or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Home Theater Gaming › HTPC Gaming › Valve looks like they are working on their own Steam Box hardware
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Valve looks like they are working on their own Steam Box hardware - Page 2

post #31 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marafice Eye View Post

I think it was about Valve entering the hardware market. Can't remember anymore lol



"Boring conversation anyway."

tongue.gif
post #32 of 86
Since when the fequency, the quantity of RAM or the number of cores means performance?
Think of the Pentium4, the PS3 or PS2 with so few MB and most MP3 players that embed dual core microcontroller.
And why talking about performance, what makes a good game? Quality of it's graphics?
No.
It's the gameplay!
What do you need to obtain a good gameplay? Good software developers first (they do miracles with crappy hardware)
- Good man-machine interface, no lag. No need for 10 cores to do that.
- The rest depends on the style of the game but the quality of graphics comes after the concept of the game itself.
That's why people still plays ugly Counter Strike or Quake 3 or Tetris.

That's also why riding a bicycle is a good game, the gameplay is excellent smile.gif

I totally agree with Valve, evolution of PCs (and consoles) is too slow, analog gamepads' quality was a regression compared to any model's radio remote control. Hire me please, Valve smile.gif


p.s. good game does not mean good sales
post #33 of 86
Xbox 360 controller is the best controller I've ever used. I have a wired one I use for the pc on some games. Mouse and keyboard are fine for other games.

I don't want a stick I have to wag around and I don't want to jump up and down, or signal with my arms and hands to play a game. Those concepts are novelty at best. Good riddance to them!
post #34 of 86
Good discussion. Aren't people expecting that pretty soon their phones will be their game controller? That it will "plug" wirelessly into their TV/projector when they are home to continue the gaming experience? I see it like that, making controllers redundant along with desktop computers.
post #35 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antripodean View Post

Good discussion. Aren't people expecting that pretty soon their phones will be their game controller? That it will "plug" wirelessly into their TV/projector when they are home to continue the gaming experience? I see it like that, making controllers redundant along with desktop computers.

Lol. That would be awful. Touchscreen gaming is quite poor. tongue.gif
post #36 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Simonian View Post

Lol. That would be awful. Touchscreen gaming is quite poor. tongue.gif

Agreed, touchscreen is so bad for gaming I'm considering getting a bluetooth controller so I can play the actiony games on my phone without the clunky touch control.
post #37 of 86
There are a few games I love on my phone like Zookeeper, but I've given up playing just about anything else.

Touchscreen gaming is horrible. I hate it. I can't play anything with a virtual d-pad and I've tried many times over the years.
post #38 of 86
I will admit that touch screen gaming has a long way to go, but just a few years ago most people could not imagine typing on a phone but now the vast majority of phones do not have hardware keyboards. With some good programming and thinking I think that great interfaces can come into play for touch screen devices. Heck most touch screen can actually detect many finger inputs unlike most of your janky keyboards.
post #39 of 86
Thread Starter 
The plot thickens:
Quote:
I ask the obvious question: is this the first step toward Valve making a console of their own? Maybe the Steam Box that has been rumored (and repeatedly shot down) for months now?

"What we really want is to ship [Big Picture mode] and then learn," Coomer said. "So we want to find out what people value about that. How they make use of it. When they make use of it. Whether it's even a good idea for the broadest set of customers or not. And then decide what to do next.

"So it could be that the thing that really makes sense is to build the box that you're describing. But we really don't have a road map. And we think we're going to learn a tremendous amount through this first release."
Quote:
"And if it's getting involved in shipping some kind of hardware, then we will get involved in doing that if we need to."
post #40 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by PubFiction View Post

I will admit that touch screen gaming has a long way to go, but just a few years ago most people could not imagine typing on a phone but now the vast majority of phones do not have hardware keyboards. With some good programming and thinking I think that great interfaces can come into play for touch screen devices. Heck most touch screen can actually detect many finger inputs unlike most of your janky keyboards.

Typing is not the same as controlling games.

I mean, iPhone has had an app store since 2008 - a lot of games have come out. And I hate pretty much all of them. Even the ones without d-pads are annoying because my finger blocks the screen or it's too imprecise. I bought Battleheart the other day (a game that got raves) and it's awful. I don't know what to do.
post #41 of 86
You either enjoy hamfisting the screen to block everything or you don't. I guess some people don't mind having an inferior control interface. Some people would say the same thing about gamepads vs mouse/kb.

Maybe someone will invent a game pad that is essentially a touch screen, separate from the actual main display. So the people that love to smear their screens can have their way.

I don't have a desire for something like this, but touchscreen and 3D isn't going away. Just thinking about it to write this comment brought visions of a pad that could display whatever buttons needed on a screen built into the gamepad. Or maybe it's just a touchpad with no display, like on a laptop, or the thing on the psvita.
post #42 of 86
Dismissing an entire control interface outright is ridiculous. Let's make the same argument with wheels: "Racing wheels are dumb! Have you ever tried to play Battlefield 3 with one? It's garbage!"

There are games that absolutely work better on a touch screen than they would work on any other interface. Just like there are games that work better on a gamepad than a keyboard and games that work better with a mouse than with a wheel.

Pick the interface that suits the game. Picking the interface first without regard to the game at hand like you guys are doing is doing life the wrong way.
post #43 of 86
I'm not dismissing it. I'm saying I don't like it, don't desire any games based off it's use.

Fruit Ninja is perfectly suited to touch screen control. That doesn't mean it's the type of game I want to play. Admittedly I don't play many games on my tablet or phone (almost exclusively when I have a chat with nature), but I have not encountered anything that would not play better with a gamepad or mouse.

Maybe there's some genius game out there, or coming, but I think Fruit Ninja is about as good as it will get in terms of touchscreen control scheme.
post #44 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by darklordjames View Post

Dismissing an entire control interface outright is ridiculous. Let's make the same argument with wheels: "Racing wheels are dumb! Have you ever tried to play Battlefield 3 with one? It's garbage!"
There are games that absolutely work better on a touch screen than they would work on any other interface. Just like there are games that work better on a gamepad than a keyboard and games that work better with a mouse than with a wheel.
Pick the interface that suits the game. Picking the interface first without regard to the game at hand like you guys are doing is doing life the wrong way.

I base what I say on trying dozens of games over the past few years, in all genres.

The number of games that play better with a touch screen is VERY limited, mostly to puzzle games - games that actually play fine with a controller (I mean, I have been playing puzzle games for 20 years with a pad). Yea, Fruit Ninja - you can't do that game with a pad. Fair enough.

The problem isn't just that it only benefits a few genres - it's horrible for the other ones. With a racer, a wheel is best but a pad is still pretty good. Touch screens work well for puzzlers and disastrously bad for just about everything else.

This has just been my experience. The problem I have is that this is supposedly the future of gaming and it's horrible compared to what we have.
post #45 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by number1laing View Post

Yea, Fruit Ninja - you can't do that game with a pad. Fair enough..

Where's My Water? and Cut The Rope, to name a couple more.
post #46 of 86
Thread Starter 
The unveiling will happen within a year according to Valve. What "it" will be is still unknown:
Quote:
When asked what the team's immediate goals are, she obliquely states, "To make Steam games more fun to play in your living room." That's the team's one-year goal, at least. The challenge is making games that require a mouse and keyboard palatable to people who are used to a controller, or to people who just don't want to migrate PC controls to the comfort of their living room. Working in tandem with Steam's newly beta'd "Big Picture Mode," Ellsworth's team is creating a hardware solution to the control barriers found in many Steam games. She wouldn't give any hints as to what that solution is exactly, but she left no options off the table -- from Phantom Lapboard-esque solutions to hybrid controllers.
post #47 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by number1laing View Post

Typing is not the same as controlling games.
I mean, iPhone has had an app store since 2008 - a lot of games have come out. And I hate pretty much all of them. Even the ones without d-pads are annoying because my finger blocks the screen or it's too imprecise. I bought Battleheart the other day (a game that got raves) and it's awful. I don't know what to do.

But you can relate that thought to alot of things. For instance I honestly cannot stand most keyboards that come on computers for gaming. And the XBOX controllers are terrible, unresponsive, mushy, innacurate, but the mass public has no problem with them. Honestly I think a phone with the quality of multi-touch input they have now could be better at controlling games than an xbox controller. The only thing you really lose with touch screen is the ability to use gripping fingers etc to control extra keys. But than again the vast majority of consumer games dont even seem to make any use of more than direction and the 4 main buttons.

I personally started using unified remote to control my HTPC and compared to any other HTPC specific input it better than them all, the only thing it does not surpass is a mouse + keyboard, its just as good as any laptop trackpad.
post #48 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by PubFiction View Post

But you can relate that thought to alot of things. For instance I honestly cannot stand most keyboards that come on computers for gaming. And the XBOX controllers are terrible, unresponsive, mushy, innacurate, but the mass public has no problem with them. Honestly I think a phone with the quality of multi-touch input they have now could be better at controlling games than an xbox controller. The only thing you really lose with touch screen is the ability to use gripping fingers etc to control extra keys. But than again the vast majority of consumer games dont even seem to make any use of more than direction and the 4 main buttons.
I personally started using unified remote to control my HTPC and compared to any other HTPC specific input it better than them all, the only thing it does not surpass is a mouse + keyboard, its just as good as any laptop trackpad.

That's not really saying much. Trackpads are absolutely horrible, especially for anything gaming related. Mouse and keyboard is still hands down the best for most stuff imo. I use a 360 controller for racing games (don't have a wheel since the ones that are any good are a few hundred each), and having played many, many games on my multi-touch phone (NOVA 3, Max Payne, etc) touch-screen is god awful unless its for something simple like Angry Birds. Max Payne is terrible, you simply cannot move AND shoot at the same time, same with NOVA 3 which is why there's an insane amount of aim assist, Multi-touch games should really be called double-touch since you can realistically only give 2 inputs at once (move +aim, then you stop aiming to shoot, etc etc)
post #49 of 86
Thread Starter 
The plot thickens:
Quote:
Ellsworth doesn't give any hints as to what form that peripheral will take, but says no options have been left off the table. It's worth noting an interesting-looking patent application Valve filed last year surfaced, featuring dual analog sticks that can be swapped out for trackballs and other inputs:



Internal beta tests on a handful of different controllers are already underway, with Valve employees able to get their hands on and try the current prototypes. Once the field is narrowed down, Ellsworth said Valve will put one or more of those controllers into gamers' hands for external beta testing. Valve already has a production line for short runs in place to make it happen, and it's likely testers will be selected through Steam, though no concrete details have been made.

I've been begging for a thumb trackball to replace the aiming analog stick on gamepads for years! It was something I wanted going back to last gen, but as far back as 2008 I've brought it up at this site:
Quote:
...and all of this could've been easily fixed (for FPS titles as well) if the PS3 came with a thumb-trackball in the place of the right analog stick as standard. Many that would've been an awesome marriage of control pad character control with the precision of mouse-look aiming.

Make it happen Valve!
post #50 of 86
That would be ....awesome!

Very few grasp the awesome-ness of a proper trackball in gaming. I do and I love it. biggrin.gif
post #51 of 86
I don't like the layout of the buttons inside the sticks already. If that's the final design.
post #52 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Simonian View Post

That would be ....awesome!

Very few grasp the awesome-ness of a proper trackball in gaming. I do and I love it. biggrin.gif

To bad there is no thumbs down.

Track balls?

Boooooooo.
post #53 of 86
Thread Starter 
Well, it would be mini-trackballs for your thumbs. If it is modular, I'd only use it to replace the right stick on the gamepad. It's much closer to the mouselook control than an analog stick.
post #54 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post

To bad there is no thumbs down.
Track balls?
Boooooooo.

That is what most people would say....
post #55 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Simonian View Post

That is what most people would say....

some people just dont know.... i've owned/used a trackball for 8-10 years.... still game "hardcore" with a mouse, but a trackball would be a great replacement for a ****** analog stick.
post #56 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by formulanerd View Post

some people just dont know.... i've owned/used a trackball for 8-10 years.... still game "hardcore" with a mouse, but a trackball would be a great replacement for a ****** analog stick.

I'll definitely agree that a good regular mouse has the overall advantage. My trackball lacks in pure accuracy so it makes pinpoint sniping type stuff very tough. Though I do get the edge in other areas. I think it balances out and I like how the mouse stays put no matter what I'm doing. Or I can hold it up in the air or sit on my leg or whatever and it still works. tongue.gif
post #57 of 86
Thread Starter 
Steam box confirmed:
Quote:
Valve has stayed mostly quiet about its plans to enter the hardware business, but in an interview with Kotaku at last night's Video Game Awards, Gabe Newell confirmed the company's plans to sell its own living room PC that could compete with next-generation consoles from Sony and Microsoft. The biggest revelation is that Valve seems set to release its own complete hardware and software solution. When we first reported that the company was working on a "Steam Box" back in March, it appeared that Valve was working on a prototype that would establish a baseline for hardware manufacturers, but it wasn't clear if the company would sell its own product or simply release the designs to others. Newell's comments to Kotaku provide a much clearer picture of what's happening; Newell says that he expects companies to start selling PCs designed for the living room next year — which Kotaku says could have Steam preloaded — and that Valve will create its own distinct package.

Newell suggests that the company will create its own carefully managed PC ecosystem that's distinct from the one offered by other hardware partners — a possibility that our own Sean Hollister exposed after looking at the company's comments and actions in recent years, including its aversion to Windows 8, its recent embrace of Linux, and its existing push into the living room with Steam's Big Picture Mode. Newell tells Kotaku that "our hardware will be a very controlled environment," and that some people will want a "turnkey" solution for their living room.

As a digital distribution platform, Steam is wildly successful, with more than five million concurrent users on any given day and over 50 million users in total (by comparison, Xbox Live has more than 40 million users). But Valve doesn't reap any income from the sale of hardware that runs its platform or the software it hosts, and the company doesn't control Windows, which is the most popular platform among computers running Steam.

Newell stopped short of saying that the company was building a Linux-based Steam OS, but he reportedly says that the next step for the company's living room operation is to enable Big Picture on Steam for Linux. From there, the timeline is still pretty murky — we only know that Newell expects some hardware to show up sometime next year — but Valve's intent to compete in the living room in a big way is no longer a secret.
post #58 of 86
Eh I don't really see how this is any more attractive than just having a PC already. If I wanted a console I'd buy a console. I mean for the Linux guys this is probably pretty cool news but for me I just can't see the appeal.
post #59 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcweber111 View Post

Eh I don't really see how this is any more attractive than just having a PC already. If I wanted a console I'd buy a console. I mean for the Linux guys this is probably pretty cool news but for me I just can't see the appeal.
This isn't aimed at those who already have a PC. This would be a "bridge" for the console crowd to enter PC gaming. If nothing else, it will open up the PC space to more players and more developers. I may not get one, but I'd be happy if it succeeded.
post #60 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by confidenceman View Post

This isn't aimed at those who already have a PC. This would be a "bridge" for the console crowd to enter PC gaming. If nothing else, it will open up the PC space to more players and more developers. I may not get one, but I'd be happy if it succeeded.

Ok, so what are you bridging? One standardized, closed platform to another? What does this offer that an Xbox or a Playstation doesn't already? I'm not being smarmy I'm actually pretty curious. There seems to be a lot of assuming by some that this is somehow a legitimate alternative to the consoles and I'd be curious to see why they think that is.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HTPC Gaming
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Home Theater Gaming › HTPC Gaming › Valve looks like they are working on their own Steam Box hardware