Yes, but also consider you are running a more updated, optimized version of Cyberpunk than what everyone experienced when it first launched (and more optimized drivers/FSR/etc). So the true performance gains of mid-low range hardware is masked by the fact that the game is not so horribly unoptimized anymore. In other words, the actual performance increase of hardware over the years is perceived to be higher than it actually is due to other factors.

It's likely in everybody's best interest that this succeeds. Not only will game developers be incentivized to actually optimize their games for reasonable setups, this will unseat NVIDIA's monopoly over gamers with their overpriced graphics cards and also Microsoft's monopoly on a gamer's operating system. NVIDIA's partnership with Palantir is a great reason to boycott them and encourage these developments and hype this all up.

And then Microsoft or Sony would bulk buy 10k steam machines to use in their server rooms. They can't sell at a loss because the hardware is not locked, otherwise people could just buy these and use them for whatever and Valve wouldn't see a cent from those machines. At the very least they need to be sold at a neutral price point, but more than likely they're looking to get some profit over them.

Yes, but also consider you are running a more updated, optimized version of Cyberpunk than what everyone experienced when it first launched (and more optimized drivers/FSR/etc). So the true performance gains of mid-low range hardware is masked by the fact that the game is not so horribly unoptimized anymore. In other words, the actual performance increase of hardware over the years is perceived to be higher than it actually is due to other factors.

While I think you’re ultimately right, 6 years ago I would have said the same thing about the Steam Deck idea, so I’m compelled to offer counterpoints. Valve, very uniquely, does offer *the best* Linux-based digital games storefront to use on that Linux gaming PC you bought. So, they’re very much positioned to take advantage of the hardware purchase. Users aren’t “locked in”, but they are compelled in, and users may have a smoother time getting games on Steam than trying to set up controller-based launchers on Heroic or something. It’s like when the pet isn’t literally fenced into the house, and is allowed to roam free, but is reminded that its fluffy toy and warm meals are all back at home, so it’ll never go far. Valve also might just be more forward-thinking than ~~most game companies~~ most COMPANIES these days. They build goodwill this way and get people obsessed with their brand by having more wins like this.

The title is a bit misleading, as the article lists diverging analysts’ opinions, ranging from Valve willing to sell at a loss or low margins, to high prices due to RAM and SSD price volatility. cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blackeco.com/post/2330473

Wasn't the OG steam controller $50 ?

For $1k I think this would be DOA.

> And then Microsoft or Sony would bulk buy 10k steam machines to use in their server rooms They'd need 10k steam accounts tho

For $1k I think this would be DOA.

You can always just build your own today even.

Original Steam controller felt like it was made with really cheap looking materials to cut costs. This controller looks like the build quality is much more premium and has a lot of inputs and tech put in than the expensive Xbox Elite. The dualsense edge getting removable joysticks and grips raised the price too. So when its those controllers that this controller will be closer to in terms of features than the base Sony and Xbox controllers. Being only $100 would be a bargain.

Wasn't the OG steam controller $50 ?

Number of investors think you should be willing to invest in a machine that you probably don't have money for to enrich them. They think you should buy games at $70 or something instead of wait for them to be $30 like on sale. Like I wait. Not all of us want to be in debt.

Investors? Valve is a private company

Number of investors think you should be willing to invest in a machine that you probably don't have money for to enrich them. They think you should buy games at $70 or something instead of wait for them to be $30 like on sale. Like I wait. Not all of us want to be in debt.

You're fundamentally misunderstanding what this development means for gaming affordability. Not having to buy a scarce, way overpriced Nvidia (or even AMD) external GPU means that gaming is a whole lot cheaper. If developers are optimizing for hardware like the Steam Machine - budget cards and iGPUs suddenly become viable again.

It's likely in everybody's best interest that this succeeds. Not only will game developers be incentivized to actually optimize their games for reasonable setups, this will unseat NVIDIA's monopoly over gamers with their overpriced graphics cards and also Microsoft's monopoly on a gamer's operating system. NVIDIA's partnership with Palantir is a great reason to boycott them and encourage these developments and hype this all up.

What is the competition on Linux? What’s their market share?