The Steam Deck - a Switch competitor coming in december 2021

[exochaft]

and yet we got other platforms making other products. Yes there is a shortage, but shortage doesn't mean there isn't any.

Heavily depends on the suppliers and contracts Nintendo has with them. For all we know, there might have been a higher grade version but it ran into development issues and was delayed/scrapped for all we know (or they settled on the version we have now)... or the higher probability reason is that the demand for a higher spec version just isn't there to justify the cost of development at this time. I mean it's not a big secret that the consoles themselves tend to not be the big money makers compared to the game sales themselves, and a chip shortage would likely make that gap grow.

Realistically, when it comes to the Steam Deck, I don't think it'll be as big of a hit compared to the Switch. As someone already stated, getting your Steam library playable on your TV is already super easy, and getting it to your mobile device is possible. However, the big issue comes down to how games are designed. When considering the Switch, the games available to this platform are specifically designed (or optimized) to run on the Switch hardware, so anything available to you on the Switch has a very high chance to run well and be playable. However, the Steam Deck does not enjoy this functionality, as you're accessing games designed and optimized to run on a PC... and in some cases, the games are designed/optimized to run on high level hardware. This isn't even going into whether a game is designed to run with a controller or a keyboard/mouse setup.

The end result is that you may be extremely limited on what you can feasibly run on the Steam Deck from your Steam library. While the specs of the machine seem decent, it's not really telling us the whole story or indicating how well it will actually perform. The major hurdle that they will likely run into is overheating and throttling, which we have no information on (and likely won't until it releases and people actually test it). Furthermore, the game titles themselves will likely have huge variance in how fast they eat the battery charge, how hot the hardware will get (or how fast it reaches thermal throttle thresholds), and their resulting performance. Heck, there's a ton of games in my Steam library that are poorly optimized and eat tons of resources on my high-end PC... there's no way it'll run well on a hand-held device.

If I had to hazard a guess, I would estimate that the games will run at 40-50% of what they would on an actual PC (similar to the performance difference between laptops and PCs using the same generation chipsets). For some games, that won't matter at all. For some games, that's just unplayable. The resulting market will be for light games or older titles, and at that point I don't think there will be that big of a market for such a device... unless we need another platform to play Skyrim!

[Egomaniac]

If I had to hazard a guess, I would estimate that the games will run at 40-50% of what they would on an actual PC (similar to the performance difference between laptops and PCs using the same generation chipsets). For some games, that won't matter at all. For some games, that's just unplayable. The resulting market will be for light games or older titles, and at that point I don't think there will be that big of a market for such a device... unless we need another platform to play Skyrim!

Well that's one reason to cap the screen resolution to 1280x800... but yeah...you likely won't be playing the bleeding edge games on that little bugger... it's just the tradeoff one makes for mobility.

[beanman12345]

Bad idea if they are actively trying to compete with Nintendo handheld, look at sega and sony... Switch got Pokemon, BotW2 coming up, Animal Crossing nobody is touching them. That said, It's a pretty cool piece of tech, so I'm gonna pick it up, kinda giving a chuckle to anyone who bought into one of those GDP win's though.

[Dhrizzle]

Switch has the massive advantage of software designed specifically to work with its exact hardware, meanwhile the SteamDeck will be trying to run games that weren't even designed with its OS in mind. It's also going to be competing against every old/spare computer, laptop, tablet, phone and Raspberry Pi with enough oomph to use Steam Link.

Also who the hell is trusting Valve to support them in the console market after they hyped everyone up about Steam Boxes then turned around with the Steam Link box that pretty much rendered them obsolete for a majority of users.

[PACOX]

Insanely overpriced next to Game Pass (or any other decent streaming service) and a controller or one of those cell phone accessories.

It would have have much better specs and a 100 - 200 cheaper than a lot of smartphones for me to look at it. The screen alone is a pass. My phone can push out 144fps while maintaining a decent enough battery life/fast charging.


The concept is great though, just poorly executed.

[jellmoo]

Insanely overpriced next to Game Pass (or any other decent streaming service) and a controller or one of those cell phone accessories.

It would have have much better specs and a 100 - 200 cheaper than a lot of smartphones for me to look at it. The screen alone is a pass. My phone can push out 144fps while maintaining a decent enough battery life/fast charging.


The concept is great though, just poorly executed.

Except your phone isn't running a full blown x86 processor, it's using a battery efficient ARM one. Valve went with those components in order to let people play titles in their existing Steam library, and those PC components have a higher cost.

Comparing it to what a smartphone can do is a pretty poor comparison, since a smartphone won't be able to run full AAA titles. The price they've reached is actually really, really good for the specs the machine has. The low res screen is almost certainly put in in order to keep battery life somewhat acceptable. It's the same reason why the Switch has a 720p display. A higher res screen is going to use a lot more battery, and a bigger battery is going to add weight to an already heavy device.

I'd not personally sold on this being a great device (I have concerns about battery, thermals and ergonomics) but it really can't be compared to what you're getting with a smartphone. By giving you an actual x86 PC you carry in your pocket, Valve is doing something very different.

[PACOX]

Except your phone isn't running a full blown x86 processor, it's using a battery efficient ARM one. Valve went with those components in order to let people play titles in their existing Steam library, and those PC components have a higher cost.

Comparing it to what a smartphone can do is a pretty poor comparison, since a smartphone won't be able to run full AAA titles. The price they've reached is actually really, really good for the specs the machine has. The low res screen is almost certainly put in in order to keep battery life somewhat acceptable. It's the same reason why the Switch has a 720p display. A higher res screen is going to use a lot more battery, and a bigger battery is going to add weight to an already heavy device.

I'd not personally sold on this being a great device (I have concerns about battery, thermals and ergonomics) but it really can't be compared to what you're getting with a smartphone. By giving you an actual x86 PC you carry in your pocket, Valve is doing something very different.

Valid points but I I cited streaming services because I think Valve will push using it as a streaming device. And if you are mostly streaming your games, your smartphone and a gaming attachment will do the trick. I think an ARM CPU is better when it comes to streaming, not claiming to be an expert.

Just thinking about it more, if Valve was the one that called it a Switch competitor they are dreaming. Part of the reason people buy Switches is because they are portable but most people buy them for the library. Consumers don't care if the thing can't run Mario, Link, and Samus.

[Edge-]

Valid points but I I cited streaming services because I think Valve will push using it as a streaming device.

I thought that initially, but looking at the specs...hell no. You don't pack that kinda hardware into a handheld if it's going to be for remote play/cloud streaming. I imagine it'll support remote play, but it's designed for using the hardware itself to run the games.

Just thinking about it more, if Valve was the one that called it a Switch competitor they are dreaming.

They didn't, and that'd be super out of character for them. Based on Gaben's comments, it seems like they're taking the Google approach - "We have tons of money and think there's a market, so we're spending big on a new product to see if the market actually exists or if this is a waste." which is similar to their approach to hardware overall. And much like Google, they've got more misses than hits. Not saying that to knock them, just an amusing similarity.

[Saltysquidoon]

Nintendies are there for the first-party exclusives and the logo. This thing could be 500 times better than the switch and it wouldn't matter.

I can see trying to appeal to PC grognards but 500 clams for a worse experience than I get on the PC I already own for the privilege of playing games when I'm out (presumably not normally playing games) seems like a very small niche before you're out of the gate.

[jellmoo]

Valid points but I I cited streaming services because I think Valve will push using it as a streaming device. And if you are mostly streaming your games, your smartphone and a gaming attachment will do the trick. I think an ARM CPU is better when it comes to streaming, not claiming to be an expert.

Just thinking about it more, if Valve was the one that called it a Switch competitor they are dreaming. Part of the reason people buy Switches is because they are portable but most people buy them for the library. Consumers don't care if the thing can't run Mario, Link, and Samus.

I’d be super surprised if this has any real designs towards being a product with streaming in mind. The specs are really beefy for that use. They could have easily used much simpler specs if that was the goal and gotten much better battery life. The idea here seems to be to run the games locally. The advantage is you won’t need to have a solid, high speed connection to play, which isn’t always available on the go. Also, having a full PC means that it could actually have some use outside of justgaming, though the form factor may make that less than ideal. Having a full Linux PC everywhere you go is cool though.

I think it competes with the Switch in an indirect way. They’re different machines geared towards different crowds, but it is certainly possible that people could be deciding between the two devices based on wanting a mobile gaming system. The real advantage this has is all the things it will be capable of that the switch just isn’t. Need to edit a document quickly? No prob. Watch Netflix? Sure. Listen to Spotify? Absolutely. Write code? Of course.

I think it’s a super niche device, and it really only makes sense if you are a pretty avid gamer with a solid Steam library, but I think that the price for such a device is actually pretty good. Especially for a gen 1 device being launched with the current chip shortage.

[Video Games]

Nintendies are there for the first-party exclusives and the logo. This thing could be 500 times better than the switch and it wouldn't matter.

I can see trying to appeal to PC grognards but 500 clams for a worse experience than I get on the PC I already own for the privilege of playing games when I'm out (presumably not normally playing games) seems like a very small niche before you're out of the gate.

I don't care about the logo. If this thing could emulate switch games with like x2 internal resolution and 60 fps, I'd throw my switch into the trash and buy the 512gb model.

[beanman12345]

I thought that initially, but looking at the specs...hell no. You don't pack that kinda hardware into a handheld if it's going to be for remote play/cloud streaming. I imagine it'll support remote play, but it's designed for using the hardware itself to run the games.



They didn't, and that'd be super out of character for them. Based on Gaben's comments, it seems like they're taking the Google approach - "We have tons of money and think there's a market, so we're spending big on a new product to see if the market actually exists or if this is a waste." which is similar to their approach to hardware overall. And much like Google, they've got more misses than hits. Not saying that to knock them, just an amusing similarity.

It's a curious situation, since it's not a complete unknown, because there has been some of these handheld pc's that have seen success, like the GPD Win, but than others that never heard from again like Nvidia shield, though they went with switch with a similar chip very quickly so that's not an entirely clear situation. I think there is a market, I think the price is right, I guess time will tell if there is enough of a market to propel more R&D for more of these down the road.

[Jastall]

It's a curious situation, since it's not a complete unknown, because there has been some of these handheld pc's that have seen success, like the GPD Win, but than others that never heard from again like Nvidia shield, though they went with switch with a similar chip very quickly so that's not an entirely clear situation. I think there is a market, I think the price is right, I guess time will tell if there is enough of a market to propel more R&D for more of these down the road.

I just don't see the market for it. I don't think there are that many people who want to lug around an even heavier Switch with shorter battery life to play PC games in an inferior fashion to their actual PC. Even if someone gifted me that thing I can think of very few situations where I'd actually use it.

[beanman12345]

I just don't see the market for it. I don't think there are that many people who want to lug around an even heavier Switch with shorter battery life to play PC games in an inferior fashion to their actual PC. Even if someone gifted me that thing I can think of very few situations where I'd actually use it.

You think the weight might be the problem? hmmm could be.

[Jastall]

You think the weight might be the problem? hmmm could be.

Already is for the Switch if you ask me, alongside its size. You obviously can't transport it around in your pocket, so what else is there? A backpack? I'm not dragging that or a case around just to play Super Smash during my 30 minute lunch break at work, especially since I usually just chat with my coworkers anyway. Anywhere else I'm usually busy, or if I gotta wait I happen to have a nifty device with internet access that I can easily transport anywhere. And any handheld PC's going to be even heavier or larger than the Switch, as I said with less battery life so hope you also have a cable handy if you're going somewhere for more than a couple hours.

Trips abroad are basically the only time I'd ever use a handheld console, personally. That's not enough reason to fork over the money to buy one, especially now.

[zealo]

Nobody but a small fraction of geeks buys hardware because of the specs sheet being neat alone. Handheld consoles lives and dies by the software side of it when everyone has a phone on them.

The 3DS ate the Vita for breakfast despite having vastly inferior hardware, and the same thing is going to happen here with the Switch and it's eventual successor because of the software side of things. Valve do not have anywhere near as strong of an exclusive software output as Nintendo does, and even then anything they release for it they'll have to convince those people to spend money to play it on this instead of just staying on their PCs.

[qwerty123456]

Given how I hate the steam controller I'm not sure I would want a steam controller with a screen in the middle.

[Indigenously Abled]

Nobody but a small fraction of geeks buys hardware because of the specs sheet being neat alone.

I took that personally.

[Nihilist74]

I would like it better than a switch depending on what games it would run well.

[KainneAbsolute]

Is it true the you can install Windows OS and basically you can play anything that you can play in a Pc? Steam, XBOS game pass, Origin, Battlenet, emulators???