Epic Games announces a slew of more EGS exclusives, including The Outer Worlds and Heavy Rain

[Theminecraftaddict555]

On 3/21/2019 at 2:49 AM, Daiyus said:

I can't defend EGS, but this "Steam only" attitude is just as shortsighted.

Why not all platforms INCLUDING STEAM 

[Master Delta Chief]

1 hour ago, valdyrgramr said:

No, it's in the company's best interest to do what financially makes the most sense to them.  Companies don't care as much as you think they do about you, the consumer.  They care about profits and doing what they want, not what you want.  The reason Epic is holding exclusives is to catch up in the market.  From a business stance that makes sense.  Sony bribes to get exclusives for this exact purpose, but to get ahead.  It's nothing new.  

That's what you desire, but that doesn't always financially work for the company.  Also, not a lot of Devs really listen.  Look at Bungie!  Their community bitches daily about cores being used for infusion, but they refuse to remove them from infusion.  Epic ignores the players who helped make them last this long to make more money off Fortnite.  Point is, these companies do what they want, not what you want.  Even if you were there to help make them rich originally.  I can list a lot more examples than just these two of the devs not caring what the consumer has to say.

Of course it's in the best interest on doing well financially, hence it's a business. But that doesn't mean that the consumer doesn't have any sort of power over the company in a manner of speaking, since they are the ones doing business with them. If many see they're implementing certain policies or changing their prices, then they may not continue to work with them, meaning the company/store will start to lose money.

[D13H4RD]

7 hours ago, valdyrgramr said:

Point is, these companies do what they want, not what you want.  Even if you were there to help make them rich originally.  I can list a lot more examples than just these two of the devs not caring what the consumer has to say.

I'll sum it up like this. 

 

Companies don't care what's popular. They care what's profitable. 

 

Valve is not your friend. Epic Games is not your friend. GabeN is not your drinking buddy. Tim Sweeney is not your drinking buddy. 

 

Ultimately, only you, the consumer, can make the final call that you think fits. Don't count on companies to do it for you, because they very likely won't. 

[D13H4RD]

Just now, valdyrgramr said:

They can find other ways to make money, though.  They would put the investors over the consumer too.  The developer also puts the publisher over the consumer.  They don't just go, "Oh, we lost consumers!  How can we make them happy again?!"

EA is probably a prime example of that. Despite having quite a number of failures, they still push on with their rethoric. 

[D13H4RD]

2 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

Bungie, Activision, Blizzard, and Sony too  Even MS is guilty of this.  XD

And Bethesda 

 

Thanks Hodd Toward 

[ARikozuM]

1 minute ago, valdyrgramr said:

Nintendo back in the 90s.  "Let's censor everything!  We're a family company!"  "Hey, Americans suck at games!  Let's give them a fake Mario 2!  Not the one they asked for!"

And thank God they did! Americans really do suck at platformers! I'm amazed From Software actually got an American following. 

Spoiler

And don't even get me started on Kaizo Mario!

 

[EldritchMoose]

On 3/25/2019 at 5:16 PM, EarthWormJM2 said:

No one is bitching on here about having to use EGS to play Fortnite, their own first-party game. No one is bitching that Nintendo is keeping their own first-party titles on their own consoles, giving consumers incentive to buy a Nintendo console. What everyone is bitching about is if Nintendo was to come out and say "Super Mario Odyssey is now coming to PC, exclusive to only the EGS store!!" Because EGS threw a bunch of money at them to lock those titles down to their platform only. There is a big difference between first party titles being released only on their own first-party store/launcher, so they keep all the profits, and purposely buying out devs/publishers with exclusivity deals to force consumers to use a platform that they don't want, mainly because of the tons of missing features and being forced to support a company they don't want to, just to play the game they want, when there are other options. They are clearly taking the "screw consumers, are the devs happy?" approach. And tons of people already have bitched about console exclusive DLC like weapons and maps in Destiny, and plenty of other games, it's just old news now.

 

4 words to resolve all of this: Vote. With. Your. Wallet.

Which is the crux of my issue with this whole mess - Epic is robbing me of the ability to do that, so will not get anything from my wallet. I was excited by the prospect of a spiritual successor to XCOM, but I guess I won't be buying Phoenix Point anytime soon.

 

Like the MSRP of $60,-, it very much seems that the 30% cut that Steam has taken was put into place once and never really questioned or contested. A solid competitor that billed itself as being more "developer friendly" would have opened up this discussion but, as it stands, Epic just wants to set itself up as the martyr against the supposedly greedy Valve by bringing the console war to PC gamers.

 

I think that's what pisses me off the most about all this: Epic is trying to take the side of being against unchecked corporate greed while securing the initial year's sales of a lot of popular titles. It's like Activision patching lootboxes into Call of Duty long after the first wave of sales and reviews for the game has come and gone. All the positive press about not being greedy bastards, and then all the money to be gained from microtransactions after the fact. It's exactly the kind of dishonest business practice I've come to hate from game publishers in recent years. In fact, unchecked consumer-unfriendly practices, if allowed, can and will be exploited. It used to be the case that I could unlock various costumes and models to use in multiplayer simply by earning them in-game, but because it is still financially viable nowadays, games are being carved up for preorder and DLC bonuses even before development is fully completed (remember how Evolve's preorder bonuses were announced before the game itself was announced) with companies like Ubisoft elevating this to an art form where you'd almost need a spreadsheet just to figure out if the one or two things you give a shit about, are included if you were to buy the game online, or if you have to go to Gamestop for them.

 

Look, I'm not a hardcore Valve fanboy. I'm a lazy bastard who likes playing video games. Any company that makes it easier for me to own and play video games will happily get my money. I should probably also say that the vast majority of games I've purchased in the past year were on sale at the time. That's another thing Steam does that helps me, a lazy bastard, play games: I have a wishlist, and when it's on sale I get an e-mail from them. At the end of the day, Steam just has a track record of making my gaming-related life better. If Epic wants to be a part of that, they need to justify the extra effort I would have to spend to download yet another launcher and create yet another account and further clutter up my KeePass database. Again, I am a lazy bastard, and when it comes to my free time, time is money.