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

[betan]

I would think that unfair Microsoft monopoly is not what is bothering Newell, he stated that the goal is to save PC gaming.

Surely Newell doesn't care about the OS monopoly nor saving PC gaming. He only cares about saving Steam which is under serious attack from Windows Store.

I was, however, talking about why consumers may or should care about SteamOS' reception and success.

 

[liolio]

Surely Newell doesn't care about the OS monopoly nor saving PC gaming. He only cares about saving Steam which is under serious attack from Windows Store.

I was, however, talking about why consumers may or should care about SteamOS' reception and success.

well he is a business man that is for sure, now Windows store is still far from threatening Steam. People dislike for Windows 8 hurts PC sales and thus affect Valve.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Windows has an unfair and unnecessary monopoly on PC gaming. In the long run, it may well be better for customers to break that.

Ultimately though, what customers (and SteamOS) need is a crossplatform game development Steam SDK and support of big publishers.

Just like Sony has a monopoly on PlayStation OS gaming, Microsoft oddly enough has a monopoly on Windows OS gaming. Except Microsoft doesn't extort game publishers that wish to publish games on the Windows platform. Ooops, I meant charge a license fee in order to sell games on their platform. For that they have the Xbox OS gaming eco-system which they have a monopoly on.

Along those same lines, Apple oddly enough has a monopoly on iOS gaming as well as MacOS gaming. And Google has a monopoly on Android gaming. And Nintendo has a monopoly on Wii OS gaming. Etc...

So, er... What's your point?

Both publishers and consumers have a broad range of choices for gaming platforms they wish to support.

Valve is attempting to create another gaming OS ecosystem that they will have control and thus a monopoly over. But it's still in its infancy and doesn't have a great chance at success, IMO.

What is interesting is that out of all of those above "monopolies", only two ecosystems are "free" to game developers. Windows OS gaming and Mac OS gaming. As well as a third one that wasn't mentioned. Linux OS gaming. Steam OS just like the consoles, iOS, and Android charge a fee (per sale) to the developers. Although for Android, if you sell only to rooted devices, then you can bypass that I suppose.

Windows OS gaming remains as popular as it is because it's a well supported platform to develop on that has robust support for gaming across an extremely large install base. That extremely large install base is the only thing that makes it profitable despite the rampant piracy. If it was the bastion of tyranny that you would like to imply that it is, then Windows OS gaming would be dead as publisher's and consumer's wouldn't support it.

Regards,
SB

 

[eastmen]

I'm still failing to see the big deal. Ms can fix issues with dx and work with its partners to put out win boxes and that's that.

 

[-tkf-]

well he is a business man that is for sure, now Windows store is still far from threatening Steam. People dislike for Windows 8 hurts PC sales and thus affect Valve.

His worries are not about today, but the future when the windows store is the only store..

 

[dagamer]

His worries are not about today, but the future when the windows store is the only store..

In what world does the EU let Microsoft pull that trick? Honestly now. This is the very definition of FUD.

Let's be clear, what Valve is *actually* worried about is that the Windows Store is so attractive, no one wants to buy apps and games any other way, aka, the Mac App Store. No one wants to buy apps on the web from a random company anymore when Apple handles it all for you. If the Windows Store were to actually be successful, you could buy a new computer, sign into your Microsoft account, click on a tile from your customized Start Screen from a previous install, and BOOM, game starts downloading and save files are recovered from the cloud (automatically backed up by the way). Valve will NEVER have that kind of simplicity, never have that kind of access to all 1+ billion Windows customers, no matter how popular Steam is. THAT is Gabe Newell's real fear, not that Microsoft will shut out desktop apps (again, a ludicrous statement after all the anti-trust lawsuits Microsoft has been through).

 

[MfA]

Windows has an unfair and unnecessary monopoly on PC gaming. In the long run, it may well be better for customers to break that.

For most of it's history Microsoft has been a beneficial force for PC gaming in a way which no other entity at the time could replicate. It's only the XBOX which slowly changed all that. PC gaming needs a strong unifying force which allows lots of different hardware manufacturers to compete ... so yes, we need competition on some levels ... but not really on others.

For instance it does PC gaming no favours that Apple and it's locked down hardware is taking an ever bigger piece of the pie.

 

[MfA]

In what world does the EU let Microsoft pull that trick?

In the same world Apple is allowed to do it on a mobile platform holding a massive part of the mobile market, and in which Metro is already Microsoft store exclusive.

Even if Microsoft didn't monopolize Metro and made an app store which achieved defacto monopoly purely through convenience, it would still be detrimental to PC gaming. Microsoft has a completely schizophrenic stance on PC gaming, they will find some ways to drag it down ... and every year announce a new initiative to promote it.

 

[betan]

Just like Sony has a monopoly on PlayStation OS gaming, Microsoft oddly enough has a monopoly on Windows OS gaming. Except Microsoft doesn't extort game publishers that wish to publish games on the Windows platform. Ooops, I meant charge a license fee in order to sell games on their platform. For that they have the Xbox OS gaming eco-system which they have a monopoly on.

Along those same lines, Apple oddly enough has a monopoly on iOS gaming as well as MacOS gaming. And Google has a monopoly on Android gaming. And Nintendo has a monopoly on Wii OS gaming. Etc...

So, er... What's your point?

I said PC gaming not Windows OS gaming.

Both publishers and consumers have a broad range of choices for gaming platforms they wish to support.

Valve is attempting to create another gaming OS ecosystem that they will have control and thus a monopoly over. But it's still in its infancy and doesn't have a great chance at success, IMO.

What is interesting is that out of all of those above "monopolies", only two ecosystems are "free" to game developers. Windows OS gaming and Mac OS gaming. As well as a third one that wasn't mentioned. Linux OS gaming. Steam OS just like the consoles, iOS, and Android charge a fee (per sale) to the developers. Although for Android, if you sell only to rooted devices, then you can bypass that I suppose.

Android let's you install apps from different sources (sideloading) without rooting.

Windows OS gaming remains as popular as it is because it's a well supported platform to develop on that has robust support for gaming across an extremely large install base. That extremely large install base is the only thing that makes it profitable despite the rampant piracy. If it was the bastion of tyranny that you would like to imply that it is, then Windows OS gaming would be dead as publisher's and consumer's wouldn't support it.

Microsoft is not under attack here, you can calm down now.
Choice is good, that's all.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

In the same world Apple is allowed to do it on a mobile platform holding a massive part of the mobile market, and in which Metro is already Microsoft store exclusive.

Apple don't have a monopoly and sometimes it's advantageous not too because when you do, whether it's through honest-to-God crazy popularity, underhanded tactics or incompetent competitors - you're playing by different rules in the US, the EU and China.

 

[dagamer]

In the same world Apple is allowed to do it on a mobile platform holding a massive part of the mobile market, and in which Metro is already Microsoft store exclusive.

Even if Microsoft didn't monopolize Metro and made an app store which achieved defacto monopoly purely through convenience, it would still be detrimental to PC gaming. Microsoft has a completely schizophrenic stance on PC gaming, they will find some ways to drag it down ... and every year announce a new initiative to promote it.

Apple holds 40% of the US market and only 12% of worldwide marketshare. Definitely not a monopoly.

 

[dagamer]

In the same world Apple is allowed to do it on a mobile platform holding a massive part of the mobile market, and in which Metro is already Microsoft store exclusive.

Even if Microsoft didn't monopolize Metro and made an app store which achieved defacto monopoly purely through convenience, it would still be detrimental to PC gaming. Microsoft has a completely schizophrenic stance on PC gaming, they will find some ways to drag it down ... and every year announce a new initiative to promote it.

You are allowed to have monopolies, you just can't abuse them.

 

[Grall]

I'm not sure that link is actually indicating that Steam machines will exclusive games:

Well, what does it refer to then, what is an "experience" - exclusive if not games then DLC, perhaps? It's gotta be, it can't bloody well be something like desktop backgrounds or icon sets. Nobody cares about crap like that, it has like negative pull on the gaming public.

I'm pretty sure Valve has mentioned they will not release games exclusively to the Steam Machine.

They said there wouldn't be steam OS exclusives IIRC, but that doesn't mean there won't be steam machine exclusives; steam machines can run windows just as well. They're just regular retail motherboard PCs after all. Not sure what would distinguish a steam machine from a PC though. Hardware dongle of some kind on an internal USB header? Slightly modified BIOS? Internal hardware serial number pre-registered with valve? *shrug*

Surely Newell doesn't care about the OS monopoly nor saving PC gaming. He only cares about saving Steam which is under serious attack from Windows Store.

...It is?

Since when? Windows 8 is busy bombing hard with everybody, business and consumers alike, but from your confident tone I derive you got some weblinks that corroborates your statement, no doubt.

 

[betan]

...It is?

Since when? Windows 8 is busy bombing hard with everybody, business and consumers alike, but from your confident tone I derive you got some weblinks that corroborates your statement, no doubt.

I have this insider info saying that Windows Store is here to stay independent of whatever happens to Windows 8. Weird I know.

 

[Nevod]

Getting read of the touch screen is a good move, if only for price.
Now after reading couples of hand on they need to fix /get rid of the left touch pad. To keep the slick design the should consider a simple but top of the line dpad, after all it is about mapping wasd keys they don't need analog inputs. It would allow to play fighting games /somehow and a accurate and well calibrated gyroscope can do a good job for driving simulation (which I discovered after tweaking the setting on a NFS game that came with my more than 2 years old phone),as a bonus it can serve as four extra bottom.
It should drive down costs and keep the controller pretty low profile. I've few hopes though.

Seems that Valve proposes that the controller should be symmetric, and I'm for that. What I think should be added is that there should be markings on the touchpads though so you can feel where on the pad your finger is.
Also, the touchpads must be very well tested and calibrated, Apple level, no less. So well that they should allow both fast and precise movements at once (obvious, huh), on the level of allowing to make headshot from afar right during 180 turn. That would indeed require variable sensitivity with acceleration and pressure (given it's a capacitative sensor, contact area). Probably the curves should be adjustable and several profiles can be saved so you don't have to recalibrate between different games.

Still, a split controller with full motion sensing would be better - use touchpad for rough and fast control, and whole hand for precise pointing. Perhaps we'll see Controller 2 sometime.

 

[Grall]

I have this insider info saying that Windows Store is here to stay independent of whatever happens to Windows 8. Weird I know.

That is not at all the same as steam being "under serious attack" by windows store.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that steam is at all being pressured by windows store, even slightly? I've not heard ANYthing of the sort, anywhere on the web.

In fact, all news about windows 8 (the only windows with the store attached to it) is dismal. Even giving 8.1 away for free is bombing with everyone. I think steam being under attack by the lame duck that is windows store would have made quite some waves in the media, but there's nothing to indicate this is the case!

 

[JPT]

Wether Windows Store is bombing or not, Valve is being prudent and making sure they can stay independent of Windows if MS decides to lock down Windows so hard that anything that you want to install must come through Windows Store.

I assume that SteamOs will be compatible with Apple hardware in the future if its not already there. And even further down the road, Valve might only release new titles for SteamOs, since all you need is to dual-boot it anyway.

 

[Grall]

Dualboot is unacceptable for 95+ percent of users. You can't ask people to shut down everything they may be doing/working on just to run a game. You could have file sharing applications running, remote desktop, web or file server running, ventrilo/voice chat server, all kinds of productivity stuff going on in the background.

 

[Malo]

I was playing with Steam Home Streaming beta over the weekend with Assassin's Creed Brotherhood. It was amazing how well it worked with no perceptible latency. I have an A6-3650 HTPC in the living room and everything running on Cat6 Gigabit so I'm sure the experience might be somewhat different on wireless but this was my final hurdle for living room gaming for me.

We're mostly core PC gamers in our household, 95% of our gaming is PC/Steam, with a bit of PS3 thrown in on occasion. Seriously questioning bothering with a PS4. I'm sure I'll miss out on some exclusives but with the similarities in hardware this gen I'm hoping we'll see more decent multi-platform titles.

 

[Blazkowicz]

Just like Sony has a monopoly on PlayStation OS gaming, Microsoft oddly enough has a monopoly on Windows OS gaming. Except Microsoft doesn't extort game publishers that wish to publish games on the Windows platform. Ooops, I meant charge a license fee in order to sell games on their platform. For that they have the Xbox OS gaming eco-system which they have a monopoly on.

Along those same lines, Apple oddly enough has a monopoly on iOS gaming as well as MacOS gaming. And Google has a monopoly on Android gaming. And Nintendo has a monopoly on Wii OS gaming. Etc...

So, er... What's your point?

Both publishers and consumers have a broad range of choices for gaming platforms they wish to support.

Valve is attempting to create another gaming OS ecosystem that they will have control and thus a monopoly over. But it's still in its infancy and doesn't have a great chance at success, IMO.

What is interesting is that out of all of those above "monopolies", only two ecosystems are "free" to game developers. Windows OS gaming and Mac OS gaming. As well as a third one that wasn't mentioned. Linux OS gaming. Steam OS just like the consoles, iOS, and Android charge a fee (per sale) to the developers. Although for Android, if you sell only to rooted devices, then you can bypass that I suppose.

Windows OS gaming remains as popular as it is because it's a well supported platform to develop on that has robust support for gaming across an extremely large install base. That extremely large install base is the only thing that makes it profitable despite the rampant piracy. If it was the bastion of tyranny that you would like to imply that it is, then Windows OS gaming would be dead as publisher's and consumer's wouldn't support it.

Regards,
SB

Actually Valve kind of has its own monopoly on linux OS gaming. That's because linux gaming is not credible otherwise, or non existent, or unknown by the general public. There's still the limited retro-gaming with Wine on linux or Steam OS, but that's another thing.

So, you can free yourself from the licensing of Windows, its quirks (adobe etc. updaters, antiviruses, browser hijacking crapware bundled with installers etc.) and gain much freedom by moving to linux but you lose the ability to run games on their own and are confined to the Steam store for games.
It may be a fine compromise but this limits your freedom. Main thing is I don't see Valve registering the times when I log in and play certain games as a feature of interest to me, there could always be something like the Playstation Network break-in or data leaked to NSA etc.
Then, I'm pissed at having to log in manually every time I want to play a game because I made a "mistake" of having two Steam accounts.