Steam Machines, what are they really?

[Vash The Stampede]

Well, it's not like they are not trying, but they have no control.

Actually they have lots of control. Lots of game developers have zero interest in porting their games over to Linux. Valve's solution was to Stream games from a Windows machine to a Steam Machine, but that means having a very powerful Windows machine to begin with. Why would you need a Steam Machine if you have a powerful Windows machine?

The solution is to either fork Wine and make their own Windows compatibility layer for Linux, or to make their own from the ground up. It's no different to Microsoft's recent Xbox 360 backwards compatibility with Xbox One. Especially with technologies like Vulkan which they helped make, the experience of running DX11 games on Linux should be nearly equal in performance. You just use a Direct3D->Vulkan conversion instead of Direct3D->OpenGL like Wine does.

They could incorporate a system like PlayOnLinux within Steam that as newer revisions of games are tested and verified worked, than they'll be able to be installed on a Linux machine. If enough people play these games on Linux then I'm sure developers will go through the trouble to properly port them.

Fighting games are more popular than ever. There's literally a major tournament every week, with cash prizes in the 5-digit ranges. I help organize and put on such events in the midwest.

I'm not saying fighting games are dead, just that Street Fighter itself is a waste of effort. I personally would rather play Skull Girls but that's just me. My point is that Valve should be working on high profile games like GTA V or Fallout 4. Just a year ago Valve was happy to start charging people for Skyrim mods with Bethesda, but nothing on porting the game to Linux. And I doubt Street Fighter V will come close to the sales of Fallout 4 or GTA V. I'm willing to be that Street Fighter V will work in Wine, while GTA V, Fallout 4, and etc just don't. If they do the game will run like crap.

[Scrysis]

I've been looking at them and wondering if I should pick a cheap one of those, over a PS4.

But I'm very skeptical towards the Linux-based OS. Will it actually be supported by games? Sure there's 1300 games for it, but are any of them major titles? And would one of them actually run games better than a PS4.

Though the steam machine has many benefits, such as modability and mods for games through Steam and not needing to pay for PlayStation Plus.But I fear it won't be much else than an underpowered PC that I'll need to upgrade to keep up with games released for PC, that it will play. And I'm by no means an expert in changing parts in a PC. In this case, I'd have to take even more considerations, because the room of in the steam machine is limited.
Portability is also important for me, I want to be able to take this thing with me.

Meanwhile, a PS4 will still be a PS4 and always be supported until the next console generation. The PS4 is on par in power, but is still nearly 100 Euro cheaper than the cheapest Steam Machine. And the Steam Machines are barely out and will suffer from baby sickness with malfunctioning hardware and the like.

What advantages and disadvantages do you see to the two options? I highly value your input.

So, from what I've been able to gather is that a Steam Machine will be able to natively play a number of games, but not a good number of triple A titles. For that, Steam Machines have a different option -- you can stream the games from your main windows PC, with the same level of performance as your pc. The idea here is that your pc is running it, but the steam machine is a very cheap way of transmitting it to your living room in a console format.

I suspect that this streaming option is a temporary stop-gap measure while Valve gets other game-makers on board.

My own personal opinion is that this is HUGE if enough people can be persuaded to support it. (If I had any money at all, I'd throw it in the ring just for support on this.) And if enough people are in on this, it has the potential for some massive ramifications further down the line.

Should it work, this is what I forsee:

Small scale impact -- Every time a new set of consoles come out, customers are charged out of the nose for them. Players then have to pay for subscriptions, etc. It's a huge cash cow. And then you have issues of limited console hard drive space, backwards compatibility, etc. Assuming it follows general linux rules, a Steam Machine isn't going to have those same problems. Once you have one, you're only going to be paying for the components you're upgrading/replacing, not the whole machine at once. This means that so long as you meet the minimum hardware requirements for a new game, you'll be able to buy and play it, instead of having to shell out hundreds of dollars for a whole new console that may or may not have all the games you want. On top of that, it's already connected to your free Steam account, so you have access to the games you already purchased there, and to the friends on your friends list there.

Bigger impact -- This has the potential to begin a break of the virtual windows monopoly. Note that I said "begin". If this does catch on and game manufacturers start making games for SteamOS, it won't be very long at all before other linux versions make small adjustments to their code and permit those same games to be played. That means that instead of everyone having to play their games on windows, there will now be an option for linux. And that might just lead to a chain effect (i.e. developers demanding that some high profile tools be ported to linux, etc.).


This has the potential to be HUGE. (Yup, I said it again.) Valve is ambitious enough and has enough muscle that this could really be pulled off. I don't know of anyone else who could pull this off.


My own personal opinion: If there are a couple of PS4 exclusive titles that you really want to play, get a PS4. If you have the extra money lying around, and like at least a couple of the titles offered on SteamOS, get the Steam Machine, and think of it as a kickstarter with immediate benefits with potential down the road. PS4 has been out for a while now, and it wouldn't surprise me at all if hints of the next generation come out soon. Worst case scenario with the Steam Machine is that it doesn't pan out as well as they hope, and you instead use it to stream your PC games to your living room. Not even the PS4 can do that, from what I can tell. That means that you still have options for the Steam Machine that you wouldn't otherwise have with the PS4 at end-of-life.

If you're worried about hardware compatibility, remember that it isn't that hard to pass software updates to an OS.

[Static]

I think you should get the Playstation 4 instead, assuming you already own a gaming PC. Not only it's cheaper, but a lot of games are more optimized for it due to it not having endless hardware configurations, and it being a very popular gaming console. This results in developers being forced to make sure their games run just fine with what hardware Sony's offering. Yes, the graphics, the resolutions and the frame rate won't be as awesome as a Steam Machine, but at least you get a piece of mind, and using it is pretty much straight-forward when it comes to couch gaming, be it alone or with a bunch of friends. That's what I personally think.

@Dukenukemx: Lots of people still play Street Fighter, dude.

[Lathais]

How hard would it have been to make Steam run in Big Picture mode at boot-up in Windows?

A steam machine will perform the same as a PC with the same specs. They generally have an i5 and a GTX x60 / R9 380 level graphics card.

Well, if Microsoft will not sell you licenses in bulk, pretty hard. I guess they could have just bought OEM copies, but from who? Personally, if I got to newegg.com and try to buy a whole bunch, max is 999. Maybe they could call and negotiate a deal, but generally, if you are going to be installing something like this stock on a machine, like Dell or other PC builders, you buy direct from Microsoft and Microsoft wouldn't sell to them.

- - - Updated - - -

The solution is to either fork Wine and make their own Windows compatibility layer for Linux, or to make their own from the ground up. It's no different to Microsoft's recent Xbox 360 backwards compatibility with Xbox One. Especially with technologies like Vulkan which they helped make, the experience of running DX11 games on Linux should be nearly equal in performance. You just use a Direct3D->Vulkan conversion instead of Direct3D->OpenGL like Wine does.

Now I have very little linux experience in general and no WINE experience at all so this may sound completely stupid but I thought WINE still needed a valid Windows Key to work. So we come back to Microsoft not allowing them to have licenses. I admit I could be completely wrong on this front, but I imagine Microsoft would be very pissed and try to find some way to stop it if they tried anything of this nature.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not saying fighting games are dead, just that Street Fighter itself is a waste of effort. I personally would rather play Skull Girls but that's just me. My point is that Valve should be working on high profile games like GTA V or Fallout 4. Just a year ago Valve was happy to start charging people for Skyrim mods with Bethesda, but nothing on porting the game to Linux. And I doubt Street Fighter V will come close to the sales of Fallout 4 or GTA V. I'm willing to be that Street Fighter V will work in Wine, while GTA V, Fallout 4, and etc just don't. If they do the game will run like crap.

Because again, Valve can not port the game, all they can do is ask the devs too. They can offer to provide help porting it, or threaten to pull the game from Steam if they do not port it, but that's about it.

- - - Updated - - -

So, from what I've been able to gather is that a Steam Machine will be able to natively play a number of games, but not a good number of triple A titles. For that, Steam Machines have a different option -- you can stream the games from your main windows PC, with the same level of performance as your pc. The idea here is that your pc is running it, but the steam machine is a very cheap way of transmitting it to your living room in a console format.

I suspect that this streaming option is a temporary stop-gap measure while Valve gets other game-makers on board.

My own personal opinion is that this is HUGE if enough people can be persuaded to support it. (If I had any money at all, I'd throw it in the ring just for support on this.) And if enough people are in on this, it has the potential for some massive ramifications further down the line.

Should it work, this is what I forsee:

Small scale impact -- Every time a new set of consoles come out, customers are charged out of the nose for them. Players then have to pay for subscriptions, etc. It's a huge cash cow. And then you have issues of limited console hard drive space, backwards compatibility, etc. Assuming it follows general linux rules, a Steam Machine isn't going to have those same problems. Once you have one, you're only going to be paying for the components you're upgrading/replacing, not the whole machine at once. This means that so long as you meet the minimum hardware requirements for a new game, you'll be able to buy and play it, instead of having to shell out hundreds of dollars for a whole new console that may or may not have all the games you want. On top of that, it's already connected to your free Steam account, so you have access to the games you already purchased there, and to the friends on your friends list there.

Bigger impact -- This has the potential to begin a break of the virtual windows monopoly. Note that I said "begin". If this does catch on and game manufacturers start making games for SteamOS, it won't be very long at all before other linux versions make small adjustments to their code and permit those same games to be played. That means that instead of everyone having to play their games on windows, there will now be an option for linux. And that might just lead to a chain effect (i.e. developers demanding that some high profile tools be ported to linux, etc.).


This has the potential to be HUGE. (Yup, I said it again.) Valve is ambitious enough and has enough muscle that this could really be pulled off. I don't know of anyone else who could pull this off.


My own personal opinion: If there are a couple of PS4 exclusive titles that you really want to play, get a PS4. If you have the extra money lying around, and like at least a couple of the titles offered on SteamOS, get the Steam Machine, and think of it as a kickstarter with immediate benefits with potential down the road. PS4 has been out for a while now, and it wouldn't surprise me at all if hints of the next generation come out soon. Worst case scenario with the Steam Machine is that it doesn't pan out as well as they hope, and you instead use it to stream your PC games to your living room. Not even the PS4 can do that, from what I can tell. That means that you still have options for the Steam Machine that you wouldn't otherwise have with the PS4 at end-of-life.

If you're worried about hardware compatibility, remember that it isn't that hard to pass software updates to an OS.

Well, the problem with just streaming it from your powerful Windows PC is that....you could just be playing it on your PC. If you want to play on your TV with a controller, well, you can do that with a PC already. Why do you need this additional peice of hardware that costs money to do this? In addition, something like this already exists in the form of nVidia Shield which costs far less than a Steam Machine(as long as you have an nVidia GPU).

For your small scale impact, what your are describing is a PC. Why go for a Steam Machine that is basically just a limited PC? Why not just get a PC?

As far as the bigger impact, the Steam Machine would have to actually become big for that to happen, which I do not think it will because, well, it's just a shitty PC that can not play all PC games.

[Vash The Stampede]

Now I have very little linux experience in general and no WINE experience at all so this may sound completely stupid but I thought WINE still needed a valid Windows Key to work. So we come back to Microsoft not allowing them to have licenses. I admit I could be completely wrong on this front, but I imagine Microsoft would be very pissed and try to find some way to stop it if they tried anything of this nature.

WINE is just a compatibility layer not an OS. So no key. ReactOS is a open source OS that runs Windows applications and drivers, and it doesn't use a key either. This is the same concept why a Wii Emulator doesn't require you to own a real Wii.

Because again, Valve can not port the game, all they can do is ask the devs too. They can offer to provide help porting it, or threaten to pull the game from Steam if they do not port it, but that's about it.

Firstly I'm sure Valve has asked devs and they told Valve to f*ck off. Porting a game can be risky, cause now you need to support that game on a different platform that your company wants nothing to do with. Even if Valve gave devs money to port the game, it would be an expensive undertaking. Plus other devs may take advantage of you by refusing to port their game unless given money. Which is the opposite of how console systems work.

Best course of action is to just make a compatibility layer like Wine and get the games working that way. Get enough statistics of players using it on Linux and Valve can hand that info to devs to see for themselves. If enough people play GTA V on Linux then Rockstar will port it.

Well, the problem with just streaming it from your powerful Windows PC is that....you could just be playing it on your PC. If you want to play on your TV with a controller, well, you can do that with a PC already. Why do you need this additional peice of hardware that costs money to do this? In addition, something like this already exists in the form of nVidia Shield which costs far less than a Steam Machine(as long as you have an nVidia GPU).

Steam Link is just $50. Nvidia Shield is $200 and requires Nvidia graphics. Who's dumb enough to buy the Shield?

But yes, why buy a Steam Machine when you NEED a Windows machine to play games?

[Witchblade77]

unless I'm misunderstanding what steam machines actualy do? I'd rather just set up a PC to play with TV as a screen. (in my particular case, I have a laptop, so taking it to the basement where our TV is and plugging it it, while using controller I already have set up (used to be xbox controler, but I switched to PS4 one)? takes me like 5 minutes. and i can play ALL my PC games on it. not just whatever they ported to steam machine.

and while I cart my laptop back and forth, I've read multiple guides that allow you to set up TV and PC screen with a tower - making the cost for comparable stats - lower.

PS4 on the other hand? I have becasue of its exclusives.

[Kagthul]

Why would you need a Steam Machine if you have a powerful Windows machine?

Convenience. I dont want to cart my PC back and forth from the living room to my office. I just want to be able to plop down on the couch and fire up a game.

I'm not saying fighting games are dead, just that Street Fighter itself is a waste of effort.

Why? Other than Smash Bros, (which i personally dont even think of as a fighting game, but Weebs will be Weebs and its SUPRSRS for them) it is far and away the most popular fighting game franchise on the planet.

I personally would rather play Skull Girls but that's just me.

Skull Girls is actually a popular niche game at tournaments. We always get ~30ish people signed up. For Street Fighter, well get 300-500. And that's at tournaments that arent even "majors" (they dont count towards standing for gaining entrance to EVO). At a major, upwards of 1200 people for Street Fighter (4, currently); another 1000+ on various other games in the Franchise (Super SF2 Turbo is still very popular, as is SF3: Third Strike and SF Alpha 2' ("dash", a Japan-only remix of Zero/Alpha 2). The next biggest will be MvC3 will 1000+ (and 400-500 at a smaller non-major event), Persona, and maybe MK, depending the area. Here in the midwest, MK is popular. Elsewhere, not so much.

My point is that Valve should be working on high profile games like GTA V or Fallout 4.

Because Fallout and GTA V are largely single player experiences that dont generate page views and attract 10+ million viewers for tournaments. (The SF4 main event at EVO last year, almost 15 million for Melee).

I'm willing to be that Street Fighter V will work in Wine

Not if you want to use a good controller (fight stick). The drivers for those things are notoriously hard to get working even on the systems they are supposed to run on, so much so that the Skull Girls developer spent half a year getting them to work, and decided to open-source them to other developers so people would actually port their games to PC. Its one the reasons that Capcom decided to only make SF5 for PS4 and PC - because those are the two systems that Skull Girls' developer developed the driver for. Its not the only reason (Sony paid out for that one, to be sure) but it was a factor. Director of the game even brought it up at EVO last year when they demo'd SF5 - it was only playable because of the driver.

- - - Updated - - -

PS4 on the other hand? I have becasue of its exclusives.

Which is the only reason to own a console - because you want the hostage-franchises.

Basically, a Steam Machine is a small, mITX PC with a custom Linux distro on it.

The prices i've seen so far are actually pretty reasonable for a good small mITX build. Yes, you're paying slightly more than building it yourself but there are sometimes some great custom enclosures that you cant buy yourself. They are usually upgradeable and everything.

Dont like SteamOS?

Just put Windows on it. Takes no time at all.

Or build your own mITX box and use it with your TV.

There are plenty of reasons to do either even if you already own a great gaming PC, the biggest being convenience.

[Artorius]

Just build a decent small form factor computer and install Windows at it. You'll have a proper OS for gaming and won't be paying extra. Steam can launch in big picture mode at Windows, and you can use a Xbox controller.

[Doomislav]

I wiped my computer and went full Linux and it didn't deliver the gaming performance or compatibility that is necessary. Well, necessary for me to enjoy the games I like. WINE works great (for some software) but it's another layer on top of the OS.

I don't like win 7+ and really tried to get away from it. But in the end the lesser OS won.

Erm and edited : my point is that a steambox is pretty much a PC with linux, so I don't see how it can compete in the gaming market.

[Vash The Stampede]

Convenience. I dont want to cart my PC back and forth from the living room to my office. I just want to be able to plop down on the couch and fire up a game.

I understand but it's not like the Steam Machine is cheap either. The price of a Steam Machine you could easily build your own PC.

Why? Other than Smash Bros, (which i personally dont even think of as a fighting game, but Weebs will be Weebs and its SUPRSRS for them) it is far and away the most popular fighting game franchise on the planet.

Again, not saying Street Fighter sucks as a fighting game but its milk won't bring all the boys to the yard. "Street Fighter II: The World Warrior" was the best selling Street Fighter game of all time for Super Nintendo with 6.3M global. GTA V has like 100M global sold, and probably more if you count PC.

The only reason to push for Street Fighter is to get in on the E-Sports. But I think if Valve wants to make Steam on Linux a thing, then their efforts are better spent on titles like Fallout 4. Especially for the modding community if they plan to bring back paid mods.

Because Fallout and GTA V are largely single player experiences that dont generate page views and attract 10+ million viewers for tournaments. (The SF4 main event at EVO last year, almost 15 million for Melee).

That's nice but that's tournaments, which I'm sure games like DOTA2 on SteamOS is probably not a bad idea. But in terms of games played on PC this is the list.

LoL
CSGO
Fallout 4
DOTA2

And the list goes on. Notice the lack of Street Figher? I hate GTA games but I know Linux needs GTA V to boost adoption.

[Kagthul]

I understand but it's not like the Steam Machine is cheap either. The price of a Steam Machine you could easily build your own PC.


Again, not saying Street Fighter sucks as a fighting game but its milk won't bring all the boys to the yard. "Street Fighter II: The World Warrior" was the best selling Street Fighter game of all time for Super Nintendo with 6.3M global. GTA V has like 100M global sold, and probably more if you count PC.

Or, you know, 54 Million total units sold across five platforms four of which Valve can profit approximately zero dollars from, and the one they can profit from the most being by far the one with the least sold units. Checking Wikipedia is rough.

And back in the day of the SNES, the install base on a console was a -fraction- of what it is now. 6.4 Million on the SNES is like 20+ million today.

The only reason to push for Street Fighter is to get in on the E-Sports.

Uh, yeah. Thats exactly the reason. Valve makes truckloads of money off of CS, CS:GO, and DOTA. They have been missing out on the FGC money (where, other than DoTA and LoL, the pots and sponsorships are the highest, and profit for supporting companies is very high). There are microtransactions in SF5 (much like DoTA and LoL, you dont HAVE to spend real money to get DLC characters or skins, but can if you want to). If Valve takes a piece of that through a partnership with Capcom? (Capcom made more money on costume DLC than shipped copies of SF4 across all platforms). Truckloads of cash.

But I think if Valve wants to make Steam on Linux a thing, then their efforts are better spent on titles like Fallout 4.

Except those aren't their efforts. Unless they are going to port it in-house and then support it, its not going to happen. Bethesda is a blind-ass company who makes terrible decisions all the time and probably wouldnt support Linux no matter what numbers Valve shows them. Fuck, they cant even push a game out on PC without it being so riddled with bugs its unplayable until the community can fix it.. and that's given a relatively unlimited budget and no ship-date deadlines. The PC developers have to WANT to work with Valve, and they obviously dont. Capcom did, so Valve put their efforts where they were useful.

That's nice but that's tournaments, which I'm sure games like DOTA2 on SteamOS is probably not a bad idea. But in terms of games played on PC this is the list.

LoL
CSGO
Fallout 4
DOTA2

And the list goes on. Notice the lack of Street Figher? I hate GTA games but I know Linux needs GTA V to boost adoption.

Good luck getting Rockstar to support Linux. They barely support Windows, with shit-ass back ports that run like unmitigated dogs ass and take months to years to even ship after the console versions.

[Fuush]

Am I the only one who was thinking about this, when reading the title?

[Vash The Stampede]

Or, you know, 54 Million total units sold across five platforms four of which Valve can profit approximately zero dollars from, and the one they can profit from the most being by far the one with the least sold units. Checking Wikipedia is rough.

And back in the day of the SNES, the install base on a console was a -fraction- of what it is now. 6.4 Million on the SNES is like 20+ million today.

Honestly the 100m number was pulled out of my ass, but the 6.4m is real. While it would be a lot today, but that's beating Street Fighter IV on modern consoles. Street Fighter IV on PS3 and 360 is like 8.2M. Another 1.19M if you include the 3DS version.

Uh, yeah. Thats exactly the reason. Valve makes truckloads of money off of CS, CS:GO, and DOTA. They have been missing out on the FGC money (where, other than DoTA and LoL, the pots and sponsorships are the highest, and profit for supporting companies is very high). There are microtransactions in SF5 (much like DoTA and LoL, you dont HAVE to spend real money to get DLC characters or skins, but can if you want to).

Non of which will increase Linux adoption. It's also a repugnant system that's going to be regulated.

If Valve takes a piece of that through a partnership with Capcom? (Capcom made more money on costume DLC than shipped copies of SF4 across all platforms). Truckloads of cash.

That's actually sad and pathetic.

Except those aren't their efforts. Unless they are going to port it in-house and then support it, its not going to happen. Bethesda is a blind-ass company who makes terrible decisions all the time and probably wouldnt support Linux no matter what numbers Valve shows them. Fuck, they cant even push a game out on PC without it being so riddled with bugs its unplayable until the community can fix it.. and that's given a relatively unlimited budget and no ship-date deadlines. The PC developers have to WANT to work with Valve, and they obviously dont. Capcom did, so Valve put their efforts where they were useful.

If Valve supports or forks Wine then I'm sure Bethesda would port it.

Good luck getting Rockstar to support Linux. They barely support Windows, with shit-ass back ports that run like unmitigated dogs ass and take months to years to even ship after the console versions.

They may have to. EA may have leaked Xbox One sales figure, and it doesn't look good. With 55 total units sold, you can do the math with PS4 announcing 35M. So 55 - 35 = 20M units for Xbox One. Seeing as we're 2 years into the console cycle, that's not good. Compared to the 80M for the PS3 and Xbox 360 each have.

So either people are playing less games or they're playing them on PC. Willing to believe more people are now gaming on PC. While Rockstar could stick with Windows for their games, it would be stupid not to invest in multi-platform titles including Linux.

[Artorius]

Seriously, read the graphics and X11 related problems and you'll know why Linux still isn't suitable for gaming.

Valve was not in their Linux saga because it was better, they were simply afraid of the Windows store at Windows 8.1 and MS making it mandatory in the future. So they'd lose their business.

[Vash The Stampede]

Seriously, read the graphics and X11 related problems and you'll know why Linux still isn't suitable for gaming.

The article also says this. "I want to make one thing crystal clear - Windows, in some regards, is even worse than Linux and it's definitely not ready for the desktop either." Which means Windows is not ready for gaming either.

Linux has lots of serious problems and they certainly need fixing. The only serious problem that'll effect gaming in my opinion is graphics driver recovery which Windows has had since Vista. That and gamepad support in Linux sucks.

Valve was not in their Linux saga because it was better, they were simply afraid of the Windows store at Windows 8.1 and MS making it mandatory in the future. So they'd lose their business.

Obviously not. They went with Linux cause it was easier to solve than dealing with Microsoft on Windows. It would be nice if Microsoft could hand you the core OS and put your own UI and make Steam the default app store, but Microsoft probably laughed at them.

Steam's Linux goals are not short term but long term. I use Linux everyday but not for gaming. I try, but it's not easy. Can't play Fallout 4 on it, or any number of DX11 only games. Wine... sucks. PlayOnLinux is not enough.

[Gilgemesh]

If you do not already have hundreds of steam games, a steam machine is not for you.

I will say that I love the new steam controller, and I use the steam link in my home to stream games to other rooms. The reaction time isn't there for any twitch basted games on the link. It just has too much of a latancy. But I don't use the link this way. I use it so we have a spectator screen where there is a couch. I have a few friends that like to watch others play games, and my father, who is disabled, it is his favorite passtime, so having the ability to keep him comfortable and still watch me game is pretty cool.

If you don't play a ton of twitch based games, online multiplayer, fighting games, or hardcore platformers. The steam link is worth it. only 60 bucks, and hell I waste that kind of money on meals i shouldn't be eating anyhow.

[Artorius]

The article also says this. "I want to make one thing crystal clear - Windows, in some regards, is even worse than Linux and it's definitely not ready for the desktop either." Which means Windows is not ready for gaming either.

The problems related to gaming are way worse at Linux than at Windows. Windows has it's problems but for the desktop usage it's undoubtedly better.

[Gilgemesh]

That is true. Linux has a few hurdles to get into the gaming race.
Steam has big picture mode for windows, and that, currently, beats steamOS. Plays more games, has more stability, and doesn't have hardware component issues.

edit:
Also lets you keep windows. Doesn't require an overcomplicated(for the average user) dual boot. And has far better controller support.

[Vash The Stampede]

If you do not already have hundreds of steam games, a steam machine is not for you.

That and none of Blizzards games or EA's, or nearly anybody else's games would run on Linux. Not without praying to the Wine gods for the game to work without hassle and without losing 50% of the performance you'd get in Windows. Would be nice if these company's would port their games over to Linux but I have a better chance of Trump becoming president of USA.

Best solution is to focus on Wine or an alternative to Wine. This is what Microsoft is doing with Xbox One and 360 compatibility. If using Vulkan instead of OpenGL, the overhead for running DX11 games on Linux should be lower than OpenGL.

- - - Updated - - -

The problems related to gaming are way worse at Linux than at Windows. Windows has it's problems but for the desktop usage it's undoubtedly better.

Consider that none of that is because Windows is superior. If anything Microsoft efforts have made the experience worse. Only saving grace of Windows is DirectX, which has nothing comparable to it so far. Do I need to remind you of Games for Windows Live? Graphic drivers are not because of Windows but from Nvidia, AMD, and Intel. Mice with extra buttons work cause the drivers and software were made for them by respective companies. Xbox 360 receiver needs drivers from Microsoft to work.

None of this is because the magic of Windows but because Windows is where everyone goes to.

[Denpepe]

You will only get a decent stable Linux that is user friendly and that can be used by the majority of computer users if you sell it so you can support it like any other company does with their products, since this is the opposite of what Linux currently is, it's unlikely to change.

Or maybe they need to do like game companies, give the base version away for free and sell the rest as DLC.

Then again seeing people stick to their old OS like a religion, who am I to think this will ever change.