Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
Comments.
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:
All that talk about fairness and treating everyone the same is nice and all, but then he's the same one that pays off publishers for exclusive deals. So why can he make special deals but Google can't?
Also it's sorta weird how the interviewer asked where he was on the day he missed from the trial.
There's a huge difference in market control between the two companies, so while I think it's scummy to have exclusives, I don't think it's the same at all compared to a dominant service doing the same.
In other words, if Epic pays for exclusivity, they're essentially buying customers. If Google or Valve pays for exclusivity, that could be considered monopolistic behavior.
monopolistic behavior
It's such a monopoly that anyone is completely free to launch a competitor at any time and succeed on their own merits!
I agree with you, and I think the jury reached the wrong conclusion, at least from my understanding of the lawsuit.
But that's irrelevant, I'm merely making the point that a smaller competitor can and should get away with a lot more crap because they don't have a commanding share of the market. Epic paying for exclusivity is desperation, Steam doing it is monopolistic, because one has a dominant position while the other doesn't.
Imo it's shitty regardless of how big the competition is. The entire reason steam got to the position it's in now is by being an extremely consumer friendly platform with little bullshit. No amount of exclusives makes the epic games client a genuinely preferable option, just a shitty requirement, and unless they stop with this shit, they'll never genuinely be a competitor with steam, as far as players are concerned.
I agree, but again, that's irrelevant. We're talking about whether they should be allowed to do stuff like pay for exclusives, restrict payment options, etc. Market leaders are held to a much different standard vs underdog competitors.
I have never and probably will never buy anything from EGS because Steam is just a better experience.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
On Monday, a federal jury surprised the world by siding with Fortnite maker Epic Games in its fight to break Google’s control over Android apps — even though “walled garden” rival Apple almost entirely won a similar case two years ago.
It’s been his fight from the very beginning, and he watched almost the entire trial in person from the best seat in the house — with a clear view of the jury, the judge, each witness, and the faces of Google’s lawyers.
Yeah, Epic is asking a lot of the court system and the jury here, spending four weeks on a major antitrust trial full of complicated facts and evidence.
So this is an awesome thing and it’s much needed by the industry which is being strangled by a few gatekeepers imposing insane amounts of control and extracting huge taxes, which not only raise prices for consumers but also make a lot of kinds of products just unviable.
The conventional wisdom that attorneys tell you is that when there’s a rapid jury verdict, it’s typically not good for the plaintiffs making a complicated case, and so there was some trepidation going on — but it was awesome to see.
You’d think a trillion-dollar company would develop to the point where they have pretty respectable processes and leadership structures that provide a check and balance against wrongdoing, but they were rampantly destroying all their chats on these topics.
The original article contains 3,833 words, the summary contains 238 words. Saved 94%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!