News Article

Talking Point: The Steam Gaming Machines Are An Unconventional Challenge to the Wii U

Posted by Thomas Whitehead

Sony and Microsoft aren't the only competitors

When considering the challenges and competitors that the Wii U faces in the months and years to come, it's becoming an increasingly cluttered and tricky space to manoeuvre. Much the same was said during the early days of the 3DS, as its struggles saw it stacked up against smartphones and tablets; at one point it seemed a mountain too high. With a combination of competitive pricing, a great deal of enticing software and plenty of hard work on Nintendo's part, the 3DS has navigated the modern day hurdles to carve itself a niche in the market. While the DS family's sales are arguably a distant goal, it's a system performing well around the world.

Of course the Wii U is currently in the same spot as the 3DS was six months into its own lifetime, even if the home console's struggles have stretched an additional few months. Nintendo is once again working to similar principles of recovery, lining up a number of exciting game releases and gradually revealing hardware bundles to improve the system's 'value' in the eyes of consumers — a modest price cut is also being implemented. The strategy goes that, despite the PS4 and Xbox One preparing to wade into the market, Nintendo's unique controller options and first-party software will set it apart and win plenty of new owners in the hugely competitive Holiday season. With a strong Winter comes renewed confidence in the platform, momentum into 2014 and, as with the 3DS, a roadmap to success.

That may well be how the scenario plays, and we certainly hope so, but the competition for living room attention is getting increasingly fierce. The picture this year is, we believe, as painted above, and Nintendo will slug it out with Microsoft and Sony — there's no notable evidence at the time of writing that the Ouya or similar Android micro-consoles will make much of a dent in the living room gaming space. Assuming Nintendo emerges from the Holidays with some confidence restored, there are challenges in 2014 and beyond that are worth acknowledgement, however, even at this early stage.

Two particular eventualities have, we suspect, had the executives of the 'big three' anxiously scanning major competitor reveals — an Apple console, and a "Steam Box". The former is still, perhaps contrary to initial instincts, not yet on the cards. Apple has had many product reveals, and beyond its Apple TV service and many, many phones and tablets, it's yet to say "here's a controller, play iOS games with this on your TV". It's perfectly possible to play iOS games on a TV using various gizmos from the company — and even approved third-party physical controllers that hook up to touchscreen devices — but there's been no high-profile or sustained effort to produce a universal controller and to turn the platform — or a part of it — into a dedicated console-style gaming service. Perhaps it's because of the hands-off approach to the iOS marketplace that leads to thousands of apps flooding the digital shelves, or simply that the company isn't sure whether it's worth the effort, but no amount of rumours have brought a dedicated Apple gaming offering to the living room.

So we come to Steam, the phenomenally successful PC platform that has, in recent times, been creeping away from PC monitors towards bigger screens. "Big Picture" mode essentially allows you to make your PC a console, if you're happy to move your computer next to the TV. The next logical step, therefore, was some sort of console from Steam's creators, Valve, as it had taken every step but release a branded box. It was coming, and the company has announced a range of Steam gaming machines. Intriguingly "there will ultimately be several boxes to choose from, with an array of specifications, price, and performance."

These boxes will utilise the just-announced SteamOS (operating system), which will be open in nature and available to anyone that wants it. In terms of controllers the boxes will support PC gamepads, mouse and keyboard options, as well there being hints at a new control input, which could be announced shortly. So we'll have a readily available set of systems that'll support various control options and Valve's own OS. It's a firing across the bows to the fixed units of Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony, and a genuinely new threat. These could be the bridging gap between the flexibility and freedom of PCs and living room convenience; PC nuts will apparently be able to "hack" the OS and mess around while, presumably, these gaming machines will be relatively simple to use in their default form — easier than a PC, we'd expect.

Valve is preparing 300 of the "high performance" variants to send out to select gamers later this year, and the machines themselves are expected at retail in 2014. There are great unknowns, primarily price: are any of these models going to be in the Xbox One price range, lower at the PS4 rate, or will there even be a Steam system competing with the Wii U price? Will these gaming machines ultimately use the same online marketplace as the existing PC and Mac Steam, will they be simplified to automatically run games to their maximum capabilities, and will you only be able to buy titles tested to run well on the particular box you own? Surely to promote itself as a living room box, it won't be necessary to check operating system requirements and mess around with graphics settings, right? And will having multiple boxes from different manufacturers confuse potential consumers?

Ultimately, it's answers to these questions that will help determine whether this move by Valve is genuinely wading into the home console space, or whether it's destined to primarily attract PC gamers. We'd expect Valve to gun for simplicity if it is trying to attract a home console audience, though it has over 50 million Steam users to also target with its marketing. Make no mistake, Steam is a big deal.

From Nintendo's perspective it's another potential shark in the water, with the space set to become even more crowded — Vita TV, if it comes West, would be yet another living room gaming system. So should Nintendo fans be concerned? Well there's always concern, as there's always competition, and with so many systems in the present and future shouting for attention it's increasingly challenging for each to be heard. Valve is a company with a lot of clout, so of course could be a formidable foe if it gets these systems right.

On the flipside, and acknowledging the many competitors on the way and Nintendo's own need to reverse a poor début year for the Wii U, the company's strengths have often been its ability to separate itself from the crowd. No-one can realistically accuse the Wii U of being a me-too system following the crowd, as it has bespoke control inputs, as well as hardware and infrastructure best suited to Nintendo's own games and projects. That can be to its detriment with third-parties, in particular, but in this case could be a benefit.

We don't think many have ever looked at a Wii U and thought of it as an underpowered PC, as the system offers a range of franchises and games not available anywhere else, along with motion controllers, a Balance Board — the benefits of the Wii legacy — and all sorts of extras. You look at the Winter lineup for the Wii U and it's serving up content that's only available on Nintendo hardware. The challenge for Nintendo is persuading millions of people that they want to play these games badly enough to buy the console.

If we are heading for an increasingly crowded and full-on battle for living room entertainment, then Nintendo will likely be forced to continue betting its fortunes on its own content. If Valve successfully simplifies PC gaming into a living room box, it'll be Nintendo's own brands and unique gameplay experiences that will help it stand apart; the words "fun" and "value" may become mainstays of the company's marketing. Whether this current generation will be the last of the conventional "closed" hardware platforms is certainly up for debate, but Nintendo's continual refusal to countenance its content appearing on other platforms is looking like it could be integral to its potential ongoing role in living room gaming.

Does the potential of Valve's Steam gaming machines in 2014 rock the world of console gaming? In theory, yes. So many details are unknown, of course, but the very concept alone is enough to put the whole console industry on alert — Valve is a big player that can't be easily dismissed. Whatever form various systems take, it's Nintendo's own experiences, allied with good value and fiercely competitive pricing, that will give it a stronger chance of staying in our living rooms as a major presence for years to come. Now is not the time for Nintendo to follow the lead of others, but rather to set itself apart.

From the web

User Comments (201)




I still don't understand the appeal, and I don't think these boxes will lower the barrier of entry for consumers hesitant to get on board with PC gaming.



FiveDigitLP said:

I'm actually quite interested in the Steam Box, er, Steam Machine (as it's called now, I guess). For quite some time, I've been considering making the switch to PC gaming for third party games that don't come to my Nintendo console, so if this is a reasonable price, it will definitely make the switch easier on me. I'm getting tired of MS and Sony's bull crap (so I don't have a huge interest in their next gen systems) and Valve really seems to have things in order.



AyeHaley said:

These boxes have a lot of potential. And I'm sure many steam users would want this in their living room.



Mytoemytoe said:

Nintendo will be fine, IF they can keep a steady stream of great first party games coming. But that's a big IF- we all know how long and arduous the game development process is.

At the end of the day, Nintendo has a unique place in the marketplace as the home for games that appeal to all ages, not just 18-35 males. As long as the games are there, like they are on 3DS, and the price isn't prohibitive, I think Nintendo will succeed.



Blast said:

I've been looking at other gaming sites like GameInformer and they aren't taking this SteamBox concept seriously. Even Adam Sessler is hesitant about this idea (there's a Youtube video). I don't want it to fail. I want it to have some success. The SteamBox needs to announce Half Life 3 as an exclusive to gain some hype. And I really hate to bring this up.... but does anyone else the Ouya and how people said it was gonna be a fighting force against Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft??? Well look at the Ouya now....



Shiryu said:

It's interesting days we live in the industry. I think steamOS will indeed change our living rooms in the way we perceive, receive and play our media in our homes, but Nintendo will always have their exclusive IPs so I am sure there will always be space reserved for the Wii U under my TV set.



unrandomsam said:

Apple doesn't need a specific console just an official gamepad. The screen part can already be done by the Apple TV. The support has been added to iOS 7 for an official controller api.

Steam is not really a competitor because the stuff that is worth getting on Nintendo is just not on there.



Auracle said:

If the Steam Box is sold at an affordable price, then I'd like to have one. My current PC can't play some of my Steam purchases very well, so it'd be nice to have something that could that doesn't cost an arm and a leg. Plus, it would make a great companion to my Wii U.



Peach64 said:

I don't think Steam is a rival to any of those consoles, and neither was Ouya. Steam OS and the Steam Box are aimed at PC users that want to play games on their TV, and Ouya was the same thing for Android users. I'm guessing their idea of successful sales numbers would be to match Apple TV. That's probably the same figure Sony would love for Vita TV too, as I firmly believe they see it as an accessory for people in the Sony eco system, rather than a new 'console' to get brand new customers in.



Philip_J_Reed said:

This is the first thing that will give Nintendo a serious run for my allegience. Don't get me wrong, I'm not jumping ship entirely as long as I have Mario, Metroid, Zelda, Pikmin et al to come home to, but I am buying a Steam box. No matter what it costs. It's happening, and I can easily imagine myself falling in love with it.



AdanVC said:

The 3DS is in the same pressure of having tremendous competition with Vita... and more importantly with Smarthphones and tablets, and look how good is doing the 3DS now. Wii U would be fine on it's own.



Mommar said:

I would think, given the markets, that Sony and MS should be the two parties really concerned. The PC, 360 and PS3 all share most of the similar 3rd party software. Nintendo is kind of off on it's own, like it's always been.



Yasume said:

I don't know about this. I love Steam, I don't think there's a better platform out there for gamers, but I think I prefer to play my PC games on my laptop.



CanisWolfred said:

It's definitely not good news for Nintendo, or really any of the console makers. I'm excited, though, so long as it means I can play more than just my RTS Steam games, now.



unrandomsam said:

@Blastoise-san Why ? All they need is to release one with twice the power of the PS4 and Xbone in about a years time then do nothing else. (Most stuff supports the big picture steam mode anyway). Problem is whether they use Linux or Windows Embedded. (The Linux ports I have tried are generally garbage). Sega is putting Football Manager 2014 on Linux though properly so things might be changing.

Ouya is not the same I would probably have one by now if it had a better controller.



TruenoGT said:

I'm a PC gaming fan, but I'm not sold on the concept yet. You basically get a hardware flexible "console" which is great, but you still have a proprietary OS which is less great. Steam has been a great platform for now, but I wonder if that will change once it's the only storefront for PC games on some devices. If they can evolve and maintain a console friendly interface on a true PC OS (e.g. Windows, Linux, Mac) as well as SteamOS then we get the best of both worlds. If the hardware is good and priced well, I could see getting one and putting my own OS on it rather than being limited to SteamOS alone.



CanisWolfred said:

@TruenoGT I don't understand, why is it less good to have a proprietary OS?

@unrandomsam ...okay? Never said they wouldn't. Competition is good for business, but it also puts more stress on them to succeed. That's all I meant by bad news...



Blast said:

@unrandomsam Go on and you will see about 5 articles talking about the SteamBox and how several people who work at GIO aren't sure how the SteamBox will work. I don't want the SteamBox to fail. I'm just saying what has been saying. Go on Youtube, type in "Rev3Games" then scroll down to find a video of Adam Sessler talking about the SteamBox. Adam Sessler is really smart and he has multiple concerns about the SteamBox. Just...saying.



Drake said:

Love Steam, I've got nearly 700 games on it, but I'm not so sure this will be too useful, considering the amount of games it has that simply play better with a mouse and keyboard. Pricing will be everything, I reckon.



TruenoGT said:

@CanisWolfred One of the big strengths of PC gaming is that one can run games outside of any established storefront. Like I can install games that aren't sold via Steam or aren't sold at all. Things like browser games, obscure indie games, games sold on, etc. Presumably systems with SteamOS exclusively will only be able to play games sold and supported through Steam (and even then only Linux games natively). Because of the proprietary nature of this system, developers will still need to make games custom for this platform (like a console). This system doesn't suddenly make all Windows compatible games more accessible on a TV, though further improvements to the Steam UI will hopefully do that in parallel.



Yorumi said:

Is anyone else having flashbacks to the game crash in the 80's? Near the time the game crash happened there were a lot of companies putting out a bunch of fairly lazy games, and the market was crowded with consoles so open they could in many cases literally play their competitor's games.

If the game crash isn't hitting home we also have the late 80's to early 90's when it seems like everyone under the sun was coming out with a new console cause consoles were making money. And there was nothing but a market flooded with a bunch of cheap, pos, consoles with the exception of the few quality ones(nintendo, sony, sega kind of).

I'm not saying valve or apple will necessarily put out a bad product but consider what the industry looks like now. Increasingly we're getting buggy, rushed games and cheap exploits to get more money. We're also getting announcement after announcement of yet someone else wanting to get into the console market. Valve, apple, nvidia, even amazon.

It's just looking all to much to me like the past is repeating itself.



Philip_J_Reed said:

Increasingly we're getting buggy, rushed games and cheap exploits to get more money.

Not from Valve we're not.

I say bring it on.



Ryno said:

@Yorumi: I have though about a potential "crash" too but I think people are to addicted to video games for a large population of people to ever stop buying them.



Yorumi said:

@Philip_J_Reed ok i'll give you that, and I'm not really against their console in any way. If anyone is going to break into the console business it's probably going to be valve. It's just to me this is all to reminiscent of the past.



CanisWolfred said:

@Blastoise-san I actually share a lot of Sessler's concerns, but even at worst, I think it'd just end up being downgraded to a "wait and see" than an outright interesting product.

@TruenoGT I see what you mean, and I always assumed that not all games will be playable. But it's still better than what they suggested before, which was going to Linux, which doesn't have much support at the moment, and is difficult for the common consumer to make use of. Valve doesn't like Windows 8, and I'm kinda glad they're offering their own alternative rather than giving in and forcing that on people.



Jellitoe said:

This will not bode well for Valve, most its customers already have a PC for their service and would not just go buy their box to play something they can play without buying their box.



CanisWolfred said:

@Jellitoe I dunno, I know a lot of people who honestly don't have gaming PCs and only buy from Steam because they're cheaper. Not being forced to play games on a laptop or whatever would be beneficial for them, at least.



TheAdrock said:

Innovate or die. That's free market capitalism. (See Blackberry and 10,000 other examples if you doubt that axiom).
If this Christmas season doesn't see a massive turnout for the Wii U, then its safe to say that the Gamepad innovation isn't of interest to the market, so dump the U and go back to the drawing board.
How about an easily upgradeable console (plug-n-play swappable CPU, GPU, RAM, etc)?
Please stop with the chatter featuring Unacceptable Content. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. — TBD



SkywardLink98 said:

I'm interested to see the final announcement. Steam Machines are a threat to all of the consoles it they're fairly priced.



Specters said:

The problem with Steam Machines will be their price. Though it might be equal to a PS4 in price, we'll have to see how good the specs are and if the components are upgradeable (though they should be since it is a PC). If Valve and their manufactures want to take a hit in dollars per unit they could make an extremely competitive console.
However for those of us that can build PCs it will almost always be cheaper to buy the separate components and assemble it ourselves. I have a top of the line PC + Wii U, which I personally think is the best set up to get the best games out there.



billychaos said:

Not sure why valve wants to do this. The best 'steam box' already exists...Alienware...any of them!



Ernest_The_Crab said:

@theadrock13 That would never happen because no one would be able to get the licenses for all of the IPs. And frankly the swappable component would just make people question why get it in the first place when you have a PC that is already highly swappable.



Senario said:

If anything I see it as an expansion of the PC market. As long as Nintendo has first party games I am not too concerned with steambox challenging the wii U. Although it will challenge the PS and Xbox, price may be an issue.



Kirk said:

The various Android consoles are very niche products but this Steam Box might actually sell more units that the Wii U and very quickly too if the Steam fanboys jump on board. Then again those same Steam fanboys are probably mostly PC fanboys anyway so they might choose to just stick with their PCs. It's a tough one to call in my opinion.



Sceptic said:

@Kirk: Jesus, of course. But that's not really saying very much.

Steamboxes are a threat for the next gen consoles and their business model. In that universe, Nintendo is already dead or reduced to handhelds.

If they go fully free and open like Ubuntu, you'd be able to buy an aging PC with no OS and no peripherals for $200 and install SteamOS on it and have an incredibly powerful 'console'. If that is how it plays out, it would flat out terminate the entire console market. Game over.



faint said:

I think steam boxes will be a chalenge for the big three. If the boxes are built right and marketing is done the right way (which it will) the are going to be a force to be reckoned with.



unrandomsam said:

@Jellitoe Don't think they are bothered about that. I suppose they will sell them not at a loss.

They are giving away the OS to anybody who wants to use it along with free to other OEM's.



ricklongo said:

I think much of Steam's appeal comes from the fact that it's a PC program. There's many reasons why a range of Steam Boxes could do well, but they're bound to lose a sizable chunk of the audience in the transition.



Kirk said:


The way I'm seeing it, Valve is basically just creating the OS and defining a few standards for the basic console/OS/controller, as well as putting out their own Valve branded version of this console and controller, and then leaving the rest open for other manufacturers to do similarly using the same OS and hardware/controller standards etc.

I don't think much is going to change in the PC space as a result of this but you'll just now have these console Steam Boxes alongside the traditional PCs (still able to run Steam as they do now) and consoles.

Basically, the market is going to get more crowded and now it's just a matter of whether consumers see more value in a console powered by an operating system that is basically cross-platform and comes in a variety of different boxes/form-factors or the more fixed traditional consoles that we currently have.

If Valve does it right then Steam Box could be huge but there's a lot of things it needs to nail if this is going to work; a couple of them being the whole OS user interface and the controller standard for example.

If they get those two things wrong then the rest won't really matter except to the biggest Steam and PC geeks in my opinion.

It could be paradigm shifting or it could be the next 3DO but I'd have to see a lot more before I'd tell you which one I think it is going to be.



Senario said:

@themac2001 Get a Wii U since it is out now? I am not sure when the steam box will be released but I do not think it will be this year.



unrandomsam said:

@Sceptic Not true. Nintendo still has plenty of cards to play it has its own back catalog. Plus its own games it is the xbone/ps4 that have the same stuff that is on steam. They could even use their own back catalog is a similar manner to what steam does.



themac2001 said:

@Senario Yeah maybe i'll buy a Wii U for Christmas and i'll save up for the parts for a Steam Machine. It will probably be cheaper to make it myself.



faint said:

I don't think nintendo is kill-able. I do think Steam can shake the market. These boxes will immediately have access to thousands at a lower price than consoles. A great deal of them are AAA titles. While Valve only has a few exclusive franchises, they are very impressive ones. You guys need to stop thinking about the appeal to pc gamers. They already have that market. This is a shot at console gaming.



unrandomsam said:

@faint They won't if they are using Linux. The quality is terrible of most of the stuff on Linux. (If they used Windows Embedded they wouldn't be able to give it away for free). The Valve stuff needs a mouse and keyboard. They have very little content. They might have some other tricks

(Transistive or a company like that if there is a current one that hasn't been bought by IBM might be able to do something).

Probably do something with XNA like Sony have and get most of the indie stuff on it same with Unity.

If you search for Linux games with full controller support then hardly anything is in it. (75 games most are garbage. Less than 10 are high quality ports. The rest are Humble Bundle forced half assed ports).



Yorumi said:

@Kirk the problem with these boxes including the ouya was they're largely just trying to rebrand something that already exists. You can already buy a low end pc in a box and plug it into your tv. The things about modding it and all that are there for pc gamers, but then a pc gamer is smart enough to know how to use a gaming pc. These are trying to market to someone who doesn't want the hassle of a pc but making a low end pc, that already exists.

The idea behind a console is that you buy the console, put a game in, and it works no hassle. Unlike a pc where you have worry about system specs, drivers, and heck even other programs installed possibly making the game run worse.

The steam box with 3 different ones of differing specs is going to have problems when someone goes to get a game and it doesn't work on their particular console. Remember the success of a console comes from people who generally don't want the hassle of a pc.

That's really the problem with these systems, they're trying to bring in the worst of both sides of the market(a console's low power with a pc's hassle).

I have to say though most pc ports from from xbox and ps, so if anything I kind of see it as more of a threat to them than nintendo.



Araknie said:

@Mommar Yeah, that's now exactly what i think.

Having the Steam console with more than 70% the same games you can get on PS4 and Xbox One but with Valve support will be a much better solution than the other two, simply because the possibility to interact with the Os and mess around to tweak the performance and flexibility it's a thing you can't do on no platform before.

The difference is, exactly the fact that PS4 and Xbox One don't aim at exclusive but multiplatforms, with Xbox One having no market in Japan whatsoever. Also, in an interview posted by Eurogamers the 20th of this month, Sony announced that they are going to delay the PS4 to february in Japan also because they want to have more Western developers than japanese.

So Nintendo can now have the occasion to give an hand to Japanese developers, like they did with SEGA and Platinum Games already (also Atlus puts great faith in Ninty), and give an unique feel on games that are Exclusives on this console. You don't find anything like X, Bayonetta 2, Pikmin 3, The Wonderful 101 or Sonic Lost World on any other console.

And also almost all the western developers working on it are making all exclusives much like Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze, Zombi U and Lego City Undercover.

All of them are quite unique in their own way already and the gamepad and a, ever evolving, community like Miiverse, with an honest service like the eShop, also evolving everyday, it's quite a thing you never saw and you don't see others trying to reach out for this kind of deals.

Nintendo did cut the price of the Wii U the most they can to mantain a profit in the long run, they did (and i belive they will keep doing them) bundles for both "pro" and "casual" gamers, they have games that can be played at age 3 till more than 18 already and more will come.

Nintendo really just needs to realize that the Japanese developers are abandoned by Sony and Microsoft and reach out for them.
This will truly give the Wii U a 'till Gamecube days kind of feel, that was half-lost with the Wii, the return of Nintendo as creative standpoint for Japanese developers.

Sorry for the long post, it's not just a response to you, as you may have noticed.



Sceptic said:

@unrandomsam: Ah yes, those "cards" that nintendo still has "to play". I hear a lot of about that, but all I see is Windwaker HD and the likes. Those are no "cards" unfortunately, and so far the market sadly agrees.



DarkKirby said:

This article implies some things about PC gaming that's plain untrue. PC gaming is not confusing, complex, hard to do or figure out. If you can use a computer you likely will find any home console's interface simpler than that and you can game on a PC. If you're playing a Steam game or a game without DRM (rare from bigger companies these days), then it's even easier to figure out.

It is expensive, if you want the maximum graphics and performance a game allows, which for many well ported PC games, is far greater than any home console on the market will be able to do. Most games you can play on lower setting and they will run, assuming your computer was built or purchased with gaming in mind at all. It is often expected at this point, sadly, that PC ports and services are often not as good as console equivalents, a decision made by many publishers who do not think there is enough of a PC market to be worth putting too much effort into satisfying, or any some cases.

You cannot just buy a game and expect it to work well on your PC, you need to understand the minimum requirements and do your research, or have a PC that is very powerful (and expensive), that is the main difference from console. Developers ensure every game will at least run at a certain level of performance on consoles.

I sincerely hope the Steam Machines/Box is successful, not because I desire to play my PC games in a console setting, although the option is nice, but because Steam has built its fortune on giving their customers freedom, while Nintendo and other home console companies insist on trying to hold their customers by the coconuts. In addition to that, Steam will be the only free to play online system that runs the newest games once PS4 and Xbone are out. If Steam's home consoles are successful, and takes business away from Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft, I hope they will have to follow suit with Steam's policies in order to keep their customers.

Personally, I think if Nintendo wishes to keep up with at least Sony and Microsoft, they have to consider some kind of way to offer different performance levels at different prices, like Steam has implied they are doing, so the Wii U will be able to run the big name 3rd party games on a similar level or performance as the PS4 and Xbone. Perhaps have a trade in system for people who have a Wii U already, or some kind of Wii U Plus upgrade for the Wii U. Also, I am not implying that if you own a cheaper/non upgraded Wii U, the games wouldn't run, but their graphics would be reduced, similar to how on PC games, there are different graphics settings to choose depending on your PC's abilities, which is likely what the Steam Machines/Boxs will do.



rjejr said:

Waaay too many questions at this point.

The price is a big one to start.
Will it need "Always on"?
Couch co-op? I hardly play any PC games b/c I like playing couch co-p w/ my kids.
Will other companies like EA get on board?

I know Steam is big. I've have had an account for many years now. But how do you sell this as different than a PC hooked up to a tv, which a lot of people probably already have?

Anybody remember the huge build-up to the Segway unveiling? How many of those do you see around? Even Nintendo had it's Virtualboy and Power Glove. Apple TV has been just a hobby for years. And I don't think their wierd lamp-like PC or cub eversions o fiMAc sol dvery well.

Lots of things in life for Nintendo to worry about, Steam hardware isn't one of them.

I kind of surprised NL even carried this story.



Darknyht said:

Steam is an issue because they know how to run a sale. If Steam can bring that to the console world then Nintendo, MS, and Sony will all have to adapt.



eza said:

The benefits to gamers on other consoles will be that Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft will all have to lower their prices and/or have regular sales in order to compete with Valve.
Hopefully a successful SteamBox will mean that our Nintendo games are cheaper!

There are a few inaccuracies in these comments regarding SteamOS and its use of Linux:
By using Linux and getting NVidia on board (in an amazing turnaround, NVidia are being super helpful to Linux driver developers all of a sudden) Valve are going to be able to get better performance out of the same hardware than Windows.
SteamOS is a customised Linux distribution. Valve will cut out all the unnecessary system services and have a blazingly fast system.
And they have NVidia's game streaming technology, which appears to be very similar to Nintendo's Gamepad streaming tech, so a bottom-end SteamBox will be able to stream a game to your TV from your high-end PC.

Also AMD made an interesting announcement yesterday: an API they call Mantle, which replaces DirectX and offers faster access to their graphics hardware. Apparently it might be open sourced so that it'll run on NVidia hardware as well. It's debut is with Battlefield 4 this year.

All of this is pointing to an extremely capable SteamBox. Not forgetting that anyone is free to put together their own box running SteamOS if they want.

It has the potential to be very disruptive in the industry.
And, apart from with their delivery estimates, how many times have Valve made a mistake so far?
Interesting times...



oreqano said:

I've been waiting for more news on this. I'm a huge fan of Nintendo exclusives and Sony exclusives. Was a big fan of Halo but to me it has lost its appeal. (still do Halo: Combat Evolved LAN parties.) Always loved PC gaming back in the day including unreal, half life, counterstrike, myst series. Haven't been able to keep up with a nice machine. If they make an afforable option that can play all the downloadable content, I will be enjoying my new steamboxmachine. Theres only room for one box. I predict Nin, Sony, Valve will be this generations big 3.



sr388survivor said:

The thing is XBox One, PS4 and PC (Steam Machine or whatever it's called) are pretty much the same thing. I think PS4 and XBone have a lot more to worry about than Wii U. I doubt I'll buy a XBone or PS4 simply because I already have a PC that does things better than those consoles and most of the big games are multiplatform. I've heard many others say similar things.



mercurio2054 said:

I welcome a steam box. Xbox and ps4 both run on directx11. They essentially are PCs. Software security is the only thing separating an Xbox game from running on a windows system.

If anything, game revs will go back to PC or charge a higher price for exclusives in those two systems. Wiiu is its own thing. And it has Nintendo's future and back catalog. I have a wiiu and a very nice PC running steam right now.

Not competition for Nintendo, but a partner.



Legromancer said:

i am genuily exited about the SteamMachine and Steam OS. It will shake up the industry, i believe. I already have a laptop connected to my HDTV and a gamepad. It really works great. This is a smart move from Valve.
Soon they will reveal AAA titles that utilize Steam OS.



Twilight_Crow said:

The Steam Box, now Steam Machines, are a very ambitious project, and it could either fail miserably or become one the best things in videogames. Valve has some guts to try this idea. Since the beginning I've had my eyes on this new console. I don't like to play games on my PC, and because of that I have missed many great Indy games that are up my alley more than any big blockbuster title of these times, one of the Steam Machines could solve my problem.

Imagine a cheap machine that can play most of the Indy games on the market, receiving the same awesome sales that Steam on PC has, I'll be all over it in a second.

Even if Nintendo has its own thing going on, a game machine cheaper than WiiU, that plays thousands of good, cheap games is something to be concerned. Nintendo needs to be careful, because if Valve gets these right, everyone will have a competitor to fear.

For example, In my case, depending on prices, capabilities and games available, I may end up more interested in a powerful Steam Machine instead of a PS4, since so far there are no exclusives announced for it I care for.



mamp said:

I don't really care I play any game I like regardless of what system the game comes out on. I just see this as an opportunity to play more games.



TheAdrock said:

@Ernest_The_Crab "the swappable component would just make people question why get it in the first place when you have a PC that is already highly swappable."
1. Because a PC doesn't play Nintendo IP.
2. Because when developers come out with a new game engine that the Nintendo console can't handle a year after its release, N can simply release a new CPU or GPU cartridge that can handle it. Cheaper for the consumer than buying a new console. Prolongs the life of the Nintendo system.
If today N released an off-the-shelf CPU upgrade for the U (easy slide-in cartridge for dummies) that compared to the upcoming MS/PS consoles in terms of flops and can handle the new Ignite engine... now they're back in the game. ??



CrazyOtto said:

I don't think Steam OS is a threat to the Wii U or even the PS4, I think it's mostly going to affect the Xbox brand.



eza said:

@theadrock13 It's a nice idea, the ever-upgradable console, but Nintendo would be unlikely to do it as it would fragment the hardware base and lead to consumer confusion.

Discussion of emulation is not allowed here as per our Community Rules. Please stop — TBD



Yorumi said:

@eza they tried upgradable consoles back in the 80's and 90's. It just doesn't work. But the thing is there already is an upgradeable console, it's called a pc. A major reason so many more people play console games is specifically because they don't require any upgrading or worrying about specs or drivers or anything else. It's just put the game in and play it.

It gets even worse for devs because this is why so few of them use ad-ons. You can't guarantee someone has the device, so you either have to make the game for the lowest common denominator or artificially limit your market.

The fact that people are suggesting this as though PC's don't exist is all you need to know about how well this would work in practice.



shingi_70 said:


Er steambox can't plat my Sony and Microsoft exclusives. Also SCEJ is working with japnese developers and Microsoft founded an Osaka studio which had behind closed doors meeting at tgs.



AyeHaley said:

@themac2001 Well there will be steam machines for every budget . If you love Nintendo games I would definitely get a Wii U but as these things won't be too expensive, why not get both?
I am a Mac user with outdated hardware so I would love to get a Steam Machine just to play certain old skool or indie games like Rogue Legacy (wonderful steam game!) Or even play several windows games. But if I could only pick one console of course I would pick Wii U.



banacheck said:

A maybe always online PC streaming games no thanks, also the price of it look at the Piston a $1,000 computer in a console. You can build your own PC that'll blow this box out of the water for that price, and thay say the $499.99 XboxOne cost to much. If thay release a lot cheaper version of that box for say $299, it'll just be an underpowered box.



CanisWolfred said:

@bezerker99 Neither game worked for me, either. Hence why I now own them on XBLA. However, those are 2 of only 3 games that don't work on my PC. And I have over 100 games.



Zombie_Barioth said:

I'd say Steam machine and SteamOS has a lot of potential. SteamOS being stand alone is great for power-users who would rather build their own box, something nobody else offers. The machines just need to be marketed right so people understand its not just another prebuilt PC and can run games hassle-free. As long as every machine can run every game it should be fine. if the OS is flexible enough for power-users while remaining simple even better.

I don't think Nintendo has as much to worry about, just about every PC gamer I've heard from or talked to has said they want the unique games that only Nintendo offers. Sony and Microsoft offer an experience too similar to that of PCs. For them its going to be that ecosystem and console-exclusive content thats important.



CanisWolfred said:

@bezerker99 So do I. Certain games occasionally have problems with certain builds. It's the reason I hate PC gaming, really. But it's not Steam's fault since every game is different, ever PC is different, and it's it's not like just because you had problems with those specific games, you'll never be able to play any Steam game ever, because as I said before, I've had problems with those games, and I can still play plenty of others.

Do you remember what specs you had?



NMH-TRI said:

I guess I don't know enough about the Steam boxes to care. My laptop runs every PC purchase I make through steam no problem. HDMI cable to TV. USB KB and Mouse to play from the couch while using my big screen as the monitor. Seems I've had a steam box for a long time...



MaverickHunterX said:

The Steambox seems kinda pointless.

From what I understand, it's a just console that can play PC games on the TV. Can't PCs and laptops do that already?

I mean that's what the HDMI output on latops and PC inputs on HDTVs are for. Sooooo, what's the point?

Instead of pissing away money on this, Valve should have been working on Half-Life 3.



Yanchamaru said:

50 million people have a Steam account. Just think if only a quarter of these members buys a Steam Machine? This will have a huge impact on Sony/MS/Nintendo console sales



progx said:

I don't think the Steam box will affect Nintendo nearly that much. Sony and Microsoft have more to worry about with Steam since it directly connects with their costumer base. Nintendo has been able to be the universal answer to video games, plus offering unique products that the Steam, Xbox or Playstation will not be able to develop. Nintendo will be around for a long time. Steam will have very little effect on their products.



uneek said:

i think the wii u being unique will have no problem if the steam machine turns out to be ok. i think ps4 and xb1 will be in big trouble because their going the same way as the pc. plus nintendo has a lot of games that you can only play on a nintendo console.



eza said:

@MaverickHunterX @NMH-TRI a lot of PC gamers have had a steambox equivalent for some time.
Back around the turn of the century I had a PC running Win98 hooked up to a TV with two wireless gamepads. My flatmate and I called it the ZBox (we put it together just after MS announced they were releasing a console called the Xbox) and even knocked up a controller-friendly UI for it. (We were young unemployed programmers at the time)

The point of the SteamBox could be to try and recapture those older people who used to build their own gaming PCs but don't have the time any more (or can't easily put a gaming PC in the living room), and to capture the Xbone/PS4 segment with "OMGZ GRAPHICS!".

A few internet commentators have mentioned that if Valve announce Half Life 3 as a SteamOS exclusive (for the first six months or whatever) then that will help to sell an awful lot of SteamBoxes.



DarkLloyd said:

i may pick up a steambox in the future to go along with my wiiu/ps4 and maybe xbox one *if they make a kinectless bundle 3 or 4 years down the road

why would i? well sales for one espeically on the indie games and so forth which you can get for a couple of bucks or less compared to the same product put out on competing console companies which kind of makes sense because the service is closed ish

at least with how the pc operates in service terms your less likely to lose your purchases providing you have an internet service to get it. on console services you get only a decade or so before it potientally closes

with that in mind thats going to give them competition to lower prices.



Jeremyx7 said:

I've always felt that Valve is the only gaming/software company closest to Nintendo in terms of putting out 'quality' content. Most of their games are very unique and extremely well designed just like Nintendo's. I still prefer Nintendo overall over Valve of course mainly because how much more top quality AAA IPs Nintendo has.

I'm still waiting for Half Life 2 Episode 3!! D:



Senario said:

@BanjoThreeie I have to disagree, Naughty Dog puts out good Interactive Movies but in terms of gameplay they lack. Most of their games for me rank 8.5-9/10 but are highly overrated. Valve on the other hand is on par with Nintendo. Now the only thing they need to do is learn to count to 3.



R_Champ said:


I agree with you.

I love Nintendo. Love 'em to death, but they miss out on great third-party games, but I can't stand Sony, MS, their politics, or their fanboys. I was definitely going PC this gen, but this may give me a new option. I'll be keeping an eye on this.



Macarony64 said:

@Philip_J_Reed you have a gaming PC right? If so you are not doing anything new. Same games will be on both steam box and PC because if valve stop supporting PC his money income will drop and fast.



rmeyer said:

Nintendo is a household name. You don't want to give your kids consoles like the ps3 or the xbox. Steam is only a threat and a huge threat it is to Microsoft and Sony. If Mario was on PC then Nintendo would have a problem but don't expect them to have any worries. The 3ds is exploding even with smartphone and iPads being the greatest thing.



jorgem696 said:

I wonder if nintendo is going to do something wuth the steam box because valve is aloing 3rd party companys to make there own ?



Senario said:

@CanisWolfred Jak & Daxter no, probably...The game I got on PS2 couldn't hold my attention, although it is not my cup of tea so no judgement there. Uncharted and the Last of us, yes. While the game series is good in the story it's gameplay is more or less a typical third person shooter. Honestly I did not say they are bad, they are good but they had a few problems. Enemy AI seems to be a problem with some games like The Last of Us for one. To me the games put the story out in front and presents it much like a movie and an experience rather than a game. And when a game to me feels like "this would be better as a Movie" it becomes a problem as games are not movies, they are games and should be merited on how fun the gameplay is. Also, uncharted is essentially Indiana Jones.

Again, I am not saying "Omg dis game is horrible" I'm just saying they don't deserve 10/10s.



SCAR said:

I only see this taking sales away from PC, because that's where it literally originates from.

I'd say Microsoft has technically had the PC in your living room since the original Xbox. That's why people liked Xbox in the first place.

Though Xbox doesn't offer as many games(how many random or lazy made games on Steam are worth mentioning anyway?), there's still plenty in a backlog from all the companies, including Nintendo.

If Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft see this as a threat to their market share, I'm pretty sure they'll just dump every worthwhile game from their past consoles onto their online shops.

This is easily countered. It would arguably take more time than just loading up Steam and having it there, but it's not impossible.



Senario said:

@R_Champ Technically this is kinda "PC" XD. Although I think my main problem with a steam box is when a game is NOT on steam and you happen to want to play it. Some games like Path of Exile are still in beta but are incredibly fun, and I don't believe I've seen League of Legends on Steam even though it is currently one of the most popular games in the world.

That said, I'm interested in a steam box. As long as it is reasonably priced compared to gaming PCs.



SCAR said:

Uncharted 2 was a 6, IMO. The gameplay was horrible, but mainly because of the AI and linear path in the games.

I'm sorry, but I think Naughty Dogs games are crappy as hell. I liked Uncharted: Drakes Fortune, but everything else was garbage.

I'm not even trolling.

If you look at the Beyond Two Souls pic on the PS3 home browser, they have William Defow and Ellen Page as "actors". That just screams MOVIE, and it reflects on the gameplay, IMO.

The presentation is good, but the content is lacking overall.



SCAR said:

Sony's movie game approach is exactly why PS isn't really a gaming machine for me.



Ernest_The_Crab said:

@theadrock13 Didn't they try that with the expansion pack back in the N64 days? That didn't turn out very well if I remember right.

I think I may have misunderstood part of your original comment as well. I thought you were talking about another console that would play all 3 companies' games.

Also, quite surprising to get a relatively polite and well-mannered comment. I've been running into more and more rude or inappropriate responses recently (obviously there are exceptions like this).



Senario said:

@BanjoThreeie And what are their arguments for why Zelda isn't good? Please enlighten me. I highly doubt a line is drawn between "I can only like Naughty dog" and "I can only like Zelda". There are people who like both and I never said that Naughty dog's games were bad. I enjoyed Uncharted 1, 2, and 3. 2 Was the overall best of the bunch.

To me the games Naughty Dog makes stuffs the story too much into your face and it gets in the way of gameplay. Compare this to another third party developer and their games...say Bioshock Infinite. A great game which was based ALL AROUND gameplay but had optional sections where you could find more about the story of the game. Again, I am not giving them bad scores, 8.5 at lowest and around 9/10. I hardly think that is unfair since the games do have their own set of flaws.

And besides that, I don't rate many games even in the Zelda series a 10/10. 10/10 is a special score that I believe only belongs to the best of the best of games. And on my list are games such as Wind Waker, Majora's Mask, Devil May Cry 3, Persona 4, and Knights of the Old Republic(not the MMO, first game). Off the top of my head.



mikeyman64 said:

Most steam users know how to rout an HDMI cable to their big screen. I'm not sure these boxes really have that much appeal. It's just too easy to use what you have, especially since most PC gamers are of the problem-solving type anyhow.



OGGamer said:

@Robottiimu2000 You took the words right out of my mouth . Steam box is the only other system that intrigues me . I will most definitely keep an open mind and wallet about it .



Senario said:

@Snkfiend And? Did I say anything about all their games being 10/10 all the time? Mario has never been a 10/10 game series to me but I do enjoy their games. Just like I enjoy the Uncharted series, not a 10/10 game series but if that was my criteria for playing games I would have played a grand total of about maybe 5 games.

I fail to see what point you are trying to make here. If any point.



JimLad said:

One thing Steam Machines will definitely have going in their favour is value for money (in software at least). I would love to see them put pressure on the established console business model. Making things like digital distribution, competitive pricing, and real indie support standard across the whole industry.
Not sure how they're gonna sell it to non-PC gamers though. :/
They need to make at least one of them affordable, and then back it up with some serious exclusives.



Senario said:

@Snkfiend To be fair, just because Naughty Dog is a first party Sony doesn't mean he has to like SONY itself. I don't like the fanbase of sony and I don't like the company. If I wasn't a PC gamer I would probably get an Xbox(and that is including steambox being "PC")

If all you are going to do is hate on people and make no attempt at a legitimate argument why are you here? You don't seem to be much of a Nintendo fan either so why are you here? I'm here because I like Nintendo's first party stuff and I have a PC for everything else. You claim that we bend over backwards for the company but the thing is we don't. If they fail to put out a sufficiently good product we don't buy it. Sticker Star was one of the more recent games that showed this.

@SCAR392 And you, while I agree that the games are heavily cinematic and it detracts from them being games I don't agree they are "trash" they are "decent" to "good" but definitely do not deserve anything above a 9. A game that receives a 6 would have much much more problems than a Naughty Dog game does. Although I cannot fault you for your own opinion. Besides, I think Resident Evil 6 is a solid 8 game. I think the problem here is that some people are taking what you said as a personal attack instead of your own thoughts on the game.



SCAR said:

It is only possible to defend against those that are offensive.

No one is "bending over backwards", or a "tool". See how I am not the one being inconsiderate?



Senario said:

@Snkfiend Look, you need to stop with the personal attacks. He just stated his OPINION. Just because he doesn't share it with you doesn't mean you have to personally attack him and call him a tool or make accusations about him that have no basis. No matter which way you look at it you are in the wrong here, he is defending his opinion and you are outright insulting him.

And making assumptions about me and Nintendo fans as a whole. I get on your case for your actions because I have seen them and I don't believe it would be good for you or your health to stay here since you constantly argue with people.



CanisWolfred said:

@Senario - Okay, I see where you're coming from. I don't quite agree - I feel the cinematics enhance the gameplay - but it's not worth arguing.



Senario said:

@Snkfiend Look, if you had just said "I'm sorry I'll let you have your opinion." It would've been fine, end of conversation! But clearly you like arguing, the Wii U will be fine. I've justified my purchase already with a single game, Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate.

I like how you say you respect people's opinion but right after you completely ignore what you said and try to start an argument instead of saying "Ok thats cool". You need a better hobby.



DarkLloyd said:

The Comment about Sony games being just movies dont know if you were implying a statement in your arguement with whoever on here the only ones that would be considered cinematic are the uncharted trilogy and the last of us plus the quantic dream games otherwise everything else are far from being movies cut scenes aside.



UnseatingKDawg said:

There's still one thing a Steam Box can't do, and that's play Nintendo games. Or Sonic Lost World. Or Sonic Colors.

I know I'm a Steam supporter, but I'll just stick with my laptop to play games that I can't on Wii U.



capitalism said:

Do steam machines have Mario, Zelda, DK, Wii(insert game title here), Metroid, F-Zero, Kid Icarus, Earthbound, Kirby, Smash Bros, Pikmin, Wario, or any other major Nintendo brand on them? Didn't think so. In business, it's all about brands and brand loyalty which Nintendo has both covered. Nuff said.



Senario said:

@Snkfiend Lol I see you baiting out an argument or hypocrisy. So I raise you a question and a statement, "Have you played the game? It is a lot of fun."

Tri had a lack of polish, but 3 Ultimate was much better. And I completely understand if it isn't your thing, it isn't some of my friends' thing due to the difficulty.



Senario said:

@Snkfiend Great! Ok then, good on you. A shame you think it is garbage as I think it is a highly underrated series in the West. Hopefully they bring over MH4 in the next year or two as the series does have its fans in non-Japan areas.



x-mas_mii said:

to everyone who thinks that apple is going to make their own console, I have one word for you.



SneakyStyle said:

Erm... Really steam? I think it's going to be a lot easier and more efficient to just stick to my PC for steam and other PC related games, no way i'd pay just for a box that only plays games sold by steam... Such a waste of money.



Senario said:

@BanjoThreeie For which games? If it is Mario and Zelda, Mario has similar gameplay for the 2D marios only though I cannot say that it is "bad".

Flat story is not something that is applicable to Zelda with Majora's Mask, Skyward Sword, and Wind Waker among others. I don't see the HUD thing. Voice acting is not needed in games, otherwise games like Journey would be complete crap(quite the contrary, it isn't). Some of the best games lacked voices or were completely text based, Fire Emblem up until Awakening was like this if I remember correctly.

Music is always reworked in amazing and beautiful ways to fit the game. Much of Skyward Sword's Music was all original and very good. And Mario music is pretty diverse in its own way although the New Super Mario bros series has been a bit too similar.

Specific examples of all these things please for your argument.

Edit: Thinking about frame rate, I hardly think that any of the Zelda or Mario games did bad in that area as a lot of other games chug along at low frame rates such as Skyrim. And that was a decently fun game, Oblivion was better though.



Senario said:

@BanjoThreeie It isnt rose colored glasses but more of you cannot judge a good game off of its lack of voice acting, its fps, or its graphics. If that were true then almost all of the highly acclaimed and good games of this gen regardless of platform would be terrible in the FPS section and bad games. Looking at older games low FPS = bad games INCLUDES one of your favorite games, Perfect Dark if you are under the assumption bad FPS means a bad game. Singling out nintendo and calling their fps bad while not criticizing other games like your perfect dark, like skyrim(console), like the last of us, ect ect is a bit selective. And fps does not make a good game automatically. Journey is an indie game on PS that has reached high acclaim. But to extend the idea that voice acting makes a good game, what do you have to say for games like final fantasy 7? Animal crossing? Fire emblem 7-11? Megaman 2? Early sonic games? Tetris? And these are just a few games that had no sense of language in what the characters said. If you mean all sounds made by the characters counts as voice acting then many of these games have that.

The music for skyward sword was very original for the most part and beautifully orchestrated. Much of the music in Wind Waker was also very new. Zelda and its story are clearly important with skyward sword having one of the most touching stories in the franchise to go along with games like a link to the past, oot, MM, and wind waker.



ledreppe said:

Nah, pointless me getting a Steam Box, my PC can run everything I want to play and it's already hooked up to my t.v. I'd just be getting another piece of hardware that downloads and plays steam content that I can already do on my PC. I'll be buying a new PC in a couple of years anyway, so I'd have older hardware if I got the Steam Box next year. I'd rather spend the money on a PS4 , cause I can't get PS exculsives on a PC.



JaxonH said:

Not necessarily. They will be if they provide the same content, but Nintendo is different than MS and Sony because they maintain such a massive portfolio of exclusive 1st party content that isn't available anywhere else.

That's why it doesn't really matter how many smartphones and tablets there are, Nintendo 3DS thrives because you can't get that content anywhere else. I think Wii U will be the same way in a few years once it has a massive library of must-have exclusives too numerous to count. All the competition in the world won't fill that gaping hole that gamers desire to fill, which can only be filled with Nintendo 1st party titles.



Senario said:

@JaxonH +A few exclusives that may not be from Nintendo but have convinced me to get their console(in this case console). Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate! Nintendo was smart to pick this game up. Now if only they had picked up Atlus, hopefully Sega does a good job with Atlus though.



GraveLordXD said:

@SCAR392 yeah I don't see what all the infatuation with these movie games either your basically paying $60 to watch a half azz movie with a little bit of gameplay sprinkled on top ahh damn it I just made myself look like a tool



brucelebnd said:

honestly I don't think it will do much.

dedicated PC gamers are a different breed, ask one of them to play an FPS on console and they'll scoff at you. they like what the PC offers for controls. they spend time and money on their rigs. it's a different culture and I don't think it will cross over.

secondly DRM is on Steam. people hated it about the XBox One so much so that microsoft took it off. is Steam going to do the same?



Senario said:

@mercurio2054 Ah I must have missed those. I wish I had played wow during the golden years of its popularity but sadly I could neither run it nor pay the subscription fee at the time. I had not heard of Lineage though, sorry.



Boyoshi said:

i would agree but personally I see Nintendo and steam on two different ends. I have a gaming pc, so inevitably I go to steam to get all of the new releases for dirt cheap. However if I ever want to play something different or innovative I'll look strait to Nintendo. That's why I don't believe these two are strong competitors, their both concentrating on different people and audiences. with different price tags.



SanderEvers said:

Nintendo should release some of their games on PCs as well I'd love to play Mario legally on my PC.

OUYA runs on a smartphone OS and plays simple games like Angry Birds. SteamBox runs on it's own OS based on Linux and optimized for gaming. This won't be the same, however I do believe that a SteamBox will be more expensive than an XBOX ONE. However you could just create one yourself (install SteamOS (which is free) on your PC and connect it to your TV)



Moshugan said:

What keeps me from getting too excited about Steam OS, and the Steam Machines, is the fact that just a fraction of my 200 game library will be playable on it. I expect that most of those games won't be getting Linux ports.
So looking to the future, it could be amazing, but it's value is greatly diminished by the fact that I will still need my Windows PC to be able to play my whole collection of Steam games.
If Steam has 3000 games, then Linux is able to play only 1% of those games natively. There's only 300 games on Linux Steam, and most of those are rather unexciting (imo) indies.



Rei7 said:

This thing is not cheap which needs an awesome PC rig to run. Who is going to put their noise and huge rig on the living room. I don't. I know there is going to be steam box and all which is probably gonna be small but will it run everything in ultra graphics? Nope. This will never effect or change anything IMO. It won't effect the Wii U, PS3, PS4, Xbox One and other consoles as it seems more than a product for die hard steam fans.



elstif said:

This is bad news for Microsoft and Sony but no that much for Nintendo (not good but still not that bad) I´m seeing a lot more market taken from MS and Sony to Steam than market from N to Steam
I´ll go for this without a doubt over a PS4 or XBONE as I would be able to get most of the same games and have flexibility with the hardware and controls.
I don´t play COD (or many FPS) but it still amaze me so many people doing it with a pad. Keyboard and mouse is the way to go, even better nunchuck and remote is pretty awesome for aiming.
You could dual system boot a steam box (the Steam OS for games and Windows/linux/OSX as a PC) to use in your living room for everything

Nintendo have their own big games (they will be a lot, give it time) only playable on their systems.
For the most part I can see a lot of Wii U + PC (thats me) or Wii U + PS4 or WiiU+XBONE setups
Microsoft, Sony and Steam will fight each other because they will offer a lot of the same but there´s a decent portion of the market (could be bigger or smaller) that goes to the unique big N and his awesome games



edhe said:

I think I've only played three games (and own a fourth one I've yet to play) that recommends the use of a gamepad, and so I don't think it's really for me.

I've got several strategy games I wouldn't mind playing on the comfort of my TV, but they'd be unplayable without some sort of pointer control.



SkywardLink98 said:

@CanisWolfred Well I got a premade PC for $500 and it can play any game on Steam (any game I've tried at the very least), and since I imagine they'll get quite a pretty penny from the amounts of games people will buy for the console/pc hybrid, it's quite possible it will be sold at a loss.



SkywardLink98 said:

@JaxonH Steam has plenty exclusives of it's own my friend. Nintendo first party franchises are amazing games, but Valve offers Portal, Half-Life, Team Fortress, Counter-Strike, Dota, and a few other odds and ends. As well as that it offers plenty of games that are on Steam. I think that would fill my "gaping hole".



edhe said:


I don't know if that was what you were suggesting, but of all those games you listed, only DOTA 2 is a steam exclusive.

Steam do offer Portal, Half-Life et al, as well as it's whole library of third party games at competitive prices (with regular sales ranging from 10% to 90% off), which to me is its most attractive selling point.



edhe said:

I think the problem Nintendo has here is that you can buy a downloadable game on the Wii U for £40, and it will appear on steam for maybe £20 without discounts. But when those discounts hit, that £20 becomes £10 or £5!

This goes for almost every indie game announced for the WiiU - if I'm correct, a lot of them will be appearing on the PC Steam platform, and at a vastly reduced price.



Maxobiwan said:

@edhe Napoleon total War, Shogun2 Total War, Rome 2 total War, Company Of Heroes 2, Counter Strike Source, Skyrim (perfect modded edition), Fairy Bloom Fresia, Skullgirl (complete), Surgeon Simulator 2013, Team Fortress2 (more hats edition), They Bleed Pixels, Killing Floor, terraria (playable edition), Civilisation 5, Black Mesa : Source, Sniper elite V2, YsI&II, Ys Origin, Torchlight 2 (playable and moddable edition), Wargame : European Escalation, Legend of grimrock, Dino D-Day, Grotesque Tactics, Jamestown...

Mostly of them are Steam Exclusive (or so good that a console version should not exist).

This "console" could cost 1000$, that won't bother me because I allready have 500 games and every future games will be cheap (excepted crap of duty series)



Jeremyx7 said:

@BanjoThreeie Not to flare up a argument or anything but Naughty Dog is nowhere near as crafty as Valve or Nintendo IMHO. Not even remotely close. I've played their games and most of them are average to me and in many people's opinions with the exception of Uncharted 2 & 3(first one was generic).

I can think of so many other developers right now that have accomplished more than Naughty Dog has in less time. And Nintendo is above every one of them in that field.



Araknie said:

I hope you're right.
I was talking about this

So i know they will have western exclusives both Xbox One and PS4.

My whole point is that Xbox One we already know is not gonna make a profit in Japan and it's gonna release in 2014 in that region, when the PS4 could have great Japanese developers from the start and that news says they're gonna delay it 3 months to febraury and even then they will have little to offer for the japanese audicence because they wanna compete with Xbox One making the PS4 an appeal for Western audicence.
Not quite like when i played the PS1 and owned a PS2, eh? Not quite the evolution and rival for Nintendo, not quite the whole reason they got out the SNES project...

Think it this way: in Japan this fall they will only the Wii U as a new console, they will get a new Sonic, Mario and DKC. PS4 and Xbox One will release in different times during 2014 in that land with a smaller number of titles in their line-up.

I'm not saying all the world is favorable to Nintendo but clearly the Japanese market is for Ninty free to roam from now to, at least, February.
Make your own conclusions.



Rafie said:

Wow what in THEE heck is going on here?! LOL All of these comments...oh boy, oh boy! I read the title and just knew that something was about to go down. Seems I'm late to the party. Here's my 2 cents.

For those saying that Nintendo has nothing to worry about and this really only affects Sony and Microsoft....that is wrong. It can potentially overall impede the Wii U's success in specific territories. We can't keep using Nintendo's first party titles excuse forever. Sony has a lot of great first party titles as well and they are threatened. MS still has some ways to go before I can say that they have a lot of good first party. While there is a few, it's not many.

Also I won't to point out the "interactive movie" term people keep throwing out there concerning Sony's big 2 games (Uncharted, The Last Of Us). They are GAMES! Just because the graphics is phenomenal and the storyline is intriguing doesn't make it any less than what it is...which is a game! Not bashing anyone's opinion about anything, but please with the whole interactive movie jibberish! If Nintendo put out a game like that, they would be getting praise after praise. I would praise them too. It would be something out of the norm that would work. It shows diversity in their line up outside of the whole platforming and party games. I'm not saying that's all Nintendo has, but that's pretty much how the general public sees Nintendo these days. I'm happy with my Wii U and 3DS (big ups to 3DS for surpassing just about every console as of recently). I just hope that Nintendo is willing to branch out just a little with their genre of games.

@Jeremyx7 If you're not trying to flair up an argument, you lost that already. Naughty Dog is a great development team. There's a reason why their games have either won GOTY, or have been in the running for it. Nintendo doesn't beat every and anything. Otherwise they would be in a better position with the Wii U. Valve doesn't always create phenomenal games either. Like L4D is a great series, but it's nothing more than just shooting zombies. What else is there? Not trying to minimize them, I'm just making a point about your claim with Valve and Nintendo against others. There are some devs that are better than others, but the ones who are the "best" is up for interpretation of the public. I'm not going to downplay MS for Halo or Gears, Sony for Uncharted/TLoU, or Nintendo for Mario, Zelda, Kirby etc.



Jeremyx7 said:

@Rafie Like I said in my first sentence in my last reply, IMHO. Never said it's a fact to believe what I believe. Of course I wouldn't expect that of everyone. What is a fact however is the Fact that Nintendo and Valve as well as many other gaming companies have accomplished MUCH MORE than Naughty Dog ever has and that is a Fact.

Whether you love their accomplishments or hate their accomplishments they are still indeed accomplishments in that they added/offered much more new in depth ideas for the gaming community worldwide. That's all I'm saying here as far as what Nintendo and Valve have contributed to the community. Everything else is opinion.



Rafie said:

@Jeremyx7 Let me say this, just because you say "fact" doesn't mean it's fact. Nor does it provide any more potency to your claim. Now I can see you don't like Naughty Dog and that's cool. However, just because Nintendo have accomplished MUCH MORE than Naughty Dog doesn't make them any less good. I mean seriously why is this a genital measuring contest now?! I can offer the same sentence you replied to me with. Whether YOU love or hate their accomplishments, they are still accomplishments and Naughty Dog is a great studio. There are other devs that accomplished more than Valve has too. So your fact claim is invalid! Nintendo is in a league of it's own and has solidified "gaming god status" for anyone to refute that claim. Still Valve is accomplished, but there are others that are just as great...and/or better! Then again...this is just opinion, right?!



Jeremyx7 said:

@Rafie "Whether YOU love or hate their accomplishments, they are still accomplishments and Naughty Dog is a great studio." - Your Quote

And you'd be right. I never said Naughty Dog didn't accomplish anything at all did I?

"many other gaming companies have accomplished MUCH MORE than Naughty Dog ever has and that is a Fact." - My Quote

This is a fact because it's true and can be proven true by various fields of data not only by the numbers but by the positive cause & effects each achievement created for the industry. Not because I said it was fact. So this is a valid statement rather than a claim as you put it.

You gotta stop misinterpreting my comments.



Lunapplebloom said:

@Twilight_Crow Well, there is one for me, and that's Kingdom Hearts 3 so far. But that's not enough for me to go and get it day one. I can wait a few years for the PS4 to drop in price before claiming another Sony console, like I did for my PS3.

Color me intrigued with this option that valve is going to start offering. I've heard rumblings of Valve working on a console like device, but I never even knew they were showing it off till last weekend. This could be a really nice option if all goes well, and if they do things right. Nintendo will always remain my number one console purchase no matter what though. Can't go on without my dose of Nintendo franchises.



eza said:

@Jeremyx7 just because you say something is a fact does not make it a fact.
Your 'fact' is a theory until you have proven it to be true (with your "various fields of data").
You'd also need to tighten up your definitions of 'many other' and 'MUCH MORE' to start approaching an actual fact.
Until then, it's only ever your opinion.

Basically, @Rafie made a kindly-worded comment to allow you to realise your mistake, and to give you the opportunity to change the language you use in future. But no, you had to come back "wrong and strong" didn't you?

You gotta stop using the wrong words which make people 'misinterpret' your comments.



Kirk said:

Just had a thought...

If Valve wants to launch this new console with a bang, wouldn't it be a good idea to have a killer first party launch title bundled with the system too; like Half Life 3...

Now that would be a majorly big deal in my opinion.



micronean said:

This competes more with the other x86 PC based systems: Sony and Microsoft.
They will all be running the same games (for the most part). Whichever one is most affordable, and user-friendly, will get the best sales. And, of course, whichever has the best online infrastructure.



Dogpigfish said:

I don't like the concept of cloud based ownership, but if it's on a secured harddrive with an instruction manual then I'm fine. I think Wii U makes digital games accessible because they can't pull the plug on ownership. What confuses me about the service hog consoles is their ability to pull the plug on ownership if they fail. What happens if Valve files for bankruptcy? We fundamentally lose everything. I'm a big fan of Valve, but even the big guys are failing and I don't see them as any different. They are simply too small and unreliable. Their service is exceptional, but I hope they sell on Wii U or PS3, because otherwise I can't support them. They should consider a Netflix like service on Wii U, then the world would be a better place.



MAB said:

The problem with PC games is the constant need to upgrade hardware on a yearly basis just to be able to play the big AAA titles



Dr_Corndog said:

And how'd we get started on Naughty Dog? Let's limit the discussion to those studios who know how to make games.



eza said:

To all who believe it will affect MS and Sony more than Nintendo: In terms of games this may be true, but what about the expense to the consumer?
Which box will a consumer buy? The one that's cheaper but only has Nintendo games, or another box that has all games except for Nintendo games?

In an ideal world you'd buy both boxes, but if you can only afford to buy one then you probably won't buy the Nintendo one unless you're a Nintendo fan.

I tell my friends and family until I'm bored and blue in the face that Nintendo make the 'best' games in terms of pure fun. I believe this wholeheartedly, and I demonstrate these games to them whenever I can.
But these days the people I know have families to support and can't justify buying a new piece of hardware just because I showed them one or two fun games.

They know that for a lower total cost of ownership (hardware plus software purchases over time) they will have almost as much 'fun' as me by using the PC hardware that they already have.
Not only that, but with Steam they'll be able to play their games on any computer they own - as well as any of my Steam games which I'll be able to offer them with Family Sharing, which is another big plus for Valve.

If a low-end SteamBox can stream existing PC games to a TV for a low price, and a high-end SteamBox can play games with better graphics than Xbone/PS4, then all of the 'big three' should watch out, because a sale for Valve is a potentially lost sale for them.



DilMan33 said:


We are long passed the point where one platform will have everything a long time ago. Sales figures don't matter as much as having a business that is sustanable.
There are challenges for all three hardware platform holders at the moment and all three are feeling the strain to the change to 'digital' and greater competition.

To overcome the threat of Steam, you need solid first party software. And over any long-term peroid, history has shown that Nintendo just has it and are in the safest position.



eza said:

@MadAussieBloke I dunno about that. If you plan your upgrades carefully then you can keep going for a while. Especially these days now that upgrades seem to be more about parallel processing and pushing higher resolutions.
Ever since I started building my own PCs in the '90s I've only upgraded every 5 - 6 years. I've usually upgraded the graphics card halfway through the life of the machine, though!
Today I'm still running an old Intel Quad from 2008. I upgraded the GPU two years ago and it's only with the very latest games that I've had to drop the detail levels down a bit to still get 60FPS @ 1920x1200.
(CPU and GPU overclocked, of course - doubt I could get away with it otherwise)

Might upgrade next year though - the new ATI graphics cards look good, and maybe Intel will release some desktop CPUs with 6+ cores for a reasonable price...maybe...



JaxonH said:

I guess what I was trying to say was alot of people love Nintendo games, for which there is no substitute. If you love Zelda, DKC, Metroid, Mario, Pikmin, Fire Emblem, Xeno series, or even just the random IPs Nintendo puts out like Wonderful 101, and those are the games you enjoy playing, then that's what you're going to buy.

Not saying other platforms aren't legit, but , nothing could ever "replace" Nintendo for me. I'll just buy the other platforms in addition to, rather than in place of...



eza said:

@DilMan33 true that.
They'll always put out great 1st-party software, but they might have to adjust their digital pricing policies in order to compete with Steam.
It's not the same as mobile games versus DS games, where there's a vast difference in quality between the two.
It's the main reason I buy cross-platform releases on PC rather than Wii U: I get more for my money.
Nintendo are getting better at this with the eShop and its regular discounts, and hopefully the threat of Steam will make them give heavier discounts more frequently.

@MadAussieBloke lol my long-winded point was that you can have a viable gaming PC for many years if you buy decent components to begin with.

Unless you want to play Crysis. Crysis has always run best on hardware that doesn't exist at the time of release. Can't wait to finally get 60 FPS in Crysis 3 on my 32-core CPU in five years time!



GraveLordXD said:

@Rafie the biggest problem with movie games that I have is that gameplay is a second thought for instance nothing felt different to me from uncharted to last of us minus the platforming areas it felt like the same game with a different story and characters , once you get that story what's the point of ever playing it again? To me there is none
Games seems like they are trying to hard to be like movies instead of a game and there is no replay value in that
If Nintendo would do that type of thing I would be extremely disappointed I don't want to spend most of the time watching cinematics I don't mind story in my games I love a good story I just don't want it forced on me like most games are now
Not trying to bash on naughty because I think they are extremely talented I think I'm pretty done with those kinds of games for now



MAB said:

@eza So you will buy Crysis 4 now but won't play it properly for another 10 years... What sort of gamer are you



themac2001 said:

@AyeHaley Thanks for your opinion. Yeah, i'll probably get a Wii U this year and buy a Steam Box/Machine next year. My Windows 7 computer is fairly old, but it has a good processor, so i think i can cope till 2014.



SkywardLink98 said:

@edhe But none of Valve's games are on the Wii U are they? If they really want this to be a console competitor, they won't launch any new ones on consoles.



BestBuck15 said:

I reckon if valve did release a console it would have minimum success, they might be big, but they're not big enough to compete with the big boys. I'd also love if apple made a console and messed up everything and lost a fortune. That's how I feel about apple.



element187 said:

@theadrock13 Remember you are posting on a gaming website and most gamers are pretty much marxist that believe companies should give us free things and complain when companies try to make a profit.



Bariand said:

For me, the problem with Steam is that I can't own the majority of games, because they must be installed first and a installer is never provided. That's different from buying a physical copy of a Wii U video game. I have an Steam account, but I have a GOG account too: if the game is on GOG and on Steam, I always choose GOG, since there is no DRM and they provide the installer every time. Anyway, the majority of Steam games I have are best played in front of a PC, with WASD+Mouse, so this big picture doesn't work for me anyway...



TheAdrock said:

@element187 "most gamers are pretty much marxist that believe companies should give us free things and complain when companies try to make a profit."

Lulz... element187 wins the internet today.



Philip_J_Reed said:

@Kirk (163)
EXACTLY what I was thinking.

I don't want to get my hopes up or anything...but yeah. That's my thought as well.



Rafie said:

@LDXD Well my friend every game isn't perfect. I guess the same can be said of Mario games. You know with the platforming and all. Not saying they're not good, but it can get stale after many iterations. Is that my true opinion of However, some of the community feels that way. Which is why Nintendo lost some of its fans to the other 2.

My stance is this, why downplay a game for what it offers. You all keep saying "movie games", but that doesn't negate it from being a game. Would you agree that most Nintendo games are "kiddy"? I hope that answer is no and nor should people keep saying that they are kiddy games. Same difference. It's not movie games, they are games that offer something different.

I don't think that Naughty Dog was going for the whole "movie" thing. They want the player to actually feel as though they are in a post apocalyptic crisis and even made the game to look like it. All I'm saying here is that Nintendo aren't the only ones trying to give the gamers something different. Other devs should be praised for trying and succeeding in their efforts to enhance gameplay that's good quality.



Rafie said:

@eza I didn't even get his last post because he didn't add my name to it. Still I was going to reply back (because I'm argumentative like that), but you basically said what I would have replied back with. I just don't get why Naughty Dog is the topic here anyway. They are good devs. The MUCH MORE thing was killing me. LOL I mean there are plenty of devs who make games of recent times that are MUCH MORE better than Nintendo and especially Valve. These 2 aren't the best, although Nintendo definitely has the debatable respect as the best. Valve is great, but not good enough to be put on the pedestal of Nintendo. Great things will come with Valve. Their Steam sales are unbeatable and some of the games they have are the most wanted amongst the gaming community. I won't take anything from them in that aspect. I'm just saying, give others a chance and don't downplay what they offer to the community.



Jeremyx7 said:

@Rafie@ eza

I think the issue here is both of you feel I was downplaying most companies in comparison to Nintendo/Valve (which I wasn't) and in turn you two got defensive. I think highly of numerous game companies and appreciate just about every well crafted game they all put out. Even if I find a developer average I can still acknowledge what they have to offer to the extent that they can and in turn give them a chance.

Honestly, most of what I said was opinion from the start, this really didn't have to be a long winded debate. The 'fact' part can be proven if one simply researches a game company's credentials and reads about how they've effected the gaming community as a whole. I didn't provide 'evidence' here because I thought it was pretty common knowledge to most. If not well than you can find the evidence online right now in front of you if you really cared about accuracy before jumping to a conclusion that I was just making it up.

It's very very simple.



Rafie said:

@Jeremyx7 I think the issue here is that you were downplaying Naughty Dog, in particular. Your wording suggested that everyone is so much more better than ND. In some cases that's true. ND certainly isn't the best developer, but neither is Valve, and in some cases, not Nintendo either. I didn't see in your post where you praised what ND has done as of lately. You were fixated on how much more better everyone else is compared to them. I'm still trying to figure out why ND was even the topic in the first place.

I didn't try to disprove your notion about Valve and Nintendo accomplishing more. My argument is more on the fact that you targeted ND for it. Why not include others in it?! I can make the same argument about Valve. There are more devs whom accomplished MUCH MORE than Valve. That's also a fact that can be researched. Also where in my post did I say you were making it up?! I said your claim stating other devs have accomplished more than ND was invalid because there are other devs who have accomplished more than the ones you were defending. Circle of life in gaming!

Don't know if you were being cheeky there with your last sentence or not, but I can invite you to do the same. There are other devs like Naughty Dog who have accomplished on the level or far above Valve. Even in some cases, Nintendo. I told you I won't argue Nintendo because they have accomplished so much in a long time frame. It would simply be unfair to compare them to anyone else. As of lately (on a developer side of things) there are some devs out there who has made better games than Nintendo.

I'm not trying to attack your opinion, Jeremy. It's just the way you came off against one developer who has done great in their own right and deserve the awards and attention that they got. Still, you're entitled to your opinion as I am with mines. I think we'll agree to disagree.



Henmii said:

Hard to say if Valve will have succes with this! For all we know it could just be another N-Gage/PSP/PS-vita!



Senario said:

@Rafie Naughty Dog on the level of Valve? I have to disagree because Valve is simply one of the best game devs in existence. Their games put a premium on gameplay and the story takes a back seat but is still influential in the fun. I don't believe there are many devs that have put out better content than Nintendo as many of Nintendo games are timeless classics. Valve being the only other one able to capture that sense of quality as their games are just plain fun.

He wasn't saying Naughty dog is bad. I have played their games but I do not feel that the more cinematic ones deserve any higher than a 9.0 or any lower than 8.0 because these games did have their problems beyond story cutscenes taking up gameplay time. AI was so terrible in the Last of Us, and gameplay was Uncharted but with crafting things. There comes a point when watching cutscenes that I wish "Can I play yet?" Heavy cutscenes are not a good substitute for quality gameplay and it has gotten so bad that even a game like Tales of Xillia had a 15-20 min cutscene in the middle of the game which could have easily been worked as actual play time or extra content. And don't get me started on how that game played itself, you win or lose and you still advance the story. With so many cutscenes these games feel like they are no longer games but would have worked better as a movie. Indianna jones = Uncharted. Hence the words "Movie game"

A non valve and non nintendo game that did story right with gameplay imo is Bioshock and Bioshock infinite. With most of the story/backstory taking place in recordings it really improved the flow of the game and allowed the player to see as much or as little as they wanted. I can't say too much about the semi standard fps style gameplay as we have seen it too many times but at the very least the powers were original so they detracted less from the experience.



Doge said:

WOW. and only for Probably a buttload of money more! Valve, PC games, are PC games. Keep um that way. Seriously. This is exactly what we DON'T need if we all want Nintendo to sell more games. Or.... Nintendo should give in to PC.
Or not. Whatever



Rafie said:

@Senario As a developer...of course they are. Why would you think different? They (ND) have already proven that when it comes to games, they run with the best of them. There's nothing wrong with a great storyline and having gameplay at the same time. Why are the lot of you so against it? I mean seriously why? I won't go into the games aspect with Valve against Naughty Dog because both companies are good and each have their bad games. At the same time both companies have GOTY games that have won numerous awards. So no I won't pick apart both respective devs for it. I think you're underestimating ND a tad. I respect your opinion of your ratings of ND's games. That's fine and it isn't bad. However I can extend the same thing to some of Valve's games. They all aren't 9's and 10's. Some of them are actually 7's. Still not bad though.

Anyway, the cut scenes you're referring to is to showcase more of what the story is about. I love playing games that have a great storyline. I'm not alone in this either. Then there's some games I want to play that gets straight to the point of gameplay. It's preference really.

I certainly agree with you on BioShock. They made a worthy GOTY that rightfully places it among this year's contenders which would be ND's The Last Of Us and you already know GTAV is going to be there (and more than likely win). There are no perfect games here as of recent and I'm cool with that. Each genre offers something different and I'm open to that. I don't try to take anything away from them. I enjoy them for what they are offering the community.



Senario said:

@Rafie I think the misunderstanding here is that we are not against good story with gameplay. It is that the cinematics try to make up for otherwise run of the mill gameplay with cover mechanics and third person shooting. GTA is a series I don't think deserves game of the year since there are better games out there, but honestly? Awards mean little to me as they are given out in accordance with a specific type of gamer in mind. As with all lists, game of the year is up to personal taste.

Story is good when it is on equal level with the gameplay. Sadly the gameplay for ND's cinematic games not only suffer from a lack of replay ability but they also are really not all that fun. You play the game for the story and at that point why not just watch a lets play? The games work better as a movie and I do nnot think that it is as important as what other devs like Nintendo, like valve, have contributed to the game industry. I honestly cannot think of any games valve made that are not good. Their level of quality is as high as Nintendo's even if they cannot count to 3.



Rafie said:

@Senario Then you obviously haven't played GTAV. That game deserves to be placed there....hands down! There aren't any games better than GTAV right now, in my opinion. The game is loaded with content. There's so much to do that it can take months to complete everything.

As far as awards are concern, it shows the general public what game is the most popular along with other attributes. It may not mean much to the average gamer, but it stills says a lot when a game is put up for an award....and if it wins.

Now your statement about replayability is your opinion. If you believe that Valve's games are on par with Nintendo's (definitely disagree there), then I can respect that.

Again, I won't downplay any of Valve's games because I like and respect them. However, I can certainly name some Valve games that aren't all that great. Counter Strike is one. Fun but not that great.

I think we'll be spinning our wheels here. You got my respect and I hope I have yours. Let's leave it at that friend.



P-Gamer-C said:

i love my ps3 but i must admit consoles cant hold a candle to pc anymore even ps4 and xbone1 still running games at 30 fps and 900p in 2013 very sad indeed



CanisWolfred said:

@Senario oh neat, you're still reading this section. Well, I just wanted to mention that I personally think that there's nothing wrong with a game being about the experience, and think that some of the greatest games this generation, such as Journey, Portal, or To The Moon, have been more about the experience than the gameplay. So long as the gameplay isn't so bad that it gets in the way of the experience, I see no reason why a game shouldn't focus on its strengths, regardless of what those strengths are. In fact, if games want to be taken seriously as anything more than just kid's games, I think games have to focus on eliciting more than the simple pleasures that you get from "fun" games, and that's what certain experience games do. That's what The Last of Us at least tries to do, and that's why certain experimental games have gotten so popular in the indie scene.

I mean, I like fun games, but I don't need a game to be fun all the time. I just need a game to be good at what it does. Just thiught I'd put that out there.



ikki5 said:

I honestly cannot see this affecting Nintendo too much. Nintendo produces games itself that people love and will never put them on other platforms. The Consoles that need to worry is the Xbox and PlayStation where most of their games are on the PC with very little exclusives compared to what Nintendo has.



GamerJunkie said:

I already buy every indie game on steam and not on Wii U, why? Steam indie games are sold for 25 cents-$1 for the same game that is $10 or more on Wii U. Why else? The PC versions come with more feautures, more support and now with Steam family share, you can even share all of your steam games with another person that you authorize, they can be on another pc or even another house as long as you authorize their account to play it, they can without paying even 1 cent.

Now this steam machine will make it even worse for nintendo. The machines will be more powerful, be able to do much more as far as media playing, more online capabilities and also it will have support from all companies, all 3rd parties, etc.

This generation will see Nintendo on the bottom under Sony, Microsoft and Valve IMO. The saving grace for Nintendo are children, and 1st party titles.



AlexSora89 said:

I'm gonna fill in for @Pachterkid and say, yeah, any console with such competitive sales can beat Nintendo when it comes to software prices.

As much of a Nintendo fan I am, I hate to admit that's the awful truth.

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...