• The GiftBot 2.0 Launch Giveaway Extravaganza has come to a close with an astounding 8073 games given away to the community by 696 members, a huge success thanks to you! The gifting now continues with more official prizes in the new Gaming Giveaways |OT|. Leftover Steam codes are also being given away to the PC Gaming Era community.

Metro Exodus for PC a timed exclusive for the Epic store (Steam preorders honoured, physical copy with Epic key). [READ staff post]

Nov 8, 2017
4,238
I don't know how anyone can blame Deep Silver here. If what a poster on this forum said is true, the game is already profitable just from the deal they made with Epic. How the hell does a publisher/developer turn that down? I can't imagine anyone in their same position not taking the deal. So much pressure is lifted if the deal covered even half of the cost of development.

I am just glad I was still able to preorder the game on Steam before it was pulled.
It's an attractive deal for the company because it means there's a low risk for this game. But others will be watching closely, because there is a plausible situation whereby they covered their cost for the game on PC with this deal, but their overall revenue was lower than it would have otherwise been if it was released on steam. Without a time machine A/B testing is not possible, so people will try to draw as many infereces as they can from what data they do have. People will also be looking very closely at the community backlash and whether reputational damage done by the deal might outweigh some or all of the benefits long term.
 

XR.

Member
Nov 22, 2018
1,455
That's not being disingenuous at all. You can be interested in a product but not support the way a company does business. I would love to purchase Metro Exodus, and I would've likely bought the gold edition if it was still available, but I categorically refuse to support paid exclusivity deals that does nothing but take options away from customers. It's anti-consumerism at its finest. Fuck that.
It's one thing if you're boycotting because a company or an individual is against basic human rights, supports racist, sexist ideas or similar -- but a game not being on your favorite launcher? That's disingenuous and absolutely a dangerous precedent.

It's completely understandable if you simply prefer Steam and just ignore the game as a result, let's say because you rely on Big Picture Mode, Steam Proton, or whatever. There's nothing wrong with that and I belong to this group as well. I'm skipping Metro for the same reason I'm skipping the next Mario or Zelda; the platform itself isn't enticing to me enough, even if I'm interested in the game, but I'm not going to participate in a movement in an attempt to prove a point.

Uhhhhhh... Isn't that the point of a boycott?
Boycotting is always to prove a point. If you're not buying a product because you're not interested in the product, that's not boycotting, that's just "not buying a product".
That's just silly. What is wrong, exactly, to boycott in order to prove a point?

People do it all the time, when they feel like the company they are boycotting are in clash with their principles/opinions/preferences. To boycott is to prove a point.
I should've said "refraining from purchasing to prove a point", but yes I see what you're saying and I agree--the point of a boycott is to prove a point.

Point still stands though. :p
 
Oct 27, 2017
7,044
Bandung Indonesia
I should've said "refraining from purchasing to prove a point", but yes I see what you're saying and I agree--the point of a boycott is to prove a point.

Point still stands though. :p
Uhh, what's the difference between "refraining from purchasing" and "boycott"? I mean, I guess I can see it refraining from purchasing is an individual thing while boycott is a collective of people thing, but boycotting is refraining from purchasing, yes?

Unless I am just not intellectually capable enough to understand your higher form of speaking or something.
 

Asator

Member
Oct 27, 2017
293
It's one thing if you're boycotting because a company or an individual is against basic human rights, supports racist, sexist ideas or similar -- but a game not being on your favorite launcher? That's disingenuous and absolutely a dangerous precedent.
No it's not. Being against anti consumerism moves is not fucking disingenuous. The Metro Exodus deals brings absolutely nothing to consumers and in fact actively take choice away from them. This deal is harmful to consumers and actively goes against their best interest, why the fuck should we be okay with that? And calling it disingenuous on top of that? What the hell?

And if there's a dangerous precedent to be had here, it's a company moneyhatting another for an exclusivity deal on PC. People boycotting a game because it's not on Steam is nothing new ("no steam no sale" has existed long before the Metro Exodus shitstorm)

And for the record, I don't care much about Steam itself and I'm completely fine with them having competitions like GOG for instance. It's the exclusivity deal that takes options away from the consumers that I absolutely abhor.
 

TheClaw7667

Member
Oct 25, 2017
625
Because it's a blatantly anti-consumer move and we, as consumers/potential consumers are pissed about that. This has been explained about 5 billion times already accross all the threads on this subject.
I didn’t say it wasn’t. I blame Epic. They are at fault here more than the developers. They are the ones bringing this practice to the PC space.

I just completely understand why Deep Silver or any smaller sized game developer/publisher would have accepted the deal. I don’t know how I can blame them for it at all.

From a short term financial perspective - sure. But Metros audience skews more towards hardcore/enthusiast types and this move has done a lot to piss people off. This could have done more harm than good even if it made the game profitable in the short term (which there’s no proof of rn)
Again, no clue how true it is, but a developer that posts on this forum who said they have spoken to someone at 4A, who said the game was profitable from this deal. That is a lot of money to turn down. Sure, it might turn out that they make less money overall but I can't imagine it's easy to say no to a big payout and hope for the game to succeed vs knowing the game will make a return.
 

olag

Member
Oct 28, 2017
698
It's one thing if you're boycotting because a company or an individual is against basic human rights, supports racist, sexist ideas or similar -- but a game not being on your favorite launcher? That's disingenuous and absolutely a dangerous precedent.
I would argue that:
a)Epic are setting a more dangerous precedent by using funds to money hat a product which has been advertised on one platform.
b)Arguing that boycotting reasons should be regulated is akin to arguing that publishers and developers are entitled to purchases and by that definition your money which is not true. Just as purchases can be made for frivolous reasons, refusal to buy and by extension boycotts can be done for equally frivolous reasons.It is up to the boycottes to put their reasons forward and a discussion can be had.
c)You're trying to minimise the issue without addressing it directly(comparing it to the pervasive issues of rape,sexism and violence). Whilst these are real damning issues which need to be addressed, they have no part in this conversation.That's disingenuous and If you want to convince people that boycotting for this is not important use reasons related to the subject matter.
 

Nappael

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,559
I didn’t say it wasn’t. I blame Epic. They are at fault here more than the developers. They are the ones bringing this practice to the PC space.

I just completely understand why Deep Silver or any smaller sized game developer/publisher would have accepted the deal. I don’t know how I can blame them for it at all.
If you read some previous posts I've made about Epic, you might noticed I've said some similar things before regarding Supergiant and co.

The difference between that and Deep Silver is that Deep Silver are not a small sized publisher. Not by any means. Short to medium term stability isn't a concern for them like it can be for indie devs. They hold some of the responsibility.
 

Deleted member 42

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 24, 2017
16,939
My consistent disappointment continues unabated

Since it has to be said again:

Not buying the game is fine
Boycotting the game is fine
Trying to justify it by lying is not fine
Just say what it says on the tin, it's your money, keep it moving.

If I wanted to guilt trip people, I've got way bigger bullets in my gun for that.

I hate the word disingenuous so much now too, it's hella overused and I wish people would stop using it, spare me the pain
 

Nappael

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,559
It's one thing if you're boycotting because a company or an individual is against basic human rights, supports racist, sexist ideas or similar -- but a game not being on your favorite launcher? That's disingenuous and absolutely a dangerous precedent.

It's completely understandable if you simply prefer Steam and just ignore the game as a result, let's say because you rely on Big Picture Mode, Steam Proton, or whatever. There's nothing wrong with that and I belong to this group as well. I'm skipping Metro for the same reason I'm skipping the next Mario or Zelda; the platform itself isn't enticing to me enough, even if I'm interested in the game, but I'm not going to participate in a movement in an attempt to prove a point.
I have purchased games on Itch.io before, despite the Itch launcher being pretty poor on features. Why? Because I generally believe that they are trying to do something good. I've done the same elsewhere. "Not being on my favourite launcher" is not the fucking point here.

You list human rights abuses, racism, and sexism as good reasons to boycott. Absolutely they are and I've avoided games in the past for those reasons. In my opinion, clear support for anti-consumer practices and attempting to set a dangerous precedent regarding exclusivity deals is another. One is clearly worse, but it doesn't make the other one not worthy of "boycotting"

I would also argue that things like invasive DRM or awful MTX's are another good reason too. Whatever someone believes is an important issue for them.

My consistent disappointment continues unabated

Since it has to be said again:

Not buying the game is fine
Boycotting the game is fine
Trying to justify it by lying is not fine
Just say what it says on the tin, it's your money, keep it moving.

If I wanted to guilt trip people, I've got way bigger bullets in my gun for that.

I hate the word disingenuous so much now too, it's hella overused and I wish people would stop using it, spare me the pain
I don't believe I have lied. I also updated my original position from "4A will be fine" to "If they aren't fine, then why are people blaming consumers instead of Deep Silver pulling a fast one".
 
Last edited:

ThatOneGuy831

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
402
It's one thing if you're boycotting because a company or an individual is against basic human rights, supports racist, sexist ideas or similar -- but a game not being on your favorite launcher? That's disingenuous and absolutely a dangerous precedent.

It's completely understandable if you simply prefer Steam and just ignore the game as a result, let's say because you rely on Big Picture Mode, Steam Proton, or whatever. There's nothing wrong with that and I belong to this group as well. I'm skipping Metro for the same reason I'm skipping the next Mario or Zelda; the platform itself isn't enticing to me enough, even if I'm interested in the game, but I'm not going to participate in a movement in an attempt to prove a point.




I should've said "refraining from purchasing to prove a point", but yes I see what you're saying and I agree--the point of a boycott is to prove a point.

Point still stands though. :p
If anything Epic paying big bucks to have a game that was once available from multiple places to only being available on their game store sets an even worse precedent.
 

Armaros

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,690
If people want to guilt trip people into supporting whats happening with Metro Exodus, they can be the first people to buy all those suffering indie games that are being buried on Steam.

Fairs Fair?
 

spacer

Member
Oct 30, 2017
620
A bit off topic, but I saw the thread title was changed. What does "see threadmark" mean? What is the update?
 

Asator

Member
Oct 27, 2017
293
Asator please calm down a little, haha. I agree in broad strokes but no need to be aggressive.
It's just get a bit tiring to have to "prove" that you have some pretty legitimate reasons to boycott this game. It's fine the first few times, but after explaining it so many times (as well as having others explain it), it gets really tiring. That's on top of all the crap that's been happening over the past two days, like all the people "not seeing what the problem is" or cheering for "competition" when they don't seem to completely grasp the situation.

Not targeting anyone in particular in this or the other threads by the way, just speaking in general.

Not buying the game is fine
Boycotting the game is fine
Trying to justify it by lying is not fine
Just say what it says on the tin, it's your money, keep it moving.
What lies? Not trying to be dishonest here, I'm genuinely curious as to what you view as lies when it comes to boycotting this game.
 

Driggonny

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,133
If people complain and boycott and it has a significant effect on profits from the game I highly doubt Deep Silver would be blind as to why that happened and blame 4a. Idk, maybe I have too much faith
 

Dick Justice

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,542
We have no idea how the console versions will do and we don't have any confirmation that Epic's policy of payouts is that way because we're not contract lawyers

If Metro as a franchise flails out or the pub wants to dip, what do you think happens to them? That's a year or two in the tank to negotiate with new pubs/develop new IP



That is some Fantastic-Four level stretching and refusing to accept any negative consequences for one's actions, you're gonna have to do better than that cause I ain't here for this

I expect better from this community
And I am consistently disappointed
Not everyone can be spineless enough for your liking. It's unfortunate, I know.
 

Nappael

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,559
If people complain and boycott and it has a significant effect on profits from the game I highly doubt Deep Silver would be blind as to why that happened and blame 4a. Idk, maybe I have too much faith
This is why user reviews are important. They give consumers a way of making sure some kind of message gets across which is more accurate than "oh well, guess people didn't want it".

Good thing the Epic store doesn't have user reviews then!
 

XR.

Member
Nov 22, 2018
1,455
No it's not. Being against anti consumerism moves is not fucking disingenuous. The Metro Exodus deals brings absolutely nothing to consumers and in fact actively take choice away from them. This deal is harmful to consumers and actively goes against their best interest, why the fuck should we be okay with that? And calling it disingenuous on top of that? What the hell?

And if there's a dangerous precedent to be had here, it's a company moneyhatting another for an exclusivity deal on PC. People boycotting a game because it's not on Steam is nothing new ("no steam no sale" has existed long before the Metro Exodus shitstorm)

And for the record, I don't care much about Steam itself and I'm completely fine with them having competitions like GOG for instance. It's the exclusivity deal that takes options away from the consumers that I absolutely abhor.
I think this is where our thoughts on the matter collide. You'll have to elaborate on this further because I don't see how it's anti-consumerism. It's their money, their property, their game--they aren't obligated to release it anywhere, at a specific time or at a specific store. This is the result of a free, open market; products don't exist to solely favor me as a consumer, they exist to create demand and if you demand it you're free to buy it.

I would also argue that things like invasive DRM or awful MTX's are another good reason too. Whatever someone believes is an important issue for them.
Invasive DRM or awful MTX's are legitimate reasons to ignore a game, absolutely. I'm 100% with you there. The concept I'm talking about is a boycott movement with a focus on smudging the developers/publishers. This is dangerous because it's not necessarily representative of the real world. Like, the market has shown that DRM is acceptable. A thousand times over. If you're about to initiate a boycott movement for DRM I'd say that's disingenuous because what you're trying to do is to make the issue appear bigger than it actually is.

What you can do instead is educating people and telling them what the issue is, and let them act accordingly.

I'm not sure I'm following you here. What do you feel is not appropriate?
Being disingenuous.

Uhh, what's the difference between "refraining from purchasing" and "boycott"? I mean, I guess I can see it refraining from purchasing is an individual thing while boycott is a collective of people thing, but boycotting is refraining from purchasing, yes?

Unless I am just not intellectually capable enough to understand your higher form of speaking or something.
As I mentioned in my previous post, above the part you quoted: I'm skipping Metro for the same reason I'm skipping the next Mario or Zelda; the platform itself isn't enticing to me enough. That doesn't mean I'm boycotting, I'm just not interested enough to justify using the particular platform they're on.

As for the bolded, yes, with the intention of proving a point.
 

grosvenor92

Member
Dec 2, 2017
568
Depending on how long the time exclusive deal is for I'm gonna wait to get this on PC. Even though I do use origin and uplay on occasion. Epic's store lacks a lot of features it needs for me to even feel its worth using.

As a fan of the series I hope the game does well enough that this deal doesn't hurt 4A in the long run. It may seem like a shit move by Deep Silver but I imagine more developers and or publishers will take similar deals unless Steam finds a way to bring them back to their platform
 

olag

Member
Oct 28, 2017
698
I think this is where our thoughts on the matter collide. You'll have to elaborate on this further because I don't see how it's anti-consumerism. It's their money, their property, their game--they aren't obligated to release it anywhere, at a specific time or at a specific store. This is the result of a free, open market; products don't exist to solely favor me as a consumer, they exist to create demand and if you demand it you're free to buy it.
A product is not an item which exists in a vacuum and by its nature exists within the relationship between maker and customer. you've pointed out, the maker holds all the rights in how a product is made and who it is distributed to, but the maker also has the responsibility of convincing the consumer that the product they made and by extension the product maker is legit and worth investing in.

Epic's/Deep Silver's recent business decision (To limit a third party's product availability to their own digital store)has been seen as counter intuitive to a lot of consumer's main concern. Themselves. Because of this they do not see an inherit advantage to being constrained to a digital store front which is lacking in features and they do not agree with the very act of limiting their options. Thus they have rightly criticised the action as is their right as consumers. Epic and Deep Silver can choose to act on the criticisms or ignore them but the consequences are on their shoulders and not the consumers.

Edit: For further clarity these consequences can range from Metro exodus being a massive success on the Epic Store to the studio performing poorly due to any boycott .All consequences both positive and negative are squarely on their heads and not the consumers.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
It's just get a bit tiring to have to "prove" that you have some pretty legitimate reasons to boycott this game. It's fine the first few times, but after explaining it so many times (as well as having others explain it), it gets really tiring. That's on top of all the crap that's been happening over the past two days, like all the people "not seeing what the problem is" or cheering for "competition" when they don't seem to completely grasp the situation.

Not targeting anyone in particular in this or the other threads by the way, just speaking in general.


What lies? Not trying to be dishonest here, I'm genuinely curious as to what you view as lies when it comes to boycotting this game.
I entered that conversation midway and seemingly halfway through a group of others talking. So maybe I should have just sat it out instead of interjecting myself, because Bronson's reply leaves me even more confused trying to understand what lies are being told leading to his disappointment? Him being cryptic isn't really helping unless I'm just not following.

I understand some hyperbole or vitriolic anger, such as the over the top "hope this company fails and closes" lashing out causing some disappointment. But I'm not sure how that translates into lying? Usually if you're not an actual asshole that's just some shooting from the hip anger you don't really mean. Like not actually getting excited about unemployment. But as I said to Bronson capitalism is capitalism. If the buyer has "consequences" for not spending their money, then a company has "consequences" for the way it conducts itself and the decisions it makes.

A very unpopular business decision has been made and there is a response from the buying market about what they think. I don't think there's much lying going on and I do expect a reasonable portion of responders to follow through. Will it be enough to hurt sales? Probably not with whatever epic have compensated. But it's hurting PR and that has its own complications above and beyond cold hard cash.
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
6,107
User banned (3 days): drive-by trolling
I still don't understand all the crying over store exclusivity. It not like you have a buy new hardware to play it. It's extra app to install. Big fucking deal.
 

Deleted member 10852

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
298
I still don't understand all the crying over store exclusivity. It not like you have a buy new hardware to play it. It's extra app to install. Big fucking deal.
again this? really

epic dont support all regional pricing, dont have bpm, steam link, support for linux, cloud saves,etc,etc.
Epic is paying to exclude Steam, and all other stores, thats not competition is monopoly.
 

Nappael

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,559
Considering the nature of his posts, I think it's fairly likely that the "lying" comment was aimed at me, and probably about my "4A will be fine" comment I made earlier before updating things.

If I'm wrong on that then I've misunderstood, but that's how it came across. If I'm right then a mod thinks I'm a liar, fucking brilliant.

If you've read the thread up to this point and you dont have any idea why people are up in arms.........
These people don't actually read the threads.
 

AHA-Lambda

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,098
This mod sees peeps going '4A will be fine' and 'I hope this game will bomb' and calls bullshit because it will almost assuredly effect them and it's unrealistic to say otherwise

Do whatever you want with your money, boycott whatever you ilke, just don't roll in and feed nonsense cause if I see it I'm checking it

And next time just quote me, I don't have time for subtweets, I ain't a punching bag
It's not my fault that Deep Silver use 4A as a hostage on this, but I'm no charity.
If people don't want to find bad practice that's very valid.

And will do.
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
Considering the nature of his posts, I think it's fairly likely that the "lying" comment was aimed at me, and probably about my "4A will be fine" comment I made earlier before updating things.

If I'm wrong on that then I've misunderstood, but that's how it came across. If I'm right then a mod thinks I'm a liar, fucking brilliant.



These people don't actually read the threads.
I must have missed your comments, that's probably my bad then.

Console sales probably aren't going to get touched by this, or if so it will be minimal.

PC sales will, but unless we know what the arrangement was with epic there is no way of knowing the compensation involved to contrast it with what sales happen in the next 12 months/speculate on what could've been on steam. Then once it finally comes back to Steam there will be sales on Steam of some sorts.

Depends how you quantify "fine" I guess? Is the studio shutting down because of this and some boycotts? Yeah I doubt that. Will they lose revenue? Maybe, but then that depends on what epic paid for timed exclusivity.

Too many factors to speculate on just now. Bad PR is bad PR though, even if you don't hurt much financially. You can still send your brand on a downward spiral and have to then try and play catch up or make amends.

The top brass rolled a hell of a dice with this move and that's simply not on the consumer. It was their move and their arrogant attitude that seemingly had them not even communicate the decision properly to the development studio.
 

Catshade

Member
Oct 26, 2017
643
4a will probably be fine... for now. Didn't Epic (either Sweeney or Galyonkin) say that they ask publishers/devs for sales projection for the first year exclusivity period - and if actual sales on EGS fall below that, Epic will cover the difference? I think I remember reading that somewhere...
 

Kvik

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
889
Downunder.
Is it seriously too much to ask for people to just read maybe a couple pages of the thread to atleast get an idea of why people are upset about this?
Ain't nobody got the time for that brother. They're too busy hugging their PS4s and salivating over the upcoming Switch revision. I mean who can blame them? Platform holders has been feeding them bullshite for their entire lives saying exclusivity is a good thing.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
 

saenima

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,320
If i choose not to eat at the corner restaurant because i think the owner is an asshole and i don't like their business practices, i'm not boycotting it. I'm simply choosing to spend my money elsewhere instead. Boycotting implies negation. None of these companies is owed my money though.

I always see the word boycott being used as a guilt tripping mechanism in these kind of threads. Nah. If Deep Silver and 4A want my money they have to earn it. And this decision is the opposite of earning it.
 

Madjoki

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,869
Bit of an update, Typing Metro in the search bar on Steam only brings up the first two games now, Metro Redux doesn't show up, don't know if it was Valve or Deep Silver that did this, but worth noting the change nonetheless.
Valve did this. It happens automatically with every game pulled from sale no matter reason.
 

fanboi

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
3,810
Sweden
If i choose not to eat at the corner restaurant because i think the owner is an asshole and i don't like their business practices, i'm not boycotting it. I'm simply choosing to spend my money elsewhere instead. Boycotting implies negation. None of these companies is owed my money though.

I always see the word boycott being used as a guilt tripping mechanism in these kind of threads. Nah. If Deep Silver and 4A want my money they have to earn it. And this decision is the opposite of earning it.
Clarification, 4A didn't have anything to do with this decision.
 

JustJavi

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,056
Is it seriously too much to ask for people to just read maybe a couple pages of the thread to atleast get an idea of why people are upset about this?
You know, I don't get it either, so followed your comment before posting this. The first page is full of "Ffs"s, "oh no" and "oh crap no"s. It takes about 40 or 50 posts before people start slowly making sense. So I don't blame them if that person got bored of reading before getting to the posts that start making sense.
 

FF Seraphim

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,598
Tokyo
You know, I don't get it either, so followed your comment before posting this. The first page is full of "Ffs"s, "oh no" and "oh crap no"s. It takes about 40 or 50 posts before people start slowly making sense. So I don't blame them if that person got bored of reading before getting to the posts that start making sense.
Well those first post do make sense if you look at it from a PC gamer point of view. Hell, that was my first reaction as well.
 

JustJavi

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,056
Well those first post do make sense if you look at it from a PC gamer point of view. Hell, that was my first reaction as well.
I got Steam. I also have Uplay, Origin, Epic and GOG. I buy the games from whoever offers them cheaper. Still don't get the big fuss about it to be honest. Could you tell me why you think it is so bad?

By the way, I'm not planning on buying Metro as it's not the kind of game I'm into.
 

Arebours

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,717
I got Steam. I also have Uplay, Origin, Epic and GOG. I buy the games from whoever offers them cheaper. Still don't get the big fuss about it to be honest. Could you tell me why you think it is so bad?

By the way, I'm not planning on buying Metro as it's not the kind of game I'm into.
how is this not trolling? There are like 100 well formulated posts that perfectly describe why this is a bad thing but you still want someone to tell you?
 

Sandersson

Member
Feb 5, 2018
1,755

MrCunningham

Member
Nov 15, 2017
1,303
Honestly, this is a smart move. Grab that 88% royalty cut early. So many people have the Epic game client on their computers now thanks to the popularity of FortNite. If 4A gets a bigger cut of money in their early sales, good for them.
 

Isee

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
3,556
If i choose not to eat at the corner restaurant because i think the owner is an asshole and i don't like their business practices, i'm not boycotting it. I'm simply choosing to spend my money elsewhere instead. Boycotting implies negation. None of these companies is owed my money though.

I always see the word boycott being used as a guilt tripping mechanism in these kind of threads. Nah. If Deep Silver and 4A want my money they have to earn it. And this decision is the opposite of earning it.
Before anything, I agree with what you say here, but...

This is a bit different though: You are not boycotting a restaurant which is making and selling their own food. You are boycotting a restaurant, because the owner is an asshole, that is selling food from another restaurant that you really like. I swore to myself to not buy any third party exclusives from the epic store. Even if it is something I really want like Mechwarrior 5 or Phoenix Point (just speculating). I'd harm epic and both of those smaller studios doing so though, which is bitter. 4A, probably, got already paid, but we don't know the specifics of their contract. Maybe their are missing out on a bonus that they deserve because sale goals won't be reached. Maybe something else. I don't know. Just wanted to point out that it is a bit more complicated.

Honestly, this is a smart move. Grab that 95% royalty cut early. So many people have the Epic game client on their computers now thanks to the popularity of FortNite. If 4A gets a bigger cut of money in their early sales, good for them.

1.) It's not 4A that is getting the extra money. It's DeepSilver and ultimately THQ shareholders. Hurray!
2.) At best 4A won't notice a difference in their salaries. At worst they'll miss out on bonuses if there are any and they are bound to sale numbers.
(It's probably the former)
3.) Steam still has a larger user base then epic, so this argument doesn't hold up. Especially if you count in china that doesn't get the game now at all. And if you don't understand how big of a market china is... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
4.) The cut between Epic and DeepSilver/Kochmedia is 88-12. Unless you have any kind of numbers how much money epic used to bribe them and what the estimated sales figures are.

And in advance:

No, It's not an illegal move. It's just shitty.
No, this isn't competition, competition would mean offering the game on multiple storefront. This is a third party monopoly in the making and the main reason people dislike it. People like choice after all. And not being forced, people also like that.
No, Steam isn't a quasi monopoly. There is a free key market around steam and many people just use steam as a way to download games and not purchase them. They also like to use the steam client as a free set of tool and services.
No, the $10 is US only all other regions pay the same as on Steam. You also was able to get the game for less then $50 before the deal happened because of the free steam key market that I mentioned before.
No, this isn't the only way to compete against steam nor is it particularly clever. Forcing people is never clever, you have to make them come willingly. If you force them, they will maybe use it, but then go back to steam for anything else. Epic wants to compete with the most basic of clients (not even cloud saving!) by angering and pressuring their future costumers. That's dump and not as you said smart, at least not from Epic.

But this all has been explained over and over again in this thread, in far greater detail by more intelligent people then me! Please, at least read a bit before rushing in and repeating something that has been disproved on several pages. All the things you said can be found like every 2 pages. Even more often at the beginning.
 
Last edited:

FF Seraphim

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,598
Tokyo
I got Steam. I also have Uplay, Origin, Epic and GOG. I buy the games from whoever offers them cheaper. Still don't get the big fuss about it to be honest. Could you tell me why you think it is so bad?

By the way, I'm not planning on buying Metro as it's not the kind of game I'm into.
Bro you serious? Are you literally not reading this thread so you can remain ignorant of the reasons people would be upset?
My reason for holding out: epic store lacks the features that steam has and Im not about to 1. Use a storefront that isnt even up to par when I know it will come to steam later. 2. Reward behavior I disagree with since it is definitely anti-customer to limit choice.