this post was submitted on 24 May 2024
385 points (95.7% liked)
PC Gaming
8581 readers
909 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Isn't that comparison asinine? I mean... Yeah, no shit. One is a handheld PC and the other isn't.
They're competitors on form factor. Actually, the one difference you mention is precisely why I'll probably be buying a SteamDeck instead of a Nintendo Switch. I can play Nintendo games on both after all.
They are only competitors for people who are fairly ignorant. Steam deck comes with the ability to play switch games for free...
Nintendo coming to shut down valve 💀
I mean, I wouldn't buy into a decade old ecosystem either if I hadn't already. But by that logic, there is less games on my WiFi router than on the Xbox. Same form factor after all.
That's not what form factor means
I beg to differ.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_factor_(design)
What do you think of as "form factor"?
You're right, it was totally meant to group together devices which share zero characteristics outside being vaguely the same size and shape.
Do a subnet router running on Debian in a data center with an ATX board and my gaming PC have the same form factor?
Are you trying to equivocate motherboard form factor (a specific terminology used for the sizes and locations of screw-holes in motherboards) with entirely different types of device that happen to have similar shapes and sizes?
The motherboards in those computers could have the same motherboard form factor, but that doesn't make comparing a rack-mounted router with specific design constraints to your gaming PC a reasonable thing to do. Your gaming PC is, most likely, far better at its job than a router in a data centre would be, and the DC router is most likely far better at its job than your gaming PC would be, because they're totally different categories of device. Likewise, a Wifi router and an Xbox are totally different categories of device. Even discussing just form factor alone, the Wikipedia summary you posted includes:
An Xbox lacks many of the things considered as basic functionality for a router, such as a second Ethernet port. Likewise, a wifi router tends to lack many of the things considered crucial for modern game systems, such as a GPU and video output. In both cases it's perfectly possible (at least in theory, though I'm sure at least one person has actually done it) to reconfigure one for the alternative purpose, but that is utilising the device well outside of its design parameters.
Yes! Exactly! A comparison between two things based on form factor is not useful! My original point
Was that a comparison between Nintendo switch and steamdeck because "they have the same form factor" is not fitting, which I tried to illustrate with my router to Xbox comparison!
Form factor very clearly isn't the only consideration though, and when combined with the other factors it becomes very useful. The comparison here is of two devices for playing video games, and form factor makes a difference there. Back in the early 2000s, people weren't really comparing the GBA to the PS2, the Xbox, the GameCube and the Dreamcast. These simply were different markets. Likewise, the Steam Deck and the Switch are more comparable than the Deck and the PS5 specifically because of form factor, even though as computing devices the Deck and the PS5 are more similar (both are running custom AMD Zen 2 CPUs with custom RDNA 2 GPUs, for example). The Steam Deck is, in practice, only slightly more "a PC" than the PS4 is.
You realize that's the argument you're making...?
See, your "argument" so far has been "you're wrong" without ever answering anything or engaging on anything. I repeat my question: what is a "form factor" in your mind? Because yes, to me a "form factor" is exactly that: size, shape, dimensions. Wikipedia confirmed my definition. You just keep telling me how ridiculous I'm apparently being without ever telling me why...
7:56 am and I can rest assured I've already read the dumbest thing I'll read today.
While the Steam Deck is technically a handheld PC, as a Linux enthusiast who's tried to use the desktop mode for laptoppy things... No it isn't.
It works in a pinch (well... Not for my job, but I also don't expect Valve to put lxd into SteamOS), but the comparison to the Switch (which I also own) is much better than comparing it to even a gaming laptop. In fact, if I were the type of person to emulate stuff (which, don't worry Nintendo, I totally am not), I would say my Steam Deck makes a better switch than my switch. If I'd emulated a Switch to play Mario Kart (which obviously I haven't) I'd say it was a better experience on my Steam Deck than on my switch.
Desktop mode is literally just KDE, and you can install whatever OS you want on it anyway. In what way is it not a handheld PC?
I think they mean functionally.
I know everytime I've had to do extended work in desktop mode I've had to use a USB mouse and keyboard. Obviously, it's a handheld PC, but it's not really designed to replace your laptop.
You could use it as a desktop computer with a dock though, I suppose.
It's not supposed to replace a laptop.
Companies making similar products seem to be aiming for this use case (for example, the GPD Win 4 has an optional dock, and can connect to an external GPU (they even sell one) through its USB 4 port).
What I'm saying is that the PC comparison simply misses the point, whereas the Switch comparison is a comparison of how the devices are intended to be used (and for the most part actually used). The Steam Deck is not a good device for running a development environment or most of the things one thinks of as "PC tasks." It's not designed for that.
One can use it in that way, but one of the biggest differences between the Steam Deck and its "more pc-ish" competitors like the Ally is that Valve has done a lot of work to make desktop mode unnecessary for the vast majority of users. The user experience puts it much more directly in competition with the Switch than with other handheld PCs, and that's a strength of the Deck, not a weakness.
One can install Linux on a Switch too, at which point it's basically an ARM-based handheld PC. But a reviewer who reviewed the Switch for its power as a handheld Linux machine would be missing the point too.
Sorry but no, you're the one who missed the point. The point (in the comment you originally replied to) was that it's obvious a handheld PC will have more games than the Switch, as the Switch is a console that came out a few years ago while PC games have been a thing for decades.
Whether or not you consider the Steam Deck a handheld PC doesn't change this.
If it's "just a handheld PC," how do I setup cups as a service that starts on boot?
The answer: as a minimal change I have to enter developer mode and understand that the next update will wipe that away. (If I want to use it for this purpose regularly, it'd be better to install another OS, at which point you might as well call the Switch a handheld PC too.) This is a limitation of the Deck, but it's a very intentional one. It's a gaming appliance first and foremost, which makes the comparison to other gaming appliances apropos.
Are "Steam Deck has X many games that Valve have certified on it, up from Y 17 minutes ago" articles particularly useful? Only really to people who are using them for ad revenue. But that doesn't make the comparison to the Switch a bad one. In fact, comparing the Steam Deck to the Switch is a better comparison than comparing it to a gaming desktop.
Did you even read the comment you replied to? The last line was:
You then proceeded to try and convince me it isn't a handheld PC in your comment, anyway.
I don't want to argue the semantics of whether or not it is a handheld PC (it's pretty subjective anyway); I'm just saying since it uses hardware and software which is common to PCs it can run most games a "normal" PC can, which means it can run way more games than the Switch (even if you install Linux on your Switch you won't be able to run the vast majority of PC games, as they're built for x86 processors).
The original comment in this thread compared the Steam Deck to a PC to highlight the fact that the amount of games available on these platforms isn't comparable, so articles such as this are pointless (especially when it's wrong, as the difference in the amount of games you can play on the Switch and the Deck is way more than 29%). You replied that calling it a PC is wrong, but that comment was only calling it a PC to highlight this obvious difference.
And yet that's exactly what you're doing, and missing the forest for the trees as you do so...
I did this in my very first comment to you, realized it was very subjective, and stopped.
All my comments to you after that did not, in fact, try to argue this. Work on your reading comprehension.