Valve just recently announced they weren’t planning a refresh “any time soon” but that doesn’t mean they are ignorant about Nintendo apparently trying to close the gap with a new switch, that’s supposed to be at least as powerful a PS5/XBS. Competition is good for the consumer.
Exactly, same architecture means nothing if it only draws a fraction of the power, eg from a battery and not mains. Not only that, but size and cooling constraints mean with our current tech, it’s impossible to have a small handheld as powerful as current gen consoles
Honestly the biggest barrier is nintendo’s policy of making profit on hardware. Microsoft loses $100-$200 per console and the XSX still costs $500. Is nintendo really ready to charge $600 or even $700 for a console that matches what was released 3 years ago? 4 probably by launch?
The biggest barrier is that Nvidia has shown no capability to make a CPU that isn’t unconditional dogshit for gaming, and the CPU is the Switch’s problem.
The only company that’s made an ARM CPU remotely interesting is Apple.
They’re proud of “withered technology” as a philosophy.
My point is that even if they changed, it doesn’t matter. The fact that it’s nvidia means that it can’t get close on real world performance with anything that uses the CPU meaningfully. Even if they did match graphics benchmarks for some reason, it would be way off from actually playing most current gen games at a reasonable level.
It’s not going to be, it’s (from what I’ve seen) simply the same architecture. It’ll probably be what’s essentially a very cut down and underpowered (as in literally uses less power) version of it. Still a massive step up from the switch, which was already well outdated when it launched, but it’s not going to touch PS5 performance
I highly doubt Nintendo is attempting any kind of gap closure with the deck, because how could they and why?
The only thing they share is a form factor. Nintendo is well aware that the reason they sell consoles is as a dedicated platform for their own games. I truly believe that is their bread and butter and all they really care about. If the system gets popular enough, then it will get some third party support which means it will have some very limited library crossover with PC/PS/Xbox, but I think we are past the point where Nintendo intends to rely on that as a selling point for this or any future generation of consoles. Ports of games that come to switch are pretty uniformly the worst version of the game to play, and it’s pretty clear that doesn’t bother Nintendo at all.
Which is all to say, I don’t think Nintendo and Valve think of each other as direct competitors, because they serve entirely different markets. I have both a switch and a deck. I love them both. I use my switch to play Nintendo games, I use my deck to play pretty much anything else. I don’t think I’m unique at all in that regard, and frankly it never would occur to me that these devices have anything to do with one another.
There are supposedly two new hardware devices coming from Valve, earlier leaks had two different product code names. So possibly we’re getting both a revised deck and a new VR something.
God, what I wouldn’t give for a standalone VR headset with the Steam Deck’s internals…mostly because I just want them to shove a whole bunch of support behind getting VR to work right on Linux.
@Fubarberry@Lord_Wunderfrog dang, people just got a deck. Oh well, time to upgrade. I really want a better screen. Playing games on the SD and seeing that same game on other consoles makes me feel like I’m missing details.
I don’t think there’s currently evidence that this new “Deck” is a Deck at all. Releasing a standing console box with the Deck’s internals but better cooling, ethernet and better wifi, HDMI/DP out, 3.5" SSD support, and SteamOS 3.5, but no screen / integrated controls / battery would make a lot of sense for Valve. And I’d be lying if I said I wouldn’t probably buy one - the docked Deck has been fantastic in that role. It would probably be cheaper than the Deck since durability, battery, and screen are all likely expensive investments for them on the actual Deck.
Steam Machines failed because there wasn’t a successful base model for companies to clone, and because Big Picture mode sucked. The modern Deck UI and UX are on par with Sony/MS/Nintendo’s and you get to sell the console as “it works with the controllers you already have and the games you already bought”.
Valve just recently announced they weren’t planning a refresh “any time soon” but that doesn’t mean they are ignorant about Nintendo apparently trying to close the gap with a new switch, that’s supposed to be at least as powerful a PS5/XBS. Competition is good for the consumer.
I think anyone who truly believes that is huffing paint lol
I want to believe. Will huffing paint help?
I always go by the wisdom of Airplane:
I picked the wrong day to stop huffing paint.
Can’t hurt! And if it does, just huff some more!
I’ve either huffed too much paint or not enough, and since I can’t huff less theres only one option left.
Didn’t it tuen out that it was literally just the same architecture? Doesn’t really mean shit
Exactly, same architecture means nothing if it only draws a fraction of the power, eg from a battery and not mains. Not only that, but size and cooling constraints mean with our current tech, it’s impossible to have a small handheld as powerful as current gen consoles
Honestly the biggest barrier is nintendo’s policy of making profit on hardware. Microsoft loses $100-$200 per console and the XSX still costs $500. Is nintendo really ready to charge $600 or even $700 for a console that matches what was released 3 years ago? 4 probably by launch?
The biggest barrier is that Nvidia has shown no capability to make a CPU that isn’t unconditional dogshit for gaming, and the CPU is the Switch’s problem.
The only company that’s made an ARM CPU remotely interesting is Apple.
deleted by creator
They’re proud of “withered technology” as a philosophy.
My point is that even if they changed, it doesn’t matter. The fact that it’s nvidia means that it can’t get close on real world performance with anything that uses the CPU meaningfully. Even if they did match graphics benchmarks for some reason, it would be way off from actually playing most current gen games at a reasonable level.
deleted by creator
@Alto @Fubarberry @spiderkle @BolexForSoup on the same lever as a PS5??? Dang. You had curiosity but now you have my attention
It’s not going to be, it’s (from what I’ve seen) simply the same architecture. It’ll probably be what’s essentially a very cut down and underpowered (as in literally uses less power) version of it. Still a massive step up from the switch, which was already well outdated when it launched, but it’s not going to touch PS5 performance
I highly doubt Nintendo is attempting any kind of gap closure with the deck, because how could they and why?
The only thing they share is a form factor. Nintendo is well aware that the reason they sell consoles is as a dedicated platform for their own games. I truly believe that is their bread and butter and all they really care about. If the system gets popular enough, then it will get some third party support which means it will have some very limited library crossover with PC/PS/Xbox, but I think we are past the point where Nintendo intends to rely on that as a selling point for this or any future generation of consoles. Ports of games that come to switch are pretty uniformly the worst version of the game to play, and it’s pretty clear that doesn’t bother Nintendo at all.
Which is all to say, I don’t think Nintendo and Valve think of each other as direct competitors, because they serve entirely different markets. I have both a switch and a deck. I love them both. I use my switch to play Nintendo games, I use my deck to play pretty much anything else. I don’t think I’m unique at all in that regard, and frankly it never would occur to me that these devices have anything to do with one another.
They said they’re not releasing a more powerful deck, and we already know from leaks that the upcoming valve hardware has the same APU.
This doesn’t rule out other changes, like a new screen, different form factor, etc.
My money’s on a new Index. Possibly with onboard graphics like the Quest
There are supposedly two new hardware devices coming from Valve, earlier leaks had two different product code names. So possibly we’re getting both a revised deck and a new VR something.
God, what I wouldn’t give for a standalone VR headset with the Steam Deck’s internals…mostly because I just want them to shove a whole bunch of support behind getting VR to work right on Linux.
@Fubarberry @Lord_Wunderfrog dang, people just got a deck. Oh well, time to upgrade. I really want a better screen. Playing games on the SD and seeing that same game on other consoles makes me feel like I’m missing details.
I don’t think there’s currently evidence that this new “Deck” is a Deck at all. Releasing a standing console box with the Deck’s internals but better cooling, ethernet and better wifi, HDMI/DP out, 3.5" SSD support, and SteamOS 3.5, but no screen / integrated controls / battery would make a lot of sense for Valve. And I’d be lying if I said I wouldn’t probably buy one - the docked Deck has been fantastic in that role. It would probably be cheaper than the Deck since durability, battery, and screen are all likely expensive investments for them on the actual Deck.
Steam Machines failed because there wasn’t a successful base model for companies to clone, and because Big Picture mode sucked. The modern Deck UI and UX are on par with Sony/MS/Nintendo’s and you get to sell the console as “it works with the controllers you already have and the games you already bought”.