I mean, it actually does work like that but whatever. Not a hill worth dying on
The way this thread has gone from page one shows us the exact opposite is true. EGS could meet feature parity with Steam tomorrow and the same 10 posters would still rain their performative disinterest on every thread with 'EGS' or 'Epic' in the title.
I'm sorry. But what exactly do you think sponsorships are if not for sale? Like there are legit things to worry about Epic buying, but this is literally what sponsoring is.
the first page of this thread is just like the first page of every EGS thread. "I have no interest in this topic or product and I want *everyone to know it*" is the rallying cry and it happens in every single thread without fail. It's pavlovian at this point. It's impossible to actually talk about the EGS without the usual suspects flooding in and holding the entire conversation hostage to their specific talking points. EGS could sponsor a hot dog eating contest or a sack race and you'd have people who hate hot dogs and sack races say "well now that's ruined for me."What to point out the posts that give you this impression? Because this feels like a pretty horseshit statement.
It's just crappy and childish behavior and it's reason numero uno I am loath to enter a pc-gaming thread in Era lately.
The way this thread has gone from page one shows us the exact opposite is true. EGS could meet feature parity with Steam tomorrow and the same 10 posters would still rain their performative disinterest on every thread with 'EGS' or 'Epic' in the title.
WTF. I mean... Maybe a discussion about PC storefronts is not the best thing to compare to Holocaust denial? I mean, for starters the Holocaust is an historic fact, a debate on whether EGS is good or bad for PC gaming is not a fact.Should Washington Post be forced to publish holocaust denying articles in order to show "both sides" of that """debate"""?
- Epic are sponsoring an event that PC Gamer has independently run for years, with the promise of exclusives for their store being revealed.
I wish this was true and honestly I was supportive of Epic before the EGS, but their bad practices just continuously deter people.The way this thread has gone from page one shows us the exact opposite is true. EGS could meet feature parity with Steam tomorrow and the same 10 posters would still rain their performative disinterest on every thread with 'EGS' or 'Epic' in the title.
Oh so it's about ethics in games journalism...Yeah can you imagine people wanting say, PC gamer to disclose that there is a potential conflict of interest when writing an article about EGS, what are these people, the FTC, pff these anti EGS snowflakes.
I mean, it actually does work like that but whatever. Not a hill worth dying on
What else is there to show from that game? I think they've shown enough.
the first page of this thread is just like the first page of every EGS thread. "I have no interest in this topic or product and I want *everyone to know it*" is the rallying cry and it happens in every single thread without fail. It's pavlovian at this point. It's impossible to actually talk about the EGS without the usual suspects flooding in and holding the entire conversation hostage to their specific talking points. EGS could sponsor a hot dog eating contest or a sack race and you'd have people who hate hot dogs and sack races say "well now that's ruined for me."
The PC Gaming show at E3 was never this sacred thing that rose above the level of running joke. It's not ruined by an EGS sponsorship. It's not evidence of the 'ethics in egs journalism' conspiracy theory getting durante all hot right now. It's not a reason to slyly interrogate a Rebellion Developments rep about their moneyhatted exclusive. It's just crappy and childish behavior and it's reason numero uno I am loath to enter a pc-gaming thread in Era lately.
PC gamer just banned me (and several other people) from their comments section, so you better don't talk about this on their site.
Guess Borderlands 3 will be there unless MS gets the showing, no? I can picture cokelord Randy sitting down in that PC show setting and showing us some magic tricks though.
Yeah, console wars-like bullshit is fun.
.... if you're twelve.
How is this circling of the wagons from people who never give a shit about PC threads until Epic shows up acceptable?
You're transparent as fuck.
Uhh..they could show, you now, the remaining two vault hunters. The game is out in September and E3 is one of the few major showings it's going to get before launch. They already said they are going to be there, afaik.What else is there to show from that game? I think they've shown enough.
Makes sense. I wasn't suggesting we'd only see Epic related games, but BL3 is their biggest exclusives as of now, and it's launching this year. Would make sense for them to promote it during E3.It's not going to be there. Or if it is it'll be at MS first and then show off some gameplay here, like has been done in the past. PC gaming show is too small fry for something like Take Two.
People don't really understand these sponsorships. What they get you is a 10 minute boring lecture and like AMD and Intel did. They don't suddenly own the whole show, nor is most of the show associated with them (so all the people freaking about like Rebellion and Warframe there are just that, freaking out). It's gonna be a speech and a highlight reel with likely a few small announcement like they did at TGA last year. Some devs might have EGS games too, but I'd bet the majority won't.
I think you're going to be wrong here. I wouldn't be too surprised if it turned out that, as a requirement for the title sponsorship, everything shown will have to agree to be at least available on EGS.People don't really understand these sponsorships. What they get you is a 10 minute boring lecture and like AMD and Intel did. They don't suddenly own the whole show, nor is most of the show associated with them (so all the people freaking about like Rebellion and Warframe there are just that, freaking out). It's gonna be a speech and a highlight reel with likely a few small announcement like they did at TGA last year. Some devs might have EGS games too, but I'd bet the majority won't.
Sponsorship deals didn't start with Epic in 2019.
I'm actually shocked valve hasn't sponsoring events like these.
These are the examples you asked forAnd you jumping into this thread just to shit on it is not doing the exact same thing?
Doing nothing but downplaying concerns and handwaving away criticism as childish behavior?
Yeah. Not watching them announce more exclusives for their shitty store
And I'm out. Not interested in any Epic exclusives so there's no point in me watching.
* pretends to be shocked * This just means five or so games have a 6-12 months delay.
As a side note: would it still be considered "vilifying games media" if people accuse Pc gamer of getting paid by epic? 🤔
Well, at least PC Gamer being 100% uncritical about the Epic Games Store makes sense now.
Is there an add-on that replaces "Epic" with "Tencent" because that's exactly what it is.
We're going to hold your word on that.
Well I won't, but they probably will...
PCGTim JapanPCPorts3 hours ago
We actually invited Sega this year and unfortunately the timing wasn't right for them. IIRC their presence is going to be minimal.
I think you're going to be wrong here. I wouldn't be too surprised if it turned out that, as a requirement for the title sponsorship, everything shown will have to agree to be at least available on EGS.
Fair enough.What sort of fact is this?
AMD has been a main sponsor of the show before, and now it is EGS. Either the show has always been influenced by sponsors, or sponsors don't impact the show. The opportunity to demo games for whatever platforms has always been there. Microsoft promoting Age of Empires, Star Citizen promoting their own game, Oculus Rift games.
You have double standards with the statement like that.
Just to clarify: There's all sorts of examples of where it makes sense to cover only one side of a debate when the other side is not grounded on facts. While I don't think that is the case of the Epic Game Store, it is the case for many topics in the world where it makes no sense to cover both sides of the "debate." There is no journalism ethics being broken when that happens. You don't, for example, see WaPo or NTY giving equal time to anti-vax movement as they do vaccines because there isn't really a "debate" there, only one side there is grounded in science and fact and it isn't the anti-vax movement.
Taken from PC gamer comments:
That's unfortunate, very little hype now unless we get Bloodlines 2 footage.
I'm going to point out that I was careful with my wording, and that being "available on EGS" doesn't preclude games from launching on Steam et al at the same time.It's just not practical.
Here's the thing with EGS: A HUGE chunk of it's catalogue are multiplatform games. They don't have very many actually PC focused games. The typical game shown at EGS tends to be PC-ass PC games. Some might be multiplatform, but most will skew toward heavily PC oriented. Now, maybe Epic will start to court that crowd more, but at the very least we've already seen Rebellion say they are there for a steam game.
Now we know Annapurna and Tripwire will have EGS stuff. I'd doubt say, Frontier with it's heavy DLC focus will be on EGS unless EGS actually ramps up it's features really quickly, which they have not done so.
I wish it would actually be about interesting conversations on the widening horizons of PC marketplaces and whether or not this grows the pie or just segments it.
I've played games and shopped from storefronts that offered material rewards for enabling MFA and I can't see evidence of such behavior stunting the growth of the industry. If free games are hobbling GOG or Humble I'd be curious about the evidence to support that.The problem is that from the looks of things (with EGS promotional efforts focusing on free games, exclusive games and now it seems that they're planning on outright handing out store credit as an incentive to enabling 2FA on Epic accounts), it's almost certainly segmentation.
Company does things that companies who want to be competitive do and I don't like it...At this point Epic is openly aggressively trying to spread its influence. PC Gamer has already shown and exhibited some of that with its articles already. I DO NOT like Epic spreading their influence with journal sites like PC Gamer. It creates room for much bias and one sided-ness. Epic clearly doesn't care about that and only wants to take over the market and everything PC with its money but oh no they won't spend a dime on their shitty store and make that a priority first and foremost instead of snatching 3rd party games and label them as 'exclusives'.
LMFAO. Epic Games isn't even trying to improve their rep. What's their endgame? Do they just expect the backlash to die out on its own?
I don't understand why you feel that this needs to be said here. You said it yourself, this is not the case for the Epic Store. So why make this sort of argument in the first place? What's the point in using such extreme examples like anti-vaxxers, or that other poster that used holocaust denial as an example?
It breaks all sorts of journalistic rules and codes when a publication decides to present only one side of a debate.
yes no one can criticize the media ever without being a gamer gater
sega isn't going to be there.
I'm surprised it took them this long to start accusing people of being gamergaters. I figured it would happen not long after they likened being anti-Tencent with being racist towards China.yes no one can criticize the media ever without being a gamer gater
congrats you figured it out