![]() ![]() ![]() If the games weren't exclusive, then it would be possible that the consumer has both stores, but see that one store is running a sale, so they get it there. They think of customers as more of a threat to their revenue rather than their community and support.Ĭompetition is good for the customer. No matter the case, a company that is willing to create policies and use tactics that don't directly ask the question "Is this good for the customer?" are businesses that grow more and more anti-consumer. This can be declared as catastrophizing though. The larger concern is that it starts with exclusives. But steam and epic are businesses after all. Exclusivity contracts are only ever made in an attempt to keep a potentially threatening opponent from keeping or gaining momentum. It's not pro consumer, thats for certain. However, this doesn't change the fact that exclusivity is an anti-consumer practice. So it's truly not like they pulled a bait and switch on being able to buy the game or something. I do however, disagree with their take on exclusives not being anti-consumer, despite their post making a few good points, namely that epic game store is free. ![]() People were finding out about it being exclusive in this post, but in the post it also is somewhat condescending, but I think that was just a situation where text doesn't really let the nonsensical sarcasm through. The actual anger starts from their blog post letting people know it would be an epic store exclusive. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |