"Potentially good" games don't have a chance vs actual good games on a platform that puts the customer as #1 and not a distant #5, after investors and Tencent money.
-
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.
Outer Wilds confirmed EpicStore timed exclusive after luring crowdfundees with a steamrelease. [see EGS guidelines]
- Thread starter Hektor
- Start date
"Potentially good" games don't have a chance vs actual good games on a platform that puts the customer as #1 and not a distant #5, after investors and Tencent money.
What on earth are replies like this? You pledge to KS a game on a platform of your choosing and one that's offered, then the company turns around and goes back on a campaign promise. Every other example this has happened with in the past(usually Vita versions for games that are delayed by +2 years so the Vita version gets cancelled) they get offered refunds. Why wouldn't it happen here, and why shouldn't people be upset if it doesn't happen?
People who blindly defend companies just worry me.
And this broke about a day ago.
Just like a timed platform exclusivity doesn't tend to lead with "yo dog, just wait a year for the definitive edition" so too does a launcher exclusivity not launch with "But seriously, folk who hate this thing can keep ignoring it"
Be cautious. But if this is a studio that you felt was worth giving money to for their vision, be optimistic that they aren't going to dick you over. If they still haven't addressed anything in a week, grab them pitchforks, I guess. But to immediately assume the worst?
To be fair, not everyone can use Epic or it really is a worse option than Steam, Epic doesn't seem to care about Linux countries at all and people from third world countries or ones where getting games is harder have noticed that Steam offers more payment options and it's a lot easier.
Not everyone can just rely on Paypal or credit cards as hard as it is to believe, and i think Steam offered exclusive payment options to different countries that really helped gamers alongside those Steam Wallet cards, people aren't all against Epic just because they don't want to use another launcher, as hard as it is to believe, to many people, Steam really is a far superior and more convenient launcher than Epic if not the one launcher they can use between the two.
Not everyone can just rely on Paypal or credit cards as hard as it is to believe, and i think Steam offered exclusive payment options to different countries that really helped gamers alongside those Steam Wallet cards, people aren't all against Epic just because they don't want to use another launcher, as hard as it is to believe, to many people, Steam really is a far superior and more convenient launcher than Epic if not the one launcher they can use between the two.
But this is on The Outer Wilds developers, not EGS. EGS doesn't maintain their website.
None of those people matter because they're poor and pay less for video games
They should have done the legwork first. This wasn't unforseen.
Waiting for people to raise a stink is a bad look. This speaks to a massive lack of consideration on their part.
Which is why I agree that backers should be offered refunds, at least if the devs don't plan to honor them with Steam codes at launch. However, 75k of the 125k total was invested by investors and I think the devs primary responsibility should be to ensure that this group gets a return out of this project. "Sorry you've made a loss, but we decided to decline the EGS offer that could have made you some profits" (exaggeratedly speaking) doesn't strike me as acceptable. Of course, so is not offering an alternative to people who merely pledged money, but I'm sure they'll find a way to accommodate for these people. The other way around it would be significantly more difficult.
The interests of customers, the health of the platform and matters of principle are individually way more important than any single game, no matter how good. Never mind all three.
If you think Valve (or literally any company ever) puts its customers as #1 as opposed to profit, you're far too drunk on that Kool Aid. You can rightfully shit on the Epic Store without having to lick the boots of other corporate overlords.
What if Valve puts customers #1 because it increases their profit?
the publisher has known about this deal for months
the devs put out a survey implying it 2 weeks ago
this isn't some out of nowhere thing for them, just for the customers who wanted their product on a not sub par service
People defending this is pretty weird to me.
cue staff post and the pdf.
Pheonix Point and now this, one of my concerns is that with the fact that the pubs/devs already got the money, what is stopping then from releasing a broken product that will never be fixed?
cue staff post and the pdf.
Pheonix Point and now this, one of my concerns is that with the fact that the pubs/devs already got the money, what is stopping then from releasing a broken product that will never be fixed?
That's fine, assuming it was properly communicated with backers, and in the case of Fig, investors. Epic wouldn't, I imagine, have taken an interest in the game and offered a deal without their initial backing making the project possible to begin with.
Then they're by definition putting profit first; they just think having happy customers is the way to maximize them. Spoiler: this is not a groundbreaking or novel strategy.
You're right it's not a novel strategy at all. I'm trying to figure out if your point is that its Bad that they are pro consumer because they are pro consumer for profit
Please read the message you are responding to be cause that is a naive crock
It is obvious Epic gave them a pretty decent exclusivity bonus. Just like sponsors tend to not like "Yo, starting tomorrow I am gonna wear Adidas because they are giving me money .But I actually think Adidas are shit. But seriously, that is a lot of money" so too do launcher-holders (it is kind of telling we don't even have a word for this...) not like their investments being completely undermined.
I am going to assume you are super smart and above all the marketing. You know this is an exclusivity bonus. I know this is an exclusivity bonus. You are obviously going to wait to get the game you are interested in on Steam. I might grab it on Epic, depending on when we get cloud saves. But lots of folk are going to say "Oh, whatever." and just redeem on whatever launcher lets them play it first.
Devs take the bonus to get a guaranteed payday. Maybe they would make more money from direct sales on Steam, maybe not. But they are getting a guaranteed check in the mail regardless of if their game is the next Fortnite or a complete failure.
And Epic gives them money because it is advertisement for their store and it gets them a broader customer base.
This is much better than alternative. Fuck customers over in the search of profits.
Why are you acting like this is the first ever game to go EGS exclusive? Its not even the first kickstarter game to do so.
Must be nice to live in a country with enough white people for Epic to care about you.
What the fuck is this?
They should have notified their fig backers and offered a refund the moment the deal with epic was closed.
There are way to many good games coming out each week for me to ever be able to play them all, so yeah it is pretty nice that it's easy to skip some of them.
"I promised you a thing a while back and already took your money but I just got offered a better deal soooooo..."
Try saying that in any other line of work without getting smacked.
Try saying that in any other line of work without getting smacked.
EGS guidelines
Official Staff Communication
Given the volatility in recent Epic Game Store related threads we have decided that some clearer guidelines are required to cultivate healthier discussion.
- Do not enter these threads in bad faith. If we conclude that your goal is to misrepresent the concerns of other users or rile people up, you will be moderated. Intent matters here. Honest questions or commentary about the differences and similarities between the Epic Games Store and other storefronts are fine. Deliberately and dismissively attempting to troll concerned members on those topics is not okay. These discussions must be held in good faith and in a civil manner.
- As a reminder, antagonizing or engaging in personal attacks on other members is still against the rules. We have a large community with a wide range of preferences and personal priorities. Not everyone will feel the same way as you do on any given topic. If you feel a post is breaking a rule please report it and do not respond with hostility. If you choose to engage do so politely. We always check to see which users have a history of trouble in this area.
- It is perfectly acceptable to want to wait for a game to be released on the storefront of your preference (ex: "I'll just wait for the Steam release.") It is not acceptable to troll threads because of storefront exclusivity timed or otherwise (ex: "So the real PC release is going to be a year later.") The latter is needlessly inflammatory and distracts from discussion. We will be scrutinizing these posts more closely going forward.
- Do not advocate, defend, or admit to piracy under any circumstances. This is explicitly against our Terms of Service. There are no justifications that will make this acceptable.
Yeah, I don't really understand the issue though so maybe I'm missing something.
Epic makes people of color pay more than they would have on Steam.
Some people seem to not understand the concept of exchanging money for a product or service? If you hand over money expecting one thing but instead get another, regardless of what, why or how you're in your right to potentially want your money back. So the hand-waiving going on is a bit silly.
I'm sure it's in their best interests to have made this decision, no doubt about that, but they need to honour refunds from anybody who wants it.
I'm sure it's in their best interests to have made this decision, no doubt about that, but they need to honour refunds from anybody who wants it.
This is well-trodden territory. You need to listen to reasons why people don't think these deals are good for customers. Just to start:
- higher prices
- fewer regions and ways to pay
- fewer features
- no Linux support
Revenue share isn't the only issue developers and publishers have with modern Steam. There's issues with (lack of) curation, bloat of titles, indirect vs direct marketing, their content/user algorithms, user reviews, etc. Revenue share is just the most direct monetary reason, but it's not the only reason, and that's why you see developers shucking Steam but maintaining releases for Xbox, PS, Nintendo, and sometimes even other PC distribution platforms.
A lot of the things that Steam enthusiasts love about Steam - they don't curate their storefront methodically (the curation argument again), they don't directly advertise specific titles (it's mostly algorithmic), they don't directly push product on customers (it's mostly algorithmic), because the previous three - there's a huge selection of titles making competition, especially for indies, much harder than smaller storefronts like Switch or even PS/Xbox (the mobile games store issue), and putting more not just control but responsibility into the hands of the user.
Those are all negatives to publishers when other stores offer better solutions - for publishers - that users may personally like less. It's easy to see why you'd want to sell your thing on a store that has a level of exclusivity - giving the appearance of 'premier' product quality, that has less competition, better advertising opportunities, that doesn't have the chance of pushing your product next to shovel-ware, malware, porn, etc., and - on top of that - has a better revenue split on the same platform.
As a publisher, it's a no-brainer. It doesn't mean you'll like it or that it's better for customers, but it's not hard to see why developers are all doing the same thing. It's not just a moneyhat issue. Steam has problems outside of the revenue share.
"Fuck you, got my millions from Epic", what they do care at this point? Didn't PP devs even say that money they got from Epic for exclusivity is enough to pay back every single backer of Phoenix Point, cover all done, current and future costs of Phoenix Point development and still have a lots left over?
Epic isn't fucking around with that checkbook when they want game to be removed from Steam.
Well, see ya guys next year...maybe lol. Anymore with the glut of new games coming out when I read stuff like this the Willy Wonka "No...stop...don't go...* image comes to mind.
I don't know what you're trying to say here.
I'm not claiming that they put customers as #1 because their angels who only care about giving us the best games ever.
They do it because they believe it leads to a better market place and helps them thrive.
Anyone with half a brain cell understands this, which is why I'm not sure why you bring it up.
The point is, What Valve tends to do is improve the market place in a way that benefits me the consumer. I'll take that over EGS any day of the mother fucking week.
If this makes the devs more money, then I'm all for it. I have no problem managing multiple storefronts.
This. The mod text wall that gets put in these threads is pointless. Ban these trolls and there would be no need for it.
I was. Hell, I even deleted my Epic account over all this fuckery that they keep pulling.
But EGS does have regional pricing and they are not the ones who decide on the pricing of which region gets what, that's up to the developers/publishers. So bringing the argument of countries with white people into the mix seems weird to me unless there's something I'm missing.
People in the US or Europe aren't getting a magically better deal than I am for the same stuff nor do they benefit in any way by this EGS deal.
I mean, Epic does decide with payment processors to support and how it charges consumers over that.
The payment options disproportionately disadvantage those from poorer countries. More than that Epic was defending this, intimating that 'those people' matter less.
Do you also have no problems with the devs closing shop after it because they lost all customer goodwill?
Corporations are corporations. My point is that it's Bad that people are brainwashed into thinking corporations care about anything but their wallets. It's kind of amazing I have to make that point in 2019.
If you've already decided being pro-consumer is an inherent property of Valve Corporation and being anti-consumer is an inherent property of Epic, I have no relevant point to offer, because then every decision Valve ever makes is transitively pro-consumer and inherently virtuous, and every decision Epic makes is anti-consumer and therefore bad (as opposed to every single one of them being carefully calculated moves to maximize their user base). No individual decision ever needs to be questioned. This is how fanboyism and platform wars work.
If you consider Valve's treatment of their customers as pro-consumer, then you logically have to consider the free games Epic store is offering monthly as pro-consumer too. There is no logical consistency in thinking of Valve's strategy as "pro-consumer" and Epic's free games as "calculated moves to illegitimately capture an audience".