Valve has competition, GOG, Humble, GreenManGaming, Etc. Etc. <br><br>Valve has more features in Steam than nearly every other "Store" hence why people use it, along side the obvious fact that it also was around first before mostly anyone else.<br><br>Valve LETS Devs to make as many keys as they want, and let other "Stores" sell those keys. <br><br>Any Dev picking to go with Epic just over being bought out with money, rather than letting the consumers choose where they want to buy the game, is a Dev losing money, sales, and possibly future customers and or prior ones who may no longer by their games.<br><br>Anti-Consumer is what Epic is being, not Valve. Anyone who says otherwise is either insane, or doesn't give a shit about having pro-consumer store fronts, and acts occur.,(reply>), ​@Tony Shen True. That being said, they still mostly benefit from it, since if a game has tradeable items, profits go to Valve. You cannot resell the game, if it's linked to steam. Basically, even sales outside it that force you to use it are mostly a benefit for Steam, since then you're more likely to make a purchase there, and not outside. <br><br>But is that competition? Hard to say it is, since either way you HAVE to use it in those cases, even if you bought it elsewhere.,(reply>), @rubbers3 but steam doesn't get money that sales elsewhere and they still need to provide service like cloud saves, wtf are you talking about? each sale outside simply mean a lost for steam, this is competition,(reply>), @PoppyCola ​ They could've made W3 exclusive to GOG, but they didn't because they weren't that well known of a brand back then. At that point, GOG was still a rather fresh, and mostly known for selling old games, not AAA tittles (7 years on the market, but only 3 years of selling more modern titles). It's The Witcher 3 that got them the attention they have now," Witcher 2 wasn't as popular as W3. Releasing it on Steam was the only way they could've reach a wider audience back then. <br><br>CDP Red also tried to make the Thronebreaker", the single player campaign for Gwent a GOG only title, but it failed miserably, so they were <b>forced</b> to release it elsewhere as well. That's the reason. <br><br>Also - CDP Red is an exception rather than the norm in many cases, so using them as an example is disingenuous.<br><br>Uplay is needed when launching a game from Steam, and that was seen as a horrible idea through the years and now it's heralded as a brilliant way of dealing with things? Interesting. In this case, it wouldn't work, because Epic is just a store, not a publisher for Metro, same as Steam is a store and not a publisher. Ubisoft is a publisher, EA is a publisher. CD-Projekt is a publisher. UPlay is a store for Ubisoft games. Origin is a store for EA games. GOG is a store for all kinds of games, but it's a small platform and rarely used to buy new titles. Epic Games Store started out as a store for Epic Games and Fortnite launcher. They did it so the don't have to give out 20-30% of their revenue to Valve (it's 30%, then 25% after $20mil in sale, then 20% after $50mil sale). Now they are so big, they can offer better cuts to developers (universal 12% IIRC) and still be ahead. So it makes sense for smaller developers, like Deep Silver, to choose a platform that offers them a better deal. Their main problem was changing right before the release, especially since that game was announced to be released on Steam before and only now, two weeks before the release things change. <br>But I got a bit off topic, so let's return to the Ubisoft case - Ubisoft could implement Uplay as a requirement even for Steam purchases, because it's the publisher for the games. Epic COULD NOT implement that, because they're just a store, a platform, they aren't a publisher. They could do this with Fortnite, they could do this with Gears of War, but they can't do this with Metro. In case of Metro, the publisher is Koch Media and it's subsidiary Deep Silver. Selling the game on Steam and then using Epic Games Store as launcher doesn't make sense, since in this case, they'd probably have to first pay Valve their 30% then another 12% to Epic. And that's not smart.,(reply>), @rubbers3 Also adding another reply,<br><br>Clients like Uplay are integrated with Steam so you own it on both clients. If only Epic had used their launcher as Uplay so Steam will need to use it when downloaded and purchased.<br><br>But at this point, nobody cares for launchers anymore. As long our preferred platform like Steam or GOG can be used to launch the game. But Epic is trying too hard to become Origin.,(reply>), @rubbers3 Included Witcher 3 because CD Projekt owns GOG which means they could have made the game exclusive to their client but they didn't. They allowed other library platforms like Steam to have it released so Steam can make cut as well.<br><br>This reason is to gain recognition and grab the consumers attention. You are not going to grab any consumers attention if you can't find it on Steam or GOG.