• Jackiedoodle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    160
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Yup hit the nail on the head. Not only can he make decisions that are risky that don’t pay off he is also 100 percent legally in his right to make decisions that lose the company money. If he feels it pushes the industry in the right direction.

    • NoneYa@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s crazy to think the Steam Deck may not have been a reality due to this. And crazier to realize that Valve probably, at the very least, doubled their annual revenue due to all these new Deck owners, some who may have never had an account before, now buying all these games because of the cheap handheld.

      Not only that, all the lack of proprietary things on the Deck like locking down the OS or forcing only Steam games and discouraging emulation or disallowing mods and upgrades like the removable SSD, even on the cheapest option with eMMC that is usually reserved for cheap soldered storage.

      • Riley@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Doubled their revenue? I think you’re severely underestimating how much money Steam pulls in yearly if you think ~2 million Steam Decks are that much of a percentage of it.

        • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          9 months ago

          They weren’t talking about deck sales, they meant the games that the new deck users that didn’t own a gaming PC bought from steam. Idk if that holds true but that’s what they meant.