This machine will be the same desktop-mode-not-required-but-allows-for-more-functionality thing that the Steam Deck is, but it will chew through battery faster in exchange for more compatibility.
Well, at least the base model Xbox Ally has essentially the same SoC as the Steam Deck. The Z2 A has 4 Zen 2 cores and 8 RDNA 2 CUs. It will be configurable up to 20 watts TDP instead of 15 on the Deck, but that’s it. So much for “long in the tooth technology wise”.
Sure, the Z2 Extreme variant will be more powerful, but it’ll also be in a different price category (800-900,-€).
And in terms of user-friendliness: the Xbox Ally will run Windows. It won’t launch into the regular desktop shell (by default), and it won’t have as many services running in the background which might help with performance and battery life, and you’ll probably be able to update drivers and Windows through it. Maybe it will have some preconfigured scripts/shortcuts to install Steam, Battle.net etc. But that’s it. Expect to fall back to the desktop mode (or open a browser, terminal and Explorer window in the new gaming mode) for anything more advanced like installing emulators.
In terms of pick up and play this won’t be much different to the Steam Deck, with the one exception being Game Pass - but even then don’t expect any of the more demanding titles to run well.
The ROG Ally X’s MSRP is 899,-€ and that’s what it currently costs here in Germany at least. It was as low as 799,-€ though recently, but now it’s back up. Considering this “Xbox Ally X” is the successor to it, I don’t think it’s unrealistic.
You’re good, no worries. We’re all just speculating anyway, there isn’t really a right or wrong.
I’d just be surprised if it’d come down in price one model to the next considering prices for tech in general. Maybe Microsoft made a special deal with ASUS, but I think the base model with the Z2 A is what they’ll use to rectify the price of the Z2 Extreme model.
Nintendo wiped the floor in the mobile gaming market for decades despite their competitors having beefier specs. The DS lasted for years before we ever got the Switch. Let the Steam Deck mature.
Even if you’re correct, it’s still too early, anyway. That’s my point.
The DS had a seven-year lifespan and the original Switch had eight. Even living room console have an average near decade long lifespan. So, of course Valve isn’t going to throw their money into a second generation.
The difference is that nobody’s releasing games specifically made for the Deck. Some are including optimizations to make their games run decently well on it, but it’s not a AAA machine. I bought one knowing this full well and am satisfied playing less demanding games on it, but it’s not going to be playing new demanding games, unlike with dedicated consoles.
I suspect handhelds are going to be the future for awhile now. It’s not just out of a growing demand or simply because portable graphics processing and battery power have improved (although those factors do help) but it’s another chance to:
Push locked hardware
Funnel to controlled storefronts
Bring down and moderate the increasingly unsustainable AAA development costs
Those first two aren’t particularly surprising, they’re the key elements that Nintendo has honed in on while Sony and particularly Microsoft continue to struggle. Microsoft feels like they’ve just left XBox to languish while they focus on Game Pass as a means to ensnare you into their economy which is why they’re first down this path, but I think Sony will follow shortly. In an ideal world, I’d love to see Sony get back to hardware manufacturing with a Vita like device you could load Linux/SteamOS onto. Vita was a great little product, done so dirty. EDIT: I know the Portal exists, but that’s mostly just a dumb receiver as far as I understand it. Still, they’re already not too far off … come on guys, just a little further.
But moreover it’s that last point, really. It’s hard to continue to push out these extraordinarily big budget, bordering on AAAA (lol) territory games that continue to flop. I know the Switch 2 is already doing stuff like Cyberpunk 2077, but that stuff can still be hell on battery life as well as requiring lower resolution and lowered visuals in portable mode.
I feel like Nintendo is making a big mistake pushing that 4K60 envelope with the Switch 2, although I see why they made that maneuver. The Switch was perpetually underpowered and they felt the need to close that gap, but they already struggle to push out big budget tentpole franchises as is illustrated by Mario Kart World being the only big release title. Also, I just want to generally point this out, Nintendo suffers from needing to up the stakes. It’s what lead to Mario Galaxy being such a grand adventure, then Odyssey going even bigger than that. Now we have Kart World because … gotta get bigger than 8 Deluxe somehow I guess.
I don’t know what any of this means or where it’s going, I just wanted to try and call out some of these observations. Turbulent times ahead, I don’t know that anyone really knows what the next 2-3 years will look like.
I know the Switch 2 is already doing stuff like Cyberpunk 2077
It’s 4 1/2 years old and already runs on other handhelds. Not really an impressive feat.
they already struggle to push out big budget tentpole franchises as is illustrated by Mario Kart World being the only big release title.
Yeah, I read that they only released something like 22 original titles in the 8 years the Switch has been around. That’s not counting any ports, remasters, and the like, which make up a hefty chunk of their Switch releases. They got away with it before because so few people had a Wii U, but they need to up their game to make the Switch 2 appealing to the masses, especially with the high price tag. It’s not a promising start, with announced titles being Donkey Kong Bananza (which looks great) and a whole bunch of Switch 1 upsells, including Metroid Prime 4, which will be released for both consoles. Feels like they’re trying to cannibalize their Switch 1 releases the way they did their Wii U ones, but 150 million Switches were sold. People already played these games if they were interested in them.
Silksooooooooooong ! New images and half revealed date of “you will be able to play it on day one”. So either same launch day or a bit before. 2nd time (after the switch 2 trailer) that they mention silksong for this year. So maaaaybe ?
Oh by the way, why are the image shown at an angle? Is it really only to showcase the console? Whatever.
This will likely only play pc games… And that is the big disappointment.
Who cares? We already have pc gaming handhelds. Unless this is subsidized to hell so it beats all other pricepoints… why should anyone care?
If my xbox library was made mobile… That would be something new and worthwhile. NO, I DONT WANT TO STREAM. I cant always stream on a handheld either. I want to possess my games!(As much as i can anyways)
Xbox will be disappointed by the sales of this handheld and might give up on their own that could play the xbox library locally. If they do that their next generation is screwed. Lets see how this plays out.
They have given up on their own handheld. And why wouldn’t you prefer the PC library when it’s so much larger? The appeal to this device at this point is that the new UI is better for the handheld use case than desktop Windows.
Its not that i dont prefer the PC library, its that there are already dozens of other handhelds that play PC games already.
So then the UI is the sole reason people should want this device?
I see no reason why this UI shouldnt also work on the plethora of other windows handhelds in the market currently. This leaves nothing new for this device to offer… Unless its really cheap.
At least at first, it will be the only handheld running this version of Windows. So maybe after a year or two, it won’t be all that unique, true, but a year or two is a long time at the rate these handhelds are advancing.
What a weak sell then, i understand your point, i just wish Xbox came out swinging with a compatibility layer for the Xbox game library. A portable device with that capability would have the potential to put them back on top.
Instead we get a less bad version of windows, that will likely be inferior to its direct competitor(steamOS) anyways, sans the ability to play a few multiplayer games.
Is it good enough for you? Is that why you will get it? Where are these people you speak of…?
I highly doubt there are enough people that want that super particular use case to make this particular handheld stand out at all, especially ones that didnt meet their needs with another handheld already.
I hate live service games and Windows, so no, this device is not for me, but those are also the most popular games on the market by a wide margin. Despite how awful the Windows experience is today, there’s still one Windows handheld sold for every two Steam Decks. That situation can only improve with a version of Windows designed for handhelds.
I see your point with the millions that play those specific games, maybe i am just disappointed by microsoft only doing the bare minimum when they are forced to.
That’s true, it took them 10-15 years but they built a huge service business. I was specifically referring to the loss of the desktop market to the “clones” which has a rough equivalence.
It was more of a cheap shot than a serious prediction ☺️ As long as MS controls the licensing and software this is a completely logical move.
the ability to log in via the Windows lockscreen with your controller
Seems like they’ve finally taken some notes from the Steam Deck, interested to see if they can actually make something decent. It seems unlikely, but I’m still interested!
A 2TB Xbox Series X now costs more than a PS5 Pro (in the US at least).
That is mental. Xbox hardware division must be bleeding money hand over fist. I honestly doubt they’ll do another generation, and stick to trying to monetise GamePass through PC and streaming. Maybe you’ll even see GamePass for PS6 since they own so many studios now.
They’ll only get Game Pass on PlayStation with Sony’s blessing, which is unlikely. And the next Xbox will just be a PC. I don’t think any of the consoles are in the market of selling units at a loss anymore. Those days are done. So with tariffs and inflation, this is the only way it could go.
Assuming MS exit the console market, I don’t see why Sony wouldn’t allow it (as long as they get their pound of flesh from every sale of it). They’d basically just be another publisher.
The breadth of the Game Pass catalog is far larger, and Microsoft isn’t exiting the console market, as much as they don’t care about exclusivity. So personally, I doubt it, but I don’t have a crystal ball.
Yeah, there’s probably a fair bit of overlap between GamePass and PSN Premium games.
I suspect to try and push their own products, we’ll be entering an age where games are $80, and almost never go on sale, purely to make their own subscription services seem better value. And then they’ll crank the price of those as well.
Yeah, there’s always someone bringing this up, but you can’t just run Steam on it, and that’s what’s about to change. Xbox games still go through cert and need explicit ports above and beyond the PC SKU.
Ya for sure, I’m just speaking on a hardware level. Always been x86 as far as I was aware. I remember bypassing the disk encryption fighting every fiber of my being on the Xbox 1 by pulling out the IDE cable as it was booting to gain access to the HDD 😂
Trying to raise the “standard” price to $80 will have very nice ripple effects of more pricing diversity, where each game will really consider what it’s actually worth, which we haven’t had for a long time. Even now we’re getting first-party Microsoft titles releasing at $20, $30, and $50.
Steam doesn’t advertise at the scale of Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo. It won’t have a ripple effect because it won’t change the degree to which artificial hype drives people towards the “Buy” button.
A lot of games priced at $70 right now are having a rough go of it, so charging more on top of that isn’t going to help, but there are the likes of South of Midnight and Clair Obscur launching at $50. If your game isn’t as hot of a commodity as Mario Kart, you’re probably going to try to lure people in with a lower price.
there are the likes of South of Midnight and Clair Obscur launching at $50.
Beautiful games, both. But again, they aren’t having the full court press of advertising like a new Call of Duty or Final Fantasy or Diablo would.
That’s the real cost savings. You don’t need to change $80+ for a game if you aren’t focused entirely on presale figures to justify your studio’s budget.
Incidentally, you also get to focus on a better game. Balatro didn’t need wall to wall subway ads in New York to end up on everyone’s phones.
Steam doesn’t need to. It’s got the steam sale and a hundred million people to share memes of “sale so good spent all my money no time to play all the games I bought in such massive sale”
I bought it long before the steam release, back when multiplayer was in experimental. So glad that there are 1000s of hours that were never tracked so I don’t need to see those.
I think all it will do is raise the ceiling of what publishers are willing to price games at. If they think they can get away with it, they’ll charge $80 instead of $70, with the rest being $70 and less just like it already is now.
Not ALL steam games have DRM. Yes, you should buy from GOG whenever you can, but if you use Linux like me, GOG doesn’t give a shit. It can be hard to decide, support DRM free games and proper ownership with GOG, or expanding compatibility with Linux and improve it in general. If its cheaper on steam cause of a sale or something, I’ll buy on steam, then years later like with DOOM 2016 for example, I’ll buy it when it hits like 4 bucks on gog. That way, I have acces to an offline installer, and I show support and interest to valve for investing in proton.
Yeah, it just launches a web browser in the client, but behind the scenes, it’s using a referral code in partnership with GOG to make sure they get a cut. So you can support DRM-free and Linux gaming support at the same time.
Your not wrong. If it weren't for steam being absolutely stellar than I wouldn't be buying games from them. I would try to go through gog. But with their work on proton alone I personally give them a pass.
To run the games i wanna play would require a pc worth 3 ps5s
Edit: people here don’t like facts, but where I live a pc that matches a ps5 is around $1500+ it you’re lucky. Yes your pc is better than my ps5 in the same way that your Ferrari is better than my Honda. But I like Hondas.
Again no, that’s not my taste. I’m just saying steam doesn’t work for most people. The convenience of a console alone is always gonna keep me. To know i can buy a game 5 years after the console is released and it’ll run. PC gaming is superior, but it costs way more and takes way more work. Im it’s not convenient for casual people like me, especially since I want to sit on my couch with a controller and not have to interact with a computer
*laugh sitting on the couch playing PC games off steam using a tv to display and a wireless controller
What are you even talking about …enjoy paying more for less, and paying monthly to play games while also being locked to whatever terms they decide all willy nilly.
If you can afford the cost of console game prices, more power to you. They’re pricing me out and I know I’ll have no choice but to switch to PC in the future if I want to be able to keep playing games.
Steam doesn’t work for most people? You sure about that? It has 132 Million active users, that’s nearly double the number of PS 5s that have been sold!
Very odd comparison, you need to buy a ps5 to be a ps5 user, you don’t need to buy anything to be a steam user, you just need to sign up and you’re considered a user.
theverge.com
Aktywne