It remains to be seen, but yeah, the situation created isn't unlike the one with video streaming services. A shame.
This is why we got Japanese games on PC, it's important Capcom, Square, Bamco etc stick to Steam i think, i don't want another Gen 7 situation where great Japanese games skip PC due to low sales & Japanese devs moving to Epic games or whatever launcher comes out next week, will be a bad move.Ashen is already being pirated too, market fragmentation was one of the reasons why the PC was seen as sort of Wild West of gaming back in pre 2007, Steam managed to bring some consolidation and made PC market a serious choice for developers, and now we go back to being fragmented and with most serious buyers on Steam, don't anyone will bother to check out other stores in the first place.
For most people Steam is the first thing they open when they start up their PC, the rest of the launcher are relegated for their respective games and no more.
I've discussed this with others and am currently wondering what we'll see going forward. Especially in the case of indie devs who typically work with DRM free software and if there is DRM it's nothing to the scale of Denuvo typically.
Right now that's the major chunk of the software going to other platforms to get a potential higher chunk of profits which no one can blame them for. But it remains to be seen if said consumers will make that move with them or just ignore/go through other means to play their content.
Evidently, the OP, Epic, and Bethesda disagree. Or perhaps they would agree, but in an example of tragedy of the commons, will still take part in the degradation of the economic environment surrounding PC games. "There may not be room in the customer's heart for EVERY launcher, but we'll be damned if we don't do everything we can to make sure they use OUR launcher."The OP callback to "2007-2008 when everyone thought it was dying" (stated as a possible consequences multiples times in multiple threads by various people) is implying that piracy will go up at the cost of sales, not that both will rise.
But, I'm trying to imagine the headspace of a person, where they would have been perfectly fine paying full price for a game, but because they have to download another storefront they decide to pirate it instead? Are people really that stupid?
I think smaller first party AAA like Rage 2 will be fine. Remember it's Bethesda published game and Bethesda selling it on their own launcher means they get all the money. Those smaller AAA don't sell as much and at least in Bethesda's case almost of their recent single player titles have suffered a loss in sales. So specifically in their case they actually might just be better off releasing it on their own platform.Huge games (like the next Elder Scrolls) might be able to get away with launching on their own service but everyone else, from smaller AAA like Rage to big and small indie devs, is going to see a reduction in sales. I think that some developers seem to underestimate the value that a Steam game has to customers over a regular version. Which is utterly bizarre to me because many of them experienced first hand the lack of consumer interest for non-Steam games before Valve opened the floodgates and let everyone in.
Worse than customers pirating their games, I think that developers will see people become indifferent to their products once again. They are jeopardizing the overall health of the platform for short-term gains from an exclusivity moneyhat.
Huge games (like the next Elder Scrolls) might be able to get away with launching on their own service but everyone else, from smaller AAA like Rage to big and small indie devs, is going to see a reduction in sales. I think that some developers seem to underestimate the value that a Steam game has to customers over a regular version. Which is utterly bizarre to me because many of them experienced first hand the lack of consumer interest for non-Steam games before Valve opened the floodgates and let everyone in.
Worse than customers pirating their games, I think that developers will see people become indifferent to their products once again. They are jeopardizing the overall health of the platform for short-term gains from an exclusivity moneyhat.
This makes it sound less like it is about feature parity between different launches and Steam being such a market leader that it is borderline necessary to release there. If people feel as though the PC is incapable of handling more than one store (like most other platforms) then I think that should be the argument instead of bringing up features or regional pricing or other things that are seemingly irrelevant because of how dominant Steam is.Evidently, the OP, Epic, and Bethesda disagree. Or perhaps they would agree, but in an example of tragedy of the commons, will still take part in the degradation of the economic environment surrounding PC games. "There may not be room in the customer's heart for EVERY launcher, but we'll be damned if we don't do everything we can to make sure they use OUR launcher."
It's gamers. The answer to your last question is, sadly, always "yes"
Unfortunately epic have already stated that they don't plan on competing with features and sales.While I don't necessarily disagree with OP, I also think that there's never been a better time for another storefront to make a serious push into taking over the market. If Epic are serious about making the Epic store a big player, and I think they are, then they've timed it perfectly. A lot of the biggest games in the world aren't on Steam right now. Steam doesn't have Fortnight or World of Warcraft or Call of Duty or Destiny or Fallout and there are more and more games coming (Rage 2 just announced this) that aren't coming to Steam. Millions and millions of people are already using the Epic launcher every day to play Fortnite. If they're gonna try and expand, this is the time to make a move.
Gamers, especially on PC, have proven that they can make wise decisions on which company to support and which to reject.
Unfortunately epic have already stated that they don't plan on competing with features and sales.
If people pirate because it bothers them to have another program installed on their computer, fuck them.
Maybe. But unfortunately their initial statements offer not such carrots to consumers. It doesn't create a good impression.I'd be interested in seeing people's feature / other concerns communicated to Epic / whomever and seeing what their responses are. Maybe they would be interested in generating a similar feedback loop and maybe they have an interest in listening to / trying to better meet consumer needs. The seeming acceptance of the launch state of new stores and resorting to piracy because of inadequacies feels lazy and like some sort of "threat" being made by some people.
I've stated this already, I'm totally fine with publishers using their own launchers exclusively to sell their own games (& that isn't really competition). This is why I don't mind Bethesda selling Rage 2 on their store and at least in their case they might even make more money since their single player games outside of Elders Scrolls, Fallout and Doom don't much. Not so much when 3rd party titles go exclusive.Gamers didn't need Steam features to play Fortnite on the Epic launcher in their millions. They just needed an exclusive game.
This makes it sound less like it is about feature parity between different launches and Steam being such a market leader that it is borderline necessary to release there.
I don't know that there's just one correct argument, it comes down to each person's identification of what they value. Different people will be more or less loyal to a brand and more or less discerning on the basis of features. I have every faith in the honesty of posters when they discuss store choice based on customer featureset. Even with my recognition that my choices are largely based on misplaced loyalty to Steam though, I'm certainly aware of and appreciative of all the features that Steam offers, and can't honestly claim that the two things aren't related.This makes it sound less like it is about feature parity between different launches and Steam being such a market leader that it is borderline necessary to release there. If people feel as though the PC is incapable of handling more than one store (like most other platforms) then I think that should be the argument instead of bringing up features or regional pricing or other things that are seemingly irrelevant because of how dominant Steam is.
I don't even think this is necessarily a bad argument either. I know PC is meant to be a more open platform and there will always be multiple storefronts, but consoles and smartphones (mostly) provide at least some argument for a single major store. I guess trying to argue that would diminish some unique aspect of the PC compared to other platforms though so people might not want to argue this.
Gamers, especially on PC; have proven over and over that they support what harms them, yeah.
I've stated this already, I'm totally fine with publishers using their own launchers exclusively to sell their own games. This is why I don't mind Bethesda selling Rage 2 on their store and at least in their case they might even make more money since their single player games outside of Elders Scrolls, Fallout and Doom don't much. Not so much when 3rd party titles go exclusive.
Well it's true that selling on their store may mean they only make money from people who really want to play it and as such buy it new.Personally, I don't. I feel that the 500,000 or so sales of such games on Steam at launch are going to drop below 100,000 on publisher services.
It's both. A Steam game is more valuable because it offers more features to the buyer and it is available on the most popular service.
Pirating sucks but this isnt the issue here. The problem is some publishers dont seem to understand why and how Steam made the PC market shift in the last 8-10 years.
Sales arent everything. The service and the convenience also matters. I'll be honest about it: When I was younger, I used to pirate games on PC. Last time I did was in 2011 or so. I stopped. Why ? Because piracy, on top of being illegal and morally wrong, was also a hassle. Then I started to buy more games on Steam. Why ? Because it made everything so easier. I would have a download that would never expire. I would have an always up to date version. No need to crack. I'd have access to features and communities. And on top of that, the game I bought had value in the fact it was a legit product inside a good service.
So yes, if it was only price related, people would still pirate since free is better than 1 dollar.
Supporting Lootboxes; every time they start a hatemob to get a female dev fired or review bomb a game because it's too diverse. The forced lack of diversity is probably the biggest thing holding back PC gaming.
I'll start thinking highly of PC gamers when that shit stops. When one look at the steam forums shows me its sorry state, I know we're not there yet.
Who are "they"? Do "they" represent the entire group of human beings who happen to play a game on a personal computer?Supporting Lootboxes; every time they start a hatemob to get a female dev fired or review bomb a game because it's too diverse. The forced lack of diversity is probably the biggest thing holding back PC gaming.
I'll start thinking highly of PC gamers when that shit stops. When one look at the steam forums shows me its sorry state, I know we're not there yet.
Yeah a f2p game is same thing totallyGamers didn't need Steam features to play Fortnite on the Epic launcher in their millions. They just needed an exclusive game.
Supporting Lootboxes; every time they start a hatemob to get a female dev fired or review bomb a game because it's too diverse. The forced lack of diversity is probably the biggest thing holding back PC gaming.
I'll start thinking highly of PC gamers when that shit stops. When one look at the steam forums shows me its sorry state, I know we're not there yet.
Releasing a new digital platform/store for PC games isn't creating competition for Steam? If it succeeds Steam will be forced to make better offers to players and developers.
It's a claim made before by this user.I'm seriously confused as to why you think these are PC-centric issues when it's plainly obvious that most other platforms have just as big or even bigger issues with exploitative monetization and bigotry. Do you have any data to support this outrageous claim?
Players? What is this store making Steam offer to players, that it doesn't already?Releasing a new digital platform/store for PC games isn't creating competition for Steam? If it succeeds Steam will be forced to make better offers to players and developers.
Releasing a new digital platform/store for PC games isn't creating competition for Steam? If it succeeds Steam will be forced to make better offers to players and developers.
While I don't necessarily disagree with OP, I also think that there's never been a better time for another storefront to make a serious push into taking over the market. If Epic are serious about making the Epic store a big player, and I think they are, then they've timed it perfectly. A lot of the biggest games in the world aren't on Steam right now. Steam doesn't have Fortnight or World of Warcraft or Call of Duty or Destiny or Fallout and there are more and more games coming (Rage 2 just announced this) that aren't coming to Steam. Millions and millions of people are already using the Epic launcher every day to play Fortnite. If they're gonna try and expand, this is the time to make a move.
Are you really implying that it's somehow our fault that publishers which have stopped releasing games on Steam in favor of exclusivity to their own stores are seeing far fewer sales as a result?Gamers, especially on PC; have proven over and over that they support what harms them, yeah. Companies like Activision Blizzard or EA or Ubisoft aren't doing as well as they are doing due to consoles. Quite the opposite, in fact.
It's a big shame, I'm not looking forward to having to switch to consoles for everything. Upgrading a PC would've been easier. But if that's where the indies will be, that's where I'll go. :)
You seem to be ignoring that Fortnite is free-to-play.Gamers didn't need Steam features to play Fortnite on the Epic launcher in their millions. They just needed an exclusive game.
I'm just going to paste my response from another topic, since people keep blindly repeating that "it's just another launcher":But.. you have most of the same convenience in other games stores. You don't have drive somewhere to buy a game. You click a pair of ties to buy a game, and you click a another time to play an installed game. As you say, no need of downloading it before, no need of updates or crack. Baam, convenience!
It doesn't sound like a hassle?
I posted it in another topic yesterday, but this is what the experience of trying to play a Uplay game with a controller is like on PC:
Don't tell me that "it's just another launcher" as if that alone does no harm to the experience of even just trying to get into the game.
- Two UAC prompts that require a password to be entered via a keyboard (Steam's on-screen keyboard can't work on the protected desktop).
- A prompt from Uplay which requires keyboard & mouse interaction to launch the game, that appeared behind the Steam window. There is often another one for a 2FA code as well.
- This process broke the Steam Overlay from being injected, so I cannot use Steam Input with it (Steam Controller/DualShock 4 with gyro aiming). Sometimes it does work, for whatever reason.
- Quitting the game kicks me back to a blank Uplay window overlaying the screen, rather than taking me back to Steam. Uplay will often display a pop-up ad after quitting games too.
It took more than two minutes before I was even at the menus, while Steam games launch in seconds without any of that hassle.
And that's ignoring all the other problems with these games being exclusive to a much worse storefront, as removing consumer choice is never a good thing for us.
The last thing I want is to go back to 2007-2008 when everyone thought it was dying.
If the store is shitty and makes those games sell poorly, it won't happen again and they'll go back to steam. That's how competition works.It isn't. Locking games behind one single store is monopoly. There's nothing Steam can do to get these games. If you want Microsoft's games, you probably have to use the most broken store out there. Have "competition" helped in that regard? It's as broken as ever. Use our shitty store or forget about our games. No matter how much Valve improve Steam, you won't see Blizzard, EA, Bethesda or Microsoft release their games there. So no, it's not competition.
Where is the "pirates don't intend on buying the game anyway" brigade?
A company using their own storefront to sell you their game on PC isn't a monopoly. Despite the fact there are multiple launchers of dubious quality in the end you still get to play the game on PC so the outrage here is unwarranted. With more launchers you have more options to acquire games digitally on PC unlike on console. You can gripe about the games you want to play not being on Steam all you want but in the end it's not that big of a deal.It isn't. Locking games behind one single store is monopoly. There's nothing Steam can do to get these games. If you want Microsoft's games, you probably have to use the most broken store out there. Have "competition" helped in that regard? It's as broken as ever. Use our shitty store or forget about our games. No matter how much Valve improve Steam, you won't see Blizzard, EA, Bethesda or Microsoft release their games there. So no, it's not competition.