Poster you quoted has never had to prioritize a product roadmap before, based on the language they used.
-
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.
Super Meat Boy Forever PC version will be on the Epic Games Store (Update: Not On Steam for 1 Year)
- Thread starter jbug617
- Start date
Poster you quoted has never had to prioritize a product roadmap before, based on the language they used.
It doesn't have it and they have not confirmed what is coming to the store front in the future. Everything is vague at the moment, which is why I will not invest in their store front.
I'd trust durante word over yours. I have no faith in epic to update and improve their store since this is the most they have done to their store since it launched.
It's not going to have the features when the game launches.
Haha.
So where is cloud saves on the roadmap of this product?
They became standard in the year 2000.
People in the US born that year can now vote.
I was referring to the time frame when the game is released. Since that is what the question was about.
In fact, the post I answered to was explicit: "I bet that playing the game in April is not going to be any different".
That's why I chose the exact words I did when answering.
Super meat boy sold more on Steam in a week than on Xbox in a full year. Yet the developer finds it necessary to help introducing paid store exclusivity on pc "to force Valve to give a shit"? That guy is an ass. Not giving him my money anymore.
Got it - I didn't see the full thread conversation, I apologize. I'm kind of bothered by the backlash, because storefront competition isn't a problem for me, so I jumped to conclusions.
People gonna have to stop fucking whinging about this eventually.
"Oh but mah Steam features!"
"But Steam needs real competition, not exclusives!"
How is Epic supposed to release a store feature competitive with a 15 year mature product right off the bat? Until they do, how are they supposed to establish market share to make that development viable?
Stop talking out both sides of your mouth.
"Oh but mah Steam features!"
"But Steam needs real competition, not exclusives!"
How is Epic supposed to release a store feature competitive with a 15 year mature product right off the bat? Until they do, how are they supposed to establish market share to make that development viable?
Stop talking out both sides of your mouth.
This.
The people I know that plays Fortnite are the sons of my relatives/friends/etc. They are between 10 and 14. They'll never spend 1 cent on the store.
One hand, the landscape on Steam is different now. And while breakout successes of course still happens there, there's no guarantee that Super Meat Boy Forever will repeat the originals success, especially that it's a sequel, with a name that sounds more like a special edition then a proper sequel.
On the other hand, this doesn't solve any problems that Steam or any other client has with discoverability, it right now only gives these selected devs a cushion.
That's not the point. The point is that with a game being made exclusive, instead of being on all stores, we who care about those features doesn't get to chose them.
And oh, it's not wrong to assume that a dev like Epic, should at least be able to compete with GOG Galaxy. Which they can't now.
so we should support anti-consumer behavior to give Epic a leg up on not working on developing a featured store.
And If Steam is so bad now, I am sure Epic should easily be able to beat Steam without exclusives even with their 15 year history. Steams detractors keep saying they are stagnate
So which is it? Steam is too far ahead so people need to be anti-competitive and. Anti-consumer.
Or Steam is stagnant and has been resting on their laurels too long so it shouldn't have that big of a lead?
Stop talking out of both sides of your mouth
If I would have took the second to properly read the post you quoted, I guess I would have known that. My bad.
They are missing extremely basic features they have failed to implement in the 4 years their launcher has existed. That they launched their third party without addressing none of them is honestly pathetic.
No, you should support developers while Epic do build a better store.
I never said steam is "so bad now"?
I never said anything about Steam being stagnant or resting on laurels.
I'm not, QED the above.
A lot of these features could take a small team of people several months to develop, at minimum, before launching them publicly. A lot of "basic" features aren't basic when your backend architecture isn't even there for them. I think it's a valid criticism, but the way people are talking about these missing features... Is odd. They'll come, but they'll be prioritized, and they'll probably take a lot of time to build :/
Steam being 15 years old has shit to do with their features. There are things we get to expect in 2018.
If a new console maker appeared in the market, would it be fine for them to try to compete against Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo with a console on par with PS2 in term of hardware power ? Cause you know, 15 years ago.
I am curious what your motivation would have been for accepting such exclusivity deal? Did you expect the majority of fans to accept this decision? And do you think that store owners buying exclusivity will actually lead to more healthy competition?
To be clear: I'm not judging you, but I'd love to hear the opinion of an actual developer about this.
I don't think anyone should expect Epic to feature match Steam out of the gate. I don't think its asking a lot to have even the bare minimum of features, which Epic's launcher doesn't have.
To your second point: how to have a competitive store? Many major store fronts do already- GOG.com/Discord Store/Humble- by offering unique services that Steam either doesn't match or came late in the game after those stores established their userbases. Epic decided to go the exclusive game route because, quite frankly, they can afford to.
Don't take it from me, take it from Epic's Tim Sweeney, when he was fighting for an open marketplace:
I wonder what happened.
If a new console maker entered the market (hey, I wonder why that hasn't happened in nearly 20 years!), would you not expect them to attempt to secure exclusives in order to build an audience?
Neither are the developers. It's a business.. sometimes they take deals.
No, I would expect them to release a better console with better specs and better price and build 1st party studios.
Not moneyhat Final Fantasy XVI which was announced on PS4/XB1/PC/Switch to then be an exclusive.
I'm not certain, but I think Epic allows you to play the games you purchase.
I'm personally keen for a new wave of PC launcher wars.
Granted, i'm only watching from the sidelines. I use steam, but have no allegiance towards them.
This is no different than having to launch up battle.net for overwatch for me.
Sure, it would be nice for every game to be in one launcher, but that goes against the philosophy of the "open platform"
I miss the good old days of just getting games directly from the developer's website.
Granted, i'm only watching from the sidelines. I use steam, but have no allegiance towards them.
This is no different than having to launch up battle.net for overwatch for me.
Sure, it would be nice for every game to be in one launcher, but that goes against the philosophy of the "open platform"
I miss the good old days of just getting games directly from the developer's website.
I'm not angry at the devs. I just think Epic's store could have launched with more features available out of the gate.
And some free Jazz Jackrabbit games
Wait, 1st party studios, as in games that won't be available on any other system? Hmm, sounds a bit more anti-competitive than expecting users to click a different desktop icon to get to their games.
You're suggesting people purchase against their own interest (as the Epic store offers them less as a consumer) just to support developers. That's charity mate.
If I'm going to be charitable, it's not going to be to support other people's for profit businesses lol.
I would assume that, at the time, I wouldn't know just how bad the Epic Store was. I don't think fans would be happy, and I don't think buying exclusive games is good for anyone.
Excellent point.
What happen was Tim Sweeney got caught spouting a bunch of bullshit in a situation that could hinder his profits. According to the Steam Spy guy, Epic's been planning this closed garden store for the past few years since they were half acquired by the Chinese government (through Tencent). Of course if Microsoft took the ball and went home by forcing everyone to go UWP via the Windows Store, Epic's plans would go under.
A Buisness has two sides. A consumer is free to reject a bad deal. When customers complain, it matters. You don't get to tell customers to suck it up.
Doesn't matter anyway, we will see where it leads. I wouldn't even bother to post if I didn't originally WANT there to be a better deal for game developers. But the paid exclusivity ruined literally everything. Something good was happening, and now it is gone.
The hardship of playing through the exact same game minus trading cards is truly benevolence personified.
It is expected that the content that they created is their content though.
Ah yes, that's definitely all that the Epic Games Store is missing over Steam. Nice one. I see you have no intention to discuss this with any honesty.
Of course they'll improve the launcher.
As well as the exclusive games, the launcher is how they'll differentiate their brand from Steam and other competitors. If people are buying games on Steam instead of Epic because of cloud saves or controller support or screen recording or whatever, they'll address those issues because their very business relies on it.
As well as the exclusive games, the launcher is how they'll differentiate their brand from Steam and other competitors. If people are buying games on Steam instead of Epic because of cloud saves or controller support or screen recording or whatever, they'll address those issues because their very business relies on it.
The hardship of playing through the exact same game minus family sharing, vr implementation, steam input... Oh and 2 automatic refunds allowed for lifetime + one each year.
MMMMMMMMH THE TASTE OF COMPETITION.
Yeah, sure, but having these "basic" features are expensive, and they're prioritizing them. It would be foolish to build a 100% Steam-like and then hope it succeeds.
Oh oops it failed, there goes 1000s of man hours.
This isn't a crazy business decision
Cloud saves became standard in the year 2000? i know update game buttons started appearing on game launchers then.. Shadows of Amn was probably the first i can remember but i dont remember cloud saves being a thing then. Unless you mean like for online games like Diablo or Everquest.
Exactly. That's why we need all games in all launchers. Let stores compete by giving the best prices and features.
I'm glad to read this. And even if Epic's launcher wasn't that bad, 3rd party games should never be tied to a single store imo. The more options consumers have, the better the competition.
In the search for quick exclusivity money a lot of companies are apparently willing to possibly lose a lot of sales. We'll see how this turns out but I can't imagine the Epic store exclusive games are going to do even close to as well as they would have.
The video game industry may possibly be the most short-sighted, self destructive industry that exists today. (Though television networks are a close second)
The video game industry may possibly be the most short-sighted, self destructive industry that exists today. (Though television networks are a close second)
This exists in so many industries. Freelance painters deal with it, to pick something out of left field. It's not uncommon. A Dev wouldn't make the deal if the economics weren't there (hopefully).
The other thing (that I'm guessing people have mentioned already) why we're seeing games go to the Epic Store is how small their catalogue is. Steam has thousands of games but right now Epic has a small, curated list of games with large banners and text drawing customers in. Steam had a similar issue to the iOS store which is its flooded with content and hard to find exactly what you want. I remember when I first installed steam with Half-Life 2 on disc and it was mostly a launcher but slowly got some games you could purchase digitally - it started small. Epic's store is in this same place right now so that's another plus for devs; more consumers being able to find their games quickly and on the home page. But in a year or so we'll see the epic store become bloated too.(I should also mention that Epic has a large audience because you need the Epic launcher to play Fortnite, right? So there's a baked in audience, albeit smaller than the users on steam but hey a lot of potential customers for sure)
Obviously there's all the other negatives and positives people have talked about in this thread but I just wanted to discuss that. Being onboard with something at its inception can be a really big deal so.
Do we know how certain online systems are being implemented for some of these games? As we know Steamworks is integrated into a lot of multiplayer games - does Epic have something similar?
Obviously there's all the other negatives and positives people have talked about in this thread but I just wanted to discuss that. Being onboard with something at its inception can be a really big deal so.
Do we know how certain online systems are being implemented for some of these games? As we know Steamworks is integrated into a lot of multiplayer games - does Epic have something similar?