this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2025
330 points (98.8% liked)

Games

41167 readers
2977 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Rules

1. Submissions have to be related to games

Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.

This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.

2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.

We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.

3. No excessive self-promotion

Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.

This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.

4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you're submitting before posting to see if it's already been posted.

We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.

5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.

No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.

6. No linking to piracy

Don't share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.

We don't want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.

Authorized Regular Threads

Related communities

PM a mod to add your own

Video games

Generic

Help and suggestions

By platform

By type

By games

Language specific

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Rose@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

An exclusivity deal is signed by both parties, so it's just as much of a choice developers make. By the way, like Valve, Epic seems to favor Wine over native ports, given their donation to Lutris. Unlike Valve though, Epic isn't iffy about others not using their launcher, so there's an official GOG Galaxy plugin for Epic endorsed by Sweeney.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, I'm not implying Epic is forcing game devs into anything, I'm saying it's explicitly anticompetitive. Whether a business partner wants to be exclusive should be 100% their decision and not involve a legally binding contract or coercion, because that's textbook anti-competitiveness.

Epic isn’t iffy about others not using their launcher, so there’s an official GOG Galaxy plugin for Epic endorsed by Sweeney.

Would they retain that policy if they or GOG became #1? I highly doubt it, this is merely a ploy to try to dethrone Steam, and you can be assured the policy will change once someone else gets on top.

[–] Rose@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Yes, I'm not implying Epic is forcing game devs into anything

Whether a business partner wants to be exclusive should be 100% their decision

This reads as mutually exclusive to me. How can it not be 100% their decision if it's their decision? Moreover, it's very common for a publishing agreement to also be legally binding, so everyone in this and other industries is used to that (or guilty of it if you view it as negative).

that's textbook anti-competitiveness.

Not if it's done by an underdog. Much of the US antitrust law for example revolves around monopolizing. Challenging what is argued to be a monopoly in a currently ongoing court case ripe with evidence isn't monopolizing.

Would they retain that policy if they or GOG became #1?

The reason the Epic store was created is Valve's unwillingness to lower their store fee that was way above the operating cost (7% still being profitable in Epic's internal calculations made public by a lawsuit).

Epic has a lot more power in the anti-cheat and game engine spaces, but still keeps their software open, whether it's by keeping the source code available or making the software compatible with Linux.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

How can it not be 100% their decision if it’s their decision?

It's very hard to break a contract like that. So an exclusivity contract is strictly worse for consumers than a dev choosing to only list with one platform since it removes the possibility of listing elsewhere.

Not if it’s done by an underdog

Anticompetitiveness is bad regardless of market position. They may not get hit with antitrust until they get a dominant position, but it's not great for consumers.

The reason the Epic store was created

No, it was created so they could keep all the money from Fortnite. It's the same reason they sued Apple and Google. They don't seem interested in actually having a competitive platform, they just want people to buy their MTX.

still keeps their software open

Yet their store still doesn't support Linux, and Fortnite doesn't work on Linux either, despite their anti-cheat technically being compatible.

So don't tell me they're doing open, they merely want their game engine and anti-cheat to sell.

[–] Rose@lemmy.zip 1 points 19 hours ago

it’s not great for consumers.

Not in the short term, but having an alternative to Steam (or anything with a lot of market share) is great for the long run. Moreover, at least everyone knows that the majority of the contracts would expire in 6 to 12 months. For all intents and purposes, Steam exclusives are a lot worse because there are many times more of them, and you can't mark a date on your calendar when you can buy them if you can't or don't want to buy from Steam.

Keep in mind that, as an example, just recently Steam just decided to no longer support the local currencies of Argentina and Turkey, resulting in no regional prices for the regions on Steam. If Epic didn't exist and didn't support regional prices for those regions, all those users would have for third-party titles is GOG, which has a much smaller catalog and seems to support fewer regions. Microsoft Store is also an alternative now, but I'd argue its rise was spearheaded by Game Pass, which relies on the "paid deal" model pioneered in the PC space by Epic.

No, it was created so they could keep all the money from Fortnite.

I think you're confusing the launcher with the store. The origin of the store itself can be traced back to Sweeney arguing about Valve's "junk fee" of 30%.

they merely want their game engine and anti-cheat to sell.

How is targeting niche operating systems helping the anti-cheat sell?