• @BluesF
    link
    108 months ago

    Having it as a benchmark is good, it encourages developers to aim to get good performance on a relatively underpowered device. I worry that an upgrade would muddy the waters… And drive games away from aiming for “verified” on the steam deck 1.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -18 months ago

      That’s only an issue for folks who don’t get the new one. The current one is feeling pretty underpowered already.

      • @BluesF
        link
        18 months ago

        I haven’t particularly felt mine is underpowered tbh. Obviously it’s a handheld so it doesn’t play the AAA graphics card melters on ultra haha. But yes, introducing a new one would affect everyone who doesn’t upgrade… Plus of course the benchmark being low benefits PC players with weaker hardware, too. Budget players, in other words, who perhaps can’t afford a £500+ upgraded deck. Seems a bit cold to just throw these folks under the bus.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          18 months ago

          That’s the issue with bottom specced hardware. It’s not future proof. It’s falls out of the window of acceptable performance much faster. Look at the Horizon games. Zero Dawn plays great, Forbidden West does not.

          At the bottom spec like the deck is, a two or three year refresh cadence is expected, unless they get to the point it hits in the middle of the performance window and has more leeway.

          • @BluesF
            link
            18 months ago

            Yes, and that is exactly why having a low spec device as a common performance benchmark is useful. It extends the lifespan of low spec devices in general - at least if publishers think it’s worth targeting the playerbase.

        • @Woozythebear
          link
          18 months ago

          The current steam deck can’t even run Madden 24. I would say if your handheld can’t run the current sports games then it’s pretty underpowered.