Rockstar just came out with their own launcher. And they’re enticing people to download it with a free copy of GTA San Andreas.
Bethesda. Epic. uPlay. Steam. Origin. GOG. Battle.net.
Another dev. Another launcher. Has this gotten out of hand yet? Does it make sense? Should developers create their own launcher to keep 100% of the profits? Or should they keep using other DRMs and “donating” a 30% of their share?
From a dev’s perspective, they’re in this for the cash, right? Do you think they really care that PC players have to launch a launcher just to play their games? Of course not. They’re a business, after all.
Being a business doesn’t mean you have to be profit-oriented. Sure, you could technically be a good person and release your stuff on Steam, where people can play it without downloading your launcher.
But why would you do that when everyone else is doing the same thing? Playing nice won’t earn your profits. And the videogame industry operates on very thin profits. So 30% is worth creating your own launcher for.
Yeah. It’s annoying. But it’s not something developers can really “fight” if every other competitor is doing the same. And the tradeoff? Hate from the players that’s diminishing in returns since this is the “norm?” You can kinda see where Rockstar’s coming from.
Do I think it’s ridiculous? Yes. But I’ve gotten to the point where I can toss all these launchers into a single folder named “garbage.” Less clutter. Less complaints. Either way, you’ll play the game. It’s just the process playing it now.
We have launchers for launchers. Maybe that’ll help. I’m really borderline on this whole topic. It’s annoying, but understandable at the same time. It’s hard to complain.
But OTOH, we may be getting Red Dead Redemption 2 for the PC now. And you bet your ass the game’s planned for an exclusive on Rockstar’s launcher.