Was the steam machine a disaster everyone but Valve could see?

I check Steam today after coming back from the bathroom having read an article in the Guardian written by female (middle class) on women rights. Apparently they don't have enough. Or something to that effect.

http://store.steampowered.com/sale/steamhardwareaccessories/

From looking at the sale, the entire focus, and expanded focus seems solely on accessories, specifically the steam controller - a moderate success.

Has Valve given up Steam Machines?

Was Valve abit thick in trying to sell it in the first place?

Why was this billion dollar company so out of touch with reality when even little kids on forum could point out how misjudged it was?

I didn't even know these were out. I didn't see them in stores and I saw no advertisements for them. I'm on Steam almost everyday, I would have thought I would have seen it somewhere on the homepage.

Really bad marketing for one. Two, doesn't making a console defeat the reason people love Steam?

the steam machine is the biggest turd ever made right next to the Steam Controller

PS4 Pro + New Dual shock 4 best console and controller ever made all in one package

Valve has a lot to learn about gaming maybe one day they can produce new game on the level uncharted 4 as well.

VALVE rethink everything.

Make a game on par with uncharted 4 visually.

Make a controller on par with the new dual shock 4 visually and with features and match its price.

Make a Console as powerful as the pro as cheap as pro.

If you can't do this stuff u belong in the console industry u don't get to be part of the industry and you have to leave.

Join the industry or get the hell outa it you need exclusives you need a cheap powerful system rx 460 with 400 dollar price tag a controller in there maybe a game too i hope your awake valve i hope your awake with ur steam machine bro wheres your games wheres ur shiz nit

When it comes to customizability and adaptability, the intended purpose, it seems nothing is on a par with the steam controller.

For it intended purpose, unlike the steam box, it's arguably a resounding success.

From a personal standpoint, it's been fabulous for older titles with limited or no support for control pads.

Microsoft is going to do what Valve couldn't.

The same team that built the xb1...thats some lofty expectations. Phil was head of games division and brought us fable legends, and halo 5, quantum break, and some other crap.

@ProtossRushX: Yes the same team. You can continue to bury your head in the sand if it's more convenient.

....but mini ITX builds are more popular then ever.....

SteamOS certainly died the minute it came out that Windows 10 ran games better.

Of course, if Microsoft starts doing massively shady things with Windows, interest in Steam OS might be renewed.

Not exactly difficult to build either, just have be selective in the parts you buy.

The main reason that I like it.

They failed because they're not good competition against prebuilt PCs, consoles, or laptops. There's no value to them. It's a PC locked to SteamOS for the sole purpose of playing games. Well, I can safely say there are millions of PC gamers who use their PCs for more than just games, so what sense does a Steam Machine make? Especially when it still maintains the same drawback to PC gaming in that you aren't sure what games will run on it and for what length of time.

The failure is in the implementation. I still think a PC/Console could work. Microsoft seems to be heading in that direction, but they are Microsoft so they'll probably mess it up.

Have no idea what relevance the beginning of the OP has. But the steam machine didn't have to suck. Going with a Linux based proprietary OS that many games simply can't run on was beyond stupid. Valve basically put bottomless pit beneath the platform and hoped it had the ability to hover

@ProtossRushX: the steam machine is the biggest turd ever made right next to the Steam Controller

PS4 Pro + New Dual shock 4 best console and controller ever made all in one package"

Do you like movies about (Japanese) gladiators, Billy?

LOL ?. The DS4 is beaten by the X1 controller hahaha hahaha

As others have pointed out, the steam controller is a great controller for it customizing and the fact it works with anything on steam, especially old games with no gamepad support. I doubt you have ever used one.

well the steam controller has done well and its a fantastic controller. if thats the only thing that comes out of the whole venture in the long run then its still good. there is some work needed on the software side still (ideally configuring it and drivers should be separate from steam) but the hardware is very solid. just needs a better d-pad/touchpad.

i also love that there supporting linux personally and continue to buy my PC games on linux and prioritise games available for it. it has the potential to be a cracking gaming OS. its really fast, light on resources and pretty robust (well ok the X server is not so robust but thats in the process of being mothballed anyway....more performance on the way..yay :D). but i do get why people are not moving to it in droves. its a bit like releasing a console that only has multiplats...but it doesnt have all the multiplats, its completely different from what you know and there are only potential benefits...not actual benefits at the moment. the steam controller works just fine on windows so no benefit there either.

and thats also one of the reasons why the hardware isnt selling. there isnt any exclusive linux/steam OS content (and there shouldnt be...that would be really bad for the PC as a whole). the gaming performance, for the moment, is generally worse. there isnt anything remarkable about the steam box itself. so why pick a steambox over a regular PC? hell get a regular PC and just put a linux distro and steam on it and it has more functionality than steam OS. or just use windows and steam and tell steam to launch in BPM if you want it close to a console experience.

i dont have a steam link (since i have a linux box running steam its a bit pointless for me) but someone i know has one and i have played around with the streaming from windows feature. the one consistne tthing is that the host has to be physically connected to the router. otherwise it just randomly stalls making the game unplayable.

Valve need to pull their head out of their ass.

they aren't even relevant beyond Steam anymore.

Steam Machines would have sold better if they were positioned more like a console with fixed hardware. There were way too many configurations for the average person to wrap their head around and the gap in prices from $500 - $2000+ didn't help matters.

The concept of the Steam Machines are good, but the price for the performance it had wasn't the best. Alienware is still making the Alphas which are basically what you want in a Steam Machine, with and upgrade in hardware (from previous version), and Windows OS.

I'd like to see them try again but change a lot of things around.

Their idea inspired me to build my own Mini I TX PC and now that's playing all my games on my living room tv.

It was obvious to me. I wont pay a premium price for a low range pc when I could build a better one for less, with better performance and everything. It was as easy a no buy as I have seen.

I knew that Steam Machines were going to be a huge failure as soon as I saw that they were going to sell so many different models. PC gamers have no use for Steam Machines and if you are going to try to compete in the mainstream console market then you can't overwhelm the customer with so many different choices that they don't know which one to pick. They should have released only, at most, three Steam Machine models and made their marketing very clear about the difference between each model. They could have had a low-tier model marketed towards the people that just want to play PC games for as cheap as possible and don't care about having great performance, a mid-tier model marketed towards people that want better performance than what they can get on other consoles, and a high-tier model that is powerful enough to handle VR gaming right out of the box.

I think that Microsoft is going in the direction of essentially turning the Xbox brand into what Steam Machines should have been, but they are doing it the right way and will be successful.

How much moolah did Valve put into the Steam boxes? If it's not a lot, considering they're largely off the shelf parts (and can be sold as Windows boxes), I wouldn't call it a disaster.

Yeah I also got the impression Valve got off pretty cheap as they had some other suckers build all the hardware/take the risk. The software stuff like Big Screen etc are useful regardless of the Steam machine. And the controller is not doing that poorly I guess (at least I've heard som positive things about it)?

Yup. A hardware seller might take the hit and go out of business. But, there's many more ready to takes its place.

no the concept of the steam machine is stupid. Why do you need a steam machine when you can get a pc for the same price

I think it's simple the reason why Steam machines failed as they did. There was a combination of factors. It was the lack of marketing, lack of games that natively support SteamOS, and the price was terrible.

Of course they can work. It just depends on what operating system you use for this implementation. One the rumored things Microsoft is going to add is a Controller based UI for Windows 10. Essentially making what Big Picture mode was for SteamOS for Windows 10. While we don't know if this big picture mode applies to only UWP games, it seems likely though.

If that is the case, then Valve is screwed then. How Microsoft develops Windows 10 has become very unpredictable. For all we know, Microsoft could be some shady stuff tomorrow and Valve wouldn't even notice until it is too late. IMO, Microsoft will probably introduce shady features until the very last minute to keep it hidden from the gaming industry and probably will do everything it can to burn open gaming distribution platforms. I also think Valve is in the worse position possible in this case.

The marketing train died upon official release. My take on it:

• Games performed worse than on Windows...that pretty much does it on it's own.
• Very, very few AA games and virtually no AAA games. The libraries have to match head to head at the very least to attract the gamers.
• Virtually no real marketing and if you can't find one at Gamestop then it's obvious. They would have been better served to directly market and compete with Consoles...since it is basically a console but even the Wii U faired better at this.
• *Oh and no Vive support on Linux..wtf?

That said, a PC console certainly could work. Linux has it's benefits and lowers cost but they really need some exclusives and I know Valve thinks it's bad for gamers but really it's not, it's what provides incentive, it provides lifelong fond memories. People have fond memories of old consoles most in part due to the exclusives.

People don't really buy hardware because they want it rather they buy for the software and best experience of said software. The hardware is just a harassment to get the software. Otherwise it's a paperweight.

Microsoft is doing just fine.

I really hope you're a troll, and not truly this f*cking stupid.

If I remember correctly, Valve had their own machine that they tossed aside before the release of other Steam Machines. Steam Link defeats the purpose imo.

Steam machine was just a small part of the bigger picture of what Gabe Newell wanted. Gabe was out there spreading unfounded accusations that Windows 8 was out to make Windows a closed system, and despite having no basis for such a big claim he tried to fan the flames of anti-Microsoft resentment to try to create a Linux revolution, one where I feel he tried to thwart Microsoft's dominance with having Windows on every PC and get all developers to make their games for Linux. I dunno what his goal was, maybe to develop a proprietary Linux OS build he could later monetize. I mean, that failed too, wasn't just the Steam machines. Anyhow, the Steam machines were made by third parties, Valve just created the Steam OS for them. But yeah, nobody saw that working, they just couldn't make it cheap enough.

It was never gonna do well. It's a solution in search of a problem. There was no market for it. You either were interested enough to build a proper PC or fine with a console. Steam machines had the problems of both with the benefits of neither.

I don't get the impression that Valve expected it to be a success.

All of Valve's ideas are amazing, but they have the most half assed execution.

Paid mods, steam controller, steam machines, trading cards, etc.

I love all of these ideas in concept, but Valve dropped the ball on every single one. I'm glad that Valve continues to host an amazing and wildly successful store front, but everything else that company does is super disappointing.

Its really "Hey guys, we have these brilliant ideas and i say we give them all a try!"

Half way through it, they all discovered they actually require a bit too much work, said "LOL just get it out of the door" and then went back to planning the next big Steam sale.

@ProtossRushX said:

Ummm the Sony VR does not come with more stuff compared to the Vive.

The Vive comes with two tracked controllers and two light house boxes.

It allows for full 360 degree tracking plus room scale.

You have to spend another 100 dollars to get the Playstation move controllers and camera and those are way lower quality compared to what the HTC Vive offers.

The HTC Vive is still the best VR device and will be until next gen VR hardware arrives which is still probably a year or so away.

I saw maybe two of these things in Gamestop and that was it. No other store in the neighborhood sells it. Steam Machine died quicker than the Vita and even then the Vita is still getting more support than it. I dunno what Valve was thinking.

The biggest issue is that I didn't even see any advertising. I didn't even know when it came out, and as someone who is invested in the gaming industry, that must mean it's bad.

The way I see it, without DX support, Steam machines are worthless; with DX support, they would be pointless. Valve should have shown some faith in their ambitions by spending more to encourage devs and pubs to release non-DX patches and by launching along with a must-have non-Windows title, e.g. Orange Box 2. As others have already mentioned, pricing was silly given they were made up from off the shelf parts, and the almost non-existent marketing didn't really help to inspire confidence.

@JangoWuzHere: they got it pretty spot on with the steam controller. great bit of hardware and an amazing idea. the software side was a bit rought at launch but its much better now.

Many have tried, remember phantom ? But nobody seems to be able to make a cross between PC and consoles.

@RyviusARC said:

@ProtossRushX said:

Ummm the Sony VR does not come with more stuff compared to the Vive.

The Vive comes with two tracked controllers and two light house boxes.

It allows for full 360 degree tracking plus room scale.

You have to spend another 100 dollars to get the Playstation move controllers and camera and those are way lower quality compared to what the HTC Vive offers.

The HTC Vive is still the best VR device and will be until next gen VR hardware arrives which is still probably a year or so away.

Except that the Vive has very little value without any good games. Look at the game list, it kind of sucks. The biggest titles coming for it are Fallout 4, Skyrim and Doom...that everyone's played to death. There's no Mafia 3, no Deus Ex...nothing. I mean unless your favorite types of games are ones like Star Trek bridge crew, Eagle Flight or Skyworld...there's not much to be had here.

At least the PSVR has a few interesting games including RE:7 which the Vive won't have support for. It's much simpler to setup and the price point is obvious. A Vive actually costs $899.00 if you include taxes and shipping and I certainly have never seen one at Gamestop, Walmart or any other retailer where as the PSVR likely will be sold at most all of them once the initial sales hype dies down.

I have a Vive, I can't really recommend it. It's not comfortable for one thing and the main issue is I'm completely bored with every game that even remotely interested me. The library is super slow to grow and how can anyone get excited for games like Chunky Orbits or File 9? These games suck big time.

No one actually competed in the same market as consoles though. Phantom never even made it to market and was cancelled. Alienware has been the closest but doesn't really market their console's specifically outside of the brand. Most of their ads are for their laptops or top end desktop. Alpha had some here and there but nothing like Sony and MS does.

That said, people need to hear about them, they need to see them for sale at BB or Gamestop, in flyers and in direct comparison with PS and Xbox, hear about it from their friends..etc. Steam Machines suffered from a lack of AA and AAA titles along with developer support. Even the Vive didn't have Steam OS support. The Linux store's biggest title is Metro LL, one would miss out on a great deal many games without Windows OS.

They probably should have struck a deal with MS to bring a Windows based OS of sorts, like xbox just have their Steam front end with Ms kernel and dx12, probably could have been licensed cheaper than full blown W10. But at least the full library would be available.