Another reason being that Steam is so big that supporting another platform is not worth the bother. Which I'm sure you think it's just fine.
Except I'm not, because from common sense perspective I'm sure everyone can agree being able to expose your products to as much possible consumers as possible is definitely worth it, UNLESS there's something that prevents that from happening. In this context, it's GOG's questionable curation system which prevented games like Grimoire, Vigilantes, and Das Geisterschiff to have a release there.
Also, I know you consider something exclusive only if it's named officially as such and made public, but that makes you a retard. However, if you were capable of even some basic logic and letting go of rampant fanboysm, you'd see that a game released only on a platform you love is exactly the same as a game released only on a platform you hate.
Something is exclusive when they are available for access in wherever it's exclusive to. In case of console exclusives, they're only available in a specific console
BECAUSE THEY'RE FUNDED AND DEVELOPED BY THE OWNER OF THE CONSOLE. In case of exclusivity as we see it happening now with Epic, the games are only available in one store
BECAUSE EPIC PAID THE DEVS/PUBLISHERS TO RELEASE THEIR GAMES ONLY IN EPIC STORE. No matter how you want to twist and turns the definition of games only available on Steam either
BECAUSE THE DEVS/PUBLISHERS DECIDED NOT TO RELEASE IT ELSEWHERE or
BECAUSE OTHER STORES REJECT THEIR GAMES, they're not the same at fucking all. Valve literally have zero fault with this. They don't pay them to only release on Steam, and up until now you Epic apologists can't give definitive proof that Valve force the devs/publishers to only release their products on Steam with immediate financial gain like Epic does.
The day you guys can finally give us proof that Valve literally paid devs/publishers to release their games exclusively on Steam is the day I'll finally accept that it's the same exclusivity as it's happening with Epic now, but as I see it that day will never come. Except if Epic actually succeeded with this business model, in which case I see not only Valve begin to make a move on signing exclusivity deals with devs/publishers, but also the other big boys who have their own launchers like Ubisoft and fucking EA.
In fact, a temporary exclusive (as those on Epic) are very likely to be released on other platforms when the exclusivity period ends. On the other hand, exclusives from Steamtard developers are very likely to stay that way.
But yeah, I know, that's awesome and those developers have integrity and fight evil. Like not releasing on GOG because hurr muh piracy protection. Truly great developers.
Holy fucking shit, are you legit retarded? Epic exclusives are proven to have only a period of 1 year (6 months in case of Borderlands 3) so it's not just 'very likely', so I'm not sure why you brought it up. But the most retarded shit I read in this quote is how you proclaimed that there are (((((Steamtard))))) developers who literally 'don't want' to release their games on GOG. Just so you know, it's been thrown around for a while now that some games like the aforementioned Grimoire, Vigilantes, and Das Geisterschiff didn't get a GOG release BECAUSE THEY'RE REJECTED BY GOG. So now, name me one developers who proclaimed they don't want to release their games on GOG for whatever reasons other than GOG rejecting them or because they're not confident in being able to pass through GOG's questionable curation system.
Also, funny that you spin devs not releasing on GOG because hurr muh piracy protection, when Epic has the exact same DRM policy as Steam, meaning you can't even download the games just from their websites and thus need to install their launcher. And because it's so obvious that the devs who signed exclusivity deals with Epic are driven solely by money, it's more plausible that these devs are the ones who touted hurr muh piracy protection, instead of (((((Steamtard))))) developers.
You guys are bringing shit from other threads in here. The point was simply that getting eyes on your client is the goal. Steam did it with free Steamworks features, Epic is doing it with paid for exclusives, GOG is now trying to do it with a big push for their client being a central hub for all clients. Once you're using the client more for these reasons, they hope you spend more money on it. That's it.
But this doesn't make sense because
1) Steamworks features enticed the developers to sell their games on Steam
WITHOUT the detriment of the consumers (except those who can't really make the most out of the launcher for whatever reason, like having shitty internet)
2) Epic paid for exclusives definitely give instant profit for devs and publishers, BUT at the cost of consumers choice, convenience, and their trust.
3) Meanwhile, I don't see how GOG pushing GOG Galaxy 2.0 is anything that can benefit the devs and publishers. From the first glance, it's definitely a 100% pro-consumers but I still don't see how it will entice devs and publishers to sell their games on GOG.