This coming from game journalism, which has just turned into a mouthpiece and constantly been used to lie about how good games are.
Funny how the date of this article comes out around the time that Amazon is failing, Epic is failing, Ubisoft is failing, and they’re failing because they hate the people that they sell their products to, and they refuse to be user-friendly and user-focused.
Steam isn’t perfect, but the reason why they’re a monopoly is they actually give a shit about gamers, unlike all of their competition.
Gamers aren’t a product, they’re a user, and Steam understands that offering the voice to those people makes their product what it is. The more users they have, the more money they make. They don’t need to nickel and dime and squeeze.
This is something that every single competitor they have had has just blatantly ignored.
The likeliest explanation is that games press lie about how good games are and not that they just have a different opinion than you? Also, this isn’t even a major outlet. It’s just some guy’s blog, not even exclusively about games.
It’s definitely happened before, though I couldn’t say to what extent. The reason has been that if they rate games from major developers too poorly they stop getting access to their new games before release.
I care very little about critics these days though, and it’s mostly for the reason you suggest, differing opinions. If they don’t like the same types of games I like, what good is their rating to me? I’m not taking the time to try to find a critic that has similar tastes as me.
The article author honestly made a very valid point, but wrapped it up with a terrible headline.
I even feel like the PS4 and Xbox One currently serve the use case of being “the cheap consoles”. There are a number of games they cannot run or would run poorly - but for their price point they’re much more of an option for the non-wealthy, primarily in other countries. It’s like it’s all one console generation with no signs of ending, and a varying range of specs.
This coming from game journalism, which has just turned into a mouthpiece and constantly been used to lie about how good games are.
Funny how the date of this article comes out around the time that Amazon is failing, Epic is failing, Ubisoft is failing, and they’re failing because they hate the people that they sell their products to, and they refuse to be user-friendly and user-focused.
Steam isn’t perfect, but the reason why they’re a monopoly is they actually give a shit about gamers, unlike all of their competition.
Gamers aren’t a product, they’re a user, and Steam understands that offering the voice to those people makes their product what it is. The more users they have, the more money they make. They don’t need to nickel and dime and squeeze.
This is something that every single competitor they have had has just blatantly ignored.
What a weaksauce article, spends most of the time arguing against itself, and the problem is most of the strawman arguments it sets up to argue against actually win in my opinion. Most of its arguments follow this kind of format:
I think that 2 + 2 = 5, now I know you might hear that 2 + 2 = 4, but the only thing that says that is thousands of years of math, and we can’t assume that’s going to continue into the future because Valve made a mistake doing math once.
Finally ends with some vague hypothetical about how even though they admit Valve is pretty good today, but still it will become evil someday because grr capitalism bad.
Steam is fantastic, they’ve made mistakes yes (Australia’s gaming laws are well known to be crazy for example so that’s not completely Valve’s responsibility) but on the whole they are doing great things and making money while doing it, which is great because a successful and profitable Steam is able to continue to do great things. Making money is not a sin if they do it fairly and ethically, and they do. 30% is a bargain for what they’re providing, especially the devoted audience which they have attracted (completely legitimately), and if you don’t agree it’s worth that 30% you’re welcome to distribute your game literally anywhere else.
It is. I really like the direction of the steam deck. A PC that’s very open, but still is able to hide most complexity from users that don’t care for that.
I figure we're coming to the end of discrete generations sooner or later. We're 4 years into the PS5's lifespan and plenty of games still launch on PS4 because they don't need PS5 hardware, and PS5 will run them anyway.
It doesn't make sense to upgrade to a PS5 Pro if you've already got a base PS5, just as it doesn't make sense to buy a new smartphone every year. But I can see the idea being that whenever you feel due for an upgrade, you buy whatever the current model is.
spacebar.news
Ważne