Satisfactory removed from Steam to be announced as Epic Store game

Oct 26, 2017
4,342
Edit: An NDA to not mention the game will be on Epic Store prior to the announcement of Epic store is fine by me, but other restrictions like not officially cancelling the Steam release, not discussing the nature of their deal with Epic etc are far less reasonable. I see no good reason for a developer not to strive for transparency, except for waiting on the right time to reveal information that relates to a partner.

You're just posting a bunch of straw men which have no basis in reality. The game isn't out yet, they already put out a video explaining things, there were no customers on Steam, and there was no misleading. Using your logic, if a dev announced a game and then went bankrupt, you'd still be demanding they finish the game and claiming they misled you.
Their video doesn't explain anything! It just says that they can't really explain anything, which one can reasonably infer to mean that they agreed to an NDA or similar. What about dealing with Epic requires this lack of transparency?

The reason that their coming soon store page matters is because it makes it clear that they were planning to release on Steam until at some point Epic convinced them not just to release on Epic Store, but to also cancel their plans for a Steam release. Because they don't want to have to compete with Steam for people wanting to buy this and other games.

I don't have a problem with them changing their plans, but I do think they should at least clearly explain why they have changed their plans.
 

no1

Member
Apr 27, 2018
804
So if Epic knocks on your door and offers you more money than you had ever hoped to make as an indie developer, and the chance to be featured next to the most popular game in the world, you're supposed to say "no, I believe my game should be available on all platforms"?
Yeah I would refuse it and keep my integrity, and probably release it on Steam, GOG, itch.io, Humble. Maybe I might not get a shitload of money on my doorstep, but what if my game blows up? And for the right reasons. Looks like I just made all that money Epic would have given me regardless of taking their cash.

That's not what I meant, what I said was if you didn't pay anything you are not a costumer. You might have been a future costumer, but they didn't turn their back on their costumers, the game wasn't for sale yet.
But that's not a good metric to go off of like people are ready to buy some games before their even announced, and just Rumored. The game might not have been for sale but it still has fans.
 
Jul 25, 2018
1,353
Their video doesn't explain anything! It just says that they can't really explain anything, which one can reasonably infer to mean that they agreed to an NDA or similar. What about dealing with Epic requires this lack of transparency?

The reason that their coming soon store page matters is because it makes it clear that they were planning to release on Steam until at some point Epic convinced them not just to release on Epic Store, but to also cancel their plans for a Steam release. Because they don't want to have to compete with Steam for people wanting to buy this and other games.

I don't have a problem with them changing their plans, but I do think they should at least clearly explain why they have changed their plans.
So you think they should have announced they were moving to the Epic Store before Epic announced it? I don't know much experience you have with business in general, but that's not how things work. Since you just acknowledged you don't have a problem with plans changing, I'm curious how you think they could have communicated it differently.
 
Oct 26, 2017
4,342
So you think they should have announced they were moving to the Epic Store before Epic announced it? I don't know much experience you have with business in general, but that's not how things work. Since you just acknowledged you don't have a problem with plans changing, I'm curious how you think they could have communicated it differently.
I don't know if you actually read my post.

They could have announced they were cancelling the Steam release, deleted their Steam page, and simply said to wait for more details. Pretending it was still coming to Steam until the last minute is extremely poor communication. They wouldn't have needed to mention Epic Store to do this.

Edit: and I suspect they would not be receiving overwhelming negative response like they are now had they communicated this stuff more transparently.
 
Jul 25, 2018
1,353
I don't know if you actually read my post.

They could have announced they were cancelling the Steam release, deleted their Steam page, and simply said to wait for more details. Pretending it was still coming to Steam until the last minute is extremely poor communication. They wouldn't have needed to mention Epic Store to do this.
Alright. So now the world would think the studio and game were having troubles. That would not be better for the dev.

"You pulled the game. Is it in trouble?"
"Can't say."
"Is it going to take much longer to finish? Will you still be able to finish it?"
"Can't say."

Yeah I fail to see how that helps the dev or consumers.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,522
Alright. So now the world would think the studio and game were having troubles. That would not be better for the dev.

"You pulled the game. Is it in trouble?"
"Can't say."
"Is it going to take much longer to finish? Will you still be able to finish it?"
"Can't say."

Yeah I fail to see how that helps the dev or consumers.
As opposed to silently doing things. Don’t tell consumers anything ahead of time. Announce new news without addressing old marketing.

When asked, say they can’t talk about it for some reason.

That’s really helpful for consumers
 
Jul 25, 2018
1,353
As opposed to silently doing things. Don’t tell consumers anything ahead of time. Announce new news without addressing old marketing.

When asked, say they can’t talk about it for some reason.

That’s really helpful for consumers
It's better than any other communications strategy anybody is coming up with. I question whether anyone so outraged by this is even a customer, or whether they are just white knighting for some perceived slight, no matter how inconsequential.
 
Oct 26, 2017
4,342
Alright. So now the world would think the studio and game were having troubles. That would not be better for the dev.

"You pulled the game. Is it in trouble?"
"Can't say."
"Is it going to take much longer to finish? Will you still be able to finish it?"
"Can't say."

Yeah I fail to see how that helps the dev or consumers.
I don't know if you understand how words work.

I never said that they should have announced that the game was cancelled.

They should have said it would no longer be releasing on Steam as soon as they had reached that decision.

How is all their "can't say" answers now helping anyone?
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,081
Works for me. Epic launcher is more visually pleasing than any of the others (steam/origin/uplay) so I don't really mind, and it's cool that a bigger cut is going to the devs. Hopefully this pressures Steam to treat devs better as well.


I understand your points and they are good ones, I just wonder if developers will actually make more net profit from having a game not on steam and keeping more of the revenue vs having on steam and giving more revenue. We have no way to actually know exactly without having two timelines. I have to think for indie games putting the game on steam increases sales significantly due to the sheer number of eyes on it. Obviously in this case they were paid by Epic which is fine so even if they sell less copies they secured the profits.
I strongly suspect that from a dev standpoint it's a VERY good time to be on the epic storefront and if they're a small/unknown dev there's probably a lot more sales potential there than on Steam.

Steam has a kabillion users, but it also has a kabillion games. Unless you're one of the lucky few, releasing a game on Steam can be like releasing it into the abyss
 
Jul 25, 2018
1,353
I don't know if you understand how words work.

I never said that they should have announced that the game was cancelled.

They should have said it would no longer be releasing on Steam as soon as they had reached that decision.

How is all their "can't say" answers now helping anyone?
If they pull it from all stores and don't announce a new destination, the obvious conclusion is that the game is in trouble, and potential customers might lose any hype they had.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,522
It's better than any other communications strategy anybody is coming up with. I question whether anyone so outraged by this is even a customer, or whether they are just white knighting for some perceived slight, no matter how inconsequential.
So you really are going to go there? Anyone that is critical of this is now a White Knight?
 
Oct 26, 2017
4,342
If they pull it from all stores and don't announce a new destination, the obvious conclusion is that the game is in trouble, and potential customers might lose any hype they had.
I disagree, and I think their decision to pull the rug from under people at the last minute is far more detrimental to hype.
 
Oct 26, 2017
919
If they pull it from all stores and don't announce a new destination, the obvious conclusion is that the game is in trouble, and potential customers might lose any hype they had.
Steam release has be canceled, PC version still scheduled for release with no delay, more details at a later date.

That was hard. ( even easier if they had the right to say something along the line of "still coming exclusively on another store" for maximum PR points )
 
Jul 25, 2018
1,353
Steam release has be canceled, PC version still scheduled for release with no delay, more details at a later date.

That was hard. ( even easier if they had the right to say something along the line of "still coming exclusively on another store" for maximum PR points )
You'd essentially be announcing a new Store will be open by that release date, and their NDA may prohibit them saying anything like that. That lack of transparency wouldn't help consumers either. The bottom line is, there was no problem with the way it was handled.
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
467
Illinois
People explained in this very page and every others how it affects people. If you cant read, don't post.
I’ll post whatever I want. I’m not reading every single post on every page, I have better things to do with my time.

The core game is still there, and if you don’t like it you don’t have to buy it. Steam isn’t the end all be all, and it shouldn’t be either.
 

Krejlooc

Dreamcast Porno Party
Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,574
This isn't about providing a platform of tools. Uplay does that, and Uplay is fine. This is about limiting the stores you can buy this at. This is like if Smash Bros Ultimate was entirely exclusive to nintendo. You know how Nintendo rarely discounts the prices of their games? Imagine if Nintendo said, you can only buy Smash Bros Ultimate through the e-shop. You can't buy it through amazon, or walmart, or anything, and just to drive the point home, you can't even use cards bought at other stores to load points into your eshop. You have to give your money directly to nintendo, they will decide the price forever.

Obviously, smash brothers isn't being sold like that. I can go to walmart and get it for the MSRB. Or I can go to a store on boxing day that is trying to vye for my patrionship and is selling it at a discount. Or I could go into the used market and buy it there, directly from another owner, who might sell it for even cheaper. Because there are many stores to choose from, I win, because I get a better price.

Epic is doing my smash brothers ultimate hypothetical with these games. They are paying so that they are the only store that will sell these games, stifling the marketplace. Steam doesn't work like this. What you call "launchers" and what people are referring to as "Steam" and "Epic" are actually a bunch of different things all rolled into one. On one end, the thing that consumers interact with to give money to, is steam the store. There is also Steam, the host. Steam, the host, is where you download games from. To download a game from steam, the host, you need to use Steam, the client, which is a launcher that also has a bunch of tools built in, like key remappers or linux translators. Thing is, you don't need to buy your game from steam, the store, to use steam, the host. And the way it's set up is that in order to download a game from steam, the host, you need to enter a unique pin number into steam, the client. That pin number is generated by developers using a tool valve provides. Developers, way from steam, the store, and steam, the client, when they are making their game, can make a huge number of keys, then they decide where they go. They can put their keys on steam, the store, or give them to other stores like amazon or gamestop.com or whatever. Once a consumer has that key, they functionally have the game. That key, regardless of where they got it from, enables them unlimited lifetime downloads from Steam, the host, using Steam, the client.

You never have to give money to Valve or use steam, the store in this situation. To understand this further, Ubisoft has a similar thing. Uplay is a host for games, and also a store, and also a client that lets people download their games. Uplay and Steam play nicely together. Steam, the store, sells Uplay keys. Uplay, the store, can also sell steam keys. When Uplay sells steam keys, Valve doesn't see a dime. Similarly, when Steam sells Uplay keys, Ubisoft doesn't see a dime... but since most uplay games are from ubisoft in the first place, they still are happy. When I launch a game that uses Uplay from steam, it opens Uplay up in the background, which then launches the game.

Now you might be saying, well what's the big deal about the launchers. In PC Gaming, launchers actually integrate into games. Uplay, the client, for example, has it's own achievement system, and it's actually superior to steam, the client, achievement system. Uplay, the client, achievement system is unique because when you earn achievements, you can turn those points into money to be used on Uplay, the store. So there is actually incentive to buy a Uplay, the client, version of a game. Similarly, Steam, the client, has things like Steam Proton, which lets you run windows games in Linux, or things like Steam Input, which lets you rebind gamepads.

Now, these features between clients actually play nicely. I can launch a Uplay, the client, game from within steam, the client, and Steam's features, like Steam Input, will follow to uplay, the client. There are actually clients that block this, like Microsoft's.

Epic announced three things, basically. That they are launching an epic game store, an epic client, and an epic hosting service. Nobody gives a fuck if people use epic's hosting service. I honestly couldn't care less. Similarly, if I needed to use epic's client to download and play the game, but the client integrates seamlessly to steam, I also don't give a shit. From what I've seen, it appears that's the case and you can integrate Epic's stuff into steam alright.

What's being discussed, which has never happened with steam, is Epic, the store, making a game exclusive. THAT is anti-consumer. It's not just about "downloading another launcher." Nobody gives a shit about that really. It's about being forced into a single vendor setup, where Epic is basically paying money to keep games out of other people's stores. This is more than just not being on steam, the store. This is also, presumably, not being on amazon.com, or gamestop.com, and so forth. The actual competition that matters, the competition that actually drives PC gaming. It is these fringe stores that haven't been the steam store since steam has existed that has made PC gaming so awesome. These stores create real competition, where multiple outlets are selling the same product and I, as a consumer, pick the one that treats me best. There will be no grey market for epic games, no organic market of keys. They control the transaction, they're the only entity you can go through to get these games, which, a week ago, otherwise were going to come to many stores.

That is why it sucks.
KOHIPEET are you ever going to respond to this, or was your "honest" question not so honest?
 
Oct 27, 2017
805
I’ll post whatever I want. I’m not reading every single post on every page, I have better things to do with my time.

The core game is still there, and if you don’t like it you don’t have to buy it. Steam isn’t the end all be all, and it shouldn’t be either.
If you don't want to even do basic research on the argument you're hopping into, don't post at all. This is just a drive-by with a few more words.
 
Oct 25, 2017
8,058
Works for me. Epic launcher is more visually pleasing than any of the others (steam/origin/uplay) so I don't really mind, and it's cool that a bigger cut is going to the devs. Hopefully this pressures Steam to treat devs better as well.




I strongly suspect that from a dev standpoint it's a VERY good time to be on the epic storefront and if they're a small/unknown dev there's probably a lot more sales potential there than on Steam.

Steam has a kabillion users, but it also has a kabillion games. Unless you're one of the lucky few, releasing a game on Steam can be like releasing it into the abyss
unless you're one of the lucky few, you aren't getting a epic games store release either lmao
 
Jun 7, 2018
510
Works for me. Epic launcher is more visually pleasing than any of the others (steam/origin/uplay) so I don't really mind, and it's cool that a bigger cut is going to the devs. Hopefully this pressures Steam to treat devs better as well.
/QUOTE]

Oh ok then hopefully Steam starts moneyhatting games away from their competitors as well...
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,522
I’ll post whatever I want. I’m not reading every single post on every page, I have better things to do with my time.

The core game is still there, and if you don’t like it you don’t have to buy it. Steam isn’t the end all be all, and it shouldn’t be either.
Then getting defensive when people call you out for posting a driveby statement that has been answered dozens of times means you have time to shitpost but not time to read.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,057

Confirmed 12 months exclusive
Some of the answers are a bit misleading (probably not deliberately) - like how the regional pricing support is technically there, but the conversion rates are nonsense. Also the no questions asked refund question.

That being said, absolutely massive thumbs up to Coffee Stain for being the first of the bought developers to actually be honest about things. I much prefer this over the attempts at justification that Supergiant and Team Meat used.
 
Last edited:
Oct 30, 2017
2,685
There's no reason for this. It's basically losing sales for the sake of a bigger cut.

And steam isn't the only online distributor. Humble Bundle gives the developer 75% with the other 15% going to charity and Humble Bundle.
 
Oct 26, 2017
4,342
Yeah really appropriate the transparency on stuff like being paid for exclusivity, and for agreeing to an NDA with Epic.

Not happy about some aspects of how this has all gone down, but certainly pleased that this information is in the public domain now.