The Division 2 Is Ditching Steam For The Epic Games Store On PC [See Threadmarks]

Echo

Member
Oct 29, 2017
5,376
Mt. Whatever
One of the few AAA that had me waiting in anticipation for 2019. But now? No thanks. I don't support Epic's business practices simple as that. And this comes at a time right when Ubi titles were going back to MORE steam integration (Achievements/Trading Cards).

Guess I'll wait to see if they ever do put it on Steam, but when they do, it had better come with a steep sale.
 

TheLetdown

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,131
Arguments that steam is a platform the way a sony playstation 4 or nintendo switch are aren't welcome at my lunch hour.
Platform or not, using money to expressly incentivize exclusivity of any kind is still moneyhatting, unless you’re being deliberately obstinate so as to reduce the meaning specifically (and exclusively, heh) to the sole instance from which it became popular: console wars.
 

Durante

Dark Souls Man
Member
Oct 24, 2017
5,070
I'm just finding some of the reasoning (not necessarily yours) little more than avant-garde posturing.
It has always been the case that some people are more deeply engaged with their hobby than others, and you'll certainly find more enthusiasts here than elsewhere. If gaming was just something I occasionally, randomly do in my free time (like hiking or watching a TV show) I likely wouldn't care about anything going on here.

Since it's decidedly not that, but rather my primary hobby (and partially my occupation) I'm far more involved with and concerned by what all of this might mean for the future quality of PC gaming in the long term. And actually also concerned about what rampant exclusivity agreements might mean for its beneficial marketplace freedom of choice (yes, I actually think that "competition" as engaged in here might not just not improve the competition I benefit from as a customer, but decrease it in the long term).

I can see and understand why other people might not care as much, but that won't prevent me from presenting the arguments that matter to me (and likely many other enthusiasts). I certanly don't think that qualifies as "posturing" -- rather, it's a difference in priorities.
 

Gentlemen

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,689
Is is possible there is a nuance to the reasoning that you might have missed though?
I'd say I'm responding mostly to the nuanced arguments. Even if there's no hard evidence, I believe you when you say that the possibility money changed hands and that's why The Division 2 is not on Steam is enough to cancel out any enthusiasm you had for the game.

But I believe we can also agree that there's a lot of sour grapes 'the division is a bad game anyway' and 'here's a context-free png file lol!' that fits under the umbrella of 'avant-garde posturing' from which no nuance or real discussion can be gleaned, an increasingly distressing, high-volume phenomenon any time something isn't on Steam for whatever reason.
 

Popetita

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 29, 2017
1,957
TX|PR
Valve is offering pc gamers the most features and best prices. You can't blame people for preferring Steam and disliking companies that actually pay 3rd party devs and publishers to keep their games away from Steam.
I totally understand that and I am not dismissing it but at the end of the day, I am in it for the games.

If Dark Souls 4 comes out and it says it is not coming out on Steam. I am going to buy it day 1 on whatever service they put it on. There has to be a game for everyone that they just go screw it I want it now because the most important thing here is the games.

This is why I don't get the Steam loyalty and the attitude of "No Steam, No sale". Maybe if Valve themselves were putting out more games of their own but I just don't know why someone would be more loyal to the platform than the games. It is not at all like consoles.
 

Durante

Dark Souls Man
Member
Oct 24, 2017
5,070
'here's a context-free png file lol!' that fits under the umbrella of 'avant-garde posturing' from which no nuance or real discussion can be gleaned, an increasingly distressing, high-volume phenomenon any time something isn't on Steam for whatever reason.
The reason some picture replies are posted at a high rate is because the same small set of (repetitive, and crucially, actually answered by the picture and multiple times in the thread) questions is asked at a high rate, often in one-off posts.
 

Antrax

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,258
Not really, because the margins have nothing to do with this, a moneyhat does.
This isn't really accurate.

If I could sell a million copies at 30% margins or 800K at 12%, I take the 2nd one because profit is higher. Unit sales mean dick. So if Ubisoft expects to only sell effectively 600K (after the cut) on the Epic Store, then Epic needs to pay them the money they'll lose for effectively 100K (70% of a million on Steam is 700K) copies. But if the margins were equal, you gotta moneyhat every lost copy.

To say it another way, there's a built-in moneyhat of 18% per copy on the Epic Store. If Steam matched that, Epic couldn't afford to pay for the lost revenue.
 

Static

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
3,549
Give it time and even competitors could have their grey market ! ^^;
They'd have to offer the ability to generate keys at no (or reduced) cost to do that. So far as I know, EGS doesn't offer the ability to sell EGS keys outside of EGS.
Arguments that steam is a platform the way a sony playstation 4 or nintendo switch are aren't welcome at my lunch hour.
lol. Your lunch hour not withstanding, Steam and EGS are digital distribution platforms that in many respects operate similarly to the Switch and PS4. The fact that Switch and PS4 both operate exclusively on proprietary hardware is sort of beside the point. They all have a storefront they want you and I to patronize. It is in their interest to secure a variety of games, and exclusivity to those games, so that we are forced to patronize them if we want to play those games, and to further increase our exposure to the rest of their storefronts. When they do that, we call it moneyhatting. This isn't a stretch.

Honestly. "Not a platform in the same way." May as well say an octopus isn't an animal in the same way a tiger is.
 

Durante

Dark Souls Man
Member
Oct 24, 2017
5,070
This isn't really accurate.

If I could sell a million copies at 30% margins or 800K at 12%, I take the 2nd one because profit is higher. Unit sales mean dick. So if Ubisoft expects to only sell effectively 600K (after the cut) on the Epic Store, then Epic needs to pay them the money they'll lose for effectively 100K (70% of a million on Steam is 700K) copies. But if the margins were equal, you gotta moneyhat every lost copy.

To say it another way, there's a built-in moneyhat of 18% per copy on the Epic Store. If Steam matched that, Epic couldn't afford to pay for the lost revenue.
In principle this is accurate, in practice it should be noted that (i) for large-scale games like The Division it's probably closer to 12% now and (ii) for smaller developers (so not Ubisoft) Steam provides a lot of features you'd need to set up and pay for hosting for if you were planning to offer them on the Epic store.
(Or you can just skip them instead, which brings us back to customer concerns)
 

Gentlemen

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,689
The reason some picture replies are posted at a high rate is because the same small set of (repetitive, and crucially, actually answered by the picture and multiple times in the thread) questions is asked at a high rate, often in one-off posts.
To which I can only say 1) You're probably being trolled, don't rise to it and 2) Those image replies don't rise to the level of a nuanced argument. They just don't. They certainly don't represent more than one person's (probably warped and inaccurate) point of view and they just make it harder to talk about our priorities in a meaningful way.
 

rocket

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,150
Not planning to buy the game anyway cause I don't feel this is a game I want to invest my time in, but at least I ain't buying it not because where it is or it is not being sold. I understand people will hate on a game cause it is bad or the dev is lazy/crappy or the pub is a thief; but where it is being sold!? ha ha, I guess this is the new "gamer" trend for 2019 then. Anyway, I love these "gamer" outrage trend, very entertaining.

I will be playing my free What Remains of Edith Finch soon, and I will enjoy it not because it is from the Epic Store or not, but because it is a great game.
 
Last edited:

Gentlemen

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,689
proprietary hardware is sort of beside the point.
It was 100% the point when the term was coined in 2000 and people didn't want to buy an XBox for Munch's Oddysee.
If anything, trying to fit the term to whatever the latest conspiracy theory is diminishes the impact of the inconvenience expressed when it first entered the lexicon.
 

Durante

Dark Souls Man
Member
Oct 24, 2017
5,070
To which I can only say 1) You're probably being trolled, don't rise to it and 2) Those image replies don't rise to the level of a nuanced argument. They just don't. They certainly don't represent more than one person's (probably warped and inaccurate) point of view and they just make it harder to talk about our priorities in a meaningful way.
You really have to explain to me how e.g. this image (which I made) presents a "warped and inaccurate" view -- or at least how it is more "warped and inaccurate" than if I typed up the same thing again in a new post. (Someone previously remarked that I missed a lot of developer-facing features that Steam has over the Epic store, and I guess that's true)
 

BernardoOne

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,287
This isn't really accurate.

If I could sell a million copies at 30% margins or 800K at 12%, I take the 2nd one because profit is higher. Unit sales mean dick. So if Ubisoft expects to only sell effectively 600K (after the cut) on the Epic Store, then Epic needs to pay them the money they'll lose for effectively 100K (70% of a million on Steam is 700K) copies. But if the margins were equal, you gotta moneyhat every lost copy.

To say it another way, there's a built-in moneyhat of 18% per copy on the Epic Store. If Steam matched that, Epic couldn't afford to pay for the lost revenue.
Steam"s margin is 20%
 

Dust

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,366
The market will decide if this is a valid strategy or not, I do wonder how much money is EPIC willing to spend on this.
 

Fudgepuppy

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,514
I'm not super excited about the Epic Launcher as they've mostly marketed its benefits for the developers.

Free games are cool, but I have enough games on my backlog, and I just like having my PC games on one platform.

One killer-app feature though, would be fully integrated suspend and resume play. That would make me change platforms.
 

Nooblet

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,696
He literally listed two other benefits that you didn't bother to address. On top of which, native Steam applications track total playtime, allow participation in the marketplace with trading cards and such, and give you access to cloud saves.
Tbf except for marketplace/trading cards Uplay has all of the things you mentioned in this post including play time tracking. It also does loyalty discounts via uplay coins. It also has support for anti cheat like Battleeye as well as install folder relocation whereas in that picture it says uplay doesn't support anti cheat or folder relocation.

On a kind of unrelated note uplay is used as the main networking front end for all Ubisoft games and pretty much ends up being the defacto platform for inviting and communication with other players while in game for Ubi games because everyone who plays an ubi game owns the game on uplay while not everyone who plays an ubisoft game owns the game on steam.
 
Last edited:

Durante

Dark Souls Man
Member
Oct 24, 2017
5,070
If anything, trying to fit the term to whatever the latest conspiracy theory is diminishes the impact of the inconvenience expressed when it first entered the lexicon.
For me, not getting the features I am accustomed to is a larger inconvenience than spending $300 on a console (and it's, features, not cost, which are the reason I always wanted every game on PC in the first place).
Also, you now referring to "the latest conspiracy theory" seems awfully dismissive given that just a few posts up you said that "I believe you when you say that the possibility money changed hands" (and of course given the fact that we have confirmation it happened for other games).
 

Gentlemen

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,689
You really have to explain to me how e.g. this image (which I made) presents a "warped and inaccurate" view -- or at least how it is more "warped and inaccurate" than if I typed up the same thing again in a new post. (Someone previously remarked that I missed a lot of developer-facing features that Steam has over the Epic store, and I guess that's true)
It's got an unexplained money hat on it and uses the mad decade-old 'master race' cosmology, and seems to not find any customer positives from the epic store when even the google doc screenshot that pulled me into the thread could and it has a silly strawman at the bottom and...do I really have to dignify this?
 

Arulan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,233
I totally understand that and I am not dismissing it but at the end of the day, I am in it for the games.

If Dark Souls 4 comes out and it says it is not coming out on Steam. I am going to buy it day 1 on whatever service they put it on. There has to be a game for everyone that they just go screw it I want it now because the most important thing here is the games.

This is why I don't get the Steam loyalty and the attitude of "No Steam, No sale". Maybe if Valve themselves were putting out more games of their own but I just don't know why someone would be more loyal to the platform than the games. It is not at all like consoles.
Everyone is free to make their own spending choices, but frankly saying all that matters is the games is just telling corporations that they can fuck with you however they want, and you'll just accept it because you want the games.

It isn't like this on consoles because they're designed to strip away all power from their customers. It's significantly more difficult to combat bullshit practices like this when you have no alternative services or storefronts to choose from. The only choice you had as a consumer was before you bought the console. This is why exclusivity deals, paying for online play services, paying outrageous prices on licensed accessories (because perfectly fine old ones are no longer supported), and many more decisions are just tolerated, because there really isn't much you can do about it on closed-platforms.
 

MickeyKnox

Member
Oct 28, 2017
211
Seriously though, is there a Steam stats/charts equivalent for the Epic launcher? Or do we have to wait on self reporting by the publishers?
 

Static

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
3,549
It was 100% the point when the term was coined in 2000 and people didn't want to buy an XBox for Munch's Oddysee.
If anything, trying to fit the term to whatever the latest conspiracy theory is diminishes the impact of the inconvenience expressed when it first entered the lexicon.
If you genuinely think that that was essential to the original definition, I'm afraid to tell you that it is no longer 2000, and the meaning of the word may have undergone a subtle change. Your feelings on the appropriateness of the word are irrelevant. We all know what it means when someone says that EGS is moneyhatting publishers for third party exclusives.
It's got an unexplained money hat on it
Seriously. Let it go. You are the only one digging their heels in on the bizarre sanctity of "money hatting only applies to consoles."
 

Gentlemen

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,689
Also, you now referring to "the latest conspiracy theory" seems awfully dismissive given that just a few posts up you said that "I believe you when you say that the possibility money changed hands"
I plead guilty to a strangely constructed sentence, but I'll repost it in its entirety with emphasis on the subject of my beliefs

"I believe you when you say that the possibility money changed hands and that's why The Division 2 is not on Steam is enough to cancel out any enthusiasm you had for the game."
"I believe [that poster] when [they] tell me [something] was enough to cancel their enthusiasm for the game"
 

Yunyo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,459
More console style exclusivity on PC... thanks a bunch, Epic. I can feel the "competition". Here's to the day when the checks stop going out.
 

Gentlemen

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,689
Seriously. Let it go. You are the only one digging their heels in on the bizarre sanctity of "money hatting only applies to consoles."
I was asked to comment on the relative bias of useless .png replies. Report my posts if you have a problem with me participating in a discussion when I'm directly asked a question.
 

Roshin

Member
Oct 30, 2017
752
This modern take that now it means "a game isn't for sale on Steam because I think money changed hands between shrouded figures in trench coats in an alley and bulging cartoon sacks labeled with big green dollar signs" is baffling to me, personally. But again, do you.
Leaving a platform that has millions of users is not something you do on a whim, I imagine. As people like to point out, this is a business. You don't turn down all those potential sales, unless you expect to make it up (and more) elsewhere.
 

stealthyfrog

Avenger
Jan 6, 2019
4,674
Wow. That's a surprising vote of confidence for the Epic Games Store from Ubisoft. Epic needs the backing of large AAA publishers for their store to succeed, and getting Ubisoft on board is a good start. I won't use the Epic launcher for anything except Fortnite until it becomes more feature-complete, though.
 

Durante

Dark Souls Man
Member
Oct 24, 2017
5,070
It's got an unexplained money hat on it
Actually, there is a money hat on it because we know that Epic paid for game exclusivity. (We admittedly don't know for sure whether this happened with Ubisoft in particular)

and uses the mad decade-old 'master race' cosmology
I find that amusing, sorry for my lack of sophistication.

and seems to not find any customer positives from the epic store when even the google doc screenshot that pulled me into the thread could
It doesn't though? Unless you refer to "curation", which I consider a preference rather than a feature. (E.g. GoG "curation" meant that they initially rejected one of the best games of last year) To me it's a negative, but I just chose to omit it entirely. It is actually listed as a positive from the developer PoV ("Empty Shelves").

and it has a silly strawman at the bottom
It's not a strawman, it was made after a great many exchanges which literally boil down to that (all of which are archived thanks to the power of the internet). Unless those were straw-people posting of course.
 

Static

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
3,549
We'll just have to see if this pays off for them or not.
I mean, if they're willing to pay all major third party publishers and major indies who don't decide to make themselves exclusive to their OWN shop (an increasingly small pool), exclusivity fees may just mean that Epic to some extent will come to own the PC space. That's a sort of depressing thought.
 

Durante

Dark Souls Man
Member
Oct 24, 2017
5,070
I mean, if they're willing to pay all major third party publishers and major indies who don't decide to make themselves exclusive to their OWN shop (an increasingly small pool), exclusivity fees may just mean that Epic to some extent will come to own the PC space. That's a sort of depressing thought.
I find it more depressing when I consider who (to a significant extent) owns Epic.