安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語（日文）
한국어（韓文）
ไทย（泰文）
Български（保加利亞文）
Čeština（捷克文）
Dansk（丹麥文）
Deutsch（德文）
English（英文）
Español - España（西班牙文 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希臘文）
Français（法文）
Italiano（義大利文）
Bahasa Indonesia（印尼語）
Magyar（匈牙利文）
Nederlands（荷蘭文）
Norsk（挪威文）
Polski（波蘭文）
Português（葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙）
Português - Brasil（葡萄牙文 - 巴西）
Română（羅馬尼亞文）
Русский（俄文）
Suomi（芬蘭文）
Svenska（瑞典文）
Türkçe（土耳其文）
tiếng Việt（越南文）
Українська（烏克蘭文）
回報翻譯問題
討論區規矩與守則
檢舉此篇文章
It depends on your bias.
Both have pro a cons-
I would say, that the biggest difference, is that steam focus on giving the users more features on the platform, while Epic wants to decrease that and focus on people just playing games without interactions.
You could look at it as, PC VS Console, model as well.
You like them, that's cool. All I said is that I think their free-game gimmick is a hollow, cynical sales pitch.
Yep, but peoples are retarded. They search for imaginary russian bots while giving their datas to their worst enemy without minding at all about that. :')
Data is a leading currency but your find your actual bank details and name is more of value to a business than a country to whom said person is not a citizen of. Its all really fanciable to assume a country not your own would need a personal register when its rather a headcount that is all that's needed and is already openly available in the form of country stats to anyone who cares to look it up.
With regard to our own respective countries however, it indeed does hold relative significance. It is this authority to whom a person should be mindful of rather than the notion of a suspected country whom attention has been put upon us by only one source, our own respective governments.
What is more of concern is the lack of availability for a person in one country to purchase from another to have a home facility to make purchases from and thus for go having to part with data to a country not their own. What is even more somewhat important is the discussion of what constitutes as an online footprint.
While a personal name, mobile number, etc may not be parted with, it cannot be said to not be specific to an individual.
I mean there is that one Unreal game on epic, but they list it as early access
Epic can become competition with Steam if they change their current road map.
1. Don't rely on dirty money to build a hollow empire.
2. Stop trying to control the consumers and listen to what they want; not what you think they want, "FREE GAMES!".
3. Add useful free features to your platform and give them to the users subtly.
4. Provide seasonal entertainment, in the form of a cheesy JS game or funded streaming events for your consumers.
When Epic first launched their platform they made it a point that the customer's opinions will be ignored. Their main drive was better pay for devs and publishers; EVIL 30% Steam Muahhahaha. Has Epic implemented a discussion forum, or even a game reviewing system yet? How about that shopping cart? Good Old Games doesn't have nearly as much of a revenue as Epic and it has all of those features implemented into its storefront.
The most common and best argument for Epic's actions I've heard is that it's the only way to edge in on Steam. The argument is that providing a good store isn't enough, because Steam is incredibly sticky and just having a good alternative wouldn't entice anyone over.
Still, the buying of exclusives out from under Steam is still a bad and shady strategy. It also doesn't seem to be working, as Epic's growing user base isn't translating over to a paying user base, which is what Epic needs.
The people who defend Epic all say that competition is good for the industry. I don't disagree, but I'm not seeing any competition from Epic.
If they really leaned into the lower cut they take, and if they made good on the promise that the savings would be passed on to the end user, that would actually potentially entice people over. If you wanted a game, and that game was $59.99 on Steam and $49.99 on Epic, that could be a good reason to spend the money on Epic, particularly if this was consistent across releases on Epic.
What we're seeing instead though is stuff like Final Fantasy VII remake being sold for $70 on Epic in spite of the lower cut Epic takes. Other big releases like God of War are the same price on either platform. Still more big releases just never got released on Epic, either because the publisher just decided it didn't matter, or my own theory that Epic offered an exclusivity deal which was turned down, and thus Epic declined to host the game in any capacity.
Epic will continue spinning it's wheels though. They won't try to compete, they'll just continue to throw money into a bottomless pit, growing a userbase of freeloaders while their fingers are crossed that all those people who claimed freebies suddenly have a change of heart and start spending money.
This article at Ars Technica[arstechnica.com] sums it up pretty well actually.
Steam Launcher...
The only thing I ever used Epic Launcher was for the Battlefield 1 free Beta.
Steam doesn't, Therefore Steam is better.