all 87 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 25 points 10 months ago (2 children)

This is actually the whole idea, right? That having your game free on Epic is good advertising for the game.

It’s just surprising that it works!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    The whole idea isn't the advertisement on itself. The idea for the publisher / developer is, to take the money from Epic, as it seems to be a lot. And for Epic this is obviously a reason to get users into the eco-system. That is the basic idea behind it. That games get free advertisement alongside, is a nice bonus effect.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 97 points 10 months ago (23 children)

    If $'s was my only consideration, I'd pirate the game.
    If my valid options are paying $25 to Valve, installing the Epic malware or dealing with pirate sites, I'm sending money to Valve.

  • source
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 108 points 10 months ago (16 children)

    Gabe Newell talked about this years ago.

    “When you look at the fact that these people have $2000 PCs and they’re spending $50 a month or more on their Internet connections, clearly they’re willing to spend money.

    So, from our point of view, what we saw more and more was that piracy is a result of bad service on the part of game companies...”

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 10 months ago (14 children)

    Gabe is one of the CEOs (if we can call him one?) of a gaming company, who truly understands gamers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 67 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    The greatest thing he's done is kept Valve a private company. He's not beholden to shareholders constantly demanding that the line go up at any cost.

    Funny how he's still fantastically wealthy. It's almost like treating your employees well and providing a quality product to consumers is a viable path to success, and selling out isn't actually necessary to become rich.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago (9 children)

    Toooooo bad he also owns multiple yachts and people just kinda give him a pass for it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 9 months ago (7 children)

    What has him owning yachts and being rich anything to do with the subject I talked about? Why would I be bothered by it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 9 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    I'm a bit confused to why you brought it up then. Sorry if it was a joke or sarcasm and I missed it. Otherwise, I don't care how many yachts he has and don't mind he being rich. That's not a reason to hate someone. Therefore, there is nothing to give it a pass for.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    I think it's because people often say Gabe is "one of the good ones (billionaires)", and they saw the original comment as implying that

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    Him, I'm not sure how someone is a good or bad person for having money. I judge someone by their actions and how much they seem to touch grass. And Gabe seems to not only understand gamers, also his background how all of this came to be makes him more sympathetic versus most other billionaires. He also owns his own platform and is a private company, which adds to the weight.

    But most importantly, the actions he does speak to me and I support what he does. We could go into details, but I think it does not matter to do that now at this place...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    It's not him having money, it's him spending on one of the most destructive vehicles (environment-wise) as you can buy. Multiple times. I do like that he has kept Valve private, and that he seems to understand what we gamers actually value. But that doesn't make him a good person or Valve a good company.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 0 points 9 months ago* (1 child)

    It's never a good idea to fall in love with CEOs; a company may sometime "help" their customer, but when strategic partner asks for a slap in the face for the customer... there's no "may", only must.

    Steam comes with Denuvo, third party launcher filled with ads and kernel level anticheat. None of these was required by Valve... yet... they still slap their customer in the face per strategic parteners requests.

    Also, refund is not something in Gabe's book: it was written in Australia's laws (also EU and other countries) and only after lot of struggles he conceded it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago

    Denuvo is not by Steam. It's a third party DRM that the publisher of the game decides to put it. Steam should not be in a position to decide what the publisher do. The anger about Denuvo should be focused on the publisher, not Valve / Steam. I don't know why you think I fall in love with Gabe... I just admire that he understands the gamers and does stuff in Steam that reflects it. Compared to other out of touch CEOs. No need to interpret more that that what I said. And no need to mud something that is positive.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    malware? bro you can redeem the games on their website and use an alternate launcher to install them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    I refuse to play games on epic simply because I hate Epic and I won't go into detail. Rather pay Steam for the game any day.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    That's fine and perfectly valid, Tim Sweeney is a dick, I just get perturbed if people call a fairly innocuous piece of software malware. Like if nothing else at least the devs are making a chunk of cash for these freebie giveaways. I even saw something the other day where a dev said they saw Steam sales double because of a free giveaway on Epic.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah. That's why demos are a thing.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 17 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    Most of the time when I get a game for free I don't value it as much. There are some exceptions, I've gotten into a few giveaways like Dead Island 2 and Lord of the Rings Return to Moria.

    But mostly I want gaming to be convenient. Steam is very convenient and has some really great sales. I recently found a space tower defense game I wanted to try and it was 0.79 on sale. Less than a dollar.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 7 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    It's called Space Run. You have to make space ship runs and configure your ship for the best combination of speed, defense, and offense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 10 months ago (22 children)

    I don't get this. Probably because I don't grab those 'free' games from Epic. but... Why buy the game on steam if you already have it? Can you not play it on a steam deck through steam all the same?

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 101 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    Steam just works better. Their cloud save is reliable, and library organizing is actually a thing. I can see someone using the free Epic game as a sort of demo. Plus, if they really liked they game they may want to support the developer

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 10 months ago

    Yeah an SSD just crapped out this weekend, reinstalled Linux and steam and was back to my save spot in my game. That alone saves so Mich time and effort of backup retrieval or playing 100 hours over again

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 52 points 10 months ago (8 children)

    The article suggests that people are willing to pay to have all their games in one place.

    A not-insignificant amount of people would rather buy a game they just got free than have to remember to open epic.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 10 months ago (5 children)

    That sounds like such a massive failing on Epic's part to make an attractive launcher/platform.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    It launched in a terrible state and they took ages to make it even tolerable tbh. I used it anyway for free games but I get why a lot of people want nothing to do with it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 10 months ago

    Tim Sweeney was too cheap to pay a dev to put in a shopping for two fucking years while in that same time he spent hundreds of millions of dollars on paid exclusives.

    Tim Swiney is a fucking idiot, and the board should vote to remove him as CEO. He's been a liability for years.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    I don't use it very much at all but the other day I saw a news item that they had introduced gifting games to other users. After how many years are they missing basic features? It's not like they need to put thought into it. All they need to do is build the same features as Steam. It's clearly not a budget issue with the millions they get from Fortnite and throw at exclusives

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago

    I am 100% one of those people. I try to check Epic weekly, to see if the current freebie is a game I'm undecided on. If so, I'll grab it to try for free but if I actually like the game I then add it to my Steam wishlist to purchase next time it's on sale.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 10 months ago

    Because its easier on Steam, at least for some (on Linux, or no hassle on Steam Deck in example) with more features if you care that too. Often the games are on sale on Steam too, so its not like paying full price. I think what is actually happening is, that people read about the game, find it interesting, the articles talk about it, people ask or want to try, because their friends tried maybe. And then they buy it on Steam, because they do not care giving a little money (me included), and don't want to mess around or use Epic.

    Back then when when the GTX 970 was brand new, I got Witcher 3 on GOG for free buying the card. A little later I purchased it on Steam, because I wanted to have it on Steam. And because the updates were somehow broken on the old GOG launcher... But that's another story. The point is, lot of people prefer Steam over the other stores / launchers for multitudes of reasons and buying the game is not a big deal for most. Depending on the price off course.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago*

    I don't think that's what's happening. It being free on Epic made people discuss it, then people saw that and purchased it on Steam. That's my assumption at least. I'm sure there's some people who just wanted it on the Steam launcher, but I'd bet on that being a minority.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    I have never played any of the free games I got on Epic. It happens regularly that I discover a game I bought on Steam, I already owned on Epic for years.

    I don't care. The platform is bad, no one uses it, you can't out-Steam Steam.

    The only platform I prefer to Steam is GOG. Fuck DRM.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    I grab everything on Epic and use playnite to browse my collection.

    I recently started playing Gravity Circuit and it is great!

  • source
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago (27 children)

    But Steam's totally not a monopoly, you guys.

    No, the word does not mean competitors don't exist. It means they don't matter.

    No, the label does not mean we have to shatter Valve. Having market dominance and abusing it are different things, but we still need to recognize when a company fffuuucking obviously has it.

    If Gaben suddenly announces he's sold it all to Larry Ellison, that has ruinous implications for the entire PC gaming market, despite the fact Valve does not strictly own PC gaming. They don't have to, to be an outsized influence, to the point most people will readily admit they only buy from one store. We have a word for that.

  • source
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 10 months ago (26 children)

    Yeah I don't think anyone can form a good faith argument claiming Steam doesn't have a monopoly.

    The thing is, all a competitor has to do to take away Steam's monopoly is to make a product as good or better than Steam

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago (25 children)

    I've had dozens of people pile on to insist Steam is not a monopoly. They're the ones I'm quoting about it being the only store they use. They're the ones downvoting me, and only me, for pointing out it is a monopoly, while they upvote you for also saying it's a monopoly, but in a yeah-but phrasing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 10 months ago (24 children)

    I'll be honest, I downvoted you, but because of the incredibly condescending tone, and for arguing against a point that literally no one has brought up in this post. I'm sorry you've run into dumbasses elsewhere that have wrongly tried to claim Steam isn't a monopoly, but complaining about them and arguing against them in a post that they haven't shown up in isn't productive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (23 children)

    I refuse to be shamed on tone when every approach sees the same response.

    A coy eye-roll which you cannot imagine anyone disagrees with gets brusquely scoffed at. Pointing out that people absolutely disagree with it gets treated like heavy messing.

    Dry statements get downvoted.

    Direct responses get downvoted.

    Detailed overviews get downvoted.

    Oblique implications get downvoted.

    Direct application with context gets downvoted.

    If I can't win I don't play. Steam is a monopoly and people are fucking weird about it. You supposedly agree with me and you're still treating me the same way these "dumbasses" do. If I pretend they don't exist I get more predictable bullshit. If I acknowledge they exist it's my fault somehow. How about no?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 9 months ago (10 children)

    I'm not asking you to feel shame, just explaining why I thought your comment was deserving of a downvote. It wasn't intended to be personal, just informational.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 9 months ago (9 children)

    And which angle would not receive the same "information?"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (8 children)
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (7 children)

    They seem to ask how to phrase the same thing in such a way that you can't come and reply that their tone is condescending.

    Much passive, very aggression, I find it hard to side with people this snarky :(

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago* (6 children)

    Even when I ask what should I say instead?, people go 'ooh, no, I wouldn't say it like that' instead of answering the fucking question.

    I've had this argument in a wide variety of contexts and tones-of-voice. All of them get the same asinine responses. This goes beyond resting bitch font, where people interpret whatever I write in the shittiest way possible. I'm starting to think the topic is just cursed. Like it's impossible to have a sensible conversation about Valve's market share. All efforts descend into snipping about the commenter, or spiral out into nonsense and denial.

    I beg of you, prove me wrong. What should I say instead?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (5 children)

    Yeah, I can't answer your question either, because I find it may be either hard or impossible to come up with an answer

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (4 children)

    Then it's not a me problem. And you shouldn't act like it is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    I really want you to understand that no one in this thread is out to get you

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    They said, continuing to make this about me, instead of the actual topic.

    Still offering a fat lot of nothing in terms of constructive criticism for this tone-policing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    I still think there is some communication issue, but I re-read your original comment and I am quite lost about what your point was: you say Valve is monopoly BUT it's not evil (from another thread you linked) and you don't propose to dismantle it. So, what should the readers do with the newly acquired knowledge?

    If you want to warn, then warn directly, if you want to call to action, do so. If you want people to just think for themselves, you will get nothing except people thinking you fail to make a point and arguing with you because they came up with that result by thinking for themselves

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago

    If you want to warn, then warn directly

    What would that look like, besides what I've done?

    I don't think any of you know what you want. You act like I've done something wrong, and when pressed on what exactly that is, you cannot provide a reason, but will not re-examine the assertion. Any amount of context is the wrong amount, any approach is the wrong approach, any tone is the wrong tone. The nature of bad faith is that there is no right answer.

    And this is over agreement. I'm used to people getting weird when they insist Steam isn't an obvious monopoly. The exact same weirdness becomes novel when it's from people insisting it's too obvious. I'm getting shit on both for explaining why being a monopoly is not intrinsically evil, and for explaining why we should be concerned about them anyway... and I'm getting shit on as though I did neither of those things... in the same comment. Baffling.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (11 children)

    arguing against a point that literally no one has brought up in this post

    You're not being downvoted here because you're wrong. You're being downvoted here because you're bringing up this argument you had with other people outside of this thread in a way that provides zero context and in an accusatory tone.

    Even your "Dry statement" was just uncalled for. We get it. You learned what monopoly means and you wanna share it with the world. You even go so far as to say Alan Wake took so long to make a profit because Valve is a monopoly. OK sure Valve is a monopoly. Maybe, it's one reason AW took forever to turn a profit. But you know what else could cause that? Epic absolutely sucking.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (10 children)

    People fall over themselves to demonstrate what I'm saying.

    I mention that it's a monopoly - 'shut up, no it isn't.' I mention the people who say it isn't - 'shut up, of course it is.' I start from scratch - 'shut up, what are you talking about.' I provide two years of context - 'shut up, that's not in this thread.'

    What sequence of words would avoid this abuse? What possible sentence would address the actual issue, without people acting like I've insulted their mother's cooking?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (9 children)
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago (8 children)
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (7 children)

    Nobody cares about what you have to say, don't agree with your point, or don't find it relevant to the conversation so don't be surprised when people tell you so. If all you want to do is people agreeing with you, start a community with like-minded people. I honestly don't know what else to recommend you. Good luck on the internet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago (6 children)

    If I have demonstrated anything in all my years online, it is that I am ready and willing to argue. But it's not an argument if the other side is just saying words recreationally. That seems to be the case here, when no amount of pleading for specifics or alternatives results in anything besides 'shut up.'

    Meanwhile:

    The actual topic remains that Valve is a monopoly. In what universe is that not relevant to this article about their largest competitor being so unimportant they can't give things away? If everyone here takes that for granted, great... so why am I getting the same response as the many times people deny it? Even the meta discussion about phrasing is fraught and confrontational, regardless of what I've actually said. Have I offended you in some way?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    No one here disagreed with the fact that it's a monopoly.

    You very first comment in this thread was in a condescending tone as if to say we here don't agree with you. Then we told you about your tone. Then you said you refused to be silenced due to tone.

    Nobody is arguing here and then you started mentioning how others in other posts argued and told you to shut up.

    Like what the fuck do you want? You came in here swinging and bitch when people engage. So fuck off.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (3 children)

    competitor being so unimportant they can't give things away

    What?

    Besides, I think part of the issue is that you argue with different people as if they were the same people

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Epic offering a game for free, only to be treated as advertisement for its sale on Steam, is the headline of this submission. What do you mean, what? Do you speak English?

    I've demonstrated I keep notes on these arguments. Not that it seems to matter, when even the people who agree that Steam is a monopoly pile on, like I'm the asshole for pointing it out. I have asked you, specifically, what I should say differently, and your response was 'well I dunno.' Great! Thanks! How distinctly useful!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments