The video was cringe but the points I’m trying to make are first, It would help the eWaste problem since not everyone would have a use for a 64 GB SSD of that size, it would cost less to buy your own SSD if you don’t want the extra hardware perks, 3rd it would be dumb to need an SD Card right out the gate (and it would be easier to manage it all on 1 storage device) And, it’s easy to do to add an SSD and will make a Steam Deck EVEN CHEAPER THEN THE SWITCH! (Had to say it twice since Nintendo should switch it up and put in good hardware in their stuff.)
I’m sure I’ll get downvotes but I always thought the 64 was idiotic. Like selling a smartphone this year with 8GB of storage. Shouldn’t be required to spend another $50-$150 on top of the device to have a well functioning device with room to grow. I know the 64 was pretty much meant to be replaced with a bigger M.2 and provide a cheaper entry point but I think a non-negligable number of less experienced PC/Steam-interested people went for the 64GB option + crappy Amazon SD card and found out the hard way it’s not really feasible long term with AAA titles due to the shader cache piling up. IMO Valve should have offered a 128GB model instead, along with a partially disassembled deck(back shell not screwed on) with no storage installed with aggressive disclaimers about the skill level required to install new storage, or simply offered a 1TB option earlier this year, once the feasibility of the Deck was established. Perhaps issues with guaranteeing a warranty on a device that requires the customer to tinker precluded it.
I rant. I struggled with limited storage when I was young and poor, and it’s something no one should have to deal with, especially with a device as polished in every other aspect as the Deck.
64gb is pretty much the only steamdeck most people in non first world countries can get
Agreed I think 64 GB shouldn’t exest but have a SSD less one since many people would open it up anyways