Fuck Ubisoft.

I was pretty hyped for the new prince of persia game (the lost crown), but come to find out it’s only available on ubisoft’s proprietary launcher or epic games. Nope, and nope.

I just want to have it available on my usual storefront, Steam, but it’s been decidedly omitted. As a long time fan of the old games, this kind of hurts. Especially since many of the others -are- available on Steam.

I wonder if/when it will come out for Steam. These platform exclusivity deals need to die.

Edit: It’s also available on several consoles, my post was just from a pc gamer’s perspective.

Norgur,

I never understood this one. All of those platforms, be it steam, epic,. Ubisofts defunct thing or EAs even more defunct thing, are embedded browsers with a more or less obnoxious skin we all use almost exclusively to click "buy now". All of them are overloaded with crappy, half-baked "features" nobody gives a flying toss about.

So why the heck do so many people spend the limited energy they have available to live their lives on "boycotts" and endless rants about how a game not on steam is basically unplayable for some reason.

If this game would bring you joy (which I doubt since it's Ubisoft we are talking about, but that's another matter), why deny yourself that joy because the launcher you interact with for literally less than a minute is shittier than your usual one?

If the launcher itself was of any importance to you, you'd use playnite or something and just be done with it all.

Don't whip this up to some exclusivity debate. It's not. Imagine if this was some tangible product. Would you really not buy the thing you'd really like to have just because it's sold at a store where the shelves are crap? Because that's essentially what you're doing.

falsem,

I'm on Linux and Valve and Itch are the only ones with first class Linux support. Everyone else you have to dick around with running their launchers through wine or lose features.

Dexx1s,

This “debate” has been going on for ages now. They don’t actually mind exclusivity. They’re just mad it’s not on the launcher they use. None of them care when it’s exclusively on Steam.

Norgur,

It's so unbelievably pointless! Why the fuck should I care about the damn launcher?

MajorHavoc,

Why the fuck should I care about the damn launcher?

DRM-heavy launchers have a history of spying on PC user activity, and of leading to malware infections. All well-known launchers, today, are DRM-heavy. (I would love tips on exceptions to this!)

DRM tries to control your PC remotely. There isn’t, and never will be, a safe way to do that without increasing the risks of outside malware attacks succeeding against you and your PC. In most cases, the risk increase is quite high.

Game launchers provide a trade-off between:

  • ease of installation and networking Vs
  • risk of malware infections

Each additional launcher brings a lot more risk, and slightly less convenience.

If it was just about the convenience, I agree - who cares.

Many of us have lost entire digital game catalogs, or had to rebuild our gaming rig, or both, due to a remotely hacked game installer/service/launcher. So many of us are incredibly bullish against adding one more installer/service/launcher to our gaming rig.

Neato,
@Neato@ttrpg.network avatar

Steam doesn’t pay or force developers to be exclusive. And it offers benefits and features Ubisoft launcher doesn’t.

Dexx1s,

So then…you’re just admitting that you’re fine with exclusivity once Steam is where it’s exclusive to.

Nobody’s forcing any developers to be on any platform, and let’s not pretend you actually care about a platform offering a deal to devs for exclusivity. Those same devs are free to say no. But in that same line, Steam gets exclusive games for free. You’re fine with Valve exclusivity that doesn’t pay the devs but hate anyone else getting exclusivity although it does pay them? Interesting.

Neato,
@Neato@ttrpg.network avatar

Lol. That’s a lot of words you’re putting in my mouth.

Steam offers no incentives for exclusivity. Others do. Devs choose to launch on steam and there’s nothing stopping them from launching elsewhere. Look at palworld: gamepass and steam and you know they got paid for gamepass.

Devs use steam because it’s where the people are. Steam has done nothing to try to be anticompetitive to other stores. Unlike said stores.

BolexForSoup,
BolexForSoup avatar

Valve doesn’t need to because they are the overwhelmingly dominant player. It’s not the same situation.

Also this isn’t an exclusivity deal in the first place. And valve makes some of their games only available on steam (Alyx for instance).

Neato,
@Neato@ttrpg.network avatar

Right. That’s the other part: what does an Ubisoft launcher contribute? My argument is that it contributes nothing new or even in parity to most other stores. So that’s why people are annoyed at having to use the Ubisoft launcher. And not just a launcher, but store. So now people have to keep track of multiple stores for no benefit to them. It’s a legitimate complaint.

Valve doesn’t need to because they are the overwhelmingly dominant player. It’s not the same situation.

Right. Because they were first. So what should Valve do? Suck more? They just have to keep doing their own thing and they continue to win because they practically invented this space. If competitors want a chance, they need to innovate and none of them have done so. So they fail and people dislike being forced to use them.

Dexx1s,

I put nothing in your mouth. Actually, quote the words I’m putting in your mouth and explain how. I merely showed the reality of words you typed. If Palworld was available exclusively on Steam would you care? If any other game you care about and wanted to play was exclusively on Steam, would there be a post or comment complaining about it?

Offering financial incentives isn’t the forcing anyone. You’re fine with Steam getting exclusives, so this has absolutely nothing to do with the concept of exclusives. Devs aren’t forced to take any incentives if they don’t want it.

But now that you mentioned it:

Devs use steam because it’s where the people are.

This is an incentive. Steam doesn’t offer money because they have pretty much a monopoly. And you guys will only buy from Steam, reinforcing it. You know you all of these stores are essentially just where you buy it right? I don’t even use EGS to launch games. It’s not some “you only get to pick one” kinda bullshit.

Look at palworld: gamepass and steam and you know they got paid for gamepass.

Yeah, because Game Pass isn’t looking to take on Steam. Game pass is a subscription service.

Neato,
@Neato@ttrpg.network avatar

If Palworld was available exclusively on Steam would you care?

No, because that would be the dev’s choice. It’s also the dev’s choice to take a bribe from Epic and such, but Valve does nothing extra to encourage exclusivity.

If any other game you care about and wanted to play was exclusively on Steam, would there be a post or comment complaining about it?

People have and still do complain when games aren’t on GoG. Not as much anymore but it happened.

Offering financial incentives isn’t the forcing anyone

OK, we’re done. You don’t understand or acknowledge financial coercion so this is going nowhere. Byyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyye.

Dexx1s,

'tis a shame you couldn’t say what words I’d put in your mouth.

No, because that would be the dev’s choice.

That “because” isn’t actually telling the reason. You’d be fine with it, because it’s on Steam. Any kind of exclusivity is also the devs choice, and you obviously have a problem when they choose to be exclusive to a platform you don’t use.

but Valve does nothing extra to encourage exclusivity.

Apart from having the most market share, that you yourself already admitted.

People have and still do complain when games aren’t on GoG.

I never asked about anybody else. I asked about you. Or should I take it you never complained when games aren’t also on GoG?

OK, we’re done. You don’t understand or acknowledge financial coercion so this is going nowhere. Byyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyye.

Oh, damn, imagine thinking that once there’s money on the table they must take it, and then at the same time, not understanding the value of a near monopoly. Steam is literally leveraging the large amount of people that will buy the game if it’s on Steam. I even acknowledged it. Me saying that they don’t have to take it is quite literally acknowledging it. But ok, byyyyyyyyyyyyyye.

cloudless,
@cloudless@feddit.uk avatar

For me, I prefer Steam because of Steam Link, which allows me to play Steam games remotely on my phone.

Eggyhead,
Eggyhead avatar

Steam link doesn’t work for external games added into your steam library? I’m new to steam in general, but it seems weird that they’d let you add a game and not use them with link.

cloudless,
@cloudless@feddit.uk avatar

I usually have problem with controller settings when playing external games via Steam Link.

Kolanaki,
@Kolanaki@yiffit.net avatar

Steam link doesn’t work for external games added into your steam library?

Yes it does. I dunno about the hardware unit, but the android app alone works with everything you have on Steam; even the non-Steam games. Just fired up The Outer Worlds Spacer Choice edition given away on EGS some weeks back added to Steam as a non-Steam game through Steam Link on my phone.

It even straight up streams your desktop, so you can launch games not even running through Steam.

https://yiffit.net/pictrs/image/46e921c6-6697-439e-baed-5f1e834fb5bb.jpeg

BolexForSoup,
BolexForSoup avatar

Steam link is actually pretty flexible. You can stream basically whatever you want IIRC with a few minor tweaks. Could be misremembering though.

Norgur,

"prefering" steam is completely understandable. Boycotting a game and being disappointed and angry because it's not on steam isn't. To me at least. Regarding steam link: if you have an Nvidia graphics card, check out Moonlight!

BolexForSoup,
BolexForSoup avatar

I mean the elephant in the room is this rant is considered acceptable by many because Ubisoft is the offender.

MajorHavoc,

What we want are reliable DRM-free installers, that don’t make our PC get infected and don’t spy on us.

What we can curently get (outside of piracy), is Steam.

Piracy is looking better every day, and specifically, every time one of these services has a huge security breach.

Marsupial,
@Marsupial@quokk.au avatar

Because ”vote with your wallets”.

Why support a dodgy business over one of the best for consumers?

tiredofsametab,

I don't mind that epic, etc. exist; I mind the exclusives. When Epic first launched, they didn't have payment processors in a number of countries so there was literally no way to legally play the games for people; that's super shitty.

rikudou,

So, Steam exclusivity is fine, but other stores exclusivity isn’t?

BolexForSoup,
BolexForSoup avatar

Not only that, they are missing about five other platforms it's available on. Steam is the only one it’s not available on basically.

TheEntity,

It's pretty obvious OP means PC, the other hardware platforms are irrelevant here.

BolexForSoup,
BolexForSoup avatar

So it’s available on every major console which serves a almost 200 million people (absurd to call that irrelevant) and 2 free launchers for PC but OP is mad because it isn’t on steam, which regularly serves as the only location for a game to be released on?

Their argument would hold water if they were saying it should not be tied to a launcher. But they are mad it is not on steam. That’s ridiculous. They have 5 ways to play it across 4 hardware options.

TheEntity,

What's absurd is bringing up hardware platforms OP doesn't have access to as equal options, you're being ridiculous. It's obvious OP won't be buying a new device for a freaking Prince of Persia.

BolexForSoup,
BolexForSoup avatar

They’re whining about using freely accessible launchers dude. I don’t know what else to tell you. They have 5 ways to play this game. I’m not sympathetic.

It's obvious OP won't be buying a new device for a freaking Prince of Persia.

Well “freaking prince of Persia” warranted this rant apparently. I didn’t place the importance on it. OP did.

MxM111,
MxM111 avatar

Did he say it should be STEAM exclusive?

Brokkr,

I’m not taking a side in the debate of Steam vs others but has Steam ever negotiated an exclusivity deal of a 3rd party game?

technomad,

Wrong. I never said I wanted it to be exclusive on Steam, I just want it to be available on there as well.

Why is Steam pretty much the only one it’s not available on? The fact that it’s on so many other platforms just makes this exclusion even more illogical.

cottonmon,
@cottonmon@lemmy.world avatar

Definitely greed, Ubisoft did the same thing in 2019 because they didn’t want to pay Steams 30% cut.

BolexForSoup,
BolexForSoup avatar

They’re on epic, their launcher, Xbox, PlayStation, and switch. That’s a lot of stores taking their cut lol.

There are five ways to play this game, two of which involve a free launcher that you interact with for all of 30 seconds. I do not understand why this is such a big deal.

I mean, the reason is obvious of course: people like to simp for Valve, and people like to dunk on Ubisoft. This is basically carte blanche to act like they have kidnapped a newborn child without any consideration for what they actually did lol

FlorianSimon,

I think it’s a money thing. Releasing a game on steam costs developers money.

Marsupial,
@Marsupial@quokk.au avatar

Ubisoft are a poor struggling indie company after all.

Not at all to do with Epic paying devs for exclusives.

Oh and btw both Epic and Steam charge $100 to publish on their store, so it’s not that.

FlorianSimon, (edited )

Keep that snark to yourself. No need to be an asshole.

If you’re going to be so aggressive, at least try to be correct. Ubi not being indie doesn’t mean they’re willing to pay the 30% fee Steam asks gamedevs on sales, which amounts to a lot of money at the end or the day at that scale. We’re talking hundreds of thousands of copies sold.

That, and POP is not an Epic exclusive. It’s on Ubisoft’s own launcher.

Marsupial,
@Marsupial@quokk.au avatar

Grow the fuck up you child. A bit of sarcasm and you’re crying about “aggressive”?

FlorianSimon,

Reported. Someone needs to go out and touch grass.

Marsupial,
@Marsupial@quokk.au avatar

Yes you do.

It’s pathetic that a grown adult cannot handle sarcasm thats not even directed at them without crying and playing a victim.

Pantsofmagic,

There is absolutely no reason to be such a giant jerk in this thread.

Marsupial,
@Marsupial@quokk.au avatar

They started it. All I did was make fun of rich companies “struggling” for money.

technomad,

It’s definitely a money thing, but I don’t think it’s in the way that you are suggesting. I think it’s a matter of them making more money (somehow) by excluding Steam. That’s pretty much the only platform it’s not available on.

shani66,

Gog exclusivity would be cool, epic not so much.

Macaroni_ninja,
@Macaroni_ninja@lemmy.world avatar

I think a million times people discussed this and ubi and epic store clients are far inferior compared to steam. People have all the rights to not want their game collection spread across half a dozen platforms.

I personally don’t buy anything Ubisoft mainly because their launcher is pure garbage and I hate it with passion.

Steam made me stop pirating games, Epic and Ubi made me overcome my FOMO and be a patient gamer.

BolexForSoup,
BolexForSoup avatar

We don’t want the market to be a monopoly but we also don’t like fragmentation.

The reality is people want games wherever they are invested most already. That’s about the only metric people use.

KeenFlame,

Was the same with every platform. Enshittification does not care about you

krolden,
@krolden@lemmy.ml avatar

What video game worth playing isn’t on a proprietary platform?

beneeney,
@beneeney@lemm.ee avatar

I’ve been playing Starsector lately, that’s been pretty fun. Native Linux version too. No launcher required

only0218,

Software Inc has drm free options

Pyr_Pressure,

I don’t know how they all manage to do it but EA, Ubisoft, and Rockstar are all my most hated companies of all time. They can make some good stuff, but I just absolutely hate how they all force people to jump through so much hoops just to play the games you pay them for.

They force you to make accounts with them and use their stupid launchers which never work properly and are just advertisements. There have been so many times I just wanted to play a game and then forgot my password to the account and got locked out or the launcher needed an update and I had to wait like 20 minutes.

Fuck all large game corporations.

Blackmist,

I’m sure the last few Ubisoft games I got from Steam all installed UPlay before letting me run them anyway…

I’m not buying it because £45 is not a budget price for what feels like an indie game experience. I can wait for a sale on that, or more likely for it to go to PSN Extra. Still got plenty on my backlog.

ombremad,

Me in 2004: Yeah I’ll never play Half-Life 2 because I hate that it comes with a mandatory useless piece of software. « Steam », what the hell is that? Full of DRMs, ugly, bugged to the core, eating up my precious RAM.

TwilightVulpine,

There are valid concerns but there are benefits to using one game manager. There’s nothing good about having to install a bunch of them because every other game is in a different store.

It still would be best if games came DRM-free and all of them were compatible with whatever game manager someone chooses, but a lot of them aren’t, especially from big publishers.

ombremad,

« There are benefits in using one game manager »

That is very true, and that’s why your game manager software shouldn’t be tied to any storefront or online service.

rabiddolphin,
@rabiddolphin@lemmy.world avatar

Ubisoft makes games for 13 year old mountain dew addicts

Wav_function,

Drink verification can to continue

Kedly,

Cue the BUT STEAMS MONOPOLY idiots that completely ignore that Valve does nothing to stop anyone from competing with them, its just that anyone who has tried (outside GOG) has only produced anti consumer garbage

ombremad,

I would agree with you, but Steam is also anti consumer garbage.

shapis,
@shapis@lemmy.ml avatar

DRM is never good for the end user.

Kedly,

Steams DRM is a VERY REASONABLE compromise between the interests of the devs and the consumer not wanting to be unfairly punished/annoyed. Steams DRM has literally NEVER caused me a headache aside from ONCE when steam was super new, its a non issue at this point

shapis,
@shapis@lemmy.ml avatar

deleted_by_author

    •
    Kedly,

    Yeah, and when I show up to work, regardless of how much I like what I do or my coworkers, I expect to be paid for it, your point is? They created a form of DRM that is the least obtrusive out there, made it optional, and they gave us one of the best store fronts out there as compensation for it. Again, Ubi, EA, and Epic’s DRM is FAR WORSE.

    OsrsNeedsF2P,

    Who downvoted this?

    Kedly,

    People who understand nuance exists in this world. Steams DRM is a VERY RARE check to the internet that you own the game, and its an OPTIONAL thing that developers can choose. EA UBI and EPIC’s versions of DRM is FAR WORSE, and if you really want to be extreme in your hatred of even reasonable level DRM, GOG exists

    trk,
    @trk@aussie.zone avatar

    Ubisoft

    rimjob_rainer,

    Is this a troll post? Who cares in which store it’s available, just get a physical copy.

    Steam shills are really mind boggling.

    memo,

    Most PC games nowadays do not have physical releases.

    GeneralVincent,

    Is this a troll comment? You seemed to have missed the point of the post.

    PC gamers love PC gaming because it’s more open and you’re not locked into a certain ecosystem. Ubisoft artificially limiting their online release to two launchers (both known for being poor quality/buggy/feature lacking) is frustrating. Buying a hard copy might be possible, but Ubisoft did this on purpose to squeeze out a little extra profit. It shows they’re more than happy to put profits over customers. A customer being annoyed this release excludes their preferred launcher doesn’t make anyone a shill.

    Cybersteel,
    @Cybersteel@lemmy.world avatar

    It’s just another software it’s not like you have to buy separate hardware for it.

    Eggyhead,
    Eggyhead avatar

    I’ve generally stopped buying Ubisoft games not because I don’t want to, but because of an issue with my Connect account. I think I had let my PS3 set one up for me back in the AC2 days with an email that is now long defunct (I deleted it after an acquisition that put my privacy at risk).

    Now they want me to verify that email so much that some games have actually refused to let me play. I contacted their “support” to request the option to update my email, proving that the registered email is inactive and that I am in complete control of the linked PlayStation account, but they pretty much told me to kindly F off because they care too much about my privacy (lol).

    I like some Ubisoft games, I just don’t have confidence spending money on anything they publish when I don’t know which ones might preemptively lock me out.

    I figure I’ll just replace the account entirely at some point, but only when there’s a game I absolutely think would be worth the hassle. It just sucks to see my OG account end up trashed over such a dumb reason.

    reksas,

    i stopped buying ubisoft games when i noticed every single one of them just follows the same path of mediocrity. There is some story, you follow it and along the way there is some busywork like collecting pointless things. If there ever are new ideas its like something wished with monkey’s paw and its ultimately just more same old shit in new wrappings.

    Eggyhead,
    Eggyhead avatar

    Yeah I get it, but I don’t really mind that sort of stuff. You know what to do, it’s only mildly challenging, traversal is kind of fun. For me it’s relaxing.

    I can’t stand rogue-likes or arena style multiplayer games, so I never touch any of that.

    bluetardis,

    Steam or GoG

    Anything else is too much pain.

    avater,
    @avater@lemmy.world avatar

    You’re missing out on a fucking great game.

    viking,
    @viking@infosec.pub avatar

    Not at all, the cracked copy from fitgirl works just fine, for those who can’t be bothered to succumb to ubisoft DRM.

    MaximilianKohler,

    It’s definitely convenient to have everything in once place, and Steam has way more features, but it’s good to avoid Steam becoming too monopolistic. We saw recently how badly that can go with reddit.

    Despite the widespread worshipping of Steam and GabeN, I’ve had lots of issues with Steam and Valve over the years.

    Kedly,

    Convince other companies to be not shit competition then. Steam has its near monopoly because its competition is dogshit

    ombremad,

    No, Steam gained its near monopoly through anti-consumer practices as well: being mandatory for playing Valve games, even offline, as soon as 2004; being DRM-ridden; locking consumers out of their right to sell their games on second-hand market; still enforcing an old revenue share system that’s hurting devs; or putting micro-transactions everywhere with their collectible system that you can’t really disable at all. Just to name a few.

    Steam is not better than others. You’re just used to its flaws.

    TwilightVulpine, (edited )

    Steam is better than Epic at least. On top of all that, Epic makes itself mandatory for third-party games too.

    ombremad,

    Epic is worse on some points listed here, better on others.

    TwilightVulpine,

    The only one that goes on Epic’s favor is the cut, but frankly I think the whole “old revenue share system that’s hurting devs” is nothing more than Epic’s propaganda trying to get marketshare. 70/30 in favor of the devs while Steam handles hosting, community platform, multiplayer and modding tools, so forth, is neither unusual nor ripping anyone off, certainly not worth how maligned it was. I understand devs who prefer Epic’s cut, but I don’t think Epic is doing this out of fairness, nor that it can be relied on if they ever do gain ground.

    In the other aspects, it’s either equal or worse. It has as much DRM. Steam provides options for people to trade extra copies they didn’t activate but as far as I know other stores don’t. Neither allows people to trade away activated copies so that’s no points for anyone.

    I assume the microtransaction thing is talking about Steam Trading Cards and such, they are a bit of an iffy worthless addition to get people to waste money… but if the person is concerned over how much money the devs are getting, they do get a cut from every transaction, so under that perspective it should be counted as a plus. Which, by the way, is entirely up to the dev to add or not.

    ombremad,

    I don’t really remember asking for your opinion on what a fair cut should be or what you think is a rip off. But the fact is that Steam takes more money from developers than other powerful competitors around (but 30% is barely enough to get servers running if I listen to you :D ). Okay. Sure. Yes. Right.

    The microtransactions are so awful in Steam that with proposed laws in some countries (like the Netherlands) it would make the whole thing illegal. Some of the worst Valve practices already are, like the loot boxes (they’re banned there).

    I don’t tell you that you should switch to something else than Steam. I don’t tell you that there’s a better choice (maybe GOG?). But what I’m saying is that Steam is indeed predatory and has been known for its anti-consumer practices, despite what some True Gamers™ seem to believe.

    TwilightVulpine,

    I don’t really remember asking for your opinion on what a fair cut should be or what you think is a rip off.

    Too bad, this is a public forum. I don’t need to ask for your permission to say whatever I want. But if that’s how you are going to go about it, then feel free to think whatever you want on your corner.

    ombremad,

    What I was saying: “your opinion doesn’t state a fact and some devs are indeed complaining about the 30% cut, maybe you should listen to them”

    What you heard: MUUUUH FREEDOM OF SPEEEECH

    Kedly, (edited )

    Yeah, Steam has DRM. Its the least annoying DRM that exists entirely because they gave us one of the best shop fronts that exists on PC as a trade off. And all companies have the right to sell their own games on whichever store they wish. Unlike Epic, Steam doesnt buy the exclusive rights to OTHER companies games, its just their own games. Your imaginary competition utopian dreamland doesnt exist, and you’re turning optional mole hills into mountains in order to pretend the best option we have is bad. If you don’t like collectible trading cards and the least annoying DRM ever created, go buy on GOG, EPIC UBI and EA all have FAR WORSE practices

    Cybersteel,
    @Cybersteel@lemmy.world avatar

    They bought out the Devs of portal to make portal for steam

    Kedly,

    Valve saw a demo and was impressed by it to the point they funded the full game, damn you guys get desperate to paint Valve in a bad light.

    TwilightVulpine,

    Avoid it in favor of GoG. Ubisoft can’t be trusted with a single drop of goodwill. As we can see by how they inject their clunky garbage manager even in games they sell through other stores.

    ColdWater,
    @ColdWater@lemmy.ca avatar

    Pirate it

    TwilightVulpine,

    That’s probably the best option. Considering how a Ubisoft exec said we should be “comfortable not owning games”, I wouldn’t trust anything purchased from them anymore.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • games@lemmy.world
  • DreamBathrooms
  • magazineikmin
  • ethstaker
  • InstantRegret
  • tacticalgear
  • rosin
  • love
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • ngwrru68w68
  • kavyap
  • cubers
  • thenastyranch
  • mdbf
  • provamag3
  • modclub
  • GTA5RPClips
  • normalnudes
  • khanakhh
  • everett
  • cisconetworking
  • osvaldo12
  • anitta
  • Leos
  • Durango
  • tester
  • megavids
  • JUstTest
  • All magazines
    •