Topic: PC Gaming

I put down a deposit for the $400 base model of the Steam Deck. SSD would obviously be better for bigger games, but, to be honest, 90% of my Steam library is games that would run OK on Switch if they were available. I won't even bother trying to run Cyberpunk on the thing if I get it. Some games are just a better match for a bigger screen and beefier system.

I would love to run Tales of Arise on this thing, though. And the Yakuza games. Imagine fully portable Yakuza games!

That's assuming I'm going to actually pre-order it. I'm still not clear on when I'll actually be able to preorder it. It lists my order availability for Q2 2022. Does that mean I won't be charged until next year, or what?

@Ralizah
Ya. Seems unless you ordered in the first 10 minutes you got pushed out to Q1 2022 and anything past half an hour was Q2 2022.

Same estimate for mine. And my brother just ordered the 256 GB not 5 min ago and it was also Q2 2022.

When they are available with stock you'll get an invitation email to make the purchase. I suspect Valve may under promise and over deliver here though. So while I'm bracing for June 2022, I'm hoping they can get it out to me sooner.

I'll probably get the $400 version next year. I just wanna wait a bit and see people's experience with it first.
Like I wanna see some kinda data on differences in performance of games if you install Windows compared to the SteamOS. Cos if I bought it, I'd probably want to install Windows and just use it as a replacement for a laptop if I need a general purpose computer when I travel. (I already have a small portable 10-inch screen which could make it better for viewing when doing non-gaming stuff with a mouse and keyboard.)

Getting an actual laptop for those equivalent specs would definitely cost a few hundred more than the SteamDeck.

@Ralizah
BTW I believe Valve said they're designing it in such a way that games are more efficient from micro SD to minimize load times. They're really going the extra mile here with their design. Plus a good UHS-I 1 TB micro SD, such as the gold and red SanDisk Extreme, have pretty good load times as is when not bottlenecked by the system itself. I saw some comparisons between SSD and microSD that weren't all that far apart. Maybe 70% longer load times. Which isn't the end of the world. Then again, this is NVMe which will have 50x faster data transfer so, that may not be accurate.

Still, I like at least having the OS on SSD. I'll keep all the games I play most on the NVMe and the rest on microSD.

@JaxonH Nice. I'm not expecting lightning speeds with the cheapest model. It's already a bit extravagant, though, since it doesn't technically give me access to anything I can't already play on my desktop at home, so I'm not super eager to tack on extra costs. As long as load times are similar to what I could expect from Switch games, I'll be satisfied.

Wouldn't games loaded from the internal memory be faster than MicroSD even with the cheapest model?

@Dezzy tbh I'm glad my reservation is pushed out a bit. That way, I'll have time to watch videos on the thing's real world performance before committing.

@Ralizah
Should be, though maybe only slightly. The 64 GB model uses the same eMMC flash memory that Switch uses. And both only accept UHS-I micro SD. So loads should be comparable. Aside from SD having to load larger files. But they’re trying to make it more efficient too so, I imagine it won’t be discernibly different. I used a micro SD on my Win 2 and never had any issues.

But after getting accustomed to SSDs on my PC, it’s hard to say no when given the option. And, knowing I maxed out two 1 TB micro SDs on Switch where file sizes are smaller and less games exist, getting the 512 GB was more of a preventative measure- necessity even, rather than a luxury. But 1.5 TB total should suffice, especially if limiting oneself to games that run well and don’t kill battery life and aren’t better played on Switch (and I understand performance wise, no games will be, but there’s more to consider than just that- as always the answer is nuanced).

I think the $400 model is a steal though. A much better bang for buck than the other two models. That’s the one they’re losing money on, for sure. A 512 GB NVMe that’s 42mm instead of the longer 80mm is probably around $200 (though I imagine they could source them for $150). Which means they are making $50-100 back on the model I bought. The sheer value of the 64 GB model is kinda mind blowing. You’d be hard-pressed to even build a comparable desktop PC for the same price.

There are so many massively popular games that have never been available in handheld format. It's hard to even imagine which games I'd most appreciate having in that format.

Crazy to imagine games like FF7 Remake or Forza Horizon 4 might run on it.

Yeah that pricing jump seemed a bit suspicious. My guess was that they're deliberately taking a loss on the lowest model for the sake of competing with the Switch audience. Makes sense if you're as rich as Valve is. If they can seriously get the more mainstream casual audience buying it, they'll easily make back that money through the software sales.

The base model should be fine for indie games and older titles. Just be aware that a lot of newer games won't even fit on it, and the ones that do might find the performance a little lacking.

I'd think that load times will be about the same as on Switch. You'll just be downloading a load of 4K textures that the games don't use, but will eat up the storage twice as fast.

While it's possible that Valve could implement some kind of caching system to speed up loading and reduce the wear on SD cards, I'd like to see it in action first. Previous attempts to do that with mechanical hard drives weren't terribly successful, and largely fell by the wayside when SSDs became cheap enough for everyone to buy a large enough one to run their games from.

On the whole, it's worth remembering that the spec of this - while a big step up for handhelds - is still pretty much entry level in the grander scheme of PC gaming.

@Dezzy
You just can't compete well in the handheld space if your leading digit in the pricetag is higher than a 3. Even for a device like this where, by value alone, it could have started at $500, easily.

$399 attracts the masses. There's a LOT of portable gamers out there, and many of them would love a device like this, but are sketchy on the whole PC thing, as they desire plug and play, no tinkering, and despise the idea of a desk, mouse and keyboard. I think this bridges that divide as well as is possibly could have. SteamOS ensures a console like experience, and since it basically auto boots a version of Steam Big Picture mode, it will feel very familiar.

This opens the door to PC gaming for countless gamers who otherwise wouldn't drop $1500-2500 on a higher end PC (though I suspect this device may convert many of them, and in 5 years time I'd be curious to see how many do go on to buy a mid to high end PC for their TV).

The core audience is sold. The response has been stellar. The question is, how many outside of the core bubble will buy in? I'm hoping a lot. If it works well, has solid compatibility, a good selection of games has reasonable battery life (Portal 2 720p max settings 60 fps is 4 hrs, while 30 fps gets 6 hrs), and good word of mouth from users, this thing could blow up outside the core bubble audience.

Not as much as Switch mind you. But I could see a future where Steam Deck does 10-15 million units, which would make it a massively successful form factor for the Steam platform. This would almost certainly ensure future successor models.

It's still worth it though for those who opt for higher storage. The 512 GB model does include an anti-glare etched glass screen as well, and it's not just larger storage, but faster storage as well. Even then it's an extra $250 for 512 GB, but buying a larger NVMe separately would cost you almost as much retail and be a major risk and hassle tearing it down to replace. I paid $350 for a 42mm 512 GB NVMe SSD for my Win 2 a few years ago. So prices have definitely come down since then.

It's supposedly a M.2 2230 drive with PCIe Gen3 x4. Closest I could find for this at retail is the LiteOn CL1-3D256 which is $72US on Newegg, they're charging $130US more for the 256GB SKU. I couldn't find any 512GB models but I expect the price at that point would start to skyrocket. These would be very high density SSDs. I expect they are getting a larger margin on the other SKUs but not quite as much as you'd think.

For comparison a similar spec M.2 2280 drive, the more common size, you can get 256GB for like $30US. That price scales pretty much by capacity up until around 1TB. Then the prices start to skyrocket because you're using higher density NAND.

Also definitely a yes on it opening up new games to portable play and not just the super demanding titles that'd tank the battery. For example XBOne titles that were ported to PC like Killer Instinct, Sunset Overdrive, Gears 5, Forza & Halo. Games that for whatever reason haven't been ported to Switch like Tomb Raider, Batman, GTA, Deus Ex. Oh, and also the endless array of indie titles most of which could run on a toaster.

@skywake
Is that your way of saying I'm probably right?

Nah, there are loads of mid range and even AAA games that are still lower than that. Pretty much all of the Soulsborne games are less than that. Dragon Quest XI was 40GB. Fallen Order was 50GB. Resident Evil 2 Remake was 25GB. Witcher 3 was 35GB (without DLC). There are loads that are in that 10GB-50GB range.

I don't think it would necessarily be that big of an issue because I don't think anyone would really buy this specifically for playing games like Cyberpunk, or Red Dead 2. Those are the games where you can pretty much guarantee it's gonna be 100GB+ install size (those and Call of Duty for whatever reason).

Use this to browse games for Proton support. Just keep in mind, massive strides have been made in just the last 12 months, so by the time we actually get our devices, we could see a much higher proportion of compatible games. Not to mention, Valve is working to get full support by launch, even for games with anti cheat, and their success will even be more so when extended out until Q2 next year.

But just as a baseline, to get a feel for which games can run right now, today, search in the tool. I see Monster Hunter World and Mass Effect Legendary Edition are Gold with Monster Hunter Stories 2 being Platinum, Gears Tactics is Silver but Gears 5 is and Persona 5 Strikers is Borked (likely due to anti cheat, I imagine, at least for P5S, but we have that on Switch too).

https://www.protondb.com/search

You can also sign in with your Steam account and see the Proton ratings for all your games in your library

@Dezzy
Yeah, you're right. It's just not quite as dramatic as it might seem. They're probably only making an extra $70US or something on the 256GB SKU vs the 64GB SKU. They're probably wearing the cost on the 64GB model and getting a small margin on the other SKUs. Which they can probably do because I think most people are going to be jumping to the higher SKUs

So… wow.

I’m not gonna lie. Trails Rising is a personal fave and would look and run so well at 60 FPS with analog shoulder buttons, so that sucks. Gears of War 5 is great, that one hurts too. Persona 5 Strikers I’m ok with since I’d rather play on Switch, and Star Ocean… eh. Don’t really care much. So 2 borked games I care about.

And of the bronzes, nothing jumps out. I’ve played Splinter Cell, and it’s an older game that’s not quite as smooth on PC with controller for gyro, though it does work. Don’t really care about any of these.

As for silvers, there’s at least 10 in that list I care about having on the Deck. These games could still run really well, mind you, but they’re not guaranteed flawless. That doesn’t mean the game won’t run well, it might just mean it takes some performance hits or something of that nature. But for the sake of a conservative estimate I’m going to write all 10 of them off as well.

That means only 12 games that I care about in my library that aren’t gold, platinum or native. That’s… impressive. And, that’s as of today. Right now. By the time this system is in our hands, 10 of those 12 games could be in the gold/platinum list.

I’m officially sold on sticking with Steam OS vs a Windows install.

@JaxonH

What does the Gold rating mean exactly when it says they need tweaks? What tweaks?

@Dezzy
Looking at a few examples for gold it seems to be stuff along the lines of additional non-core features aren't working or there are error messages that don't stop you from playing the game. Like anti-cheat not allowing you to play online, cloud saves not working, getting warnings about a corrupted save on boot. And for some of them there are trivial workarounds like editing one line in a config file or removing a file from your home directory.

I never realized how much more expensive the roughly equivalent alternatives are. I knew there was the GPD Win, which is kinda similar, but apparently there are a few other companies too, and they all cost WAY more than the cheapest Steam Deck. Here's a comparison between a bunch of them:

https://liliputing.com/2021/07/compare-handheld-gaming-pc-spe...

I'm not sure you understood the logic of what I said. Yes, there are plenty of games that take up less than 64GB. However, that doesn't in any way refute the existence of the ones that do.

Also, bear in mind that you won't be able to use all of that storage for games. A 64GB eMMC is more like 57GB in terms of usable space. Then you'll have the operating system, the steam client, any other pre-installed software and a healthy margin of free space for updates, temporary files and saves.

For my original GPD Win, also with a 64GB eMMC, I'd not be comfortable putting anything bigger than 24GB on it. However, that's running Windows and Linux is a fair bit leaner so the Steam Deck might stretch to 30GB, maybe even 40 if you're lucky. However, even some of the games you just listed are probably going to be too big for it.

@Matt_Barber

Sure, but you made it sound a lot worse than it actually is, by saying it would be good for older titles and indies. Obviously when games like Elden Ring will probably fit on it, it's really not that bad at all. That's probably the most anticipated game of next year.