Sujet : Re: Hey, my SteamLink still works
De : candycanearter07 (at) *nospam* candycanearter07.nomail.afraid (candycanearter07)
Groupes : comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.actionDate : 23. Nov 2024, 21:30:03
Autres entêtes
Organisation : the-candyden-of-code
Message-ID : <slrnvk4eir.31jat.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
References : 1 2 3
User-Agent : slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Spalls Hurgenson <
spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote at 17:17 this Saturday (GMT):
On Sat, 23 Nov 2024 15:29:23 +0100, "Werner P." <werpu@gmx.at> wrote:
>
Am 22.11.24 um 21:41 schrieb Spalls Hurgenson:
Steam Link --and indeed, the whole Steam Machines concept-- never
really caught on amongst gamers. The Steam Machines themselves were
too expensive and too underpowered to justify themselves, and
SteamLink never really found a market. I guess people who owned PCs
beefy enough to run games and stream it over the local network either
weren't interested in playing on the couch, or had the dosh to just
buy a second dedicated computer for that purpose. Steam Machines
disappeared from the Steam storefront in 2018, and SteamLink was
discontinued shortly afterwards.
They simply were too early, SteamOS was not "ripe" enough to give a
decent console experience. Valve struck gold with the same concept with
the Steam Deck but given SteamOS now is relatively mature and the deck
did not repeat the main mistake of the Steam controller of forcing you
to use the right touchpad instead it always is optional!
Cannot wait for the Steam Controller 2 whoch should come out hopefully
next year!
>
There were a variety of problems with Steam Machines. One was that it
was a fairly open standard, with only minimum hardware specs as the
prime requirement... so of course the OEMs all shipped the least
powerful machines they could. The devices were extremely overpriced
too, especially regarding the hardware you were getting (some were
upwards of $5000 USD). And at that price, people wanted a computer
that could do more than just play games... except SteamOS was a poor
fit for that, since it couldn't run a lot of Windows applications.
Some of the Steam Machines weren't easily upgradable either, which
-especially for the sort of gamers who'd be interested in a $5000
gaming device- is a deal-killer. And in 2014, there was still enough
fluctuation in PC hardware that tying yourself down to a fixed
hardware config was a recipe for quick obsolescence.
>
Add to that, Valve itself shot itself in the foot with its own
actions. One part of the Steam Machine spec was that it had to ship
with a Steam Controller... except Valve delayed the release of the
controller for over a year as they worked out various bugs and
designs. The decision to leave manufacture of the Steam Machines up to
OEMs --who could customize their builds as they saw fit-- only sowed
confusion in the market; which Steam Machine to buy? The much cheaper
SteamLink also probably sabotaged Steam Machine sales to some degree.
>
I think Steam Machines would go down better today; hardware
requirements for games are much less severe, existing GPUs and CPUs
are much more powerful, and there's much less turnover in PC hardware.
SteamOS -and the underlying Linux OS it's based on- are much improved
in compatibility and --thanks to the proliferation of web-services--
there's much less reliance on specific applications (e.g., MS Office)
for performing non-gaming activities. If Valve could develop a
small-factor gaming PC and sell it for ~$800 USD, I think it would see
more success.
>
But the simple fact is, there's really no need for it. The Steam
Machines were a reaction to Microsoft's attempt to shoulder its way
into Steam's bailiwick. That's not really a problem for Valve right
now; they are --and are likely to remain-- the de facto PC games
provider for most PC gamers, regardless if they are using a custom
'Steam machine' or some Dell box. The bigger problem Valve faces is
that a lot of gamers aren't even BOTHERING with PCs (or consoles)
anymore; they play entirely on mobile devices, and Valve has _nothing_
in that arena.
>
[no, the SteamDeck doesn't count. That's mainly designed as
competition against consoles and to bolster their hold on
the PC market by enhancing the Steam ecosystem. Mobile gaming
is an entirely different beast]
>
There's entire markets that never even LOOK at Steam, and these are
only going to become larger and more important as years pass. It's not
a threat to them right now but the PC gaming audience is aging out and
not being replenished at the same rate. I suspect we'll see a
SteamStore on mobile sooner than we see a return of Steam Machines.
To be fair, you can *technically* play steam games on mobile with
streaming. It's not very good.
-- user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom