SteamOS Will Not Have Exclusive Games

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

lacktheknack:

kiri2tsubasa:
No exclusives...so absolutely fuck all reason to get it.

You mean, no reason for YOU to get it.

If you don't care about shifting focus from Windows to Linux, that's fine. Stick with Windows. I, however, cannot WAIT to ditch Windows permanently, and having a really major company toss their hat into the Linux ring is exactly what the doctor ordered.

EDIT: A lot of people seem to completely misunderstand what a "Steam Machine" even is. -__-

I applaud this news! It is VERY good that Valve wont support this shitty practice of exclusivity!
HOWEVER, I can NOT go for a STEAM OS unless it is a Dual Boot. First of all, I cant be certain the system is backwards compatible. Second, I need something that DOES WORK as well. Most PCs here use Windows, so I need to use Windows as well. Also, it does seem like this OS is going to be only good for multimedia and not even be as capable as Linux :P.

If only MS and Valve settled their differences and Windows 9 came with a modified Steam OS mode made for gaming and still had all the emulation and backwards compatibility :P . Alas my dreams

kiri2tsubasa:
No exclusives...so absolutely fuck all reason to get it.

No exclusives... from Valve.

But Valve did say that small developers may only have the resources to make a game for one platform, and that platform could be SteamOS. Plus there is the possibility that other developers may release for SteamOS first, then other OS's later.

Desert Punk:
Because not everyone has a PC that can run games that well? Some that dont think they are smart enough to build their own PCs?

Ok, here are some valid points I have been waiting on and not just the "OMGZ VALVE" sentiment surrounding this things. So the console is being sold as a platform that will run the current backlog of PC games. It is being sold to the casual PC market and non-PC gamers. These are interesting pros but it adds nothing to the market in the grand scheme of things. This is what baffles me. People act like it is this revolutionary thing and it is most decidedly not.

And dear god, you couldnt be more wrong. Neither of them connect to the internet...At all, neither have microtransactions... at all... and neither have advertisments in the slightest. They are completely free and are fun, and pretty damn awesome

Ok, now that you have called me out...

Dwarf Fortress is funded through donations so it does not have ads. It is not, however, a fully completed project so you have a "free beta" essentially. The majority of the data mining would then be bugs, glitches, and player strategy to refine the game. And the game is on your PC so unless you physically disconnect the internet don't assume it is not sending information.

Aurora is funded with the dev's online poker winnings so again no ads. That is about all the info I could find so I'll just assume I'm right because I'm too lazy to care.

you are just too cynical.

There is no such thing as "too" cynical, and I prefer to call myself a "realist" anyway.

Mromson:
Your negativity is baffling.

To be completely honest I get really edgy when people flock to Valve because... Valve. In this very thread I have seen them be called, among other kind names, the "good guy greg of the industry" and that really pisses me off. What have they done to earn that? They said they were going to do HL in an episodic manner to release cheaper games faster but in order to do that the games had to be shorter. We, as the community, were ok with that so we gave it a go. One outta three aint bad, I guess.

And consoles are just PCs too. PCs that run exclusives. Nothing more.

This is true, but what I was trying to show was at least they bring something unique to the table (the exclusives) to make themselves competitive in the market. Like I said I do want exclusivity to go away, but until it goes away uniformly then those with exclusives will always be more competitive in the market.

lacktheknack:
Because Wine is terrible?

Because native support is infinitely better than non-native support?

Why would I want to hack something into half-working when Valve's push into Linux will cause a rush of native support? These are exciting times, and I don't buy any argument that says "But it kind of works already!"

So Valve is going to recode all those games from the ground up to run on Linux? Or are they just gong to put a program in the OS that, how did you say it? "...to hack something into half-working..." Will the OS bring more developers to support Linux? I don't know, but if I were a betting man I would say no. The steam machine and the OS have almost no market weight because other than the Valve-lovers and Linux supporter no one else has a reason to get it. Limited market share is limited.

I can't speak for Aurora, but in terms of Dwarf Fortress, which doesn't even have an EULA, nope. You're wrong.

See above.

TheEvilCheese:
You can't get a large amount of games working on Linux. Especially working well.

So how will Valve get them to work on their OS?

u can play require an ungodly amount of tinkering, in short it just isn't feasible right now. If valve can show decent market penetration with their OS big publishers will be far more likely to make games that run on Linux and OSX, allowing more people to play games with a lower initial investment which is a good thing no matter how you slice it. If you're happy with windows then the steam OS isn't for you, but for those of us who aren't (and there are many) it is an interesting proposition.

It isn't about being more happy with one or the other I simply can't see the SM or the OS bringing anything awe inspiring enough to the table to have nearly as big of a market impact as you seem to. I just don't think it is competitive enough to make a dent, let alone thrive, in the current market.

front you're simply wrong. Have you never looked into Linux based operating systems? You wont pay anything for them, there isn't really an EULA because it all falls under GPL http://www.gnu.org/licenses/quick-guide-gplv3.html. And Dwarf Fortress (as mentioned) is completely free. That's it. You can donate to the creator if you want to, but it's a free game in the purest sense of the word.

See above.

Ultratwinkie:
Living room PCs are rare, and unless you want to deal with falcon northwest for an overpriced shoebox, Valve is the best bet. Not that it would work well since its actually meant for LAN parties. Falcon's "Steam box" doesn't have the OS to put it in the living room easily, its just a desktop computer that you can move around.

If you don't want your PC in the living room or don't want to stream PC games to the living room, its not for you.

You skillfully sidestepped my initial question. Why not just use a PC? I know several people who have their whole setup of consoles, media players, and their PC in their living room. Hell, the only reason all of my shit isn't in my living room is because I have a bigger tv in my room. I'm just not seeing what the SM or the OS could possibly bring to the table that a legit PC couldn't do better.

Yup, you sure got 'em good!
image

Braedan:
Jesus man, what are you complaining about?
A free OS specifically made to run games?
More options?
FREE options?

If you don't think there's anything good to come out of free stuff dedicated to your hobby, then fine, just don't fuckin use it. Your Windows PC isn't going to stop working when SteamOS comes out.

Well welcome to the middle of a conversation that didn't involve you. So because you jumped in the middle I'll give you the short version. It brings nothing unique to the table and as such I am asking what is the point. It has next to no market weight to make a difference and a PC can do everything this thing is supposed to do.

Sarge034:

You said STEAM OS data mines you that does nothing.

I said its an insurance policy for PC gaming.

Steam boxes are not just bought. They are made too. Any PC can be a steam box. The OS is there to turn a regular PC into a steambox.

You don't need to plop down money like a console. You can build one yourself, but if you want a prebuilt one you can do that too.

Its for people who want to bring PC gaming to the living room, and yes people want that too. The OS is also light and optimized for gaming, so it will beat any windows computer in gaming efficiency.

Which in turn lowers the bar of power you need because of those optimizations. Its an optimized OS that is free. It helps you play games. That alone should be enough reason to ditch windows once it gets native support.

I don't want exclusive games. I want my steam library, my full library. THATS the make or break. At first I assumed it was there, but people keep making me question that. I don't see why more people aren't talking about that. I don't need two steam libraries. I want the games I have but on my big TV in a way more like a console. (Plus steam sales).

First off, for the love of god only post the portions of the reply that were for you.

Ultratwinkie:
You said STEAM OS data mines you that does nothing.

Ok. SHOW ME IT DOES NOT! You can't because while it might be based on Linux you don't know if or how it was modified. Linux can be used to undermine your security and slip past your firewalls (ie Linux on the PS3) so even if there is no first party data mining show me proof that the system can not be used for third parties to data mine you.

I said its an insurance policy for PC gaming.

And I said it did nothing a PC couldn't do, but I'll play ball with this one. The steam OS is an insurance policy for PC gaming is it? You said that MS could block steam if it didn't pay them money. So will MS games and services magically work on the steam OS or do ya think they might lock them out of that too? And is steam the last bastion of hope for free PC gaming? Cus last I checked there was GoG and the like dealing in games without ANY DRM and make no mistake Steam is DRM.

Sarge034:
First off, for the love of god only post the portions of the reply that were for you.

Ultratwinkie:
You said STEAM OS data mines you that does nothing.

Ok. SHOW ME IT DOES NOT! You can't because while it might be based on Linux you don't know if or how it was modified. Linux can be used to undermine your security and slip past your firewalls (ie Linux on the PS3) so even if there is no first party data mining show me proof that the system can not be used for third parties to data mine you.

I said its an insurance policy for PC gaming.

And I said it did nothing a PC couldn't do, but I'll play ball with this one. The steam OS is an insurance policy for PC gaming is it? You said that MS could block steam if it didn't pay them money. So will MS games and services magically work on the steam OS or do ya think they might lock them out of that too? And is steam the last bastion of hope for free PC gaming? Cus last I checked there was GoG and the like dealing in games without ANY DRM and make no mistake Steam is DRM.

Microsoft puts it games on steam. However, its store front would only be on Windows because they build that stuff in. It would only work if there was no other alternative, the store assumes its the only game in town. The MS store won't be on mac, or linux.

They want to restart Games for windows live. Once its back on, they will try to force it down everyone's throat like last time. If it wasn't Windows only, they wouldn't call it "Games for WINDOWS live."

And prove it doesn't data mine? Really? Proving a negative? Prove to me you didn't pirate a game. Prove to me you didn't murder or rape anymore.

The creator of Linux hates big business. He hates people trying to corrupt his OS. He hates big business enough to avoid big name brands in his personal life. He would have stepped in if it was shady. Instead, he allowed it.

Prove your accusations. Otherwise don't waste people's time with baseless claims.

and guess what, windows can be used to slip past your security and data mine you too. Windows doesn't block third party data miners, nothing can. Every time you go on the internet they data mine you and record everything you do. Don't want to get data mined? get off the internet, because everything is recorded and mined by everyone. Especially sites linked to facebook, which is a lot of sites.

In fact, Firefox's own lightbeam shows that the Escapist alone has 20+ third party data miners if firefox's program is to be believed. This is nothing compared to other sites.

And GOG saving PC gaming? Microsoft will cut GOG out too with its certification process and windows store. Haven't you been reading anything I posted? GOG doesn't have the pull nor the ability to make a third party OS or try to push a 3rd party OS. Only steam does because of its size. GOG won't save you. The only reason steam is trying is because AMD and Nvidia are backing it up. Once windows certifies games, and locks out anything that isn't, GOG loses everything. GOG won't be able to claim its DRM free because everything on windows would be DRM due to the certification.

Its lack of DRM doesn't help anything because windows applies that DRM regardless if the game has it. The certification process is DRM tacked onto everything. Nothing will work until microsoft gives an OK.

That is what PC gaming is afraid of. That is what Nvidia and AMD are afraid of. Microsoft writes the OS, they have the power. No one else will save you from Microsoft's DRM because they brow beat you into upgrading by locking games to the new OS. They can morph windows into a giant DRM that discourages competition with microsoft itself.

With linux, you don't have that problem. You aren't even forced to use steam OS, you can use regular linux. The more you post the more I think you don't know anything about what STEAM os is trying to accomplish.

Sarge034:
Why bother? What does this add to my experience?

You keep bringing up this point, yet I fail to see how exclusive titles bring anything "new". An exclusive title is an artificial limitation meant to force players to buy specific hardware, not only does it NOT bring anything new, but it actually takes freedom of choice AWAY from the consumer.

What this brings to the table is the possibility of OS/Hardware manufacturers focusing on making the best products they can, without relying on exclusivity deals (money) to artificially boost sales.

Someone mentioned the idea of a "one console future". The only "one console" future worth having is one where, no matter what physical console a consumer buys, she can play ANY GAME SHE CHOOSES on it.

Additionally, this means that developers won't be tied to an specific hardware/OS, and thus won't sink if the Hardware/OS manufacturers mishandle their product (as has happened countless times, and not only on gaming... Ask anyone who adopted J# before Microsoft pulled the plug).

If Valve keeps it's word on this, they might just have earned my support, both as consumer and (hobbyist) developer.

lacktheknack:

kiri2tsubasa:
No exclusives...so absolutely fuck all reason to get it.

You mean, no reason for YOU to get it.

If you don't care about shifting focus from Windows to Linux, that's fine. Stick with Windows. I, however, cannot WAIT to ditch Windows permanently, and having a really major company toss their hat into the Linux ring is exactly what the doctor ordered.

EDIT: A lot of people seem to completely misunderstand what a "Steam Machine" even is. -__-

Wow, someone who understands!

Even if I don't initially install SteamOS, I'm glad that it exists as an option if MS goes even more retarded post-Ballmer.

Captcha: it's super effective (lets hope so Captcha)

Charcharo:

HOWEVER, I can NOT go for a STEAM OS unless it is a Dual Boot. First of all, I cant be certain the system is backwards compatible. Second, I need something that DOES WORK as well.

Whats this IF, you can dual boot OSX, and apple don't want you to, but you still can. The problems with dual booting has more commonly been hardware related than software, and since all the steam boxes effectively use off the shelf parts for PCs that shouldnt be an issue.

Charcharo:
Most PCs here use Windows, so I need to use Windows as well. Also, it does seem like this OS is going to be only good for multimedia and not even be as capable as Linux :P.

Not as capable as Linux, please go back to the start, engage your brain and then read even a small part of the info which will tell you that SteamOS is effectively a linux distro, so being not capable as linux would mean its not as capable as itself....... Theres been nothing to suggest that this distro will lock out anything, only that it will have features designed to make it work better with a TV/controller style arrangement and nothing to suggest that a more traditional desktop mode wont be present, almost like they are replicating the current steam options, just built into the OS.....

I do plan to dual boot it (am even hoping that they fix it for dual booters to be able to have 95+% of a games files shared between OSs so I can access games avaliable on both on both without duplicate installs).

I don't share quite the gloom of others about MS plans for windows, I cant see them locking things down more than OSX is, and that still lets me install 3rd party programs from sources other than their own store, which OSX has had far longer than windows has.

A move to cross platformal compeiters to DirectX as being pushed by AMD at least is only good for consumers. The reason wine et al tend to have issues on osx and linux is often due to emulation of directx and other MS protocals. PC gaming (and by that I use PC to refer to OSX, Windows and Linux machines) these days mostly needs the shift to platform agnostic protocals like OpenGL for it to become platmform agnostic itself.

Sarge034:

Desert Punk:
Because not everyone has a PC that can run games that well? Some that dont think they are smart enough to build their own PCs?

Ok, here are some valid points I have been waiting on and not just the "OMGZ VALVE" sentiment surrounding this things. So the console is being sold as a platform that will run the current backlog of PC games. It is being sold to the casual PC market and non-PC gamers. These are interesting pros but it adds nothing to the market in the grand scheme of things. This is what baffles me. People act like it is this revolutionary thing and it is most decidedly not.

We dont know if this is revolutionary or not, its not released yet. But Valve is a well known name in gaming, so they may make much more of an impact on the scene than someone else, and we dont have hard figures on the technology in the boxes yet or its price point. If it is on par or cheaper than the newer consoles, has better hardware (Highly unlikely but a possibility) then it could make a huge impact with gamers that only have consoles but not PCs.

Overall, it has a lot of potential, but we wont know how well it will turn that potential into reality until the thing gets into the hands of people later on down the road.

Charcharo:
HOWEVER, I can NOT go for a STEAM OS unless it is a Dual Boot. First of all, I cant be certain the system is backwards compatible. Second, I need something that DOES WORK as well. Most PCs here use Windows, so I need to use Windows as well. Also, it does seem like this OS is going to be only good for multimedia and not even be as capable as Linux :P.

Well the machines are going to be hackable and moddable, plus the OS itself will be freely available with the source code. Even if somehow the "official" Steam machines aren't capable of supporting a dual boot set-up there'd be nothing stopping you getting hold of any old standard Windows PC and putting the Steam OS on it to dual boot.

black_knight1337:

OT: I can't see why they wouldn't want to put something like Half Life 3 (or Left 4 Dead 3 or Portal 3 or Team Fortress 3) as an exclusive for either the SteamOS or their Steam Machines or at the very least having them as timed exclusives. Sure, they gain a bit of good will (Which I don't think they could possibly get more, on the Escapist anyway) but it puts both the SteamOS and the Steam Machines at an even greater risk of just failing completely. Exclusives was how they made Steam as dominating as it is now after all.

Isn't that obvious? Most of their consumer base are Windows users who might have need for Windows for games that aren't supported in SteamOS or other important software they need in their daily life. They don't earn anything by making people use SteamOS since it's a free OS that anyone can choose to download if they like Linux. By making Half-Life 3 SteamOS exclusive they may gain a larger user base, but they are preventing anyone who's uncomfortable making the shift from Windows to Linux from getting the game. It's never a sound business plan to reduce the amount of customers. They earn just as much from Windows versions sold and SteamOS versions sold.

Great for gamers, possibly not so much for Valve. I think both the Steam OS and Steam Machine will have to be that much better to make up for a 'feature' that all the other consoles will happily bring up when competing with it. But if it does manage that then maybe it will have a positive effect on the game industry, reducing or even eliminating the concept of exclusives over time.

As long as the price point is right I think I'll probably be getting some form of Steam product for next gen as they'r fast becoming the most exciting alternative to the current stale console market.

Sarge034:

Mromson:
Your negativity is baffling.

To be completely honest I get really edgy when people flock to Valve because... Valve. In this very thread I have seen them be called, among other kind names, the "good guy greg of the industry" and that really pisses me off. What have they done to earn that? They said they were going to do HL in an episodic manner to release cheaper games faster but in order to do that the games had to be shorter. We, as the community, were ok with that so we gave it a go. One outta three aint bad, I guess.

And consoles are just PCs too. PCs that run exclusives. Nothing more.

This is true, but what I was trying to show was at least they bring something unique to the table (the exclusives) to make themselves competitive in the market. Like I said I do want exclusivity to go away, but until it goes away uniformly then those with exclusives will always be more competitive in the market.

I don't think you've seen very much Valve flocking of any kind in this thread. This isn't just another player joining the Linux market, Valve is big (and rich) enough to make a significant impact on the future development of Linux - just on that merit alone, especially compared to the competition, you'd be hard pressed to do anything but praise them for it. You might not be aware of this, but having someone this big join in on the development of Linux is really a big deal - as they won't simply be porting over a OS, but also developing for it, something that helps ALL Linux distributors, not just Valve.

They've already created the OS, which means they've already put in significant contributions to various Linux drivers - whether or not that will end up breaking the issues with Linux will be determined later, but some work is already unquestionably done.

The main make or break point will be the interface, Linux has a major interface usability issue in every distro I've encountered, so if they can break the ice in that department then they might as well be holding on to a killer-app in and of itself. Exclusivity is nothing compared to that. There are plenty of games on the Xbox that I'd love to play, but the exclusive nature of the system prevents me from purchasing, as the investment simply isn't worth it for me, and no game on the PC runs better on an Xbox. But are you trying to tell us that you wouldn't play the latest games on SteamOS if said games performed better on said OS? Would you stick around with Windows if SteamOS provides a better user interface and usability?

it's the hope that SteamOS will provide a competition to Windows. Linux is already superior to Windows, it's just not as user-friendly. If Valve can make it user friendly, without locking it ala-Apple, then they'll do a considerable service to consumers worldwide, not just gamers.

I wasn't really expecting there to be any exclusives, at least any permanent ones. A couple of timed exclusives to launch the thing sure but it would be silly to expect Valve to ransom off some of their highly-anticipated-but-not-real games to try and sell a few more boxes.

Desert Punk:

Sarge034:

Desert Punk:
The point of the console is to be an alternative to other next gen consoles.

It may not have any that are steam OS exclusive, but there are MANY PC games that never make it to consoles that it will play that other consoles wont.

But you said it yourself... It plays PC games. You know what else plays PC games? PCs do. It is not an alternative to the "other" next gen consoles because the steam box is not a next gen console. It is a box running PC software to play the PC titles on your PC. Why not just hook up your computer to a big TV and link in a USB controller?

And yes some things are free, I suppose Dwarf Fortress, Aurora, ect all mine data to sell to other people?

As I can't be bothered to look up the EULAs for the titles you mentioned I will answer broadly. It is highly probably the software is data mining your activity, pushing microtractions (pay to win primarily), and/or slapping advertisements everywhere they don't belong. In short, yes.

As for Steam OS, naturally they will have their store front built in, so they will still be making money through the simplicity of clicking to buy a game, and the people who buy the steam box will likely buy a number of games through steam as well.

And this brings up the question again. If I can do the same thing and play the same games on my PC, what is the point?

Because not everyone has a PC that can run games that well? Some that dont think they are smart enough to build their own PCs?

And dear god, you couldnt be more wrong. Neither of them connect to the internet...At all, neither have microtransactions... at all... and neither have advertisments in the slightest. They are completely free and are fun, and pretty damn awesome, you are just too cynical.

And see my first part.

Not true. Dwarf Fortress has microtransactions. The only way you can get a hand crayon (pronounced "cran") drawing is to make a "donation". Only then will Tarn and his brother go to their grandma's house and sit around playing with crayons. Breaking out the wallet is also the only way to get a few ANSI characters and a story written by Tarn's brother about the characters. Dwarf Fortress pretty much invented microtransactions.

Charcharo:

lacktheknack:

kiri2tsubasa:
No exclusives...so absolutely fuck all reason to get it.

You mean, no reason for YOU to get it.

If you don't care about shifting focus from Windows to Linux, that's fine. Stick with Windows. I, however, cannot WAIT to ditch Windows permanently, and having a really major company toss their hat into the Linux ring is exactly what the doctor ordered.

EDIT: A lot of people seem to completely misunderstand what a "Steam Machine" even is. -__-

I applaud this news! It is VERY good that Valve wont support this shitty practice of exclusivity!
HOWEVER, I can NOT go for a STEAM OS unless it is a Dual Boot. First of all, I cant be certain the system is backwards compatible. Second, I need something that DOES WORK as well. Most PCs here use Windows, so I need to use Windows as well. Also, it does seem like this OS is going to be only good for multimedia and not even be as capable as Linux :P.

If only MS and Valve settled their differences and Windows 9 came with a modified Steam OS mode made for gaming and still had all the emulation and backwards compatibility :P . Alas my dreams

Two hard drives (or two partitions on the same hard drive) = dual boot. The OS really doesn't have much of a say about it. So you should be all set ;)

I hope they hook up with Mike Robertson (the guy who tried to make Linspire work). a) he deserves another chance given how hard he pushed Linspire, and b) if he can get Linspire that far on his own efforts, he'll definitely move SteamOS forward in the applications marketplace.

Steven Bogos:
He did, however, concede that small, independent studios who only have the resources to focus on one platform may inevitably make games that only run on SteamOS, "but that's a very different thing."

It's also what makes your title misleading and downright untrue. It should read:
"Valve will not make exclusive games or pay for exclusives for Steam OS". That's not the same thing as "there'll be no exclusives for Steam OS"

Yopaz:
Isn't that obvious? Most of their consumer base are Windows users who might have need for Windows for games that aren't supported in SteamOS or other important software they need in their daily life. They don't earn anything by making people use SteamOS since it's a free OS that anyone can choose to download if they like Linux. By making Half-Life 3 SteamOS exclusive they may gain a larger user base, but they are preventing anyone who's uncomfortable making the shift from Windows to Linux from getting the game. It's never a sound business plan to reduce the amount of customers. They earn just as much from Windows versions sold and SteamOS versions sold.

I like how you don't quote the part that addresses this. The thing is, Valve has already done exactly that before. When they launched Steam it excluded EVERYONE from both Counter-Strike: Source and Half Life 2. But did they have horrendous sales and fail completely? No, they sold millions and set Steam on track to becoming the dominating digital distribution service that it is today. The potential is there for the SteamOS along with their Steam Machines to do the same again, but it really does need some "killer apps" to get it there. And like I said, even just making them timed exclusives would do the trick and work out as a good middle ground.

Sarge034:
snip

Okay, you seem interested in a reason for the existance of such a creation as the steamOS and the steambox. Well, considering no one else seems to want to give a reason besides "Valve is God, trust in them," I'll try to give you a few examples for its existance. For the OS, many people, especially with this site, many people love Linux, or at least the concept of Linux, but just hate its lack of practicality, and so wish it had more practical uses, such as more games to play natively for it. They assume SteamOS will fix this, though that has yet to be seen. It's a safe bet with Valve, considering their sway in the industry, but it isn't a promise yet. As for the box, as I saw someone else say, it's for people that don't necessarily want to try and build their own PC, but still want to play PC games. Or, there might also be people that love consoles for their relaxed sort of play, but prefer the major concepts of having a PC, like the massive amounts of games or the flexibility of the system. As for why you specifically might want to buy that, you probably don't. And it's a product, some people will want it, which i feel is a bigger group than most think, but not everyone will want it. So I can't answer why you should buy it, only why a person might want to buy it if they see those features as what they want.

Sarge034:

And yes some things are free, I suppose Dwarf Fortress, Aurora, ect all mine data to sell to other people?

As I can't be bothered to look up the EULAs for the titles you mentioned I will answer broadly. It is highly probably the software is data mining your activity, pushing microtractions (pay to win primarily), and/or slapping advertisements everywhere they don't belong. In short, yes.

Sorry this little thing here caught my attention and it's something that needs to be corrected. These games don't have EULA's because they have been made from the ground up for anyone to play for free and the developers who make them live off of donations from the community. There is no agreements you have to sign or anything. Just download and play.

The developers have enough on their hands as it is creating the games without putting in some overly complicated system just for a little extra cash.

Also just because a game is free doesn't mean it's Pay to Win in the microtransaction area if it does have one. Take for example League of Legends there is no pay to win.

Also the point of the SteamOS is to create an OS that is specifically built for games. Windows isn't that. It's fucking terrible as far as OS's go but the reason why it is the primary OS is because it is the most successful which developers feel comfortable developing for. Tbh Windows is just the OS which is slightly less terrible then Mac.

Also since it's being developed in Linux it means that it will probably open up more avenues for other markets on the PC since the step from Linux to Mac (Although I find Mac's to be terrible as well) isn't great.

As a side effect which is something that is more interesting then it is useful or linked to this is that it will drive down the costs of building a game PC as well since it will allow for you to skip out on a 70 OS and instead invest that elsewhere.

black_knight1337:

Yopaz:
Isn't that obvious? Most of their consumer base are Windows users who might have need for Windows for games that aren't supported in SteamOS or other important software they need in their daily life. They don't earn anything by making people use SteamOS since it's a free OS that anyone can choose to download if they like Linux. By making Half-Life 3 SteamOS exclusive they may gain a larger user base, but they are preventing anyone who's uncomfortable making the shift from Windows to Linux from getting the game. It's never a sound business plan to reduce the amount of customers. They earn just as much from Windows versions sold and SteamOS versions sold.

I like how you don't quote the part that addresses this. The thing is, Valve has already done exactly that before. When they launched Steam it excluded EVERYONE from both Counter-Strike: Source and Half Life 2. But did they have horrendous sales and fail completely? No, they sold millions and set Steam on track to becoming the dominating digital distribution service that it is today. The potential is there for the SteamOS along with their Steam Machines to do the same again, but it really does need some "killer apps" to get it there. And like I said, even just making them timed exclusives would do the trick and work out as a good middle ground.

Creating a platform that separates software completely is something else than creating a DRM model. They created a MANAGER not a new platform. It required Steam to run, sure, it didn't change anything in regards to Windows, it didn't limit people to an unfamiliar OS, it didn't interfere with the compatibility of other software and games.

Comparing the two is like comparing a bike and a car. Both are faster than walking.

Edit: Also I like how you simply threw out an accusation rather than read WHY forcing SteamOS on their users wouldn't work. They already have Steam, they don't earn anything by people downloading SteamOS, they earn by people buying things from Steam regardless of if they're running Steam or Windows. I explained this too. You ignored both and accuse me of ignoring you. First class hypocrisy there. Well done.

Charcharo:

lacktheknack:

kiri2tsubasa:
No exclusives...so absolutely fuck all reason to get it.

You mean, no reason for YOU to get it.

If you don't care about shifting focus from Windows to Linux, that's fine. Stick with Windows. I, however, cannot WAIT to ditch Windows permanently, and having a really major company toss their hat into the Linux ring is exactly what the doctor ordered.

EDIT: A lot of people seem to completely misunderstand what a "Steam Machine" even is. -__-

I applaud this news! It is VERY good that Valve wont support this shitty practice of exclusivity!
HOWEVER, I can NOT go for a STEAM OS unless it is a Dual Boot. First of all, I cant be certain the system is backwards compatible. Second, I need something that DOES WORK as well. Most PCs here use Windows, so I need to use Windows as well. Also, it does seem like this OS is going to be only good for multimedia and not even be as capable as Linux :P.

If only MS and Valve settled their differences and Windows 9 came with a modified Steam OS mode made for gaming and still had all the emulation and backwards compatibility :P . Alas my dreams

1. All OS's are dual-bootable. ALL of them. This cannot be changed.

2. How can it not be as capable as Linux if it IS Linux?

So much misunderstanding.

Sarge034:

lacktheknack:
Because Wine is terrible?

Because native support is infinitely better than non-native support?

Why would I want to hack something into half-working when Valve's push into Linux will cause a rush of native support? These are exciting times, and I don't buy any argument that says "But it kind of works already!"

So Valve is going to recode all those games from the ground up to run on Linux? Or are they just gong to put a program in the OS that, how did you say it? "...to hack something into half-working..." Will the OS bring more developers to support Linux? I don't know, but if I were a betting man I would say no. The steam machine and the OS have almost no market weight because other than the Valve-lovers and Linux supporter no one else has a reason to get it. Limited market share is limited.

Streaming is not a half-working hack. It's a full feature that works as a placeholder for older programs, like emulation (except, unlike Wine, this one looks like it'll actually work).

Also, Valve already HAS recoded a whackload of its games to work on Linux natively (Including Half Life, Portal and Left 4 Dead 2), and there's nothing stopping other devs from doing the same thing if they so desire.

Also, you hideously underestimate the number of Valve fans and Linux supporters. Furthermore, this won't build Rome in a day, and therefore we shouldn't try? You're the type of person that Johnathan Swift addressed "A Modest Proposal" to.

I'm glad that i wont have to dualboot, no matter how great steamOS might be for games, but i still need the features that windows provides and the apps to go along with it.

Sarge034:
I kindda figured Valve would shy away from exclusives, but I also know that the SteamOS will not have any of the other exclusive titles either. So what is the point of buying one? While I am a huge proponent of the "one console future" we aren't there yet. If your product does not offer something unique then there is no reason to buy it. It's kinnda sad to know the "one console future" will be doomed to fail by its' own merits. *Sigh*

unique features for steam machines as consoles.

access to the PC back catalogue.
Not a monopoly environment
open source
everything is hackable modable personally configurable.

no $20 DRM fee , so prices will be PC prices not console prices.

anyone can patch or upgrade their products no draconian MS or Sony vetting testing and charging you for the privilege.

zumbledum:
snip

EDIT: Ah, you edited out the section of my post you quoted. Sorry.

Great on Valve for not doing exclusives.

However that just means that it will be very slow for getting a strong userbase to Steam OS.

If there are no sequels to be had on the machine, than people who are satisfied with Windows will simply not bother with it unless they are a Valve fan.

It's good to know I'll never have any reason to get one then.

I'm already going to be tempted by the 3DS, WiiU, PS4, and Xbone (in that order).
Who needs even more consoles grabbing their attention?

Sarge034:

Also, I'm wondering what else the OS will do when you install it your computer. Nothing is free, so I could see some sort of data mining going on.

Not to put too fine a point on it but you are completely and totally wrong. A lot of software is completely and totally free, in fact anything under GPL is written and licensed in such a way that anyone trying to infringe upon a user's freedom is in breach of license.

Whether this particular project is fully free is another matter of course, though if it isn't you'll be able to just install Steam on a distro of your choice and have that functionality back.

kiri2tsubasa:
No exclusives...so absolutely fuck all reason to get it.

1. It's free
2. Supposedly we're gonna have better gaming performance
3. It's not Windows
4. Did I mention that it's free?

Sarge034:

There is no such thing as "too" cynical, and I prefer to call myself a "realist" anyway.

I call myself "the resident cynic" often and even I get the feeling you're being cynical just for the sake of being cynical.

That said, of course I'm going to keep a careful eye on it and not jump aboard anything without care to look at it. Don't feel much of a need for a new OS at the moment, and all.

AWAR:

kiri2tsubasa:
No exclusives...so absolutely fuck all reason to get it.

1. It's free
2. Supposedly we're gonna have better gaming performance
3. It's not Windows
4. Did I mention that it's free?

1 + 4: So...really, so. Because it is free it is somehow great? I do not follow this logic at all.

2: Evidence of GTFO since I have a great system as is, though maybe in a year or so I'll upgrade the 560 ti to something newer.

3: How is that an advantage? How is that any more of an advantage then saying "It's not Apple"?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here