100

Valve’s Good Guy Image Makes Up For The Steam Deck’s Problems (www.forbes.com)

submitted 1 year ago by ylai@lemmy.ml to c/steamdeck@lemmy.ml

79 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Contramuffin@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

Hard disagree. Steam Deck is good because it fills a niche that no other handheld PC fulfills. You can't really nitpick when there isn't really any competitors.

The Deck isn't the most powerful, its display isn't the best, it isn't the cheapest. What people like the author seem to miss is that the Deck wasn't marketed to be the most powerful, or the best display, or the cheapest. It was designed to balance all these design considerations, such that even though it's not best at anything, it's not bad at anything either. That's really the allure of the Deck for me, that I don't really need to work around any limitations

[-] BrainisfineIthink@lemmy.one 6 points 1 year ago

Yeah I dont get the sentiment at all. If it was trash and couldn't run anything it wouldn't sell. But it's not, and it runs damn near everything, even if some higher end games will destroy the battery in 25 minutes, it'll be a great 25 minutes. You can also stop at any point in any game and just come back later and it resumes seamlessly, almost instantaneously, and with next to no battery loss. I'm not being sarcastic, I've never had ANY game system that can do that. The closest is the PS5 with rest mode but it's still way behind ateamdeck in wake up time. It's a first gen release and it's capable of things no other console (maybe switch - I don't actually know, I don't have one) handheld or otherwise, has been able to do.

Like love or hate valve all you want, but there's really not a lot to shit on the steam deck about. It's had like three competitors come out and two most people already forgot exist (Logitech something, and some other one). The Asus one seems capable but is bottlenecked by using windows. Let's not forget Google's attempt at a revolutionary gaming product.

[-] dlove67@feddit.nl 3 points 1 year ago

To be fair, the logitech G Cloud was never going to be a competitor to the deck, since it's not made to run things on the bare metal

[-] BrainisfineIthink@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago

Just because it isn't a real competitor doesn't mean that it wasn't meant to be one. It was developed targeting what Logitech thought would be the biggest use case for deck, which was playing games that could be streamed, and have other hardware do the bulk of the lifting. The problem is that deck can also do that, and does it better. It was probably a fairly low effort cash grab by Logitech, but they still made it and sunk a ton of R&D costs into getting it out near the deck release.

It was probably developed directly in response to the deck being announced, in order to compete in an open market. If it wasn't directly in response, then they still felt strongly enough that it would compete that they didn't cut their losses after the deck was announced.