-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
"No Steam No Buy" an explanation about competition, launchers, storefronts and monopolies on PC.
- Thread starter GhostTrick
- Start date
- Status
OP
OP
Well, Fortnite is a F2P online only title.
What I worry is that they're basically bringing more logins, even on consoles, different trophies list on consoles, basically nearly another ecosystem save for a store, on consoles too.
Same boat. I'd go even further and say that you shouldn't even have bought those games if booting up a different launcher is what dissuades you from playing them.
You are talking as if the devs just flipped a coin to decide, instead of pondering their options and deciding what they think is best for them. It's fine if you disagree with their choice, but I'm willing to bet their opinion is much better informed than yous.
I think the implications could also be universal cross buy. I realize everyone would be kicking and screaming but that's a potential path this leads down.
I don't understand why people are acting like in 18 months time, or even further out, the Epic Games Store will be the same as it is today.
You're comparing a service that has evolved over 15 (?) years to a store that launched like a week ago and has 3 games on it currently. Lol.
It's going to grow and evolve. People will either hate it, not care either way, or like it. If it's horrible, it will fail. If not, it won't.
You're comparing a service that has evolved over 15 (?) years to a store that launched like a week ago and has 3 games on it currently. Lol.
It's going to grow and evolve. People will either hate it, not care either way, or like it. If it's horrible, it will fail. If not, it won't.
All I'm gonna say is Epic gonna have to moneyhat like Dark Souls 4 if they want me to download their thing. Moneyhatting a bunch of indie games is an... interesting strategy I guess.
Doubt it'll work as I really think people will wait the year then buy those games on Steam or wait longer for a sale. I just don't think people care about the developer cut more than their own convenience, but maybe I'll be wrong.
Doubt it'll work as I really think people will wait the year then buy those games on Steam or wait longer for a sale. I just don't think people care about the developer cut more than their own convenience, but maybe I'll be wrong.
OP
OP
Too bad everything is coming Q2/Q3 2019. No cloud saves, etc until then.
Funny thing is, if they'd launched their store with all the stuff described in that post (which is less than what Steam offers me currently, but better than Origin, for instance), and correct regional pricing for my region, I'd have zero problems buying games from them.
Why should rich corporations be given a benefit of the doubt for not launching a good product?
And why should we give Epic a handicap because they came to the PC market late? And especially late after calling PC gamers, pirates for a generation?
Nice write-up. While I don't necessarily agree with a lot of it, I can appreciate the argument being made.
That being said, can I please get some sources on the section about Steam Sales? I'm fairly certain that sale prices are dictated by the publisher or developer, not Valve. There may be some sales that utilize a model where Valve eats the cost of the sale, but for the most part I was certain that it is either a locked payout to Valve, or a shared risk discount between Valve and the publisher/developer.
As someone who utilizes Steam on a daily basis, the absolute largest knock I have against it is how ridiculously ugly it is. I find the Epic Store much more aesthetically pleasing from a design perspective, and have been happy to have it (and Hades) on my computer so far.
That and the fact that Steam customer support is non-existant.
That being said, can I please get some sources on the section about Steam Sales? I'm fairly certain that sale prices are dictated by the publisher or developer, not Valve. There may be some sales that utilize a model where Valve eats the cost of the sale, but for the most part I was certain that it is either a locked payout to Valve, or a shared risk discount between Valve and the publisher/developer.
As someone who utilizes Steam on a daily basis, the absolute largest knock I have against it is how ridiculously ugly it is. I find the Epic Store much more aesthetically pleasing from a design perspective, and have been happy to have it (and Hades) on my computer so far.
That and the fact that Steam customer support is non-existant.
Last edited:
In general I agree with this post. If I have the option of buying it on Steam or Epic games store at the same price ill get it on Steam all day.
The way Epic is trying to strongarm people into using their store is not very consumer friendly however I think it's probably the easiest/fastest way to try and get some people on board.
As long as they don't try to get games that are permanently exclusive (except for first party ofcourse) then I guess ill wait it out and get it later.
We'll have to wait and see how well these timed exclusive games sell on Epic games store.
The way Epic is trying to strongarm people into using their store is not very consumer friendly however I think it's probably the easiest/fastest way to try and get some people on board.
As long as they don't try to get games that are permanently exclusive (except for first party ofcourse) then I guess ill wait it out and get it later.
We'll have to wait and see how well these timed exclusive games sell on Epic games store.
Just read the OP.
The Epic store in 2018 at launch is a digital storefront out of 2006 or 2007, not 2018. It does not have basic search functionality, cloud saves come in Q2 2019 (lol) and no achievements (also sometime next year) and no real regional pricing.
Yeah at the end of the day it's just a singular game, people download a multitude of launchers for a single thing, hell, one of the largest PC games uses its own launcher (League).
Arguing "it's not consumer friendly" and then rambling about a bunch of steam features people may or may not care about does nothing but state the same opinion that we've seen in the past 20 (Yes we've had too many of these threads) threads. Just let people enjoy their games in their own launcher even if it's worse? It's not like someone enjoying a game on epic causes you to not enjoy your steam library.
This is a ridiculous overreaction from people
Precisely, outside of ERA and some people on twitter, most people I know could give 2 shits about a game being on epic, if it's a good game they'll download it. Arguing that it's not on my preferred launcher so I'm not buying it is the same level of nonsense as "it's not on PS4, I'm not getting it" when you own all 3 consoles.
"lol no". console manufacturers aren't going to let someone else sell for their platform, let alone all of them suddenly AND undercut their deals. it's pipe dream.
This analogy was the first thing that popped into my head when I first heard the news and then started to read the complaints.
GhostTrick posted a well thought-out and quality OP (and yes, I read it; all of it, like every OP deserves), but distilled it's essentially an argument for how high of a bar Valve and its Steam platform/distribution system has set and any other product that fails to meet that bar is unnecessary.
Doesn't the store only have like 5 games? Why would it need a search function right now.
It's likely they've determined that the number of people willing to boycott a store for a few months for these features were not worth waiting to launch the service or make the developers wait to launch their games. And the number willing to boycott them forever for such a thing is likely miniscule, so they feel they'll get a chance to earn that business in the future anyways.
It also has like three games, dude. Lol. Features are coming, obviously.
If they don't, then this is a failure.
The OP says that it took Steam 5 years to develop a lot of the most celebrated features that Steam touts. People have given this storefront 5 days.
All I'm saying is patience is truly a virtue. If, in time, this store still has nothing of value on the feature side, it's absolutely a failure and the market won't support it and it will go away. But to just cut bait after 5 days seems... hasty.
Clearly that person is carefully considering the features offered by Steam that are not currently offered by Epic. It is NOT fanboy drivel.
Love you OP. Thanks for doing this.
What annoys me the most about Epic is that will all the money they get from Fortnite and UE4 royalties, instead of using that money to develop a launcher with many features that can rival Steam, they just use it to have developers put their games exclusives to their store.
What annoys me the most about Epic is that will all the money they get from Fortnite and UE4 royalties, instead of using that money to develop a launcher with many features that can rival Steam, they just use it to have developers put their games exclusives to their store.
They could have waited perfectly until they had all those features in their launcher in 2019 for release it and have developers put games in their store instead of creating controversy by forcing exclusives in their store.
16 games are in the storetab. To find some of them you still need to scroll down.
Besidess that the storepages dont have any relevant information. I cant see whether it has controller support, it has MP, local coop, which language a game is in and other relevant information a storefront should have.
The thing is to a lot of people it lacks basic features.
Its even stranger knowing what Sergey actually said before he was employed by Epic that those things should be normal...
OP
OP
The OP also says Epic Launcher has been around since 2015, maybe even 2014 if we go back to Unreal Tournament.
The OP also says there are features that are expected in 2018. Did Tesla first car looked like this ?
Or, they can (and will probably do) both. These are not mutually-exclusive plans, and they won't be able to compete with Steam otherwise.
Good post.
I personally won't support any further launcher until they do something pro-consumer in a major way. For this reason I'm always using GOG when I can due to their extremely commendable anti-DRM stance, and for games which are not available on GOG I use Steam, but that's it. I'm not going to use any other launcher/store unless they either go fully anti-DRM or introduce some other important pro-consumer stance.
I personally won't support any further launcher until they do something pro-consumer in a major way. For this reason I'm always using GOG when I can due to their extremely commendable anti-DRM stance, and for games which are not available on GOG I use Steam, but that's it. I'm not going to use any other launcher/store unless they either go fully anti-DRM or introduce some other important pro-consumer stance.
I don't give the benefit of the doubt to most people that they actually care about the quality of the other services when it comes to "no steam, no buy" after all these years.
People have legitimately argued that Steam is a benevolent monopoly so anyone even trying to compete is some evil entity. Not that Epic isn't a legitimate competitor; not that Steam has done well despite a lack of good competition; but that competing with Steam is straight up bad. Considering the capitalistic leanings of this board that is an astounding assertion.
I would never argue about Epic in particular being good enough for anyone to use, and I agree with being against moneyhatting exclusives, but after all the years of that kind of talk I'm genuinely skeptical the attitude of most people would change even if Epic's launcher was amazing.
People have legitimately argued that Steam is a benevolent monopoly so anyone even trying to compete is some evil entity. Not that Epic isn't a legitimate competitor; not that Steam has done well despite a lack of good competition; but that competing with Steam is straight up bad. Considering the capitalistic leanings of this board that is an astounding assertion.
I would never argue about Epic in particular being good enough for anyone to use, and I agree with being against moneyhatting exclusives, but after all the years of that kind of talk I'm genuinely skeptical the attitude of most people would change even if Epic's launcher was amazing.
I understand the reasons why people like Steam and all its features. Personally I don't ever use them, so a simple store and launcher where I can pay for a game and click on a button to run that game is really all I'm looking for.
And despite the fact that people have their reasons, the indignant #nosteamnobuy hashtag just seems stupid to me.
And despite the fact that people have their reasons, the indignant #nosteamnobuy hashtag just seems stupid to me.
I read it in full.
It's a typo-ridden polemic of scare-mongering: "Bethesda's launcher is bad therefore more launchers are bad including Epic's" and mental gymnastics: "This is why this kind of competition is good (Steam being the sole source of keys permitting humble-esque stores to exist) and this is why this kind of competition is bad because it's a tiny monopoly [insert terrifying crash of cymbals and violins here]." I guess it does do a good job of illuminating the thought process behind 'no steam no buy' and it's not a flattering look.
No, because you can't modify it once it comes off the line and goes to the end user. That's not a very good analogy. Cars aren't a work in progress. This CLEARLY is.The OP also says Epic Launcher has been around since 2015, maybe even 2014 if we go back to Unreal Tournament.
The OP also says there are features that are expected in 2018. Did Tesla first car looked like this ?
Although it seems most people don't want to treat it as such.
Yeah, but if I can wait until Q2/Q3 2019 for these features, I'll wait until 2020 for the Steam release (and then, I'll probably wait for a sale too, since I've already waited that long).
That's the problem; they don't have something unique to be competitive. Say whatever you want about Origin or Uplay, but at least they offer something that Steam doesn't have. Origin with EA Access, Uplay with the club points, GOG with DRM-Free games.
So instead of raking their brain and launch their store with a good launcher and something unique, they instead have developers release exclusive games in their store.
That isn't competitive at all. And currently, they have released a walled-garden, just like they accused Microsoft of doing that some years ago.
I don't care about hypothetical futures. If you want to launch a service, it needs to actually compete with what is in the market right now.
If you can't have basic fucking client functionality day 1, then your service isn't ready to launch.
OP
OP
You sound really angry, why is that ?
I doubt you really readed it since I adressed Bethesda's launcher in a different way than Epic. You're the one doing mental gymnastics here, surely because you're not in capacity to offer a counter argument.
Work in progress since years. Doesn't even feature basic stuff like wishlists or even storepages saying if the game supports single or multiplayer.
From that other thread about Epic's cross-platform game services coming later:
https://www.resetera.com/threads/ep...originally-built-for-fortnite-for-free.86720/
I think I see their game now, and it's possibly cross buy/play/save etc etc for a bunch of platforms
They're basically like 'why have 1 Fortnite when we could have several'
https://www.resetera.com/threads/ep...originally-built-for-fortnite-for-free.86720/
I think I see their game now, and it's possibly cross buy/play/save etc etc for a bunch of platforms
They're basically like 'why have 1 Fortnite when we could have several'
I have and will continue to skip games that try to force me into other ecosystems that are not Steam. This even includes games within Steam that boot a different client. I like having all my catalog and friends under one account for ease of use. Obviously, League of Legends and Blizzard games are excluded.
That absolutely may be true, but unfortunately we live in an age of unfinished gaming software being the norm. Games usually ship with Day 1 patches. Hell, some of the biggest games in the world this year weren't even out of Early Access.
I'm with the people that are disappointed in the state in which the Epic Game Store launched. I divert when these same people pretend as if because it launched this way, it can never be better and will never be better than it currently is. *shrug* Just seems like a strange line of thinking.
Wait... what? Why?
That is not the same thing at all. With everything explained it shows that games were pulled from the store for the exclusivity. People would have had less of a negative reaction if they were funded this way from the start. It would be at least understandable. As a PC gamer I litterally have 7 store launchers next to each other. It is getting tiresome having things fragmented so much to the point I stopped using 4 of them and after I beat a particular game that will increase to 5.
There is a world of difference between valuations of consoles and the concept of back compatibility. Some people are nostolgic and love the idea of going back and playing older games they purchased due to this. Choices between that and purchasing a new console for only access to one game is vary large ask and isn't reasonable for many peoples budgets. Especially if they aren't interested in any other game on platform.
Fanboyism/Brand loyality, is behavior you see where people excuse anything a company does, or not only ignore the compition but try to detract from the positives of any company or game, alot of the times without hands on experience. It is a world of difference between just choising something that suits you better or is more financially feasible.
Some one buys a Honda because they can afford it, do you call it Fanboyism/Loyality because they didn't buy a BMW? Someone purchases an Apple device because all the software they are accustomed to and use for personal work are exclusive to the platform, do you say it's Fanboyism/Loyalty if they choose to purchase another Apple device instead of a Windows machine?
You may ascribe to loyalty as something that influences you but some times people care about convenience more than any particular brand or company.
I've already countered the ridiculous notion that Epic is building its own monpoly. Almost everything else in your OP is unsourced conjecture about what gamers prioritize and very poorly structured doomspeak about 'fragmentation' of a community on the most open platform on the planet, where people can choose any social platform they want (like Era! and Discord! and Twitch!) should they wish for a unified community experience. That I'm not just nodding and saying 'uh huh good post Ghost Trick!' like others in this thread doesn't mean I'm "really angry." Nice try though.
I'm sure they'll roll something interesting down the line. What I want to address is: does it matter? Wouldn't people be complaining more if the launcher was a legitimate threat to Steam in terms of features, not less?
Per a dev Epic doesn't require DRM either so they will probably have DRM free games as well.
It can get better, sure. It probably will. I have no reason to give it the time of day until it does, however.
OP
OP
monopoly
/məˈnɒp(ə)li/
noun
noun: monopoly; plural noun: monopolies; noun: Monopoly
1.
the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.
That's what happens when one store is the only place selling a product.
You're welcome. And no, you sound angry because of your passive agressive stance, the way you change sentences that were never like this in the first place. You put fragmentation into quotes but:
https://www.gog.com/game/dying_light_the_following_enhanced_edition
"Multiplayer available only between GOG.com users "
https://www.engadget.com/2016/11/04/windows-10-call-of-duty-restrictions/
The rest of your post sounds even more angry/salty. Come back with arguments please.
I'd bet you it's more than you and they think.
Not really, Those are first party exclusive games to their platform, The games talked about here are not first party to the client and are games that shouldn't be exclusive to a client.
I'm sure that if they had released a competitive launcher without the exclusive bullshit, some people would still complain. But doubt there would be so much controversy. In fact, many would welcome the launcher with open arms. I was kinda interested in it before we knew they were putting exclusive games on it that had already Steam pages.
Same Steam; Witcher 3 is DRM-Free on Steam. The difference is that GOG means no DRM at all. No forced launcher, no Denuvo, no DRM of any kind.
I don't know if you knew this, but lots of modern cars get firmware updates..lol
I feel like the feature comparison wars don't matter for most people at the end of the day. People will stay on Steam mostly because they're already there, and the only thing that will get them to move or try other things is a heretofore unheard of and needed feature or exclusive games. Outside of the hardcore enthusiast, most of those features don't move the needle either way.
As if you needed any more proof
Right now, the "value" of the Epic store to me is essentially equivalent to the value of the things I've purchased on it, and no more: that is to say, so far, Hades. Excluding my Fortnite "stuff" (junk I've acquired over a few seasons of off-and-on engagement with Fortnite), the Epic launcher is actually the "Hades Launcher", as of this moment. It's an unfortunate barrier between me and the game, but barriers are, for better or worse, something I've gotten used to.
I've gotten used to the Steam barrier -- it was the first barrier I got used to back in the HL2 days. I got used to Origin, and U-play, and Battle Net, and GOG, and... I mean, don't get me wrong, I *tried* to avoid all of this. I'm not insane: I want all of my games in one place just like most human beings do. But I have gotten used to this shit: I've been beaten down by the made up need for all this launcher junk, and for better or worse I've gotten used to it. To me, all these launchers are at this point -- and the stores -- all of it, it's just a value proposition. Right now, Epic's launcher and store, for me, have a value of 20 bucks.
My steam account, on the other hand, the store, the feature set, everything it is, what it supplies, what it promises, how it helps me get what I want... the value of that is astronomically fucking high to me. I mean, the games by themselves define a value for me. I've got a bunch of them on there. For every game I add on Steam, it makes the account *weightier*, and digital content likes to clump together because it's the path of least resistance. And Steam makes it insanely easy, right now, for me to add to that accumulation, worry-free.
I prefer Steam. I like Steam more. If I could have it all on Steam, I totally would. But I am so beaten down by all of the "needed" launchers that at this point I just don't fucking care anymore. If you're offering a product, and I want it, then I'll download another fucking launcher because I've already lost the fight to keep it all in one happy place.
To be fair, it was never a fight I or any of us were gonna win anyway.
I've gotten used to the Steam barrier -- it was the first barrier I got used to back in the HL2 days. I got used to Origin, and U-play, and Battle Net, and GOG, and... I mean, don't get me wrong, I *tried* to avoid all of this. I'm not insane: I want all of my games in one place just like most human beings do. But I have gotten used to this shit: I've been beaten down by the made up need for all this launcher junk, and for better or worse I've gotten used to it. To me, all these launchers are at this point -- and the stores -- all of it, it's just a value proposition. Right now, Epic's launcher and store, for me, have a value of 20 bucks.
My steam account, on the other hand, the store, the feature set, everything it is, what it supplies, what it promises, how it helps me get what I want... the value of that is astronomically fucking high to me. I mean, the games by themselves define a value for me. I've got a bunch of them on there. For every game I add on Steam, it makes the account *weightier*, and digital content likes to clump together because it's the path of least resistance. And Steam makes it insanely easy, right now, for me to add to that accumulation, worry-free.
I prefer Steam. I like Steam more. If I could have it all on Steam, I totally would. But I am so beaten down by all of the "needed" launchers that at this point I just don't fucking care anymore. If you're offering a product, and I want it, then I'll download another fucking launcher because I've already lost the fight to keep it all in one happy place.
To be fair, it was never a fight I or any of us were gonna win anyway.
It's also generally pretty obvious (to me at least) that all the kow-towing about Epic's launcher not having basic features/having exclusives/etc (things you could throw at other launchers, including Discord Store, which I like) is because they're clearly coming in to bring serious heat and this is a shot across the bow at Valve/Steam, the first in a while
Legit competition brings legit fighting so better get ready to throw down
Legit competition brings legit fighting so better get ready to throw down
- Status