Check out these rave reviews of this re-release of a previously failed title (that Steam ALSO had no problem selling, EVEN after the devs abandoned it!):
I think you are missing the big picture here, you are only focusing on the negative. When you publish thousands of Indie games it's physiologic to have a good chunk of them which turn out to be bad. Pointing out that Steam still makes money out of them is ridiculous. Did Amazon stopped selling FO76 just because it was crap? I don't think so. So why Steam should be singled out?
Steam is an excellent platform for Indie developers, it gives small Teams the chance to showcase their games to the world (because of that we have games like Divinity, NMS, ARK and so on), something EPIC is not doing. They prefer to undercut Steam on AAA games burning Fortnite money like there is no tomorrow, instead of slowly and patiently building their library with Indie games. Their aggressive behavior without the means to back it up, is the problem I have with EPIC.
Today this aggressive behavior is aimed at Steam, tomorrow will be the customers, you can bet on it. This apparent "generosity" expressed by Epic won't last long, it's either they kill Steam and they take over, or they shut shop, there is no room for two universal game digital distributors on the Internet (almost everything is a monopoly on the Internet, I don't know if you noticed it). I rather have Steam having the monopoly of Digital Distribution, rather than Epic, EA or Google.
i find it silly to complain about bad game on steam... Because you can just ignore it.
But I don't know why OP keep trying to paint steam to be some innocent "small guy". Steam is not a small guy... Anyhow I'm sure most of people are too lazy to install 2 plateform unless they have to.
i find it silly to complain about bad game on steam... Because you can just ignore it.
But I don't know why OP keep trying to paint steam to be some innocent "small guy". Steam is not a small guy... Anyhow I'm sure most of people are too lazy to install 2 plateform unless they have to.
Look, Steam is not small, but it started small, and slowly they got where they are now. I am not trying to say that Steam are the good guys, every company is about making money and Steam is not an exception.
But Steam compared to other gaming companies can still be considerate as a "family run business", they do not depend too much from stock market restrains, so they still
have some room to deliver a product that is somewhat customer focused, a bit like Bioware before being bought by Electronic Arts. Basically the difference between Bioware pre-EA and Bioware post-EA is the reason why I am making such a fuss about Steam.
Steam is the Bioware before EA, EPIC is the Bioware after EA. Since gaming digital download is going to be a monopoly, like everything else on the Internet, I rather have Valve owning this monopoly than EPIC.
When Steam will be bought by Google or Amazon (I am sure it will happen at some point), I might change my view on Steam.
i find it silly to complain about bad game on steam... Because you can just ignore it.
But I don't know why OP keep trying to paint steam to be some innocent "small guy". Steam is not a small guy... Anyhow I'm sure most of people are too lazy to install 2 plateform unless they have to.
<snip>
Steam Epic is the Bioware before EA, EPIC Steam is the Bioware after EA. <snip>
Steam Epic is the Bioware before EA, EPIC Steam is the Bioware after EA. <snip>
Can you elaborate on this? I am actually curious why you think it that way.
Valve is a private owned Company (Gabe Newell 50%) while Tencent Holdings who owns the majority Stock of Epic (40%) is a public company quoted on the Shenzen (China) Stock Market.
Seeing this thread pop up I decided to take a second look at the store. Guess what? Sale is over and what do ya know now their are a bunch of preorder games back up.
Use key sites folks for all your discounted preorder needs, or GMG sometimes.
Bartoni's Law definition: As an Internet discussion grows volatile, the probability of a comparison involving Donald Trump approaches 1.
Seeing this thread pop up I decided to take a second look at the store. Guess what? Sale is over and what do ya know now their are a bunch of preorder games back up.
Use key sites folks for all your discounted preorder needs, or GMG sometimes.
Exactly my point. It was just a marketing move.
Meanwhile on Steam sales are still going strong as usually, week in week out.
I don't get why people think that a company like Epic owned by a Chinese mega corporation who base their business on microtransaction, could offer a better value for money than Steam.
Seeing this thread pop up I decided to take a second look at the store. Guess what? Sale is over and what do ya know now their are a bunch of preorder games back up.
Use key sites folks for all your discounted preorder needs, or GMG sometimes.
Exactly my point. It was just a marketing move.
Meanwhile on Steam sales are still going strong as usually, week in week out.
I don't get why people think that a company like Epic owned by a Chinese mega corporation who base their business on microtransaction, could offer a better value for money than Steam.
That's not the point I was trying to make.
My point is that the greedy Devs/publishers/whoever took down their games during the sale in the first place. That's the shitty part. I don't blame Epic Store for that. They were discounting games. That's a good thing no matter what their "agenda" might be. ALWAYS be for the consumer, not the corporations. The Epic Store is new and quite honestly pretty bare boned. I don't expect them to try to keep up with Steam for awhile.
Bartoni's Law definition: As an Internet discussion grows volatile, the probability of a comparison involving Donald Trump approaches 1.
Funny thing, during the last days of sale the Ubisoft games came back and The Division 2 was actually cheaper in the Epic sale then in the Ubisoft sale. Not only that, Watchdogs 2, FarCry Primal ed. got added as well, on sale. Gues Ubisoft is pretty happy with the Epic store.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Funny thing, during the last days of sale the Ubisoft games came back and The Division 2 was actually cheaper in the Epic sale then in the Ubisoft sale. Not only that, Watchdogs 2, FarCry Primal ed. got added as well, on sale. Gues Ubisoft is pretty happy with the Epic store.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
It's not unusual at all. Publishers are generally forbidden by contract to make better prices than Distributors. What Steam does with the publishers is the same Walmart or Gamestop or Epic do when they sign a distribution contract with any Publisher.
I think you are missing the big picture here, you are only focusing on the negative.
Classic example of the pot calling the kettle....
Maybe. But while I am trying to explain why Steam is good value (though it has its negative too = monopoly), I have yet to hear a single good argument for the Epic store. -The Store layout is crap. -The free games and discounts are just temporary (unlike Steam). -Epic arrogant attitude stinks, remember the "we stop games exclusivity if you cut the games commission" to Steam. -Epic is part of a big Corporation quoted on the stock exchange, which means they have tons of restrains due to shareholders and stock market expectations (that's why games like F76 and Anthem are rushed, that's not just developers being lazy, profit come first)
The "competition" argument is just not good enough in this case, because Epic is just trying to replace Steam as the main Digital Distributors and it's using dirty tricks to achieve this. Do you think Tencent will care about customers once they get the monopoly of Digital Distribution? Do you think they will offer better deals than Steam does at the moment? I highly doubt that.
Steam on the other hand is owned by one person, the founder Gabe Newell. I rather trust a single person who can do whatever he likes with his own company, than a Company owned by the biggest game publisher in the world which only cares about profit and has no regard for the quality of their products?
For whoever think Epic is a good option as Steam competitor, I say be careful what you wish for.
1. Tencent doesn’t own Epic 2. A Monopoly is never good 3. Somehow thinking Epic is an evil megacorp and Steam isn’t is incredible naive 4. Bad tactics that Epic uses shift constantly. First developers were getting helped and there was whining about poor players. Then there were free games and an amazing sale and all of a sudden it was poor developers 5. The free games given out by Epic are yours to keep forever. Some of them quite good actually 6. Where can I find the source that states Epic wanting to overtake Steam? They are challenging them yes, long overdue too. But overtaking? 7. The store layout is sufficient for now. As the library grows and features get added it will need to be changed yes. Saying it is too difficult to find and shift through all 60 or so titles is a bit of an overreaction 8. Discounts on Steam are temporarily too and they rarely give free games away (unlike the Epic store) 9. The most important one, most don’t buy from the Epic store because they love them or hate Steam. They just want to buy a game. And when that game is only on the Epic store that store is 100% better value then Steam. That works both ways of course
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
People keep making comment like "facebook/amazon/steam" should be break up because of monopoly... blah blah blah. I find that argument stupid.
But I like that company are competing. Not to mention nothing wrong with Epic store. Even if they fail to grab much of the pie... Which is totally fine. It is just another digital distributor.
Funny thing, during the last days of sale the Ubisoft games came back and The Division 2 was actually cheaper in the Epic sale then in the Ubisoft sale. Not only that, Watchdogs 2, FarCry Primal ed. got added as well, on sale. Gues Ubisoft is pretty happy with the Epic store.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
It's not unusual at all. Publishers are generally forbidden by contract to make better prices than Distributors. What Steam does with the publishers is the same Walmart or Gamestop or Epic do when they sign a distribution contract with any Publisher.
This is some Epic stance flipping btw. You made this whole thread of Ubisoft leaving the sale to show that that was a sign of developers going to leave completely and what horrible mistakes Epic made. Now, 6 pages further I present evidence of the exact opposite happening and you say ‘Its not unusual at all.’
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Maybe. But while I am trying to explain why Steam is good value (though it has its negative too = monopoly), I have yet to hear a single good argument for the Epic store. -The Store layout is crap. -The free games and discounts are just temporary (unlike Steam). -Epic arrogant attitude stinks, remember the "we stop games exclusivity if you cut the games commission" to Steam. -Epic is part of a big Corporation quoted on the stock exchange, which means they have tons of restrains due to shareholders and stock market expectations (that's why games like F76 and Anthem are rushed, that's not just developers being lazy, profit come first)
The "competition" argument is just not good enough in this case, because Epic is just trying to replace Steam as the main Digital Distributors and it's using dirty tricks to achieve this. Do you think Tencent will care about customers once they get the monopoly of Digital Distribution? Do you think they will offer better deals than Steam does at the moment? I highly doubt that.
Steam on the other hand is owned by one person, the founder Gabe Newell. I rather trust a single person who can do whatever he likes with his own company, than a Company owned by the biggest game publisher in the world which only cares about profit and has no regard for the quality of their products?
For whoever think Epic is a good option as Steam competitor, I say be careful what you wish for.
Most of your points are just very subjective. Also want to explain free games and discounts are just temporary?
A while back people were in uproar over epic reading steam friends lists. Regardless of if the statement brought forth is true or not. Tim Sweeney took the blame himself. He was responsible for it even though he supposedly had already told the developers on the store to remove it.
You know what steam did when confronted about geoblocking in EU around the same time. It wasn't their fault the developers/publishers were responsible. So they pushed the blame away.
I rather trust someone to do right by me who isn't afraid to take the blame over someone who blames others for mistakes/problems
This is some Epic stance flipping btw. You made this whole thread of Ubisoft leaving the sale to show that that was a sign of developers going to leave completely and what horrible mistakes Epic made. Now, 6 pages further I present evidence of the exact opposite happening and you say ‘Its not unusual at all.’
/Cheers, Lahnmir
I was referring to the fact that Epic discounts were bigger than Ubisoft, obviously. That's not unusual at all.
I don't know if you noticed but the discussion moved away from the original OP, so my reply was referring to the new path this thread took, I wasn't even thinking about the OP.
But if you want to go back on topic, my OP wasn't actually talking about Ubisoft games at all, but Vampire Masquerade 2 and Borderland 3. I said "some" (not all, not many, just some) developers started to show some sign of nervous-ism.
But my prediction (Developers will pull out from Epic store eventually), has nothing to do with this Sale debacle. I just think that such a tiny store, doesn't have what it takes to guarantee big publishers (like Ubisoft) the coverage to guarantee the income they expect.
If Ubisoft is happy with Epic and they added more games, it's a good sign, but I still think that in the long run, most publishers will pull out of the store. Time will tell.
1. Tencent doesn’t own Epic 2. A Monopoly is never good
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Tencent owns 40% of Epic which in business terms means they own Epic as they are the major stake holders.
A monopoly is never good, yet on the Internet it's impossible not to have one (Google, Amazon, Facebook, Spotify etc) unless they are artificially regulated by governments, which is not really happening atm. So all I am saying is if we have to have a monopoly, I prefer Steam has it, as it made wonders for my gaming library thanks to its more than generous Sales all year long. Since Steam has the monopoly, it could charge games full price all the time or with tiny discounts. But that's not the case. I am sure if Epic was in the same position Steam is now, you won't get the same treatment.
Competition is good, but Epic is not the solution.
People keep making comment like "facebook/amazon/steam" should be break up because of monopoly... blah blah blah. I find that argument stupid.
But I like that company are competing. Not to mention nothing wrong with Epic store. Even if they fail to grab much of the pie... Which is totally fine. It is just another digital distributor.
I think OP is probalby some steam salesman... lol
Steam doesn't need a Salesman, as it is a monopoly.
All I am doing is trying to warn people that thinking of handing the Digital Distribution business in the hand of a big corporation, shouldn't be a thought you should entertain, it could bite your ass in the long term.
The reason why AAA games are released unfinished and/or broken, it's because big corporations put profits well ahead of quality of product. They have strict deadlines and practices to appease the market, and Publishers/Developers have to respect those deadlines and practices even if that means releasing products that are subpar.
Would you trust one of those company to run a monopoly? Sure as hell I don't.
I dont' think anyone care. If people want to use either platform all they need to do is install it. It is not like people need to shell out 300$ for a console.
Who the heck give a crap what company is in charge of digital distribution. It is not like steam isn't trying to milk customer's money any differently.
And nothing wrong with big corporation in charge of eCommerce. I love amazon. I understand big game studio make crappy games but... that is only in the game industry.
As far as I see, big corp provide great service. Google, facebook, sony, microsoft, apple etc etc doing fantastic service.
It's getting from bad to worse for the Epic Store. Apparently Epic forgot to ask publishers if they wanted to opt in the Big Sale, and some of them pulled their games from the store while the sale was already going on.
This is probably the first big crack in what I predict will be a failure of epic proportion (pun intended) for the Epic store. As I predicted some time ago, as soon as publishers see that the sales are not coming in, they will pull out from the store all together. This is just the first sign of it.
Long live Steam.
so you are one of these genius not understanding the meaning of a monopoly in sales? you, dear sir, are the companies most favorite customer, dumb as a brick
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
1. Tencent doesn’t own Epic 2. A Monopoly is never good
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Tencent owns 40% of Epic which in business terms means they own Epic as they are the major stake holders.
A monopoly is never good, yet on the Internet it's impossible not to have one (Google, Amazon, Facebook, Spotify etc) unless they are artificially regulated by governments, which is not really happening atm. So all I am saying is if we have to have a monopoly, I prefer Steam has it, as it made wonders for my gaming library thanks to its more than generous Sales all year long. Since Steam has the monopoly, it could charge games full price all the time or with tiny discounts. But that's not the case. I am sure if Epic was in the same position Steam is now, you won't get the same treatment.
Competition is good, but Epic is not the solution.
False, Sweeney owns over 50% of Epic, making him the majority shareholder.
Also, you've been reaching for ways to demonize Epic for about.... 7 pages now. It's no less ridiculous here on page 7 than it was on page 1, and @lahnmir explained to you why already.
This is some Epic stance flipping btw. You made this whole thread of Ubisoft leaving the sale to show that that was a sign of developers going to leave completely and what horrible mistakes Epic made. Now, 6 pages further I present evidence of the exact opposite happening and you say ‘Its not unusual at all.’
/Cheers, Lahnmir
I was referring to the fact that Epic discounts were bigger than Ubisoft, obviously. That's not unusual at all.
I don't know if you noticed but the discussion moved away from the original OP, so my reply was referring to the new path this thread took, I wasn't even thinking about the OP.
But if you want to go back on topic, my OP wasn't actually talking about Ubisoft games at all, but Vampire Masquerade 2 and Borderland 3. I said "some" (not all, not many, just some) developers started to show some sign of nervous-ism.
But my prediction (Developers will pull out from Epic store eventually), has nothing to do with this Sale debacle. I just think that such a tiny store, doesn't have what it takes to guarantee big publishers (like Ubisoft) the coverage to guarantee the income they expect.
If Ubisoft is happy with Epic and they added more games, it's a good sign, but I still think that in the long run, most publishers will pull out of the store. Time will tell.
Ok, Vampire 2 and Borderlands 3 are back too on the store. Does it count then? Can we say you have been wrong then? Because at this point you only have assumption left while reality keeps proving you wrong. Or are we going to wait for one single developer to pull out and ignore all the others that came back or stayed or joined just to yell ‘I told you so!’ ?
And yes, time will tell. But so far the only thing that has been presented is a gut feeling. And this ‘everything and the kitchensink’ approach of bashing Epic hasn’t been working. I have no love for Epic or Steam, they are companies, there shouldn’t be this weird kind of loyalty either way, both Sweeny and Gabe just want your cold hard cash, no two ways about it.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
5. The free games given out by Epic are yours to keep forever. Some of them quite good actually
Can you play those without Epic's launcher? I have received free games many times from different sources (Steam and Amazon's Twitch game launcher) but could NOT play them without the launchers in place. GoG I get free games that I actually DO own and can play without any connection to GoG.
I'm curious as I have avoided the Epic Store and their launcher
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
1. Tencent doesn’t own Epic 2. A Monopoly is never good
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Tencent owns 40% of Epic which in business terms means they own Epic as they are the major stake holders.
A monopoly is never good, yet on the Internet it's impossible not to have one (Google, Amazon, Facebook, Spotify etc) unless they are artificially regulated by governments, which is not really happening atm. So all I am saying is if we have to have a monopoly, I prefer Steam has it, as it made wonders for my gaming library thanks to its more than generous Sales all year long. Since Steam has the monopoly, it could charge games full price all the time or with tiny discounts. But that's not the case. I am sure if Epic was in the same position Steam is now, you won't get the same treatment.
Competition is good, but Epic is not the solution.
False, Sweeney owns over 50% of Epic, making him the majority shareholder.
Also, you've been reaching for ways to demonize Epic for about.... 7 pages now. It's no less ridiculous here on page 7 than it was on page 1, and @lahnmir explained to you why already.
That Sweeney owns 50 or 51% is largely irrelevant and in no way refutes that Tencent owns 40%, and if you think owning 40% doesn't give Tencent any influence or control then you would be wrong. A monopoly is never good, and attempting to gain a monopoly through exclusives has never been good for consumers, neither on console, nor on PC.
I think one of the reasons why Valve has largely ignored Epic, is because Epic is doing a pretty good job of alienating themselves from gamers, while Steams reputation is perhaps not sterling, it is at least, far better than Epics, and that disparity is only getting worse with Epics actions. If Epic want to improve their reputation, all they have to do is fix their store, and stop engaging in anti consumer practices, also, promising that they will never again engage in any spyware and guaranteeing that they have removed the ones they had will do wonders, as would having the same returns policies as Steam, which they do not.
Comments
When you publish thousands of Indie games it's physiologic to have a good chunk of them which turn out to be bad.
Pointing out that Steam still makes money out of them is ridiculous.
Did Amazon stopped selling FO76 just because it was crap? I don't think so.
So why Steam should be singled out?
Steam is an excellent platform for Indie developers, it gives small Teams the chance to showcase their games to the world (because of that we have games like Divinity, NMS, ARK and so on), something EPIC is not doing.
They prefer to undercut Steam on AAA games burning Fortnite money like there is no tomorrow, instead of slowly and patiently building their library with Indie games.
Their aggressive behavior without the means to back it up, is the problem I have with EPIC.
Today this aggressive behavior is aimed at Steam, tomorrow will be the customers, you can bet on it. This apparent "generosity" expressed by Epic won't last long, it's either they kill Steam and they take over, or they shut shop, there is no room for two universal game digital distributors on the Internet (almost everything is a monopoly on the Internet, I don't know if you noticed it).
I rather have Steam having the monopoly of Digital Distribution, rather than Epic, EA or Google.
But I don't know why OP keep trying to paint steam to be some innocent "small guy". Steam is not a small guy... Anyhow I'm sure most of people are too lazy to install 2 plateform unless they have to.
I am not trying to say that Steam are the good guys, every company is about making money and Steam is not an exception.
But Steam compared to other gaming companies can still be considerate as a "family run business", they do not depend too much from stock market restrains, so they still have some room to deliver a product that is somewhat customer focused, a bit like Bioware before being bought by Electronic Arts.
Basically the difference between Bioware pre-EA and Bioware post-EA is the reason why I am making such a fuss about Steam.
Steam is the Bioware before EA, EPIC is the Bioware after EA.
Since gaming digital download is going to be a monopoly, like everything else on the Internet, I rather have Valve owning this monopoly than EPIC.
When Steam will be bought by Google or Amazon (I am sure it will happen at some point), I might change my view on Steam.
I am actually curious why you think it that way.
Valve is a private owned Company (Gabe Newell 50%) while Tencent Holdings who owns the majority Stock of Epic (40%) is a public company quoted on the Shenzen (China) Stock Market.
I don't get how your analogy works.
Bartoni's Law definition: As an Internet discussion grows volatile, the probability of a comparison involving Donald Trump approaches 1.
Meanwhile on Steam sales are still going strong as usually, week in week out.
I don't get why people think that a company like Epic owned by a Chinese mega corporation who base their business on microtransaction, could offer a better value for money than Steam.
Bartoni's Law definition: As an Internet discussion grows volatile, the probability of a comparison involving Donald Trump approaches 1.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
We had Empires run by Emperors, we had Kingdoms run by Kings, now we have Countries...
Publishers are generally forbidden by contract to make better prices than Distributors.
What Steam does with the publishers is the same Walmart or Gamestop or Epic do when they sign a distribution contract with any Publisher.
But while I am trying to explain why Steam is good value (though it has its negative too = monopoly), I have yet to hear a single good argument for the Epic store.
-The Store layout is crap.
-The free games and discounts are just temporary (unlike Steam).
-Epic arrogant attitude stinks, remember the "we stop games exclusivity if you cut the games commission" to Steam.
-Epic is part of a big Corporation quoted on the stock exchange, which means they have tons of restrains due to shareholders and stock market expectations (that's why games like F76 and Anthem are rushed, that's not just developers being lazy, profit come first)
The "competition" argument is just not good enough in this case, because Epic is just trying to replace Steam as the main Digital Distributors and it's using dirty tricks to achieve this.
Do you think Tencent will care about customers once they get the monopoly of Digital Distribution?
Do you think they will offer better deals than Steam does at the moment?
I highly doubt that.
Steam on the other hand is owned by one person, the founder Gabe Newell.
I rather trust a single person who can do whatever he likes with his own company, than a Company owned by the biggest game publisher in the world which only cares about profit and has no regard for the quality of their products?
For whoever think Epic is a good option as Steam competitor, I say be careful what you wish for.
2. A Monopoly is never good
3. Somehow thinking Epic is an evil megacorp and Steam isn’t is incredible naive
4. Bad tactics that Epic uses shift constantly. First developers were getting helped and there was whining about poor players. Then there were free games and an amazing sale and all of a sudden it was poor developers
5. The free games given out by Epic are yours to keep forever. Some of them quite good actually
6. Where can I find the source that states Epic wanting to overtake Steam? They are challenging them yes, long overdue too. But overtaking?
7. The store layout is sufficient for now. As the library grows and features get added it will need to be changed yes. Saying it is too difficult to find and shift through all 60 or so titles is a bit of an overreaction
8. Discounts on Steam are temporarily too and they rarely give free games away (unlike the Epic store)
9. The most important one, most don’t buy from the Epic store because they love them or hate Steam. They just want to buy a game. And when that game is only on the Epic store that store is 100% better value then Steam. That works both ways of course
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
But I like that company are competing. Not to mention nothing wrong with Epic store. Even if they fail to grab much of the pie... Which is totally fine. It is just another digital distributor.
I think OP is probalby some steam salesman... lol
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
A while back people were in uproar over epic reading steam friends lists. Regardless of if the statement brought forth is true or not. Tim Sweeney took the blame himself. He was responsible for it even though he supposedly had already told the developers on the store to remove it.
You know what steam did when confronted about geoblocking in EU around the same time. It wasn't their fault the developers/publishers were responsible. So they pushed the blame away.
I rather trust someone to do right by me who isn't afraid to take the blame over someone who blames others for mistakes/problems
I don't know if you noticed but the discussion moved away from the original OP, so my reply was referring to the new path this thread took, I wasn't even thinking about the OP.
But if you want to go back on topic, my OP wasn't actually talking about Ubisoft games at all, but Vampire Masquerade 2 and Borderland 3.
I said "some" (not all, not many, just some) developers started to show some sign of nervous-ism.
But my prediction (Developers will pull out from Epic store eventually), has nothing to do with this Sale debacle.
I just think that such a tiny store, doesn't have what it takes to guarantee big publishers (like Ubisoft) the coverage to guarantee the income they expect.
If Ubisoft is happy with Epic and they added more games, it's a good sign, but I still think that in the long run, most publishers will pull out of the store.
Time will tell.
So all I am saying is if we have to have a monopoly, I prefer Steam has it, as it made wonders for my gaming library thanks to its more than generous Sales all year long.
Since Steam has the monopoly, it could charge games full price all the time or with tiny discounts. But that's not the case.
I am sure if Epic was in the same position Steam is now, you won't get the same treatment.
Competition is good, but Epic is not the solution.
All I am doing is trying to warn people that thinking of handing the Digital Distribution business in the hand of a big corporation, shouldn't be a thought you should entertain, it could bite your ass in the long term.
The reason why AAA games are released unfinished and/or broken, it's because big corporations put profits well ahead of quality of product.
They have strict deadlines and practices to appease the market, and Publishers/Developers have to respect those deadlines and practices even if that means releasing products that are subpar.
Would you trust one of those company to run a monopoly?
Sure as hell I don't.
If that monetisation method gains popularity, this whole discussion will become obsolete.
Who the heck give a crap what company is in charge of digital distribution. It is not like steam isn't trying to milk customer's money any differently.
And nothing wrong with big corporation in charge of eCommerce. I love amazon. I understand big game studio make crappy games but... that is only in the game industry.
As far as I see, big corp provide great service. Google, facebook, sony, microsoft, apple etc etc doing fantastic service.
you, dear sir, are the companies most favorite customer, dumb as a brick
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
Also, you've been reaching for ways to demonize Epic for about.... 7 pages now. It's no less ridiculous here on page 7 than it was on page 1, and @lahnmir explained to you why already.
And yes, time will tell. But so far the only thing that has been presented is a gut feeling. And this ‘everything and the kitchensink’ approach of bashing Epic hasn’t been working. I have no love for Epic or Steam, they are companies, there shouldn’t be this weird kind of loyalty either way, both Sweeny and Gabe just want your cold hard cash, no two ways about it.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
I'm curious as I have avoided the Epic Store and their launcher
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
A monopoly is never good, and attempting to gain a monopoly through exclusives has never been good for consumers, neither on console, nor on PC.
I think one of the reasons why Valve has largely ignored Epic, is because Epic is doing a pretty good job of alienating themselves from gamers, while Steams reputation is perhaps not sterling, it is at least, far better than Epics, and that disparity is only getting worse with Epics actions.
If Epic want to improve their reputation, all they have to do is fix their store, and stop engaging in anti consumer practices, also, promising that they will never again engage in any spyware and guaranteeing that they have removed the ones they had will do wonders, as would having the same returns policies as Steam, which they do not.