KickStarter Phoenix Point - the new game from X-COM creator Julian Gollop

[thesheeep]

There is no reason it needs to scan those files before you use the friendlist sharing. Steam API also exists and is used by GOG etc. precisely so they don't need to do this shit..

So what if Valve decides to not allow Epic to use their API?
Not the most likely scenario, but still. Better to use a method that does not even require their permission, if anyhow possible.

From the devs themselves:

He also addressed the question of why the launcher access Steam data files directly rather than using Steam's own API, saying that Epic aims to minimize its use of third-party libraries because of security and privacy concerns—not with Valve specifically, but "for the general concern of APIs collecting more data than expected."

If you use APIs like the Steam API, Steam will also know a lot about you (API calls are never one-sided, Valve is certain to collect data from who makes the calls, what is being requested, etc.). Something that Epic certainly has an interest to prevent, as data = money and why give Valve some free data?

To be fair, Valve might fix this possible "data leak" somehow, and then Epic wouldn't have a choice but to either find another workaround or use the API (or remove Steam connection).

 

[GrainWetski]

Oh, they're worried about companies collecting data from them because of security and privacy concerns, are they? Is this real life?

Epic bragged a while back about how only 50% of Fortnite players/Epic Launcher users used Steam and how only 20% used it regularly. Pretty obvious how they got their numbers now.

 

[thesheeep]

Oh, they're worried about companies collecting data from them because of security and privacy concerns, are they? Is this real life?

Epic bragged a while back about how only 50% of Fortnite players/Epic Launcher users used Steam and how only 20% used it regularly. Pretty obvious how they got their numbers now.

I don't believe for a second Epic cares about their user's privacy and security (more than they have to for obvious reasons, anyway). No big company does, including Valve btw.
However, they do have an interest in not giving Valve more data than necessary. That's what this is about, if you ask me. And that's also how you can spin it to make it look you care about your users' privacy.
After all, it is factually correct that Valve WILL know less about you if Epic does not use their API but finds other methods

 

[Thal]

It looks and plays like NuXCOM, whose popularity only increased with XCOM2. People have been waiting for XCOM3 for quite a while and haven't gotten it. At the time of release, Phoenix Point will be the only new game of its type.

I hope you ain't one of the people, a group composed mostly of PP devs, who thinks this game can do nuXCOM numbers.

These guys just made everything possible to piss off the people who were their actual core audience and who would talk about the game, create and maintain the community etc.

No, I'm not a PP dev, I'm someone who played UFO: Enemy Unknown to the death in mid-90s. Seriously, did I say something controversial? If the game is good, it will sell well. If it's bad, it won't sell shit. I never said that it will sell millions. I said that there is a large market for the game of this type. Also, the latest number I read for cancelled pledges was 1600 out of +10000. That's out of the core audience, and that's after several betrayals. You're overestimating how enraged their backers are.

I don't like those shoulder pads, or the sleek tacticool look. In fact, I'm looking forward to that one game that will abandon the cartoony WoW art style and will instead draw inspiration from the relatively restrained and realistic style of Baldur's Gate 1, Fallout or Diablo 1. What I'm saying is simply this, the quality of the game will depend on other factors. Namely, the tactical combat system, the quality of the geoscape layer and how they come together. Gameplay is what matters, not the art style. UFO had borderline anime hair for fucks sake. When it comes to presentation, the real game changer about UFO was the line of sight, fog of war and night missions. All things with direct gameplay effects. Also, sound design, if you count it as presentation.

no matter what launcher it is on

Yeah, right.

Nobody would buy UFO: Enemy Unknown quality game if it was released now but only on Epic?

Just had a thought. I know I'm dealing with a bunch of youngsters on this forum but are you all so young you don't actually remember a time before Steam?

Here's the thing though, the real kicker. Steam despite several issues at launch was way more convenient than the place PC gaming was at before.

I recall vividly how hated Steam was even years after release. Primarily because they didn't like the idea that if Steam would go poof so would their games. Also because they were attached to physical goodies like manuals, boxes and artwork. Besides the "convenience" factor, I suspect that quite a big reason why Steam was accepted was that the new generation started playing games and didn't know any different. Older generation otoh got used to it, and started having more disposable income so the financial risk of losing their games wasn't as big.

 

[Alienman]

I got the TransferWise e-mail now, but I'm not sure I want to use that service, giving them my bank details - looking at this thing:

https://www.consumeraffairs.com/finance/transferwise.html

 

[Shog-goth]

I got the TransferWise e-mail now, but I'm not sure I want to use that service, giving them my bank details - looking at this thing:

https://www.consumeraffairs.com/finance/transferwise.html

Take a look at this thread on Reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/PhoenixPoint/comments/b0m1wj/update_people_who_issue_chargebacks_are_being/

 

[Alienman]

Don't wanna do a charge back I think.

The reviews look a bit better on this site though:

https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/transferwise.com?page=2

 

[pm_675]

I got the TransferWise e-mail now, but I'm not sure I want to use that service, giving them my bank details - looking at this thing:

https://www.consumeraffairs.com/finance/transferwise.html

Apparently you can go directly to Fig to get your refound: https://www.reddit.com/r/PhoenixPoi..._you_can_refund_your_pledge_directly_through/

And I seriously considering asking chargeback. Fuck Gallop, especially after the "answers" of the last days.

 

[GrainWetski]

Don't wanna do a charge back I think.

The reviews look a bit better on this site though:

https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/transferwise.com?page=2

That site seems accurate.
https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/www.epicgames.com

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

No, I'm not a PP dev

Seriously, did I say something controversial?

You said that nuXCOM gained popularity with XCOM2, which is blatantly false.

Since the first nuXCOM turned out to be a hit, there were smaller and bigger copycats that tried to cash in on its success. And none of them really made it, even according to scaled down expectations. Check out the Phantom Doctrine thread, where one of the devs reported that much of the team was laid off because the game did not perform. And that's a recent release, made by a professional studio, with some fresh ideas and very decent production values.

You're overestimating how enraged their backers are.

I will repeat myself for the n-th time, but all I'm saying is that currently PP seems to be sitting in the exact spot many similar "genre revival" projects were sitting before: the people for which it was supposedly made largely alienated in order to appease the gaming everyman who, in the end, inevitably does not care nearly enough about these efforts. Of course this strategy can be viable, there are some painful examples of classic PC series bastardized to become super hits, but it needs to be done with way more money and, uh, dedication.

I'm not saying it's impossible for PP to sell good, I just think it is very unlikely. Its creators seem to share this opinion at least partially and when they saw the occasion to get the cash upfront, they jumped right at it. Make of that what you will.

Nobody would buy UFO: Enemy Unknown quality game if it was released now but only on Epic?

Yes, this is exactly what I'm saying.

Spoiler: What I'm actually saying is that any games being released only on one store and not the most popular one by far will of course have impact on its sales. I don't even know how it is possible to claim otherwise.

 

[Thal]

Seriously, did I say something controversial?

You said that nuXCOM gained popularity with XCOM2, which is blatantly false.

Ok, as far I could tell, it had good sales, despite being a pc-only release.

I will repeat myself for the n-th time, but all I'm saying is that currently PP seems to be sitting in the exact spot many similar "genre revival" projects were sitting before: the people for which it was supposedly made largely alienated in order to appease the gaming everyman who, in the end, inevitably does not care nearly enough about these efforts. Of course this strategy can be viable, there are some painful examples of classic PC series bastardized to become super hits, but it needs to be done with way more money and, uh, dedication.

I'm not saying it's impossible for PP to sell good, I just think it is very unlikely. Its creators seem to share this opinion at least partially and when they saw the occasion to get the cash upfront, they jumped right at it. Make of that what you will.

I somewhat agree with that assessment. I don't think it's highly probable that PP will become a smash hit. There's a reason why UFO is still better than all the other spiritual successors. It's very hard to get that kind of game right.

I don't think PP devs took the money because they have no faith in their game. It's probably because they calculated risks. The potential costs of failing to sell, even if the chance is deemed low, are so great that it might be better to choose the more likely risk of some lost sales due to enraged hardcore fans. Gollop pretty much confirmed that they knew about the latter. Hell, by the time of release the grognards might have even changed their mind and buy it anyway (provided its good), or so the owners might have though. Cynical strategy maybe, but that's not the point.

Spoiler: What I'm actually saying is that any games being released only on one store and not the most popular one by far will of course have impact on its sales. I don't even know how it is possible to claim otherwise.

Okay, I'm not claiming otherwise. I'm simply saying that the gameplay will determine the reception.

 

[GrainWetski]

Ok, as far I could tell, it had good sales, despite being a pc-only release.

It was PC only at first because the first game sold relatively poorly on consoles so "despite being a PC only release" doesn't really mean anything.

 

[PanteraNera]

there are some painful examples of classic PC series bastardized to become super hits, but it needs to be done with way more money and, uh, dedication.

 

[PanteraNera]

So Backer Build 4 seems to be not to far away:

We're at content lock, which means we've stopped adding new stuff and are focusing on bugs. Firstly it's getting all of the show-stoppers and game-breaking bugs. After that, we try and track down the more minor issue. It's always possible that something we have added may end up getting pulled from the BB4 release if there's a major issue we can't fix in time, which is why we leave ourselves a couple of weeks for testing and fixing

 

[LootSeeker]

Don't wanna do a charge back I think.

The reviews look a bit better on this site though:

https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/transferwise.com?page=2

I was hesitant as well when I received the e-mail from Transferwise. But then I realized they weren't asking me for any information that isn't on every check I've ever written, and I've passed more than a few checks to businesses that are likely more questionable than Transferwise. Supposedly my money will arrive in my checking account on Monday.

 

[Infinitron]

Spoiler

 

[Delicieuxz]

It is likely that the develop would be found liable by a court for:

Breach of contract
Breach of fiduciary duty
Breach of good faith


Two important quotes about this matter (both featured in this video):


"As a company you shouldn't take people's money by making certain alluring promises, spend that money, and then when things are going well for you back-track on promises before giving the money back when customers' money and satisfaction is no longer as pivotal for your long-term success and survival. Customers aren't there to act as temporary interest-free loan services, they are there to back projects so they can support the fulfillment of certain promises.

And as far as games go, ensuring they release on stipulated platforms is an important part of that. Add on as many platforms as you want, but do not take away any of them, especially if it means breaking your word after you have people's money and done what you need with it. It will only make backers feel like they have been used and exploited, rather than valued as huge contributors to getting the crowd-funded game off the ground."


"I think what makes this particularly galling is how they basically used us backers as an interest-free loan. They took our money, developed to the point where it was mature enough to attract external investors, then totally changed the game plan and fully expect us to withdraw our cash, since they're now out of the high-risk phase of the project.

The conned us into lending them the money, and manoeuvered it so we'd be sitting on the bill if the development project failed. For a game that sold itself based on community involvement, with backer builds and all, this is just awful."

 

[sser]

I'm sure some of you know my big chode gets real hard for this genre and it definitely engorges for Sir Gollop, but I've lost total faith in this one. It is really difficult to think the game is gonna be good. If it's a good game, you put it on as many platforms as necessary. If it's average or shit, you go to Epic, take the lump sum and the loss of credibility in the eyes of many fans with it.

 

[Ironmonk]

It will be fun to watch they launch the game around the end of the year, and by the end of 2020 when the 1 year exclusive deal ends and they finally decide to put it on Steam, XCOM 3 is launched and they get royally fucked because nobody will care about their game.

IMHO this game will be garbage (or barely average at best) and we have been getting signals of that since they started to change things and go back on their words.

 

[True Ukrainian]

It is likely that the develop would be found liable by a court for:

Breach of contract
Breach of fiduciary duty
Breach of good faith


Two important quotes about this matter (both featured in this video):


"As a company you shouldn't take people's money by making certain alluring promises, spend that money, and then when things are going well for you back-track on promises before giving the money back when customers' money and satisfaction is no longer as pivotal for your long-term success and survival. Customers aren't there to act as temporary interest-free loan services, they are there to back projects so they can support the fulfillment of certain promises. And as far as games go, ensuring they release on stipulated platforms is an important part of that. Add on as many platforms as you want, but do not take away any of them, especially if it means breaking your word after you have people's money and done what you need with it. It will only make backers feel like they have been used and exploited, rather than valued as huge contributors to getting the crowd-funded game off the ground."


"I think what makes this particularly galling is how they basically used us backers as an interest-free loan. They took our money, developed to the point where it was mature enough to attract external investors, then totally changed the game plan and fully expect us to withdraw our cash, since they're now out of the high-risk phase of the project

The conned us into lending them the money, and manoeuvered it so we'd be sitting on the bill if the development project failed. For a game that sold itself based on community involvement, with backer builds and all, this is just awful."

There's no breach. Just because the backers poured money into the project does not mean you have a share in it. Backers are not partners, shareholders or equity holders in relation to the dev. Also any suit against Gollop will have to prove how the backers lost out through his maneuvering. Gollop has already stated that he will provide refunds making good any financial loss a backer might have experienced. So even if there was a breach, any backer would be hard pressed to prove what exactly he lost other than what Gollop is already willing to repay. A court generally does not provide compensation for butt-hurt.

 

[Drakron]

There's no breach. Just because the backers poured money into the project does not mean you have a share in it. Backers are not partners, shareholders or equity holders in relation to the dev. Also any suit against Gollop will have to prove how the backers lost out through his maneuvering. Gollop has already stated that he will provide refunds making good any financial loss a backer might have experienced. So even if there was a breach, any backer would be hard pressed to prove what exactly he lost other than what Gollop is already willing to repay. A court generally does not provide compensation for butt-hurt.

Did I just walked into /v/ and I am reading one of those shills/contrarians/"pretending" to be retarded posts?

Crowdfunding have rules, its not "give me money" and you cannot simply switch what the project is about because thats FRAUD.
But there is more! the crowdfunding was in Fig and Fig works diferently as they arent exactly "backers" as more of "investors" since they are supposed to get some of any potential revenue back (this was so people would use Fig and not the other Crowdfunding sites) so yes, they are in fact "partners, shareholders or equity holders" or rather investors since, again, Fig.
In fact this opens some good questions as I pointed out, Fig works in a somewhat different model ... there are no backers, there are investors and the project said "we will put this game on sale on these two sites" and then "oh wait, this guys offered us a lot of money for a timed exclusive on their site", this begs the question if for those investors that is a good decision because its unlikely as fuck that the Epic store will have more sales that Steam and GoG combined, EPic have "assured sales" as their payola but how does that is put on the books for Fig backers that, again, are investors ... it sounds like its a great deal for Snapshot Games as they get to keep all the money from Epic without having to pay Fig investors even if its extremely unlikely this game would ever generate enough sales to actually give some back to said Fig investors but then again, you want to argue in court this isnt a issue because you had no actual confidence in the product? I think not.

Also I have taken a look and Snapshot Games only made another game that, surprise, was also crowdfunded ... what will happen when 2022 comes and all the Epic payola had run out?

 

[True Ukrainian]

Read the small print Fig puts out on their site. Particularly the offering for POE2.

The backers or investors are in reality buying stock in Fig Publishing Inc which pays out dividends based on the revenue of the game's sales. So no, Gollop's relationship is with fig itself. He is not answerable to any of the backers. In fact it is Fig making the offering and promises in law to the backer, not Gollop. Also the "risk factors" in the offering specifically state that the investor is investing in Fig, not the developer.

So as I said, Gollop is going to get away with this and no amount of butt-hurt is going to change that.

 

[LESS T_T]

Was this not posted here? Fig inverstors will get their profit from the Epic payments: https://www.resetera.com/threads/pc...e-to-the-epic-game-store.104914/post-18785666

Dear Investor,

We are exited to share that Snapshot has announced today that they have signed a deal with Epic games for one year of exclusive distribution of Phoenix Point on their game store. As a reminder to shareholders, upfront payments paid by distributors to Snapshot are counted as revenue, and contribute to returns for Fig investors. We will be releasing additional information on how investors of Fig Game Shares - Phoenix Point will be affected by this deal in the near future, so stay tuned for updates.

As always, if you have any questions, feel free to reach out to us at invest@fig.co.

Best,

Fig Team

 

[Mustawd]

I recall vividly how hated Steam was even years after release.

I remember I stopped playing CS cuz of Steam. Plus the changes in 1.6 weren’t my cup of tea iirc.

What’s sad is that Vault Dweller hit the nail on the head in the Epic vs Steam thread: Having a good game on Steam today is better than getting a minimum sales guarantee from Epic.

 

[Alienman]

Starting to sound like a pyramid scheme

Invest now and get double back, and EPIC is currently footing the bill.