Believer in human rights like freedom of speech and self defense. πΉ
Thought for the Day: "Too many people have opinions on things they know nothing about"
@HockExe@SubRayven@Hamzaonchain@Pirat_Nation Anti trust laws like Robinson-Patman Act generally ban suppliers using different prices for different retailers. Even if that particular law doesn't apply, retailers are still within their rights to fight being undercut to protect themselves and consumers.
@HockExe@SubRayven@Hamzaonchain@Pirat_Nation Pretty sure the Steam version handles more, but even if it doesn't and they wouldn't need to treat it like a "crossplay disabled" type of thing, at this point it's barely relevant to the core issue of a supplier trying to undercut a retailer.
@HockExe@SubRayven@Hamzaonchain@Pirat_Nation It's multiplayer so they'd probably have to cordon off parts of the playerbase to not use ANY Steam. And even if there's really is 0 Steam, Ubisoft was still trying to engage in pricing discrimination. Retailers in almost every industry crack down on that pretty hard.
@SubRayven@HockExe@Hamzaonchain@Pirat_Nation R6S would basically have to have separated matchmaking for players who bought different versions to not use Steam in any way. That's a headache neither want.
@SubRayven@HockExe@Hamzaonchain@Pirat_Nation They still use Steam for some things to make it easier to connect players who use Steam. And Ubisoft was the one trying to engage in monopolstic behavior by undercutting Steam. Price discrimination should not be defended.
@SubRayven@HockExe@Hamzaonchain@Pirat_Nation Steam does not stop devs from selling a separate version that doesn't use Steam infrastructure for cheaper. Ubisoft just wanted a free ride from Steam while punishing consumers for their storefront preferences which is anti trust bullshit.
@SubRayven@HockExe@Hamzaonchain@Pirat_Nation I got R6S through the Starter Edition via Steam years ago. There are decade old posts about it being made available on Steam. Ubisoft set the prices on both platforms anyway. This was a clear cut attempt ar price discrimination by Ubisoft.
@SubRayven@HockExe@Hamzaonchain@Pirat_Nation Steam WAS ensuring consumers got the same deal. The Starter Pack was added to Steam by demand from Valve. Not letting suppliers engage in pricing discrimination is pro consumer.
@Pirat_Nation Nothing burger unless Ubisoft was the one getting investigated. Enforcing price parity to make sure suppliers cannot "punish" consumers for preferring a different storefront is both standard practice and pro consumer.
@APArizonaTea@Pirat_Nation Valve made Ubisoft sell the Starter Pack on Steam so consumers could choose their storefront. Ubisoft executives were the ones screwing people over.
@mjarbo@ratethecritic If you don't like him then why not just rate him negatively? I don't like Uwe Boll movies and consider them all to be tax fraud, but I'm not going to ask that they be removed from Rotten Tomatoes.
@basedbinkie As an aside, I love how the sleekest IPSN mechs are all stated to be for a specific client (Nelson), a failed attempt to shift markets (Raliegh), or variants of the latter (Stoertebecker and Zheng). And even then they're still pretty industrial compared to their competitors.
@basedbinkie I think it comes down to the question of whether the mech is a supposed to be armor or a tank. Japanese designs that are more chunky tend to be noted as leaning more in to the tank idea (i.e. Dougram) and vice versa (i.e. Megas XLR). Also, luv me ISPN chunky mechs.
@ablublublyeah@QuiteShallow The more I hear the more glad I am that my Recommendations only gave me funny videos with Skeletor complaining about Destiny 2