If Valve defeats Sony and Microsoft

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
Edited 4 years, 4 months ago

Poll: If Valve defeats Sony and Microsoft (40 votes)

Yes 43%
Possibly, not 58%

According to softpedia the most respected website in the world, Valve could defeat the consoles with the linux based steamos platform.

source

Hypothetically my friends, if this was to happen and Valve once again repeated the huge revolutionary success of steam with it's new platform, would this 100% undoubtedly cement Valve as the greatest game company in the world?

Avatar image for destroyerman455
#1 Posted by destroyerman455 (77 posts) -

Most of the gaming industry's consumers are casual gamers. No one is going to buy a Steam based console unless it meets 2 major criterias.

1) It has to be fairly cheap compared to the rest and reliable

2) It needs big mainstream gaming titles ex: Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, NBA2K/NCAA/Madden games

Sony and Microsoft have deals with publishers and developers which cover both of those fields and people are so used to the Xbox and Playstation brands that it would be unlikely to change as dramatically as you'd think. The only people aware of how Steam actually is are the people who use it. Outside of that, not many people care in terms of the general populace.

Also Valve didn't announce the Steam Machine until AFTER E3 so people who already invested funds into the X1 and PS4 have already spent it leaving a smaller demographic of people who would possibly buy the Steam Machine. And lets also add that most people outside of Steam's own community are even aware of the Steam Machine so the lack of publicity to it wouldn't allow for much of a takeover either.

And to throw onto all of this, Sony and Microsoft are incredibly wealthy (Especially Microsoft) and wouldn't be stopped simply by the addition of one other console into the competition.

Avatar image for endlessinfinity
#2 Edited by EndlessInfinity (231 posts) -

@destroyerman455:

steam machines are not console they are smaller PCs and we already know one of the first steam machine will be 500 dollars with better specs than next gen console from iBuyerpower. They can play the exact same game as any other PCs just install a windowOS.

Avatar image for Zelda187
#3 Posted by Zelda187 (1047 posts) -

Will never happen.

Although as a PC gamer first and foremost, I'd love to see it.

Bottom line is, most people don't even know what the hell Steam is.

So of course they'll go with a company like Sony, Nintendo, or Microsoft for their newest game system.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#4 Edited by uninspiredcup (26123 posts) -

Steam has more people on it than xboxlive.

Avatar image for Spartan070
#5 Posted by Spartan070 (16402 posts) -

@uninspiredcup said:

Steam has more people on it than xboxlive.

True but it doesn't have the cache as a household name like XBL does, dat mass marketing.

Avatar image for Zelda187
#6 Posted by Zelda187 (1047 posts) -

@uninspiredcup said:

Steam has more people on it than xboxlive.

Yeah, strictly PC gamers.

The VAST majority of console gamers, and especially casual gamers, have no idea what the hell Steam is.

Therefore, the majority of them will flock to a familiar brand. Not spend $500+ on something they are hardly (if at all) familiar with.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#7 Posted by uninspiredcup (26123 posts) -

@Spartan070 said:

@uninspiredcup said:

Steam has more people on it than xboxlive.

True but it doesn't have the cache as a household name like XBL does, dat mass marketing.

Valve (specially Gabe Newell) has stated that marketing is mostly a waste of time. Considering he has more people on steam than xboxlive with practically no steam marketing in comparison, i'm somewhat inclined to agree with this viewpoint.

Avatar image for lamprey263
#8 Edited by lamprey263 (35030 posts) -

Valve could then jack up the rates on games and require 24/hour DRM checks, and who'd we have to run to, Nintendo?

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#9 Posted by uninspiredcup (26123 posts) -

@lamprey263 said:

Valve could then jack up the rates on games and require 24/hour DRM checks, and who'd we have to run to, Nintendo?

Publishers set the price. And they already do that. They do it on physical retail consoles games as well btw. Call Of Duty. Xboxone and PS4 titles are currently £44.99 - £59.99 (previously £39.99). It's a non argument.

Avatar image for deactivated-57d307c5efcda
#10 Edited by deactivated-57d307c5efcda (1302 posts) -

Yeah... keep dreaming. I don't get everyones love affection with Valve. Half-Life is decent, Portal is decent and theres nothing else I like by them, also multiplayer only games are very boring to me. Steam has some good sales sometimes and thats all my steam collection consists of. There is no way valves mini PC's are going to eliminate Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo. Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Infamous, Uncharted, Gran Turismo, Halo, Forza, Final Fantasy, Tales of, Level 5 (Ni nu kuni and such), Xenoblade >>>> Half-life, Portal, Team Fortress 2, Left for Dead. I hate how floaty valve games are, it feels like theres no weight to your character as your moving. While this is my opinion, there are many more who share my opinion too. Basically I don't know anyone personally who would choose valves games over these games and more (not to mention for Half Life 3 and whatever else they make will more than likely be available for consoles anyway.

I already have a PC capable of playing games, but I honestly hardly use it for that, mostly for graphic work. I still prefer physical media over digital, I hate how if I take my laptop somewhere and forget to put steam in offline mode I can't play anything if theres no internet connection or the connection blocks steam. I hate how you have to be very careful when selecting games because some never get fixed (can happen on console, but most get fixed, very rare if one is left in a completely unplayable state), I have run into several games on PC where there are major issues with running it and they never get fixed.

Theres so many reasons why I and way more people prefer consoles, I think the steam box is a waste of time because the only people who would get it are PC gamers, but then they will just complain that it's overpriced because whatever company will make profit on them and not sell it to them at cost or take a hit.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#11 Edited by uninspiredcup (26123 posts) -

When writing a big rant, it usually helps to have some informed concept of what you are attempting to talk about.

Avatar image for GeoffZak
#12 Posted by GeoffZak (3715 posts) -

The only thing that bothers me about the Steambox is the controller.

Trackpads instead of analog sticks? really?

I'm trying to imagine playing games with trackpads and I can't imagine it being fun...

Avatar image for Jankarcop
#13 Posted by Jankarcop (11056 posts) -

valve has already beaten both M$ and Phony with steam, it has more games and concurrent gamers than both combined.

Avatar image for anybodykilla15
#14 Edited by anybodykilla15 (114 posts) -

valve is in no way a contender to sony,

but Microsoft on the other hand,

valve seems to be in directly attacking Microsoft on every front other than mobile

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#15 Edited by ronvalencia (25654 posts) -

Doing a "Google Android" on non-clone friendly "interactive entertainment" HiFi device competitors would be entertaining.

It's 3DO reboot with reduced faults.

Avatar image for LegatoSkyheart
#16 Posted by LegatoSkyheart (29702 posts) -

Valve Beating Sony and Microsoft.

btw, Valve already admitted defeat to Microsoft because their SteamOS can't even play all Steam Games.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#17 Posted by ronvalencia (25654 posts) -

@destroyerman455 said:

Most of the gaming industry's consumers are casual gamers. No one is going to buy a Steam based console unless it meets 2 major criterias.

1) It has to be fairly cheap compared to the rest and reliable

2) It needs big mainstream gaming titles ex: Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, NBA2K/NCAA/Madden games

Sony and Microsoft have deals with publishers and developers which cover both of those fields and people are so used to the Xbox and Playstation brands that it would be unlikely to change as dramatically as you'd think. The only people aware of how Steam actually is are the people who use it. Outside of that, not many people care in terms of the general populace.

Also Valve didn't announce the Steam Machine until AFTER E3 so people who already invested funds into the X1 and PS4 have already spent it leaving a smaller demographic of people who would possibly buy the Steam Machine. And lets also add that most people outside of Steam's own community are even aware of the Steam Machine so the lack of publicity to it wouldn't allow for much of a takeover either.

And to throw onto all of this, Sony and Microsoft are incredibly wealthy (Especially Microsoft) and wouldn't be stopped simply by the addition of one other console into the competition.

Valve needs to convince the ex-3DO clone vendors to the SteamOS platform in e.g. Samsung(South Korea), Goldstar/LG (South Korea), Toshiba (Japan), Panasonic (Japan), Sanyo (Japan), Creative Labs (Singapore) and 'etc'.

Avatar image for -Unreal-
#18 Posted by -Unreal- (24650 posts) -

@ryangcnx-2 said:

Yeah... keep dreaming. I don't get everyones love affection with Valve. Half-Life is decent, Portal is decent and theres nothing else I like by them, also multiplayer only games are very boring to me. Steam has some good sales sometimes and thats all my steam collection consists of. There is no way valves mini PC's are going to eliminate Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo. Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Infamous, Uncharted, Gran Turismo, Halo, Forza, Final Fantasy, Tales of, Level 5 (Ni nu kuni and such), Xenoblade >>>> Half-life, Portal, Team Fortress 2, Left for Dead. I hate how floaty valve games are, it feels like theres no weight to your character as your moving. While this is my opinion, there are many more who share my opinion too. Basically I don't know anyone personally who would choose valves games over these games and more (not to mention for Half Life 3 and whatever else they make will more than likely be available for consoles anyway.

I already have a PC capable of playing games, but I honestly hardly use it for that, mostly for graphic work. I still prefer physical media over digital, I hate how if I take my laptop somewhere and forget to put steam in offline mode I can't play anything if theres no internet connection or the connection blocks steam. I hate how you have to be very careful when selecting games because some never get fixed (can happen on console, but most get fixed, very rare if one is left in a completely unplayable state), I have run into several games on PC where there are major issues with running it and they never get fixed.

Theres so many reasons why I and way more people prefer consoles, I think the steam box is a waste of time because the only people who would get it are PC gamers, but then they will just complain that it's overpriced because whatever company will make profit on them and not sell it to them at cost or take a hit.

I'm glad I only skimmed your post and didn't waste too much time on it. You don't seem to understand why Half-Life 1 AND 2 were landmark titles, the market for pre-build systems running Steam OS ("Steam Machines") and you don't seem to understand the most basic of functions a PC has. And I mean really basic stuff.

Avatar image for -Unreal-
#19 Posted by -Unreal- (24650 posts) -
@LegatoSkyheart said:

Valve Beating Sony and Microsoft.

btw, Valve already admitted defeat to Microsoft because their SteamOS can't even play all Steam Games.

Can Xbox One play all Xbox games?

Avatar image for LegatoSkyheart
#20 Edited by LegatoSkyheart (29702 posts) -

@-Unreal- said:
@LegatoSkyheart said:

Valve Beating Sony and Microsoft.

btw, Valve already admitted defeat to Microsoft because their SteamOS can't even play all Steam Games.

Can Xbox One play all Xbox games?

No, but Steam relies on Windows, a Microsoft Product.

Avatar image for Boddicker
#21 Posted by Boddicker (4347 posts) -

It will never, ever happen. People stick with what they know and unfortunately to most people PC gaming = nerds but console gaming is OK.

Still, I'd like to see it not completely fail. I'm giving serious thought to picking up the $500 version.

Avatar image for deactivated-59b71619573a1
#22 Posted by deactivated-59b71619573a1 (38222 posts) -

Explain how exactly they will "defeat" them.

Will they battle to the death?

Avatar image for endlessinfinity
#23 Edited by EndlessInfinity (231 posts) -

@Boddicker:

What? The only people I met who even think that are console fanboys

Avatar image for crimsonman1245
#24 Edited by crimsonman1245 (4253 posts) -

Ok someone help me out here.

Is Valve getting major dicounts on hardware to match Sony and Microsoft?

Is Valve selling their hardware for a 60+ dollar loss to match Sony and Microsoft?

Are there developers that are going to focus on a single sku to match Sony and Microsoft?

Is Valve doing billions on R&D to compete with Sony and Microsoft?

Is Valve going to spend billions on advertising to compete with Sony and Microsoft?

Is Valve going to have dozens of high quality Steam machine exclusives to compete with Sony and Microsoft?

Are Valve's hardware engineers on par with Sonys?

I'm not saying that this isnt going to be a good product, im just not understanding how a prebuilt PC is going to outsell Playstation and XBox, Sony and Microsoft put alot of time/money/resources/talent/manhours into these things.

Avatar image for edidili
#25 Posted by edidili (3449 posts) -

@crimsonman1245: I doubt it. Valve's success with steam was mainly thanks to windows so most of that work was already done by others. Steam gave the most popular OS in the world an app store for games and that is what made it popular.

Avatar image for Puckhog04
#26 Posted by Puckhog04 (22814 posts) -

Won't happen.

Avatar image for fishsticklover
#27 Posted by Fishsticklover (252 posts) -

lol valve, they will never amount to anything with that horrible steambox, they should stick with the PC and cater to nerds only

Avatar image for Vatusus
#28 Posted by Vatusus (8430 posts) -

I dont think so. Valve fans are hermits and hermits wont waste money on a steam machine when they already have their rigs. Console gamers still buy consoles for exclusives, something the steam machines wont have cause its games will also be available on PC.

Steam machines were a bad business decision from Valve imo

Avatar image for deactivated-5acbb9993d0bd
#30 Edited by deactivated-5acbb9993d0bd (12449 posts) -

@Spartan070 said:

@uninspiredcup said:

Steam has more people on it than xboxlive.

True but it doesn't have the cache as a household name like XBL does, dat mass marketing.

neither did the xbox 12-13 years ago, what a pointless thing to bring up.

@Vatusus .... what kind of too basic logic are you trying to pull here?

Sharing PC games BENEFITS it, its not the fact that it has the same game, but in how its delivered. E.G "the console experiance", but with the steam platform and more PC freindly controller.

Avatar image for deactivated-57d307c5efcda
#31 Edited by deactivated-57d307c5efcda (1302 posts) -

@-Unreal- said:

@ryangcnx-2 said:

Yeah... keep dreaming. I don't get everyones love affection with Valve. Half-Life is decent, Portal is decent and theres nothing else I like by them, also multiplayer only games are very boring to me. Steam has some good sales sometimes and thats all my steam collection consists of. There is no way valves mini PC's are going to eliminate Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo. Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Infamous, Uncharted, Gran Turismo, Halo, Forza, Final Fantasy, Tales of, Level 5 (Ni nu kuni and such), Xenoblade >>>> Half-life, Portal, Team Fortress 2, Left for Dead. I hate how floaty valve games are, it feels like theres no weight to your character as your moving. While this is my opinion, there are many more who share my opinion too. Basically I don't know anyone personally who would choose valves games over these games and more (not to mention for Half Life 3 and whatever else they make will more than likely be available for consoles anyway.

I already have a PC capable of playing games, but I honestly hardly use it for that, mostly for graphic work. I still prefer physical media over digital, I hate how if I take my laptop somewhere and forget to put steam in offline mode I can't play anything if theres no internet connection or the connection blocks steam. I hate how you have to be very careful when selecting games because some never get fixed (can happen on console, but most get fixed, very rare if one is left in a completely unplayable state), I have run into several games on PC where there are major issues with running it and they never get fixed.

Theres so many reasons why I and way more people prefer consoles, I think the steam box is a waste of time because the only people who would get it are PC gamers, but then they will just complain that it's overpriced because whatever company will make profit on them and not sell it to them at cost or take a hit.

I'm glad I only skimmed your post and didn't waste too much time on it. You don't seem to understand why Half-Life 1 AND 2 were landmark titles, the market for pre-build systems running Steam OS ("Steam Machines") and you don't seem to understand the most basic of functions a PC has. And I mean really basic stuff.

Yeah wow, maybe you should try reading a bit, it's good for you.

I don't see how you think I don't understand the basic functions of a PC when we are TALKING ABOUT GAMES!!!

The Steambox is nothing more than a prebuilt PC with a linux based GAMING ONLY OS on it. The steam box cannot do regular PC tasks like Windows or the Mac OSX, it cannot open a word document, it cannot run Photoshop, internet browsers, check your email, run 3DS Max, Zbrush, convert video and music files and such. It is strictly a Consolized PC, but then it will never be as optimized as a console. A console is a standard set of hardware, when developing a game optimizing means well people are going to see this rock much so lets lower it poly count (bascially skimming through the game and lowering whats least noticeable and since every PS4 is exactly the same, they don't have to account for other setups, they can simply do what they need until it runs better) They CANNOT do this on a PC even a steam box because of all the different hardware configurations. Also not to mention all the overhead a PC has over a console. While steam os might lower this a bit, it still has to deal with different hardware configs.

A steambox won't sell because it's main market already has PC's. Seriously, if you own a PC capable of gaming and can run steam why in the world would you go out and buy a steambox? It still has to deal with drivers and many games that never get fixed and stay broken forever and lacks all the exclusive titles a PS4/X1/Wii-u will have so it's not going to attract console gamers. It's a misfit device that will only sell to a very niche market, and a market thats probably smaller than the jrpg market. Hardcore PC elitists will also mock it because Valve and other companies will sell these things for profit, meaning they will bunked in with "Prebuilt" machines that are overpriced and just say that you should just build your own PC. You get where the rest of us are going with that there is no actual market for this thing?

Also had you read my post, you would have caught it was "MY OPINION" that all those games I listed are way superior to Valve games, I just also noted that there are many more who share this same opinion as well. You do have to admit, valve games feel floaty, it feels like a camera on rail, which to me breaks the immersion of a FPS. But again, I don't know how you assume that I know nothing about basic functions of a PC by not liking valve games.

Avatar image for Shielder7
#32 Edited by Shielder7 (5191 posts) -

Valve made a console to play PC games, but my PC already does that. Hermit's won't want it because they have their PC already and Consolites will have no need of it because they have their consoles.

The margin of gamers who want to get into PC gaming but don't want a PC isn't that large IMO.

Avatar image for GhoX
#33 Posted by GhoX (6267 posts) -

@lamprey263 said:

Valve could then jack up the rates on games and require 24/hour DRM checks, and who'd we have to run to, Nintendo?

GMG, Amazon, GOG or heck even Origin. Digital distribution is far from a monopoly. Steam is the most popular platform, but it remains the most popular platform because it remains competitive in nearly all aspects against its competitors. There's a flying mammoth truck more competition on the PC platform internally than the simple black and white distinction that are console platforms - tons of competing distributors, tons of competing hardware and accessory manufacturers, Intel/nVidia and AMD/ATI, and soon competing gaming OS between Windows and Linux. It's very very difficult to achieve monopoly in even a single field of PC gaming, let alone dominating the entirety of it.

Avatar image for Spartan070
#34 Posted by Spartan070 (16402 posts) -

@MBirdy88:

@MBirdy88 said:

@Spartan070 said:

@uninspiredcup said:

Steam has more people on it than xboxlive.

True but it doesn't have the cache as a household name like XBL does, dat mass marketing.

neither did the xbox 12-13 years ago, what a pointless thing to bring up.

Focusing too much on the household name bit and not enough on the mass marketing bit...

Avatar image for XBOunity
#35 Posted by XBOunity (3837 posts) -

@destroyerman455: valve will be a niche product. 1 . the console design looks like shit, and only steam gamers are gonna buy it. Not even close, xbox one has upped the bar.

Avatar image for Fleeboi
#36 Edited by Fleeboi (99 posts) -

In my opinion, absolutely, and here's why....

Casuals love new experiences, the Wii was a success not because of it's graphics or its titles, but the fact that it was a new gaming experience which catered to more than an hardcore gamer. The Oculus Rift does the same thing for casuals, look at any Oculus Rift youtube video and you will see people of all ages, male and female soaking this stuff up and loving it, and that's with a low resolution development kit. When the Rift is released it will receive a LOT of buzz, everyone will want to get their hands on one and the easiest option for most people would be to get a device that enables them to use the Rift without much knowledge and is user friendly (the appeal of consoles in the first place), hello Steam Box.

Not that the Oculus Rift caters only to casuals, hardcore gamers will love it to (I can't wait for Star Citizen), so there's definitely incentive for those who buy consoles to want a similar console experience in their living room, with the added bonus of being able to stick a VR headset on and go for complete immersion when you're playing games by yourself.

Come 4 years in the future the current generation of consoles will seem completely outdated, not just technology wise but experience also, and there's no way that the current generation of consoles will be able to match what the Oculus Rift experience will bring aside from Sony's own attempt but we have no real detail on that yet, but let's be honest, the PC has too many advantages and just a couple of years from now the increased power of the PC will make these consoles look obsolete in comparison, the mid ranged Steam Box matches console power now and is going to be around the same price so in a couple of years you'll have a far better machine for the same price mark.

Personally, I think this generation of consoles will be the last, the advancements in technology are far too great and soon enough this current technology will seem outdated. If you are familiar with Moore's Law, the co-founder of intel who once stated "The density of transistors on silicon will double approximately every 18 months", well now it's down to 8-12 months, this means that by the time hardware choices are finalised and dev kits are produced and sent out to the time when a console is released computing power has already doubled, sure developers are able to optimise and will continue to make the games look and perform better, but there's a certain point in which there's going to be diminishing returns 4-5 years from now the raw power of a PC alone will stomp anything a PS4 and Xbox One is capable of regardless of optimisation. Unless consoles in the future have the ability to be upgraded then it's almost a certainty that a PC/Console hybrid like the Steam Box will replace them.

That's my take on it anyway.

Avatar image for 2mrw
#37 Edited by 2mrw (5730 posts) -

Long story short Won't happen.

Avatar image for anybodykilla15
#38 Edited by anybodykilla15 (114 posts) -

@XBOunity:

@XBOunity said:

@destroyerman455: valve will be a niche product. 1 . the console design looks like shit, and only steam gamers are gonna buy it. Not even close, xbox one has upped the bar.

raised the bar how? they raised it up your ass and wave you like a flag?

either sony, Nintendo and valve gang raped your mother,

or you are a paid shill,

because you cannot be serious about these posts

Avatar image for treedoor
#39 Posted by treedoor (7648 posts) -

I'm of the opinion that Valve is secretly one of the most evil companies in gaming.

But the Steamstation won't take off without a huge marketing budget behind it. If it's just simply some type of 'certification' that companies like ibuypower or sager can stick on premade PCs then it won't sell all that well to the mass market much like the current offerings from those companies don't.

Avatar image for PsychoLemons
#40 Posted by PsychoLemons (3178 posts) -

It has a chance, nonetheless.

Avatar image for deactivated-5acbb9993d0bd
#41 Posted by deactivated-5acbb9993d0bd (12449 posts) -

@Spartan070 said:

@MBirdy88:

@MBirdy88 said:

@Spartan070 said:

@uninspiredcup said:

Steam has more people on it than xboxlive.

True but it doesn't have the cache as a household name like XBL does, dat mass marketing.

neither did the xbox 12-13 years ago, what a pointless thing to bring up.

Focusing too much on the household name bit and not enough on the mass marketing bit...

Mass Marketing isn't saving windows phone, isn't improving window 8's image and certainly isn't doing wonders for the surface range.

Now, the XBOX on the other hand was probably the last non-windows brand that is a success. hell alot to do with windows and pc gamers in the first place no doubt.

but then this isn't just a console device we are talking about here, its both. can be tailored for both.brings together the eco system of desktop pcs, laptops and console format in one games interface. most gamers are at least aware of what steam is.

mass-marketing isn't the end all of everything.

Avatar image for Jamex1987
#42 Posted by Jamex1987 (2187 posts) -
@endlessinfinity said:

@destroyerman455:

steam machines are not console they are smaller PCs and we already know one of the first steam machine will be 500 dollars with better specs than next gen console from iBuyerpower. They can play the exact same game as any other PCs just install a windowOS.

Installing windows just puts right back to why so many people don't bother with computers to play games. Too much to deal with. The vast majority of consumers don't have time for that.

Avatar image for Jamex1987
#43 Edited by Jamex1987 (2187 posts) -

@uninspiredcup said:

Steam has more people on it than xboxlive.

Lots of people just use it as a messenger and there are lots of free to play games like Dota 2 which is by far the most popular game on Steam. Everyone with a PC can play it. It does not require a $500 video card.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#44 Posted by ronvalencia (25654 posts) -

@MBirdy88 said:

@Spartan070 said:

@MBirdy88:

@MBirdy88 said:

@Spartan070 said:

@uninspiredcup said:

Steam has more people on it than xboxlive.

True but it doesn't have the cache as a household name like XBL does, dat mass marketing.

neither did the xbox 12-13 years ago, what a pointless thing to bring up.

Focusing too much on the household name bit and not enough on the mass marketing bit...

Mass Marketing isn't saving windows phone, isn't improving window 8's image and certainly isn't doing wonders for the surface range.

Now, the XBOX on the other hand was probably the last non-windows brand that is a success. hell alot to do with windows and pc gamers in the first place no doubt.

but then this isn't just a console device we are talking about here, its both. can be tailored for both.brings together the eco system of desktop pcs, laptops and console format in one games interface. most gamers are at least aware of what steam is.

mass-marketing isn't the end all of everything.

For smart phones, Windows Phone 8 is too late for clone friendly OS platfrom i.e. Google's Android has this position.

Steve Ballmer laughs at iPhone http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eywi0h_Y5_U MS's lost "Windows Phone 6" lead by not addressing usability issues.