• nanoUFO@sh.itjust.worksOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      competition is good when the rest of the competition is able or good. EGS is so shit it has to buy exclusives and give out free games and it still doesn’t work. There has to be some equality in quality to have any chance of making steam better otherwise they just exist to make anti competitive moves, what is steam supposed to do? Also pay for exclusives?

    • NightOwl@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Like Walmart coming into a town to compete with the stores already there and then putting them out of business? Then moving onto the next town to compete again?

    • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ok, but as a consumer I’m fine with the shit competitor existing but I’m not going to use it.

    • leftzero
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      When their launcher is literal malware or they engage in anti-consumer practices like exclusives, no, they are not good for the customer.

      (Not that any publicly traded company can be good for the customer, mind; by definition they can only be good for the shareholders; any benefit they might accidentally provide to the customer or to society is an inefficiency that will eventually be corrected through enshittification. The only reason Valve isn’t entirely harmful is that they aren’t publicly traded yet.)