For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
Most of the time when I get a game for free I don't value it as much. There are some exceptions, I've gotten into a few giveaways like Dead Island 2 and Lord of the Rings Return to Moria.
But mostly I want gaming to be convenient. Steam is very convenient and has some really great sales. I recently found a space tower defense game I wanted to try and it was 0.79 on sale. Less than a dollar.
Which one? I love TD games
It's called Space Run. You have to make space ship runs and configure your ship for the best combination of speed, defense, and offense.
Thanks! I wishlisted it, any idea if it runs on the Steamdeck? It says unknown in the store
If $'s was my only consideration, I'd pirate the game.
If my valid options are paying $25 to Valve, installing the Epic malware or dealing with pirate sites, I'm sending money to Valve.
malware? bro you can redeem the games on their website and use an alternate launcher to install them.
Gabe Newell talked about this years ago.
“When you look at the fact that these people have $2000 PCs and they’re spending $50 a month or more on their Internet connections, clearly they’re willing to spend money.
So, from our point of view, what we saw more and more was that piracy is a result of bad service on the part of game companies...”
I 100% pirate games because of price what are people even talking about. Most of the launchers work fine ime. Valve has linux support which is nice
Yeah. That's why demos are a thing.
Epic game store freebies are the demo..
This is actually the whole idea, right? That having your game free on Epic is good advertising for the game.
It’s just surprising that it works!
I don't get this. Probably because I don't grab those 'free' games from Epic. but... Why buy the game on steam if you already have it? Can you not play it on a steam deck through steam all the same?
I don't think that's what's happening. It being free on Epic made people discuss it, then people saw that and purchased it on Steam. That's my assumption at least. I'm sure there's some people who just wanted it on the Steam launcher, but I'd bet on that being a minority.
Steam just works better. Their cloud save is reliable, and library organizing is actually a thing. I can see someone using the free Epic game as a sort of demo. Plus, if they really liked they game they may want to support the developer
The day Steam enshittifies will be a dark day for me.
I feel that's going to happen as soon as Gaben retires
Totally agree. Plus if there's DLC or mods you wanna mess with you often use the Steam game as a jumping off point
Yeah an SSD just crapped out this weekend, reinstalled Linux and steam and was back to my save spot in my game. That alone saves so Mich time and effort of backup retrieval or playing 100 hours over again
The article suggests that people are willing to pay to have all their games in one place.
A not-insignificant amount of people would rather buy a game they just got free than have to remember to open epic.
That sounds like such a massive failing on Epic's part to make an attractive launcher/platform.
It's really, really bad. Slow, janky, unintuitive layout, full of ads.
I don't use it very much at all but the other day I saw a news item that they had introduced gifting games to other users. After how many years are they missing basic features? It's not like they need to put thought into it. All they need to do is build the same features as Steam. It's clearly not a budget issue with the millions they get from Fortnite and throw at exclusives
It launched in a terrible state and they took ages to make it even tolerable tbh. I used it anyway for free games but I get why a lot of people want nothing to do with it.
Tim Sweeney was too cheap to pay a dev to put in a shopping for two fucking years while in that same time he spent hundreds of millions of dollars on paid exclusives.
Tim Swiney is a fucking idiot, and the board should vote to remove him as CEO. He's been a liability for years.
I would rather pay money than use Epic, not because I don't want another launcher but because it's Epic.
I am 100% one of those people. I try to check Epic weekly, to see if the current freebie is a game I'm undecided on. If so, I'll grab it to try for free but if I actually like the game I then add it to my Steam wishlist to purchase next time it's on sale.
I would assume the people buying it on Steam while it's free on Epic aren't bothering to claim it on Epic, so they don't "already have it"
Probaly coz people start talking about the game again after it was free and others jist buy the game on steam after reading the social chatter
People hate Epic* games.
That also assumes they got it on Epic in the first place, instead of the increased awareness of the game leading them to decide to get it, just from Steam instead.
You can, but it requires some setup in the desktop mode. I guess some people do not bother or don't know you can do that.
It's been great advertising for sequels. I got 20XX free on Epic, then bought 30XX on Steam when it came out. Great games.
But Steam's totally not a monopoly, you guys.
No, the word does not mean competitors don't exist. It means they don't matter.
No, the label does not mean we have to shatter Valve. Having market dominance and abusing it are different things, but we still need to recognize when a company fffuuucking obviously has it.
If Gaben suddenly announces he's sold it all to Larry Ellison, that has ruinous implications for the entire PC gaming market, despite the fact Valve does not strictly own PC gaming. They don't have to, to be an outsized influence, to the point most people will readily admit they only buy from one store. We have a word for that.
Yeah I don't think anyone can form a good faith argument claiming Steam doesn't have a monopoly.
The thing is, all a competitor has to do to take away Steam's monopoly is to make a product as good or better than Steam
I've had dozens of people pile on to insist Steam is not a monopoly. They're the ones I'm quoting about it being the only store they use. They're the ones downvoting me, and only me, for pointing out it is a monopoly, while they upvote you for also saying it's a monopoly, but in a yeah-but phrasing.
I'll be honest, I downvoted you, but because of the incredibly condescending tone, and for arguing against a point that literally no one has brought up in this post. I'm sorry you've run into dumbasses elsewhere that have wrongly tried to claim Steam isn't a monopoly, but complaining about them and arguing against them in a post that they haven't shown up in isn't productive.
I refuse to be shamed on tone when every approach sees the same response.
A coy eye-roll which you cannot imagine anyone disagrees with gets brusquely scoffed at. Pointing out that people absolutely disagree with it gets treated like heavy messing.
Direct responses get downvoted.
Detailed overviews get downvoted.
Oblique implications get downvoted.
Direct application with context gets downvoted.
If I can't win I don't play. Steam is a monopoly and people are fucking weird about it. You supposedly agree with me and you're still treating me the same way these "dumbasses" do. If I pretend they don't exist I get more predictable bullshit. If I acknowledge they exist it's my fault somehow. How about no?
I'm not asking you to feel shame, just explaining why I thought your comment was deserving of a downvote. It wasn't intended to be personal, just informational.
And which angle would not receive the same "information?"