Steambox

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

The Xi3 project 'Piston' was incorrectly assumed to be the 'steambox;' it is not.

http://www.edge-online.com/news/gab...x-reveals-valves-controller-and-mobile-plans/

 

[Wardez]

Wow, somebody drew up a concept speculation about the system being a modular PC thing and it's exactly right. I just think it's needlessly small.

I guess you could say the xi3 thing is overpriced, you can definitely build a better one cheaper, but there's no price for the "Piston" just yet, we'll have to wait and see. Every one's calling loss-leader on it but I'm not exactly sure what approach they're going to take. Could be as low as $300 for a base model. I do like that you can upgrade everything slot-by-slot rather than having to open anything up.

But like you said, better for competition for sure, I hope more companies take whacks at opening up PC gaming, someone's eventually going to strike gold.

 

[Sharky.]

I hope more companies take whacks at opening up PC gaming

What is there to open up though? PC gaming is already cheaper than console gaming in the long (well, slightly-longer-than-short) run, so the only way to really make PC gaming more instantly affordable is, well, cutting the costs of components... but previous-gen parts are cheap anyway. Once you get to the point where you've bought eight or so console games (+ the cost of a new console), you could've spent that money building a gaming PC instead

On top of that, PC games are cheaper than their console equivalents so you save money while spending it!

 

[Wardez]

Yeah, that's exactly what's wrong. You have to put it together yourself, invest time, many steps are involved and in order to open it up more to those who are more casual there needs to be simple packaging.

People don't want to figure out whether their computer will run this or that. They want to just be able to buy a machine and easily be able to identify the line of games for it - there are lots of people that would love to play PC games right now but just feel like they don't have the time, things like this are what they're waiting for.

 

[Terronium-12]

There are companies that specialize in pre-built gaming computers to one's specifications, so that's hardly a problem for those less inclined than others.

No, the real problem is people spend way too much time spreading falsehoods and giving PC gaming the appeal that it's either "do or die" with the absurdly foolish notion that you'll have to upgrade parts every 6-8 months because whatever you buy will be obsolete by then.

Chances are, unless the PC you're using has a Pentium III in it, you can spend no more than $300 and get yourself a 660 Ti - boom, already packing more graphics horsepower than any of the consoles.

 

[Sharky.]

You could even spend as little as $180 and get a 560Ti, which is still above console level performance - chuck that in a computer that has a half-decent processor and at least 4GB DDR3 RAM (but RAM is mega cheap, 50 bucks for 8 gigs) and you're sorted. Last I checked (which was just now, unfamiliar with US pricing), a console costs more than $200.

The "but you have to upgrade every six months" thing is, like you said, nonsense, my first gaming PC lasted me over two years before I upgraded - and that was simply to get rid of CrossfireX and go to a single, strong card solution!

 

[Wardez]

People not wanting to get into PC gaming because they're afraid of having to upgrade is not it. The idea that technology rapidly becomes obsolete is universal across the industry. People "know" that the devices they buy are just going to be outclassed in months but they buy anyway.

People have all kinds of reasons, but again the average consumer simply does not want to deal with so many options. If it's not in one simple to grab area, people don't even really think of it as a product at all, just a service or hobby. People just need to be marketed to in a way that defeats that notion. Simple stuff.

And going back to "all kinds of reasons:" with my console-only buddies, they really just don't want to switch to PC gaming because they like gaming on TVs only and either surf the web mainly with their laptops or phones exclusively and don't see a place for gaming on a relatively small screen. There's also a couple who can't imagine playing games on a keyboard and mouse.

The thing with this Steambox, I think they'll make it or break it on how they package their line-up of games intended for this thing. Is it going to be built so it can run every game on Steam or be a whole new platform with only certain games being able to run well and a new base standard developed for their push of Greenlight and such?

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

It's running Linux so the library is pretty much limited to Valve games for the time being; mobile titles I assume as well. Developers aren't going to reprogram their titles to run on the steam box.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Tiny computer = awesome.

 

[sesselpupser]

It's running Linux so the library is pretty much limited to Valve games for the time being; mobile titles I assume as well. Developers aren't going to reprogram their titles to run on the steam box.

Have you seen the Linux section on Steam? There's quite a few decent games on there. In fact of the 41 games in the list, I'd say there's a much better ratio of good to crap than there is in the entire Mac section. Maybe not enough to motivate me to buy a Piston though, but I'm interested in gadgets and hardware anyway (like the Arduino and Raspberry Pi) so if Valve's involvement makes the X7A (if that's what it's called) reasonably (i.e. console) priced I might pick one up for other uses.

Also, at that size it's pretty much a portable gaming PC, I'd be interested to see where it fits in the Laptop scheme of things; laptops you could get for the same price and/or what laptops with the same performance would cost and all. In fact I think that's a key competitor too, nothing stopping you from plugging a TV and controller into your laptop running Linux, is there? That's relatively compact but is more importantly portable and can work standalone.

Edit: ... And a laptop can play Windows games.

So really is the benefit to the Piston simply that you don't have to build your own compact PC? I'm keen to see the price and features that make this a must-have, if any.

 

[sesselpupser]

Ooh, intrigue! Apparently the computer we've been discussing isn't the Steam Box: http://www.edge-online.com/news/gab...x-reveals-valves-controller-and-mobile-plans/

 

[Wardez]

I love how open-ended the platform seems to be. Leaves a lot of room for other people, even end-users to come in and enhance the experience for everyone, throwback!

Still pretty vague, but I'm sure they'll be able to focus on their best angle soon enough and get some real momentum going with developers and such, can't wait to track more advanced progress.

Here's a good post on Reddit summing up the more tasty details of The Verge interview and what they could mean:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comme...interview_valves_gabe_newell_on_steam/c7thv33

Really like the simple idea of user-created storefronts.

Bring it on Gaben!

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

Ooh, intrigue! Apparently the computer we've been discussing isn't the Steam Box: http://www.edge-online.com/news/gab...x-reveals-valves-controller-and-mobile-plans/

Interesting; thanks for posting that. Looks like everyone jumped the gun in deeming the 'piston' the steambox.

I am relieved that it isn't the steambox though; that price point was too high to compete with consoles... and we need more PC gamers.

 

[sesselpupser]

Interesting; thanks for posting that. Looks like everyone jumped the gun in deeming the 'piston' the steambox.

I am relieved that it isn't the steambox though; that price point was too high to compete with consoles... and we need more PC gamers.

Note how Gaben said the Steam Box will allow you to install Windows if you wish, but I wonder if they'll deliberately 'optimise' the 'console' for Linux to the extent that Windows runs like crap? It sounds really interesting, though, I'd love to know how they plan on having one console that can serve four displays and four controllers, possibly playing different games in different rooms in the house for a reasonable price.

I mean I wonder why 'local' cloud gaming isn't a thing yet? Why hasn't anyone released an OnLive-like TV box which streams games from your PC? I'd immediately buy two, no question, and some 500Mbps Power line network adaptors. Still, if the Steam Box is cheap enough and I can play all my games on it, I'm most likely going to get one regardless. I was just thinking the other day that I'd love to be able to sit on my sofa and play Lego Star Wars or something relaxing.

 

[Ddrizle]

Pre-orders open for Xi3's 'Piston' PC, $100 off during SXSW

Xi3's Steam-focused PC "console," the Piston, is now available for pre-order, the company announced yesterday. The tiny, $999 box includes a 128 gig solid-state drive that can be upgraded to 512 gigs for an additional $750 , eight gigs of RAM and a 3.2 Ghz quad-core processor.

Any pre-orders placed between now and 11:59 p.m. Central on March 17, however, will have a smooth Benjamin shaved off the price. Pre-orders are expected to ship "in time for the 2013 Holiday Season," according to Xi3's announcement. Further information is expected to surface during the course of Austin's ongoing SXSW Interactive Festival.

 

[Earth]

What is there to open up though? PC gaming is already cheaper than console gaming in the long (well, slightly-longer-than-short) run, so the only way to really make PC gaming more instantly affordable is, well, cutting the costs of components... but previous-gen parts are cheap anyway. Once you get to the point where you've bought eight or so console games (+ the cost of a new console), you could've spent that money building a gaming PC instead

On top of that, PC games are cheaper than their console equivalents so you save money while spending it!

Why do people say PC gaming is cheaper then consoles "in the long run?" If you want those pretty high end PC graphics, you HAVE to spend $1000+ on hardware. Theres no way around it. Your processor and graphics card alone will be $600 or more. If I want to play games on low or medium settings I can do that on an ancient 6th gen console.

And I dont care what anbody says about "cheap" games.

Sim City is $80. Battlefield 3 was $60 at launch.

And this "Steam Box" is silly. No windows support strike one. Tiny and not upgradeable to basic box components? Strike 2. Pretty much no exclusives and possibly heavily reliant on downloading games? Strike 3.

 

[Sharky.]

Why do people say PC gaming is cheaper then consoles "in the long run?" If you want those pretty high end PC graphics, you HAVE to spend $1000+ on hardware. Theres no way around it. Your processor and graphics card alone will be $600 or more.

How are these possible then? Even the cheap build is capable of graphics higher than a console can put out, even moreso when you consider that many console titles are only 1280x720 (and under in some cases!)...

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/I0Bk Total: $504.17 (i3-3220, 7770 GHz Ed.)
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/HCzZ Total: $773.97 (i5-3570k, 7870 GHz Ed.)

My original PC that I built in 2010 with a US$150 graphics card and US$200 processor (both from 2009) would still be capable of better performance in games than a 360 or PS3 even to this day. True 1920x1080 at >30fps? No problem.

And I dont care what anbody says about "cheap" games.

So you'll disregard one of the main points in the PC vs console debate? Fact is, you can get AAA PC titles for $30 and under if you know where to look, whereas console titles are $60 and up.

Let's do the math with some recent releases, game prices are discounted if available. Xbox titles sourced from Amazon.

PC: $500
Assassin's Creed III: $25 [special edition]
Far Cry 3: $25 [Lost Expeditions version]
Black Ops II: $53
Tomb Raider: $30
Crysis 3: $39
Battlefield 3: $20 [limited edition]
Borderlands 2: $36 (available for $16 with VPN activation)
Dishonored: $30

Total: $758


Xbox 360: $300 (because, let's face it, a 4GB console is better off not existing)
Assassin's Creed III: $49
Far Cry 3: $40
Black Ops II: $54
Tomb Raider: $60
Crysis 3: $40
Battlefield 3: $53 [limited edition]
Borderlands 2: $39
Dishonored: $52
Xbox Live Gold: $50/year

Total: $687 + $50/year

Xbox is only $71 ahead at this point. Factor in the need for Xbox Gold in order to use online features and that erodes away to $21. For $21 you could add Left 4 Dead 2 and Tropico 3 + 4 + all DLC for both titles to the PC list and still be able to go to the supermarket and buy a few cans of grog.

After all that you then have a computer which you can use to surf the internet, do your homework on, play your music through, watch TV on, do important business-y stuff on, design art with...

Sim City is $80.

If SimCity is $80, then how did I manage to buy it for NZ$65 (US$55) in a territory where prices for anything are less favourable than the United States? And how come other people were able to buy it for US$40 in the States?

 

[Luminis]

Why do people say PC gaming is cheaper then consoles "in the long run?" If you want those pretty high end PC graphics, you HAVE to spend $1000+ on hardware. Theres no way around it. Your processor and graphics card alone will be $600 or more. If I want to play games on low or medium settings I can do that on an ancient 6th gen console.

Lolwut?! 600 bucks will get you a GTX680 and an i7 3770K. That's pretty high end, actually, and well above what's needed to max out a lot of recent games. You could buy much cheaper hardware and still outperform consoles by a huge margin.

That sort of misinformation is what keeps people from getting into PC gaming, really.

 

[Terronium-12]

Why do people say PC gaming is cheaper then consoles "in the long run?" If you want those pretty high end PC graphics, you HAVE to spend $1000+ on hardware. Theres no way around it. Your processor and graphics card alone will be $600 or more. If I want to play games on low or medium settings I can do that on an ancient 6th gen console.

And I dont care what anbody says about "cheap" games.

Sim City is $80. Battlefield 3 was $60 at launch.

And this "Steam Box" is silly. No windows support strike one. Tiny and not upgradeable to basic box components? Strike 2. Pretty much no exclusives and possibly heavily reliant on downloading games? Strike 3.

Remember when I said: "No, the real problem is people spend way too much time spreading falsehoods..."? Congratulations, you're exactly the kind of person that makes PC gaming out to be more of a hassle and more expensive than it actually is. Allow me to retort in a more fashionable manner: no, you don't have to spend $1000+ on hardware. Who told you that?

There's no way around it? Who told you that?

A processor and video card alone will be $600 or more? Who told you that?

Example 1: Core i5 3470S - $209.99

Sapphire HD 7850 1GB - $169.99

Total: $379.98. That's below $600, am I correct?

Example 2; let's kick it up a bit: Core i5 3570K - $219.99

EVGA GTX 660Ti 2GB - $294.99

Total: $514.98. That's also below $600, is it not?

I could keep going, and I should point out the examples use are just with Intel CPU's.

 

[LaBounti]

Earth, you should have seen this coming. Random pc prices/specs with random pc results.

I've recently consider returning to PC gaming but after looking into it. Its not worth the $700 it would have cost me.

 

[sesselpupser]

If you just want to buy one or two console-friendly games a year, get a console. If you want to be able to play (non-exclusive) console games in modern resolutions, sims, old games, free games and indie games or you want to buy a lot of games, get a PC. Simple!

I have to admit, I can't see the point of this Piston thing. It's too expensive, you can get small form factor PCs (I can't remember who but someone has a thread about theirs in the Computers forum, is it DustDriver?) that are perfectly suitable for lounge use for less than this and they can have anything you want in them. A tiny PC like this just isn't necessary, it's the wrong side of the size/price ratio. If they could've made it the size of a console for a console price, which they most likely could have (I mean, why not?), I'd be singing its praises even if it wasn't upgradeable. There's no way it'll perform the same as a sensibly compact $1,000 PC, or even a laptop as others have mentioned.

 

[LaBounti]

I have an APU Laptop. There are few games on PC that make me want to spend $700 just for pretty graphics. I got this over an Ipad that cost more and does less. The laptop complements my console. For me $1000 would be better spent on an APU(A8/A10) laptop plus a next gen system. I understand PC games are not made to run on just one PC.

 

[Terronium-12]

Earth, you should have seen this coming. Random pc prices/specs with random pc results.

I've recently consider returning to PC gaming but after looking into it. Its not worth the $700 it would have cost me.

What's random about a wildly inaccurate statement being disproved?

 

[sesselpupser]

For me $1000 would be better spent on an APU(A8/A10) laptop plus a next gen system. I understand PC games are not made to run on just one PC.

And I'd probably spend $1000 on another graphics card, an i7 3770K and some new monitors. Horses for courses. I have no need for a laptop nor a next gen console, but everyone has different requirements* hence why these PC vs. Console debates are a bit stupid. That includes the cost debate, because the cost depends on the intended use and the number of games the user wants to buy. If you just want to play the latest Call of Duty, you'd be mad to buy a PC just for that, making the cost argument moot.


* (This is about where my reply to you ends, so everything after this isn't directed at you.)

 

[Terronium-12]

Which makes his original argument look even more ridiculous.

My point stands. If you're going to pull random figures out of your rear and expect them prove a point... no.

 

[dice1998]

There are few games on PC that make me want to spend $700 just for pretty graphics.

Why would you spend $700 for a video card?

 

[LaBounti]

First of all I wasn't arguing anything. Second of all I was talking $700 for a PC(AMD cpu 78502GB,8GB ram. Better than my laptop for better graphics and its not worth it. I wasn't down playing anyone's opinion on PC gaming. This is Just mine and what I'd rather spend $1000 on. Just like have I no problem with someone spending $1000 on graphics card.

Random PC results come from different parts you combine, different performance depending on what you use it for. I wasn't defending him my point was Earth should have see the PC gamers coming to the defense. I enjoy the best of both worlds.

 

[Earth]

How are these possible then? Even the cheap build is capable of graphics higher than a console can put out, even moreso when you consider that many console titles are only 1280x720 (and under in some cases!)...

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/I0Bk Total: $504.17 (i3-3220, 7770 GHz Ed.)
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/HCzZ Total: $773.97 (i5-3570k, 7870 GHz Ed.)

My original PC that I built in 2010 with a US$150 graphics card and US$200 processor (both from 2009) would still be capable of better performance in games than a 360 or PS3 even to this day. True 1920x1080 at >30fps? No problem.

I would hope so. For the processor and graphics card alone you paid pretty much the price of gen6 consoles circa 2010. Now lets slap on $100 Windows 7, $100 motherboard, $100 PSU, the list goes on and on

So you'll disregard one of the main points in the PC vs console debate?

Fact is, you can get AAA PC titles for $30 and under if you know where to look, whereas console titles are $60 and up.

So where is Sim City for $30 and under? Or are we going to say PC games are cheaper but not mention they dont become cheaper then console games until months after release on average, likely because they sold poorly when compared to the console versions and devs are trying to get them off the shelves? PC gamers should be thankful for console gamers. Because without them your initially lower prices and fast price drops would not happen.

Let's do the math with some recent releases, game prices are discounted if available. Xbox titles sourced from Amazon.

PC: $500
Assassin's Creed III: $25 [special edition]
Far Cry 3: $25 [Lost Expeditions version]
Black Ops II: $53
Tomb Raider: $30
Crysis 3: $39
Battlefield 3: $20 [limited edition]
Borderlands 2: $36 (available for $16 with VPN activation)
Dishonored: $30

Total: $758


Xbox 360: $300 (because, let's face it, a 4GB console is better off not existing)
Assassin's Creed III: $49
Far Cry 3: $40
Black Ops II: $54
Tomb Raider: $60
Crysis 3: $40
Battlefield 3: $53 [limited edition]
Borderlands 2: $39
Dishonored: $52
Xbox Live Gold: $50/year

Total: $687 + $50/year

Xbox is only $71 ahead at this point. Factor in the need for Xbox Gold in order to use online features and that erodes away to $21. For $21 you could add Left 4 Dead 2 and Tropico 3 + 4 + all DLC for both titles to the PC list and still be able to go to the supermarket and buy a few cans of grog.

For starters is funny how all the PC supporters talk about mythical "$500 PCs" but they themselves have PCs well over $1000. And I go as far as to say you're doing people a disfavor when suggesting they only spend $500 to build what will be a rather shoddy gaming PC. The first 3rd party steambox is $1000+, because they know most PC gamers dont want to settle for low end garbage.

As for game prices the PSN has big sales all the time. Little Big Planet Karting was $9.99 not too long ago, and it had only been out a few months. Steam isnt the only place in the world with sales.

After all that you then have a computer which you can use to surf the internet, do your homework on, play your music through, watch TV on, do important business-y stuff on, design art with...

Many people have iPads, iPods, iTablets, iLaptops, and such that already does that. They dont need an expensive gaming PC.

If SimCity is $80, then how did I manage to buy it for NZ$65 (US$55) in a territory where prices for anything are less favourable than the United States? And how come other people were able to buy it for US$40 in the States?

Yeah, 1% of the population found it for $40.

If you want the "deluxe" edition of Sim City that includes gameplay extras its $80

http://store.origin.com/store/ea/html/pbPage.SimcityNA

Thats the price the mainstream PC gamer pays, not the 1% who can find that one obscure website

Lolwut?! 600 bucks will get you a GTX680 and an i7 3770K. That's pretty high end, actually, and well above what's needed to max out a lot of recent games. You could buy much cheaper hardware and still outperform consoles by a huge margin.

That sort of misinformation is what keeps people from getting into PC gaming, really.

Misinformation? If you want to run the latest PC games on max settings and comfortably above 30fps, you're looking at that price tag.

Remember when I said: "No, the real problem is people spend way too much time spreading falsehoods..."? Congratulations, you're exactly the kind of person that makes PC gaming out to be more of a hassle and more expensive than it actually is. Allow me to retort in a more fashionable manner: no, you don't have to spend $1000+ on hardware. Who told you that?

There's no way around it? Who told you that?

A processor and video card alone will be $600 or more? Who told you that?

Example 1: Core i5 3470S - $209.99

Sapphire HD 7850 1GB - $169.99

Total: $379.98. That's below $600, am I correct?

Example 2; let's kick it up a bit: Core i5 3570K - $219.99

EVGA GTX 660Ti 2GB - $294.99

Total: $514.98. That's also below $600, is it not?

I could keep going, and I should point out the examples use are just with Intel CPU's.

I've gone through the books multiple times pricing parts. Every single time the number $900+ keeps popping up, no matter what part I downgraded. If I want any chance of playing the latest games anywhere near full settings and safely above 30fps, $1000~ is the only option.

Actually, here is the parts list I have saved

$200 - AMD Radeon HD 7850 2 GB
$190 - AMD FX-8350
$110 - Corsair Enthusiast Series TX 750 Watt
$100 - Seagate Barracuda 7200 2 TB
$100 - Microsoft Windows 8 64-bit (Full Version) - OEM
$100 - GIGABYTE GA-970A-UD3 AM3+
$50 - Corsair Vengeance 8GB
$40 - Case Elite 311
$30 - Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO
$30 - Sony AD-7280S-0B 24x
$30 - Logitech Wireless Combo

$980. And Im sure many would consider this a "mid-tier" system. If someone was building a gaming PC, I really couldnt recommend anything less.

Earth, you should have seen this coming. Random pc prices/specs with random pc results.

I've recently consider returning to PC gaming but after looking into it. Its not worth the $700 it would have cost me.

Maybe PC gamers should just accept their hobby is a luxury that comes at a price? Why do they have to pretend its "cheaper" in the long run, and they're getting the best of both worlds? I really want to join the PC gaming party again, but its going to take a while to come up with $1000, especially when I have other electronics in mind.

 

[Luminis]

Misinformation? If you want to run the latest PC games on max settings and comfortably above 30fps, you're looking at that price tag.

Who ever said something at maxing all modern games out? A $ 500 will run modern games well and better looking than recent consoles will - which is the important bit here. If you consider that everything, from games to peripheral equipment like Gamepads and what have you is generally cheaper on PC, then yeah, it just evens out. Which then harks back to the point that consoles aren't necessarily better bang for your buck than a PC is. Not the "not necessarily" bit.

There's that fine difference between bulding a PC that will outperform a console and building a relatively high-end system. Which is why you see lots of folks on here with $1000+ rigs.

Sure, those high-end PCs aren't offering as much bang for your buck as a current gen console does. But if you're going to settle for outdated graphics, you might as well get a lower-end gaming PC and still get at least a bit more visual fidelity out of it.

The first 3rd party steambox is $1000+, because they know most PC gamers dont want to settle for low end garbage.

Yeah, and the fact that it's the size of my fist and also a design piece? Not really comparable to a PC, is it?

Maybe PC gamers should just accept their hobby is a luxury that comes at a price? Why do they have to pretend its "cheaper" in the long run, and they're getting the best of both worlds? I really want to join the PC gaming party again, but its going to take a while to come up with $1000, especially when I have other electronics in mind.

That might be because for some, it actually is. If you want an extreme example, try getting a tripple screen setup with Forza. That's $900 bucks in consoles and the game still isn't even comparable to something along the lines of Assetto Corsa.

 

[dice1998]

That might be because for some, it actually is. If you want an extreme example, try getting a tripple screen setup with Forza. That's $900 bucks in consoles and the game still isn't even comparable to something along the lines of Assetto Corsa.

You forgot to add in a fanatec wheel for xbox consoles