That being said, I do think EGS is going the correct route by investing in games / unique games and locking them into their platform.
I strongly disagree. I quit consoles because of the exclusivity nonsense, and EGS guaranteed I will never buy anything from them by doing that shit. I won’t even redeem free games on their platform via Prime Gaming, just on principle.
You compete by giving devs and publishers a better cut, or convincing them to do deeper sales on your platform. You compete by providing a better service to users. You do not compete by literally not competing.
You’re describing how you would compete in a normal competition, but Steam has already had a decade to lock in it’s following. The competition is/was over.
I say that as a Steam user, there’s absolutely nothing a competitor can do to convince me to start buying / keeping my games on a platform outside Steam. Steam just has it all AND that’s where all my existing games already are. No amount of UI/UX improvements will convince me. No amount of sales will convince me because Steam will have the same game. Better cuts to developers doesn’t bring in repeat customers.
Like, Steam would need to take a nosedive in quality and care and I just don’t see that happening.
Well, exclusive games is the only thing Nintendo really has going for, and it’s working.
And those games being first or third party isn’t really making much difference for the final user.
I don’t particularly like the direction that Nintendo has taken in recent years, but are you willing to ignore that they were the only company in the market for handheld gaming until very recently? It’s not just game exclusives.
I strongly disagree. I quit consoles because of the exclusivity nonsense, and EGS guaranteed I will never buy anything from them by doing that shit. I won’t even redeem free games on their platform via Prime Gaming, just on principle.
You compete by giving devs and publishers a better cut, or convincing them to do deeper sales on your platform. You compete by providing a better service to users. You do not compete by literally not competing.
You’re describing how you would compete in a normal competition, but Steam has already had a decade to lock in it’s following. The competition is/was over.
I say that as a Steam user, there’s absolutely nothing a competitor can do to convince me to start buying / keeping my games on a platform outside Steam. Steam just has it all AND that’s where all my existing games already are. No amount of UI/UX improvements will convince me. No amount of sales will convince me because Steam will have the same game. Better cuts to developers doesn’t bring in repeat customers.
Like, Steam would need to take a nosedive in quality and care and I just don’t see that happening.
I’ve turned around and bought games they were giving out for free on egs. I won’t even install that bs.
Well, exclusive games is the only thing Nintendo really has going for, and it’s working. And those games being first or third party isn’t really making much difference for the final user.
Only real difference is hardware lock in.
I don’t particularly like the direction that Nintendo has taken in recent years, but are you willing to ignore that they were the only company in the market for handheld gaming until very recently? It’s not just game exclusives.
They were not. They killed the PSP and the Vita. Even before the N64 and the GCube had massive exclusives.
The only “recent” failure was the Wii U, which had only one or two great exclusives.
Nintendo was included in that statement.
But you’re not the market. So this not working for you doesn’t mean it’s a bad strategy, and Nintendo is an example of a company who pulled this off.