I wasted all the anger I have for EGS on Origin in 2012. Pubs throwing their money around to try to get you to use their launcher is something I've been dealing with for years - I just don't understand what line is crossed with EGS that Bethesda/Blizzard/EA haven't already been crossong with reckless abandon.
Frankly, I prefer Epic's method because they have the decency to not buy studios and instead just focus on individual games. Damning a studio to Bioware's fate is a thousand times worse than temporary exclusivity, but everyone cheers for Microsoft's acquisitions of soon to be exhumed studios like Obsidian and Double Fine, so I don't understand what exactly is so uniquely repulsive about Epic.
Fundamentally, epic are spending money to deny access to a title to people, not spending money to create a title from scratch in the first place.
Most of the games they've done this with so far have been things fully funded by things like kickstarter, and then epic have swooped in at the last minute to add an exclusivity clause, and its usually not with the developers but with the money men publishers.
MSs acquisitions are at least going to ensure that the studios in question survive to get at least one game out, and is going to be paying wages for people throughout that period, giving them plenty of time to see the warning signs and move elsewhere.
Its the difference between Sony co-funding development of SFV, or Nintendo co-funding Bayonetta 3, versus MS moneyhatting Laura Craft 2: Tom Braider to cock block sony for 6 months.
In an ideal world none of those would be exclusives, but an exclusives better than the game not existing at all.
Making something that was never going to be exclusive into an exclusive a month before release is a dick move.