Live data from Hacker News

Sunsetting the Bethesda.net launcher and migrating to Steam

bethesda.net

11–20 of 404 posts

Re: Sunsetting the Bethesda.net launcher and migrating to Steam

#11
post #4
post #2

I'm surprised that they're not migrating customer games to the Xbox store considering Bethesda is a subsidiary of Microsoft.

Microsoft has been happy-ish to have their games on Steam for a while now. They probably would've gone all-in on the Xbox store if the windows store (backend) wasn't so shitty.

Windows store is really bad. The UI, the UX, the lag, the jank, all designed to spoil your day

Re: Sunsetting the Bethesda.net launcher and migrating to Steam

#12
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Players have spoken and a LOT of them prefer Steam.

Players should be saying they don't want "launchers" at all. They provide no benefit that couldn't be done a better way.

I personally disagree, I don't want to downplay the power of having stand alone applications - but having one application that can help me matchmake in games and helps keep all those games up to date while clearly (and non-obnoxiously) advertising new features or DLCs for those games. Steam does this things really cleanly and I don't want to return to the world where each application has to self-update whenever I launch it.

Re: Sunsetting the Bethesda.net launcher and migrating to Steam

#13
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Players have spoken and a LOT of them prefer Steam.

Players should be saying they don't want "launchers" at all. They provide no benefit that couldn't be done a better way.

And what would that "other way" be? Let me guess, another launcher, or simply no launcher, no updates, no "cloud" saves, etc.

Downloading games off Steam is easier than pirating them. If that's not progress, I don't know what is. Definitely not the same with movies and music which tells me they don't want it to be that easy.

Re: Sunsetting the Bethesda.net launcher and migrating to Steam

#14
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Players have spoken and a LOT of them prefer Steam.

Players should be saying they don't want "launchers" at all. They provide no benefit that couldn't be done a better way.

People always forget what a pain in ass it was to download patches before Steam existed.

Re: Sunsetting the Bethesda.net launcher and migrating to Steam

#15
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Players should be saying they don't want "launchers" at all. They provide no benefit that couldn't be done a better way.

People always forget what a pain in ass it was to download patches before Steam existed.

With "just don't do it" being perhaps the most common solution.

Re: Sunsetting the Bethesda.net launcher and migrating to Steam

#16
post #10
post #5

You can theoretically solve a lot of problems with crappy, multitudinous game stores - easier payments, lighter software. But the real question is: do I trust that I'll be able to continue downloading my purchases for the foreseeable future? I trust that Steam will be around for a very long time. I can download DRM-free installers from GOG. Everyone else? I don't know, I have much less confidence.

I expect we're less than five years away from seeing everyone's Stadia purchases evaporate.

Yea, I have it, although I haven't used it in a while and plan on cancelling. I made zero purchases on the platform though. I just play the free games.

Re: Sunsetting the Bethesda.net launcher and migrating to Steam

#17
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Players have spoken and a LOT of them prefer Steam.

Players should be saying they don't want "launchers" at all. They provide no benefit that couldn't be done a better way.

> They provide no benefit that couldn't be done a better way

This is like the famous Dropbox comment

"For a Linux user, you can already build such a system yourself quite trivially by getting an FTP account, mounting it locally with curlftpfs, and then using SVN or CVS on the mounted filesystem"

Re: Sunsetting the Bethesda.net launcher and migrating to Steam

#18
post #4
post #2

I'm surprised that they're not migrating customer games to the Xbox store considering Bethesda is a subsidiary of Microsoft.

Microsoft has been happy-ish to have their games on Steam for a while now. They probably would've gone all-in on the Xbox store if the windows store (backend) wasn't so shitty.

The Xbox app is a masterclass in how not to design a user interface, it is clunky, the menus don't go anywhere, they mixed terminology (some places have "Add friend" others have "Follow friend"), users with multiple screens will find their game launching on the non-principal one, language is tied to the OS so if you want your games in English but your Windows is in French you have to change the OS-level language.

I don't work at Microsoft, but if I had to guess there are several teams working on individual components and they lack a clear leader that enforce a global vision so it falls apart at integration time.

Re: Sunsetting the Bethesda.net launcher and migrating to Steam

#19
nice, about time. I wonder if e.g. Quake Champions would've flopped as hard as it did if it was just released on Steam at launch instead of moved there later. I had a ton of fun with it despite its controversial formula changes, and the soundtracks (there's two, you can pick one or both, the second one is by Andrew Hulshult) are really good.

Re: Sunsetting the Bethesda.net launcher and migrating to Steam

#20
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft has been happy-ish to have their games on Steam for a while now. They probably would've gone all-in on the Xbox store if the windows store (backend) wasn't so shitty.

Windows store is really bad. The UI, the UX, the lag, the jank, all designed to spoil your day

and until a couple months ago, it was a crappy web app.
Post reply on HN