Mashiki Amiketo wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 13:25:
SabreT wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 09:23:You can do that all on your own, and doing so well all on your own. Remember the part we're talking about exclusivity. Reminder that Microsoft isn't paying developers to develop only on the PC - they have on their console on the other hand. Which is an appropriate comparison. "Single market lock-ins" are anti-compeitive behavior, the same way if Google or Apple only let you buy through them, and locked out competing services from selling on their platform(they do).
Lol if trying to discredit other people is the only thing you can contribute to this discussion then rather stfu.
How many games out of the 9300 that was released on Steam in 2018 are available elsewhere? If an Indie studio wants to release a game do you think they stand a chance to try and publish it on their own?
"When it comes to operating systems, Microsoft is essentially a monopoly. Microsoft Windows is by far the dominant operating system today. It is said to have at least a 95% share of the market. This is not technically a monopoly, but the market does show most of the characteristics of a monopoly."
Your failure to understand the difference between the two does explain a lot though.
Beamer wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 09:57:Remember the days when it was a 'choice of development' on what platform you wanted to make your game on? You could develop for DOS, Amiga, or O2/2 and ride the winds and/or market as you wanted. You remember the days when the commadore awas the primary development platform, and they didn't try to pay off companies to only sell through one storefront. If you wanted to make a proper comparison it would be like DOS developers only allowing their software to be sold at one business, and the same for Amiga and OS/2. But that didn't happen did it.
Remember the days when the game you wanted wasn't available for DOS, only Amiga or OS/2? You would have had to buy an entirely separate system to play them. Or, hell, even if something was Windows or DOS, and you had to boot separately to play them. No additional money spent, but you'd need to sit through a several-minute long reboot.
You keep saying lock-ins, anti-competitive behavior and exclusives like somebody is preventing you from pressing the download button on Epic's website. THAT IS THE ONLY thing keeping you from playing the games. Not costing you anything extra except your finger pressing down on the mouse one time for the download. How's that any different than downloading battle.net to play Blizzard games ?
oh and about that "Your failure to understand the difference between the two does explain a lot though." fart that came out of your mouth google Microsoft Monopoly
"MSFT ruled a monopoly - Nov. 5, 1999. NEW YORK (CNNfn) - A federal judge declared Friday that Microsoft Corp. possesses monopoly power in the market for PC operating systems and harmed consumers through its anti-competitive behavior, giving the government a pivotal victory in the long-running antitrust trial." - https money cnn com/1999/11/05/technology/microsoft_finding/
Your failure to understand how Microsoft compares to Steam does explain a lot though.This comment was edited on Apr 19, 2019, 14:25.