Why is COD MW 2019 not on steam?

[🔥Astral Rage🔥]

I mean just why , it's a great game well optimised looks fun . By all rights it should be on steam

[Windsmoker]

Escrito originalmente por Harry Gumdropzap:

Escrito originalmente por JG | Luxe:

I still don't see the point in that, When they could put it in all the launchers and make more money.

People who don't care could buy it from Battle.net and they get 100% profit, we can buy it on Steam and they get 70% profit as opposed to 0% profit.

from a business standpoint that isnt how it works
if a popular game is only available on one launcher, a lot of people will flock to said launcher
so if said game was available on all platforms, i would assume steam would get the most sales
vs if people are willing to switch launchers they would be getting a hell of a lot more profit

as for all the people who wont buy because no steam? the loss of profit on that is most likely compensated by the 30% extra profit they are making and then some

as those games age only then it would probably release to other launchers to maximize publicity and profits, in other words milk it, at least thats my idea

This seems the most legit comment (best answer to the question).

[nomorevideos]

Escrito originalmente por Harry Gumdropzap:

Escrito originalmente por JG | Luxe:

I still don't see the point in that, When they could put it in all the launchers and make more money.

People who don't care could buy it from Battle.net and they get 100% profit, we can buy it on Steam and they get 70% profit as opposed to 0% profit.

from a business standpoint that isnt how it works
if a popular game is only available on one launcher, a lot of people will flock to said launcher
so if said game was available on all platforms, i would assume steam would get the most sales
vs if people are willing to switch launchers they would be getting a hell of a lot more profit

as for all the people who wont buy because no steam? the loss of profit on that is most likely compensated by the 30% extra profit they are making and then some

as those games age only then it would probably release to other launchers to maximize publicity and profits, in other words milk it, at least thats my idea

The logical fallacy is that CoD isn't a popular game, on PC.
Not only is bnet a bad launcher with horrible features you can't turn off, it is also a way more niche launcher whose main userbase isn't really into "competitive" FPS games.
CoD was never big on PC (feel free to check Steam charts) and bnet only made it worse for the series.
CoD is doing well on consoles and PC is lucky it has basic crossplay now. PC BO4 is dead, while on console it is still thriving. Reason being no crossplay.

Steam could be a lot better in terms of features and stability (dumbass weekly maintenance), but it still beats every other launcher out there for having the largest userbase and best experience.

[Rivery Jerald]

Escrito originalmente por secuda:

Why make 30% less when you can make 100% profit? They are big enough to have their own store in combination with Blizzard.

they can still have it on steam and their launcher. 30% is the industry standard btw, everyone uses that

[Vault Hunter 101]

Escrito originalmente por Rivery Jerald:

Escrito originalmente por secuda:

Why make 30% less when you can make 100% profit? They are big enough to have their own store in combination with Blizzard.

they can still have it on steam and their launcher. 30% is the industry standard btw, everyone uses that

When you buy on Blizzard, they get 100% of the money
When you buy on Steam they get 70% of the money


now you see why they don't want to sell on Steam?

[Darugdawg]

Escrito originalmente por JG | Luxe:

Escrito originalmente por Arkham:

Because Modern Warfare is published by Activision, which is a part of the bigger Activision/Blizzard company. So to save money, they just put it out on the Blizzard launcher (Battle .net) instead of having to pay Steam to sell it here and they keep a part of the profits.

I still don't see the point in that, When they could put it in all the launchers and make more money.

People who don't care could buy it from Battle.net and they get 100% profit, we can buy it on Steam and they get 70% profit as opposed to 0% profit.

Man to be honest its like dota2 or fortnite. Warzone is just like any other flag bearer. Same thing with playstation and xbox games

[Vault Hunter 101]

Escrito originalmente por UnityAngel:

because blizzard exist

Escrito originalmente por Vault Hunter 101:

When you buy on Blizzard, they get 100% of the money
When you buy on Steam they get 70% of the money


now you see why they don't want to sell on Steam?

but why they dont sell on steam too ? so they get 100% money on battle net and 70% on steam

Because they prefer 100% of the money than 70%

[TheBoss]

Escrito originalmente por BluntlyHonest:

then you would have steam fanboys who cannot grasp steam is "just another launcher" saying stuff like "LOLZ daed gamz only 60 online on steamdb" forgetting that millions play via battle.net and consoles.

and a rule of thumb, if someone is so in love with steam they will use no other launcher.. they are the type of gamer that every community is better off without.

Old thread but whatever. Here goes.

A launcher is no longer "just another launcher" when the game selection becomes proprietary. You're now talking about a platform. There is no longer anything unique about the original Nintendo Entertainment System. My calculator can run Super Mario Bros. However, only Nintendo hardware is legally allowed to run the game. My calculator is therefore "just another launcher." An NES is something different. That's why NES Classic is currently selling for around $200 on Amazon.

Activision is attempting the same approach with launchers as every major company attempted with consoles at one time or another. Get the user on your platform with one or two major games. Now that same user is brand locked to the rest of your lineup. Switching launchers is easier than switching consoles. However, most users don't want a bifuricated online game collection. They don't care which launcher but they don't want more than one launcher. That's exactly why people keep asking "Why not on Steam?" all the time. It's not about community; it's about convenience.

For my part, I opine platform specific gaming niched within the PC realm violates the entire principle of PC gaming. PC gaming is by definition cross-platform because no two PCs are ever exactly alike. Launchers are emulating a console on your unique PC thus virtualizing away your system's uniqueness. They can develop specifically to their environment and, by the way, prevent you from running other games in that environment. Doesn't that sound like a console to you? The implications aren't great for future gaming.