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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Neato@ttrpg.network 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Steam doesn't pay or force developers to be exclusive. And it offers benefits and features Ubisoft launcher doesn't.

[+] Dexx1s@lemmy.world -6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Neato@ttrpg.network 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] BolexForSoup@kbin.social 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Valve doesn’t need to because they are the overwhelmingly dominant player. It’s not the same situation.

Also this isn’t an exclusivity deal in the first place. And valve makes some of their games only available on steam (Alyx for instance).

[+] Dexx1s@lemmy.world -6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

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:

Devs use steam because it's where the people are.

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.

Look at palworld: gamepass and steam and you know they got paid for gamepass.

Yeah, because Game Pass isn't looking to take on Steam. Game pass is a subscription service.

[–] Neato@ttrpg.network 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

If Palworld was available exclusively on Steam would you care?

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.

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?

People have and still do complain when games aren't on GoG. Not as much anymore but it happened.

Offering financial incentives isn’t the forcing anyone

OK, we're done. You don't understand or acknowledge financial coercion so this is going nowhere. Byyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyye.

[–] Dexx1s@lemmy.world -3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

'tis a shame you couldn't say what words I'd put in your mouth.

No, because that would be the dev's choice.

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.

but Valve does nothing extra to encourage exclusivity.

Apart from having the most market share, that you yourself already admitted.

People have and still do complain when games aren't on GoG.

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?

OK, we're done. You don't understand or acknowledge financial coercion so this is going nowhere. Byyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyye.

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.