Its apparently "fully customizable" so can probably be turned off.
Its apparently "fully customizable" so can probably be turned off.
The GPU's faster than that in the PS4 on paper but will be packing far less high speed memory and the HSA communication with the CPU. We also don't know how fast the CPU is or how much memorys in there so its tough to say atm.
Now I've used Steam, I'm not impressed. The intial interface is really messy, and Big Screen Mode was buggy, putting buttons on top of buttons. It's no substitute for the console experience. Navigation was also perplexing and not at all intuitive. It's a PC experience dressed up, and feels like it. I wouldn't want to own and run a console founded on what I used on PC, and if that's the direction Valve are going, I don't think they'll win over any console audience, although they could ensure a PC in the living room instead of a console for existing Steam users.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
You mean Steam OS or just Steam?
Did you actually just tried Steam for first time now, ~10 years after release?
Steam on Windows. Yes, this is the first time I've tried it. Just had another look at big picture mode. The core interface is okay, but it's when one starts looking at webpages and stuff, the buttons are unexpected. So 'down' to scroll down a webpage brings up a big heart icon. Turns out you need to use the left stick. One can probably get used to it, and off consoles there'll obviously be assumptions (ingrained behaviours) of the standard control schemes. I'm also using a DS3 instead of an XB360 controller so the buttons need a little thinking about.
Hopefully the push into the living room will encourage further development of the interface into something slicker and more on par with the console experience. As you say its pretty cool for just starting games from the TV but even then some native steam games still start a windows based launcher that you then have to navigate via a mouse.
Yes. That's very unconsoleish. Awesomenauts brings up a resolution selector, options for VSynv and Multithreading, and OGL or DX options (of which DX does work). A console take would be to launch the game and put graphics properties in a settings page for VSync. Multithreading would be on by default and resolution would be chosen by display. I understand that you may want a lower res for better performance which PC offers, but then you're adding complexity that Joe Gamer doesn't want.
Maybe a SteamBox can standardise a 1080p output. The base system will have a configuration that can be the norm for games run on SteamOS (whatever that is) with an advanced mode for PC gamers. The problem is adoption. Valve need devs to target Steam as a platform and use it's protocols, instead of targeting Steam as a PC distribution system. How many devs are going to be convinced consolifying their PC games for Steam Boxes is a good investment?
Most console ports are already consolified as it is aside from things like launchers. It wouldn't take a whole lot of work to modify future or existing games to, for example, hide the launcher when running in big picture mode or use specific settings for specific steam machines and what not. I would be surprised if Valve wasn't already working on some sort of standard protocol for handling this. Older games would need to be updated. We've already seen older games get updated to remove GFWL, add Windows compatibility, add achievements, etc. so I would think devs will invest in it. I don't see them all rushing to port their catalog titles to linux for steamos compatibility though.
I'm honestly wondering if devs will actively invest in it if anything to create another competitor in the field. The game makers have nothing to lose from a successful Steam machines launch, and as you say most of the work is done already, porting current games over to a steam box could be done by a single coder. It seems like a win-win situation for them to support SteamOS, I'm crossing my fingers and hoping it gets widespread support. If it launches well then I wouldn't be surprised to see a startup or two emerge that does nothing but port peoples games to SteamOS.
DO you guys think that on top of Steam OS, Steam should seriously consider to release a matching open source API, say Steam GL, that would closely mimic say Mantle?
Mantle situation is a complex one, AMD has few intensive to open it now, I can't see Nvidia giving that intiative merit (by principle), I don't see MSFT changing Dx significantly till the Xb1 is fresh, etc.
Mante "raison d'etre" remains, PC hardware ecosystem needs a slimmer API to shine further, it is especially true for lower end gaming set-ups.
Mantle situation is a complex one, AMD has few intensive to open it now, I can't see Nvidia giving that intiative merit (by principle), I don't see MSFT changing Dx significantly till the Xb1 is fresh, etc.
Mante "raison d'etre" remains, PC hardware ecosystem needs a slimmer API to shine further, it is especially true for lower end gaming set-ups.
Unless the interface interferes with getting to the part where you're playing a game.
Before Mantle, we need Visual Studio (equivalent) on SteamOS (especially the debugger), then Mantle, then a fair amount of kernel work to make it more desktop oriented.
(And don't ask me what to change in the kernel, I checked that one or twice and have since given up on Linux, amusing geek toy to me, but won't take it seriously anytime soon.)
(And don't ask me what to change in the kernel, I checked that one or twice and have since given up on Linux, amusing geek toy to me, but won't take it seriously anytime soon.)
What problems do you have with the equivalents right now?
No Steam machine here, but I had a go at installing the OS on my spare system and put a bit of a video together. 
Be careful if you give it a try, the install process in automatic mode will literally erase your hard drive without asking ANY questions. Fortunately I tested it out on a spare system, but it will only install on PCs that can do a UEFI mode boot so pre-Sandy Bridge machines are probably out, and at present they only support NVIDIA graphics cards.
System I tried it with was a Haswell Core i7 with a GeForce GT430 and everything seemed to work pretty much flawlessly, other than having to switch my audio output from HDMI to analogue output for my capture card.
Tested with Super Meat Boy and Portal and both worked straight off, no fiddling required. Literally just installed the OS, logged in to Steam, downloaded updates and then downloaded the games.
Be careful if you give it a try, the install process in automatic mode will literally erase your hard drive without asking ANY questions. Fortunately I tested it out on a spare system, but it will only install on PCs that can do a UEFI mode boot so pre-Sandy Bridge machines are probably out, and at present they only support NVIDIA graphics cards.
System I tried it with was a Haswell Core i7 with a GeForce GT430 and everything seemed to work pretty much flawlessly, other than having to switch my audio output from HDMI to analogue output for my capture card.
Tested with Super Meat Boy and Portal and both worked straight off, no fiddling required. Literally just installed the OS, logged in to Steam, downloaded updates and then downloaded the games.
How would this give you more compatibility?
Because for whatever reason the newest driver is not always the best one to use for every game.
