Gregory's Server@firecat @EU_Commission and as for the launcher integration, Valve's approach is one of two paths publishers can take. The other is basically selling a game key that prompts you to download the respective launcher of that publisher and manage your game launching and features through that. Many publishers take this approach, to the chagrin of gamers (why exactly do I need to sign up to *another store account* with *another full fat launcher* to manage a handful of games they publish? It wastes resources, it's obnoxious, it's another vector of my data being taken, it's another layer of DRM, it's another thing that often breaks because publishers do not invest in the UX required for gamers to see them as comparable to Steam, etc.). It has an interesting implementation on EGS though:
If you buy an EA or Ubisoft game there, they basically give you keys on their respective launchers. The difference is that Ubisoft doesn't require the EGS launcher to play those games afterwards (the ⭐ standard), but Origin *does.*
|
Top-level
 1 comment
|
@firecat @EU_Commission if publishers insist on having their store integration within other stores' launchers, I would prefer that they implement it the way Battle.net and Nexon do by default, with Ubisoft at worst:
Treat the store like another sign-in option and don't burden me with yet another launcher
OR
Let me buy a code from the store and then never need their launcher again.
I don't need multiple layers of store DRM and launcher software invading my disk and using up resources. I need them to treat themselves as another authentication option or to use the minimum resources necessary between their services and my game.
And this is why gamers often favor Steam.
@firecat @EU_Commission if publishers insist on having their store integration within other stores' launchers, I would prefer that they implement it the way Battle.net and Nexon do by default, with Ubisoft at worst:
Treat the store like another sign-in option and don't burden me with yet another launcher