Thoughts on the upcoming "Steam Box"

Other Games
1

Here’s an interesting article I read about Valve’s plans to sell their own hardware.

forbes.com/sites/erikkain/20 … e-changer/

I’ve been thinking that Valve would do something like this for a while. However, I don’t agree with the author that Valve would copy the iPad model and release new iterations of the Steam Box every year, with only some games being compatible with older Steam Boxes. Console gamers don’t want to have to upgrade their hardware often, and that’s who this box would be aimed at. Five to eight year cycles would allow console gamers to feel that buying a Steam Box is an investment comparable to buying a Microsoft or Sony console.

2

I am most excited about the prospects like this because from all indications, this Steambox will be Linux based. I hope this will push developers to move toward more OpenGL/CL, etc. and away from DirectX and anything proprietary to the Windows Environment. The only thing that really keeps me in Windows is gaming. Even though this will be a console like box, I don’t think that Valve is interested in keeping the amount of control over the software and hardware as Apple does. The cultures at the two companies couldn’t be further apart. It just sounds like they are going to release a set console type box that is more configuration controlled but still allow you to have the same experience on whatever PC you choose to build. I just see this as a positive for open source Linux OS’s. If they can deliver a nice set top PC Linux Box that does everything a regular PC can, just bundled in a Valve Box, and it is reasonably priced, I would probably buy it on principle alone. I will still keep my PC and laptops at home and probably use them for games also.

3

The Valve Steam Box sounds like it will be a closed platform based on Newell’s comment. Even if it does use Linux for the operating system, it probably won’t be able to run non-Steam applications and games, or let users go beyond the Big Picture interface. Which is fine - people who want a more custom solution can build a more expensive Linux PC. I imagine Valve will sell the hardware at a loss and make it back with game purchases in order to compete with the other next generation consoles. Valve might require some stricter standards for games to work on the Steam Box too, e.g. full controller support, which would be a good thing for gamers who prefer the couch/living room experience (me!).

But in any case, like you say frelled, this should be positive for Linux gamers. And for OSX gamers too, if more games use OpenGL instead of DirectX.

By the way, it looks like 36 Steam games already work on Linux: store.steampowered.com/search/?s … nux&page=1

4

Price and hardware will dictate if I buy a Steam Box. It needs to be comparable to current console systems otherwise I will just continue using Steam on a Linux PC.

The current lineup is limited, but you know Valve will port all their in house games to Linux with Counterstrike being the one I think will draw the most users over. The id games are already all OpenGL games and probably won’t take much to convert. What I am curious about are all the Unreal engine based games out there. The original Unreal and UT run in Linux. Even the original Deus Ex has a native Linux version. I wonder how difficult it would be to port newer ones, especially something like Mass Effect. Although EA/Steam relationship is pretty poor now, so the chance of that series being ported are slim. There are so many Unreal engine games out now that are extremely popular and I imagine if you get one of the more modern Unreal engine games running under Linux, that then porting more of the rest would be easier.

I guess time will tell how well this takes off, but I have high hopes.

5

Well I didn’t post here about it before but I always thought people hype it too much.

I saw people saying it can bring PC gaming to the masses with the ease of use they expect out of a console, which is impossible (if we assume PC gaming is hard to begin with, I think it’s gotten exponentially easier in recent times, I’m just saying, if buying a Dell and playing on Steam is too hard then this is what I think). If you play PC games then you will have to be wary of compatibility, go through settings screens, etc, for the optimal experience. PC games are made for a variety of systems and the minimum/recommended specifications change often, for now. For it to be a console like experience it has to be a closed platform with games designed just for it (or other devices like it) which in turn negates all of the PC advantages, ie, the vast library, software compatibility, etc. Also I didn’t think Valve has enough pull to manage going against the established brands in their own game and get enough software support at a point even the big ones have been struggling for exclusives outside their in house software. So basically I saw the various benefits people hyped as mutually exclusive. It either is a PC, with all the baggage that has, or it is a console, without PC benefits.

With recent developments it seems they’re in fact merely collaborating with companies to provide mainstream small form computers, not consoles. Which is nice and all, though hardly innovative as others have already been trying to do this, and it’s totally not for me at this point (unless I eventually buy some cheap model for the living room, though there are alternative solutions). But I’m glad for it as it doesn’t conflict with PC gaming like a console would, much like laptops, home theater PCs, new tablet form PCs, etc, don’t. They have competition with other companies as well. Or rather an informal collaboration, since Valve is primarily a software developer and publisher and all that software will work on the competing platforms as well if they’re Windows or Linux based.

But I like where this is going with all these platforms (the so called Steambox, Ouya and other Android devices, Nvidia’s portable system, tablet PCs, many others) that are compatible with each other to an extent. Maybe it’s a hint of the future where you can just buy any manufacturer’s system based on your needs yet have access to a whole universal library for the most part based on the model you chose (if it has physical controls or not, etc). Not just the Sony or Nintendo or Microsoft or Apple library. A lot like PC gaming currently is, where whether you buy this or that brand or build your own mixing parts together you still get the same PC games. But a bit more user friendly for the mainstream, at least once we reach the point even tiny systems can be beasts, lessening the need to care for specs. I suppose eventually we may not even have graphics settings, just 3 presets automatically chosen by the software and optionally tweaked by the user in some advanced tab (some games already attempt this).

But yeah, basically there’s no reason to let Apple rest easy they have dominated the consumer gadget space, when you can provide other solutions that are arguably more consumer friendly (being PCs they have access to a larger library and more quality free software, they aren’t controlled by a single entity as hardware and software provider, etc) and eventually can be just as casual friendly as both Windows and Linux in recent years have become more and more user friendly. I’m sure this will continue, there’s also Android which is growing bigger by the day as an alternative, though that then negates PC compatibility so I’d rather it doesn’t become the dominant one.

What we’re seeing currently is maybe baby steps to that end. Hopefully it will work. I’m sure the first parties could learn to adapt, the stronger ones would probably release accessories (controllers, kinect like stuff, etc, compatible with all the other devices) like they now release consoles and so not completely ditch that hardware revenue either.

6

Ease of use is one reason why some people prefer console gaming. I agree that PC gaming isn’t too hard, but if it can be made even easier that’s going to make it more attractive to certain users. Even those who can deal with the slight extra hassle with PC gaming may not want to, or may want a more integrated experience.

Some other factors to consider are price and the user interface. I think what the Steam Box will likely bring is a console user experience but with some of the benefits of the PC that are absent from Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft’s consoles.

For example, with Steam Greenlight, there is less of barrier to get games published than on a traditional console. A Steam Greenlight game could still have all the benefits of console gaming (full controller support, guaranteed compatibility, etc) when running on a closed Steam Box, but without having to go through same red tape to get published. Perhaps games will have to meet a set of requirements to get certified for Steam Box, but I see that as a good thing, similar to meeting Apple’s requirements to get an app published on the iOS App Store. Going through Apple ensures that all apps meet a certain standard, and they reject those which don’t meet that standard, such as apps which use Flash. Similarly, Valve could reject games that don’t have full controller support or other console requirements. Apple’s approach is far is much less strict than Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo, but not so relaxed as to let any app run on the device; Valve has demonstrated a similar approach so far with Steam.

Another example is the user interface. With controller based games on the PC, you have to manually switch between mouse/keyboard and controller. This is becoming less of an issue with Big Picture Mode, but it’s still not plug and play, and many games still only have partial controller support. A more closed platform could mean that the user interface fully supports the controller from the moment the machine is turned on, including installation of games, in-game menus etc. Much more immersive and relaxing. I think this aspect is often overlooked by PC gamers who perhaps don’t care about this aspect of the user experience, but in my opinion it’s an important feature.

Another benefit of a Steam console is the integration between the living room and the PC. Having the same gaming network for PC and console would be great, meaning that you could play multiplayer with friends on the Steam Box, PC, or Mac. Cloud saves could work between devices too, so you could continue playing a living room game on a PC in the office if the game was supported on both devices. This is great for PC gamers even if they don’t end up getting the Steam Box themselves, because their friends may only play on the Steam Box.

The lack of compatibility with the existing Windows Steam library isn’t a huge problem IMO. Just look at how the Mac Steam library has grown since the Mac client was launched. If the Linux Steam library grows to a similar size, it shouldn’t be too hard to get most of those games working on the Steam Box too. If Valve price the Steam Box at a competitive price point (compared to the Wii U, Xbox 720, and PS4), continues to offer great deals, and includes a Steam exclusive killer app (Half-Life 3?) I don’t see why it couldn’t compete.

7

Did you click the link? I really think that just indicates they’re going for boosting the PC platform itself by offering more user friendly solutions, rather than going for a closed console system alongside their PC business. Whether it will work or not I can’t know, I’m not the target market and as I said they do have competition, while we don’t yet know its final form. It’s also worth nothing that previously Valve didn’t call their plans the Steambox, it was the press who coined the term, which sounds very console like for sure.

Even when Gabe talks about a closed system it sounds more like he’s talking about what they will require from other manufacturers’ Steamboxes, ie, if they will or won’t allow an optical drive and such, rather than an actual console they have full control over.

Though I suppose maybe they’re still going to come out with a console alongside these PC boosting plans that’s kind of competing with one’s self on some levels.

I think most of the user friendliness issues will be solved on the PC itself over time, you don’t need a console for that, they’ve been improving all the time and consoles and other gadgets have become more complex over time and not much unlike PCs in some ways, with people being able to follow suit and use them just fine, not to mention all the people using PCs for work aren’t necessarily tech savvy geeks either.

Allowing one to control the OS with the controller if they just want to game shouldn’t be an issue, any program can have controller support like a game, Steam and OS included. Or maybe they’ll bundle it with one of those controllers with a touch screen (or touch pad, the photo wasn’t clear) on it for more intuitive pre-game control. Or whatever else. Or just code a boot splash screen that works with the mouse and the controller and asks you if you want to start Steam Big Picture on boot or use the rest of the PC.

8

A follow up article discusses pricing and Gabe points to $300 for a mid range box and $99 for a box meant to stream content from your PC, perhaps further showing the Steambox is not a console but a PC too, otherwise the streaming tier would be a wholly different thing to regular Steambox which would have its own content, not PC content. I’ll be very surprised if they’re consoles after this information, though I guess it’s possible.

I’m now very curious to see what kind of hardware they can cram in a small box for $300. Laptops and tablet form PCs have more parts that add to their price but when going down to $399 or less if any even exist for less the specs are pretty bad for gaming. I really hope they’ve found a way to make it better than that.

Unless they intend to sell them (their own brand, not the other manufacturers’ compliant boxes) at cost and to bring the money from the software sales by having Steam and its store prominently show up on boot etc. But for that to work they need to ensure it will bring new customers, not people who already game on PC and buy Steam games.

If the streaming works nicely (lagless, like the Wii U gamepad’s screen) I could see me getting that for the living room though, instead of a real box.

9

In this Kotaku article Gabe says the following:

“Well certainly our hardware will be a very controlled environment,” he said. "If you want more flexibility, you can always buy a more general purpose PC. For people who want a more turnkey solution, that’s what some people are really gonna want for their living room.

Then in the Verge article you linked he says:

“We?ll come out with our own and we?ll sell it to consumers by ourselves. That?ll be a Linux box, [and] if you want to install Windows you can. We?re not going to make it hard. This is not some locked box by any stretch of the imagination.”

It sounds like it will be simple PC that will (probably) boot directly into Big Picture Mode. Perhaps you’ll be able to install non-Steam Linux software as well as an option, perhaps not. Since he mentions that it will be a “turnkey solution”, I think they will probably remove the traditional Linux desktop and just have Big Picture Mode as the interface. But if they don’t include the Linux desktop, it sounds like there will be an option to install any Linux distro, since there’s the option to install Windows.

Hmm, I guess it depends how we define console here. A PC that plugs into a TV and boots straight into Big Picture Mode is basically a console.

Valve doesn’t seem to care how gamers access their games. So long as gamers are using the Steam service, the hardware isn’t important. Be that on Windows, Mac, Linux, or some other box running Steam.

The big question is how much this box will cost. Will Valve sell it at a loss to compete with the next gen consoles directly, or keep the price higher, in line with the third party Steam PCs?

[quote=“Al3xand3r”]I think most of the user friendliness issues will be solved on the PC itself over time, you don’t need a console for that, they’ve been improving all the time and consoles and other gadgets have become more complex over time and not much unlike PCs in some ways, with people being able to follow suit and use them just fine, not to mention all the people using PCs for work aren’t necessarily tech savvy geeks either.

Allowing one to control the OS with the controller if they just want to game shouldn’t be an issue, any program can have controller support like a game, Steam and OS included. Or maybe they’ll bundle it with one of those controllers with a touch screen (or touch pad, the photo wasn’t clear) on it for more intuitive pre-game control. Or whatever else. Or just code a boot splash screen that works with the mouse and the controller and asks you if you want to start Steam Big Picture on boot or use the rest of the PC.[/quote]

Keyboard/Mouse, Touch, and Gamepad based interfaces are three very different worlds. Windows 8 has tried to unite Keyboard/Mouse and Touch, but hasn’t been very successful IMO. So I think if PC operating systems are designed to be useable with a gamepad they’ll need to rethink some aspects of the traditional desktop. Valve have done a great job with Big Picture mode, but it’s very much a different experience to using other applications on the PC.

10

Interesting. I think the $99 and $300 boxes are on different tiers. While the $99 box appears to require a PC to stream from, it appears that the $300 box is standalone. The standalone device is the interesting unit because it’s basically the same price point as a console. Console or not, it looks like that’s the device that will be aimed at competing with the next generation of consoles.

[quote=“Al3xand3r”]I’m now very curious to see what kind of hardware they can cram in a small box for $300. Laptops and tablet form PCs have more parts that add to their price but when going down to $399 or less if any even exist for less the specs are pretty bad for gaming. I really hope they’ve found a way to make it better than that.

Unless they intend to sell them (their own brand, not the other manufacturers’ compliant boxes) at cost and to bring the money from the software sales by having Steam and its store prominently show up on boot etc. But for that to work they need to ensure it will bring new customers, not people who already game on PC and buy Steam games.[/quote]

If it boots directly into Big Picture mode it would perform the same role as a console of the same price point. So, I think they could sell it at cost using the same strategy that Sony and Microsoft use for their consoles. I’m not sure how else they could make it competitive.

11

I didn’t suggest using the controller to write an essay there, just enough rudimentary support to conveniently boot an app without switching between different inputs, since the PC may by default boot into Steam but it’s still a PC that you will be able to use for other things, rather than only Steam, so that could come in handy. I doubt for example that they’d ban people from using things like media players and other such programs, or any browser outside Steam’s integrated one. Touch is close enough to mouse input for such uses, hence so many laptops coming with a touch pad for years now. Obviously not to play Quake with though in theory you can do that. Or their controller might have a button like the Xbox one in the center, which would start or bring Steam into focus or something. There are many different ways to do something like it.

Well, we’ll have to disagree on if it is or isn’t a console just because it’s got a boot sequence that starts Steam up on boot. Any PC can be made to do that, smaller form home theater PCs as well. Hell, it’s likely that once it’s actually done you will be able to install the exact Steambox software on your own custom built Linux PC (if there’s even any additional software and it’s not merely integrated into Steam itself as an option). Offering that in a nicely designed product for people who can’t bother to do the research on their own is nice and all, but hardly makes it a console. Alienware has built some beastly small form PCs (the x51 models) and they aren’t consoles and they don’t change the industry in a significant way like anything akin to adding a fourth first party. Similar to any pre-built PC or laptop, the ever present option every casual user has gone for.

I’m skeptical about how much they can subsidize the costs (what’s the benefit to them if they don’t profit from it and will only profit on the software sold, since they already sell software on any PC, why also sell their own if it won’t lead to extra profit, why not just offer incentives for the existing computer manufacturers to bundle Steam with theirs and such, that would be cheaper) and how many of their own brand they can offer worldwide, it could be that they only market those locally and the rest of the world only sees third party Steamboxes designed to spec, which wouldn’t be as subsidized. But anyway, to get a decent graphics card alone you need around $300, never mind building the tech to cram it in a smaller than usual small form box and what not. No laptop or tablet PC even approaching that price point has enough juice to run yesterday’s and today’s demanding games, never mind tomorrow’s. So I’m thinking the $300 box will be gimped and a full spec box will be closer to $999. At this point I wouldn’t settle for a new PC that can’t run upcoming games like Crysis 3 perfectly in order to be somewhat future proof. But we’ll have to wait and see. Still, a less than great setup would especially highlight how it’s still a PC to the mainstream user who would dislike low performance and fiddling with settings to get better performance for a tradeoff where possible etc.

12

Yeah, I don’t think they’ll ban desktop applications outright either. What seems more likely is that the regular Linux desktop won’t be installed by default. It’ll just be the core Linux operating system and the Steam interface. From the UI perspective, I don’t see any reason to have non-Steam apps running on the box by default - unless they’re redesigned to work with the controller. For example, the Steam Big Picture web browser is quite different from Firefox or other Linux web browsers. Similarly, I don’t think the Steam Box would have any of the existing Linux media players or other apps installed by default - if there are media players, they’ll be integrated with Big Picture Mode.

I understand that you can control touch interfaces with a mouse, but do you think a UI designed around touch is the best interface for a mouse user?

A mouse is much more precise, so a well designed UI is going to take advantage of that with smaller icons, etc. Apple saw this when they designed iOS and OSX as two separate environments designed around two very different input devices. The Windows 8 user interface seems like a step backwards for mouse users for that reason.

I’m happy to call the Steam Box a PC. :slight_smile: I don’t think the name matters so much anyway.

What’s interesting about the $300 Steam Box is that is appears to be filling the role of a console. Same price point as consoles, turnkey solution, controller based UI, etc. So even if the Steam Box is capable of doing more than the average console, the details so far suggests that it will be aimed at the console market. And that’s exciting for console gamers.

This is the same for Microsoft and Sony right? Initially, they don’t make money off the hardware, but sell it as a means to an end to get more people onto the platform and buying software through them. To compete with Microsoft and Sony directly, Valve needs to sell a box at the same price point. While third party PCs are great, they can’t match the consoles when it comes to price. The $300 box will be likely be marketed at console gamers rather than PC gamers with more money who would more likely go with one of the “better” boxes that Valve describes. The graphics may be gimped in comparison to these high end PCs, but not necessarily in comparison to consoles.

13

I think the comparison would be closer to asking Microsoft to sell their own computers, tablets and phones at cost or less than cost because they should be able to make that money back from the Windows store sales, vs third party computer, tablet and phone manufacturers that also sell Windows devices but have to sell them with a certain profit margin as they don’t gain anything from Windows store sales. I don’t think they do that, despite doing that for Xbox, because they’re very different things, and they help push Windows store by having said third party manufacturers put Windows on them, rather than by making new just as capable yet cheaper devices of their own.

Oh, and Microsoft hasn’t been profiting all that much from the Xbox brand (and only recently at all) either, while Sony also isn’t doing great financially, those approaches certainly take a toll on things, at least when they don’t progress ideally.

14

Yeah, they don’t do that with Windows 8 devices, one reason being that their main competition is Apple who also profits off hardware sales. They don’t need to sell the hardware at cost. Whereas the $300 Steam Box will be competing against the next Sony and Microsoft consoles. In order for it to competitive it will need to have similar specs - unless they go the Nintendo route and release an underpowered system compared to the competition.

True. Valve needs to be careful that they can make up any money lost on hardware with software sales.

15

I think Valve can subsidize some of the hardware cost. Other cost savings could come from not having a disk drive as they are unnecessary with Steam. Really they could not include a controller or offer a version without a controller as the system should support keyboard and mouse natively along with any existing PC controller(or even the Xbox controller for that matter). They also could really cut OS costs by using a custom Linux OS with BigScreenMode.

I would purchase a 300 dollar Steambox if it could play all existing games at Med to High with some antialiasing at 1080p well, ie close to 60fps. This would not replace my upcoming PC build, but would be used in conjunction with that. I am still just so damn excited for the prospects of improved Linux support, even if I don’t purchase a Steambox. I want to be able to run Ubuntu full time!

16

They could do that, but I’m not sure why they would. The Steam Box is being designed to compete with next gen consoles, so making it more like a desktop PC would be detrimental to that role. I also think most users don’t want to use a clumsy keyboard and mouse in the living room, a living space not typically optimised for those inputs. If the Steam Box does support keyboard and mouse it’ll probably be as a secondary option rather than something required out of the box for gameplay.

I think the box will likely be designed around controller-based games that run on Linux. For everything else, you’ll probably be better off sticking with your PC.

17

Looks like the next Call of Duty game may be coming to Linux-based Steam boxes.

Photo

18

[quote=“Solo Wing”]Looks like the next Call of Duty game may be coming to Linux-based Steam boxes.
[/quote]

While I don’t play Call of Duty, I really hope this is true as it possibly brings in a huge fanbase of gamers to the Linux platform. Just read a recent interview with Gabe where he mentioned a timeframe for the first Steambox being about 4+ months away. Will have to look for the link, but this is exciting news. Now only if Valve would get the remainder of their library playable in Linux! (That and get Ep 3/HL3 out the damn door.)