- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
From the opinion piece:
Last year, I pointed out how many big publishers came crawlin’ back to Steam after trying their own things: EA, Activision, Microsoft. This year, for the first time ever, two Blizzard games released on Steam: Overwatch and Diablo 4.
They made you re-purchase half life? If you owned half life, you had to rebuy half life again on the steam page?
Or they launched a new launcher, and did what every single other game publisher does when they launch a new launcher, and ported all of their own personal titles into the launcher?
Because with metro exodus, until mass backlash caused them to revert the decision, everyone who had preordered the game on steam needed to refund the purchase and repurchase it within the epic store. Only after backlash did they honor steam prepurchases.
And even then, they struggled with the fact that all the physical orders still had steam codes, despite the game apparently not being allowed to be owned on steam.
All of this happening 2 weeks before the game release.
deleted by creator
Interesting, because in your previous comment you said literally the exact opposite, that people just needed to open it via the launcher to get the next update.
My previous comment already says this. With metro exodus, they expected people to rebuy the game on epic, and only reversed the decision after the immediate backlash.
Which, mind you, is not a game they developed nor published. Your valve example is the owner of the game moving their own game into their own brand new launcher, with conflicting claims of repurchase. Epics example is buying out a random hyped games release and scrambling to backtrack after it blew up in their face