Sorcerer
Member
Project Christine is dead. They can't get any manufactures on board with the idea.
Plus I think the custom parts for this thing would be insanely expensive.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
No hype for Steam Machines?
- Thread starter goomba
- Start date
Project Christine is dead. They can't get any manufactures on board with the idea.
Plus I think the custom parts for this thing would be insanely expensive.
N
Noray
Unconfirmed Member
Steam Machines seem like a solution in search of a problem. Valve even seems to realize this because they have the Steam Link.
Why would anyone buy a Steam Machine instead of just a PC? I don't see the appeal at all.
Why would anyone buy a Steam Machine instead of just a PC? I don't see the appeal at all.
Using Linux does have advantages. You don't have to call MS when you upgrade your hardware to transfer the license. It allows Valve to customize everything the way they want. They can easily push updates through the package manager. I rarely use Windows, but in my experience software updates are a lot more hassle on Windows. Under Linux, I get a notification which I'm free to ignore for as long as I want (or just turn off). When I want to update, I just click OK and it does it's thing. If it's a new kernel, it'll ask me if I want to reboot, which I'm again free to ignore until it's convenient for me. Since all my software is installed through the package manager, all updates use that same process.
Just checked, and Steam currently has 1555 games listed for SteamOS.
Doesn't make any sense to get a steam machine, they don't appeal to any major demographic.
PC gamers already have a PC, probably custom built and better. And they know how to hook up said PC to the TV if they want to play on the big screen.
Console gamers get consoles for convenience, which is hard to label steam machines when there's like 20 different versions on the market to confuse people (see: video game crash of the 1980s, saturation). With a price of 400+ dollars depending on version, there needs to be some key exclusive games to help sell the machines. But there's not.
PC gamers already have a PC, probably custom built and better. And they know how to hook up said PC to the TV if they want to play on the big screen.
Console gamers get consoles for convenience, which is hard to label steam machines when there's like 20 different versions on the market to confuse people (see: video game crash of the 1980s, saturation). With a price of 400+ dollars depending on version, there needs to be some key exclusive games to help sell the machines. But there's not.
Bolivar687
Banned
Hard core gamers don't want or need it and Valve does not have the money to go up against Sony and Microsoft for casuals. The current Linux compatibility list reinforces how half-baked it is.
That said, we know consoles are usually a Trojan horse for something else and I think this has succeeded in changing perspective. For one, Valve has catalyzed the gaming prebuild manufacturers into making more affordable boxes. But more importantly, they have developers and even big pubs thinking more seriously about Linux, and gamers considering the possibility of leaving Windows behind entirely. It won't happen tomorrow, but I anticipate the possibility that many gamers will just slap a Linux OS on their next build and wait to get a Windows key until they really need it.
That said, we know consoles are usually a Trojan horse for something else and I think this has succeeded in changing perspective. For one, Valve has catalyzed the gaming prebuild manufacturers into making more affordable boxes. But more importantly, they have developers and even big pubs thinking more seriously about Linux, and gamers considering the possibility of leaving Windows behind entirely. It won't happen tomorrow, but I anticipate the possibility that many gamers will just slap a Linux OS on their next build and wait to get a Windows key until they really need it.
Pretty much. They have been making statements about this since 2013, and how they intend to start very small just to gather more info, rather than a bombastic console type release. They just want to enable more Steam users and more purchases, no matter what method they choose to do that.
The focus of most of this work has really been on bringing value to Steam customers, he said. Even if were only serving a fraction of them, we feel like well be very successful if that fraction is having a great experience in the living room. That number will probably grow over time. Were not even trying to push our existing users toward the living room or the TV if they dont want to have that experience. All those customers are currently pretty happy doing what theyre doing in the den with their PCs or laptops. This is just an extra avenue for them, if they want to sit on the sofa like a lot of them do, I think. Then its great to have this other option through which you can access Steam. Its not an attempt to go very far, or really at all at first, beyond our initiated customer base. Were going to learn a bunch from the people who already value Steam really highly. We dont feel like we have to jump exponentially outside that group just to be successful in that realm"
Usually, when a platform like this gets brought out, its a very different working method and proposition to customers, he continued. It looks more like a team thats much larger than us has worked at perfecting something and finishing it, and then reducing risk as much possible and locking down that design, making it ready for a massive initial manufacturing push, spending billions of dollars on marketing. Very different from what were trying to do. We dont have to be so risk-averse. We intentionally are operating this way because we think it will result in a much better product, in the short term and the long term, to be public about this, and to have it iterated with us and with partners and with users. But it lets us start small and grow over time.
They are not paying attention to going for any particular market, but just putting some solutions out, learning from what happens and then iterating from there,. They mention something similar recently.
We built Steam for the same reasons we did all this: it didnt exist, a bunch of people wanted it to exist, no one was building it, so we built it. There was this post-rationalisation of Steam after it was launched; like of course youd build that, its obvious but, at the time, when we were building it, no one else was, says Valves business development specialist Erik Johnson.
Who knows if itll be the same this time, but if you ask customers, do you want to be able to play all your Steam games in your living room with a controller?, theyre like: yeah, that sounds cool. Thats good enough for us to move forward. Were not obsessed with what market were creating or what users were cannibalising from other platforms. No one ever makes good decisions based off that kind of data"
SliceSabre
Banned
I've been somewhat interested in Steam Machines with an eye on the Alienware Alpha. But the more I've looked into it the more I've just thought.
"I might as well just stick with my PS4 for what they're offering."
The SteamOS only ones are just a complete non-starter for me, I refuse to deal with that operating system.
"I might as well just stick with my PS4 for what they're offering."
The SteamOS only ones are just a complete non-starter for me, I refuse to deal with that operating system.
Boombox On
Member
I never even saw this first quote before. Good find.
They've already said they are not going to do "exclusives" for the machines, which is complete contrast to their philosophy with Steam and everything else. Also I posted quotes that explain how the intentions of all this are not aimed as some sort of traditional console launch, but rather to start off very small and learn what to do next for Steam users.
I think this post has it.
The biggest issue with people's perception of Steam machines is that they get compared to consoles a lot in terms of popularity or reach, when I don't think Valve's goal has ever been to sell a certain number of millions of units or whatever. The post with the Valve quote links makes a great point. Valve is just trying to create more and more ways for people to become exposed to Steam. If Steam Machines do become a success, it will probably only become slowly apparent over the course of years. Steam itself was seen as this unneeded thing in 2004 and then all of a sudden people started loving it around 2007 and 2008, likely because Valve iterated on it very quickly and flexibly in response to its users.
This is another good point. Despite how many console games get PC versions and all the old PC developers moving to consoles, what people play a lot on PC and what people play a lot on consoles are still very different things. It's as if after the old PC developer guard moved to consoles, the PC market filled the void with a new generation of developers and games -- the kind that still can't really work on consoles. That said, there are a TON of indie games on PC inspired by console games of the 80's and 90's, most of which aren't available on consoles. Of course they're indie games, but AAA gaming just doesn't have the same weight on PC as on consoles. Running AAA games at 60fps at higher resolutions in my opinion isn't even that great a reason to get into PC gaming by itself. That's why I got in, but I ended up spending a lot more time on smaller games which aren't on consoles.
These products really aren't targetting the enthusiast market that a lot of GAF make up.
If you've been interested in PC gaming before, you probably already have a machine, if you're a serious console gamer there isn't really a compelling reason to get one of these over an other make or build of pc. I'm sure there will be some people very excited to get these, but it's not (most of) gaf. There's going to be a lot more hype for the in-home streaming box.
If you've been interested in PC gaming before, you probably already have a machine, if you're a serious console gamer there isn't really a compelling reason to get one of these over an other make or build of pc. I'm sure there will be some people very excited to get these, but it's not (most of) gaf. There's going to be a lot more hype for the in-home streaming box.
outunderthestars
Banned
I loved my Alienware Alpha, and I think Alienware is on the right track. Keen to see what they announce next year....
I greatly dislike this attitude. Not everyone wants to build a PC. Anything that allows someone to play the games they want is a good thing, even if they might spend more money for a machine with lower power than what someone could piece together on their own.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
I don't think these Steam machines are going to garner much interest. The Alpha seems to be the only model that's down to Earth in pricing, and even that seems like a dud.
I'm not even as high on the Steam controller as I was before. I'll have to get some hands on experience, but it doesn't sound as good as I'd hoped.
I'm not even as high on the Steam controller as I was before. I'll have to get some hands on experience, but it doesn't sound as good as I'd hoped.
Ultimadrago
Member
Exactly. There was a time where I was excited behind the idea, but reality (in regards to margin and overall "hot new gamer tech") hit pretty hard.
You took issue with half of my sentence?
There are other brands of pre-built pcs. I didn't suggest someone build their own or that they would be wrong for not doing it. There's no compelling reason to get a steam box branded pc over one that is not.
BleedOrange
Banned
What's the point at that point? Ostensibly the draw of SteamOS is that it's NOT a generalist OS and as such can offer better performance than something like Windows. Whether that's true or not remains to be seen.
As for its place in the market? Yeah... Most seem to exist in the weird no-mans land between consoles and Windows PCs and since SteamOS is Linux you can't play either Console Exclusives or Windows exclusives. Dunno who that would be attractive to.
undu
Member
OpenGL drivers in Linux are not as fast as they are in Windows, and they generally run games slower compared to DirectX in Windows.
The situation might change when games start adopting vulkan, but that would be for new games, and maybe some existing games using the SDL library.
The biggest issue about the Steam machines is that Valve doesn't care.
All parts of it, hardware, SteamOS and such were a reaction from Gaben to certain Microsoft policies he didn't like. With W10 being basically free SteamOS won't gain any traction, as it has happened already with Linux for many years.
And without Valve pushing the concept, it won't get past the ultra-niche concept.
Alienware Alpha? Dead. It's 725 at my Amazon branch (more than 800$). I could buy a PS4 and a XBO for that price and still have money left. They were meant for the US PC market (which is a truly alternate reality when you compare prices) and even so they're a niche within a niche.
All parts of it, hardware, SteamOS and such were a reaction from Gaben to certain Microsoft policies he didn't like. With W10 being basically free SteamOS won't gain any traction, as it has happened already with Linux for many years.
And without Valve pushing the concept, it won't get past the ultra-niche concept.
Alienware Alpha? Dead. It's 725 at my Amazon branch (more than 800$). I could buy a PS4 and a XBO for that price and still have money left. They were meant for the US PC market (which is a truly alternate reality when you compare prices) and even so they're a niche within a niche.
I don't understand what you mean by it supporting only "mouselook for certain first person games." It emulates either a touchpad or a trackball, with so many configuration options it seems unlikely you would not be able to create a play style you are comfortable with. Where did you hear it only worked with first person games?
I don't know how it would handle MMO games that use more than say the full row of number buttons, but it's easy to assign button modifiers to open up more key combos than there are buttons on the controller. For example, you can assign the left touch pad to a 4-point D-pad style loadout, and then assign the left trigger as a modifier so that when it is held down the left touch pad becomes an entirely different set of commands.
The more I use it, the more I like it. Out of the box I actually thought first person games were its weakest point! But after a little tweaking it is really impressive how precise and comfortable it is to use.
As for Steam machines: I don't know who the audience is. SteamOS and the Steam controller require more user adjustment than any console out there. You need some level of technical competence to be able to get the most out of them. Building your own computer is so streamlined and easy today. I would say configuring the Steam controller is actually more complicated than choosing parts and assembling your own PC.
That said, if SteamOS offers a low-cost alternative to Windows as a gaming ecosystem, it will have been worthwhile. But I don't know how successful it will have to be for developers to hop on board, and I don't know what kind of influence it can hope to achieve if it doesn't see that kind of mass adoption. I would like Valve's hardware experiment to be progressive and disruptive, but it is tough to imagine how it could be.
Why would anyone be hyped? There's nothing on there I can't already play on my current PC. It's just a PC with a controller for a fair price. Nothing more, nothing less.
Now this might work for stuff like phones, where people are lining up 3 days in advance to get their new toy to update facebook with, but not so much for gaming devices.
Now this might work for stuff like phones, where people are lining up 3 days in advance to get their new toy to update facebook with, but not so much for gaming devices.
Well, I already have a gaming PC that poo poo's any steam machine. So that's why I'm not hyped.
In terms of why the press or market doesn't seem to be hyped, I have no idea. I have no idea who steam is targeting with these things. People who are scared to build their own PC's? They generally buy consoles.
In terms of why the press or market doesn't seem to be hyped, I have no idea. I have no idea who steam is targeting with these things. People who are scared to build their own PC's? They generally buy consoles.
HyperCubed4
Member
If you get a PC built for you, it can easily be more powerful than a Steam Machine for the same price. PCs also do a lot more than Steam Machines. Sony and Microsoft also offer a wider variety of digital products on their respective services. Movies, music, etc.
It has less functionality than a PC and doesn't have the service that Sony or Microsoft provide (Steam sales notwithstanding).
It has less functionality than a PC and doesn't have the service that Sony or Microsoft provide (Steam sales notwithstanding).
Movies, music, streaming services etc is something Steam have been promising since they announced the whole machine / os / controller development, it just hasn't happened yet despite restating the idea back during GDC this year
My current setup is like this. The one great thing about this movement Valve are pushing, is that it has driven me to plan for making my own living room machine. I'll only be utilising the Steam Controller, and perhaps later a Steam Link for other rooms. The fact that I am now going this route is entirely on their efforts to make Steam more suitable for that environment. In that sense, what they are doing is already starting as something of a success, since I wouldn't be doing it otherwise. They really don't care what method or products you use (as the quotes mentioned earlier demonstrate), as long as Steam is a part of it.
Enter The 36 Chambers
Member
I've no interest personally.
And steam/valve don't exactly have the same level of mass appeal name recognition like Ms/Sony do. Seeing their product in a story isn't likely to evoke much of a reaction from the average consumer
Just seems to me like the target audience already has a Pc to play games on
And steam/valve don't exactly have the same level of mass appeal name recognition like Ms/Sony do. Seeing their product in a story isn't likely to evoke much of a reaction from the average consumer
Just seems to me like the target audience already has a Pc to play games on
SaintMadeOfPlaster
Member
...Seriously?
Jon Armdog
Member
I've been using the controller since Saturday; it's pretty awesome. Not sure what you mean by not having a pointer system. It can easily be used as a mouse, even outside of Steam.
I have spent a lot more than that on my primarily gaming PC, and it's running Linux exclusively. It's not because I can't afford Windows, I might even be able to get a license through work, I haven't even checked, because I don't want to run Windows. Linux gives me far more control over what's going on on my PC. I don't have to worry about licenses when I upgrade hardware or need / want to reinstall for whatever reason. I have more choice in what software I run and how my system looks and behaves (different desktop environments etc). All that stuff I can install and uninstall through the package manager, which keeps everything updated. And when I do need to do something for work, it's easier on a Linux system.
Also, the more people buy and play games on Linux, the better support we'll get on Linux. I'm not hyped for Steam Machines, but I'm excited that they'll hopefully mean more games coming to Linux.
It's really great for games that are normally controlled via mouse like wasteland 2 or pillars of eternity.
It's not as good at pretending it's a second analog stick.
I've found it works far better when you switch it to having a dynamic joystick where the origin changes dependant on the point you touch at. I find it preferable to traditional analogue controls.
The Steam Controller is quickly looking like it will be my main controller. My only current gripe is that I'm still getting my head around the learning curve for more competitive FPS while using trackball + gyro, and also that the controller will likely not be good enough for the more intense RTS games - but that was expected from the start.
I have a living room PC so I'm not interested in purchasing a Steam Machine.
But that Alienware HDMI-input sounds cool. Supposedly if I purchased an HDMI-input card, Steam would detect it and create another tab in Big Picture mode for me to access. That could be kind of neat for connecting a console or a HDCP-compliant TV signal.
But that Alienware HDMI-input sounds cool. Supposedly if I purchased an HDMI-input card, Steam would detect it and create another tab in Big Picture mode for me to access. That could be kind of neat for connecting a console or a HDCP-compliant TV signal.
alexandros
Banned
Yeah, it's another Valve slow burner.
GankzyMcfly
Member
Im sure the hardware in a steam machine is better then xbone and ps4 but im not sure how many game devs will be optizing games specificly to run on the various types of steam machines like the do with ps4 and xbox one games
RichiRamjag
Member
This pretty much. I want my closed off console to by my console and my PC to be my PC.
OP makes all these comparisons to the Xbox/PS4, but not much of that matters if a console is what you're looking for. Otherwise, you'd be on PC already.
Nostremitus
Member
The only way I see steam machines really doing well is if the Vulkan API takes off in a big way and becomes a standard within the industry that developers use to release multiplatform(PC/Linux/Mac) versions of all of their games...
As long as a larger percentage of PC games are locked to Windows Steam Machines don't make sense.
As long as a larger percentage of PC games are locked to Windows Steam Machines don't make sense.
Crayon
Member
This conversation always makes me wonder how different it would be it steam machines had some big marketing push and message behind them. They don't, and that's alright because the project itself is not so compatible with a marketing blitz.
The Controller
The Machines
The OS
You don't have to use any of them. When people buy anything on steam, money goes towards these projects whether they like it or not.
The controller is brilliant. I've had one for the last week. The Alienware 450usd steam machine is a fair price and has good performance and is attractively styled. These are my opinions and I'm just putting them out there. What I really want to comment on is the os.
Steam OS. I've used it daily for the last five months or so. I'm one of relatively few people doing so. As far as I know, everyone using Steam OS right now is doing it because they are particularly interested in the project and want to participate in this phase. There's not a whole lot more reason to use it at the moment. That said, it's been really pleasant overall.
I dont actually own windows so I am "missing out" on the windows games. That seems to be the main complaint about steam os: That it doesn't play every game that windows does. I think this complaint is weird because no platform other than windows plays everything windows does. Besides, I have a playstation 4 so most aaa games are available to me. If I didn't have that around or couldn't afford it I would dual boot windows on my steam machine so I could play sf5, mgs5, witcher 3 (But not bloodbourne or gran turismo 7). So I have 2 next gen consoles: A ps4 and a steam machine. The ps4 affords me access to the most conspicuous games missing from steamos, and a few missing from windows as well. The steam machine gets a whole lot more playtime, tho. It has a much different selection of games and I end up turning it on more often.
I have 43 games on my steambox. They were all cheap as chips, they are downloadable and playable on any lin mac or win pc with just my authentication, and they represent a great variety ranging from shooters to strategy to adventure. The library and store are very distinct from a ps4 and I enjoy them immensely. So I hope one can understand how the innability to play every windows game is not souring me on either my ps4 or steambox.
Installation and maintenance is a treat. You can download it free, and bring up a system from a usb stick. Otherwise, I'd have to go buy a liscense to windows 7. It's nice to have something free that you can just download and redistribute anytime. Once it's up, you set the overscan (put the arrows to the edges of the screen) and it's good to go. It automatically forces everything to fullscreen, forces triple buffer, and forces the global overscan setting on all graphics. So while you can make a windows machine do these things, it's good to have an out of the box system that already does these things. After that, the ability to forget about the desktop for as long as you choose is really great. With windows, no matter how much you set it up to act like a console, you are going to end up back on the desktop for something, no matter how small. You may think this is a trivial point, but I disagree.
One enormous bonus is that its open source and can be modified completely. Theres not alot of that going on atm, but the potential is huge. A small example: I install steamos with vaporos; an installer package that adds the basic software that is missing on the standard steamos desktop. Notepad, vlc, that sort of thing. This is a little modification but what's important is that it's okay to repackage valve's os and redistribute it as one sees fit. This represents a potential that doesn't exist on windows. I can't take windows, modify any part of it I think needs improvement, re-name it and freely distribute that. This is important.
Consider that before steamos/ubuntu steam, any "gaming" pc used to be a brick without a legal or illegal windows liscense . Now that brick can be ready to rock in minutes for free with zero configuration or legal implications. Or antivirus. Or viruses. Future maintenance is all handled thru steam updates, as well. I hope I'm not the only one who can appreciate this progress in computer gaming.
Steam OS is good. You don't have to use it. Just buy your steam machine and put your windows on it. Or just keep playing on your built pc with you keyboard and mouse at your desk like you always have. You'll continue to support steam os and steam machines by using steam and buying steam games and on behalf of steam machine/os/linux desktop users everywhere, I thank you.
The Controller
The Machines
The OS
You don't have to use any of them. When people buy anything on steam, money goes towards these projects whether they like it or not.
The controller is brilliant. I've had one for the last week. The Alienware 450usd steam machine is a fair price and has good performance and is attractively styled. These are my opinions and I'm just putting them out there. What I really want to comment on is the os.
Steam OS. I've used it daily for the last five months or so. I'm one of relatively few people doing so. As far as I know, everyone using Steam OS right now is doing it because they are particularly interested in the project and want to participate in this phase. There's not a whole lot more reason to use it at the moment. That said, it's been really pleasant overall.
I dont actually own windows so I am "missing out" on the windows games. That seems to be the main complaint about steam os: That it doesn't play every game that windows does. I think this complaint is weird because no platform other than windows plays everything windows does. Besides, I have a playstation 4 so most aaa games are available to me. If I didn't have that around or couldn't afford it I would dual boot windows on my steam machine so I could play sf5, mgs5, witcher 3 (But not bloodbourne or gran turismo 7). So I have 2 next gen consoles: A ps4 and a steam machine. The ps4 affords me access to the most conspicuous games missing from steamos, and a few missing from windows as well. The steam machine gets a whole lot more playtime, tho. It has a much different selection of games and I end up turning it on more often.
I have 43 games on my steambox. They were all cheap as chips, they are downloadable and playable on any lin mac or win pc with just my authentication, and they represent a great variety ranging from shooters to strategy to adventure. The library and store are very distinct from a ps4 and I enjoy them immensely. So I hope one can understand how the innability to play every windows game is not souring me on either my ps4 or steambox.
Installation and maintenance is a treat. You can download it free, and bring up a system from a usb stick. Otherwise, I'd have to go buy a liscense to windows 7. It's nice to have something free that you can just download and redistribute anytime. Once it's up, you set the overscan (put the arrows to the edges of the screen) and it's good to go. It automatically forces everything to fullscreen, forces triple buffer, and forces the global overscan setting on all graphics. So while you can make a windows machine do these things, it's good to have an out of the box system that already does these things. After that, the ability to forget about the desktop for as long as you choose is really great. With windows, no matter how much you set it up to act like a console, you are going to end up back on the desktop for something, no matter how small. You may think this is a trivial point, but I disagree.
One enormous bonus is that its open source and can be modified completely. Theres not alot of that going on atm, but the potential is huge. A small example: I install steamos with vaporos; an installer package that adds the basic software that is missing on the standard steamos desktop. Notepad, vlc, that sort of thing. This is a little modification but what's important is that it's okay to repackage valve's os and redistribute it as one sees fit. This represents a potential that doesn't exist on windows. I can't take windows, modify any part of it I think needs improvement, re-name it and freely distribute that. This is important.
Consider that before steamos/ubuntu steam, any "gaming" pc used to be a brick without a legal or illegal windows liscense . Now that brick can be ready to rock in minutes for free with zero configuration or legal implications. Or antivirus. Or viruses. Future maintenance is all handled thru steam updates, as well. I hope I'm not the only one who can appreciate this progress in computer gaming.
Steam OS is good. You don't have to use it. Just buy your steam machine and put your windows on it. Or just keep playing on your built pc with you keyboard and mouse at your desk like you always have. You'll continue to support steam os and steam machines by using steam and buying steam games and on behalf of steam machine/os/linux desktop users everywhere, I thank you.
openrob
Member
I am vaugly interested. As someone who basically plays most of my Steam games through a HDMI cable to my TV and a 360 controller I am just glad that they are using Steam OS to keep Big Picture mode in the forefront of it all with updates, etv.
If I didn't have a PC, I would possibly consider getting one (although I would prob cave in and get Windows anyway haha).
If I didn't have a PC, I would possibly consider getting one (although I would prob cave in and get Windows anyway haha).
The Abominable Snowman
Member
I mean a pointer like the Wiimote/Wii U tablet. a touchpad to play non-first or third person over the shoulder games (where you need to click specific objects in a timely manner) seems like an exercise in patience.
And to the others, when I say a console game, not every console game is a shooter. I just don't see the controller being good for a Street Fighter V or Sonic. Maybe Shenmue. My last PC purchase was Tales of Zestiria, so I guess I'll hear impressions about it soon. Like I said, I'm sure it's do-able, but I think that a cheaper, already-purchased x360 controller or PS4 controller is just as good or better for most games like that. I do think this controller is probably really good for shooters, though.
Definitely no hype from me, I own a gaming PC and see no reason to switch.
That said, I'm not the intended audience either. But the real question is whether or not there is an audience for these.
At the end of the day it's a smart move because regardless of if people buy into the SteamOS, "Steam boxes" are just pretty decent PCs with a really attractive form factor. So with a little tinkering it can just be a PC - it's a low risk proposition.
That said, I'm not the intended audience either. But the real question is whether or not there is an audience for these.
At the end of the day it's a smart move because regardless of if people buy into the SteamOS, "Steam boxes" are just pretty decent PCs with a really attractive form factor. So with a little tinkering it can just be a PC - it's a low risk proposition.
Nostremitus
Member
...and at this point you've made having SteamOS a pointless hassle. It serves no purpose beyond being a curiosity if you need Windows anyway.