PC Gaming isn't locked in to one store, so why is the hate for Steam competitors?

Yeah the good old days when you needed to buy a game, install it, sign into fileplanet and queue to download the latest patch, install and sign into gamespy, install and sign into punkbuster, and install and sign into all seeing eye to browse servers.

That's ignoring the stealth DRM added and additonal programs to do things like take screenshots or message people.

I think this is the important part everyone forgets. I remember this, and it sucked.
I've always found it curious that people call uPlay and Origin bloatware, but not Steam. Steam is every bit as much of a shit piece of software as the other two. The only major storefronts that aren't are GOG and Humble.

The wonder of steam, is that it's pseudo drm hidden by the social networking features, which even years later could use improvement (partially a fault of valve's company design though)

I see what steam is, but I don't care because I know what the alternatives are, and they're worse. Steam brings many good things to the table, much more than it does wrong, which im not even sure I can count more than 3 of them if I tried.

Also if steam goes down, like permanently, even though technically you have a subscription, i can guarantee that within an hour there will be a way to play your games offline, all of them. Steam drm is just, really flimsy.
 
Steam has In-Home Streaming. Steam keeps doing cool stuff like In-Home Streaming. Do you see much in the way of innovation like that from Origin or UPlay? Not really. It just seems like they're constantly playing catch up to Steam.

I have no major qualms with Origin (it has nice download speeds) but its just not very good. As a storefront its pretty lousy and it just doesn't do enough better than Steam to make me want to use it more than I'd use Steam.
 
I got Arkham Asylum on Steam last year. Took me a week trying to recover my old account that I used for like a year after the 360 launch to be able to play it. It felt like MS was using dumb tricks to get me to use their service rather than the one I want to use, like Google+ tries and fails with.
 
Just so you know, if you don't like that experience, you're a steam fanboy. I learned that ITT.

Just started splinter cell again. Surprise: another update!

Edit: lol, this is great. The patch notes say the patch is from August 2013. Why didn't it just patch to the most recent version when it patched the first time?

Edit 2: it's patching again. This is ridiculous. It patches once then let's me play. The next time I want to play it wants to patch again.
 
Steam has In-Home Streaming. Steam keeps doing cool stuff like In-Home Streaming. Do you see much in the way of innovation like that from Origin or UPlay? Not really. It just seems like they're constantly playing catch up to Steam.

They don't even want to play catch up.

They just want to provide the minimum amount of features that a storefront needs to provide so that they can pocket 100% of the sold-to-consumer price (which lets not forget is always the MSRP / RRP if not higher).

For those who forget what EA digital sales were like before steam;
- all patches were hosted on fileplanet, because EA didn't want to spring for their own bandwidth to host
- all digitially purchased titles sold you a single installer. If you ever lost that installer, you would be required to rebuy that title to reinstall that game.
 
They don't even want to play catch up.

They just want to provide the minimum amount of features that a storefront needs to provide so that they can pocket 100% of the sold-to-consumer price (which lets not forget is always the MSRP / RRP if not higher).

I would agree, and I think people don't realize how easily EA could drop them if they find it unpopular. It's been said before ITT, but MS and GFWL is exactly the kind of scenario that EA could find itself in.

Valve doesn't really have other avenues of revenue outside of Steam, so there is less to worry about them losing interest in it or it losing priority.
 
I have Steam, Origin and UPlay on my PC. I prefer to have everything on Steam due to firends, the ease of sue and all the feauteres. If a game is very cheap on sale and is not on Steam, let say only on origin or UPlay, I might buy it, but only if it is very cheap.

GOG is for games which is not on Steam, usually old games. But if an old game is both on Steam and on origin I will buy it on Steam, maybe on GOG if the game is on a good sale.

So for me: Steam > GOG > Origin > UPlay
 
Also if steam goes down, like permanently, even though technically you have a subscription, i can guarantee that within an hour there will be a way to play your games offline, all of them. Steam drm is just, really flimsy.

Even Valve guarantees as much:

Looks like my cynicism [regarding the veracity of a Reddit user's supposed Steam Support ticket] was misplaced:

Hello Jason,

Thank you for contacting Steam Support.

We apologize for the delay.

In the unlikely event of the discontinuation of the Steam network, measures are in place to ensure that all users will continue to have access to their Steam games.

If you have any further questions, please let us know - we will be happy to assist you.

Valve really is guaranteeing continued access to one's library in the event of Steam's imminent death.
 
Sorry to bump this, but I just realized that a lot of the perception and the performance of the different clients themselves has a lot to do why each one was originally made.

Steam is known as a store today, but it was originally designed as an installer and auto-patcher. That's why those features work so well on Steam -- Valve originally designed it with the intention of making PC gaming just download-and-play.

UPlay on the other hand was originally built as an achievement and reward system on top of other distribution infrastructures, then a store, with patching and installation seemingly an afterthought. That's why installing a game through UPlay is a lot like installing a retail PC game (the only step it removes being the CD key).

A lot of the other ones like Impulse and GameFly were originally built as stores with other features being secondary.
 
I have no hate for them. I'm using gog and battle.net regularly, and will use the rest as well if I need to. But with all the steam sales, there is really no point in getting games in other stores unless they are missing from steam.
 
Steam is known as a store today, but it was originally designed as an installer and auto-patcher. That's why those features work so well on Steam -- Valve originally designed it with the intention of making PC gaming just download-and-play.

That makes a lot of sense, I've only really used it on Linux but it feels a bit clunky compared to the repository system Linux has used since the 90s (which has to scale to manage tens of thousands of pieces of software with library dependencies). As an installer for third party software it's still not quite as slick as the Loki one, but the library management definitely makes up for that.

It's always felt a bit like running a piece of Windows software, but hopefully it'll improve due to SteamOS and integrate a bit better over time.
 
When you're invested in an ecosystem as convenient and polished as steam it's inconvenient to use something else. That said I don't hate origin or uplay. They're just underwhelming.
 
Like the OP brought up, It all comes down to which company I trust with my digital library. Valve and GOG has gained my trust over the years, and in return have been rewarded with my investment.
 
Cant really say for Origin as I havn't used it that much but on Uplay I went to play my Splinter Cell Blacklist. It then proceeeded to download about 4-5 LARGE patches and this happened every time I started the game for a a good few times. One patch each start up.

Steam does this seemlessy and you never notice it, One of the many reasons its better. Uplay sucks for patching. What is Origin like usually? I dont recall it being seemless.

I like the new Battle.Net and have no problem using that.
 
Origin... oh Origin...

I personally hate it for a singular reason. You cant legitimately purchase a game with English in it if you are in Russia. Nope, only Russian for you mate.

And refunds... I tried for a week to refund Titanfall preorder, guess what - no luck. It got to a point that I had to go to the bank and get a written statement with all the stamps e.t.c. As you might have guessed I was too lazy to go for it, thus I turned to "Outcome" for help.
O3pNXZt.png


So yeah.. it's rather screwed up in my experience, it might be OK in EU or US, but outside it's a mess.

And as for steam, I never had any problems with it, English is pretty much always there, regionally decent prices are there, and even if the restrict it by your location it's not really a problem to me, since it's always clearly labeled, which is not the case with Origin (the refund story was pretty much about that fact that preorder stated there's 5 languages, but as soon as it came closer to release - turns out nope, just one).
 
People don't hate steam competitors. Poeple hate shit softwares and companies. I have never seem nobody saying anything bad about gog, for instance.
 
I don't get that, you can add any non steam game to the steam launcher library.

Or do you mean to update too? would you give up all competition on the PC platform so the all update on the one service?
EA still forces origin on you if you don't want to use their shitty service. Hell it used to be a piece of spyware. I don't trust EA at all. Steam and GoG is all I need.
 
Top Bottom