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)
I wonder if GPU/motherboard manufacturers are not leaving money on the table by not selling an all-in-one gaming motherboard like the one in the Steam Machine.
Built-in GPU and VRAM with the CPU, RAM and cooling optional.
Why would anyone who’s in the market for a by-itself motherboard ever want something you can get as a modular piece as a built-in to another expensive piece?
Besides, if you want everything soldered on you can just buy a laptop motherboard.
For the same reason there’s other options. Having options alone is more than enough reason.
A motherboard with a built-in GPU has obvious price, cooling design and size advantages.
The only things I suggest to be soldered are the GPU and the VRAM since GPUs are extremely sensitive to their memory setup. CPUs can use off-the-shelf stuff without issue.
For the same reason that people are interested in the steam machine. It’s nice to be able to just throw some money at people and get a complete product. I can see businesses getting these things if they need a moderately powerful GPU for business reasons. Unless valve go utterly mad on the pricing here, it’s going to be much better value for money than a Mac mini, and it’ll have better compatibility with existing software as well.
On the steam hardware page it says the CPU and GPU are discrete although also “semi-custom” which I think means it’s not Gigabyte and has some cooling features that are tailored to the form factor.
Built-in GPU and VRAM with the CPU, RAM and cooling optional.
I don’t think that’d be a wise idea. After watching Valve interviews, it’s clear that they designed the entire system around a specific max TDP. Apparently they figured out the TDP, picked a fan to move it, then designed the rest of the cooling system based on that.
If you start swapping out different CPU’s that’ll change the TDP and very quickly become a problem. Plus, the CPU is soldered to the board. Having a socket to allow for swapping would require a redesign of the cooling to account for the increased height
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
I agree we don’t know if they’re loss leaders yet. I will say that even if the hardware is priced at a loss, though, it’ll sell more Steam games. Ultimately I don’t know if it really matters.
Though yeah, people should get past headlines. Lol
To be a loss leader doesn’t the need to lead to something?
The only way it could make sense that they’re selling these at a loss would be - oh yeah. They’re coming straight for Nintendo / Sony / Microsoft now, huh?
The day I see a steam console in wal mart is a day I will be very happy.
For Valve it would ideally lead to a new Steam account being created. Which would make sense if someone got one as a gift or something, naturally they would set up a Steam Account if they didnt already have one.
Also the new offerings are very much something Johnny Joe who has only ever owned a PlayStation, Nintendo, or Sony console would potentially buy.
Of course Johnny Joe would put the entire thing up his ass and die from heavy metal poisoning because he’s an idiot, but his peers would actually use them.
I guess that would depend on the front end and game support. If it is any less user friendly than Xbox or Playstation, people wont want to use it Johnny Joe and Little Timmy don’t want to fiddle with a bunch of settings and constantly change stuff to get games working. The Steam Deck does okay but I still find sometimes it needs some… coercing… to get some games to work right.
If they dial it in right, everything should work properly out of the box without needing settings changes.
A loss leader (also leader) is a pricing strategy where a product is sold at a price below its market cost to stimulate other sales of more profitable goods or services.
So the answer to their question is “Yes, a loss leader needs to lead to something”. I have no idea why you think they have no idea what they’re talking about.
Yes, but that’s a different sale. My point is it can still be considered a loss leader if they sell it at cost. It took them many millions to develop it, so overall they would be losing money on the hardware sales.
That’s as opposed to something like Costco’s hot dogs. There was no R&D there, so if they sold it at cost, I wouldn’t consider it a loss leader.
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.
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
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.
I actually think that, while it’s maybe a fun topic for idle conversation…it doesn’t have a huge impact in the way traditional console pricing normally does.
With a traditional console, what the console vendor chooses to do on hardware is what you get. Maybe, as with Microsoft on the Xbox Series X/Series S, you get a high and low end model, but that’s as much choice as you get. All the games are made for that hardware, and whether the platform lives and dies depends on it.
But…that’s not really true of the Steam Machine. It’s just another PC, albeit preconfigured for Steam and HTPC-oriented. If you want to get a lower-end PC or a higher-end PC, you have the option of getting one and plugging it into a TV and running the same games on it and save some money or with a bit more visual bling. The games for PCs are already more or less written to scale up and down with hardware.
And it’s not like Valve’s platform is gonna live or die based on the Steam Machine the way a traditional console generation is, where success of a hardware console is high-stakes for the manufacturer and the players in successfully getting a game library going. I’d guess that it might help Valve make strategic inroads into gaming in the living room. But even if it completely bombs, Valve is gonna keep right on selling games to people to run on PCs (and the Deck) and their huge game library isn’t going anywhere.
I think comparing it to a console is the wrong mindset. It’s a computer first that can also be a console. It’s also a pre built Linux based computer you can have a higher degree of confidence that things just work even after updates. It’s a legitimate competitor for a new windows PC as much as it is a console competitor.
Console manufacturers sell at a loss because they need to sell the console first before they can sell anything else. They can expect to make that money back on software the user could not have bought without the console.
Valve doesn't need people to buy Steam Machines to get them to start using Steam. In fact, I suspect most units sold will be to users who are already invested in the ecosystem. Selling at a loss would just be a straight loss to them.
They may be trying to muscle in on traditional console territory.
Steam has a well tenured reputation for having inexpensive games. They may be leveraging this to appeal to the console players turned off by the all recent price hikes.
I suspect the gabecube may be close to if not, at cost. I don’t think it’ll be at a loss.
Gabe has previously claimed that they developed the index because they didn’t want VR to die and even gave grants the game developers who made VR titles.
So it’s established that Steam is big enough and secure enough to risk cultivating new or disrupting old markets.
Operationally steam has low overhead and insane profit margin. Unless they fuck up the steam store they’re guaranteed massive profit.
If the new hardware flops and they lose a bit of money; Gabe just buys one less yacht and steam ticks on as normal.
As you say valve are incentivised to do this because it will move more people over to Linux. I suspect that they want that more than they’re really bothered about hardware sales so while I don’t think it’ll be sold at a loss, because frankly that would be stupid even if they could afford to do it, but I don’t think it’ll be anywhere near as expensive as some people seem to be claiming.
Console manufacturers haven’t sold at a loss in a long time.
I agree, it won’t be huge gains directly for them, but even moving people off of Windows benefits them by removing control a competitor (Microsoft) has. I somewhat agree that it won’t be sold at (much of) a loss, but maybe at cost. I’m sure they expect manufacturing prices to go down over time, and engineering was a one-time investment, so sold just below cost doesn’t seem unreasonable to me at launch, which then becomes at cost or above in the future.
This all depends on if their goals for it are short-term or long. Historically, they seem to target long-term. That’s why I think it’ll be as low as they can make it, which they also said they’re doing by only having 8GB VRAM as cost savings. They want to drop the price as low as they can to compete. They won’t compete at $1k. I doubt they’d compete at $600-700. I suspect they’re targeting $400-500, which seems like a reasonable cost for the hardware too.
bin.pol.social
Gorące