• nanoUFOOPM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ubisoft, Epic etc… have done nothing to make the market better or make it more healthy. Epic is even more anti competitive than it’s competition.

    • IWantToFuckSpez@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Doesn’t matter. It’s still competition. They motivate Valve to create a better store and keep it that way. Since that is Valve’s unique selling point and what distinguishes them from the competition. Therefore I believe devs should make their games available on every storefront. Not just the best one, to give customers a choice.

      • nanoUFOOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Steam was great before epic and has been adding killer features since before egs came along. EGS tactics to win over steam users is to be anti competitive…

          • nanoUFOOPM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            competition is good when the rest of the competition is able or good. EGS is so shit it has to buy exclusives and give out free games and it still doesn’t work. There has to be some equality in quality to have any chance of making steam better otherwise they just exist to make anti competitive moves, what is steam supposed to do? Also pay for exclusives?

          • NightOwl@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Like Walmart coming into a town to compete with the stores already there and then putting them out of business? Then moving onto the next town to compete again?

          • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ok, but as a consumer I’m fine with the shit competitor existing but I’m not going to use it.

          • leftzero@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            When their launcher is literal malware or they engage in anti-consumer practices like exclusives, no, they are not good for the customer.

            (Not that any publicly traded company can be good for the customer, mind; by definition they can only be good for the shareholders; any benefit they might accidentally provide to the customer or to society is an inefficiency that will eventually be corrected through enshittification. The only reason Valve isn’t entirely harmful is that they aren’t publicly traded yet.)

      • stillwater@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Doesn’t matter. It’s still competition. They motivate Valve to create a better store and keep it that way.

        Explain. What specific examples can you point to regarding the UPlay store that forced Steam to improve something?