General / Off-Topic Steam OS

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Walled gardens or not, Steam is popular and if they offer a platform, it wouldn't be foolish not to evaluate it. It may not work for anyone (including FD), but still it's interesting experiment.

Same time while Steam is walled garden for games, they promise you could a lot more with SteamOS computers themselves.

If people make informed choices about walled gardens, it's all good. It's not a bad thing in any scenario. What's very important that not everything offered in market is walled garden, and that if monopoly does it, it doesn't abuse this garden to get foot into other markets.

 

[Alien]

"it doesn't abuse this garden to get foot into other markets."
So .... Steam isn't doing exactly that with their plans for an OS?

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

"it doesn't abuse this garden to get foot into other markets."
So .... Steam isn't doing exactly that with their plans for an OS?

No, I don't see what monopoly exactly they would have.

 

[Alien]

No, I don't see what monopoly exactly they would have.

not "would have" ... more "do have"
Valve (the company that releases Steam) would love a monopoly in the games market. They would love to have every games developer on their books. They already try to get as many as they can. That is simply business: be as successful as you can.

But that is not good for the customers, the people who should matter. The customers end up being the ones told the way things will be when it should be the other way around.

This country is democracy, right? We vote for which political party we prefer. So in theory, if we were not happy, we could vote some other people in.
Why does it never happen? Because power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Steam wants absolute power in the games market, and their OS is another attempt to get that. Yes they'll dress it up, make promises etc, but the truth is, what you want is the last thing they care about.

Sorry, but I'll never like Steam.

 

[Oss133]

No, I don't see what monopoly exactly they would have.

Depends how far they take it.

I have Steam.
Do I need to use SteamOS to play Steam Games?
Do I need SteamBox hardware to run SteamOS?

As long as the answer to those two questions in No, a proprietary system does not exist. No problem.

 

[Juniper]

But that is not good for the customers, the people who should matter. The customers end up being the ones told the way things will be when it should be the other way around.

Sorry, I just don't see that. A software company (Valve in this case) makes a piece of software. People use it. They like aspects of it, dislike others, and then they offer feedback. Valve can choose to ignore that feedback, but if they do they run the risk of people not using their software. And that is critical if...

Steam wants absolute power in the games market, and their OS is another attempt to get that.

... that is their stated aim. And there's nothing wrong with that. It will only come about though if people use it, and if they feel they're disenfranchised (as you appear to be) then they won't. And then it's a failure... because games companies will only go onto Steam if they think it's going to reach a lot of people.

Your analogy of a democracy is flawed, because business is not a democracy. The only vote you have is with your wallet. And believe me, all companies (Valve included) care about that. They don't care about you whining on forums though.

To bring it back on topic (E: D related) I would argue that for Frontier to get the kind of sales they are wanting for E: D it has to go onto Steam. It's not even an option for them to do otherwise. It's hard to buy PC games on the high street these days, and they cannot rely on people accidentally stumbling upon their website. Steam offers desktop advertising & a simple instantaneous payment system. E: D will be a commercial failure if it is not available on Steam.

 

[Oss133]

not "would have" ... more "do have"
Valve (the company that releases Steam) would love a monopoly in the games market. They would love to have every games developer on their books. They already try to get as many as they can. That is simply business: be as successful as you can.

But that is not good for the customers, the people who should matter. The customers end up being the ones told the way things will be when it should be the other way around.

This country is democracy, right? We vote for which political party we prefer. So in theory, if we were not happy, we could vote some other people in.
Why does it never happen? Because power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Steam wants absolute power in the games market, and their OS is another attempt to get that. Yes they'll dress it up, make promises etc, but the truth is, what you want is the last thing they care about.

Sorry, but I'll never like Steam.

Hi Alien. A passionate position, you have there. I don't disagree with your opinion but I wonder who you do like. Every business would put itself into a position of greater influence if it could. That is how they survive. I think I would advocate that we spread the love (money) around. That way no-one is monopolising us. Simplistic? probably. Do I have more power than where I spend my money, though?

 

[Zak Gordon]

Steam has always been about control, and this will be no different. I know Gabe was really annoyed with Windows 8 (in particular the App store move) and could see that Windows may move to a position that cuts out on-line purchases unless through their own system (a little like Steam works now for many games).

That was a direct confrontation with Steams business (which is about trying to push ALL on-line distribution through their system, Steam-works integration etc).

Basically Steam wanted to become the 'Windows' of gaming, and now they have to move to another platform to ensure that long term. Linux is good because it is FREE for them to use, that is about the only reason they will be looking at it.

I'm all for anything pushing Linux into the mainstream, but i always known exactly what Steam (and Gabe (ex-microsoft himself)) is really about, a monopoly and control of PC gaming. So i don't expect all this new stuff to be any different to that aim and goal.

 

[dannysquid]

I'm all for anything pushing Linux into the mainstream, but i always known exactly what Steam (and Gabe (ex-microsoft himself)) is really about, a monopoly and control of PC gaming. So i don't expect all this new stuff to be any different to that aim and goal.

Have to admit I'd much rather be using something designed by Valve than something designed by Microsoft.

 

[Niding]

Added bonus of having Elite on steam is that the people on your steam friendlist
will see you are playing Elite Dangerous. I know I at times sit infront of the computer semi-bored wondering what to do. Browse the friendlist and see a buddy playing some game Ive never heard about. Check the info and suddenly Ive added another game to my library

As has been said above, customers vote with their wallets. If the outcry over
the endproduct is loud enough, companies will react. Not out of love and careing
for the customer, but to protect their bottom line/revenue.

Look at Diablo 3. Very successful sales, mostly due to the hype based on the history of Diablo 1&2. Thru the Auction house+Real Money many customers
got fed up and just stopped playing. Whining on forums probarly doesnt influence a whole lot. Pretty much every game forum Ive read contains trolling/flaming which is hard to take serious. But rating and online activity
is monitored. Twitch.tv had high view count on Diablo 3 in the beginning but dropped gradually. Blizzard has finally taken critizism and are moving away from Auction House.

My point is; stray too far away from what customers wants/expects and you will eventually find yourself "voted off the island".
At the moment being on steam got more pros that cons from my point of view.

 

[Zak Gordon]

Have to admit I'd much rather be using something designed by Valve than something designed by Microsoft.

They (making Valve=Gabe) both come from the same mind set, that of monopoly, so they are more or less the same, with more or less the same purpose. Gabe was at MS for Thirteen years, and that shows in how Steam works now and how Steam will evolve.

 

[Frank]

It is great that the profile of Linux is being raised by Steam. More competition for Windows will be a good thing.

But I still prefer vendors which champion freedom from DRM which is why I buy from Good Old Games, and back Kickstarter projects that proudly proclaim their absence of DRM.

 

[dannysquid]

They (making Valve=Gabe) both come from the same mind set, that of monopoly, so they are more or less the same, with more or less the same purpose. Gabe was at MS for Thirteen years, and that shows in how Steam works now and how Steam will evolve.

I know where you're coming from, but I find Steam enormously convenient and reliable. It saves me a load of faffing about and I'm grateful for it. Maybe I'm unique, but I can't think of the last time I had trouble installing or running (or updating) a game.

 

[psykokow]

I have had issues with steam but none that have tainted my experience.

One Pre-order that didnt work... had to delete it and re-download it after release date... pain

 

[Vicks]

Interesting points in the second announcement today:

Will I be able to build my own box to run SteamOS?
Yes.

Can I hack this box? Run another OS? Change the hardware? Install my own software? Use it to build a robot?

Sure.

Can I download the OS to try it out?

You will be able to download it (including the source code, if you're into that) but not yet.

I can't conceive any type of monopoly anywhere with SteamOS. If you can install any type of Linux software that means that we will be able to use it as a main OS for everything and even 'retail' games running natively on linux without Steam or DRM.

I truly believe now that my days using Windows at home are counted... I've been dreaming about this day for years...

Also, i hope they announce Source 2 engine this friday. That would mean, probably, HL3. :O

 

[Jenner]

I'm pretty skeptical of SteamOS, but I think that's mainly because I'm old and jaded. Still, it's great that Steam is apparently designing it to be open and whatnot. I don't see my Windows days as numbered, though. I use my OS for more than just gaming, and despite Microsoft's best efforts to undermine the quality of its OSes with bad business practices I still use a 100% MS environment. I manage a 2008R2 server cluster at work, Windows workstations, Office installation, etc. For the most part it's a solid system all around.

Back to Steam, I've been a Steam user for years now and am quite happy with it. But, like Google's entry into the OS ecosphere I'll reserve my praise until I see what exactly they can bring to the table.

 

[Oss133]

I know where you're coming from, but I find Steam enormously convenient and reliable. It saves me a load of faffing about and I'm grateful for it. Maybe I'm unique, but I can't think of the last time I had trouble installing or running (or updating) a game.

I am sure you are unique and fabulous, but not in this. I like Steam for the same reasons as you.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

I'm pretty skeptical of SteamOS, but I think that's mainly because I'm old and jaded. Still, it's great that Steam is apparently designing it to be open and whatnot. I don't see my Windows days as numbered, though. I use my OS for more than just gaming, and despite Microsoft's best efforts to undermine the quality of its OSes with bad business practices I still use a 100% MS environment. I manage a 2008R2 server cluster at work, Windows workstations, Office installation, etc. For the most part it's a solid system all around.

Back to Steam, I've been a Steam user for years now and am quite happy with it. But, like Google's entry into the OS ecosphere I'll reserve my praise until I see what exactly they can bring to the table.

Let's paraphrase that - days for Windows as undisputed ruler in PC gaming *could* be over. This is their first biggest challenge. No one say it will succeed.

I know, I know lot of people say what about those others who have tried and failed. Well, those usually didn't have any AAA game development company behind them (in fact, none of them had). Valve have gone for this at least for 3 - 4 years. While they are still a gaming company, they're force to reckon with.

 

[Susimetsa]

I know, I know lot of people say what about those others who have tried and failed. Well, those usually didn't have any AAA game development company behind them (in fact, none of them had). Valve have gone for this at least for 3 - 4 years. While they are still a gaming company, they're force to reckon with.

I agree. Basically the only thing keeping gamers from migrating to Linux has always been the lack of AAA titles. With this block gone, I'd hope to migrate my systems in a timely fashion.

There will be, however, still people who want to use Windows in order to have access to their programs that cannot be found in Linux (Photoshop, Corel PaintShop Pro etc.).

 

[Oss133]

I agree. Basically the only thing keeping gamers from migrating to Linux has always been the lack of AAA titles. With this block gone, I'd hope to migrate my systems in a timely fashion.

There will be, however, still people who want to use Windows in order to have access to their programs that cannot be found in Linux (Photoshop, Corel PaintShop Pro etc.).

Indeed. I use a PC because of versatility beyond playing games.