Tamo240

It also doesn't run off battery power, hardly apples to apples.

Presumably it will come back as some free-to-play, live-service microtransaction-filled nightmare that can be supported by a few whales and eventually make up the cost

They should gather that before they set the price. Once the box office doors open, increasing the price is price gouging plain and simple.

I disagree with this whole 'market price' thing because as a consumer you don't have constant opportunity to buy. You get one slot where you are are the front of the queue, and if you don't like the price then tough. It essentially just rewards those who got to the front sooner, and punishes later joiners.

The Internet Archive does not create shareholder value

/s

Nobody is attacking your free choice, they're literally trying to give you another option. That's what free choice is all about.

If you are making an informed devision to remain with windows as it gets worse and worse, then that is up to you, but don't come at people for trying to offer you an alternative just because you've made that decision.

Bit weird to be so angry about this. The commenter is not 'basically just another marketer' because they have nothing (financial or otherwise) to gain from others using linux. They genuinely believe it is a better product and it is in your interests to use it.

Direct your anger at Microsoft if you feel as though you are being forced to do anything, they the ones choosing to enshitify Windows, and removing it as a viable option.

pendant

pedant?

Sorry

Making a platform that was simply a copy of all of Steam's features would certainly take a lot of time. That's why to break into the space a new platform would need to actually innovate a killer feature that brings early adopters to it even without having all the bells and whistles Steam has. Then the user base can and will grow as you fill in the gaps so the 'sacrifice' of using your platform is lessened.

All exclusive games do is build resentment in your customers at being forced to use an inferior product.

The point is that Epic complaining about being unable to compete with Steam, and therefore needing to employee anti-competitive, anti-consumer practices rings a little hollow given that they have significantly more resources available.

I'm not here to stan for either company, I think if Epic wants to compete they need to create a better product, not fling monopoly accusation while actively pursuing monopolistic strategies.

Quick google says epic has 13000+ employee while Valve has only 300+, and yet they can't build a legitimate competitor and have to resort to exclusivity deal to force people onto their platform which is totally anti consumer.

Also for the record console players whine endlessly about Xbox/PS exclusive games, so don't act like this is some weird thing that PC gamers do.

Anyone in software engineering will tell you that as you get more senior you spend less time writing lines of code and more time planning, designing, testing, reviewing, and deleting code.

This will continue to be true, it's just that there will be less juniors below who's whole job is to produce code that meets a predefined spec or passes an existing test, and instead a smaller number of juniors will use AI tools to increase their productivity, while still requiring the same amount of direction and oversight. The small amounts of code the seniors write will also get smaller and faster to write, as they also use AI tools to generate boilerplate while filling in the important details.