• Jonamon23 - October 3, 2013 6:14 a.m.

    I was hoping for Valve to announce the "Steam Box". To have at at most 3 models where you could have modular upgradable parts. Where the low end model could be upgraded to the high end model or upgrade further it in the future when you want to play more advanced games. The Low end model would be a barebones PC with a decent graphics card in a modular compact case with the Steam Logo. You could play <2006 games on high settings and modern games on lower settings. Everything would be accessible for new PC gamers, so, if you are new and don't understand all the advanced settings, steam would automatically detect the hardware (that they made) and set them accordingly. The price point of this model would have to be important. It would have to introduce newcomers to PC gaming. The main problem is: New people have little understanding of what is required to have a great experience. I'm finding out that many people don't care how the game looks, but how fun it is to play. I wish I could point to one device and say, "This is what you need to get." The higher end models could play Witcher 2 and Metro: Last Light on max settings and be upgradable in the future with faster processor, RAM, and graphics units. I think of a futuristic spaceship game where you can upgrade parts. It would be cool to have a UI that tells you what you have and how to upgrade it. The parts will sell themselves. The major goal for Valve would be to use the consumer's existing home products. Make it HDMI compatible where it automatically detects the screen resolution upon connection. The PS3 and Wii U require a reset and going through menus each time I connect it to a different TV. All modern controllers are compatible, but they need to have a simple-design one available in where the Steambox sold. $20 for a 360 knockoff with sticks, triggers, and buttons. Everything needs to be ready for those that don't know what they are doing when they buy this, but not hinder those that do. This needs to run inside windows (for game compatibility) and have the windows part restricted unless you go to Advanced with a bunch of warnings. The box needs to have all the streaming apps available. You could even use the steam app on phones to set up downloads, control and type in the browsers, and even control games. What I'm getting at is that Valve could have made that middleman product that bridges all devices and introduces unknowing consumers to large existing market. Also I wish Gaben had the Number 3 in orange as the last slide and said, "Pre-loaded on every SteamBox", put on some Arnettes (for the camera flashes) and smiled.
  • The_Ambivalent_Cantaloupe - October 2, 2013 9:51 a.m.

    As someone who is interested in building my own computer for gaming, and knowing Valve would likely announce hardware, I was hoping that Valve would announce hardware that would make it easier to start PC gaming for someone who has never had a gaming PC much less built a PC. However after the announcements, I'm not sure if I should wait around to see these "Steam Machines" or not. Valve left the "Steam Machine" discussion a little too murky...
  • StrayGator - October 1, 2013 8:09 a.m.

    9/25/2013 10:00 AM, Bellevue, WA Having announced their own OS and hardware, Valve uncovers their latest technology: the Wolpaw field, allowing them to incorporate unprecedented gameplay experiences to their yet unannounced upcoming games. They also decare that in order to realize it's full potential, they have no choice but to secede from the established game industry. Minutes later, Valve's HQ building detaches from the ground, slowly rising into the clouds, not to be seen again for decades.
  • StrayGator - October 1, 2013 8:09 a.m.

    2092 - A fallen wheeled desk is found high in the Alps, leading to the discovery of several games, mostly Source multiplayer mods and derivative top-down shooters. It also contains what seems to be concept art for a possible Half-Life sequel.
  • StrayGator - October 1, 2013 8:10 a.m.

    12/31/2094 - Valve emerges from isolation and brazenly showers New York City with copies of Left 4 Dead 3. Fans are infuriated: "Too soon!".
  • StrayGator - October 1, 2013 8:13 a.m.

    oh, and Cabriolet is Europese for "Convertible". Merci beaucoup.
  • StrayGator - October 1, 2013 8:15 a.m.

    oops, spoilarz.
  • Spieg89 - September 30, 2013 8:29 p.m.

    I wanted Valve to announce Half-Life 4. Half-Life 3 is so 3 years ago. And I had hoped they would announce that Gordon Freeman would be wearing Arnette sunglasses exclusively from here on out!
  • Teradi - September 30, 2013 6:19 p.m.

    I hate the number 3 because of Valve. They have many games that can have a sequel using the number 3, and it confuses me D: I think that Valve should have announced a new Left 4 Dead or a new Team Fortress. Here in Argentina we loves thouse games
  • bobob101 - September 30, 2013 11:30 a.m.

    I happen to like the old mouse keyboard scheme, but the problem is that it almost always has to be attached to the computer you are using. However, if Valve followed the example of one specific innovator, I'm sure they could make quadrillions. I'm speaking of Tony Stark. What Valve should have done is made holographic keyboards, like in Iron Man. Obviously, that is ridiculously high-tech and not likely to happen anytime soon, unless you bring in one element. Arnette Sunglasses. If, and this is a gigantic if, Valve and Arnette would team up so we could have hologram projecting sunglasses, I believe we are looking at bazillions of dollars. Balls in your court Gabe.
  • ipaqi - September 30, 2013 5:05 a.m.

    Oh, FFS. Calling Windows 8 a closed platform or a risk to the openness of PC is tossery of the highest order. Yes, they have an in-OS store. So effin' what? So does every other bloody OS on the market that ISN'T Linux-based. The store doesn't block or interfere with any program you want to run on the desktop side. Windows 8 is in no way a closed system, and I'm sick and bloody tired of people, especially Notch and Gabe harping on about it. Considering Newell's objections to Windows 8 centered around the store, which was in concept (though not in practice) a potentially very big competitor to Steam, I find everything he says on the subject suspect. Would you trust negative words spoken by Sony about MS? Or by MS about Sony? Or by Apple about Google, and vice-versa? No, you wouldn't. You'd take it with a healthy pinch of salt. Besides, I don't know how Gabe Newell came to be the messiah of "openness" on the PC, or the gilded saviour of revolutionary gaming, considering up until Greenlight, they were as closed a platform as any console, and even now, Greenlight is shit-in-a-handbag awful. Is Steam overall a very good thing for indie devs on PC? Sure, If they can squeeze in. Otherwise, the almost complete and utter focus of the digital PC marketplace on Steam means that if you're not there, you're not going anywhere. And don't even get me started on their "family sharing" and "Early access", which are nothing but mechanisms by which to pull more money out of more people.
  • Eightboll812 - September 30, 2013 8:15 a.m.

    People not too close to things might see it that way. There's a definite possibility this is exactly where MS is going with the PC. I know people there, and the company is in panic mode with Windows and desktop. The market is finally shrinking after years and years of analyst predicting it and not happening and MS being able to happily ignore those "fools". They are also in panic mode with Phone and their failed tablet. They are being squeezed out of the consumer market at all angles. So they are desperate to make bold changes in order to hold onto their nice large beachhead with PCs. Which way will they go? No one knows for sure, but they seem to be moving toward closing down the platform in order to milk licensing revenue (and penalties) out of it. That's what they do with the other marketplace for tablets/phone. (Which a lot of people also don't know.) As for painting a possible picture of the future, I'm not sure anyone can criticize too harshly here for something that is very plausible.
  • ipaqi - September 30, 2013 10:58 a.m.

    How, exactly are they "moving towards closing down the platform"? By bringing in a store? There is no digital distribution service in the world that doesn't involve at least a bit of curation, and as for non-store-bought applications, it's not like we don't have non-metro natively fullscreen applications. There is no limitations on what you can do on a windows 8 PC. Other than that, you write the word "fools" as though anyone in MS has referred to analysts as such - which is not the case, and you're talking about "panic mode" and them being "squeezed out", as though MS isn't still the most proliferate office and home workstation OS in existence. Yes, there is some healthy competition in the market now, which means that MS has to make right choices, not just bold ones. And trying to sell people a product with which they can do less than with the product they already have is a surefire way to destroy your marketshare, as they have learned from the XBox One DRM fiasco. And I'm going to just ignore your foolhardy assertion that what happens in the phone/tablet sphere is at all representative, because it has no hold in any reality that has ever existed. It's like saying that the XBox is a closed platform, and that's evidence that windows is going to become one as well. Finally, I'm not seeing any of this so-called panic from my own friends at MS.
  • Eightboll812 - September 30, 2013 2:03 p.m.

    Everyone is entitled to an opinion even if ill founded. You've really not addressed anything I've said other than to twist words and run off on tangents that have nothing to do with a given point I made. The "fools" comment referred to action, er rather inaction, than to specific statements. If those predictions were taken seriously, MS wouldn't have been so slow to respond to the tablet phenomenon. You really can't argue against this, even if a huge homer. They got caught with their pants down, even years after the trend started. The phrase squeezed out referred to the shrinkage of the desktop/laptop PC market while being completely uncompetitive in the markets that this is shifting to, i.e tablets and phones. The combination is a squeezing effect. Again, you can pretend to argue against it, but that's the fact. By saying there's no limit to what you can do with a Windows 8 PC, you clearly let my statements fly right over your head. I was talking about business model being restrictive (again where they are clearly trying to go with it), not that the OS is restrictive. But whatever dude. I've come to expect you to misread and twist just about anything that is said to you. "And I'm going to just ignore your foolhardy assertion that what happens in the phone/tablet sphere is at all representative," That's mighty kind of you. I'll let you just go put your head in the sand, because tablets are as different from a PC as the Xbox is... Tell that to all the people who are ditching laptops for tablets. "Finally, I'm not seeing any of this so-called panic from my own friends at MS." Clearly you are either lying or don't know anyone worth knowing there. Which is funny because I just had a lengthy discussion two days ago about this topic with a family member who works there.
  • ipaqi - September 30, 2013 2:16 p.m.

    Wow. You begin your post with saying that I ignored or misrepresented everything you said, and then proceeded to do the same. Bravo.
  • TokenGamesRadarFurry - September 30, 2013 3:11 p.m.

    Going to refute his misrepresentations, or are you taking your ball and going home?
  • ipaqi - September 30, 2013 8:23 p.m.

    First off, I did more than "misrepresent" or "let [his] statements go over [my] head", which by the way, was just plainly antagonistic. Second, this person is pretending to have some intuitive grasp of Microsoft's plans that is antithetical to simple logic. If anyone thinks it's a good idea to make a future version of your program able to do less than a previous version, then that new version isn't going to sell. Simple logic. Easy. And MS knows that, which is why Windows 8 doesn't limit you as a user, and why future versions are even less likely to limit you. It actually doesn't limit you as a software-maker either (which isn't what I was talking about to begin with, BTW - misrepresentation, AGAIN), because you can (and 99.99% of software-makers do) just make a normal desktop program. If you don't want to sell through the Windows Store, because you want to maintain your profits, not go through certification, etc., you can just not sell an app on the Windows Store. But if MS is going to let you buy a program essentially from them, through that store, then it only makes sense to have it go through certification and/or curation, like all other in-OS stores do. Speaking of which, his assertion about phones/tablets being a precursor to what's going on on the PC aspect WAS idiotic, because it isn't true for Xbox and PC, it isn't true for iOS and MacOS, and so saying Windows Phone/Tablet closedness it is a precursor for Windows PC closedness is completely ignoring reality. -> This is me refuting another misrepresentation, BTW.
  • Eightboll812 - September 30, 2013 9:01 p.m.

    "If anyone thinks it's a good idea to make a future version of your program able to do less than a previous version, then that new version isn't going to sell." Wow, more word twisting even after I clarified they are moving in their business model, not the technical capabilities of Windows 8. Simple logic, yet you fail to even follow it, and pretend to be "logical". Spock you aren't. Maybe you should have just taken the ball home, lol. The problem you fail to grasp is that there are rather clear signs this is where they are headed: Now, given the history with MS trying to use their position to undercut competitors and forcing customers through their single source channels, ahem, Internet Explorer, and trotting a fine line with the courts in the process, you say, "no way", and I say, "I see the writing on the wall." "because you can (and 99.99% of software-makers do) just make a normal desktop program. If you don't want to sell through the Windows Store, because you want to maintain your profits, not go through certification, etc., you can just not sell an app on the Windows Store." You really have no idea how licensing works in the current iteration of the store do you? Because they have penalties for not putting the app in the store that cost more than the average PC game. All they have to do is implement the same business model on the PC and it's no longer such an open system. You seriously think it hasn't occurred to anyone at MS that ALL software is going digital and ALL they have to do is funnel it through their store and completely cut out the middle men and reap maximum returns to shareholders? I think you think MS are idiots. Regarding your point on tablets, I'm supremely confident you are the one sounding like an idiot here. You've only responded with non sequiturs rather than disproofs. A sign of a weak mind.
  • Eightboll812 - September 30, 2013 10:28 p.m.

    Another sign of the trend towards the move to enforcing app store distribution. Most people can connect a series of dots. I guess you aren't most people.
  • ipaqi - October 1, 2013 6:18 a.m.

    Okay, let's reset here for a second. We've already gone past the point of just being two d-bags yelling at each other on the internet. I apologize for my use of invectives. I still think that you're mistaken in thinking that MS is going to lock down development on PC or limit at all the business models available there. I don't see any real benefit to them by doing so, and too much potential for self-harm. That said, there is no need for me to throw insults in your face. There's no reason we can't argue about this like grown ups. I hope you agree, and that we can lower the toxicity of the tone in our discussion here. Now, that theverge article you cited is wrong. Visual Studio Express 2012 can develop for desktop windows, with no more limits than the free VS versions have ever really had. Source: As to the other article, all I saw there was talk about consolidation the various windows stores into one. This causes no new limitations on development for windows as a whole. Finally, I still claim that you cannot disengage the question of what can a user do with their computer from the question of what business model can a developer use for their product. So long as MS isn't controlling users' access to desktop (that is, non-Metro-style) applications, then users can get their programs from whomever and however they wish, and so there's no "closing" of the platform. The Windows Store itself arose as a closed platform, true, but its existence in no way detracts from what users and developers can do using Windows, whether in the business aspect or the technical. And again, I say that limiting what users can do with their PC in future versions of the OS (which is the only way to "close" the platform) would be disastrous. If Steam Machines are readily available, and if SteamOS can be used similarly to Ubuntu or other user-friendly Linux distros, doing so may cause MS to relinquish so much of its marketshare that any licensing gains wouldn't even come close to compensating. And I just don't think the guys and gals at Redmond are foolhardy enough to do so. Your turn.

Showing 1-20 of 56 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000


Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.