Maybe if this was like, $50 I would consider this, but $140 is too much to ask just for a screen upgrade that people have to self-install.
Like, I have an LCD Steam Deck, and the screen does fine. Sure it would be nice if it was a bit brighter, but not for $140. I mean, a new OLED Steam Deck is $550 but includes performance, battery life, and WiFi speed increases as well, including a screen with a 90Hz refresh rate even if most games never reach that. Plus, this screen requires that I flash a custom BIOS, why would most people want to do that when they can just run the stock one from Valve?
I don’t see where this gives such a massive benefit over just buying an OLED model. Too much loss for not enough gain, IMO.
I dont get the hate for the lcd at all. I never have my brightness maxed out. I guess if youre like obsessed with HDR or something, but otherwise im perfectly happy with the lower price of the lcs, especially since i got it on sale when the OLED first released.
I have an LCD near launch edition and is it really about brightness? I don’t want OLED because the LCD is dim (which it can be outside or in sunlight), but because the LCD is pretty mediocre or possibly even bad. The OLED is supposed to be pretty damn good colour wise. It’s also bigger which is nice.
The only practical difference it made for me is night usage. You can play dark movies or games and the pixels dont light up the entire room which they would on the LCD.
The OEM Steam Deck OLED Screen is $95, $145 for the version with the anti-glare etching.
$140 is totally reasonable for an aftermarket product like this.
It might not make sense for most to purchase and install as an upgrade on its own, but it’s the same workflow as a shell swap so the two upgrades can easily go hand in hand. For users with a broken screen, it also provides a repair option that is also an improvement.
Also, just want to point out that flashing a BIOS is a pretty trivial task, strikes me as a bit weird to list the mildest of inconveniences as a deterrent.
I don’t get the impression this is being presented to anyone as “a massive benefit over just buying an OLED model”, but it does cost ~$400 less and reduce waste.
it’s the same workflow as a shell swap so the two upgrades can easily go hand in hand.
That’s exactly what I’m planning on doing, if it gets funded. I was going to go with the DeckHD screen, but they’ve been having issues for months and it’s turned me off from it - bad customer service, simply not shipping product purchased, forcing their customers to do a charge back for a refund because they’ve ghosted their user base.
If it doesn’t get funded, I’ll be buying a replacement screen from ifixit. My deck screen has some discoloration from pressure being applied to the screen at some point.
There were rumors yesterday about it after CES. It looks like Valve is denying it after AMD said there were new processors on the way for Steamdeck. I’m not 100% sold on the denial, I think it may have been some miscommunication on the timing of the news. Either way, that’s where I got it from, I just hadn’t seen the news today about them denying it yet.
Don’t think they are lying about the denial, they said they wanted the upgrade to be big and the z2 is marginally better than what the Steam Deck already has. I would guess a Steam Deck 2 is years away, but we might get a Steam Home Console, or maybe the Deckard VR headset. I kinda doubt any of those would run a z2 though. Why would Valve be using an off the shelf chip when they had a custom chip last time?
Yeah, I don’t think it’s a full steamdeck 2, I think it would be more like the oled upgrade. Slightly better performance and battery life. I think valve is going to lean into the cellphone model of smaller upgrades every year, with an eventual phase out of old hardware after 5 years or so.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying people should constantly buy new stuff. I mean, I daily drive a 1968 Ford Galaxie 500. I still run a GTX 1080Ti in my gaming PC (partially due to cost, but also the 1080Ti was just a really good card). I am a big proponent of “keep stuff operating for as long as possible to prevent more waste.” I love repairing stuff. I am also content with what I already have. I dont have to have the latest stuff, if what I have now works for what I need it for then its no big deal to me.
Im just saying for someone considering this as an upgrade, if they aren’t content with the Steam Deck they have, then probably they will get way better value out of buying a new one than they will from a $140 screen only upgrade.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
$140 seems like a massive rip-off, honestly.
Maybe if this was like, $50 I would consider this, but $140 is too much to ask just for a screen upgrade that people have to self-install.
Like, I have an LCD Steam Deck, and the screen does fine. Sure it would be nice if it was a bit brighter, but not for $140. I mean, a new OLED Steam Deck is $550 but includes performance, battery life, and WiFi speed increases as well, including a screen with a 90Hz refresh rate even if most games never reach that. Plus, this screen requires that I flash a custom BIOS, why would most people want to do that when they can just run the stock one from Valve?
I don’t see where this gives such a massive benefit over just buying an OLED model. Too much loss for not enough gain, IMO.
I dont get the hate for the lcd at all. I never have my brightness maxed out. I guess if youre like obsessed with HDR or something, but otherwise im perfectly happy with the lower price of the lcs, especially since i got it on sale when the OLED first released.
I have an LCD near launch edition and is it really about brightness? I don’t want OLED because the LCD is dim (which it can be outside or in sunlight), but because the LCD is pretty mediocre or possibly even bad. The OLED is supposed to be pretty damn good colour wise. It’s also bigger which is nice.
The only practical difference it made for me is night usage. You can play dark movies or games and the pixels dont light up the entire room which they would on the LCD.
Yeah I don’t either. I have an oled steam deck, my mate has an LCD one. I can’t really see much difference TBH, they’re both great little machines.
The OEM Steam Deck LCD screen is $65.
The OEM Steam Deck OLED Screen is $95, $145 for the version with the anti-glare etching.
$140 is totally reasonable for an aftermarket product like this.
It might not make sense for most to purchase and install as an upgrade on its own, but it’s the same workflow as a shell swap so the two upgrades can easily go hand in hand. For users with a broken screen, it also provides a repair option that is also an improvement.
Also, just want to point out that flashing a BIOS is a pretty trivial task, strikes me as a bit weird to list the mildest of inconveniences as a deterrent.
I don’t get the impression this is being presented to anyone as “a massive benefit over just buying an OLED model”, but it does cost ~$400 less and reduce waste.
That’s exactly what I’m planning on doing, if it gets funded. I was going to go with the DeckHD screen, but they’ve been having issues for months and it’s turned me off from it - bad customer service, simply not shipping product purchased, forcing their customers to do a charge back for a refund because they’ve ghosted their user base.
If it doesn’t get funded, I’ll be buying a replacement screen from ifixit. My deck screen has some discoloration from pressure being applied to the screen at some point.
Don’t forget, there is a new steam deck refresh coming soon, so getting a new one will have even more benefits.
Source of that second refresh?
https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/handheld-gaming-pcs/a-new-steam-deck-is-coming-with-one-of-amds-more-powerful-ryzen-z2-series-processors-inside-it/
There were rumors yesterday about it after CES. It looks like Valve is denying it after AMD said there were new processors on the way for Steamdeck. I’m not 100% sold on the denial, I think it may have been some miscommunication on the timing of the news. Either way, that’s where I got it from, I just hadn’t seen the news today about them denying it yet.
deleted by creator
Don’t think they are lying about the denial, they said they wanted the upgrade to be big and the z2 is marginally better than what the Steam Deck already has. I would guess a Steam Deck 2 is years away, but we might get a Steam Home Console, or maybe the Deckard VR headset. I kinda doubt any of those would run a z2 though. Why would Valve be using an off the shelf chip when they had a custom chip last time?
Yeah, I don’t think it’s a full steamdeck 2, I think it would be more like the oled upgrade. Slightly better performance and battery life. I think valve is going to lean into the cellphone model of smaller upgrades every year, with an eventual phase out of old hardware after 5 years or so.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying people should constantly buy new stuff. I mean, I daily drive a 1968 Ford Galaxie 500. I still run a GTX 1080Ti in my gaming PC (partially due to cost, but also the 1080Ti was just a really good card). I am a big proponent of “keep stuff operating for as long as possible to prevent more waste.” I love repairing stuff. I am also content with what I already have. I dont have to have the latest stuff, if what I have now works for what I need it for then its no big deal to me.
Im just saying for someone considering this as an upgrade, if they aren’t content with the Steam Deck they have, then probably they will get way better value out of buying a new one than they will from a $140 screen only upgrade.
deleted by creator