• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The number of PC digital storefronts/launchers is getting out of hand

D

DyslexicAlucard

Member
gngf123 said:
I absolutely hate the "no Steam, no buy" mindset and find that it is toxic to the open PC platform.

The only problem I have with other launchers is that in the past, some of them have been pretty bad. UPlay in particular comes to mind. Other

I typically use Steam, GOG and separate DRM Free downloads from Itch/Humble
Click to expand...

Earthbound64 said:
Agreed.

DRM-free is the way to go.
Click to expand...

See, I don't get this. People espouse the importance of "choice," but when a user makes that choice and says they prefer Steam (for convenience, consolidation, unified friends list, feature set, Steam Controller support, whatever) they get shit from some people. I don't run Steam exclusively -- I use Origin, UPlay, GOG Galaxy and Battle.net -- but I understand why someone would. I don't think many of those users say that publishers need to be on Steam or that their clients are particularly bad; just that their titles are not worth leaving an ecosystem they currently enjoy -- especially when it's a result of taking away their "choice" to use Steam.

And to those saying that every publisher should have their own client: careful what you wish for. Thanks to its open nature, there is a veritable cavalcade of publishers in the PC market. If every publisher had one, that'd result in a complete mess and an absurd amount of splintering -- not to mention the logistics of every publisher upkeeping an app and storefront.
 
A

Arulan

Member
Diancecht said:
Can somone tell me what's wrong with uPlay? I buy a game, I download a game and I play that said game. Haven't had any problems with it since, I don't know, 2013?
Click to expand...

Why do you use the Uplay client? If the answer is solely because you have to, then it's serving no purpose. It's not providing any benefit to you. It's just another step to launch the game and useless software.

Publishers can still sell Steam keys directly from their store without giving Valve their standard cut. They can also sell me the game directly, DRM free, and let me update it manually. Why do I have to use their useless software?

Steam and GOG both give me excellent reasons to use their storefront and client. Why can't Uplay give me a reason to?

I'd love to see more clients that provide me with competitive features.

I believe Amazon is planning on entering the space (or has already; I haven't tried the Curse/Twitch client), but I would imagine they're planning on leveraging competitive features such as stream-friendly support and features, not simply add another useless client.
 
D

Dec

Member
Battle.net and Steam are the only ones I don't uninstall when I'm done playing a game. As I usually have games like Diablo installed at all times should the mood strike.
 
B

blummer102

Member
I dunno, I try to keep it limited to just:

Steam (for most games)
GOG (for old games/some CD Projekt Red games as well as stuff I find cheaper than on Steam)
Battle.net (Blizzard games)

And then there's the FFXIV launcher, but that's separate.
 
D

Diancecht

Member
Arulan said:
Why do you use the Uplay client? If the answer is solely because you have to, then it's serving no purpose. It's not providing any benefit to you. It's just another step to launch the game and useless software.

Publishers can still sell Steam keys directly from their store without giving Valve their standard cut. They can also sell me the game directly, DRM free, and let me update it manually. Why do I have to use their useless software?

Steam and GOG both give me excellent reasons to use their storefront and client. Why can't Uplay give me a reason to?
Click to expand...

At some point, why do I have to use Steam? I don’t care about its social stuff, I just want to play games on it.

I use the X client because the Y game is on that client. I understand the frustration of having to juggle around three or four clients but I personally don’t care at all. I install them all when I format my pc every six months or so, turn the auto log-in option after the first log-in and forget that they exist. I want to launch the Y game by clicking the shortcut, who cares if it launches the X client in the background.
 
R

Roshin

Member
FirmBizBws said:
It’s insane and I refuse to buy games that aren’t on GOG, steam, blizzard or uplay. Enough is enough. There’s no need.
Click to expand...

I don't have time to even play my Steam games, so it's basically Steam first, then GOG (for old PC games), and Origin standing in the wings, barely getting any attention.

I don't really care about the others. I just don't have the time.
 
Z

Zizbuka

Banned
I have Steam running all the time, since it's my most populated 'store'. GOG Galaxy I only use to install games, and use Launch Box to run the games. Battle.net, Origin and Uplay I only run when I want to play one of their games, which isn't very often these days.
 
1

120v

Member
a mild inconvenience at worst. i kind of fear a future with like 30 launch shortcuts littering my desktop but even then it's a tradeoff i'll take for modern PC gaming

only issue i've ever had is with Origin, as that always seems to be doing something in the background and taking up more memory than it should. but nothing settings adjustments won't fix
 
A

Arulan

Member
Diancecht said:
At some point, why do I have to use Steam? I don't care about its social stuff, I just want to play games on it.

I use the X client because the Y game is on that client. I understand the frustration of having to juggle around three or four clients but I personally don't care at all. I install them all when I format my pc every six months or so, turn the auto log-in option after the first log-in and forget that they exist. I want to launch the Y game by clicking the shortcut, who cares if it launches the X client in the background.
Click to expand...

If you're not interested in ANY of Steam's features, then you should probably buy as many games as you can from GOG or directly from the developer when DRM-free is an option.

Personally I find the following very useful:

- The library under list mode is the most functional launcher of any client with excellent searching, user-defined categories, and configurable launch options.

- Steam's controller support and API is best-in-class of any platform. It supports practically any controller you can plug in, even those without official drivers (PS3 controller). The configuration options are also insanely good. The Steam controller is also the best controller I've used for most modern titles.

- In-Home Streaming is a very useful feature. Paired with the Steam Link I can easily play anything I want anywhere in my house with a display.

- Family Library Sharing

- Big Picture Mode

- Easily start streaming a game to show my friends something.

- SteamVR

Those are some of the first that came to mind. I'm omitting the standard set of features such as automatic patching and cloud save support that I believe are standard at this point.

There are also a number of policies that I believe sets Valve apart from its competitors. Valve's insistence of furthering an open-platform, removing themselves as gatekeepers, and ease of publication for indie developers have made both the client and storefront a much better place for both consumers and developers alike.
 
R

RedSwirl

Junior Member
The problem people have isn't the number of them, it's that almost none of them really justify themselves apart from Steam. GOG is DRM-free and specializes in old games but the rest are pretty much just proprietary launchers for different publishers that lack most of Steam's features. I guess itch has a lot of cool experimental stuff that's nowhere else, I've heard a lot of people like EA's Origin vault now.

It just feels like unnecessary clutter when you have a whole bunch of different clients, each one potentially for just one game.

Oh, and what pisses me off is that none of Steam's competitors has a big picture mode. You can't even really navigate the Xbox app and Windows start menu with a controller.

Windu said:
Just use the OS to launch the games.
Click to expand...

I've actually gone back to doing this. I just launch all my games through either the start menu like old school times, or the Xbox app. The Xbox app on Windows 10 automatically adds any game that has a start menu shortcut, and when you launch it from there it just boots up whatever launcher it came with.
 
N

Nev

Banned
But I thought Steam had a monopoly??

Console fanboys on NeoGAF were wrong?? Who would've guessed.

Luckily you can always choose. You can't in consoles (that have a real monopoly) and we all know how that ends. With a cancerigenous paywall.
 
E

ezodagrom

Member
SeeNoWeevil said:
Well, that's the trade-off with PC gaming. You enjoy the competitive pricing but deal with multiple launchers.
Click to expand...
I don't see how multiple launchers result in competitive pricing.
For as long as Steam allows publishers/developers to freely sell steam keys in other digital stores, competitive pricing exists, independently of other launchers existing.

Publishers that have their own launchers and don't release their games anywhere else, wouldn't that result in less competitive pricing instead?
 
Z

Zeouterlimits

Member
Kind of an uglier tone to the thread already than I'd like but
- yes, OP, it would be handy if we had one aggregation library tool, but the OS does tend to function in that, in that trying to open the game normally opens the client to go along with that
- it's a trade off most of us are currently happy with having
 
C

Chairmanchuck

Member
gngf123 said:
I absolutely hate the "no Steam, no buy" mindset and find that it is toxic to the open PC platform.

The only problem I have with other launchers is that in the past, some of them have been pretty bad. UPlay in particular comes to mind. Other

I typically use Steam, GOG and separate DRM Free downloads from Itch/Humble
Click to expand...

Steam is the most convenient.

I know that I have games there from 13 years ago when I first had my Steam Account.
I know that when a game gets delisted, I can still download it, since they are still stored on the servers.
I have my friends there.
I can directly check out User Guides there for collectibles inside the game.
I have cloudsaves there for most games.
I can refund games easily.
I get cards that I can sell.
It has Steam Music and I can just link my music library to it and play music with just one controller click when I want inside a game.
It has BPM, that is important since I play most games on my TV.
My wife can play my games when Im not playing.

It is the most conventient launcher for me and the one I have most faith in to actually keep my games in the future.
 
N

neurosisxeno

Member
ezodagrom said:
I don't see how multiple launchers result in competitive pricing.
For as long as Steam allows publishers/developers to freely sell steam keys in other digital stores, competitive pricing exists, independently of other launchers existing.

Publishers that have their own launchers and don't release their games anywhere else, wouldn't that result in less competitive pricing instead?
Click to expand...

Bingo. The only legitimate competitors to Steam are GOG and Origin. The others only sell a specific companies products, and usually are just there to throw ads at you. Steam has the most features and games, GOG has a niche when it comes to older games, and Origin is basically a thing because EA actually tried to branch out to other publishers, and games like SWTOR, Battlefront, and Battlefield all required it and were fairly popular.
 
Alexander DeLarge

Alexander DeLarge

Member
everyer said:
That is why I play console... It's simple.
Click to expand...

It's also more expensive thanks to paid online multiplayer, it's a closed platform and you're at the mercy of Sony when it comes to customer service, backwards compatibility and those servers remaining up. Not to mention it's not a standard practice to allow graphical settings on the Playstation so even if they do release a backwards compatible PS5, Bloodborne is almost certainly going to be stuck at the same 1080p/30fps it was seven years and one console generation prior.
 
StereoVsn

StereoVsn

Member
Let's also not forget hat Steam by far has the most free developer resources like APIs, Cloud Saves and so on in Steamworks, is the friendliest entity to indie developers.

It is at the end the most friendly with prices since it allows developer to gen their own keys and sell them through means other then Steam without Balve taking a cut. This is the reason of various price and bundle options available for Steam based games.
 
J

Joey Ravn

Banned
I have no issue with this, but I wish clients like UPlay or Origin allowed you to automatically close them when you launch a game. Battle.net already does it.

Or at least be as "silent" as Steam. I don't need to see the interface of the client every time I want to launch a game through it.
 
E

ezodagrom

Member
neurosisxeno said:
Bingo. The only legitimate competitors to Steam are GOG and Origin. The others only sell a specific companies products, and usually are just there to throw ads at you. Steam has the most features and games, GOG has a niche when it comes to older games, and Origin is basically a thing because EA actually tried to branch out to other publishers, and games like SWTOR, Battlefront, and Battlefield all required it and were fairly popular.
Click to expand...
If I remember right, Origin happened because of a DLC policy change with Steam, after that change DLC can't be sold only though outside means, it has to be available on the Steam store itself as well, I think?
Not entirely sure, but IIRC EA took Crysis 2 out of Steam because of that policy change, I think they wanted to sell DLC for Crysis 2 only through their own store?
After that, Origin happened and EA stopped releasing games on Steam, other than a version of Crysis 2 that had all DLC included.

(That Steam DLC policy change was for the best, even if they lost EA in the process, I don't miss the days of having to go through Bioware's store and lousy currency system to get Mass Effect/Mass Effect 2's DLC, for example).
 
A

Aureon

Please do not let me serve on a jury. I am actually a crazy person.
Reminder that digital storefronts take 30%.
Of course all publishers want that 30% back.
 
StereoVsn

StereoVsn

Member
ezodagrom said:
If I remember right, Origin happened because of a DLC policy change with Steam, DLC can't be sold only though outside means, it has to be available on the Steam store itself as well, I think?
Not entirely sure, but IIRC EA took Crysis 2 out of Steam because of that policy change, I think they wanted to sell DLC for Crysis 2 only through their own store?
After that, Origin happened and EA stopped releasing games on Steam, other than a version of Crysis 2 that had all DLC included.

(That Steam DLC policy change was for the best, even if they lost EA in the process, I don't miss the days of having to go through Bioware's store and lousy currency system to get Mass Effect/Mass Effect 2's DLC, for example).
Click to expand...
Steam doesn't preclude Developers from selling DLCs outside, they just have to also sell them on Steam. And yes, that change was certainly for the best. DLC situation with ME games in particular was and still is insane.
 
N

neurosisxeno

Member
ezodagrom said:
If I remember right, Origin happened because of a DLC policy change with Steam, after that change DLC can't be sold only though outside means, it has to be available on the Steam store itself as well, I think?
Not entirely sure, but IIRC EA took Crysis 2 out of Steam because of that policy change, I think they wanted to sell DLC for Crysis 2 only through their own store?
After that, Origin happened and EA stopped releasing games on Steam, other than a version of Crysis 2 that had all DLC included.

(That Steam DLC policy change was for the best, even if they lost EA in the process, I don't miss the days of having to go through Bioware's store and lousy currency system to get Mass Effect/Mass Effect 2's DLC, for example).
Click to expand...

Yup. EA wanted a piece of the pie but I think realized running a storefront that could compete with Valve was incredibly difficult. I don't even know what other games are on Origin other than EA games--I remember they made a big deal about getting Rift on there like a year after it launched when it was available through every place that sold games...
 
E

ezodagrom

Member
StereoVsn said:
Steam doesn't preclude Developers from selling DLCs outside, they just have to also sell them on Steam. And yes, that change was certainly for the best. DLC situation with ME games in particular was and still is insane.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's what I meant, DLC can't be sold only outside without being available on Steam (it could before the policy change, which EA wanted to keep doing), it can be sold outside, but it has to be available on Steam as well.
 
C

CSJ

Member
You don't know how good you've got it when you've got choice and automatic updates.
Do you remember having to find patches for games, on 3rd party websites, that started from the version you had on CD/DVD and then you had to run them all one by one to go from 1.01 to 1.01a, then 1.01a to 1.02235 then 1.02235 to .36, oh my fucking god did it get annoying.
 
KonradLaw

KonradLaw

Member
Most of F2P titles have their own launchers and few people care :)
Personally I miss days where they were no launches and every game could just be launched directly by shortcut.
 
daninthemix

daninthemix

Member
What gets on my nerves when the alternate launchers interfere with Steam's ability to stream the game, for example. That's actively preventing me from playing the game the way I want to play it.
 
A

Aztechnology

Member
everyer said:
That is why I play console... It's simple.

8WrTT3h.jpg
Click to expand...

Yea, we have that too, it's called shortcuts. Really makes this a relative non issue. Can also really easily add non steam games to steam (At least to launch).
 
N

neurosisxeno

Member
KonradLaw said:
Most of F2P titles have their own launchers and few people care :)
Personally I miss days where they were no launches and every game could just be launched directly by shortcut.
Click to expand...

Those are usually incredibly light weight applications that include things like patch notes and server status. They are not a legitimate storefront and close right when you actually launch the game. Things like uPlay serve no real function other than to force you to use another unnecessary app that does a shittier job of what Steam already does. It's the same reason people hated stuff like GFWL or whatever Microsoft tried to peddle it as over the years.
 
R

Rathorial

Member
Not really sure it's getting out of hand, especially compared to the old days where you had to organize every individual game. Most people likely don't even use all of those services, and have just a few they can pin to their taskbar.

I don't really want to live in a world where Steam dominates 100%, even if I'm annoyed that only GoG is the real competitor...while the rest just seem to be big publishers avoiding the 30% cut to host largely their own games. GoG being DRM-free is going to always hold it back from some big companies that still think Denuvo is worth something.

Best way to save yourself hassle is when you install the storefronts, create your own custom folders that games get installed to vs. the default ones that are buried within subfolders. Label them something simply like Uplay Games, and put them in an obvious spot you'll see. I never have a problem that way. Also can add non-steam games pretty easily, including Windows store apps.
 
K

kinoki

Illness is the doctor to whom we pay most heed; to kindness, to knowledge, we make promise only; pain we obey.
Between Mass Effect being shit now and Ubisoft’s philosophy of not making good games I don’t find much use for other platforms than Steam and B.net. I don’t have enough time to play more games than what are on those. Most likely I can get it on PS4 if it is really interesting. I find the problem extremely nice to have as far as problems go.
 
KonradLaw

KonradLaw

Member
neurosisxeno said:
Those are usually incredibly light weight applications that include things like patch notes and server status. They are not a legitimate storefront and close right when you actually launch the game. Things like uPlay serve no real function other than to force you to use another unnecessary app that does a shittier job of what Steam already does. It's the same reason people hated stuff like GFWL or whatever Microsoft tried to peddle it as over the years.
Click to expand...

well. to me Steam also doesn't serve any function. It's just annoying obstacle between game and me. All those launchers and clients are like this, but thankfully they're such a small annoyance that they don't impact my enjoyment all that much.
 
B

BrettHeazy

Member
To be honest, as long as you have a shortcut to the games on your desktop you can pretty much ignore launchers after logging in.

Also if you're trying to search for the big files on your drives that are eating away space use WizTree, a speedy disk space analyzer that can scan NTFS hard drives in just seconds.
 
Goalus

Goalus

Member
Kayant said:
"Competition" in the storefront place with pubs isn't about actually competing with Steam or other storefronts. It's about not wanting to give Steam 30% of their revenue.
Click to expand...

And it's great that they are doing this. Why should Valve get free money? I hope that more publishers will abandon Steam in the future.
 
TheRedSnifit

TheRedSnifit

Member
Earthbound64 said:
Some people would apparently rather have less choice and allow companies to become monopolies.

Steam, Netflix, etc.
People apparently want "convenience" over anything else, and want everything on one monopolistic platform, and just assume that prices and such will stay the same.
Click to expand...

What advantage are you getting by buying a game on Origin over Steam? You aren't getting one, because there isn't any. Origin, Battle.net, etc. aren't competing with Steam, they're just adding a layer of inconvenience by removing the choice of buying the game on your preferred platform.

Competition only exists when the same games are sold across all launchers, providing motivation to compete on price and features. Instead we have a bunch of clients that are objectively inferior to Steam and GOG that provide zero benefit to anyone but the corporations that run them.
 
U

UncleSporky

Member
The other day I saw someone play Orion Trail on a stream and it looked really fun to me, and I had to log in and search Humble Bundle, Gog, and Steam to see whether I already had it or not. So that was mildly annoying. (I didn't have it, I bought it on Steam.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PC gaming's many launchers, reviewed for 2024: Steam still puts the rest to shame
Analysis Review
49
2K
Doctor Hades replied
GameStop CEO Says Disc Drives Should Be Required On Game Consoles
Opinion Business 2 3 4 5 6
269
12K
TheBTL replied
If your entire digital library went away, what would you do?
2 3
130
4K
nkarafo replied
Diablo IV PC Game Pass users will need to install Battle.net in order to play; Achievements not supported
2
54
4K
Topher replied
Every FIFA game has been delisted from digital storefronts ahead of EA FC 24 launch
News
33
2K
Silver Wattle replied
Top Bottom