They absolutely are unreasonably high. My barely overclocked 6700K is sufficient for virtually every new or slightly older game I throw at it, but somehow it’s not enough for the OS?
They absolutely are unreasonably high. My barely overclocked 6700K is sufficient for virtually every new or slightly older game I throw at it, but somehow it’s not enough for the OS?
Since XP, I always upgraded to the next version whenever it came out. The insane hardware requirements of Windows 11 make it the only exception.
Steam is largely driven by Valve’s own games and freebies as well. 1.5M currently playing Dota 2 and CS 2, with the next best being F2P games: PUBG with 370K online, Apex Legends, and Naraka.
In countries like Georgia and Syria, the minimum annual wage is below $100.
If Epic had required developers to, say, sell games 15% cheaper
Epic cannot do that because
In response to one inquiry from a game publisher, in another example, Valve explained: “We basically see any selling of the game on PC, Steam key or not, as a part of the same shared PC market- so even if you weren’t using Steam keys, we’d just choose to stop selling a game if it was always running discounts of 75% off on one store but 50% off on ours. . . .”
(source)
However, Epic regularly offers coupons out of pocket. Right now you can get 33% off any game above $14.99 or the regional equivalent, as many times as you want, even if the game is already discounted by the publisher. You also get 10% as cashback.
Valve’s actions do not have to copy those of Google for it to engage in anti-competitive behavior. Focus on the Steam-specific arguments deemed reasonable enough for the judge to allow the trial to go through, like those on the MFN, high profit margin related to the 30% fee, user reviews manipulation, and so forth.
Heck I’m sure that they very quickly came up with a functional shopping cart at the very least.
Steam has been offering third-party titles since 2005 but still had no shopping cart as of 2008.
In the Epic trial, Google made some of the same arguments as those used to defend Steam, like the presence of competing stores or the claim that it wins people over by the quality of the product.
Epic’s expert made these relevant points:
Google impairs competition without preventing it entirely
Google’s conduct targets competition as it emerges
Google is dominant
And we know who won in the antitrust case. Let’s see what happens in Wolfire et al v. Valve.
Not to mention that open source software can and sometimes does contain spyware.
Debunked time and time again.
Many of the articles do have references on the DRM status. Here’s an example indicating verification by a staff member. I personally tested a bunch of the games for DRM and noted it back when I contributed. Until recently, most of the games released on Epic were DRM-free. Even the Sony games were notably DRM-free on Epic before they were released on GOG. Nowadays, it’s more common for the new ones to use EOS and have it function as DRM.
Epic’s current approach to reviews is arguably better anyway. There’s no toxicity, incentive to troll to farm points, and it’s randomized, so it doesn’t enable review bombing.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
They own Easy Anti-Cheat, which has kernel level access and collects data as part of its user agreement but these people keep regurgitating the debunked claim of the launcher being spyware. Occam’s razor, anyone?
Gamers and developers benefit from the developers being paid rather than not being paid for the same thing.
Rocket League is fully playable on Steam.
The story of most of Valve’s games is finding a mod, hiring the modder, then making the game exclusive to Steam.
Epic has a significantly higher percentage of games confirmed to be DRM-free.
There are already precedents of software (the Riot games) and the OS itself refusing to work if the requirements are bypassed, so it’s a very risky move that nobody should choose for their main OS.