2. It will have unparalleled gamer-bias and developer-bias instead of revolving around publishers (meaning its truly gamer focused as what has been Valve's MO)
3. It will be just good enough in the graphics department but will instead lower the friction in the assets pipeline department, virality and player-analytics
4. Graphics will now take a backseat to story, AI, art-direction and pacing (due to the hardware spec being fixed and player measuring tools)
5. crowdsourcing features will be baked in thru APIs (Team Fortress hats as a precursor)
6. social multiplayer features baked in thru APIs
7. a standard controller will be mandated
8. optional accessories like bio-measuring gadgets (measure opponent's sweat, heart-rate and track gaze) will be sold online.
If any of this comes to pass then it would have made PC gaming much much more evolved.
I don't think the hardware spec will be fixed. The article seems to think it will be Android-like. Valve will give guidelines like 'must support OpenGL' and 'needs at least HDMI output and 6 USB ports', but if you want to spring for the Alienware Mega-'Console', then you'll have a bit more power.
And the more I think about this and type my response, the less exciting this sounds... All of this is possible on a PC. What they'll be offering us is basically a pre-loaded, locked-down Linux based OS.
Speaking of Android, I think Google should either either Android or Google TV to turn it into a "console platform" rather than the usual "console-device" we have now.
Graphics on ARM chips are getting good enough for enjoyable 3D games in HD, and soon we'll be able to just hook our phones to a TV and play all the Android games there anyway (some phones already do this).
But Google could encourage manufacturers to build special cheap $100 boxes that are meant only for gaming, too. Then it would just be able to gain market share over the Xbox 360 and PS3 in the same way it gained over the iPhone - by getting all manufacturers to make such devices.
True, but if they invest the resources into making all of these games run on Linux then perhaps those of us with "real" Linux setups will be able to run them too. No more dual booting!
Graphics taking a backseat to the story would be awesome. I think indie games are showing that gamers don't care too much about graphics as long as the gameplay/story are good.
I'd love that as well. But what does Valve has anything to do with it? If it's an open platform, it probably isn't a good idea for them to tell developers to do it their own way. It's up to the developers to decide that.
Indirectly thru the values of this Steam box. If most of the hits on this box are not graphic rich but very gameplay or story rich + hardware is mid-range + shiny tools for story, AI and multiplayer it will inform developers to most of their games in one way.
I second this as well. I think the spot light on eye candy due to mass appeal, for the past few years, has shifted the focus from game play it self which is what games are really about. I'd take a clever and fun game over a glossy one any day.
1. Steam OS will be powered by Linux + OpenGL
2. It will have unparalleled gamer-bias and developer-bias instead of revolving around publishers (meaning its truly gamer focused as what has been Valve's MO)
3. It will be just good enough in the graphics department but will instead lower the friction in the assets pipeline department, virality and player-analytics
4. Graphics will now take a backseat to story, AI, art-direction and pacing (due to the hardware spec being fixed and player measuring tools)
5. crowdsourcing features will be baked in thru APIs (Team Fortress hats as a precursor)
6. social multiplayer features baked in thru APIs
7. a standard controller will be mandated
8. optional accessories like bio-measuring gadgets (measure opponent's sweat, heart-rate and track gaze) will be sold online.
If any of this comes to pass then it would have made PC gaming much much more evolved.