some issues.
On the Xbox, patches are largely automated - an inform pops up as the game opens asking whether you want the patch, you select that you do, and it takes a few seconds you're done. Convenience, see? Again, I'm not saying that the Xbox or consoles in general are perfect, just that they make things very simple for the end user, which to a technophobe like myself is a definite bonus.
Yeah, that's one thing Steam doesn't offer. You have to spend a long time looking for patches to your games rather than letting Steam download it in the background when your system doesn't see any heavy use of internet or CPU.
Oh right, it does that if you want it to (which is the default setting). Patching even goes unnoticed most of the time. I have had some patches on Xbox 360 that has required me to wait some time for it to download, then reset the system, then watch another sequence where it downloads and installs something more. That's actually less convenient than Steam's background downloads and occasional (also optional) restart. Some times I have really wanted to play a game, then I've received a message that in order to access Xbox live I need a crucial update which takes so long that I lose interest in the game while downloading.

OT: I really wish we could actually wait for the next console generation to start before we decide who won it. Valve might do some great things with their Steam box, but it might fail. The Next Xbox might do well, it might fail. The PS4 might fail, it might win. As much as I like the service Steam offers I'm not sure how well it will translate to the console market. It caters to one audience which is satisfied with the workings of PC which might be a different demographic than the console users. I am looking forward to seeing what they can accomplish and I might get one, but I already have a great PC so it's nowhere near certain.
 

Albino Boo

New member
Jun 14, 2010
4,667
0
0
iniudan said:
albino boo said:
gigastar said:
that any ventures necessitated "great fortitude", "deep pockets and a very strong balance sheet".
Id say Valve has those. Gabe certainly is not a stranger to pushing into new markets, and i doubt the people behind Steam have much want for cash.
Valve is small compared to the console kings. The market values Sony at $ 162 billion, Microsoft at $66 billion and the estimate of value of valve comes in at $5 billion. The big boy already have world wide physical distribution networks setup, Valve use EA to distribute physical media.
I don't think you understanding the way valve is working is basically steambox will be like ultrabook for Intel, they don't need a wide distribution network, for OEM already have it. OEM will just have to fill the restriction which give them right for the steambox branding and to distribute steam software on it, maybe a % of game sales to subsidize price also. (that last one come from how Google work with Android official partner, except in their case it right to distribute google software they give)
Err, Newell has stated at that Valves plan is to develop a hardware unit themselves and work with other manufactures who want to offer different hardware to the one that valve is selling. They fully intend to sell steambox themselves, just like google sells the nexus. Further more they are also considering making a gaming tablet. Valve is most definitely intending to get into the hardware business.
 

Rad Party God

Party like it's 2010!
Feb 23, 2010
3,560
0
0
I already have a "Steam box" and I've been enjoying using it for more than 5 years now. It's called a PC.
 

V8 Ninja

New member
May 15, 2010
1,903
0
0
Whenever I see/hear anything about Microsoft dismissing any sort competition, I get the mental image of women with the heads of middle-aged business men on the beach posing sexually with the Windows logo while wearing nothing but bikinis.

...God, am I a strange man.
 

AzrealMaximillion

New member
Jan 20, 2010
3,216
0
0
iniudan said:
AzrealMaximillion said:
And I mean exclusives that are not available on Steam's PC store. The Steam Box seems like a lot of wishful thinking without something to set it apart from the other consoles.
That never gonna happen, steambox is just a platform to put a gaming HTPC in the hand of those that don't buy gaming PC or doesn't build their own hardware.
Seems kind of pointless to make the thing regardless. If its just a gaming rig that connects to the TV, Big Picture takes care of that. And let's be honest, most people who game consistently on their PCs don't have that hard of a time upgrading their rigs. That, and depending on the gamer, the vast majority of PC games don't required anything more than what you can buy as a run of the mill out of a Best Buy PC. The people with the PC building experience will just continue using their rigs, and those who don't build their PCs will most likely just make due with what they have. That is, until its time for them to simply upgrade their PC, which will wind up being load cheaper than buying a SteamBox console. This is all my opinion of course, but

No exclusives for the console itself will kneecap it significantly.