I don't doubt that there's people who consider features and availability their #1 priority, but the vibe I get from EGS threads in general is definitely more on the side of principled backlash. Anyway, I don't want to belabor the point. Everyone has their own, valid reasons for not wanting to support Epic, and that's OK.
-
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.
E3 PC Gaming Show 2019 is being sponsored by Epic (See EGS Guidelines)
- Thread starter Ge0force
- Start date
I'm aware they don't do advertising. If they refuse to advertise their service when that kind of platform promotion is included by everyone else charging the same 30%, that's kinda shitty.
Steamlink is largely design to increase your dependence on Steam for PC gaming. Their linux work has always been a hedge against having their fortunes tied completely to the Windows OS. VR has never been treated like more than a hobby for the company's idle, rich employees..
Compared to not doing a show? Yes. How is that a question? Doing something is action compared to not doing something. If your position requires denying modus ponens, you need to reexamine your logic.
I would be just as put off with the aggressive and relatively irresponsible tactics. but I would be delighted that there was another platform is capable as steam.
I think you'll find that people are disturbed by this for a number of different reasons in different combinations.
Myself, for example. I don't happen to think epic poses any serious threat to PC gaming. I don't think they pose any serious threat to steam. So that's two points that I could be upset about that I'm not.
I'm not upset about the idea of exclusives in and of itself. I enjoy consoles after all, and I accept that as part of the landscape for as long as I can remember. So no problem there. I am fairly annoyed that they chose this lazy route, but hey.
So moving on to things that I do find a obnoxious, we have the lack of steam's powerful features that makes the epic store version an inferior game. And the price fixing that is a symptom of the exclusive deals. Oh and I'm a little annoyed that I can't play the game at all thanks to no Linux support. You can see how I would be a little annoyed at that.
But of course there has to be something that I really care about in all this. Or else, I wouldn't be frequenting these threads so much.
I'm pissed off that this time last year we had a PC landscape that was for the most part cooperative with storefronts and platforms coexisting somewhat peacefully. Now here we are in 2019 the year of our Lord, and we have this bull in a china shop show up and openly declare war on valve.
The valve that has been non-aggressive since their inception despite having every chance to strong-arm or hamstring competitors.
And they're going to do it by making steam users as uncomfortable as possible while adding nothing of value. That makes me pretty mad.
There's something that makes me madder though. It's the waves of marketing... or 'messaging', if you know what I mean... That we are dealing with on a daily basis. Republican-grade talking points have been boosted constantly for months now. Random personalities throw out red meat to get clicks on twitter.
Yes that makes me very mad. Look at the damage it's done here. Look at the longtime members here that have been either banned or driven away because they've been exhausted by this onslaught of misinformed comments day in and day out. This is the thing I'm most mad about. This is the thing that really affects me. I fucking miss those people.
So there you go. As you can see, theres many things to be upset about, but I am only upset about some and to different degrees. That's my profile as an epic detractor. We're not all the same. Far from it.
Last edited:
Good idea. Let's call this square one.
Am I supposed to resent valve for not doing gobs (really not much at all to be more precise) of marketing and self promotion?
Just wait till June 10. Either there will be fireworks or a trash fire.
Unfortunately, 'Dev and consumer facing features' is not a very useful substitute for marketing, promotion and exposure.
Can we accept that Valve isn't perfect? I posted that I expected the dominant force in PC gaming to be a major sponsor of an event at E3 celebrating and promoting PC gaming. I'm not sure why that's even contentious.
Of course they're not. However on a sliding scale of unperfectness, EGS is in the pits and Valve stands comparatively in heaven.
I assume that by dominant force you mean Steam and you can bet that it would look just as bad as it does for PC Gamer if they ended up doing this. Moreover, what's with this obsession of wanting Valve to pay for everything? They are the most popular platform but they are in no way PC Gaming as a whole and I'd feel pretty concerned if they represented themselves as such.
Thankfully they've never done so, unlike another company sponsoring the event (and, dare I say, articles).
Valve isn't perfect but it does things way better than Epic who have only made the pc a worst platform to play some games.
Seeing a lot of talk last few pages of Valve not doing enough promotion but I am wondering what type of promotion could legitimately counter money hats. All the positive promotion in the world would not prevent Epic from gobbling up exclusives at the end of the day. Plastering their face all over town as the face of PC gaming would probably just give people more ammo to accuse them of being a "monopoly" for those with a bone to pick with them.
It feels like empty criticism that really does not apply anywhere in the conversation.
For the record I don't think there is anything wrong with Epic sponsoring the show. The show has had other sponsors before and usually they do it if the content of the show benefits them in some way and I imagine the same will be of the upcoming show.
It feels like empty criticism that really does not apply anywhere in the conversation.
For the record I don't think there is anything wrong with Epic sponsoring the show. The show has had other sponsors before and usually they do it if the content of the show benefits them in some way and I imagine the same will be of the upcoming show.
I can't even buy a game from the EGS because they have paypal limitations. That's a pretty big "example" right there.
User Warned: Provocative drive-by post.
LOL epic causing outrage has definitely been fun to watch
Well with 13 posts you're obviously new here and just asking questions. Its been covered rationally and in detail quite a bit here.
Nobody has said that Valve is perfect. In fact, there's plenty of criticism on how they handle things sometimes, and a very long list of things that can be improved on Steam.
Valve not sponsoring stuff like this probably has to do with their 'live and let live' libertarian mindset. Or maybe they're stingy, who knows. They usually have a big sale two weeks after E3 so people can wishlist and buy some of the games featured on the different shows.
Smart move by PC gamer, people will hate watch the PC gaming show this E3 instead of just ignoring it like every other year.
Detailed list of reasons? Here you go.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DuU-bjOqiCsZgXtqN_F3eCdx2CKKOT8_/view
The majority of the stuff shown isn't going to be Epic exclusive, but OK.
not like the E3 show could get any worse than it already was
It was always a platform for AMD, and nobody was screaming foul play then.
If only PC gamers could organize and fund the show they want.
It was always a platform for AMD, and nobody was screaming foul play then.
If only PC gamers could organize and fund the show they want.
¿Honestly? I'm being pretty excited for the free games they've been giving lately, and I'm pretty optimistic the store is going to be decent in one year from now (If we take their roadmap at face value, that is). Games that I never experienced before the EGS like Subnautica or Edith Finch are really awesome and I'm glad I could play those thanks to them.
The store is pretty lackluster right now and then there's the price problem for games like Metro Exodus, but I'm a type of consumer who doesn't buy any triple AAA games (40 price tag or higher) at release, so that's why I could easily accept just its free games without worrying too much about the exclusives, but I can see that could be a problem for a lot of other people. Now that the PC Gaming Show is gonna be hosted by Epic, I think it's now turned as a benchmark for measuring the potential greediness Epic will have with its own exclusives. Maybe this could affect the quality of ongoing free games from the store? If it does, I would not like as much as now.
I never did say Valve is perfect though did I? They do messup a fair bit with their projects some times and definitely should be better about communicating what they do.
It's just the dumb "valve lazy" stuff that I'm critiquing
And what's your point? That these features aren't beneficial to the consumers and developers of those platforms?
Also seriously pulling out the lazy dev piece yikes.
Edit: Should've just double quoted sorry for the double post
As much as I dislike Epic and their store, I see nothing bad here. This is something Valve could have done years ago.
While the aggressive tactics being used by Epic are affecting a lot of people negatively because of limited access to their storefront, having their back on the E3 PC show gives different importance and notoriety - and strength - is really nice.
I hope Valve would have engaged like this.
I hope Valve would have engaged like this.
How do you know? Even when a game is not announced as Epic exclusive, if there's enough buzz around it there's a huge chance Epic will still moneyhat it right before release.
I'm done looking forward to games until they are actually for sale on a storefront that I want to support. So I'm definitely not gonna watch a PR show sponsored by Epic.
This is largely true. Epic doing a massive marketing push on the E3 stage is fine. I think the problem is they're in a position of promoting "PC Gaming" as a whole, and they're a terrible steward of it. If they were coming up to tout the incredible success of Fortnite, of Unreal Engine, to celebrate the purchase of Psyonix (ouch.), it would be a logical press conference for basically a major publisher.
But as a representative of "PC Gaming", Epic has literally done nothing to make it more convenient, user-friendly, forward-looking compared to consoles. All they've done is add one more storefront/downloader to an already-saturated and frustrating market. At the same time they've tried to situate themselves as a somehow more friendly actor than Valve, which is a laugh.
None of this is to stan for Valve. If Epic (or anyone) came through with a gaming portal that was better than PS4's OS, I'd love to see it. There's no indication they're going to do that, and Valve has been making substantial progress in that direction.
What's really going on is a fight over the cost of stewarding PC gaming. Publishers seem unwilling to pay it. Epic is giving them a way out without the features. Maybe the answer is that Valve should slash their % and pass the costs of Steam development onto gamers. Either way, this is bad for the longterm health of PC.
And NONE of this addresses a major longterm problem that only Valve is touching: the direction of Windows and Microsoft's control over the platform. Epic is just going to punt on that question despite Tim Sweeney's high profile concern on this issue. Valve are taking big risks to solve the problem for all of us:
https://venturebeat.com/2016/03/05/...ted-micrsooft-in-bid-to-keep-windows-10-open/
Maybe Epic can announce they used some of the fortnite money to improve the store and also release Unreal Tournament 4
Or perhaps the opposite
Or perhaps the opposite
People who think it's a minor issue that EGS lacks features should take a look at the other PC gaming portals. Origin launched 8 years ago and is still a glorified download manager. EA hasn't even attempted to turn it into a unified gaming platform. Same with Battlenet, who's current incarnation is about 10 years old. It's a bit better than Origin, with limited support for party invites and stuff, but still a dim shadow of Steam.
This tbh. At least until they get their act together with the client.
Honestly, by this standard we should be supporting Microsoft's efforts more than Epics. At minimum Microsoft has a gaming UI with gamepad controls. It's bad, but it's something.
If Epic did that then that would be pro-consumer and as of yet, they showed no signs of being pro-consumer.
But they are working in the best interest of the consumer, we just don't know it yet. Tim said so...
This will all come trickling down on us soon enough, just wait. /s
If Valve sponsored the PC Gamer Show, people would be like "see, they are just trying to control the PC market! It's a monopoly."
If Epic at least funded the development of those games...
There is a difference: neither ActiBlizz or EA are moneyhatting other publishers to put their games exclusives on those stores. Most people use them because they want to play the games those companies developed. People didn't mind when EGS was just a Fortnite launcher. People's grievances were when they started forcing exclusivity to their store and how barebones it is.
Honestly, I think Valve should do a show, maybe similar to how Google rolled out Stadia at GDC. For example when they first released the controller API, they could've had on someone from Paradox to show how they implemented it with Cities Skylines. It should be framed as how Steam makes life better for players and developers, not just the lineup of exclusives they've bought.
I disagree. I find it incredibly annoying that I have to think about which launcher I need to run to play one game over another. If I've got Big Picture mode up on my TV, and I've got my gamepad on the couch, I have to get up, get a keyboard, open up Origin, and click Apex Legends. Even if I add it as a "Non-Steam Game" (more configuration/frustration), it still launches Origin before running, which adds potential points of failure. Some library update or Origin dialog box will frequently interrupt the flow of launching a game without the need for keyboard/mouse intervention.
Also, I follow the industry and know which games come from which publishers etc. Imagine being like most people and not knowing that you'll need Uplay for Assassin's Creed, and Battlenet for Overwatch and EGS for Fortnite, and Bethesda launcher for Rage, etc.
When a game becomes massive, and it's free to play like Fortnite, maybe it seems like an exception where you'll tolerate some game-specific launcher, but all of them add friction to the experience, and they're all bad.
EGS exclusivity is just salt in the wound. All the publishers are contributing to PC gaming frustration.
Even if their client is near perfect, I will never support moneyhatting on pc. I want this to die asap.
I've bought Forza Horizon 3 on there so that's more than I've spent on EGS already. Atrocious store and service though. I won't buy anything on there that isn't first-party and can be gotten elsewhere.
Last edited:
Yeah I agree. It drives home how important Steam is to the PC ecosystem. The next best competitor (one of the world's largest software companies no less) is so far behind. I'm not against Steam competitors, but if all they do is fracture my game library, my friends list, and my user experience, I don't see any upside. Console gamers wouldn't accept this, and I don't see why PC gamers do.
We may as well go back to exe installers for each game. At least that would be open to independent/open source game launchers.
The potential downside is that the focus could be on EGS exclusives and the developers and publishers working with Epic rather than a broad swath of PC centric companies. Narrowing the scope is clearly moving in the wrong direction. The PC's E3 presence has been shrinking over the years even as the install base has been growing.
Actually, as a gamer, it's far better.
Which is of course the reason why Steam is by far the best platform.
It's not like E3 is all that relevant -- it's importance is tied to the importance of traditional games media, and that is obviously on the decline.
E3 is one of the few gaming events that gets mainstream media coverage. I think the convention hall is becoming less relevant but E3 is still a prime opportunity for publishers to generate hype for their IP.