Listen. Steam is free. Uplay is free. Epic is free. EA App is free. It’s not like Playstation vs Xbox, where the market is divided because of financial limitations on the consumers. What stops anyone from using any other launcher? What stops any publisher from not selling through Steam? “market share” is not really a valid argument when all options are free and easily available to everyone. Monopoly means lack of alternatives.
Right now the option is buying a game for $70 on either Steam or EA App, for example. People choose Steam.
Nothing is stopping EA from saying you know what, we’ll sell it only on our own page but for $60. Nothing.
People who want to play a game would most likely just buy it there then.
My view is that these lawsuits etc are purely a way for the failed competitors to force their way in while still providing the same absolute garbage of a service.
This is not what I’m talking about. I agree with you, and anyone can choose whichever platform they want.
The discussion is about how Valve Corporation uses it’s status for anti-trust practices which is a major blockade for other companies to compete with steam.
Like I said, as long as this keeps happening, others can hardly compete and gamers don’t have a reason to use other platforms.
Oh my lord. The problem isn’t the pricing!!! If you feel like you can’t sell your game for $55 on just Epic so you must sell it on Steam too but for $70, there’s a problem with your product and/or service. Not Steam. Epic tried the “1 year exclusivity” for a couple of games, like Borderlands 3 did that. People simply didn’t buy the game. Was the game cheaper? Nope.
See my point? Steam had zero hand in people rather not buy a game than installing Epic.
So? They could’ve sued for anything, doesn’t mean they’re right.
They sued for the money issue because they either can’t comprehend that consumers don’t like what they’re providing, or they (the companies) simply don’t want to invest in improving it so they start pointing fingers instead. That’s all it is.
No, they sued as an answer against Valve’s threats and actions, nothing really to do with customers, but Valve using it’s power to dictate how they can sell their product in a way that does not create competition against Valve.
It’s literally called anti-trust lawsuit.
EDIT: Honestly dude, I think we should just agree to disagree and finally end this convo. You’re obviously not convincing me and I’m not convincing you, so it’s a dead end of back and forth.
Listen. Steam is free. Uplay is free. Epic is free. EA App is free. It’s not like Playstation vs Xbox, where the market is divided because of financial limitations on the consumers. What stops anyone from using any other launcher? What stops any publisher from not selling through Steam? “market share” is not really a valid argument when all options are free and easily available to everyone. Monopoly means lack of alternatives.
Right now the option is buying a game for $70 on either Steam or EA App, for example. People choose Steam.
Nothing is stopping EA from saying you know what, we’ll sell it only on our own page but for $60. Nothing. People who want to play a game would most likely just buy it there then.
My view is that these lawsuits etc are purely a way for the failed competitors to force their way in while still providing the same absolute garbage of a service.
This is not what I’m talking about. I agree with you, and anyone can choose whichever platform they want.
The discussion is about how Valve Corporation uses it’s status for anti-trust practices which is a major blockade for other companies to compete with steam.
Like I said, as long as this keeps happening, others can hardly compete and gamers don’t have a reason to use other platforms.
Exactly my point. Give them a reason. And they can compete. They just don’t want to. It’s easier to shift the blame onto big bad Valve.
…
How can I not blame Valve when they’re the reason others can’t compete in pricing? Why are you not getting this?
Oh my lord. The problem isn’t the pricing!!! If you feel like you can’t sell your game for $55 on just Epic so you must sell it on Steam too but for $70, there’s a problem with your product and/or service. Not Steam. Epic tried the “1 year exclusivity” for a couple of games, like Borderlands 3 did that. People simply didn’t buy the game. Was the game cheaper? Nope.
See my point? Steam had zero hand in people rather not buy a game than installing Epic.
It’s literally what lawsuit is about, but okay.
So? They could’ve sued for anything, doesn’t mean they’re right.
They sued for the money issue because they either can’t comprehend that consumers don’t like what they’re providing, or they (the companies) simply don’t want to invest in improving it so they start pointing fingers instead. That’s all it is.
No, they sued as an answer against Valve’s threats and actions, nothing really to do with customers, but Valve using it’s power to dictate how they can sell their product in a way that does not create competition against Valve.
It’s literally called anti-trust lawsuit.
EDIT: Honestly dude, I think we should just agree to disagree and finally end this convo. You’re obviously not convincing me and I’m not convincing you, so it’s a dead end of back and forth.