Recent content by tetris42

I don't know the details on that one. I tried doing a search and the first thing I saw was this post of a bunch of people saying it wasn't an exclusive and you could pre-order it on Steam. Have a link that shows it was an exclusive (prior to April 11th, 2018) and for how long?

It failed as an app store, which makes sense since it primarily targeted desktop users. As far as I know, it's still successful as a games store. That's why I asked about games. MS has had Quantum Break, Gears of War 4, Forza Horizon 4 as exclusives and I believe they all did quite well on PC...

Completely serious question: When has a boycott of a good game ever worked? In other words, people thought the game was good, but it was packaged with some anti-consumer tactic or something else customers didn't like, so they boycotted it in such volumes that it hurt the company?

Your reply is just proving the point. Consoles exclusives ARE more anti-consumer, by a country mile. So your rebuttal is "go talk about that somewhere else." Since you guys don't get it, here's the point: You don't want to face the BIGGER anti-consumer issue, but are crying bloody murder...

From the consumer perspective (which you seem hyper-focused on) it is. They're both games you can't play anywhere else. I mean honestly, what's the difference? 1st party exclusive: A company funds a studio in-house to sell a game exclusively to keep it off other platforms in order to gain...

I can't speak for him, but it's not that they cancel out each other, it's more hypocrisy + focusing on the smaller problem that bugs me. Let me ask you, do you ever buy exclusive console games? If so, I would put you in hypocrite category. If not, you at least have principles, though I still...

Incorrect. You're a de facto monopoly if you control a majority of marketshare in a field, whether you're behaving well or not. Companies that never abuse their position usually aren't fined 3 million dollars for violating laws with anti-consumer practices...

QFT. One of the more adamant users in the forum railing against Epic said he despises exclusives of all kinds, fair enough. He also had a link to his blog page. Guess what was on it? Reviews of games, including console-only exclusives.

It doesn't change the point. The costs are absolutely minimal for a company worth billions, breaking records it's so much. In fact, I think it would take some real effort to find a company that profitable that has LESS expenses than Valve. I think a lot of people don't understand the scale on...

Here's the thing: You're comparing percentages on a physical product with only so much room in the store to digital distribution. If you compare a so-so deal to a bad deal, of course the so-so deal is better. That doesn't mean it's good. 30% is the so-so deal, not a good deal. If that...

Yeah, then they'd be like GOG, which is barely making a profit, except with less games. Ruthlessness is usually rewarded in corporate America and good will is often penalized. I'm amazed the level of naivety in the thread. Going up against an entrenched de facto monopoly takes either a...

We don't know if that's going to be the business model. Say you have a service where streaming access is free, but you pay per game you access. Hell, this is exactly how Steam, Epic, etc. work now. The access is free, but you pay per game as a good. Streaming could have the exact same...

In theory, sure. In practice, not really. If I have a copy of a game where the server is shut down, what "resolutions" do I have if I wish to continue playing the game? Assume I'm not a programming genius who can reverse engineer encrypted server software. Or better yet, what rights will...

It is important distinction, however, in real-world terms. Yes, you still own the game, a worthless and unusable copy of the game. The point is, prior to Steam, almost any game you owned couldn't be disabled by the seller after the point of sale. After Steam, that no longer became true. As...