EuroGamer - Valve hit the headlines this week with the confirmation that it will enter the console business with its own Steam Box.
For the Half-Life company it marks a desire to take on Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo with its own hardware powered by Steam and Linux.
10°
10°
10°
20°
Ad 
30°
Their big hurdle is marketing and the retail end of it. They could also take some business away from Alienware.
What we have to remember is Valve isn't interested in all the other fluff. They don't sell operating systems and use hardware to catapult other sales. They don't sell TV's or blu-ray and use a game platform to offset those sales. Their interest is games and if they can treat publishers more fairly and not charge them as much in royalties then yes, we could have a winner on our hands.
"So I wouldn't in any way criticise what they've achieved and the role they've played in the industry. But I'm not sure we would choose Steam as a benchmark of success. We would always seek to innovate and push beyond.
"Xbox Live as a foundation, the reach we have and the experience we deliver is a great place to build on."
I don't agree with that comment. Steam is actually a great service. You can also gift items within Steam. It also allows other things like dedicated servers and mod support. The prices are also much more competitive for the consumer. I do see it as a benchmark of success and one that doesn't need to hide itself with a ton of apps and other things so they can justify a fee either. Steam is free, that's a benchmark when compared to Live.
What you initially typed you could pretty much replace "valve" with "MS" and it would be the same situation. MS didn't have a distribution channel. They had not been in console gaming before.
Also, steam was nothing like it is now without looking at live as a reference. Let's say, all good ideas are influenced by something else. Now I could be wrong but when I used steam it was for hl2 and counter strike. There were no achievement or community like it is.
I got into the 360 after the Xbox and the changes with live were obvious. If steam had achievements first then I didn't know that. No need to discredit one to promote the other.
...but if Valve allows us PC gamers to use our existing Steam account (and our already-purchased games) on the Steambox, I'm getting one.
THAT is something people keep forgetting. PC gamers who are already using Steam may pick this up simply as a mini-PC to use on an extra TV, or to bring over to a buddy's house. Sure, non-PC gamers who are new to PC gaming will get it, too, but there's a big threat of PC gamers who are currently using Steam on a Windows-based PC migrating to a Linux-based system.
I respectfully disagree. One thing that the xbox did have that Steam didnt have is Microsoft. Before microsoft went into the gaming business they were a powerhouse in computers. They had a distributing channel that distribute computers, software, and let not to say they had very very deep pockets to invest in gaming. Therefore they can take a risk. Microsoft was in a very good position to make the xbox successful because they had the money, the staff, the knowledge, and they are a very well known brand.
MS was/is primarily a software company. they dont make or distribute computers (unless you count surface tablets).
So their only real hardware experience was in making keyboards and mice and controllers for the PC (sidewinder line).
their experience in any kind of console form would be their name on the dreamcast because it used a modified windows CE operating system. They did try the home market with webTV but that was exactly what it was. "WebTV" no games.
To be fair, even Sony was a newcomer to the console market at one point but there is no need to discredit them for that when we see that it took them a few years to mature and be accepted. Many will just hate MS because its MS regardless.
Its like the Google effect. Google was a search engine that built into something bigger and is taking on hardware and software but they didnt get there without something else as a base of reference. Was it MS or Apple or even Commodore...but still all good ideas come from something else.
Valve as a company is a software company. Steam was their distribution service for new games that you could buy digitally or at retail and validate through steam. It grew into something bigger just like Live grew into something bigger. Like it or not, all of these companies are connected to each other in more ways than people give them credit for.
The Steam box as a concept is very similar to the idea behind the 3DO. Meaning that while there had to be a base unit to demonstrate the idea, that idea was open to any other company that wanted to build a platform that was their own but compatible with the standard 3DO library.
Valve will not be the only ones making steam compatible units. Just as i would imagine MS has been toying with the notion of building a set of standards for their next xbox that would be open to other companies making xbox/live compatible units as well.
Nintendo (and possibly sony) are the only ones who continue to do it alone from concept to R&D to finished product. That takes lots of $$$ and lots of risks.
If there were (insert game platform) compatible units on the market from various companies like Samsung, JVC, RCA, Panasonic then we would have more of a DVD/Bluray type of electronic selection on the market and all of them would work with the same software.
It would be like buying a PC from Dell, HP, Compaq etc and they all come with windows or (if offered) your choice of OS. That is what the steam box idea is and probably what the next xbox would be like as well. The set of standards created by valve (or MS) but the hardware would be competitive because there would be more than one company making it.
Phil's concerns are legitimate. Production and distribution will be the two big issues, I think Valve will have one great advantage jumping into the game with the possibility of having their titles like Half-Life, Portal and Left 4 Dead become PC exclusive. Don't know if they'll do it, but it will be interesting to see.
I know at one time Valve were talking about Steam on consoles... we never really saw anymore than Steamworks on PS3, but it makes me wonder if the SteamBox is a result of the lack of a Steam system on consoles. Like they decided to build it after not being able to do what they wanted on consoles.
I wasn't really referring to the Achievement status. I still think Xbox Live wins in this area due to the fact all games on the Xbox 360 have it. I'm not sure if all Steam games do. I just disagree with the comment of not acknowledging Steam as a benchmark of success. In PC gaming it is. They have led and never looked back. Heck, even Microsoft tried to get their hands in there with Xbox Live on the PC and failed miserably. Origin is nowhere near the same caliber as Steam either. Will that success transfer over to the Steambox? I'm not sure. I think companies like Microsoft spend a lot of money marketing and securing partnership deals with the likes of Activision and Epic. I don't think Valve will go that route. They are interested in bringing a platform that is far more flexible and open. Will gamers care? That we will soon find out.
One thing both Microsoft and Sony are willing to do is sell hardware at a loss. I don't think Valve is willing to do that but the value will still be there for customers. You're not paying for things you may not want like a blu-ray drive or having to pay a membership fee to play online. The software may also be better value on Steam, in fact it already is.
As for distribution channel Microsoft was already a player with Windows and Window based PC games before the Xbox. They didn't have hardware so yes, you are right about that, but they still had software at the retail end. I think all Steam has now are Steam cards which are like iTunes, Xbox Live and Playstation Network cards.
I am glad to see a company who doesn't have to answer to shareholder jump in.
Make me wonder since I can sign into steam with my psn account will they try to break down the barrier of cross platform on console? PC, steambox & ps4 multiplayer? portal2, DCU & payday are all on steam and are cross play & maybe planetside 2 & Ever Quest Next for ps4. I already know MS is not having it so I won't mention 720.
That would be cool though.
"Steambox Seen by Newell to Have Three Tiers of Pricing, Could Start at $99"
http://www.gameranx.com/upd...
Also this could mean less bad pc ports.
Idk I am just happy now I want to huge everyone!!
"I already know MS is not having it so I won't mention 720."
MS is the dominant player in the online connectivity of consoles so they won't include another platform unless they are threatened by it or if there is very strong synergy.
"I am glad to see a company who doesn't have to answer to shareholder jump in."
Well the other part of it is, Valve really couldn't jump into the console business. There aren't many players that have the financial resources to get a console released and be successful. MS spent billions entering the industry, and other than old time players there hasn't been a new serious entrant in a long time.
There are mostly just small timers.
"Also this could mean less bad pc ports."
I always dreamed of this 3-tier setup, but I hope Valve has a forward moving plan i.e. how do you move to the next generation for the lowest level. How long will it be supported?
There are a lot of questions like that and Valve has no history of building any hardware. In fact, Steam was more of an accident than a planned business.
Valve is a great company, but I question their ability to succeed. I welcome competition with open arms though.
So I'm I... not that I really need it, I already have a LAN, but just to tinker with it in front of the TV and to support Valve. Valve is a good company that gives us gamers value for our money and they don't try to nickel & dime us to death.
Plus I'm a Linux nut and finally getting rid of M$ would be my dream come true. So I'm going to support the penguin!
Scare?
Practically the entire business world runs on Windows. It's easy to change browsers, because there is no lock down on software. Practically any website can be viewed on a different browser.
Can't say the same about productivity software, let alone games!
Remember when PC manufacturers tried to include Linux? Like Dell? The PC ended up costing more! That's irony.
That's WHY a big company coming in and pushing Linux scares them; because right not it can't compete with Windows. But once Gamers switch away because Linux game support skyrockets, others will follow. Don't pretend like business is the only important part of OS sales.
Have you been involved with software licensing and cost decisions in a company?
If you have, you know the biggest cost isn't the software, but rather the employees time. Half an hour wasted a day easily outweighs the cost in almost a week or two.
One serious backer doesn't make a big difference at all. What they need is the industry support overall. They are facing the mountain that MS did with the original Xbox, except Linux doesn't give gamers anything Windows doesn't.
To the vast majority, Windows is practically free with the computer. In fact, computer cost increases without Windows as seen before when Dell tried to push Ubuntu laptops.
It's a pipe dream to replace Windows and Valve had a better shot using Android than Linux. Primarily because there is already customers there.
@SilentNegotiator:
If MS was scared, they would have supported Windows gaming far more. MS wants to push Xbox, not PC gaming anymore. It's mostly there to have a presence.
Linux game support ain't gonna skyrocket. Why would it? What about Linux would make gamers compelled to choose it over Windows whom they are familiar with, exist on their PC pre-installed from the store and has most of their other compatible software.
If you feel differently, I would like to know WHY? What about Linux will compel gamers to choose it over Windows?
The only real backer of PC gaming these days are Valve really, because that is their main business.
to the custom PC building community there is a benefit to using linux. But the custom building side of things has changed dramatically over the last 10 years.
Mainly due to the cost of building a PC vs simply buying one already built and loaded with an OS. I liked building computers but it got to a point where I just couldnt build one at the same price as what you could buy.
you may have more control over the parts you want to use but all of that adds to the overall cost. People (in general)these days are more enthralled with just buying a new machine or tablet or smartphone than building one.
Linux has its pro's (mainly being free) but it also has it's cons (no standarization from version to version). There are many variants of Linux and each one is made from the same basic core but tweaked to be just a bit different than the next one. At least with windows, you know your copy of windows 7 or 8 on a dell will be just like the copy of 7 or 8 on an HP.
I think valve is more concerned in getting other companies to make steam units than them being the sole supplier. That way they can lay out the standards for the service to work. Obviously they chose linux in their design because of licensing but if they let other companies make units then it would be on them (Samsung, Dell etc) and those companies could use whatever works for them so long as it meets the bare minimum for compatibility.
also many pc gamers have no reason what so ever to buy a consoles that is essentially a tiny pc that costs the same as the desktop pc they already own.
anything can be a steambox. you can connect a gaming laptop to your tv and that can be a steambox. you can make small pc with a mini ITX motherboard that will be the same size as a console and connect that to your tv. alienware have a small gaming pc that can be your steambox
finally the third problem is the open nature of the steambox, if valve do decide that they will lower the price to stay competitive they are doing so in the hope that they will make that money back from items bought from steam however not all people who buy the steambox will use it for gaming. i think the piston or the Xi3,Xi5 & Xi7 computer will be a success but i'm not sure that success will come from people using it as a games console and i can't see them replacing people's gaming PC's
I haven't been into PC gaming for the last 10 years or so but I've always been a big fan of Valve, their games, and their philosophy. If the Steambox turns out to be good I wouldn't mind getting one. Really hyped about what it could do. :)
(you can't use the ps3 for anything else other than to play ps3 games and use sony services thats why sony prevented people from installing linux to the ps3 when it came out and removed support for other os)
i think valve will do it if they want to as they do have the resources to do anything they please but how beneficial it will be to them is questionable. from a consumers stand point I am looking forward to the steambox too!
This, to me, sounds like Microsoft trying to scare off Valve. I play my xbox 360 primarily over ps3 (therefore i am an "xbox fanboy") and i am really looking forward to Steambox.
This is big for console gamers, whether you be Microsoft or Sony fan-boys. Hopefully Steambox stays true to Steam and they offer the same great games that Sony/Microsoft offer, but at 1/4 of the price.
Good luck, Valve! Unlike Microsoft, i actually mean it.
Valve's SteamBox is one of those systems where I'm confident in getting it during it's first year of release.
Message twice.
You are acting like the people you are criticizing.
By all means let's stamp out some reasonably intelligent dialogue. Seriously, it's either this, or baseless grumblings about who has the best hardware, games, online service, or whatever.
If you had even gone to college you'd know they don't teach you about stocks in economics, that's all in the finance department.
If you hadn't noticed, virtually every comment on n4g is speculation. Maybe you hadn't, considering how exceptionally unobservant you are.
Harrison has been a failure everywhere. Sony England.... Atari.
Tough biz indeed Mr Harrison
Not interested and i don't think it will be that successful. Might be wrong.
If its worth it in the long run might even consider dropping Sony and Microsoft consoles all together
i agree with AznGaara , i smell like steam box will not be that huge since people would rather buy a PS4 or an Xbox720.
keep in mind that the support linux has is awful, there is a reason why windows is still dominant after all these years same applies with apple and OS X.
+
EA is starting to pull their games from steam.
I never like companies that attack each other, as it is childish. Glad to see a great response from ms. Right now Gabe Newell is probably slowly putting on suglasses; "challenge, accepted".
Turn 10 are classy?
Try looking between the lines. Valve is making Linux the backbone of their Steambox. Microsoft thought that they had officially killed Linux off as a threat when they threatened hardware companies out of using Linux in some their computers (least MS take away their privilege to license Windows), even making Asus’ chairman, Jonney Shih, apologize for SHOWING a Linux powered computer.
Microsoft's biggest fear is open platforms. Look at how Firefox and Chrome have taken over. Microsoft has tried several times to keep people from downloading them at all. Even with Windows 8 they tried pulling that crap.
It's about trying to scare away potential partners/investors and Valve themselves, that way Linux won't have a chance to grow. Not class. They're a corporation; you can't seriously think that they MEAN IT when they said "We welcome competition with open arms! ;)"
Then again, as usual, people hear what they want to hear on N4G.
This got nothing to do with being classy , there have been enough instance to show that , you just wanna hear what you wanna hear .
I think it would be better if they focused on their own stuff and stick to more informal PR about upcoming games, services, technical innovations etc.
Phil Harrison comes off as kind of ignorant boasting about the 40 million active users on Xbox Live when Steam has 50 million.
Gaming PC that runs on Linux and supports steam to its core. If anything this will only help make PC market look more attractive to publishers. They didn't even announce publisher support. It seems kind of worthless since they have steam on all PCs defeats the purpose.
Hopefully Valve knows this and can make the task of maintaining a Steambox nice and easy. BUT i had an absolutely terrible customer service experience with Steam so Im not totally convinced they can do it. It's a wait and see situation for me.
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
but they look alike in some way
Beginning of 2012, I believe.
so is he saying steam already won? is that fear i detect philly? you worried you wont be able to keep the xboxlive milk flowing
steam is 4000x better than psn or xboxlive, sorry, its just a fact, the deals, the mods, the clans, the forumns, the guilds, the greenlight, the patches, the multitasking, next gen consoles will not even come close to what steam had 3 years ago, let alone what they will be bringing in the future!
steam has 50 million already, 100 million is coming, very, very soon!
this is NOT aimed at pc gamers, STEAM already has all of us, the 50 million that are already steam customers, i alone have bought over 200 games from them!
we build rigs that DESTROY this steam box, ps4 and xbox 720 all combined, i wouldnt ever buy some tiny pc that only does console resolutions and console settings
but, millions will, people who don't have the money to buy a $500 gpu and the tech abilities to build a pc (though its pretty damn easy)
this is aimed at console players and casuals, and it will work
Hell if it's not even aimed at there current user than theirs no way in hell they will be able to get into this market. Nintendo got the casual market sealed down tight. Sony and Microsoft have a huge fan base and I can't see fans changing over to a PC console maker. The only people I see possible thinking about getting are there current PC makers. 200 Games you must buy alot of 2 dollar games on steam.
Coming from a guy who's company he represents for and previous represent for has not sold hundreds of millions of units...also a rep for one of the biggest hardware companies in console gaming.
In any case, his point was that selling a hundred million is VERY rare, especially for a first entry into the console market, where selling tens of millions will be tough enough.
If the Steambox runs steam, EA probably won't support it, because they try to do their own thing.
You can't succeed with a console that does not offer Fifa, Madden or Battlefield.
That is a major disadvantage.
And why should devs go for Linux now? It has a 1.2% market share in the OS market and there are 28 games on steam that run on Linux. That is not much.
And Valve has basically no first party developer support. Sure there is Half-Life every 5 years, but that's it. ANd Valve would lose about 50% of its revenue if they stop developing for other consoles. Left 4 Dead made more money on 360 than on Steam for example.
I don't see it succeed. Sony, MS and Nintendo have more money, more experience, more support, more first party support, more budget.
As far as first party support. There a more games exclusive to PC than a PS3 & 360 combined. Moot point!
PC gamers will play on the PC. They won't switch to consoles, because the retailer they buy their games from builds one.
My prediction is that the Steambox will fail to get its fair part of the market. It might sell its 3 - 5 million / year, but that is it.
Valve makes some good games, and steam works well for it's users.
But I can't played Uncharted,Battlefield,GT,GOW, etc. On a steam box.
I already have a very nice pc.
I think a lot of this depends on what PS4/720 bring to the table.
They are going after the console gamer like me who are dieing to get into pc gaming without having to deal with the crap that comes with it, namely elitist pc heads to name some of the crap that comes along.
Have fun on your new Xbox playing halo 45 and gears 19, heaven help you if you buy an xbox to play multiplats lol
The biggest take up issues will be price but if it's not too far away from PS4/ 720 pricing then I'd say it's got a great future.
I'm kinda worried about the whole thing thou. Steam sure did great things for pc gaming but now that it's coming with it's own console, what says that most pc devs won't just make games based on the specs of that console instead of actual kick-butt pc hardware?
This is something that could be actually one of the biggest blows to a pc games industry. Steam is doing just fine, wtf do they need to make a console for?