You've linked an article about Google where Time are, in fact, quoting *themselves* on Google's motives. They are explicitly saying that Google intends to 'shame' telecoms companies in to providing better service - but they link their own, earlier, article in which they state that Google's move "*could* embarrass" other ISPs, not that it intended to. In that article they link to a Google staffer blog, which contains the actual reality: that Google was experimenting with a gap in the market (one which is now a successful part of their business) - nothing more. In fact, the blog explicitly states that they DON'T expect their move to change ISP's practices.
So, yeah, you're wrong - and linking articles which bend the truth to make a point opposite to reality won't change that.
Half-life 2 was the first game to require installation of Steam to install the game at launch, even to play offline - but Counter Strike already required Steam for online play by that point. Regardless, the point I was making was that you had demonstrated a lack of knowledge about the industry, and the history of Steam, not that you were wrong about the first game to need it (which you were not). Your attempt to disprove that with a quick google search has not made you look smarter.
Now you are focusing on Epic being a business, which has to make money, as if anyone said it wasn't. Are you deliberately missing the point I was making, so that you don't have to accept it, or are you just too wrapped up in praising Epic to realise that what you're talking about is irrelevant?
The 5% was mentioned not to say "oh, how terrible that Epic charges for it's product", but to point out that, despite talking about fees, Coffee Stain, Epic, and various news outlets have all avoided mentioning the 5% at all, in case people think that only enforcing the fee on other platforms is a bit underhanded, or that avoiding such fees might be a factor in the decision. The decision to lock in to Epic is being paraded as a bold move to support indie devs, and 'stick it to the man', when it clearly isn't. In fact, this whole excercise is aimed ONLY at marketing the Epic platform to other devs. For some reason, Coffee Stain are willing to potentially sacrifice the success of their game, and definitely sacrifice their profits, to market Epic to other devs - but they are pretending that their reasons are other than that. I'm sure that THQ Nordic already being in bed with tencent and Epic Games has nothing to do with it at all...
So, to be clear, very very clear: Coffee Stain have betrayed their own fans, and then lied about their reasons for doing so; they have taken an unnecessary step, to limit their own sales and profits, and irritate and upset eager customers, while pretending it's all for a noble cause - when anyone with half a brain can see otherwise; they have made a decision which puts their customers financial and personal information at risk, for the benefit of no-one but Tencent.
This? This is reality, and everyone else has the right to speak with their dollars too, by refusing to buy on Epic - and has the right to speak up on here (especially when invited) to point out their dissatisfaction, without being attacked, called lazy, and sworn at by people like you who have nothing to add to the conversation but wade in anyway to flaunt their ignorance and repeat fanboi mantras. Do you work for Epic, or directly for Tencent? Or did Steam kick your puppy? Seriously, why are you so angry at people not wanting to have their information sold or stolen, and deciding that is more important than a game? If you don't stand to gain, why does it matter to you?