I think some folks are missing the really neat thing about this: remote play.
Steam supports playing games remotely on another computer. So your desktop is doing the heavy lifting, but you can view the game on your TV in the livingroom. Now you can be playing the game on your Chromebook as well.
Then the next step is that Google Cloud offers you an on demand high end gaming machine, pay by the minute, which runs Steam on Windows x86 and has an instant VPN to your Chromebook.
I set this up successfully once on an AWS machine and a very low end laptop running Ubuntu, but I couldn't get the hardware accelerated video encoding to work right. 3 seconds per frame made the game hilariously unplayable, but it did function.
> Then the next step is that Google Cloud offers you an on demand high end gaming machine, pay by the minute, which runs Steam on Windows x86 and has an instant VPN to your Chromebook.
I find it difficult to believe they'd offer this, given that they already have Stadia.
I do see how this could be more appealing for consumers, but aside from competing with themselves, I also would be curious about the economics. Considering how expensive GPUs are, is it even possible the prices for an on-demand gaming service could ever make that much sense? With Stadia, they are making you buy the games through Stadia itself, where they would get a cut of the revenue, which probably helps subsidize the actual cost of the service a bit more.
There's also other very irritating issues. For example, a litany of AAA game companies do not allow their games to be streamed via GeForce Now, even though it would be running your own copy that you bought from your Steam or other library. I assume they would fight to earn additional money on game streaming, even though the money simply isn't there.
This is unfortunate, but perhaps it's OK. Lower end devices will be getting more and more powerful and eventually I'm sure even reasonably priced Chromebooks will be able to play games decently. Given this launch only applies to newer Intel processor based Chromebooks, that day is not today... but still, it certainly could be on the horizon.
Every time I've tried Steam Play, even over hardwired gigabit, it's been laggy, buggy, and crash prone. There was always display switching problems, controllers and keyboards not being detected correctly, graphical issues, etc. Just a PITA.
GeForce Now works much better and doesn't require you to have your own GPU. Do need fast internet though.
You can do remote play on a Chromebook right now with Moonlight! Works great (for me). Some other alternatives include Parsec and Rainway, and probably a few others I'm missing.
AFIACT, it's a "no but yes" sort of answer. Linux games are free to build binaries for any architecture they wish, but any game relying on Proton because it's a Windows binary will require x86.
Good news is, any of us in here are going to buy whatever we want and aren't limited to Chromebooks. Its everyone else that is screwed by the virtual duopoly of Windows and !Windows.
I remember when Chrome OS first came out. I have an old Chromebox I got at Google I/O over a decade ago too. And I remember all of the narrative about it being better because it was just the web browser, and the web was all you needed.
Chrome OS has firmly educated me on how to read marketing copy about things the product doesn't have. "Tell people they don't need it until you catch up to your competitors."
Ten years more from now if Chrome OS still exists, I expect it to simply be another macOS or Windows clone with more or less all of the same features and trappings.
Wait - does this mean that if Steam ships on Chromebook, and Steam can be made to run arbitrary software via proton, that Chromebooks have become regular laptops?
It is worth noting that ChromeOS runs Linux software in a neat way to isolate it from the host OS.
It runs it in Debian-based KVM VMs, and it uses virtio-wayland[1] to pass the applications through to the host compositor, making them feel as if they are not running in a VM.
This architecture means that ChromeOS can preserve its readonly system partition, delta updates, and fast boot times while being able to run any Linux app. Very similar to Qubes, actually.
To be clear, chromebooks have for a few years been able to be regular labtops since crouton [1] allowed installing linux distros on them. (And could even use wine to run windows games on the x86 chromebooks.)
Regardless, last time I was in Walmart Chromebooks where the only laptop available. For better or worse (mostly worse IMO) as far as a large portion of the population is concerned "regular laptops" are specialized equipment that they won't have.
But I suppose it can be useful for arguing that Linux gaming market is expanding, so developers who like to excuse lack of Linux releases with market size will have less excuses now.
At this stage, native Linux releases are becoming less and less likely because of Value's efforts to improve gaming on Linux, as paradoxical as that seems. Proton is getting better and better with each release, and in many cases, is providing better performance than running native code on Windows.
Why bother with official Linux support when you can just check that your game runs via Proton and push the burden of support onto Valve and the Proton community?
You and the dozens of people like you, but the Chromebook consumer market is huge.
Right now Steam is only targeting higher end Chromebooks that make up a small fraction of its market share, but I’m sure they’ll improve that over time.
When travelling, I have used GeForce Now to play Fortnite on an a pretty weak ARM Chromebook from a web browser.
I was able to turn up the graphical settings up much higher than what my regular desktop's ageing GTX 970 graphics card can get, while still maintaining a high frame rate.
Latency is low enough to have fun and contribute to the team. Wasn't a good experience over cellular, but it was very good on a wired connection.
I was very happy to have had a streaming option available at the time.
I am! Though I've been using Stadia + Chromebook when traveling. As for runnig games locally: I'm not sure if most Chromebooks have adequate GPUs to run recent AAA games, but I'm guessing that's a small portion of most people's Steam catalog.
I am a hardcore PC gamer.. but last Christmas I was at the in-law's place and we had a blast trying out a bunch of stadia pro offerings. So much so that I seriously considered buying FIFA on stadia. I just think there's too much of occasional lag on cloud gaming which makes it only suitable for casual gaming.
I was a "only have a Macbook Air" person for a while. You end up sticking to small indie things, but there's lots of games that work on the old integrated graphics stack, available on Steam.
You'd think they would want to double- and triple-down on their cloud gaming platform, Stadia, for Chromebooks. But there's also good reason to believe that platform won't be going the distance so perhaps this is another signal in that direction.
... does Steam provide any sort of services that manage the runtime of games or is the majority of the game still dependent on the users rig? remote GPU workloads/rendering, managing game-play coordination, etc?
If not, then it sounds like working with google (maybe others too) to get Steam running on ChromeOS is a fantastic idea that doesn't conflict with any of their own ambitions.
It's good for google bc you'll potentially attract more users to ChromeOS and once they're on ChromeOS, I'm sure they'll have more exposure to Stadia and other google services. Moreover, as game developers and platforms start to migrate a lot of their workloads to the cloud, Steam might be able to provide a more seamless way to do so (proton?)... again, potentially using google services or even the Stadia backend to do so.
It's good for Valve bc if furthers their independence from Windows. It may also lower the barrier and provide access to individuals that don't have the money or access to expense machines and OSes, especially if the compute intense operations can be offloaded to GPU services in the cloud.
A few years ago (around 2015-2016), I got Counter Strike: Global Offensive running on my x86 Chromebook using Chrubuntu. The experience was about as good as one would expect, but it was still a fun time
[+] [-] mabbo|4 years ago|reply
Steam supports playing games remotely on another computer. So your desktop is doing the heavy lifting, but you can view the game on your TV in the livingroom. Now you can be playing the game on your Chromebook as well.
Then the next step is that Google Cloud offers you an on demand high end gaming machine, pay by the minute, which runs Steam on Windows x86 and has an instant VPN to your Chromebook.
I set this up successfully once on an AWS machine and a very low end laptop running Ubuntu, but I couldn't get the hardware accelerated video encoding to work right. 3 seconds per frame made the game hilariously unplayable, but it did function.
[+] [-] jchw|4 years ago|reply
I find it difficult to believe they'd offer this, given that they already have Stadia.
I do see how this could be more appealing for consumers, but aside from competing with themselves, I also would be curious about the economics. Considering how expensive GPUs are, is it even possible the prices for an on-demand gaming service could ever make that much sense? With Stadia, they are making you buy the games through Stadia itself, where they would get a cut of the revenue, which probably helps subsidize the actual cost of the service a bit more.
There's also other very irritating issues. For example, a litany of AAA game companies do not allow their games to be streamed via GeForce Now, even though it would be running your own copy that you bought from your Steam or other library. I assume they would fight to earn additional money on game streaming, even though the money simply isn't there.
This is unfortunate, but perhaps it's OK. Lower end devices will be getting more and more powerful and eventually I'm sure even reasonably priced Chromebooks will be able to play games decently. Given this launch only applies to newer Intel processor based Chromebooks, that day is not today... but still, it certainly could be on the horizon.
[+] [-] technobabbler|4 years ago|reply
GeForce Now works much better and doesn't require you to have your own GPU. Do need fast internet though.
[+] [-] allanbreyes|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tfolbrecht|4 years ago|reply
https://flathub.org/apps/details/com.valvesoftware.SteamLink
As does the Android App in the ChromeOS Android Play Store.
Can't wait to have the full steam experience!
[+] [-] jokowueu|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DiabloD3|4 years ago|reply
Good news is, any of us in here are going to buy whatever we want and aren't limited to Chromebooks. Its everyone else that is screwed by the virtual duopoly of Windows and !Windows.
[+] [-] ekianjo|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dEnigma|4 years ago|reply
https://www.aboutchromebooks.com/news/steam-gaming-on-chrome...
[+] [-] lillecarl|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ocdtrekkie|4 years ago|reply
Chrome OS has firmly educated me on how to read marketing copy about things the product doesn't have. "Tell people they don't need it until you catch up to your competitors."
Ten years more from now if Chrome OS still exists, I expect it to simply be another macOS or Windows clone with more or less all of the same features and trappings.
[+] [-] torginus|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] conradev|4 years ago|reply
It runs it in Debian-based KVM VMs, and it uses virtio-wayland[1] to pass the applications through to the host compositor, making them feel as if they are not running in a VM.
This architecture means that ChromeOS can preserve its readonly system partition, delta updates, and fast boot times while being able to run any Linux app. Very similar to Qubes, actually.
[1] https://alyssa.is/using-virtio-wl/
[+] [-] cl3misch|4 years ago|reply
https://support.google.com/chromebook/answer/9145439?hl=en
[+] [-] em3rgent0rdr|4 years ago|reply
[1] https://github.com/dnschneid/crouton
[+] [-] Mikeb85|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] paxys|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] moltke|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pa7ch|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shmerl|4 years ago|reply
But I suppose it can be useful for arguing that Linux gaming market is expanding, so developers who like to excuse lack of Linux releases with market size will have less excuses now.
[+] [-] JamesMcMinn|4 years ago|reply
Why bother with official Linux support when you can just check that your game runs via Proton and push the burden of support onto Valve and the Proton community?
[+] [-] pjmlp|4 years ago|reply
Just keep using DirectX and Win32, and let Steam handle shipping an Windows layer on top fo Linux while calling it "Linux gamming".
[+] [-] TulliusCicero|4 years ago|reply
Right now Steam is only targeting higher end Chromebooks that make up a small fraction of its market share, but I’m sure they’ll improve that over time.
[+] [-] jordanmoconnor|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zucker42|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] someperson|4 years ago|reply
I was able to turn up the graphical settings up much higher than what my regular desktop's ageing GTX 970 graphics card can get, while still maintaining a high frame rate.
Latency is low enough to have fun and contribute to the team. Wasn't a good experience over cellular, but it was very good on a wired connection.
I was very happy to have had a streaming option available at the time.
[+] [-] sangnoir|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] esalman|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] donatj|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rtpg|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TulliusCicero|4 years ago|reply
Or older games, for that matter.
[+] [-] pja|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mdoms|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ehsankia|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chrisjc|4 years ago|reply
... does Steam provide any sort of services that manage the runtime of games or is the majority of the game still dependent on the users rig? remote GPU workloads/rendering, managing game-play coordination, etc?
If not, then it sounds like working with google (maybe others too) to get Steam running on ChromeOS is a fantastic idea that doesn't conflict with any of their own ambitions.
It's good for google bc you'll potentially attract more users to ChromeOS and once they're on ChromeOS, I'm sure they'll have more exposure to Stadia and other google services. Moreover, as game developers and platforms start to migrate a lot of their workloads to the cloud, Steam might be able to provide a more seamless way to do so (proton?)... again, potentially using google services or even the Stadia backend to do so.
It's good for Valve bc if furthers their independence from Windows. It may also lower the barrier and provide access to individuals that don't have the money or access to expense machines and OSes, especially if the compute intense operations can be offloaded to GPU services in the cloud.
[+] [-] Grazester|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] scaredginger|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lima|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pengaru|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ekianjo|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] DatDay|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sendilkumarn|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pvg|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] pipeline_peak|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] m0ngr31|4 years ago|reply
Quite a lot actually. Obviously you won't be playing AAA games on a Chromebook, but I think most would run lots of older games well enough
[+] [-] dadoprso|4 years ago|reply