Dev wrote on Mar 5, 2012, 09:06:

^Drag0n^ wrote on Mar 5, 2012, 08:41:
MSSE. Free for life. Auto-updates. No annual renewal hassles. Low CPU overhead. No brainier.

^D^

I don't think its free if you have more than 10 PC's

Verno wrote on Mar 8, 2012, 08:52:
Any time you buy a preconfigured machine you're either getting fleeced on the price or they cheap out on components like the PSU. A "Steam Box" isn't likely to be an exception anymore than something like Alienware, in fact I wouldn't be surprised to see Valve partner with a company like that because it is insanely expensive to do it yourself. There's a price tag for the convenience much like consoles and overpriced iphones.

Dev wrote on Mar 7, 2012, 16:45:

Krovven wrote on Mar 7, 2012, 12:10:

Jerykk wrote on Mar 6, 2012, 01:35:
A Steam Box won't have the power or flexibility to appeal to PC gamers

Wrong. More than a few in this thread have expressed interest already. You do not speak for everyone and please stop thinking you can. Personally Im very interested in this as I have an aging desktop and the ONLY reason for me to upgrade is for games. I currently have my desk setup next to my tv so I can game from the couch or my desk without hassle on my PC. Something like the "Steambox" would be a good fit in my entertainment setup. However, I'm waiting to hear more info, rather than random speculation.

BTW, have you looked at the alienware x51?
http://www.dell.com/us/p/alienware-x51/pd.aspx
Looking at that, I wouldn't be surprised if steam just rebranded it and put a custom UI into it (I think this model was mentioned in the thread, I just never looked at that model).
Its overpriced as all alienware setups are, but alienware tends to look cool at least.

Krovven wrote on Mar 7, 2012, 12:10:

Jerykk wrote on Mar 6, 2012, 01:35:
A Steam Box won't have the power or flexibility to appeal to PC gamers

Wrong. More than a few in this thread have expressed interest already. You do not speak for everyone and please stop thinking you can. Personally Im very interested in this as I have an aging desktop and the ONLY reason for me to upgrade is for games. I currently have my desk setup next to my tv so I can game from the couch or my desk without hassle on my PC. Something like the "Steambox" would be a good fit in my entertainment setup. However, I'm waiting to hear more info, rather than random speculation.

Jerykk wrote on Mar 6, 2012, 01:35:
A Steam Box won't have the power or flexibility to appeal to PC gamers

I know Jerykk hates car analogies and loves describing PC gaming as objectively better, but he always forgets that convenience, ease, lack of worrying/fiddling and a level playing field matter very much to many people and not at all to him, making things subjective.

avianflu wrote on Mar 5, 2012, 11:11:
It would need the adoption level of a console and that is asking for a lot in the first gen

It would need the adoption level of a console and that is asking for a lot in the first gen

avianflu wrote on Mar 5, 2012, 11:11:
Not sure this gadget will fly. It would need the adoption level of a console and that is asking for a lot in the first gen -- and during a global recession.

Hope Valve has an big advertising budget.

It will be fun to see what happens.

^Drag0n^ wrote on Mar 5, 2012, 08:41:
MSSE. Free for life. Auto-updates. No annual renewal hassles. Low CPU overhead. No brainier.

^D^

Jerykk wrote on Mar 4, 2012, 23:15:
True. That said, some options are pretty subjective. V-sync, for example. People with 60 Hz monitors tend to swear by V-Sync, as they're willing to deal with input lag in favor of preventing tearing. Conversely, others are more tolerant of tearing instead of input lag. Same deal with mouse smoothing.

I just really can't see the Steam Box appealing to either console or PC gamers. It won't be as cheap, easy or convenient as a console, nor will it be as powerful or flexible as a regular PC. It also won't have any high-profile exclusives. It will suffer from the same issue that the WiiU will inevitably face; no definitive target audience.

Jerykk wrote on Mar 4, 2012, 20:05:

Lots of people own and use PC's with ZERO knowledge and understanding of hardware, and valve can make a lot of stuff happen automatically under the hood.

But how many of those people are PC gamers? You don't really need a lot of tech knowledge in order to check your e-mail or browse the web. Being a PC gamer, on the other hand, requires significantly more tech savvy.

Even if Valve hides all the OS stuff, you still have the in-game stuff to deal with. How many console gamers know what V-Sync is? Or mouse smoothing? Or DX11? Or triple buffering? Or anisotropic filtering? Or antialiasing? The average console gamer doesn't know or care about any of these things. They just want to sit on their couch and play games. Sure, players can skip all the video and control configuration and just jump into the game, but that typically results in an inferior experience because default settings are usually crap. And if someone doesn't care about having an inferior experience, they'll just stick with consoles.

Jerykk wrote on Mar 4, 2012, 23:15:
I just really can't see the Steam Box appealing to either console or PC gamers.

Jerykk wrote on Mar 4, 2012, 23:15:
That said, some options are pretty subjective. V-sync, for example. People with 60 Hz monitors tend to swear by V-Sync, as they're willing to deal with input lag in favor of preventing tearing. Conversely, others are more tolerant of tearing instead of input lag. Same deal with mouse smoothing.

Jerykk wrote on Mar 4, 2012, 23:15:
There's also the matter of standards. What will be considered a minimum acceptable framerate? Or resolution? Or AA level? Or AF level? Given the size of the machine, I highly doubt it'll be capable of running every game at 1080p, 8xAA, 16xAF, all at 60 FPS. It's much more likely that 30 FPS will be considered standard, in which case the Steam Box won't be much of an improvement over consoles.

Bhruic wrote on Mar 4, 2012, 21:43:

Even if Valve hides all the OS stuff, you still have the in-game stuff to deal with. How many console gamers know what V-Sync is? Or mouse smoothing? Or DX11? Or triple buffering? Or anisotropic filtering? Or antialiasing? The average console gamer doesn't know or care about any of these things. They just want to sit on their couch and play games. Sure, players can skip all the video and control configuration and just jump into the game, but that typically results in an inferior experience because default settings are usually crap. And if someone doesn't care about having an inferior experience, they'll just stick with consoles.

If you've got dedicated hardware then you can ship a config file specifically designed for that hardware, and eliminate the need for the end user to fiddle with settings.