Steam Library Beta Coming Sept 17th

Does anyone else use the grid view? I still think that's the most visually appealing option. Especially if you take the time to download/create artwork and include your non-Steam games.
 
the list thing on the left doesn't seem that bad if you're able to create your own categories and move games. it will make it easier to organize it but the rest of that shit, yeah i'll pass..
 
Basic functionality seems retained. It appears to be very feature rich, built in React, so performance there's going to have an impact, that's for sure. I wonder if they've upped their inside app tracking along with everything else
 
All I want is them to fucking preload the icons in list mode. I don't know why the hell that STILL lags on my computer when I reboot when I scroll up and down. I'm running steam off a damn NVME SSD with 3GB read speed.
I have too many games to use any view that's not list view, frankly.
 
pXsEvCoGD7jqQ42HKUXEQC078d4=.gif
 
The UI of Steam as it is and has always been is terrible. But my GOD, everyone loves it.
Why change something that is crap but everyone from some unknown reason seems to love?
 
The UI of Steam as it is and has always been is terrible. But my GOD, everyone loves it.
Why change something that is crap but everyone from some unknown reason seems to love?

Ask Amazon :p
 
My problem with this statement is that Epic is not abusing customers any more than Valve is. My preferred storefront is and into the forseeable future will continue to be GOG. Before GOG there was Stardock Impulse (before they sold it). Both were, IMHO, superior to Steam and yet Steam was the default and frequently ONLY venue for new game releases. Epic is doing to Steam what Steam has been doing to everyone else all along, only more people are used to using Steam and fail to see the hypocrisy of their position.

Valve never ever mandated exclusivity. Ever. So, no. They aren't doing the same thing that Epic is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dgz
like this
The UI of Steam as it is and has always been is terrible. But my GOD, everyone loves it.
Why change something that is crap but everyone from some unknown reason seems to love?


Honestly, make changes but allow people to stay with the old if they want.
 
Valve didn't have to mandate exclusivity - exclusivity happened because they were in the defacto monopoly position. My point still stands.

It really doesn't though. It actually falls apart and you're not willing to admit it. Consumer demand dictated support. Not corporate decisions. That's a huge difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dgz
like this
It really doesn't though. It actually falls apart and you're not willing to admit it. Consumer demand dictated support. Not corporate decisions. That's a huge difference.

If the end result is exactly the same: I am unable to purchase a product on my preferred platform and there is no technical reason for this limitation - then there is no difference to me at all. The cause of the result is irrelevant.
 
If the end result is exactly the same: I am unable to purchase a product on my preferred platform and there is no technical reason for this limitation - then there is no difference to me at all. The cause of the result is irrelevant.

No. Again, if it's due to popular demand, then you're paying the price from a populations choice. Not a singular entity making a choice for you. If you cannot understand that difference, then there's not much more to discuss. The differences are huge and certainly not irrelevant.

Valve never mandated exclusivity. Developers/Publishers were always free to sell elsewhere.
 
No. Again, if it's due to popular demand, then you're paying the price from populations choice. Not a singular entity making a choice for you. If you cannot understand that difference, then there's not much more to discuss. The differences are huge.


I understand what you are saying perfectly well. What YOU are not understanding is that the end result being the same, the reasons for it don't matter. There is no PRACTICAL difference. You can argue there is an ethical difference, but since Business Ethics is a mythical beast on par with the Unicorn, that argument is pointless. Without regulation, every business there is will fuck you in the ass just as hard as they are able every time. Full stop.
 
You guys should just copy and paste the debates from the other bunch of Steam vs EGS threads and save yourselves the time.
 
I understand what you are saying perfectly well. What YOU are not understanding is that the end result being the same, the reasons for it don't matter. There is no PRACTICAL difference. You can argue there is an ethical difference, but since Business Ethics is a mythical beast on par with the Unicorn, that argument is pointless. Without regulation, every business there is will fuck you in the ass just as hard as they are able every time. Full stop.

There is a very practical difference. There are a number of games I can choose to buy from Steam, GOG or other stores. The games aren't exclusive to Steam. Steam did not tell anyone they could not sell their games on other platforms. That the game is on Steam is irrelevant when I can buy that very same game somewhere else. Full stop.

The only exceptions are Valve games. Which it shouldn't be ironic since Valve and Steam are owned by the same entity. I also have no problem with this since they are owned by the same entity. Same issue with Epic store. Games owned by Epic I have no problem with being exclusive on its own store. Although I'd say there is a bit of an issue if they remove games from other stores which were previously on there.

But this isn't what you're arguing. Actually, I'm not sure what you're arguing since what you're arguing doesn't make any logical sense.
 
There is a very practical difference. There are a number of games I can choose to buy from Steam, GOG or other stores. The games aren't exclusive to Steam. Steam did not tell anyone they could not sell their games on other platforms. That the game is on Steam is irrelevant when I can buy that very same game somewhere else. Full stop.

The only exceptions are Valve games. Which it shouldn't be ironic since Valve and Steam are owned by the same entity. I also have no problem with this since they are owned by the same entity. Same issue with Epic store. Games owned by Epic I have no problem with being exclusive on its own store. Although I'd say there is a bit of an issue if they remove games from other stores which were previously on there.

But this isn't what you're arguing. Actually, I'm not sure what you're arguing since what you're arguing doesn't make any logical sense.

It is obvious you don't understand, because whatever it is YOU are talking about is entirely different than what WE are talking about.

WE are discussing how most games for a while have been ONLY available from Steam - and nowhere else (thankfully, this is now less true than it has been) and how now Epic is buying exclusivity for some high-demand games so that they are NOT available on Steam (at least, for a while). MY argument is that, from the perspective of a non-Steam non-Epic game store user, Steam and Epic are engaging in the same behavior. I can't buy whatever game from my preferred store (in this case, GOG), when that game is exclusive to Epic or Steam. . HIS argument is that Epic is MOAR EEEVIL than Steam because Epic is paying developers to have exclusivity periods with them, and that Steam is GOOD because they didn't have to spend money for their exclusives and that Steam only even has exclusives because they are the biggest store. It's not STEAM'S fault that most people buy all of their PC games there. Personally, it is an ethical/moral argument - something I don't apply to business.

The fact is this: Steam was first to market with a viable online store which they used to sell their own products. They later expanded that store by offering "distribution" to third-party publishers, and even later, directly to third-party devs. Publishers were willing to give it a go because of the inherent DRM in the platform. Because of their first mover advantage and their savvy in opening up their store, Steam has become the default PC gaming platform that it is today. Steam is the PC software store equivalent of 1981 AT&T. There are other stores out there, but they all pale in comparison to the sheer size and scope of Steam. The publishers saw the writing on the wall far too late, and their own storefronts were and are too little, too late to upset the Steam hegemony.

Of those other stores, some live entirely on their own exclusives (Activision/Blizzard). Some capitulated and rejoined Steam while also offering their own storefront (Ubisoft and Paradox). Others are still trying to out-Steam Steam (EA is also trying to cater to third-party devs). Still others are relying on a gimmick (GOG with its DRM free sales and NON-exclusivity - remember the owners of GOG also make The Witcher games and Cyberpunk 2077). And lastly, we get to Epic who said "Fuck it" and is throwing money at devs to grow their market share.

Hell, all Valve really IS anymore is a publisher via Steam. You can't really call them a game developer anymore when they don't actually seem to develop any games. Make no mistake: Valve has more in common with EA than it does with any developer.

And do you want to know which storefront has made the largest progress in disrupting the Steam hegemony in the shortest time? Epic. Personally, I don't buy anything from them, but whatever you think of their tactics, they are making a dent.

Anyone else miss the days when you could go into just about ANY software store and buy just about ANY game?
 
If the end result is exactly the same: I am unable to purchase a product on my preferred platform and there is no technical reason for this limitation - then there is no difference to me at all. The cause of the result is irrelevant.

It's actually way different, because you are trying to vilify Steam by claiming they are doing the same thing as EGS. Objectively, they are not. If a publisher chooses to only put their game on Steam, that is on the publisher 100%, not Valve.

So despite the fact that some games may only be on Steam because a publisher decided it, that has absolutely nothing to do with Valve. As an end user it may appear that Steam and EGS are similar due to some games being only on that platform, but that, again, has nothing to do with Valve.
 
Valve is in such good shape internally that UI update takes them 3 years to develop and it still needs a beta.
 
is that for real?...the text is a bit hard to read

LOL it was a real screenshot I did in Steam years ago.It is eaiser to read in 4K.
You can do lots of stupid stuff with steam but like I said I only play games and steam launches games.
 
It is obvious you don't understand, because whatever it is YOU are talking about is entirely different than what WE are talking about.

WE are discussing how most games for a while have been ONLY available from Steam - and nowhere else (thankfully, this is now less true than it has been) and how now Epic is buying exclusivity for some high-demand games so that they are NOT available on Steam (at least, for a while). MY argument is that, from the perspective of a non-Steam non-Epic game store user, Steam and Epic are engaging in the same behavior. I can't buy whatever game from my preferred store (in this case, GOG), when that game is exclusive to Epic or Steam. . HIS argument is that Epic is MOAR EEEVIL than Steam because Epic is paying developers to have exclusivity periods with them, and that Steam is GOOD because they didn't have to spend money for their exclusives and that Steam only even has exclusives because they are the biggest store. It's not STEAM'S fault that most people buy all of their PC games there. Personally, it is an ethical/moral argument - something I don't apply to business.

The fact is this: Steam was first to market with a viable online store which they used to sell their own products. They later expanded that store by offering "distribution" to third-party publishers, and even later, directly to third-party devs. Publishers were willing to give it a go because of the inherent DRM in the platform. Because of their first mover advantage and their savvy in opening up their store, Steam has become the default PC gaming platform that it is today. Steam is the PC software store equivalent of 1981 AT&T. There are other stores out there, but they all pale in comparison to the sheer size and scope of Steam. The publishers saw the writing on the wall far too late, and their own storefronts were and are too little, too late to upset the Steam hegemony.

Of those other stores, some live entirely on their own exclusives (Activision/Blizzard). Some capitulated and rejoined Steam while also offering their own storefront (Ubisoft and Paradox). Others are still trying to out-Steam Steam (EA is also trying to cater to third-party devs). Still others are relying on a gimmick (GOG with its DRM free sales and NON-exclusivity - remember the owners of GOG also make The Witcher games and Cyberpunk 2077). And lastly, we get to Epic who said "Fuck it" and is throwing money at devs to grow their market share.

Hell, all Valve really IS anymore is a publisher via Steam. You can't really call them a game developer anymore when they don't actually seem to develop any games. Make no mistake: Valve has more in common with EA than it does with any developer.

And do you want to know which storefront has made the largest progress in disrupting the Steam hegemony in the shortest time? Epic. Personally, I don't buy anything from them, but whatever you think of their tactics, they are making a dent.

Anyone else miss the days when you could go into just about ANY software store and buy just about ANY game?

Again, you have no clue what you're talking about. The only way you could say Steam is any way the same or even similar to Epic is if Steam bought exclusives. Steam doesn't and never has.

If you don't like the fact that you can't buy any and all games on GOG, then you need to talk to the publishers. It's the publishers' fault that games don't end up on GOG for you to buy them there. I'll well aware the makers of The Witcher series also owns GOG. I've also purchased a number of games on GOG and tend to purchase there over any other place simply because they don't allow DRM on anything on their store. The very reason I tend to purchase from GOG is the exact reason few publishers allow their games on GOG, the lack of DRM.

You're attempting to argue something which doesn't exist. The only games on Steam which are exclusive are Valve games. Everything else is perfectly free to be sold on any other store if the publishers wish to do so. Stop trying to blame Steam for something which isn't Steam's fault.
 
Again, you have no clue what you're talking about. The only way you could say Steam is any way the same or even similar to Epic is if Steam bought exclusives. Steam doesn't and never has.

If you don't like the fact that you can't buy any and all games on GOG, then you need to talk to the publishers. It's the publishers' fault that games don't end up on GOG for you to buy them there. I'll well aware the makers of The Witcher series also owns GOG. I've also purchased a number of games on GOG and tend to purchase there over any other place simply because they don't allow DRM on anything on their store. The very reason I tend to purchase from GOG is the exact reason few publishers allow their games on GOG, the lack of DRM.

You're attempting to argue something which doesn't exist. The only games on Steam which are exclusive are Valve games. Everything else is perfectly free to be sold on any other store if the publishers wish to do so. Stop trying to blame Steam for something which isn't Steam's fault.

Therein lies your problem:

I DIDN'T blame Steam for it. I only noted that the situation exists, and that it is ironic so many people are getting their panties in a twist about it now that it is happening to Steam when I have been having this same user experience all along - i.e. Welcome to the party. The reasoning behind the experience (the WHY of it) does not objectively change the experience. If I get run over by a car and survive, I am still injured regardless of whether or not the driver intended to hit me. My experience is the same regardless.

And nothing I've said is in any way false. I do know what I am talking about, because I have been living it. Again, welcome to the party.
 
Therein lies your problem:

I DIDN'T blame Steam for it. I only noted that the situation exists, and that it is ironic so many people are getting their panties in a twist about it now that it is happening to Steam when I have been having this same user experience all along - i.e. Welcome to the party. The reasoning behind the experience (the WHY of it) does not objectively change the experience. If I get run over by a car and survive, I am still injured regardless of whether or not the driver intended to hit me. My experience is the same regardless.

And nothing I've said is in any way false. I do know what I am talking about, because I have been living it. Again, welcome to the party.

You claim Steam had exclusivity because you can't buy what you want on a different digital storefront. That is you blaming Steam. Your whole argument is based on blaming Steam for the issues you have. If it wasn't there would have been no reason to say what you did and try to equate Steam and EGS. It's not the same thing, far from it in fact.

And you're still trying to claim the same argument. Look at your last sentence: "Again, welcome to the party."

You may be living something but what's you're imagining and what reality is are two different things.
 
There is a very practical difference. There are a number of games I can choose to buy from Steam, GOG or other stores. The games aren't exclusive to Steam. Steam did not tell anyone they could not sell their games on other platforms. That the game is on Steam is irrelevant when I can buy that very same game somewhere else. Full stop.

If you're talking about stores then I can't think of any game that is exclusive to any single store. If you're talking about clients/embedded DRM, most Steam games can't be downloaded or used outside of Steam. But that is a developer/publisher choice. A few indie games make them DRM free because it gives them brownie points for the few people who hate all DRM including Steam. And then there are games/IPs sold for cheap to GOG. But you don't see much of any big games like Tomb Raider, Bioshock, Borderlands or Dihonored not tethered to Steam unless it is their own launcher/client.

I literally cannot event think of AAA or AA game that released both on Steam and another client. I don't count Ubisoft because those all use Uplay.
 
Something new! Everyone here hates it.

I swear, everyone on [H] is over 50.
 
I dont mind change but I prefer the simple listing of games and information. Easier and faster to use.
 
Something new! Everyone here hates it.

I swear, everyone on [H] is over 50.

No, I don't hate it because it's new, I hate it because it's pointless and bloated "UI" wankery which ends up creating visual noise.
I prefer minimalist and clean UIs which provide the bare minimum for needed information and nothing else.

Also I am <30 so please, take your ageism elsewhere lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ncjoe
like this
No, I don't hate it because it's new, I hate it because it's pointless and bloated "UI" wankery which ends up creating visual noise.
I prefer minimalist and clean UIs which provide the bare minimum for needed information and nothing else.

Also I am <30 so please, take your ageism elsewhere lol.

+1 and I'm going to be 29 this year.
 
I'm very comfortable with the current Steam layout and options are. Visually, I'm unimpressed with the new layout.

Then again, every folder in my Windows install - except pictures - are in detail view mode. :D
 
I actually like the new layout...visually it's a big step up...Valve is obviously trying to fend off Discord with this new look and added features...

The problem is all this crap makes the program more bloated, in an age where you have several increasingly bloated launchers clogging up your system.
 
Not sure if I like the look or not.

I really with GOG would just hurry it up with Galaxy 2.0 so that I don't have to concern myself with Steam's UI anymore.
I've always found Windows Explorer and Start Menu the best game launcher and GOG works beautifully with it.
 
Back
Top