Editorial Guidelines

Steam Deck Machine is an independent magazine. We don't take marching orders from Valve, publishers, or hardware manufacturers. These guidelines describe the standards we hold ourselves to, and give readers the tools to push back when we fall short.

Sourcing

Every factual claim has a source. Where possible, we link to the primary one — a Valve blog post, a developer's tweet, a benchmark we ran, a patch note. When the source is a person rather than a document, we name them; when a source asks for anonymity, we explain why in the article.

We never invent quotes. We never paraphrase someone in a way that changes their meaning. If a source asks to clarify or retract a quote before publication, we honour it where it doesn't damage the story's accuracy.

Reviews

Reviews are based on hands-on use, not on press materials. Hardware reviews list the specific unit reviewed, firmware version, and the conditions of testing. Game reviews list the platform and Proton version (where relevant) and the patch tested.

Review units are loaned by manufacturers; we return them at the end of the review window unless told otherwise. Accepting a review unit doesn't promise coverage and doesn't shape the verdict.

Benchmarks

Benchmarks are run on the hardware we describe, with the settings we describe, at least three times per data point unless the article says otherwise. Outliers are noted, not silently dropped. We don't quote vendor-supplied numbers as if we measured them.

Use of AI

We use AI tools the way a newsroom uses spell-checkers and research assistants — for drafting headlines, summarising patch notes, and brainstorming structure. Every published article is written, edited, and fact-checked by a human.

We do not publish wholly AI-generated articles. We do not impersonate journalists with synthetic bylines. If a piece relies materially on AI-generated analysis, we say so in the article.

Conflicts of interest

If a writer owns stock in a company they're covering, has a personal relationship with someone involved, or has accepted travel or hospitality from a vendor, that's disclosed in the article. We try to avoid the situation in the first place — but where it can't be avoided, transparency is the rule.

Affiliate links are covered separately on the affiliate disclosure page.

Sponsored content

Sponsored placements are clearly labelled at the top of the page and excluded from category and tag feeds where it makes sense. Sponsors don't get to approve or veto editorial content elsewhere on the site.

Corrections

When we get something wrong, we fix it. Every correction includes:

• A dated note at the bottom of the article describing what was changed.
• For substantive corrections, an updated headline or lead paragraph as needed.
• For misattributed or invented quotes, a public apology to the source.

To request a correction, contact us with the URL and the fact in dispute. The full process — and the running log of corrections issued — lives on the corrections page.

Updates vs. corrections

Compatibility, prices, and release dates change. When we update a guide because the world moved on — a Proton version shipped, a game became Verified — we add a dated update note but don't treat it as a correction. Corrections are reserved for things that were wrong when published.

Take-down requests

We don't remove published articles on PR request. If a story contains a factual or legal error, we correct it. If a story causes inconvenience to a vendor but is accurate, it stays up. Legal disputes go through the contact page.

Reader feedback

Readers spot what writers miss. If you find a mistake, a missing nuance, or a better source, tell us. Substantive contributions are credited in the article when they shape an update.