The "killer feature" is that they pay more to the developers, so if you are getting the exact same game on (e.g.) Steam versus Epic Games, then whomever actually made the game gets more money from the Epic sale. Isn't that a good thing?
(Note that I may be conflating the publisher with the developer, but either way, it's still the case that less money is taken by intermediaries, which is a good thing.)
Except they only do that because its the only way to get publishers to use them over steam, and once they have a reliable customer base they will reneg on that generosity to gain profit.
We know this business strategy. It will not stay that way.
Quite likely, but until then...
Until then, what? You as the consumer have no incentive to use their worse service, and publishers clearly arent that enticed by it for how few exclusives the store gets?
Or until then, you want to reward a bait and switch that you know is a bait and switch to try and trick you into using a worse product?
Which option are you excited about here?
Their service is in no way worse: I buy games, and I get them.
I'm excited about the fact that someone provides an alternative to the monopoly that is Steam.
......... The ability to purchase is not the only aspect of a stores service
It's all I need: I buy a game, I download and play it. I don't need anything else.
Ok, and? All you need is water and moldy bread to not die, that doesnt mean water and moldy bread are equivalent in quality to a 3 course meal.
Having a bunch of features that I don't want or need is a waste. The Epic Store and Steam both do exactly what I need, so I don't care about any of whatever the other features are.
So, you dont own any non xbox controllers? Or want to play games properly with friends? Or, hell, want to find a non AAA game? Since epic has way fewer games, and loses a lot of indie darlings?
Correct, correct, not correct (but if they don't sell what I want, then I would buy it elsewhere).
this is how we get companies like walmart and amazon.
they roll in, throwing bags of money into a bottomless pit as long as it takes to amass a large customer base and ruin existing competitors. Then they start enshittifying, and everyone wonders where all the competition went.
No, Steam are the monopoly now! The only other option is Good Old Games and for weird indie titles Itch.io.
However because of their 40% ownership, you're ALSO giving more money to Tencent.
Wait tencent has ownership of epic games?
Yes
Yikes. Good point.
That's a reason for developers to use them, not for consumers to use them.
EPICs anti-customer practices (such as trying to make everything exclusive) are reasons for consumers not to use them.
And are those because Steam is trying to pressure them into being exclusive on Steam? Or did they just not bother releasing anywhere else?
If a developer just wants to release on Epic and nowhere else they can do that. My issue comes from Epic approaching games that have already announced a Steam release asking for exclusivity, and having no interest in hosting the game if they don't accept the exclusivity offer.
There are almost 40,000 entries, I obviously cannot answer for all of them.
Still waiting for you to answer my question.
Well you sound like someone trying to have a good faith discussion and attempting to continue would be a good use of my time.
What is the alternative to Steam?
As I said.
(The linked article is about Epic)
Exactly. Not having an alternative marketplace--and no other one exists--is anti-customer and yet, you seem to have no problem with a Steam monopoly. Why?
"it exists" is not enough reason to use something.
If I start an online store that charges twice as much as Steam and has none of the features are you going to purchase from it just because It'S cOmPeTiTioN tO StEaM's MoNoPoLy?
Probably not. Do games on the Epic Store cOSt TwIcE aS MucH? Do you routinely buy goods and services with irrelevant features to your needs?
So we agree that it's unreasonable to purchase from a store that provides worse service just because it exists or to "promote competition".
EPICs anti-customer practices (such as trying to make everything exclusive) are reasons for consumers not to use them.
No and it's not worse service.
No, because epic has been engaging in anti consumer practices from the start. This is literally the only category epic has a leg up on steam, and if they didn't need to bully their way into the marketplace, I have no reason to believe they'd treat creators any better than they currently do customers
edit: The revelation that they are running the store at a loss just furthers me not believing they are helping developers from the goodness of their heart, it shows they're likely running the Walmart strategy of using their vast wealth to choke out their competition until there is none, and then once they have a monopoly, jack everything up, which'd probably include their cut of the pie
Note that I may be conflating the publisher with the developer
You think?
Yes, I do, or else I wouldn't have mentioned it. I'd prefer the publisher gets money over a middleman store. Isn't that preferable?
Its a phrase that signals something else, and not a literal content reply.
How about you write what you mean and have quality conversation in the future?
How about you write what you mean
I did. Its a standard phrase used by people in conversation. See defintion #2 below.
The "killer feature" is that they pay more to the developers, so if you are getting the exact same game on (e.g.) Steam versus Epic Games, then whomever actually made the game gets more money from the Epic sale. Isn't that a good thing?
(Note that I may be conflating the publisher with the developer, but either way, it's still the case that less money is taken by intermediaries, which is a good thing.)
Except they only do that because its the only way to get publishers to use them over steam, and once they have a reliable customer base they will reneg on that generosity to gain profit.
We know this business strategy. It will not stay that way.
Quite likely, but until then...
Until then, what? You as the consumer have no incentive to use their worse service, and publishers clearly arent that enticed by it for how few exclusives the store gets?
Or until then, you want to reward a bait and switch that you know is a bait and switch to try and trick you into using a worse product?
Which option are you excited about here?
Their service is in no way worse: I buy games, and I get them.
I'm excited about the fact that someone provides an alternative to the monopoly that is Steam.
......... The ability to purchase is not the only aspect of a stores service
It's all I need: I buy a game, I download and play it. I don't need anything else.
Ok, and? All you need is water and moldy bread to not die, that doesnt mean water and moldy bread are equivalent in quality to a 3 course meal.
Having a bunch of features that I don't want or need is a waste. The Epic Store and Steam both do exactly what I need, so I don't care about any of whatever the other features are.
So, you dont own any non xbox controllers? Or want to play games properly with friends? Or, hell, want to find a non AAA game? Since epic has way fewer games, and loses a lot of indie darlings?
Correct, correct, not correct (but if they don't sell what I want, then I would buy it elsewhere).
this is how we get companies like walmart and amazon.
they roll in, throwing bags of money into a bottomless pit as long as it takes to amass a large customer base and ruin existing competitors. Then they start enshittifying, and everyone wonders where all the competition went.
No, Steam are the monopoly now! The only other option is Good Old Games and for weird indie titles Itch.io.
However because of their 40% ownership, you're ALSO giving more money to Tencent.
Wait tencent has ownership of epic games?
Yes
Yikes. Good point.
That's a reason for developers to use them, not for consumers to use them.
EPICs anti-customer practices (such as trying to make everything exclusive) are reasons for consumers not to use them.
There are tens of thousands of Steam-exclusive games: https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/List_of_games_exclusive_to_Steam
What is the alternative to Steam?
And are those because Steam is trying to pressure them into being exclusive on Steam? Or did they just not bother releasing anywhere else?
If a developer just wants to release on Epic and nowhere else they can do that. My issue comes from Epic approaching games that have already announced a Steam release asking for exclusivity, and having no interest in hosting the game if they don't accept the exclusivity offer.
There are almost 40,000 entries, I obviously cannot answer for all of them.
Still waiting for you to answer my question.
Well you sound like someone trying to have a good faith discussion and attempting to continue would be a good use of my time.
As I said.
(The linked article is about Epic)
Exactly. Not having an alternative marketplace--and no other one exists--is anti-customer and yet, you seem to have no problem with a Steam monopoly. Why?
"it exists" is not enough reason to use something.
If I start an online store that charges twice as much as Steam and has none of the features are you going to purchase from it just because It'S cOmPeTiTioN tO StEaM's MoNoPoLy?
Probably not. Do games on the Epic Store cOSt TwIcE aS MucH? Do you routinely buy goods and services with irrelevant features to your needs?
So we agree that it's unreasonable to purchase from a store that provides worse service just because it exists or to "promote competition".
No and it's not worse service.
No, because epic has been engaging in anti consumer practices from the start. This is literally the only category epic has a leg up on steam, and if they didn't need to bully their way into the marketplace, I have no reason to believe they'd treat creators any better than they currently do customers
edit: The revelation that they are running the store at a loss just furthers me not believing they are helping developers from the goodness of their heart, it shows they're likely running the Walmart strategy of using their vast wealth to choke out their competition until there is none, and then once they have a monopoly, jack everything up, which'd probably include their cut of the pie
You think?
Yes, I do, or else I wouldn't have mentioned it. I'd prefer the publisher gets money over a middleman store. Isn't that preferable?
Its a phrase that signals something else, and not a literal content reply.
How about you write what you mean and have quality conversation in the future?
I did. Its a standard phrase used by people in conversation. See defintion #2 below.
Below definition is from here ...
Quality is in the eye of the beholder, apparently. /shrug
If you did, then I answered the genuine question you asked.