Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

themagicbong t1_j4smk06 wrote

Whaaaat? You don't love having a million different launchers? It's the best! And tons of accounts through God knows how reliably secure services? My desktop is nothing but launchers, you've got the origin launcher, the 2k launcher, paradox launcher, you've got the Ubisoft launcher, launchers as far as the eye can see, AS IT SHOULD BE.

5

ShawnyMcKnight t1_j4umtfl wrote

I know you jest but now that my kids are on my steam account all the time playing the Lego games I’m happy I have games on other accounts I can play.

Really though, from their perspective, I get it. Why would Ubisoft or EA give Steam a 25-30 percent cut when they don’t have to? I mean, they probably don’t even give their developers that much of a cut.

When I format my pc every few years I spend 15 minutes downloading the 8 or so launchers and logging in and then make a folder in my start menu with their shortcuts and I’m done. I don’t get why that’s so hard for people, but I guess if you wanna pay the steam tax instead of getting the game cheaper on another platform, more power to you.

2

themagicbong t1_j4w6gbs wrote

I wanted to play bioshock infinite. No biggie, go to download, fire it up, and oh, what's this? 2k added a fuckin launcher since the last time I played the game? Why? I already purchased the game a very long time ago.

We see this fracturing of marketplaces often. It's very similar to streaming services. It's not great for the consumer, and eventually leads to confusion and annoyance. Not to mention how I'm not constantly playing 2k games, why on earth should I have to use their stupid launcher specifically only to play bioshock infinite? Sure, any company could sell their games directly for more money than they could through something like steam. But that doesn't mean the market wants or could even sustain having 700 different marketplaces to purchase games from. It's dumb as hell, and like I had said earlier, why should I be forced to use the 2k launcher when bioshock is the only game I'm gonna play through it?

Additionally, maybe steam isn't the best, I can agree with that. But does that mean I want another 15 companies collecting data on my usage and being forced to send them information about myself, that I didn't have to do, when I purchased the game originally? Fuck no. It's stupid, and I can't wait until this dumb ass trend falls apart.

1

ShawnyMcKnight t1_j5ar4us wrote

Your bioshock example is valid. If you bought it and then they added a launcher. Sometimes that’s cool, like GTA 4 used this “games for windows” platform as it’s DRM through steam, or whatever it’s called. It straight up wouldn’t even launch on anything windows 8 or later, but I was reading that now it goes through the rockstar launcher. So that I’m cool with.

I wouldn’t say it’s not great for the consumer. Isn’t valve guilty of it too? I don’t see myself able to play Valve games like half-life on GoG or EA or anywhere else? Why does everyone else get shit for gatekeeping their own games but valve gets a pass?

Also I don’t think the fracturing of the market is stupid or a trend. I find it hilarious how Reddit, and especially this sub, is so anti-monopoly but they insist that all games should go through one platform. What happens if Gabe retires and the new person is an asshole and thinks you should pay $10 a month to use steam because of all the services they offer and you get locked out of your cloud saves and mods and everything as that’s now a “premium service”? Check the thing you signed, you don’t own your games but only the right to use them and that can be revoked for any reason. Having all your eggs in one basket, so to speak.

I wouldn’t be worried about them getting any valuable info on you. Unless their installer is scanning your computer for bank statements and logins or can turn on your webcam what worthless info they get about your game playing habits would just go into the overall stats.

1