Epic Games Store - the console war comes to PC

[hpstg]

So, we don't trust the public for anything, except the economy.

That's a non-answer, it is wishful thinking like communism or libertarian crap. If people didn't like Disney's content, Disney wouldn't be launching the service in the first place. Same for EA, Ubisoft, and even shit like CBS.

The idea behind this is not to wonder what people like, but to make sure that it is something viable for everyone, from consumers not wanting to get robbed, to more obscure stuff being in the same virtual self as mainstream titles. I honestly cannot see a downside in the case where they are all forced to have a single fee that gets distributed between them later.

 

[Steamboat Willie]

From a consumer perspective, one delivery platform where everyone participates and is only censored according to local law, where I get everything, is perfect. It's really either that or back to piracy again. I refuse to pay for more streaming/CDN services of any kind.

What are even ranting about? First you said the government should have stepped in and broke up Netflix back before these other services came out, now you wish there was only one streaming service that had everything?

 

[hpstg]

Man, sure you miss the point.

What I am saying is that multiple services for any kind of digital data, are actually anti-consumer, and even anti-creator, as media in smaller services can never get the exposure they could.

What I would suggest, is that you have some sort of regulated body that will act as a gatekeeper for ALL the content. The only way it can happen is with a neutrality mandate for it, and with government oversight. I don't want to pay for Netflix/HULU/RULU/SULU/KTHULU every month. I want to pay a flat fee and have access to everything, while revenue gets fairly split between the content providers.

There is no fucking way this can ever happen in "free" market conditions.

 

[Mustawd]

There is no fucking way this can ever happen in "free" market conditions.

So you’re advocating for a monopoly? This is retarded.

 

[Reever]

Man, sure you miss the point.

What I am saying is that multiple services for any kind of digital data, are actually anti-consumer, and even anti-creator, as media in smaller services can never get the exposure they could.

What I would suggest, is that you have some sort of regulated body that will act as a gatekeeper for ALL the content. The only way it can happen is with a neutrality mandate for it, and with government oversight.

There is no fucking way this can ever happen in "free" market conditions.

How is choosing between different services anti-consumer exactly? Moreover, there are big reasons for not wanting a gatekeeper for the content. As an example, let's say Sony becomes the gatekeeper to every digital store-front. Would you be okay with games with any kind of nudity being lens flared or would you want to buy the game on a different platform that doesn't practice censorship? Well, bad luck since daddy Sony says that they're protecting the children and everyone has to adhere to their moral code.

I don't want to pay for Netflix/HULU/RULU/SULU/KTHULU every month. I want to pay a flat fee and have access to everything, while revenue gets fairly split between the content providers.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but wouldn't that flat fee still be the same as if you were to pay everyone individually? The number of content providers doesn't change, as you said it gets split, so the price remains the same. What's the advantage here?

 

[hpstg]

Guys, what I am talking about already exists. There are a lot of countries that even had an "HDD tax" for a while, but they never went the next step and actually allow free access to content, while actually giving back to the content creators.

What I am trying to say for so long, is that the only solution to this is to have a single bill/tax/fee paid by any person who wants to have access to types of digital content. Then, whoever manages that (which ideally would be a consortium of all the content providers, with government oversight), splits bill/tax/fee according to consumption. It's a win for everyone situation, but it is impossible to happen unless government intervenes.

 

[hpstg]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but wouldn't that flat fee still be the same as if you were to pay everyone individually? The number of content providers doesn't change, as you said it gets split, so the price remains the same. What's the advantage here?

The advantage is in overhead and simplicity for consumers. As for the morals, hence it should be used with government oversight. This already happens with ISPs and power companies. They all use the same infrastructure, and people pay them according to preference and usage. Since these are digital goods, switching actual providers is unnecessary. They get paid a percentage of your flat fee, that they split between them, with oversight so that smaller creators don't get fucked by Uncle Mickey.

 

[Steamboat Willie]

So you’re advocating for a monopoly? This is retarded.

He seems to want some kind of communist nonsense where everyone pays a flat amount of money and then the government takes that money and distributes it evenly among producers.

 

[DalekFlay]

You specifically mentioned old games. WINE runs old games better than Windows does. It even allows you to run true 16bit applications on a 64bit OS, which Windows doesn't allow at all.

You're right, not sure why I said old there. My point was if I can someday play everything on a Valve run Linux then I would strongly consider moving over. However as long as I need Windows to play everything, I don't see a point. No reason to fuss with two OSes without a good reason, and "LOL MICRO$OFT" has never been something I got enraged by.

The 16bit thing is cool, but every game I actually want to play runs fine on Windows thanks to repacks, fan patches or GOG versions.

Not about Epic Store or games at all, but still a relevant video to this discussion.

This dude analyzes why Netflix has become worse after competition entered the scene and the competition has, in the end, only been negative for the consumer.

Netflix having everything for $12 a month was always a retard's pipe dream. Was never gonna happen. Even put aside all corporate motivation and whatnot, it was just never financially feasible that massive cable and home video markets would condense into something that cheap.

Also while I get the basic comparison of multiple services versus one, it's really completely different. Origin, Uplay and Epic aren't charging you money on top of Steam to play everything.

 

[Jigawatt]

 

[passerby]

[ Gamers ] don't need [ competition for Steam ] but I don't think they're against it either. Especially if that store offers something that isn't available on Steam. GOG offering DRM-Free games is enough to entice people to buy games on their store for example.
Epic offers nothing at the moment for the consumer. In fact they're offering less than one of the most bare bones Stores on the market. Their main selling point could be lower prices since they only take 12% but that hasn't happened yet.
Unless you count that very brief Metro discount that was only available in US. And since they don't offer free keys to the developers to be sold on third party store like Steam does, a lot of the games end up costing more.

GOG has secured a tiny niche part of the market of hipsters with old games and DRM free shtick ( black sheep marketing strategy ) and it charges accordingly for it, so not much benefit for publishers in its existence, rather annoyance.
Most gamers are not opposed to Steam competition existence as long as it doesn't have exclusives, they just won't bother using it.
The small minority of gamers that would bother to use another service just for lower prices, is already actively hunting for deals on Steam key reseller sites, lower price wouldn't sell Epic Store to anyone.
There is also little benefit for publishers in having these cheaper deals on release day, since they get same money from them as directly from steam they are not against, but having smaller cut while keeping that 60$ day one price, now this is a profit.

 

[Avonaeon]

Their main selling point could be lower prices since they only take 12% but that hasn't happened yet. Unless you count that very brief Metro discount that was only available in US. And since they don't offer free keys to the developers to be sold on third party store like Steam does, a lot of the games end up costing more.

Not only that, but they also off-load the transaction costs onto the customer, which also effectively increases the price.

 

[passerby]

Not only that, but they also off-load the transaction costs onto the customer, which also effectively increases the price.

They only do that if you live in some third world country and use some weird local payment service that charges around 10%. If you use credit card, or paypal then payment processing is covered, no additional charge. Should they subsidise these purchases, or what ?

 

[Thane Solus]

playing Dungeon Keepeer, or Caesar III or Heroes III, is now hipstering. The more you know guys!

Also GOG is slowly moving to todays games, since their GOG catalog is almost full. I also bough X4 failure from GOG, godam hipster me, hating the DRM so much. You should work for Epic mate.

 

[passerby]

Playing good old games is not. Refusing to use Steam, or overpaying for games on GoG as it used to be in the beginning definitely is. I didn't say all GoG customers are hipsters, but most of the ~0,5% of the customers market share, that is unique to it are.
Games can be drm free on Steam and Epic too and it's somehow not an issue when GOG have exclusives btw. I don't mind GOG, I have around 100 games there I used to play as a kid, but at some point I started to only buy games that are exclusive there, see how it works ?

 

[Thane Solus]

Playing good old games is not. Refusing to use Steam, or overpaying for games on GoG as it used to be in the beginning definitely is. I didn't say all GoG customers are hipsters, but most of the ~0,5% of the customers market share, that is unique to it are.
Games can be drm free on Steam and Epic too and it's somehow not an issue when GOG have exclusives btw. I don't mind GOG, I have around 100 games there I used to play as a kid, but at some point I started to only buy games that are exclusive there, see how it works ?

Why? I prefer to buy new games from there, i dont like DRM. Yes some steam games dont have DRM and its fine, but i really dont like launchers at all, i usually play offline when on steam. Last time i bought an exclusive garbage was Diablo III... as for old games, lots of them are on steam as well, only packaged worse with no proper settings etc. But what am i talking about, i rarely buy any triple A, or at all. Last games bought: Kenshi, X4 (my bad) and some smaller indie games (from steam). For me triple A doesn't exits or trendy "indie" "survival" games.

 

[passerby]

Nothing wrong with preferring GOG, that was not the point, I had more in mind people that would refuse to buy a rare good game because of DRM.
Heroes III is a charming casual clickfest btw, it has a cherished place in my memory, but if you still unironically actually play it, you are manchildren and hipster.

 

[fantadomat]

Nothing wrong with preferring GOG, that was not the point, I had more in mind people that would refuse to buy a rare good game because of DRM.
The tone was intentionally edgy to make sheeple and fanboys butthurt. Heroes III is a charming casual garbage btw, if you still unironically actually play it, you are manchildren and hipster and this not an edgy joke.

Really low effort.

 

[Thane Solus]

Nothing wrong with preferring GOG, that was not the point, I had more in mind people that would refuse to buy a rare good game because of DRM.
The tone was intentionally edgy to make sheeple and fanboys butthurt. Heroes III is a charming casual garbage btw, it has a cherished place in my memory, but if you still unironically actually play it, you are manchildren and hipster and this not an edgy joke.

I actually played it once every few years, great game. With the HD patch made by "russian bots". I also play new games like Kenshi, which is awesome. Hipsters dont have the IQ to play Caesar 3, H3, or Dungeon Keeper, so i dont know wtf are you talking about.

Also the game is still better than h4,h5,h6. "Casual"? Hahaha! Okay.

Trolling failed.

 

[passerby]

Also the game is still better than h4,h5,h6.

True that, I played h4 for like an hour and never bothered with h5,h6 since I grew out of heroes by the time of their release, but it's clear just from a youtube gameplay that h3 is superior. I played h2 and h3 a lot as a kid.

"Casual"? Hahaha! Okay.

Yes it is. It's the only franchise that girls loved to play when I was 14.

Hipsters dont have the IQ to play [...] Heroses 3, so i dont know wtf are you talking about.

I literally have a 21 y.o. hipster niece who loves Heroes III, she also loves Pokemons and Minions and I am not joking. If you think that Heroes are anything but lovely games for children and require an above average intelligence, then I have bad news for you.

 

[Dexter]

Not only that, but they also off-load the transaction costs onto the customer, which also effectively increases the price.

They only do that if you live in some third world country and use some weird local payment service that charges around 10%. If you use credit card, or paypal then payment processing is covered, no additional charge. Should they subsidise these purchases, or what ?

Steam does.

 

[passerby]

It does not, because even with the 10% processing cost, it is left with more profit than Epic Store by default, which would just loose money on such sales.
It probably applies to a tiny minority of customers anyway and making them aware that they use a shitty payment service, so they can ivestigate other options, is only a good thing imo.

I mean, who can't just register a paypal account, which would be handled with no additional charge ffs, instead of paying with their phone credit, or something

 

[fantadomat]

It does not, because even with the 10% processing cost, it is left with more profit than Epic Store by default. It probably applies to a tiny minority of customers anyway and making them aware that they use a shitty payment service is only a good thing imo.

Give hard numbers retard,or fuck off!

 

[Gerrard]

I fully expected EGS to not have VAT included in the prices, like some digital distribution US cunts do (looking at you Bandcamp).

 

[Reinhardt]

which would just loose money on such sales.

And why we should care?