Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit in particular, all have their own special kind of stupid. Also TikTok-style videos. 

I don't feel that way to be honest.  The reason being there are more games I want to play then I have time for.  So, I don't feel like I am missing out on anything.  If game A is straight up Steam (e.g. RE9) and game B is separate launcher BS (e.g. Ubi) - I simply go RE9.  And the next "RE9" will be out before I catch-up on my backlog.  

I think developers need to realize this isn't the N64 days anymore.  Nobody is waiting months for the next big game.  Big games come out constantly, faster than most can keep up with.  Thus, we have the luxury of being picky.  If the market dries up, maybe my position changes.

I avoided gaming before Steam.  Steam unified/simplicity is the only reason PC appeals to me.

I would argue it does cost me something.  Multiple launchers takes up RAM, which slows my system, which defeats the purposes of a PC to begin with.  Additionally, forgetting my password for some stupid login and spending 15 minutes with 2-step authentication just to play a game is annoying.

The other side of this...  why is a separate launcher being required?  Why do companies require login?  It is unnecessary BS that doesn't improve my gaming experience and, in a world, where there are more games than I could possibly find time for...  **** them.

Edit

I could be drawing a correlation where isn't one, but RE9, launched straight up with minimum BS and day 1 on PC...  selling like wildfire.  

Edit 2

I thought of a good example.  I would like to play the 2D Prince of Persia, but it requires (at least did, could have changed) a separate launcher.  So, I am missing out.  Except I still haven't played either of the Hollow Knights and Belmont's Curse is on the way.  so, I am not missing out on Metroidvania.  I have options.  

I am on none of those, so fair enough.  I will have to take your word for it.  Personally, $450 for a ps4 pro (with some bells) that is also portable, and has Nintendo exclusives.  Seems more than fair to me. 

side note, out of paranoia that Sony removes what few games they have on Steam, I went to town yesterday. Grabbed Ragnarok, Forbidden West and Spider 2. I now own all Sony games on Steam. Not sure if they would remove games already available, but I didn't want to take the risk.

Are you playing multiple games at the same that a launcher is active while you play another game? Or you mean Steam + the game launcher? If so it will only affect your game if its a peace of shit, in which case you have a reason to dislike it for that, like people dislike Uplay.

About forgetting your login this is a non issue really, just make a note, or have a app with all your passwords, saying a password is a problem is really weird, even if you do find it actually annoying, it won't take anything from the game you are playing.

You mean RE9 is being successful because it lacks a launcher or password and not because people think it's the best RE since 4 from 2005?

Capcom had real problems years ago with having games with locked content on disc and having to buy DLC to see the ending to the game you already paid for. They have being doing excellent games and reaping the good will they sowed with their games quality, that's all.

About the question about why not have another launcher or separated login, I will answer with an opposite question: why not? Like Steam every other company have their own reason to try to keep you involved with them, Steam just happens to be the biggest store out there, but PC is an open plaftorm, mostly running on a Microsoft OS, they didn't sell you the hardware you are using to access it (unless you are on SteamDeck), so why does everything need to be Steam-related?

Sure, having Steam be a place to have it all is a good way to keep up your game library cohesive, but that's all. It's not really the end of the world to access your games in any other way, you just need an extra click or so.

My experience is limited, but the little experience I had with EA and Ubi, both auto started when my PC launched, both took resources.  It was super annoying.  

As for passwords, I still take a different view.  Why do I need to login?  So, developers can sell my personal information?  If there was a reason to justify logins for games, I would not push back.  But there is ZERO benefit to me.  Zero.  Developers are going to need to justify the extra instead of forcing it with zero tangible benefit.    

RE9 success is multi reasons.  No launcher, no stupid login, well optimized and a great game.  I think it all plays a role.  

Why not separate launchers?  Because it takes additional system resources for no reason.  It takes up HDD space.  It takes up RAM.  It adds yet more DRM, which reduces fps.  And if servers are down, it can prevent me from playing games.  Also, what happens if Ubi goes under?  Will my games stop working?  Will someone else buy their IP and still support their launcher?  There is no benefit for gamers.  Zero, none, zilch.  

The world has moved to convenience.  Amazing, Netflix, Spotify, etc.  The gaming industry can start realizing people want convenience or they will fall behind.  I still think the Switch's success is largely convenience; it is way more adaptable than a standard home console.  

You can disable auto start of applications and the password is stored the first time, you don't need to type it again.
I have steam and battle.net and they don't use ram because they are disabled and I never had to type the password for a second time.

Call of Duty was not a Microsoft game, there is a massive difference between Call of Duty, one of gaming most popular franchises, to any Microsoft game (well Minecraft is even bigger, but was also always a multiplat, and bought after already being a success too).

Once something that big was in the picture, yes, exclusivity could matter a lot, and Sony was indeed aware of it, but even that could not be enough either, we just saw after being bought the first CoD under Microsoft was a flop, at least compared to what the series once was for nearly 20 years.

That has really nothing to do with Halo being available on PC, Halo being available on PS5 now could have been a way bigger deal, but by now it really just doesn't matter anymore.

Microsoft was doing decently or good for years having games on PC, and the PS5 was not really affected by having some of their games on PC for years either.

I do believe in the power of diluting a brand over time with it, exclusives are indeed a very important part of a console, but I honestly don't see it being even close to the biggest reason Xbox is fading away nowdays.

It could have been, given more time, same for PS5, but at least from my POV that didn't happen to either of them. Xbox crumbled by other reasons. Sony might have prevented it happening later on to Playstation, but it still didn't happen, PS5 is as strong as ever while having other strong reasons that should be preventing it to be as successful as it is.

And what happens if Steam goes under? You are still buying licenses and not ownership, we have GoG supposedly offering ownership to their games, Steam does not, so why not support GoG instead of Steam if a company going under is a fear?

That's actually a legitimate fear I also share, thus why nearly all my games are physical except things I paid very little for, I can still play the vast majority of my games on my systems if Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo all go under today at the same time. Some will be lost, but nearly all of them will be at my leisure to do as I please. To play or turn them into money if I need to.

I agree the world has moved to convenience, tho, and I can understand the appeal, it's not like I want to not have it, but minimal stuff like setting up a free account doesn't really bother me that much to prevent me from playing a game I think I'll like. And regarding streaming services for example as you are listing them, those are paid services, so needing more them 1 becomes an actual money drain and yes, having a Netflix and Spotify and so on is an excellent way to keep expenses on check.

I do not disagree with you that if Steam alone is enough that's ideal tho.

Funny how Sony decides to drop Kena on Switch 2 for April right after the report came out lol. Granted, AFAIA Sony doesn’t own Kena 1 nor Ember Studios, though the game was a console exclusive.