Valves entire business strategy requires that developers actually bother to support it.
Virtually all of the games currently on steam use DirectX, and only very few use Open GL. Also, the non standardization of the hardware somewhat obviates one of the main points of a console (easy to develop a game KNOWING that it will work on all target machines).

So one of the following must be the case:

1) they have to reach some kind of agreement with MS to licence DirectX technology for use with a competing operating system AND a competing hardware device (never gonna happen)

2) they have to convince a significant number of developers to target yet another non-standardized PC-like platform, for even less revenue than they would have got before (a difficult sell)

3) the steambox will be an expensive PC that does less than the PCs people already have, and doesn't play a number of the games that people already own, on an OS that most gamers are not familiar with, and which only has one selling point - it can fit under your TV - which most PCs can already do anyway.
(eViLegion Chief Commissioner of the Scottish Lunacy Board, Wed 8 Jan 2014, 13:53, 2 replies)

you bunch of nerds

( The Doveston haunted by the memory of his own amnesia, Wed 8 Jan 2014, 14:12, closed)

1. Is OpenGL really so poorly supported? I thought it was quite well accepted (nothing to back this up, so won't argue the point).
2. I thought that the point of the SteamBox was that it would adhere to a set of standards, to ensure a minimum level of compatibility?
3. I expect it to be cheaper than competing consoles, with the bonus of having full PC functionality, if the user wants.

I'm not really in the market for a console, but I'd like to see Valve's project succeed.
( monster munch person, man, woman... camera... TV?, Wed 8 Jan 2014, 15:43, closed)