• mint_tamas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    4 hours ago

    A “de-facto” monopoly is not a monopoly. Competitors basically refused to innovate their stores beyond the MVP despite users pointing out the missing features. Epic pissed away a lot of money to buy traffic and then never did anything to keep it.

    • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      21 minutes ago

      For all the things I enjoy about GOG, I really wish they added an “ignore” button to games. Steam has had it for 10+ years now.

      Another thing I really wish they added is negative filters to the store search/list, “hide games with the tags”. It’s shopping UX 101

    • wpb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      30 minutes ago

      A “de facto” monopoly (whatever that is) has all the drawbacks of a “real” monopoly (whatever that is): reduced incentive for innovation, possibility for price fixing, means for anticompetitive practices, and so on. The distinction is entirely meaningless when you look at the actual impact an <adjective> monopoly has on society.