Who Is Steam Box For?

[DaytonaUSA]

Before I start, I'm going to make this VERY clear. I'm not trying to ruffle up any feathers. I'm not trolling. I'm not trying to offend die hard Steam users (heck, I am one myself). I'm merely asking a question with a simple observation. Because I can't figure this out, and I honestly need help here.

 

Who is the Steam Box for?

 

Steam Box will cost anywhere from $500 to $6000 (no joke, look it up, depending on the model you get). All with different specs from literally using mobile parts to using high end gaming rig parts. None come with Windows. Thus at least out of the box, it just runs Steam OS. Meaning it's not a full fledged PC out of the box, it's basically a console. Cheap mobile Boxes look like an Ouya and obviously are not upgradable. Ultra powerful Boxes look like a PC tower, which aren't exactly living room friendly in size, are at least upgradeable.

 

This is my issue: The people who should love this, already have a gaming PC, and wouldn't spend top tier money on mid tier components for the same price. They'd just build their own PC. People without custom built PCs powerful enough to run this, wouldn't buy this as it costs as much as a PC, but has much less functionality. Seriously, look at the Alienware X51 if you can't make your own PC. More powerful than most Steam Boxes, cost about the same as most lower end Steam Boxes, and comes with Windows.

 

"Functionality?" Things like what games can be played or the fact it's not a full fledged computer with Windows. Now, before you jump in saying "but you can dual boot". Great. For the person who would buy this (not someone who can build their own PC as they already own one, and someone who most likely is a console gamer who just wants something ... there... that works), are they really going to understand how to perform a dual boot on a system with an OS they've never experienced? Furthermore, you can buy like-spec pre-built PCs WITH Windows already on them for less than the cost of a Steam Box plus the additional cost of Windows added onto it.

 

"Well, then don't install Windows", you're probably saying. But then the amount of games you can play is pathetic at best. This is to get people to buy a Steam Box OVER a PS4 or X1, right? Let's walk through the mindset of the customer then. "Can I play Mario, Halo or Uncharted?" Obviously not, these are exclusives to their respective consoles. "Oh I get it! This is a third party juggernaut! So I can play Assassin's Creed Black Flag, Tomb Raider, Watch Dogs, etc".... Well... No, those games only run on Windows, and your Steam Box doesn't have that. "Oh. So what can I play?" Games like Super Meat Boy, L4D, VVVVV, etc.

 

IE: Games you could probably play on any PC since what, 2008?

 

Again... not trying to make fun of it. I JUST DON'T GET IT. I'm trying to figure out who this is for, and NOTHING makes sense. It's too complex and offers too little value for a out-of-the-box-cant-tinker-with-hardware console gamer, and it's less hardware and functionality than what a standard Steam user already has for a fraction of the cost of a Steam Box, as his custom built PC was cheaper. Even if he paid for a pre-made gaming rig, costs are nearly identical, but he has Windows thus can play more games. If he wants Steam OS on his Windows machine, he probably knows how to dual boot as he's technologically more savvy. And Steam OS is free, so that doesn't cost anything unlike Windows would for a Steam Box user. And for a system that will play games like Super Meat Boy, have you seen how poorly the controller handles 2D games? Check out some CES footage. It's not pretty. It looks great for FPS, but when most of your games are indie games, it should be able to play them equally well. For those saying "but you can just use a 360 pad or PS4 pad" ok great, another expense though. For those saying "use a keyboard and mouse", in the living room????

 

I just don't get it. If it was clearly marketed to console guys, awesome. I'd probably get one then. If it was clearly marketed to be the new PC for PC users who already run Steam, then awesome, it's the new hardcore PC machine for high-tech users. But it's neither. It shuns both groups.

 

Who is it for? Because frankly, I can't find anyone who can give me an answer that makes a lick of sense.

Edited January 10, 2014 by DaytonaUSA

[Algus]

I think Valve is attempt to wed the simplicity of console gaming with the library and versatility of PC gaming. Or to be more precise, they want in on the revenue streams Microsoft et al. are soaking up from their own digital offerings.

 

The pricing perplexes me because I would think they would try to undercut the current systems. Maybe they are hoping they can move these to console gamers that want an in to PC gaming but lack the technical knowledge to make it happen.

 

I remain interested in the platform insofar as one ramification could be bringing AAA titles to Linux which would be grand. At $500 for a base unit though, it is well out of my price range.

 

The games I play on PC are MMOs, strategy games, etc...stuff that doesn't play so well with a gamepad. I need to see how that kind of gaming is going to come to the living room and be worthwhile before I'm willing to consider spending $500 on this thing.

[Reaperman]

Personally, I was thinking that SteamOS was for people building budget gaming rigs who wanted $100 more hardware from the money they save by not buying windows. That is the only scenario I can imagine steam being even slightly practical.

 

Also, the way I see it, steam's OS cannot possibly be about the games it already has (because there's so few), but is looking more at the games it can get going forward. If future games come to the combination of xbone, ps4, windows, linux, steamOS--then steamos might possibly have some slight future appeal for some people. Especially in the anti-computer world of simplified phone interfaces.

 

That said, windows is 'worth' $100 to me, and even for my $500 gaming rig ($400+OS) I wouldn't have considered a non-windows OS even a remote possibility. On a $6000 system, it advertises a more-money-than-brains scenario. Really it wouldn't matter what OS was on it at that point.

Edited January 10, 2014 by Reaperman

[swlovinist]

Before I rant, I just want to say that I embrace different games on most all formats, teach intro to game development at a College, and love to see diversity/competition of gaming devices, as it usually means that consumers win to due to fierce competition. With that being said, I usually am pretty good at noticing ideas that will not be successful. This is looking like one of those. I love steam on the computer. If offers a wide variety of games to those who do not want to spend a ton of money.

 

The Steam Machine direction is the wrong move. For the many friends and fans of Steam that I know, this is not what was envisioned, and will not be part of my personal additions to game machines that I will be purchasing in 2014 or beyond. When it is was first announced, I thought this could really be successful at the $199/$299 price point. Instead, we got a perplexing multitude of options that are just going to confuse the crap out of everyone.

 

The Steam Machines first of all, are priced all wrong. I feel that these machines will be avoided by two core gaming families. PC gamers are going to build their own units. Always have, and always will. The ones that don't build their own units are going to buy...an actual computer that can be upgradable/do 1000 more things that what the Steam Machine offers. Console owners have 2 significantly better options for the same/less money. Both the PS4 and Xbox One are significantly positioned better at being an entertainment hubs as well as a gaming devices. Nope the console gamers are going to avoid this as well.

 

Who is left? In my opinion, nobody. This is the wrong direction. Unless Valve pulled a "3DO deal" and just cares about the $$$ it will make from the third party deals, this could possibly be the big fail of 2014. There are too many other options to game that are significantly better in my opinion.

Edited January 10, 2014 by swlovinist

[godslabrat]

I'm a console gamer who occasionally gets tempted to play a PC game. I don't really want to invest the time or money in a game-worthy PC, and I don't really like Windows. Most people who are interested in Steam boxes seem to be in the same boat.

 

But I agree about the pricing... way too much.

[DaytonaUSA]

I'm a console gamer who occasionally gets tempted to play a PC game. I don't really want to invest the time or money in a game-worthy PC, and I don't really like Windows. Most people who are interested in Steam boxes seem to be in the same boat.

 

But I agree about the pricing... way too much.

 

You see, that's cool that you don't have time or money to go PC gaming-rig-mode (so many PC users slam people like you, which is wrong) and I agree with you all the way. It's silly when you can get a better specced Alienware X51 with with Windows, which offers much more options for less money.

 

I'm struggling to see an audience with Steam Box. Users like you don't want it. Users like Reaperman don't want it. Sure, it's a curiosity I guess, and I'd like to try it. But that price point just scares me away completely, especially considering the cheapest model at a whopping 500 smackers has integrated mobile graphics cards on board. Yheeeclllk!

[DaytonaUSA]

Before I rant, I just want to say that I embrace different games on most all formats, teach intro to game development at a College, and love to see diversity/competition of gaming devices, as it usually means that consumers win to due to fierce competition. With that being said, I usually am pretty good at noticing ideas that will not be successful. This is looking like one of those. I love steam on the computer. If offers a wide variety of games to those who do not want to spend a ton of money.

 

The Steam Machine direction is the wrong move. For the many friends and fans of Steam that I know, this is not what was envisioned, and will not be part of my personal additions to game machines that I will be purchasing in 2014 or beyond. When it is was first announced, I thought this could really be successful at the $199/$299 price point. Instead, we got a perplexing multitude of options that are just going to confuse the crap out of everyone.

 

The Steam Machines first of all, are priced all wrong. I feel that these machines will be avoided by two core gaming families. PC gamers are going to build their own units. Always have, and always will. The ones that don't build their own units are going to buy...an actual computer that can be upgradable/do 1000 more things that what the Steam Machine offers. Console owners have 2 significantly better options for the same/less money. Both the PS4 and Xbox One are significantly positioned better at being an entertainment hubs as well as a gaming devices. Nope the console gamers are going to avoid this as well.

 

Who is left? In my opinion, nobody. This is the wrong direction. Unless Valve pulled a "3DO deal" and just cares about the $$$ it will make from the third party deals, this could possibly be the big fail of 2014. There are too many other options to game that are significantly better in my opinion.

 

Exactly, it shoves away it's two possible demographics. I just don't get it. And this is coming from someone who, too, felt really excited about Steam entering the "living room" (ie: console space). I figured, even with a funky controller, how could they screw this up. Guess I was wrong...

 

Personally, I was thinking that SteamOS was for people building budget gaming rigs who wanted $100 more hardware from the money they save by not buying windows. That is the only scenario I can imagine steam being even slightly practical.

 

Also, the way I see it, steam's OS cannot possibly be about the games it already has (because there's so few), but is looking more at the games it can get going forward. If future games come to the combination of xbone, ps4, windows, linux, steamOS--then steamos might possibly have some slight future appeal for some people. Especially in the anti-computer world of simplified phone interfaces.

 

That said, windows is 'worth' $100 to me, and even for my $500 gaming rig ($400+OS) I wouldn't have considered a non-windows OS even a remote possibility. On a $6000 system, it advertises a more-money-than-brains scenario. Really it wouldn't matter what OS was on it at that point.

 

Windows is the key here, totally. And yeah, worth the 100 bucks any day (well, at least for 7). The 6000 dollar one is total "lolz". I mean... come on. And people thought the Neo Geo was expensive. HA.

 

The weird thing is that Valve is a smart company. Seriously. They're investing in the Oculus Rift, and that's a VERY good idea right there. How they can go from that to .. this... is anyone's guess. It honestly confuses me and slightly angers me. It's frustrating, especially when it seemed like they were invincible going into this project.

[godslabrat]

When this project was first announced, I was hoping that maybe some people could take it in the direction of being a HTPC, minus the Windows factor. In that sense, being "just a PC" was actually a good thing. I'm still hopeful that once the prices come down and hobbyists get their hands on this thing, it might eventually go in that direction.

[Algus]

Well SteamOS remains a Debian-based Linux distro and it's got less junk on it than ChromeOS which can still be modded to run traditional software. I have no doubt that Steam boxes will quickly be converted to run traditional desktop software.

 

You can download the beta now and run it on your current computer, a homebrew steambox. So there's that.

[AtariLeaf]

 

Who is the Steam Box for?

 

 

 

For people who like to relax sweaty, hot and naked with friends but when I was a kid, we called them "saunas"

[DaytonaUSA]

 

For people who like to relax sweaty, hot and naked with friends but when I was a kid, we called them "saunas"

 

.......huh?

[AtariLeaf]

 

.......huh?

 

It was a joke

 

http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/1056848462/sauna_steam_box.html?s=p

[MagitekAngel]

Right now, I get all the living room experience I need by hooking my PC up to my TV and enabling Steam's Big Picture Mode. Only downside is that I don't really have a dedicated spot to stick my PC, but all the Steamboxes with comparable hardware would entail the same problem.

[TheGameCollector]

The cheapest one is $500? How in the world does it expect to compete with the $100 and sometimes even less when on sale Ouya? Especially if it is going to play the same kinds of games as it? My guess for the high end $6000 rig is that they want to be ready for next generation while this generation is still going on, but you have to pay insane amounts of money for this time warp. Another question is whether Valve themselves are developing a game that is going to be exclusively specific to the insane hardware. What kinds of graphics artists do they think they have on hand, that can draw textures that are more detailed than reality?

 

At $500 it should be ready to at least give users the experience of a PS4 or Xbox One. But do you see it happening? Valve better have some exclusives up their sleeves if they think this is going to work. If they are the ones responsible for creating Halo 1-3, maybe then they can come up with something good. But what?