Celebrating no Epic Store Version of games makes me little sad , and here is why (regional pricing, read OP)

[spineduke]

Care to provide evidence? The celebration of people being denied access to a game by people in this thread claiming they support an open market for PC games proves my case beyond being simply a hypothetical. It doesn't matter whether the person prefers Steam (the majority) GoG, etc.. The fact that people actively celebrate the restriction of content availability while simultaneously claiming to want unrestricted content availability exposes a core tribalism.

i.e. "its ok for there to be "competition" as long as thats just the small other store I'll dabble with here and there, but my fav is still the clearly understood default for the entire PC gaming audience".

Click to shrink...

What kind of evidence would convince you? I can provide you plenty of anecdotal instances, since you're convinced its all happening here. Most of the regulars on the PC threads have 6+ launchers installed on their PCs. It's a given considering the open nature of the PC market, and hence the strong reaction to the concept of creating exclusivity. People are happy about seeing something not being gatekeeped artificially. There are plenty of barriers for devs to release everywhere, in terms of resources and time, but to champion a store that prides on restricting other storefronts from its games is inherently un-PC. It's not hard to see why people object to it.

 

[DealWithIt]

Oh hey we're still doing this in the morning, ok cool

For those just joining us



I swear guys, just look inward for like 5 minutes

Click to shrink...

Yeah this thread is bonkers. OP gave a perfectly valid viewpoint and people been jumping down their throat.

 

[spineduke]

Yeah this thread is bonkers. OP gave a perfectly valid viewpoint and people been jumping down their throat.

Click to shrink...

its a EGS thread, by page 10 it doesn't matter what the initial context was.

first few pages are reasonable enough

 

[VatticWave]

Maybe that people doesn't see those issues as something relevant?

Click to shrink...

So much this. Store features aren't as important for a lot of people than the games and their prices. Steam got it's real fame because of it's sales, not it's family sharing or cloud saving. Not that I don't use those features, but It is not a priority above the games themselves (as a sidenote, Epic promised on their roadmap that they will put these features in the future, but they are just promises). We'll see in future sales data from the EGS if that is really a problem.

I saw some users defending that the 30% cut Valve gets is better than the lower 11% that the EGS has for games in it's store. Content creators for the workshops of Dota 2, Team Fortress 2 and Counter Strike:GO would like to have a word with you, guys. It's like we're forgetting Valve is a greedy company, too. We were so pleased to forcibly accept Steam in order to play Half Life 2, but whatever.

 

[Reinhardt Schneider]

And this is why EGS exclusives are problematic. Because if Epic decides to not bother... we're getting another GFWL situation.





I do remember them reaaaaally well. You're right, you needed to download the client. But buying on Steam those games means today I can still access them. With EGS though, we might get another GFWL situation where the service stops and we get fucked. EGS is worse than that because it's actually more agressive: Not only I cant buy them on a reliable service, but they managed to be the only place selling those games, killing smaller storefronts.

Click to shrink...

Does the EGS suffer a huge amount of unexplained login bugs that prevented you to even play? If the answer to that is no, EGS is in no way worse than GFWL.

And now, I would rather take this to private if you don't mind. I don't want to derail any further

 

[Drek]

And this is why EGS exclusives are problematic. Because if Epic decides to not bother... we're getting another GFWL situation.

I do remember them reaaaaally well. You're right, you needed to download the client. But buying on Steam those games means today I can still access them. With EGS though, we might get another GFWL situation where the service stops and we get fucked. EGS is worse than that because it's actually more agressive: Not only I cant buy them on a reliable service, but they managed to be the only place selling those games, killing smaller storefronts.

Click to shrink...

They aren't analogous, in part because Epic is paying for nothing more than timed exclusivity.

Microsoft cared about an XBL equivalent on PC and so had partners selling games on Steam that required GWFL to even play. This created a secondary layer of authentication that was the cause of the GWFL fallout.

With Epic all online components of exclusives appear to still largely be within the control of the publisher/developer themselves. If EGS goes away it doesn't impact your ability to play Anno 1800, it'll just be on the UPlay store. Hades is being early accessed entirely through the developer's own channels, Epic not required. The exclusives they're picking up can be shifted by the developer to another storefront without issue, and in fact most already will be approximately one year after release.

Microsoft had games altered to restrict how they worked outside of their ecosystem, Epic is just paying a publisher to not launch on another platform for a few months.

That doesn't justify Epic's practice but its revisionist history to claim its worse than what GFWL was or that an end scenario like GFWL is even possible here.

What kind of evidence would convince you? I can provide you plenty of anecdotal instances, since you're convinced its all happening here. Most of the regulars on the PC threads have 6+ launchers installed on their PCs. It's a given considering the open nature of the PC market, and hence the strong reaction to the concept of creating exclusivity. People are happy about seeing something not being gatekeeped artificially. There are plenty of barriers for devs to release everywhere, in terms of resources and time, but to champion a store that prides on restricting other storefronts from its games is inherently un-PC. It's not hard to see why people object to it.

Click to shrink...

The inability to provide real evidence to a strawman was the point to my response. Having every launcher other than Epic on a PC doesn't mean someone isn't a Steam fanboy any more than owning all current systems prevents someone from being an MS/Sony/Nintendo fanboy.

Try this - construct and support an argument for actively wanting to keep games off Epic game store for non-technical reasons that correlates with wanting an open market for PC games, then prove how that belief is held by the people who are celebrating the lack of availability of a game on a storefront because they support open access of games across storefronts.

Obviously it can't be done as its logically incoherent, just like your original response. People can't buy their way out of tribalism and biased perspectives. The only way out is to accept those flaws and correct behavior in the future.

Or double down and claim the problem isn't the hypocritical arguments being made but instead the company/game store that was the catalyst for all the angst.

 

[Lothars]

So much this. Store features aren't as important for a lot of people than the games and their prices. Steam got it's real fame because of it's sales, not it's family sharing or cloud saving. Not that I don't use those features, but It is not a priority above the games themselves (as a sidenote, Epic promised on their roadmap that they will put these features in the future, but they are just promises). We'll see in future sales data from the EGS if that is really a problem.

I saw some users defending that the 30% cut Valve gets is better than the lower 11% that the EGS has for games in it's store. Content creators for the workshops of Dota 2, Team Fortress 2 and Counter Strike:GO would like to have a word with you, guys. It's like we're forgetting Valve is a greedy company, too. We were so pleased to forcibly accept Steam in order to play Half Life 2, but whatever.

Click to shrink...

Epic doesn't offer anything of benefit for the vast majority of people. Only in certain regions it even offers better pricing otherwise it offers a worst experience. I have no issues with Baldur's gate 3 going to epic game store but I also am not bothered if it never does. The one thing to come out of this is more regional pricing for more locations on steam including where the OP lives. I'm also curious to see if Epic decides PC gaming is the worst again and runs off because i think that's the most likely scenario of all this. I don't see them propping up EGS for years to come if it doesn't take off how they want it to.

 

[Deleted member 1849]

In my eyes, this is literally the definition of a mistake, Napp.

I understand the gravity of things and how you feel in general, especially in regards to Linux gaming, but that comparison was bad, and instead of trying to explain it, just make a mental note to not get tripped up again. You're smart enough that you shouldn't be falling for that.

Click to shrink...

In that case, I made a mistake then and I apologize.

I haven't actually mentioned Linux gaming in this thread though, but you are right in that that is one way Epic are restricting games and it's something which personally annoys me a lot.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

its a EGS thread, by page 10 it doesn't matter what the initial context was.

first few pages are reasonable enough

Click to shrink...

It feels like the same thread every time with the exact same arguments. It really is worthless to keep arguing about it, no one is going to budge.

 

[Absolute]

I wish we could've had this level of moderation, tone policing and concern over regional pricing in previous EGS specific exclusive threads. Now it's a game hitting steam and not EGS (through no moneyhatting) and we need to look inwardly and be better people towards the concerns of other users.

 

[Deleted member 42]

its a EGS thread, by page 10 it doesn't matter what the initial context was.

first few pages are reasonable enough

Click to shrink...

The stuff I was citing there happened in the first four pages.

It's definitely not a majority, not even close, but it's more than zero, and that bites eggs

 

[spineduke]

The inability to provide real evidence to a strawman was the point to my response. Having every launcher other than Epic on a PC doesn't mean someone isn't a Steam fanboy any more than owning all current systems prevents someone from being an MS/Sony/Nintendo fanboy.

Try this - construct and support an argument for actively wanting to keep games off Epic game store for non-technical reasons that correlates with wanting an open market for PC games, then prove how that belief is held by the people who are celebrating the lack of availability of a game on a storefront because they support open access of games across storefronts.

Obviously it can't be done as its logically incoherent, just like your original response. People can't buy their way out of tribalism and biased perspectives. The only way out is to accept those flaws and correct behavior in the future.

Or double down and claim the problem isn't the hypocritical arguments being made but instead the company/game store that was the catalyst for all the angst.

Click to shrink...

My explanation was coherent, its just that you aren't interested in engaging with it - im not the one setting up strawmen arguments.

It's clear to me you're not arguing in good faith, and are only interested in setting up traps. Goodbye.

 

[Deleted member 10629]

Not that I don't use those features, but It is not a priority above the games themselves

Click to shrink...

Tell that to the guys in this very forum who lost 40+ hours of progress because their save file got borked.

 

[Hektor]

Maybe that people doesn't see those issues as something relevant?

Click to shrink...

Karen,

It's fine if you or anyone else doesn't care about those features, but that doesn't give you or anyone else the right to declare that all the other people who do care about those features shouldn't care either or a childish for doing so, and repeatd thousand instances of this is were the aformentioned aggressiveness comes from.

 

[Reinhardt Schneider]

Karen,

It's fine if you or anyone else doesn't care about those features, but that doesn't give you or anyone else the right to declare that all the other people who do care about those features shouldn't care either or a childish for doing so, and repeatd thousand instances of this is were the aformentioned aggressiveness comes from.

Click to shrink...

I've read people in this forum telling users to not buy games on the EGS or even calling them out for taking advantage of the lastest sale, so excuse me if I refuse to believe that bs about "we're aggressive because we're fed up of people whose opinion is different than ours and we can't allow that"

 

[Deleted member 4482]

Oh hey we're still doing this in the morning, ok cool

For those just joining us



I swear guys, just look inward for like 5 minutes

Click to shrink...

you're arguing against human nature. I said everything I could have said about this store in previous threads and the people who had already chosen their side were not interested in listening. My ignore list is massive because anyone who gets off on shitting all over people for seeing value in something they don't like to the extent seen on this forum doesn't deserve to have their posts read by me. It's sad and embarrassing and the shortsightedness and selfishness of a lot of these views correlate strongly to other social issues dominating our world right now.

 

[Drek]

My explanation was coherent, its just that you aren't interested in engaging with it - im not the one setting up strawmen arguments.

It's clear to me you're not arguing in good faith, and are only interested in setting up traps. Goodbye.

Click to shrink...

Your argument was that anecdotal examples of people owning games on multiple storefronts disproved any kind of PC games tribalism outside of Epic.

Those examples prove nothing, so it isn't a valid argument.

Me pointing this out apparently reveals that I'm not arguing in good faith, somehow.



What Epic Game Store Threads All Really Are:

EGS topic comes up.

A segment of Resetera show up with pitchforks and already lit torches.

Some people point out that while this is not ideal it is not an end of the world scenario.

The first segment puts up false arguments about how Epic is causing some kind of massive damage to the PC games market, totally justifying the outrage.

The second group points out the problems with those arguments.

The first group then tries to act like the second group are a bunch of Epic apologists.


The vast majority of people in these threads take issue with Epic's practice of signing exclusives. Everyone understands the convenience of Steam for most people, and that Epic is lacking significant features compared to Steam. No one is trying to posit that Epic is a better alternative to Steam.

But developers/publishers like money, Epic has money, and Epic thinks that exclusive games will help build market share with their storefront. So this is a thing. Bitching about it doesn't really fix it.

Not buying the exclusives, specifically, is a way to vote with your wallet. By all means please do that. Hell, I haven't bought Anno 1800 even from Ubi's store just because of the whole exclusivity thing they did with Epic because I don't want a penny of my money showing up in a metric used to justify this crap.

The arguments against Epic's practices requires one to not lean into the schadenfreude of developers/publishers excluding Epic though. The arguments lean on either a belief in games being openly available across all technologically valid strorefronts, and for storefronts to provide roughly analogous and contemporary services to their customers.

So celebrating games not being available on EGS is logically incoherent with one of the core arguments that justify angst towards Epic. That is an underlying problem with the PC gaming space that Epic didn't create, just gave a focus to.

Personally I'd also argue that not using EGS at all just makes one a non-entity in Epic's metrics, which isn't a valid way to utilize soft influence to change behavior. They're offering a $10 discount straight out of their own pocket for anything over $15. They give out free games every week. Those are two market growth practices on their part that are net positives.

TL:DR - The way to effectively push back against EGS is not through hypocritical celebration of game access limitations or forum bitching. The effective methods are either completely starving them out or supporting exclusively the fringe actions Epic has taken that are industry positives.

 

[Deleted member 10629]

EGS topic comes up.

A segment of Resetera show up with pitchforks and already lit torches.

Some people point out that while this is not ideal it is not an end of the world scenario.

The first segment puts up false arguments about how Epic is causing some kind of massive damage to the PC games market, totally justifying the outrage.

The second group points out the problems with those arguments.

The first group then tries to act like the second group are a bunch of Epic apologists.

Click to shrink...

This has literally never happened.

 

[Hektor]

I've read people in this forum telling users to not buy games on the EGS or even calling them out for taking advantage of the lastest sale, so excuse me if I refuse to believe that bs about "we're aggressive because we're fed up of people whose opinion is different than ours and we can't allow that"

Click to shrink...

Apart from the fact that your quotation marked part is either completely misunderstanding the point or willfully dishonest (thus proving my point):

It's a matter of fact what i posted. That's where the aggressiveness comes from.
Believe it or not.
I certainly can't prove it to you, but it factually is the reason.

This has literally never happened.

Click to shrink...

I wanted to say something but i didn't knew what, so i'm just gonna quote this.

 

[eonden]

Your argument was that anecdotal examples of people owning games on multiple storefronts disproved any kind of PC games tribalism outside of Epic.

Those examples prove nothing, so it isn't a valid argument.

Me pointing this out apparently reveals that I'm not arguing in good faith, somehow.



What Epic Game Store Threads All Really Are:

EGS topic comes up.

A segment of Resetera show up with pitchforks and already lit torches.

Some people point out that while this is not ideal it is not an end of the world scenario.

The first segment puts up false arguments about how Epic is causing some kind of massive damage to the PC games market, totally justifying the outrage.

The second group points out the problems with those arguments.

The first group then tries to act like the second group are a bunch of Epic apologists.

Click to shrink...

More like:
The first segment puts up good argument about the issues with EGS.
The second segment just says "it is just another launcher", "stop being a Steamdrone", "fuck Steam", "Valve are lazy", "Steam is shit", just stupid arguments that downplay any real type of complain against EGS.
The first segment ends up annoyed at having to deal with that shit over prolonged periods of time and the thing escalates over time.

Mods start to notice that and start imposing a harder rule on the EGS topics to try and avoid the second segment that downplays the complain against EGS.
The conversation somehow improves with time after that happens.

 

[DealWithIt]

its a EGS thread, by page 10 it doesn't matter what the initial context was.

first few pages are reasonable enough

Click to shrink...

The first few pages are what I'm responding too.

 

[inner-G]

Your argument was that anecdotal examples of people owning games on multiple storefronts disproved any kind of PC games tribalism outside of Epic.

Those examples prove nothing, so it isn't a valid argument.

Me pointing this out apparently reveals that I'm not arguing in good faith, somehow.



What Epic Game Store Threads All Really Are:

EGS topic comes up.

A segment of Resetera show up with pitchforks and already lit torches.

Some people point out that while this is not ideal it is not an end of the world scenario.

The first segment puts up false arguments about how Epic is causing some kind of massive damage to the PC games market, totally justifying the outrage.

The second group points out the problems with those arguments.

The first group then tries to act like the second group are a bunch of Epic apologists.


The vast majority of people in these threads take issue with Epic's practice of signing exclusives. Everyone understands the convenience of Steam for most people, and that Epic is lacking significant features compared to Steam. No one is trying to posit that Epic is a better alternative to Steam.

But developers/publishers like money, Epic has money, and Epic thinks that exclusive games will help build market share with their storefront. So this is a thing. Bitching about it doesn't really fix it.

Not buying the exclusives, specifically, is a way to vote with your wallet. By all means please do that. Hell, I haven't bought Anno 1800 even from Ubi's store just because of the whole exclusivity thing they did with Epic because I don't want a penny of my money showing up in a metric used to justify this crap.

The arguments against Epic's practices requires one to not lean into the schadenfreude of developers/publishers excluding Epic though. The arguments lean on either a belief in games being openly available across all technologically valid strorefronts, and for storefronts to provide roughly analogous and contemporary services to their customers.

So celebrating games not being available on EGS is logically incoherent with one of the core arguments that justify angst towards Epic. That is an underlying problem with the PC gaming space that Epic didn't create, just gave a focus to.

Personally I'd also argue that not using EGS at all just makes one a non-entity in Epic's metrics, which isn't a valid way to utilize soft influence to change behavior. They're offering a $10 discount straight out of their own pocket for anything over $15. They give out free games every week. Those are two market growth practices on their part that are net positives.

TL:DR - The way to effectively push back against EGS is not through hypocritical celebration of game access limitations or forum bitching. The effective methods are either completely starving them out or supporting exclusively the fringe actions Epic has taken that are industry positives.

Click to shrink...

Or people just don't think that walking into the scene and waving money around earns you the right to make games in loved series like ANNO exclusive to your store. It's like the Donald Trump of games stores.

And I'd say that if the community continues to constantly rag on it, it will be effective against it. Right now they're spending tons of money on promos and almost no one uses the store. They won't do that forever, especially once Fortnite loses popularity and they're not drowning in cash.

 

[Astra Planeta]

This has literally never happened.

Click to shrink...

sarcasm?

 

[Swenhir]

sarcasm?

Click to shrink...

Reality.

One-liner drive-by are so easy, I should do it too.

 

[Deleted member 10629]

sarcasm?

Click to shrink...

Their whole post is trying to paint EGS detractors as irrational people with a hate boner for everything not called Steam, and cites (but not links) a supposed recurring course of EGS threads, which anyone who has followed the whole case knows that it isnt true.

 

[Astra Planeta]

Reality.

One-liner drive-by are so easy, I should do it too.

Click to shrink...

It was a genuine question. It's hard to tell from the context of your original statement. I think we have all seen exactly the sort thing that you said didn't happen , happen in all kinds of EGS threads. Its a very touchy subject around here.

 

[Swenhir]

It was a genuine question. It's hard to tell from the context of your original statement. I think we have all seen exactly the sort thing that you said didn't happen , happen in all kinds of EGS threads. Its a very touchy subject around here.

Click to shrink...

Apologies then. I'm also not one of the original people involved in this chain of conversation so I don't think you meant "my" original statement.

Regardless, the touchiness is because we are in the 4th or 5th consecutive month of having people drive by with stupid one-liners and "it's just another launcher" fallacy-ridden statements. It's really irritating and we now have the afore-mentioned poster trying to portray us as ill-reasoned lunatics. Suffice to say, people aren't pleased with that.

 

[Hektor]

People arguing with reason in favor of the epic store against a flood of pitchfork grabbing steam fanboys certainly rarely ever happened, although i have no doubt that people posting neoliberal slogans about competition and lazy monopolies see themselfs that way.

 

[Astra Planeta]

More like:
The first segment puts up good argument about the issues with EGS.
The second segment just says "it is just another launcher", "stop being a Steamdrone", "fuck Steam", "Valve are lazy", "Steam is shit", just stupid arguments that downplay any real type of complain against EGS.
The first segment ends up annoyed at having to deal with that shit over prolonged periods of time and the thing escalates over time.

Mods start to notice that and start imposing a harder rule on the EGS topics to try and avoid the second segment that downplays the complain against EGS.
The conversation somehow improves with time after that happens.

Click to shrink...

In this thread OP gave a real genuine reason for liking Epic and people still jumped down his throat, or just ignored the fact that the regional pricing was a real pro for him. It does seem like its not possible to praise ANYTHING EGS does even if it is something good like this. Steam does plenty of good things & plenty of bad, and that has the opposite issue - it does seem impossible to criticize steam/valve on this forum.

I think it is tribalism same as console wars with these launchers. The truth is probably someplace in the middle, Steam does need something to make them innovate a bit & changes some of their policies, and EGS did launch a store that was lacking some key features. So IMO both companies are both bad & good, same as most companies. Both have contributed a lot to PC gaming, between steam & unreal engine so I personally am ok supporting both of them. I am not a huge fan of they money hatting, but like consoles, its the only way to get people to try your platform now. If everything came out on every platform, people would just stick to one - just like you'd never get an second console if everything was on the one you had.

 

[Deleted member 10629]

It is quite amusing how folks have the gall of saying Valve doesnt innovate when they're the only entity to ever give a shit about Linux gaming, just to say one of the many things Valve has done.

If you ever see some incendiary comments it's because these dumb arguments are repeated over and over ane over.

 

[Deleted member 3208]

Eh... No. I would say Epic has helped overall the entire gaming landscape with the Unreal Engine, but PC Gaming itself no. They even ran away in the 360/PS3 era, blaming piracy for low sales in PC.

 

[deadman322]

It is quite amusing how folks have the gall of saying Valve doesnt innovate when they're the only entity to ever give a shit about Linux gaming, just to say one of the many things Valve has done.

Click to shrink...

the thing is that they don't care about gaming on linux so valve doing anything in that department doesn't count.

 

[Swenhir]

Steam does need something to make them innovate a bit & changes some of their policies

Click to shrink...

Like what exactly? And don't even think of trying to portray me as a Steam fanboy - I still resent them for 2004, paid mods and many other things. But they are the innovator in the PC gaming platform space and lightyears ahead of consoles.

EGS did launch a store that was lacking some key features.

Click to shrink...

"Some".

As in, all of them.

So IMO both companies are both bad & good, same as most companies. Both have contributed a lot to PC gaming, between steam & unreal engine so I personally am ok supporting both of them.

Click to shrink...

And here we go again, the false equivalency. They are not "good and bad" on even remotely the same level and you know it. Whatever Epic did with Unreal - which by the way benefited them immensely in the console space to which they fled from the PC - doesn't make what they are doing in any way acceptable, nor is it justifiable by a cynical imagination of gaming realpolitiks.

If they have nothing to offer to the consumer or the market, then they shouldn't be owed a place in the PC ecosystem.

 

[Astra Planeta]

And here we go again, the false equivalency. They are not "good and bad" on even remotely the same level and you know it. Whatever Epic did with Unreal - which by the way benefited them immensely in the console space to which they fled from the PC - doesn't make what they are doing in any way acceptable, nor is it justifiable by a cynical imagination of gaming realpolitiks.

If they have nothing to offer to the consumer or the market, then they shouldn't be owed a place in the PC ecosystem.

Click to shrink...

I think people gloss over a lot of nasty shit valve has done - fought refunds (EA had them first), the whole Australia thing, the whole content creator thing where they paid people a 75/25 split based completely on speculative labor. And then they reduced the percent they gave to creators.

Some of the benevolent things valve has done were out of self preservation - they only cared so much about linux gaming because they were concerned Microsoft would lock everything down in the app store. They allow keys to be sold and absorb the cost because it gets entire emerging markets onto Steam. Sure it helps consumers, but Valve is benefiting immensely too.

So far Epic has moneyhatted some games (which is anti consumer but I can see their logic - they want people on their platform), and launched a storefront that works fine , but is missing features steam has.

It just seems like Valve gets a free pass, and Epic gets too much hate - I do think they are good and bad on the same level.

 

[Hektor]

Yes, the entire reason companies improve their products is because they expect the improvements lead to more customers and thus money.
This is neither an original take, nor a good one.

Next up: Restaurants only cook for you because they expect monetarian compensation.

 

[deadman322]

I think people gloss over a lot of nasty shit valve has done - fought refunds (EA had them first), the whole Australia thing, the whole content creator thing where they paid people a 75/25 split based completely on speculative labor. And then they reduced the percent they gave to creators.

Click to shrink...

fyi ea's refund policy is only their own games and a select few 3rd party games, not everything on their store.

 

[Astra Planeta]

fyi ea's refund policy is only their own games and a select few 3rd party games, not everything on their store.

Click to shrink...

They still had it first.

 

[eonden]

I think people gloss over a lot of nasty shit valve has done - fought refunds (EA had them first), the whole Australia thing, the whole content creator thing where they paid people a 75/25 split based completely on speculative labor. And then they reduced the percent they gave to creators.

Some of the benevolent things valve has done were out of self preservation - they only cared so much about linux gaming because they were concerned Microsoft would lock everything down in the app store. They allow keys to be sold and absorb the cost because it gets entire emerging markets onto Steam. Sure it helps consumers, but Valve is benefiting immensely too.

So far Epic has moneyhatted some games (which is anti consumer but I can see their logic - they want people on their platform), and launched a storefront that works fine , but is missing features steam has.

It just seems like Valve gets a free pass, and Epic gets too much hate - I do think they are good and bad on the same level.

Click to shrink...

So, if you dont count any of the good things that Valve does because they benefit from them (by putting the customer first) and you dont count any of the bad things because Epic is just entering an entrenched market, they are equals?

In the short time that Epic has launched the store:

• They had to backtrack their refund policy which was backwards (you had to use refund tockens which you would get only 1 per year).
• They started violating GDPR policy by, by default, sharing your information with the developers you bought games from (and I would add knowingly doing it as the language they used was pretty much twisted to do that).
• Had some issues with scrapping data from your computer to get your Steam friend list (instead of you know, using the API that Steam provides).
• Promised they wouldnt do some anticonsumer stuff again after Metro Exodus only to do it again 2 weeks after making that statement.
• Launched a store without a search functionality.
• To fight against the whole concept of them having a shitty store, made publish an internal function roadmap (which as many internal roadmaps ended up being delayed in most situations).
• Has explicitly said that they believe stores as they are right now (not their but more Origin like) are in a good-enough situation for the customer and do not really need more improvement.
• Had to remove all the Ubisoft games 1 week before their big sale and only Anno is back as of right now, almost a month later.

There is also the point that Valve got a lot of pushback for the refund (and they now have the best refund policy in gaming), they got a lot of pushback for the paid mods (which ended up being removed), got pushback for the content creator (which sadly didnt have any effect), got pushback for bad customer support (improved a ton, only issue now is not having phone support), got pushback for bad moderating (greatly scaled up in the last 2 years).

Valve has also (as I have said several times in this topic) been the front leader in creating new functionalities for the stores, while all other stores just coast by without adding more extra value. Origin is the same as it was when it launched (except for Origin Vault which is a good addition!). UPlay has slowly decreased the value they add as they transition to a pure exclusive service. GOG was slow (but now seems to pick the pace with Galaxy 2.0).
We talk about Valve being slow and Steam barely improving while the quality (and added value of the store) gap continues increasing.

Seriously, I am not against EGS as a competitor, I just want it to be, you know, NOT WORSE THAN ORIGIN WAS IN 2013.

 

[Violet]

Epic being shitty in many ways doesn't mean you need to spend hours talking about how Steam is good, actually. All of these companies suck and should be sent into the sun.

 

[Deleted member 1849]

the thing is that they don't care about gaming on linux so valve doing anything in that department doesn't count.

Click to shrink...

This argument is both incredibly common and utterly infuriating.

"It doesn't effect me directly therefore it might as well not exist" - Say people who are not even aware of how important loosening Microsoft's grip on PC gaming could be in the future, something even Windows PC users should be able to see the benefit of.

 

[Demacabre]

Yeah I have no sympathy for a company going out of their way for exclusives. Also, I don't want EGS excluded from games. I just want them to stop being disingenuous shits. Compete on their services and pro-conumer stances. Good on them for offering regional pricing in some areas. Now how about the laundry list of shitty things they have done?

 

[Astra Planeta]

So, if you dont count any of the good things that Valve does because they benefit from them (by putting the customer first) and you dont count any of the bad things because Epic is just entering an entrenched market, they are equals?

In the short time that Epic has launched the store:

• They had to backtrack their refund policy which was backwards (you had to use refund tockens which you would get only 1 per year).
• They started violating GDPR policy by, by default, sharing your information with the developers you bought games from (and I would add knowingly doing it as the language they used was pretty much twisted to do that).
• Had some issues with scrapping data from your computer to get your Steam friend list (instead of you know, using the API that Steam provides).
• Promised they wouldnt do some anticonsumer stuff again after Metro Exodus only to do it again 2 weeks after making that statement.
• Launched a store without a search functionality.
• To fight against the whole concept of them having a shitty store, made publish an internal function roadmap (which as many internal roadmaps ended up being delayed in most situations).
• Has explicitly said that they believe stores as they are right now (not their but more Origin like) are in a good-enough situation for the customer and do not really need more improvement.
• Had to remove all the Ubisoft games 1 week before their big sale and only Anno is back as of right now, almost a month later.

There is also the point that Valve got a lot of pushback for the refund (and they now have the best refund policy in gaming), they got a lot of pushback for the paid mods (which ended up being removed), got pushback for the content creator (which sadly didnt have any effect), got pushback for bad customer support (improved a ton, only issue now is not having phone support), got pushback for bad moderating (greatly scaled up in the last 2 years).

Valve has also (as I have said several times in this topic) been the front leader in creating new functionalities for the stores, while all other stores just coast by without adding more extra value. Origin is the same as it was when it launched (except for Origin Vault which is a good addition!). UPlay has slowly decreased the value they add as they transition to a pure exclusive service. GOG was slow (but now seems to pick the pace with Galaxy 2.0).
We talk about Valve being slow and Steam barely improving while the quality (and added value of the store) gap continues increasing.

Click to shrink...

Valve pioneered the idea of the digital storefront - I am not arguing that. But I don't think that entitles them to have that locked down forever. But you are right - a lot of the digital stores have stagnated. EGS is doing things different with its 88/12 split, and the sale is also pretty unique - since publisher's money isn't affected, the money saved is coming from Epic's pocket. Has (steam or any storefront) ever done that? AFAIK that is an actual new thing that is good for consumers (& publishers) and people don't talk about it.

 

[Swenhir]

I think people gloss over a lot of nasty shit valve has done - fought refunds (EA had them first), the whole Australia thing, the whole content creator thing where they paid people a 75/25 split based completely on speculative labor. And then they reduced the percent they gave to creators.

Some of the benevolent things valve has done were out of self preservation - they only cared so much about linux gaming because they were concerned Microsoft would lock everything down in the app store. They allow keys to be sold and absorb the cost because it gets entire emerging markets onto Steam. Sure it helps consumers, but Valve is benefiting immensely too.

Click to shrink...

Absolutely. Valve was never criticism-immune and you do well to remember those things. The creator cut for games like TF2 and Dota 2 is egregious in my opinion. However, you unfortunately go on to add :

So far Epic has moneyhatted some games (which is anti consumer but I can see their logic - they want people on their platform), and launched a storefront that works fine , but is missing features steam has.

It just seems like Valve gets a free pass, and Epic gets too much hate - I do think they are good and bad on the same level.

Click to shrink...

You can't possibly compare the faults you enumerated regarding Valve and the astounding toxicity and magnitude of the impact exclusivity deals have on the PC ecosystem. Seeing the logic is all well and good, and we all can, but it can absolutely not be substituted for a justification. Valve never, ever got a free pass. It's just the behavior of Epic is so much beyond the pale that they make Steam look perfect by comparison.

It's the magnitude of theirs faults that makes people push back so strongly against Epic. If you will remember the paid mods debacle, you will know it was one hell of a clusterfuck and neither Bethesda nor Valve ever got close to paid mod again. Unfortunately, Epic does not seem to have the wisdom to be so reasonable.

Nobody here is under any illusion about the benevolence of any company, but Epic's short history of abuse is damning.

 

[LewieP]

Valve pioneered the idea of the digital storefront - I am not arguing that. But I don't think that entitles them to have that locked down forever. But you are right - a lot of the digital stores have stagnated. EGS is doing things different with its 88/12 split, and the sale is also pretty unique - since publisher's money isn't affected, the money saved is coming from Epic's pocket. Has (steam or any storefront) ever done that? AFAIK that is an actual new thing that is good for consumers (& publishers) and people don't talk about it.

Click to shrink...

Yes Valve have done exactly this in the past, and didn't severely bungle the execution, either.

 

[Deleted member 10629]

Valve pioneered the idea of the digital storefront - I am not arguing that. But I don't think that entitles them to have that locked down forever. But you are right - a lot of the digital stores have stagnated. EGS is doing things different with its 88/12 split, and the sale is also pretty unique - since publisher's money isn't affected, the money saved is coming from Epic's pocket. Has (steam or any storefront) ever done that? AFAIK that is an actual new thing that is good for consumers (& publishers) and people don't talk about it.

Click to shrink...

Yes, they have paid for discounts from their own pocket - this very year, in fact.

 

[Astra Planeta]

Yes, they have paid for discounts from their own pocket - this very year, in fact.

Click to shrink...

When was this? That is news to me

 

[Hektor]

Valve pioneered the idea of the digital storefront - I am not arguing that. But I don't think that entitles them to have that locked down forever. But you are right - a lot of the digital stores have stagnated. EGS is doing things different with its 88/12 split, and the sale is also pretty unique - since publisher's money isn't affected, the money saved is coming from Epic's pocket. Has (steam or any storefront) ever done that? AFAIK that is an actual new thing that is good for consumers (& publishers) and people don't talk about it.

Click to shrink...

Bruh, they literally lifted this idea from steam who did it a few months before

 

[eonden]

Valve pioneered the idea of the digital storefront - I am not arguing that. But I don't think that entitles them to have that locked down forever. But you are right - a lot of the digital stores have stagnated. EGS is doing things different with its 88/12 split, and the sale is also pretty unique - since publisher's money isn't affected, the money saved is coming from Epic's pocket. Has (steam or any storefront) ever done that? AFAIK that is an actual new thing that is good for consumers (& publishers) and people don't talk about it.

Click to shrink...

Yes, they have done something like that before. Precisely in the previous sale.

They also didnt do it in an idiotic way where the value of the discount could be totally broken in some regions, causing publishers to remove their games from sale. (And without losing money with each sale, which means the system is sustainable instead of being a really expensive PR campaign)

 

[Astra Planeta]

Yes, they have done something like that before. Precisely in the previous sale.

They also didnt do it in an idiotic way where the value of the discount could be totally broken in some regions, causing publishers to remove their games from sale. (And without losing money with each sale, which means the system is sustainable instead of being a really expensive PR campaign)

Click to shrink...

To start the Year of the Pig, Steam's giving everyone a discount worth $5 on 'qualifying' purchases over $30. It's a one-off and limited to one cart purchase per account. Check here for more details on the discount.

That sounds like its $5, once time per account? That isnt really the same thing is it?

 

[Stone Ocean]

When was this? That is news to me

Click to shrink...

Like 4 months ago in the Lunar Year sale.

To start the Year of the Pig, Steam's giving everyone a discount worth $5 on 'qualifying' purchases over $30. It's a one-off and limited to one cart purchase per account. Check here for more details on the discount.

That sounds like its $5, once time per account? That isnt really the same thing is it?

Click to shrink...

It was possible to get another $5 discount during the sale.