PCs and Steam: Thread 01

[Digfox]

Sorry [MENTION=3144]Dogg Thang[/MENTION] I don't think it's that simple. Everyone is different and people will have different logic for why they want the game on Steam. But amongst the 'I just want the game in one place' reason there are plenty of valid concerns such as people getting £35 version from keysellers cancelled (on the EGS for the same £50), limited to no customer support on the Epic Game Store currently or the people on ResetEra who now can't play the game on their large TV's via Steam link/in-home streaming etc. Ultimately this is not being done for the consumer's benefit and therefore can feel like an anti-consumer move.

[fuse]

I find myself a little conflicted on it, as while I dig Epic's pro-developer stance, I don't think throwing money at bullying another platform out of the picture and reducing customer choice is great news. On the other hand, I find PC folks' insistence on further monopolizing Steam really odd. They already do a pretty crummy job on a number of fronts, and I'd much rather the space was a bit more competitive so they actually had to try and do better.

[Dogg Thang]

Yep [MENTION=3822]fuse[/MENTION]. And I'm even not sure you can apply the word "bullying" when it's aimed at the dominant, close to monopolising force. Bottom line is for Epic to make their store viable, they need to find ways to bring people to their store. This is one of them. Everyone can buy the game if they want. Or choose not to. That hasn't changed. I don't think I have more to offer than that.

[Digfox]

I said earlier in the thread that the tactic Epic are pursuing is 100% correct. They have to be aggressive. It's one of the few things they can do. And I personally love the 88% split (as well as free Unreal Engine use) which Epic (along with others like Discord) are doing well.

That said again I personally understand the consumer anger. I do think Valve have done a great job of expanding their ecosystem and feature set and some of the work on ensuring Linux compatibility, for example, is something no-one else would ever have taken on. Ultimately it is what it is and PC gaming just got a bit messier with a whole bunch of win32.exe programs fighting for system resources.

[Neon Ignition]

There'll also be an element I guess of core hive outrage given Steam is a Valve product and there's still a very loyal and dedicated fanbase who are protective of Valve (for god knows why)

[Digfox]

Sorry one more thing.

I've used the EGS to play Unreal Tournament over the past week (free in it's current unlikely to be finished pre-alpha state, unfortunately) and it is really, really barebones. I can't even find a search box. I remember when I first opened Far Cry 3 and saw UPlay - even that had more to it than this. So another valid argument in my mind is that Epic really have a responsibility to launch with something fit for purpose. And as the software locked up on me when I tried to download the current free game (Jackbox) I can't help but be facetious and wonder if they did enough.

It will improve but that is a bit like praising these game studio's for patching features into a full-price game after launch.

There'll also be an element I guess of core hive outrage given Steam is a Valve product and there's still a very loyal and dedicated fanbase who are protective of Valve (for god knows why)

Perhaps because apart from having a feature set that is way in excess of anyone else, they've been the guardian's of PC gaming for so long. Arguable when MS haven't been. [flammable mode off ]

[Neon Ignition]

Epic will get the store finalised lickety-split... as soon as they finish Save the World and get Fortnite out of Early Access...

[Digfox]

Epic will get the store finalised lickety-split... as soon as they finish Save the World and get Fortnite out of Early Access...

[Dogg Thang]

*insert Half-Life 3 gag here*

[Digfox]

Re: HL3 It's coming - honest! Keep the faith...

In all seriousness I'd love a decent Fortnite PVE mode (as well as more HL). That game is so technically on point that it would be great if there was something more to it than a PVP mode.

[fuse]

Yep @fuse. And I'm even not sure you can apply the word "bullying" when it's aimed at the dominant, close to monopolising force. Bottom line is for Epic to make their store viable, they need to find ways to bring people to their store. This is one of them. Everyone can buy the game if they want. Or choose not to. That hasn't changed. I don't think I have more to offer than that.

Don't worry, I getcha. Bullying may be off the mark, but it's also not a case of David vs Goliath - Steam may have the market share, but Epic clearly have their own leverage in terms of its control over the Unreal engine, and a bank balance that puts them in a unique position in terms of what they can do.

I understand why they're being aggressive, and I know that expecting them to put together a set of features in a matter of months that allows them to compete with a platform that has a 15 year headstart is unrealistic, but I still feel that paying to stitch up the competition rather than improving your own value proposition is a crummy way of doing things. If they were in the kind of leagues-ahead position that Steam were, and continued this practice of courting exclusivity I feel it'd be a terrible thing for consumers. The closest equivalent I can think of is Amazon, and while they're anti-competitive in a bunch of other ways, I would imagine people would be rightly mad at them if they started paying for exclusivity on physical console games while they waited for Game etc to die off.

[Dogg Thang]

Yep, I see that and, absolutely, it is not David vs Goliath by a long shot. It's Goliath vs Goliath who is already at the top of the hill in this scenario. Although in your analogy, I would take Amazon to be Steam rather than Epic as they already own the space. Even then, yes, people would probably not be happy if an item was exclusive to some other store and not available on Amazon but I'm guessing that already happens. We live in a world where different stores stock different things. That's pretty normal. But yes, I totally take your point that it is not some tiny underdog taking on the giant.

[wakka]

Just catching up - where did we land on the crisps?






Seriously, though. Some good points in here. For myself as a lifelong console gamer, I simply find myself confused by the level of vitriol being directed at Epic. Games, as far as I'm concerned, have always sometimes only been available in certain places. It's always been a way of getting an edge for your platform. It's not a new thing. And I'm kind of surprised that people would react so poorly to have to use a different storefront.

I get you can't use your Steamlink thing (although I would be interested to know what percentage of Steam users actually have and use one of these, especially considering it was discontinued last year) or get your Steam achievements, but otherwise, it's a hell of a lot more convenient than buying an entire new console. Something I've done, on multiple occasions, just to play one or two games.

It's an overreaction, is my perspective.

[Digfox]

I get you can't use your Steamlink thing (although I would be interested to know what percentage of Steam users actually have and use one of these

I would imagine it's a small percentage. Steam Link was the product Valve sold to support the in-home streaming feature. However as software it is also baked into Steam, SteamOS, Samsung Smart TV's, Android and an official Raspberry Pi OS. This means there are a myriad of ways to play your Steam library on other PC's, mobiles, tablets etc. on your local network. It is just one example of the many features only Steam has which other gaming services/clients do not.

[wakka]

Which is cool, but this is still less of a big deal than exclusives for console, which have been around forever.

I’m just repeating myself here but, yeah, don’t see the big whoop. I bought a Switch just for Mario Odyssey - that was £330 and I certainly couldn’t use any of my existing PS4 pads to play it!