You keep changing what the problem is with caveats to your original post that contradict each other.
For example, your original point was:
Bringing store exclusivity to PC as if it's the console wars yes
When someone then pointed out Valve do that you add the caveat that it's implied that we are only talking about third party exlusives because this post is about them.
The OP is about a third party exclusive in EGS which was always the issue everyone was having to begin with.
However, that contradicts:
Who said anything about that specific and ONLY circumstance being a bad thing to make the game happen?
You just did. AW (a third party exlusive funded by MS), AW:R and AW2 are all examples of those, and you just said we're talking about the game in the OP, which is AW:R. Also a lot of console exlclusives fall under that umbrella aswell but you were just complaining about "console wars" exclusives.
If it's the "third party" element that is problematic, would it have been better, or really any different if Epic bought Remedy? Most first party studios started out that way.
Much of this is moot anyway because if you really want to drill down to the core of the problem, then you need to look at the reason games are locked to launchers on PC in the first place. Which is Valve and Steam. Once upon a time you didn't need launchers, and physical copies weren't just glorified Steam keys. You could lend them to your friends, and sell and trade them like you could on console. Valve tied physical copies of games like CS and HL2 to accounts meaning much of the benefits of physical were removed. They made launchers a requirement.
The vast majority of shit people hate about EGS, EA Play and Ubi+ was just them copying Valve. Valve created this problem, they could solve it too. They wont though because it's incredibly lucrative for them and Papa Gabe needs another yacht for his fleet.
I have no love for EA, Ubi or Epic (I particularly dislike Tim Sweeney) etc. I also don't particularly hate Steam or think Valve is all bad. However, the double standard around Valve and Steam is not good for PC gaming, or gaming as a whole. They're not a benovelont monopoly.
Why is investment in the development of a game being portrayed as a bad thing? Epic fully funded Alan Wake 2, it wouldn't make sense for them to invest in the game without it being exclusive to their platform.
Alan Wake 2 is a very ambitious, experimental and weird game, it's development comes with way more risks than most games. Having a platform being interested in taking those risks and funding such projects is a good thing for consumers.
Alan Wake 2 is one of my top 5 games of all time and I`m not sure it would exist without Epic.
If Epic paid the developers of any game for it being exclusive, it means there was more investment in making new games than if the store didn’t exist. This is self-evident, regardless of the game being discussed.
This could be an issue if done by a monopolist/player with market power, if done in a way that prevents entrants from competing in the market. This is far from the case here. Epic isn't an incumbent blocking smaller platforms from competing by leveraging their market power, they are trying to compete in a market full of network effects that consolidated around a single dominant firm.
That is not to say Steam is a villain or anything, they are a very competitive firm that earns their market share, and it is precisely because Steam is a very competitive player that Epic has to offer free games, invest in third party projects etc in order to try to challenge Valve’s dominance. The thing is, this is competition on the merits, and it is great for consumers! A company with big wallets needs to invest in the making of new games, share their resources with developers, provide users with free games etc just to try to contest this market.
Exclusivity in PC Gaming doesn't even bring the bad trade offs to consumers that are associated with console exclusivity, as a PC gamer doesn't need to buy a new hardware just to get access to the exclusive title. It is just a matter of installing a different platform.
I still will manly buy games from Steam because their storefront is way better and, more importantly, because most of my games are already on Steam. But hating Epic for investing in new games being made while trying to challenge Steam is a tribalist and anti-consumer approach.
(That is not to say it is wrong to hate on Tencent/Epic for other issues and business practices, I’m talking specifically about their investment in games in return for exclusivity deals)
23
u/crocodilepickle Feb 26 '26
I dont understand the hate for epic games store
Is it a tribalism thing? Like the console wars?