Gabe Newell: Valve will release its own console-like PC

[Silent_Buddha]

Of course the PC will exist, but if this 'console' is just going to be sharing the same hacks and cheats ecosystem as PC its not really very console like, and as I've said before they may as well opt for a sticker on some existing hardware.

Not really, that's the whole argument for the "walled garden" where both the hardware AND the software (OS) are locked down.

Currently it is mandatory for Windows on ARM but is "optional" for Windows on x86. The question is, will MS help Valve with potentially locking down the OS while allowing Steam to install games without going through Metro? Will MS allow Valve to release a machine that defaults to no Metro interface (relatively simple to do). Will Valve want to co-exist on a Win8 box with Metro? Will Valve do their own system of locking down the OS?

It is certainly most possible to lock out installation of non-approved programs in Win8. Hence, no cheats or hacks without hacking the system itself. The question is, "Are MS interested in helping Valve do this?"

And it's quite possible they are. Microsoft's own guidelines for the Metro store explicitly prohibit many of the games that are sold through Steam. Hence, other than Steam, there would be no way to get those games on a "locked down" x86 machine. So, it's entirely possible that Steam could be complementary service on a locked down x86 machine.

Whether they go this route? Who knows. But it is certainly the least risky. But along with less risk, there's the potential for less profits. IE - if Valve requires Microsoft's help to lock down the system and in return MS wants a small share of the profits.

Regards,
SB

 

[MfA]

IE - if Valve requires Microsoft's help to lock down the system and in return MS wants a small share of the profits.

They don't need Microsoft's aid, they are allowed to pre-install software and control all the inputs and outputs ... so they can get it into that software (and away from Metro) without user intervention and without anything showing up on the screen before they get to it. The only thing they have to show are things like EULA and other similar agreements during installs/updates of Microsoft software.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

I think that those talking about custom linux and closed systems have gotten the wrong idea.

Gabe Newell specifically said PCs - Personal Computers - that are living-room friendly (and not only Valve's own branded machines BTW) will be competing with home consoles next year.
PC means it cannot be a locked-down system that only runs Valve's software, or a console using consumer-level x86 hardware as that would still be a console. PC means it's a platform that allows personalization and installation of consumer software - games or not.

Despite their own Linux efforts, Valve would be shooting themselves in the foot by trying to sell a Linux computer for gaming in 2013. Just look at the list of supported Linux games. Take away all the indies and they're left with a dozen of games, and not even the Half Life series are in there.
They would be alienating almost every single PC user who purchased something from their store and it would cause a division inside their own market. I can't see that as a reasonable business tactic, as much as they want to lower Microsoft's dominance in the PC market.

Maybe if Valve start pushing Linux as a publishable platform really hard they can come up with a Linux box in 5 years or so, but this is definitely not happening with their first Steam-branded PC coming out in 2013.
And by really hard I mean pushing for OpenGL-based engines among the developers, offering discounted prices for the Linux version of every game, pushing for better driver quality and faster releases from AMD, Intel and nVidia, etc.


I think it's going to be just a Steam-branded windows machine. I'd bet it'll be something along the lines of Asrock's VisionX Series and Alienware's X51, maybe without an optical drive and larger in order to fit standard components with a higher TDP.
If they're smart, they can build a small-ish, high-performing and efficient machine for some $650 or less: a 128GB mSATA SSD for the OS, a 2.5" 1TB hard drive, a 4-core/4-thread or 2-core/4-thread Haswell and whatever price-equivalent of Pitcairn/GK106 might exist in Q3 2013. If they sell the hardware through the Steam store, they can probably get a high-enough volume to guarantee customized components (I think it would be hard to make a living-room friendly PC without a low-profile graphics card, at least) at a low price. They could order most components like graphics card, motherboard and case from the same Taiwan-based PC company (Asus, MSI) to cut costs.


Despite Newell's statements about Win8, I don't think they'll have a choice, and in fact I think the OS is quite good for HTPCs. At least anything is better than Win7's piss-poor support for large-screen scaling. I know how much I suffer with it.
And then there's the fact that there are some AAA games that aren't coming to Steam, like Mass Effect 3. Valve doesn't want to deal with the anger of their PC clients not being able to play some very important titles that aren't being sold by Steam.

Now what I think they must really solve if they want a console-like friendly experience is the amount of publisher-specific in-game sub-sub-interfaces with specific logins. Jeez I logged into Steam, then if I launch a Microsoft-published game I also have to login into Live, so I can have the game working within the Live interface which is working within the Steam interface. Then I launch a Rockstar game, I have to login into the Rockstar Social Club so I can have the game working within the RSC within Steam. And then there's EA and Ubisoft that are constantly trying to make me go into their own marketplace to purchase DLCs when I'm playing their game, even if I'm playing the game from Steam and the DLCs are available from there.
More than driver stuff and optimization issues, I think this DRM stuff is hurting the PC gaming industry the most.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I think that those talking about custom linux and closed systems have gotten the wrong idea.

Gabe Newell specifically said PCs - Personal Computers - that are living-room friendly.#

PC means it cannot be a locked-down system that only runs Valve's software, or a console using consumer-level x86 hardware as that would still be a console. PC means it's a platform that allows personalization and installation of consumer software - games or not.

You're applying a specific interpretation there where the actual language is more ambiguous. It could be off-the-shelf parts running a PC OS, like a laptop. If sold and packaged as a closed, turn-key solution, it'll be a 'PC' in architecture regards how developers address it, but a 'console' as far as consumers are concerned.

There's plenty of scope for different system designs to constitute a 'living room PC', and it'd be a mistake to assume a living room PC has to tick al the same feature boxes of the PC standard.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

You make some pretty interesting points here. On the other hand this also makes me question the point of the whole thing... what would anyone gain with this? Gamers would still have to fight uneven framerates and compatibility issues, the DRM systems, all the crap associated with PC gaming; and developers would still have to make sure the games run on the average PC as well.

 

[tunafish]

How many games support linux? I thought that platform was all but dead to gaming.

From the point of view of games, there is very, very little difference between running a game on Linux and running it on OS X. Anything that runs on a mac should be ported over in a jiffy if there is a market.

 

[dagamer]

Not really, that's the whole argument for the "walled garden" where both the hardware AND the software (OS) are locked down.

Currently it is mandatory for Windows on ARM but is "optional" for Windows on x86. The question is, will MS help Valve with potentially locking down the OS while allowing Steam to install games without going through Metro? Will MS allow Valve to release a machine that defaults to no Metro interface (relatively simple to do). Will Valve want to co-exist on a Win8 box with Metro? Will Valve do their own system of locking down the OS?

It is certainly most possible to lock out installation of non-approved programs in Win8. Hence, no cheats or hacks without hacking the system itself. The question is, "Are MS interested in helping Valve do this?"

And it's quite possible they are. Microsoft's own guidelines for the Metro store explicitly prohibit many of the games that are sold through Steam. Hence, other than Steam, there would be no way to get those games on a "locked down" x86 machine. So, it's entirely possible that Steam could be complementary service on a locked down x86 machine.

Whether they go this route? Who knows. But it is certainly the least risky. But along with less risk, there's the potential for less profits. IE - if Valve requires Microsoft's help to lock down the system and in return MS wants a small share of the profits.

Regards,
SB

Just yo be clear, Microsoft's guidelines prohibit what would Bebe "Adult only" games by ESRB standards. The problem is when this policy gets translated to other countries, their game policy review boards treat games we would rate as "Mature" like Assassins Creed III or Gears of War as their highest level in their rating system, and in some cases such ad Germany, outright banning them. Its not Microsoft that is causing this, but local standard for rating games. There is nothing inciduous going on.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

You make some pretty interesting points here. On the other hand this also makes me question the point of the whole thing... what would anyone gain with this? Gamers would still have to fight uneven framerates and compatibility issues, the DRM systems, all the crap associated with PC gaming; and developers would still have to make sure the games run on the average PC as well.

I think the initial target is existing Steam users, providing them with a console that plays their current library. If the hardware is updated over time, it'll also provide gamers with the option to play their library improved, unlike fixed-hardware consoles. Issues of uneven framerates? That's a plague of current consoles. The days of tight, stable framerates are long behind us. Compatibility shouldn't be an issue because Valve can vet their Steam library on their Steam certified boxes and only sell games that work. The idea would be to release a package that provides PC gaming without the Pc issues. I think a lot of those issues are solved now in the main, unlike the 90s and 2000s where games on PC were a total nightmare and that's where consoles found their worth. Without IRQ conflicts and memory issues, is the PC really plagued with game-killing faults any more?

If the platform also grows to a sizeable margin, it'll give developers, especially indie's who don't want to tackle the costs and madness of MS and Sony certification, a strong target too, allowing for optimisation to a particular standard on top of a general engine for PC. And that would benefit PC gamers too, promoting adoption of more modern hardware if more people are buying into it. eg. Let's say in 2018 Valve release a version with DX13 graphics. Up to that point PC gamers with DX13 GPUs have had their hardware largely unused because the target is DX11 in the PS4 and XB3. If 10 million gamers switch to Steambox 2/3, playing their old Steam games from 2014 in improved quality, that's a large enough market for developers to add DX13 features to all their games, improving the PC gamer experience.

I guess one could think of it as similar to a media PC in a world of CE devices. Joe Schmo isn't popping into the high-street store looking for a media PC. He goes in looking for a PVR or a Smart TV or a BRD player. But there's still a noteworthy market for media PCs among the savvy tech-head. I don't foresee the Steambox appearing in BestBuy and GameStop and PC World etc., but it will see recognition among millions of gamers who'll give it serious thought, and some degree of adoption. Whether enough to undermine the conventional consoles or not, we'll have to see, but it's a strategy worth taking IMO.

 

[Rangers]

I have a hard time seeing a place for this. even in year 8 of PS360, PC (ports) visuals are not enough of an upgrade over casuals to wow "joe six pack". Because they're still mostly just console ports.

So how much less will the gap be for the next 2-3 years when this thing releases alongside Durango/Orbis?

And it will still lack what makes consoles attractive, ultimate ease of use. And if it is priced reasonably, say 399, then the hardware will suck by Pc standards.

But, I could be wrong. I applaud it as interesting test.

 

[Osamar]

I think it dependes on the "power" of PS4/Xbox720.
If they are no so next gen, a mid range PC can compete.
Steamed Linux + (Wine and/or Ported) + Geforce Experience like profiled plug and play games, could be successfull.

 

[novcze]

Why not have just Steam OS and let users to buy hardware they want plus offer some standard hw. for average joe. I would like to see some highly optimized (windows) OS for gaming and media with some nice GUI.
SingStar affair on EU PSN accounts made me more open for Sony's competition and this could be interesting.

 

[MfA]

PC means it cannot be a locked-down system that only runs Valve's software, or a console using consumer-level x86 hardware as that would still be a console.

It can not be locked down against a malicious user (of course in the end neither can consoles) but it can be locked down against cooperative users ... and just because there is a Windows install which only runs Steam&games doesn't mean there can't be a separate install which acts like normal Windows (which you might be able to bring up in seconds).

 

[Deleted member 13524]

You're applying a specific interpretation there where the actual language is more ambiguous. It could be off-the-shelf parts running a PC OS, like a laptop. If sold and packaged as a closed, turn-key solution, it'll be a 'PC' in architecture regards how developers address it, but a 'console' as far as consumers are concerned.

There's plenty of scope for different system designs to constitute a 'living room PC', and it'd be a mistake to assume a living room PC has to tick al the same feature boxes of the PC standard.

If it was going to be a console that simply uses PC parts, why would he ever call it a PC?

I don't think Gabe Newell can be someone who would just ignore the universal designation of a personal computer during an interview. The PC isn't a set of hardware using the x86 architecture, it's a general purpose computing device. It doesn't have to tick the same feature boxes as every PC out there, but you take the general purpose out of it and it ceases to be a PC.
There are several arcade systems that have run-of-the-mill x86 PC hardware inside, but they're not called PCs, they're still called arcades. Likewise, a system that is by all means a console but uses PC hardware would still be a console.

Not even apple, which tends to invent its own marketing-twisted terms for their implementations of prior concepts (retina for high-dpi screens, facetime for videocall, etc.) ever dared to call Apple TV a PC, even when it actually was a box with a Core Duo and a Geforce 7300GS.

You make some pretty interesting points here. On the other hand this also makes me question the point of the whole thing... what would anyone gain with this? Gamers would still have to fight uneven framerates and compatibility issues, the DRM systems, all the crap associated with PC gaming; and developers would still have to make sure the games run on the average PC as well.

Today, Mr. Joe Regular goes to walmart, asks the local clerk Mr. Smarty Pants for a gaming PC and he gets pointed to a $800 PC from Dell with a high-end Sandybridge, 16GB RAM, 2TB of slow hard drive and no discrete graphics card.

What a Steam-branded machine could do is to sell a PC directly to the customer that is guaranteed to play all games that can be purchased in Steam with a certain level of quality. Maybe they could throw in a software for driver updates, plus some flags in their own games that automatically set the game's IQ when the Steam PC is detected.
This would give Mr. Joe Regular the possibility of actually purchasing a cost-effective gaming machine without being ripped off by Mr. Smarty Pants, having a console-like gaming experience with the added IQ, performance and pricing of the PC gaming world.

 

[joker454]

What a Steam-branded machine could do is to sell a PC directly to the customer that is guaranteed to play all games that can be purchased in Steam with a certain level of quality. Maybe they could throw in a software for driver updates, plus some flags in their own games that automatically set the game's IQ when the Steam PC is detected.
This would give Mr. Joe Regular the possibility of actually purchasing a cost-effective gaming machine without being ripped off by Mr. Smarty Pants, having a console-like gaming experience with the added IQ, performance and pricing of the PC gaming world.

Thing is, how can they guarantee things when there is no certification process on pc games? Compare it say to a 360 where joe regular knows any game they buy will have online support, achievements, cloud saves, cross game chat, etc, all the stuff that has long been standard. It is that way because if it isn't then you'd fail certification and your game wouldn't go out. How can Valve do the same thing? They could do like their current Greenlight system where they only approve certain games that meet all the criteria to offer the "full experience", but they don't have that kind of power and control over the big name games. So I guess what I don't understand is that in the end if it didn't offer a "console" experience, which to me without more strict controls in place like a full certification process means they never can, then why would typical joe regular console gamers care?

 

[AlphaWolf]

What a Steam-branded machine could do is to sell a PC directly to the customer that is guaranteed to play all games that can be purchased in Steam with a certain level of quality. Maybe they could throw in a software for driver updates, plus some flags in their own games that automatically set the game's IQ when the Steam PC is detected.
This would give Mr. Joe Regular the possibility of actually purchasing a cost-effective gaming machine without being ripped off by Mr. Smarty Pants, having a console-like gaming experience with the added IQ, performance and pricing of the PC gaming world.

So how do you get to there? How long does that guarantee last? If its not a significant target for publishers (closed environment with large install base) what advantage does it offer? Is it just auto updates, cuz mostly my pc does that now. Or does this thing just become the defacto standard for PC ports, which probably won't make pc gamers happy as support for things like 3d vision and eyefinity basically goes out the window. How does the steamboat become more compelling than building the same pc yourself and sticking steam on it?

I guess what I am saying is that I don't see a place for an in between type of box. Closed hardware/software offers advantages, customizing to preference offers advantages, what is compelling about middle ground to consumers?

 

[Laa-Yosh]

Not to mention that why would publishers want to become even more dependent of Valve?

And I don't really like Steam either. I decided to get Rage for my PC and since it's not fully supported through Steam in my region or whatever, some stuff just didn't work (I think there was some downloadable but free content in the form of extra sewer levels). WTF? Well I'll get back to my console then, thank you very much.

 

[MfA]

If it was going to be a console that simply uses PC parts, why would he ever call it a PC?

As long as you are going to persist in this argument I'm going to persist in pointing out the obvious counter, just because it can work as a dedicated locked down gaming machine doesn't mean it can ONLY act like that ... it is perfectly possible to have two separate windows installs, one locked down and remotely Valve administered and one general purpose one (and with certain technical measures switching can be relatively fast).

 

[Osamar]

joker454 Thing is, how can they guarantee things when there is no certification process on pc games?...
AlphaWolfSo how do you get to there? How long does that guarantee last?...

With something like Gforce Experience (or "Radeon Experience") that is transparent to the user.
Steam Big Picture is more than functional, so you have the UI.
Valve can test the games and could even put some profiles in each or some games.
For example:
XCOM, target 30 fps, the best graphics you could get.
CoD. BO2, single player 30 fps, the best graphics you could get. Multiplayer 60 fps adjusting graphics.

Nice read. And I have no relation with Nvidia.
http://www.geforce.co.uk/whats-new/articles/geforce-experience-closed-beta-released

 

[Shifty Geezer]

If it was going to be a console that simply uses PC parts, why would he ever call it a PC?

I don't think Gabe Newell can be someone who would just ignore the universal designation of a personal computer during an interview. The PC isn't a set of hardware using the x86 architecture, it's a general purpose computing device

Do you use a PC at home, or a Mac?...

Language changes. The origins of the personal computer are as individual, self contained computing devices as opposed to mainframes and mini computers. But as the computing world has changed, so too has use of terms. 'PC' now denotes a Windows or Linux computer, and that's fairly loose too. Is a PS3 running Linux a personal computer, or a console? Is a smart phone or tablet a personal computer (yes, but no-one would call it that as the term PC is used to differentiate the devices)? The only difference between a personal computer and a console is the software running on it - both include CPU, graphics chips, RAM, etc.

Now if you are intending to build a box that plays PC games, what do you call that box? If the OS allows any software to be installed, it's a PC. What if you only allow games? Is that a console? Then what if you allow games and apps, but only through a limited software portal? We don't need a specific definition, so there's not much point expecting people to use one or adhere to one. In this context it's unclear what Newell meant, but my money is on him saying they'll produce a box that plays games over Steam. That's PC games, developed to run on PC, which his box can run. That box could be open or closed regards other functionality. If you want to offer a user friendly turnkey solution, closing it off from general use can provide benefits. We don't know either way if it'll be Linux with a Valve frontend, a whole new OS, Windows 8 in a little box, or anything else, and we can't know without more details - certainly not from the choice of term 'PC' in describing it.

 

[liolio]

I've for what it is worth no interest in that product. The nice thing about Windows is that it gives me choice.
Valves is not OK with MSFT policies but as a costumer I see no reason to jump into another provider's hands that would in fact de facto match the policies they are criticizing...

Either way, if the other big editors (so for me, EA and Activision/Blizzard) were to join the initiative it would be a different matter. I could be interested in a platform that as Steam, Origin and Battle.net integrated in a convenient matter. If not what the point over Windows?