Image: Dell

After watching the reveal of Alienware's Concept UFO gadget at CES a couple of weeks back, we couldn't shake the feeling that we'd seen the concept somewhere before. Obviously, it's only natural that the best aspects of any tech will eventually get incorporated into rival companies' products, but watching the Windows 10 device presented as if it were 2015 and the very idea was totally brand new felt a little laughable. How did they keep a straight face while presenting? With the tablet's detachable controllers, kickstand and everything else about it, calling it 'innovative' felt remarkable cheeky.

Still, it seems that the machine itself has won over the people who have played it, with Trusted Reviews giving it one if their Best In Show awards. Alienware has since taken to Twitter quoting the website:

While the quote itself feels odd to anyone who's been enjoying the deluge of software hitting Switch every week, the context of the article itself makes the "limited number of games" comment make more sense. The writer is speaking in relation to the tens of thousands of PC games available across dozens of portals. In comparison, Switch's library of 3000-ish games obviously can't compete. Still, if there's one thing area where we'd say Switch definitively isn't lacking, it's the number of games to its name.

Alienware hasn't announced a price for its device yet, although with an 8-inch 1080p screen and a 10th generation Intel Core running things, it'll certainly cost more than Switch, assuming it makes it out of the prototype phase. It's a smart little (or not so little) piece of kit, certainly - especially if you've got a big old Steam library - and it'll be interesting to see how it fares against Nintendo's take on full-fledged gaming on-the-go if it does ever make it to market.

How does the Concept UFO strike you? Innovative and the inevitable next step in portable gaming or cheeky co-opting of Switch's design? How much would you be willing to pay to play your PC library on-the-go? Feel free to discuss below.

[source, via]