
As someone who regularly uses their OG Steam Controller with their Deck docked to the TV, it does work better. Having the trackpad does a lot of heavy lifting for non-game apps. Plus the trackpad simulating a trackball is great for FPS games.
My one complaint is that about 50% of the time the controller double-inputs everything. You can fix it by removing the batteries and putting them back it, but it’s still annoying.
And a piece of advice for anyone interested, if you want to Watch Youtube videos without ads, Grayjay is available as a Flatpak. Go to desktop mode and search in dolphin/discover. Then you can open Steam (in desktop mode) and add it as a non-steam game. Once that’s done, you can open it in game mode.

Also, talking about costs isn’t really relevant when we’re talking about future tech.
Then explain why the VRAM requiremwnts for 4K gaming hasn’t really changed in the past 10-15 years. And no, DLSS doesn’t reduce it, the AI models also require a decent chunk of VRAM so you often end up using a similar amount of memory to what you did before. Not to mention that DLSS has a lot of other problems.
And again, if you followed tech at all it’s pretty clear that Moore’s law is dead and we’re not getting exponential improvements in tech anymore. All the GPU companies have been able to do lately is work around hard limits, and they’re running out of space for that. There’s an old adage in investing that’s relevant: “past performance does not predict future results”.

No, people aren’t going to want 1000+fps in games. As someone else pointed out in the thread, 4k 60fps is <5% of builds in Steam hardware surveys. Going even higher framerates just adds more and more cost, with reduced returns.
If you could build a system that goes from 500fps to 1000fps, you’re theoretically reducing latency by 1ms (it’ll most certainly be less though). But how much more expensive is the 1000fps build? Based on tech trends the past few years, that’s probably going to be a lot more expensive, since architectural improvements of chips has slowed down over the past few years. Right now, Nvidia’s just pushing more and more power into their cards to get more performance, because efficiency has plateau’d
Add to that, the human eye only sees up to 500fps in ideal conditions. Why would you pay a bunch of money for extra frames that you physically can’t see?

We know there’s a growing number of people who use their phone as their primary and only computing device
There’s also some people moving in the other direction, and I wouldn’t be surprised if that grows. My parents only had their smartphones for years, but recently had me pick out a laptop for them because trying to use their phones for everything was a headache.
I think one thing to consider is that cost of living has been going up in the US with wages not keeping up. So budgets are getting tighter, and if you can only afford a single device to buy, you’re going to buy the phone, even if a PC makes a lot of things significantly easier.
None of that will change the fact that gaming will always push technology forward with the need for faster CPUs and GPUs
Tbh, I think we’ve reached a point of diminishing returns on video game graphics. Do we really need games to be any more photorealistic and power hungry than they are now?
That being said, I don’t think android phones are going to usurp this domain any time soon. Power requirements for 4k 60fps are way too high, and mobile devices simply can’t distribute enough heat to handle it unless there’s enormous bumps in efficiency. And advancements in chip design have seriously slowed down the past few years

and in the medium-long term make expensive, bulky gaming PCs an anachronism.
This claim is a ridiculous overreach. There’s only so much computing power you can fit in a small space due to heat dissipation. You can’t beat thermodynamics. You can get a lot of games to run on lower end systems, but only if you’re willing to make a ton of compromises.
In no way are you going to be running something like Cyberpunk at 4k 60fps on a phone within the next 10 years. Thats what the “expensive, bulky gaming PCs” are for.
And I don’t get why they’re painting a target on the back of high end gaming hardware or even the Steam Deck. There’s another target that would be more beneficial to society to take out: consoles, particularly their locked-in ecosystems. Democratize gaming.

They basically invented gambling for chlidren
The gambling sites aren’t owned by Valve
they actually are the one that have anticompetitive practice
Citation desperately needed, and not just the one internal email from 10 years ago that reads like a misunderstanding.
they take a huge cut of 30%
30% is standard across the industry, including itch.io and GOG. And given that EGS just laid off 1000 employees, it’s looking like 12% isn’t a sustainable business model.
Don’t forget that EGS has been using anti-consumer policies like paid exclusives from the start. Meanwhile Steam, GOG, and itch.io don’t force exclusivity, allowing an open ecosystem. Tim Swiney isn’t against monopolies, he’s just mad that he doesn’t habe one.
And let’s not forget that Steam has been investing in open source and Linux gaming for years. PC gaming are getting close to a point where making walled off gardens becomes impossible.
Do I think billionaires should exist? No. But when there’s one that’s actively building systems to keep digital ecosystems open permanently, I’m willing to make an exception.
But you’re clearly just some gullible jackass that fell for Tim Swiney’s propaganda hook line and sinker. You speak of cognitive dissonance despite being fully immersed in it yourself. Go touch grass; you desperately need it.

You know what this is called? A healthy and competitive market.
Yeah, I get there’s layoffs, but that’s mainly at AAA studios and is a symptom of a previously unhealthy, highly consolidated market. The job losses suck, but now diversity and competition is coming back, and that’s generally a good thing for consumers.

You’re fucking nuts if this is your response. I never said anything about age.
And guess what? I played New Vegas when it was new as well. Loved the game, but the fact of the matter is that its gun mechanics are terrible, evem when you compare it to other FPS games from that same year.
Fallout 3 came out in 2008. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare released in 2007. Guess which one has the better gunplay?
Fuck off with your ageism accusation. You want to know why age is irrelevant to the conversation? Because I never brought it up, jackass

Except it wasn’t intended to be a remaster. They used Skyrim as a testbed to overhaul the Creation Engine to x64 to prepare it for Fallout 4, and by the end of it they effectively had a new, more stable version of Skyrim so they released it for free to everyone that already had the base game and DLC’s.
And this was mainly a project for the engine developers. All of the artists, level designers, etc. were focussed on Fallout 4 at the time.
EDIT: You also seem to be unaware that the USSEP is also notorious for taking artistic license with some of their “fixes”. Such as making the Warrior Stone apply to archery instead of the Thief Stone and changing the ores in Redbelly Mine from ebony to iron despite there being good lore reasons for them to be ebony

The gun play is fun ads hell, just like any Bethesda game
You must not have played Fallout 3 or New Vegas. The gunplay was pretty bad before Fallout 4, to the point where you were better off using V.A.T.S. most of the time.
That being said, the gunplay since Fallout 4 has been pretty good. Especially the auto-lean around corners when you use ADS

didn’t fix shit for any of the re-re-re-re-releases of Skyrim
Skyrim Special Edition was built for x64 architecture (the original was on x32), is significantly more stable, and supports 4096+254 plugin files (vs 255 in the original). The modding scene has only gotten better frome the update. And let’s not forget the VR support.
You have no idea what you’re talking about. They didn’t change any of the gameplay because 1: the base game is still fun to play and 2: people already mod the hell out of it to fit what they want

They were also pretty novel in their controversies.
They were the main ones throwing a hissy fit when GeForceNow wanted to automatically let you stream to any game you already purcgased on Steam. The game’s devs wanted GeForce to require everyone to purchase an additional copy just to stream it through their service.
The game devs also started selling DLC while the game was unfinished, which is also shitty. And we’re not talking skins either.



You mean a storefront that enables tons of indie devs to be noticed and actually compete with AAA publishers?