Steam, Origin, uPlay, Bethesda, Epic, W10 Store, Rockstar Social Club, GoG Galaxy, where's the line?

[Ploid 6.0]

I'm glad Steam isn't the only big player anymore. I just don't like having to launch their store to play the games I buy. I try to keep background programs to a minimal, and this is becoming a pain.

Click to shrink...

This reminds me of another thing I don't like about steam for me*, sometimes for whatever reason it starts to take up a lot of CPU resources. I have to use steam a lot because I really like the Steam Controller and Steam Input, but even if I'm not using the Steam Input/Controller it sometimes hogs a lot of resources. I have to quit the game and relaunch steam hoping that it would back off. I never really found out how to totally prevent it from ever happening again, or why it happens. Nothing was installing, downloading, or decrypting.

 

[Gestault]

The big problem with this argument is that itch.io already exists and addresses basically everything a developer wants. The problem with itch.io is that the number of people who buys games there is negligible. Arguing that competition for developers and publishers is mutually exclusive from competition for customers is silly.

Click to shrink...

That wasn't what he was saying. He was more or less saying that storefronts compete for publishers through (among other things) overhead cost, and that ignoring that would be missing out on a big part of the picture. There wasn't anything about being mutually exclusive.

 

[Huddy]

Steam and BNet that's my personal line, if the titles I'm interested in don't show up on those I'll pass. Fortunately it's not really been an issue to this point as EA and Ubisoft titles don't interest me.

 

[Budi]

I don't know about you, but I regularly have to update my PC hardware to play the newest games.

Click to shrink...

Umm sure, but you don't have to buy another PC on the side. You can play all the PC games on the same hardware, I can't play all console games on one console. Console players need to buy new hardware to play new games and different hardware on the same gen. I think that's bigger inconvenience than downloading a launcher, that's all I was saying.

 

[Tracygill]

I mean what's really needed is a program that pulls from all the platforms and displays your games in one place,

Click to shrink...

What's wrong with a folder filled with program shortcuts to all your games?

 

[Gestault]

I don't know about you, but I regularly have to update my PC hardware to play the newest games.

Click to shrink...

I figured they were talking about [buying different consoles] vs [using a different launcher on the same PC].

 

[Tracygill]

I mean what's really needed is a program that pulls from all the platforms and displays your games in one place,

Click to shrink...

What's wrong with a folder filled with program shortcuts pointing to all your games?

 

[Mozendo]

It doesn't matter to me since
1. Complaining that there are too many choices on an open platform and wanting a steam monopoly or less choices seems silly.
2. It takes less than an minute to open up the launcher and start the game I want.

 

[Kinthey]

It sure is annoying, but compared to the exclusivity battles between console publishers this is overall quite harmless.

 

[Adamska]

There is no line. Different clients will never "break" PC gaming, and you only ever have to use one if a game you really like is not out for other clients anyway. And, yes, publishers will keep their biggest products on their own ecosystem in order to make the most out of it. Wanting any game to be on a client of your own preference is pure entitlement.

 

[Lashley]

It's annoying as fuck, but apparently this is "competition". Locking shit to different storefronts.

 

[newmoneytrash]

They're just storefronts, not platforms. Outside of the lack of regional pricing on some it's not like the cost you money to use

I don't understand these complaints and would never want less options for the sake of convenience

 

[Ploid 6.0]

I don't know about you, but I regularly have to update my PC hardware to play the newest games.

Click to shrink...

A long time ago? My old 2012 PC can still play a lot of the current games, the only problem it may run into is some odd requirement in CPU like No Man's Sky being a problem for some AMD CPUs that didn't have SSE 4 or something. I gave it to my nephew and he's blazing through current popular games with a huge smile on his face. 1080p 60 fps with some settings changed? No problem for him. Funny enough, the only reason I updated some of the parts, which lead to two PCs, was because I wanted even faster framerates on Marvel Heroes just because, and it's now dead.

 

[OniluapL]

They're just storefronts, not platforms. Outside of the lack of regional pricing on some it's not like the cost you money to use

I don't understand these complaints and would never want less options for the sake of convenience

Click to shrink...

It is less options. More options would be if the games were in all of the platforms and so you could choose which to buy.

 

[flaxknuckles]

I wish Valve would give Steam Machines another try because at this point I think that's the only thing that'd get these publishers back onto Steam. Just go hard with one powerful sku so as not to confuse anyone, subsidize that shit, and make some exclusives. Do it Valve, save us from all these clients and make Linux gaming thrive at the same time.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

Why would I want to give Valve 30% margin on my biggest games opposed to taking it myself?

Unless the market outright rejects it its not going anywhere

 

[Gestault]

It is less options. More options would be if the games were in all of the platforms and so you could choose which to buy.

Click to shrink...

Their point is that on the same computer, you can play any of the games, regardless of the storefront. They're not saying the software selections on those storefronts are identical.

 

[HighFive]

Netflix, Hulu, Crave, HBO, Disney, Amazon, is the same thing but with movies and shows.

Id love to have only at one place to look at for everything, but its not possible, and for gaming, its the same story. I though Netflix will cut cable charge, it does, the difference is now that we can choose tompay for what we want.

For gaming? At least the application are free, and we can choose how and what we want separatly. Sucks, but everybody want his market share.

 

[Atom Heart Mother]

Dump every launcher except Steam and Battle.net. Uplay is trash, Origin is shit, Epic Store or whatever will probably suck too. Bethesda is trash.

 

[OniluapL]

Their point is that on the same computer, you can play any of the games, regardless of the storefront. They're not saying the software selections on those storefronts are identical.

Click to shrink...

What was written is "would never want less options for the sake of convenience". I'm answering the second line, not the first.

 

[Goldenroad]

IKEA, Home Depot, Walmart, Best Buy, Amazon, Target, K-mart, Costco, Walgreens, Kroger, CVS....where's the line? I don't want to shop at all those stores...and guess what, I don't have to! I don't have to shop at any of them if I don't want to.

 

[Ploid 6.0]

Netflix, Hulu, Crave, HBO, Disney, Amazon, is the same thing but with movies and shows.

Id love to have only at one place to look at for everything, but its not possible, and for gaming, its the same story. I though Netflix will cut cable charge, it does, the difference is now that we can choose tompay for what we want.

For gaming? At least the application are free, and we can choose how and what we want separatly. Sucks, but everybody want his market share.

Click to shrink...

It would be the same to me if I only had to subscribe to one. Adding a new launcher to my PC costs nothing. A few seconds to put the launcher exe in my start menu group square is just a few clicks. Sometimes I don't even need to do that and am able to launch its games directly, especially if it's drm or steamworks(?) free.

 

[no1]

Steam and BNet that's my personal line, if the titles I'm interested in don't show up on those I'll pass. Fortunately it's not really been an issue to this point as EA and Ubisoft titles don't interest me.

Click to shrink...

Plus Ubisoft offers all their games on Steam anyways.

Also could I just point out something I saw that struck me as really fucking odd in the EULA for Epics Launcher.

Epic may update the Software remotely without notifying you, and you hereby consent to Epic applying patches, updates, and upgrades.

Click to shrink...

As far as I can see this isn't in any other storefronts EULA. This has me specifically concerned at their practices and basically just got me to uninstall the launcher from my system.

 

[no1]

IKEA, Home Depot, Walmart, Best Buy, Amazon, Target, K-mart, Costco, Walgreens, Kroger, CVS....where's the line? I don't want to shop at all those stores...and guess what, I don't have to! I don't have to shop at any of them if I don't want to.

Click to shrink...

But Walmart, Amazon, CVS, Best Buy, Target, K-Mart, Costco all have stuff in common they sell. Consoles, food, brands are sometimes the same, etc.

 

[Deleted member 28815]

I don't use any launchers outside of Steam and GoG, but I think it will be interesting to see how successful (or not) Epic is at incentivizing their service with developers. Can't recall the engine/storefront combo being done like this before.

 

[newmoneytrash]

What was written is "would never want less options for the sake of convenience". I'm answering the second line, not the first.

Click to shrink...

It's not less though? How is it less. If anything it's just the same, but the Epic games aren't all going to be exclusive, so ultimately it is more

 

[Ge0force]

I buy my games in the store that offers me the best value (features, pricing, open nature etc). I don't need all my games in a single store or ecosystem.

But I won't support any store that tries to lock down pc gaming (windows store) or money hats 3rd party devs to prevent them from launching games in competing storefronts. F*ck these shitty practices.

 

[robjoh]

I am actually only using two store fronts GOG and Steam. However I don't see why there should be a line. If you want a line just don't buy a game. There is so many games out there that I fail to see how anyone can be upser over that one game is on another store front. Don't like a new store front don't spend your money at the store front.

 

[razakin]

I wonder when piracy will be more popular if this annoying movement of everyone having their own launcher continues. Hasn't the same thing happened with TV shows now that there's way too many services to subscribe. Especially in the US?

 

[OniluapL]

It's not less though? How is it less. If anything it's just the same, but the Epic games aren't all going to be exclusive, so ultimately it is more

Click to shrink...

For instance, Annapurna as a publisher seems to be putting all of their games in Epic exclusively, when they would be on Steam and potentially GOG (they had games there before). I don't know if the exclusivity deal impedes them from selling keys on Humble, GMG and other sites (Do Epic even has this feature?), but if so, that's even less options. So, yeah, a game that could be bought in many different platforms now can only be bought in one.

 

[Gestault]

What was written is "would never want less options for the sake of convenience". I'm answering the second line, not the first.

Click to shrink...

This will come out snarky, but I don't mean it to be, I'm just trying to help spell this out:

They said (narrowing it to the second line): "I...would never want less options for the sake of convenience."

They're saying different storefronts are different options. They're recognizing that stores aren't identical. They're saying they'd rather have more stores, even if it means purchases are spread out, because the result is more variety.​

> You responded: "It is less options. More options would be if the games were in all of the platforms and so you could choose which to buy."

That doesn't follow at all; It's a nonsense response. There's nothing that prevents playing [Game A] and [Game B] if you buy them from different stores. You want consolidation that they don't, which is a fine point of disagreement, though I'm not aware of a time when all digital retailers had identical libraries, which is what your rationale would rely on.​

 

[Deleted member 2785]

Why would I want to give Valve 30% margin on my biggest games opposed to taking it myself?

Click to shrink...

This question is why the PC market is where it is.

 

[Zojirushi]

At some point I will have more launcher apps installed than actual games lol

 

[Ploid 6.0]

But Walmart, Amazon, CVS, Best Buy, Target, K-Mart, Costco all have stuff in common they sell. Consoles, food, brands are sometimes the same, etc.

Click to shrink...

Sometimes, they usually have exclusive products like Marth Stewart had with Kmart or something, and Walmart has a lot of things that you only find there. I don't know about Ikea, but it seems like they are the place to go for their Ikea stuff?

 

[Goldenroad]

But Walmart, Amazon, CVS, Best Buy, Target, K-Mart, Costco all have stuff in common they sell. Consoles, food, brands are sometimes the same, etc.

Click to shrink...

And same with these services. There is some overlap, and there are some things that are only available at one place or another.

 

[no1]

This question is why the PC market is where it is.

Click to shrink...

Uh doesn't Xbox and Sony also take 30%, and doesn't Nintendo take more then 30?

 

[Ploid 6.0]

Remember when people were very disappointed that steam users would have to opt in to show their games to the public, because of steam sale numbers and stuff? Maybe this is part of why people want steam to be the only place to play PC games as well, part of the reason*.

 

[OniluapL]

This will come out snarky, but I don't mean it to be, I'm just trying to help spell this out:

They said (narrowing it to the second line): "I...would never want less options for the sake of convenience."

They're saying different storefronts are different options. They're recognizing that stores aren't identical. They're saying they'd rather have more stores, even if it means purchases are spread out, because the result is more variety.​

> You responded: "It is less options. More options would be if the games were in all of the platforms and so you could choose which to buy."

That doesn't follow at all; It's a nonsense response. There's nothing that prevents playing [Game A] and [Game B] if you buy them from different stores.​

Click to shrink...

But my point is that, the way I see it, I don't have a option. I can only buy the game I want in only one place instead of choosing between them. I understand, I'm just disagreeing with the view. I only have a - singular - option of where to buy a game I want. How is the result more variety? The problem isn't the extra launcher, is the exclusivity.

 

[Gloomz]

I buy my games in the store that offers me the best value (features, pricing, open nature etc). I don't need all my games in a single store or ecosystem.

But I won't support any store that tries to lock down pc gaming (windows store) or money hats 3rd party devs to prevent them from launching games in competing storefronts. F*ck these shitty practices.

Click to shrink...

I'm seeing this a lot, specifically in terms of the exclusivity deals that have been announced recently for the EPIC games launcher, and I am curious - does this work both ways for you?

What I mean is, do you also feel this way towards the game developer for entering into these exclusivity deals?

Let's say after a year when the deal runs its course, and the devs then start releasing their games on other storefronts. Do you wait until then to buy the game or just pass on it completely due to these practices?

 

[Lothars]

But my point is that, the way I see it, I don't have a option. I can only buy the game I want in only one place instead of choosing between them. I understand, I'm just disagreeing with the view. I only have a - singular - option of where to buy a game I want. How is the result more variety? The problem isn't the extra launcher, is the exclusivity.

Click to shrink...

The other issue IMO is it's third party games that were not exclusive to anything until epic decided to buy exclusivity. If it was just the first party stuff than that is understandable.

Let's say after a year when the deal runs its course, and the devs then start releasing their games on other storefronts. Do you wait until then to buy the game or just pass on it completely due to these practices?

Click to shrink...

It might turn out I will never buy them or I will wait till the exclusivity is done and buy them there, It depends on the game and how much I really care about it but I do know I will not be buying any of these for a long time.

 

[JaggedSac]

The line is where the market decides it will be. Simple.

 

[Nooblet]

Origin, battle.net, epic launcher etc are not competition to steam when they offer exclusive content.

Additionally Steam does not have a monopoly in PC gaming. GMG and Cdkeys are stores too and people buy from them often enough for steam to get competition. Just because those stores sell codes that can be redeemed on steam doesn't mean Steam has a monopoly. It just means that despite buying from their competitor I can still launch the game from my preferred launcher.


Additionally all these other launchers do not have regional pricing, which is why I barely use them. Basically Origin and Battle.net are the only non steam launchers I use with Uplay being kind of like just there as you need it even if you have the game on steam since Ubi games is it for their network. At least Ubi doesn't prevent its game from being sold on steam.

 

[Deleted member 2785]

Uh doesn't Xbox and Sony also take 30%, and doesn't Nintendo take more then 30?

Click to shrink...

But because of, wait for it... compeition... that competing storefronts can offer more attractive terms.

 

[TheMadTitan]

Keys can be bought in launchers and they can be bought on Amazon, Green Man Gaming, and so on. That's good enough for me.

Sure, it's annoying to have 8575 launchers for games, but a game being on Steam or not on Steam doesn't impact me because it's still on PC, which is what matters most. Games locked behind launchers aren't generally locked from other stores, so I'm good. Cracking open Origin, uPlay, and eventually Epic's shit to play a game isn't that big of an issue to me. I launch all of my games through Launchbox anyway. And eventually, all launchers are just going to be open on startup, so once I'm in game, I won't even notice anything different.

This is an issue for price sensitive markets, but as long as Humble, Fanatical, and GMG exist, there's still some alleviation to that in some markets at least. And I'm sure everyone else will adapt to market pricing if it's not already there.

 

[blizzardjesus]

I'm for anything that finally Kills Steam.

GOG is the only service that lets you download the executable and doesn't require and online handshake to prove ownership.

 

[sprinkles]

I guess I am a console warrior now because I want my games primarily on the one available store client which has a TV mode interface with In-Home-Streaming as I am playing pretty much all of my games via Steam Link in the living room and the PC is in the home office...

 

[GhostTrick]

This question is why the PC market is where it is.

Click to shrink...

Pretty simple: Because back in 2008 the PC market was a total clusterfuck that big western publishers didn't want to touch with a 10 foot pole. Major AAA Western titles would always be delayed or not even release there. Piracy was the boogeyman and the reason to not release stuff. Even before, it was also a clusterfuck and the platform was in dire need of centralisation.

People keep babbling about "PC is about openess" and it's true. But it's not about having 10 different online clients to organize a game. I remember the days of XFire or Gamespy. I remember the unconvenient days where you had to download a patch on some weird russian website for X or Y game. Then Steam in 2008 consolidated the entire market. Made things more convenient and gave a service that made people buy PC games again. Slowly and slowly, publishers got back. Japanese publishers, who were used to not even release shit on PC, are now making day and date releases on PC.

Basically with Steam we got a good platform that is the most open one. We keep getting hardware/vendor agnostic features and such to make everything works easily and better. We got sales (because ffs if it wasn't for this, we'd get no sales on PSN/XBL today. I should remind everyone that according to EA, sales were devaluating their IP and games). We got more indies (because, then again to all the people whining about competition, one generation ago, indies had to hope a publisher would help them to be published on XBLA or PSN). And then all the people that kept claiming that PC is dead came back.

And now we're at a point were uninformed people keep telling us about how competition is fantastic and that something that isn't broken needs to be fixed... with a broken solution that is Origin, Bethesda.net, Epic Store. Heck, may I recall everyone that in 2018 Battle.net has region locked friend lists ?

Basically, what we have now is the "fuck you, got mine" thinking, with indies complaining about open platforms because they have to compete with other indies, publishers moneyhatting games because "it's good for us in the end if they become bigger, because they promised to be kind to us if Valve ever start fucking up".

People tend to forget so easily how much this market was in a sorry state barely 10 years ago.

 

[Virtua Saturn]

It doesn't bother me one bit. More opportunity for sales and developers making more money. It may be a little annoying to manage multiple launchers but it's less annoying than buying multiple consoles.

 

[GhostTrick]

I'm for anything that finally Kills Steam.

GOG is the only service that lets you download the executable and doesn't require and online handshake to prove ownership.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, let's kill the launcher that support native controller from 3rd party vendors, VR headset from every vendors and is open to indies.

Let's kill it because reasons.

 

[Jonscrambler]

not a problem for me, why should Valve just get 30% of every PC game sold?