Fallout 76 Won’t Launch on Steam

[M76]

So EA, Epic, Bethesda, Blizzard, Activision should pay 30% per sale for Glorified File Hosting?
because you are Lazy

You're quite late to the party. Anyway, guess you never heard of the concept of supply and demand. If supply doesn't meet demand there won't be a sale. They're better off making 70% money off someone, than making 0% by trying to lock them in to their proprietary ecosystem. I have abandoned shows, that went and started their own private on demand streaming service. Don't think for a moment I'm not ready to skip on games for the same reason.

Steam is nothing but glorified file hosting.

Oh, I see now, it's quite clear you have a personal vendetta against steam, so why should anyone engage you?

 

[M76]

Steam sales, they want games but they don't want to pay full price, which is Ironic since the same community refers to Console Gamers are Peasants.
the reason people carry water for steam is because they are Cheapskate's who want to buy AAA games for 10 bucks.

That's funny considering that steam is traditionally the most expensive place to buy PC games online be it discounts or new releases.

 

[Darunion]

It isn't that I hate different game platforms or UI's, it is that I hate having them all. I like steam because that is where the most of my games are and that updating is done. Typically I have steam set to autorun at boot so stuff stays updated but with others I do not (because you have to draw a line somewhere with on boot tasks and downloads) so when I go to play a game I always have to wait for an update.

Basically it comes to it is easier to bandwith manage one program than it is to do it to all of them.

 

[Jagger100]

That's funny considering that steam is traditionally the most expensive place to buy PC games online be it discounts or new releases.

They weren't. When heavy discounting first started in 2008-ish, steam was the place. Now I think they're being jerked around from game publishers that want to take them down and their ability to take a stand against publisher's BS if they decided to have one.

Gabe's always been a little woke but hasn't seem to gotten on-board with the levels of self-destructive super-woke the rest of the industry is following, yet. Could be partly why.

 

[RanceJustice]

THis is disappointing. Especially with regards to the massive problems with Fallout 76 and Bethesda, releasing for Steam would be perhaps a hint of them going the right direction. After all, on PC Bethesda's largest properties have literally decades of Steam release success (ie Elder Scrolls, Fallout series, even ESO etc) so with 76 being such a huge fuckup and requiring an ongoing player base to keep player-bleed from ruining the game further, Steam seems a natural partnership. However, watching them distance themselves like this is very frustrating because it shows short-term greed before long term success.

This whole 'having a ton of launchers" thing is getting really annoying and has nearly universally meant a worse experience for me as a player. The business justification is "oh we dont' want to share even a little bit of our revenue with Steam, so we'll just make our own thing!" which...99% of the time is a garbage experience. I'm a big advocate of Free software, Linux/Mac support etc... and other elements of open gaming, but I have to say that Steam (even if it isn't completely FLOSS) has done WAY more to justify their position than anyone else in the industry - and they don't show signs of stopping. Steam as a platform is leagues ahead of everything else and they reinvest into niche expansions that massively impact gaming. The Steam Controller, Big Picture UI, Steam for Linux, SteamOS, features like Steamworks and Workshop being easy integrations for mods and online play that literally enable developers who would never before be able to afford online play middleware or dev time to release their titles, tons of community features like Achievements, Cards, messaging etc... major contribution to Linux drivers, Steam/OpenVR, and most recently Proton allowing for seamless play of many Windows titles on Linux without any fidding around etc.... not to mention having the biggest platform around for visibility on PC, and being one of the major players in the possibility of significant percentage game sales, I say that Steam has justified taking a reasonable( and unchanging! They haven't jacked it up with the times last I checked) cut for what is given in return!

Seeing companies, especially well heeled ones throw a big fuss about Steam just seems like sour grapes. I CHOOSE their launcher and platform because they've earned it, year in and year out. The only other company I give something of a pass to is Blizzard as they have never launched their titles under any other platform/launcher/store, for better or worse; though I still wish they would use their massive wallet to formally support Linux and otherwise give back to the community as much as Steam does. They took early first steps with always allowing their titles to use OpenGL and thus making them easier to WINE, but with their success I think they could do quite a bit more for the community overall. GOG / Galaxy I consider something of a push - I like the idea of DRM free titles as always, but the fact is the experience is often not as good on that platform compared to what Steam offers....and even after all this time they still don't have a Linux Galaxy client! I'd love to see GOG and Steam work together on compatibility and there have been some cross-play collaborations taking place since a few years back, but things have seemingly stalled. Games that release both on Steam and GOG, the Steam version likely doesn't include any DRM (if the dev/publisher insisted, it wouldn't make it on GOG etc), but offer more features and are often the first updated and with the best player base (Dying Light was a good example of this) so I'd like to see more progress on Steam and GOG not as incompatible alternatives but as options.

Other companies and launchers however, I just can't see much value. Ubisoft gets a half-point because they also release via Steam, but their UPlay system is based around certain features like achievements and points that actually "unlock real stuff"; I'd like to see Steam integrate a similar system, but I can at least understand the presence of UPlay to some degree. EA Origin, Bethesda Launcher, Epic launcher etc... single manufacturer setups are somewhat annoying to me, especially as they often have relatively few game titles and almost never offer similar features to or compatibility with Steam. Epic launcher is the hallmark of this, entirely supported by the low-work-high-value Fortnite boom where pretty much the only other things on the launcher are failed titles, a quality remake title that later came to Steam (Shadow Complex Remastered), and mod tools for Unreal Engine. On the other side of the spectrum are all the non-publisher/general Launchers and game stores that require them - the Twitch Client and Discord's new game store for instance are both examples here. These are frustrating because again they lack the features or compatibility of/with Steam and in many cases are Windows only, so games purchased/played on the platform are actually of LESS value than if you bought on Steam, not to mention things like lack of Steam community features or Workshop support.

I hate watching continued market fragmentation like this - its not good for the players, its not good for the developers (who now have to support, update etc.. the title on multiple incompatible launchers in many cases), and its only done to sate the "we could always make more" crowd. Steam's success is rare in that they don't simply throw their weight around , but its undeniable that their platform and Valve have been instrumental in developing of elements for great player experience - they aren't just the biggest guy exploiting while they can. Their cut has been relatively small and parity with other platforms, not to mention much lower than what it costs to release on ANY major game console in both money and creative control - and I won't even go into how small it is compared to physical releases! . Overall Steam seems to be one of the rare times that the biggest guy in the industry got there via mostly reputable means and hasn't turned evil or rested on their laurels. The company isn't perfect, but there's unique case study here. In any event, seeing Bethesda stubbornly refuse to release their flopping-out-of-the-gate "Rust clone w/Fallout coat of paint" on Steam, despite the fact the game's success is predicated by design on having lots of players, doesn't seem to be the right move from what I've read.