Valve don't exactly like to give out sales numbers, so we often have to make educated guesses but sometimes with huge hits like Black Myth: Wukong, it gives us a slightly clearer idea on how the Steam Deck is actually selling.
For a while I've been tracking the top sellers lists on Steam to see where the Steam Deck ranks. It's important for us especially that it does well, since it's a Linux device (SteamOS) flowing out into the hands of the public. And masses of improvements there benefit Linux gaming as a whole from driver improvements to Proton upgrades.
The thing is, the top sellers lists on Steam go by revenue, not units sold. The Steam Deck costs (in comparison) a lot more compared to games so naturally it will rank quite high anyway most of the time. But, here's where the fun begins. Black Myth: Wukong is a huge hit, a truly massive seller. According to the official X/Twitter account, by August 23rd it had hit already 10 million sales across all platforms. Right now another 4 days later, both VG Insights and Gamalytic put it somewhere around 14 million sold just on Steam.
When you look at the global top seller list on Steam right now, removing free to play titles so just those you have to pay for you end up with:
- Black Myth: Wukong
- Steam Deck
- Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine 2
- Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
All three of those games will be selling a lot and the cheapest of them (Black Myth: Wukong) is £49.99. Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine 2 for example, is currently the second most-wishlisted game on Steam while also being a top seller on pre-orders. So, this shows pretty darn well in no uncertain terms, that the Steam Deck from Valve is also clearly selling a lot of units too right? Probably quite a few more than a lot of people thought. Likely even more than I thought recently too. Keep in mind that by November last year, Valve said the Steam Deck had already sold "multiple millions".
Perhaps no surprise then when we see developers getting their games Steam Deck Verified well ahead of release, like the upcoming Dragon Age: The Veilguard.
So then, how about Fortnite on Linux / Steam Deck? Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney said when it hits "tens of millions of users" that it "would actually make sense to support it". We must be pretty close by now right? Why ignore a platform that's sold multiple millions, and is clearly just continuing to fly off the shelves?
But, another thing, this also goes to show that Valve are likely in no rush at all on a Steam Deck 2. They simply don't need to do one right now. Also shows why Valve continue to roll out new Steam Deck features on Steam like the reviews filter, a most played games chart and why there's no rush to get SteamOS on other devices.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
Quoting: slaapliedjeEhhh . . . yes and no. Mostly no. Sure, neither the far right nor the far left have perfect information . . . neither does the mainstream centre. You can find systematic falsehoods about certain things in the NYT and WaPo . . . for instance, any Latin American head of state that the United States doesn't like becomes a "dictator" no matter how clean the election was.Quoting: Purple Library GuyBut you have to admit, this happens with both the far-right and far-left. They are sucked so far down their particular rabbit holes due to whatever modern algorithm there is, that the only real way to dig yourself out is try and find multiple fact checking sources.Quoting: Cato-the-youngerThe problem is that pretty much everything else you wrote, all this stuff you think, is also based on weird propaganda that is not actually true about the real world.Quoting: Purple Library GuyQuoting: Cato-the-youngerWhat is false exactly? That the rhetoric of say BLM if used by whites would get them labelled as "white supremacists"?The rhetoric of BLM is that blacks in the US would really prefer it if cops would stop killing them. It would be weird coming from whites because the cops don't kill them nearly as much.
Really, what are you on?
Lol. If it was just about cops, I would agree. But its not.
And nice job addressing everything else I wrote.
There was a time when argument between the left and the right wing, even the fairly far right wing, was more or less possible, since everyone was working with pretty much the same set of facts, maybe emphasizing different ones, but the main dispute was about interpretation and ethical values, models of how it all fit together. I am not young, I remember when it was like that. Since that time, the hard right has gone and invented themselves a different set of "facts" which are just not true . . . there's still some stuff which is "true" if weirdly cherry-picked, like finding some "feminist" nobody has ever heard of doing a rant and then saying "look, this is how feminists think!!1!", but increasingly it's all just made up from nothing, having no relationship to reality in any way. Just simple lies.
It's clever, in the sense that if you want fundamentally decent people to support horrible ideas, probably the most effective way is to give them fake facts that support the horrible ideas instead of the real facts, which don't. But I don't have time or energy to debunk every goddamn weird social media echo-chamber nonsense you've unfortunately absorbed, and you wouldn't believe me if I did. It's a pity, and I'm sorry.
But it's not symmetrical. The far left does not by and large have a whole ecosystem of false information and conspiracy theories. Mostly, they just talk about stuff that you can see confirmed in mainstream media . . . they just talk about (whatever it is) a whole lot and the mainsteam media talk about (whatever it is) only a very little bit, because both are talking about the facts that fit their narrative and analysis. This difference is largely because the far left has no money (which in turn is because they're by definition the enemy of the people who have all the money). The far right has the dough to amplify false messages enough to get traction, but the far left don't have what it takes to get away with that.
So there'll be a few memes that travel on the left that turn out not to be real, but it's no more common than on the centre. Whereas the far right have really created this whole set of falsehoods, from "climate change isn't real" to the anti-vax stuff and various other anti-science stuff, to the notion that Democrats are socialists to these weird ideas about "cultural Marxists" (which aren't a thing) to replacement theory and various other conspiracies about immigrants, blacks, feminists, gays et cetera, to stuff about Democrats abducting children to drain their blood . . .
You can't tell me there's a left wing equivalent to all that crap; if you want to try, I want a similar itemized list. The urge to see left/right politics as inherently symmetrical is a problem, because they really aren't.
Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 5 October 2024 at 9:48 am UTC
2 Likes, Who?
slaapliedje Oct 5
Quoting: Purple Library GuyMostly, they just talk about stuff that you can see confirmed in mainstream media . . . they just talk about (whatever it is) a whole lot and the mainsteam media talk about (whatever it is) only a very little bit, because both are talking about the facts that fit their narrative and analysis. This difference is largely because the far left has no money (which in turn is because they're by definition the enemy of the people who have all the money). The far right has the dough to amplify false messages enough to get traction, but the far left don't have what it takes to get away with that.Uhm, what? The richest companies on the planet are ALL on the Left. Microsoft, Google, Apple.
Crazy things from the far-left? Identity politics. Denying biological science, etc. I'm sure I could come up with more, but I need coffee. Denying DNA is basically the equivalent of flat-earth in my mind.
0 Likes
Quoting: slaapliedjeUhm, what? The richest companies on the planet are ALL on the Left. Microsoft, Google, Apple.
Erm.
No.
They want to make money and basically don't care about politics.
(Their goal might be that they don't need to care anymore what the governments under them do. Which would probably be called libertarian?)
Quoting: slaapliedjeCrazy things from the far-left? Identity politics.
It wasn't the question though what you consider crazy. That's for sure not hard to answer. The question was about making up a whole world of "facts" (lies).
Quoting: slaapliedjeDenying biological science, etc. I'm sure I could come up with more, but I need coffee. Denying DNA is basically the equivalent of flat-earth in my mind.
Nobody is denying DNA though.
And biology seems way more complicated than XX and XY.
(There obviously are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersexual people. Hard to deny that I guess? The question, just as Library Guy said, is what we make of it. That's how political debate should be, and used to be.)
Last edited by Eike on 5 October 2024 at 6:07 pm UTC
2 Likes, Who?
Quoting: slaapliedjeUhm, what? The richest companies on the planet are ALL on the Left. Microsoft, Google, Apple.
(What a thread huh?)
No, you can't believe that, do you? You're just kidding, right? I'm afraid you're not...
Or you really have a strange definition of what left is, and it's surely not what is mine...
2 Likes, Who?
slaapliedje Oct 6
Quoting: Cyrilhttps://youtu.be/3GE3HoJMEMw?si=oqEisCOMSLFgb_1IQuoting: slaapliedjeUhm, what? The richest companies on the planet are ALL on the Left. Microsoft, Google, Apple.
(What a thread huh?)
No, you can't believe that, do you? You're just kidding, right? I'm afraid you're not...
Or you really have a strange definition of what left is, and it's surely not what is mine...
Fortunately, there has recently been a much larger purge of activists in companies. I could go digging, but there recently were layoffs at least at Microsoft and Google.
Edit: Twitter used to also be very left, and Facebook still pretty much is.
Last edited by slaapliedje on 6 October 2024 at 5:05 pm UTC
0 Likes
slaapliedje Oct 6
Quoting: EikeI wouldn't ever consider lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender as a biology thing. There's no evidence of it. Sure, it might be the way their brains are wired. But it's still XX/XY chromosomes. Intersexual people is a tiny minority and is considered an anomaly, not a normal thing. There are also people who grow horns out of their heads.Quoting: slaapliedjeUhm, what? The richest companies on the planet are ALL on the Left. Microsoft, Google, Apple.
Erm.
No.
They want to make money and basically don't care about politics.
(Their goal might be that they don't need to care anymore what the governments under them do. Which would probably be called libertarian?)
Quoting: slaapliedjeCrazy things from the far-left? Identity politics.
It wasn't the question though what you consider crazy. That's for sure not hard to answer. The question was about making up a whole world of "facts" (lies).
Quoting: slaapliedjeDenying biological science, etc. I'm sure I could come up with more, but I need coffee. Denying DNA is basically the equivalent of flat-earth in my mind.
Nobody is denying DNA though.
And biology seems way more complicated than XX and XY.
(There obviously are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersexual people. Hard to deny that I guess? The question, just as Library Guy said, is what we make of it. That's how political debate should be, and used to be.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RO4maCISQc
0 Likes
Quoting: slaapliedjeWhat on earth are you talking about?Quoting: Purple Library GuyMostly, they just talk about stuff that you can see confirmed in mainstream media . . . they just talk about (whatever it is) a whole lot and the mainsteam media talk about (whatever it is) only a very little bit, because both are talking about the facts that fit their narrative and analysis. This difference is largely because the far left has no money (which in turn is because they're by definition the enemy of the people who have all the money). The far right has the dough to amplify false messages enough to get traction, but the far left don't have what it takes to get away with that.Uhm, what? The richest companies on the planet are ALL on the Left. Microsoft, Google, Apple.
Crazy things from the far-left? Identity politics. Denying biological science, etc. I'm sure I could come up with more, but I need coffee. Denying DNA is basically the equivalent of flat-earth in my mind.
So, first of all, identity politics is "liberal"; it's not left at all. But in any case, identity politics has nothing to do with endorsing false facts--note, I didn't say "crazy stuff" which is a pretty subjective value judgement, I said basing ideas on stuff that is not true. Identity politics is all about interpretation and values; whether you endorse it or disagree with it, there's no facts you can point to that getting them wrong is the basis for identity politics. Identity politics is about wanting to treat everyone equally in an unequal world, without making the world itself more equal. This leads to some difficulties and contradictions, but there's nothing wrong with the basic insight that groups are often treated unequally even though everyone is fundamentally equal and it would be nice if that weren't the case.
Denying biological science and DNA . . . um, who is doing this in what way? Is this some kind of weird misinterpretation of what transgender stuff is about, or what? (which, again, would be getting something wrong about liberals, not really leftists) Come on, I gave real and widespread phenomena that were actually about denying facts.
Microsoft, Google and Apple are also arguably liberal. They are in no possible way left. Just to be clear, being on the left is about economic class in one way or another. It's about redistribution of wealth and power to the poorer classes away from people who own things for a living. None of these corps are going to get behind any of that stuff. Google in particular a couple years back rejigged their algorithm to avoid getting socialist websites in search results. Left my ass.
3 Likes, Who?
Quoting: slaapliedjeThat appears to be a 2 hour video about how Google use their ability to direct people's eyeballs via their control of search, to subtly influence people. Sure, fine, I'm totally willing to stipulate that, known about that for years. How does that make them "left"? They use that power against the left.Quoting: Cyrilhttps://youtu.be/3GE3HoJMEMw?si=oqEisCOMSLFgb_1IQuoting: slaapliedjeUhm, what? The richest companies on the planet are ALL on the Left. Microsoft, Google, Apple.
(What a thread huh?)
No, you can't believe that, do you? You're just kidding, right? I'm afraid you're not...
Or you really have a strange definition of what left is, and it's surely not what is mine...
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: slaapliedjeI wouldn't ever consider lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender as a biology thing. There's no evidence of it. Sure, it might be the way their brains are wired. But it's still XX/XY chromosomes. Intersexual people is a tiny minority and is considered an anomaly, not a normal thing. There are also people who grow horns out of their heads.
So I see us agreeing on main facts and we could (but won't) go into interpretation and what we do might with it?
Well, that's just as Purple Library Guy said, and the opposite of what the far right is doing (by inventing whole worlds of lies).
0 Likes
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me