For all the talk about how they speak with their wallet, EA and other shitty companies still get a lot of money from gamers. If Valve changed its policies, it could turn the whole platform upside down in a matter of months.Įven though Valve is on the consumer's good side, as a monopoly they would have an easy time changing that without serious ramifications. The very fact Steam is actually perceived as the platform is alarming.
Monopoly is just objectively undesirable, and it boggles my mind that so many people aren't realising just how scary is the fact that there is a monopoly on game distribution on PC. Instead they build a userbase by paying to make games exclusive to their platform when they were previously available in several places, removing consumer choice. They have Steams 15 or so years of features to look at and see "ok, this feature is good and a lot of people use it, we can copy it", but instead they launched without a shoppingcart or wishlist. Epic could have delayed releasing the EGS to work on implementing features, they could actually be working on implementing features at all. I simply prefer using the storefront that has the features I want, which currently is Steam. Of course ignoring games that are fully or partially funded directly by EpicĪnd no, I am not loyal to a desktop icon and I don't mind having multiple launchers open. If you still publish on Steam you aren't even trying to get a better cut on Steam. If it is so incredibly important then they should go the Ubisoft route and just not publish on Steam, otherwise I have a hard time seeing taking Epic money to make games exclusive as anything other than greed. The platform is still in heavy use by both people who have taken Epics money and those who haven't, proving that a difference between 15% and 30% isn't all that important to devs.
#Epic games store reddit update
Launchers are meant to make life convenient for players and developers alike, if the 30% cut is such an issue we could just go back to downloading games installers after inserting your credit card into shady websites and hoping whatever key you got when buying is still valid after the next update when you need to download the next installer.Īgain, if the 30% cut was actually the important factor for publishers and devs no one would be using Steam, but the platform provides so much more for both user and developer. Everyone would make their own launchers and download pages. If this was actually such an issue with no benefit for the developer no third party game would ever be put on Steam. However, developers are still very happy to reap the money and publicity they get from Steam and are still happy to put their games on Steam even if they get 15% less. So if a developer chose, without being paid off, to only pick Epic as their storefront, or only pick GOG, or whatever else, I could respect that and probably buy the game from that store. Steam taking 30% of the sales is bad, I agree. Sadly we do live in a capitalist system, can't argue with that, though isn't steam taking 30% just capitalism as well? Maximising profits That's a benefit to you, the consumer? Getting less options for where to play a game is a benefit for the consumer? So console exclusives are great because you get the benefit of playing a game on that specific console? Spiderman games only being available to Playstation and Bethesda games being exclusive to Microsoft is a benefit to all consumers? You have the benefit of getting to go out and buy a 600 dollar piece of plastic that functions 99% the same as your other 600 dollar piece of plastic with the only difference in what games they can play.
0 kommentar(er)
