They argument is that they should've just switched over to OpenVR, which is feature identical to SteamVR and also developed by Valve - the only difference is SteamVR simply launches steam to run. This implies that, like basically every other game thus far announced for EGS, it was made exclusive right about when it was going to launch on Steam.
Depends on how much of the steam specific features they used when using the library.
I reported the post but apparently eventually saying sorry and editing your post is enough to not get a warning or getting banned.
I think they do, OP has done the same to me and by the looks of it others as well. I'm sure they took that into consideration.
Sure but for the meantime they can use SteamVR since it's free and robust. I rather them use a properly working and proven system on my game, I don't care about their business politics and what-not
If you don't care, you don't care.
Is steamVR some philanthropic endeavor? Valve isnt doing you any free favors.
I get the thread, but as a consumer I would rather them use a proven system for a product I will purchase. Valve lets them, why not us? Maybe they paid them for a wholesale use of the system?
Oh wow, I explained above, never thought you guys would be so aggressive on this :)
The discussion revolves more around the fact that EGS or Tim Sweeny the person in charge has consistently stated steam doesn't deserve their cut when they have created tools such as steam vr for many to use. It's sort of ironic when you see the bare influence they've brought to the market and how feature less their launcher is.
Good to know then. Can't see all posts all the time so thanks for clarifying
I understand the Tim is a hypocritical snake. I understand that EGS needs a LOT of work, I use the launcher so I know (lol at cart tho honestly given how few the games are in there). But as a consumer, I'm just stating that they should use a proven system if it's available, unless of course if Valve pulls it
There is no "meantime", they don't care on bettering a service and they've said as much. Their MO is exclusivity, not making the platform itself.
True, given how slow their updates are on their own launcher, so they should just use SteamVR as long as they can.
As a consumer, I think you should also want the game to be on multiple storefronts that will attempt to compete on pricing or even on features.
Is it not in valve's best interest that a developer uses steamVR? So who's benefiting from who here.
I'm not sure how Steam VR being used by a game exclusive to another store front has any effect on Valve at all, except possibly through the cost of supporting that developer?
I don't see how it's in valves best interest at all when it's not selling on their store or generating any revenue. More like it wouldn't matter to them
Of course, i'm not advocating otherwise, in fact I rather buy the game on Steam but the reality right now is that the game isn't on it. And if I buy it I rather they use a proven system
Steamvr is a wrapper for a more up to date, developed version of openvr. Steamvr tends to work better than openvr in a lot of cases. Im almost positive when using steamvr api it will launch the steamvr client but this is not the steam client/ store.
Subnautica is also on steam.
Sorry if I'm a bit dim, but how does SteamVR becoming the standard directly benefit Valve though, over OpenVR becoming the standard? Valve isn't collecting license fees, and SteamVR being included in third party's store exclusives doesn't seem like it'd translate into any addition sales on Steam.
Well then. I had not noticed this. It was under our noses the whole time.
Youre launching steam. You have to download steam. That doesnt help valve?
But... It doesn't exactly launch steam? It's not on steam right now, it's on EGS.
Oh, does it actually require the launch of the client just as if you were launching it yourself? Does SteamVR work even if you don't login, even if you don't even have a Steam account, just so long as the client is open at all?
