Valve's Gabe Newell shares his thoughts on the third-party Steam Machines at the Valve CES press conference and even manages a quick pop at Microsoft and Xbox One.
Haha.. consoles-holders typically sell on average 80 mil every 7 years. Steam Box will falter.
exactly nothing in the tech world sells 50mill + over 5 or more years. only videogames tend to do that. steam machines will not be top sellers. they will probably sell 10mill at best as a whole.
Right! All I can remember from the announcement of iPads is how it had fail written all over it.
@letros ipad....1,2,3,4. which one?! why not make this caparison. PS1,PS2,PS3,PS4. (let's just add them all)
Apple is a front-running and technology inventive company. Smartphones didn't take off until they came around and the tablets didn't take off until they came around. Consoles have been around for a while with Nintendo and Sony dominating for a while. Steam-box isn't doing anything particular new that consumers are salivating from the mouth for. And tell me what Steam's legacy has had. Have they have any of the calibar like Apple 2, IMac, Powerbook, Macbook Air, iPod, and iPhone?? We're talking about a video game industry. Lots of tried but many have failed.
Steam machines will fail because they only apply to a specific group of people that won't want them anyway. That group is the PC gamers. They won't want a Steam Machine because they'll have better rigs that they built themselves that are either cheaper and better, or more expensive and better. Console gamers aren't going to want the Steam machine unless they dabbled in PC gaming or have been wanting to dabble in PC gaming. Casual consumers have pretty much moved on from consoles altogether. Steam machines are not going to be nearly as successful as consoles, not even close.
Consoles DO NOT typically sale 80 million... Lol in fact excluding Sony consoles (Nintendo handhelds if you count them as a console), last gen was the only time any other company even got close to that number. At the same time though, I do not think steam machines will succeed either. To me it is similar to the Vita, as in they are going after a very niche market. So maybe they will have some small success (they do not have to have complete separate support for it, like Sony does with the Vita), but they will not be some new powerhouse.
^ 80 was the only time last but I said it's the average, so I'm willing to bet that you get pretty close 80 mil when you take the avg of all PS systems and then Nintendo systems. 60, 40, 30, 20, 100, 100, 100,. I just said 100 for the handhelds because I forget how much the Gameboys or GBA sold. For PS 120, 150, 80, 65.
The Xbone720p is the only real STEAM Machine. Do these so-called Steam Machines produce steam higher than 720p?
yea the steam machines tend to be more powerful then consoles. I guess its all teh flavor you want... a sports car steam machine... or a broke down POS that gets the job done... lol
I don't know why this has to become a console vs the steam machine battle... The steam machine really is just a new flavor. It doesn't need to outsell anything because at hart Valve is a software company. If Valve sells more games across pc and the steam box it wins. As a PC gamer this is exciting because it really does put PC gaming on the map more so then in years. No, steam box's aren't going to outsell PS4 and Ones. But yes, steam is going to be a big time choice for gaming for years to come and thats the point. @DragonKnight Not all pc gamers will migrate to the tv, but I think a few less tech savvy people will buy the box. Valves strategy is a lot more broad then your argument gives it credit for. PC builders can build their own steambox and download steam os onto that from the steam website so the techies can have any steam box they want.
If what some industry people say Valve is taking almost no risk with Steam Boxes. Basically they made the OS and most of the risk is on the partners making the Boxes. Valve basically just supplies the OS and the partners(like Alienware and Falcon Northwest) So if the boxes don't sell all to well it's not really going to affect Valve in anyway. But as I said this is just what some of the Industry people assume is going on and they could of course be wrong as some of them often are. Either way I want to see how well the Steam Boxes perform in terms of sales.
i see steam box as a smart investment and not risky at all. i mean they are selling a normal PC with a good GFX card and a controller, with a free OS like linix, so if valve lose, they wont lose much, and if it all goes good then they'll make profit out of it.
Part of me hopes Steam machines do well (it'll allow PC gaming to proliferate). Part of me hopes they fail (Valve/Steam doesn't need any more of a death-grip on PC gaming. It needs to be MORE open, not less, thanks to Valve). I'll probably never buy one. Too many platforms already to play on and I already own a gaming PC, but if it was a choice between Valve and MS in the console market, I'd much rather take Valve.
Ok besides DRM what has Valve done that is anti-consumer. Microsoft sold it's customers a broken gaming system with the ability to pay to play online charged game developers for updating/patching say games plus extra money went to Microsoft due to developers were forced to pay for the third DVD disk and fourth. Sony brought online passes, removed backwards compatibility to resell PS1 PS2 games. PS4, xbox one and wii u require day one patch. PS4 and Xbox One charge gamers to play online and any services they provide like Sony music unlimited which is $10.00 a month not included in the subscription service. Wii u lacks online gaming and is a last last generation system. I am not saying Valve is perfect because is not but the Steam service is the most open service out there. Modding one click away with Steam Works, want to make money sell game items, trading cards, etc. Want some rare obscure games to come to STEAM is one click away with green light. Bargain bin prices able to get Steam keys from everywhere like Amazon. The Steam service is the closest service to gaming Nirvana. The console manufacturers failed and have become unimaginative, greedy and want gamers to bow to their anti consumer tactics.
I agree, console need to die. We only need one platform for gaming, the other closed platform should just go away. Ps4 and xbone are just locked down pc with some few IPs in hostage of the corporations.
@kingduqc Oh please. If consoles die, gaming dies. You'd never see a game like GTA V sale 20 million in a few weeks on PC and games can barely make a profit off 2 million sold these days. Plus how's the PC version of GTAV holding up? Oh wait...
@kingduqc That was one of dumber things I've ever heard. Just as Withdreday said: if consoles die, so will gaming.
@s45gr32 You do make a lot of great points, at the same time, you clump all console manufacturers together. Should I group Steam, Origin, Uplay ect. into one category? You act like ps+ is a rip off.. I will take my plethora of games for $50. If I ever decide to get a Vita, I do not even need to buy a game, I already have almost a dozen from PS+ and that will continue to grow. Hell Bioshock Infinite and DMC are free this month, I will play both. PS+ offers value just as Steam does, but in a slightly different way. Not to mention, you talk about these rare games on Steam, yes I love that. Nintendo and Sony also give gamers great exclusive experiences! Nintendo gives us the classic stuff you grew up with, and some completely weird stuff (good or bad lol). Sony gives us some really different big budget experiences too, who else is going to green light a new franchise right before a new console cycle from their most prized dev (ND). Little Big Planet, Heavy Rain, Modnation Racing, these are unique experiences that I am glad I got the chance to indulge in. All in all, this giant ecosystem is good for gaming collectively!
Is it a good thing to have so many different steam machines? I can't imagine trying to market these. Its all gonna get lost in a crazy shuffle. Its hard enough to convince console owners to switch or pc players to invest in something they already have. Maybe Valves machine can rise above the rest b/c of their stellar reputation but seriously, how the he'll do you convey the reason anyone should invest in one of these machines as a primary device?
Hes actually right. Consoles need to die. Steam machine is nothing more then a PC done cheap and for gaming. But steam doesnt own PCs. That means you can buy PCs from anywhere or build your own. Can you build your own xbox? no... in 5 years will xbox be behind ... yes.. Hell its already behind... So yea... Hes got a good point. And no gaming would not die without consoles hahha. thats a joke. Gaming was alive and well way before there even were consoles.. and pc gaming is huge as it is right now. In fact just look at how many poeple are playing online on steam this very moment! Thers like 8 million people online right now and the entire united states is still asleep. Its 5 AM If steam or any online service gets to big headed.... you cant do anything about it on consoles.. but on pc.. a developer can make their own service just for their game.. or use no service at all. Its freedom.
Well Valve isn't trying to convince PC gamers to buy Steam Machines. Its all about the mainstream or casual consumer that doesn't know how a computer can play games. Alot of retailers have not sold PC gaming hardware in awhile in the US. Steam Machines is a new way for them to actually sell something that plays games to the consumers. Valve does offer the OS free to PC consumers as well. So it can be dual booted. So its not much of a change really for the typical PC community.
@Kurylo3d What did you do, make a 2nd account just to agree with yourself? You sound butthurt because you spent $1500 on building a gaming rig and you can't even play blockbusters like GTAV or The Last of Us. It's PC gamers like you who give the whole base a bad name. Why not just enjoy your rig and let consoles continue to flourish? You sound so immature wishing consoles die off while you continue to suck off PC. Get over yourself.
Here is my two cents on what a single open platform would do: 1. Bigger gamer base. Instead of being locked to being exclusive to a platform with 50-80m Users Dev would sell their game to a single platform of over 600 million users. They could sale more way more copies. 2. Instead of paying fees to Sony/Microsoft every game they sell, being on an open platform would bring more revenue per copy. This is a significant boost considering they lose up to 10$ every game sold. 3. They could embrace new tech and advancement way faster. Console are locked down to a 6-7 year cycle and really hold back developers because they have to develop the same game across those older platform at the end of the cycle. 4. Game dev would have a bigger competition pool for making games, it would force them to maybe try something new instead of doing the same game 3 times in a row (gow, uncharted and you name em. All clone of the original) 5. Since gamer would only have to deal with 1 platform, they would spend more money on this one. Instead of owning a ps3 a 360 and a pc, the gamer could get away with only having this mythical open platform(pc). Since he spend less money on hardware that is basically the same thing across the 3 he would have more money for actual game. Also, the hardware he pick could posibilly be higher end since the budget inst spread thin. 6. Cutting the middle man, sony and microsoft beside making sure they get the time/exclusive don't do much. All the dev working first party would also thrive on a single open platform because they are good at what they do. also point 1/2 apply so they would actually make more money. 7. With the console there is no hardware competition at all. Xbones and ps4 are made on the same architecture, their chips inside is on the same architecture (both cpu and gpu) The only thing that change is the scale (xbone based on a 7790 and ps4 on a 7850) Also, we are lock in time because of that. Dev will have to deal with those restriction for all the games in 4-6 years because they just don't keep up with recent tech. All games have to be scaled down to work on the low end hardware that consoles are. Even today, those specs are limiting (1080p and 60 fps is till far from the norm, Imo 120 fps should be aimed for any game because of the smoothness but that's a whole new discussion) 8. Gamers could have 1 library with backward compatibility, if they want the pc experience or the console experience they still could keep all those games without worrying if somehow they can't play older games with their new hardware. This is exactly why it would be better for us. Specially since that library would be so much bigger( over 21 000 games on pc versus under 2000 for both ps3 and xbox, the library would jsut get bigger and bigger to please everyone without limiting them on a closed platform or one way of playing) 9. Console don't innovate. They just take what average and does not cost much at the time and ship it in a box. No flexibility at all for the budget on hardware and if any new exciting tech come along in 2-3 year you wont be able to use it for half a decade. No mods, not easy for indie game, can't really support new peripherals. Limiting is the word when it come to a closed platform. 10. Don't forget, no more consoles does not mean no more Big screen and controller in the hands. A console is just a PC with locked features, locked hardware and locked way to play. You could have this box in your house that power every screen, all the games you ever bought would be playable at the desk or on the big screen and it would just be easier, faster and better for everyone no matter how you like to enjoy gaming.
@ kingduqc 1. No not true. It won't be "600 million users" as you say, it'll be just the ones who have powerful enough rigs to run the latest games and it wouldn't be that many. 2. Actually it would probably allow for LESS revenue as most PC games barely crack 1 million in sales save for a handfull of franchises, so many games would fail to make a profit even with that. 3. Again, seeing as games would sell less, no they couldn't. They would still have to keep the minimum requirements so most people can buy and play the game. I'm sure no company what's what happened with Crysis 1 again were Crytek out did like 90% of PC gaming rigs. Notice how they've keep them low every since? That's a big reason why. 4. But doesn't the PC platform exist now? There no reason this shouldn't already be happening if that logic is true. 5. What you're neglecting here is that loads of gamers don't even buy all three. They just pick the one they want for that gen and stick to it which is a major reason for all the fanboy spats. So really, that point is MOOT. 6. lol are you serious? I'm sure the numerous studios that MS and especially Sony owns beg to differ... I'm starting to think you have no clue what you're talking about here. 7. Since it's a closed platform though, there's plenty of room for improvement because it doesn't have a heavy OS running under it like PC does and games do get better because of it. Don't believe me? Just take a look at Resistance 1 and GTAV. Now by your logic, both games would have looked exactly the same being 7 years apart on the same hardware, but they didn't as devs evolve, engines evolve, and so on and so forth. And the human eye can see past 73 FPS from what I read, so 120 would be all but pointless. 8. Probably the only real advantage, but even that could be nixed with most software needing to be updated with the latest OS's. Plus with streaming on consoles, that could soon become irrelevant anyway. So... 9. The last console "innovate" was the PS3 with the Cell Processor and it was a disaster for devs in the beginning and ended up costing Sony loads of cash, so it's no wonder consoles play it safe when it comes to that aspect. And that "exciting new tech" that PC gamers can upgrade to constantly is often obsolete in months time. So really, if it was one platform in your dream scenario, people would be constantly upgrading, and changing their PCs simply to be able to play the latest and greatest games... and I'm sorry, but that doesn't sound too practical financially, especially for the average gamer. Sounds to me like your wishing for a gaming crash, but I digress... And don't know were the hell you got the idea that consoles aren't that good for indie devs. Apparently you haven't been following console news lately and how they've been falling over themselves courting indie them. 10. Haha, did you even read the story you're posting on? A central part of Steam box IS the controller. You should try posting while not drunk. It'd be much easier to understand.
Unless Steam Machines are the price of consoles (400-500€) and have "big" exclusives like consoles, Steam Machines will not be that successful... i think! Steam Machines will sell, but not as much as home consoles.
They're not supposed to be console replacements, but PC replacements. They're competing with the PC market. They are PC's! They're supposed to be cheap, user-friendly, pre-made, small form-factor PC's for people who want a gaming pc without the extra stuff like Windows.
They have the same exclusives PC has Ie: They have the most exclusives.
Why do consoles gamers see more options a a threat. They are doing this for gamers but people are so focus in the console wars to see a benefit to this
@irish: I wasn't aware that every PC game has Linux support.
@dragon every pc has linux support besause you can do with your pc as you wish. like the guy said above me lets not look at this as a threat, lets welcome it. what pc teaches people at least for me, is that its your choice, gamers should be embracing this. i love my console and we all do. why are we trying to not embrace a open platform(which is a pc). people was complaining about not wanting to build a rig and wanting mobility of the pc rig. so my point is why not embrace it. gamers love games but why we hate one good companies trying improve our hobby. serious i know different kinds of industries where their customers embrace and try new things, but why we dont embrace companies with a track record that improve out experience. seriously we gotta to get it together and bring this thing to a new standard. we all love game and we all dont want to get abused. lets look out for each other and show them that games can be fun even with the most sensitive taste buds. im i right truthfully i would want too say more about this article which i cant even get to the link, but this site dont reward bubbles for being a gamer gamers for the win nes sne gens sgens n64 ps1 ps2 dcast xbox wii ps3 xb360 wiiu ps4 xbone wuddup
@webeblazing. I think Dragon was talking about PC games having linux support. Not all PC games have linux support. Valve is apparentlyworking with devs to get most to have support though.
It's about bringing more people to PC gaming as a whole. No one thinks they are going to take on and bring down the already established console market. Why all the hate on PC gaming? I always see your name and accompanying posts spreading unneeded negativity. If you want a PC, just buy one. There's no need to get defensive and trash that which you don't have. And if you don't want one, the second rule still applies.
Jesus that is good advice. Though shalt not covet thy neighbours PC. Do unto other's etc, etc ;)
After following their lackluster conference I'd have to agree with you. The steam machines will be a very niche item and won't effect the console market at all.
Valve always think for the long haul n the do it for gamers they even took their highly competitive game tf2 n made it free, along wit making dota2 free while giving game artist a place to make money even tho their high. .What is the problem with gamers on this site . The top site for gamer news n y'all making gamers look bad I get mad because all the fanboys and bs on here, but let's move gaming forward.
Seems like everyone missed the part about the controller sold separately which will add to the price of owning one of these pointless "consoles". Yeah. Falter indeed.
you can use any company's controller..
The Alienware steam machine ships with a steam controller. Obviously it depends on the vendor. There's only 1 reason I can think of that you would be hating so much... Defending a purchase comes to mind
Proof,? I watched an ign video and they said that the boxes all have to come with a controller that's part of valves steam deal with them
"And tell me what Steam's legacy has had. Have they have any of the calibar like Apple 2, IMac, Powerbook, Macbook Air, iPod, and iPhone?? " Well I'm not a pc gamer nor am I am fan of valve games personally but to say they don't have one of the best legacies out there in the gaming world is to be ignorant -steam has redefined pc gaming -half life series has been called one of the best fps series -left for dead made zombie games good again -portal was brilliant (the only game I am a fan of by valve) then their other games like team fortress and all seem to be really well respected as well. This is a company that has managed to foge its own path and stay its own entity instead of selling to EA or Activision, and have prospered. I believe that they will definitely find success with the steam boxes, no they won't sell 80 million systems but they don't need to, this is just a way to bring in non pc gamers to the pc, its just a means to increase the steam userbase to people who are console gamers.
You mostly listed great games not what steam has done. And for the record half life 2 is considered to be one of the best games ever created. For the record I do agree with you
I dont know what to think about it...i mean with its amazing indie library and already more than 100x amount of titles ps4 has its hard to say if it will dominate or fail....got allot potential,i have allot of friends who don't have a gaming pc that would like this.They will have literally 100's of indie titles on their console that others dont....not only that left 4 dead,half life,portal,counter strike,they have enough first party AAA for it too.
It doesn't matter if it falters. It's more of a statement.
By the way http://www.youtube.com/watc... It's gonna be GREAT TONIGHT.
The number's sold in the 7th gen was a lot smaller then on 6th gen(ps2) That's number will decrease even more 1) The Microsoft's attempt to fuck up their costumers 2) The 8th gen simply being a 7th gen with newer hardware 3) At lauch many games(especially on X1), didn't run on max settings even PS4 had to lower the resolution for BF4, so, that already shows that the hardware will wear out even faster this gen PC on the other hand will gain ever more people thanks to Steam Machine and Oculus Rift
3 million users who paid 500$ for the system Vs. 65M users who downloaded Steam for free.... Great comparison Gabe lmfao.
Agreed. You know who else got cocky? Zynga. They thought their skyrocketing numbers of Facebook players meant they were a popular game company. Look how that turned out. Not saying Valve will go the way of Zynga, but Gabe needs to keep some perspective.
Yeah sorry Gabe. I have been a Steam member for many years, but only because I like the idea of digital downloads. Having said that, the last game I bought on steam was X3 Reunion and the last time I played that was in 2009. Now the thing that gets me with this whole steam box thing, is that you CAN'T buy a steam box and then play your old library of PC games on it. Can you believe that? In fact, what you gotta do is have ANOTHER gaming PC that streams your old games onto your steam gaming PC. WTF? fail.
Yeah, I never got the hype behind the Steam Boxes. Anyone who knows how to build a rig could easily build their own ITX/m-ITX rig and then stream games to that box just like Steambox does. It's really nothing special and I doubt it will take off in a massive manner. I'll just stick with my main PC, thanks.
Dude, if the last PC game you bought was in 2009, you're missing out.
i am interested in building a pc for gaming, but i have zero interest in a steam machine... why would you take their pre-fab boxes when you could build your own with custom specs? makes zero sense... it's like building a console but not getting any good console games.
@joecanada agreed. @kwyjibo nah dude I built a pc in 2013. cpu3570k, gpu7950, SSD samsung pro 256gb. 8GB RAM. I runs anything and everything available on PC for now and for a few years into the future. I just haven't bought anything off steam is what i was trying to say. I just play Starcraft2 on PC :D
I love Valve, but damn Gabe.
The daily active info shows that we have about 7 million(6,960,055 to be exact) online every day if you been long enough on steam you would know that we usually have that number at 4-5 million
"He took a quick pop at Microsoft and XBox One saying it will take them a while to catch up with their 3 million units sold compared to the 65 million registered Steam users." Yeah, let me know when you've sold 65 million Steam Machines. You can't compare 65 million free accounts, of which a large amount are secondary accounts, to 3 million actual console sales. Hell, I know people who've been banned for cheating in 1.6 multiple times and have 5+ accounts. Steam Machines are a niche product, and they seem destined to fail.
"You can't compare 65 million free accounts, of which a large amount are secondary accounts, to 3 million actual console sales." Yeah you can't compare because the console makers have lost a ton of money selling those 3 million consoles where Valve has made money on every one of those free accounts since it only counts accounts that have bought at least one game and are active. Also please post a source where you seem to "know for a fact" that a large amount of the 65 million ACTIVE game buying accounts are just secondary accounts because I think you're just talking out your #$%.
But porkChop is right, and you don't understand how the console business works (which is why a ton of PC developers in the late '80s and '90s died away because they tried to jump into console gaming yet failed). Consoles are a risk because the 1st-party company has to put up all the money to do R&D, market the machine, and put it out there. 3rd parties have it easy. They just make games and they have very little risk compared to 1st parties.
so @sorane - you are saying that to build and maintain their steam accounts site and servers and all the other stuff costs no money? so when a person buys a 2.99 game off of a free account, that is 2.99 in valves pocket? yeahhh ... i don't think so.
@joecanada Please point out where I ever said anything close to that because you're just trying to put words in my mouth that I never said. Go troll someone else please or at least take a reading comprehension class.
Lol as if Valve gives a shit how many Steam machines are actually sold. Valve doesn't make Steam machines, they're giving away Steam for FREE. Tracking Steam machine sales as an indicator for success make as much sense tracking PCs sales in relation to WoW subscriptions. It's completely idiotic. But that's console fanboy logic for you.
I think he's referring to the volume of customers on each format. There does seem to a lot of negativity towards Steam PCs but I feel any thing that puts the PC environment towards the top of the format list is not just good for PC gamers but console gamers too. Maybe if the PC format were the format to compete with console gamers wouldn't get shafted on ridiculously overpriced games software. Right now the mid range PC, PS4 and X1 can offer a similar gaming experience but the console games are some 30-40% more! it's just wrong.
@sorane, first off, both xbox one and ps4 are manufactured at a PROFIT. doesnt mean they make profit after shipping to stores and all that, but theres no reason for you to think they lose money. also, are so many other ways console companies obtain revenue, including full fledged 60$ retail games, peripherals and accessories, subscription fees. in my life of gaming on steam, i have purchased about 40 different games and have spent less than $200 total. ive already spent about 200 on ps4 alone in a little over a month. thats not including an extra controller and a subscription to ps+ do you think companies arent aware they break even on console sales? theres plenty of other ways they make money that steam cant. if selling consoles has such a negative effect on hardware companies, why wouldnt they just ditch the console manufacturing entirely and have a PC service like valve does? buying a console = guaranteed revenue. creating a steam account = absolutely no guarantee of making any money.
well Shu himself (or someone high up it was an article on eurogamer) has said that Sony are relying on peripheral sales with the PS4 to make a profit as they're making a small loss per console. Pretty sure MS have said it aswell but not entirely sure on that
These are active accounts, this has previously been stated to mean accounts which have logged in during the previous month and own at least one game. I'm not sure if the definition has changed given the dominance of free to play. So if you're banned from cheating (which is rare), you're unlikely to log in with that account. I doubt those multiple account logins surpass those of offline mode users who didn't log in at all. Note that the 65 million figure dates from October. After the holiday sales season, I wouldn't be surprised if it were 3 million higher.
Exactly. Have you seen the prices? Can't remember the name, but one brands Steam Machines will cost from $1700 all the way to $60000
yeah the prices are gonna be a turn off to a large majority of the market... think the cheapest machine is $499