They can’t sell them at a loss without a locked-down ecosystem. Sony learned that the hard way with the OtherOS support for the PS3 that lead to a ton of them being purchased to build cheap supercomputer ls and never spending a dime on games or software to cover the loss.
I think that was overstated. Sure there were some “fun” projects for fun or publicity.
However supercomputer clusters require higher performance interconnect than PS3 could do. At that time it would have been DDR infiniband (about 20 Gbps) or 10 g myrinet.
Sure gigabit was prevalent, but generally at places that would also have little tolerance for something as “weird” as the cell processor.
OtherOS was squashed out of fear of the larger jailbreak surface.
I think that one was also significantly a publicity thing, they made videos and announced it as a neat story about the air force doing something “neat” and connecting relatable gaming platform to supercomputing. I’m sure some work was actually done, but I think they wouldn’t have bothered if the same sort of device was not so “cool”
There were a handful of such efforts that pushed a few thousand units. Given PS3 volumes were over 80 million, I doubt Sony lost any sleep over those. I recall if anything Sony using those as marketing collateral to say how awesome their platform was. The losses from those efforts being well with the marketing collateral.
IIRC, the Deck, at launch, had a limit per Steam account, and it had certain requirements. There’s no reason they couldn’t do something like that here. Sure, it makes it harder to convert console players if they do the same technique, but it could be restricted sales based on something.
Isn’t quest 3 sold at a loss? Selling similar hardware at no loss will present a challenge.
Though, at the same time, there’s not much wrong with making low quantities of something and selling them at a profit, slowly.
I’m aware of Valve being very generous with warranty/replacements of controller hardware for the Index. Even years after the warranty is up. But I think this is because of the major durability issues and known defects that the Index Controllers have.
In any case, Valve seemingly has lost money on a certain percentage of Valve Index kits/controller hardware. Based on how many people I know, including myself, who have gotten replacement hardware from Valve. Sometimes many times for recurring issues.
But I’m not aware of Valve doing the same for the Deck.
Edit: and you can tell they focused really hard on making the new controllers more durable:
No charging port to melt
durable sticks that won’t start drifting
No special finish on the controller that can be worn/scratched away
No internal battery to go bad
seemingly far fewer delicate parts
Funny point on the melting charging port. 2 years or so after the Index came out, SteamVR started warning using with a status dialog that told users to stop charging their controllers while they use them. They never accounted for long play sessions and people who would want to charge while playing.
The steam frame controllers use AA batteries, the steam controller has a lithium ion internal battery.
Also it does have a USB port but the primary charging method is via the pogo pins. But obviously you might want to recharge from a wall outlet so they also include a USB port. But that’s obviously going to get used far less often than it would otherwise.
An item that is sold to you at a loss in hopes that you buy more profitable stuff from them to make up for said loss. Game consoles are usually sold at a loss in order to get people into their ecosystems, so they can buy things like games and subscription services, which are more profitable.
It’s a Ubisoft game so if you don’t have a copy anymore you can at least rest assured it will be dirt cheap during the next sale (or of course there’s always other options).
It always struck me as odd that they did that with their games. They’d go from a 60$ release to “here’s a 5$ price tag for a month” almost instantly.
I guess I’m not complaining as it lets me enjoy my guilty pleasure games affordably. But still. Doesn’t strike me as a smart business decision
I like your posts on the games you’re playing Atticus. And you’re 100% right, people have become much more willing to show how shitty they are. I think they’re more willing because they see how people can still succeed while openly being shitty people, so they no longer assume that being inhuman impedes their personal success.
The only positive I can think of is that it least this makes shitty people easier to point out. It doesn’t make them easier to avoid because we’re unfortunately all bound to cross paths with them.
Some of them I wonder if they got burned trying to be good people once and then just let that sour all their opinions. I suppose that’s a bit of an edgy “all it takes is one bad day” take, but it is something I’ve wondered.
I do agree a lot with your take though. Shitty and horrible people have realized they can get away with being shitty and horrible. So they don’t hide it. Maybe it’s just the cost of me growing up but it’s disheartening to see it happening with so many people.
As you said, it at least makes it easier to root them out, even if we’re forced to interact with them
When the game launched I did all the trading. Idk how I managed too because it’s trading is so confusing sometimes. I love that AC4 streamlined a lot of it
True to that. Having worked in stadiums before at games, they usually don’t stay that neatly sorted. I was just impressed from a hardware perspective was all
That was a good time for the story portion of the Ubisoft formula. 360-era and early One-era Assin and Far Cry games did a lot to make you question your own morality while not giving you a clear “good guy” ending. I only played a little of AC3 and I guess AC4 wasn’t that deep on the topic. FC2 had you aiding opposing factions in a foreign conflict and manages to make you, potentially, sympathetic to the Jackal at the end. FC3 kinda saves it for the ending when you realize the fantasy mass-killer hero life is incompatible normal life. FC4 has you actively watching competing revolutionaries advance with different drastic flawsgiving validity to Min’s dictatorship. ACU gives a strong case for the Templars while giving you such a hollow ending. I’d say ACOri also has a hollow ending, though the baddies are shallow along the way. .
I can’t recall any major moral conflicts in ACOdy (played 2020) and they definitely went light in FC6 (played 2024, dictator makes the country money with drugs but gives nothing back to the people). Haven’t played anything later.
AC4 always kind of struck me less as morality motivated and more just a story of Edward’s growth as a person. There is of course, some there, but not like with the other games.
Unity was where I feel it started to decline. I did enjoy the story but that ending definitely wasn’t very good. (speaking at least from a purely AC stand point. I’ve only played FC4, FC3, and part of 5)
bin.pol.social
Aktywne