Steam Machines – Prototype Details(steamcommunity.com) |
Steam Machines – Prototype Details(steamcommunity.com) |
Or maybe they'll have a minimum spec that gets bumped every 2 years, so a game can say "runs on all Steam Machines (2014+)".
But it's clear there's going to have to be some way of "tranching" the different hardware levels, because nothing will kill this idea faster than a general public who's heard that you can never be quite sure if a game you buy will run on your particular Steam Machine.
But then I realize something: where do people get Steam games from? The Steam store online! I'm pretty sure they'll build in the equivalent of the windows performance score that can be sent to Steam's servers, and they'll simply be able to show you the games that will run best on your machine and hide games that simply won't run at all.
Thoughts? I think that, as with the controller, this is a really important aspect of getting this whole big idea to work.
No. And none of this tier stuff either. The point of the Steamboxen is to kill the windows dependency of games, probably why they are future proofing them so much. They'll last 3-5 years in their present iteration and at that point it will be moot.
OK, you don't have to hide it, but there still needs to be some kind of guide about how games will play on your Steam Machine.
This is not a big deal right now, but what about in, say, 6 years? You have an original Steam Machine and a new game JUST came out. It doesn't run on your Steam Machine because yours doesn't have a Whatsit Quantum Coprocessor. Shouldn't the Steam UI, you know, let you know that before you go about buying and downloading that 30GB game??
And I don't want tiers, either, but Valve did say they'd have something to say about this; I'm simply speculating about what it could be.
It would have to be some sort of rolling release I think, because this year's gold hardware will be next year's silver or bronze.
> I'm pretty sure they'll build in the equivalent of the windows performance score that can be sent to Steam's servers, and they'll simply be able to show you the games that will run best on your machine and hide games that simply won't run at all.
You'd need to know before you buy the hardware, though.
They can do just the same for the Steambox and use it to display the performance for games on similar systems - if they want to.
There has to be a plan for that.
The trouble is in getting unbiased results. I doubt Valve would want to test each model themselves.
edit: or maybe a triplet, CPU index, GPU index, Storage index.
Then, after I saw AMD announcing the Mantle API, I realized, it would be a perfect match for the Steam Machines, to get some of that console-level performance for more or less the same price. John Carmack agrees that Valve+Mantle would be a deadly combination:
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-mantle-api-xbox-one-pla...
Mantle is the future of gaming machines. It will not create lock-in, because both Nvidia and Intel will scramble to create something similar, or even compatible with AMD's API (which will be open soon), and what this will lead to eventually is a reset of standardized overlays for GPU hardware, that will support AMD, Nvidia, Intel, and probably even ARM GPU's, but with much lower overhead than DirectX and OpenGL.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7371/understanding-amds-mantle...
http://semiaccurate.com/2013/09/30/amds-mantle-biggest-chang...
A couple of years ago I built a small AMD Llano based computer using a small enclosure sold by Mini-Box and an 80W fanless Pico Power Supply also sold on the site.
Case - http://www.mini-box.com/M350-universal-mini-itx-enclosure
PSU - http://www.mini-box.com/picoPSU-80
It is much quieter than an Xbox 360, but also can't play any XBox level games on it (I use it as an HTPC). I'd be curious to see what I can do today with the same amount of power using Haswell, some 28nm GPU and SteamOS.
It's basically a game of chess.
Coincidentally, the League of Legends world championship final is occurring tonight. Anything you learn about the genre or strategy will apply somewhat to any game in the MOBA (multiplayer online battle arena) genre, so check it out if you're interested in learning more. Riot Games has hired an entire team of casters and analysts, and I find the commentary to be mostly insightful and enjoyable compared to American sportscasters.
To bring this on-topic: I wonder whether Valve will allow non-Steam games to run on SteamOS. League of Legends is directly competitive with Valve's own DOTA2, but Valve has historically allowed you to use Steam purely as a launcher. My biggest fear is that this is yet another walled garden, just one that has embraced its digital nature sooner and better.
After all of the talk about leveraging the AMD successes with the game consoles -- and about smoothing ports -- surprised to see nvidia only.
Prototype hardware always costs a gzillion dollars.
Another post mentions this as a way of getting SteamOS out there, but really -- as this is just standard PC hardware -- there are already hundreds of millions of candidate devices.
The only real way I can see SteamOS having a chance is if it offers a console-like value proposition (because the next generation of very powerful consoles are just coming out, and even "hard core" gamers are looking at them longingly), which valve needed to make happen through tight integration, optimization, and mass production. Another go at HTPCs == almost certain commercial failure.
At this point if I have to be skeptical about something is about how well the hardware will work with the OS considering the reputation nvidia has with Linux...
nvidia (closed source) > AMD > nvidia (open source)
I would think that the Steam environment will do a lot of your thinking for you. It'll check your hardware, suggest upgrades (since the boxes will evidently be upgradable), etc...
The point of SteamOS is that it's open, and anyone can make them (and people other than Valve can sell them). If they become insanely popular, I'm sure that someone will jump on integration to sell a cheaper console.
Maybe (probably) I'm just biased, but I spent a few years trying to get MythTV, Satellite PCs, Silverstone chassis, Mediacenter, XBMC on a modded 1st gen XBox, etc etc working smoothly.
It was a nightmare. I don't ever ever never want to have to think about overscan again as long as I live.
For me to be interested it needs to be flawlessly plug & play.
This was a few years before HDMI output was available on videocards, so maybe that has already solved the problem.
But as a ~8 year Mac user who converted from Windows XP for Ruby I will never, ever buy another Windows PC. Ever. Never. I mean, my wife still has to occasionally open network settings to get her work laptop onto the network. And because it's an Airport Extreme, that never has to be rebooted (unlike the dozen other WAPs I had previously), it's never the network. Just her laptop. That's crazy. No way I'm letting that into my living room.
Pitch me a box and out of the box experience that is guaranteed to work as long as I keep it vanilla (which is all I want) and is otherwise a PS4 I have the ability to upgrade piecemeal... Yeah. I'm totally on board with that.
And if the price of entry is pushing $600+, I'm probably OK with that too. That's what I paid for an 80GB PS3 on release day after all. I don't think I could make the mental leap past $999 though. ;-)
Price isn't my primary concern. Plug & Play access to a top-notch gaming environment is.
Honestly the PS4 may be a better fit, but the ability to swap out circuit boards on a SteamMachine is appealing. And the game library. If I could play DOOM and System Shock on my TV without spending as much time getting it working as playing I'd be pretty stoked.
The plug-and-play thing has never really worked. However not having to wait the normal generational time between consoles would be an advantage -- it was always baffling that each iteration of the 360 and PS3 (there were many of each) couldn't improve it in some way beyond making it smaller or lower power. GTA IV on the 360 had draw distance issues and would stutter mid-town -- it would have been nice if some GPU improvements in the 2nd and then 3rd edition eliminated that, etc, but the nature of that platform makes it so they can't.
But, back to Steam Machines. I don't think it would be a good idea for Valve to try to get Steam Machines down to console like costs. They're not in a position to sell hardware at a loss like console manufacturers have traditionally done in the beginning of a cycle. The Steam Machines should offer quality.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidewalt/2012/03/07/valve-gabe...
Look at the specs we're discussing. Even the low-end version is decidedly non-casual.
The bigger limiting factor would be "games that run on Linux." Does League of Legends play on Linux?
Those specs are high end but that also means the device will be compatible with games for the rest of the decade.