Fuck Ubisoft.
I was pretty hyped for the new prince of persia game (the lost crown), but come to find out it's only available on ubisoft's proprietary launcher or epic games. Nope, and nope.
I just want to have it available on my usual storefront, Steam, but it's been decidedly omitted. As a long time fan of the old games, this kind of hurts. Especially since many of the others -are- available on Steam.
I wonder if/when it will come out for Steam. These platform exclusivity deals need to die.
Edit: It's also available on several consoles, my post was just from a pc gamer's perspective.
— A man that put his VR game exclusively on his own digital distribution platform.
On their own game engine.
Built to showcase their specific VR hardware. That they built after getting burned from multiple VR companies who abused Valves good will of providing access to their patent protected VR tech for free, to help accelerate the VR industry.
...a platform that works much better than the others... and a game that has been made with more love than anything in the past half a decade
You are fully justified to put your own developed stuff where youwant to.
On this one point I side with Ubisoft.
The problem isn't that Ubisoft is using their own launcher, it's that their launcher blows ass
Yeah, this particular argument goes back around to validating Ubisoft
I've been boycotting Ubisoft for years, haven't missed a damn thing.
Yeah, there are so many great games by non-shitty developers. Skipping Ubisoft, EA, and Activision entirely is not only possible but there are more great games left than one can play anyway.
Yeah, that's pretty much where I'm at with gaming now. Why settle for a subpar experience? I don't have the time or finances for that.
Yeah, they're a pretty shitty company. Weren't they one of the first companies to implement always-on DRM?
Yeah, I think it was in Assassin's Creed 2. At the time, people were unable to play the single player game they bought at launch because Ubisoft shitty authentication service couldn't handle the load.
Guess who didn't have that problem...
You can be sure that even the Epic version will still require the Ubisoft launcher. That is how all of my Steam purchased Ubisoft games are with the exception of the first Assassin's Creed which predated the Ubisoft launcher. All of the others require it regardless of how I bought it.
I'm going to wait for at least two or more years after release for the new Prince of Persia. My days of paying full price for Ubisoft's games are over and recent statements from the CEO make me reluctant to ever buy their games again.
I tried playing the original AC games recently. They went back and integrated the launcher for those too smh
YAR HAR FIDDLE DE DE YOU DO WHAT YOU WANT BECAUSE A PIRATE IS FREE.
Unless Denuvo!
Of all the shit Ubisoft does, not selling on steam is the dealbreaker? Alright.
No, they should definitely be accountable for all the other shitty things too. This is just a game I was actually kind of excited for, hence why I'm upset about it.
Lol right? Why is steam the only acceptable DRM?
Because it's optional and if opted in, works offline.
I know of at least one other place it is available, and they have it for the cheapest price 😈
Wrong. I know a place that will pay you to download it, if you're willing to first disable Windows Defender.
Don't they also offer a great discount if you pay within 12 hours to unlock your personal files? I'm in!
Me in 2004: Yeah I’ll never play Half-Life 2 because I hate that it comes with a mandatory useless piece of software. « Steam », what the hell is that? Full of DRMs, ugly, bugged to the core, eating up my precious RAM.
There are valid concerns but there are benefits to using one game manager. There's nothing good about having to install a bunch of them because every other game is in a different store.
It still would be best if games came DRM-free and all of them were compatible with whatever game manager someone chooses, but a lot of them aren't, especially from big publishers.
« There are benefits in using one game manager »
That is very true, and that’s why your game manager software shouldn’t be tied to any storefront or online service.
It's definitely convenient to have everything in once place, and Steam has way more features, but it's good to avoid Steam becoming too monopolistic. We saw recently how badly that can go with reddit.
Despite the widespread worshipping of Steam and GabeN, I've had lots of issues with Steam and Valve over the years.
Convince other companies to be not shit competition then. Steam has its near monopoly because its competition is dogshit
No, Steam gained its near monopoly through anti-consumer practices as well: being mandatory for playing Valve games, even offline, as soon as 2004; being DRM-ridden; locking consumers out of their right to sell their games on second-hand market; still enforcing an old revenue share system that’s hurting devs; or putting micro-transactions everywhere with their collectible system that you can’t really disable at all. Just to name a few.
Steam is not better than others. You’re just used to its flaws.
Yeah, Steam has DRM. Its the least annoying DRM that exists entirely because they gave us one of the best shop fronts that exists on PC as a trade off. And all companies have the right to sell their own games on whichever store they wish. Unlike Epic, Steam doesnt buy the exclusive rights to OTHER companies games, its just their own games. Your imaginary competition utopian dreamland doesnt exist, and you're turning optional mole hills into mountains in order to pretend the best option we have is bad. If you don't like collectible trading cards and the least annoying DRM ever created, go buy on GOG, EPIC UBI and EA all have FAR WORSE practices
They bought out the Devs of portal to make portal for steam
Valve saw a demo and was impressed by it to the point they funded the full game, damn you guys get desperate to paint Valve in a bad light.
Steam is better than Epic at least. On top of all that, Epic makes itself mandatory for third-party games too.
Epic is worse on some points listed here, better on others.
The only one that goes on Epic's favor is the cut, but frankly I think the whole "old revenue share system that’s hurting devs" is nothing more than Epic's propaganda trying to get marketshare. 70/30 in favor of the devs while Steam handles hosting, community platform, multiplayer and modding tools, so forth, is neither unusual nor ripping anyone off, certainly not worth how maligned it was. I understand devs who prefer Epic's cut, but I don't think Epic is doing this out of fairness, nor that it can be relied on if they ever do gain ground.
In the other aspects, it's either equal or worse. It has as much DRM. Steam provides options for people to trade extra copies they didn't activate but as far as I know other stores don't. Neither allows people to trade away activated copies so that's no points for anyone.
I assume the microtransaction thing is talking about Steam Trading Cards and such, they are a bit of an iffy worthless addition to get people to waste money... but if the person is concerned over how much money the devs are getting, they do get a cut from every transaction, so under that perspective it should be counted as a plus. Which, by the way, is entirely up to the dev to add or not.
I don't really remember asking for your opinion on what a fair cut should be or what you think is a rip off. But the fact is that Steam takes more money from developers than other powerful competitors around (but 30% is barely enough to get servers running if I listen to you :D ). Okay. Sure. Yes. Right.
The microtransactions are so awful in Steam that with proposed laws in some countries (like the Netherlands) it would make the whole thing illegal. Some of the worst Valve practices already are, like the loot boxes (they're banned there).
I don't tell you that you should switch to something else than Steam. I don't tell you that there's a better choice (maybe GOG?). But what I'm saying is that Steam is indeed predatory and has been known for its anti-consumer practices, despite what some True Gamers™ seem to believe.
Too bad, this is a public forum. I don't need to ask for your permission to say whatever I want. But if that's how you are going to go about it, then feel free to think whatever you want on your corner.
What I was saying: "your opinion doesn't state a fact and some devs are indeed complaining about the 30% cut, maybe you should listen to them"
What you heard: MUUUUH FREEDOM OF SPEEEECH
Avoid it in favor of GoG. Ubisoft can't be trusted with a single drop of goodwill. As we can see by how they inject their clunky garbage manager even in games they sell through other stores.
Cue the BUT STEAMS MONOPOLY idiots that completely ignore that Valve does nothing to stop anyone from competing with them, its just that anyone who has tried (outside GOG) has only produced anti consumer garbage
DRM is never good for the end user.
Steams DRM is a VERY REASONABLE compromise between the interests of the devs and the consumer not wanting to be unfairly punished/annoyed. Steams DRM has literally NEVER caused me a headache aside from ONCE when steam was super new, its a non issue at this point
Who downvoted this?
People who understand nuance exists in this world. Steams DRM is a VERY RARE check to the internet that you own the game, and its an OPTIONAL thing that developers can choose. EA UBI and EPIC's versions of DRM is FAR WORSE, and if you really want to be extreme in your hatred of even reasonable level DRM, GOG exists
Ubisoft
I would agree with you, but Steam is also anti consumer garbage.
https://fitgirl-repacks.site/prince-of-persia-the-lost-crown-switch/
Well fuck I should just put it on my switch. Oh well I got $20 off on QVC and I like Prince of Persia so I don't mind pumping sales figures for it.
Idk when it'll get here though so maybe I still will 😂
Ubisoft is shit, most of their games are.
The moment I heard the new Prince of Persia had Denuvo, I wasn’t going to play it anyway.
It mandates a Ubisoft account everywhere anyway. Apparently on Switch in airplane more is the only way to circumvent this.
According to the DF review vídeo the account is required on PS/Xbox unless you're offline, but entirely optional on the Switch.
It's discussed around 15min into the video.
I try the switch demo, you presses back multiple time, it skip the ubishit login.
Yep, double shitty. Makes me want to start sailing. 🏴☠️
If it’s denuvoed you’ll have to wait for the crazy bigot Empress to crack it. Could be a while.
30 seconds of googling revealed that someone already packaged the Switch version for PC with a preconfigured emulator.
I'm still kinda shocked there isn't anyone else trying. Maybe you need to be crazy to be a legend.
cracking Denuvo shit must be incredibly challenging.
It is, but i don't think for a second empress is the only person to stumble across the solution. Unless it's something so crazy only a crazy could do it.
I know there are a lot of reasons why it's a harder choice to make; you can't share the secret because that's a security risk, you can't make as much money, you are at greater risk. I guess i just miss the old days where people into tech were anti establishment and into doing things because it was cool.
Well, guess I'm going to pirate it.
They count that. You have to not even steal it for them to realize they fucked up.
I don't know how they all manage to do it but EA, Ubisoft, and Rockstar are all my most hated companies of all time. They can make some good stuff, but I just absolutely hate how they all force people to jump through so much hoops just to play the games you pay them for.
They force you to make accounts with them and use their stupid launchers which never work properly and are just advertisements. There have been so many times I just wanted to play a game and then forgot my password to the account and got locked out or the launcher needed an update and I had to wait like 20 minutes.
Fuck all large game corporations.
Steam or GoG
Anything else is too much pain.
Was the same with every platform. Enshittification does not care about you
Pirate it
That's probably the best option. Considering how a Ubisoft exec said we should be "comfortable not owning games", I wouldn't trust anything purchased from them anymore.
Ubisoft makes games for 13 year old mountain dew addicts
Drink verification can to continue
well also you might wanna look into pirating their titles (even if you do 'own' them), as they have made it clear they dont want you to have any control over the games you buy, like access to them in the future. So say the epic steam thing goes belly up, epic closes, ubi will not see a reason to give you access on their service or steam if they move their games there.
Most games appear on STEAM as well, some time (like 1 year) later. And they appear in much better shape with all patching and all.
Genuine curiosity, why does it matter which platform it comes out on? Asking from a comlnsole-only point of view. I only game on PS5, so I'll never get to play Xbox-only games. But if you're on a PC, you can just get the other platform?
Too many launchers nowadays. It's becoming like movies and tv streaming services.
It's inconvenient for sure, but monopolies are worse.
Steams competition is worse than a steam monopoly. Im not giving Ubi or EA or Epic money for their shitty ass store fronts and anti consumer bullshit
Those companies have changed their own launcher so many times as well that it doesn't give me any hope that they will continue to exist or continue to let me borrow the games I bought from them.
From the last time I had to use EA's launcher, I still couldn't easily pick an install location. It's incredible how shitty it is.
People say that theoretically but not only Steam doesn't stop anyone from selling in other places, it delivers better services than any other platform (except maybe GOG that has the big benefit of being DRM-free)
The Steam "monopoly" ends up being less detrimental than the "competition" of locking each game to a different platform.
If it was only on their launcher I wouldnt care. Its the little exclusivity deal on epic that annoys me.
Its one thing to only sell your stuff on your own personal store. Thats fine, whatever. But to create fake exclusivity on pc? Nah fuck off dude, especially from ubisoft
It's "exclusive" on a different free platform that doesn't have any extra requirements. Sure, it's worse than steam in some ways but choosing not to play the game because it's only on Epic is pretty dumb, honestly.
Choosing not to use epic branded things because of the companies pretty nasty decisions and financial backers is completely justified. The world is not always about getting things for free.
The game is not being given away for free...
I didnt say it was
I’ve generally stopped buying Ubisoft games not because I don’t want to, but because of an issue with my Connect account. I think I had let my PS3 set one up for me back in the AC2 days with an email that is now long defunct (I deleted it after an acquisition that put my privacy at risk).
Now they want me to verify that email so much that some games have actually refused to let me play. I contacted their “support” to request the option to update my email, proving that the registered email is inactive and that I am in complete control of the linked PlayStation account, but they pretty much told me to kindly F off because they care too much about my privacy (lol).
I like some Ubisoft games, I just don’t have confidence spending money on anything they publish when I don’t know which ones might preemptively lock me out.
I figure I’ll just replace the account entirely at some point, but only when there’s a game I absolutely think would be worth the hassle. It just sucks to see my OG account end up trashed over such a dumb reason.
i stopped buying ubisoft games when i noticed every single one of them just follows the same path of mediocrity. There is some story, you follow it and along the way there is some busywork like collecting pointless things. If there ever are new ideas its like something wished with monkey's paw and its ultimately just more same old shit in new wrappings.
Yeah I get it, but I don’t really mind that sort of stuff. You know what to do, it’s only mildly challenging, traversal is kind of fun. For me it’s relaxing.
I can’t stand rogue-likes or arena style multiplayer games, so I never touch any of that.
I'm sure the last few Ubisoft games I got from Steam all installed UPlay before letting me run them anyway...
I'm not buying it because £45 is not a budget price for what feels like an indie game experience. I can wait for a sale on that, or more likely for it to go to PSN Extra. Still got plenty on my backlog.
Had this epiphany with the new Ass Creed. It launched on steam, but after buying it still has a second front end Ubisoft launcher. Thats just straught up lying to me about what im purchasing. I dont want Ubi Spyware. Period.
Maybe it runs on a switch emulator. 😏
I heard from a "friend" that it runs very well on a Switch emulator on a Steam Deck. Some pre-rendered cutscenes are janky. It has a pretty cool system where you can take a screenshot that will pin to the map to indicate places you need to find back to once you unlock a new ability, and sometimes those don't render right either. But otherwise, gameplay is flawless. Or so I've heard.
I've heard this as well I've heard it works well on the steam deck too
I reckon some sort of physically active girl already has it but packaged and released with a switch emulator so you can just go play it.
Hope so.
I haven't bought a Ubisoft game since Farcry 3 when a friend invited me to join an online game (which is something I very rarely had the opportunity to do) but the game wouldn't let me play because I didn't have that subcription thing they had. I tried using the free signup code that came with the game, but my brother already used it. So yeah, I have a personal grudge against that shitty company.
Also, I hate what they did to the Rainbow Six franchise. The original games (by Red Storm, I think?) are what those games should've been.
https://youtu.be/DfYknJqk\_xo?si=rM4jFpUzPk4OdX6S
What an incredible and numerous combination of harmonies. Excellent share, thank you.
It will be because of the "First Run" deal that Epic offers, so you'll get to play in 6 months. I don't blame the studio for doing it though but it's not ideal for some.
Ubisoft make it pretty easy for me. I don't have to worry about any of this, because none of their recent titles have been worth spending your money, let alone time on
I don't hate the idea of exclusive games because they kind of bring more competitions. But I also couldn't give too much fucks because Ubisoft games suck anyway.
You're missing out on a fucking great game.
Not at all, the cracked copy from fitgirl works just fine, for those who can't be bothered to succumb to ubisoft DRM.
"I'm mad because they are in the walled garden that is not my walled garden."
None of these are walled gardens really. That term applies to platforms (iOS) that restrict the user.
Steam and Epic are just stores. The DRM part isn’t even required (for Steam at least).
Based.
What video game worth playing isn't on a proprietary platform?
I've been playing Starsector lately, that's been pretty fun. Native Linux version too. No launcher required
Software Inc has drm free options
I never understood this one. All of those platforms, be it steam, epic,. Ubisofts defunct thing or EAs even more defunct thing, are embedded browsers with a more or less obnoxious skin we all use almost exclusively to click "buy now". All of them are overloaded with crappy, half-baked "features" nobody gives a flying toss about.
So why the heck do so many people spend the limited energy they have available to live their lives on "boycotts" and endless rants about how a game not on steam is basically unplayable for some reason.
If this game would bring you joy (which I doubt since it's Ubisoft we are talking about, but that's another matter), why deny yourself that joy because the launcher you interact with for literally less than a minute is shittier than your usual one?
If the launcher itself was of any importance to you, you'd use playnite or something and just be done with it all.
Don't whip this up to some exclusivity debate. It's not. Imagine if this was some tangible product. Would you really not buy the thing you'd really like to have just because it's sold at a store where the shelves are crap? Because that's essentially what you're doing.
Because ”vote with your wallets”.
Why support a dodgy business over one of the best for consumers?
For me, I prefer Steam because of Steam Link, which allows me to play Steam games remotely on my phone.
Steam link doesn’t work for external games added into your steam library? I’m new to steam in general, but it seems weird that they’d let you add a game and not use them with link.
Yes it does. I dunno about the hardware unit, but the android app alone works with everything you have on Steam; even the non-Steam games. Just fired up The Outer Worlds Spacer Choice edition given away on EGS some weeks back added to Steam as a non-Steam game through Steam Link on my phone.
It even straight up streams your desktop, so you can launch games not even running through Steam.
I usually have problem with controller settings when playing external games via Steam Link.
"prefering" steam is completely understandable. Boycotting a game and being disappointed and angry because it's not on steam isn't. To me at least. Regarding steam link: if you have an Nvidia graphics card, check out Moonlight!
What we want are reliable DRM-free installers, that don't make our PC get infected and don't spy on us.
What we can curently get (outside of piracy), is Steam.
Piracy is looking better every day, and specifically, every time one of these services has a huge security breach.
I'm on Linux and Valve and Itch are the only ones with first class Linux support. Everyone else you have to dick around with running their launchers through wine or lose features.
I don't mind that epic, etc. exist; I mind the exclusives. When Epic first launched, they didn't have payment processors in a number of countries so there was literally no way to legally play the games for people; that's super shitty.
This "debate" has been going on for ages now. They don't actually mind exclusivity. They're just mad it's not on the launcher they use. None of them care when it's exclusively on Steam.
Steam doesn't pay or force developers to be exclusive. And it offers benefits and features Ubisoft launcher doesn't.
So then...you're just admitting that you're fine with exclusivity once Steam is where it's exclusive to.
Nobody's forcing any developers to be on any platform, and let's not pretend you actually care about a platform offering a deal to devs for exclusivity. Those same devs are free to say no. But in that same line, Steam gets exclusive games for free. You're fine with Valve exclusivity that doesn't pay the devs but hate anyone else getting exclusivity although it does pay them? Interesting.
Lol. That's a lot of words you're putting in my mouth.
Steam offers no incentives for exclusivity. Others do. Devs choose to launch on steam and there's nothing stopping them from launching elsewhere. Look at palworld: gamepass and steam and you know they got paid for gamepass.
Devs use steam because it's where the people are. Steam has done nothing to try to be anticompetitive to other stores. Unlike said stores.
I put nothing in your mouth. Actually, quote the words I'm putting in your mouth and explain how. I merely showed the reality of words you typed. If Palworld was available exclusively on Steam would you care? If any other game you care about and wanted to play was exclusively on Steam, would there be a post or comment complaining about it?
Offering financial incentives isn't the forcing anyone. You're fine with Steam getting exclusives, so this has absolutely nothing to do with the concept of exclusives. Devs aren't forced to take any incentives if they don't want it.
But now that you mentioned it:
This is an incentive. Steam doesn't offer money because they have pretty much a monopoly. And you guys will only buy from Steam, reinforcing it. You know you all of these stores are essentially just where you buy it right? I don't even use EGS to launch games. It's not some "you only get to pick one" kinda bullshit.
Yeah, because Game Pass isn't looking to take on Steam. Game pass is a subscription service.
No, because that would be the dev's choice. It's also the dev's choice to take a bribe from Epic and such, but Valve does nothing extra to encourage exclusivity.
People have and still do complain when games aren't on GoG. Not as much anymore but it happened.
OK, we're done. You don't understand or acknowledge financial coercion so this is going nowhere. Byyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyye.
'tis a shame you couldn't say what words I'd put in your mouth.
That "because" isn't actually telling the reason. You'd be fine with it, because it's on Steam. Any kind of exclusivity is also the devs choice, and you obviously have a problem when they choose to be exclusive to a platform you don't use.
Apart from having the most market share, that you yourself already admitted.
I never asked about anybody else. I asked about you. Or should I take it you never complained when games aren't also on GoG?
Oh, damn, imagine thinking that once there's money on the table they must take it, and then at the same time, not understanding the value of a near monopoly. Steam is literally leveraging the large amount of people that will buy the game if it's on Steam. I even acknowledged it. Me saying that they don't have to take it is quite literally acknowledging it. But ok, byyyyyyyyyyyyyye.
It's so unbelievably pointless! Why the fuck should I care about the damn launcher?
DRM-heavy launchers have a history of spying on PC user activity, and of leading to malware infections. All well-known launchers, today, are DRM-heavy. (I would love tips on exceptions to this!)
DRM tries to control your PC remotely. There isn't, and never will be, a safe way to do that without increasing the risks of outside malware attacks succeeding against you and your PC. In most cases, the risk increase is quite high.
Game launchers provide a trade-off between:
Each additional launcher brings a lot more risk, and slightly less convenience.
If it was just about the convenience, I agree - who cares.
Many of us have lost entire digital game catalogs, or had to rebuild our gaming rig, or both, due to a remotely hacked game installer/service/launcher. So many of us are incredibly bullish against adding one more installer/service/launcher to our gaming rig.
The fucking irony.
Lol as someone else put it, it's silly to complain that you won't buy a game because it doesn't use the marketplace you want to use.
Steam is just one marketplace and it needs competition. One day it's going to go through enshittification and when that happens you'll be thankful other marketplaces exist.
Sometimes I honestly wonder why PC gamers get so riled up over inconsequential things.
Convenience, the whole reason piracy took a backseat for a few years. Inconvenient? Hit the seas.
I've never found it more convenient to use Steam or another store over piracy so it doesn't make much difference to many.
Some of the games I do own on Steam now don't work either, so it's not like it's an amazing store.
But if it's inconvenient to download a different client just to buy a game then you're just lazy. It's not like you have to subscribe to it, it's just a click and 5 minute wait.
Lazy for not wanting to have 6 different accounts and launchers? Nah. It's easier to just get a pirated version than trying to remember which service you bought what on.
If it's hard work having 6 launchers, it's easier to just get a pirated version period, so might as well just pirate everything.
Not even close... no one is complaining that it's on other stores, the problem is that it isn't on steam and even if there was, it still requires you to install their own garbage client. Quite literally the opposite.
Who cares if it is on Steam or not though?
If everything was on everything then sure, that would be great. But that's not realistic, and having this alternative where everything is on Steam but not elsewhere is not a good solution for that because Steam will be shit one day, and already has quite a few shitty issues.
Honestly, people have this ridiculous view of PC gaming and Steam sometimes. Look around the world and show me where having one company having a massive hold over that sector has ever worked out well long term for consumers.
Man what are you on and whats with these pointless anti steam propaganda. I get why people would be against steam but this literally isn't one of them.
So let me repeat that. NO ONE WANTS IT TO BE STEAM EXCLUSIVE. PEOPLE ARE AGAINST PLATFORM EXCLUSIVITY. To me you look like weird one having some weird fetish for hating big bad companies. Everyone knows the problems of monopoly and I have also taken course on economics so I am somewhat aware of it but I buy things where it's convenient and if it isn't I would rather pirate it. Doesn't matter if it's stream or gog or epic, you are simply barking at the wrong tree mate.
It sounds like we agree then. Ideally everything would be on every platform, but that's unrealistic so OP is pretty much complaining needlessly. It's good there are different platforms and competition.
I tend to agree.
Every storefront is DRM, some better than others, and people shouldn't get so tied to a specific one. PC gaming is so open and getting angry at this is pointless.
So, Steam exclusivity is fine, but other stores exclusivity isn't?
Did he say it should be STEAM exclusive?
I think a million times people discussed this and ubi and epic store clients are far inferior compared to steam. People have all the rights to not want their game collection spread across half a dozen platforms.
I personally don't buy anything Ubisoft mainly because their launcher is pure garbage and I hate it with passion.
Steam made me stop pirating games, Epic and Ubi made me overcome my FOMO and be a patient gamer.
Gog exclusivity would be cool, epic not so much.
Wrong. I never said I wanted it to be exclusive on Steam, I just want it to be available on there as well.
Why is Steam pretty much the only one it's not available on? The fact that it's on so many other platforms just makes this exclusion even more illogical.
Definitely greed, Ubisoft did the same thing in 2019 because they didn't want to pay Steams 30% cut.
I think it's a money thing. Releasing a game on steam costs developers money.
It's definitely a money thing, but I don't think it's in the way that you are suggesting. I think it's a matter of them making more money (somehow) by excluding Steam. That's pretty much the only platform it's not available on.
Ubisoft are a poor struggling indie company after all.
Not at all to do with Epic paying devs for exclusives.
Oh and btw both Epic and Steam charge $100 to publish on their store, so it’s not that.
Is this a troll post? Who cares in which store it's available, just get a physical copy.
Steam shills are really mind boggling.
Most PC games nowadays do not have physical releases.
Is this a troll comment? You seemed to have missed the point of the post.
PC gamers love PC gaming because it's more open and you're not locked into a certain ecosystem. Ubisoft artificially limiting their online release to two launchers (both known for being poor quality/buggy/feature lacking) is frustrating. Buying a hard copy might be possible, but Ubisoft did this on purpose to squeeze out a little extra profit. It shows they're more than happy to put profits over customers. A customer being annoyed this release excludes their preferred launcher doesn't make anyone a shill.
It's just another software it's not like you have to buy separate hardware for it.