
Valve working on 'Steam Box' gaming console with hardware partners - Kynlyn
http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/2/2840932/exclusive-valve-steam-box-gaming-console
======
fufulabs
Here is what i hope will pan out:

1\. Steam OS will be powered by Linux + OpenGL

2\. It will have unparalleled gamer-bias and developer-bias instead of
revolving around publishers (meaning its truly gamer focused as what has been
Valve's MO)

3\. It will be just good enough in the graphics department but will instead
lower the friction in the assets pipeline department, virality and player-
analytics

4\. Graphics will now take a backseat to story, AI, art-direction and pacing
(due to the hardware spec being fixed and player measuring tools)

5\. crowdsourcing features will be baked in thru APIs (Team Fortress hats as a
precursor)

6\. social multiplayer features baked in thru APIs

7\. a standard controller will be mandated

8\. optional accessories like bio-measuring gadgets (measure opponent's sweat,
heart-rate and track gaze) will be sold online.

If any of this comes to pass then it would have made PC gaming much much more
evolved.

~~~
pwf
I don't think the hardware spec will be fixed. The article seems to think it
will be Android-like. Valve will give guidelines like 'must support OpenGL'
and 'needs at least HDMI output and 6 USB ports', but if you want to spring
for the Alienware Mega-'Console', then you'll have a bit more power.

And the more I think about this and type my response, the less exciting this
sounds... All of this is possible on a PC. What they'll be offering us is
basically a pre-loaded, locked-down Linux based OS.

~~~
nextparadigms
Speaking of Android, I think Google should either either Android or Google TV
to turn it into a "console platform" rather than the usual "console-device" we
have now.

Graphics on ARM chips are getting good enough for enjoyable 3D games in HD,
and soon we'll be able to just hook our phones to a TV and play all the
Android games there anyway (some phones already do this).

But Google could encourage manufacturers to build special cheap $100 boxes
that are meant only for gaming, too. Then it would just be able to gain market
share over the Xbox 360 and PS3 in the same way it gained over the iPhone - by
getting all manufacturers to make such devices.

------
citricsquid
This article doesn't mention a very important and very relevant point (maybe
they assume everyone is aware):

Valve are also the developer and publisher of some of the most popular video
game titles around. This puts them in an exceptionally good position to build
something like this because with the backing of some of their own titles (For
example releasing Half Life 3 as a "Steam Box" exclusive) would immediately
encourage sales. Portal, Portal 2, Left 4 Dead, Half life and Team Fortress 2
are all hugely popular Valve games and their platform "Steamworks" is again
used by some huge names, Call of Duty, Football Manager, the list goes on.
They have their platform directly integrated with a large amount of popular
games and a lot of new releases go with Steam for their PC releases.

There are some interesting Steamworks and Steam statistics and information in
this PDF:
[http://www.steampowered.com/steamworks/SteamworksBrochure201...](http://www.steampowered.com/steamworks/SteamworksBrochure2011.pdf)

~~~
davidconnell
Valve games currently require Steam (on PC) but can be bought anywhere. Making
HL3 a Steam Box exclusive would alienate the vast majority of their fan base
and kill all the good will they've built over the years.

~~~
citricsquid
That's true and I don't believe they ever would, I was using it as an example
of the position they're in and the _power_ they hold to make something like
this work and be successful. I should have clarified.

------
mortenjorck
Well, this clinches it. The next generation of home consoles from Sony and
Microsoft are going to, of necessity, run on minimally-customized, commodity
hardware, with the end-user experience as sole differentiator. It has seemed
like an obvious choice following the diminishing returns of Sony's adventures
in exotic supercomputing architecture, but with a competitor at last combining
a stationary-target PC with existing vertical integration and massive mind
share and market share, they'll have no choice if they want to remain
competitive. This industry is in for interesting times.

And heaven help them all if Apple brings apps to the Apple TV.

~~~
Steko
"with the end-user experience as sole differentiator"

Does Kinect not count as a hardware differentiator? For this reason alone MS
has the be the favorite among dedicated game boxes.

Nintendo's been the most innovative historically but they've already shown
their hand and sadly for them it's holding a ginormous controller that I'm 97%
sure is a refurbished Sega Gamegear.

The only question left about Nintendo is who wins the exclusive rights to
Mario/Link and co. It's probably worth the most to Microsoft but Apple has a
lot of cash overseas they don't know what to do with.

~~~
rapind
Apple purchasing nintendo would be interesting. I don't think Apple has
anything to offer in terms of gaming, but they know how to manufacture great
hardware (and for less than competitors), and they know how to market and
distribute content.

~~~
jiggy2011
I'm not sure that apple itself has nothing to offer. I have a feeling it is
only a matter of time before apple releases something that is of serious
interest to gamers.

It may not be a games console as such but think something with a large screen
, an app store and some new input method that lends itself well to gaming.

~~~
phren0logy
Apple's announcement of what will likely be the iPad 3 coincides with GDC. I
would think an iPad 3 + 1080p AppleTV is a compelling console replacement. I
bet that is their move: to make your TV a monitor for the iPad. That solves
the interface issue with TV in one fell swoop.

~~~
jiggy2011
I think this could work well for some categories of games, for example
strategy games but there are still many popular games this wouldn't work so
well for at all(driving games, fps etc)

So either they will focus on a different category of gamer/games or there will
have to be some other more game specific input device such as a controller.

------
farhanpatel
There were rumours a while ago that Valve was working on Linux support for
their infamous source engine which powers most if not all their games. What if
it wasn't just support for linux but Steam running on a Valve tailored Linux
kernel. Obviously most games would still need Windows for DirectX but all of
Valves games and many others could work on this super thin Linux kernel.

* [http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=ODE4M...](http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=ODE4Mw)

~~~
tapoxi
The Source (and Goldsrc) engines support a Linux dedicated server, which
explains the job listing. As far as using Linux goes, unlikely, since people
won't be able to play any of the games they already own.

~~~
stonemetal
Haven't they already ported most of their games to mac? It doesn't seem like
going to Linux would be that big an effort. Valve's games make up like 10% of
steam sales though so they would need to work on pressuring the other 90% of
the market that they don't control. Releasing a dedicated box that doesn't
work with 90% of the content you have sold doesn't sound like a winner to me.

------
Revisor
This sounds interesting and all, but who is going to be their customers? The
30 or so millions of their users obviously already HAVE their own hardware.

So is it going to target the current console owners? And persuade them how?
"It's like your box, but you can install mods. It's like a PC but with less
freedom."?

Anyway I'm looking forward to the development. The three big console
manufacturers need a kick.

Edit: Also Steam doesn't have their own OS obviously. So is every box going to
need a Win licence?

~~~
bryanlarsen
How many of those 30 or so million users are looking to upgrade their video
card or buy a new computer? That's your target market.

potential markets:

\- people looking for a computer to hook up to their television. I bet there
are lots of people out their who would like a nice HTPC but want modern gaming
performance as well.

\- people with laptops as their primary PC but who also game. How many people
have a desktop and a laptop because gaming sucks on most/all laptops? Probably
the vast majority of PC gamers. Every single one of these is a potential
customer. Use a MacBook Air for work & facebook & casual gaming and get a
SteamBox for serious RTS gaming or flight simulators or whatever other kind of
games don't work well on consoles or on laptops. You'll no longer have to
worry about anti-virus or any of the other crap involved in maintaining a
Windows box. You'll just have an OS X box that "just works" and you'll have a
Linux box that "just works".

\- people who want to buy a PC without paying a license fee to Microsoft. Some
of these will install Ubuntu or a pirated Windows on their later, but then
support is no longer the Vendor's problem. I suspect it will be much easier to
persuade vendors to sell "SteamBox OS" boxes than Linux boxes just because it
should reduce support costs.

To summarize: cheapskates and gamers. I think that covers about 99% of the
home desktop PC market -- everybody else buys laptops.

------
nwmcsween
Am I the only one that sees this as a bad move? Microsoft had os development,
directx, intel this is why they pivoted into the console market. I think valve
should expand steam even more - bring steam to xbox, ps3, wii make buying
games cheap easy and fast.

~~~
redthrowaway
Thing is, Valve has mindshare and love amongst gamers that MS couldn't hope to
match, and Sony had none of when it brought out the PS.

There will be many gamers (myself included) who will buy this simply because
it's Valve and we trust them not only to make it awesome, but to bring awesome
games to it as well.

------
sbierwagen
I wrote a post about this a year ago[1], and concluded that it was unlikely
that either Microsoft or Apple would sell them OS licenses cheaply enough to
make such a product viable.

The third alternative is Valve using Linux, or something, which isn't
enormously plausible.

1:
[http://bbot.org/blog/archives/2011/05/08/valve_isnt_going_to...](http://bbot.org/blog/archives/2011/05/08/valve_isnt_going_to_make_a_console/)

~~~
bryanlarsen
Why is Linux not plausible?

1) There have been several leaks indicating that Steam for Linux exists, or at
least has been prototyped. I imagine that pretty much the only reason why it
hasn't been released is because it's a small market with large support
requirements.

2) Porting games to a Linux with decent video drivers is no harder than
porting to the Mac. Once you've done one, you're 95% of the way to doing the
other. The largest task is porting to OpenGL which you have to do to port to
PS3 or to Mac anyways.

3) The largest problem game makers have with Linux is supporting a large
variety of hardware along with a large variety of distributions. If you can
say "We only support SteamLinux on SteamBox", that problem completely
disappears.

~~~
potatolicious
> _"Why is Linux not plausible?"_

Short answer: DirectX.

Scream all you want about OpenGL, but MS has honestly created a superior
product. Between the hand-wringing over specs and the massive fragmentation
via vendor-specific extensions, OpenGL doesn't hold a candle to DirectX. Even
old OpenGL stalwarts like Carmack himself have bailed from that wagon.

There's a reason why Mac ports are still relatively rare in the industry, and
more importantly, where they do exist, they are universally _horrendous_ in
quality and performance.

~~~
Arelius
It should be noted, that while there is agreement that DirectX is a better
API. Portability is becoming a much larger concern, especially with mobile
gaming. These days, just about every major game engine has the capability of
running on OpenGL.

Carmack has acknowledged that DirectX is better, but Rage, for instance, still
supports it for systems that don't support DirectX.

~~~
potatolicious
Correct me if I'm wrong (written lots of OpenGL and DirectX over the years,
but never worked on a console), but doesn't the PS3 use PSGL, an OpenGL
offshoot that's not directly compatible with other OpenGL implementations?

Which is to say, porting effort to PS3 does not also give you a PC/Mac OpenGL
port.

This is the big problem I see - UE and idTech both support OpenGL, though in
reality only UE has any significant licensee base to speak of. There is,
however, an _awful_ lot of home-brewing even at the AAA-levels: EA's gone and
thrown a lot of weight behind the Frostbite engine, Ubisoft seems quite fond
of their Anvil engine (Assassin's Creed + more), and the big massive CoD
franchise runs a proprietary engine too.

An OpenGL-only platform might automagically include all UE and idTech licensed
games, but that's hardly an impressive snapshot of the gaming industry,
particularly the core gaming demographic (as compared to say, the mobile
gaming demographic, where OpenGL already reigns supreme). This hypothetical
platform won't just leave the vast majority of Steam's existing titles in the
cold, but will also have the unenviable task of forcing many devs to provide
cross-platform support where none currently exists.

Valve is a juggernaut in the industry - but even that's a very, very tall
order. There's certainly a renaissance of interest in OpenGL thanks to the
mobile gaming side of things, but I'm _extremely_ skeptical of claims that any
player, even someone the stature of Valve, can get a majority of existing
Steam devs to sign up to support OpenGL.

~~~
__alexs
Frostbite and Anvil run on DirectX and OpenGL-esq systems. IW engine even has
games out on Wii. I kind of suspect that all the major engines out there have
pretty decent cross-platform support these days. The publishers don't like to
be locked into any one console unless they are getting an exclusivity kick-
back from Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft.

It might require Valve to get people to recompile their games and tweak some
stuff, but like you say, Valve are a juggernaut.

~~~
maximilianburke
I think you're mistaken, Frostbite doesn't run on any OpenGL-esque systems.

~~~
__alexs
The PS3 is OpenGL based. Specifically it's OpenGL ES with some extra
proprietary Sony stuff. The important point is that the engine is not directly
tied to any low-level rendering API and clearly has enough abstraction to be
ported to multiple platforms with a reasonably low cost of development.

~~~
Arelius
Your first comment isn't entirely accurate. While the PS3 does support PSGS,
which is the library you are referring to, engines like FrostBite use the
LibGCM interface, which has very little similarity to OpenGL.

------
lucaspiller
I'm not a hardcore gamer, but I still have a Windows box I keep up to spec to
play the latest COD et al when they come out. I still also enjoy playing a few
old school games that aren't available for consoles, hence I don't have one
__. The only use I have for this box is gaming, as I do everything else on a
nice portable 11" MBA. I would prefer to be able to use the MBA for gaming
too, I can connect it to a monitor, mouse, gamepad, etc but it doesn't have
the graphics power. I've used OnLive a few times which has been great, but
their catalogue is rather limited. Personally I would rather see Valve buy (or
build) something like this so I can game anywhere.

(N.b. If you haven't tried OnLive give it a go, they have trials for most
games, Just Cause 2 is pretty fun and is a good example of the graphics it can
do)

 __*I also don't have a HD TV which I guess is another reason.

------
akahs
If this is true, maybe that's why Valve has been working on Steam on Linux for
so long. People over at Phoronix have been talking about it for years, but
nothing official has ever been released.

After all, it doesn't make sense to pay Microsoft the Windows tax for every
console, and they couldn't use OSX.

~~~
angrycoder
They would have to pay the windows tax, that is where 90% of the games are.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
What about WINE?

------
sandGorgon
I recently bought a 1.7GB game for my Android phone (Modern Combat 3), that
you can optionally connect to a HD monitor using a HDMI out cable.

Quad core mobile chips are already in production and PS3 capable mobile GPUs
are 6 months away (ARM Mali T-658).

Why is a console, a console and not simply a power/cooling/connectivity dock
for a suitably powerful mobile device ? Id's flagship game, RAGE, has been
supremely playable on an iphone for ages now.

Consoles like PS3 and Xbox already lag desktop-grade video hardware by 5-6
years, yet have a large market - so why cant the same be true for mobile
hardware ?

~~~
archangel_one
Rage on iPhone is a rail shooter, it's not the same game as the PC/console
version. It's been stripped down to the exact minimum it needs to support that
predefined path through the game, and while that's great fun on a mobile, I
don't think everyone would be totally impressed if that was the direction the
next generation of consoles took.

~~~
ConstantineXVI
It's a rail shooter because of control issues, not power. Drop your phone in a
dock attached to a gamepad, and those issues disappear.

~~~
mgcross
According to Carmack, it's on rails to reduce file size (texture
LOD):<http://toucharcade.com/2010/11/19/john-carmack-on-rage/>

~~~
teamonkey
And then some. On the 360 Rage comes on 3 8GB DVDs. The megatexturing method
that Carmack favours is intensely data-heavy.

------
ChrisNorstrom
Hmmm. They must have something special planned because I doubt it's another
console.

[http://www.chrisnorstrom.com/2011/02/creation-the-steam-
cons...](http://www.chrisnorstrom.com/2011/02/creation-the-steam-console-no-
its-not-another-set-top-box/)

(above) What I predict Big Picture mode is suppose to be. But seriously, how
is a $300-$600 console suppose to compete with a $800-$2,000 mid to high end
gaming pc? And shouldn't Valve be working on bringing movie and music to steam
first before taking this on? I don't know, but I'm dying to find out.

~~~
Lewisham
Why would Valve be interested in selling this to people with a gaming PC?
Those people already play games on a PC, and are unlikely to give up their
keyboard/mouse setups.

Your scenario is highly unlikely.

~~~
ChrisNorstrom
Thanks for the downvote and not understanding the concept.

Many console games outsell their PC games, PC and Console games can both reach
the same graphical qualities. A lot of poeple play PC games with a controller
because it's so much easier than with a mouse and keyboard (except for sim
games, strategy games, and first person shooters). In many cases the only
difference between console gaming and PC gaming is the setting. Console gaming
takes place in a living room with a big screen tv and nice comfy chairs with
room for others, PC gaming takes place in your home office or personal room
and it's not as relaxing or natural feeling nor is there room for others. So
by streaming a PC into the living room instead of buying more hardware to
maintain and take care and hook up and make room for. Just stream your $1,000
PC to the living room.

------
msie
If they are too loose with their hardware specifications then writing software
for it will be a nightmare. Ideally it would be a rigidly specified but open
platform. Actually, I wouldn't mind if it was a locked down platform like the
iPhone but I wouldn't have to buy an expensive dev kit to develop for it. I've
always wanted to develop something for the XBox or PS2/3 but couldn't because
I would need the big bucks for the dev kit and approval to be a part of the
developer program. Apple's proven that their model of development works.

------
bitsoda
Ha, about five years ago I thought about how I wanted Valve to compete with
Alienware in the gaming PC business, and how they would brand their rig the
"Steam Box". Interesting to see something happening here. Also, I bet a Valve-
branded "SteamBook" laptop computer would be spiffy.

------
ekianjo
A bold move but it makes perfect sense. Manufacturers bring no value in the
games business, its now all about contents and distribution. Apple and Valve
will have growing power over the old business models.

------
mdonahoe
I want Steam OS on my desktop. Optimized for gaming and little else.

~~~
mwill
Semi-related on Win7 (Pro/Ultimate/Enterprise only) you can use the group
policy object editor to launch something other than explorer.exe as the shell.

In the past I've used this to launch directly into Steam. My friend has a
spare PC in his living room mean for games with an open invitation for anyone
to use, but didn't like people abusing it/his internet (We have data quota
here, iirc his is 75GB a month then he gets throttled to 65Kb/s), so he asked
if I could make it for steam games only. Now when you turn it on, you get a
steam login prompt, and basically nothing else. All the installed games are
available to anyone who owns them on steam, and work normally.

Hitting Ctrl+Alt+Del, opening the task manager, hitting File->New Task and
running explorer.exe gets you the start bar back, so its not locked in or
anything.

In general its pretty useful if you have a Windows box that's used for
basically one thing, like XBMC or Steam.

~~~
mdonahoe
Is there a noticeable performance difference? Sounds cool

------
2mur
KB+M and user mods please. I'll drop xbox in a heartbeat.

