The Future Problem With Handhelds 

Thank you to everyone that viewed this! I never thought it would get this many views, it means so much!

The thing is that a lot of car manufacturer are looking for a more efficient way to store electrical power for the evs, if a breaktrough happens, it would be first for them and then it could spread to other areas like handheld

One overlooked problem with such short battery life, is the number of cycles you are putting that battery through, and the higher discharge rate. You are gonna kill the battery SUPER fast. I had a steam deck, and I sold it within a few months for that reason. Super short Battery life, and knowing that the battery health is gonna go out the window super fast. If it only lasts 1-1.5 hours of heavy use out of the box, soo it will be 45 Minutes to an hour as that battery degrades. That will be noticeable within as little as a year with daily use

After reading the comments, I feel like I need to weigh in a bit with some things that are often over-simplified, forgotten, or misunderstood. First, there is a law in the US (possibly more) that you cannot take a battery on a plane if it's over 100Wh. Which is why you see laptops cap out at 99Wh, because anything more would not be allowed on a flight that lands in the US. That has good reasoning, mostly due to the volatility of lithium. And I don't think that's going to change until we've completely replaced lithium batteries and every one ever manufactured is disposed of. Since that's not going to happen anytime soon, we need to look at the silicon. And there's a fundamental misunderstanding with ARM being more efficient, and the Apple Silicon has made that worse. The biggest advantage of ARM is that it can downclock further than x86. This means that having a very tiny load on the system draws a lower minimum amount of power. But games are not a minimal load, which eliminates a lot of the advantages of ARM. Which is where the confusion around Apple Silicon comes in. Apple Silicon isn't just ARM. Apple added a lot of accelerators for the tasks most commonly performed on a Mac. Accelerators are dedicated hardware that do one thing very well, and are literally useless for anything else. So if you're not using that accelerator, it's wasted space on the chip. That's part of the reason Vulkan performance is so poor, comparatively. Since Apple doesn't have the same level of control over Vulkan that they have over their own graphics libraries, they can't optimize silicon around it. There are some benchmarks out there that deliberately avoid all the accelerators on Apple Silicon. And the performance is very similar to the closest equivalent AMD chip. If you want a better understanding of accelerators and why they're important, you can look into why all the crypto miners switched from GPUs to ASICs as soon as they could. It's the same principle. Saying "Developers just need to optimize" is also a lot more complicated of a topic than people understand. One example would be requiring 16GB of VRAM instead of 8GB. And there was a decent amount of time when you could argue that the PC was an inferior gaming platform to the consoles. And mostly because of core count. That finally ended with Ryzen being released, and hopefully we never find ourselves in that situation again. The VRAM optimization is best explained with the example of someone working on a project that requires two different materials. They cover their workbench in material A. They cut out the part they need for their current step and set it to the side, then shove everything else into the garbage. They then run to the store, buy up enough of material B to cover their workbench. They cut out the part they need, then shove everything in the trash and go back to the store to buy a workbench worth of material A. Which sounds like a better idea: Speeding up how quickly you can run to the store, or just buying a second workbench? That's the difference between more memory and faster memory. The single most wasteful thing you can do in computing is move data. And the increase in how wasteful it is proportional to distance isn't linear. It's worse. That's why Apple put their RAM on the CPU package. Which also improves efficiency. And there's a lot more things like that when it comes to hardware and software. And that's before you factor in what the OS is doing. One other thing people forget in comparing x86 to ARM is instruction sets. There's validity to both, depending on what you're doing. But one advantage of more complicated instruction sets is their ability to optimize specific instructions even further, and combine what might be a multi-step process into a single step. So it's not "ARM good, x86 bad." The issue is a lot more nuanced, and even a lot of programmers don't understand it. Partly because they never need to do the level of optimization that would require them to understand it. Everything is tradeoffs, and ARM vs x86 is one of those. It takes a huge amount of work to optimize for ARM and x86. And if developers are already having trouble optimizing for just x86, imagine making them do at least twice as much optimization work. One solution might be FPGAs, or a similar technology. In theory, you could add an FPGA to the CPU package and specifically optimize it for each game. It could literally change how it's wired and what hardware features it has based on what game you play. With something like Ryzen, you could have a normal chiplet and a FPGA chiplet, with the FPGA taking most of the load and the normal one handling what has the lowest amount of inefficiency for that particular game's optimizations. Sorry that's so long, but there's a lot of misunderstandings out there, and I guess I needed to vent a little. At the very least, I hope I've given people a rough idea of what's going on, and an idea of what to look into for a better understanding. There's a lot I haven't even touched on, but I didn't want to turn this comment into a doctoral thesis, so I'll leave it there.

Along with the battery/life degrading over time especially with them going full throttle most of the time, most likely will be un-usable in about 5 years, phone batteries get pretty bad after 3. They need to make one with easily swappable batteries. Those smaller handhelds in particular.

I've had my steam deck for almost a year now, and yeah the battery isn't enough but I've never had any problems with it. Even something like cyberpunk 2077 lasts several hours, and I'm not usually playing for super long between charges. While this is an issue, it won't necessarily affect every user.

Also remember a lot of these battery materials need to be mined or recycled. They are rare or else they are in someone drawer unused or in a skip. Better tech almost seems inevitable to just cause other problems

ARM based handheld are a thing (not just switch) and it last much longer than intel atom or x86. All we need are any developver dare enough to support translation layer from x86 to ARM with small performance loss.

In my personal opinion I see two main issues with handheld PC consoles. The biggest issue in my opinion has less to do with the hardware and much more to do with the fact that many PC games were simply not designed and optimized for handheld portable experiences, in turn being much more taxing on battery and other hardware limitations compared to games that have been developed to take advantage and make of the most of portable hardware. The second issue I have is even if a particular game runs well on the system, many PC games are not designed with the whole 'pick up and play' approach to gaming. It's something that sticks out in the marketing of many of these devices that I find a bit odd, showing these consoles running AAA games. Yes it's cool that these handhelds can run Witcher 3 for example, but if I'm on the bus and have ten minutes to kill, it's not exactly practical to whip out my steam deck, load up Witcher, play for a handful of minutes, and then suspend the system and pack it up when it's time to go. I'd much rather pull out my 3DS, play a game or two of Mario kart, and then forget about the game when I fold up the 3DS and go without having to worry about the battery draining while it's suspended or potentially losing progress on my game. Handhelds like the Switch, a 3DS or Vita, have the upper hand regarding these issues in my opinion. The games on these handhelds for one are designed to deliver the best possible performance given the hardware they run on (even though they might not be the prettiest games out there), and many of the games on these handhelds allow players to effortlessly pick up and put down their games on a whim. I want to emphasize just how important I think pick up and playability for handheld consoles are, it's a type of gaming experience that only a handheld can deliver, and I truly believe this is where handheld gaming shines the most and the direction handheld PC consoles need to do a better job at catering too.

Another current workaround has been the development of fast charging although that assumes you have planned your route to include the ability to have mains power connection and carry around a usually pretty heavy fast charger… or even carry like a 45/65w portable charger (once again heavier than a more common 18-20w version).

That's why I picked up the steam deck, and a battery pack, the hardware is more efficient running at lower watts and the steam OS like consoles OS are designed to play games more efficiently. Windows 11 has too much bloat ware. So there needs to be a Microsoft windows handheld OS for there to be better competition.

Bad take. The problem is that we demand Triple AAA games on the go. This is not feasible. Hand held gaming should have less hardware requirements, akin to indie games now. Compare the graphics of GBA to PS2. Now compare the graphics of Steamdeck to a ps4. There is the main problem

I think ARM processors will be the future of handhelds (look at the phone market or macbooks) the speed/power is just better ...

I also considered buying the ROG ally however that battery life is also off putting as it need to run at 25w for any real benefit over the steamdeck. I do love my steamdeck though as in comparison to all other windows based gaming handhelds it is superior in battery life tests using lower wattages. As an action/FPS fan played through all COD last gen campaigns at 60fps using 12w as well as Wolfenstein series, Crysis, far cry, Deus Ex series. Currently playing Fallout 4, medium/high settings, 40hz at 11w and get 3 hours of battery, it’s amazing. I would really suggest getting a steamdeck if you haven’t already. Just replace the SSD and you will have the best and most cost effective pc gaming handheld you can get right now. You won’t regret it :)

It's not an issue of battery capacity or hardware, the issue is because of developers. Any battery larger than 5000mAh would have negative effects on the portability of a handheld console. Games are being released every other day that require 4 cores, 8 threads, 4.0GHz, 12GB ram, and a video card that matches these specs too. Just because we can use all this power doesn't mean we should, that's just piss poor optimization. PSP: 200-333mhz cpu, 16-32MB ram, 1200-1800mAh battery, 4~5TDP, with a TDP of 4 we should expect 65~97 minutes of gameplay and yet it lasts 3~5 hours on average. Magic? No, it's because devs had strict guidelines to make a game run on the console, and just because the device CAN handle running at max CPU/RAM usage doesn't mean the device SHOULD run at these speeds. Devs have gotten far too lazy now that consoles are catching up to PC specs, they see their game running on a PS5 maxing out and dropping frames in some areas and think it's just fine. Anyone who claims anything remotely similar to "limitations of hardware" is just refusing to optimize their software. Just having this video open in a web browser, not even having started loading the video yet, is using 400-600MB of ram (chrome is the former, Firefox the latter). That's 25-38 times more ram than is required to play GTA on a PSP.

The problem is more exacerbated by the fact that most of us are PS Vita/3DS owners and the batteries are showing signs of age already…..

this is why I love the switch. big games last 5 hours at the lowest 4. at least the oled model. and my ps vita has around 4 hours. the switch is so comfortable to me and easy to take anywhere

Never found it to be a problem with my switch. Rarely am I ever several hours without an outlet and at the same time have so little to do I would be playing games on the go. And for those cases a high output powerbank would work well.

Worth noting that the steam deck does do this already when it comes to being efficient at lower watts. So much so that it outpaces the rog ally in when playing games at the 10-15 watts range.

As chipsets become more advanced, and continue to shrink die sizes, efficiency will increase. The future is brighter than you think, even with minimal battery improvements. Just look at the advancements of the 6800 vs 7800 series APUs.

There will be a law in Europe for mandatory removable and replaceable battery on all electronic including phone. I hope this law come to America/Canada. Still using my LG G4 with extended removable battery as a media player (prime, youtube, crunchyroll, disney plus, etc). I hope the next Switch have it.

This video is really well made out for somebody with 81 subscribers! Remember me when you're famous :)

Very good topic ! I agree even my laptop battery is like horrible if I’m actually pushing it hopefully we just get a super battery!

They need to come out with solar powered handhelds.

How do you only have 7 subscribers? This video was great! Good show! You've got 8 now. Don't give up!

I remember hearing about new graphene batteries years ago, still no where in sight tho

Great video with so many great points made! I wish your channel the best of luck and you have gained a subscription

It would be nice if there were handhelds with battery that lasted 20 hours, not 2 hours. I definitely see that happening in the future. Give them time. Technology is always improving. They’re slowly getting there. The legion go is very good, but it has a few flaws.

And that's why the Switch X1 is severely underclocked for longer battery life. They are long time handheld makers so they know what they're doing.

your editing is too good for guy who has 60 subscribers. You need MORE subscribers !!

But you gotta admit this is a huge step up. Lets say I dont have a pc or gaming laptop This is still a good option to get started, even if I have to keep it plugged in to play games without getting a ps5

While I agree with the second half of the video I do think battery life is not the main selling point of a handheld. To me it’s being able to move around the house, playing in bed, share the couch with my wife etc where a laptop would be too intrusive and awkward to move around.

Please, back in the day the Sega Game Gear used 6 AA batteries, thats a lot of money in batteries and it lasted 2 hours and we didnt care. Now you have only to charge it.

thats why arm is the future

Your format is cool.......love your bgm *****Subscribed****

Either battery tech has to improve or COS's need to become more efficient. Now we're definitely on course for the latter, but I feel X86 will never truly be as efficient for a long playing session. ARM could be the answer but that requires a massive push from devs to both make new games and port the previous ones, and as far as gaming goes I cant see if they will? Apples new porting tool can maybe give devs incentive but thats on MAC. I think Microsoft needs to be the one to create the incentive. But they're ARM endeavours aee underwhelming at best.

I don't think battery improvements wouldn't be welcomed across the board. Any mobile device lasting longer or lasting as long as before at higher performance would be appreciated. Better efficiency is not really solving this problem as it doesn't mean high end performance will be running at 15W or less per hour. Today's high end performance (mobile only, else even a 7840U is far from being high end) might be by that point, but it won't be anywhere near high end anymore. ARM SoC are more efficient but then we have the problem of software compatibility and I would hate having to use Android or iOS on such a device. We also need better ways to story energy from renewable sources as these are already producing too much energy at certain times in Summer, overloading the grid, if they wouldn't shut down solar farms and wind parks, but not enough in Winter. Btw, I own the SD but also a GPD Win 4 and am still interested in ARM devices. The Anbernic RG505 with custom OS (still Android though) is lasting up to 20h by using the low power mode that can handle emulation up to PSX.

The DS and PS Vita had games that were custom made and pushed them to the limit usually without sacrificing battery Now portable consoles are expected to run home console quality games which they were never meant to do past 7th gen

Yeah, in order for my 3d games to last 4 hours 30 minutes at most I gotta put everything on low settings. Still looks pretty good but being able to have that kind of battery life on max settings would be nice.

The chips will need to move to ARM to offset the battery drain, X86 is too power hungry. How Apple is influencing the market to support ARM natively with their M series chips may end up helping handhelds make the switch. unless the wizards at AMD make a processor that performs well enough at 5-10 watts.

FIY: That bit about efficiency is why Nintendo hardware still uses ARM processors. They're exponentially more efficient than x86 processors. If you want more proof, see Apple's new M-series of processors. I'm not a fan of their software, but damn if their performance and efficiency isn't some of the best in the business atm.

absolutely underrated

Could it also be thst handheld consoles are too early for their time and it’s one of those things we deal with because of lack of technology

I appreciate the effort here👌💯! You and i are on same page! But i will get eventually of the other handheld, hopefully switch 2 changes the game next year.

There is a solution and it exists right now... the only issue is the cost. Graphene is considered a wonder material good for so many things including high density batteries that are lightweight, fast charging and have longevity. It's also environmentally friendly Until we have enough companies willing to take financial hits to bring down the cost, well be stuck with lithium

My impression is that people who want to play "on the go" are an expected minority. Inevitably, the "going" is brief and during much of it, we are preoccupied with focus requiring tasks like driving. So it's less about playing in between as much as it is with which couch or hotel bed you find yourself in. In regards to "future" mobile device problems. The future solution is scaling down the device enough to drive power demands off of the human body. One word: singularity.

If you have the time to play 5+hours a time and want hadheld just get a switch. If you're like most people you just have 30minutes to 1hr and the deck/ally are perfect.

I wouldn't point out the battery as the biggest cause of the problem; that is only the surface issue. To solve a problem, you need to look at its root, not just its end. The most significant problem lies in the system architecture of both hardware and software. These handheld devices are using an inefficient x86 architecture that was never meant to be used on a small handheld device. Unfortunately, the majority of the gaming ecosystem will stick with x86 architecture because it's currently the most powerful architecture, without considering efficiency. Similarly, the softwares are designed to run at the highest performance the system could possibly provide. By the way nowadays smartphones last actually longer. You can play visually beautiful graphics games smoothly on these device more than 10 hours straight on low power mode. Sadly majority of the smartphone games are disappointing and you can blame the market for that.

Handhelds exist for a quickplay and next to a power source. It’s expected that players have a life outside of gaming

I say these aren't portable gaming handhelds like the Switch but just mini gaming PCs that offered the benefit of portable play. They aren't design to play games on the go but to have portable computing on the go. If they are portable gaming handhelds, all games would be optimized with their hardware in mind and not the other way around.

The reason they have bigger batteries in phones roughly the same size is because all the chips/processors have gotten smaller leaving more room for a larger battery. The highest capacity 18650 is still around 3.5 ah, and it's been like that for a long time...

honestly the switch oled has godly battery power, it last at least 4 hours even with a big game like tears of the kingdom

This is an issue I've noticed virtually no discussion on and I absolutely agree with everything you said. My greatest fear though is what this will mean for Nintendo, a company who gains a majority of their success from handhelds, with the Switch being the most recent. The Switch quite definitely needs an upgrade to be more powerful, but with the issues of battery life and cost of production taken into consideration, it makes me afraid of what exactly has to be sacrificed in order to make this supposed "Switch Pro". If the Switch was on par with let's say the Steam Deck, the console battery life would take a major hit and additionally so would the price, especially when you note the fact that the Steam Deck is sold at a loss. And even then, if it was on par with the Steam Deck, the Switch Pro would still not be able to catch up with next gen games and will quickly become outdated performance-wise within a couple of years (which I believe we will see a similar thing with the Steam Deck, and in a sense, we already are). Nintendo either have to ditch handhelds and create physical consoles once more or a major breakthrough has to happen. Either way I see it, the handheld market is doomed and there isn't a simple solution at this current stage, despite how simple putting a modern chip in a Switch may seem.

Solid state batteries are on the horizon

Great insight

60 minutes is enought for me. Enough to make my legs go numb while sitting on a toilet.

Wow! Great video! Ur channel is gonna blow up very quickly if u keep this up dude!

My biggest problem with current handhelds is that they don't feel anywhere near as portable as handhelds from the past in terms of their form factor.

apple already figured it out with M series. Qualcomm did not catch up yet

bruh... just take a powerbank with you

its a good kind of device for 6th gen console emulation while away from home, but thats about it

This is one of the main reasons why those people saying that “modern phones are better that the switch” are wrong. I mean, yes, modern phones have way better chips, therefore better graphics, but really, that’s all, everything else make modern phones simply useless when compared to any handheld, not only the switch. And when I say “everything else” I mean really everything else, like the cooling system; phones do have a longer battery charge life, but they don’t have a cooling system, making them totally inefficient to play, even with medium-performance games you can’t get a single hour (this is my own experience) without having to let the phone naturally cool down, besides cooling systems cost a lot of energy, thus, a handheld console needs a lot of energy to maintain the good performance. This is just a simple example. This is why I don’t usually play my switch in handheld mode. PD: I don’t consider myself an expert or anything, just saying in case I made a mistake 👍

Probably won't be an issue that can be fixed until maybe 10th gen Ryzen APUs and more dense batteries

The dualsense edge is meant for pros who want the least imput lag. Playing with a cable is better for competitive gaming

65w power banks are a thing... so you can play ~4-5 hours on highest possible settings...

personally if you are playing for more than 5 hours without a break and that is a problem. Even 3 hours should be enough for a healthy lifestyle

The answer to why battery tech has stagnated is actually incredibly simple, physics or to be more specific, energy density. Anyone who's ever seen a lithium fire knows how hard and long they burn for and are nearly impossible to put out. Its not like we don't know of more efficient ways of storing energy, its that doing so and carrying them around in your pocket is monumentally stupid.

"im no expert here" - thats obvious. "If it was going to happen, it would have already happened".....uhhhhhhhh....yeah, I mean lets pretend that Solid state lithium with 4x or Li-S with up to 14x the energy density of Li-Ion isnt coming to market in the next 24 months then I guess.

Love the ps mobile gag

The Ally has some advantages. Being Windows based you can use a lot of streaming services like Gamepass or Geforce Now in any location you have a solid internet connection which outsource the processing power and allow the local machine to run the games without expending as much of its own power doing so. Not an Ideal solution since it requires fast stable internet which won't always be available but it is something to consider since it allows the machine to play the games at great framerates and settings while running on a much lower power setting and preserve it's own power.

Heck, this is even worse than the Game Gear's battery duration.

I plan to get a handheld soon. But I don't expect or plan to play much in the way of the latest games at the highest settings. I think people just need to know what they are getting into. I plan to play indie games and older 3D titles. On PC, there are a ton of games that meet that criteria. Also, these can serve as a fine PC to dock and use as a desktop or media center PC. Certainly, it'd be nice if the battery life could be better. But not at all a deal-breaker for me. By keeping the TDP low, and sticking to less demanding games, I don't think the battery will be a huge problem.

Need a arm based handheld that can emulate x86 efficently. My Vita, can last weeks on a single change in rest mode, my steam deck about 2 days.

More efficient display tech will help battery life too.

ARM chips are more energy efficient than the x86 chips in the Steam Deck and ROG ally so the Switch will likely have much better battery life than the portable PCs.

These are not for new AAA games . You don't buy a low end laptop to play those too or ? For the go you either have to turn it down or just not play these games without a power bank .

The first fix is that they should have use OLED screen. 2nd is probably use smartphone processor instead??

I mean, there is an easy soluton to this. Just buy 10 of them and charge them all up before the roadtrip and you will have 10-20 hours of gameplay. Problem solved

This is the best video I've seen on handhelds hands down! I'm very impressed and this is what I've been saying for quite some time. The switch as well as all Nintendo handhelds, have been doing this for years now. Nintendo builds their machines (mostly handhelds) and components around efficiency. That's why their handhelds always has a balance between battery life, graphics and performance. All these pc handhels are doing are just slapping together pc parts and throwing them to the wall hoping that it works and sticks. Nintendo always use power efficient components to what they are trying to achieve and what does people do? Complain!. You can't please everybody. There will always be those group of people that will find something to complain about. What these pc handhelds are doing doesn't impress me one bit. I'm more in awe in what nintendo have done with a handheld that came out 6 and half years ago, with a chip that's now 8 years old and is able to accomplish against these new handhelds. I've compared some of the same games on the switch to games on the deck and rog, and to my surprise, the games either looked the same, just a teeny bit better on the other devices or looks better on the switch! No joke!. Just go and check out the comparison between zelda on the rog vs oled switch on my channel. It's amazing that nintendo's old handheld can keep up with the new handhelds, and that's because nintendo knows what they are doing. They are more about efficiency than raw power. These pc handhelds need to take a page out nintendo'sbook. This is the reason why the switch is still number one. Great video, dude.

PURCHASE A POWERBANK BRO SIMPLE

Lowering maximum system consumption is future. Batteries will not not much bigger in next years.

bro is thinking tooo much 🫥

The Sega Game Gear - loved it - but the batterylife was also poor and you needed 6 of them. I like these handhelds but I'll stick with the Switch - can't play them all

Call me crazy but this is where I think the new Sony handheld thing can actually be really good, recently streamed my pc to my phone to play some games over data. It worked pretty damn well just a small bit of latency. You'll not need to worry much about battery life because it's just streaming the game. We just gotta get better data/wifi technology instead of making porformace per watt soc's. (Although I'm not saying not make good soc's tho. I like good battery life on my phone)

nice video bro keep going

More efficient cpus and gpus like if we ever manage to go smaller than 1nm into atom like cpus we'd use a lot less energy.

i dont think this issue is what you think. Games on Switch are made to run on batteries...AAA PC games are developed to run plugged in. 4-6 hours playing under10 watts give you plenty of access to good games for awhile without charging. Think people just need to be smarter and people aren't away from plugs as much as they think...

I just play mine while I'm laying in bed 😅

Oh and i forgot to add that ps5 controller are just bad battery wise the nintendo switch pro controller and xbox controller have a livespan of like 20 hours on one charge

So to solve the battery problem we need devs to optimize their games. yea.....good luck to us (looking at modern games that struggle on 3090) The deck is great for what it is, and "on the go" means short communes (to and from work for example) or just play anywhere comfortably around the house. so battery life is less of an issue really for this purpose. If you need anything for longer commune times (for flight, long bus ride....then i wouldn't bother with the deck and take a switch instead) The ROG Ally just seemed redundant to me at this point. i dont need better graphics on a small screen, i need better content made with these devices in mind. p.s, for retro gaming Miyoo Mini Plus is my best friend on the go, i am getting around 5h of play time with PS1 games on that tiny device and frankly, i find it much easier to concentrate on retro games while sitting in a moving bus than trying to use all the modern controls in use nowadays.

Every new generation of CPU's and GPU's reduce they wattage needs as they shrink they transistor size.

its Watthour not Watt/hour. Maybe somewhere in distant future solid state batteries will finally emerge, buts its a think 5 years away for last 20 years

If they give you a big battery don't complain about the price because these developer aren't making these batteries from scratch they are buying them from a manufacture and turning around and charging you a arm and leg for their systems they aren't manufacturing these things that's why they charge you so much for them

The only thing you can really do is buy a portable charger. I have one and it can charge the switch from dead about 3 times.

great video

Well you get a steam deck and when you need the battery life you play Celeste, Cuphead or Katana Zero for 6H. It's not like arm devices could play anything higher end. The problem is you refusing to play anything but mega AAA on the go (which you can still do plugged in). Adapt to circumstances instead of complaining.

Love my RoG Ally, Battery life problems? Idc I don’t play enough in a single portable sitting for the battery life to matter. I play mostly boomer shooters, doom wads, emulators, and some jrpgs all which get me roughly 2 - 3 hours Also I see people complaining that nobody talks about the battery life problem when literally every review complains about this, its a real schizophrenic cognitive dissonance.

Watts per hour?????

@2:34 People critical thinking skills are tanking. I've being pointing this out since the handheld PC explosion. Whats the point of an 1 hour brick that needs to be carried in a bag & close to an outlet? Why just dont go for a gaming laptop a bit more expensive but with bigger screen & million times more flexibility/potential? This "conundrum" was solved in 1989. Seems like people forgot.

Our processors and graphic cards are not powerfull and efficient enough. In my opinion batteries are not the problem nintendo consoles worked for 8+ hours one one charge and the games where great at the time and now valve made a console that is not yet possible with long battery life but in a few years games that worked 2 hours on a steam deck will work for 8 on a another console. Valve made a decision and they choose to chop battery life for performance