Valve working on 'Steam Box' console

[LilithSlave]

If it gets popularity like a console then that would mean in turn more games would be coded to work on this console and in turn work for PC.

That would be the major appeal for me. More games I like and care about coming to the PC.

And I don't consider myself a PC gamer by any stretch.

 

[crappingpegasus]

I do not see why so many people are hating on consoles. I am one of the few who plays on both PC and consoles, so I see both sides, but some PC gamers are just such elitists its not funny. Course my primary is console, but thats because I do not have the money to upgrade every six months, thats why most game on consoles. So i think this is a great idea for those with low money.

this.

i don't mind PC gaming - but there is peace of mind in knowing that a one time fee guarantees me a smooth gaming experience for the next five years or so. Also, you really can't beat how simple live is for chatting and gaming with friends.

that's probably what I don't get about this whole move, sure Steam is a good platform for software, but what's it gonna offer the user in terms of accessibility? will it be standard to package a microphone with each piece of hardware like Xbox does? will you be able to have a party chat with friends? also, as an Xbox user, why is Steam's community more compelling than Xbox's where I already have a xx,xxx+ gamer score?

it just seems redundant to me.

 

[Risingblade]

Would this mean steam sales on console games?....god yes do want

 

[ResonanceGames]

3.) the lack of biometrics (which have been shown to enhance the game experience a ton in all of Valve's tests) on ANY platform.

>,>
Of course Valve would say that but the fact it only measures the player's pulse rate and galvanic skin response seems slightly gimmicky...motion controls anyone? Don't you remember the hype?

Skin galvanic response is just one of many, many biometrics experiments Valve has run. They have several employees who do pretty much nothing but biometrics work. They also have a controller that follows eye motion that apparently works beautifully and tons of other unannounced stuff.

I don't remember any "hype" about it, since at the time it was made pretty clear that they had no plans to release it, but now that all those things are potentially on the horizon, they're starting to sound pretty good.

 

[Kinokohatake]

*bangs head on keyboard*
No. No. No. No. No.
1. I think consoles are going to die out eventually. Probably soon.
2. Valve's main market are PC gamers, who have gaming PCs
3. We don't need more bloody consoles

Looks over my vast array of consoles and then at my just for work laptop. I don't think we're going anywhere anytime soon. Especially as long as we have the Modern Warfare fanatics.

 

[crappingpegasus]

Would this mean steam sales on console games?....god yes do want

I doubt anything other than PC games would be sold through the system. Anything else would be a port. Unless the programming language between the Next Box, PS4 and SteamBox are conveniently similar. Also, I doubt Microsoft would allow Steam to sell Halo or Gears over their own digital store on the Xbox.

 

[Domehammer]

This is worst news possible for gaming to hear. Heavy handed DRM of steam possibly making it's ways to consoles in full force would be worst thing ever. People would be up in arms if EA was doing this but because Valve they will ignore what they would otherwise be against. Plus people that aren't valve fanatics won't buy a console made by nobody when it comes to consoles with how much wallets are hurting. People will buy a sure thing and go for next installment of another console series.

 

[ResonanceGames]

This is worst news possible for gaming to hear.

Really? The worst possible news for gaming? Not that games are now banned. Not that the internet has been shut down. Not that Ubisoft now owns all other publishers...but that Valve might be making a living room product. Worst news possible. Gotcha.

Heavy handed DRM of steam possibly making it's ways to consoles in full force would be worst thing ever.

I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but you might want to do a little fact checking. Steam has the EXACT DRM that all three consoles have. You have one account, and you can only download your game to that account. Steam also allows you to download games as many times as you want, forever (even when they remove games from sale, like Crysis 2, you can still download them if you've paid for them). So it's actually BETTER than the console DRM out there.

People would be up in arms if EA was doing this but because Valve they will ignore what they would otherwise be against.

No, if EA were doing this, we would laugh because EA is nowhere near competent enough to pull it off.

Plus people that aren't valve fanatics won't buy a console made by nobody when it comes to consoles with how much wallets are hurting. People will buy a sure thing and go for next installment of another console series.

Then don't buy it. But remember, they said the exact same thing about the Xbox. Not that I think this launch is nearly as ambitious as the Xbox launch. I suspect this is aimed more at PC gamers who are frustrated with the current big 3 consoles, and console gamers who want a PC-experience in the comfort of their living room. I don't think Valve is planning on ousting any existing console.

Really, people. You don't have to be excited for this, but to say that it's horrible for gaming is insane. If you don't want the device, this has no impact on you. It's not like standard PC's, Xboxes, and Playstations are all just going to disappear instantly because Valve made a living room product.

 

[GiantRaven]

1. I think consoles are going to die out eventually. Probably soon.

I....what? How? Why? That's an utterly ridiculous thing to suggest.

There's some evidence to suggest that it could happen.

Spoiler: Credit goes to Ultratwinkie for the article

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_video_game_crash_of_1983

Read up on it. Source? look around you. Consoles are fundamentally flawed in the idea. Sony, and the xbox are choking financially (basically they worked themselves into a corner). Look at how the generation of these consoles were lengthened due to high production costs of unleashing a new console. What does this mean? They need to adopt more PC ideas to increase longevity like selling upgrades, and other attachments. The high cost, and longer generation will spell out the death of consoles on the loss leader method of business. The death of consoles isn't by lack of players, its choking on costs. If selling consoles themselves can't make a profit they rely on games. On the developer's side however its absolute hell. Console tax, second hand market, and high development costs on top of that. If you want I can get the statistics to show the drop of the number of console games from the last generation to this one.

Here is the graph of games courtesy of Metacritic's game database.

Sixth Generation (1999-2006):
Ps2: 792 (out of 1609)
Xbox: 471 (out of 856)
Gamecube: 263 (out of 502)
Total Games: 2967.
Total games over 70%: 1526.

Seventh Generation (2005-present):
Ps3: 341 (out of 579)
Xbox 360: 479 (out of 924)
Wii: 242 (out of 649)
Total Games: 2152.
Total games over 70%: 1062.

See this graph? We are in year 6 of the console generation. The time frame for the last generation was 7 years, and yet the current generation is off by 856 games. Now you could say "higher complexity" of games, and that is the problem. You see when the Xbox and PS3 were first released they were sold at a loss, relying on console games to make up the difference. The Nintendo's wii however was the only console making a profit at that time. The reason? The Wii was cheaper to make, and has been known to be less advanced than its cousins. In short, the new tech doesn't fit into a small box like it used to. Standardization does not work anymore. The tech gets more complex, the cost becomes higher, and the profits decrease. You could say "oh but the console makes more money" but it isn't that way in the eyes of Activision, who makes 70% of their money from the PC, and portable PCs. Keep in mind this is the same "PC hating publisher" that was responsible for modern Warfare 2.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/148982/xbox_delivers_a_profit.html
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/12/01/forbes-nintendo-making-6-profit-on-every-wii-sold/
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.203926-Kotick-Only-30-of-Activisions-Profits-Come-from-Consoles

Basically, the profits are being drained by many factors including manufacturing, tech level, mounting development costs, etc. Want a "source" on the mounting development costs too?

http://www.next-gen.biz/news/ubisoft-development-costs-to-double-next-gen
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.52799-News-Report-Says-Rising-Development-Costs-A-Nightmare
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9823945-7.html?tag=mncol;title
http://www.joystiq.com/2009/02/04/more-wii-games-from-ea-thanks-to-low-development-costs/
http://www.nowgamer.com/news/4226/thq-studio-dev-costs-biggest-industry-issue

This isn't some prediction out of hate, it's a prediction using the data available. It's not due to the lack of players as there are plenty, but it's the cost that goes into the consoles that are beginning to take their toll. Consoles are not sustainable in their current business model and if continued it will mean the death of the console entirely, especially now that the PC and the casual market (much like the wii) have shown to be very profitable with less risk. You have to remember businesses don't make games as a fun hobby, they make them to make money. If another method proves more profitable and safe, then businesses will change sides without a second thought. Businesses have no "brand loyalty" to a platform, nor do they stay in one sector for long. The dynamics of the economy doesn't stay still. It's a cycle, businesses crowd in one newly found market until it' no longer worth it and move on which causes an economic crash. Sure there will be businesses to pick up the slack due to the newfound vacancy of the market but it's not the same as the clamoring before the economic crash.

Thank you for such a detailed explaination, it was interesting. If that is the case then I truly hope that consoles don't go away because it's definitely my preferred method of playing games.

 

[MercurySteam]

An Nvidia GPU and an Intel Core i7 CPU? Sounds an awful lot like a PC lunchbox running custom firmware. This basically means that it is not a real console nor is the hardware even designed by Valve. It's literally just Valve selling off pre-built PCs, only with less PC functionality. While a PC built by Valve sounds cool, I think I'll stick to my custom-built gaming rig. And for all those who this it will launch with a decent price tag: you're kidding yourself, even Valve can't spin something like that for a cheap price.

We don't need more bloody consoles

This is what I thought. Then I realised it wasn't even a real console.

 

[mad825]

3.) the lack of biometrics (which have been shown to enhance the game experience a ton in all of Valve's tests) on ANY platform.

>,>
Of course Valve would say that but the fact it only measures the player's pulse rate and galvanic skin response seems slightly gimmicky...motion controls anyone? Don't you remember the hype?

Skin galvanic response is just one of many, many biometrics experiments Valve has run. They have several employees who do pretty much nothing but biometrics work. They also have a controller that follows eye motion that apparently works beautifully and tons of other unannounced stuff.

I don't remember any "hype" about it, since at the time it was made pretty clear that they had no plans to release it, but now that all those things are potentially on the horizon, they're starting to sound pretty good.

Again, what Valve says lacks validly.

There might be some implications for Valve games but in a industry as a whole, don't expect anything.

 

[Threeseventyfive]

I'm not sure how I feel about this. This is either going to be a great idea or a horrible failure.

I still think this rumor is BS.

 

[RipRoaringWaterfowl]

Not sure if I got my calculations right, but I'm thinking something like this:

Steamcast?

I have my doubts, but I'm excited at whatever's in the Steam cooker.

I think your math is spot on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Bandai_Pippin

The crux of the theoretical Steamcast is that it might be and/or try to look like an inexpensive computer specifically for gaming and Steam. As evidenced by Apple's failed venture, and the lack of enthusiasm from most here about the whole idea, that most likely just won't work.

I actually applaud Valve on this, though. The eighth generation is going to be WIDE open, since Sony and Microsoft are sticking to their guns of a ten year console cycle and will only go against their plans if the other does, and Nintendo will likely flounder with the WiiU. Ninetndo, Sony, and Microsoft entered the console market under far riskier circumstances that what Valve would be up against. We could use a truly new console from someone new to the game to liven things up. As much as I can only tolerate Steam, at best, I want this to happen and I want it to work. I do not want a two console future.

Side Note: You do not know how long I've been waiting to play the Apple Bandai Pippin card. Yay!

 

[Arqus_Zed]

No... no, they won't be doing that. Not a chance.

Do you have any idea what kind of investments you have to do to get in the hardware market, let alone the console hardware market? They aren't going to do that.

Maybe they'll do some new thing with steam. Maybe they will be doing something like Google, when they made Chrome OS en Chromium OS. You know, create a version of steam that is also kind of a compact operation system.

And maybe they'll cut a deal with certain hardware developers to let their hardware support Valve's software.

But Valve making a Steam console? Nope.

 

[Rule Britannia]

I'd love to see this come out or be officially announced . If my friends and I decide that we all get it then I probably will . Question remains if I do get one of these "steam boxes" "what do i do with my Xbox360 games?" Sell them to EB games for a butt fucking?

 

[Vohn_exel]

Hmm, I'd probably buy it since my computer can't play a few of the steam games I have now. If it'll play the games I can't, I'll be happy.

 

[ResonanceGames]

Again, what Valve says lacks validly.

And you're reasoning is...? It would seem to me that one of the most successful and lauded game developers in the world saying "WE FOUND OUT THAT THIS IS AWESOME FOR GAMES!" would imply quite a bit of validity. In fact, I can't think of a more credible source.

Valve has nothing to gain by going into the hardware business except to enhance the software experience of their customers. You really think they would take such a huge risk to sell a peripheral no one wants?

There might be some implications for Valve games but in a industry as a whole, don't expect anything.

That's quite a prediction there, Nostradamus. Valve has reportedly been working close with other developers, and has a great relationship with hundreds of them through Steam. I'm thinking you might want to hold off with predictions that this technology isn't in demand.

 

[LiquidSolstice]

While I question the validity of this source, (Has anyone heard of "The Verge" before now?) it's good to see Valve sees the writing on the wall about PC gaming.

...Seriously? The Verge is quite possibly the single most prolific tech news site on the internet. It contains pretty much the entire original staff of Engadget.

 

[mooncalf]

This seems about as surprising as when Microsoft threw in with it's Xbox originally. Which is not much. With Valve's track record you can see it succeeding, but the implications are a little harder to track. Will this be a step towards merging the pc and console markets? More practically, will it have local storage or will it make the step to cloud technology?