There is absolutely no way that 350€ was not a loss for them. The also basically said that indirectly. And if you include all the software dev work that goes into the platform it gets even more cost intensive for them.
“Painful” could easily (and mostly likely) refer to extremely low profit margins that would take several years to pay off the development costs. And that quote specifically refers to the base 64GB version. The price difference between that and the 256GB version was way more than the increase in storage costs, despite that being the only difference.
Also, I absolutely knew you were going to reply with this quote despite it not being evidence. Congrats on being extremely predictable.
No they weren’t. There is literally 0 proof of that. Quit spreading misinformation
There is absolutely no way that 350€ was not a loss for them. The also basically said that indirectly. And if you include all the software dev work that goes into the platform it gets even more cost intensive for them.
https://www.nme.com/news/gaming-news/gabe-newell-says-steam-decks-aggressive-pricing-painful-but-critical-2995253
“Painful” could easily (and mostly likely) refer to extremely low profit margins that would take several years to pay off the development costs. And that quote specifically refers to the base 64GB version. The price difference between that and the 256GB version was way more than the increase in storage costs, despite that being the only difference.
Also, I absolutely knew you were going to reply with this quote despite it not being evidence. Congrats on being extremely predictable.
It never sold at 350€, it started at 350£/400€ at launch for the 64bg LCD. The price point being painful does not mean they sell at loss.