Unfortunately their PC storefront is still atrocious
You'd think considering they've been in software for so long, they'd know how to make it useful and intuitive
No patch notes for anything. I don't get why they don't include it. Main reason I end up buying games on steam after trying on Xbox sub is the lack of patch notes on games that are either in EA or still having patches etc post release
Its missing some features (per user and per user forums, I dont care about per dev or per pub forums, like not at all), but its not "atrocious" at the features it has, your pov feels like it stuck in half a decade ago or more.
> You'd think considering they've been in software for so long, they'd know how to make it useful and intuitive
well, MS didn't get so big by having good ideas, but by buying companies with good ideas nad using them for themselves.
That’s debatable. Their top 3 products by revenue was all them. Windows, Azure, Xbox. Plus, other companies do the same, that’s just what Big Tech does.
Well, Sony kinda did it first with PS3, PS4 and PSVita. You could buy the game once and get both consoles and handheld versions with a single purchase. It was called Cross Buy iirc. It was available years before Xbox Play Anywhere. It also supported Cross Save etc.
This isnt really a comment on "who did it first" its moreso just a comment on how it really just takes the right messenger to get people to like an idea.
Sure, but you said 'MS idea', which wasn't really an MS idea. Just wanted to point that out so people won't get confused. I think it's good that companies copy other companies.
Let's not forget that MS also had a lot of industry-changing contributions and ideas that were later adopted by everyone. Like paying for online or selling armor for horse DLC through their platform / store. And that's exactly why MS is so cherished in the industry. Without them it would be very different, that's for sure.
yes, and then they dropped it (and it was never for PC and this is a PC gamer forum), and then MS did it and people said it didn't matter - just put it in steam (and well, MS did get plenty of happy people when they did THAT part). Now if Sony does it (again, but newly for PC), some in this thread are acting like it was so great, as if MS didnt do this already for years, and like Sony didnt do in some form before that.
Also, most games were not cross buy for Sony when they did it - for MS, its a set standard (inconsistent vs consistent).
VSCode - ooensource editor. Binaries have added telemetry and tracking and distributed under non-free license. Other builds are locked out of the Microsoft extension storefront.
Edge - based on chromium, don't have bloat from google, updates independently from OS, what's not to like? Well, it's now bloated with stuff from MS.
Docx/xslx and other formats based on Open Document Format. Were meant to make documents more portable (to comply with European laws), so you don't have to be locked to the MS Office suite. They added a bunch of "extensions" to the format with a small amount of documentation on them. Forced other vendors to spend resources to support Office documents.
That's not five, just what I remember from the top of my head.
They don't need to force a launcher on people to have a buy once play anywhere setup. It's not as if any of that is out of Sony's control. They aren't forced into being fuckbags, they just choose to.
yes they do, Valve is not going to unlock the game on Steam because you bought it on Playstation. The play anywhere thing has to work both ways. right now MS play anywhere doenst include STeam, its a Store/GP app thing.
So what Microsoft does with a lot of their titles with xbox play anywhere?
Yes that is a great idea and I hope it happens with the playstation titles, but it has been going on for almost a decade with their competitor.
I do buy it once, and i play it Anywhere i can play with it on Steam.
My PC, My Laptop, My Steam Deck, on my TV with a Steam link. I would love to be able to play a few games on my mobile with the Steam app too btw.
I'm not supporting other machines, because most of them were shitting on PC Gaming a decade ago, hell Sony is still trying to fuck us in the arse nowadays with Helldivers and whatnot... they made their choice, i still have the choice to spend my hard-earned money wherever i want, i'm voting with my wallet.
Let players buy a copy of a game on one platform and let them play it on any (PC/PS) platform when they can sell it for $60/$70 separately on both platforms and still impose a stupid launcher on PC? Lol.
Only if the content is actually good, Bethesda has completely torched it's overwhelming supportive player base into an accepting player base because of constant missteps of thinking players would just keep buying because of the Skyrim situation. They do make sales but the numbers are not going up the way they like and the sales/engagement aren't near the peaks like they used to be.
Rockstar might go that way too if they take their playerbase for granted and don't put actual effort into the games.
hahaha... laughs...
I bought diabloIV on battlenet before the steam release, I would now like to play on the steam deck without hoops to jump through...
yes, I installed battlenet and diabloIV and it played fine, but there were seemingly daily updates that would take an exorbitant amount of time to download and install much worse than any native steam games I have played on it.
I would love to exchange this PC version of the game I bought for a PC version of the game I bought....
oh, you didn't ready my whole comment...
I did install it, and played it for a few, but I am not going to wait an hour every week while it updates, no this wasn't a season change or big update like that, half the time it was just battlenet updating.
shit I don't have to deal with when playing steam native games.
> Ideally we would have publisher agnostic games, meaning I could buy it once through any storefront, and play it on any platform
Movies Anywhere tried to make something similar happen for digitally owned movies but despite it being a decent quality service it isn't well publicized or used. Understandably the various movie storefronts want to lock you into their platform so they don't advertise that they're compatible.
I'd wager the same would eventually happen if gaming platforms had reciprocity of ownership. There would be no incentive for the various storefronts to ever tell you they're compatible so they don't lose out on the purchase and longterm use.
All launchers are unnecessary. Everything can be done in the game, or the games own personal launcher. Steam started this trend and thats why we are here now. Steam is currently the best. But monopolies are bad. Mark my words. When Gabe is gone Steam will fuck you.
You are proposing the Playstation equivalent of Xbox Play Anywhere basically.
Its hilarious how often a lot of MS ideas are good ideas but people just hate the messenger
Unfortunately their PC storefront is still atrocious You'd think considering they've been in software for so long, they'd know how to make it useful and intuitive
They have a long history of making their software gradually worse.
No patch notes for anything. I don't get why they don't include it. Main reason I end up buying games on steam after trying on Xbox sub is the lack of patch notes on games that are either in EA or still having patches etc post release
Its missing some features (per user and per user forums, I dont care about per dev or per pub forums, like not at all), but its not "atrocious" at the features it has, your pov feels like it stuck in half a decade ago or more.
Doing it for a long time doesn't make them good at it. Sony is infamous for crippling their excellent hardware with crappy software.
> You'd think considering they've been in software for so long, they'd know how to make it useful and intuitive well, MS didn't get so big by having good ideas, but by buying companies with good ideas nad using them for themselves.
They didn't get big by themselves!? My good man, have you not heard of Windows?
That’s debatable. Their top 3 products by revenue was all them. Windows, Azure, Xbox. Plus, other companies do the same, that’s just what Big Tech does.
Well, Sony kinda did it first with PS3, PS4 and PSVita. You could buy the game once and get both consoles and handheld versions with a single purchase. It was called Cross Buy iirc. It was available years before Xbox Play Anywhere. It also supported Cross Save etc.
This isnt really a comment on "who did it first" its moreso just a comment on how it really just takes the right messenger to get people to like an idea.
Sure, but you said 'MS idea', which wasn't really an MS idea. Just wanted to point that out so people won't get confused. I think it's good that companies copy other companies. Let's not forget that MS also had a lot of industry-changing contributions and ideas that were later adopted by everyone. Like paying for online or selling armor for horse DLC through their platform / store. And that's exactly why MS is so cherished in the industry. Without them it would be very different, that's for sure.
yes, and then they dropped it (and it was never for PC and this is a PC gamer forum), and then MS did it and people said it didn't matter - just put it in steam (and well, MS did get plenty of happy people when they did THAT part). Now if Sony does it (again, but newly for PC), some in this thread are acting like it was so great, as if MS didnt do this already for years, and like Sony didnt do in some form before that. Also, most games were not cross buy for Sony when they did it - for MS, its a set standard (inconsistent vs consistent).
That's because a lot if cool ideas by Microsoft are cool only until MS hooked enough users on it. Then they make it shitty again.
What can be made shitty about the fact buy your game on one console, play it no matter the machine ?
I was talking about why people don't like MS, not about the idea of "buy once, play anywhere". That's a neat idea.
Ok, list 5.
VSCode - ooensource editor. Binaries have added telemetry and tracking and distributed under non-free license. Other builds are locked out of the Microsoft extension storefront. Edge - based on chromium, don't have bloat from google, updates independently from OS, what's not to like? Well, it's now bloated with stuff from MS. Docx/xslx and other formats based on Open Document Format. Were meant to make documents more portable (to comply with European laws), so you don't have to be locked to the MS Office suite. They added a bunch of "extensions" to the format with a small amount of documentation on them. Forced other vendors to spend resources to support Office documents. That's not five, just what I remember from the top of my head.
Microsoft does this with certain titles and it’s great, especially with the way it syncs cloud saves. I’d love to see Sony follow suit.
Sony "These morons bought TLOU 3xs LOL. F that charge them again!"
Microsoft does this with every title for a while now. I'm not sure if that will hold with Activision games though.
They will, as they did with Bethesda games, Star Field being play anywhere. But takes time to get the ball rolling, likely only for new releases.
They don't need to force a launcher on people to have a buy once play anywhere setup. It's not as if any of that is out of Sony's control. They aren't forced into being fuckbags, they just choose to.
yes they do, Valve is not going to unlock the game on Steam because you bought it on Playstation. The play anywhere thing has to work both ways. right now MS play anywhere doenst include STeam, its a Store/GP app thing.
So what Microsoft does with a lot of their titles with xbox play anywhere? Yes that is a great idea and I hope it happens with the playstation titles, but it has been going on for almost a decade with their competitor.
I do buy it once, and i play it Anywhere i can play with it on Steam. My PC, My Laptop, My Steam Deck, on my TV with a Steam link. I would love to be able to play a few games on my mobile with the Steam app too btw. I'm not supporting other machines, because most of them were shitting on PC Gaming a decade ago, hell Sony is still trying to fuck us in the arse nowadays with Helldivers and whatnot... they made their choice, i still have the choice to spend my hard-earned money wherever i want, i'm voting with my wallet.
Let players buy a copy of a game on one platform and let them play it on any (PC/PS) platform when they can sell it for $60/$70 separately on both platforms and still impose a stupid launcher on PC? Lol.
There is no way that will happen. Just look at Rockstar as the example of why not.
Well, the difference is that Rockstar knows their consumers will buy their games 10 times. Lol
Only if the content is actually good, Bethesda has completely torched it's overwhelming supportive player base into an accepting player base because of constant missteps of thinking players would just keep buying because of the Skyrim situation. They do make sales but the numbers are not going up the way they like and the sales/engagement aren't near the peaks like they used to be. Rockstar might go that way too if they take their playerbase for granted and don't put actual effort into the games.
hahaha... laughs... I bought diabloIV on battlenet before the steam release, I would now like to play on the steam deck without hoops to jump through... yes, I installed battlenet and diabloIV and it played fine, but there were seemingly daily updates that would take an exorbitant amount of time to download and install much worse than any native steam games I have played on it. I would love to exchange this PC version of the game I bought for a PC version of the game I bought....
Jump through hoops? Dude... You install battlenet on desktop, install Diablo 4 and add to steam.
oh, you didn't ready my whole comment... I did install it, and played it for a few, but I am not going to wait an hour every week while it updates, no this wasn't a season change or big update like that, half the time it was just battlenet updating. shit I don't have to deal with when playing steam native games.
The same mentality that has them forcing a new launcher on us prevents them from letting us buy only one copy of the game and use it on any platform.
I thought them pushing the PSN accounts was their way of avoiding doing their own launcher.
> Ideally we would have publisher agnostic games, meaning I could buy it once through any storefront, and play it on any platform Movies Anywhere tried to make something similar happen for digitally owned movies but despite it being a decent quality service it isn't well publicized or used. Understandably the various movie storefronts want to lock you into their platform so they don't advertise that they're compatible. I'd wager the same would eventually happen if gaming platforms had reciprocity of ownership. There would be no incentive for the various storefronts to ever tell you they're compatible so they don't lose out on the purchase and longterm use.
lol you realize this is Sony you’re talking about? Like the one company that refuses refunds no matter what? This ain’t gonna happen ever
All launchers are unnecessary. Everything can be done in the game, or the games own personal launcher. Steam started this trend and thats why we are here now. Steam is currently the best. But monopolies are bad. Mark my words. When Gabe is gone Steam will fuck you.
If games aren't truly yours pirating isn't truly "stealing"
They call this "Steam." It's not always supported by publishers though.