Microsoft VP Marc Whitten Isn't Worried About Steam Machines

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Microsoft VP Marc Whitten Isn't Worried About Steam Machines

Microsoft Corporate Vice President Marc Whitten says he's "not sweating" the looming launch of Steam Machines because they're fundamentally different than consoles.

The major players in the console wars have remained more or less constant for so long that it's hard to imagine a new player coming along and changing the balance of power. That's exactly what Valve appears threatening to do with Steam Machines, its PC-powered living room gaming gambit that's backed by partnerships with more than a dozen different manufacturers who will make rigs ranging from $500 to more than $5000.

Yet while Valve has a way of making things happen, Whitten, Microsoft's chief Xbox guy, told Engadget that he doesn't feel threatened by the new kid on the block. "I personally don't know how to think about Steam Machines yet," he said. "I'm not knocking it or whatever. I continue to think that PC gaming -- the sort of uber configuration and I can change everything and I can mod -- that's an important thing and there's a lot of people that wanna do that."

But the living room is a different sort of environment, one that eliminates a lot of advantages the PC holds over consoles. "When you get into that living room environment, you don't want to spend any of your brain cells doing anything but being entertained. I don't want to work on it; I don't want to feel like I have to know how it works. I would like to be blowing things up now, or watching a thing now. That's the fundamental thing that you want to do," he continued. "I think there's space for both. I'm not sweating it."

As a long-time PC gamer, I can see where he's coming from. We've come a long way from setting IRQ jumpers and needing to know the difference between Extended and Expanded memory, but PC gaming is and always will be more demanding than playing on consoles. And while Valve initially appeared to be positioning Steam Machines as a turnkey solution for the living room -- essentially a Steam console -- everything we've seen so far indicates that they're just PCs with Steam OS installed. Maybe there's more to it than meets the eye, but maybe Whitten has a good reason not to be worried, too.

Source: Engadget

Permalink

Well let's see here...

Skyrim on consoles sold better on 360 than PS3.
If Steambox is capable of playing Skyrim at an equal level as the 360, BUT also includes the capability of mods. 360 loses.

See where I'm going Microsoft? Sony wiped the floor with you simply by not being complete utter idiots, and Valve is going to grind its heel into whatever else is left of the Xbox One with removing whatever else was holding an edge over it, if the Steam Boxes are affordable and equally priced.

And that little comment he makes about the "living room advantage" completely ignores what has been announced about the Steam Box. It shows just how little he actually even has paid attention to the system, and thus disrespects and underestimates it. I hope that the Steambox is competitively priced and crushes what little is left of the Xbox one, solely because of that.

And I'd say he has EVERYTHING to be worried about potential competition.

i feel like over time they're not gonna be able to claim as much due to the erosion of their own advantages...even the insular nintendo now relies on regular updates and fixes

ofc, even steam can't claim to have the best sales anymore, but even then, most of the time the other games sold lead back into the steam system anyway (since the steam system is the deepest established database besides all of the older games that crop up on classic game websites), and now that they have the leverage in virtual item marketplaces, i think their game plan is to rapidly expand on their hat economy...

If Steam Boxes become a thing, and every PC game ends up targeting SteamOS... Well, SteamOS is based on Linux so suddenly Linux would actually become a good option for gamers.

If Linux PCs become a viable gaming platform, then there's one less reason to use Windows (and many other reasons to use Windows are moving to web-based services or have free cross-platform alternatives). So Microsoft should fear Steam Machines, and not just for the fate of the XBone.

He should be worried. Valve plays the long game. It's slow, but in the end it always pays off. Like every other idea they've ever had.

They may be more PC orientated, but these are consoles at the end of the day. You can't use word on them (without installing a new os) and they are fundamentally different yes, but not different wii u/ wii kind of way where the audience is a different arena of gaming. This is a different product in THEIR market, in the PS4, xbone zone, with the ability to be a standard same price console, but also the capacity to be whatever the end user wants it to be. Sony/microsoft are marketing these as elite gaming devices for the living room. Well here's an elite gaming device that people can choose to make as elite as possible.

Also it has 1080p. So there's that.

Be careful there, fella. You know what they say about famous last words.

XMark:
If Steam Boxes become a thing, and every PC game ends up targeting SteamOS... Well, SteamOS is based on Linux so suddenly Linux would actually become a good option for gamers.

If Linux PCs become a viable gaming platform, then there's one less reason to use Windows (and many other reasons to use Windows are moving to web-based services or have free cross-platform alternatives). So Microsoft should fear Steam Machines, and not just for the fate of the XBone.

I think this is a bit of a dream fantasy at the moment. Steam OS isn't a platform designed for say, doing the office presentation on. I'd suggest it might make a good dual boot, but I have a dual boot system (this message was written on a mac os with windows available on the other side) but dual booting is a pain in the arse to be convenient.

If Steam's long term goal is to take on microsoft os (I don't think it is) it'll need to be convenient. I think it's doing what it sees as the future, your games are available everywhere. Do what you want, when you want sir etc.

final verdict: if the new generation comes up dry for most of this year (by say, making the mistake of dogpiling christmas, AGAIN), the pc's advantage of the seemingly eternal game library and range of affordable games is gonna hammer them hard

the success of the new games is basically the only thing standing between them and failure

cursedseishi:
Well let's see here...

Skyrim on consoles sold better on 360 than PS3.
If Steambox is capable of playing Skyrim at an equal level as the 360, BUT also includes the capability of mods. 360 loses.

See where I'm going Microsoft? Sony wiped the floor with you simply by not being complete utter idiots, and Valve is going to grind its heel into whatever else is left of the Xbox One with removing whatever else was holding an edge over it, if the Steam Boxes are affordable and equally priced.

And that little comment he makes about the "living room advantage" completely ignores what has been announced about the Steam Box. It shows just how little he actually even has paid attention to the system, and thus disrespects and underestimates it. I hope that the Steambox is competitively priced and crushes what little is left of the Xbox one, solely because of that.

And I'd say he has EVERYTHING to be worried about potential competition.

Steambox doesn't add anything that you can't already do on PC. Most graphics cards have an HDMI output so you can plug into a TV. You can plug in a USB game controller and hey presto you can do anything that the steam box can do.

The only way to play Skyrim on steamos is own a second windows PC and use that as a dedicated streaming device to play it on your steam box.

Look at him, smugging it up:

"Ooh, I'm the Microsoft Corporate Vice President!"

Yeah, well I am the corporate Vice President of my desk!

And we both know which one is the swankier of the two!

#blueledsforthewin

OT: To be honest, no console manufacturer should really be all worried, Steam Machines are aimed at people on the fence of deciding to buy a next gen console, and those people are not their priority market right now.

Not to mention the fact that marketing the Steam Machines will be reasonably difficult(it's still not a brand per se) and that the electronic makeup of the machines is still a bit hazy.

Best case scenario: Valve manage to get a few customers in that will spread the word, this first generation of Steam Machines really won't do all that much to shake up the gaming climate, it's the second and third generations when things will get interesting methinks(at that point we will see how popular they are after they have had time to become established sufficiently to the average consumer).

weirdguy:
final verdict: if the new generation comes up dry for most of this year (by say, making the mistake of dogpiling christmas, AGAIN), the pc's advantage of the seemingly eternal game library and range of affordable games is gonna hammer them hard

the success of the new games is basically the only thing standing between them and failure

Except you can't play very many games on steamOS. There is no money in other publishers porting their back catalogue to Linux if you have already bought the game on steam.

I'd love to see the Steam Machines do well and force this guy to eat his words, but I'm not really sure how big of an impact they will have. I doubt they will topple the competition but they are at least going to do better than the Ouya and if they promote Linux gaming to the point that people start a mass exodus from Windows...Microsoft should at least be a bit cautious.

Adam Jensen:
He should be worried. Valve plays the long game. It's slow, but in the end it always pays off. Like every other idea they've ever had.

Except episodic gaming, that didn't work out as planned.

I'd love to see the Steam Machines do well and force this guy to eat his words, but I'm not really sure how big of an impact they will have. I doubt they will topple the competition but they are at least going to do better than the Ouya and if they promote Linux gaming to the point that people start a mass exodus from Windows...Microsoft should at least be a bit cautious.

Adam Jensen:
He should be worried. Valve plays the long game. It's slow, but in the end it always pays off. Like every other idea they've ever had.

Except episodic gaming, that didn't work out as planned.

Little Duck:
I think this is a bit of a dream fantasy at the moment. Steam OS isn't a platform designed for say, doing the office presentation on. I'd suggest it might make a good dual boot, but I have a dual boot system (this message was written on a mac os with windows available on the other side) but dual booting is a pain in the arse to be convenient.

If Steam's long term goal is to take on microsoft os (I don't think it is) it'll need to be convenient. I think it's doing what it sees as the future, your games are available everywhere. Do what you want, when you want sir etc.

Given Gabe Newell's many and varied comments (all of which are negative, to one degree or another) about Windows and the direction Microsoft is taking it, I feel pretty safe in saying that the SteamOS was likely designed specifically to entice developers to stop making games for Windows and design for Linux instead.

check list

installing before playing. check.
takes about 1 min to boot up from a cold boot up. check.
modding. maybe later.
third party solutions. none.
takes 5-30sec per loading screen. check.
customizable. only some few thing.

yep consoles are almost PCs now

I still don't understand the goal of steam machines.

So you're building a rig with all the negatives of PCs... why not just build your own PC? I guarantee you'd get more use out of a custom rig than a steam machine, what with Windows OS > Steam OS, plus you can save money on parts and assembly. What am I missing? If you want a living room gaming experience, there are 2 superior solutions to this Steambox thing.

A) Custom PC hooked to your TV.
B) Console that costs about half as much and is much more convenient.

What niche are these things supposed to be filling? Right now it looks like the worst of both worlds.

MetallicaRulez0:
I still don't understand the goal of steam machines.

So you're building a rig with all the negatives of PCs... why not just build your own PC? I guarantee you'd get more use out of a custom rig than a steam machine, what with Windows OS > Steam OS, plus you can save money on parts and assembly. What am I missing? If you want a living room gaming experience, there are 2 superior solutions to this Steambox thing.

A) Custom PC hooked to your TV.
B) Console that costs about half as much and is much more convenient.

What niche are these things supposed to be filling? Right now it looks like the worst of both worlds.

The majority of people who are inexperienced with computers perhaps? It may come as a major surprise to some, but not every PC gamer is knowledgeable in terms of building their own computers, much less knowing how and what they should avoid or look into. That's the inherent advantage of consoles to begin with, generally speaking. Asides from the whole "single set of hardware/software to worry over" that is.

Steam Box seems to be trying to bridge that gap. PC gaming with a system more so designed for it than the general use computers out there or the highly "name brand" PCs that exist, yet without the obnoxious need to have to check pins, power draw, and all that technical crap most people don't want to deal with.

You know, 10 years ago Steam only had one game. Half Life 2. Steam was also really shitty back then.

Now? It's a juggernaut and *the* place to buy PC games.

When the Steambox launches, sure, it won't have as many games as the consoles. May not sell that great at first. But I'm wondering where it will be in 10 years. If it follows the same path as Steam... then the next Xbox and PS5 may have some very, very stiff competition.

Well I can understand MS's attitude to this, its a niche market not a mass market. The majority of PC gamers are not going to bother with a Steambox as they already have one in the form of their PC. A lot of the traditional console market won't be interested as they are for the most part won't of heard of Steam or Valve.

The only people who really would be inclined to buy one are people who want to upgrade a older PC on the cheap (parts wise the Steamboxes are really good value for money) or PC people who don't have the time or the knowledge to build a PC.

cursedseishi:

Skyrim on consoles sold better on 360 than PS3.
If Steambox is capable of playing Skyrim at an equal level as the 360, BUT also includes the capability of mods. 360 loses.

Pretty big assumption that the people who are buying Skyrim on the 360 are going to know about, desire and install mods.

FalloutJack:
Be careful there, fella. You know what they say about famous last words.

As last words go, this is fairly reasonable stuff.

Saying there's room on the market for both isn't exactly fighting words.

CriticalMiss:

Except episodic gaming, that didn't work out as planned.

They're still playing the long game. Episode 3 will come out in 32 years.

I have to admit, I'm not quite as optimistic about the Steam Boxes as I used to be (and yes, I'm still calling them Steam Boxes, just because "Steam Machines" sounds clunky and awkward).

When the announcement first broke, I somehow got the idea that Gabe was like, "Hey, console people! Want to play PC games? Don't know anything about building PCs? Don't care enough to learn? Get one of these! Forget all the numbers and technical jargon--we've got a little box, a medium box and a big box, and the only difference is how much money you want to spend." And I immediately went, "I'll take a medium, please." And that was all I needed. Because every six months, I'll get the urge to buy a gaming rig, I'll look at a website for ten minutes, my eyes will glaze over as I try to work out which numbers mean what, and then I'll give up and head back to my nice simple console.

Now the boxes are finally here, and there's like two dozen of the fucking things. And when I try to figure out what the difference is, it's all, "Well, this one has an i9-9285M gigadrive with seven thousand teraflops of GPS," and my eyes glaze over again, because it's just like PC shopping. Look, I'm not trying to get a goddamn electronics degree here--all I want, all I care about, is to get a thing that plays games. That's it.

The point is, I thought the whole concept of the Steam Box was that it'd make this simpler. If it's not going to, then I can't see many people like me bothering with it.

Zachary Amaranth:
Snip

Microsoft thinks there's enough room in the biz? Yeah right. That smile is so fake, that assurance so made up.

Why should they be? Let's be honest with ourselves, who are the Steam Machines aimed at? PC Gamers know they can get a comparable computer for cheaper. The prices vary wildly, but the cheapest only matches the PS4, it doesn't beat it. Future titles are going to be limited in that most Triple A developers are not going to be Linux compatible.

I hate to say it, but they kind of hurt themselves by not agreeing on limited hardware configurations. The whole point was to make a box that a layman could play PC games on, but all of that is out the window at his point.

I am hopeful for these, but as it stands, I don't currently need or care about owning one. I own a gaming PC.

Despite my excitement and curiosity at what Valve could bring to the table, I'm at a loss as to what their strategy is. The biggest problem that I see is that there are simply too many Steam Machines. The greatest advantage to consoles has always been that it's a box dedicated to gaming (this is becoming more and more debatable) and all the boxes from your developer of choice are essentially the same. Get the game and play it without fiddling with settings or upgrading parts, etc., etc..

To the average consumer, this will look just as daunting as pc gaming. And looking at some of the specs on the different models, there are some that may as well be a gaming pc, but all are limited only to gaming. It's more complicated and less convenient than its console competitors, and has infinitely less functionality than a pc. Unless I'm missing something.

They should narrow it down to three models (at the absolute most). A low-end around $500 with better specs and performance than the Xbox (the iBuyPower looks like really good bang for the buck), a mid range around $700 that can compete with current basic gaming rigs, and a high-end of around $1000 that can match some solid gaming rigs.

I just see Mr. or Ms. Average Consumer Person looking at all the models (that's another thing - there is nothing uniform in the appearance), and all the prices and just putting his/her hands on his/her head in frustration. But then maybe that isn't the target consumer for this product. If not though, who is? Pc gamers that would not be daunted by any of this may well already be gaming on machines that would outperform the Steam Machine model in a comparable price range.

That said though, Valve is a very savvy enterprise. I'm sure they know things I don't (even if I do think having 13 different models from as many manufacturers with as many different prices is silly and possibly alienating to members of two major potential markets). Microsoft execs have a history now of scoffing at the ideas and products of competitors, down-playing them in interviews, laughing a them at conferences, and generally looking down their noses at them only to be proven very, very wrong. I guess we will all see as the release plays out.

I'm not worried about the Steam machine either.

For a device that PC asshats praised as being the thing that finally gets console turd slingers into PC gaming, a majority of the steam machines are not only priced $1k or higher, but they don't even put the specs in laymans terms so that even someone as stupid as me will figure out.

I looked at the specs for all those machines, and I still haven't a damn heck what the hell half those words mean, how powerful they are, and why should I even bother when my laptop can give me the same experience, and then some.

Little Duck:

XMark:
If Steam Boxes become a thing, and every PC game ends up targeting SteamOS... Well, SteamOS is based on Linux so suddenly Linux would actually become a good option for gamers.

If Linux PCs become a viable gaming platform, then there's one less reason to use Windows (and many other reasons to use Windows are moving to web-based services or have free cross-platform alternatives). So Microsoft should fear Steam Machines, and not just for the fate of the XBone.

I think this is a bit of a dream fantasy at the moment. Steam OS isn't a platform designed for say, doing the office presentation on. I'd suggest it might make a good dual boot, but I have a dual boot system (this message was written on a mac os with windows available on the other side) but dual booting is a pain in the arse to be convenient.

If Steam's long term goal is to take on microsoft os (I don't think it is) it'll need to be convenient. I think it's doing what it sees as the future, your games are available everywhere. Do what you want, when you want sir etc.

Well the thing about that is that SteamOS is basically just a stripped down version of Linux, so SteamOS itself doesn't have to be a general OS for Linux as a whole to benefit from its success. If Steam Machines become a major market competitor and attract a lot of developers(which basically would indicate a shift from DirectX to OpenGL), then Linux in general becomes a better platform for gaming in turn.

Should Microsoft be worried? Depends on how well Valve markets this thing. But losing DirectX dominance in the PC market itself would be a pretty major blow, so I wouldn't not be worried...

albino boo:

weirdguy:
final verdict: if the new generation comes up dry for most of this year (by say, making the mistake of dogpiling christmas, AGAIN), the pc's advantage of the seemingly eternal game library and range of affordable games is gonna hammer them hard

the success of the new games is basically the only thing standing between them and failure

Except you can't play very many games on steamOS. There is no money in other publishers porting their back catalogue to Linux if you have already bought the game on steam.

yeah thats whats holding me back. I'd gladly drop Windos, but i dont want to lose my back catalog

Dragonbums:
I'm not worried about the Steam machine either.

For a device that PC asshats praised as being the thing that finally gets console turd slingers into PC gaming, a majority of the steam machines are not only priced $1k or higher, but they don't even put the specs in laymans terms so that even someone as stupid as me will figure out.

I looked at the specs for all those machines, and I still haven't a damn heck what the hell half those words mean, how powerful they are, and why should I even bother when my laptop can give me the same experience, and then some.

It may be worth noting that we're talking about prototype machines that have only just been introduced at CES a few days ago. Actual market products will of course have proper spec sheets. Additionally, Steam Machines themselves are merely a convenient vehicle; it's SteamOS's success that Valve cares about, and that can be installed on any PC(including your laptop). Finally, the existence of pricey versions of the concept don't negate the existence of the cheaper ones(which start at a more competitive $500). There are televisions that are priced over $10,000, but that hasn't discouraged me from purchasing one in the sub-thousand price range.

In the end, it will all come down to marketing and support.

Scars Unseen: PC asshat and occasional console turd monkey

Scars Unseen:

Dragonbums:
I'm not worried about the Steam machine either.

For a device that PC asshats praised as being the thing that finally gets console turd slingers into PC gaming, a majority of the steam machines are not only priced $1k or higher, but they don't even put the specs in laymans terms so that even someone as stupid as me will figure out.

I looked at the specs for all those machines, and I still haven't a damn heck what the hell half those words mean, how powerful they are, and why should I even bother when my laptop can give me the same experience, and then some.

It may be worth noting that we're talking about prototype machines that have only just been introduced at CES a few days ago. Actual market products will of course have proper spec sheets. Additionally, Steam Machines themselves are merely a convenient vehicle; it's SteamOS's success that Valve cares about, and that can be installed on any PC(including your laptop). Finally, the existence of pricey versions of the concept don't negate the existence of the cheaper ones(which start at a more competitive $500). There are televisions that are priced over $10,000, but that hasn't discouraged me from purchasing one in the sub-thousand price range.

In the end, it will all come down to marketing and support.

Scars Unseen: PC asshat and occasional console turd monkey

Their marketing ploy as of right now is that it's to bring console gamers to the PC. Right now, as a console gamer, I don't see what's the point in getting this when it's priced equal to the most expensive console this generation, didn't simplify specs for the common console gamer (yet alone the average consumer) and isn't something I can do already on my laptop via Steam.
Steam OS already feels redundant to me. It does what, play Steam games? I mean...isn't that what computers can do in general? But I guess for those who really care- Linux is the draw for the OS.

XMark:
If Steam Boxes become a thing, and every PC game ends up targeting SteamOS... Well, SteamOS is based on Linux so suddenly Linux would actually become a good option for gamers.

If Linux PCs become a viable gaming platform, then there's one less reason to use Windows (and many other reasons to use Windows are moving to web-based services or have free cross-platform alternatives). So Microsoft should fear Steam Machines, and not just for the fate of the XBone.

Honestly that's the one thing holding Windows on my PC, gaming. If steam os succeeds and its backlog of games are updated to work on Linux, well lets just say Microsoft will only exist in my house in the form of my 360 I rarely play.

Dragonbums:

Scars Unseen:

Dragonbums:
I'm not worried about the Steam machine either.

For a device that PC asshats praised as being the thing that finally gets console turd slingers into PC gaming, a majority of the steam machines are not only priced $1k or higher, but they don't even put the specs in laymans terms so that even someone as stupid as me will figure out.

I looked at the specs for all those machines, and I still haven't a damn heck what the hell half those words mean, how powerful they are, and why should I even bother when my laptop can give me the same experience, and then some.

It may be worth noting that we're talking about prototype machines that have only just been introduced at CES a few days ago. Actual market products will of course have proper spec sheets. Additionally, Steam Machines themselves are merely a convenient vehicle; it's SteamOS's success that Valve cares about, and that can be installed on any PC(including your laptop). Finally, the existence of pricey versions of the concept don't negate the existence of the cheaper ones(which start at a more competitive $500). There are televisions that are priced over $10,000, but that hasn't discouraged me from purchasing one in the sub-thousand price range.

In the end, it will all come down to marketing and support.

Scars Unseen: PC asshat and occasional console turd monkey

Their marketing ploy as of right now is that it's to bring console gamers to the PC. Right now, as a console gamer, I don't see what's the point in getting this when it's priced equal to the most expensive console this generation, didn't simplify specs for the common console gamer (yet alone the average consumer) and isn't something I can do already on my laptop via Steam.
Steam OS already feels redundant to me. It does what, play Steam games? I mean...isn't that what computers can do in general? But I guess for those who really care- Linux is the draw for the OS.

I didn't say marketing ploy; I said marketing. Spending money to get the device's existence into the awareness of people who don't go to gaming sites and debate the validity of a Linux-based gaming OS. Valve would love for you and I to switch to SteamOS for gaming, but any actual marketing will likely disregard us in favor of the general populace, who collectively have more money that we do. If Valve can do that successfully, and if they can gather more developer support, then SteamOS will succeed. If they cannot, then it will (at least in the short term)fail.

Of course, the best thing Valve has going for them is time. Since their only true horse in the race is the OS itself, and because they already have a giant cash cow called Steam to support them, Valve really can just sit back and let this build momentum slowly, and eventually even a $500 Steam Machine will outclass the new generation of consoles. If this first generation of Steam Machines fail, it's really the hardware manufacturers that fail, not Valve.

""When you get into that living room environment, you don't want to spend any of your brain cells doing anything but being entertained. I don't want to work on it; I don't want to feel like I have to know how it works. I would like to be blowing things up now, or watching a thing now."

After the game installs.

After the patch downloads.

After the console firmware updates.

After I log in to my account.

After I wave at the Kinect to get it to recognize my fat stupid face.

Anything else?

But the living room is a different sort of environment, one that eliminates a lot of advantages the PC holds over consoles. "When you get into that living room environment, you don't want to spend any of your brain cells doing anything but being entertained. I don't want to work on it; I don't want to feel like I have to know how it works. I would like to be blowing things up now, or watching a thing now. That's the fundamental thing that you want to do,"

OH WAIT, except consoles don't even fucking do that these days, now do they, Mr. Whitten? Noooo, its not "I want to blow things up now", it's "I want to blow things up now, but wait.. Oh first I have to download the game.. Than the patch.. Then log in.. Than console update.." Yeah no. A console isn't plug and play anymore, and anyone who says it is is talking out of their ass. Also, I hope Steam Machines do really well in the long run so this guy can eat his words and shove it down his throat. I'm not a PC elitist, I'm just upset at what consoles have become. My last console was the PS2, and if things are progressing the way they are with consoles, it's going to stay that way.

FalloutJack:

Microsoft thinks there's enough room in the biz? Yeah right. That smile is so fake, that assurance so made up.

We're not talking mind reading here. You were predicting "last words," and as last words, these are fairly tame. It's absurd to think that words these mild are some sort of major deal.

You can argue what their intent is all you want, but that doesn't make for last words, especially not memorable ones.

Baresark:
Why should they be?

Because a bunch of people want them to be, want Valve to be right, want the Steam Machine to be more than what it appears to be: a niche line of largely boutique PCs in a declining market. They want Valve's idea to dominate here, and so Microsoft should be trembling in their boots. Or loafers. They seem more like the loafer type.

One thing I've come to take as standard on the internet: What you want is more powerful than the facts. Like when Microsoft was going to fail even after the Xbone became the One-eighty.

 Pages 1 2 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
Registered for a free account here