You really didn't bother reading this article, did you? The only mention of Steam Boxes was a single line saying he didn't like them. Everything else was talking about Steam, the PC game distribution platform, not Steam, the console(s).Kirill Steshin said:
And yet you won't because you'll be too cheap to put down the cash for one when you've spent triple the price of a console on your PC.PMAvers said:
You Need to remember a significant portion of consoles are never connected to the internet. So thats 120 online users plus probably tens of millions offline users.Phrozenflame500 said:
My laptop has radeon graphics and still doesn't meet min specs for any current game. My desk top one has specs that are more than twice as good and only some current games work at all and thats with everything turned all the way down.Phrozenflame500 said:
Steam is so popular because of the prices. Thats why everyone goes there originally. Steam sales might make little indie titles more money because it gives them more exposure. I highly doubt it has the same boost for GTAV or AAA games. My point is if steambox somehow captures a third of the console market you will NOT find the console games on it for a cheaper price. The reason pc ports are cheaper is sony and M$ dismiss that market as insignificant.Phrozenflame500 said:
The $500 steambox is not a console that has been manufactured optimized for gaming. Its a crappy pc thats assembled by a third party, so it will be overpriced for the parts, that has steam os installed on it. I HIGHLY doubt it will be able to run all the games that will be coming out on the ps4 or xbo. And its hardware will be outdated WAY faster than the console and receive probably no support.Phrozenflame500 said:
The AAA games are being ported as a way to get every penny they can. But the devs count on the console sales to support the cost of making the games. The steam sales are not something they depend upon.Phrozenflame500 said:
The steam boxes aren't a gaming PC compliment. They're a gaming PC substitute. If you have a gaming PC you're probably already using Steam. Valve doesn't give a shit about you buying a dedicated Steam Machine as well. You can even dual boot with SteamOS and the PC IS a Steam Machine.Toadfish1 said:
I too bought a PC for 500 that can handle any game out there, i may not be able to turn everything on super ultra high with AA x16 but i can run everything on medium to high. The only problem i have is my processor is overheating but that's the company's fault not mine and i'm too lazy to get it replaced. So ye the 3x number is mostly people talking out of their asses and i live in a country where the PC expenses are quite bigger than in some "modern" countries.PMAvers said:
Not sure why you'd consider that embarrassing. 10% failure after nearly a decade is actually not bad at all for electronics.Shamus Young said:
No there isn't. The entire point of the article was that PCs are at least as mainstream as consoles. And it's particularly silly to suggest that patches are a problem unique to PCs. Maybe back in the '90s that might have been the case, but console games are just as likely to come with day-1 patches these days.SupahGamuh said:
Whereas console gamers are mindless drones who all value everything exactly the same?BrotherRool said:
And the console numbers include people who only bought a PS3 as a bluray player or for streaming TV and have never played a single game on it. It includes people who only play indies, who only play a single FPS game, and so on. It's just plain silly to suggest that this argument only applies to PCs.
Sure, but that actually counters your above point - there are a lot of people who buy CoD every year and nothing else. The fact that one franchise sells well says absolutely nothing about the attractiveness of a platform to other developers and other genres.
If we start considering these factors, we'll get nowhere, as we'll just find more and more of them. For example, what about the significant overlap between X360 and XBOne users? Or the not-so-insignificant overlap between PS4 and X360 users? Not even speaking of the overlap between that and PC, and the possibility of people owning multiple consoles. We could also count a ton of people on steam that use PCs with Intel HD graphics out (as those are quite often incapable of driving a lot of games), but where would we get by doing that?Toadfish1 said:
What a waist of statistics. You wasted time and effort looking up "active" Steam Users. You should have just pulled up the stats for the last 48 hours [http://store.steampowered.com/stats/]. Guess what, Steam has between 3.5M, and 7.5M active users. The 75 million number is like counting all the dead xbox 360's, and duplicate family accounts. My Brother, His Wife, and His Daughter all have "Active" steam accounts and you're effectively triple counting him by using the 75 million number. Do you count each household member who plays a console?Shamus Young said:
You could say literally the exact same thing about the console market. You have people that just buy the newest iteration of FIFA or Madden games every year, you have people that just buy the latest iteration of COD and Battlefield every year, you have people that buy the console to mainly use as an media center, you have people that only play singleplayer games, the list goes on. There is just as much spread in the console market as on PC.BrotherRool said:
