Will you start buying games on places other than steam?
Nice page where we can see the difference between monopoly and competition in the market place
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/152884184065507328/525734982011060224/unknown.png
Comment has been collapsed.
if all AAA publishers leave steam, what steam has to offer?
Thousands of trash and a few good Indie games.
The only real advantage over other platforms is the community market, everywhere else we will have to use real money all the time.
Comment has been collapsed.
Steam, and GOG. I don't feel like I need any other platforms.
Comment has been collapsed.
For me, other platform still cannot win over me because of Steam's regional pricing.
My region is SO MUCH more cheaper on Steam.
Unless GOG, Epic or whatever starts offering regional pricing as cheap as Steam, I don't see myself buying elsewhere.
Comment has been collapsed.
Steam should cut better deals with the major game makers so they'll come to steam..
Charging 30% (more?) just to be on steam is insane, and why big big games either aren't on steam, or don't launch on steam.
How much did steam miss out on because gta 5 wasn't on steam at launch?
And how many users are disgruntled because they got a damn rockstar key instead of steam?
Comment has been collapsed.
It's a complicated question. On one hand, it's bad for Steam to have a monopoly - it gives them too much power and discourages them from improving stuff like their support (since they don't have to if nobody can threaten their control of the industry.)
On the other hand, it's annoying for customers to have to run twelve different clients to play games, or to have the list of what you own scattered all over the place.
What I sort of wish would happen is some sort of law or rule that made it so owning software in anywhere forces any online marketplace above a certain size to recognize your ownership and let you download / run it through there (with perhaps some nominal charge to the original retailer for bandwidth etc.) That way we could have competition, but still run all our games through Steam. It would also destroy the inherent advantage to being the largest retailer, adding more competition.
Comment has been collapsed.
IMHO the more clients, the better. No more games that "bribe" their way through Steam Greenlight and get shoved down our throats! We want games that are high quality and not just Unity/Unreal/GameGuru/Newsgrounds asset-flips.
Also, just look at LBOstore, where devs get 100% of all sales. So much incentive to diversify and spread out, especially if you are a big dev and don't want Steam to milk millions off you (LBOstore is not a client, but the point has been made)
Comment has been collapsed.
I buying ubisoft games on Uplay instead of steam (mostly). Thanks for free Destiny 2 I'm using battlenet now. Origin only for Battlefield sometimes. Bethesda goes in trashcan after Fallout 76. Steam is the best place for indie developers which I mostly play.
Comment has been collapsed.
IMO other stores need more community features and meta-gaming to be competive, that's the part nobody except Steam even bothers to do currently. Add achievements, levels, badges, cards, inventory, all this stuff.. Make us able to create and beautify profile. Make it worthy to complete games by giving achievements and skins. Add forums, reviews, screenshots, artworks, streams, and tonnes of other stuff to spend time on. All that makes people to see platform as something bigger than just another obstacle before launching the game.
Comment has been collapsed.
on the contrary I'd prefer a more streamlined steam client, more or less like the others are right now.
Comment has been collapsed.
you can take out of steam client all functionalities but library menu, and if you're a perfectionist make it work decently (I mean filter and information). the rest is fluff and I prefer firefox or chrome any day of the year to the official client for all that. and no, I don't buy from the pc client.
Comment has been collapsed.
my happiness level won't rather change because of steam client. that said, I prefer a smaller client without all the fluff that any browser can do. before there where 2, lib and key activation. now only one is left. it would be great if it worked fine.
filtering works badly. you can't filter hidden games. when you implement categories you can only see yourr whole list in pics mode so you can't list games by developer or metascore, for instance. you can't see you normal games and hidden games together. you can't see in the lib all the important info of the game that's normally present in the store page (if the game is still sold). you can't see your dlc pics on pc client but you can on Mac client. you can't see your friends comments on a game in your library. on install, it install those distribution files over and over, so silly. you can't tell your steam play games in the library from those that are not. you can't see the requirements from the lib. I could go on...
since all of that will never be, I prefer a small app that just downloads and launches games, that's pretty much it.
Comment has been collapsed.
if you think about it, it's not a big deal to have multiple storefronts and clients. you have very small disadvantages.
with luck more competition also makes some advantage. steam is far from perfect, and a bit of a cure will be positive for it (and the others).
Comment has been collapsed.
Bought FIFA 19 and it's only playable through ORIGIN , Bought CSGO and it's only playable through steam , Bought rainbox six and the division and they're only playable through uplay, Bought COD BO4 and it's only playable through blizzard's client...... but i'm fine with it, when i want to play a game it's only 1 more click away ... giving too much monopoly to 1 plaftorm is always a bad idea.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is a very anti-consumer way of fighting monopoly though. The pro-consumer way would be to demand every game to be available on every platform. This way we will have a choice of where to buy games based on our personal preference, and platforms will compete for the quality of their services to win our preference instead of putting those huge amounts of cash to bribe developers for exclusivity.
Comment has been collapsed.
The problem is, it would be fair to make games on Steam more expensive than on other stores as there's larger comission (so total price stays the same), but Steam rules forbid that. So price has to be same across all platforms despite developer having smaller cut. Consumer can't feel the consequence of choosing store with bigger comission. If it would be fair, more people would buy in Epic store to have that sweet -20% permanent discount on all games - but Steam rules forbid that.
Comment has been collapsed.
Epic is Tencent, a Chinese Cultural Enterprise. They have QQ, which their Sinophonic (though not exclusively) social media clone which has like 1.6 billion or so monthly regular users, or about 2/3 of what Facebook has. They have the cash to go buy PUBG and Fortnite, and before that Riot (league of legends) which is fine because I don't play them.
I don't want to give a Chinese Cultural Enterprise (see their homepage) any logins or keys or PC information or anything. I can't really trust Facebook or Valve, but at least there is a shadow of government oversight. I feel like their cultural enterprise moniker is all but saying they are the government or in cahoots with them.
Comment has been collapsed.
This thread seems more relevant than ever. I wonder how many big games will actually come to steam this summer/fall.
Comment has been collapsed.
With Bethesda and Ubi gone, so are the bulk of my purchases on Steam. The games I want that are coming out this year such as Doom, Rage, Halo, Outer Worlds, Control etc. will all be stuck on other launchers or require some other shitty drm. Right now, I can't even think of any other game coming out this year, that I want, that won't be moneyhatted by epic. And I'm never buying from epic. I generally don't buy most non bethesda/ubi games on launch anyway, so waiting an extra year might not be as bad as it sounds, if they still have sales once they come to steam(assuming their epic contract doesn't forbid it). I guess my best alternative for the ones never coming to steam is to buy an ssd for my ps4, and buy their games used, so I can still play them without supporting the companies. The only semi-positive thing coming from this is I no longer feel the need to upgrade my pc, as pc gaming is nearly dead to me.
Comment has been collapsed.
1,808 Comments - Last post 15 minutes ago by rashidnemar
545 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by UltraMaster
41 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by ViToos
69 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Hawkingmeister
1,520 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by ayuinaba
451 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by Rosefildo
7 Comments - Last post 18 hours ago by xXSAFOXx
9,528 Comments - Last post 32 seconds ago by snow0815
86 Comments - Last post 7 minutes ago by coleypollockfilet
7,997 Comments - Last post 9 minutes ago by schmetti
28,264 Comments - Last post 12 minutes ago by PastelLicuado
42 Comments - Last post 22 minutes ago by snow0815
110 Comments - Last post 25 minutes ago by schmoan
47 Comments - Last post 27 minutes ago by Ninglor03
Long ago EA stopped releasing their games on Steam, people feared that this meant other big companies would do the same. Nothing really came out of it until the last year or so.
Activation released Destiny 2 and COD BO4 on Battlenet. Bethesda has FO76 on their launcher, and Rage 2 will not be coming to steam, which means all future Bethesda games most likely won't either. Epic Games Store also is being very competitive and it is starting to a lot of exclusive games on it's service. Ubisoft feels like the last big publisher that hasn't gone exclusive to their launcher yet. (Which wouldn't surprise me if/when they finally do so)
So I'm curious. How do SG users feel about all this?
Comment has been collapsed.