• @WraithGear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    89 months ago

    I am not aware of any stream agreement with game developers that prevents them from releasing their game using any other method. Your argument about streams “” monopoly “” is 100% due to market forces working as advertised. They offer a service that no other company either can or will match. And that is not the fault of steam and was not achieved by illegal means. There’s dissent even need to be a launcher at all! Game companies can just sell us the game alone without a launcher. What other companies want is market dominance, not a fair market place. Because the fair market place gave steam the current win

    • @corbin@infosec.pubOP
      link
      fedilink
      59 months ago

      Whether or not the exclusivity deal is between the publisher and the store or just the publisher doesn’t make a difference for the consumer. There’s no functional difference between Counter Strike 2 requiring Steam and Fortnite requiring the Epic launcher except that gamers are used to Steam.

      • @WraithGear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        79 months ago

        Yes there is. Because it gives the games companies the ability to sell however they like. What to make the game sellable privately? No problem. What to sell an apple version, go for it.

        So what part of the open market covers preventing the consumers from being able to choose which launcher they prefer, if any? Valve didn’t do that. EGS did. You should blame the competitors for failing to meet market standards

        When you are upset at Valve for not doing for apple what they did for Linux, who you are really mad at is Apple for having terrible… everything, and game developers who don’t want to put the needed effort in for such a modest return.

        You are upset at everyone BUT Valve. Or at least you should be.