Valve launched Steam Machines with their own OS and started shipping a version of Steam on Linux with predictable library versions. At the same time, they started working with the Wine project and shipping things which is now called Proton but is actually the cumulative results of their own patches.
This paved the way for the success of the Steam Deck when adequate material became available.
I don’t think it makes sense to call the Steam Machine a misstep because there was no Proton. There would be no Proton nor Steam Deck without the ground work started with the Steam Machines.
I’ve written before about how I think the Steam Deck is one of the best v1 products in recent memory, in large part because Valve learned so much (and so well) from the failures of the Steam Machines.
I don’t know if I would call it a misstep, but it was absolutely a failure. And a brutal one. Valve should be lauded for taking the right lessons from that failure and investing in Proton and doing the compatibility work themselves rather than expecting devs to do it (Apple is the only company that consistently gets developers to rebuild for their platform, and even game developers won’t do that), but we shouldn’t let the fact that it wound up on the right path years later diminish the fact that the original strategy —- if not the devices or idea itself —- was hugely flawed.
Personally, for such an early and unlikely product, I don’t view it as a failure at all. They ironed everything they had to using the platform as a stepping stone.
They can also introduce Windows/DirectX APIs that Proton will have a hard time copying, by requiring additional hardware or subsystem features not easily copyable.
They can let their legal team have some fun.
Finally, companies don't last forever, and I am betting as the 2nd most valuable company in the planet, Microsoft will outlive Steam's current management and eventually deal with the problem in another way.
Steamdeck is already a niche device, and they have direct competition since years now. Optimizing the software and interface won't probably make it much worse for Valve.
> They can also introduce Windows/DirectX APIs that Proton will have a hard time copying, by requiring additional hardware or subsystem features not easily copyable.
Seems unrealistic that games will adapt a new restricted API, which at the same will be a longterm hazzle for Wine/Proton, and will survive that court-battles. At best, it's just some annoying money-sink, with Microsoft playing on time to make it worse for everyone without gaining any real advantage.
> Finally, companies don't last forever, and I am betting as the 2nd most valuable company in the planet, Microsoft will outlive Steam's current management and eventually deal with the problem in another way.
That's actually realistic, but there is also the chance that valve will be outliving Windows and has to battle with whatever will follow.
They can try making Proton's job more difficult, but I'd expect that major changes to the APIs would prevent a lot of existing games from working on Windows.
Legally, I don't think they've got a leg to stand on.