• 4 Posts
  • 304 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: January 24th, 2024

help-circle
  • Lmao so you include all the deals for the switch with your “mario kart upgrade”, but not the steam deck?

    Ironically enough a steam deck with zero games on it is still a way more compelling device if we’re describing a generic gaming device, because all games on PC are free if you want them to be, and that’s a library of hundreds of thousands of games. Then you consider it’s also your laptop/main PC too…

    Plus, if you must buy games, you’re only a few quid away from one, not £60 + online fees etc etc.

    We can go in circles forever though, but over the long term of course a PC or any Steam Deck will win in terms of ownership cost due to cheaper/free games. The issue is that we can’t really calculate an objective metric of value there.

    That also isn’t the point I was even disputing, it’s precisely that the ownership is more expensive because PC gamers buy more games, but either way you’re wrong.

    But if we keep going, we’ll run into problems because of course it’s apples to oranges to compare the value because these are largely mutually exclusive target audiences I’d imagine.



  • Btw, these 9 titles would have cost a switch user just €540, if all of them were AAA games at full price. That too doesn’t factor in that the figure from Nintendo includes massively popular cheap indie titles or the fact that even Nintendo games sometimes go on sale.

    Yes, I’m a heavy buyer of games, but those games cost £12 on average, not £60, nor anywhere near to that amount, even if it’s lower due to the few indie games that get console releases.

    €540 for those 9 games is roughly more than half of what I spent in the last decade on 430-ish PC games. It’s literally why I even have more games in the first place.

    So even though I have more games on paper, I don’t spend more paper, capische?

    And I certainly don’t spend more per game than the switch user, which makes your claim misleading.

    In fact the opposite is true and most PC gamers are notoriously stringent in spending on games.


  • Wait, what?

    First of all, PC gamers don’t buy a ton of games.

    PC is the number one piracy platform for starters, seeing as it requires no jailbreaks and the like.

    Secondly, PC gamers tend to own a lot of games legitimately because our gaming library doesn’t expire with a console generation, and because our steam libraries consist of many many indie games that cost a few bucks each, not a few $50 AAA releases.

    My steam library is about 435-ish games. But that’s since 2013.

    The total value of the account per steamdb is like £1080, this is a vast over-estimate because I used to live in a country where the entire GTA series before 5 cost £0.20, but let’s go with £1080.

    If I bought £1080 worth of standard £60 games, I’d only have 18 games. That’s actually less than I even had for the PS Vita, and most people would be surprised to know that platform even has that many games.

    Between the online fees and subscriptions to PS Plus etc., lacking discounts compared to steam, and the inability to pirate even an extremely high end PC tends to be far, far cheaper in the long run than a console, especially since it also doubles as the TV, the music player, the work and hobby computer, etc etc.




  • You can spend more on mobile game mtx than a full triple A experience including the console and in fact most people do which is why the “core” is an ever shrinking slice of the pie that to GenA probably doesn’t even make any sense.

    The price doesn’t really matter, my point is that you’re not buying a Nintendo switch to play GTA 6 and you’re not buying a steam deck to play Warioware Inc.

    (Well, I am, because I’ve never given them any money nor plan to and think Nintendo peaked way back in either the SNES or the GBA era and I neither had nor knew what a Nintendo even was as a kid).









  • I use F-Droid on Android and I don’t use Google Play at all. I’m really glad laws exist that prevent monopolization and I’m really glad the OS is open source so that if it were to ever change I will just use a different fork.

    There’s no sign up or payment info required.

    It works great for me. I don’t pay for any apps nor have I ever nor will I, but if I did, I would PayPal/Ko-Fi/Shopify/Patreon the money to the Dev without any further sign up required.

    1. It’s your SO or kid accessing it and they don’t know any better.

    Teach them or dont give them devices or admin privs on them. If all else fails they are free to use the apple app store where apple will now be exposed to the broader market and set the fees accordingly.

    1. You just bought something (an appliance, a vehicle, an FPV drone, whatever) and it requires you to use an app, and that app is an exclusive on the shadiest App Store possible.

    I would never buy such junk that it requires an app. Your decisions are your own.

    hope you like signing up with all your personal data and credit card information on app stores that make Apple look like saints, because that’s where this is headed, and sadly you’ll drag me with you.

    Isn’t that also a problem with Apple? And any specific app? In any case I’ve never signed up with any app store nor am I going to.

    Because again this hypothetical thing you bought might be a family member buying it, so it won’t even be up to you at that point.

    I mean, it’s their device, why do you care? You can educate them but you can’t make the right choices for them nor can I for you.

    The way to avoid it is to get rid of app stores completely, and have users download and install apps one by one. Like that’s going to happen.

    Do you mean like the way everyone installs programs on Windows and has for the last two and a half decades?





  • AI can do what Google used to do - do an internet search to give semi-relevant results once in a blue moon. As a bonus it can summarise and contextualise information and tbh idk - for me it’s been mostly correct. And when it’s incorrect, it’s fairly obvious.

    And no - DuckDuckGo etc. is even worse. Google isn’t to blame for the worsening of their own search engine necessarily, it’s mostly SEO and marketers who forced the algo to get much weirder by playing it so hard. Not that anyone involved is a “good guy”, they’re all large megacorps who cares about their responsibility to their shareholders and that alone.