Exactly. Win customers over by providing a better experience that makes people want to use your platform over a competitor, not because they’re forced to
Exactly. Win customers over by providing a better experience that makes people want to use your platform over a competitor, not because they’re forced to
That’s not a money reason or a store related reason. That’s really on the developer. Mac is a different architecture. Often times Mac versions require extra development.
Linux is gaining more ground not because of a store or the developers themselves, but because Proton makes the windows versions of games run on Linux.
My argument was about exclusivity deals, not technical compatibility.
Yes, I do realize the money goes to the same place. My argument is not that Epic should go bankrupt. My argument is that I don’t want to encourage or support the Epic Store.
“vote with your wallet” - my vote says I approve of unreal but disapprove of epic store.
Okay?
2 wrongs don’t make a right. That said, Microsoft does this much less frequently than Epic and mostly just with first party games.
Here’s a list of Microsoft Store exclusives. I don’t see a whole lot of triple A games on there.
Starfield was on Steam at launch, as was Halo Infinite. Microsoft has been moving away from exclusivity. But how dare they keep Solitaire all to themselves, right?
I meant I don’t want to give the Epic Store a dime.
Yep. Heard great things about the game, but I’m waiting till it’s on steam to get it. I refuse to give Epic a dime. Exclusivity deals hurt consumers.
I’m not a lawyer, but this seems suspicious. How would this work? If I purchase a product in a retail store, where exactly would I sign something agreeing to give up my eligibility to participate in a class action suit? Are they trying to argue that linking the hardware to your account carries over the restriction to any hardware used?