Because none of those emulate current generation systems.

People act weirdly entitled about Nintendo product, throw shitfits when Nintendo reacts exactly like Sony or Microsoft would to them doing the same thing, then act extra hurt that Nintendo did it.

That’s not the cause- benchmarks have been done on the matter, as you can see slightly down the comment chain. You’ve simply attributed the slow load times to what you think is the issue.

I’ve been told (haven’t done it myself) that the ps5 controller pairs extremely well with the steam deck + dock. I would ask around though- I have an actual Steam Controller that I use, myself, but I don’t think you can buy those anymore.

Usb-c port, so yes, though you may need an adapter… And a long cord.

Unless you also grab the dock, but then you also need a controller.

Yep. At some point maybe Valve will change that, but for now, it’s a great way to get a steam deck. And even if they do change/fix that later, you’re not really missing out on anything- everything will be the same speed it always was for you.

Not to mention you can just toss a 1tb SD card in, with no skills needed and only minimal cost difference.

Yes, accessing your data off an SD card is marginally slower than off an NVME ssd… but we’re talking, iirc, milliseconds. If it really bugs you later down the line, then you can upgrade the SSD.

The alternatives is getting a PS4 and playing 98% of the PS5 games at 70-90% of the visual quality and 100% of the gameplay, plus all the PS4 games the PS5 doesn’t have.

Or just get a switch. You should already have a PC you can cheaply upgrade.

Which there wasn’t, so still illegal.

I’m not sure why you’re getting so aggressive over this, or so defensive about being told to separate your TV from your streaming tools so that if the streaming tools start to suck you can just replace a $20 stream stick instead of a several hundred to several thousand dollar TV you need to calm down and stop being a dick to people trying to politely help you and explain things to you.

Not to mention Valve has a history of offering interest-free loans to developers to help them get their games out- and there’s not even a requirement that you have the game on steam after.

Not to mention you can generate steam keys to sell on other game stores, in which case steam gives themselves a 0% cut, despite you still using and benefiting from all their services.

Man, Epic must be patting themselves on the back for all the money they paid getting people to believe 30% was outrageous, because it’s paying massive dividends.

It may shock you to know that before Steam, your options were to fuck off or offer your product in a store where you would only get 30% of the profit, with the rest going to the publisher, the retailer, licensing, etc. These days it’s closer to 50% for physical copies, and Apple/Nintendo/Sony/etc all standardized with Steam on you getting 70% for digital.

Don’t like it? Pull a Valve and make your own alternative that’s better. If you build it, they will come… which is why nobody uses EGS.

It’s actually not the standard, the standard was iirc 70% for in-store at the time. These days I think it’s closer to 50%, assuming no 3rd party losses/licensing.

Nintendo/Sony/Apple/etc are all 30% too, by the way.

I find it rather hilarious that you’re trying to warn me against discourse in the vein of "I assume you’re ignorant, so let me enlighten you’ while literally doing it yourself. You can try to pretend you’re not in #3, but you literally just spent like 8 paragraphs trying to do so. Incorrectly, at that, but since you clearly think you’re so much smarter than all the ignorant “muppets” (as you put it) out there who you’re dismissing as band-wagoners without doing any of your beloved deductive reasoning on the proof they’ve been providing I doubt you’ll actually consider it for a moment.

Even funnier is the fact that you’re trying to drag out all these debates about the exact definitions and semantics when in the end this only came up because of your own strawman in the first place- that being your own assumption that an appeal to authority was even happening in the first place, when I specifically noted that one should examine what the experts are saying instead of just dismissing them as band-wagoners.

Actually, you’re misunderstanding why the Appeal to Authority is a fallacy- Appeal to Authority is one of the few fallacies that has both fallacious and non-fallacious uses. You shouldn’t take AtA being known as a fallacy as a reason to distrust authorities, or do some kind of ‘well I have to do my own, uneducated research on this subject.’ You shouldn’t take it as an automatic fallacy simply because the authority might have biases either. AtA is not an argument for anti-authoritarianism or anti-education.

The key here is that an appeal to authority is fallacious when it’s stated to support a position that is not related, or the authority is not an authority in the subject.

For example, if someone said “I’m a game developer, and I think this was stolen,” that could be a fallacious appeal to authority- they might work on sound engines! However, if someone says they’re an 3d modeler/animator and they think the mesh looks stolen because the edgelines for the tris map the same ways within the quads, which is unlikely to happen by accident, that’s a legitimate appeal to authority that is not fallacious. If someone says they’re a lawyer and think it’s stolen, this could be a fallacious appeal to authority- they might not be an IP lawyer.

They key is ensuring that the appeal to authority is relevant and is not predicated on the idea of being true simply because of who they are.

And no, ‘There is a theoretical possibility the authority could have had a bias’ is not an acceptable reason to dismiss an expert opinion as a fallacy.

Ehhhh. These are the experts in the field. If they’re chiming in with “Yo this looks sketchy as fuck,” you should consider that, instead of bandwagoning, they’re speaking in their capacity as video game artists with experience and training in the matter.

Hate to break up the bandwagon, but the modder didn’t say he faked anything at all. He tweeted that while he originally said that the models were “exactly” the same, he clarified that while they were not precisely 1:1 without any modifications at all, they were still the same model with minor adjustments.

Some other dude then jumped on the tweet and made up a narrative that the modder had faked everything. Then this “journalist” decided to make an entire article about a tweet from some random dude putting words in the modders mouth.

Given the rest of the editorializing in the article, I think we can pretty safely say this dude is coping hard.