Could the two software giants really come together to produce something to challenge the big three in the future? Would it even be a smart business move to enter the console market this late in the game?
Valve gave a user Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 for free as compensation for the long wait during their Steam Deck repair.
I had a similar experience when I initially pre-ordered my Deck. There was an issue during shipping and they offered me a customer service perk for the hassle and let me pick any game on Steam. It was super nice of them. I got a copy of Rime.
There have been plenty of comparisons online between the Steam Deck and Nintendo Switch 2, but does Valve really need to compete?
Steamdeck plays Switch games better than the switch hardware.
I see no reason why this won't continue with the successors. Switch will sell more, sure. But those who game on PC always come out ahead both in enjoyment and value for their money.
you think a Steam Deck is going to emulate a Steam 2 when it's arguably more powerful than it?
Interesting..
We're going to have to wait and see. Currently, there's no technology that would allow a Steam Deck 2 to achieve a performance leap over the Steam Deck 1 similar to what the Switch 2 offers over the Switch 1, without sacrificing the device's portability.
We'll either need AMD to seriously improve the efficiency of their cores, so we can get something with the rasterization power of a Radeon 8060S but without the power consumption of an Xbox Series S, or Valve would have to invest heavily in a translation layer for ARM. Neither of these paths is easy to achieve, so we probably shouldn't expect a Steam Deck 2 for at least a 3 or 4 more years.
Considering that other companies have shat out multiple PC handhelds already while Valve hasn't even mentioned a successor tells me they aren't looking to compete with anyone. They went for a console experience and that includes holding off on new hardware til there's a generational leap.
None of those other companies can realistically compete with Valve either. Valve can sell the hardware for a minimal gain and still know they are for the most part, just having every user still use Steam.
Every other handheld has to make its profit entirely on the hardware, which is why most of them went for an even more PC enthusiast market/price point
That is the one point where Nintendo does compete with Valve, or Sony with their rumored handheld or even more so MS, if they release a first party handheld (with a decent version of handheld windows)
What many people don't get is that most of Steam Deck users have a high-end or at least a good enough PC alongside the Steam Deck. Yes, we like better graphics and higher refresh rates and we get them in our PC, we are not relying on the Steam Deck for them. We use the Deck for other reasons and in other eventualities, where we are willing to compromise on all these things, because we still get to enjoy them when we can/feel like it in the PC. Thus, a direct comparison with a sole device like the Switch is misplaced. Of course you need the Switch 2 to be strong if there is no stronger alternative to play your games in. By the way I got a Switch on day 1 and I loved it, it's just that I'm not really playing it anymore.
CS2 has brought new graphics, mechanics, and has become the new standard for esports competition. Learn about updates, pro strategies, and the future of Counter-Strike 2.
I doubt it, both companies have opposite design philosophies. Valve thinks the more open the better, while Apple prefers a much more closed and controlled system.
Don't want Apple involved. It'll cost twice as much as it should, use all sorts of proprietary garbage, and they'll release a new iteration of the console every year with very minor upgrades.
Could gamers brains start working so that they can finally figure out that it won't happen? The answer is no, to both questions.
No. Apple blows and Valve doesn't. It's that simple.
Would it work? From a technological standpoint, I'm certain it would function.
Would people buy it? Not really.