Steam meets Blizzard.

I guess they’re giving up on convincing people to download their launcher.

  • elouboub
    48•1 year ago

    I don’t understand what the point of a blizzard launcher is - steam is already a launcher.

      • @thannEnglish
        10•1 year ago

        yeah, plus steam takes 30%

          • @thannEnglish
            2•1 year ago

            IDK what your comment is about, but its not a coincidence the first blizz game coming to steam is free to play,

            • @poryEnglish
              2•1 year ago

              In-app purchases, mtx, DLC, and premium currency are also subject to Valve tax for games that are on Steam. Free to play means “enough people pay $200+ that we can get away with not selling it for $50”, putting it on Steam still means Valve gets a piece of the pie.

    • @[email protected]English
      7•1 year ago

      The Battle.net launcher pre-dates Steam though, doesn’t it?

      Edit: guess not. Steam came out in 2003. I hadn’t heard of it until well after the Battle.net launcher came out in 2013. 🤷🏻‍♂️

      • @beefcatEnglish
        22•1 year ago

        Battle.net actually launched in 1996, though the client as it existed back then would hardly be recognizable as a launcher/storefront today. The modern client launched in 2009.

        • @DonjuanmeEnglish
          9•1 year ago

          Battle.net is dead and gone. The launcher has nothing to do with battle.net and everything to do with attempting to harvest as much data as possible, bonus if you run it in the background without playing any of their games.

          • @rambarooEnglish
            1•1 year ago

            I was wondering why it sucked so much ass. This explains it

        • @[email protected]English
          2•1 year ago

          Yeah I just mean the launcher application. I dunno, I had it way before Steam was even on my radar though.