Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Epic Games Store - the console war comes to PC

Wyatt_Derp

Arcane
Joined
May 19, 2019
Messages
3,062
Location
Okie Land

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
Except it doesn't makes sense in long run. Aside from what has been listed so far, you also need to consider that it wasn't only Epic who pissed off a lot of people. Do notice that most of the games being signed exclusivity deals with are also crowdfunded, mostly from Fig. Now, if you tell me all these people who participated in helping the games possible to be developed in the first place to just shut their mouth and accept this anal fuck quietly, you gotta be really fucking kidding me.
Besides, so far we don't have real numbers and real data that the games released exclusively on Epic so far actually proven to be profitable. It's all just buzzwords and bullshits about how "Oh, it's in line with our expectation." "Oh, it exceeded our expectation." "The game sells 2.5x more than the previous game!"

I never said they were succeeding as of now, I said exclusives were probably the only thing that would shake Valve's massive market share. I also said Epic need to follow up with a better client, better PR, and other such things to actually bear fruit with the strategy. Also I said if you promised something in crowd-funding you need to deliver, and it's bullshit when they don't. You're doing that thing where you assume my positions on shit without actually knowing them, because I disagree with you in other areas. I even stated these things within the last few pages.
 

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
Isn't Steamworks still free? I was under the impression none of Valve's features for sellers cost money.

Yes of course, the "back in the day" part was just about how that initiative started a long time ago and is one reason so many games are "exclusive" to Steam with Valve paying for them.
 

passerby

Arcane
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
2,788
You can still resell physical console games.

Tick-tock on that being a thing though. MS already released a digital-only XBone and I'll be surprised if the next gen consoles offer physical at all.

Microsoft already attempted to link games permanently to the console account for xbone, but had to backtrack because Sony refused to play along.
I've never owned a console and don't care, but no reselling is the one of the main reasons PC gaming market share is comparable with PS, or XBOX currently.
Each sold copy of console game is played by 2-3 people on average, when they get rid of reselling and sharing, maybe a bit less people would be inclined to D1P at full price, but the number of units sold could even double.
It could increase console market by 50%, they would get back all revenue that parasitic services like Gamestop are leeching from them and then some more.
 
Last edited:

Black Angel

Arcane
Joined
Jun 23, 2016
Messages
2,910
Location
Wonderland
I never said they were succeeding as of now, I said exclusives were probably the only thing that would shake Valve's massive market share. I also said Epic need to follow up with a better client, better PR, and other such things to actually bear fruit with the strategy. Also I said if you promised something in crowd-funding you need to deliver, and it's bullshit when they don't.
And once again, you're wrong that exclusives are (((((probably))))) (((((the only thing))))) that Epic could do to gain a recognizable foothold in the industry. As much as you think people didn't care for GOG, they've provided legitimately good service by virtue of providing a catalog of good old games, of which many aren't even available on Steam, and an all DRM-free products. If you think people didn't care about this, then you're either blind or haven't been to taking a look at places where a lot of mass gathered to comment these relevant topics.
People here already pointed out many ways for Epic to do this properly, and if they want to court devs and publishers while at it they could've done it to fund down-on-luck devs who's proven to have talent but not the marketing capabilities to sell their games. And then Epic could then market their storefronts as a place that made new games from these devs possible to be made in the first place.
And again, if you think all Epic need is to follow up with better client, better PR, etc etc, well, if you really think about it it's already waaaaaay too fucking late, no? The fact that you think, "Oh, this is all they need to do now!" is some fabulous optimism at best.

You're doing that thing where you assume my positions on shit without actually knowing them, because I disagree with you in other areas. I even stated these things within the last few pages.
And you're doing the exact same thing to me and most people here. Because we're calling out on Epic's bullshit, we're Steam (((((loyalist))))))? Give me a fucking break. Maybe, just maybe, we want to have a choice on where to buy, instead of having to wait for 6 months-1 year. Although, if you ask me, now that these devs/publishers revealed themselves to be blatantly anti-consumer, I personally won't be handing them a single cent in foreseeable future, and all those sailing the Seven Seas stuff is just meme from me.
 

Black Angel

Arcane
Joined
Jun 23, 2016
Messages
2,910
Location
Wonderland
Yes of course, the "back in the day" part was just about how that initiative started a long time ago and is one reason so many games are "exclusive" to Steam with Valve paying for them.
What third-party games out there actually get paid by Valve to be """""""exclusive""""""" on Steam? Name one, because this is the very first time I heard that Valve actually throw some bucks to persuade devs/publisher to sell their games exclusively on Steam.
 

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716
Yes of course, the "back in the day" part was just about how that initiative started a long time ago and is one reason so many games are "exclusive" to Steam with Valve paying for them.
What third-party games out there actually get paid by Valve to be """""""exclusive""""""" on Steam? Name one, because this is the very first time I heard that Valve actually throw some bucks to persuade devs/publisher to sell their games exclusively on Steam.

If you read his post you'd see that "with" doesn't make sense. I'm sure he meant "without Valve paying for them". Meaning, devs have released games only on Steam due to that reason and/or others without Valve even needing to pay for that. Another reason being that Steam is so big that supporting another platform is not worth the bother. Which I'm sure you think it's just fine.

Also, I know you consider something exclusive only if it's named officially as such and made public, but that makes you a retard. However, if you were capable of even some basic logic and letting go of rampant fanboysm, you'd see that a game released only on a platform you love is exactly the same as a game released only on a platform you hate.

In fact, a temporary exclusive (as those on Epic) are very likely to be released on other platforms when the exclusivity period ends. On the other hand, exclusives from Steamtard developers are very likely to stay that way.
But yeah, I know, that's awesome and those developers have integrity and fight evil. Like not releasing on GOG because hurr muh piracy protection. Truly great developers. :lol:
 

Grauken

Gourd vibes only
Patron
Joined
Mar 22, 2013
Messages
12,787
Yes of course, the "back in the day" part was just about how that initiative started a long time ago and is one reason so many games are "exclusive" to Steam with Valve paying for them.
What third-party games out there actually get paid by Valve to be """""""exclusive""""""" on Steam? Name one, because this is the very first time I heard that Valve actually throw some bucks to persuade devs/publisher to sell their games exclusively on Steam.

If you read his post you'd see that "with" doesn't make sense. I'm sure he meant "without Valve paying for them". Meaning, devs have released games only on Steam due to that reason and/or others without Valve even needing to pay for that. Another reason being that Steam is so big that supporting another platform is not worth the bother. Which I'm sure you think it's just fine.

Also, I know you consider something exclusive only if it's named officially as such and made public, but that makes you a retard. However, if you were capable of even some basic logic and letting go of rampant fanboysm, you'd see that a game released only on a platform you love is exactly the same as a game released only on a platform you hate.

In fact, a temporary exclusive (as those on Epic) are very likely to be released on other platforms when the exclusivity period ends. On the other hand, exclusives from Steamtard developers are very likely to stay that way.
But yeah, I know, that's awesome and those developers have integrity and fight evil. Like not releasing on GOG because hurr muh piracy protection. Truly great developers. :lol:

What is Valve to do about these cases, force them to publish on other platforms as well?
 

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
And once again, you're wrong that exclusives are (((((probably))))) (((((the only thing))))) that Epic could do to gain a recognizable foothold in the industry. As much as you think people didn't care for GOG, they've provided legitimately good service by virtue of providing a catalog of good old games, of which many aren't even available on Steam, and an all DRM-free products. If you think people didn't care about this, then you're either blind or haven't been to taking a look at places where a lot of mass gathered to comment these relevant topics.

GOG has never been a real competitor, and multiple indies have said they get about 5% of their sales from GOG. Most big publisher games don't come out there for many years after release, if ever. The fact you're holding GOG up as proof that Steam had competition without exclusives is frankly laughable. I'm a huge GOG fan, I buy pretty much everything I can there, but they're a super niche and not many care.

And again, if you think all Epic need is to follow up with better client, better PR, etc etc, well, if you really think about it it's already waaaaaay too fucking late, no? The fact that you think, "Oh, this is all they need to do now!" is some fabulous optimism at best.

Why would it be way too late? They didn't even start this shit that long ago, their biggest game by far hasn't come out yet, and they've got a massive Fortnite warchest and can keep this up a long time. No one liked Steam at all when it started either, but exclusive games made people use it and it got better and better over time and slowly people started opting to use it. I'm sure Epic is planning the same thing. Whether they succeed or not I have no fucking idea, but again I think it was their only shot at making a big time Steam competitor. Would have been nice if they funded the exclusives rather than bought them, but strategically I don't think it makes much difference. Very few people actually give a shit about backstage crap like that.

And you're doing the exact same thing to me and most people here. Because we're calling out on Epic's bullshit, we're Steam (((((loyalist))))))? Give me a fucking break. Maybe, just maybe, we want to have a choice on where to buy, instead of having to wait for 6 months-1 year. Although, if you ask me, now that these devs/publishers revealed themselves to be blatantly anti-consumer, I personally won't be handing them a single cent in foreseeable future, and all those sailing the Seven Seas stuff is just meme from me.

Weird, I never had a choice about which client to use for the vast majority of games the last 15 years. I had to use Steam. If everything were on GOG or other DRM free outlets before now, you'd be hearing me bitch quite a lot about the Epic Store, just like I bitched about Half-Life 2 back in the day. Sadly I've been forced to use Steam for many years now, and I'm numb to these whines about not having choices. We haven't had choices for most games for a long time, you just didn't mind what you were forced to use. Now you do. That plus your romantic story about Steam's effect on potato economy combined should make it pretty clear why I think you and Gaben make googly-eyes at each other.

Anyway this will just go on and on in a circle and is pointless, so I'm gonna take a long break. Enjoy your commiserating.
 

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
What is Valve to do about these cases, force them to publish on other platforms as well?

You guys are bringing shit from other threads in here. The point was simply that getting eyes on your client is the goal. Steam did it with free Steamworks features, Epic is doing it with paid for exclusives, GOG is now trying to do it with a big push for their client being a central hub for all clients. Once you're using the client more for these reasons, they hope you spend more money on it. That's it.
 

V_K

Arcane
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
7,714
Location
at a Nowhere near you
Just for context, on GOG market share and competition strategy:
Piotr Karwowski: It really depends on the product. It's difficult to calculate the market share. If we have a game starting on the same day as Steam or another platform, with parity of content and updates, then we have cases where we could work up to 15 per cent of the Steam [sales]. It's nice but it's not, say, half, where you could say 'wow, crazy'. But there is definitely opportunity and GOG can do well if we have the title from day one. If we jump in later then it's not so beautiful looking.

Whenever someone says 'how do you see yourself against Steam - how do you compete?'... I know we are in the same space of digital distribution, selling the same product, but we never ever say, 'OK this is what Steam's doing so let's kill Steam this way.' The assumption of building a product around being a killer of some other product is extremely stupid. Why not build a service which has value and brings something more to the consumer rather than just trying to say we're up against those guys and want to take part of it.

When you ask about numbers and I say GOG has 15 per cent: we got there organically, not because we were doing something based on what Steam was doing. We have our own way and people responded to that.
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...-support-steam-rivalry-and-problematic-tweets
 

Baron Dupek

Arcane
Joined
Jul 23, 2013
Messages
1,870,765
Epic got another ace in their sleeve
image.png
 

Silentstorm

Learned
Joined
Apr 29, 2019
Messages
885
Fake news, or at least i can't find anything about it, though, i will admit something, that would be the game that would make me actually buy something on Epic Games Store, i mean, yeah, they are getting the David Cage games but those seem more like those "art" games that want to be movies so much they forget about being a game while not having the greatest stories ever.
 

Lutte

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
1,967
Location
DU's mom
Wait, is this true ?

allegedly its taken from the store itself, but I couldnt find anything about it despite one reddit thread.
That codexers would believe that kind of retarded rumor is just a step away from the dumbfucks who burned their smartphones because of 4chan fake ads.
3VVLp7L.jpg


Bloodborne is a Sony funded and owned IP. Just like all their bigger system sellers, it will never leave the platform.
 

Lutte

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
1,967
Location
DU's mom
Quantic shit interactive movies are published by Sony but not owned by Sony.
https://trademarks.justia.com/790/32/heavy-79032564.html
Bloodborne is a 100% Sony IP, just like Demon's Souls.
https://trademarks.justia.com/862/62/bloodborne-86262151.html

And just like DeS it's bound to 1/ never be ported anywhere 2/ die when its current gen platform dies because Sony doesn't give a shit about oldies, they want to sell new shit

Also this :
The news comes as no great shock. In January, Quantic Dream announced that it had taken an investment from Chinese internet company NetEase for a minority stake in the studio. At the time, Quantic Dream executives said they would take their future projects to multiple platforms, suggesting that the company’s long-running exclusive partnership with Sony had come to an end. The wording in Wednesday’s announcement underscored that.
 

Black Angel

Arcane
Joined
Jun 23, 2016
Messages
2,910
Location
Wonderland
Another reason being that Steam is so big that supporting another platform is not worth the bother. Which I'm sure you think it's just fine.
Except I'm not, because from common sense perspective I'm sure everyone can agree being able to expose your products to as much possible consumers as possible is definitely worth it, UNLESS there's something that prevents that from happening. In this context, it's GOG's questionable curation system which prevented games like Grimoire, Vigilantes, and Das Geisterschiff to have a release there.

Also, I know you consider something exclusive only if it's named officially as such and made public, but that makes you a retard. However, if you were capable of even some basic logic and letting go of rampant fanboysm, you'd see that a game released only on a platform you love is exactly the same as a game released only on a platform you hate.
Something is exclusive when they are available for access in wherever it's exclusive to. In case of console exclusives, they're only available in a specific console BECAUSE THEY'RE FUNDED AND DEVELOPED BY THE OWNER OF THE CONSOLE. In case of exclusivity as we see it happening now with Epic, the games are only available in one store BECAUSE EPIC PAID THE DEVS/PUBLISHERS TO RELEASE THEIR GAMES ONLY IN EPIC STORE. No matter how you want to twist and turns the definition of games only available on Steam either BECAUSE THE DEVS/PUBLISHERS DECIDED NOT TO RELEASE IT ELSEWHERE or BECAUSE OTHER STORES REJECT THEIR GAMES, they're not the same at fucking all. Valve literally have zero fault with this. They don't pay them to only release on Steam, and up until now you Epic apologists can't give definitive proof that Valve force the devs/publishers to only release their products on Steam with immediate financial gain like Epic does.

The day you guys can finally give us proof that Valve literally paid devs/publishers to release their games exclusively on Steam is the day I'll finally accept that it's the same exclusivity as it's happening with Epic now, but as I see it that day will never come. Except if Epic actually succeeded with this business model, in which case I see not only Valve begin to make a move on signing exclusivity deals with devs/publishers, but also the other big boys who have their own launchers like Ubisoft and fucking EA.

In fact, a temporary exclusive (as those on Epic) are very likely to be released on other platforms when the exclusivity period ends. On the other hand, exclusives from Steamtard developers are very likely to stay that way.
But yeah, I know, that's awesome and those developers have integrity and fight evil. Like not releasing on GOG because hurr muh piracy protection. Truly great developers. :lol:
Holy fucking shit, are you legit retarded? Epic exclusives are proven to have only a period of 1 year (6 months in case of Borderlands 3) so it's not just 'very likely', so I'm not sure why you brought it up. But the most retarded shit I read in this quote is how you proclaimed that there are (((((Steamtard))))) developers who literally 'don't want' to release their games on GOG. Just so you know, it's been thrown around for a while now that some games like the aforementioned Grimoire, Vigilantes, and Das Geisterschiff didn't get a GOG release BECAUSE THEY'RE REJECTED BY GOG. So now, name me one developers who proclaimed they don't want to release their games on GOG for whatever reasons other than GOG rejecting them or because they're not confident in being able to pass through GOG's questionable curation system.

Also, funny that you spin devs not releasing on GOG because hurr muh piracy protection, when Epic has the exact same DRM policy as Steam, meaning you can't even download the games just from their websites and thus need to install their launcher. And because it's so obvious that the devs who signed exclusivity deals with Epic are driven solely by money, it's more plausible that these devs are the ones who touted hurr muh piracy protection, instead of (((((Steamtard))))) developers.

You guys are bringing shit from other threads in here. The point was simply that getting eyes on your client is the goal. Steam did it with free Steamworks features, Epic is doing it with paid for exclusives, GOG is now trying to do it with a big push for their client being a central hub for all clients. Once you're using the client more for these reasons, they hope you spend more money on it. That's it.
But this doesn't make sense because
1) Steamworks features enticed the developers to sell their games on Steam WITHOUT the detriment of the consumers (except those who can't really make the most out of the launcher for whatever reason, like having shitty internet)
2) Epic paid for exclusives definitely give instant profit for devs and publishers, BUT at the cost of consumers choice, convenience, and their trust.
3) Meanwhile, I don't see how GOG pushing GOG Galaxy 2.0 is anything that can benefit the devs and publishers. From the first glance, it's definitely a 100% pro-consumers but I still don't see how it will entice devs and publishers to sell their games on GOG.
 

Black Angel

Arcane
Joined
Jun 23, 2016
Messages
2,910
Location
Wonderland
GOG has never been a real competitor, and multiple indies have said they get about 5% of their sales from GOG. Most big publisher games don't come out there for many years after release, if ever. The fact you're holding GOG up as proof that Steam had competition without exclusives is frankly laughable. I'm a huge GOG fan, I buy pretty much everything I can there, but they're a super niche and not many care.
Just for context, on GOG market share and competition strategy:
Piotr Karwowski: It really depends on the product. It's difficult to calculate the market share. If we have a game starting on the same day as Steam or another platform, with parity of content and updates, then we have cases where we could work up to 15 per cent of the Steam [sales]. It's nice but it's not, say, half, where you could say 'wow, crazy'. But there is definitely opportunity and GOG can do well if we have the title from day one. If we jump in later then it's not so beautiful looking.

Whenever someone says 'how do you see yourself against Steam - how do you compete?'... I know we are in the same space of digital distribution, selling the same product, but we never ever say, 'OK this is what Steam's doing so let's kill Steam this way.' The assumption of building a product around being a killer of some other product is extremely stupid. Why not build a service which has value and brings something more to the consumer rather than just trying to say we're up against those guys and want to take part of it.

When you ask about numbers and I say GOG has 15 per cent: we got there organically, not because we were doing something based on what Steam was doing. We have our own way and people responded to that.
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...-support-steam-rivalry-and-problematic-tweets
Also, now that it's admitted GOG can technically compete with Steam IF they got to release a game same day as Steam, you should now realize that Epic's shenanigans, while might not exactly hurt Steam in a meaningful way, it definitely hurts GOG because all those games signing exclusivity deals with them could have day 1 release on GOG.

Why would it be way too late? They didn't even start this shit that long ago, their biggest game by far hasn't come out yet, and they've got a massive Fortnite warchest and can keep this up a long time. No one liked Steam at all when it started either, but exclusive games made people use it and it got better and better over time and slowly people started opting to use it. I'm sure Epic is planning the same thing. Whether they succeed or not I have no fucking idea, but again I think it was their only shot at making a big time Steam competitor. Would have been nice if they funded the exclusives rather than bought them, but strategically I don't think it makes much difference. Very few people actually give a shit about backstage crap like that.
1) It's too fucking late because they had all the time in the world to look at how Steam, GOG, and whatever storefronts there is do their thing. Hell, they could've spend more time doing R&D to create better stores for NOT just devs/publishers, but ALSO consumers.
2) By the time they begin this whole storefront business, the general audiences are used to the essential features of storefronts that, whether you like it or not, Steam has. You can spout "sTe4M tR4d1n5 caRD" and "FrI3Nd l1sT" all you like, but the main essential features of a storefront is a shopping cart, reviews system and a forum where devs can directly communicate with consumers. And then Epic has the fucking nerve to not have a shopping cart day 1, let developers opt out of reviews and provides no forums because "toxicity!!!11!!!"?
3) Finally, the lack of shopping cart is biting them in the arse, and unfortunately it also bites some asses who didn't know better. People who bought multiple games during Mega Sale actually got banned under suspicion of fraud, and it's too fucking obvious that this happens because the lack of shopping cart, you know one of the essential features for storefronts to have?

As long as Epic throw around money to sign exclusivity deals, I don't fucking see how they got time and money to actually improve their services for customers. The time is ticking by the seconds, and the more it pass the more they piss off consumers, you know the very people who pays them for their service?

Weird, I never had a choice about which client to use for the vast majority of games the last 15 years. I had to use Steam. If everything were on GOG or other DRM free outlets before now, you'd be hearing me bitch quite a lot about the Epic Store, just like I bitched about Half-Life 2 back in the day. Sadly I've been forced to use Steam for many years now, and I'm numb to these whines about not having choices. We haven't had choices for most games for a long time, you just didn't mind what you were forced to use. Now you do. That plus your romantic story about Steam's effect on potato economy combined should make it pretty clear why I think you and Gaben make googly-eyes at each other.

Anyway this will just go on and on in a circle and is pointless, so I'm gonna take a long break. Enjoy your commiserating.
Lol, hold your fucking horses old fuck. Now, I'm only relatively recently getting informed with the happenings of gaming industry in the last few years, but what I know is that Steam literally saved PC gaming industry with their business model when everyone else, including fucking Epic which you're being an apologist cuck to thinking their cock would hurt less in your sorry fucking arse, jumped the ship and abandoned PC gaming thinking it's dead.

And you who are registered here in 2010 couldn't know this?

Also, it seems you fucking forget that you're not the only consumer on Earth. But I guess that's what an Epic Cuck™ is.
 

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
Lol, hold your fucking horses old fuck. Now, I'm only relatively recently getting informed with the happenings of gaming industry in the last few years, but what I know is that Steam literally saved PC gaming industry with their business model when everyone else, including fucking Epic which you're being an apologist cuck to thinking their cock would hurt less in your sorry fucking arse, jumped the ship and abandoned PC gaming thinking it's dead.

I'll just pop in and say I said this myself not long ago, and completely agree Valve saved PC gaming at the time. That's also completely irrelevant to the issues being discussed, other than some people still being emotionally butthurt because CliffyB said mean things about PC gaming 10 years ago.

And no I don't think the lack of shopping cart today means the Epic Store is already dead or can't turn things around, sorry.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom