[Duke of Hazzard]

Turning my HTPC into a Steam Box seems tempting, but SteamOS, being Linux-based, still lags behind Windows unfortunately. Native gaming compatibility is crap; for Windows games you have to use WINE, which isn't ideal. SteamOS also doesn't have any performance boost over Windows. I wonder if it'll ever become the OS of choice for gamers, because right now things don't look too good.

[Lunick]

When Half-Life 3 comes out.

[Tea Monster]

This ______^

I love Valve, but I can't see through this Steam OS thing except for living room consoles. The whole thing I love about PC gaming is the keyboard and mouse, having a hot cup of tea or a beer by your mouse and being able to lean in close to the screen and scream at people when they one-shot you. Sitting on the couch with your controller that looks like it should unfold into headphones is just not where I'm coming from.

I was similarly grumpy about Steam itself when it first came out and I love that too now, so maybe they are onto something and I'm just too old fashioned, bald and grumpy to appreciate it.

Supposedly, Steam OS will trounce a Windows box for speed on most games. Everytime I think of trying it out, I think "But I've already got a box that will play everything I want - it's called a PC. Why do I want to pay for another box to do that?" The only way I could justify it is if I created a home server for media and stuck Steam OS on that.

[MusicallyInspired]

I did some research on this a few weeks ago. I'm excited about it. The in-home game streaming feature works wonders with SteamOS, though. I took an ancient Dell Optiplex 745 and installed SteamOS on it. It's got crap for on-board graphics, RAM, and streaming L4D2 and every other game I tried was a dream. Something like Super Meat Boy isn't worthwhile because you need precision and there's just a biiiiiit too much delay to play something like that. FPS's and other games work fine, though.

The thing about SteamOS and Valve's campaign into the living room is that they're not trying to change anything for anybody, just provide more opportunities for current customers and to reel in customers who are comfortable on the couch. Also, you can use a keyboard and mouse if you want, but that doesn't make sense on the couch anyway. But it's not trying to change anything, just add alternatives and bring in new people. Also, SteamOS doesn't require you to purchase a copy of Windows if you don't have one. So it's effectively free to use now in more ways than it was. Desktop PC will always be there and you won't need to abandon it. I'm very interested in trying out the Steam Controller, though, as it isn't actually read like a controller to the system, it appears as a keyboard and mouse. The touch pads are a genius design and can be used in a number of ways; as a joystick, a mouse touch pad, and more and all with a meticulous implementation of haptic feedback for the touch response you need. It sounds like the perfect marriage of keyboard/mouse and the living room. Of course it's not the same as having a screen right in front of you, no. But it's all very intriguing.

[Person of Color]

SteamOS sucks. There's a reason when Windows 10 started having fucked up Plug and Play a few weeks before launch, I didn't go Linux only. I bought a bigger 256GB SSD for Windows 7 and used my old 128GB for Fedora 21.

Linux isn't for games. So far I've been really surprised at how competent it is at workstation tasks. It used to choke years ago. Now it's excellent. Nicer to use than Windows IMO. KDE Plasma 5 is everything great about Windows 2000, Windows 7, and MacOS rolled into one bundle.

The fact Valve wants to create SteamOS is boggling. Only Nvidia has competent OpenGL drivers. This OS wasn't written for games.

[MusicallyInspired]

They created it because Gabe hates Microsoft and Windows. What this will effectively create, however, is a new "console" that hardware and game developers alike will want to take part in working for. They've already made Steam boxes running SteamOS with various manufacturers and more will come, that will bring the bigwigs like nVidia and Radeon in there eventually if not already. It's inevitable, in my opinion. This will create more demand for quality software and drivers on Linux where once there was none. Give it time.

[Rapture Rising]

MusicallyInspired, on 01 August 2015 - 01:54 PM, said:

They created it because Gabe hates Microsoft and Windows.

Didn't Gabe also hate Sony and Playstation?

[Person of Color]

MusicallyInspired, on 01 August 2015 - 01:54 PM, said:

Give it time.

Said the doctor to the AIDS patient.

[Inspector Lagomorf]

Rapture Rising, on 01 August 2015 - 09:16 PM, said:

Didn't Gabe also hate Sony and Playstation?

The big guy has plenty of hate to go round.

[Person of Color]

He's still mad at McDonald's for making the McRib a seasonal item. And don't even get him started on the McDLT. That's his own personal holocaust.

GABE IS FAT. GABE IS FAT. GABE IS FAT. THAT'S ANOTHER 3 YEARS.

[Mblackwell]

SteamOS is made to be used for a living room box, and not much else. Yes it continually optimized for gaming tasks, but the entire idea is that you can do absolutely everything with a controller and without having to drop to any kind of desktop or command line (you can force it to if you want to do some kooky shit, but that's not what it's for). Unfortunately at the moment things like Netflix only work via some hacks (although they are simple, eg: a script that just installs Chrome and writes some .desktop files).

So the entire experience is really just "plug in some shit and play games and browse on my tv".

As for games that work, there are a lot of native titles (about half of my library) and most of the others will work in Wine (flawlessly in many cases) but I couldn't say how you'd screw around with that in SteamOS (I don't run SteamOS). What I will say is to just wait on SteamOS. In the fall there will be more titles launching and the production version of the OS.

Tea Monster seems confused: An OS isn't a PC. Steam Machines are custom form factor PCs with SteamOS installed, but SteamOS is an open source OS you can install right now if you want. But it's not something that you should necessarily install for everyday use. That's why there are other Linux flavors, and Windows, and Mac too*!

*please don't use mac

[Tea Monster]

Tea Monster is not confused, thank you. I have been considering installing Steam OS on a spare box so I can play around with it. By necessity, it would also have to be a family server, as I only have one spare box to dedicate to this function. Why you would buy a dedicated Steambox (Alienwares is nearly 800 smackers) when you have a spare PC lying around with a reasonable graphics card baffles me.

[Mblackwell]

In the US the Alienware Steam Machine is $450 and comes with the Steam Controller (which is $50 alone). It has a smaller form factor than a console.

You buy it because you want to buy something that "just works" (like when you buy a console) and has a nice form factor. It's not marketed to people that want to build something themselves.

[MusicallyInspired]

Or people that don't have a desktop worth using. That's my point. This isn't necessarily for people who are already gaming on the PC. It's for people who aren't.

[MrBlackCat]

Mblackwell, on 03 August 2015 - 08:48 AM, said:

<snip>

You buy it because you want to buy something that "just works" (like when you buy a console) and has a nice form factor. It's not marketed to people that want to build something themselves.

This ^^

Anyone who has dealt with computer software which controls its hardware for compatibility purposes knows the value of this.
For tinkerers, gaming PC's are great... for people who want something that "just works" Windows PC's are generally not a good choice.


MrBlackCat

[Duke of Hazzard]

The in-home streaming gives you more choices. You can play in the living room or, if you so desire, in your home office.

I want to try streaming out because I'm having neck problems playing at my desk. Around 1 hour after I start playing FPSes my neck hurts and it becomes annoying to play.

I think that "streamlining" the PC experience is a great move, for time reasons. I gave up modding games because I just wanted to play the game rather than spend time tinkering with it.

[Balls of Steel Forever]

A PC build company decided

Quote

that we will not offer Steam OS because we believe that a system that boots directly into Steam Big Picture mode coupled with an available Steam Controller already offers a seamless Steam experience within Windows,

Full Article:
Gameinformer: Origin PC Decides Against Steam OS For Its Steam Machines

[Mblackwell]

Booting into Steam Big Picture Mode isn't the same as having an OS that requires no setup that can't be done through the BPM interface, is completely usable with just a controller (never requires a mouse and keyboard for any tasks), has little to no overhead, and its window manager is designed to smoothly transition between the BPM interface and your game.

Additionally, any hardware you plug into it (generally) works out of the box with no setup, including replacement parts.

Games running on SteamOS have the additional benefit of being built to run entirely using the Steam Runtime, which means that a piece of installed software that's marked as working with SteamOS requires no additional software installation. No DirectX/.NET/etc setups required.

Spoiler

You can also set the system to allow you to drop to a GNOME desktop and set up the Debian package manager and have a fully featured desktop as well, so you're not limited in that way if that's a concern.

Spoiler

And for those wondering about games that aren't compatible, boo hoo! I have 192 games on Steam, 99 of which are native to Linux/SteamOS, and most of the rest either have Linux/SteamOS versions releasing in the next year, binaries available from their website, or can be hacked to run via Wine.

[MusicallyInspired]

Again, it's for people who don't use computers and won't ever use any other applications, who are gamers, who want access to games that aren't on consoles (or even just for the better graphics), and want a similar experience to a console interface without all the overhead of a massive operating system such as Windows.

If a company doesn't want to build a Steam machine with SteamOS they're just after more money so they can charge for all the Windows installations/keys. SteamOS is free. Even for system builders, if I'm not mistaken. Or they're just lazy.

[Balls of Steel Forever]

My Opinion on Steam OS:

Spoiler

Firstly,
Steam OS loses all of the advantages of a console,
no game is going to be publicly released and funded that's specific to a steam machine build composition.
So there's no optimizations for that specific machine to prolong its lifespan.

along with the system not being tailored API wise to run harmoniously
therefore not having better performance than a machine with windows OS.
(both of them having worse performance then a console with the same specs)

Making a steam machine, in my opinion not a console.

Secondly,

there is already the ability to use a game controller
as a mouse and keyboard for all possible functions on windows.
(W/ an origin omega PC this function is already built in)

Along with being able to boot(startup) into
steam big picture mode on a windows PC
just like the steam OS.

(missing programs can easily be filled in
with some fork of linux used instead of Steam OS)

Thirdly,
Windows is really easy to deal with and handle,
when installing games and similar programs.
I don't see much of a problem here personally.

Also,
I have decided my opinion in the previous post is void,
(not this posts opinion)
along with having changed my mind somewhat...
due to it being free, therefore it can't really misinform consumers.
(other then a steam machine misinforming consumers it's a console, in my opinion)
Unless a Steam OS PC is priced the same or higher
as it's windows equivalent.
(given that you can format your hard drive to run
steam OS for free of charge and windows cost $99)
Along with seeing that one of the benefits of Steam OS is that it's another option,
which is always good for the consumer.*
Also I got to learn summarizing an opinion in a few words isn't a good idea.
Sorry for that.

*except in the case of shovelware

Just to be clear:

Spoiler

I did not state steam os is shovelware,
I believe
Steam OS is not shovelware, it provides a service
that may or may not fulfill the wants of a
large or small percentage of the population.

Shovelware however has no chance of fulfilling any wants.
(besides of those who want shovelware)

[Mblackwell]

SteamOS and Steam Machines fulfill a desired niche to be able to partake in most of the benefits of PC gaming with as few downsides as possible. Part of the reason consoles are enticing isn't just exclusive games (or else why would PS4/Xbox One sell units at this point) but rather the feel of the ecosystem and the ability to plug the unit in and it and all games for it "just work". Additionally when your hardware does fail you always have a point of contact.

The machines that run SteamOS are basically guaranteed to work fully even if you modify the hardware, and the manufacturers provide a high level of support. SteamOS allows Valve to guarantee everything will run as intended with no hassle on the part of the user. It also gives them and consumers another avenue to play and purchase games, even without Steam itself (the Steam Runtime is freely available) and avoids the necessity for consumers, OEMs, developers, etc to pay Microsoft for the privilege of doing business.

Part of the reason for the somewhat soft launch of all of the Steam hardware and OS is because Valve isn't nearly done (and probably never will be). They are focused on constant iterative improvements. What we see next year should be even better.

As for performance: It's hard to get the same performance as in Windows when AMD and Nvidia program workarounds for games in their driver guaranteeing they get a fast path, including rewriting/replacing shaders wholesale. Hopefully Vulkan and DX12 help mitigate this nonsense, since then if it's slow it just means your programming sucked.

[Balls of Steel Forever]

Mblackwell, on 13 November 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:

the ability to plug the unit in and it and all games for it "just work".

The problem is, with a PC that's not a specific, specialized unit that developers can use to make their game
(like a console)
that can't happen.
Some games won't work, due to hardware capabilities
(just like PC)
(which yes can be easily upgraded/fixed, but that isn't free of charge)
So stating you plug the unit in and it "just works"
is not 100% correct.
You'll still have to fiddle with settings,
still have to replace your PC parts every 5 or so years to keep up to date.

The problem I'm trying to get at here, is that it's not a PC
and it's not a console
(although it's trying very hard to be one)
it's somewhere in the middle.

Really poor analogy warning:

Spoiler

It's Hillary Clinton,
trying way too hard to be display herself as a liberal,
or a populist
when she is neither.
And well I don't like Hillary Clinton.
Because her ideals are based off of
political expediency.
Nothing more, Nothing less.

I prefer Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul,
total opposites
but you know,
at least they know who they are.

I just don't like the middle, probably, not my preference.
However I think that more competition, no matter with what Steam OS is competing with
is a good thing. For me and everyone else, no matter how much I personally don't like it.

The fact that it couldn't have been a console
(due to steams hugely popular pre-established pc userbase)
kind of saddens me a little bit.

Because a Steam console is something I would buy.
(the valve exclusives...)

To Address Console Exclusives:
I bought a PS4 because there was a glimmer of hope in a new Twisted Metal game, a glimmer of a chance of a risky exclusive in a debt ridden company.
This is the only reason I own a console.

[Tea Monster]

I have a machine with that will play PC games and 'just works' - it's called a PC. If you want to play games in your living room while sat on your couch, you are going to have to use a controller - which defeats a big part of PC gaming. I don't see why this is such a radical, or even necessary departure from having an XBox or PS in your living room.

[MusicallyInspired]

PC exclusives. Also, free multiplayer. That's a big one I forgot.

[Duke of Hazzard]

Tea Monster, on 14 November 2015 - 11:51 AM, said:

I have a machine with that will play PC games and 'just works' - it's called a PC. If you want to play games in your living room while sat on your couch, you are going to have to use a controller - which defeats a big part of PC gaming. I don't see why this is such a radical, or even necessary departure from having an XBox or PS in your living room.

PC has much bigger library and, in theory, backwards compatibility.

I don't see how controller defeats the purpose of PC gaming. The only genres in which keyboard and mouse have a clear upper hand are FPS (and only because of the mouse... any PC shooter that requires mild jumping around sucks on keyboard), strategy (both real-time and turn-based), and MOBA. Racing is best played with wheel but controllers are a better compromise than keyboard for sim racing and are superior in arcade racers.

[Mblackwell]

Using the Steam Controller for a few days it seems to work as a decent keyboard and mouse replacement. Much better than a normal gamepad. The controller even lets you set Mouse Joystick so you can get mouse-like control in games that otherwise have gamepad controls and don't allow you to use two input types simultaneously.

In Fallout New Vegas I was able to set up mode shifting (you hold one button and it changes the function of all of others) so that I can get all of the quick select slots accessible very quickly.

The way the controller works it opens up basically the entire library of PC games no matter the genre for couch gaming.

As for Just Works, literally you go to the store, buy an Alienware Steam Machine (for example), plug it into your TV, log into your Wi-Fi, log into your Steam account, and start downloading/playing games. You don't have to know anything about PCs and you never have to see the underpinnings of the OS. You also don't have to deal with task management or additional software.

[MrBlackCat]

I don't use Steam as I don't care for the concept of not owning games in the same manner you do with PS2 and back era games... but I am not really a modern PC gamer. I bought my PS3 so I could play Duke Nukem Forever, for example.

I am going to have to do some calling out here though... with this statement, there is no gray area... Windows based PC's have never "just worked" when compared to gaming consoles... period. They don't... even if "yours does", the vast majority simply do not. So feel free to say "yours does", but "it just works" doesn't go with Windows based PC's and never has.

While there might be some argument for "new PC's" that will come on and work out of the box, if you start gaming, or in my case, networking relative to machine controls, you learn quickly that "change" is the enemy of Windows Based PC's. Again, this is NOT an opinion, this is a fact. If you look at mass computer usage in big business, the most successful ones control VERY tightly hardware type/brand along with update deployment control and prison level control of many windows settings. In other words, the less you change it, the more stable it remains. Unlike the average user PC, which is in constant change with any of 100 programs being updated in a given quarter. The whole concept of reinstalling the OS because of this or that issue is unacceptable...

The whole Windows reliability argument is like people saying they owned convertibles that don't leak, or Corvairs that never leaked oil etc etc... individual cases under unusual or non-standard circumstances will be the only exceptions. I am not saying there aren't instances or sets of configurations that work reasonably well for groups of Windows based PC's in very narrow bands of application. I won't argue that Windows has improved in reliability since Windows 95 first came out... and of course, there have been improvements in things like hard crash frequency and other areas... but they are just that, improvements. Is like Windows is up to "poor". Sometimes being first, sets it up so you don't have to be very good.

With that said... those of us "here" on forums are likely far more computer savvy than we realize... I generally exclude myself from this group because I work in the field of computer/networking... but the point is that when I help the elderly or anyone you might say is not compute savvy, use Windows based PC's, it becomes painfully obvious just how deficient Windows has always been. I am migrating all my casual users to Chromebooks because of most of my clients requirements... and so far, they actually do "just work". No failures... these things make Windows look like a joke, at least in their area... even trying to be fair to MS/Win for trying to "do everything" relative to compatibility and Chrome just being a browser OS. I sometimes call ChromeBooks "the consoles" of the PC world.

If you don't agree, there are plenty of corporate forums that have the data of mass Windows computer usage you can go discuss it with... no need to do it here, as your argument will be invalid at the individual level. If you have good luck with the few PC's you have owned in your life, yay... but that is not often the case. I run into many people that stop using their PC because it has so many problems crashing and slowing down etc... they just get another one. (WTH?) I guess they are just not computer savvy... BUT I have not seen this situation with game consoles... yet.

While I don't have corporate level data to reference on game consoles, I have yet to reinstall my game consoles OS and still have not encountered a single driver issue with any console I own, nor have I ever heard of this... if you have, I am guessing you are again in that minority of people who don't have to tinker with your PC on a regular basis also.

I love my PC's of which I have many running on DOS, 3.11, 95, 98,Xp, and Win7... but the idea that they have ever been reliable, or user friendly, or just not required screwing with when compared to a game console, is the most hollow argument I have ever heard.

MrBlackCat

[Balls of Steel Forever]

I'm about to do something that's very opinionated and probably pretty dumb:

Spoiler

Consumer Convenience (IMO) and compatibility:

Windows ----- least convenient, most compatible

Mac ----- more convenient, less compatible

My opinion of The Gray Area:
] -Chrome OS even more convenient, even less compatible } State
] -Steam OS, even more convenient, even less compatible } In Flux
Not the Gray Area

Consoles ---- most convenient, least compatible


-Linux, Jack of all trades, master of none
(and yes I realize Steam OS and Chrome OS are forks of Linux)

Chrome and Steam OS are similar, in the fact that they both lack a serious amount.
and are made to streamline certain aspects of things.

Steam OS lacking non gaming programs, (made to streamline gaming)
and Chromebooks lack the horsepower, consumer support and developer support to play triple AAA titles (made to streamline basic computer necessities)

However for casual users Chromebook has the advantage due to them not needing that gaming software,
along with not needing to worry about there computer being outdated
as fast due to updated software gaming requirements.
(as Chromebooks are mainly, as I understand, for basic computer necessities)

And for gamers, and for those who use Steam OS compatible 3D editing programs,
Steam OS has the edge.........
due to the superior ability of having the horsepower, developer, and consumer support to play triple AAA titles.

Both support ways of getting third party software...
(store/download place wise)
also please correct me if I'm wrong here
(I don't know which is better at getting third party software)
(separates from consoles)

And again, practically quoting myself here so...

Spoiler

Firstly,
Steam OS And Chrome OS lose all of the advantages of a console,
no game is going to be publicly released and funded that's specific to a steam machine or Chrome OS build composition.
So there's no optimizations for that specific machine to prolong its lifespan.

along with the system not being tailored API wise to run harmoniously
therefore not having better performance than a machine with windows OS.
(both of them having worse performance then a console with the same specs)

Making a steam machine, in my opinion not a console.
(also applies to Chromebook)

Although this is not chrome OS's goal...
So this statement doesn't really matter for it

So to finally answer the question

Quote

When will SteamOS be worth it for PC gamers?

Never (if you mean windows gamers, because changing an OS will not be convenient for traditional or savvy PC gamers,
and because of possible reasons seen in my next post)

for those just wanting to play PC games
(and who weigh convenience over performance)
(at least for now)
December 13, 2013

[Balls of Steel Forever]

SteamOS gaming performs significantly worse than Windows, Ars analysis shows:

Quote

Cross-platform 3D games face 21- to 58-percent frame rate dip on same hardware

Ars Technica

Spoiler

*separated out from my previous post because this is not my opinion, and therefore a separate entity,
spurring its own possible opinions.

[Mblackwell]

Already addressed it in post #21. Anyway in apps designed for GL from the ground up you get performance parity. For other titles the peformance varies depending on the quality of the port - if it was just a simple shim or not and for titles like Shadow of Mordor there's a lot of features that haven't been pushed much by the Linux driver stack until recently.

Note that they didn't specify their build setup, aren't running on any modern hardware (not even an i3), and aren't even using the latest update of SteamOS. From my own experience titles like The Witcher 2 perform exactly the same as on Windows at this point, and performance of other popular titles is the same or within spitting distance enough that you don't have to alter the settings to get a stable 60fps.

Even anecdotally the app they used for testing CPU perf gives different results if you compile it with a new compiler stack and different optimizations. There was confusion about the article from Linux users on a few sites who saw the exact opposite results in their own testing.

And honestly, the whole article is a bit off from the perspective of the target market: If you buy a Steam Machine you can play all compatible games including current titles like Dying Light or Alien Isolation at better-than-console settings, you get more variety of titles for lower prices, and you never have to rebuy your games or get locked-in to your one piece of hardware.

If you're happy with your Windows PC that's fine.