Lemdro.id

1 point

1 day ago

The third option is you don’t understand how games are made

Right, the devs just need to change the code from “If_On_PC_Do_Not_Run” from TRUE to FALSE and it will work just fine. And I’m the one that doesn’t understand how games are made.

Looks like option #2 was the correct one.

report

[ - ]

MudMan@fedia.io

1 point

1 day ago

Dude, no, you really don’t. You’re Dunning-Krugering the crap out of this one.

Look, you don’t need to take my word for it, but I also don’t need to give you my bona fides or give you a TED talk about how platform targets are chosen in most modern games. You can go look it up.

It’s… really not how you’re picturing it. And you’re picturing it that way to justify your chosen platform as a home team. You should really stop doing that and just enjoy the games you want to enjoy wherever you want to enjoy them.

report

[ - ]

1 point

1 day ago

It’s… really not how you’re picturing it

How do you think I am picturing it? I’m responding to your absurd claims that not being able to use gasoline in a diesel engine is the same thing as Esso being the only business allowed to sell gasoline.

report

[ - ]

MudMan@fedia.io

0 points

24 hours ago

No, you’re imagining that games are like fuel. Games are not, in fact, like fuel. It’s not like you’re picturing it.

I’m tempted to give you a different simile, but it’s clearly pointless. Games are like games. You put them on platforms if it makes more money to sell them there than it costs to port them, and modern hardware is very similar across the board, so that’s most of the time, unless you have something more profitable for your programmers to be doing OR somebody pays you to change that math.

There I am, giving you the TED talk. And you know what? You don’t deserve it. You’re confidently wrong on the Internet, it’s kind of on you at this point. You can figure it out or not, but under no circumstanes will exclusivity deals, co-marketing or co-development deals be anticompetitive just because you want to shill for a random company online. It just doesn’t track at all and it’s weird that people keep parroting it.

report

[ - ]

1 point

24 hours ago

No, you’re imagining that games are like fuel. Games are not, in fact, like fuel. It’s not like you’re picturing it.

You are saying that a product (games) not being compatible with every hardware (system) is the exact same thing as the product only allowed to be sold from 1 business.

I substituted a different product (fuel) and hardware (engine) to highlight how absurd that is because you still seem to think they are the same thing.

It doesn’t matter how theoretically profitable a port to another system might be, it still takes time and resources to produce. Time and resources that a company might believe can be more profitable spent elsewhere.

It does not take time or resources to make a PC game that is on the EGS compatible with the PC on Steam. I don’t know how to explain this to you more simply.

report

[ - ]

MudMan@fedia.io

0 points

23 hours ago

That is irrelevant, and I realize that attempting to explain this to you is now reflecting poorly on me, but here we are.

Any first party submission is a first party submission. It has some cost and generates some profit. Believe or not, game publishers have these things called speadsheets. They can sum like nobody’s business.

They can count how much money they can make by porting something and how much money they can make from, say, putting those same engineers to work on something else. And they will typically do the thing that yields the most money.

Not that it matters because these days most games are on middleware engines targeting effectively a few iterations of the same rebadged mid-spec PC, so a bunch of ports ARE in fact mostly pushing a button to make the game go. Hell, most of the work across the current-gen consoles comes down to sorting out all the APIs and metadata nonsense from all the first party services.

Of course it’s cheaper to put a PC game in more than one storefront, but it’s also irrelevant because, and I can’t stress this enough, all storefronts are running on the same computers, so you’re typically not blocked from any of your userbase. Next to zero cost, next to zero reward.

You aren’t even arguing about exclusivity to a platform, you are arguing about the layer of download management software that installs the same files to the same computer. It’s the stupidest fanboyism I have encountered in all my years of paying attention to videogames for fun and profit. It’s baffling.

You can even boot your Epic games from inside the Steam interface and use all the Steam features on them. This is such a nonsense debate it doesn’t even begin to justify all this back and forth you and I are having here, let alone however long it took to put together this meme. I swear, man, gamers are exhausting sometimes. I am done here.

report

[ - ]

1 point

22 hours ago

You aren’t even arguing about exclusivity to a platform, you are arguing about the layer of download management software that installs the same files to the same computer.

Exactly. You are arguing about “exclusivity to a platform is bad because monopolies” but somehow exclusivity to the download management software, something that there is no good reason for, is good?

It’s the stupidest fanboyism I have encountered in all my years of paying attention to videogames for fun and profit.

“I don’t like this specific company because of these things that they do” is the opposite of fanboyism. The only fanboyism is you ranting for post after post trying to argue that EGS’s anti-consumer practices are “good actually because everyone chooses to use Steam so that makes Steam bad.”

report