I don't understand why this such a common argument. Nobody wants steam to have a monopoly without competition and hard drive space isn't hard to come by. So why is having separate launchers a big...
I don't understand why this such a common argument. Nobody wants steam to have a monopoly without competition and hard drive space isn't hard to come by. So why is having separate launchers a big deal?
Having to manage a bunch of different logins and programs for different platforms is obnoxious, it's just software bloat. I don't get why everyone has to have a launcher and an ecosystem, PCs are...
Having to manage a bunch of different logins and programs for different platforms is obnoxious, it's just software bloat. I don't get why everyone has to have a launcher and an ecosystem, PCs are quite capable of executing programs on their own, and nobody wants another communications platform that does the same or less than all the others.
That hasn't been my experience, I have about 3-4 launchers downloaded and I don't have to do much of anything after I sign in the first time. I also just launch games from search or a shortcut...
That hasn't been my experience, I have about 3-4 launchers downloaded and I don't have to do much of anything after I sign in the first time. I also just launch games from search or a shortcut without issue. The reason companies have their own launchers is because they're competing with Steam and want to offer similar services like cloud-saves and the ability to easily update games. It seems pretty straight forward to me.
My biggest issue is the amount of management I have to do to play one game. If the majority of my games are on one platform and I only play one game on another launcher, I have to load up a...
My biggest issue is the amount of management I have to do to play one game. If the majority of my games are on one platform and I only play one game on another launcher, I have to load up a completely different launcher for one game. It might have to update, and it might have 2FA that I have to fiddle with everytime. On top of that, every website/launcher has different rules for its passwords. Steam has, on several occasions, logged me out and forced me to relog. Or sometimes, I'll log in on another computer and have to do everything again. Most times, there's usually only one game on any given launcher I play. I only have Origin because of the Mass Effect series, and Uplay because of R6S. So not only do I have to wait for these clients to load up, update, and apply updates to games, they're also taking up space in different directories that aren't always stored near my other client's directories. If they're going to compete with steam, they're going to need a lot more games on their client than just the games they publish or develop in house. Origin and Uplay were mistakes because they're essentially publisher loyalty apps. Steam is a marketplace, and unless Epic can guarantee the same amount of trust and ease of putting games on their launcher, as well as sheer volume and quality, they just won't be able to compete and they'll be another hassle that I'll have to load a separate process for.
This may or may not be helpful to you, but I've found it's good to centralize all your games, regardless of DRM into a single launcher program and I use Playnite. Doesn't solve the ever-increasing...
This may or may not be helpful to you, but I've found it's good to centralize all your games, regardless of DRM into a single launcher program and I use Playnite. Doesn't solve the ever-increasing bloat, but it does make it a little more navigable.
Personally I just set up a batch script that opens up all launchers at once when I start gaming. It takes 30sec for everything to finish loading so I usually just grab a drink in the downtime....
Personally I just set up a batch script that opens up all launchers at once when I start gaming. It takes 30sec for everything to finish loading so I usually just grab a drink in the downtime. Personally I rather take this burden over the monopoly of a single platform.
Well ya see, I'm on the cusp of technological expertise but the only thing I'm clueless about is code/script/what have you. It'd be easy for you, yeah, but not for me or the more average Joe
Well ya see, I'm on the cusp of technological expertise but the only thing I'm clueless about is code/script/what have you. It'd be easy for you, yeah, but not for me or the more average Joe
[I'm going to assume you are using some version of Windows.] To get all programs to open at once you'll have to create a batch file that looks something like this: start "" "C:\Program Files...
[I'm going to assume you are using some version of Windows.]
To get all programs to open at once you'll have to create a batch file that looks something like this:
Basically you add a line for each application with
start "" "<path to the .exe>"
Note that Discord is a bit of an exemption here as is it normally launches over the updater with an additional command line argument, so it looks like this:
where <user> is your Windows username. If you want to know how an application is started you can right click its shortcut and go to Properties and under directory (or something like that) it should show you the .exe's directory + argument used to call it (if there is any)
To create the Batch file you just open Notepad, add the line for your applications as described above and then select Save as and change Save as txt to all filetypes and name the file something.bat. Double clicking it should now open all the applications you added. If you want to edit it again, right click the .bat file and then select Edit.
Steam, U-Play, Epic Games Launcher, EA Origin, it IS getting a bit out of hand. I understand the aversion to monopoly, but I also have an aversion to redundancy and invasions of my privacy. The...
Steam, U-Play, Epic Games Launcher, EA Origin, it IS getting a bit out of hand. I understand the aversion to monopoly, but I also have an aversion to redundancy and invasions of my privacy.
The free software community has worked this problem out over a decade ago with repositories. You can have one package manager, and add repositories from whichever vendor you like. I wish commercial software developers would hop on board.
List of launchers I have currently installed: Steam GOG Galaxy Uplay Origin Itch.io Epic Games Battle.net I don't care at all. Too many passwords to manage? You should already be using a password...
List of launchers I have currently installed:
Steam
GOG Galaxy
Uplay
Origin
Itch.io
Epic Games
Battle.net
I don't care at all.
Too many passwords to manage? You should already be using a password manager. Too many programs? Not like I'm paying money to run them. Is it inconvenient? Sure, but I'm not going to act like an inconvenience is an affront to my being.
GOG Galaxy is probably the most recent and naked in terms of benefits to a launcher over maintaining a program directly. The game library management and updates are so much better and easier through a launcher than going through GOG's sites for files, as easy as that was. It's exactly like the turkey vs. beef burger content from Parks & Rec—the launcher experience is just better overall. Some of the games in GOG's library are not easy to manage with just the base files.
Most importantly, these launchers don't overlap or interrupt each other. You don't have to run them all at once. Your library is spread across them, you only need to be running the one with that game. Compare this to having a spread of communications platforms to talk to all your contacts. Having multiple different communication programs is a far worse experience since you can end up using multiple ones for different people, at the same time.
It's not entering different passwords. It's that they all have their own quirks and annoyances. Imagine if everyone had known how profitable the web would be. Every website would be like a...
It's not entering different passwords. It's that they all have their own quirks and annoyances. Imagine if everyone had known how profitable the web would be. Every website would be like a separate launcher. Instead what happened is a bunch of people rallied round a standard because it was useful. I know it's an absolute pipe dream, but really what I wish is that these people would do is create a unified api such that I could have a single launcher with multiple profiles. Bu they won't. In fact it's in their best interest if they think they can get a foothold to maximize incompatibility and annoyance such that people seek to minimize the number of walled gardens they visit. I am so tired of the way the online experience has degraded to a poor facsimile of what's available in the meat space.
Indeed, but it all amounts to a simple inconvenience right now. When the biggest issue I face with all these launchers is remembering which game is on which platform, I'd say this definitely falls...
Indeed, but it all amounts to a simple inconvenience right now. When the biggest issue I face with all these launchers is remembering which game is on which platform, I'd say this definitely falls squarely into the realm of "first world problem". I'm certainly not going to avoid a game because it's on Origin instead of Steam.
Ideally, a single unified experience that can hook into other launchers would be the best solution. Steam may always be the main launcher because it's one of the few that allows other programs to be added to its launcher. This was a smart move by Valve because it means that Steam can always be set up as the parent in any relationship between launchers. Uplay is the only one that has accepted this and works on top of Steam when running its own games. If they insist on having their own launcher, I feel like this is a good way to go about it.
Really, the launcher out there that I have the biggest consternation with is Bethesda. I cannot figure out why they thought they needed their own launcher except to mandate paid mods. Every single one of these other launchers offers something that can't be found in other launchers, things that I feel are beneficial as a consumer, no matter how small. Bethesda's feels like it's purely for profit.
For comparison, the only other one I have some issue with is the Windows Store, because that is simply not good enough to be a game launcher. It handles files extremely poorly, and when it glitches up, there's no easy way to fix it.
I started using a unified launcher called Playnite on my Windows box, and it's fantastic. I actually have all of the launchers you listed plus one (ManiaPlanet, for TrackMania), and while Playnite...
I started using a unified launcher called Playnite on my Windows box, and it's fantastic. I actually have all of the launchers you listed plus one (ManiaPlanet, for TrackMania), and while Playnite doesn't yet support all of them (most notably itch.io), he's working on it.
Not having to worry about which game is where is a great convenience, but, honestly, the best part is simply the psychological benefit of feeling like my games are all under one roof.
This is definitely a first world problem. Don't even get me started on how much I hate booting into windows to play games (although it seems like that might actually be changing).
This is definitely a first world problem. Don't even get me started on how much I hate booting into windows to play games (although it seems like that might actually be changing).
I have Steam and GoG's launchers, because they each offer an interesting selection of games beyond that of a single studio. I have the Twitch launcher and the Nexus launcher because they provide...
I have Steam and GoG's launchers, because they each offer an interesting selection of games beyond that of a single studio.
I have the Twitch launcher and the Nexus launcher because they provide easy modding.
The last time I opened Steam was some months ago, I was sick of having to open shitload of crap just to play a game, now I play mostly GOG games. And FYI, for the people playing Blizzard games,...
The last time I opened Steam was some months ago, I was sick of having to open shitload of crap just to play a game, now I play mostly GOG games.
And FYI, for the people playing Blizzard games, you can start their games by starting the "Switcher" executable that exists in the Support64 folder without having to start their shitty launcher (which is still mandatory for updates).
No support on Linux announced. This means Tim Sweeney will still cry at Microsoft's practices while doing nothing to get out of the situation that enables Microsoft to impose them. Meh (I don't...
No support on Linux announced.
This means Tim Sweeney will still cry at Microsoft's practices while doing nothing to get out of the situation that enables Microsoft to impose them.
Meh
(I don't really consider MacOs a valid escape route seeing that it will soon exclusively support Apple's exclusive and endemic Graphics API: Metal)
I mean, not to mention the whole, locked into a hardware ecosystem at triple or quadruple the price thing. But yeah, ultimately, even if it never becomes a popular choice, Linux support needs to...
I mean, not to mention the whole, locked into a hardware ecosystem at triple or quadruple the price thing.
But yeah, ultimately, even if it never becomes a popular choice, Linux support needs to be something every games platform dangles over Microsoft's head like the sword of Damocles, ready to drop if they ever do anything stupid.
Personally I like it. Valve has really been coasting for a long time and hopefully this helps them perk up a bit and get back some of the magic that made them great so long ago.
Personally I like it. Valve has really been coasting for a long time and hopefully this helps them perk up a bit and get back some of the magic that made them great so long ago.
No definitely not implying that they haven't been doing anything, just saying they haven't been their former selves for a really long time. As much as I think valve is an amazing gift to the...
No definitely not implying that they haven't been doing anything, just saying they haven't been their former selves for a really long time. As much as I think valve is an amazing gift to the gaming community, the half-life 3 memes and the general dissatisfaction people have with the company ever-increasingly focusing on the Steam marketplace speak to at least some difference in focus than what they had at the beginning.
All the things their doing are great but it feels like with the market dominance and pervasiveness in the community they would be innovating more than they're currently doing.
This coupled with the 12% revenue cut will entice many indie developers. However I don't think it will convince any major gaming companies, and those are the ones that make Valve so popular. If...
A big sell for developers using Epic’s game engine is that the company says it will forego that Unreal revenue cut for any sales of the titles in the Epic Games Store. Depending on the early success of the game store, this could be a big threat to other game engines like Unity.
This coupled with the 12% revenue cut will entice many indie developers.
However I don't think it will convince any major gaming companies, and those are the ones that make Valve so popular.
If they could survive for more than a few years then I can see them competing with Valve or atleast forcing Valve to make changes for the better of developers.
Here's the only question that matters: will I be able to have two different games running on two different computers on the one account? Because if not, it's got the same deal-breaker that Steam...
Here's the only question that matters: will I be able to have two different games running on two different computers on the one account? Because if not, it's got the same deal-breaker that Steam does, only I don't already have years of products purchased before discovering it.
That would enable multiple people sharing the same account instead of making their own. I understand the frustration but no company would allow that feature in their launcher.
That would enable multiple people sharing the same account instead of making their own.
I understand the frustration but no company would allow that feature in their launcher.
Which is why Steam and the like are a bad idea. If I own two games without Steam, I can play one on one computer (say, leaving a character in an MMO as a sales bot) while playing another game on...
Which is why Steam and the like are a bad idea. If I own two games without Steam, I can play one on one computer (say, leaving a character in an MMO as a sales bot) while playing another game on my main computer. Any retailer system that denies me doing that partially strips away ownership rights. It's the main reason I curtailed my use of Steam (the only time I buy a game on Steam now is if there's literally no other way to get it.)
The irony behind all if this is Tim Sweeny and his utter hypocrisy against msft and their closed platform when he himself is running a company with a closed platform and paying for exclusivity....
The irony behind all if this is Tim Sweeny and his utter hypocrisy against msft and their closed platform when he himself is running a company with a closed platform and paying for exclusivity. It's incredibly hilarious how he is such a worthless pile of garbage. Was this really worth deliberately killing unreal tournament?
Oh good, one more proprietary game launcher clogging up my hard drive....
I don't understand why this such a common argument. Nobody wants steam to have a monopoly without competition and hard drive space isn't hard to come by. So why is having separate launchers a big deal?
Having to manage a bunch of different logins and programs for different platforms is obnoxious, it's just software bloat. I don't get why everyone has to have a launcher and an ecosystem, PCs are quite capable of executing programs on their own, and nobody wants another communications platform that does the same or less than all the others.
That hasn't been my experience, I have about 3-4 launchers downloaded and I don't have to do much of anything after I sign in the first time. I also just launch games from search or a shortcut without issue. The reason companies have their own launchers is because they're competing with Steam and want to offer similar services like cloud-saves and the ability to easily update games. It seems pretty straight forward to me.
My biggest issue is the amount of management I have to do to play one game. If the majority of my games are on one platform and I only play one game on another launcher, I have to load up a completely different launcher for one game. It might have to update, and it might have 2FA that I have to fiddle with everytime. On top of that, every website/launcher has different rules for its passwords. Steam has, on several occasions, logged me out and forced me to relog. Or sometimes, I'll log in on another computer and have to do everything again. Most times, there's usually only one game on any given launcher I play. I only have Origin because of the Mass Effect series, and Uplay because of R6S. So not only do I have to wait for these clients to load up, update, and apply updates to games, they're also taking up space in different directories that aren't always stored near my other client's directories. If they're going to compete with steam, they're going to need a lot more games on their client than just the games they publish or develop in house. Origin and Uplay were mistakes because they're essentially publisher loyalty apps. Steam is a marketplace, and unless Epic can guarantee the same amount of trust and ease of putting games on their launcher, as well as sheer volume and quality, they just won't be able to compete and they'll be another hassle that I'll have to load a separate process for.
This may or may not be helpful to you, but I've found it's good to centralize all your games, regardless of DRM into a single launcher program and I use Playnite. Doesn't solve the ever-increasing bloat, but it does make it a little more navigable.
Personally I just set up a batch script that opens up all launchers at once when I start gaming. It takes 30sec for everything to finish loading so I usually just grab a drink in the downtime. Personally I rather take this burden over the monopoly of a single platform.
Well ya see, I'm on the cusp of technological expertise but the only thing I'm clueless about is code/script/what have you. It'd be easy for you, yeah, but not for me or the more average Joe
[I'm going to assume you are using some version of Windows.]
To get all programs to open at once you'll have to create a batch file that looks something like this:
Basically you add a line for each application with
Note that Discord is a bit of an exemption here as is it normally launches over the updater with an additional command line argument, so it looks like this:
where
<user>is your Windows username. If you want to know how an application is started you can right click its shortcut and go to Properties and under directory (or something like that) it should show you the.exe's directory + argument used to call it (if there is any)To create the Batch file you just open Notepad, add the line for your applications as described above and then select Save as and change Save as txt to all filetypes and name the file
something.bat. Double clicking it should now open all the applications you added. If you want to edit it again, right click the.batfile and then select Edit.Hope that helped.
Steam, U-Play, Epic Games Launcher, EA Origin, it IS getting a bit out of hand. I understand the aversion to monopoly, but I also have an aversion to redundancy and invasions of my privacy.
The free software community has worked this problem out over a decade ago with repositories. You can have one package manager, and add repositories from whichever vendor you like. I wish commercial software developers would hop on board.
List of launchers I have currently installed:
I don't care at all.
Too many passwords to manage? You should already be using a password manager. Too many programs? Not like I'm paying money to run them. Is it inconvenient? Sure, but I'm not going to act like an inconvenience is an affront to my being.
GOG Galaxy is probably the most recent and naked in terms of benefits to a launcher over maintaining a program directly. The game library management and updates are so much better and easier through a launcher than going through GOG's sites for files, as easy as that was. It's exactly like the turkey vs. beef burger content from Parks & Rec—the launcher experience is just better overall. Some of the games in GOG's library are not easy to manage with just the base files.
Most importantly, these launchers don't overlap or interrupt each other. You don't have to run them all at once. Your library is spread across them, you only need to be running the one with that game. Compare this to having a spread of communications platforms to talk to all your contacts. Having multiple different communication programs is a far worse experience since you can end up using multiple ones for different people, at the same time.
It's not entering different passwords. It's that they all have their own quirks and annoyances. Imagine if everyone had known how profitable the web would be. Every website would be like a separate launcher. Instead what happened is a bunch of people rallied round a standard because it was useful. I know it's an absolute pipe dream, but really what I wish is that these people would do is create a unified api such that I could have a single launcher with multiple profiles. Bu they won't. In fact it's in their best interest if they think they can get a foothold to maximize incompatibility and annoyance such that people seek to minimize the number of walled gardens they visit. I am so tired of the way the online experience has degraded to a poor facsimile of what's available in the meat space.
Indeed, but it all amounts to a simple inconvenience right now. When the biggest issue I face with all these launchers is remembering which game is on which platform, I'd say this definitely falls squarely into the realm of "first world problem". I'm certainly not going to avoid a game because it's on Origin instead of Steam.
Ideally, a single unified experience that can hook into other launchers would be the best solution. Steam may always be the main launcher because it's one of the few that allows other programs to be added to its launcher. This was a smart move by Valve because it means that Steam can always be set up as the parent in any relationship between launchers. Uplay is the only one that has accepted this and works on top of Steam when running its own games. If they insist on having their own launcher, I feel like this is a good way to go about it.
Really, the launcher out there that I have the biggest consternation with is Bethesda. I cannot figure out why they thought they needed their own launcher except to mandate paid mods. Every single one of these other launchers offers something that can't be found in other launchers, things that I feel are beneficial as a consumer, no matter how small. Bethesda's feels like it's purely for profit.
For comparison, the only other one I have some issue with is the Windows Store, because that is simply not good enough to be a game launcher. It handles files extremely poorly, and when it glitches up, there's no easy way to fix it.
I started using a unified launcher called Playnite on my Windows box, and it's fantastic. I actually have all of the launchers you listed plus one (ManiaPlanet, for TrackMania), and while Playnite doesn't yet support all of them (most notably itch.io), he's working on it.
Not having to worry about which game is where is a great convenience, but, honestly, the best part is simply the psychological benefit of feeling like my games are all under one roof.
This is definitely a first world problem. Don't even get me started on how much I hate booting into windows to play games (although it seems like that might actually be changing).
I have Steam and GoG's launchers, because they each offer an interesting selection of games beyond that of a single studio.
I have the Twitch launcher and the Nexus launcher because they provide easy modding.
What does the Epic Game store offer me?
The last time I opened Steam was some months ago, I was sick of having to open shitload of crap just to play a game, now I play mostly GOG games.
And FYI, for the people playing Blizzard games, you can start their games by starting the "Switcher" executable that exists in the Support64 folder without having to start their shitty launcher (which is still mandatory for updates).
No support on Linux announced.
This means Tim Sweeney will still cry at Microsoft's practices while doing nothing to get out of the situation that enables Microsoft to impose them.
Meh
(I don't really consider MacOs a valid escape route seeing that it will soon exclusively support Apple's exclusive and endemic Graphics API: Metal)
I mean, not to mention the whole, locked into a hardware ecosystem at triple or quadruple the price thing.
But yeah, ultimately, even if it never becomes a popular choice, Linux support needs to be something every games platform dangles over Microsoft's head like the sword of Damocles, ready to drop if they ever do anything stupid.
Personally I like it. Valve has really been coasting for a long time and hopefully this helps them perk up a bit and get back some of the magic that made them great so long ago.
They recently dropped Proton on the world, how is that stagnating?
No definitely not implying that they haven't been doing anything, just saying they haven't been their former selves for a really long time. As much as I think valve is an amazing gift to the gaming community, the half-life 3 memes and the general dissatisfaction people have with the company ever-increasingly focusing on the Steam marketplace speak to at least some difference in focus than what they had at the beginning.
All the things their doing are great but it feels like with the market dominance and pervasiveness in the community they would be innovating more than they're currently doing.
Here's their blog post: https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/blog/announcing-the-epic-games-store
This coupled with the 12% revenue cut will entice many indie developers.
However I don't think it will convince any major gaming companies, and those are the ones that make Valve so popular.
If they could survive for more than a few years then I can see them competing with Valve or atleast forcing Valve to make changes for the better of developers.
Here's the only question that matters: will I be able to have two different games running on two different computers on the one account? Because if not, it's got the same deal-breaker that Steam does, only I don't already have years of products purchased before discovering it.
That would enable multiple people sharing the same account instead of making their own.
I understand the frustration but no company would allow that feature in their launcher.
Which is why Steam and the like are a bad idea. If I own two games without Steam, I can play one on one computer (say, leaving a character in an MMO as a sales bot) while playing another game on my main computer. Any retailer system that denies me doing that partially strips away ownership rights. It's the main reason I curtailed my use of Steam (the only time I buy a game on Steam now is if there's literally no other way to get it.)
The irony behind all if this is Tim Sweeny and his utter hypocrisy against msft and their closed platform when he himself is running a company with a closed platform and paying for exclusivity. It's incredibly hilarious how he is such a worthless pile of garbage. Was this really worth deliberately killing unreal tournament?
Yeah, Nah. It's not likely.