• sugar_in_your_tea
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I agree with you, and I think the jury reached the wrong conclusion, at least from my understanding of the lawsuit.

    But that’s irrelevant, I’m merely making the point that a smaller competitor can and should get away with a lot more crap because they don’t have a commanding share of the market. Epic paying for exclusivity is desperation, Steam doing it is monopolistic, because one has a dominant position while the other doesn’t.

    • PrincessEli@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Imo it’s shitty regardless of how big the competition is. The entire reason steam got to the position it’s in now is by being an extremely consumer friendly platform with little bullshit. No amount of exclusives makes the epic games client a genuinely preferable option, just a shitty requirement, and unless they stop with this shit, they’ll never genuinely be a competitor with steam, as far as players are concerned.

      • sugar_in_your_tea
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I agree, but again, that’s irrelevant. We’re talking about whether they should be allowed to do stuff like pay for exclusives, restrict payment options, etc. Market leaders are held to a much different standard vs underdog competitors.

        I have never and probably will never buy anything from EGS because Steam is just a better experience.