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.
I don’t hate the idea of exclusive games because they kind of bring more competitions. But I also couldn’t give too much fucks because Ubisoft games suck anyway.
This is my take as well. The last Ubisoft game I enjoyed was Black Flag. It’s a shame because in the early 2000s they were great, but now they’re just churning out yearly sequels to turn Assassin’s Creed and Far Cry into Call of Duty.
I haven’t bought a Ubisoft game since Farcry 3 when a friend invited me to join an online game (which is something I very rarely had the opportunity to do) but the game wouldn’t let me play because I didn’t have that subcription thing they had. I tried using the free signup code that came with the game, but my brother already used it. So yeah, I have a personal grudge against that shitty company.
Also, I hate what they did to the Rainbow Six franchise. The original games (by Red Storm, I think?) are what those games should’ve been.
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.
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
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
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.
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
Built to showcase their specific VR hardware. That they built after getting burned from multiple VR companies who abused Valves good will of providing access to their patent protected VR tech for free, to help accelerate the VR industry.
I heard from a “friend” that it runs very well on a Switch emulator on a Steam Deck. Some pre-rendered cutscenes are janky. It has a pretty cool system where you can take a screenshot that will pin to the map to indicate places you need to find back to once you unlock a new ability, and sometimes those don’t render right either. But otherwise, gameplay is flawless. Or so I’ve heard.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
“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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
'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.
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.
Had this epiphany with the new Ass Creed. It launched on steam, but after buying it still has a second front end Ubisoft launcher. Thats just straught up lying to me about what im purchasing. I dont want Ubi Spyware. Period.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Rules
1. Submissions have to be related to games
Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.
This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.
2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.
We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.
3. No excessive self-promotion
Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.
This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.
4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you’re submitting before posting to see if it’s already been posted.
We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.
5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW
Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.
No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.
6. No linking to piracy
Don’t share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.
We don’t want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.
Most games appear on STEAM as well, some time (like 1 year) later. And they appear in much better shape with all patching and all.
I don’t hate the idea of exclusive games because they kind of bring more competitions. But I also couldn’t give too much fucks because Ubisoft games suck anyway.
deleted by creator
This is my take as well. The last Ubisoft game I enjoyed was Black Flag. It’s a shame because in the early 2000s they were great, but now they’re just churning out yearly sequels to turn Assassin’s Creed and Far Cry into Call of Duty.
I haven’t bought a Ubisoft game since Farcry 3 when a friend invited me to join an online game (which is something I very rarely had the opportunity to do) but the game wouldn’t let me play because I didn’t have that subcription thing they had. I tried using the free signup code that came with the game, but my brother already used it. So yeah, I have a personal grudge against that shitty company.
Also, I hate what they did to the Rainbow Six franchise. The original games (by Red Storm, I think?) are what those games should’ve been.
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.
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
I would agree with you, but Steam is also anti consumer garbage.
DRM is never good for the end user.
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
deleted by creator
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.
Who downvoted this?
Ubisoft
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
— A man that put his VR game exclusively on his own digital distribution platform.
You are fully justified to put your own developed stuff where youwant to.
On this one point I side with Ubisoft.
Yeah, this particular argument goes back around to validating Ubisoft
The problem isn’t that Ubisoft is using their own launcher, it’s that their launcher blows ass
On their own game engine.
Built to showcase their specific VR hardware. That they built after getting burned from multiple VR companies who abused Valves good will of providing access to their patent protected VR tech for free, to help accelerate the VR industry.
…a platform that works much better than the others… and a game that has been made with more love than anything in the past half a decade
Maybe it runs on a switch emulator. 😏
I heard from a “friend” that it runs very well on a Switch emulator on a Steam Deck. Some pre-rendered cutscenes are janky. It has a pretty cool system where you can take a screenshot that will pin to the map to indicate places you need to find back to once you unlock a new ability, and sometimes those don’t render right either. But otherwise, gameplay is flawless. Or so I’ve heard.
I’ve heard this as well I’ve heard it works well on the steam deck too
Hope so.
I reckon some sort of physically active girl already has it but packaged and released with a switch emulator so you can just go play it.
Is this a troll post? Who cares in which store it’s available, just get a physical copy.
Steam shills are really mind boggling.
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.
It’s just another software it’s not like you have to buy separate hardware for it.
Most PC games nowadays do not have physical releases.
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.
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.
« 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.
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.
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.
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.
For me, I prefer Steam because of Steam Link, which allows me to play Steam games remotely on my phone.
“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!
deleted by creator
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.
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.
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.
I usually have problem with controller settings when playing external games via Steam Link.
Because ”vote with your wallets”.
Why support a dodgy business over one of the best for consumers?
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.
Steam doesn’t pay or force developers to be exclusive. And it offers benefits and features Ubisoft launcher doesn’t.
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.
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.
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:
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.
Yeah, because Game Pass isn’t looking to take on Steam. Game pass is a subscription service.
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.
People have and still do complain when games aren’t on GoG. Not as much anymore but it happened.
OK, we’re done. You don’t understand or acknowledge financial coercion so this is going nowhere. Byyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyye.
'tis a shame you couldn’t say what words I’d put in your mouth.
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.
Apart from having the most market share, that you yourself already admitted.
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?
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.
It’s so unbelievably pointless! 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:
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.
Ubisoft makes games for 13 year old mountain dew addicts
Drink verification can to continue
Was the same with every platform. Enshittification does not care about you
What video game worth playing isn’t on a proprietary platform?
I’ve been playing Starsector lately, that’s been pretty fun. Native Linux version too. No launcher required
Software Inc has drm free options
Had this epiphany with the new Ass Creed. It launched on steam, but after buying it still has a second front end Ubisoft launcher. Thats just straught up lying to me about what im purchasing. I dont want Ubi Spyware. Period.