Supergiant took the timed exclusive deal so they could afford to avoid crunch while developing one of their games. Do you take issue with them treating their employees well?
If you have an issue with how Epic treats its game developers then don't buy Epic games. If you avoid buying games from other developers out of some bizarre logic that this will somehow "teach them" to deal with Epic, you'll just end up driving them out of business or toward the crunch deathmarches they were trying to avoid.
Otherwise, by your logic, you should avoid buying games from any AAA developer, or from any digital storefront (including Steam), or for any console. Basically, you would need to avoid buying games at all except from a very small set of indie developers.
You can't blame them for taking time exclusive money, they are a business afterall. And its not like they support their practices.
Yes, I can blame them for that. When running a business you have to decide what your core principles are and which ones, if any, you are willing to compromise for money.
>And its not like they support their practices.
Taking their money and listing their game on the Epic store is an endorsement of Epic's business practices, just like listing your app on the Apple App Store is an endorsement of Apple's business practices.
By your logic:
> You absolutely support their practices by doing business with them.
Life is not black and white.
If Nestle is engaging in child slavery and you buy their products then yes you obviously are supporting child slavery through indirect material cooperation. Behaving morally isn't easy, which is why it's so rare.
Whether or not you choose to adapt your purchasing decisions based on this knowledge is a separate question of your ethics and other factors.
I don't understand the vocal support for Steam over Epic Games. Steam literally charges you more and there are no competitors as big as Steam. I'd rather have a de facto duopoly vs a monopoly. And yes, I'm aware of GMG, Origin, Blizzard, etc.