Steam Machines

[cmdrdredd]

Are there RF Xbox controllers? Just run an HDMI cable and use an RF controller and it's living room gaming!

I've tried to game on a projector thinking it would be awesome, but I get used to the 120hz monitor I game on. It was pretty painful. I can see the appeal, but the problem with SteamOS gaming is if you're playing BF4 won't you be playing against other PC gamers? Dual Trackpad abortion controller vs. keyboard mouse users are going to lead to a very frustrating Steambox player I would think.

Yeah it wouldn't be good for any competition.

 

[Doppel]

Not much love for Steam at the Steam OS thread:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2358745

The main defense of the entire concept I keep seeing is "It's Valve, they rock and always get it right.". I don't see many praising it by itself.

 

[mizzou]

Are there RF Xbox controllers? Just run an HDMI cable and use an RF controller and it's living room gaming!

I've tried to game on a projector thinking it would be awesome, but I get used to the 120hz monitor I game on. It was pretty painful. I can see the appeal, but the problem with SteamOS gaming is if you're playing BF4 won't you be playing against other PC gamers? Dual Trackpad abortion controller vs. keyboard mouse users are going to lead to a very frustrating Steambox player I would think.

pcs are well capable of playing in the living room without steam or with steam anyway....i have an hdmi cable running to mine.

the difference will be what can steamOS do differently, and right now it seems like less multi purpose ability via windows for a cheaper OS that will run games faster....

not too long ago.....or long ago...gamers would preferably load a game in DOS for a solid fps boost. steamOS may satisfy those old urges.

SteamOS isnt about "now" anyway, its about how microsoft may eventually change the landcsape amd negatively affect steam in the way we use it today.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Well, I don't know about running faster and how that's a concern. I am already running almost every game out there above 60fps at 1080p. A TV can't benefit from 120hz refresh rates like a PC monitor. I run 1440p though so I see a little bit of a hit from the resolution.

 

[mizzou]

Well, I don't know about running faster and how that's a concern. I am already running almost every game out there above 60fps at 1080p. A TV can't benefit from 120hz refresh rates like a PC monitor. I run 1440p though so I see a little bit of a hit from the resolution.

overall it's better for games. Since you can play games at high FPS anyway, there is no overhead. This means programmers could add additional AI, complex things, or bump up the graphics.

If the min specs are lowered, meaning that you average joe now also gets regular high FPS, we might see some impressive things done in games.

 

[Lil Frier]

The minimum specs seem to be really low as it is, so I don't know what you mean here. One of the boxes that was announced apparently runs an A6 CPU (which I imagine is the Richland APU with the GPU torn out, one of those Athlons), and it's put with a 270 for graphics. I'm not sure how you could talk about really lowering it from there, because I don't think I'd trust an R7 GPU for a Steam Machine.

 

[cmdrdredd]

overall it's better for games. Since you can play games at high FPS anyway, there is no overhead. This means programmers could add additional AI, complex things, or bump up the graphics.

If the min specs are lowered, meaning that you average joe now also gets regular high FPS, we might see some impressive things done in games.

There is overhead...the OS needs drivers and an API. This still isn't a console like PS4 and XB1, it's Linux with a different overlay.