Its because the other exclusives are the devs/publishers launcher. While epic was actively seeking those 1year exclusivity deals to get more users on the platform.
So it would be better if it was a permanent exclusivity deal, like traditional publishers have?
They’ve been paying out in advance in some cases (Epic Mega Grants, I think) so the devs can finish the game. That’s basically the definition of what publishers do, but when Epic do it it’s somehow “not publishing”?
Well it really depends how you look at it. For the devs it’s better in terms of how much they get per purchase given that epic takes a lower cut than steam, IIRC 15% as opposed to 30%.
But many users hate epic as a platform seeing how it’s not as mature in features, and probably just pure love of steam.
What I’m actually wondering about is if it’s worth signing the exclusivity deal seeing how some people will not bother buying a game on a platform they hate or do enough people purchase for it to even out and even gain a larger profit.
steam and valve has also been generally more respectful with users than mostly any other online business, not even just in the space of online software stores. of course it’s not all rainbows and glitter but the point stands.
I don’t give any attention to the arguments that Steam is “more mature” in regards to features, when the vast majority of users don’t use those features to begin with. Steam has all the community features (and more) of Discord, but I would wager most of the fanboys in this thread don’t even know about that, or where to find those community features, let alone actually use them.
They waited until a game previously announced for Steam was finished development and had a launch date, then tried to bribe them with an exclusivity deal to not provide the game on the platform they promised to backers.
They weren’t paying a damn thing for development, just to eliminate consumer choice. Instead of, you know, providing a better service in some way so people want to purchase from you instead.
don’t hide the full story, they pay devs millions to keep their games exclusive to epic for a year. that is an extremely scummy business practice that you are rewarding and encouraging if you buy from this shitfest of a platform
When Half Life 2 launched, you had to register your game with Steam before you could play it. You had to give up your physical ownership of the product, and lock it to yourself. You couldn’t sell it to anyone else, or even let them play it.
That’s what you were encouraging by buying from that shitfest of a platform.
I really don’t see how bunging devs money for publishing rights is worse. The devs clearly don’t see it that way.
You couldn’t sell it to anyone else, or even let them play it.
Epic lets you sell your games to someone else?
As to your 2nd point I play my friend’s games all the time. I haven’t purchased Satisfactory but have almost 100% it on Steam playing my friend’s copy.
So we’re talking about everything except this moment in time?
Epic doesn’t have disks either so it’s irrelevant to the discussion of Epic games. If you want to complain about eliminating physical media try talking about it in regards to someplace that actually sells physical media.
If Steam is bad because no physical media then so is Epic.
But I guess Epic is okay because of how things are right now right? but I shouldn’t bring up how things are on Steam right now? In direct comparison?
Pick an era in time you would like to complain about, and if it’s the early 2000s then go bitch to people in the early 2000s. I’m sure many of them are complaining about the loss of physical media. People still used Steam anyway and now it’s the norm. Now people are complaining about exclusivity deals, if people still use Epic anyway then that will become the norm.
I mean I see this as a good thing. I have to keep a separate launcher around but… at least that dev is getting a great deal and will probably be able to support that game for a while (or start their next one)
There are apparently 270 million Epic Store accounts made.
Now most of them don’t buy anything and are probably installed on a whim for one free game ad now they’ve forgot their password, while a good chunk of them are probably 12 year olds playing Fortnite who don’t even look at it and hurl all their pocket money into V-bucks so the rest of us get free games, but it’s not an insignificant amount.
They’re paying indie devs millions to remain exclusive for a year. What’s scummy is the Steam fanboys who see that and think it’s better for gamers if those games just aren’t financially successful.
-Valve didn’t kill ownership it was already dead. DLC has been pulled, and games delisted, as well as games made unplayable by server shutdowns. They just happened to be the platform who told you to your face what you were getting into while everyone else lied and said the game was yours until it wasn’t. They also say they’ll provide downloads for a time if they ever shut down, but if you want that long term guarantee you’re probably better off looking at GOG and some kind of data storage for the installers.
-Origin is shit and I hate EA/Origin exclusives too, but it’s basically a launcher for their own games which I understand, but still prefer steam to be included too, so much of the time I avoid EA games (i avoid them for a lot of reasons tbh)
-Battle.net started as a unified launcher for blizzard games, which sort of made sense as they never worked with or were involved with steam, and many of their games were disc based or had its own installer. Subscriptions specifically I don’t think existed with steam for a while so that was sort of a complicating factor. Still wish their games were on steam, but it sort of made sense at its inception.
-I don’t even use the microsoft store unless forced to, I find it annoying and bleh. They’re forcing more games to it and it’s shitty too.
-Epic is annoying, but it’s a special kind of annoying because for many games early on, they would announce steam as a supported platform, some even sold the game on steam, until they changed to Epic exclusives. I think Fall Guys was one example. The bait and switch really lost them trust with a lot of gamers and you’ll find the attitude towards them can be pretty bad because of that history.
Add in that many of the games aren’t published by them, they just threw money at the publisher or devs to make their games epic exclusive. This can be good for developers, like an upfront investment, but sucks for gamers who like to keep things somewhat unified in terms of a game library. Especially when you already have to deal with 5 other launchers, another arbitrary one is pretty annoying.
If you’re wondering why people want their games on steam, look at the features. Free cloud save backups, a decent amount of free screenshot backups, in game recording is new and pretty neat, achievements, community marketplaces, frequent sales, family sharing, steam workshop for easy integrated modding, discussions and guides for all your games, early access games, built in friends, text chat, voice chat, remote play together, game streaming, etc.
TLDR: It isn’t an “oh epic stinky just because” situation. The Epic game store simply doesn’t have feature parity, bait and switched gamers multiple times with exclusives after games were advertised as being on steam, and basically survived on throwing money at devs to put their games exclusively on EGS, at the expense of the people who want to play those games on their chosen platform. Doesn’t shock me that they don’t have a lot of positive PR in the community.
kills? most of them work with a steam emu, even offline. that’s not even cracking. most of those that don’t have a different limitation.
with a steam emu you can do whatever you want with the game files, often you can put it on your pendrive and play it as a portable game (the right goldberg emu settings allow game data to be stored near the game files instead of appdata)
I’m OK if you own the game you are making exclusive to your platform. Bribing devs is shitty practice. They also sit and wait for a game’s early access to gain momentum on Steam first before offering them money to leave.
Epic games launcher is no where best as bad as anyone says. The storefront is also one of most responsive ones, especially compared to the likes of GOG.
For me, I just buy a game wherever it’s cheapest. Like I got satisfactory on epic because I could get it like £15 cheaper than steam.
Like I don’t understand why people are so irked by a steam alternative. It’s not like it requires new hardware to play it’s exclusives like with consoles. Aren’t we all supposed to be against monopolies, steam needs competition, look at how shit its sales have been for like 10 years now compared to what they were like prior.
Wait until you read all the problems people have with EGS!
I’ve read people complaining they lost their account and support couldn’t do shit because “of security reasons” while steam needs a few stuff and you get it back. I’ve helped someone getting his steam account back after someone stole his account changing mail + password in like ~12 hours (?)/1 day
Was very simple:
Yo steam I lost my account here a bunch of pics proving my email was the owner of said game: There you can see my old steam user, email address and purchase
Let me check Yep, you’re right. Changed back your email and your password has been reset. Log back in and change it
I’ve experienced losing my old email address, and all traces of my old digital identity. They went above and beyond to work with me till I could prove to their satisfaction that I was the original owner of the account, then restored it to me. Steam support is generally amazing.
Epic games launcher is no where best as bad as anyone says.
Is it better now? Last I used it, earlier this year, it still took me half a year for any UI change to happen when I did anything.
To be clear, I hated Steam for ages too. Only maybe 6 years ago I started actually buying games there. Before then I’d just pirate everything. The Steam application often had issues and I had no money before then anyway. But nowadays I find Steam more convenient than piracy. I do not find EGS more convenient than piracy. I do wish Steam had more meaningful competition.
I’m gonna have to agree. It used to be about the most slow and bloated thing in existence, but they actually fixed a lot of performance issues last time I checked. It’s still slow, but in the same time period Steam on Windows decided to add a pointless splash screen increasing the load time by 4x, letting Epic take the W by a wide margin in load times, while responsiveness is a draw.
Yes, I know that Steam is more feature complete and consumer friendly which is why I still prefer to buy from Steam when possible.
Aren’t we all supposed to be against monopolies, steam needs competition
Steam is not a monopoly. The vast majority of PC gaming revenue is made outside Steam. Fortnite: EGS only, not on Steam. Minecraft: own web storefront and Microsoft Store, not on Steam. Roblox: I think it has its own storefront, it’s not on Steam.
Steam has an estimated revenue of 8.6bn out of PC gaming’s overall 45bn. It’s very far from even approaching 50%, let alone surpass it.
I don’t mind other storefronts. What I mind is people spreading the false narrative as if one of the most widely installed storefronts (EGS because of Fortnite) is somehow the little underdog.
Does the image have a source? Also I don’t think just revenue some us the only Barometer for a monopoly. If something has very few users but had really high prices that they’re willing to pay for them by your metric they’d be closer to a monopoly than steam
Yes, the image has a source and everything is detailed in the lower part of the image.
Also I don’t think just revenue some us the only Barometer for a monopoly. If something has very few users but had really high prices that they’re willing to pay for them by your metric they’d be closer to a monopoly than steam
But that’s exactly why the EU classified Apple as digital gatekeeper: iPhones have a lower installed base than Android in the EU but higher spending.
Given the massive popularity of Fortnite, I wouldn’t bet if Steam has a higher installed base than EGS. People just prefer to buy on Steam.
The apple thing wasn’t about apple vs android for a monopoly. It was about how there’s no alternative option on ios for purchasing apps. Android is completely irrelevant to that decision.
The apple thing wasn’t about apple vs android for a monopoly. It was about how there’s no alternative option on ios for purchasing apps.
Nobody in the EU would have cared if the commercial app market wasn’t dominated by Apple. Plenty of devices out there don’t let you install random stuff off the internet but if the market dominance isn’t there, the EU won’t care.
I can’t think of any other devices that have apps in the same sense where other developers can also release their apps as long as there is a cut for the platform holder where there is no other legal alternative to get apps elsewhere.
The only examples I can think of are games consoles, but they are seemingly next on the chopping block. I think the only thing that has stopped that from happening as soon as the apple one is the fact that for the majority of games, you can still get them physically elsewhere at prices that aren’t completely dictated by the platform holder.
As much as I like using Steam, I’m on Epic’s side here. They sue over anti-competitive practices of other marketplaces that take almost triple the cut that Epic does on game sales.
If I were a developer and one platform took 12% while the other took 30%, I’d push my customers to the 12% option no matter how much better the in-game overlay or whatever was on the other platform. Game studios are closing left and right, and that extra 18% is a big deal when games are struggling to actually profit from the development.
I don’t understand why people are so in love with a Steam monopoly. Steam has a lot of neat features, but the main feature I’m looking for in a game is the game itself, and I’d prefer more of the money to go to the companies making the games.
And maybe if Valve didn’t take home a larger profit from game sales than the developers themselves, they’d go back to being a full-time game studio to make their money.
I might have been on epic’s side if they had delivered a storefront/launcher at least as good as Steam, then found they still weren’t able to compete and only then decided to try the exclusivity crap.
They did not. They have a launcher/store that is far worse than Steam or even GOG (which is an accomplishment; GOG’s isn’t all that good and yet they manage to be worse by a large margin), and they didn’t even attempt to provide a better product/service. Instead they just started throwing money in order to secure exclusivity.
It shows all they want is to muscle into the market, not provide anything better for people.
Is a better launcher really worth 18% of the gross value of a game?
If a developer decided to cut 20% of their content, and their excuse was “we want to use that budget towards a better third-party game launcher instead of using it to develop the game” would you be okay with that?
Because that’s what you’re suggesting they do by choosing Steam over EGS.
The thing is gaming is a weird industry where the consumer price is essentially fixed tegardless of platform/marketplace outside of sales.
Ideally, games would cost more on Steam to make up for the increased fees. That would create a market where Steam would probably have to lower its fees to be competitive. And if Steam did that, EGS would need to improve the quality of its service to remain competitive.
Or maybe Steam could be a boutique marketplace where the games cost more but the UU is better, while EGS is an unholy mess of a UX, but the games cost less.
But what we have right now is neither. With the customers being shielded from the price differences, the negative effects of Steam are invisible to most people and the market doesn’t properly function.
The other day I wanted to download it (wink wink) but from the site I checked (popular and recommended, not a shitty one) it required you to login to epic and some other shit. Gave up 3 seconds later, not worth the trouble
Yeah, the repack of that store requires some calls home and fake accounts.
I’ve honestly seen all I really need two of the game by watching a couple of people play it on YouTube. It’s pretty, it’s neat. If it would have came out on steam back in the day I would have bought it without a question.
Ok, weird hill to die on, but I think everyone should be given the right to choose to end their life early, if they wish to, so I support your decision.
The way Coffee Stain explained it for satisfactory is that the exclusivity windfall gave them enough runway to finish the game.
If the system of temporary exclusivity in exchange for upfront development cash continues I think it’s an overall win for the gaming community as games get to come out at less rushed pace and with potentially less cash generation grabs in the game itself.
Nothing has gone wrong, and it’s been going on for years at this point. But yeah, maybe you’re right. Maybe aliens will invade us because people use Epic. Maybe the sun will go supernova because the Epic store doesn’t have reviews.
That’s great that devs can benefit from it, I will not purchase the game until it’s available on other platforms due to Epic’s general shitty behavior.
I can’t think of any examples of the top of my head, but aren’t there some games that should have thrived but we’re heals back by launching as Epic exclusives?
An exclusive on Epic Games may as well just not even exist, as far as I'm concerned. Didn't play Anno 1800 until it was finally released on Steam. Nice discount too.
Why do companies do exclusive launches? Presumably they think the money they get from Epic is more than the money they’ll lose in sales. Whether or not they’re right is another question.
They indicate how much of an ass you come across as.
There are tons of people in this world who are right, yet everyone dislikes and doesn’t interact with. Something to think about some day, when you calm down.
The commenter above you said that it’s a gamble as to whether a developer making their game exclusive to a certain platform and the payout from doing so is more lucrative compared to releasing to all platforms. It may be, or it may not be.
I’m not sure if we have the statistics of how well Anno 1800 did in terms of sales when it first launched, but the parent commenter said they obtained the game on Steam when it was discounted. That said commenter didn’t pay full price for it at launch to me speaks to how maybe Anno 1800 lost revenue by not reaching more audiences.
Point is: we don’t know if it was a double win for Anno 1800, or any game by any developer that is restricted to a limited amount of platforms. Don’t claim it was so unless you have evidence one way or another.
Basicaly they do not think their game is any good. So if someone takes the deal. I instantly loose interest. I mean if even the developer think it is no fun…
In what way is it not? They get Epic’s money for exclusivity and know they’ll still get sales after it ends from people that “boycott” them for doing that.
Buying the game later doesn’t hurt them, it just reinforces the same behavior later.
That’s not what a boycott is. If I don’t buy a game because it’s exclusively on Epic, it’s not because I’m taking a moral stance. It’s because it’s invisible to me.
A boycott is when I don’t play Epic/EA/Unisoft/Blizzard-Activism games for the company’s historic shitty behavior.
Getting Epic’s money isn’t a slam dunk for profit. You’re hedging your bets taking guaranteed Epic money for lower potential sales vs non-guaranteed Steam money for higher potential sales. Having a bad exclusivity deal on Epic and then selling your game at a loss (90% discount) on steam isn’t profiting both ways, and sometimes isn’t profiting either way.
I also disagree with the sentiment that you’re reinforcing bad behavior. If anything, you’re signalling to them that you won’t support exclusivity deals, and are happy to wait for a deep discount on Steam. Ultimately, that’s a win for consumers.
That said, fuck exclusivity deals, and I’m much in the same boat where I’m hard pressed to support developers that take them.
Unless they’re actively losing money in their deal, they’re not gonna care if the sale comes immediately or years later. If Epic exclusive + late “hold outs” = $$$, they’re just gonna do that until the equation changes.
Economists cannot predict the future, as much as some people might wish they could.
Whatever break even point the devs of Anno 1800 considered when making the decision between releasing only on Epic and releasing to all platforms may have seemed reasonable at the time the devs were gearing up to release the game, but performance of said game is never guaranteed. Sure you may have statistics to influence things one way or another, but it’s still a gamble.
We don’t know if Epic exclusive + late discounts > full game purchases on all platforms specifically for Anno 1800, and it appears that you’re claiming which way that equation points with no evidence. Do you work for Epic? For Ubisoft? For Blue Byte? Are there public sources pointing to game sales? What research are you pulling from that considers game futures?
I will respect that you’re right about predicting devs’ decisions based on which way that equation points. Everyone is downvoting you though because you’re making it seem like you know the answer when clearly there’s more to this game, and financial gaming decisions like this.
You’re not an expert. You’re a chatter. Unless you can prove otherwise.
When I see sales of Playstation games on PC the numbers are very underwhelming compared to other big third party titles. In contrast helldivers 2 got insane numbers when it launched simultaneously.
I don’t think launch hype sales can be overlooked and how much may potentially be lost. If people are willing to wait then by the time game is available hype is less and it’s more likely for people to move on or wait for even steeper sales.
You need a better definition of „they“. Because I don’t buy from Epic for one particular reason, so they (Epic) don’t get my money. If the game is good and I want to play it I will do so later and at that point the developer still deserves my money.
I have a friend that uses epic games. I met him on steam. I’ve never played an epic game even though he keeps telling me about free games or whatever on epic games.
Yeah it’s not like valve or any of the other companies that sell games on steam too. They’ll all have your data and some what people think are so dastardly, (when in reality it’s just grown-ups playing with numbers).
Nah, pretty sure this isn’t about the data. They just want to encourage people to go through the effort of setting up an account and downloading their launcher in the hopes that they can then later entice you to buy something else while you’re there. Every time you run one of those free games they get to show you another offer, and since you’re already signed up, the hurdle to buying something is far lower than it otherwise would have been.
Correct, as an added bonus, they get to report X million monthly active users on top of that to their investors (that’s why they make you come back every week for a new game). Likely at relatively little cost to them since they don’t have to pay full price for those games.
It’s probably still expensive as hell but when you have a competitor as big as Steam in the market, you gotta be able to afford some ammunition, and the Unreal Engine likely still brings in tons of cashflow.
Actually it is (or at least was) surprisingly cheap for them. A while ago internal data leaked and they paid surprisingly little for the giveaways. Either the Devs are desperate or there was some kind of backdoor deal like no or very little fees (for engine and distribution) for the next game they develop or something like that. Look it up, the data is still out there; incredibly cheap.
Most of the free games are crap but they have on occasion given away absolute bangers (double- or even triple-A titles, although of course usually older titles or ones that didn’t sell well). I recently got The Outer Worlds: Spacer’s Choice for free (a game I wouldn’t otherwise have bought or even known about), and I ended up having a very solid ~55 hours of fun with it. I still do all my buying either on Steam or GOG because I don’t trust Epic and I hate their godforsaken launcher so I refuse to pay for anything that’ll be tethered to it, but getting a free game of that caliber certainly made up for the pain of installing it.
I got exactly one free epic game (subnautica) that I uninstalled and bought immediately the day I couldn’t play the game because I lost Internet and there was no goddamned offline mode.
Epic store is shovelware, and I can’t believe the amount of people who defend a 4th rate store comparing itself to the gold standard that can’t even offer basic functionality expected of a modern platform. But people always have liked trash, so meh.
Steam has made great strides in helping to make the gaming scene more consumer friendly. They constantly have sales, make refunds extremely easy (and in some cases have forced refunds), and are even now setting guidelines to battle passes and how you can’t just advertise it as a battle pass and instead have to list whats in it. Epic hates consumers and their main business strategy is to force business by paying publishers to only release on their store.
It doesn’t matter how good the game is, I’m not purchasing from a store that doesn’t have the customer in mind.
Nothing of this that you’ve described is related to the one specific game. I don’t really like Epic Store because it has a shitty UI, but I like Alan Wake 2 enough to want to buy it on release. I don’t want a personal crusade to stand in a way of me enjoying a great game. I don’t give a shit, honestly, I will get my favorite games wherever they are available as long as it’s on PC.
That’s because I wasn’t talking about my opinion of the game. I was talking about my opinions on the store. Crazy how I wouldn’t bring up the game when the conversation is about the store. And that’s okay. That’s your choice. I really don’t care. I was just offering some perspective that I thought was help and would benefit you and others. You know, how commenting typically works in platforms such as this.
Let me rephrase it for you. If the game i have the most hours in and I love the most suddenly became an epic exclusive I would never play it again.
And just to make you happy, I don’t like Alan Wake, not my cup of tea.
Also the “one specific game” isnt even mentioned in the post?? That wasn’t the point of the post??
Thank you for bringing me up to date on all the Epic Store hate opinions, not like I’ve read that a million times before. I’m glad you decided that the conversation was about the store when my original comment was about a game. Why are you changing the topic of discussion?
The “one specific game” wasn’t mentioned, yes. Just to me it’s pretty weird to make decisions on whether I like the game or not, based on the store and not the quality of the game itself. So I stated my opinion on that part specifically. You know, how commenting typically works in platforms such as this.
Well you brought up your opinion. Which is fine. It’s valid. I don’t agree with it, but that’s for you to keep, not me. But then I gave you my opinion. And now you seem upset and irate. You posted an epic store neutral opinion in a thread where nearly everyone is dogging on them. And you seemed clueless. So I gave my perspective on the epic game store. Maybe you just didn’t know, you did seem a little clueless. But then you just got angry. And now I’m wondering if you have brain worms. Because who in their sane mind, would walk into a tiki bar, and then start stomping on the toes of everyone wearing a Hawaiian shirt. And you can at least cure brain worms.
I didn’t get upset, irate or angry though. None of my questions were hostile. I was keeping a softer tone than you did in any of your responses. In fact, from my side, you seem pretty angry right about now. Maybe you are, maybe you are not. I don’t really care.
Regarding your “tiki bar” comment — last I checked, this is a Games community, not a Steam community. I stated my opinion, like you said. I know the opinion of the capital G Gamer on Epic Store perfectly well. The thing is that I enjoy poking people into their hypocrisies every now and then, in hopes that they will spot the contradictions in their argument and that will make them think for themselves a little bit. But I guess the capital G Gamers are not the best audience for these exercises.
Both are horrible mess, I don’t really understand this deepthroating of steam their ui is horrible, they do behave like a monopoly, games by them have drm by default. Same can be said about epic.
As evidenced by this post, they are not a monopoly. So what does this statement actually mean?
This post gives evidence of the contrary, game that dared not to be published on platform that has 70-80% of pc market share ( geekwire.com/…/gaming-giant-valve-hit-with-anothe… ) shouldn’t even exist and even stating otherwise is a blasphemy, lol. As for more anecdotical examples, games that are published on steam only, are majority most don’t even list other platforms on their web sites, in cases when they can be bought elsewhere. Even more, updates and patches often do not reach other marketplaces. So yeah steam is a shitty marketplace with horrible ui and captured fanatical clients.
Lawsuits are cheap and meaningless. Unless actually ruled on, they don’t mean crap (and even then, sometimes it’s just clear evidence of jury / judge bias, like the infamous patent trolls of East Texas).
70-80% of pc market share
This source puts their market share at ~20% of the PC gaming market. Your source is for ‘85% market share in multi-publisher PC game stores’, which is not the same thing, and it’s based on a random tweet by their competitor CEO attacking them, which should carry approximately 0 credibility.
You keep using the word monopoly. It does not mean what you seem to think it means.
Your “source” is an image that doesn’t even differentiate between various stores and lists everything as blue, with text that says “steam revenue is probabaly x billion”. I couldn’t find anything except other similar images when looking up Pelham Smithers reports. In reports from previous years steam is not mentioned. I will rephrase it then if you dislike the word I am using: Steam has a dominant position in the pc gaming market and uses it to their benefit which doesn’t (in my opinion) coincide with consumer benefit, also their app is shit.
Also, Steam’s estimated revenue and the PC gaming market are numbers available from various sources. I’ve pointed out why your source is nonsense, and provided more accurate figures.
uses it to their benefit which doesn’t (in my opinion) coincide with consumer benefit
That’s changed from your original ‘behave like a monopoly’ comment, and which I’m still waiting for clarification on. How exactly do they behave like a monopoly supposedly does?
You post the same data now with article that doesn’t even have word “steam” in it. Your various sources weren’t linked. I think that clears why your source is “nonsense”.
Yes my words are changed because, you somehow read me saying multiple times of steam being monopoly in single use of phrase, steam behaves like a monopoly. I repeat, not liking one store doesn’t make me a fan of another, they both are horrible.
As for examples of anti-competitive behaviour, price matching that is being discussed in comments here is a big one, don’t you think?
No, Steam games do not have DRM by default. By default Steam is a mere download manager. For Steam DRM to be applied, the publisher has to run the drm_wrap command: partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/drm
Ok, sorry I was wrong. So I can filter out drmed games on steam, right?
Steamcmd looks unrelated, why would I need to use it? Also the wiki page only confirms my earlier thought about steam ui being horrible, whole article is avout how to install it and what kinds of problems exist, not telling how to do some basic things with it.
I wonder how much Epic games makes at the end of the day. most companies that do stuff like this operate at a huge loss, functioning only through investment capital until they starve out their competition and become the head of a monopoly at which point their investors become even more pointlessly wealthy. However I believe this works so often because those competitors are also operating off of investor capital and eventually their investors decide to sell out and switch teams to get some of their investment back. How does this work with Valve? Unlike companies previously discussed Valve is a privately held company and has control over their own company, as evidenced by the fact that they seem to make discissions in favor of long term goals instead of short term profits, a concept that has grown foreign to the US market. On top of the fact they are currently the leader in online game sales, I’m unsure how epic can justify, what i would assume, is a huge sum of money constantly paying for exclusives. Maybe im wrong and the pie is so large Epic is currently operating financially soundly. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Regardless we should all be happy that this market is not a clear cut monopoly, competition is a consumer win.
lemmy.world
Aktywne