PC Version of Phoenix Point (X-Com spiritual successor, crowdfunded game) 1 year exclusive to the Epic Game Store

Oct 25, 2017
4,493
Man, I was looking forward to this, but to be perfectly honest, I am probably gonna enjoy this wriggling, spin, and justification more than the game because I won't be playing it in the 2010s it seems. ;)
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,004
So you don' use chat, no Steam overlay, no cloud saves, no controller, no screenshots, nothing?
Don't know about that EGS user, but I'm personally at a point where I don't. It's not unconceivable.
  • Controller remapping concept is legitimately cool. It's, in fact, so cool that I am opposed to how closely knit is it to Steam and, to a lesser degree, Big Picture. Big Picture is legitimately disgusting to me compared to how usable the "ugly, outdated" regular desktop UI is. So, I'd rather use other stuff that's clunkier but independent.
  • My active chat friends mostly moved to Discord.
  • Related to that, overlay was a really fun idea when everything was using exclusive fullscreen. As is, I can just alt-tab to a full browser which is more customizable.
  • Don't know how often do I need screenshots (maybe thrice a year), but PrintScreen key is reliable about them now.
  • Cloud saves are a cool concept, but I never really need them, and occasional internet outages make them confused more often than I actually use a game on a different computer than before.
There's a reason Epic thought they could get away without this type of stuff. Of course, they also thought it would be okay to launch their client without offline mode, which was a grave mistake as I'm not going to just forget that...
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,576
Don't know about that EGS user, but I'm personally at a point where I don't. It's not unconceivable.
  • Controller remapping concept is legitimately cool. It's, in fact, so cool that I am opposed to how closely knit is it to Steam and, to a lesser degree, Big Picture. Big Picture is legitimately disgusting to me compared to how usable the "ugly, outdated" regular desktop UI is. So, I'd rather use other stuff that's clunkier but independent.
  • My active chat friends mostly moved to Discord.
  • Related to that, overlay was a really fun idea when everything was using exclusive fullscreen. As is, I can just alt-tab to a full browser which is more customizable.
  • Don't know how often do I need screenshots (maybe thrice a year), but PrintScreen key is reliable about them now.
  • Cloud saves are a cool concept, but I never really need them, and occasional internet outages make them confused more often than I actually use a game on a different computer than before.
There's a reason Epic thought they could get away without this type of stuff. Of course, they also thought it would be okay to launch their client without offline mode, which was a grave mistake as I'm not going to just forget that...
This really speaks to just how many features and extras Steam has, where someone can disregard 5 features of the client - including one major one (controller support) which would've been unheard of even 5 years ago - and still be frustrated because a "competitor" of Steam doesn't have a feature they use.
 
Jun 10, 2018
56
So you don' use chat, no Steam overlay, no cloud saves, no controller, no screenshots, nothing?

Btw, you realize you support the scummy assholes at Epic, right? They are making monopoly.
TBH, I've been using Steam for 13 years and have never used any of that stuff (well, intentionally as I do have cloud saves on, but only because it's just there). Personally, I'm just there to play games which Steam does well: I just install and play (after doing any tinkering/modding - usually through the Nexus).

And wow at the AMA - somehow they managed to make things even worse than if Epic at just moneyhatted them...
 

Morrigan

Armoring
Moderator
Oct 24, 2017
8,290
Controller remapping concept is legitimately cool. It's, in fact, so cool that I am opposed to how closely knit is it to Steam and, to a lesser degree, Big Picture. Big Picture is legitimately disgusting to me compared to how usable the "ugly, outdated" regular desktop UI is. So, I'd rather use other stuff that's clunkier but independent.
You don't need Big Picture to use the controller features. I think you might need it for original setup but that's it.
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,630
If these leads to backers selling their EGS keys for a fraction of the price I might end up getting it for the store. At least that way epic doesn't get any of my money.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,576
Pretty much caught-up on the thread now...

The devs seem like the people who come into Steam/Valve/Epic threads to just say "competition is good" and "it's just another launcher". I'm honestly not wanting to be rude, but as a pub/dev how do you not have a plan for backer keys when walking into the Epic office, and not even realise that the game would be entirely unavailable in China? That level of ignorance about a competitor to Steam... The working assumption that the China thing wouldn't be an issue, because you're so used to what the standard is that it never occurs to anyone that something could exist and be worse than the standard.
 
Nov 18, 2018
20
Oh man, Transferwise? I haven't thought about them in a while.

A couple years back, I tried to use Transferwise to pay some education abroad fees because my bank didn't allow foreign money transfers, and they seemed like the best deal out of all the services I looked into. Key word is "tried" because the transfer never actually went through, even after dealing with their customer service for days, getting additional account information from the university beyond what should have been necessary, and triple-checking it all with them to make sure it was accurate. They were just completely incapable of verifying the account information of the no-name institution *checks notes* Osaka University.

I didn't lose any money out of it, but I also never figured out what the issue was. Ended up just giving a check to a relative and having them transfer the money via their bank.

So yeah, I'm pretty pumped to find out what's going to happen to my refund!
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,768
You don't need Big Picture to use the controller features. I think you might need it for original setup but that's it.
That's only if you want to configure it from within the game (which is convenient, as you get to try your setup in real time). In desktop mode you can right click the game on your library and select "Edit Steam Controller configuration", although that's with an already paired Steam Controller. Can't remember how it was when using it for the first time though, you're probably right about having to go through Big Picture Mode for that.
 

matimeo

UI/UX Game Industry Veteran
Verified
Oct 26, 2017
912
TBH, I've been using Steam for 13 years and have never used any of that stuff (well, intentionally as I do have cloud saves on, but only because it's just there). Personally, I'm just there to play games which Steam does well: I just install and play (after doing any tinkering/modding - usually through the Nexus).

And wow at the AMA - somehow they managed to make things even worse than if Epic at just moneyhatted them...
80/20 rule. 80% of users use 20% of features. The biggest issue is Valve is terrible at onboarding new users or walking thru their features so I bet it’s more like 10% for them.

Cloud saves is not mandatory for games like how consoles have mandatory certification so many games I own don’t use it so I prefer to set up a save system on my own based on advice from others in the PC thread for consistency.

If JaseC (mod here) had not explained so much back on Gaf when I used to lurk I would have no clue and I used to work at Valve on steam back in the day lol.

So business wise Epic would be silly to go for parity but instead focus on the 20% of core features the majority will use and instead of funding extra features for a smaller audience that goes to another budget.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,576
80/20 rule. 80% of users use 20% of features. The biggest issue is Valve is terrible at onboarding new users or walking thru their features so I bet it’s more like 10% for them.

Cloud saves is not mandatory for games like how consoles have mandatory certification so many games I own don’t use it so I prefer to set up a save system on my own based on advice from others in the PC thread for consistency.

If JaseC (mod here) had not explained so much back on Gaf when I used to lurk I would have no clue and I used to work at Valve on steam back in the day lol.

So business wise Epic would be silly to go for parity but instead focus on the 20% of core features the majority will use and instead of funding extra features for a smaller audience that goes to another budget.
I get this angle. It makes sense from a business perspective, for sure... But it's why Epic won't get the loyalty from users that Steam currently does, and is also regressive for the PC sector. Valve had no real reason to, say, develop the Steam Controller API, since the 360 controller was (and still is?) the de facto controller standard on PC. No other company was developing anything similar, so it wasn't a "required" feature with a definite user base that would justify the time/money/effort. The number of users who wanted to use, for example, their Switch Pro Controllers was small, and the total number of who currently use them is probably well short of 1m, based on these numbers from September last year. A drop in the bucket. But now that Valve has developed the API, it feels like a step-back for Epic to not ensure compatibility with it (and the Steam Overlay, which is required for the Controller, I believe), so that users can use whatever controller they wish.

Certainly there's got to be a point at which Epic shrugs and says "not worth it" to a feature, but I think this why moneyhatting games ahead of development of the client is a bad idea. There's no requirement for Epic to take an objective look at Steam features, soliciting feedback from industry and consumer, because they're using games as the driving force for uptake of the client/store, not feature-set or innovation.

And, for your very first point, once again we hit upon Valve's awful awful communication. It should not require a forum poster telling someone that "No, you don't need to go into BPM to configure controllers". That should be Valve's job, and that should be obvious on a well-placed page of their website. It's fundamentally poor management that there aren't official YT tutorials, help pages and full explanations of every Steam feature on the Steam website.
 
Oct 26, 2017
25
80/20 rule. 80% of users use 20% of features. The biggest issue is Valve is terrible at onboarding new users or walking thru their features so I bet it’s more like 10% for them.

Cloud saves is not mandatory for games like how consoles have mandatory certification so many games I own don’t use it so I prefer to set up a save system on my own based on advice from others in the PC thread for consistency.

If JaseC (mod here) had not explained so much back on Gaf when I used to lurk I would have no clue and I used to work at Valve on steam back in the day lol.

So business wise Epic would be silly to go for parity but instead focus on the 20% of core features the majority will use and instead of funding extra features for a smaller audience that goes to another budget.

I would love to know what you think about this situation, and the moves epic are doing in general?
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,654
One thing I didn't think of before.

They took on investors in the game, promising to sell the game on Steam.
Then they change the target platform to a relaunched one, with significantly less exposure.
They themselves seek this solution, and does not tell investors beforehand.

It feels like they're on very thin ice with this, and that they do not take the investment part seriously.
 
Oct 28, 2017
4,804
Belgium
One thing I didn't think of before.

They took on investors in the game, promising to sell the game on Steam.
Then they change the target platform to a relaunched one, with significantly less exposure.
They themselves seek this solution, and does not tell investors beforehand.

It feels like they're on very thin ice with this, and that they do not take the investment part seriously.
Exactly. In fact they've sold their backers to Epic. It's disgusting really...
 
Oct 27, 2017
178
One thing I didn't think of before.

They took on investors in the game, promising to sell the game on Steam.
Then they change the target platform to a relaunched one, with significantly less exposure.
They themselves seek this solution, and does not tell investors beforehand.

It feels like they're on very thin ice with this, and that they do not take the investment part seriously.
That's right. They're treating it as a charity or an interest free loan. They don't care about the input of those who funded them as long as they got theirs.
 
Oct 26, 2017
5,083
One thing I didn't think of before.

They took on investors in the game, promising to sell the game on Steam.
Then they change the target platform to a relaunched one, with significantly less exposure.
They themselves seek this solution, and does not tell investors beforehand.

It feels like they're on very thin ice with this, and that they do not take the investment part seriously.
To be honest that is on Fig, their ToS allows it more-less.
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,487
UK
One thing I didn't think of before.

They took on investors in the game, promising to sell the game on Steam.
Then they change the target platform to a relaunched one, with significantly less exposure.
They themselves seek this solution, and does not tell investors beforehand.

It feels like they're on very thin ice with this, and that they do not take the investment part seriously.
I mean, they're backers, not investors. Investors put their money into something in the hope of a return on it

Epic are actually investing in the game as they're hoping the money they put in ends up coming back to them in some way, whether that's in their cut on the store through sales or by helping to make their store viable in the long run

It's absolutely shitty for backers and people in general who just wanted to play the game though

I've seen a few verified developers on Era and they all seem to be pretty sympathetic to the developers taking these deals. Making games is pretty risky and having Epic remove all the risk with their current game in one fell swoop is a pretty big deal, and allows them the time and money to finish their current game and then make at least one more without worrying about money and/or the game being a flop

If the game is good chances are it will sell a little on the EGS then sell a few more copies on Steam in a years time

It does 100% suck for consumers in general, and doubly so for backers of the game, but I would imagine the main priority for most developers is to have enough money to continue to exist and keep everyone being paid

I can understand everyone who wants to boycott all these games/developers, but I also understand why the devs are taking the money
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,654
I mean, they're backers, not investors. Investors put their money into something in the hope of a return on it
Some actually are investors. That is the point of Fig, that you can chose whether to be a backer or an investor.

As for being sympathetic against them, it's much harder to be that, when they took money from people over two years ago, based on certain promises.

They chosed to go with crowdfunding.
They chosed to go with Fig.
They chosed to promise certain platformers.
They chosed to seek out Epic.
They chosed to not disclose this to backers and investors.

This is on them.
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,076
I mean, they're backers, not investors. Investors put their money into something in the hope of a return on it

Epic are actually investing in the game as they're hoping the money they put in ends up coming back to them in some way, whether that's in their cut on the store through sales or by helping to make their store viable in the long run

It's absolutely shitty for backers and people in general who just wanted to play the game though

I've seen a few verified developers on Era and they all seem to be pretty sympathetic to the developers taking these deals. Making games is pretty risky and having Epic remove all the risk with their current game in one fell swoop is a pretty big deal, and allows them the time and money to finish their current game and then make at least one more without worrying about money and/or the game being a flop

If the game is good chances are it will sell a little on the EGS then sell a few more copies on Steam in a years time

It does 100% suck for consumers in general, and doubly so for backers of the game, but I would imagine the main priority for most developers is to have enough money to continue to exist and keep everyone being paid

I can understand everyone who wants to boycott all these games/developers, but I also understand why the devs are taking the money
I thought Fig was a mix of the two. That backers are getting a share of sales revenue.

Edit: hah, I see other chimed in, should've refreshed
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,228
I mean, they're backers, not investors. Investors put their money into something in the hope of a return on it

Epic are actually investing in the game as they're hoping the money they put in ends up coming back to them in some way, whether that's in their cut on the store through sales or by helping to make their store viable in the long run

It's absolutely shitty for backers and people in general who just wanted to play the game though

I've seen a few verified developers on Era and they all seem to be pretty sympathetic to the developers taking these deals. Making games is pretty risky and having Epic remove all the risk with their current game in one fell swoop is a pretty big deal, and allows them the time and money to finish their current game and then make at least one more without worrying about money and/or the game being a flop

If the game is good chances are it will sell a little on the EGS then sell a few more copies on Steam in a years time

It does 100% suck for consumers in general, and doubly so for backers of the game, but I would imagine the main priority for most developers is to have enough money to continue to exist and keep everyone being paid

I can understand everyone who wants to boycott all these games/developers, but I also understand why the devs are taking the money

And I've seen a few developpers verified here saying it's bad. Think of the long term. Not the short one.
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,487
UK
And I've seen a few developpers verified here saying it's bad. Think of the long term. Not the short one.
Yeah that is true, both are a risk, you can only think long term if you know you have enough money to guarantee you'll be around in a few games time

If your current game fails to hit it's target and that means you'll go under, how far into the future can you realistically plan?
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,228
Yeah that is true, both are a risk, you can only think long term if you know you have enough money to guarantee you'll be around in a few games time

If your current game fails to hit it's target and that means you'll go under, how far into the future can you realistically plan?

Well, that's the thing here.
Either you take the money now and have a midterm success (but people will remember how horrible you were).
Or you take the risk in the short term but if you succeed you'll ride for a longer time.
Even then the risk was mitigated by the crowdfunding money.

I'm not saying I wouldn't be tempted to take the money. But let's stop the narrative that Epic has been courting money starving indies.
Yes the deal is appealing. But taking this deal also means a huge spit on the face of the backers with a good middle finger rubbed on the face.

The fact that they didn't even think of the "gog/steam keys" or even chinese backers is literally showing it.
I hope that money can sustain them a long time because good luck making business with people again.
 
May 9, 2018
283
  • Controller remapping concept is legitimately cool. It's, in fact, so cool that I am opposed to how closely knit is it to Steam and, to a lesser degree, Big Picture. Big Picture is legitimately disgusting to me compared to how usable the "ugly, outdated" regular desktop UI is. So, I'd rather use other stuff that's clunkier but independent.
I have no comment on other points, but on this one - it's not closely knit at all. You have to have Steam running, that's it. Launching off-Steam games through the client (or a client-made shortcut) ensures 100% compatibility with the controller functions. The mapping configuration window is designed after BPM, but is completely usable with a mouse and keyboard. And you can set a desktop configuration for the controller that will enable controller support everywhere in Windows as long as Steam is running, albeit in my experience with trying to make a generic gamepad's stick axis recognized properly, launching through the client works far more reliably.
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,487
UK
Well, that's the thing here.
Either you take the money now and have a midterm success (but people will remember how horrible you were).
Or you take the risk in the short term but if you succeed you'll ride for a longer time.
Even then the risk was mitigated by the crowdfunding money.

I'm not saying I wouldn't be tempted to take the money. But let's stop the narrative that Epic has been courting money starving indies.
Yes the deal is appealing. But taking this deal also means a huge spit on the face of the backers with a good middle finger rubbed on the face.

The fact that they didn't even think of the "gog/steam keys" or even chinese backers is literally showing it.
I hope that money can sustain them a long time because good luck making business with people again.
Yeah it's not a good look, and it's a risk, they're hoping in the long term the backers/investors and people who dislike the EGS in general don't cause them much long term harm

The game could also come out and sell poorly on the EGS and then sell poorly on Steam as people no longer care about it by then

If the game comes out and is actually pretty bad, then it's even less likely to do well on Steam a year later

I have some sympathy with the developers who take Epics deal, but I have more with people who play on PC in general having the way PC gaming has worked for the last decade thrown into turmoil
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,228
I have no comment on other points, but on this one - it's not closely knit at all. You have to have Steam running, that's it. Launching off-Steam games through the client (or a client-made shortcut) ensures 100% compatibility with the controller functions. The mapping configuration window is designed after BPM, but is completely usable with a mouse and keyboard. And you can set a desktop configuration for the controller that will enable controller support everywhere in Windows as long as Steam is running, albeit in my experience with trying to make a generic gamepad's stick axis recognized properly, launching through the client works far more reliably.


Not 100%. You dont have the community shared profiles.
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,228
Yeah it's not a good look, and it's a risk, they're hoping in the long term the backers/investors and people who dislike the EGS in general don't cause them much long term harm

The game could also come out and sell poorly on the EGS and then sell poorly on Steam as people no longer care about it by then

If the game comes out and is actually pretty bad, then it's even less likely to do well on Steam a year later

I have some sympathy with the developers who take Epics deal, but I have more with people who play on PC in general having the way PC gaming has worked for the last decade thrown into turmoil


Then again, it sucks and it's a spit a customers face. But I cant blame the developpers either. If you handed me a bag of money, I'd just take it. Is it understandable ? Yes.

What I dont understand is how some people are actually trying to convince others (not you) that it's a good thing for the market as a whole when it's basically a company forcing its way to have a marketshare they're not owed and is likely to abuse its position if it has a slight hold on the market by choosing the winners in the market and making it worse for the customers.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,507
Don't know about that EGS user, but I'm personally at a point where I don't. It's not unconceivable.
  • Controller remapping concept is legitimately cool. It's, in fact, so cool that I am opposed to how closely knit is it to Steam and, to a lesser degree, Big Picture. Big Picture is legitimately disgusting to me compared to how usable the "ugly, outdated" regular desktop UI is. So, I'd rather use other stuff that's clunkier but independent.
  • My active chat friends mostly moved to Discord.
  • Related to that, overlay was a really fun idea when everything was using exclusive fullscreen. As is, I can just alt-tab to a full browser which is more customizable.
  • Don't know how often do I need screenshots (maybe thrice a year), but PrintScreen key is reliable about them now.
  • Cloud saves are a cool concept, but I never really need them, and occasional internet outages make them confused more often than I actually use a game on a different computer than before.
There's a reason Epic thought they could get away without this type of stuff. Of course, they also thought it would be okay to launch their client without offline mode, which was a grave mistake as I'm not going to just forget that...
A couple of things from my experience:
  • You don't need to start Big Picture to play with a controller. I plug my DS4 controller once I start Steam and when I start a game through the normal UI the controller is recognized. Internally it starts BP, but if you don't use the overlay the process is invisible to you, since when you close the game it goes back to the normal UI.
  • I prefer using the overlay for web browsing that just alt-tabbing. Specially if I'm using a controller starting the browser is as easy as 2 button presses. The browser is not very good, but has improved marginally in the last couple of years. Now it supports having favorite pages and all, so I can save my gamefaq guide pages, access to it and switch back to the game in a few seconds, all with the controller.
  • DS4windows is nice, but I rather use the Steam functionality since it has been flawless for me when DS4windows was faulty more than once
  • I like whe I use the screenshot functionality, when I finish the session it gives me a preview of the screens I took and I can save them directly to the cloud. I guess other programs can do it better but I like I don't need to install additional programs just for that.
  • Cloud saves was a lifesaver when I switched PCs. Just not having to worry about backing saves to another hard drive make the process much easier. Is cool to know that when you have toswitch PC you can just install Steam again and all your saves are there.
In the end Steam features improves so much my gaming experience on PC that I don't want to use other stores if I can avoid doing so. I know I can put other store games on Steam, so I can have some of these features but is a cumbersome experience that I'd rather skip if I can.

I remember when I started an Origin game expecting to recognize my DS4 and was surprised it was not a common feature by now.
 
Oct 27, 2017
367
Can't really complain much if they're offering refunds. Still sucks though.
I think you can. Game most likely gained public traction with crowdfunders acting as early investors taking most of the risk. Really shitty move to renege on your promises to them when you get attention from someone bigger who is effectively taking less risk.
 
Oct 26, 2017
3,823
Austria
Dec 2, 2017
1,625
Don't they need Sega onboard for that to happen? Sega has a very big and successful presence on Steam.
Published by Deep Silver so that's certainly plausible
Yu Suzuki re-affirmed a Steam release last weekend. (from a Google translate version of a French interview)

GAMEBLOG: There are only a few short months left before the release of Shenmue III, what kind of work do you have left to do?

YU SUZUKI: Our job now is basically tuning, debugging, and upgrading.

The game itself is totally finished?

Yes. After that there are still things like the location of the game, or the adjustments with the platforms of Steam and Sony.
Suppose the rug could still be pulled, but Deep Silver don't have the equity in the project to do that with a snap of their fingers.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,768
Well, that's the thing here.
Either you take the money now and have a midterm success (but people will remember how horrible you were).
Or you take the risk in the short term but if you succeed you'll ride for a longer time.
Even then the risk was mitigated by the crowdfunding money.

I'm not saying I wouldn't be tempted to take the money. But let's stop the narrative that Epic has been courting money starving indies.
Yes the deal is appealing. But taking this deal also means a huge spit on the face of the backers with a good middle finger rubbed on the face.

The fact that they didn't even think of the "gog/steam keys" or even chinese backers is literally showing it.
I hope that money can sustain them a long time because good luck making business with people again.
Yep, in the end that's what these deals are all about: choosing who you want your customers to be. For every dev and publisher doing this, their intended customer is Epic, and not the potential buyers of their game.

Then again, it sucks and it's a spit a customers face. But I cant blame the developpers either. If you handed me a bag of money, I'd just take it. Is it understandable ? Yes.

What I dont understand is how some people are actually trying to convince others (not you) that it's a good thing for the market as a whole when it's basically a company forcing its way to have a marketshare they're not owed and is likely to abuse its position if it has a slight hold on the market by choosing the winners in the market and making it worse for the customers.
Couldn't agree with this post more. I don't blame devs for taking the money either, but I damn sure believe it's disingenuous that they try to play victim while cashing the check. You can't play both the "I'm starving, please support me and my artistic vision" and "I'll do literally anything for money, even if it goes against your interests" cards at the same time and expect me to be happy about it.
 
Last edited:
Oct 26, 2017
5,141
Yep, in the end that's what these deals are all about: choosing who you want your customers to be. For every dev and publisher doing this, their intended customer is Epic, and not the potential buyers of their game.


Couldn't agree with this post more. I don't blame devs for taking the money either, but I damn sure believe it's disingenuous that they try to play victim while cashing the check. You can't play both the "I'm starving, please support me and my artistic vision" and "I'll do literally anything for money, even if it goes against your interests" cards at the same time and expect me to be happy about it.
Developers are betting that customers will forget or get used to it. We need to prove them wrong.
 
Oct 27, 2017
263
Is it from sales on the Epic Store only, or from the money being paid to them in other forms?
https://www.resetera.com/threads/pc...e-to-the-epic-game-store.104914/post-18785666
Dear Investor,

We are exited to share that Snapshot has announced today that they have signed a deal with Epic games for one year of exclusive distribution of Phoenix Point on their game store. As a reminder to shareholders, upfront payments paid by distributors to Snapshot are counted as revenue, and contribute to returns for Fig investors. We will be releasing additional information on how investors of Fig Game Shares - Phoenix Point will be affected by this deal in the near future, so stay tuned for updates.

As always, if you have any questions, feel free to reach out to us at [email protected].

Best,

Fig Team
Sales.
Which means, the game will have lower sales on Epic Store. The investors get shafted, and the developer gets a big payout that has to share 0 with all the investors that supported the project.

Fuck these guys.
Stop pulling shit from your ass.
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,487
UK
Developers are betting that customers will forget or get used to it. We need to prove them wrong.
The last decade has shown that people in general are pretty much ok with getting on board with shitty practices if they stick around long enough for people to get used to them

Lootboxes are maybe the only area where consumers manged to get any kickback and that was more down to EA pushing their luck and getting dangerously close to breaking gambling laws than anything else

We just have to hope that over time moneyhatting games doesn't grow the EGS to a point where it is sustainable and Epic decide to stop throwing money at it

That or it gains enough marketshare for them not to need to moneyhat anymore