Re: Even Epic Knows Their Client Sucks

Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote at 21:39 this Monday (GMT):

On Mon, 9 Jun 2025 17:50:02 -0000 (UTC), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
candycanearter07 wrote:
>

Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com> wrote at 18:34 this Saturday (GMT):

On Sat, 07 Jun 2025 10:47:05 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>

* there's an article about it here
https://www.pcgamer.com/gaming-industry/props-for-the-honesty-tim-sweeney-says-the-reason-people-characterize-the-epic-games-launcher-as-clunky-is-wait-for-it-because-the-epic-games-launcher-is-clunky/

>
Read the article. He still doesn't get it.
>
Admitting the problem is the first step, but then he went on to whine
about Steam's "anticompetitive" practices, its "siloing," and how Epic
will do better with their approach (in "emergent" cross-platform support
services). Spoiler-alert: It's not emergent. Been here for years.
>
It's sour grapes. Steam is hardly lock-in. He needs to mimic Steam's
software approach as much as possible. Once that is working, for reals,
*then* cross-platform becomes a thing.  Does. Not. Get. It.
>
"Your client sucks, Sweeney. You are not a destination for mainstream
gaming. No amount of speculative disruptive strategy is going to work
while that is still the case. Shelve the 4D, MBA, C-suite chess and
deliver an attractive, working product." ~Zag to Sweeney, 6/7/25
>
It's like watching a run-down bodega owner bitch about how bad Walmart
is.

>
>
"Piracy is not a money issue, its a distribution issue"
Valve/Gabe Newell really seems to be one of the few companies to
legitimately care about the user experience, and its funny to see other
companies barely try and complain about Steam's success.
>

Yup. We don't care if Gabe provides a better product that people like, we
have a disruptive theory that should be a Steamkiller, but for that
product. Boo!, product that people like. Yah, right.

Buisnessmen do not understand how real people think.

Not to say Valve is perfect...

>
Never perfect, but when Valve finally put reasonable refund policies in
place, I now have most of the consumer rights from the early 80's when I
could bring games back to the store for a 10-day limited refund, no
questions asked.
>
It's all I ever really wanted in the first place. If a game sucks,
performs poorly, or is somehow incompatible, I want a refund. That basic
principle was rescinded in the mid-80s.
>
Game sharing is reasonably good on Steam too. Those were my two big asks.

Oh yea, I never used Steam Family, but from what I heard it works pretty
well.

That the CP/DRM doesn't compromise my machine with a sketchy kernel-level
driver is good too.
>
But Steam's about as "siloed" and "locked down" as a brick-and-mortar
store that locks up at closing, ie: As much as it needs to be. The best
decision Gabe made was to mostly stop making games. Steam really is, for
the most part, a store. That means it has to be a good experience.

To be fair, there are a lot of games that you can just copy the files
out of steamapps/common and just play them raw. Obviously, that's up to
how the developer verifies the Steam runtime, and stuff, but the access
to the raw files is VERY nice.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom