this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2024
721 points (91.2% liked)

Games

32960 readers
2469 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Nothing more disappointing to me than seeing a game I might enjoy... and then it's only available on PC on Epic Games store. Why can't it be available on Epic, Xbox game store and Steam? It's so annoying, like you have no choice but to use Epic... which I would literally do ANYTHING not to use.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] blind3rdeye@lemm.ee 17 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (32 children)

I don't like it when something is only available on Epic either. I also don't like it when someone is only available on Steam - which happens far more often.

[–] Cris16228@lemmy.today 27 points 3 weeks ago (31 children)

Problem is:

  • Steam does nothing and devs release it on steam
  • Epic pays devs to release it on Epic
[–] indog@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 weeks ago (20 children)

But why should this matter to a consumer? If you don't like Steam or Valve's business practices, it's much more difficult to avoid Steam because of its exclusives.

There's a class action lawsuit against Valve now, over Steam's practices similar to price fixing. Part of the reason Epic has to pay for exclusives is that Steam prohibits publishers from offering lower prices on lower cut stores like Epic. If publishers could pass on part of the savings to consumers from the smaller cut, Epic could be more successful without exclusive contracts. Anyway, hopefully what comes out of the suit will be better for consumers in the end.

[–] Cris16228@lemmy.today 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Steam because of its exclusives.

Exclusives? Never heard of them paying devs to release only on steam, epic did that and still does that (?? I think). Steam offers a better store and features to devs so they release the games there.

You know steam offers you to generate infinite (?) Steam keys to sell them on your website or anywhere else and valve gets 0% from it? It's plenty of bad practices and devs accepting money just before the steam release (Metro exodus, I'm talking about you)

[–] indog@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

If it's only on Steam and no other PC platform, it's exclusive. I don't see the relevance from a consumer's point of view whether money changed hands for that exclusivity. You could even argue that no money changes hands, Epic just doesn't take its cut from the game's sales is how I believe that works.

If Steam has the better store, then it should have no need to require publishers to match their prices. Of course if you're buying a game on a fully featured, 30% cut store, it should cost more than on a less fully featured 12% cut store. Steam is using their large market share to bully publishers into not passing on savings to consumers from lower cut stores.

Steam keys can be generated, but the product can't be discounted, ie again the 0% cut savings cannot be passed on to consumers. So all this does is create an extra inconvenience for the consumer to sign up to some publisher's storefront to get the same product at the same price.

[–] Cris16228@lemmy.today 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Whatever dude. The difference is Epic paid for the exclusive, Steam just offers a better store and people release it there because they want it

Edit: Look at Ubishit, went epic exclusive then went back to steam crawling because no sales on epic LOL

Cya

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The difference is the developer deciding they don't want to bother going through the effort of making their game available on every platform on the Internet, vs. a dev saying "we are going to release a game on this platform", even doing presales, and then saying "oh, some guy just gave us a bunch of money to not sell you the thing we promised."

Ya, that's great for the devs being given a bunch of money, but that's shitty for me so I'm not going to give money to the rich asshole doing this so that he can keep doing it

[–] indog@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

If you don't like giving money to rich assholes, I have some bad news for you about Valve.

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

That rich asshole doesn't try to actively interfere with things in my life.

And if your only response is "Gabe is also rich" I guess that means the rest of my post stands.

[–] indog@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

If the allegations in the current lawsuit are true, and they are still being tested, then Valve is leveraging its market dominance to keep prices fixed at a higher level. If you have bought more than 0 video games in recent years, this is most certainly interfering with things in your life.

[–] _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 3 weeks ago

Yeah, but it's different when Gabe does it. You know, just cause it is!

load more comments (18 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)