A interesting scenario would be to sell the hardware at cost, but include a 30% off ticket to the steam store (up to a few hundred dollars, in savings).
I already said why, but you ignored my second sentence out of two sentences...?
Let's say Valve subidizes it down to $800. But you can get a good office/art PC for $300, and a steam machine isn't particularly good for video editing. So why would you pay $800 and pick the steam machine if you're not gaming?
> And gaming is not only Steam, there is also GOG, EGS, Microsoft Store.
Why are you bringing up a whole different argument now? Yeah Steam won't get their cut for all games. But they'd get their cut for most games. If they have 75% market share then reduce the subsidy they could reasonably apply by 25%. Well, less than 25% because most people are leaving Steam OS on there and are even more likely to buy on Steam.
You've ignored "art, video editing" and you claim that your point ignored? Why do you type words at all if issue is their consumption?
Those people are gamers! If they want the steam machine it supports the argument I actually made before you brought up something entirely different (most of them buy steam games too btw).
> GPU used for 3D modelling and sculpting, video editing, encoding. Steam machine subsidized by $200 PC would be used for anything but Steam, payed by Steam users.
It's not a particularly good GPU. I don't think you'd get a lot of those users.
> You've ignored "art, video editing" and you claim that your point ignored? Why do you type words at all if issue is their consumption?
What are you talking about? I addressed both of those.
Use ctrl+F if you need to.
You've gone beyond skipping what I said to gaslighting me about it.
While you showed an inability to read my sentences twice.
But sure blame me if you want, bye.