-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
E3 PC Gaming Show 2019 is being sponsored by Epic (See EGS Guidelines)
- Thread starter Ge0force
- Start date
This kind of "media is bought by Epic" hyperbole is sad. You're better than peddling shitty conspiracy theories like this. Please act like it. This kind of statement, vilifying media and peddling conspiracy theories, is some of what makes the discourse in Epic-related threads toxic, and it is clear violation of this addendum:
Whether or not ResetEra staff chooses to enforce policy is their prerogative. However, rather than try to cultivate healthy discussion in these threads, Durante, you seem intent on doing the exact opposite. It is unfortunate to see someone who can often be a voice of reason on topics and issues do this sort of posting.
No, I'm not going to pretend that an obvious connection is not obvious.
Pretending not to see the forest for the trees or facing repercussions is not "cultivating healthy discussion". It's cultivating thought-crime, and pushing everyone not willing to participate in that theater away from your forum.
I've authored a dozen or so articles for PC gamer. I enjoy working with people there. But pretending that their reporting on and editorial stance regarding anything EGS-related has been even remotely unbiased is exactly that -- pretending.
Last edited:
No sega is indeed disappointing. Had hopes that we might see some Persona related PC news during this E3 but i guess i won't happening.
You think since Sega showed off Yakuza last time and Catherine was ported to PC recently, that Persona 3 and 4 PC editions could be announced here?
Because for some reason, Atlus keeps its main Persona games on dead platforms, its the reason no one I know could get into Persona until P5.
All these years, people have seen me rave about P4 thinking I'm some sort of madman.
No more!
Because for some reason, Atlus keeps its main Persona games on dead platforms, its the reason no one I know could get into Persona until P5.
All these years, people have seen me rave about P4 thinking I'm some sort of madman.
No more!
Way to throw the people you claim to enjoy working with under a massive bus
Your response to "you're getting dangerously close to breaking the rules, careful" is "#*&$ the rules they're bullshit and so are you!"
That's a bold move there.
Given that, in capitalism, most people are wage slaves to some extent I don't believe the actions of corporations reflect on the ethics of its individual workers.
I'd like ResetEra to be a place where you can discuss reality. I hope that's not too bold, but if it is, then at least I tried.
That goes directly against the thing you said in your previous comment lol.
I hate the EGS stuff and I'm not going to buy games on it, but I hope this thread doesn't have to be a constant pity party about that. It's really not that hard to just play the tons of other games coming out they didn't moneyhat until they ones they did show up on Steam.
They haven't announced all the participants yet.
They haven't announced all the participants yet.
I don't believe you understood my posts if you think that.
My first post is basically "PC Gamer as a publication is not reporting on EGS-related topics in an unbiased manner, and Epic is a huge sponsor for them, I'm not going to pretend that it's impossible for there to be a connection".
My subsequent post is "Individual workers are not responsible for the actions of their employer".
I see no contradiction.
To be clear: you are doubling down on the statement that PC Gamer is giving Epic positive coverage as a direct result of Epic's sponsorship of the E3 PC Gaming Show 2019? Do you have any evidence to back up your outlandish claim?
Since you seem to have no concept of journalism code of ethics, I would encourage your attention to be directed to the Society of Profession Journalists (SPJ) Code of Ethics: https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp
Notably, there is a section titled "Act Independently":
These are standard code of ethics that every institution follows, including PC Gamer. There is no evidence to suggest that PC Gamer has violated their responsibility to act independently. Were you to have evidence, I am positive it would be major news to virtually every major gaming news outlet, and they would be eager to report on it. Obviously, you don't have that evidence.
You are comparing not being allowed to push conspiracy theories to a thought-crime. I hope you realize how absurd this leap in logic is. ResetEra has a moderation standard that they behold themselves to in order to ensure healthy discussion. For example, bigotry is banned from this forum. That does not mean that not allowing someone to post bigoted statements is a thought crime. You're still free to have bigoted thoughts, but they aren't welcome nor accepted here.
What you have done is suggest that PC Gamer's coverage is pro-biased because they are receiving funding from Epic for that coverage which is incredibly inflammatory. This is not the same as saying that PC Gamer has a pro-Epic PoV or bias in its coverage. I hope you can see and understand the difference.
^This is where I am at.
Look, at what point do we see a distinct history of behavior of being very slanted on a topic with regards to a company, see they are being sponsored by the company they are biased for, and run effective presses releases for and begin to question things? This isn't just citing one or two or even four examples and then jumping to a conclusion. Do we need a smoking gun in the form of a public confirmation before this can be addressed? Do we need atleast 10 questionable examples?
I'll try not mention it again and others can hold onto the altrusism that the right way is that marketing and editorial never influence each other, but we have a lot signs they have a favorite.
This is BS, the company that left PC gaming in the late 90s/early 2000 because the business was getting more challenging and blamed it on "piracy" and painting an entire gaming community as criminals now wants to be the face of PC gaming? And they are trying to make the company that stuck to PC during the hard times as the current villain, no less. Fuck off, Epic. You are only here to try to become a monopoly, now that other people did the hard work of stabilizing PC gaming and mailing it a desirable market.
Okay to be fair, regardless of PC Gamer's situation, it is clearly not true that every institution actively follows that code. We wouldn't have Fox News, or One America News Network, or whatever the hell this shit is from Sinclair-owned local news stations:
To me all this means is that the 2019 PC Gaming Show has been pushed back a year.
Thanks, Epic!
Thanks, Epic!
So, I've had a look, and while Epic has sponsored events related to games press outlets in the past (e.g. Reboot:Develop, EGX), they did this via Unreal Engine. In the dev conferences in particular, that does make sense as UE4 is a very popular engine for game development. Here, it's explicitly the Epic Games Store that's sponsoring. Combined with the incredibly pro-EGS and anti-Steam stance PC Gamer has taken over the last six months, and at minimum it's dreadful optics for Future Publishing.
yep. never read a bad word from pc gamer about epic or the egs, now we know why. they do business together. just lol.
and yet it's alright for people to troll in these threads by saying 'it's just another launcher" or give bullshit reason why steam is a monopoly when epic is actually doing just that. I rarely see a warning, much less a ban, for these practices. I'm with Durante on this one, I say let's call out bullshit when we see it. PCGamer in particular don't go in hard on epic's practices and on some articles they seemingly favor them over steam. I'm sorry, not sorry, but that is bullshit.
on topic: despite everything, I'm interested to see the reactions that follow. It's a good test to see if PC Gamers will push back or not.
Trying to think of the most outlandish turn this could take and I just can't imagine anything that would top "Red Dead Redemption 2 is coming exclusively to the Epic Game Store this fall" which probably means it's gonna happen. The only thing
would be if they announced an EGS exclusive port of RDR1 at the same time.
would be if they announced an EGS exclusive port of RDR1 at the same time.
Digital Extremes is HIGHLY engaged with their own community, i would hope they would realize that they would be immediately crucified if anything of significance had even a whisper of exclusivity. That being said, they've also traditionally been willing to engage with just about every avenue possible to make Warframe available, and I could easily see them making the game available via EGS with some exclusive cosmetics or boosters (they've already done so with Discord Nitro), especially given their history with Epic. And to be honest, I would be perfectly ok with that, because it's the RIGHT way to leverage exclusivity without alienating those who do not want to engage.
There are already articles in the media saying people are tired of the excessive partitioning of the movie streaming industry and piracy is seeing a rise after years of decline. We don't want to see that happen on PC gaming, as some of the larger companies that are not as invested on PC gaming will quickly use that as an excuse to not do ports anymore. Then it's a bit of a vicious cycle.
Yes, people are frigging lazy and want convenience. You ask the average user to handle more than 3 streaming services and they get sick of it, same for game launchers. I don't have this problem, but given exclusivity deals that are not self financed by the publisher was not a thing on PC until EGS, seeing this being introduced by them on an open platform I've been playing on for almost 30years is really grating.
I guess advertisements in gaming magazines also mean those magazines can't be unbiased, right? Or if someone doesn't share your opinion and condemn Epic you have to assume Epic paid for that because no one could possibly have a differing opinion?
My guess would be Remnant from the Ashes, the new post-apoc schlooter Gunfire Games is making. It's set to release end of August.
You are making this a binary judgement when reality is rarely binary.
I don't believe that some individual(s) at PC Gamer took a cash payment from Epic with specific conditions on what to report on attached.
I do believe that the overall editorial direction at PC Gamer can be influenced by not wanting to lose out on future contracts with an important sponsor. Not necessarily because individual people knowingly choose to change their reporting, but due to the direct influence something has on you personally potentially coloring your impressions on the overall impact it has. (I would, in fact, argue that the same is true for developers) If you think that very idea is offensive and intolerable then I sadly don't think we'll ever agree on this.
I'd consider this a perceived conflict of interest, given that there are many posters on this forum who feel it is as such. It doesn't help that these are just guidelines and nothing enforceable. Just suggestions.
The "Act Independently" paragraph literally states:
avoid political and other outside activities that may compromise integrity or impartiality, or may damage credibility.
I'm pretty sure that getting paid by the company - that you are supposed to report of in a neutral way - kinda violates that.
Or we act like PCGamer and EGS just like each other for some reasons and EGS became the main sponsor for free.
avoid political and other outside activities that may compromise integrity or impartiality, or may damage credibility.
I'm pretty sure that getting paid by the company - that you are supposed to report of in a neutral way - kinda violates that.
Or we act like PCGamer and EGS just like each other for some reasons and EGS became the main sponsor for free.
Yes, there are examples of companies that break ethical practices from time to time, and some that do it more flagrantly (Fox News, Sinclair, etc.). Fox News and others fail at the bias test (responsibility to not have a bias PoV), but they generally adhere to other standards in media practice in terms of reporting, sources, etc.
There is an enormous difference between saying that a media outlet has biased coverage vs saying that a media outlet is on the take. Yes, they both are against the code of ethics, but suggesting a media outlet is on the take is a FAR greater offense ethically than saying a media outlet has biased coverage since virtually every media outlet has some form of inherent bias in their coverage because journalists and editors are people with their own biases, and those biases sometimes slip into their coverage. Journalists are supposed to cognizant of their inherent or perceived biases and try to eliminate them as much as possible, but it still happens.
The issues with movie streaming services has more to do with multiple subscription fees, not the fact that there are multiple launchers. The two aren't remotely the same.
I have but I won't say anymore because that will be considered backseat modding at this point but I will say look at the post he quoted. That's my point. If you want to discuss this further, we should take it to PM's.
People act like there's so many examples of them giving Epic sloppy blowjobs but if you actually tried to collect what people are getting outraged about and showed them to a third party observer you would look fucking looney toons.
PC gamer just banned me (and several other people) from their comments section, so you better don't talk about this on their site.
Still not similar at all to the reason movie and TV streaming piracy has gone back up. It's about the money. People think keeping multiple streaming services is too expensive after the whole "cut the cord" movement. Streaming is no longer cheaper than cable so piracy came back with a vengeance.
