| Azzanation said: 1) Steam has been operating almost a decade without EGS and was doing just fine without them. This conclusion of "we need it" is rubbish. No point did Steam step out of line when they basically owned a monopoly. The issue with this type of competition like EGS is they push anti-consumer practices on the industry to steal the market. Its bad competition. I'll give you an example: If EGS became big enough, they might implement a Pay for Online system, and if that happens, that will entice Steam and other platforms to follow suit, just like we seen PS and Nintendo follow Xbox's Live model. You are only defending EGS because you believe in this false narrative of, we need competition. Some competition is fine but not at the extent you are thinking of. EGS has brought nothing but headaches to consumers on PC. PC has always been good with just Steam being the main platform. |
The thing about competition is that it comes and goes.
Many industries had monopolies or duopolies which had zero competition only for competition to come out of nowhere.
Take the operating system and internet browser markets for instance.
After Netscape navigator failed, Microsoft enjoyed what was essentially a monopoly, Firefox then came along and upset the market, Chrome then came along which provided further invigoration in the market... And Microsoft was forced to shut down Internet Explorer and start from scratch to remain competitive.
In the OS market, Microsoft did have a monopoly, then Android came long and the rest is history.
Many design aspects of Android and iOS have had big influences on Windows design language, technology and compatibility for better or worst.
Before Epic Game store provided Steam with competition... Steam was competiting with *Physical* sales.
However, Steam won as they provided four important things that gave them an edge:
1) Larger game variety availability. (Not limited to the selection on a shelf.)
2) Convenience. (Download straight away vs Install.)
3) Price. (Cheaper and more frequent sales.)
4) Better DRM.
It was a no brainer. - Physical did try and compete with more boxed-in value added addons, but it was clear physical gaming was going to go the way of Blockbuster video.
Eventually digital competition came and valve introduced basic consumer-rights features like refunds.
Steam has been slow to adopt consumer-friendly ideas and features, it is only because of competition that we got them.
Competition is good.
| Azzanation said: 2) It's not just Nintendo that will be competing with PS, its also the PC market. You can never make too much money and MS have IPs that will sell. If Sony so no, good luck, Nintendo might take those customers instead, and we know Steam will have them by default so more Console gamers immigrating to PC isn't something Sony would like to happen to their console hardware. |
Sony is selling games to the PC market, or haven't you been paying attention?
PC gaming and console gaming isn't going anywhere, console gamers stick to consoles because they like it... And PC gamers enjoy PC gaming because they like it.
There are gamers that don't care about the politics of the two different form factors and will happily leverage both, but preferences have been set.
To assume that gamers will migrate over to PC if hypothetically... Sony and Microsoft didn't exist in the marketspace is disingenuous, you will have some... Sure. But Nintendo appeals to console gamers as well and they would likely absorb most of that market.
| Azzanation said: 3) MS can literally rely on distributing games without the billions of investing in hardware which doesn't sell. Id expect MS going hybrid to full digital/Streaming next gen or the gen after that. |
Xbox is more than just games.
Microsoft is selling services. - Servers, search, content delivery networks, movies and tv, technology and more... Which actually become more viable the larger in scale you scale these services.
For example... I did bomb training last week as part of my hazmat technician response... And Microsoft's technology was front and center... This doesn't happen without vertical integration of technologies from top to bottom.
Yes. That is an Xbox controller on a 1 million dollar robot.
| Azzanation said: 3) MS can literally rely on distributing games without the billions of investing in hardware which doesn't sell. Id expect MS going hybrid to full digital/Streaming next gen or the gen after that. |
I am not sure if you are legitimately being obtuse or trolling currently.
Xbox 360 sold 85~ million consoles.
Xbox Series X/S is currently outselling the Xbox 360 launched align.
https://www.vgchartz.com/article/456726/xbox-series-xs-vs-xbox-360-sales-comparison-february-2023/
Spinning it like Microsoft is failing and not selling consoles is a blatant fucking lie.
You have literally lied constantly through this thread or provided fake information.
| Azzanation said: 4) Strange, currently Xbox has the higher rated game over PS in 2023 so far, so i don't see what the point you are making is. They released nothing last year probably because they are holding their cards close to their chest due to the ABK case going on. I wouldn't be surprised if it was self sabotage to make themselves look bad towards the FTC but ill digress. Nintendo and Sony have stuffed up, let's not make this a MS only thing. Nintendo with the recent Pokemon and Sony with TLOU1 PC and Xbox with Redfall. They are not a gen behind, that analogy makes no sense. They were publisher of the year just 2 years ago. |
This is a conspiracy theory and not based on facts or evidence.
Yes Nintendo and Sony have stuffed up. So has Microsoft. - Especially with Redfall and Halo: Infinite recently.
It's like these companies are run by human beings who make human mistakes sometimes?
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
Essay Pro