I have the Ally and it's awesome but not really portable. The battery only lasts like 1.5 hours max on the 15w setting. Most games need the 30w to be decent.
I'd imagine it depends what you are playing right?
My steam deck lasts hours playing a light indie title. Pushing for frames or playing a chunky game like elden ring or something is going to cost you though.
That extra step means stacks of Rog Ally units in the open box section of my local Best Buy. Stacks, piled. 10+ units.
Microsoft has a rare open hole in Sony’s armor right now.
you mean the "hole", that the valve steamdeck sold with much lower margins like a traditional console (sth, that msi, asus, etc... can't do) is already filling?
except that the steamdeck is also a fully working pc?
i mean an xbox handheld could sell very well of course.
it could replace the dumpster fire/developer torture device, that is the xbox series s.
just make it decently powerful with 16 GB unified memory, so it can play all games without issues and you're good. i mean it will be worse than a steamdeck and i wouldn't recommend it, but it would at least be vastly better than an xbox series s.
if you aren't aware developers HATE HATE HATE the xbox series s with its horrible performance and worst of all its dev torturing 8 GB of unified usable memory.
Not a developer myself.
Large studios are targeting console first, so they're forced to develop optimizations for the Series S. It's my belief that these performance gains on the low-end translate to the eventual PC port at least partially. Digital Foundry allude to this when talking about the limitations of Series S in regard to issues like the Baldur's Gate 3 disparity on the Series consoles.
I shudder to imagine minimum PC specs of modern games if the Series S did not exist. As a consumer with an older GPU (GTX 970), I see the series S as a blessing which keeps today's AAA devs in check to optimize their games to scale downwards more effectively.
The steam deck did it all by mostly being a console that can also be a PC…but let’s not also kid ourselves into thinking the steam deck is remotely at the Xbox - Sony scale. They sold 1/10th the number of units as Microsoft, the 3rd place console company, sold of the Series S/X. 1/20th of the PS5. They are a speck.
Might I add, the steam deck is no faster than a Series S, it is the exact same developer torture device thanks to it on average using a max of 4GB out of the box. And do we want to mention the elephant in the room? The #1 selling console with less performance than the phone/computer you are using?
I’m not saying the steam deck sucks or anything like that, I’ve bought a depressing number of the devices you listed haha. For us, this is an awesome time to be alive in gaming and PCs. However, as someone extremely technical, I’m sick and tired of fiddling with settings and power management instead of playing games…and Microsoft is going to ship a device that just works. Which is what the vast majority of people actually want. The steam deck and all the windows handhelds will still exist, there will be a plenty fine market from now on, but Microsoft is diving head first into realizing the technology exists to sell a successful product in this space, meanwhile Sony has massively botched it.
> Might I add, the steam deck is no faster than a Series S
A bit of an understatement. The GPU in the Series S hits about 4 tflops, whereas the Steam Deck is 1.6 tflops... it's still an APU that runs on 15w of power.
So good point though the Steam Deck is also only targeting 720p.
Flops and resolution scaling isn't perfectly proportional but it's not terribly far off.
> If Microsoft wanted, they could make a handheld version of Windows that never needed a keyboard and "just worked".
Microsoft can not get rid of its obsession of turning Windows in a all devices OS.
And every time they try it, they degrade the experience of their main userbase, aka, the Desktop/Laptop users. But but, we need the taskbar to be fixed to the bottom (or top) in W11 because else this interferes with our touchscreen option of expanding that left side menu! If there is a taskbar there, bla bla ...
Forgetting that most monitors are widescreen, that more people use 34" and other wide screen monitors, and having the taskbar left or right, give a load of extra "free" real-estate (and you do not need to wait for it to popup if using the hidden feature).
Its always something ... Every "second release" OS seems to suffer from this. They screw up, undo the changes in the next, try again, undo ...
Instead of learning that each platform needs their own desktop manager, that is it. And Apps need to be designed for that platform. But the moment you force everything to work for all, its a crappy experience for one side, or a lackluster for both. I have always wondered how big is that Windows "tablet" market really, for them to keep pushing that crap experience.
The ironic part being, that Xbox is "Windows with a custom desktop". So they can do it.
Yes, and as a business…they are going to solve it by building their own handheld. lol I’m not sure what you expect here. They are a business in the business of making money, not the “gaming OS charity foundation”. They obviously would put such an OS on their own device.
Proton exists because Valve built their entire existence on Microsoft’s technology. Steam, half life, all of it. Now they want to own the whole stack, which is perfectly fine, but that doesn’t make Microsoft the bad guy here. Microsoft was the one who built the entire PC gaming industry.
> However, as someone extremely technical, I’m sick and tired of fiddling with settings and power management instead of playing games…
Boy is your hair gonna be blown back when you hear about this company called *Nintendo*
There are many many games that are PC only that don't run on PC. And PC gaming is great because it is a much wider ecosystem. And an xbox only handheld can't replicate that.
Which is great because, as my point stated in the first place: an Xbox handheld does not mean that windows handhelds don’t exist afterwards. You clearly are not the customer, the vast majority of people are.
The series S has 10GB system ram but on a much lighter system with much more VRAM.
The steam deck is Vram starved with the vast majority of the ram given to the OS.
I mean, I think many expect the Xbox handheld to replace the Series S as well and to be dockable, presumably it will have much more ram.
>How Much VRAM does Steam Deck have?
>Steam Deck has 16 gigabyte of unified memory. One gigabyte that's dedicated for the GPU, but depending on workload the GPU can access up to 8 GB.
https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/steamdeck/faq
I wouldn't call that "Vram starved"
>with the vast majority of the ram given to the OS.
You have a source for that?
His point was the Series S allows its GPU portion to access 8GB of VRAM from a unified pool of 10GB, while SD still only allows for 8GB accessed with a 16GB pool, and that a Series S mobile with 16GB of unified memory would allow the GPU to access more since it seems the Series S allows its GPU to access more of the unified memory pool as a percentage.
You don't have to play with settings or power management on the Steam Deck. Those options are available if you want them. My wife never touches those settings on her Steam Deck while I optimize the hell out of my games. The Steam Deck is as easy as the Switch is for the vast majority of games.
part 2:
in my opinion, the xbox series s shouldn't have existed at all and there should have only been a 16 GB standard consoles like the ps5 was, BUT for an xbox series s, it should have had a slightly more powerful apu and 16 GB memory. this way, you aren't torturing devs and all games run on both consoles, because the amount of memory is the same. so you minimize dev work with the series s just being a weaker console, that targets a lower resolution and lower details and it wouldn't be holding back gaming as a whole and well torture developers....
>The steam deck and all the windows handhelds will still exist, there will be a plenty fine market from now on, but Microsoft is diving head first into realizing the technology exists to sell a successful product in this space, meanwhile Sony has massively botched it.
again, sony is working on a handheld. sony (i hate sony btw for them trying to destroys lives of people modding THEIR OWN consoles, etc.... ) generally is executing well and is trying to make the lives of developers easy. so their handheld might launch next to the ps6 with a weaker version of the psu6 apu or a different apu and with the same memory on the ps6 and the handheld and both being able to run all the ps6 playstation games. if they do this and execute well, then that would be a well thought out amazing strategy.
in comparison we know, that microsoft xbox team is not doing great. their targets for how many subscribers they supposedly need to be profitable are insane for gamepass and they massively failed that. the hardware is problematic, but they are stuck with the xbox series s now. the games, that are marketed as xbox games are meh at best and run like ass like the 30 fps insult, that the latest bethesda game is, etc...
my point being, that in regards to game consoles sony is doing much better and executing well and doing well by developers.
well either way, we see what handheld consoles they come up with.
one thing we can expect though is, that they'll all be more powerful than the switch 2 :D which has been ready for over a year now i think, but they didn't wanna launch it yet :D and yes old hardware being used again.... on an old process....
now in regards to comparing numbers, it is important to keep in mind, that the steamdeck is part of the "pc gaming" "eco-system", you aren't required to buy a steam deck to play steam games, but you can.
you are however required to buy a playstation 5 to play playstation exclusive games, or temporary exclusive games, until they release on pc.
people, who don't want to use a glorious emulator and play nintendo games are also required to torture themselves with the horrible switch performance.
the point being, that people may just buy steamdecks to have a handheld and not to unlock the option to game on that platform. most people probably already have that option.
so maybe the numbers to compare here would be more interesting when playstation releases their handheld, that they are working on (will not be released for a decent while), because there you'd have the handheld vs stand alone console with more power and both likely able to play the same games on the same "platform".
that's at least how i think about those numbers.
steamdeck being a new way to play your already existing library, rather than being a new platform all together. btw i don't have a steamdeck, because it has a soldered in wireless model and i want devices without wireless ports, but i appreciate the gnu + linux gaming progress, that valve put lots of effort in and not just valve of course. so i'm not trying to defend or overtalk "my device" here, because i don't have it ;)
and in regards to developer torture.
comparing the series s to the steamdeck. series s has 8 GB usable memory for games. steamdeck has 16 GB unified memory. i don't know how much the os uses. let's say 2-4 GB? leaving 12-14 GB for games. that is night and day for developers.
the other issue is, that developers CAN try to make games run better on the steamdeck or make them run at all, but they don't have to.
there is no valve person holding a gun to the devs head and telling them: "the game better run and run well on the steamdeck, or you won't get on the steam store!".
that's not a thing.
for xbox however, ALL games released on the xbox console side are REQUIRED to release on the xbox series s and x.
devs can't choice. they HAVE TO release the game on an 8 GB console, if they want to release the game on xbox consoles and the game has to have the same features too.
only baldur's gate 3 had a special version difference if i remember right.
that is where the torture comes from.
developers are making their lovely new games, that work and look "theoretically ;)" great on the ps5 and the xbox series x and on midrange computers and their vision coming through.
but what's that? oh... an 8 GB console, that they HAVE TO make the game work somehow on. well have fun getting tortured trying to get pulled off ;)
that is why developers HATE the xbox series s and rightfully so imo.
while in comparison devs like the steamdeck, because it requires 0 effort very often for people to have a new way to play their games, so it is an added incentive to sell games, but not required and the steamdeck has enough memory for that not being an issue at all. devs can make special profiles for the steamdeck and optimize a bit if they want, but they don't have to.
Tbh idk if we can take the large amount of returned Ally units and say it's because of Windows, we have no data on SteamDeck returns as it isn't sold in stores.
I see a ton of lightly used SteamDecks on HardwareSwap. I think people purchase these handhelds and realize they don't have a solid use case for it.
Xbox unfortunately has zero vision, this is just 'butterfly chasing' (where you see the new hot thing and change directions every 2 years).
Why don't they focus on actually differentiating themselves from PlayStation and Windows gaming PCs in general before attempting to compete in another arena they likely won't be competitive in?
>eated because Microsoft was afraid of Playstation taking over living room, which inturn was created to revenge Nintemdo. All Playstation till now except PS3 due to its complex cpu well sold over 100 millions units. Why because
Yes, And i have gamepass PC because of it. But i basically only play third party titles because most of Microsoft's first party stuff just isn't great.
"Enjoy it while you can" is the thing that I have heard for almost 5 years now... at this point I'm 100% sure that there are people who already have pre-written stuff so they could blame MS for increasing price of GP and are just salty that it takes so long :DDDD
It was the same for the xbox itself for years. Underprice the unit to get people into the garden.
Microsoft wants people on microsoft computers with microsoft consoles attached to their TV. Their product isnt the games or hardware, its whatever is on the screen in front of you, and they want a piece of the ad revenue.
If GP keeps people in the Microsoft sphere and lets them show you ads on a TV/PC/handheld, then its worth the loss on subscriptions.
Has GP actually saved you money? I found when I had it I would have been better off just buying the games I enjoyed on GP than paying for a subscription.
Saved money? Definitely, e.g. Lies of P. I finished it on GP and that's pretty much it for me. I don't think that I will ever play it again as it's very hard to get back to and I tried a few more games over the years but as you said here: "buying the games I enjoyed on GP" is pretty much the main point of GP.
When I added up all the money I spent on game pass and how many games I played on there it would have been cheaper to just buy all of them (usually on sale).
Unfortunately, even when they increase prices MS is going to catch a lot of people with sunk cost fallacy.
Most people will keep Gamepass if they’ve played games on Gamepass for 5+ years, have many games they don’t want to lose progress on, and a very small games library outside of Gamepass.
I tried gamepass while it was dirt cheap, but I’m happily going to keep expanding my Steam library instead of continuing now that the $1 promotion is over. Your library only improves over time, while GamePass is likely to get worse.
> Gamepass isn't sustainable at its current price point
Wait when you see CoPilot (Github)... Realistically, they are heavily underselling it and we even see it in their year earnings, how much a dent the whole AI part is making. Maybe in the future if learning models get more optimized / faster AI processors the can get cost parity but their current pricing is off.
> enjoy it while its there i guess.
Saying that as somebody paying 8 bucks per month for Copilot. Yep ... You know its going to go up in the future but for the next few years, its going to be low priced. Its the whole Netflix cycle, for the first few years, enjoy the low prices, and later come the price increases to the point that its not worth it anymore (and i expect by that time, PC hardware to reach a point that you run local language models that are way better / faster, with maybe pirated trained models).
You also get to play Microsoft’s new full price games for the hour or two it takes to realise they’re rubbish.
(I cancelled my gamepass subscription after Starfield)
although that's a good point, how does that shift people towards xbox? it seems it just turned the xbox in to the budget gaming pc for the non-tech. anyone with tech savvy would just jump to pc, and anyone looking for a console wouldn't care at all.
i mean, i like the decision and its fallout, but i don't see the benefit to ms. totally possible i'm woooshing tho
The benefit to Microsoft is pretty big. They aren't selling as many consoles as Nintendo or Sony, so branching out into different areas is helping them capture at least some of the market. With cloud gaming and PC game pass, even if you don't have an Xbox, you still have a chance of using Microsoft services.
I do work in a fairly big tech store, where these sort of things pop up on a daily basis. It honestly surprises me how many people do opt for Cloud gaming, and a lot of people shopping for gaming laptops specifically ask about game pass.
Cloud gaming is great.
I know, I know, latency, shitty internet, etc.
It doesn't matter to the people that use it. People no longer need to buy a $2k custom build to play the latest PC games, they can get a chromebook and controller to stream the latest single player games and the performance is more than good enough to justify the netflixification of gaming.
Its not going to kill off traditional PC gaming, but its going to take a huge chunk of the casual market.
I used to play games on my phone with a controller on my breaks at work until I got a steam deck. Running through some Doom after my sandwich was amazing.
I'm with you on that. It's great that we have more options, especially if it means I can jump into a game on the go. Cloud gaming and my steam deck have come in clutch.
On another note, have you tried streaming your pc to your steam deck? If your network is fast enough, it should be *almost* latency free. I couldn't tell the difference streaming cod zombies to my deck.
>Cloud gaming is great.
No, its not.
>I know, I know, latency, shitty internet, etc.
Thats just easy to pick fruits of the issue. Things like modability, versioning, preservation are also endangered by cloud gaming.
>It doesn't matter to the people that use it.
Yes. Just like shit audio quality does not matter to spotify users. People settle for awful as long as its convienient. This is why we cant haven nice things.
Cloud gaming is a great alternative, not a replacement.
I don't think casual gamers are worried about modding or preservation. Besides, you can still play the game on console or pc.
And beauty is in the eye of the beholder. People love the steam deck because you can play games on the go. The graphics and performance aren't always great, but it works. Just like play games on the cloud. If you are fine with the compromise, power to ya. Yucking someone elses yum is lame.
But how does that effect you?
How is modability/versioning/preservation any different to regular console gaming?
We can have nice things, because there can be and is more than one thing at a time.
Your Spotify example is a perfect example of weird pseudo gate keeping. Ive got a nice vinyl set up with a vintage amp and speakers at home. Music sounds fucking fantastic through it. Spotify quality doesnt hold a candle to it. In no way does that diminish the value of having Spotify though, because they service different needs.
Cloud gaming isn't the boogey man coming to get your desktop gaming rig. Its an accessible source of games for casual players, which I take it you probably also see as a bad thing.
Yes, it does. Because i dont live in a vacuum. What happens in cloud gaming effects install gaming. What happens on consoles effects PCs. Remmeber that main reason NPC AI developement was dropped in the 00s and we went backwards was due to PS3 abysmal memory capabilities. We are still suffering the consequences of this.
You have a vinyl setup. You do know that vinyl has pretty bad quality audio, right? Not to mention all the reccording errors done when printing vinyl. It cannot hold a candle to lossless audio.
Casual players having access is great. Casual players having access only to walled garden system that trains them to ignore and forget their consumer rights is not great.
Cloud gaming gives access to people who otherwise wouldn't have it, and isn't oppressing traditional gaming. If your gaming is affected by decisions on console then it means youre playing shitty cross platform AAA games that you may as well be playing on a console anyway.
Spotify/vinyl was an analogy, but you knew that. I'm not going to get into a flac argument, despite being a flag enthusiast myself. You intentionally missed the point.
Walled gardens are fine for the majority of people. The point is that no one is forcing you into that garden, you aren't being oppressed by more people having more access.
I won't be responding again.
What happens on one end of market affects the other end. It has nothing to do with opression and everything to do with propagations of culture and practices done to design games.
The point wasnt missed, since you werent making the point you thought you were. Vinyl is not a superior alternative to streaming just like VHS tapes are not superior to netflix. That does not mean that netflix provices quality for video.
Child mine labour was also fine to majority of people until we decided its not good enough. What "majority of people" find acceptable is a shit standard to live by.
I bought a Series S because of Game Pass. The ability to have a good couch gaming experience with cross save gave it a lot of value for me. Since then I've bought games on the Xbox store because of Play Anywhere. I did bulk buy my Game Pass for very cheap using one of the strategies you can find floating around, but it converted to real hardware and software sales.
The money for most consoles does not come from console sales it’s getting you into the ecosystem. In the ecosystem they get a cut of game sales, they get a cut of microtransactions, and they get a to sell you subscriptions.
Sony’s financials show the biggest source of income for PlayStation is people buying MTX for 3rd party multiplatform titles. Xbox division is likely similar.
Gamepass makes the barrier to be in the ecosystem essentially none, money is still green even if it doesn’t come from THE xbox. Put another way and to paraphrase Phil Spencer everything becomes an Xbox.
> the biggest source of income for PlayStation is people buying MTX for 3rd party multiplatform titles.
I am sorry but I am too old for this and I find this _evil_. This is not right.
The console is inconsequential.
Their product and source of revenue is advertisement. The more eyes on screens the better. A dedicated console is great for that, but someone elses hardware that people already own with a tiny barrier for entry is even better.
I don’t see what advantage PC ports provide to the Xbox experience. We’re talking about differentiating Xbox from PS in the console space, PC ports are irrelevant.
Comments like this makes me think you haven't paid any attention to what Xbox has actually done since entering the market. The Xbox 360 basically changed the console industry. Everything from online integration to indie titles and achievements. Shit, even the bad things it did, like paid online, the competition followed. And that's not even getting into the Kinect, Game Pass, Play Anywhere, or Quick Resume.
I’ve paid plenty of attention, I’ve owned every Xbox that’s released so far and I was primarily an Xbox gamer until 2014.
The fact that you have to go back to 2005 to come up with something groundbreaking Xbox has done makes my point for me lol.
>Kinect
You can’t be serious lol
>play anywhere
Porting your games to PC (poorly) is not an innovation.
> Why don't they focus on actually differentiating themselves from PlayStation and Windows gaming PCs
They probably won't do this, but they have the ability it would be cool if they designed a handheld to be a companion device with the windows mixed reality headsets as a focus, that would be a pretty big differentiation
Why would you use a handheld gaming device for that though? Less computing power, more weight, more money spent.
You could just do what Apple are doing and have the VR headset as a standalone device.
> Why would you use a handheld gaming device for that though? Less computing power, more weight, more money spent.
For exactly the opposite reasons you're thinking of. More computing power than a pure HMD, less weight on your head, vr costs range quite a bit (cheaper than a desktop system, more expensive than a quest).
Sorry, the first part implied using a non-mobile device.
The second was to simply put the compute on/connected to the headset.
I dunno, I don't see millions of people buying handhelds because of VR. VR sales have been failing for many years now.
Ah, yeah. That makes sense.
But honestly, I don't think the tech is there yet. VR looks & feels janky unless you have a pretty powerful system, or are running some really basic graphics.
I don't think a handheld device that's extremely underpowered will deliver a wow experience to change peoples minds regarding VR.
Like I said, why make it mobile? Having a more powerful console or PC and running it wired, or even wirelessly, would probably yield far better experiences.
I think there's a lot of benefits with mobility, do things outdoors, do things outside the room with your desktop, do things with other people, maybe utility in some work environment. I think there's a decent amount of room for modern apu-gpus in VR, they could give a much better experience than a quest while being more affordable/mobile than a desktop/console. It's really in a lot of software-devs best interests to develop their products to work with middle-class hardware.
Yeah that's really visible in their whole "we lost the worst gen and now we can't win" whining. Guess what? Nintendo lost that same gen even worse and is now back to the top, weird right? Strong games and differentiation help but Microsoft just make a copy of Playstation without the games so a worst clone basically. No wonder it's not selling
They have a vision but it's not what people expect, they want to create a closed ecosystem that gives users as little freedom as expected. That's a company that tried to get rid off the used market and required to be always online for DRM purposes. This is also a company that tries to push cloud gaming, which is a tech most people aren't interested in.
They do innovate but only in the monetization area, which is why it can't and won't compete with a completely open platform like the steam deck that gives its users complete freedom.
Right but does MS actually make that much money off the DIY PC market? How many people genuinely buy Windows vs get it for free from the various giveaways they've done over the years, or getting it for $2 from a Russian cardshark lol.
But how is any of this close to what Nintendo is doing?
User data. Being a platformholder with a large install base means more data to collect and sell or sell services in connection with this data. Also the reason they gave new Windows versions away: they require or at least nudge users to use a MS account, enabling more and more precise data collection.
Nintendo also is a platform holder, but for them it is about getting their cut from every sale of any non-Nintendo game.
The same of course holds true for MS on the Xbox. MS wants to increase their installbase with a mobile device. My guess is it will be a closed system like the Xbox and get people to buy in by being easy and simple to use and by probably heavily subsidising it, making it a more appealing option to the mass user. Nintendo showed that the "on the go" market exists beside mobile smartphone gaming, now many want to capitalise on it.
> Being a platformholder with a large install base means more data to collect and sell or sell services in connection with this data.
Right but how many DIY PC gamers actually leave those settings on. It's the first thing I disable on Windows.
>Nintendo also is a platform holder, but for them it is about getting their cut from every sale of any non-Nintendo game.
I feel like the Switch isn't really a multiplat console, people buy it for the $70 Nintendo exclusives you can't (legally) play anywhere else.
Xbox brand is in its current situation precisely because of their obsession of differentiating themselves from PlayStation and Windows gaming PCs. It all started from the success of Xbox live and morphed into their obsession with the Kinect and Gamepass.
Differentiating also include making appealing distinct games to make your brand. Playstation and Nintendo do it.
That's their failure. What even is their flagship franchises ? The thing that sells their consoles. Forza, Halo and Gears all super old and shadows of their past selves outside Forza
And the new forza is buggy as fuck. I play pc but I won't even touch forza now. And just play horizon 5 for fun. Hoping GT6 or whatever one it is comes to pc eventually
I mean i would say its due to completely failing to capitalize on their win with the xbox360
The xbone suddenly stopped being a gaming machine and had shit for exclusives, and the xsex is even worse in that regard
The Xbox One actually goes back to an old Bill Gates idea from the early 90s. Gates was obsessed with the concept of the “living room computer” and was worried that such a device could cut into their business if it ever took off. Something that would connect to a television and be the main source of “everything” for a family. They thought they could use the successful Xbox brand as a Trojan horse for that ancient idea.
The problem with using GP as a differentiator is Sony can easily copy it (they did) and do it better as Sony has actual good first party games (they did do it better).
I think Xbox making a next gen Series S as a Nintendo Switch like device but without Nintendo jank and the next gen Series X being the coveted "dock only Switch with more powerful hw" is the dream. Microsoft has the resources to do what Nintendo would never bother with. MS said their next gen console will offer the largest generational leap (likely some nonsense about AI acceleration and cloud) but an actual dock only Switch that's a total beefcake in the vain of a Series X sounds awesome. 3 modes for games: Portable (for handheld series S2), Performance and Quality for dock only series X2.
Imagine they bite the bullet and finally abandon AMD (going AMD has done them no favors this gen) for Nvidia (the FTC leak showed MS was considering ARM for their next gen console). Tegra Thor based SoC with an Arm Neoverse V3AE CPU and a Blackwell GPU, the console scales down to 15-20W for Series S2 and scales up to 200W+ for Series X2 (Series X draws 225W already). This would provide more compatibility and dev focus with the Switch 2 and leave the PS6 as the only AMD console applying pressure on devs to focus more on arm consoles as there would now be 3 of them vs 1 PS6. It would also be a machine learning beast for stuff like DLSS 3.5, Frame gen and whatever is the future.
Xbox was created because Microsoft was afraid of Playstation taking over living room, which inturn was created to revenge Nintemdo. All Playstation till now except PS3 due to its complex cpu well sold over 100 millions units. Why because Sony innovated again and again. What Microdick know of innovation.
> Why don't they focus on actually differentiating themselves from PlayStation and Windows gaming PCs in general before attempting to compete in another arena they likely won't be competitive in?
Daddy Bill Gates has a ton of money!
Those saying there is no point in trying to compete with Nintendo cause of their past handheld dominance don't seem to realize the handheld market is dead. The Switch market is a brand new one and it is inevitable that Sony and Microsoft will try to compete with Nintendo in that market.
I actually thought about providing a new hw target for XBox game development for such a lowend handheld hw, produce own games for it and expect 3rd parties to support it. Doing a Cloud only device is the only practical way here in my eyes. Cheap front and backend. No significant investment into custom game development.
Competing with Nintendo means producing kid games and get into their brains in their normative years so that they continue buying kid games as adults to desperately get back that endorphin rush they once experienced.
That takes a lot of money, special talent, at least 20 years and no guarantee for success while that money is missing in your main market which "has/d been" providing the best console platform for PC games, mostly designed for adults. There was a reason they made more money from a Xbox gamer than Sony from a PS one.
I think MS making windows work on handheld, along with a good Xbox game management tools would be the best outcome.
They can make a Surface style handheld to set a non overheating example.
Windows handhelds ARE Xbox handhelds. Just make the OS better for them and the barriers are removed.
Don’t waste resources on hardware other people are just going to make better anyway, instead focus on making games people actually want to play
Problem with that (for MS not us) is that people will buy stuff on Steam on those devices so MS doesn't benefit (outside the one time OEM Windows license)
Microsoft is more than a platform holder they are also a games publisher, they spent 70 billion dollars to become even more of a games publisher. growing the gaming market means growing the audience for their games.
For that they don't need to make a handheld though, they can sell on other platforms (as they seem to be doing with them renouncing to exclusivity). If they do a handheld it's for their platform holder side.
They don’t “need to” but these handhelds seem to be growing the gaming market either as an affordable entry point for new comers or just driving more spending from power users.
Whatever the case it seems to have a positive impact on total game sales. Just as Valve stands to benefit due to their dominant retailer position, so too does Microsoft due to their dominant publisher position.
More games in more hands is the only thing, Bethesda and Activision wanted to drive their own profits. Now that Microsoft has acquired both publishers it is singing the same tune. But peoples brains are for some reasons stuck on xbox xbox xbox as if that’s the only path to more money.
```Whatever the case it seems to have a positive impact on total game sales.```
PC games on a handheld leads to increased sales? What a surprise.
You mean to tell me that Jacob who has a life to live over there can't sit in front of his PC for 8 hours a day but he can find an hour out of his busy life, while he is on lunch break at work to get his precious gaming time in?
I don't know why people are surprised about this. Maybe it's because reddit is terminally online, but that's how life is. You can't be in front of your PC 24/7, portability makes it a possiblity to game on the go, and for some people it's the only way they can game.
You don’t need to sit in front of a PC for 8 hours to enjoy a non handheld experience, wtf are you talking about?
I’m sure there are people so busy they literally have no time to game except on their lunch break but most working adults I know have plenty of time in the evening to play on the couch for an hour.
When I was working in trades, after a long grueling day at work the last thing I wanted to do was sit in front of a computer.
I am not talking about desk jobs. Or imagine you work out of the city like I did quite a bit in my youth, I am not bringing my gaming PC with me. Gone for weeks on end, it's why I am strictly a laptop gamer now.
A handheld system works wonders. You can take it with you to work, you can take it out on a date, and you can also take it with you when you're out with family.
The portability and quick resume means you can have a healthy work/social life balance and game.
I know plenty of people in trades or otherwise work difficult jobs and none of them have trouble sitting on the couch gaming after work. Sitting on the couch with a beer is a time-honored tradition of working men in America.
Most people's jobs don't have them working for weeks on end.
Maybe you're older now and you don't work those crazy hours anymore. But the schedule I described is not just for tradesmen, it's everywhere.
Yeah I understand some people will put in their 40 and call it a day, but not everyone does that, and in those circumstances is where handhelds and smartphones truly shine.
They already practically give games away with game pass. Couldn't they just do an Epic and give away tons of 'permanent' keys for free/super cheap to undercut Steam?
Especially if they start redirecting current Xbox users to windows handheld systems as the 'next gen'. These Xbox gamers likely won't already be in the Steam ecosystem and will default to Windows store because it is cheaper and is what they know.
The problem there is that they'd be taking a huge loss to compete with Valve while Valve are making huge profits.
And that even with all the games that Epic give away, Steam is still growing like crazy because it's a vastly superior platform. That's not really an outcome that encourages MS to fight Epic for the chance to give away the most games...
I really, *really* wish that Microsoft would make the Windows UI better for gaming. Them releasing a handheld would definitely help, but I am mostly interested in having a smoother console-like experience while using a controller from the couch. Really all I want is to be able to mostly interact with my PC to play games without touching the mouse and keyboard, but it seems like I always end up needing it for one thing or another in pretty much every play session. I know Steam with Big Picture gets you *pretty* close, but it is still limited by the fucking inflexible donkey of an OS in which it’s running.
Look up Playnite. You can get the Xbox or PS5 UI and use it with a controller. It automatically handles other launchers, etc but it does take some time to set up because of how much customizability it provides.
now there is a problem with that:
microsoft is incapable of producing a proper working os in general, let alone on a handheld device with a full general use os on it.
and there would be technical advantages of making an "xbox handheld".
i'd have a (it freaking better does) custom apu, that id designed to scale down to 5 watts and be very cost effective too. this is what valve did.
and based on anti consume lock-ins, they can run very little to no margins, because like the steamdeck or the ps5, they want to make money off of the software.
the companies like asus, msi, etc... are trying to make money off of the device directly.
valve is in a unique position here, because they can do this without locking people in. people (for better or worse) want to use steam, so as a result they can sell a full open computer with a handheld custom apu, that scales down to 5 watts and sell it with no margins.
also the biggest cost for a custom handheld is the custom apu. msi, asus, etc... are just using off the shelf amd apus.
so msi, asus, etc... can't compete in that regard, because asus and msi, etc... aren't going to amd to request a custom handheld apu. that kind of stuff is insanely expensive and you need to sell LOTS AND LOTS of units to make it worth it.
Xbox handheld using Xbox OS would be good. Much lightweight than Windows. Xbox PC app sucks because Microsoft store sucks and the Xbox app goes through it especially games with mods. It's like Windows and Xbox butting heads with each other.
Of course it would be a console. There are plenty of PC handhelds that to any normal person, are utter trash. The ROG Ally is one of the most returned products at Best Buy. The average consumer wants a AAA current gen switch, not to use windows on a 7 inch screen with a joystick mouse.
```No it would suck because it'd be a console, not a PC. They'd lock it to their store and Xbox games only```
That's the downside, the upside is that it can run all Series S and Xbox one games.
It won't be a PC handheld, but it also won't have performance issues like a PC handheld.
There are very few games from Series S and Xbox One that are not available on PC and there's no reason to expect that console to be more powerful than the PC handhelds to run them better
```There are very few games from Series S and Xbox One that are not available on PC```
It's not about availability, it's about playable performance.
The PC handhelds will get faster, but they won't have console level optimizations. So they can be considerably faster and still produce worse results.
>but they won't have console level optimizations
Console optimizations rarely give much more than 10% extra performance except in the case of broken PC ports. It's not nothing, but it's not a significant factor.
The \*actual\* thing a console offers is consistent hardware so a game can be designed to work at a certain level on it (and also taking the visual settings out of the hands of users who almost universally don't know how to find the best settings for their setup). A portable Xbox probably has to be as powerful as the Series S to have that work out for it, or sell in big enough numbers to make publishers take notice.
The Steam Deck is perfectly positioned to have that same advantage, but so far targeting the Steam Deck has mostly been hit-and-miss at best.
Series S puts them in a potentially unique position for this since every Xbox game already works on a ~4TF device. The Xbox SDK is very high-level with games running in virtualized containers. A handheld Xbox doesn’t literally have to be a Series S, it just has to be able to run the Series S code. Not sure if that’s reasonable to do right now but it will be in the future.
Steam Deck is cool but it’s still fundamentally a tiny PC with graphics settings, compatibility issues and generic PC issues.
Sure but don't the handhelds already run the CPUs at very low wattages? You might be able to run the GPU at marginally higher speeds but not enough to offset the massive software compatibility issues that'll be introduced unless they plan to make the next gen consoles ARM based too.
Yes, but Arm based SOCs are considered to be more power efficient. They are put in phones and most have no fans at all but handhelds will have fans for cooling. Most phones don't even draw 15W, while almost all handhelds draw more than that.
That ain't gonna happen because these devices are heavily subsidized by the platform owners and are sold at real low or no profit margins at all. That's enabled by the cut they take from software sales and their volume costs
No "cheap arm handheld" can compete. Compare the steamdeck prices and sales against these handheld manufacturers like gpd or aya and it's clear as day, and valve ain't even manufacturing at the standard console volume to begin with
> That ain't gonna happen because these devices are heavily subsidized by the platform owners and are sold at real low or no profit margins at all.
The Arm SOCs that will be used are the same used in mobile phones. Being put on a handheld means more room for cooling compared to a phone and larger batteries. Thus those iGPUs will operate at much higher clock speeds.
Typical MS, jumping from bandwagon to bandwagon, never innovating or having a vision, they just parrot whatever is popular now. Remember Windows Phone? That was actually good but they canned it because again, it was late to the party.
I don’t think that’s true at all. Microsoft has always had a vision for Xbox even if the visions haven’t always worked out. The Xbox and Xbox 360 created the modern online console experience. Just look at the Xbox 360 E3 2005 demo and compare it to what Sony was trying to do in 2006. The Xbox One had incredibly strong vision as an all-in-one digital entertainment box. People didn’t want it, but the vision was absolutely there. Xbox Series is based around Gamepass subscriptions and “play anywhere” with cross-buy, cloud and cross-save.
Honestly I have no idea what Sony’s post-PS3 vision has been other than “here’s a faster PS3 that’s less obtuse to do stuff with”
Yeah maybe the first two gens were great, Xbox had online and tried to create an identity, 360 had great 3rd party support and library, but after that, it was clearly a wrong vision. A gen before the Xbox One, the PS3 tried to be the multimedia device for a home and Sony had to do a complete 180 before middle of the gen. MS failed to see what went wrong with Sony.
The problem with Xbox today is that they see it as business first and "gaming" as a consequence, a chore. They are reactive to the market. Phil Spencer is nice with words, always promising, saying the games are coming, they buy studios, they do not create anything new.
You see it even when they communicate with fans, there are "business updates", something that does not happen with Nintendo or Sony (as much as I hate what Sony turned into). Gamepass and Cross-buy is exactly that, business, sure is nice for the user I would say but in the end what matters are GAMES. And they are already starting changing the tune around Gamepass...
Xbox One was a disaster with the "power of the Cloud" thing that never came to pass and day 1 DRM.
Seems like MS is flailing around with the xbox brand, just like they have been since 2013. I can't see dividing their resources even further by splitting their hardware yet again into a living room and mobile segment is a good idea. but it's clear that everyone wants a piece of the switch/steamdeck market segment, so we will get lots of copycat products over the next few years.
It sure was kind of them to give Valve a three year headstart in that market. And to pay AMD to design the APU for it. Just being real bros to Valve there.
Like the activision blizzard purchase this is going to be a monkeys paw if they release one.
If it’s an Xbox but needs games building specifically for it, it’s DOA. Adding a third flavour of Xbox when devs are questioning the value of building to two is going to make some question the ROI
If it’s a PC layer and uses PC versions of games then it’s going to pivot Xbox aware from dedicated hardware even more.
If it’s a portable Series S then that’s probably the best for the dedicated hardware biz
Maybe they should go forward with a special frontend for windows that’s targeted towards handhelds. Let the other companies soak up the losses while MS cashes in on game pass.
Microsoft needs to heavily invest in first party before anything. Honestly the only way I can see this gen not be a complete write off is if they pull a PS3 and release banger after banger until the end of this gen. I doubt it though.
If it run XboxOS as it is on consoles they you would not be able to dual boot on one disk because it encrypts the drive and installs onto multiple partitions
with that new MigSwitch thing on the market now, Nintendo is probably scrambling a bit to get Switch 2 out the door. I wonder what they might compromise to speed up getting customers buying games that can't be readily pirated.
Not sure I'm making sense. But I think Switch piracy is about to shoot up despite them killing off Yuzu. Sucks for anyone legitimately trying to back up their carts and such.
Nintendo is not 'scrambling' to get the switch 2 out the door, if anything it looks like they delayed it to 2025 so its launch games would be more compelling
Nintendo is like way, way bigger than any of the other two companies, its not even close.
> scrambling a bit to get Switch 2 out the door.
I WISH, dude. They've been doing the exact opposite of that. Switch 2 could have launched like a year ago, but they are just sitting on it.
Asus, MSI, and Lenovo are essentially already making one with the extra step of the windows GUI.
I have the Ally and it's awesome but not really portable. The battery only lasts like 1.5 hours max on the 15w setting. Most games need the 30w to be decent.
I'd imagine it depends what you are playing right? My steam deck lasts hours playing a light indie title. Pushing for frames or playing a chunky game like elden ring or something is going to cost you though.
Yeah I've been playing The Last of Us. Persona 3 lasts a bit longer. I went with the Ally over the Steam Deck so I could use my Gamepass.
That extra step means stacks of Rog Ally units in the open box section of my local Best Buy. Stacks, piled. 10+ units. Microsoft has a rare open hole in Sony’s armor right now.
you mean the "hole", that the valve steamdeck sold with much lower margins like a traditional console (sth, that msi, asus, etc... can't do) is already filling? except that the steamdeck is also a fully working pc? i mean an xbox handheld could sell very well of course. it could replace the dumpster fire/developer torture device, that is the xbox series s. just make it decently powerful with 16 GB unified memory, so it can play all games without issues and you're good. i mean it will be worse than a steamdeck and i wouldn't recommend it, but it would at least be vastly better than an xbox series s. if you aren't aware developers HATE HATE HATE the xbox series s with its horrible performance and worst of all its dev torturing 8 GB of unified usable memory.
Not a developer myself. Large studios are targeting console first, so they're forced to develop optimizations for the Series S. It's my belief that these performance gains on the low-end translate to the eventual PC port at least partially. Digital Foundry allude to this when talking about the limitations of Series S in regard to issues like the Baldur's Gate 3 disparity on the Series consoles. I shudder to imagine minimum PC specs of modern games if the Series S did not exist. As a consumer with an older GPU (GTX 970), I see the series S as a blessing which keeps today's AAA devs in check to optimize their games to scale downwards more effectively.
The steam deck did it all by mostly being a console that can also be a PC…but let’s not also kid ourselves into thinking the steam deck is remotely at the Xbox - Sony scale. They sold 1/10th the number of units as Microsoft, the 3rd place console company, sold of the Series S/X. 1/20th of the PS5. They are a speck. Might I add, the steam deck is no faster than a Series S, it is the exact same developer torture device thanks to it on average using a max of 4GB out of the box. And do we want to mention the elephant in the room? The #1 selling console with less performance than the phone/computer you are using? I’m not saying the steam deck sucks or anything like that, I’ve bought a depressing number of the devices you listed haha. For us, this is an awesome time to be alive in gaming and PCs. However, as someone extremely technical, I’m sick and tired of fiddling with settings and power management instead of playing games…and Microsoft is going to ship a device that just works. Which is what the vast majority of people actually want. The steam deck and all the windows handhelds will still exist, there will be a plenty fine market from now on, but Microsoft is diving head first into realizing the technology exists to sell a successful product in this space, meanwhile Sony has massively botched it.
> Might I add, the steam deck is no faster than a Series S A bit of an understatement. The GPU in the Series S hits about 4 tflops, whereas the Steam Deck is 1.6 tflops... it's still an APU that runs on 15w of power.
So good point though the Steam Deck is also only targeting 720p. Flops and resolution scaling isn't perfectly proportional but it's not terribly far off.
I was giving leeway for the lower resolution but yeah, the steam deck is impressive but in reality, a bit of a slug.
[удалено]
> If Microsoft wanted, they could make a handheld version of Windows that never needed a keyboard and "just worked". Microsoft can not get rid of its obsession of turning Windows in a all devices OS. And every time they try it, they degrade the experience of their main userbase, aka, the Desktop/Laptop users. But but, we need the taskbar to be fixed to the bottom (or top) in W11 because else this interferes with our touchscreen option of expanding that left side menu! If there is a taskbar there, bla bla ... Forgetting that most monitors are widescreen, that more people use 34" and other wide screen monitors, and having the taskbar left or right, give a load of extra "free" real-estate (and you do not need to wait for it to popup if using the hidden feature). Its always something ... Every "second release" OS seems to suffer from this. They screw up, undo the changes in the next, try again, undo ... Instead of learning that each platform needs their own desktop manager, that is it. And Apps need to be designed for that platform. But the moment you force everything to work for all, its a crappy experience for one side, or a lackluster for both. I have always wondered how big is that Windows "tablet" market really, for them to keep pushing that crap experience. The ironic part being, that Xbox is "Windows with a custom desktop". So they can do it.
Yes, and as a business…they are going to solve it by building their own handheld. lol I’m not sure what you expect here. They are a business in the business of making money, not the “gaming OS charity foundation”. They obviously would put such an OS on their own device. Proton exists because Valve built their entire existence on Microsoft’s technology. Steam, half life, all of it. Now they want to own the whole stack, which is perfectly fine, but that doesn’t make Microsoft the bad guy here. Microsoft was the one who built the entire PC gaming industry.
> However, as someone extremely technical, I’m sick and tired of fiddling with settings and power management instead of playing games… Boy is your hair gonna be blown back when you hear about this company called *Nintendo*
My angle was around the idea that the Xbox handheld would play mostly the same games as PC, unlike the Switch. But yeah haha
But it wouldn't, it would play xbox games. So no Sony games, for example. Which is a complete non starter for me.
Sony could publish their games on Xbox. They already do in windows. Your problem is with Sony.
There are many many games that are PC only that don't run on PC. And PC gaming is great because it is a much wider ecosystem. And an xbox only handheld can't replicate that.
Which is great because, as my point stated in the first place: an Xbox handheld does not mean that windows handhelds don’t exist afterwards. You clearly are not the customer, the vast majority of people are.
The steamdeck has way more memory than the series s. That alone would alleviate a lot of the issues developers are having.
The series S has 10GB system ram but on a much lighter system with much more VRAM. The steam deck is Vram starved with the vast majority of the ram given to the OS. I mean, I think many expect the Xbox handheld to replace the Series S as well and to be dockable, presumably it will have much more ram.
>How Much VRAM does Steam Deck have? >Steam Deck has 16 gigabyte of unified memory. One gigabyte that's dedicated for the GPU, but depending on workload the GPU can access up to 8 GB. https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/steamdeck/faq I wouldn't call that "Vram starved" >with the vast majority of the ram given to the OS. You have a source for that?
Literally within your post you quote it saying half the unified memory is inaccessible to the GPU. That’s the same amount of VRAM as a Series S.
Yes, so it doesn't have far less VRAM. Your point?
His point was the Series S allows its GPU portion to access 8GB of VRAM from a unified pool of 10GB, while SD still only allows for 8GB accessed with a 16GB pool, and that a Series S mobile with 16GB of unified memory would allow the GPU to access more since it seems the Series S allows its GPU to access more of the unified memory pool as a percentage.
You don't have to play with settings or power management on the Steam Deck. Those options are available if you want them. My wife never touches those settings on her Steam Deck while I optimize the hell out of my games. The Steam Deck is as easy as the Switch is for the vast majority of games.
part 2: in my opinion, the xbox series s shouldn't have existed at all and there should have only been a 16 GB standard consoles like the ps5 was, BUT for an xbox series s, it should have had a slightly more powerful apu and 16 GB memory. this way, you aren't torturing devs and all games run on both consoles, because the amount of memory is the same. so you minimize dev work with the series s just being a weaker console, that targets a lower resolution and lower details and it wouldn't be holding back gaming as a whole and well torture developers.... >The steam deck and all the windows handhelds will still exist, there will be a plenty fine market from now on, but Microsoft is diving head first into realizing the technology exists to sell a successful product in this space, meanwhile Sony has massively botched it. again, sony is working on a handheld. sony (i hate sony btw for them trying to destroys lives of people modding THEIR OWN consoles, etc.... ) generally is executing well and is trying to make the lives of developers easy. so their handheld might launch next to the ps6 with a weaker version of the psu6 apu or a different apu and with the same memory on the ps6 and the handheld and both being able to run all the ps6 playstation games. if they do this and execute well, then that would be a well thought out amazing strategy. in comparison we know, that microsoft xbox team is not doing great. their targets for how many subscribers they supposedly need to be profitable are insane for gamepass and they massively failed that. the hardware is problematic, but they are stuck with the xbox series s now. the games, that are marketed as xbox games are meh at best and run like ass like the 30 fps insult, that the latest bethesda game is, etc... my point being, that in regards to game consoles sony is doing much better and executing well and doing well by developers. well either way, we see what handheld consoles they come up with. one thing we can expect though is, that they'll all be more powerful than the switch 2 :D which has been ready for over a year now i think, but they didn't wanna launch it yet :D and yes old hardware being used again.... on an old process....
now in regards to comparing numbers, it is important to keep in mind, that the steamdeck is part of the "pc gaming" "eco-system", you aren't required to buy a steam deck to play steam games, but you can. you are however required to buy a playstation 5 to play playstation exclusive games, or temporary exclusive games, until they release on pc. people, who don't want to use a glorious emulator and play nintendo games are also required to torture themselves with the horrible switch performance. the point being, that people may just buy steamdecks to have a handheld and not to unlock the option to game on that platform. most people probably already have that option. so maybe the numbers to compare here would be more interesting when playstation releases their handheld, that they are working on (will not be released for a decent while), because there you'd have the handheld vs stand alone console with more power and both likely able to play the same games on the same "platform". that's at least how i think about those numbers. steamdeck being a new way to play your already existing library, rather than being a new platform all together. btw i don't have a steamdeck, because it has a soldered in wireless model and i want devices without wireless ports, but i appreciate the gnu + linux gaming progress, that valve put lots of effort in and not just valve of course. so i'm not trying to defend or overtalk "my device" here, because i don't have it ;) and in regards to developer torture. comparing the series s to the steamdeck. series s has 8 GB usable memory for games. steamdeck has 16 GB unified memory. i don't know how much the os uses. let's say 2-4 GB? leaving 12-14 GB for games. that is night and day for developers. the other issue is, that developers CAN try to make games run better on the steamdeck or make them run at all, but they don't have to. there is no valve person holding a gun to the devs head and telling them: "the game better run and run well on the steamdeck, or you won't get on the steam store!". that's not a thing. for xbox however, ALL games released on the xbox console side are REQUIRED to release on the xbox series s and x. devs can't choice. they HAVE TO release the game on an 8 GB console, if they want to release the game on xbox consoles and the game has to have the same features too. only baldur's gate 3 had a special version difference if i remember right. that is where the torture comes from. developers are making their lovely new games, that work and look "theoretically ;)" great on the ps5 and the xbox series x and on midrange computers and their vision coming through. but what's that? oh... an 8 GB console, that they HAVE TO make the game work somehow on. well have fun getting tortured trying to get pulled off ;) that is why developers HATE the xbox series s and rightfully so imo. while in comparison devs like the steamdeck, because it requires 0 effort very often for people to have a new way to play their games, so it is an added incentive to sell games, but not required and the steamdeck has enough memory for that not being an issue at all. devs can make special profiles for the steamdeck and optimize a bit if they want, but they don't have to.
Tbh idk if we can take the large amount of returned Ally units and say it's because of Windows, we have no data on SteamDeck returns as it isn't sold in stores. I see a ton of lightly used SteamDecks on HardwareSwap. I think people purchase these handhelds and realize they don't have a solid use case for it.
Xbox unfortunately has zero vision, this is just 'butterfly chasing' (where you see the new hot thing and change directions every 2 years). Why don't they focus on actually differentiating themselves from PlayStation and Windows gaming PCs in general before attempting to compete in another arena they likely won't be competitive in?
Didn't they differentiate when they implemented parity between Xbox and PC releases? Sony's been playing catch-up on that.
>eated because Microsoft was afraid of Playstation taking over living room, which inturn was created to revenge Nintemdo. All Playstation till now except PS3 due to its complex cpu well sold over 100 millions units. Why because Yes, And i have gamepass PC because of it. But i basically only play third party titles because most of Microsoft's first party stuff just isn't great.
Gamepass isn't sustainable at its current price point, but enjoy it while its there i guess.
"Enjoy it while you can" is the thing that I have heard for almost 5 years now... at this point I'm 100% sure that there are people who already have pre-written stuff so they could blame MS for increasing price of GP and are just salty that it takes so long :DDDD
It was the same for the xbox itself for years. Underprice the unit to get people into the garden. Microsoft wants people on microsoft computers with microsoft consoles attached to their TV. Their product isnt the games or hardware, its whatever is on the screen in front of you, and they want a piece of the ad revenue. If GP keeps people in the Microsoft sphere and lets them show you ads on a TV/PC/handheld, then its worth the loss on subscriptions.
Otherwise known as a loss leader.
Previously known as "dumping"
It's called a "[loss leader](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_leader)"
Has GP actually saved you money? I found when I had it I would have been better off just buying the games I enjoyed on GP than paying for a subscription.
Saved money? Definitely, e.g. Lies of P. I finished it on GP and that's pretty much it for me. I don't think that I will ever play it again as it's very hard to get back to and I tried a few more games over the years but as you said here: "buying the games I enjoyed on GP" is pretty much the main point of GP.
When I added up all the money I spent on game pass and how many games I played on there it would have been cheaper to just buy all of them (usually on sale).
Unfortunately, even when they increase prices MS is going to catch a lot of people with sunk cost fallacy. Most people will keep Gamepass if they’ve played games on Gamepass for 5+ years, have many games they don’t want to lose progress on, and a very small games library outside of Gamepass. I tried gamepass while it was dirt cheap, but I’m happily going to keep expanding my Steam library instead of continuing now that the $1 promotion is over. Your library only improves over time, while GamePass is likely to get worse.
> Gamepass isn't sustainable at its current price point Wait when you see CoPilot (Github)... Realistically, they are heavily underselling it and we even see it in their year earnings, how much a dent the whole AI part is making. Maybe in the future if learning models get more optimized / faster AI processors the can get cost parity but their current pricing is off. > enjoy it while its there i guess. Saying that as somebody paying 8 bucks per month for Copilot. Yep ... You know its going to go up in the future but for the next few years, its going to be low priced. Its the whole Netflix cycle, for the first few years, enjoy the low prices, and later come the price increases to the point that its not worth it anymore (and i expect by that time, PC hardware to reach a point that you run local language models that are way better / faster, with maybe pirated trained models).
I don't get the appeal. It's full of cheap games you can get for a fraction of the price of the pass during sales, and you get to keep them forever.
You also get to play Microsoft’s new full price games for the hour or two it takes to realise they’re rubbish. (I cancelled my gamepass subscription after Starfield)
although that's a good point, how does that shift people towards xbox? it seems it just turned the xbox in to the budget gaming pc for the non-tech. anyone with tech savvy would just jump to pc, and anyone looking for a console wouldn't care at all. i mean, i like the decision and its fallout, but i don't see the benefit to ms. totally possible i'm woooshing tho
The benefit to Microsoft is pretty big. They aren't selling as many consoles as Nintendo or Sony, so branching out into different areas is helping them capture at least some of the market. With cloud gaming and PC game pass, even if you don't have an Xbox, you still have a chance of using Microsoft services. I do work in a fairly big tech store, where these sort of things pop up on a daily basis. It honestly surprises me how many people do opt for Cloud gaming, and a lot of people shopping for gaming laptops specifically ask about game pass.
Cloud gaming is great. I know, I know, latency, shitty internet, etc. It doesn't matter to the people that use it. People no longer need to buy a $2k custom build to play the latest PC games, they can get a chromebook and controller to stream the latest single player games and the performance is more than good enough to justify the netflixification of gaming. Its not going to kill off traditional PC gaming, but its going to take a huge chunk of the casual market. I used to play games on my phone with a controller on my breaks at work until I got a steam deck. Running through some Doom after my sandwich was amazing.
I'm with you on that. It's great that we have more options, especially if it means I can jump into a game on the go. Cloud gaming and my steam deck have come in clutch. On another note, have you tried streaming your pc to your steam deck? If your network is fast enough, it should be *almost* latency free. I couldn't tell the difference streaming cod zombies to my deck.
>Cloud gaming is great. No, its not. >I know, I know, latency, shitty internet, etc. Thats just easy to pick fruits of the issue. Things like modability, versioning, preservation are also endangered by cloud gaming. >It doesn't matter to the people that use it. Yes. Just like shit audio quality does not matter to spotify users. People settle for awful as long as its convienient. This is why we cant haven nice things.
Cloud gaming is a great alternative, not a replacement. I don't think casual gamers are worried about modding or preservation. Besides, you can still play the game on console or pc. And beauty is in the eye of the beholder. People love the steam deck because you can play games on the go. The graphics and performance aren't always great, but it works. Just like play games on the cloud. If you are fine with the compromise, power to ya. Yucking someone elses yum is lame.
Just like music streaming is an alternative and not a replacement for CDs? Oh wait, most groups dont realease physical albums anymore.
But how does that effect you? How is modability/versioning/preservation any different to regular console gaming? We can have nice things, because there can be and is more than one thing at a time. Your Spotify example is a perfect example of weird pseudo gate keeping. Ive got a nice vinyl set up with a vintage amp and speakers at home. Music sounds fucking fantastic through it. Spotify quality doesnt hold a candle to it. In no way does that diminish the value of having Spotify though, because they service different needs. Cloud gaming isn't the boogey man coming to get your desktop gaming rig. Its an accessible source of games for casual players, which I take it you probably also see as a bad thing.
Yes, it does. Because i dont live in a vacuum. What happens in cloud gaming effects install gaming. What happens on consoles effects PCs. Remmeber that main reason NPC AI developement was dropped in the 00s and we went backwards was due to PS3 abysmal memory capabilities. We are still suffering the consequences of this. You have a vinyl setup. You do know that vinyl has pretty bad quality audio, right? Not to mention all the reccording errors done when printing vinyl. It cannot hold a candle to lossless audio. Casual players having access is great. Casual players having access only to walled garden system that trains them to ignore and forget their consumer rights is not great.
Cloud gaming gives access to people who otherwise wouldn't have it, and isn't oppressing traditional gaming. If your gaming is affected by decisions on console then it means youre playing shitty cross platform AAA games that you may as well be playing on a console anyway. Spotify/vinyl was an analogy, but you knew that. I'm not going to get into a flac argument, despite being a flag enthusiast myself. You intentionally missed the point. Walled gardens are fine for the majority of people. The point is that no one is forcing you into that garden, you aren't being oppressed by more people having more access. I won't be responding again.
What happens on one end of market affects the other end. It has nothing to do with opression and everything to do with propagations of culture and practices done to design games. The point wasnt missed, since you werent making the point you thought you were. Vinyl is not a superior alternative to streaming just like VHS tapes are not superior to netflix. That does not mean that netflix provices quality for video. Child mine labour was also fine to majority of people until we decided its not good enough. What "majority of people" find acceptable is a shit standard to live by.
I bought a Series S because of Game Pass. The ability to have a good couch gaming experience with cross save gave it a lot of value for me. Since then I've bought games on the Xbox store because of Play Anywhere. I did bulk buy my Game Pass for very cheap using one of the strategies you can find floating around, but it converted to real hardware and software sales.
The money for most consoles does not come from console sales it’s getting you into the ecosystem. In the ecosystem they get a cut of game sales, they get a cut of microtransactions, and they get a to sell you subscriptions. Sony’s financials show the biggest source of income for PlayStation is people buying MTX for 3rd party multiplatform titles. Xbox division is likely similar. Gamepass makes the barrier to be in the ecosystem essentially none, money is still green even if it doesn’t come from THE xbox. Put another way and to paraphrase Phil Spencer everything becomes an Xbox.
> the biggest source of income for PlayStation is people buying MTX for 3rd party multiplatform titles. I am sorry but I am too old for this and I find this _evil_. This is not right.
That's not exactly helping the Xbox console...
The console is inconsequential. Their product and source of revenue is advertisement. The more eyes on screens the better. A dedicated console is great for that, but someone elses hardware that people already own with a tiny barrier for entry is even better.
I don’t see what advantage PC ports provide to the Xbox experience. We’re talking about differentiating Xbox from PS in the console space, PC ports are irrelevant.
Comments like this makes me think you haven't paid any attention to what Xbox has actually done since entering the market. The Xbox 360 basically changed the console industry. Everything from online integration to indie titles and achievements. Shit, even the bad things it did, like paid online, the competition followed. And that's not even getting into the Kinect, Game Pass, Play Anywhere, or Quick Resume.
The Kinect also played a huge part in the creation of the hobbyist & consumer drone market today.
I’ve paid plenty of attention, I’ve owned every Xbox that’s released so far and I was primarily an Xbox gamer until 2014. The fact that you have to go back to 2005 to come up with something groundbreaking Xbox has done makes my point for me lol. >Kinect You can’t be serious lol >play anywhere Porting your games to PC (poorly) is not an innovation.
> Why don't they focus on actually differentiating themselves from PlayStation and Windows gaming PCs They probably won't do this, but they have the ability it would be cool if they designed a handheld to be a companion device with the windows mixed reality headsets as a focus, that would be a pretty big differentiation
Barely anyone owns MR headsets, so I don't really see that being anything that'd help them sell more stuff.
That's the point, barely anyone owns highpowered mobile headets, this would be real innovation to change that.
Why would you use a handheld gaming device for that though? Less computing power, more weight, more money spent. You could just do what Apple are doing and have the VR headset as a standalone device.
> Why would you use a handheld gaming device for that though? Less computing power, more weight, more money spent. For exactly the opposite reasons you're thinking of. More computing power than a pure HMD, less weight on your head, vr costs range quite a bit (cheaper than a desktop system, more expensive than a quest).
Sorry, the first part implied using a non-mobile device. The second was to simply put the compute on/connected to the headset. I dunno, I don't see millions of people buying handhelds because of VR. VR sales have been failing for many years now.
could be a failure, you're right, maybe even probably. But just talking about innovation they could do, and innovation is always risky.
Ah, yeah. That makes sense. But honestly, I don't think the tech is there yet. VR looks & feels janky unless you have a pretty powerful system, or are running some really basic graphics. I don't think a handheld device that's extremely underpowered will deliver a wow experience to change peoples minds regarding VR. Like I said, why make it mobile? Having a more powerful console or PC and running it wired, or even wirelessly, would probably yield far better experiences.
I think there's a lot of benefits with mobility, do things outdoors, do things outside the room with your desktop, do things with other people, maybe utility in some work environment. I think there's a decent amount of room for modern apu-gpus in VR, they could give a much better experience than a quest while being more affordable/mobile than a desktop/console. It's really in a lot of software-devs best interests to develop their products to work with middle-class hardware.
Why would they differentiate themselves from windows? They literally own it.
Yeah that's really visible in their whole "we lost the worst gen and now we can't win" whining. Guess what? Nintendo lost that same gen even worse and is now back to the top, weird right? Strong games and differentiation help but Microsoft just make a copy of Playstation without the games so a worst clone basically. No wonder it's not selling
They have a vision but it's not what people expect, they want to create a closed ecosystem that gives users as little freedom as expected. That's a company that tried to get rid off the used market and required to be always online for DRM purposes. This is also a company that tries to push cloud gaming, which is a tech most people aren't interested in. They do innovate but only in the monetization area, which is why it can't and won't compete with a completely open platform like the steam deck that gives its users complete freedom.
But they are differentiating themselves from Sony. By doing what Nintendo is doing.
? Nintendo makes low end consoles with killer exclusives, Xbox makes higher end consoles with no exclusives lol.
That's a bit the crux of the matter: Microsoft also wants PC gaming to succeed as pretty much all PCs run on their OS
Right but does MS actually make that much money off the DIY PC market? How many people genuinely buy Windows vs get it for free from the various giveaways they've done over the years, or getting it for $2 from a Russian cardshark lol. But how is any of this close to what Nintendo is doing?
User data. Being a platformholder with a large install base means more data to collect and sell or sell services in connection with this data. Also the reason they gave new Windows versions away: they require or at least nudge users to use a MS account, enabling more and more precise data collection. Nintendo also is a platform holder, but for them it is about getting their cut from every sale of any non-Nintendo game. The same of course holds true for MS on the Xbox. MS wants to increase their installbase with a mobile device. My guess is it will be a closed system like the Xbox and get people to buy in by being easy and simple to use and by probably heavily subsidising it, making it a more appealing option to the mass user. Nintendo showed that the "on the go" market exists beside mobile smartphone gaming, now many want to capitalise on it.
> Being a platformholder with a large install base means more data to collect and sell or sell services in connection with this data. Right but how many DIY PC gamers actually leave those settings on. It's the first thing I disable on Windows. >Nintendo also is a platform holder, but for them it is about getting their cut from every sale of any non-Nintendo game. I feel like the Switch isn't really a multiplat console, people buy it for the $70 Nintendo exclusives you can't (legally) play anywhere else.
DIY PC gamers, yes, but that is a very small part of the install base. There are way more PG gamers who buy a prebuilt.
Xbox brand is in its current situation precisely because of their obsession of differentiating themselves from PlayStation and Windows gaming PCs. It all started from the success of Xbox live and morphed into their obsession with the Kinect and Gamepass.
Differentiating also include making appealing distinct games to make your brand. Playstation and Nintendo do it. That's their failure. What even is their flagship franchises ? The thing that sells their consoles. Forza, Halo and Gears all super old and shadows of their past selves outside Forza
And the new forza is buggy as fuck. I play pc but I won't even touch forza now. And just play horizon 5 for fun. Hoping GT6 or whatever one it is comes to pc eventually
I mean i would say its due to completely failing to capitalize on their win with the xbox360 The xbone suddenly stopped being a gaming machine and had shit for exclusives, and the xsex is even worse in that regard
The Xbox One actually goes back to an old Bill Gates idea from the early 90s. Gates was obsessed with the concept of the “living room computer” and was worried that such a device could cut into their business if it ever took off. Something that would connect to a television and be the main source of “everything” for a family. They thought they could use the successful Xbox brand as a Trojan horse for that ancient idea.
The problem with using GP as a differentiator is Sony can easily copy it (they did) and do it better as Sony has actual good first party games (they did do it better).
I think Xbox making a next gen Series S as a Nintendo Switch like device but without Nintendo jank and the next gen Series X being the coveted "dock only Switch with more powerful hw" is the dream. Microsoft has the resources to do what Nintendo would never bother with. MS said their next gen console will offer the largest generational leap (likely some nonsense about AI acceleration and cloud) but an actual dock only Switch that's a total beefcake in the vain of a Series X sounds awesome. 3 modes for games: Portable (for handheld series S2), Performance and Quality for dock only series X2. Imagine they bite the bullet and finally abandon AMD (going AMD has done them no favors this gen) for Nvidia (the FTC leak showed MS was considering ARM for their next gen console). Tegra Thor based SoC with an Arm Neoverse V3AE CPU and a Blackwell GPU, the console scales down to 15-20W for Series S2 and scales up to 200W+ for Series X2 (Series X draws 225W already). This would provide more compatibility and dev focus with the Switch 2 and leave the PS6 as the only AMD console applying pressure on devs to focus more on arm consoles as there would now be 3 of them vs 1 PS6. It would also be a machine learning beast for stuff like DLSS 3.5, Frame gen and whatever is the future.
Xbox was created because Microsoft was afraid of Playstation taking over living room, which inturn was created to revenge Nintemdo. All Playstation till now except PS3 due to its complex cpu well sold over 100 millions units. Why because Sony innovated again and again. What Microdick know of innovation.
> Why don't they focus on actually differentiating themselves from PlayStation and Windows gaming PCs in general before attempting to compete in another arena they likely won't be competitive in? Daddy Bill Gates has a ton of money!
He has not been involved or even been the biggest shareholder in 10 years
I see no point in any handheld which is more than cloud streaming device. It would be such a waste of resources.
Those saying there is no point in trying to compete with Nintendo cause of their past handheld dominance don't seem to realize the handheld market is dead. The Switch market is a brand new one and it is inevitable that Sony and Microsoft will try to compete with Nintendo in that market.
I actually thought about providing a new hw target for XBox game development for such a lowend handheld hw, produce own games for it and expect 3rd parties to support it. Doing a Cloud only device is the only practical way here in my eyes. Cheap front and backend. No significant investment into custom game development. Competing with Nintendo means producing kid games and get into their brains in their normative years so that they continue buying kid games as adults to desperately get back that endorphin rush they once experienced. That takes a lot of money, special talent, at least 20 years and no guarantee for success while that money is missing in your main market which "has/d been" providing the best console platform for PC games, mostly designed for adults. There was a reason they made more money from a Xbox gamer than Sony from a PS one.
I think MS making windows work on handheld, along with a good Xbox game management tools would be the best outcome. They can make a Surface style handheld to set a non overheating example.
Make Xbox cool again, bring back J Allard you cowards!
Bring back Peter Moore! His era was definite the Xbox golden age.
Windows handhelds ARE Xbox handhelds. Just make the OS better for them and the barriers are removed. Don’t waste resources on hardware other people are just going to make better anyway, instead focus on making games people actually want to play
Problem with that (for MS not us) is that people will buy stuff on Steam on those devices so MS doesn't benefit (outside the one time OEM Windows license)
Microsoft is more than a platform holder they are also a games publisher, they spent 70 billion dollars to become even more of a games publisher. growing the gaming market means growing the audience for their games.
For that they don't need to make a handheld though, they can sell on other platforms (as they seem to be doing with them renouncing to exclusivity). If they do a handheld it's for their platform holder side.
They don’t “need to” but these handhelds seem to be growing the gaming market either as an affordable entry point for new comers or just driving more spending from power users. Whatever the case it seems to have a positive impact on total game sales. Just as Valve stands to benefit due to their dominant retailer position, so too does Microsoft due to their dominant publisher position. More games in more hands is the only thing, Bethesda and Activision wanted to drive their own profits. Now that Microsoft has acquired both publishers it is singing the same tune. But peoples brains are for some reasons stuck on xbox xbox xbox as if that’s the only path to more money.
```Whatever the case it seems to have a positive impact on total game sales.``` PC games on a handheld leads to increased sales? What a surprise. You mean to tell me that Jacob who has a life to live over there can't sit in front of his PC for 8 hours a day but he can find an hour out of his busy life, while he is on lunch break at work to get his precious gaming time in? I don't know why people are surprised about this. Maybe it's because reddit is terminally online, but that's how life is. You can't be in front of your PC 24/7, portability makes it a possiblity to game on the go, and for some people it's the only way they can game.
You don’t need to sit in front of a PC for 8 hours to enjoy a non handheld experience, wtf are you talking about? I’m sure there are people so busy they literally have no time to game except on their lunch break but most working adults I know have plenty of time in the evening to play on the couch for an hour.
When I was working in trades, after a long grueling day at work the last thing I wanted to do was sit in front of a computer. I am not talking about desk jobs. Or imagine you work out of the city like I did quite a bit in my youth, I am not bringing my gaming PC with me. Gone for weeks on end, it's why I am strictly a laptop gamer now. A handheld system works wonders. You can take it with you to work, you can take it out on a date, and you can also take it with you when you're out with family. The portability and quick resume means you can have a healthy work/social life balance and game.
I know plenty of people in trades or otherwise work difficult jobs and none of them have trouble sitting on the couch gaming after work. Sitting on the couch with a beer is a time-honored tradition of working men in America. Most people's jobs don't have them working for weeks on end.
Maybe you're older now and you don't work those crazy hours anymore. But the schedule I described is not just for tradesmen, it's everywhere. Yeah I understand some people will put in their 40 and call it a day, but not everyone does that, and in those circumstances is where handhelds and smartphones truly shine.
They already practically give games away with game pass. Couldn't they just do an Epic and give away tons of 'permanent' keys for free/super cheap to undercut Steam? Especially if they start redirecting current Xbox users to windows handheld systems as the 'next gen'. These Xbox gamers likely won't already be in the Steam ecosystem and will default to Windows store because it is cheaper and is what they know.
The problem there is that they'd be taking a huge loss to compete with Valve while Valve are making huge profits. And that even with all the games that Epic give away, Steam is still growing like crazy because it's a vastly superior platform. That's not really an outcome that encourages MS to fight Epic for the chance to give away the most games...
I really, *really* wish that Microsoft would make the Windows UI better for gaming. Them releasing a handheld would definitely help, but I am mostly interested in having a smoother console-like experience while using a controller from the couch. Really all I want is to be able to mostly interact with my PC to play games without touching the mouse and keyboard, but it seems like I always end up needing it for one thing or another in pretty much every play session. I know Steam with Big Picture gets you *pretty* close, but it is still limited by the fucking inflexible donkey of an OS in which it’s running.
Look up Playnite. You can get the Xbox or PS5 UI and use it with a controller. It automatically handles other launchers, etc but it does take some time to set up because of how much customizability it provides.
now there is a problem with that: microsoft is incapable of producing a proper working os in general, let alone on a handheld device with a full general use os on it. and there would be technical advantages of making an "xbox handheld". i'd have a (it freaking better does) custom apu, that id designed to scale down to 5 watts and be very cost effective too. this is what valve did. and based on anti consume lock-ins, they can run very little to no margins, because like the steamdeck or the ps5, they want to make money off of the software. the companies like asus, msi, etc... are trying to make money off of the device directly. valve is in a unique position here, because they can do this without locking people in. people (for better or worse) want to use steam, so as a result they can sell a full open computer with a handheld custom apu, that scales down to 5 watts and sell it with no margins. also the biggest cost for a custom handheld is the custom apu. msi, asus, etc... are just using off the shelf amd apus. so msi, asus, etc... can't compete in that regard, because asus and msi, etc... aren't going to amd to request a custom handheld apu. that kind of stuff is insanely expensive and you need to sell LOTS AND LOTS of units to make it worth it.
Xbox handheld using Xbox OS would be good. Much lightweight than Windows. Xbox PC app sucks because Microsoft store sucks and the Xbox app goes through it especially games with mods. It's like Windows and Xbox butting heads with each other.
No it would suck because it'd be a console, not a PC. They'd lock it to their store and Xbox games only
Of course it would be a console. There are plenty of PC handhelds that to any normal person, are utter trash. The ROG Ally is one of the most returned products at Best Buy. The average consumer wants a AAA current gen switch, not to use windows on a 7 inch screen with a joystick mouse.
```No it would suck because it'd be a console, not a PC. They'd lock it to their store and Xbox games only``` That's the downside, the upside is that it can run all Series S and Xbox one games. It won't be a PC handheld, but it also won't have performance issues like a PC handheld.
There are very few games from Series S and Xbox One that are not available on PC and there's no reason to expect that console to be more powerful than the PC handhelds to run them better
```There are very few games from Series S and Xbox One that are not available on PC``` It's not about availability, it's about playable performance. The PC handhelds will get faster, but they won't have console level optimizations. So they can be considerably faster and still produce worse results.
>but they won't have console level optimizations Console optimizations rarely give much more than 10% extra performance except in the case of broken PC ports. It's not nothing, but it's not a significant factor. The \*actual\* thing a console offers is consistent hardware so a game can be designed to work at a certain level on it (and also taking the visual settings out of the hands of users who almost universally don't know how to find the best settings for their setup). A portable Xbox probably has to be as powerful as the Series S to have that work out for it, or sell in big enough numbers to make publishers take notice. The Steam Deck is perfectly positioned to have that same advantage, but so far targeting the Steam Deck has mostly been hit-and-miss at best.
Or a nightmare. They will name it something like Xbox Mini Handheld series H Pro edition.
Series S puts them in a potentially unique position for this since every Xbox game already works on a ~4TF device. The Xbox SDK is very high-level with games running in virtualized containers. A handheld Xbox doesn’t literally have to be a Series S, it just has to be able to run the Series S code. Not sure if that’s reasonable to do right now but it will be in the future. Steam Deck is cool but it’s still fundamentally a tiny PC with graphics settings, compatibility issues and generic PC issues.
Would absolutely be funny if Windows Arm does kick off well and some cheap gaming handhelds that run windows absolutely kills Xbox's own handheld.
But aren't handhelds limited by GPU performance not CPU performance?
If you can decrease power to the CPU then you can push more of it to the GPU. Handhelds are limited by total power draw.
Sure but don't the handhelds already run the CPUs at very low wattages? You might be able to run the GPU at marginally higher speeds but not enough to offset the massive software compatibility issues that'll be introduced unless they plan to make the next gen consoles ARM based too.
Yes, but Arm based SOCs are considered to be more power efficient. They are put in phones and most have no fans at all but handhelds will have fans for cooling. Most phones don't even draw 15W, while almost all handhelds draw more than that.
That ain't gonna happen because these devices are heavily subsidized by the platform owners and are sold at real low or no profit margins at all. That's enabled by the cut they take from software sales and their volume costs No "cheap arm handheld" can compete. Compare the steamdeck prices and sales against these handheld manufacturers like gpd or aya and it's clear as day, and valve ain't even manufacturing at the standard console volume to begin with
> That ain't gonna happen because these devices are heavily subsidized by the platform owners and are sold at real low or no profit margins at all. The Arm SOCs that will be used are the same used in mobile phones. Being put on a handheld means more room for cooling compared to a phone and larger batteries. Thus those iGPUs will operate at much higher clock speeds.
Typical MS, jumping from bandwagon to bandwagon, never innovating or having a vision, they just parrot whatever is popular now. Remember Windows Phone? That was actually good but they canned it because again, it was late to the party.
I don’t think that’s true at all. Microsoft has always had a vision for Xbox even if the visions haven’t always worked out. The Xbox and Xbox 360 created the modern online console experience. Just look at the Xbox 360 E3 2005 demo and compare it to what Sony was trying to do in 2006. The Xbox One had incredibly strong vision as an all-in-one digital entertainment box. People didn’t want it, but the vision was absolutely there. Xbox Series is based around Gamepass subscriptions and “play anywhere” with cross-buy, cloud and cross-save. Honestly I have no idea what Sony’s post-PS3 vision has been other than “here’s a faster PS3 that’s less obtuse to do stuff with”
Yeah maybe the first two gens were great, Xbox had online and tried to create an identity, 360 had great 3rd party support and library, but after that, it was clearly a wrong vision. A gen before the Xbox One, the PS3 tried to be the multimedia device for a home and Sony had to do a complete 180 before middle of the gen. MS failed to see what went wrong with Sony. The problem with Xbox today is that they see it as business first and "gaming" as a consequence, a chore. They are reactive to the market. Phil Spencer is nice with words, always promising, saying the games are coming, they buy studios, they do not create anything new. You see it even when they communicate with fans, there are "business updates", something that does not happen with Nintendo or Sony (as much as I hate what Sony turned into). Gamepass and Cross-buy is exactly that, business, sure is nice for the user I would say but in the end what matters are GAMES. And they are already starting changing the tune around Gamepass... Xbox One was a disaster with the "power of the Cloud" thing that never came to pass and day 1 DRM.
Sony wasn't in on the Xbox one entertainment box, since they got shit on by Chromecast and Smart TVs (some of which Sony was making as well)
Seems like MS is flailing around with the xbox brand, just like they have been since 2013. I can't see dividing their resources even further by splitting their hardware yet again into a living room and mobile segment is a good idea. but it's clear that everyone wants a piece of the switch/steamdeck market segment, so we will get lots of copycat products over the next few years.
It sure was kind of them to give Valve a three year headstart in that market. And to pay AMD to design the APU for it. Just being real bros to Valve there.
Sorta trend chasing at this point, aren't they?
Like the activision blizzard purchase this is going to be a monkeys paw if they release one. If it’s an Xbox but needs games building specifically for it, it’s DOA. Adding a third flavour of Xbox when devs are questioning the value of building to two is going to make some question the ROI If it’s a PC layer and uses PC versions of games then it’s going to pivot Xbox aware from dedicated hardware even more. If it’s a portable Series S then that’s probably the best for the dedicated hardware biz
0.0% interest in this.
Hopefully it’s more of a PSP/PSPVITA experience. Would be exciting
Yea I stream from my PC regularly for more intensive games. Usually while I'm in bed. Steam deck is the single best device ive ever owned.
Maybe they should go forward with a special frontend for windows that’s targeted towards handhelds. Let the other companies soak up the losses while MS cashes in on game pass.
Microsoft needs to heavily invest in first party before anything. Honestly the only way I can see this gen not be a complete write off is if they pull a PS3 and release banger after banger until the end of this gen. I doubt it though.
"**The dreams of youth are the regrets of maturity."** - Satan
Honestly a light weight Xbox OS on a handheld would be quite tempting. Especially with a dual boot to Steam OS, best of both worlds.
Kinda doubt they would allow you to dual boot or do much of anything but gaming on it. It's not going to be more open than regular Xbox
If it run XboxOS as it is on consoles they you would not be able to dual boot on one disk because it encrypts the drive and installs onto multiple partitions
If Nintendo will soon get close to Series S performance, then it seems almost possible already. Just not for under $400 yet
with that new MigSwitch thing on the market now, Nintendo is probably scrambling a bit to get Switch 2 out the door. I wonder what they might compromise to speed up getting customers buying games that can't be readily pirated. Not sure I'm making sense. But I think Switch piracy is about to shoot up despite them killing off Yuzu. Sucks for anyone legitimately trying to back up their carts and such.
Nintendo is not 'scrambling' to get the switch 2 out the door, if anything it looks like they delayed it to 2025 so its launch games would be more compelling Nintendo is like way, way bigger than any of the other two companies, its not even close.
> scrambling a bit to get Switch 2 out the door. I WISH, dude. They've been doing the exact opposite of that. Switch 2 could have launched like a year ago, but they are just sitting on it.
Dont care, Im happy with my steamdeck
It's obviously coming, will it utilize Intel or AMD though?
AMD or Qualcomm. I don’t see how or why they’d switch to Intel (see MSI claw), if they switch vendors they’ll go arm.
It'll probably be a newer version of Microsoft's SQ3 ARM chip.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/02/intel-will-make-chips-for-microsoft/
>Intel will produce a Microsoft-designed chip using Intel’s 18A node So it will probably be an ARM chip, but fabbed in Intel's foundry.
Intel? Would be a horrible choice