Vulkan is an open platform independent standard, no royalties needed. And DXVK will bridge Direct3D use on the Steam Machine (and other systems running Linux) by translating it to Vulkan automatically.

I don’t know, I’ve got a feeling it’s going to flipflop pretty hard when it comes to specs and competition…

引用自 JuaN64：

Valve should consider releasing a new graphics engine for developers, using the Steam Machine's specifications as a foundation for creating games. This would benefit developers by saving them on royalties.

The new machine won't be available in Poland, Czech republic, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Ukraine, Bulgaria, Romania, Moldova, Slovakia. I think this device is such a failure that most of the east is realising that they need to protect their customers, Turkey is also trying to actively blacklist its sale/release, Greece released a statement that everything has to be up to standard or VALVe will face lawsuits over customer protection breaches (countrywide).

We just have to wait and see how the situation is gonna develop, I heard Finland and Sweden have upcoming meetings about customer practice violations about Apple, wonder if Steam/VALVe will be mentioned.

引用自 Ettanin：

Vulkan is an open platform independent standard, no royalties needed. And DXVK will bridge Direct3D use on the Steam Machine (and other systems running Linux) by translating it to Vulkan automatically.

Too bad Vulkan never worked on my machine, huh?

The jump between "Steam Machine specifications" and "saving them on royalties" is a non-sequitur.

引用自 ReBoot：

The jump between "Steam Machine specifications" and "saving them on royalties" is a non-sequitur.

I'd further argue that creating your own branded prebuilt PC warranting creating a game engine around the prebuilt's specs is a bit nonsensical.


How would Valve even do that? Cripple the engine to prevent developers from doing things that would exceed the system's performance limitations at a certain threshold? I mean easier said than done for starters. Also the assumption that games will be built primarily around the Steam Machine's specs is also a bit "optimistic".

OP is just another idea-man, full of ideas, but no knowledge, experience or wisdom to make them worthwhile. Just because something is easy to say, and sounds good in your head, doesn't make it easy to do, or a good idea when scrutinized.

引用自 Gandalf furioso：

I don’t know, I’ve got a feeling it’s going to flipflop pretty hard when it comes to specs and competition…

Feels like an entry level Linux gaming PC. Which is absolutely fine if you ask me.

If they made this into somekind of high-end one. People would ♥♥♥♥♥ anyway, just not the same people.

Source Engine 2 is already updated

引用自 nullable：

引用自 ReBoot：

The jump between "Steam Machine specifications" and "saving them on royalties" is a non-sequitur.

I'd further argue that creating your own branded prebuilt PC warranting creating a game engine around the prebuilt's specs is a bit nonsensical.


How would Valve even do that? Cripple the engine to prevent developers from doing things that would exceed the system's performance limitations at a certain threshold? I mean easier said than done for starters. Also the assumption that games will be built primarily around the Steam Machine's specs is also a bit "optimistic".

OP is just another idea-man, full of ideas, but no knowledge, experience or wisdom to make them worthwhile. Just because something is easy to say, and sounds good in your head, doesn't make it easy to do, or a good idea when scrutinized.

That's been done for generations on consoles. When a game is developed primarily for the Switch, it usually performs spectacularly on PC. What I mean is, if you develop the game primarily for Steam Machine to incentivize that, instead of charging 30% in royalties, you should set it at 20 or 25%.

If the rumor that it will release with a new Half Life game is true, then it could stand as an example for how to optimize with Source 2. Maybe it would also include a more public release of Source 2 engine, like was originally planned. I can only hope.

引用自 JuaN64：

That's been done for generations on consoles. When a game is developed primarily for the Switch, it usually performs spectacularly on PC. What I mean is, if you develop the game primarily for Steam Machine to incentivize that, instead of charging 30% in royalties, you should set it at 20 or 25%.

Consoles are consoles. The Steam Machine is just a prebuilt PC, no one is developing games primarily for a specific prebuilt PC. I understand your thinking, but I also understand why you're thinking is a non-starter. Namely you're imagining the Steam Machine to be something other than what it is.

You don't have to take my word for it. But let's watch and see if

1. Valve tries to get developers to target the Steam Machine primarily (they won't, it's just a prebuilt PC)
   
2. Any developers decide to target the Steam Machine primarily (they won't, it's just a prebuilt PC)

Treating the Steam Machine as this special product that now needs to be accommodated and supported specifically apart from the rest of PC's in PC gaming I think misses the reality.

Besides, if Valve were going to do anything like that, wouldn't they have done it with the Steam Deck? Why didn't they? And what's so special about the Steam Machine compared to a Steam Deck?