Comment on Microsoft claims: Steam Deck Did Not Need Call Of Duty To Succeed
dlove67@feddit.nl 1 year agoThe deck is only successful because Valve is already successful enough to take the first loss on a console
This may be true(and I wouldn’t doubt it being the case, at least on the $399 model) but it’s pure speculation on your part.
MJBrune@beehaw.org 1 year ago
There are a dozen consoles like the Steam deck that didn’t have the impact that Steam had. en.wikipedia.org/…/List_of_handheld_game_consoles It’s not pure speculation. It’s certainly backed by history. Playstation is the other company that tried this and was big enough to release 2 iterations of a failed handheld that was very good on all accounts.
dlove67@feddit.nl 1 year ago
I was only talking about your claim that they’re selling at a loss, nothing about success or not.
We don’t know their BOM so its speculation that they’re taking a loss.
MJBrune@beehaw.org 1 year ago
Sorry, I mean the overall loss. Not selling at a loss from a manufacturing point but a loss on the development and research of a console. They spent years just designing and building prototypes of the Steam Deck. It is an assumption but I think a fair one to say that they’ve yet to make their money back from those costs to break into the console industry.
telemachuszero@kbin.social 1 year ago
Why do you think the PSP was a failure? They sold over 80 million of them, and manufactured it for nearly 10 years.