fumanstan

Valve has mentioned improved performance without the Windows overhead. That and an experience tailored for gaming like a console, opposed to all the other stuff in Windows. But yeah, getting Linux support from developers will be an obstacle.

Jay G.

You don't necessarily need a secondary OS to use a Steambox like a PC. SteamOS is built on Debian Linux, and includes a feature that can be enabled that lets you exit Steam to the Linux Desktop.
http://steamcommunity.com/groups/ste...4395741989999/
Granted, you'd be limited to running Linux applications, but it is possible.

The idea of SteamOS is to have a simple to use box for attaching to a TV, giving an experience more akin to a console. Windows isn't really optimized for
TV use, and with the mass of system and driver updates and maintenance, isn't as user friendly.

Plus SteamOS gives developers a single target for developing Linux versions of their games. Instead of worrying what Linux distros to support or not, and deciding it's not worth the hassle, they can just aim to support SteamOS.

Finally, SteamOS, being based on Linux, can be used by manufacturers royalty free, meaning that manufacturers can pass the savings from not paying for Windows onto the consumer.

Valve is hoping that as more people buy Steamboxes or use SteamOS on their own machines, more developers will create a SteamOS port of their games. In the meantime, they're working on a feature that will let people stream their Windows games from their Windows PC to the Steambox:
http://store.steampowered.com/livingroom/SteamOS/

taffer

Linux/SteamOS cheats to get "improved performance." Its not really improved at all.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/rfThaG975uQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

In that video, someone with a beta Steam Machine runs a test on Metro Last Light in both SteamOS and Windows.

Windows is set to very high settings, and it gets 20 fps. SteamOS doesn't actually have customizable settings, but rather just one single slider that controls all settings. He was getting 40+ fps under SteamOS with the slider at max.

However, he then goes into the config files and notices that in SteamOS many of the graphical settings on max are actually disabled and/or lower than its Windows counterpart. He then reduces the Windows settings to an equivalent of what SteamOS is on max, and suddenly he is getting the same 40+ fps under Windows.

So really there isn't any improved performance at all on SteamOS. It just runs at lower settings. And really if you want to run at lower settings to improve performance... well that's what the PS4 and Xbox One are for...

Streaming from a Windows PC seems kind of silly to me. It requires you to already have a gaming PC. If you have a gaming PC, why buy a Steam Machine too? Just hook up your gaming PC to your TV. It may be slightly more complicated to hook up a gaming PC than a Steam Machine, but I'm sure most people that actually own a gaming PC have enough technical knowledge to do it.

fumanstan

I wouldn't call that cheating or call it conclusive yet, especially since it's beta and I don't know much about the port of that particular game. Granted I don't believe the numbers Valve threw out for Linux improvements will be typical either.

This was the blog post from Valve about performance - http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/linux/faster-zombies/

Jay G.

This isn't really a cheat. There are only two settings that are different between the two (the SteamOS game config is missing some like resolution, but I imagine that's because it's set by the OS overall, and not on a per-game basis), which are PhysX and supersampling. In regards to PhysX, Nvidia hasn't developed PhysX support in their Linux drivers yet, so it's missing from SteamOS because the SteamOS version can't do it.
https://devtalk.nvidia.com/default/t...ive-on-linux-/

The supersampling may be a limitation of the game's port, and not something SteamOS is enforcing.

There is the possibility of some Linux ports being poorer perfomers than their Windows counterparts. This isn't because Windows doesn't have a larger overhead, it does, but that the developers likely spent more time optimizing the Windows version, since it has more users. I think there's been similar issues with Mac ports of games for years.

Maybe you have your gaming PC in a different room than your TV, and you want something hooked up to the TV as well, and don't want to have to move their PC back and forth.

The idea is that people who already have a gaming PC could then buy a Steam Machine, and keep the gaming PC around for legacy support, but going forward buy and play mostly SteamOS compatible games. Then when the gaming PC is finally too old, the user doesn't miss the few older games that never got a SteamOS port.

It's not like gamers aren't used to buying multiple machines for playing games anyway. Plenty of people have had and Xbox, Playstation, and PC all at the same time for playing games. The Steam Machine can be seen as a new console, but one that has some cross-compatibility with games you already own on Steam, meaning you don't have to buy all new.

Tarantino

The Steam Machine won't take off. Not at all. Not at these prices.

Wasn't their goal to get regular console gamers interested in PC gaming?

RocShemp

Yup. Which is why I find the prices surprising.

Jay G.

There's at least two machines priced at $500, iBuyPower and CyberPowerPC, according to this article:
http://www.engadget.com/2014/01/06/v...achines-specs/

Those are the ones aimed at the general console market.

The more expensive ones have specs well above what the PS4 and XB1 offer. Some of them dual-boot Windows, while some, like the Bolt 2, are obviously PCs that the manufacturer added SteamOS to as a feature. These ones are clearly aiming at the high-end PC market.

SteamOS is like Android in that there's not going to be one hardware configuration, but a wide variety of them at a variety of prices.

redrum

Lol fail

Music

Wow... enough different specs? Steambox my ass, those are just over-priced PCs.

fumanstan

It would have been cool if they did something like this Razer prototype. Modular components.

http://gizmodo.com/razers-modular-de...6479940/@Fahey

RocShemp

I think this is a case of too many options and might end up biting Valve in the ass.

Matthew Chmiel

In regards to SteamOS versus Windows performance, it all depends on the game and the coding.

For example, the Valve games get better performance than the Windows variations as they're built specifically for OpenGL in Linux compared to their Windows variation that uses Direct X.

If a game uses OpenGL on both Linux and Windows, performance differences will be minimal at the most.

Jay G.

Something I've thought of was that Valve could've developed a standard, requiring a certain level of specs/performance that would've served as the baseline, and called that standard "Steam Machine," similar to how Intel developed an "Ultrabook" standard for anyone wanting to use that trademark. Then a variety of manufacturers would develop and get certified for that standard, and compete on price. If they wanted to go above that standard, that's their prerogative. But then game developers would have a minimum baseline for what they could expect from a Steam Machine, and consumers would know that any games certified for the Steam Machine would run on any of the certified hardware.

Then, a few years later, release an updated Steam Machine 2 spec.

RocShemp

I believe you posted a similar idea once before. It reminded me of THX Certification (back when it actually mattered). I really like that idea and wish that's what Valve was going for.

Decker

Article today in IGN about impressions of 30 minutes of gameplay with the controller. Confirms what I had previously thought : controller is essentially functional with practice, but inferior in every way to a 360 controller or keyboard & mouse. I didn't understand what they were thinking when they showed the prototype and I still don't know.

Jay G.

Presumably they were thinking that it'd be pretty awkward for someone to have to juggle three devices (keyboard, mouse, and traditional controller) in their living room on their TV. They're trying to fuse the functionality of all 3 previous input devices into one.

As for the IGN review, I think 30 minutes is not enough time to judge if the controller is as capable as traditional methods. It likely took that amount of time for the reviewer to get remotely comfortable with the control scheme, let alone get any good at it. Even the reviewer is reluctant to make a judgment of the controller after his experience. From the end of the review:

Matthew Chmiel

Again, they've already fragmented themselves right out of the gate.

A dual-core i3 and i5 is not going to yield as much power as a quad-core i5/i7 or eight-core AMD. Same as an intergrated AMD or Intel graphics processor comparing to a 2-3GB dedicated nVidia card. With the prices these manufacturers are offering, it's still cheaper to build a better PC.

Jay G.

The idea for these Steam Machines is for people not comfortable building their own PCs, or using PCs in general for gaming. Also, some of the Steam Machines are in a compact form factor to more easily fit next to TV and with the other home theater equipment, form factors that aren't so readily available or easy to assemble for home builders.

If you prefer building your own PC and hooking it up to your TV, that's fine; Steam offers SteamOS free for you to use that way. However, that's not the market these Steam Machines are going after, anymore than the pre-assembled gaming PCs that most of these manufacturers build are aimed at the do-it-yourselfers.

Decker

I don't doubt that. It's just I think they went too far outside the box with this design. There's a reason we control cars almost exactly the same way we did in 1950 : it's the best system of input that works.

Jay G.

Is it the best system? Or is it the one everyone is so used to that changing it, even to a method objectively better, would require too much of a learning curve for everyone to relearn how to drive, making performance an issue in the short term?

I'm thinking of things like how the US has stubbornly rejected switching to metric, despite it being much easier to learn and figure out. Or how we still use QWERTY keyboard arrangements instead of supposedly better ones like Dvorak.

Before the iPhone, the keypad was the best way to use a phone for decades, going back to touch tone. Now smartphones are phasing out nearly all physical buttons. There is a bit of a learning curve when switching to touch-based phones, and some people still don't like it, but it happened.

RocShemp

The problem with that logic is that pre-built gaming rigs already exist (in a variety of prices). The only thing Steam Machines bring to the table is a new OS (that you can download for free) and and a weird controller that is a poor substitute for the already available options of a 360 controller and/or a mouse-keyboard combo.

Drexl

I'd say a keypad is still better, but a touchscreen is an acceptable compromise to make the screen as large as possible while keeping the device as small as possible. If the buttons were dedicated (like in a wall phone), I'd want the keypad.

taffer

I say we should bring back rotary phones!



Anyway, I thought the Steam controller's weird input was supposed to make it more precise than traditional analog sticks? Yet people are saying the 360 controller is still better? Maybe they haven't used it enough to get comfortable with it yet.

Jay G.

It doesn't really matter if the OS is available for free, most people don't have the know-how or confidence to install an OS on their own. Having a preconfigured machine pre-loaded with SteamOS is enough of an advantage for these consumers.

And again, the idea with the controller is that it's better than having to juggle three other devices, especially in a living-room TV situation. Whether or not it's a "poor substitute" is a matter of opinion, and for most right now, conjecture.

If you're hardcore enough to be able to build your own PC, install an OS, and juggle three input devices while using it on your living-room PC, then yes, the Steam Machines don't have anything to offer you. That doesn't mean there isn't a market for it though.

I don't really want to get into a debate on which is "better." My point was just that the length of time a form of input is a standard doesn't really have any bearing on whether it's the "best" or not, or whether a newer input method can be introduced and become adopted by a wide swath of the population.