Forum Discussion
Seriously? My PC is in my bedroom, my TV is in my living room. I’m not going to lug my pc out to my living room every time I want to play on the couch bud, and I’m not running an HDMI cable across my entire house. Streaming is a far more seamless process. Using a steam link, I literally just press the Xbox button and it automatically connects to my PC and pulls up big picture. It’s a million times better than running an HDMI cable across my entire house, managing the extra TV as a monitor, running multiple usb extenders for my controller…just why? Unless your TV is in the same room as your PC, it literally makes no sense to use an HDMI.
Well, I'm not a gamer so that scenario wasn't something I considered. For one, it seems odd if your gaming PC is in a bedroom, not some other location. But if that's your layout, no problem. I am also expecting a home to have more than one computer. Maybe not multiple high power gaming PCs, but still.
Personally, I doubt any model of Roku has the processing power needed to perform well with something like Steam. Most gaming requires significant video processing power, and although I expect the computer would do most of the heavy lifting I'm not confident the Roku could handle the bitrate required for seamless playback. Remember, these are not in any way considered high powered. Even the latest Ultra doesn't come close to the power of a five year old Nvidia Shield. The Shield does support Steam (I believe) but again it has much more power and is far more capable.
- Birkin2 years agoReel Rookie
Like I said, it just seems like a fundamental misunderstanding. I’m not trying to be rude or anything, but all your questions pretty much answer themselves. Most people either keep their gaming pc in their bedroom or home office. It’s pretty rare for a gaming pc to be in the living room. And sure I have multiple computers in the home, but that doesn’t do me any good when only one has the newest hardware capable of gaming.. And yes, streaming a video game is certainly more demanding than just a video stream. But still essentially ALL of the lifting is done on the PC. The TV just needs to be capable of streaming at a high enough bitrate, and send inputs to the PC. And as far as I know, Roku is simply a bit behind in the game. Almost every TV that runs on Android nowadays, has the Steam Link app available. That’s actually what led me here, every now and then I’ll check in with Roku to see if they’ve added it… nope. I doubt they will, which is a shame because this means I likely will not purchase another TV from them. They would definitely gain a fair share of customers if they were to implement this.
- atc980922 years agoCommunity Streaming Expert
No problem. I defer to your knowledge and judgement about the performance requirements. I'll just point out one more thing. Roku themselves does not create apps/channels for 3rd party uses. So for something like this, most likely someone associated with Steam would need to create the app and offer it on Roku. It will never happen if people are waiting for Roku to add it themselves.
Game on, and more power to ya!
- Shottakc9 months agoNewbie
I’m a few months late but I have found 2 loopholes. If you have a phone or tablet you can download the steam link app on that device and mirror it to the Roku. If you have windows 10 and up on your pc you can add your Roku as a wireless second display. I’ve found mirror through phone to be the most effective way. You would think there would be a delay since it’s streaming from the of to the phone and then to the Roku but streaming straight from the of to Roku cause a very noticeable input delay. Also if you have google tv or chromecast you can download steam link straight to that device and not need to mirror from your phone/tablet.