Borderlands 3 will be exclusively on the Epic store for the first 6 months

[Ravendarat]

2 hours ago, 79wjd said:

A company being motivated by maximizing their profit. How dare they.

It shocks me every time people seem to have a problem with this. I personally have zero problems with the exclusivity agreements, and honestly I see very little blow back in real life when I talk to people about it yet on message boards its the biggest atrocity in history it seems

[Tech_Dreamer]

3 hours ago, 79wjd said:

A company being motivated by maximizing their profit. How dare they. 

[Blademaster91]

16 hours ago, Bouzoo said:

As I said, no one is forcing you to buy it on EGS, if you can survive without playing wait for a Steam release. If you must buy it, buy it on EGS. Just to be clear, there is nothing wrong with deciding to buy on EGS, which is what people here do not understand. Buy it on any platform that you want but then be aware that by buying the game from said platform you actually support the practice so then don't be shocked if it becomes even a more common practice. And if you buy from EGS, I really do hope you enjoy the game. There is always a choice. 

Yeah I think its fine if you'd rather not wait and don't care what store is selling it, but I mean it would be better for everyone if it were available on both EGS and Steam.

15 hours ago, RejZoR said:

You have a choice. To say "screw you" to Metro devs and to Epic and vote with the wallet like people endlessly talk but very few actually do it apparently. Am I really the only one with solid principals? Screw me now and you lost me forever. I'm not gonna wait like some loser for them to release the damn thing somewhere else. I don't need games that much to beg them to let me play it lmao. Screw such devs and/or publishers.

I've been voting with my wallet and haven't bought any game that went to Epic because of the exclusivity agreements the publishers are taking to make quick cash rather than launching a title on a more consumer friendly platform. I don't mind another launcher however I don't trust EGS after hearing about the security concerns.

[jaggysnake57]

22 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

When no-one else can sell stuff just you that is called monopoly....

 

Are we forced to buy the game from epic or not? OFC you are wrong again.

 

Yes you can when a given merch is only sold by you....

 

Seeing how EGS scanned your computer without any kind of consent it is definitely safer.

monopoly - the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.  not a singular product. not a timed exclusive.

not - wait 6 months not to mention your link talks about exclusivity between retailer or wholesaler and supplier not consumer.

actually you did consent its called TOS

 

22 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

Did Epic give any timing when improvements would come to EGS? My point is those features should've been there earlier, if Epic actually wants to compete with stores that have a larger share in the market, and IMO grabbing up games with exclusivity to their store wouldn't have been that necessary to grab market share if Epic put money into making a well featured platform instead of exclusivity to get sales on their store. The security issues are well known especially EGS taking Steam data when Epic had no reason to,not just "steam fanboys on reddit" as it was on news sites as well.

1) https://trello.com/b/GXLc34hk/epic-games-store-roadmap TLDR upto 6 months for some

2) sorry how long did it take steam?

the news sites citied reddit as a source so.... they were reading your friends list from steam and see above

 

22 hours ago, D13H4RD said:

Remember that a significant portion of the EGS userbase don't use Steam, and some have both but aren't frequent Steam users. It's fair to assume that a lot of these are Fortnite players as that's where the bulk of the userbase comes from. 

 

It is not consumer friendly and I personally won't use the EGS until Epic follows their word on toning down exclusivity and implementing all the features that it lacks. However, whether we like it or not, it is working to some degree. 

 

Though I doubt the EGS will suddenly receive an influx of Steam users from this even when the exclusivity deal is done. It takes a lot to rebuild a fragmented public image. 

 

On that note, there is one other difference between the typical console exclusive and EGS exclusives. Console exclusives tend to be developed by in-house studios or studios who have received capital infusion for development purposes. EGS exclusives are quite different in the sense that they're typically third party and the deals tend to come well after much of the game is developed, so the cash infusion doesn't really help core development, though it may help post-launch development. 

 

Those are all in theory however. Reality tends to be different. 

1 unless you have some source for that EGS userbase claim im calling bullshit. i realy can not see how anyone thats gaming on EGS doesnt have steam for some other game let alone a large portion.

2 division, call of duty and  battlefield all have DLC timed exclusives with either xbox or sony and thats without researching

[jaggysnake57]

17 hours ago, Bouzoo said:

I don't know, maybe the fact that EGS didn't (or maybe still doesn't, really can't confirm nor do I want to) send verification e-mails to people. People getting e-mails that their EGS account has been changed despite them never making said account. Meaning someone else used their address to create an account. Just to name one.

jesus what is it with people not looking at there own freaking links

 

Quote

That said, though the issue has been further complicated by the fact that many other users reported that they did, in fact, receive verification emails upon creation of their Epic Games Store accounts. The Epic Games Store also features two-factor authentication security including a Fortnite reward for activating it, though it isn’t enabled by default. This shows that Epic Games does have an understanding of account security, but that there may be an oversight or bug involved in the process.

 

like steam has never had any issues

 

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jul/27/steam-account-hijacking-bug-fixed-valve

 

https://games.slashdot.org/story/15/12/25/2111242/steam-bug-shows-you-other-users-account-details

 

that last one was a doosy, you clicked your profile link and went to some randoms profile.....i mean really 

[D13H4RD]

1 hour ago, jaggysnake57 said:

unless you have some source for that EGS userbase claim im calling bullshit. i realy can not see how anyone thats gaming on EGS doesnt have steam for some other game let alone a large portion.

https://www.pcgamer.com/40-percent-of-epic-games-store-users-say-they-dont-have-steam/

 

Quote

Epic Games said during a GDC presentation today that there are now 85 million registered users of the Epic Games Store on PC—and, according to user surveys from August 2018 and January 2019, 40 percent of them report not having Steam.

 

According to the survey Epic performed, 68 percent of Epic store users don't use Steam "regularly," a figure that seems awfully high given Steam's decade-plus dominance of the platform. But the multiplatform Fortnite is the x-factor here: The slide also said that "more Epic PC users regularly play on consoles than on Steam." 

 

1 hour ago, jaggysnake57 said:

Division, call of duty and  battlefield all have DLC timed exclusives with either xbox or sony and thats without researching

Hence why I said "typical", games like The Last of Us or God of War. 

 

There are exceptions like how Rise of the Tomb Raider was a 1 year exclusive to the Xbox One. 

[D13H4RD]

4 hours ago, Ravendarat said:

It shocks me every time people seem to have a problem with this. I personally have zero problems with the exclusivity agreements, and honestly I see very little blow back in real life when I talk to people about it yet on message boards its the biggest atrocity in history it seems

Honestly, I only really have an issue when a game is constantly advertised as being on other platforms, and then suddenly going to Epic without warning. 

 

If it's going to Epic from the get-go, then I won't be all that annoyed. I still don't like it, but it isn't nearly as frustrating. 

[Bouzoo]

1 hour ago, jaggysnake57 said:

jesus what is it with people not looking at there own freaking links 

Hm? 

[suicidalfranco]

6 hours ago, DragonTamer1 said:

steam is taking 30% of their revenue for doing little to no work

looks at services and tools offered by steam at no extra cost to the consumer or developer

looks at services and tools offered by epic at no extra cost to the consumer or developer

 

Is this a joke?

[DaRk0]

7 hours ago, SlimyPython said:

It's ties with the communist party of china and also privacy problems...

Well, first of all Epic is not the only gaming company that has connections with this company and second - so what? like really. If there's a law in China stating government needs to own a portion of the company then so be it. It's a law in their country. If you are paranoid about it, don't use their service. It's cool.

[jagdtigger]

13 hours ago, DaRk0 said:

I guess people forgot how Steam was in early days.

I dont remember paid exclusives.... (only their own games were exclusive, but thats a whole other issue)

[IntMD]

If they wanted to save some of their Epic dollars, they should not be advertising it to me on youtube, as I would never have bought it anyway. 3/4 of the youtube videos I watched yesterday had adverts for Borderlands 3.

[Fnige]

54 minutes ago, DaRk0 said:

If there's a law in China stating government needs to own a portion of the company then so be it. It's a law in their country

IF, Though there probably isn't, anyway ties with china communist party = usually bad

 

Also can you answer about privacy issues and for your own sake, here's this

 

[Ross Siggers]

I've not read through the previous 7 pages of this thread, but here's my take; I'm not against timed exclusives. It's a potentially good way of attracting attention to a new platform, and EGS seems like one that could genuinely be competetive with steam given time to mature.

 

BUT... Borderlands is not the game to do it with. It's a long running franchise, with an established fanbase. Figures have already proven a huge portion of Epics subscribers aren't Steam users, merely kids registering so they can play Fortnite. So a large number of their users may not feel the urge to play the game, they should pick a timed exclusive that would appeal more to their userbase. And to those die-hard fans who do cave, and buy Borderlands on EGS? They're faced with a far worse experience than they would have on Steam. 

Borderlands should be going after the players that it's currently excluding. Must've been a pretty laaaarge number for devs to agree to this bullshit.

[jaggysnake57]

2 hours ago, D13H4RD said:

https://www.pcgamer.com/40-percent-of-epic-games-store-users-say-they-dont-have-steam/

 

 

Hence why I said "typical", games like The Last of Us or God of War. 

 

There are exceptions like how Rise of the Tomb Raider was a 1 year exclusive to the Xbox One. 

WHAT!

 

looking at the system requirements for fortnite im guessing most couldnt run much on steam any way though in all honsety i have kinda lost your p[oint and my own for that matter......

[Master Delta Chief]

7 hours ago, Ravendarat said:

It shocks me every time people seem to have a problem with this. I personally have zero problems with the exclusivity agreements, and honestly I see very little blow back in real life when I talk to people about it yet on message boards its the biggest atrocity in history it seems

I get that some people don't see the problems with exclusivity deals, fair enough, but I personally do see a problem in it once a company starts snagging in all sudden a few games and then make it exclusive-only. My main concern about EGS is it's security. The rest like features and what not can be added in later. Many times it has been said that EGS doesn't have proper security and sure, Steam has had a few on it's own but they at least try to fix it.

[D13H4RD]

2 hours ago, jaggysnake57 said:

WHAT!

 

looking at the system requirements for fortnite im guessing most couldnt run much on steam any way though in all honsety i have kinda lost your p[oint and my own for that matter......

It's honestly not surprising, given that quite a number EGS users tend to also play Fortnite. 

 

Though it also kinda shows just how big Fortnite was (and probably still is) 

[DaRk0]

Just now, jagdtigger said:

I dont remember paid exclusives.... (only their own games were exclusive, but thats a whole other issue)

I was referring to functionalities though.

Just now, SlimyPython said:

IF, Though there probably isn't, anyway ties with china communist party = usually bad

 

Also can you answer about privacy issues and for your own sake, here's this

 

 

I believe we don't know for sure Tencent has a ties to Chinese government and, like I said, even if they do - who cares?

You see it as a bad thing. Cool. Does not mean it's necessarily bad. Different people will have different opinion.

 

I can say that I disagree with companies that have ties to NATO member states since NATO is responsible for 11 million civilian deaths in the last 20 years, and 37 million since World War 2. There's no good and bad in this world only. It's not a movie.

[Ravendarat]

5 hours ago, D13H4RD said:

Honestly, I only really have an issue when a game is constantly advertised as being on other platforms, and then suddenly going to Epic without warning. 

 

If it's going to Epic from the get-go, then I won't be all that annoyed. I still don't like it, but it isn't nearly as frustrating. 

Thats totally fair

[dalekphalm]

4 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

I dont remember paid exclusives.... (only their own games were exclusive, but thats a whole other issue)

That's because they didn't have to. They were the only digital game store when Steam launched. That didn't change for literally years until Origin and uPlay and GoG came online.

 

Why would they pay someone for exclusives when they're literally the only choice?

 

That's the thing a lot of people are discounting:

1. Steam didn't have a lot of the same struggles that any new platform has

2. Steam was the only option for so long that they gobbled up the vast majority of the market share long before any other competitor even launched

 

Ideally, yes, exclusives are bad. But practically speaking, this is EGS's best chance to gain some marketshare while also adding features to their new launcher.

[jagdtigger]

1 hour ago, dalekphalm said:

That's because they didn't have to.

Epic do!snt have to either, just offer something better.....

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, jagdtigger said:

Epic do!snt have to either, just offer something better.....

The difference is that when Steam launched, it would literally be a waste of their money to have paid exclusives. They were the only choice - period, for a digital launcher/store.

 

Whereas, paid timed exclusives (that will eventually land on other stores) is an acceptable and practical way to gain market share. As I said, give it a year, see how EGS is then.

 

Odds are, the vast majority of gamers who want to play Borderlands 3 on launch, will buy it from EGS and not complain overly about it. Or perhaps they'll be annoyed it's not on Steam, because they want all games on Steam, but they'll still buy it.

 

I will be extremely shocked if BL3 has poor sales.

[79wjd]

13 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Epic do!snt have to either, just offer something better.....

And unless that something is significantly better than Steam, EGS will have died before getting off the ground. Even if EGS was slightly better than Steam, it still wouldn't have stood a chance at competing due to Steams dominant market position.

 

Without exclusives or something similar (or Valve doing something so unbelievably stupid), there would never be any real competition to Steam. The only other realistic alternative they could have done would have been to list below Steam pricing while giving publishers the same amount of money, thereby encouraging people to try EGS over Steam, which has its own set of problems -- namely that publishers might not be thrilled with devaluing the entire new game market like that.

[DragonTamer1]

10 hours ago, suicidalfranco said:

looks at services and tools offered by steam at no extra cost to the consumer or developer

looks at services and tools offered by epic at no extra cost to the consumer or developer

 

Is this a joke?

I was specifically referring to the fact that steam does not have a direct hand in developing the the majority of the titles released on their platform and that it's unheard of for any company to charge that much money for simply distributing a product.

 

Edit: Apple apparently charges 30% for products sold on the apple store but this is the only company I could find an example of.

[jagdtigger]

5 hours ago, 79wjd said:

there would never be any real competition to Steam

Can you stop citing competition when there isnt any? Locking games into one store is a far cry from any sort of competition.