Gabe Newell's PC-centric vision of video games' future
Posted 10 February 2013 - 04:12 PM
Posted 10 February 2013 - 08:30 PM
The important part in that YouTube video is at 33:45 and lasts for about a minute. I think that pretty much conveys the message best. It's really about the direction Gabe wants to take Steam, which has been evident for the past couple years now. From a distribution standpoint, I believe he's right. From his hardware standpoint, ehh... MS, Sony, Nintendo are still going to be competitive and convincing developers to support his platform is only going to add more headaches. In principle it sounds great, but the industry goes where the money is. Porting will likely start off as an outsourced project only if Gabe can get enough momentum with his platform. Something I think students and hobbyists will have to help with first before the big companies start to take action.
Perhaps a more interesting twist would be if Valve teamed up with TransGaming (or roll the dice with Wine). I haven't heard much from them in awhile, but if a Windows game runs fine through wine, it could help with the sales pitch.
Posted 11 February 2013 - 02:19 AM
Yeah, there's different ways to take it. I think independents will find it easier to get a Steam Greenlight if it supports Linux, and that will be the majority of Linux releases until it gains a lot higher user base.
Linux users are pretty avid, somewhat like Apple fans, so smaller numbers can still make a point. This is a huge influx of games for them and the quality is a step up from what they are used to with open source offerings. They've also shown they are willing to pay for good games. Probably not as much as Apple, though, because there isn't the same level of affluence. I'm not sure what will happen with the next console generation. Nintendo isn't doing that well. I think the other two will find less excitement also because there are more options and gamers are changing somewhat. If Gabe comes up with some interesting input ideas, I think a Steambox might make a dent. Even if it doesn't, it's still an established growing market.
Posted 11 February 2013 - 09:24 AM
Believe me, I've been there and got the scars on my credit history to prove it.
To have a hope of getting the volume of games to make consumers buy the hardware, you need to be the size of Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo.
If you aren't big enough to do that, then you have to go the other way. Make the software work on more hardware. Take away the need to buy the console and people will be more willing to part with their hard earned for a game.
Then to make it commercially viable for developers you have to have huge volumes of devices that their games will run on.
That's what we do.
Posted 11 February 2013 - 11:50 AM
Posted 11 February 2013 - 12:28 PM
Posted 11 February 2013 - 06:20 PM
1) Fixed system. Once you have a dev kit you know you are going to be able to churn out product and it will run
With nearly all other systems you always have issues. Android is a nightmare, so is the PC market, how many graphics cards?
2) Infrastructure Modern consoles have update mechanisms and over the air updates that mean you aren't relying on end users to keep their
machine up to date
3) Monetisation Consoles allow you to sell extra bits. Micro-payments are getting more and more important, having a fixed system to do that is
excellent. No way I could afford to print and distribute scratch cards that allow people without credit cards to buy online from me.
4) Hardware pricing Consoles rapidly come down in price after release. Often they are cheaper than an equivalent PC
5) Distribution Retailers are set up to handle DVD's coming out of a factory and going on to shelves everything is in place for that.
3) Sony £30,000.00 for a DEV KIT????????? AND IT'S ONLY A RENTAL!
4) Nintendo although they are better than they used to be. Their old system was a f(*king nightmare.
Posted 13 February 2013 - 02:16 PM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users