I don't think they tried releasing a compelling product.
Games
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
I think their biggest hurdle was that they are owned by Jeff Bezos
'Why didn't they just try harder?' is an increasingly worrying take. A company could copy Steam's storefront and backend, verbatim, and it wouldn't impact Steam's monopoly on PC game sales. They're entrenched and they're well-liked. You can't buy a reputation overnight.
Blaming the action without considering the environment is still a mistake. Epic tried everything, and people still scoff about UI, like that's the billion-dollar difference. Nah: it's attributing the difference in outcome to surface-level distinctions. And if Epic unfucked their apparently ugly storefront, these people would pick another excuse, because I guarantee you it wouldn't change EGS's irrelevance.
Steam was the first to offer 2 hour/14 day refunds, as well as refunds over broken games. They brought reviews to the storefront. Communities and discussion boards to communicate with devs and find like-minded players. Demos, 4 packs, easy access to servers and SDKs, easy update delivery and tracking for consumers...
It's a store-front with a strong focus on consumer happiness. People are not going to give that up for EGS or Prime, which are run by psychopaths and not even remotely consumer-friendly. Tim Sweeny even said EGS is made for developers, with the implication it is not for consumers.
GOG is probably the closest competitor that stands any hope of success but they have steered clear of actually entering Steam's territory, preferring to grab a market Steam neglects (retro PC gamers). Considering they have not developed the other systems Steam has I don't think they want to compete and are content to coexist.
Neat.
Explaining how they got the monopoly doesn't change that they have a monopoly. Amazon or Epic could do all that - and they genuinely could, god knows they have the money - but the result would not be the same. They exist in the context of Steam already running shit. Adoption is a feature you cannot design. That's why Valve had to force it on people via Half-Life 2.
Tim Sweeny even said EGS is made for developers, with the implication it is not for consumers.
What an absurd read. As if middlemen taking a third of revenue is pro-consumer.
What an absurd read. As if middlemen taking a third of revenue is pro-consumer.
Considering this was a shift from retail where getting games to retail cost a great deal more, how exactly is that bad?
Also you know nothing stops gamedevs from selling their keys elsewhere and getting all of the revenue right?
That shift was a quarter-century ago. 'It used to suck worse' is a bad excuse even when it's fresh. I don't care what Steam would cost if they were a brick-and-mortar store; they have only ever done digital distribution, and they have done it for a while.
Their cut is so huge that they can afford to let devs sell keys elsewhere, knowing it makes no difference to their immense profit margin.
Largely because their monopoly is self-reinforcing, and the number of off-site sales is a rounding error.
Meanwhile:
What Epic means by "for developers" is, developers keep more of the money. Walk me through how that's bad for you.
I hate the idea of more game stores because exclusives piss me off, and that's the only viable tactic another store could use to get people to leave steam. When Netflix was all there was, it was great. We saw in real time how that shitshow ended. I had to bring out my old ship and chart new waters. I do not want to do this with my game library.
Every single Amazon product is a half-arsed mess off things that barely function. They're basically just a delivery company that charges a percentage of the package value now.
Something like 70% of their net income comes from AWS that pretty much runs a huge portion of the internet.
This is why you never really trust anything from a lemmy comment kids.
Everything, including:
-
giving a shit about the customer and having them permanently own their own games, even DRM-free like GOG?
-
Not forcing online connectivity to access the library?
-
Not shoving ads and spyware into the rest of the Amazon platform?
-
Appealing ethically by paying all employees a living wage?
-
Prioritizing innovation in expanding native Linux compatibility?
🤔
Most of the games that Amazon give away are GOG codes lol
GOG codes are the absolute best.
Well wipe my ass backwards and call me biscuit; I have been informed today.
Yeah I found that out too and have been cashing in
Steam doesn't give customers permanent ownership of their games. Its extremely rare, but game licenses do occasionally get revoked on Steam.
Which means that's an area where they could've tried to set themselves apart from Steam.
Those are terms set by the games publishers, Steam and other platforms pass them on to the customer. The only platform big enough to strongarm publishers to not do that is Steam, but it would definitely make some publishers pull out of Steam completely.
I just installed all the free games I got from Amazon before deleting my account and they're all DRM free...
No they didn't.
I never saw a simple program with a clean store front and no bullshit.
Steam? Set your sights lower. Maybe try to beat GOG or the EA launcher.
They'd have to do something really crazy to have me pick Amazon over GOG!
It's basically like G-Force now for a selection of GOG and epic games
I mean, they didn’t try making a good game store.
Their Luna product seems to be different to Steam. It's a streaming platform like Playstation Now or the Google Stadia one that got shut down.
The other games that they've got on there primarily seem to be DRM-free GOG codes, mixed with some for the Epic store. Maybe they meant they were taking on Steam by boosting their competitors?
They barely tried at all
I didn't even notice they tried to take on Steam.
Ethan Evans desperately trying to keep his job as VP of Prime Gaming:
Nobody is going to overtake steam without being better. Corporate suits are also too out of touch to even come close
No publicly traded company can compete with a well run private company. Infinitely growing profits breaks everything. Never take a company public if you can help it. It may even be preferable to shutter it if that is the only other option. Having stupid amounts of money is cool and all, but it does nothing useful. Money is only a tool if you actually use it... a golden hammer sitting on a shelf does no one any good.
Yeah even apple is talking about potentially introducing ads into maps when their whole positioning of premium price has meant premium product and experience.
But the pressure of continual stock increases means company has to keep chasing exponential growth as opposed to being content with sustainable growth.
Nobody is going to overtake Steam even if they're better. People don't want to have multiple libraries to deal with so you see them brag about paying for games to have them on Steam even though the game has been free on other platforms... Sometimes they even have claimed them and will still spend money to have them on Steam.
... and then they'll recoil in horror when you mention that's what a monopoly is.
Monopolies can be positive and functional. They're still monopolies. Streaming was better was Netflix was the only choice, and had everything, for a reasonable price. Competition's supposed to be what drives those qualities. Exclusivity breaks that. Exclusivity splinters the market into desperate fiefdoms.
But there's still a word for when only one store matters.
Yeah, Steam is a monopoly, but 1) they've been a monopoly since forever and there hasn't been a Comcast-ish disaster, and 2) more competition doesn't seem to actually benefit us here but could potentially make things a lot worse.
In principle, Steam is a Sword Of Damocles just like any other Monopoly. In practice, the alternatives are EA and Epic, no thank you (I know itch.io is a good competitor, but they don't have any pull on AAA publishers so I don't expect them to take the market if Steam implodes).
Also, Valve is innovating in ways that nobody else seems willing to - not just their Linux ports (represent!), but also their attempts on HTPC gaming (which was unnecessarily a huge pain in the ass on PC, for no good reason) and their steam controller. And their portable PC gaming with the Steam deck (which to be fair GPD probably did first).
All in all, I'm happy to pay the Steam tax for what they're doing. I have no illusions that Epic Games Store would provide serious competition in terms of the goodies I want, because they already aren't, and they're still in their sweetheart phase.
Steam will stay great so long as they stay a private company. It's the enshitification of going public and appeasing boardmembers and shareholders that ruin companies like Valve. I hope GabeN chooses a great successor when he decides to step down. Hoping for another 27 years of awesome.
Tried everything except building a nice service that doesn't get in the way and that works, without enshittification and monetisation everywhere.
Cloud streaming is not a replacement for steam.
Beat the competition, then enshittify yourself while your customer base sticks with you is the strategy used in all Amazon products. Amazon is the last storefront I would want to sell games in the scale of Steam.