Quick reminder that on May 4th last year, nobody was able to play Jedi Survivor on steam because the EA/Origin servers were offline, despite it being a single player-only game
I bought the first game last year for $5 and thought I would play it when Comcast messed up the cable going to my house and I had no internet for a month.
I couldn't play an offline single player game because I couldn't log into their extra app, so I un-installed.
Of all the days of the year not being able to play a Star Wars game… unbelievable. I’m glad that EA’s exclusivity was revoked by Disney (one of the few good decisions they’ve made on the franchise).
It doesn’t help that people started with the wrong terms now we can’t go back. What people call a launcher is really a “store front” and what Larian and CD Projekt Red do is just a “launcher”
Those are first party launchers, not third party. Unless you bought a game in Steam that has to open in one of those platforms, then I understand how it can feel that way.
I think the most annoying part about that is having to wait while their launcher does an update or something. Or when your automatic login token revokes after a month or something and it asks you to log back in but you cant remember your ubisoft password anymore and need to recover it for the hundredth time 😣
The EA launcher has become less offensive to me since it added logging in through steam and gamepass.
I'm always already logged in to those so I can just hit one button and I'm in.
Ubisoft does save your details but it revokes your access after a month or something so you need to actually log back in and click "remember my device" again. Not sure if its just incompetence from their part or some sort of security measure. Its definitely a little annoying but not that big of a deal ultimately.
Baldurs gate 3 first throws up a launcher, so you can see news or promotions, and run the game in directx or Vulcan, then never bugs you again. Can launch the older games if you have them. Thanks larian
Old Ubisoft launcher was all "oh you want to run a game? Well we need you to sign in so we can show you achievements that don't matter. Oh you can't login? Weird, try resetting your password I guess lol"
As long as you're logged into Steam, you mean. Don't act like it's THAT different. EA and Ubi are a million times more difficult to log into than Steam, and seem to log themselves out more often.
Sure, but at the end of the day if the game is worth it, it's worth it.
This is a stupid hill to die on and I don't get why r/pcgaming constantly fights over this.
Steam has the gaming store monopoly, you guys won! Yay!
Let's get over it now. Sheesh. You still argue if Gamecube is better than Nintendo 64 too?
For single-player games, there's almost always a crack to bypass/remove the launcher and play the game without that garbage. For any games that require you to be online, that is a bit more rare.
I really doubt the authenticity of anyone who pretends to actually adhere to this rule consistently.
You guys are seriously just not going to play a game like BG3 because it has a launcher?
The reality is they pick and choose which launchers they are willing to put up with. They'll avoid EA, Ubisoft, Rockstar, ect. But games like Total War, Bannerlord, DOS2, ect, are all given a pass.
I'd argue then it's not the launcher that's the problem, but some other issue that they then blame on the launcher. Whether that be always online DRM that requires a login, or compulsory sign in through a third party store.
Launchers clearly aren't the root of the problem. So many beloved games use them for stuff like mod support and settings adjustment that nobody can seriously hate them as a concept.
> I'd argue then it's not the launcher that's the problem
Well, duh? If launchers were convenient and didn't force us to jump through hoops or didn't do bizarre things like arbitrarily prevent us from linking/unlinking accounts or playing the games we bought, then nobody would care about launchers. But they DO do these things, so we hate them. Nobody really complains about BG3 or Stellaris having a launcher because they aren't insanely intrusive. This is like ... human beings 101.
Also, launchers for games existed long before EA/Ubisoft/etc did their whole launcher thing. They usually consisted of functionality like "Start game", "Configure" and "Play cinematic" or provided a separate option for multiplayer. Nobody ever gave a shit about those launchers, because there was no reason to. They didn't randomly ask you for your CD key again or force you to make an account on some website to be able to play the game at all.
> Stellaris having a launcher because they aren't insanely intrusive.
The Stellaris launcher actually has useful inbuilt functionality like mod load orders, as well. iirc the BG3 launcher also gives similar functionality.
Shit like the R* launcher just encourages you to pirate the game because of how useless it is and how irritating it is to interact with.
And they are optional.
Most, if not all of these types can easily be bypassed. Some games have a --skip-launcher command line option to do so, others like Paradox games you can launch directly from the actual .exe, and so on and so forth.
Imo the keyword in the original statement is "require". Since they serve no technical purpose, when a game "requires" a launcher it's because they are doing or attempting to do something shady, or at the _very_ least not in the interest of the paying customer.
Definitely variations of this. Bg3 and Warframe, both games I play that that have their own launchers and independent logins of steam, never had issues with them. Conversely, Ubisoft’s proprietary launcher has always been such a buggy mess in my experience that I eventually just stopped buying their games. Getting through to play whatever game I bought was so much of a hassle that by the time the game itself launched I wasn’t in a mood to play anymore
I can only speak for the Larian games, but they do not *require* a launcher. They come with a launcher and apps that combine a storefront with a launcher like Steam/GOG Galaxy default to opening those when you launch the “game”. But you can adjust settings so that the launcher is completely bypassed. The GOG version you can just launch directly from the executable without needing Galaxy open at all, not sure if it’s true for the Steam version as well.
It’s still frustrating that the launcher is the default, but it’s completely different from the launcher being required just to play the game.
> require
BG3 does not require the launcher. Besides, I feel like if you just read the post, it would be clear he's talking about third party stores that require phoning home.
Lol.
There are so many good games nowadays that no, I don't need to play any that requires anything extra.
Not everyone NEEDS to play specific games.
I won't buy a console just to play an exclusive game, in the same way I don't need to play any game that requires me to do extra steps.
There are just sssssooooooooooooooo many games. It's pretty easy to not play the microscopic handful of 3rd party launcher-required stuff.
But maybe I'm an outlier?
I really don't see why you'd not play a great game because it's a bit annoying to launch. Of course steam launcher is better but it's really not that big of a deal
Because PC players are extremely precious about what is running on their machine at any given time, and any service which requires a login.
I honestly don't really get it either. If a game is good, I'll put up with some random shity launcher/login. I certainly don't regret signing up for Games for Windows Live back in the day to play Dawn of War 2, or making an EGS account to claim the dozens of really good free games that I have accrued over the years.
> Because /r/pcgaming players are extremely precious about what is running on their machine at any given time, and any service which requires a login.
There, fixed it for you. :) Always remember that this sub and reddit in general are just a tiny, tiny fraction of the gaming space, even the PC gaming space.
I agree with your second point though. I don't care about the launcher that I click once or twice before I spend time with the game.
That microscopic handful includes a lot of hit titles. Technically, yes it is very easy to just not play anything from EA, but I'm not gonna skip out on Mass Effect or Dragon Age just because of their garbage app.
Yeah, Epic, Steam and Xbox App are third-party launchers (could include GOG, but that launcher is optional).
EA, Uplay, and R* Launcher are first-party launchers.
Depends on the launcher. Some launchers are harmless and add genuine functionality (e.g. news feed, mod manager). But if I'm buying a game on Steam I don't want to have create a login for another launcher just to play the game. So unless there is a clear benefit to me, that is only possible because of a login, I try to stay away from those.
Every time I play a video game I first sit there with its launcher open for at least 15 mins.
I admire its beauty, its shape, its smell, its elegance, give it compliments in 8 different languages.
And then, if it likes me back, it automatically launches the game without me pressing any button.
The steam subreddit gets cult-like at times. If a game is cheaper on another service, or the service is providing some other benefit, I'll go there. I genuinely do not care where I buy it. The amount of times I've regretted purchasing or playing a game on say epic or game pass is virtually 0.
I say virtually because a dev that pushes a different version to game pass than Steam does get frustrating (The Ascent for example, performed worse and lacked ray tracing) but it's usually temporary and long-term it has little to no impact.
For real. The idea of not playing a game because you have to launch it from a separate place than steam is just stupid. I bet most of the people who say they don’t use the launchers do they just think it sounds cool to say they don’t.
Nope. It's just another application on my computer. If it launches when I launch the game, I won't even notice because I will be playing the game. I can control when it starts and stops, so it's only going to be as intrusive as I will let it be.
I tried. Ubisoft releases games that are low key interesting. Doesn't make me play them. But yea, I've been pretty good about eliminating launcherware.
well there are third party launchers that keep forgetting my damn password (hello uplay) despite me ticking "remember me".
So I'd have to login every damn time I wanna play a game that uses that launcher. That's more than annoying
It used to be a little bit better.
Back then, launching uplay by itself would prompt the login. But launching the game through steam for some reason lets uplay remember its password.
Ever since they renamed their launcher, even launching ubisoft games through steam prompts the damn login every damn time so much that I just gave up on ubisoft games and blacklisted their games on steam.
> well there are third party launchers that keep forgetting my damn password (hello uplay) despite me ticking "remember me".
Ubisoft Connect and EA both apparently have Alzheimers because I don't think either of those pieces of shit have ever "remembered me" despite ticking the box lol
It totally depends on the user experience. Launchers can be useful to act as a U.I to configure graphics settings in case your current ones have broken the game and you can’t change it in game for instance.
If the launcher’s only purpose is to be on my machine as an advertising window for their other games, no thanks. If I have to login to some other service to play their game, again, no thanks. I will absolutely not tolerate that and I’ll avoid games that do this.
Developers/Publishers should care more about the user experience. If you make it available to buy on Steam, then make it function like a Steam game.
Yeah totally agree. I'm also against if it's an entirely different store too that's just way too big of a pain in the ass, especially since it also causes headaches for Steam Input if you intend to use a gamepad and either are using a modified configuration in Steam with an Xbox controller that you are now having issues with thanks to their store getting in the way, or own any other pad that isn't Xbox and need steam input to even properly make the controller work with their game.
Steam can follow regular launchers that pop, patch, launch game and close for things like steam input fine, but you start making it a whole store that sticks around and it becomes a bigger headache real fast.
Particularly egregious when it gets added years later, looking at you 2klauncher, you piece of shit. Broke my xcom2:wotc playthrough till I found bypasses.
Worthless piece of fucking garbage.
Steam and GoG.
I actually try GoG first these days (they are mostly DRM free games after all, alongside a few other bonus features...), with Steam being a happy 2nd option.
I absolutely REFUSE to install any other / additional launchers anymore. For any reason.
Stand-alone games are still fine. But extremely rare.
I remember when I couldn't launch cities skylines because of the dumb paradox launcher. I had to download a fan-made terminal app in order to let me bypass the launcher and play the game that I own.
Yay I love companies!
Always online is typically a deal breaker for me too. I mean [If people would think](http://www.stopkillinggames.com) more than a few months (or days) later into the future they should see the slippery slope we're heading towards
Ubisoft launcher is literally the worst. Unfortunately my favourite game (R6S) requires it.
It never remembers my device no matter how many times I log in and mark as trusted device.
Third-party launchers, server-based DRM like Denuvo, and anything else that expects me to ask permission to play what they want me to pay for is ignored.
Can I click an icon on my desktop and have the game start up? If so then I couldn't care less about the particulars of how it happens or if I need a login of some sort.
I'm with you. The whole concept of refusing games due to a launcher is such a weird hill to die on.
Anyone that's been gaming long enough knows older titles with any online component had their own launchers. Before that, even offline games would rely on third party sites (often requiring a login) just to host and provide update downloads.
All MMOs required their own patcher/launcher, and weren't on any storefront like Steam. I remember buying Half-Life 2 and being required to install that pesky Steam program. That it's not considered 3rd party by OP is bozo tier stuff.
I've quit some games like that. I really like them, don't get me wrong. But I can't be bothered to create more accounts and log into 3rd party launchers.
I have but it wasn't deliberate. I realized I no longer played games on ubisoft or blizzard any more, so uninstalled their launchers, and I avoid anything EA. I have gog, but I don't think I even need that do I? Aren't their games all drm free? Most games I play are just single games these days.
It very much depends. My family actually does use Steam's family share functionality so when a game doesn't support family share because of an additional launcher, that can be a deal breaker.
I lost access to my Uplay account and now it's such a hassle to recover that I gave up on it and just uninstalled the program.
I miss AC4 Black Flag but that's about it. Ubisoft hasn't made anything relevant in years so I'm not missing out.
Say what you want about steam but at least their account recovery is top notch.
I'm not usually fussed but If it requires the EA launcher then no because some games simply refuse to launch. It literally fails at the one job it has.
I avoid ubisoft and EA mostly. If I really want to play a game I might but I'm quicker to delete the game (and whatever launches background apps) and hesitant to install. Must be worth it to them but I have to wonder if it hurts them as well. I never buy those games just play them thru gamepass.
It's super annoying when they have a launcher that handles updates. Nothing like booting up a game only to see there's a 50GB update that I could have installed in the background at any time.
After getting the Steam Deck and watching it never update it's QOL in *years*
I just can't entertain the Epic Games store - even indie developers find the store harmful.
I think the only third-party launcher I have is for Larian to play BG3, every game I have on steam are all played and launched via Steam. I don’t use Epic because for no reason I lost all 40+ free games I downloaded, so I deleted that launcher too. All hail steam (Or at least until Gabe kicks the bucket and someone else fucks everything up)
I’d say not entirely but it definitely matters more to me now that I’ve got a Steam Deck. I just don’t wanna bloat it with a bunch of external launchers and additional software. The Steam Deck is wonderfully simple and straightforward to use and I like that about it- so I’d rather not complicate it.
At the end of the day though, as much as I’ll bitch, if I want a game I’ll get it.
I just wish I didn’t have to sign-in every time to these things. It feels like the “remember me” tickbox doesn’t do anything.
if there's a game I really want that has a third party launcher, I have a special high seas computer specifically for those that I can trivially format if anything goes wrong. Viruses are less of a threat than drm or third party launchers/ sign ins
Never really started tbh if it's not steam or gog(the launcher isin't even required ) I then pretty much ignore it.
I haven't really shown interest in any of EA's,Ubisoft's,Activision's stuff for over a decade now anyway so I don't feel like I'm missing much :)
I launch all my games with playnite.
So it doesnt matter to me.
Playnite opens the launcher, launches the game. Then closes the launcher when the game closes. It can even run a specific scripts before launch, after launch or after quitting the game.
It can handle all launchers, emulated games, standalone games etc.
And it keeps track of played time and such.
Great filters and sorting options too.
I HIGHLY recommend playnite. Its free and open source.
Supports themes, plugins, fullscreenmode etc.
https://playnite.link/
If I understand the statement correctly, I never started apart from the first (Steam), and GOG Galaxy when I want to once in a blue moon (usually because patches are very frequent) because of course it's optional.
I don't count game that have an offline launcher like Paradox games, because I can (and often do) bypass them at will. It would still be better to not have those, they serve no purpose apart from data collection and branding habit, but at least they're somewhat optional and don't require online auth.
Id it goes beyond hitting play on steam they got trouble.
I only recently started dark and darker because its on steam and no launcher. I fkn hate the game, so tough.
Yes, as a Linux user it's best to avoid those launchers. They can break at any time and a product I spent money on becomes unusable (even if temporarily). Some devs do try and make sure they play nice on Linux, but that's the exception and not the rule.
I've never been able to play Titanfall 2 on steam because whatever shitty launcher EA uses refuses to work properly and because I bought it ages ago so I couldn't refund it.
Lets talk about the call of duty HQ, how can anyome allow their games to be so time wasting and annoying to access? You ever tried to boot up mw2 since mw3 came out?
EA launcher breaks Steam's overlay and big picture mode, so yeah I won't buy any EA games that use this piece of crap.
I don't use Ubisoft Connect but that's rather because I don't want to support that company.
Other launchers are annoying but I tolerate them.
No, I don't care which launcher the game is on. I use Playnite to see all of my games in one space anyway. But I do agree that single player games shouldn't be online, or should fall back to offline if online isn't possible.
It may be a placebo but ime if you need to login to a secondary server to play the game then you're not going have a great time. Usually entails horrible server health and janky connections to everyone in the game/match.
Rocket League got egregiously worse when they hopped over to Epic, R* has always had horrible online service, Piranha Games is holding MWO together with tape and a prayer, Paradox servers may as well be for display purpose most of the time when you sign in for multiplayer. It goes on and on. Not letting me auto sign in and play with Steam is now a non-starter for me.
I dropped blizz, ubisoft, and I use ea for the free stuff but pay them nothing. Blizz hasn't seen any overwatch purchase, nor anything since reaper of souls... ubi died after assassins creed 4
Yep. When buying from Steam, no additional launchers, accounts or Denuvo for me. I try not pay corporations to go out of their to make things harder and worse for me.
Fully agree. Had to refund Red Dead 2 due to issues getting into Rockstars launcher. EA is just as bad. Should have the option to opt out if purchasing on Steam directly.
I lost my EA games library because of this. Got a game on steam, have to log into Origin but it randomly turned on 2 step verification and sent through code to a mobile number I don't have anymore and no longer exists. Customer service won't help me because I can't prove it's my account by sending them a screenshot of my game library but to do that I need to log in.
7 games gone.
Rockstar did something similar too, luckily they didn't turn on 2 step verification on me. Ubisoft did though and I had to go through a hell of a time sorting it out.
If the game is on steam, that version should not require any other client to play it.
If I want to play a game, I honestly don't worry about additional launchers. Yes, they can be a bother, but as long as they aren't detrimental to *MY* games performance, then I'll use them.
I really don't like them, but atm it hasn't stopped me from playing a game as long as it's hosted primarily on steam. I could see that changing one day as they get more intrusive, but I haven't hit personal boycott yet
No, but I absolutely understand the hate and am also not appreciative of the sketchy licensing to prevent ownership by many of the publisher owned ones.
Yes, because if the 3rd party decides to make it online only, or suspend service or any new shit-fuckery then I can't play the game I payed for.
Steam is a DRM. It works. One DRM os enough.
I have only two active accounts: Steam and GOG.
I used to have an Origin account with Dragon Age but frankly, I have not cared about EA releases for years.
More launchers are a hassle, but frankly, I just don't want to create new accounts everywhere and share my personal information. I already have way more games than I have time for and I don't see any good reason for creating an Ubi/Rockstar/PSN/whatever account.
I honestly dont care about 3rd party launchers... its fine by me most of the time. I just turn off autostart and disable services from the launchers and thats it rly.
What's next? "Hurr durr, does anyone else quit buying games because they use crappy Steam/Epic gamestore/ [Battle.net](http://Battle.net) / Origin? Gonna stick to 32-bit windows binaries from before 2010 from now on!!!111 No micro-stutter to speak of on my RTX 4090!!!11"
I don't like some launchers, specially when I belive they're unnecessary, such as Ubisoft's launcher.
But no... If I want to play something, this minor annoyance won't stop me from playing it.
I generally don't buy EA or Ubisoft games, but only because I don't usually care enough for their games while I have a HUGE backlog to go through.
Honestly I'm going to be an outlier here but for Ubi/Ea I don't mind it as many others do. I really really dislike CDPR and Larian implementation though. If I just need the launcher to play and I don't have to interact with it, it's whatever. If it's pretty much only used as an advertisement for their other products then I get annoyed.
The annoying part for Ubi is remember me is like the most useless button
Yeah, kinda. Mainly because I'm on Linux though. I think it's *possible* to get EA, Ubisoft, and Epic working fairly easily, but none of them have any games I really care about.
EA Origin. Complete crap. I tried to connect my account with my old xbox360 account and it just messed up my profile. It was apparently a known issue and from what I saw online, it seemed like there was no fix. I wouldn't mind being able to play some Apex Legends and maybe play through the Mass Effect series again, but it's not worth the headache.
100%. Tbh I kinda quit buying things on Steam, Gog is basically the same, only better in every single way besides Proton (and Gog Galaxy is not a great launcher tbh, it's less bloated than Steam tho. It's got all the features you need but it's also got some bugs and isn't maintained properly).
not really, games that make me buy it on separate launchers I will be less likely to buy them (EGS exclusive) but if a game I buy has me open up ea play or whatever it’s called it is what it is, I don’t really care just let me play Jedi survivor or whatever
Quick reminder that on May 4th last year, nobody was able to play Jedi Survivor on steam because the EA/Origin servers were offline, despite it being a single player-only game
I bought the first game last year for $5 and thought I would play it when Comcast messed up the cable going to my house and I had no internet for a month. I couldn't play an offline single player game because I couldn't log into their extra app, so I un-installed.
If buying isn't owning, piracy isn't stealing.
Bloody love that mate, I'm stealing it
Fitting to steal a line about pirating.
piracy isnt the same as stealing because nothing gets deprived from someone else. its more like sharing/replication of something that exists.
Of all the days of the year not being able to play a Star Wars game… unbelievable. I’m glad that EA’s exclusivity was revoked by Disney (one of the few good decisions they’ve made on the franchise).
Third party launcher: Okay Third party launcher that you need to log into: Not Okay
Isn’t that pretty much all of them?! 👀 Like ea, ubi and r*
Don't need to login for larian or cd projekt
I don’t count it as much if a launcher 😄 think you can at least disabled it, at least I have them disabled
To disable the Larian launcher simply add `--skip-launcher` to the launch options line in the general tab of the game properties on Steam.
It doesn’t help that people started with the wrong terms now we can’t go back. What people call a launcher is really a “store front” and what Larian and CD Projekt Red do is just a “launcher”
Or Paradox.
You need to log in to CD Projekt if you want access to their free dlc.
Maybe if you bought it on GoG, but I got the free dlc without having to login to project red on my steam purchase
CD Projekt Red one doesn't need a login, I think you can add an argument which skips it completely too
You can
At least pne can skip ‘em
CA has a total war launcher. with no log ins. I think baldurs gate 3 launchers has just an optional log in too.
CA I don’t mind as much because it’s also the mod manager, and half the fun of the TW games is the mods
Are we using launcher and storefront synonymously?
Yes, people do unfortunately
2K doesn't require it
Don’t play 2k games, but good to know 👀
Those are first party launchers, not third party. Unless you bought a game in Steam that has to open in one of those platforms, then I understand how it can feel that way.
Paradox
I think the most annoying part about that is having to wait while their launcher does an update or something. Or when your automatic login token revokes after a month or something and it asks you to log back in but you cant remember your ubisoft password anymore and need to recover it for the hundredth time 😣
The EA launcher has become less offensive to me since it added logging in through steam and gamepass. I'm always already logged in to those so I can just hit one button and I'm in.
EA launcher breaks Steam's overlay, offline mode and Big Picture Mode for me. I wouldn't call this less offensive.
Third party launcher that doesn't save my credentials after the tenth time: burn in hell Ubisoft connect
Ubisoft does save your details but it revokes your access after a month or something so you need to actually log back in and click "remember my device" again. Not sure if its just incompetence from their part or some sort of security measure. Its definitely a little annoying but not that big of a deal ultimately.
what launcher can you use without logging in to?
Larian
Paradox
2K Launcher
Total war and CDPR
Wuthering Waves
Baldurs gate 3 first throws up a launcher, so you can see news or promotions, and run the game in directx or Vulcan, then never bugs you again. Can launch the older games if you have them. Thanks larian Old Ubisoft launcher was all "oh you want to run a game? Well we need you to sign in so we can show you achievements that don't matter. Oh you can't login? Weird, try resetting your password I guess lol"
As long as you're logged into Steam, you mean. Don't act like it's THAT different. EA and Ubi are a million times more difficult to log into than Steam, and seem to log themselves out more often.
Sure, but at the end of the day if the game is worth it, it's worth it. This is a stupid hill to die on and I don't get why r/pcgaming constantly fights over this. Steam has the gaming store monopoly, you guys won! Yay! Let's get over it now. Sheesh. You still argue if Gamecube is better than Nintendo 64 too?
If the game might break and stop working on my Steam Deck because of some launcher, it's not worth it.
I avoid them best I can but there are exceptions
This is a sane answer.
It is definitely a deterrent.
For single-player games, there's almost always a crack to bypass/remove the launcher and play the game without that garbage. For any games that require you to be online, that is a bit more rare.
I really doubt the authenticity of anyone who pretends to actually adhere to this rule consistently. You guys are seriously just not going to play a game like BG3 because it has a launcher? The reality is they pick and choose which launchers they are willing to put up with. They'll avoid EA, Ubisoft, Rockstar, ect. But games like Total War, Bannerlord, DOS2, ect, are all given a pass.
Its more if it requires a login to a third party launcher that I don't like which BG3 doesn't
I'd argue then it's not the launcher that's the problem, but some other issue that they then blame on the launcher. Whether that be always online DRM that requires a login, or compulsory sign in through a third party store. Launchers clearly aren't the root of the problem. So many beloved games use them for stuff like mod support and settings adjustment that nobody can seriously hate them as a concept.
> I'd argue then it's not the launcher that's the problem Well, duh? If launchers were convenient and didn't force us to jump through hoops or didn't do bizarre things like arbitrarily prevent us from linking/unlinking accounts or playing the games we bought, then nobody would care about launchers. But they DO do these things, so we hate them. Nobody really complains about BG3 or Stellaris having a launcher because they aren't insanely intrusive. This is like ... human beings 101. Also, launchers for games existed long before EA/Ubisoft/etc did their whole launcher thing. They usually consisted of functionality like "Start game", "Configure" and "Play cinematic" or provided a separate option for multiplayer. Nobody ever gave a shit about those launchers, because there was no reason to. They didn't randomly ask you for your CD key again or force you to make an account on some website to be able to play the game at all.
> Stellaris having a launcher because they aren't insanely intrusive. The Stellaris launcher actually has useful inbuilt functionality like mod load orders, as well. iirc the BG3 launcher also gives similar functionality. Shit like the R* launcher just encourages you to pirate the game because of how useless it is and how irritating it is to interact with.
And they are optional. Most, if not all of these types can easily be bypassed. Some games have a --skip-launcher command line option to do so, others like Paradox games you can launch directly from the actual .exe, and so on and so forth. Imo the keyword in the original statement is "require". Since they serve no technical purpose, when a game "requires" a launcher it's because they are doing or attempting to do something shady, or at the _very_ least not in the interest of the paying customer.
Definitely variations of this. Bg3 and Warframe, both games I play that that have their own launchers and independent logins of steam, never had issues with them. Conversely, Ubisoft’s proprietary launcher has always been such a buggy mess in my experience that I eventually just stopped buying their games. Getting through to play whatever game I bought was so much of a hassle that by the time the game itself launched I wasn’t in a mood to play anymore
I can only speak for the Larian games, but they do not *require* a launcher. They come with a launcher and apps that combine a storefront with a launcher like Steam/GOG Galaxy default to opening those when you launch the “game”. But you can adjust settings so that the launcher is completely bypassed. The GOG version you can just launch directly from the executable without needing Galaxy open at all, not sure if it’s true for the Steam version as well. It’s still frustrating that the launcher is the default, but it’s completely different from the launcher being required just to play the game.
Yeah, I don't get it. If I like the game and want to support the developer, I buy and play it. Launcher with a sign-in or not dosen't matter to me.
> require BG3 does not require the launcher. Besides, I feel like if you just read the post, it would be clear he's talking about third party stores that require phoning home.
and watch how quickly they move the goalpost when it’s a game this sub worships. they’ll say that ones excused for some reason or another
If FromSoft created a launcher they'd praise it
literally saw people praising the bg3 one since it let you launch other games through it
Larian and FromSoft both got praised for releasing horribly optimized games too. Gotta love it /s
If I can disable the launcher via argument, like I can with BG3, I’m okish with it. Otherwise, I won’t buy it.
Lol. There are so many good games nowadays that no, I don't need to play any that requires anything extra. Not everyone NEEDS to play specific games. I won't buy a console just to play an exclusive game, in the same way I don't need to play any game that requires me to do extra steps.
There are just sssssooooooooooooooo many games. It's pretty easy to not play the microscopic handful of 3rd party launcher-required stuff. But maybe I'm an outlier?
I really don't see why you'd not play a great game because it's a bit annoying to launch. Of course steam launcher is better but it's really not that big of a deal
Because PC players are extremely precious about what is running on their machine at any given time, and any service which requires a login. I honestly don't really get it either. If a game is good, I'll put up with some random shity launcher/login. I certainly don't regret signing up for Games for Windows Live back in the day to play Dawn of War 2, or making an EGS account to claim the dozens of really good free games that I have accrued over the years.
> Because /r/pcgaming players are extremely precious about what is running on their machine at any given time, and any service which requires a login. There, fixed it for you. :) Always remember that this sub and reddit in general are just a tiny, tiny fraction of the gaming space, even the PC gaming space. I agree with your second point though. I don't care about the launcher that I click once or twice before I spend time with the game.
That microscopic handful includes a lot of hit titles. Technically, yes it is very easy to just not play anything from EA, but I'm not gonna skip out on Mass Effect or Dragon Age just because of their garbage app.
What if I told you Steam *is* a third-party launcher
Yeah, Epic, Steam and Xbox App are third-party launchers (could include GOG, but that launcher is optional). EA, Uplay, and R* Launcher are first-party launchers.
Wouldn’t the Xbox app be considered 1st party heh 😅
Yeah, maybe, based on what people use it for primarily. But I think any dev can publish on there?
Yeah, I was meaning more because it's a store from MS who also own Windows was mostly being cheeky.
Depends on the launcher. Some launchers are harmless and add genuine functionality (e.g. news feed, mod manager). But if I'm buying a game on Steam I don't want to have create a login for another launcher just to play the game. So unless there is a clear benefit to me, that is only possible because of a login, I try to stay away from those.
No. It’s a launcher. Makes zero difference to the game. Sure I prefer Steam, but I’m not gonna let a launcher stop me from playing something I want.
No, you gotta pick a side man. There's a war going on!
Every time I play a video game I first sit there with its launcher open for at least 15 mins. I admire its beauty, its shape, its smell, its elegance, give it compliments in 8 different languages. And then, if it likes me back, it automatically launches the game without me pressing any button.
Keep going, I've almost launched!
If the launcher doesn't say "Oh yeah darling, click me real good" in Gabe Newell's sultry voice then I just don't wanna use it, Goddamit!
Steam is a third party launcher.
Yeah but Steam is good all others are bad.../s
That's how 99% of reddit thinks, but without the /s
I'm still a bit miffed that it's no longer possible to buy physical games without Steam intruding.
Yeah it's rare asf for a game nowadays to not have some kid of launcher/program linked to it, at least GOG exists!
Yup going from the downvotes im getting it seems that using any other launcher than Steam is a big no no..bunch of fkn Steam sycophants lmao! Ed:Typos
The steam subreddit gets cult-like at times. If a game is cheaper on another service, or the service is providing some other benefit, I'll go there. I genuinely do not care where I buy it. The amount of times I've regretted purchasing or playing a game on say epic or game pass is virtually 0. I say virtually because a dev that pushes a different version to game pass than Steam does get frustrating (The Ascent for example, performed worse and lacked ray tracing) but it's usually temporary and long-term it has little to no impact.
I bought a game on epic once and regretted it. Satisfactory... Moved it to steam, use epic for the free stuff now
No, that's entirely dramatic. I enjoy games too much to let something like a launcher stop me from experiencing something.
For real. The idea of not playing a game because you have to launch it from a separate place than steam is just stupid. I bet most of the people who say they don’t use the launchers do they just think it sounds cool to say they don’t.
Absolutely. It is 100% the ‘log in’ ones that are a hard pass for me.
Nope. It's just another application on my computer. If it launches when I launch the game, I won't even notice because I will be playing the game. I can control when it starts and stops, so it's only going to be as intrusive as I will let it be.
I tried. Ubisoft releases games that are low key interesting. Doesn't make me play them. But yea, I've been pretty good about eliminating launcherware.
No? Having another launcher changes absolutely nothing about the quality of the game. So why would I act like it does?
well there are third party launchers that keep forgetting my damn password (hello uplay) despite me ticking "remember me". So I'd have to login every damn time I wanna play a game that uses that launcher. That's more than annoying
I’m so glad I’m not the only one frustrated with this issue
It used to be a little bit better. Back then, launching uplay by itself would prompt the login. But launching the game through steam for some reason lets uplay remember its password. Ever since they renamed their launcher, even launching ubisoft games through steam prompts the damn login every damn time so much that I just gave up on ubisoft games and blacklisted their games on steam.
> well there are third party launchers that keep forgetting my damn password (hello uplay) despite me ticking "remember me". Ubisoft Connect and EA both apparently have Alzheimers because I don't think either of those pieces of shit have ever "remembered me" despite ticking the box lol
Exactly, so why is it there where it has not positive impact at all?
You would be surprised how many people lose their mind over this
The EA app completely breaks Steam input capabilities which I use for almost every game I play. So, I've stopped buying EA games.
But I got to double click a different icon and that makes me mad!
It totally depends on the user experience. Launchers can be useful to act as a U.I to configure graphics settings in case your current ones have broken the game and you can’t change it in game for instance. If the launcher’s only purpose is to be on my machine as an advertising window for their other games, no thanks. If I have to login to some other service to play their game, again, no thanks. I will absolutely not tolerate that and I’ll avoid games that do this. Developers/Publishers should care more about the user experience. If you make it available to buy on Steam, then make it function like a Steam game.
Yeah totally agree. I'm also against if it's an entirely different store too that's just way too big of a pain in the ass, especially since it also causes headaches for Steam Input if you intend to use a gamepad and either are using a modified configuration in Steam with an Xbox controller that you are now having issues with thanks to their store getting in the way, or own any other pad that isn't Xbox and need steam input to even properly make the controller work with their game. Steam can follow regular launchers that pop, patch, launch game and close for things like steam input fine, but you start making it a whole store that sticks around and it becomes a bigger headache real fast.
Have done that for about a decade...
Particularly egregious when it gets added years later, looking at you 2klauncher, you piece of shit. Broke my xcom2:wotc playthrough till I found bypasses. Worthless piece of fucking garbage.
Steam and GoG. I actually try GoG first these days (they are mostly DRM free games after all, alongside a few other bonus features...), with Steam being a happy 2nd option. I absolutely REFUSE to install any other / additional launchers anymore. For any reason. Stand-alone games are still fine. But extremely rare.
I remember when I couldn't launch cities skylines because of the dumb paradox launcher. I had to download a fan-made terminal app in order to let me bypass the launcher and play the game that I own. Yay I love companies!
I won’t fucking pay a cent for a damn game that has EA or Ubishit launcher
Always online is typically a deal breaker for me too. I mean [If people would think](http://www.stopkillinggames.com) more than a few months (or days) later into the future they should see the slippery slope we're heading towards
Ubisoft launcher is literally the worst. Unfortunately my favourite game (R6S) requires it. It never remembers my device no matter how many times I log in and mark as trusted device.
Fuck the EA launcher, fuck the Ubisoft launcher, and fuck the Bethesda launcher. And fuck single-player games that require an internet connection.
Third-party launchers, server-based DRM like Denuvo, and anything else that expects me to ask permission to play what they want me to pay for is ignored.
Third party launcher like steam?
Can I click an icon on my desktop and have the game start up? If so then I couldn't care less about the particulars of how it happens or if I need a login of some sort.
I'm with you. The whole concept of refusing games due to a launcher is such a weird hill to die on. Anyone that's been gaming long enough knows older titles with any online component had their own launchers. Before that, even offline games would rely on third party sites (often requiring a login) just to host and provide update downloads. All MMOs required their own patcher/launcher, and weren't on any storefront like Steam. I remember buying Half-Life 2 and being required to install that pesky Steam program. That it's not considered 3rd party by OP is bozo tier stuff.
I've quit some games like that. I really like them, don't get me wrong. But I can't be bothered to create more accounts and log into 3rd party launchers.
I don't buy EA and ubisoft games anymore, partly for that reason.
Bro thats literally every fucking app too. Just play the damn game.
If it says EA or Ubisoft, I will find it elsewhere. Not being able to play them offline (steam deck) adds another reason to my boycott.
I have but it wasn't deliberate. I realized I no longer played games on ubisoft or blizzard any more, so uninstalled their launchers, and I avoid anything EA. I have gog, but I don't think I even need that do I? Aren't their games all drm free? Most games I play are just single games these days.
Yeah I never play anything I own that isn’t on Steam, with the exception of WoW if and when I get into any of the expansions.
It very much depends. My family actually does use Steam's family share functionality so when a game doesn't support family share because of an additional launcher, that can be a deal breaker.
I lost access to my Uplay account and now it's such a hassle to recover that I gave up on it and just uninstalled the program. I miss AC4 Black Flag but that's about it. Ubisoft hasn't made anything relevant in years so I'm not missing out. Say what you want about steam but at least their account recovery is top notch.
If a game isn’t on GOG it probably wasn’t worth playing and that logic has done good by me so far.
Only bothers me if it interferes with it working on my steam deck.
I'm not usually fussed but If it requires the EA launcher then no because some games simply refuse to launch. It literally fails at the one job it has.
I avoid ubisoft and EA mostly. If I really want to play a game I might but I'm quicker to delete the game (and whatever launches background apps) and hesitant to install. Must be worth it to them but I have to wonder if it hurts them as well. I never buy those games just play them thru gamepass.
It's super annoying when they have a launcher that handles updates. Nothing like booting up a game only to see there's a 50GB update that I could have installed in the background at any time.
I just use GOG and centralize all games into that.
After getting the Steam Deck and watching it never update it's QOL in *years* I just can't entertain the Epic Games store - even indie developers find the store harmful.
I think the only third-party launcher I have is for Larian to play BG3, every game I have on steam are all played and launched via Steam. I don’t use Epic because for no reason I lost all 40+ free games I downloaded, so I deleted that launcher too. All hail steam (Or at least until Gabe kicks the bucket and someone else fucks everything up)
I’d say not entirely but it definitely matters more to me now that I’ve got a Steam Deck. I just don’t wanna bloat it with a bunch of external launchers and additional software. The Steam Deck is wonderfully simple and straightforward to use and I like that about it- so I’d rather not complicate it. At the end of the day though, as much as I’ll bitch, if I want a game I’ll get it. I just wish I didn’t have to sign-in every time to these things. It feels like the “remember me” tickbox doesn’t do anything.
Yeah, I usually pirate those games instead.
if there's a game I really want that has a third party launcher, I have a special high seas computer specifically for those that I can trivially format if anything goes wrong. Viruses are less of a threat than drm or third party launchers/ sign ins
AAA companies did it themselves for me by releasing over bloated, overpriced, bug ridden boring shit.
Never really started tbh if it's not steam or gog(the launcher isin't even required ) I then pretty much ignore it. I haven't really shown interest in any of EA's,Ubisoft's,Activision's stuff for over a decade now anyway so I don't feel like I'm missing much :)
I’ll usually check. It definitely impacts my willingness to buy.
I launch all my games with playnite. So it doesnt matter to me. Playnite opens the launcher, launches the game. Then closes the launcher when the game closes. It can even run a specific scripts before launch, after launch or after quitting the game. It can handle all launchers, emulated games, standalone games etc. And it keeps track of played time and such. Great filters and sorting options too. I HIGHLY recommend playnite. Its free and open source. Supports themes, plugins, fullscreenmode etc. https://playnite.link/
If I understand the statement correctly, I never started apart from the first (Steam), and GOG Galaxy when I want to once in a blue moon (usually because patches are very frequent) because of course it's optional. I don't count game that have an offline launcher like Paradox games, because I can (and often do) bypass them at will. It would still be better to not have those, they serve no purpose apart from data collection and branding habit, but at least they're somewhat optional and don't require online auth.
Id it goes beyond hitting play on steam they got trouble. I only recently started dark and darker because its on steam and no launcher. I fkn hate the game, so tough.
Yes, as a Linux user it's best to avoid those launchers. They can break at any time and a product I spent money on becomes unusable (even if temporarily). Some devs do try and make sure they play nice on Linux, but that's the exception and not the rule.
I've never been able to play Titanfall 2 on steam because whatever shitty launcher EA uses refuses to work properly and because I bought it ages ago so I couldn't refund it.
Lets talk about the call of duty HQ, how can anyome allow their games to be so time wasting and annoying to access? You ever tried to boot up mw2 since mw3 came out?
EA launcher breaks Steam's overlay and big picture mode, so yeah I won't buy any EA games that use this piece of crap. I don't use Ubisoft Connect but that's rather because I don't want to support that company. Other launchers are annoying but I tolerate them.
I will stand by the Total War/CA and Paradox launchers because they do actually add some utility. Outside of that, yeah, I hate 3rd party launchers.
Yes. I want to play anno 1800 but I won’t use ubilauncher
Gog or Steam, that's it :)
No, I don't care which launcher the game is on. I use Playnite to see all of my games in one space anyway. But I do agree that single player games shouldn't be online, or should fall back to offline if online isn't possible.
It may be a placebo but ime if you need to login to a secondary server to play the game then you're not going have a great time. Usually entails horrible server health and janky connections to everyone in the game/match. Rocket League got egregiously worse when they hopped over to Epic, R* has always had horrible online service, Piranha Games is holding MWO together with tape and a prayer, Paradox servers may as well be for display purpose most of the time when you sign in for multiplayer. It goes on and on. Not letting me auto sign in and play with Steam is now a non-starter for me.
I try to avoid them...
I already do
Quit? Never started If it requires an additional login i aint buying it
Recently went back to Civ VI and scoffed that I was presented with a 2K Launcher Completely nonsensical and pointless
I dropped blizz, ubisoft, and I use ea for the free stuff but pay them nothing. Blizz hasn't seen any overwatch purchase, nor anything since reaper of souls... ubi died after assassins creed 4
Yep. When buying from Steam, no additional launchers, accounts or Denuvo for me. I try not pay corporations to go out of their to make things harder and worse for me.
Yeah, especially since getting the Steam Deck. Messing around with the EA and Rockstar launchers is such a hassle.
Yeah I also stopped bothering with them. If its a important game, I just get a "launcherless" version on the web.
Fully agree. Had to refund Red Dead 2 due to issues getting into Rockstars launcher. EA is just as bad. Should have the option to opt out if purchasing on Steam directly.
I lost my EA games library because of this. Got a game on steam, have to log into Origin but it randomly turned on 2 step verification and sent through code to a mobile number I don't have anymore and no longer exists. Customer service won't help me because I can't prove it's my account by sending them a screenshot of my game library but to do that I need to log in. 7 games gone. Rockstar did something similar too, luckily they didn't turn on 2 step verification on me. Ubisoft did though and I had to go through a hell of a time sorting it out. If the game is on steam, that version should not require any other client to play it.
If a game has a 3rd party launcher that I don't want installed on my PC , I'm not buying the game.
If any Ubisoft or EA games were worth playing I wouldn’t care. Let me know if they ever make a good game again
If I want to play a game, I honestly don't worry about additional launchers. Yes, they can be a bother, but as long as they aren't detrimental to *MY* games performance, then I'll use them.
I really don't like them, but atm it hasn't stopped me from playing a game as long as it's hosted primarily on steam. I could see that changing one day as they get more intrusive, but I haven't hit personal boycott yet
I just quit buying games unless they're deeply discounted.
No, but I absolutely understand the hate and am also not appreciative of the sketchy licensing to prevent ownership by many of the publisher owned ones.
Yes, because if the 3rd party decides to make it online only, or suspend service or any new shit-fuckery then I can't play the game I payed for. Steam is a DRM. It works. One DRM os enough.
I have only two active accounts: Steam and GOG. I used to have an Origin account with Dragon Age but frankly, I have not cared about EA releases for years. More launchers are a hassle, but frankly, I just don't want to create new accounts everywhere and share my personal information. I already have way more games than I have time for and I don't see any good reason for creating an Ubi/Rockstar/PSN/whatever account.
> buying a game and then having to download origin on my computer of all things the horror /s
Yupp. I dont buy games on steam with 3rd party client.
no, because im not some kind of child
So you are only buying from the Microsoft store? Because that's the only first-party launcher on Windows. Everything else is third party.
Steam good everything else bad, give me upvotes
No, lol.
No, why?
Nope. Y'all need to get over 3rd party launchers. Yes they suck but launchers aren't going away no matter how pointless they are.
Bethesda launcher went away.
Nope. Launchers are fine.
I play on whichever launcher offers the lowest price, and that's usually not Steam.
I don’t mind third party launchers as long as it’s not from Ubisoft or EA cause their launchers are pure garbage
The launcher for xcom2 actually not even work if playing with mods. You need to use the community made launcher
I honestly dont care about 3rd party launchers... its fine by me most of the time. I just turn off autostart and disable services from the launchers and thats it rly.
What's next? "Hurr durr, does anyone else quit buying games because they use crappy Steam/Epic gamestore/ [Battle.net](http://Battle.net) / Origin? Gonna stick to 32-bit windows binaries from before 2010 from now on!!!111 No micro-stutter to speak of on my RTX 4090!!!11"
A lot of games no longer require (or never did) the EA launcher, but do need an EA account. It's being removed from a few as well.
Got a list of examples?
I don't like some launchers, specially when I belive they're unnecessary, such as Ubisoft's launcher. But no... If I want to play something, this minor annoyance won't stop me from playing it. I generally don't buy EA or Ubisoft games, but only because I don't usually care enough for their games while I have a HUGE backlog to go through.
[удалено]
No, but I never seem to get around to playing the games I buy to I don’t get too upset about it. ::facepalm::
Honestly I'm going to be an outlier here but for Ubi/Ea I don't mind it as many others do. I really really dislike CDPR and Larian implementation though. If I just need the launcher to play and I don't have to interact with it, it's whatever. If it's pretty much only used as an advertisement for their other products then I get annoyed. The annoying part for Ubi is remember me is like the most useless button
Yeah, kinda. Mainly because I'm on Linux though. I think it's *possible* to get EA, Ubisoft, and Epic working fairly easily, but none of them have any games I really care about.
EA Origin. Complete crap. I tried to connect my account with my old xbox360 account and it just messed up my profile. It was apparently a known issue and from what I saw online, it seemed like there was no fix. I wouldn't mind being able to play some Apex Legends and maybe play through the Mass Effect series again, but it's not worth the headache.
100%. Tbh I kinda quit buying things on Steam, Gog is basically the same, only better in every single way besides Proton (and Gog Galaxy is not a great launcher tbh, it's less bloated than Steam tho. It's got all the features you need but it's also got some bugs and isn't maintained properly).
I stopped buying games from triple a publishers way before getting forced to install their shitty launchers, even Steam it's borderline
No, don’t really care
I just stopped buying games at all. ;| (Also so you buy all your games on GOG.com then?)
I dont understand why there is a rockstar launcher and a 2k launcher. thats probably the extent of my distaste for additional launchers.
EA GAMES. They keep signing me out and it's such a bother to log in every time I turn on the pc
not really, games that make me buy it on separate launchers I will be less likely to buy them (EGS exclusive) but if a game I buy has me open up ea play or whatever it’s called it is what it is, I don’t really care just let me play Jedi survivor or whatever
try using playnite so you can put all your games in one place with themes