I don't think that's the job of Valve.
They tried to push Linux gaming a decade ago by providing a Linux distribution optimized for gaming and invited hardware vendors to sell machines with that distri.
At that time a gaming optimized distribution was hardly needed, so they were pioneers at the time.
And they still maintain their SteamOS, although it is only supported on Steam Decks.
But there has so many happened since then. Gaming Hardware is working from Day 1 with Linux. Proton - wich is supported by Valve - is supporting latest games on Linux, mostly from Day 1. At least if the developers don't actively sabotage it.
As a result we don't have that one SteamOS distribution which would ultimately put us in dependece from Valve. We have several different gaming optimized distributions that you can use.
It's great that Valve does so much for Linux gaming, but I don't want them to manage everything.
And they still maintain their SteamOS, although it is only supported on Steam Decks.
It's not important, but there is no connection between the original Steam OS and there new one. The original was an Ubuntu derivative, and there new one is an Arch derivative.
It seems sort of a waste of resources to use a steam deck as a stationary device. However, I don't think there is a really large market for a console-like steam machine.
Right; a stationary Steam Machine (upgradable, etc.) would be a desktop PC running SteamOS, which should probably remain outside the purview of Valve's hardware division.
on the other hand something as sleek, cheap and ready to go out of the box as consoles, with guaranteed support for a while AND the biggest library of games on release? that could bring a lot of console people over to "PC" if done correctly. or market it more as a streaming server, that would be cool too.
It would need to be priced aggressively and have competitive specs to get enough volume of sales to justify building. They'd also need a new controller.
But if you want that, wouldn't you just buy a pre built from literally anywhere and install Steam and enable big picture mode? That's really not that hard, I do it on my laptop for when my kids want to play on the big screen.
i havent looked into them in a while but arent they more expensive? reducing cost is realistic if valve could pull off the same punch as a steamdeck by using similar but better powered SoCs, or be able to sell at a loss as a calculated risk to get people spending on steam. sony and microsoft do it and it works.
make it convertible as a computer, like the deck is and as upgradable as possible (at least a gpu slot pls!) and you got an easy low cost linux based introduction to the pc ecosystem. with all money going to portables i dunno if they would do it but it would change that part of the game, it would certainly make it more open.
Their SOC makes sense in the Steam Deck because it's running at a lower resolution. If you try to run at 1080p, you'll get significantly worse performance, and that's kind of the bare minimum resolution for a console.
Valve would need a significantly stronger SOC to run on a home console, and it would likely need to be stronger than what's in existing consoles because they don't get the benefit of devs targeting that SOC.
I'm guessing they'd need to sell for ~$800 for it to make any sense. That's quite a bit more than existing consoles, but it's a competitive price for a gaming PC. And I'm guessing the market for a Steam console is a lot smaller than a handheld.
Would be nice, but I think it would cost Valve more than Microsoft and Sony because volumes would be a lot lower. I'm guessing a small percentage of existing PC gamers would want a console, because a lot of the point of PC gaming is either using what you have or customizing your rig. I'm also guessing the same is true for console gamers, because they already have a console and probably want to stick with the same ecosystem.
I could be wrong, but that's my take. I'm more interested in them refreshing the Steam Link and Steam Controller. I guess they could reuse the same SOC, but that would run really hot, so they'd probably want a check ARM SOC instead.
But who knows, maybe there's a big enough market for it.
The Steam Deck works so well because it's dedicated hardware.
Lots of other hardware would not work quite so smoothly, without direct support from Valve. It's why there are manufacturers that make money selling Linux laptops. They have to choose specific components that are well supported on Linux. Lots of people experience problems with WiFi, BT, Ethernet, audio, fingerprint readers, etc. etc. on Linux.
Not to mention developers specifically targeting the hardware, some even going so far as to have dedicated presets for Steam Deck.
And not to mention Valve's marketing presence.
And not to mention the lack of any official release of SteamOS.
A small set-top box (essentially a Steam Deck with the screen, controls and batteries removed, and with components that don't have the space restrictions that come with a mobile device) would still be an interesting proposition. Particularly if they partnered with the main video streaming services to port their apps across, and implemented Chromecast/AirPlay support.
I can see a market for it, as a "Chromecast and Apple TV competitor that also plays all your games".
What resolution do you use it at? How do activate FSR on TV resolutions? I've tried it once or twice but my TV is 4K, and that makes the interface and games on the Deck kinda sluggish.
If I'm going to game stationary, something with more than 10W of horsepower would be nice.
I agree that the steam machine was too early. People hadn't been fully disillusioned by the planned obsolescence of their console libraries yet. Today, in a world of $600+ consoles that are impossible to find within 2 years of their release, hardly any worthwhile exclusives, and Nintendo trying to make you repurchase the old games at full price again, a steam console could potentially sweep the industry.
This seems like something people could get working today, and I'd be all about it. Though I believe there are bandwidth limitations that hamstring performance with this setup. And those external enclosures are as expensive as the GPU that goes in it.
I don't know how it could ever start from zero without having to go through a growing stage. I think it was just necessary to have modest expectations, and so far as I can tell, valve partnered with third party vendors and didn't lose $$$ on it.
Moreover, the downstream effect has been to set the foundation for the Steam Deck, which has been a smashing success. It just takes time to build up a mature ecosystem.
Ctrl+F Deckard - 0 results
does author know about the Deckard thing that Valve is supposedly working on?
from what I understand, it will be some kind of Steam Machine with focus on In-Home Streaming.
Well, at this point it is not entirely clear what Dekard will be. There are some details that point to it being a hybrid of both a VR optimised Qualcomm SoC and a SteamDeck like x86 system.
They are probably experimenting with various form factors, one of which could be a belt mounted box with the x86 part that you can alternatively use as a set top box in a more stationary setting.
Makes sense, except for "one model". I think it would be better to have two options.
One low cost, thinking mini pc with integrated gpu (like steamdeck) for casual gamers, 2d gaming, old game(r)s, etc. Would also be perfect as "home office" PC or media consumption device.
Second one would be bigger and stronger with dedicated GPU capable of "real" gaming and running all the modern games. Yes, powerful hardware is expensive, but serious gaming is no cheap thing...
Yep, I would buy steamdeck for that purpose except I'd feel it could be even cheaper as a simple and more convenient small brick without fancy display and controls.
