Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action
Subject: Re: Hey, my SteamLink still works
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2024 20:30:03 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: the-candyden-of-code
Lines: 80
Message-ID: <slrnvk4eir.31jat.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
References: <dap1kjtmua5ipssj775rb3qnmfk94d80pr@4ax.com>
 <vhsos3$1o5bp$1@dont-email.me> <5t14kjp6uejdu91sc4j3h953fet2211tu4@4ax.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2024 21:30:04 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="bccb52cab5ee918e17e3fa4f96b351a5";
	logging-data="1960225"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+tsFbM4j9fAeDMubfpnqAwROcZLJBC5gg1wxxct+4vbA=="
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:wIKnJaz5BI6klFwWMqwFsRtMLaw=
X-Face: b{dPmN&%4|lEo,wUO\"KLEOu5N_br(N2Yuc5/qcR5i>9-!^e\.Tw9?/m0}/~:UOM:Zf]%
 b+ V4R8q|QiU/R8\|G\WpC`-s?=)\fbtNc&=/a3a)r7xbRI]Vl)r<%PTriJ3pGpl_/B6!8pe\btzx
 `~R! r3.0#lHRE+^Gro0[cjsban'vZ#j7,?I/tHk{s=TFJ:H?~=]`O*~3ZX`qik`b:.gVIc-[$t/e
 ZrQsWJ >|l^I_[pbsIqwoz.WGA]<D
Bytes: 5925

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote at 17:17 this Saturday (GMT):
> On Sat, 23 Nov 2024 15:29:23 +0100, "Werner P." <werpu@gmx.at> wrote:
>
>>Am 22.11.24 um 21:41 schrieb Spalls Hurgenson:
>>> Steam Link --and indeed, the whole Steam Machines concept-- never
>>> really caught on amongst gamers. The Steam Machines themselves were
>>> too expensive and too underpowered to justify themselves, and
>>> SteamLink never really found a market. I guess people who owned PCs
>>> beefy enough to run games and stream it over the local network either
>>> weren't interested in playing on the couch, or had the dosh to just
>>> buy a second dedicated computer for that purpose. Steam Machines
>>> disappeared from the Steam storefront in 2018, and SteamLink was
>>> discontinued shortly afterwards.
>>They simply were too early, SteamOS was not "ripe" enough to give a 
>>decent console experience. Valve struck gold with the same concept with 
>>the Steam Deck but given SteamOS now is relatively mature and the deck 
>>did not repeat the main mistake of the Steam controller of forcing you 
>>to use the right touchpad instead it always is optional!
>>Cannot wait for the Steam Controller 2 whoch should come out hopefully 
>>next year!
>
> There were a variety of problems with Steam Machines. One was that it
> was a fairly open standard, with only minimum hardware specs as the
> prime requirement... so of course the OEMs all shipped the least
> powerful machines they could. The devices were extremely overpriced
> too, especially regarding the hardware you were getting (some were
> upwards of $5000 USD). And at that price, people wanted a computer
> that could do more than just play games... except SteamOS was a poor
> fit for that, since it couldn't run a lot of Windows applications.
> Some of the Steam Machines weren't easily upgradable either, which
> -especially for the sort of gamers who'd be interested in a $5000
> gaming device- is a deal-killer. And in 2014, there was still enough
> fluctuation in PC hardware that tying yourself down to a fixed
> hardware config was a recipe for quick obsolescence.
>
> Add to that, Valve itself shot itself in the foot with its own
> actions. One part of the Steam Machine spec was that it had to ship
> with a Steam Controller... except Valve delayed the release of the
> controller for over a year as they worked out various bugs and
> designs. The decision to leave manufacture of the Steam Machines up to
> OEMs --who could customize their builds as they saw fit-- only sowed
> confusion in the market; which Steam Machine to buy? The much cheaper
> SteamLink also probably sabotaged Steam Machine sales to some degree. 
>
> I think Steam Machines would go down better today; hardware
> requirements for games are much less severe, existing GPUs and CPUs
> are much more powerful, and there's much less turnover in PC hardware.
> SteamOS -and the underlying Linux OS it's based on- are much improved
> in compatibility and --thanks to the proliferation of web-services--
> there's much less reliance on specific applications (e.g., MS Office)
> for performing non-gaming activities. If Valve could develop a
> small-factor gaming PC and sell it for ~$800 USD, I think it would see
> more success.
>
> But the simple fact is, there's really no need for it. The Steam
> Machines were a reaction to Microsoft's attempt to shoulder its way
> into Steam's bailiwick. That's not really a problem for Valve right
> now; they are --and are likely to remain-- the de facto PC games
> provider for most PC gamers, regardless if they are using a custom
> 'Steam machine' or some Dell box. The bigger problem Valve faces is
> that a lot of gamers aren't even BOTHERING with PCs (or consoles)
> anymore; they play entirely on mobile devices, and Valve has _nothing_
> in that arena.
>
>      [no, the SteamDeck doesn't count. That's mainly designed as 
>       competition against consoles and to bolster their hold on 
>       the PC market by enhancing the Steam ecosystem. Mobile gaming 
>       is an entirely different beast]
>
> There's entire markets that never even LOOK at Steam, and these are
> only going to become larger and more important as years pass. It's not
> a threat to them right now but the PC gaming audience is aging out and
> not being replenished at the same rate. I suspect we'll see a
> SteamStore on mobile sooner than we see a return of Steam Machines.


To be fair, you can *technically* play steam games on mobile with
streaming. It's not very good.
-- 
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom