Linux Gaming Renaissance on hold Epic Games is putting up a roadblock

[Sauron]

10 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Like I said, you can get business either by winning people over, or forcing them to use you by ruining the other options.

I would argue Steam DRM actively "ruins" GoG. Steam is home to a vast quantity of games that aren't available anywhere else. Whether they actively paid publishers to make sure that was the case is irrelevant to the final outcome - they still made use of their prominent position to overwhelm competitors and give the end user no choice.

[Delicieuxz]

8 minutes ago, Sauron said:

I would argue Steam DRM actively "ruins" GoG. Steam is home to a vast quantity of games that aren't available anywhere else. Whether they actively paid publishers to make sure that was the case is irrelevant to the final outcome - they still made use of their prominent position to overwhelm competitors and give the end user no choice.

Valve didn't use their position to do that, though, and Steam was around before GoG. Valve using their position to prevent competition would be an action. But, in that regard, Steam merely exists and is Steam. Publishers choosing to release on Steam of their own independent and non-coerced choice isn't Valve doing anything.

 

Steam also can do DRM free games - it a publisher chooses it for their game.

 

For DRM-free titles, the Steam client isn't itself DRM any more than logging into the GoG website with your username and password to download a game is. They're both single layers of one-time authentication before accessing the download for the game.

 

Valve have also encouraged publishers to release their titles on other platforms in addition to Steam.

 

https://ca.ign.com/articles/2013/11/04/valve-will-not-make-exclusive-games-for-steamos

Quote

This will also apply to third-party titles, Valve’s Anna Sweet told us. “Whenever we talk to third-party partners, we encourage them to put their games in as many places as possible, including not on our platforms," she said. "Because we think that customers are everywhere, and they want to put their games wherever customers are. That would go against our whole philosophy, to launch something that’s exclusive to SteamOS or Steam machines.”

 

“Or to drive customers there artificially,” Coomer continued. “Because if it can run in both places, we don’t like to create those artificial barriers to accessing content. We believe that, in maybe five years from now, folks will find it a quite antiquated notion that you should assume that when you change devices or platforms, that you lose all of your other games and friends. We’re hoping to unify, to get Steam to be as platform- and context-agnostic as possible. You shouldn’t have to shed that every generation, or even slightly shed it.”

 

Coomer added that “it would be pretty silly” if a third-party developer wanted “to limit their game to a certain platform.” He did note that small, independent studios who only have the resources to focus on one platform may inevitably make games that only run on SteamOS, “but that’s a very different thing.”

 

[Sauron]

37 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Valve didn't use their position to do that, though, and Steam was around before GoG. Valve using their position to prevent competition would be an action. But, in that regard, Steam merely exists and is Steam. Publishers choosing to release on Steam of their own independent and non-coerced choice isn't Valve doing anything.

Publishers choosing to release games on the EGS in exchange for money is also a completely independent and non-coerced choice by these same standards. Again, Epic's behavior is not only perfectly acceptable but actively rewarded in the current system. They are simply more on the nose with it than Valve ever needed to be but that doesn't mean Steam should get away with basically the same behavior. Don't forget that Steam first became popular because Valve made HL2 require it, much in the same way the EGS gained traction through Fortnite.

 

Steam stifles competition by holding thousands of games hostage with their DRM. It doesn't matter if the publisher is ok with it, the end user has no choice. The publishers are also at fault for not releasing a DRM free version but Steam is at fault for allowing them to use DRM on their platform.

46 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Steam also can do DRM free games - it a publisher chooses it for their game.

That's neither here nor there, Steam allows publishers to use DRM just like Epic allows publishers to take their money and give them a timed exclusive.

47 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Valve have also encouraged publishers to release their titles on other platforms in addition to Steam.

https://ca.ign.com/articles/2013/11/04/valve-will-not-make-exclusive-games-for-steamos

Oh yes, one article from 2013 where a PR spokesperson said that completely overrides their actions in the last 15 years.

 

Regardless, a somewhat benevolent dictator is still a dictator. There are things Steam gets right but there are also things it gets very, very wrong and since there was no alternative they could essentially do whatever they want.

Quote

We believe that, in maybe five years from now, folks will find it a quite antiquated notion that you should assume that when you change devices or platforms, that you lose all of your other games and friends. We’re hoping to unify, to get Steam to be as platform- and context-agnostic as possible. You shouldn’t have to shed that every generation, or even slightly shed it.

Notice how here he's basically saying that they don't want you to depend on any platform - except Steam. It is Steam that, in his vision, should be context agnostic, while the games should be tied to Steam. They want to be free from Windows but they want their customers to be firmly in their grasp. The problem he's talking about was in great part created be Steam. Why do my friends need to be tied to my game library? Why should I lose access to games I bought if I uninstall Steam in favor of another platform (even if the game is available on that platform you still have to repurchase it)? "Generations" aren't even a concept that existed in PC games until Valve tried to make their own console.

[Guest]

such biased opinions done by individuals that are .... eeeewwwww you know  

Save the world, lets blockchain.... Timer time decreased with 20 years ... thats who you are!!!

[Delicieuxz]

29 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Publishers choosing to release games on the EGS in exchange for money is also a completely independent and non-coerced choice by these same standards.

No. It's a multi-party choice coerced by money offered from one of the parties. Not independent, not free from coercion.

 

Quote

That's neither here nor there, Steam allows publishers to use DRM just like Epic allows publishers to take their money and give them a timed exclusive.

EGS has a vested interest in getting exclusives, and so solicits them and encourages publishers to agree to them by offering financial incentives, and then EGS receives a personal benefit in return for the deal.

 

Valve simply has options built into their platform. They don't tell or ask publishers to use any particular option, and don't receive anything in exchange for whatever options publishers choose to use. The publisher's choice isn't the result of a negotiated deal, and doesn't serve Valve. And so, there isn't an analogy here.

 

Quote

Oh yes, one article from 2013 where a PR spokesperson said that completely overrides their actions in the last 15 years.

I don't think so. Where have you seen Valve opposing publishers releasing their titles on other platforms? That would be the opposite of Valve supporting publishers releasing their titles on other platforms.

[Sauron]

3 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

No. It's a multi-party choice coerced by money offered from one of the parties. Not independent, not free from coercion.

That's not what coercion means. You're talking about persuasion.

5 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

EGS has a vested interest in getting exclusives, and so solicits them and encourages publishers to agree to them with financial incentive, and then receives a personal benefit in return.

Yes, that's called capitalism.

5 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Valve simply has options built into their platform. They don't tell or ask publishers to use any particular option, and don't receive anything in exchange for whatever options publishers choose to use.

What? Do you think Valve doesn't make a truckload of money when people publish on their store?

 

Steam offers "options" in the same way a megastore gives you the "option" to stand at a street corner and try to sell your stuff after it outcompeted and bankrupted every smaller store in town. The megastore won't give you money to go with them and will take a part of your earnings (through rent); yet, you MUST go with them if you want any chance of making your money back. If you don't have the money to do mass marketing and set up your own store platform, selling on Steam has been the only option for over a decade. Sure, you could have released your game on other platforms too if you wanted to - but without releasing on Steam you wouldn't have made any money.

13 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

I don't think so. Where have you seen Valve opposing publishers releasing their titles on other platforms? That would be the opposite of Valve supporting publishers releasing their titles on other platforms.

They don't need to say it explicitly. What, do you seriously believe Epic are doing what they are doing in a selfless effort to improve developer revenue and drive the prices down just because they said so?

 

Valve's every action concerning Steam has been in an effort to make it the standard platform for all PC game distribution. Where have you seen them supporting other stores outside of a couple of throwaway sentences? They have tied everything they could to their store platform; achievements, friend lists, chat clients, mods, collectible trading, game streaming, parental controls, you name it.

[Delicieuxz]

3 hours ago, Sauron said:

Yes, that's called capitalism.

That's irrelevant to what was said and doesn't defend your comment that publishers' choices to make their games exclusive to EGS are independent just as a publisher's choice to use DRM or not for their games on Steam is independent. They're not. Publishers choosing to make their games exclusive to EGS is the direct result of EGS paying them to make that choice.

 

Quote

What? Do you think Valve doesn't make a truckload of money when people publish on their store?

What Valve receives from people using their platform doesn't factor into what Valve receives from publishers using or not using an option within the platform - which is nothing.

 

Quote

Steam offers "options" in the same way a megastore gives you the "option" to stand at a street corner and try to sell your stuff after it outcompeted and bankrupted every smaller store in town.

It would actually be akin to a distributor getting to sell at the megastore, where they're most eager to have their wares because that's where they'll sell the most copies, and also being guaranteed to have stocks of their wares in all the other smaller shops around - of which there would be many.

 

A distributor doesn't care which store their wares are in other than for the sake of being able to sell more volume of their products. A distributor would have no problem with selling through the largest storefront - in fact, that's where they most want to sell.

 

And Valve didn't bankrupt smaller operations because Steam existed before any smaller ones did.

 

And what is "outcompeted"? A store doing better than competitors is a good thing for consumers. A store that provides worse service and prices than its competitors and doesn't intend to try to compete in terms of quality of services and prices but seeks to muscle customers to their store anyway by doing exclusives deals is a negative thing for consumers.

 

You're also confusing a platform's publishing options with the number of choices of retailers.

 

And even in terms of choices of retailers, Valve has done nothing to stifle other stores. EGS is.

 

 

 

Quote

The megastore won't give you money to go with them and will take a part of your earnings (through rent); yet, you MUST go with them if you want any chance of making your money back. If you don't have the money to do mass marketing and set up your own store platform, selling on Steam has been the only option for over a decade.

What are you complaining about: That publishers have options including one that can make them lots of money? That Steam, like all other platforms, takes a fee (though less than most others)? You aren't identifying anything blame-worthy.

 

There will be fewer 3rd-party titles appearing for sale on Uplay, Origin, and Microsoft Store now than before because Stem and EGS are offering lower fees than all the others, while most all of the others are still offering a 30% fee.

 

It costs nothing for publishers to sell their games on any other platform in addition to Steam, and Valve charge nothing for Steam keys that are sold through other stores.

 

If a game isn't available on other platforms, it's because the publishers decided for itself free from pressure that there's no big reason to have it on other platforms, which would probably because gamers aren't interested in buying their games on other platforms.

 

Quote

Sure, you could have released your game on other platforms too if you wanted to - but without releasing on Steam you wouldn't have made any money.

And? There's no problem there. Publishers like to release games where they'll make money - which is where gamers want to buy their games. They can release on Steam, where they'll make the most money, and on all the other platforms as well at no additional costs, and free from any pressure by Valve.

 

You haven't identified an issue.

 

Quote

They don't need to say it explicitly. What, do you seriously believe Epic are doing what they are doing in a selfless effort to improve developer revenue and drive the prices down just because they said so?

They don't just not say it, but they also don't show it.

 

Of course I don't think EGS are acting selflessly - they're doing the opposite. And EGS's exclusives are driving prices up, not down.

 

Anno 1800 and The Division 2 Prices Rising Without Steam

 

All the games that were previously on Steam now cost more on EGS for regions outside of North America than they did on Steam - because EGS doesn't do regional pricing whereas Valve do. And as EGS have made titles exclusive to their store, there isn't the large number of 3rd-party resellers for those titles like there are for games that activate on Steam.

 

Quote

Valve's every action concerning Steam has been in an effort to make it the standard platform for all PC game distribution. Where have you seen them supporting other stores outside of a couple of throwaway sentences?

By not engaging in monopolistic practices such as exclusives-buying, by not speaking against other platforms, by voicing support for the use of other platforms, by allowing publishers to print as many Steam keys as they want to be sold on other sites while charging 0% for all keys sold on places other than Steam - that includes through the publishers' own storefronts.

 

Quote

They have tied everything they could to their store platform; achievements, friend lists, chat clients, mods, collectible trading, game streaming, parental controls, you name it.

In order to satiate your criticism, Valve would have to remove the quality features that people like to use Steam for. But, being popular as a result of developing quality service is not blameworthy and is positive competition and good for consumers.

 

You're blaming Valve for doing an excellent good job and for succeeding as a direct result of doing a good job.

[vanished]

6 hours ago, Sauron said:

I would argue Steam DRM actively "ruins" GoG. Steam is home to a vast quantity of games that aren't available anywhere else. Whether they actively paid publishers to make sure that was the case is irrelevant to the final outcome - they still made use of their prominent position to overwhelm competitors and give the end user no choice.

I think we're seeing this from very different angles.  For one, the intent and process does matter to me, perhaps moreso than the outcome even.  I think the law agrees with me also: the charges for attempted murder (bad intent but neutral outcome) and manslaughter (neutral intent but bad outcome) are distinct and separate, and the latter is far less severe.  There has been zero attempt by Valve to crush GoG that I'm aware of, and Steam came first.  Steam simply existed, and later, GOG started up to compete by offering something nicer.  I don't see anyway I could possibly look at this and think steam is ruining gog. 

[Sauron]

3 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I think we're seeing this from very different angles.  For one, the intent and process does matter to me, perhaps moreso than the outcome even.  I think the law agrees with me also: the charges for attempted murder (bad intent but neutral outcome) and manslaughter (neutral intent but bad outcome) are distinct and separate, and the latter is far less severe.

Of course but we are discussing things that are perfectly legal here. Also if you're the murdered party it hardly matters to you what the intentions of the murderer were - the deed is done and you suffered the same consequences.

3 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

There has been zero attempt by Valve to crush GoG that I'm aware of, and Steam came first. Steam simply existed, and later, GOG started up to compete by offering something nicer. I don't see anyway I could possibly look at this and think steam is ruining gog. 

Steam has, intentionally or not (I believe it was at least partially intentional, Valve aren't a bunch of morons who don't understand the consequences of their actions), created an environment where competing with them on an even playing field is impossible. You can either act as a small niche alternative like GOG or try to tip the balance with money and in-house exclusives like EA, Ubisoft and now (in a more strong handed fashion) Epic. I'll concede that Valve isn't actively going after GOG to try and bankrupt them but Steam's mere existence in its current state is more than enough to prevent the likes of GOG from ever growing.

[ImNotDeViLzzz]

Epic Games has every right to do what they want.  Also Linux users there is this thing called dual boot you can do or you can partition a drive and use Linux on one part of it and Windows on the other and play games made by Epic Games. I remember having posts taken down just because I was said to be trolling by recommending this legitimately once or twice by Level 1 Tech mods  Look you can fight for Linux to become more common place and give people more options but from what I experienced for years being part of the Level 1 Tech side of what was once Tek Syndicate I honestly have no sympathy for crying Linux users.  Talk of feeling entitled to something eh how about maybe get the people that work so much on 1 billion versions of Linux and get them focused on creating games to maybe make being a Linux user a better experience.  Sorry but no sympathy from me to Linux users I have met as they were just horrid people in many ways.  Also for the record let me state though that having options is good and so if Linux became easier to use and was a more affordable OS and was supported by more gaming companies and others in a greater way that would be great for the consumer.  Also for the record let me state yes there are horrid people that use Windows.  LOL!

[Ashley MLP Fangirl]

5 hours ago, ImNotDeViLzzz said:

Epic Games has every right to do what they want.

of course. we have every right to complain. 

 

5 hours ago, ImNotDeViLzzz said:

Also Linux users there is this thing called dual boot you can do or you can partition a drive and use Linux on one part of it and Windows on the other and play games made by Epic Games.

that wouldn't be necessary if Linux had more support, which Epic Games is now actively trying to discourage. 

 

5 hours ago, ImNotDeViLzzz said:

I remember having posts taken down just because I was said to be trolling by recommending this legitimately once or twice by Level 1 Tech mods  Look you can fight for Linux to become more common place and give people more options but from what I experienced for years being part of the Level 1 Tech side of what was once Tek Syndicate I honestly have no sympathy for crying Linux users.

that's unfortunate that happened, but don't let that experience generalize all linux users for you. 

 

5 hours ago, ImNotDeViLzzz said:

how about maybe get the people that work so much on 1 billion versions of Linux and get them focused on creating games to maybe make being a Linux user a better experience.

there are only a few "distro's" technically. the others are re-skinned versions of those and don't usually require programming knowledge to create.

 

5 hours ago, ImNotDeViLzzz said:

Sorry but no sympathy from me to Linux users I have met as they were just horrid people in many ways.

again, try not to generalize. i've met some really bad Windows fanboys on here but am i therefore gonna say that all windows users are awful people? of course not. everyone is different. 

 

5 hours ago, ImNotDeViLzzz said:

let me state though that having options is good

so let's fight together to not let Epic take existing options away. 

 

5 hours ago, ImNotDeViLzzz said:

Also for the record let me state yes there are horrid people that use Windows.

there are horrid people in every community. don't generalize based on an unfortunate incident involving such people. 

[GoldenLag]

5 hours ago, ImNotDeViLzzz said:

Epic Games has every right to do what they want.

you arent wrong....... they can do what they want, but like free speech; be prepared to receive backlash if you are being a douche. 

[Candren Lycosa]

I would be on linux if it wasn't for Wallpaper Engine (because WE isn't supported on Linux due to how it works) but I've heard a lot of good things about it and i've been itching to try it out. Though I can agree with everyone on the EGS topic. I think Tim Sweeney told Andrew Wilson to hold his beer.

[vanished]

7 minutes ago, Candren Lycosa said:

I would be on linux if it wasn't for Wallpaper Engine (because WE isn't supported on Linux due to how it works) but I've heard a lot of good things about it and i've been itching to try it out. Though I can agree with everyone on the EGS topic. I think Tim Sweeney told Andrew Wilson to hold his beer.

Wow, that's the only thing keeping you from switching!?  I wish I could say the same I'd look into alternatives, it wouldn't surprise me if something like it existed for one DE or another.  Best of luck!

[Candren Lycosa]

On 5/8/2019 at 9:46 PM, Ryan_Vickers said:

Wow, that's the only thing keeping you from switching!?  I wish I could say the same I'd look into alternatives, it wouldn't surprise me if something like it existed for one DE or another.  Best of luck!

People have asked why WE isn't supported on Linux and it's mainly due to how it works

"The thing is, it's still going to have to project that wallpaper to your desktop environment. It's going to be a lot harder than just getting it to launch.

First off, we have GNOME, the default Ubuntu desktop. Before that, Ubuntu used Unity. Then, we have Linux Mint, which comes in all of four different desktop environments.

In Cinnamon, the wallpaper is linked to the default file explorer. I don't know how it works on GNOME or KDE, or any other desktop environment, but my point is: you'd have to make an implementation for every single one.
And that's just not realistic for an app developer to do."

As said by Insta on https://steamcommunity.com/app/431960/discussions/2/1736588252400271256/

That and a few games like Black Desert Online (it has A LOT of issues on Linux), I may try and Dual Boot both Linux and Windows at the same time just to try out linux for myself and see if i like it

[vanished]

1 hour ago, Candren Lycosa said:

People have asked why WE isn't supported on Linux and it's mainly due to how it works

"The thing is, it's still going to have to project that wallpaper to your desktop environment. It's going to be a lot harder than just getting it to launch.

First off, we have GNOME, the default Ubuntu desktop. Before that, Ubuntu used Unity. Then, we have Linux Mint, which comes in all of four different desktop environments.

In Cinnamon, the wallpaper is linked to the default file explorer. I don't know how it works on GNOME or KDE, or any other desktop environment, but my point is: you'd have to make an implementation for every single one.
And that's just not realistic for an app developer to do."

As said by Insta on https://steamcommunity.com/app/431960/discussions/2/1736588252400271256/

That and a few games like Black Desert Online (it has A LOT of issues on Linux), I may try and Dual Boot both Linux and Windows at the same time just to try out linux for myself and see if i like it

Yeha I get why they wouldn't bother, just, knowing the Linux community, it wouldn't surprise me if there was an alternative made by different people

[Guest]

This still here ? i thought this post to be removed by now because of failure to show sense of common thinking.... ....

I still am embarressed by people stating how variant () includes epic will ruin the pc gaming scene  

Don't get me wrong, i admire the linux society for still being around etc .. i guess in a way i look to them as i would look at goths or something.... not in a diminishing way but in a .. oh look, thats a way to make a statement too right ( yea i know hardly applicable ) and i believe it is the way to go for some server stuff and such? but screaming like this.. I can understand your mad for whatever reason possible ( just like the goths ) but do you really need to be that expressive about it? Your an it dude right use logic and common sense .. maybe that will lead to the base of all that anger too !