Game News Phoenix Point now an Epic Store Exkloosive

[FeelTheRads]

There is literally not a single game on Steam that is contractually bound to be exclusive there.

How the fuck do you know? Just because it wasn't public? If you actually believe that you're fucking retarded.
But even if that's the case, it's irrelevant, retard. The result is the same for the player. EXACTLY THE SAME. No Steam no play.
And since you steamtards always go screaming how you care about the players, then you should care that the player is literally forced to used Steam.

Not to mention that there is a very long list of perfectly legitimate reasons to prefer Steam as objectively the better option than most of its alternatives.

Ah, so... right, it's OK to have exclusives if Tuco thinks you're better than others. Cool story, bro.

Oh yeah, and it's also funny how steamtards believe competing with something means being better than it. That's essentially the steamtard main complaint: durr why isnt epic better than steam durrrrr
Competition means offering similar services, cretins, that's it. Could be better, could worse, the main point is that it offers alternatives to people.

 

[Darth Roxor]

You know what's a great example of "competition" in the retailer world?

GOG.

You can think whatever you want about their policies, but the fact is that they provide a shop for games that is significantly different than Steam. For starters there's the DRM-free aspect. Some of the things in their catalogue are priced differently. They offer free bonuses (mostly trinkets like wallpapers, but it's something). This is healthy competition. Taking Steam and giving it a different paint job while browbeating developers to sell their shit there and only there is cutthroat business - which, sure, is also a manner of competition, but in its current state is in no way beneficial to customers, and that's the only thing you should be caring about.

 

[CyberWhale]

Tuco Benedicto Pacifico you are wasting your time with FeelTheTards, I've already covered all of those points and he didn't get it. Probably never will. Putting him to sleep would probably be the most humane treatment at this point.

 

[cvv]

You know what's a great example of "competition" in the retailer world?

GOG.

....a shop for games that is significantly different than Steam.

The reason why it's not really a competition to Steam. No DRM option, no big publisher love.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Tuco Benedicto Pacifico you are wasting your time with FeelTheTards, I've already covered all of those points and he didn't get it. Probably never will. Putting him to sleep would probably be the most humane treatment at this point.

Where did you cover anything, imbecile?

All I remember seeing from you is furious Gaben cocksucking. And the same vague retarded bullshit Tuco is spewing: durr steam is like better cuz of reasons

There's literally nothing you can say that can defend Steam exclusives while at the same time crying about Epic exclusives. The fact that it's not enforced by contracts means NOTHING to the players, and therefore is irrelevant.

 

[FeelTheRads]

You know what's a great example of "competition" in the retailer world?

GOG.

....a shop for games that is significantly different than Steam.

The reason why it's not really a competition to Steam. No DRM option, no big publisher love.

The competition to games that are exclusive to Steam... is to have... stores that don't sell those games.

 

[cvv]

There is literally not a single game on Steam that is contractually bound to be exclusive there.

There wasn't a single Playstation 1 game that was contractually banned from competition until Xbox came around. Amazing coincidences eyn't they?

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

There wasn't a single Playstation 1 game that was contractually banned from competition until Xbox came around. Amazing coincidences eyn't they?

What the hell are you talking about?
Aside for the fact that it's an apples and oranges comparison, you are completely making shit up.

 

[JarlFrank]

I'm not against having viable options. Key-word here is options. Paying for third party exclusivity deals is not giving people an option. On top of that, not allowing the activation of third party keys so that users can buy their games wherever they want (like Steam allows you to do), is also not giving anyone an option. Price is too high on the epic store? They don't respect regional prices? Getting fucked by conversion rates? Don't accept your payment method? Too bad, because they're greedy chinks you can't just buy the game from another store.

Yeah, options bro. Like those options you have when the game is exclusive to Steam. Nice how steamtards always handwave that Steam is the WORST when it comes to exclusives. Probably worse than consoles. If you don't want to use Steam you're fucked.
But yeah, somehow it's OK for Steam to have exclusives, no Steamtard ever complained when a game was released only on Steam, but nope, others shouldn't do that because omg I liek steam and they like the bestest bros and saved pc gayming

Yeah, options bro. Like Steam and GoG, both of which Phoenix Point would have been released on before Epic bribed the devs. Oops.

 

[cvv]

There wasn't a single Playstation 1 game that was contractually banned from competition until Xbox came around. Amazing coincidences eyn't they?

What the hell are you talking about?
Aside for the fact that it's an apples and oranges comparison, you are completely making shit up.

It's apparently teh hard to understand that it's nonsensical to talk about exclusives when there's effectively only one player on the market. When there's noone else to compete in your specific niche then everything is exclusive and nothing is. Just like games on Steam for the past 15 years or PS1 games before Xbox came around.

But sure, angst, outrage and forum circlejerking is much more fun than boring thinking in the brain.

 

[JarlFrank]

There wasn't a single Playstation 1 game that was contractually banned from competition until Xbox came around. Amazing coincidences eyn't they?

What the hell are you talking about?
Aside for the fact that it's an apples and oranges comparison, you are completely making shit up.

It's apparently teh hard to understand that it's nonsensical to talk about exclusives when there's effectively only one player on the market. When there's noone else to compete in your specific niche then everything is exclusive and nothing is. Just like games on Steam for the past 15 years or PS1 games before Xbox came around.

But sure, angst, outrage and forum circlejerking is much more fun than boring thinking in the brain.

GoG.com
itch.io
Discord Store (which opened at around the same time as Epic and also offers a generous cut to devs but never did the exclusive deal bribes, I wonder why nobody is hating on that store hmmmmm)

Yes yes, none of them are the same size as Steam, but they exist and for the games that are on them they are viable alternatives that don't resort to scummy business practices in order to gain traction.

 

[cvv]

GoG.com
itch.io
Discord Store (which opened at around the same time as Epic and also offers a generous cut to devs but never did the exclusive deal bribes, I wonder why nobody is hating on that store hmmmmm)

Yes yes, none of them are the same size as Steam, but they exist and for the games that are on them they are viable alternatives that don't resort to scummy business practices in order to gain traction.

Agreed, none of them resorted to scummy practices to gain traction like Valve did back in the day when they locked a single player game - HL2 - into Steam to force people to use their shitty platform.

 

[JarlFrank]

HL2 is their own game, which they sell on their own platform exclusively, kinda like how some indie games back in the early 00s were exclusively available from the developer's own website.

Sure, Steam is different because it requires a client. Yet a company selling its own game exclusively on its own platform isn't that unusual and not half as scummy as bribing other companies, which are in no way affiliated to you, to exclusively offer their game on your platform.

I don't like EA, don't like Origin, and haven't bought a single EA game after they went exclusively to that platform, but I don't consider the move to sell on their own platform exclusively to be scummy. It's their own games. It's a difference.

 

[cvv]

HL2 is their own game

How's the result any different? It's still forcing people to use a platform for no other reason than to artificially gain traction. Why does it matter who pays for the development? Epic in effect paid for the development of Phoenix Point - they'd be in the black even if nobody bought the game - it's basically their own game now. And it's still completely irrelevant. Whether it's EA, Ubi or Activision selling their games exclusively on their platforms or Epic selling someone else's games on theirs (while wholly paying for them) the end result is always the same.

 

[CyberWhale]

TBH I don't even blame Epic all that much. They have the right to use any tactic they want to achieve their goals. It is the developers and, most importantly, the customers/gamers that support them who are the main problem. THQ made a scummy move with the new Metro game, but at least they've stuck to the preorder deal and delivered the keys to people who bought it before the decision to make the deal with the de... Epic was made.

Gollop, on the other hand, is an utterly disgusting subhuman filth. Not because he made a deal with Epic, but rather because he crowdfunded his game using backers' money and then decided to withhold them the right to play the game on the platform of their choosing (which is a great deal to many of the backers, whether they choose Steam or GOG).

 

[cosmicray]

How's the result any different? It's still forcing people to use a platform for no other reason than to artificially gain traction.

Result is different because Steam client is also Valve's. Just like Origin client EA's. There is still a difference between requiring 3rd-party authentication and your own. Even if on the surface it's not that different.
Besides, Valve decided only to sell on their platform. Just like many other developers decided authenticate their game via Steamworks. But even then you can buy game from anywhere else and use Steam to authenticate.

And Epic is still partly for blame here. Sure, it was developers' choice, but they took it only because Epic offered the money deal and contractually obligated not to sell anywhere else. The last beat is why gamers are pissed off. They can't buy the game DRM-free, they can't buy it from anywhere else and they're required to use another drm-client. The only choice they have is not to buy it.

 

[JarlFrank]

HL2 is their own game

How's the result any different? It's still forcing people to use a platform for no other reason than to artificially gain traction. Why does it matter who pays for the development? Epic in effect paid for the development of Phoenix Point - they'd be in the black even if nobody bought the game - it's basically their own game now. And it's still completely irrelevant. Whether it's EA, Ubi or Activision selling their games exclusively on their platforms or Epic selling someone else's games on theirs (while wholly paying for them) the end result is always the same.

The end result in this particular case is that a game that had been kickstarted on Fig and promised Steam or GoG keys to its backers (hey look, two fundamentally different stores to choose from depending on your preferences) has now backpedaled on that promise and essentially told people who pre-ordered the game for a particular platform that the game isn't coming to this platform now, and they have to wait a year to get their DRM free GoG copy.

And if you promise a DRM free GoG copy but then pull that back... yeah, people are going to be pissed.

Phoenix Point is about more than just Steam vs Epic. This was a game that was available on more than one platform - the exact kind of competition that is healthy for the market - but now, thanks to Epic, the store that wants to bring "competition" to the "monopolist" Steam, causes a game that would have been available on two platforms from the start to be exclusive to one platform for an enitre year.

It's ironic, isn't it? The guys who claimed to fight the monopoly actually causing a monopoly that previously wasn't one in the case of this particular game.

 

[commie]

How the wheel turns full circle:

2019: "GAEM IS NOT ON STEAM!!!! REEEEEEEE!!!!!!! BOYCOTT, KILL THE DEVS, PIRATE THE SHIT!!!!!"

2004: "GAEM IS ON STEAM!!!!!!!! REEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!! BOYCOTT, KILL THE DEVS, PIRATE THE SHIT!!!!"

 

[samuraigaiden]

There is literally not a single game on Steam that is contractually bound to be exclusive there.

There wasn't a single Playstation 1 game that was contractually banned from competition until Xbox came around. Amazing coincidences eyn't they?

It's public knowledge that Square Soft had an exclusivity deal with Nintendo for NES and SNES and then switched over to Sony when the PS1 came out. Many other companies had exclusivity deals with consoles during that period.

 

[JarlFrank]

More like: "GAME THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE RELEASED ON TWO STORES IS NOW ONLY RELEASED ON ONE STORE!!!!" because that's what's really happening here.

 

[Dreed]

Half-Life 2 is not a Steam exclusive anyway:

 

[Reinhardt]

Gaben strikes from the past.

 

[cosmicray]

Game was promised on GNU/Linux. Cancelled 4 months ago because of lack of funds.
Game was promised DRM-free at release.
Game was promised as Steam key at release.

It's like they decided to piss everyone off.

 

[razvedchiki]

lol steamtards.

 

[JarlFrank]

I love how the Epic Store defenders still resort to calling the critics steamtards when clearly it has gone beyond Epic vs Steam.

This game was supposed to come out on Steam and GoG, not Steam only.

Now it's Epic only.

Available on 2 stores
vs
Available on 1 store

Do the maths, I know you can do it. Use a calculator if you must.