Although 13 versions of the Steam Machine were announced at CES Monday, Valve won't be releasing its own version, as the company views itself as more of a catalyst for its hardware partners, Valve co-founder Gabe Newell said at CES.

"We're going to continue to make that decision as we go along," Newell said. "We've been happy with the results of doing hardware development with clients. We have plans to build more machines, but we also expect that users will be really happy with the range of offerings from these hardware manufacturers.”

Valve has already made a handful of its own Steam Machines, Newell said, but the company has no plans to release it to the public.

“I mean, we’ve made 300 [machines], which is a very tiny step," Newell said. "We’ll make what we need to. We really view our role in this as enabling. So we’ll do whatever is going to be helpful to other hardware manufacturers – whether that’s with controller design or building specific kinds of boxes."

Source

I wonder what the next step for valve is once the steam machines are released. Do they continue to manage steam as a software platform or will they change their mind and release its own version of the steam box.

CONFIRMED

Seems like the smartest way to roll out. Valve does what it does best, the software, and leaves the companies that already have their own manufacturing pipelines in place to take the risk of producing the gizmos. It also ensures that consumers can weigh each device against each other equally without having to compare them all to the "official" models.

They should focus work on making SteamOS widely adopted by most publishers for now and not hardware. If in 5-6 years from now you know longer have to ask yourself the question whenever a new game comes out whether it runs on SteamOS or not and it just becomes a given that it does like it is now with Windows then these Steam Machines will become interesting.

If we ever reach this point then having a box that says Steam on it, you know it runs SteamOS and essentially any game on the market, at that point the only added thing to consider compared to a traditional console are system requirements for the games that interest you. That's something that could work for most people that still find PC gaming too complex. When you only have one more thing to take into account compared to a console then it's no longer too complex.

This is all such a weird undertaking. Steam OS, Steam Machines with different specs from different companies, all of it. So crazy.

That makes no sense.

What you just said makes no sense.

All of that is already true of a gaming PC. You can buy what you described, minus that one major glaring issue (because everything already runs on Windows). It's a thing that exists today. Why slapping a Steam logo on the side of it changes anything, other than the fact that you know that you need to buy Windows separately, I have no idea.

This thing is a long term long shot from Valve, and I'm a bit shocked at how cautious everybody is at acknowledging it as such. Alienware has been selling that same "steam machine" thing they announced today for two years. I hear it's pretty OK, for a middle-of-the-road compact PC. It starts at $699. You don't need to bother about compatibility, just what specs you need for the games you want. Comes in three basic specs, low, mid and high. Go buy it. Today. Or don't, because there isn't a huge market for set-top PCs that cost more than dedicated consoles for a damn good reason.

Guys, I'm disappointed in Windows 8 too, it kinda sucks, but making Steam OS must be the most incredible overreaction to bad Windows release from a geek that I've ever seen. I guess it makes sense, Gaben is part of Microsoft's old guard and he sees his circle closing by replacing Microsoft, but the plan that he has in place... just doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I've heard enough people say this online to make me relieved for our collective sanity, but then I also see posts like yours and I have to wonder just how powerful Valve's perception-altering field is.

It's nothing new or crazy at all, Valve are only doing what other companies have for years; pre-built computers. The only difference is they have the weight of Steam and good will behind them, the interest in the Steam machines is pretty much because of that alone. Steam OS won't be relevant to game on until they get nearly all new releases and their backlog to run on it, otherwise I see 99% of people never booting into Steam OS in favour of just using Windows permanently.

There's no real need to even boot into SteamOS because putting Steam on Windows into Big Picture mode is practically identical, with all the compatibility Windows offers.

It's a solution looking for a problem, honestly. At least as far as I can tell.

@noelveiga: You don't understand what they're trying to if you think what i said makes no sense then. They want to sell Steam Machines that run on SteamOS. You need games to run on SteamOS for that to happen. They're creating competition for Windows and focusing on making their OS a success will go a long way in making hardware marketed as running said OS a success too which in turns will go a long way into making that competition successful.

What you are saying is that because something like that already exist with windows and other pre-built PCs this makes no sense. Saying that is what makes no sense. The industry needs more competition, not less.

It'd be really interesting to see what Valve would choose as the specs for their own creation.

you pretty much nailed it

@pr1mus: That post wasn't easy to decipher, but I don't see a bunch of new developers flocking to Linux without a large SteamOS install base and I don't see a large SteamOS install base without developers flocking to Linux- a catch-22. You could dual-boot windows, but then they're hardly in competition with windows,are they? Also, competition should, ideally, compete by trying to offer things people want that the competing products don't, whether that's features or ease or price, and I don't see that Steam machines do that currently.

@towersixteen: And all of that is even less likely to happen if no one ever try. Which seems to be what everyone talking against SteamOS and the Steam Machines have to offer for a solution. Not doing anything isn't exactly the most compelling idea in the world either.

False dichotomy. Your claiming that steam machines are over-criticized because the only alternative, doing nothing, is worse. But no one is saying that no one should try to compete- just that the current plan for steam machines doesn't look like it'll cut it. I'd love to see more competition; I'd just also like to see that competition stand a chance of actually competing. And that means an offering that adequately fulfills a demand better than it's competition. Steam Machines don't seem to do that currently.

i think the plan may have worked better with one unified box developed or branded by valve so things would be homogenous. they'd also have to be willing to take a loss on it to really penetrate the market. maybe this is a step in the right direction for more serious pc gamers and will probably do alright for valve, but it's definitely not going to take the world by storm in its current guise.

Makes sense. Valve has no means to mass produce, sell, and give customer support for hardware. Shoving that off to vendors who are already in the business of doing those things would be better for them. Still think this will barely do anything for the average consumer though. Pre-built PCs are nothing new. If you want to get into the Steam platform and don't want to build a PC, you can buy a pre-built system now that will be more functional than any of these Steam Machines out of the box. I see no reason to wait for a Steam Machine-branded PC other than to buy into the hype Valve is creating.