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

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
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.

I said absolutely nothing about which was better for the customer or anything like that. Zero. Zip. All I said were all these tactics were designed to get people using the clients. And Steam was absolutely a detriment to the customer back in 2004, I can promise you that. For DRM free advocates it still is.
 

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716
What is Valve to do about these cases, force them to publish on other platforms as well?

How is that relevant to anything?
Are there games only available through Steam or not?

Please explain, for somebody who has no emotional attachment to a client or another, what's the difference when they want to buy a game that's only available on one of the clients.

No matter how you want to twist and turns the definition

:lol:

Steamtards are the only ones twisting and turning definitions. If a game is only available through one platform it's an exclusive. The reasons for exclusivity are irrelevant for anyone without any fanboy affiliations. Period.

Valve literally have zero fault with this.

Again, irrelevant. Are there games only available through Steam or not?

Similarly, you can say that Epic has no fault but the developers. Just like Valve didn't force developers to only release on Steam, Epic didn't force developers to accept their deals.

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.

For comparison with Steam exclusives that have been exclusives for years and will probably be forever, retard. Try to keep 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.

Yes, those are the only games, of course. Any game that's available only on Steam is because they were refused everywhere else. :lol:

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.

Cretin, that's exactly what I said. I specifically mentioned not releasing on GOG, I did not say Epic is better in this regard. I know it's hard to understand for a cocksucker fanboy, but pointing out the facts about Steam does mean I defend Epic.
 
Last edited:

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716
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.

Talk about apologism and fanboism. :lol:
Now we get to the "valve saved pc gaming" retardation again.
So now one has to love Valve and anything they do because they saved PC gaming.

Meanwhile everybody with some brain looking at the state of PC gaming would agree that it would've been better off dead.
But yeah, thank you Valve, whatever could we have done without the millions of shovelware and AAA garbage we have.

Edit:
Also, lol at the whining how Epic misses this or that or trying to motivate your Steam fanboysm with any mistake Epic does. Guess nobody remembers when for quite some time one could download Steam hacks that gave you access to all the games available there.
But of course, Valve saved PC gaming, they're allowed mistakes, everyone else must be perfect right from the start.
 
Last edited:

flyingjohn

Arcane
Joined
May 14, 2012
Messages
2,945
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.

Talk about apologism and fanboism. :lol:
Now we get to the "valve saved pc gaming" retardation again.
So now one has to love Valve and anything they do because they saved PC gaming.

Meanwhile everybody with some brain looking at the state of PC gaming would agree that it would've been better off dead.
But yeah, thank you Valve, whatever could we have done without the millions of shovelware and AAA garbage we have.

Edit:
Also, lol at the whining how Epic misses this or that or trying to motivate your Steam fanboysm with any mistake Epic does. Guess nobody remembers when for quite some time one could download Steam hacks that gave you access to all the games available there.
But of course, Valve saved PC gaming, they're allowed mistakes, everyone else must be perfect right from the start.
It is better to have a choice of garbage then just selected garbage according to somebodies garbage standards.
 

Cromwell

Arcane
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
5,443
But of course, Valve saved PC gaming, they're allowed mistakes, everyone else must be perfect right from the start.

ynobody whines except you. Of course you cant make big mistakes when other companies already do what you want to do better. If youre the first on the scene you get more leeway because youre the first and the only one.

The same happened to all the WoW Killer MMOs, if youre not the first you better bring something more to the table than the guy thats already there.
 

Black Angel

Arcane
Joined
Jun 23, 2016
Messages
2,910
Location
Wonderland
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.

I said absolutely nothing about which was better for the customer or anything like that. Zero. Zip. All I said were all these tactics were designed to get people using the clients. And Steam was absolutely a detriment to the customer back in 2004, I can promise you that. For DRM free advocates it still is.
My point is why the fuck bringing up GOG Galaxy 2.0 when they, from what I see, brings literally fucking zero for clients to the table?

Also, I pointed out Steamworks vs. exclusivity in terms of what it means for the consumers and the former is clearly better and preferable because it doesn't fucking intrude on my rights as a consumer. I'll admit as much that I have no idea how it's like back in the day, but those days are long gone and it doesn't fucking excuse what Epic's doing, like what you're doing now trying to play devil's advocate and providing a list of what Steam does wrong when someone is calling out Epic's bullshit.

snip snap
Yeap, retard confirmed. No wonder they call you FeelTheTards.
 
Self-Ejected

A_boring_GOG_bot

Self-Ejected
Joined
Dec 29, 2018
Messages
338
off topic

There's one thing that i hate about Steam Workshop . It not let you to use user created content ( mods , maps , etc. ) outside the platform .
 

Silentstorm

Learned
Joined
Apr 29, 2019
Messages
885
Meanwhile everybody with some brain looking at the state of PC gaming would agree that it would've been better off dead.
But yeah, thank you Valve, whatever could we have done without the millions of shovelware and AAA garbage we have.
So, what you're saying is that Valve kept things the same as it was decades ago?

Because shovelware was absolutely a thing, there were tons of games being made for PC and other computers that were trash, hell, a lot of them being slower and sounding worse than many indie games nowadays, and a lot of AAA games sucked, it's just that as time passed, we learned what the good games were and to focus on those.

I mean, let's not even fucking pretend all good games got lots of sales in the past, otherwise some good games wouldn't have been cult classics at best or flops at worst with good developers shutting down, and it's not as if good games got always good reviews or vice-versa.

Look, i am not going to pretend it's perfect, there came microtransactions, DLC and other stuff, but in a lot of cases, i don't think it was Valve creating or pushing for those, and what you described was happening long before Steam.

Again, Steam is not perfect, but i also don't want to pretend everything was great without it or that they are solely responsible for everything bad.
 

passerby

Arcane
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
2,788
Games are exclusive on Steam because 99,5% of gamers will buy there if it's not available anywhere else and some companies decide that remaining 0,5%, or small additional exposure, is not worth the hassle, especially if they want to use some kind of copy protection.
Games are exclusive on Epic, because otherwise the main selling point of the platform, low cut, would be useless if everyone would buy elsewhere, or the game couldn't be finished if Epic didn't offer advance payment.

In both cases publisher/dev choose exclusivity out of their own will and there is no fundamental difference.
 

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716
In both cases publisher/dev choose exclusivity out of their own will and there is no fundamental difference.

Ah, but Epic is evil and Valve is good, therefore one is not allowed to have exclusive and the other is.

Just shows what hypocrites steamtards are. They keep whining about how they only care about the consumer and not about their favorite client, but then they make it about the reasons for exclusivity and completely avoid the main issue: actual availability of the games.

It's still unclear how the reasons for exclusivity affect customers, but you can't expect logic from religiotard level fanboysm.
 

cosmicray

Savant
Joined
Jan 20, 2019
Messages
436
If a game is only available through one platform it's an exclusive. The reasons for exclusivity are irrelevant for anyone without any fanboy affiliations. Period.
But reasons are relevant. Actively pursuing publishers for exclusive deals is Epic's MO. Thus they are to blame along with the publishers.
 

Irata

Scholar
Joined
Mar 14, 2018
Messages
304
Games are exclusive on Epic, because otherwise the main selling point of the platform, low cut, would be useless if everyone would buy elsewhere, or the game couldn't be finished if Epic didn't offer advance payment.

Which publishers or developers are selling games solely on the Epic store because of the lower cut Epic takes and have not received an advanced payment from Epic?
 

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
My point is why the fuck bringing up GOG Galaxy 2.0 when they, from what I see, brings literally fucking zero for clients to the table?

Also, I pointed out Steamworks vs. exclusivity in terms of what it means for the consumers and the former is clearly better and preferable because it doesn't fucking intrude on my rights as a consumer. I'll admit as much that I have no idea how it's like back in the day, but those days are long gone and it doesn't fucking excuse what Epic's doing, like what you're doing now trying to play devil's advocate and providing a list of what Steam does wrong when someone is calling out Epic's bullshit.

You're debating stuff from the other thread here. I'm not sure what we're even debating in this one. Do you NOT think the purpose of Steamworks, GOG 2.0 and Epic exclusives is to get people to use those clients, hoping they spend more money there down the line? Because that's literally the only thing I'm saying in the posts you're quoting in this thread.
 

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
Again, Steam is not perfect, but i also don't want to pretend everything was great without it or that they are solely responsible for everything bad.

Yeah, to be clear in here Steam is a great thing for PC gaming overall. I dislike a lot of what it does but it helped us out a TON in the dark times and for 90% of people gives them far more than it takes away. I strive to be realist in all my posts which is why I'm not scared to say shit that annoys people about my personal feelings and the Epic Store's tactics and whatnot, but being realist also requires being honest about the great overall benefit Steam has been for PC gaming.

I don't see it going anywhere either, even if more publishers stick to their own clients and Epic builds a competitor out of itself. Steam will just be one of a handful of powerhouses, rather than THE powerhouse. Same shit is happening with Netflix as we speak.
 

Ismaul

Thought Criminal #3333
Patron
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,871,807
Location
On Patroll
Codex 2014 PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Strap Yourselves In Codex Year of the Donut Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 BattleTech A Beautifully Desolate Campaign My team has the sexiest and deadliest waifus you can recruit.
completely agree Valve saved PC gaming at the time. That's also completely irrelevant to the issues being discussed

But of course, Valve saved PC gaming, they're allowed mistakes, everyone else must be perfect right from the start.
The fact that "Valve saved PC gaming" is used here to explain why they are dominant on the market. They didn't get there by buying exclusives and pushing all-around anti-customer practices, they did some good for PC gaming and the customers, and therefore for themselves. That's entirely relevant to what's discussed there, because Epic is doing the exact opposite to get a piece of the market. It's not about Epic not being allowed mistakes, it's about their whole approach to the business. Epic are cunts at their very core. And it drives all their decisions.
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2018
Messages
2,323
Location
Illinois
There's one thing that i hate about Steam Workshop . It not let you to use user created content ( mods , maps , etc. ) outside the platform .
Ahckshually you can. May depend on the game in question, but a large number of games that use Steam Workshop still let you use content outside of it. Bethesda's games, Rimworld, etc. It's harder for non-Steam users to get at mods on the workshop and once again it's on a per-game basis since some people opt out of allowing it, but you can download workshop mods as a non-Steam user with this. http://steamworkshop.download/
 

Metro

Arcane
Beg Auditor
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
27,792
FeelTheEdge... after a decade of ranting about Steam on this forum haven't you gotten a job by now such that worrying about your 'ownership rights' to video games that have absolutely no resell value should be a low priority? Jesus, man... get another fetish.
 

Solid Snail

Learned
Joined
Oct 31, 2018
Messages
328
completely agree Valve saved PC gaming at the time. That's also completely irrelevant to the issues being discussed

But of course, Valve saved PC gaming, they're allowed mistakes, everyone else must be perfect right from the start.
The fact that "Valve saved PC gaming" is used here to explain why they are dominant on the market. They didn't get there by buying exclusives and pushing all-around anti-customer practices, they did some good for PC gaming and the customers, and therefore for themselves. That's entirely relevant to what's discussed there, because Epic is doing the exact opposite to get a piece of the market. It's not about Epic not being allowed mistakes, it's about their whole approach to the business. Epic are cunts at their very core. And it drives all their decisions.
Yeah, I agree. The narrative about Valve saving Pc gaming is true because it's one of those rare scenarios in which the decision took by a company were also good for customers. Before Steam it was a jungle: finding some games was a pain in the ass (even because when Steam launched the online market was nothing like it's today, so at least here, in Italy, if you didn't find a game in a physical store you were screwed), the digital distribution made all the games available to everyone, and it came with a bundle of new features like Steam cloud, screenshots, the easy way to patch games and pretty much all the feature Steam has.

Epic is doing nothing like that. They just take out the money, lock a game for six months or one year on their store and sell it. This Epic sale while it's good for consumers because they can get some new games (not even released or just released like The Observation) for a very cheap price is indicative on how Epic is doing business, aka burning the ground. They have money and they are ready to burn them all in order to get some consumers on board. The fact is, while some people can purchase one or two games on the sale because they are very cheap doesn't mean they are now your consumers, because if there are zero features compared to other places, why should I keep returning to your store?

People are getting games on the Epic Store just because there's no alternative: if those games were available on Steam people would still buy those games on Steam, because they prefer to pay a little more but having features like cloud, achievements, screenshots sharing, the controller api etc.

I'm rather curious about what will happen in one year when all those exclusive will leave the Epic Store.
 

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
The fact that "Valve saved PC gaming" is used here to explain why they are dominant on the market. They didn't get there by buying exclusives and pushing all-around anti-customer practices, they did some good for PC gaming and the customers, and therefore for themselves. That's entirely relevant to what's discussed there, because Epic is doing the exact opposite to get a piece of the market. It's not about Epic not being allowed mistakes, it's about their whole approach to the business. Epic are cunts at their very core. And it drives all their decisions.

Dude in 2004 the DRM and required client they were forcing on people with Half-Life 2 was the cause of infinite anger. Just as much anger as Epic's shit today, if not even more. It wasn't altruism either, Valve knew what they were doing and were rewarded massively as a result. 15 years of Steam improvements and market adjustments to DRM and clients have made people forget that at the time it was awful. People bought Half-Life 2 anyway though, because at the end of the day consumers care more about getting the big new thing than anything else. Which is why Borderlands 3 will sell just fine, and the process goes on forever.

As I said above, Steam saved PC gaming, but they didn't do it to be your best friend and it had massive downsides at the time, and arguably still today.

People are getting games on the Epic Store just because there's no alternative

Just like Half-Life 2 then, and hundreds of games since? Interesting. :lol:
 

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716
But of course, Valve saved PC gaming, they're allowed mistakes, everyone else must be perfect right from the start.

ynobody whines except you. Of course you cant make big mistakes when other companies already do what you want to do better. If youre the first on the scene you get more leeway because youre the first and the only one.

The same happened to all the WoW Killer MMOs, if youre not the first you better bring something more to the table than the guy thats already there.

Yeah, sure thing, bro. Everybody is doing it so why can't Epic too, amirite? Oh wait, pretty much nobody is capable of coming up with straight up a better product than somebody who had the market for themselves for so long.

But clearly it's not about that. Actually it's all about:

Epic are cunts at their very core.

In other words: If I don't like them they're not allowed to do business.

And that means that even if they had a much better client than Steam and made no mistakes, Steamtards would have the same fanboy reaction. Because hurr muh business tactics and also swiney said pc is dead and he hurt muh feelings.
But instead of admitting it's all about what they like or not, they try it to give it validity by whining about mistakes, about how much they care for the consumer and now, the lowest of the lows, going for the saving of PC gaming bit.

A "save" I never asked for, really. And I could argue that Steam was the main force behind all the garbage the have today, the devaluation of games through continuous sales and the emergence of shit like microtransactions. Hey, if they saved PC gaming, then they also paved the way for this. Isn't that how it works? But hey, you can buy cheap shovelware from your third world shithole. Congratulations. An amazing save indeed.

So I hope this "save" only serves to accelerate the death now. If that happens I'll join the Steamtards and love Steam forever.
 

Cromwell

Arcane
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
5,443
pretty much nobody is capable of coming up with straight up a better product than somebody who had the market for themselves for so long.

so? Is your point now I should use the inferior one to give them a chance because in just ten years time they may have caught up?

If I don't like them they're not allowed to do business.

They are but it may happen that a lot of people dont like them and wont use them. Your whole argument rotates around the fact that you think everyone that doesnt use epic is a steamtard and thats bad so they need to stop being steamtards and use epic. Its like discussing politics with someone but as long as you dont take it up teh ass by mohammed you are a racist.
 

Grauken

Gourd vibes only
Patron
Joined
Mar 22, 2013
Messages
12,786
The fact that "Valve saved PC gaming" is used here to explain why they are dominant on the market. They didn't get there by buying exclusives and pushing all-around anti-customer practices, they did some good for PC gaming and the customers, and therefore for themselves. That's entirely relevant to what's discussed there, because Epic is doing the exact opposite to get a piece of the market. It's not about Epic not being allowed mistakes, it's about their whole approach to the business. Epic are cunts at their very core. And it drives all their decisions.

Dude in 2004 the DRM and required client they were forcing on people with Half-Life 2 was the cause of infinite anger. Just as much anger as Epic's shit today, if not even more. It wasn't altruism either, Valve knew what they were doing and were rewarded massively as a result. 15 years of Steam improvements and market adjustments to DRM and clients have made people forget that at the time it was awful. People bought Half-Life 2 anyway though, because at the end of the day consumers care more about getting the big new thing than anything else. Which is why Borderlands 3 will sell just fine, and the process goes on forever.

As I said above, Steam saved PC gaming, but they didn't do it to be your best friend and it had massive downsides at the time, and arguably still today.

Nobody does it to be your best friend, and nobody was arguing this, just that they helped PC gaming to some degree (and selling out lots of games who without pirates would end up not being available to anyone, just looking at those delisted games who for licensing reasons aren't available anywhere legal). That said, EPIC is worse than Steam in almost every aspect, so until they get their shit together, nobody will take them seriously except to get those exclusives

GOG at least, despite all their flaws, did try to succeed on doing something Steam didn't, but sadly it seems most people don't care about actually owning their software, otherwise GOG would be much more successful
 

cosmicray

Savant
Joined
Jan 20, 2019
Messages
436
Dude in 2004 the DRM and required client they were forcing on people with Half-Life 2 was the cause of infinite anger. Just as much anger as Epic's shit today, if not even more. It wasn't altruism either, Valve knew what they were doing and were rewarded massively as a result. 15 years of Steam improvements and market adjustments to DRM and clients have made people forget that at the time it was awful. People bought Half-Life 2 anyway though, because at the end of the day consumers care more about getting the big new thing than anything else. Which is why Borderlands 3 will sell just fine, and the process goes on forever.
What was the state of online DRM/authentication before Steam? I don't remember, if Steam was on the forefront of online side of DRM.
 

GrainWetski

Arcane
Joined
Oct 17, 2012
Messages
5,080
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.
The epic shills totally just prefer GOG. That GOG will be killed by Epic 3 centuries before they manage to make a dent in Steam obviously doesn't matter because they loooooove GOG.
 

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