RAGE 2 and DOOM Eternal, among others, to release on Steam
67 replies, posted
Having a game on multiple store does not make the biggest one a monopoly.
Would people take two fucking seconds to look up what a monopoly is.
Exactly, when all these games get announced at the same time, one has to wonder what kind of a deal was made behind the scenes to make this happen. Especially now that Steam's losing big releases left and right, this gives Beth a ton of leverage to negotiate a bigger cut.
That's memory usage my dude
Wonder if their launchers are still mandatory when bought on Steam? Probably yes.
Go the Uplay way where you launch a game on steam and then have to remember your ubisoft login but accidentally use the wrong one that was made years ago only to discover that you have 4 other ubi games on that account
Now only one is actually tied to steam and logs in automatically oops
We might ironically be saved from EGS's exclusivity bullshit because every publisher has its own store nowadays.
I discovered I had Fallout 3 Blood Dragon and Beyond Good & Evil for some unknown reasons when I opened up uplay to play the first Division after the Ubisoft sale weekend.
Pretty sure you'll only need a Bethesda account and not the launcher if you have the buy and play the game on Steam.
Although, this is from personal experience with Quake Champions which is a multiplayer focused game.
Guessing for singleplayer focused games an account or launcher won't be needed.
Yeah, developers are wrong to voluntarily release on Steam because it's the best financial decision they could possibly make!
Pro tip: monopolies aren't defined by "there's a clear best product". Steam being obviously the best doesn't make it a fucking monopoly, jesus.
More like Beth is trying to save face after the nuclear fiasco that is FO76
$70 AUD in Australia which is $50 USD
Holy shit. Bethesda actually priced a game reasonably in Australia. A lot of their other games were 5-10 USD above the US and Euro stores.
Wolfenstein The Old Blood on release was $40USD in Australia when it was $20 USD elsewhere in the world.
For an example of an actual monpoly that has clear detrimental effects on the industry its monpolozing, go look at Diamond Comic Distributors and the comic book industry. The only reason they arent "TECHNICALLY" violating anti-monpoly laws is because comics are still considered part of the overall magazine industry.
No one is asking for a monopoly, saying you want it to be sold on steam is the same as saying you want to be able to buy them off amazon.
Insert steammonopolyvsepiccompetition.png
Which is weird because we also have extra taxes, I would expect a 50USD game to be 70-85AUD
I also hope that if they were to make multiplayer, I'd want them to keep them separate and not bog down users with one million extra gigs of updates you'd have to install even if you only just wanted to play the singleplayer
Granted monopoly is the wrong word choice, but saying steam should be the "default" is insinuating that if the developers don't want to work with Valve, they're in the wrong.
I don't blame any developer who doesn't want their game on steam, it's not morally required. Steam isn't any better ethically than other platforms, so long as those platforms don't pull exclusivity bullshit.
Of course there are shit-baggers who DO pull exclusivity deals out of their ass on games they didnt make, but it's not like steam is the only one who doesn't.
They might be, making a Bethesda account is definitely mandatory though. At the moment I can play Fallout 76 without having to launch the Bethesda launcher, you just have to sign on at launch every time, whereas if you do it via launcher instead, you skip having to sign on every time.
Pleased it seems the immediate Bethesda titles are officially on Steam. I can live with luanching a bethesda net launcher like Ubisoft games do with uPlay.
HahaHAHAAHHAHAAHHA
Guess those numbers weren't all that good huh Bethesda?
I think it's a dangerous mindset because it implies that you need a valid excuse to not be on steam, to not go with the default, when it should a free choice either way.
Literally ignoring all the DLLs and ancillary files for the launchers.
Games are ~50GiB regularly now, so <1GiB of space for launchers is trivial.
I'm all for shitting on requiring multiple launchers, but this is the worst way to go about the argument.
Ideally, all games should be on all launchers so the quality of service offered by each storefront is your deciding factor.
I don't know why so many find this so hard to get.
No one provided competition to Steam for almost ten years besides Electronic Arts pushing all of their shit (which declined in quality rapidly thereafter besides maybe Battlefield) to Origin. Microsoft tried, but the Windows segregation methods and the horrible quality of their service made even them abandon it. Steam didn't become a 'monopoly' through dirty tactics in anything other than their games, they got there because publishers and potential competition were negligent and now want all of the money ever from their products. But surprise, their sheer negligence in handling that properly means that no one wants to go to personal launchers for these companies. Demonizing Steam for this is a bit ridiculous when they're not the ones going anti-consumer compared to the competition, even though i'm spiteful of Valve's methods and laziness in recent history.
Im not the obe demonizing steam, Im just saying that it shouldnt be considered the default. There shouldn't even BE a default.
why would you not be where something like 90% of the PC gaming world is?
Not even gonna mention how much of a mess the bethesda launcher is and how that would probably be a ordeal to users and Bethesda itself, but it honestly sounds conterproductive to not be in the platform where everyone is.
Almost like releasing a game on a PS4 or Xbox, and not using the respective app store, or whatever way was the standard for content updates.
Well not only is steam actually a really really really good platform for a wide variety of reasons, I think the actual mindset here is that it shouldn't be exclusive to any one platform. It shouldn't be an announcement that it will be on same as well as all the other places you would expect to find it, such as bethesda's platform.
I doubt it's less Bethesda talking Valve into a better rate, and more Bethesda is pretty much guaranteed to get that better cut of at least 75/25 (and maybe even 80/20) with games like DOOM Eternal probably selling millions of copies. Combine this with the fact that the Bethesda Launcher is even worse than EGS in terms of customer satisfaction, and the current atmosphere of having exclusive launchers for games, and their already horrid PR due to Fallout 76, and you have a recipe for Bethesda coming back to Steam.
That all being said, I wouldn't be surprised if Bethesda also decided to take the UPlay approach, and just have their launcher be bundled in with Steam installations from now on. Honestly, it's what Bethesda should've done from the beginning if they're dead set on having their own launcher. UPlay is an annoyance, but most people are fine with it because Ubisoft puts out good games on a platform most of their consumers are on. The same applies for Bethesda... most of the time...
fuck yes, i can finally pre-order doom eternal
Fuck yeah dude, now all my worries about Doom Eternal are finally gone, today is a damn good day.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.