Ashen, Announced as Coming to Steam and the Win10 Store, Now Exclusive to the Epic Store on PC *Update* Game Director Responds - Win10 Coming ASAP

[GhostTrick]

Freudian slip?

All my comments here have been 100% dispassionate. When I'm not chortling at the absurdity of it all.
You guys have been the ones consistently attacking folks who have no issue with using multiple storefronts to play the games they want. A few minutes ago, you called me a 'console warrior' for not going to bat for Valve.

Now my desire to see Valve give a larger cut of the pie to developers is being labeled 'blind hatred' by you.

Freudian slip, Indeed.

Click to shrink...

Now you seems more calm after I called you out, so it wasnt in vain :D
I mean, yes basically you've been calling out people with deaf tone arguments about blind love and "just a different launcher to click" on which shows how you talk about stuff you didnt touch.

People dont have a blind love for a client. What they care about is their features. What they care about is their wallet and their library.

And whenever I see you posting here, you talk high and belittle these people because as opposed to you, they are actual users and customers.

I mean, who in their right mind would tell people "Guys, dont be that mean toward that company because they force you into a subpar service by undercutting competition with monopolistic means". If it was any other industry, people would be like "Wait, you expect me to use an inferior product of a bad competitor just so that, eventually, that competitor becomes as good as the product I use already ?"
Just imagine OnePlus releasing a phone on par with the Galaxy S3 to compete against Galaxy S9.
Just imagine Samsung releasing a video streaming platform which doesnt support Livestreaming nor HD videos.

That's basically you right now. :O

I mean yeah, service matters. Why do you think since Steam became good, piracy rates dropped and more people bought stuff ?
Why do you think people suddenly started buying games on PC ?

Maybe, just maybe they see value in the service offered.
And yeah, you can dismiss that as much as you want but a storefront and a launcher are a service. If after 4 years of Steamspy Epic is not capable to offer descriptions on their store pages or basic controller support or regional pricing, the service sucks.

The customer is king.

 

[Sandersson]

Wow, why so much hate ? You seem to have a blinded hatred for a company or something here my friend. :")
Dont worry, everything's fine. If people dont want to download a broken client, it's their consumer choice ?
Why would you get so mad and upset because for once, consumers refuse to bend to a big publisher employing monopolistic anti consumer tactics such as moneyhatting ? If anything, you should be glad to see consumers reacting negatively, but instead it seems to drive you mad, I wonder why. :"")

Click to shrink...

NOOOOOOO Tencent decides what is competition, you dont! Even though every macroeconomics teacher in the world would roll their eyes if you told them that buying exclucivity for product X increases competition. You will buy the exclusivity and like it! Why? Because consoles do it too! Next Pryme is gonna tell us how storefronts should start billing customers for online play because hey, why not? You dont get to decide and you not deciding is competition and market economy!

 

[sheaaaa]

A few years ago I innocently bought the collector's edition of Age of Wonders 3 in a physical box with a DVD, only to find out that I had to install Steam in order to play the game.

This caused me a lot of mental pain, and it's part of the reason why I will hold a grudge against Steam forever. I simply don't want to install some kind of "launcher" software that will bloat my system.

Click to shrink...

Ok? Wouldn't that be on the developer or publisher of that game and what they offer in their physical version, not on Steam?

Besides which, I'm not sure if you're aware, Steam has a bunch of other stuff beyond Age of Wonders 3.

 

[Sandersson]

Now you seems more calm after I called you out, so it wasnt in vain :D
I mean, yes basically you've been calling out people with deaf tone arguments about blind love and "just a different launcher to click" on which shows how you talk about stuff you didnt touch.

People dont have a blind love for a client. What they care about is their features. What they care about is their wallet and their library.

And whenever I see you posting here, you talk high and belittle these people because as opposed to you, they are actual users and customers.

I mean, who in their right mind would tell people "Guys, dont be that mean toward that company because they force you into a subpar service by undercutting competition with monopolistic means". If it was any other industry, people would be like "Wait, you expect me to use an inferior product of a bad competitor just so that, eventually, that competitor becomes as good as the product I use already ?"
Just imagine OnePlus releasing a phone on par with the Galaxy S3 to compete against Galaxy S9.
Just imagine Samsung releasing a video streaming platform which doesnt support Livestreaming nor HD videos.

That's basically you right now. :O

I mean yeah, service matters. Why do you think since Steam became good, piracy rates dropped and more people bought stuff ?
Why do you think people suddenly started buying games on PC ?

Maybe, just maybe they see value in the service offered.
And yeah, you can dismiss that as much as you want but a storefront and a launcher are a service. If after 4 years of Steamspy Epic is not capable to offer descriptions on their store pages or basic controller support or regional pricing, the service sucks.

The customer is king.

Click to shrink...

All his post can be boiled down to: I play on consoles, consoles do it so why not pc?

 

[Golvellius]

Ok? Wouldn't that be on the developer or publisher of that game and what they offer in their physical version, not on Steam?

Besides which, I'm not sure if you're aware, Steam has a bunch of other stuff beyond Age of Wonders 3.

Click to shrink...

What I wanted to express is that what Steam cheerleaders are currently experiencing with the Epic Store exclusivity is exactly the same what people who do not want to use Steam for whatever reason are experiencing all the time a game forces them to use Steam.

 

[senpai]

Ashen is the best dark souls like game i have ever played....

so good...play it

 

[Pryme]

All his post can be boiled down to: I play on consoles, consoles do it so why not pc?

Click to shrink...

Not a single one of my posts can be boiled down to that summary.

Like I told one guy some days ago, I cannot be blamed for your comprehension issues.

 

[aevanhoe]

Buying games away from the competition is definitely a bad guy move. Even more so when they have literally nothing else to offer consumers. Go check the client out it's barren as hell. It doesn't even have a search function!

It's nice for devs and all but seriously this site is obsessed with devs. You shouldn't be so worried about devs when it's hinged to a move that negatively harms you as the consumer. You come before them.

Click to shrink...

Devs come before your search function and the fact you'll have to install another client.

You want more good games, original concepts, new ideas? This site is right to be obsessed with devs, because they are the ones making games - only natural. It's funny how some "consumers" want devs to earn as little money as possible - they hate IAP, they hate preorders, and now they'r against a store offering a smaller cut? Insane.

Especially for smaller devs, gamedev is a really tough gig and the stores are not exactly fair. 30% cut on top of tax? Devs go where the money is, and Epic store is great news. More competition is good for devs, for players, for the industry.

I'm sorry you'll have to install a whole new client on your PC, I know it's painful but I hope you get through.

 

[Dandy]

A big part of that is having Ashen featured in a place that isn't crowded and at an exciting time when a great new platform, one that genuinely wants to do the best for developers and players alike, first launches.

Click to shrink...

This has nothing to do with benefiting players.

 

[aevanhoe]

Have you actually read the posts in this thread?

Click to shrink...

Yes.

 

[aevanhoe]

These games arent there for the better rates but for the moneyhat.
https://www.gameinformer.com/2018/12/03/tim-sweeney-answers-questions-about-the-new-epic-games-store

What sort of exclusive games are going to come to this platform? Is exclusivity something you are thinking about?

Epic's own games are exclusive to the Epic Games Store on PC and Mac, and we'll sometimes fund developers to release games exclusively through the store.

Click to shrink...

Which is ok and fair. Exclusivity can help a small dev fund their title, and could push a bigger one to make the next God of War instead of Fallout 76.

 

[SirKai]

I desperately want and welcome some competition for Steam since Steam feels like a garbage dump right now, but that's because I want Steam to feel the pressure and improve further. Other clients/launchers are bare bones as hell and don't have anything nearing the feature set of Steam. I appreciate Epic giving a bigger cut to devs/pubs, and I think Valve should do that too (beyond their recent new announcement), but there's no way in hell I'm buying games for the same or similar price on a different service with a fraction of the features, options, and support.

 

[Sandersson]

Not a single one of my posts can be boiled down to that summary.

Like I told one guy some days ago, I cannot be blamed for your comprehension issues.

Click to shrink...

Why is locking games behind launchers competiton?

 

[Sandersson]

there's no way in hell I'm buying games for the same or similar price on a different service with a fraction of the features, options, and support.

Click to shrink...

You will, because you are forced to. /competition

 

[GhostTrick]

Which is ok and fair. Exclusivity can help a small dev fund their title, and could push a bigger one to make the next God of War instead of Fallout 76.

Click to shrink...

Exclusivity is fine as long as you fund the game to be made.
Moneyhatting a game close to release so that it doesnt release elsewhere isnt.

I doubt any of the exclusive titles on Epic Games store needed funds. Ashen is published by Annapurna, Satisfactory's studio was bought by THQ.

It's just straight up moneyhat.

 

[Deleted member 27771]

Exclusivity is fine as long as you fund the game to be made.
Moneyhatting a game close to release so that it doesnt release elsewhere isnt.

I doubt any of the exclusive titles on Epic Games store needed funds. Ashen is published by Annapurna, Satisfactory's studio was bought by THQ.

It's just straight up moneyhat.

Click to shrink...

Again with the "money hat". Stay edgy and living in the past.

 

[Truant]

Did someone just post that Steam ruined PC gaming?

 

[GhostTrick]

Again with the "money hat". Stay edgy and living in the past.

Click to shrink...

It's just what it is. If you aren't able to understate "fund titles to release exlusively on our store" I cant do much for you.
I mean, we basically have Epic saying "We'll pay people to release exclusively on our store".
What do we get ?
"Indies that were releasing their game on Steam delaying that release".

If you cant process two basic informations like this into a simple conclusion, I dont know what to tell you anymore. Maybe try to be less edgy ?

 

[DSP]

They didn't need funding, but they for sure needed exposure. Indie games live and die by exposure. Being on Epic store lineup and shown on game awards is the biggest exposure they could possibly get. They are among like only a dozen of games prominently featured on a store with the most popular game in the world.
On steam, they will be sharing with 100 others games on the frontpage then buried forever.

Look how many people are talking about it now, even if it's about it not being on steam, it's still being talked about, it makes the game much more sought after.

 

[Deleted member 27771]

It's just what it is. If you aren't able to understate "fund titles to release exlusively on our store" I cant do much for you.
I mean, we basically have Epic saying "We'll pay people to release exclusively on our store".
What do we get ?
"Indies that were releasing their game on Steam delaying that release".

If you cant process two basic informations like this into a simple conclusion, I dont know what to tell you anymore. Maybe try to be less edgy ?

Click to shrink...

So they made a business decision that upset you?

 

[GhostTrick]

So they made a business decision that upset you?

Click to shrink...

Oh, so you admit the moneyhat part then. :)
Good, see you only exchanged 2 messages with me and you're doing record progresses. :")

 

[Deleted member 27771]

Oh, so you admit the moneyhat part then. :)
Good, see you only exchanged 2 messages with me and you're doing record progresses. :")

Click to shrink...

So they made a business decision that upset you?

 

[Ge0force]

Did someone just post that Steam ruined PC gaming?

Click to shrink...

Yep. But don't worry; Epic and Tencent will save pc gaming by taking long awaited games away from Steam.

 

[GhostTrick]

So they made a business decision that upset you?

Click to shrink...

Upseting, no.
Anti-consumer, yes.
I vote with my wallet though, I'm not entitled to a good service, they're not entitled to my money.

 

[Deleted member 27771]

Upseting, no.
Anti-consumer, yes.
I vote with my wallet though, I'm not entitled to a good service, they're not entitled to my money.

Click to shrink...

Okay. I understand your perspective now.

 

[GhostTrick]

Okay. I understand your perspective now.

Click to shrink...

Which is ?

 

[LewieP]

Reading the statement from the game director, I'm curious as to whether they are contractually bound by Epic to not mention the word "Steam".

I'd feel a whole lot better about this stuff if the parties involved were more transparent.

 

[Deleted member 1759]

Reading the statement from the game director, I'm curious as to whether they are contractually bound by Epic to not mention the word "Steam".

Click to shrink...

Seriously. lmao

 

[SmAsH]

The hot takes in this thread are other-worldly. My god. Devs are entitled to take their game away from Steam, but also can't complain when their games potentially fail to a very paltry and basic store. Which is what I honestly think will happen. I'm fine with skipping them. I don't need another client to spread my library across. If they want to go exclusive on that "storefront", by all means, just don't bitch when your company/studio fails to make any money and you are forgotten. :)

 

[Sandersson]

Yep. But don't worry; Epic and Tencent will save pc gaming by taking long awaited games away from Steam.

Click to shrink...

Buying exclusive rights and creating monopolies is in the heart of competition.

 

[sheaaaa]

What I wanted to express is that what Steam cheerleaders are currently experiencing with the Epic Store exclusivity is exactly the same what people who do not want to use Steam for whatever reason are experiencing all the time a game forces them to use Steam.

Click to shrink...

Games are on Steam by default as a result of its tremendous success and userbase, gained by offering objectively the best store and features in the market. Steam has never paid for a game to be exclusive on its store. I mean fucking Age of Wonders 3 is available on Gog presumably DRM-free: https://www.gog.com/game/age_of_wonders_3

Games are on the Epic Store because Epic is paying them money not to be on Steam. These are not remotely comparable scenarios.

 

[Techno]

Reading the statement from the game director, I'm curious as to whether they are contractually bound by Epic to not mention the word "Steam".

I'd feel a whole lot better about this stuff if the parties involved were more transparent.

Click to shrink...

"Variety of platforms", we know what they mean lol.

 

[Valdega]

But somehow, Epic is able to make a living with a 12% cut, along with other Unreal Engine waivers.

Click to shrink...

Really? You do realize that Steam currently hosts over 20,000 games while the Epic Game Store has less than 20 (and less than 10 that can actually be downloaded and played right now)? It's safe to say that Steam's server costs and general maintenance expenses are significantly higher than the Epic Game Store's.

It's really not up to you to determine what 'competition' is. And no, they don't have to match Steam feature-for-feature to compete. Linux gaming and VR for example remain niche features that don't need to be in there day 1 to appeal to the vast majority of users.

Click to shrink...

You say these things but reality suggests otherwise. Origin, Uplay, Battle.net, Bethesda.net, etc, all offer basic feature sets. Unsurprisingly, people only use these platforms to play the games that require them. Steam is far more useful and that's why the majority of PC gamers actually want their games to be on Steam. It's true. Go to a gray market site like G2A or Kinguin and you'll notice that Steam keys and gifts are almost always more expensive than their equivalents on other platforms.

There's nothing inherently wrong with paying for 3rd party exclusives. Feels a lot less distasteful than seeing people become fanboys for a particular PC storefront.

Click to shrink...

It's a shitty practice because you're inconveniencing the majority of consumers, especially when your platform is woefully underdeveloped. Developers should be trying to get their games into the hands of as many players as possible and signing exclusivity deals tends to have the opposite effect.

No. It's basically launching with an inferior service, but nobody is saying there's no plan to improve the client over the years. Why are you spreading FUD? They have a viable product, able to hit the features that the majority of PC gamers want. They can work to add the extras over time.

Click to shrink...

You're ignoring history. People made the very same claims about Uplay and Origin when they first launched. Years later, these platforms still lack most of Steam's features. There's no reason to think Epic will be any different.

Look, I understand the desire for competition. However, competition needs to be driven by quality. If you want to compete with Steam, offer customers a better service. Don't resort to third-party exclusives in order to compensate for your platform's lack of appeal.

 

[qrac]

Looks like epic didn't pay the developers. Some people should apologize to the devs and epic. They, mostly the devs, need all the support they can get.

 

[LewieP]

"Variety of platforms", we know what they mean lol.

Click to shrink...

Exactly, which makes their dancing around the subject more curious.

I can't see why they'd do it unless they were contractually obliged to not mention Steam.

Maybe there's another explanation, but I can't think of one.

I think it would be noteworthy if Epic are requiring these developers to not mention Steam, or plans to release on Steam later. I think it would be better for players if developers were able to be transparent about their release plans, rather than being somewhat misleading.

 

[Techno]

Exactly, which makes their dancing around the subject more curious.

I can't see why they'd do it unless they were contractually obliged to not mention Steam.

Maybe there's another explanation, but I can't think of one.

I think it would be noteworthy if Epic are requiring these developers to not mention Steam, or plans to release on Steam later. I think it would be better for players if developers were able to be transparent about their release plans, rather than being somewhat misleading.

Click to shrink...

Agreed, especially when all of this pretty much happened over night. Could have given people some warning first.

Personally I won't be buying these games on Steam at launch, if or when they decide to sell them there, but when it's discounted - maybe. I've got too many games to play and once I see something I don't like it's not getting my money.

 

[Lukas Taves]

But that was like what, 14 years ago?

Any new storefront/launcher/client launching now would presumably have the benefit of seeing what the main player in this market is doing and try to one up them in some way or try to compete with features or novelty, like GOG with games being DRM free. All I'm seeing right now from Epic is a nicer cut for developers and Epic basically moneyhatting indies into some form of exclusivity for their games. So sure, that's nice for developers I guess but as a consumer what's in this for me? I have zero choice now in terms of where I can possibly play or buy those games from as they're locked down to one client. That's not competition or choice for the consumer.

Click to shrink...

So no one should get into the market unless they match the features and content that took steam 14 years to develop? That's a super reasonable take.

And it's competition, they are offering a game that if you want you have to consume it from there, you are not forced you can simply not buy it.

Make their own exclusives? Push their game giveaway promotion?

Click to shrink...

There's literally no difference from funding an exclusive from the start to making a deal. At least in this case the game will eventually launch elsewhere.

 

[JackOfSomeTrades]

I don't really understand why all these PC gamers, on the "open platform", are so happy with Steams monopoly. If they don't make exclusives then consumers have no reason to use Epics store, and Steam have no reason to rebalance the scales(70/30).

Epic's is another launcher that you can use on the very same hardware. A minor inconvienance, sure, but this is a move that'll help developers (who make the games you all love) have a better chance at survival. Recycling is an inconvience too, but we do that so that it'll bring about good change.

Let's do some simple Math:
For a €20 game, on Steam the developer receives €14
On Epic, they recieve €17.60
So €3.60 of a difference.
So for 10000 copies that's €36000, that's another developers wage for a year, and a low one at that.

The difference adds up quickly, so ask yourself if the minor inconvience is worth the health of the companies that actually make your games.

 

[Kathiel Rayna]

I don't really understand why all these PC gamers, on the "open platform", are so happy with Steams monopoly. If they don't make exclusives then consumers have no reason to use Epics store, and Steam have no reason to rebalance the scales(70/30).

Epic's is another launcher that you can use on the very same hardware. A minor inconvienance, sure, but this is a move that'll help developers (who make the games you all love) have a better chance at survival. Recycling is an inconvience too, but we do that so that it'll bring about good change.

Let's do some simple Math:
For a €20 game, on Steam the developer receives €14
On Epic, they recieve €17.60
So €3.60 of a difference.
So for 10000 copies that's €36000, that's another developers wage for a year, and a low one at that.

The difference adds up quickly, so ask yourself if the minor inconvience is worth the health of the companies that actually make your games.

Click to shrink...

This, as someone who is working on my own small UE4 project, the Epic Store option is extremely alluring, specially since the usual 5% Epic takes is included in the 12% if sold through their store.

 

[sredgrin]

It's moon logic to assume the sales will be similar. That extra 18 percent won't mean much if you could sell 2 or 3 (or many more) times as much on a different store

If CD Projekt Red can't even do well on Thronebreaker with 100 percent of their money going into their own pockets, breaking within 20 days their exclusivity, it's going to be very hard for anyone to do it.

 

[Nzyme32]

Exactly, which makes their dancing around the subject more curious.

I can't see why they'd do it unless they were contractually obliged to not mention Steam.

Maybe there's another explanation, but I can't think of one.

I think it would be noteworthy if Epic are requiring these developers to not mention Steam, or plans to release on Steam later. I think it would be better for players if developers were able to be transparent about their release plans, rather than being somewhat misleading.

Click to shrink...

As with console exclusivity of a third party game purely for the purpose of locking the game to a service /platform, if you were open about the game coming to X platform in future, people will wait and the point of a platform / service paying for exclusivity to them, is diminished.

By deceiving and obfuscating this fact from customers, you introduce doubt and uncertainty in customers looking / waiting for said game to be elsewhere, which is the goal here, to drive customers to this service / platform. It isn't a healthy way to do this necessarily, as many customers are not stupid. If your service offers far less to them beyond the game, they will complain about what they are seeing and some may push back. I feel this is certainly more true on PC, where users are generally strongly against this activity. Then when the game is available elsewhere that image for the game and company remains, sales can be affected also.

 

[sredgrin]

It's also fallacious to suggest the only way to compete is with exclusives. Ubisoft has made huge strides with Uplay because they compete on a price and availability front. If I want ACO I can go get a Uplay key on like 13 different sites, and at competitive prices that Steam or even base Uplay won't match. And so I buy nearly every Ubisoft game via Uplay despite preferring Steam.

 

[tuxfool]

This, as someone who is working on my own small UE4 project, the Epic Store option is extremely alluring, specially since the usual 5% Epic takes is included in the 12% if sold through their store.

Click to shrink...

That doesn't stop you from putting your game out elsewhere.

Epic's is another launcher that you can use on the very same hardware. A minor inconvienance, sure, but this is a move that'll help developers (who make the games you all love) have a better chance at survival.

Click to shrink...

If they pull this kind of bullshit, they're going to have to survive without my help. By all means they should sell in as many places as possible. What they shouldn't do is pull the rug out under me as a customer.

I prefer steam, but I bought Witcher 3 on GoG, because the developers asked nicely, and enticed me with something unique, namely a discounted price.

 

[SuikerBrood]

So you're not going to play a game because it's not coming to steam day one ? Or is it the play anywhere part ? Either way just play it and stop being outraged over silly things.

Click to shrink...

You don't watch things you wouldn't normally watch because they are on Netflix? I pay for a subscription service so I can play all kind of different games (besides games I buy). Ashen was supposed to come to Gamepass to PC (Now delayed, which is fine.. I can wait. (But communicate for gods sake)) so I was willing to try it out. I really do not care if a game is on Steam, the Epic Store or Origin personally. I do see the negatives in features and support like regional pricing, Linux support, friendlists hassle, etc.

Don't assume things.

 

[Stone Ocean]

I don't really understand why all these PC gamers, on the "open platform", are so happy with Steams monopoly. If they don't make exclusives then consumers have no reason to use Epics store, and Steam have no reason to rebalance the scales(70/30).

Epic's is another launcher that you can use on the very same hardware. A minor inconvienance, sure, but this is a move that'll help developers (who make the games you all love) have a better chance at survival. Recycling is an inconvience too, but we do that so that it'll bring about good change.

Let's do some simple Math:
For a €20 game, on Steam the developer receives €14
On Epic, they recieve €17.60
So €3.60 of a difference.
So for 10000 copies that's €36000, that's another developers wage for a year, and a low one at that.

The difference adds up quickly, so ask yourself if the minor inconvience is worth the health of the companies that actually make your games.

Click to shrink...

Steam isn't a monopoly. I can buy Steam games from a multitude of storefronts that compete in pricing with each other.

Also having to pay a much higher price due to no regional pricing isn't a "minor inconvenience".

 

[LewieP]

As with console exclusivity of a third party game purely for the purpose of locking the game to a service /platform, if you were open about the game coming to X platform in future, people will wait and the point of a platform / service paying for exclusivity to them, is diminished.

By deceiving and obfuscating this fact from customers, you introduce doubt and uncertainty in customers looking / waiting for said game to be elsewhere, which is the goal here, to drive customers to this service / platform. It isn't a healthy way to do this necessarily, as many customers are not stupid. If your service offers far less to them beyond the game, they will complain about what they are seeing and some may push back. I feel this is certainly more true on PC, where users are generally strongly against this activity. Then when the game is available elsewhere that image for the game and company remains, sales can be affected also.

Click to shrink...

Yep, this is pretty much what I was alluding to.

 

[cyress8]

Not a single one of my posts can be boiled down to that summary.

Like I told one guy some days ago, I cannot be blamed for your comprehension issues.

Click to shrink...

Kinda sad you did not respond to GhostTrick post.

 

[Ge0force]

I don't really understand why all these PC gamers, on the "open platform", are so happy with Steams monopoly. If they don't make exclusives then consumers have no reason to use Epics store, and Steam have no reason to rebalance the scales(70/30).

Click to shrink...

1) PC gamers don't want a monopoly. They want a choice where they buy and play their games. Epic buying store exclusivity takes that choice away.

2) PC gamers would have a reason to use Epic's store if it was actually better than steam. But it isn't, not by a long shot. Being forced to use a worse store to play a certain game because of a moneyhat isn't competition; it's anti-consumer.

Like I told one guy some days ago, I cannot be blamed for your comprehension issues.

Click to shrink...

My God, what's wrong with you? :(

 

[sheaaaa]

So no one should get into the market unless they match the features and content that took steam 14 years to develop? That's a super reasonable take.

Click to shrink...

Well yes, why should I care at all how difficult it is to match Steam's feature set? A new store is competing with Steam now, not Steam 14 years ago. A company releasing a new phone in 2018 is competing with today's iPhone, not the iPhone from 10 years ago. What a bizarre opinion.

 

[GhostTrick]

So no one should get into the market unless they match the features and content that took steam 14 years to develop? That's a super reasonable take.

Click to shrink...

Uh, YES ???!!!
It took 10 years for Youtube to arrive where they are.
Should we be fine if a new service launched without HD video support, livestreaming and such ?

Should we be fine when a 1st part hardware maker has a online service so bad there's no vocal chat of party ? Should we say "It took 15 years for Xbox Live to be like this !"

I swear the gaming industry is the most blind one. Either you're saying that because you have an agenda or because you're so used to publishers stomping and taking a dump on consumers that it sounds okay for you. I dont what's the worst between these two, honestly.