PC Gaming

I know you said allegedly, but the article explicitly says that a policy like that doesn't exist, and the only thing that would happen (if the game is cheaper somewhere else) is that the game wouldn't be advertised during a sale.

When pushed on official policy in his deposition, DJ Powers claims that the ‘if else’ is normally this: “If we get to a situation where a partner is telling us that the price needs to be lower on other platforms than it is on Steam, then we will typically choose not to run curated marketing during times where that game is being discounted.”

He also notes that suggesting a game can’t be on the store at all - if not at parity - is “not our typical process”. Which is semi-believable, because a) it’s not in the contract and b) nobody at Valve has time to check and enforce that. But has it happened before, multiple times? Sure. And Wolfire’s lawyers will use that in the case.

Price parity is pro consumer. This is what consumer cares about. What they shouldn't care about is developers' revenue split because it doesn't affect them.

No one would be selling on Epic for a lower "discount-like" price, even if it would be allowed. This notion was never about "hey dev, get your users a cheaper price", it was always about "hey dev, get yourself more revenue if you choose our platform" (a lie too though since Epic is simply not a good selling platform). Else, you would have seen cheaper games amongst those Epic exclusives that never hit other stores.

I wouldn't play games from Epic's storefront if I were paid to.