Quoting: TheSHEEEP

Quoting: kuhpunktThen please show the clause in the contract that dictates this.

From the article:

The suit mentions how Valve require developers to sign an agreement that contains a "Most Favored Nations" provision to have developers keep the price of their games the same on Steam as other platforms.

This means that developers cannot have their game on itch, GOG, Humble or anywhere else at a lower price

Seems self-explanatory to me, I don't need to show you anything.

If this wasn't in the contract with Valve, the lawsuit would indeed be absurd.
But if this wasn't in the contract with Valve, the lawsuit would never have happened as it wasn't necessary to begin with.

You come off like a very aggressive fanboy here.

How am I an aggressive fanboy? It's not in the contract. And you really think the lawsuit would never have happened? Do you know how many dumb lawsuits are filed all the time?

Liam linked the Tweet from Sweeney (which is what the lawsuit refers to, not the contract!) and people called him out already back in 2019.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEP

Quoting: SuppenSounds like a well deserved lawsuit

Absolutely.
That's an abuse of market power if I ever saw one.

And nobody profits - except Valve.
Customers get screwed, devs get screwed.

The equivalent would be Amazon not allowing sellers lower prices outside of Amazon's marketplace.

Then please show the clause in the contract that dictates this.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: SuppenSounds like a well deserved lawsuit

It's doesn't.

What are your thoughts on this? Should Valve be forced to allow developers to set their own prices, and not require their price to be the same as other stores?

As far as I'm aware Valve already allows that. CD Project Red could sell Cyberpunk 2077 on gog and Epic right now for $20 and $60 o Steam and there's nothing Valve could/would do about it.

They only have one such clause and that applies to STEAM KEYS... which are sold below the Steam price all the time anyway.

This lawsuit is dumb and ridiculous.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Meine Banane!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

The response from Valve, at least the second part, is just a copy/paste from 2 years ago :grin:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: pmstroexSooooo... Did they also promise to stop geo-blocking or are we just talking fines here ? Can't see anything in the linked article about that.

They already did that years ago...

""The region locks only applied to a small number of game titles," Valve said in a press release. "Approximately just 3 percent of all games using Steam (and none of Valve's own games) at the time were subject to the contested region locks in the EEA. Valve believes that the EC's extension of liability to a platform provider in these circumstances is not supported by applicable law. Nonetheless, because of the EC's concerns, Valve actually turned off region locks within the EEA starting in 2015, unless those region locks were necessary for local legal requirements (such as German content laws) or geographic limits on where the Steam partner is licensed to distribute a game."

https://www.pcgamer.com/valve-called-out-by-the-european-commission-for-geo-blocking-games/ [External Link]

View this comment - View article - View full comments

And again... Epic doesn't pay for exclusivity. They pay devs/publishers to not publish on Steam. Pathetic.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Wait what? Joshus works on this, too? Jfc, what a kid.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: mylkadid they make the launch options more user friendly?
like right click -> launch options instead of right click -> properties -> launch options
also it would be great if we could save some launch options and we just have checkboxes for each command, instead of writing them down

Yes, just right click and click on properties and the "launch options" line is directly there.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Basiani

Quoting: Leopard

Quoting: BasianiWorMzy

However, by buying a game that doesn't support Linux, you are sending the message to the dev that they don't need to support Linux to get your money. Why should that dev support Linux if you're going to give them money either way?

Thanks. You said what I wanted to say.
Looks like game developers are thinking "Why we support Linux, when Linux users have WINE/PROTON and they already are buying games from us. Yes, they have some pains to play our games but they don't care it so why we care them, why we support them?!"
Buying unsupported game sends game developers signal that you anyway paying of them. So they don't have reason to support Linux. No one makes games for supporting gamers, it's business.

Game sold over 1 million copies at Steam alone , do you really think they will care about a Linux port?

You can't get a Linux port deal from huge games like this if you are not Google and throw money to them for porting the game for your platform.

You are misunderstanding what I'm talking about.
I never said that annoying phrase "Please port your game on Linux", it's shame to say that phrase.

You (maybe) and many others are paying game developing companies doing nothing for Linux. You justify it by saying that rises Linux gaming marketshare. Yes, technically you are right, but look at the other side of the coin, your action causes a backlash, other game developers have noticed this and it also makes sense for them not to create games for Linux.

Other developers see that Linux users are already buying their games even though the games do not have a Linux version. They see that Linux users are paying money for the WINE version. So much less games will be released in the future with the official support of Linux. Why should a game developer create a Linux version when Linux users are happy with the Windows version with WINE?!

Do you remember when Feral Interactive last time ported the game to Linux? For some reason the Feral's radar shows nothing. A large portion of Linux users bought the game before Feral ported it to Linux. Here, to many user wrote contentedly about how well these games ran with the WINE and waited to see when Feral would portray it so that they could then enjoy the Linux version.

I have a question for the public here, does Feral Interactive have any reason to port something to Linux in the future? I guess not, because a large part of you will buy such a game before porting, your paid money will go to the creator of the Windows version of the game, while Feral will be left with a three-finger combination. Consequently there is no reason for Feral to port anything to Linux in future.

No company has any interest in releasing the game with the Linux version as the WINE has done them a disservice. None of developer is foolish enough to incur additional costs in what they will earn income without spending, with the help of WINE.

It is nonsense to talk about the Linux marketer when most of the games bought by Linux users do not have Linux support. Why do Linux users need to pay for the product and receive 30-40% of the product fee?! As the Linux marketer grows, so do the Linux versions of games goes down. Why do you complicate the situation?! Install Windows and play there, get full fun. Your action, paying for wine versions, more and more reduces the likelihood of creating Linux versions and why bother taking in only a small portion of the pleasure to play them with WINE?!

Who cares if you play in Linux?! Nobody, nobody cares that!

Chicken and egg.

View this comment - View article - View full comments