Slightly off-topic but what is this alluding to? Do we have special rules regarding Medium?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
DARQ Dev: Why I turned down exclusivity deal from the Epic Store
- Thread starter Axisofweevils
- Start date
- Status
Slightly off-topic but what is this alluding to? Do we have special rules regarding Medium?
Not really. Email is a pretty standard first point of contact. They also stated the game was releasing soon so it makes sense they'd just want to cut to the chase.
Plus, the "un-corporate" approach may be much more approachable to some people.
First point of contact, exactly. They shouldn't be going into ANY specifics via email. It's too easy for people to say no.
It's not about being corporate or not. You can still dress in your flannel shirt and conduct business correctly, getting the best results for your company.
It doesn't look like they're really getting into specifics. They're just saying Exclusivity and compensation based on projected sales. Those aren't really hard numbers.
As the person who was there, that was literally not it. They never said anything like "Just add new content to the game and we'll let it on the Switch." They just didn't view it as priority due to our tiny company and the game not being super popular on existing platforms. In the end, we had to get an already approved Switch publisher to publish the game and then they had no problem with the game coming out.
I really didn't need to see this lol. Even worse I can imagine the nods of approval from plenty of other forum-goers reading that.
People are really showing their whole entire ass over this EGS stuff.
It's so, so gross and so, so predictable.
every developer who took an exclusivity deal: "hey this industry is volatile and they're just doing what's best for them, don't you want indie devs to survive and make more games?"
one guy puts out a statement on reddit about why he's not taking a deal: "he's fanning the flames of controversy and inciting harassment for his own personal benefit, how cynical and self-serving."
one guy puts out a statement on reddit about why he's not taking a deal: "he's fanning the flames of controversy and inciting harassment for his own personal benefit, how cynical and self-serving."
Oh wow, shining a light on Epic's dealings with developers. What a scummy, lowlife move!
/s
Epic literally used the Ooblets developer's harassment as an opportunity to advertise the Epic Games Store's business goals. Where was he then?
EDIT: Before someone says this is conspiratorial, I'm referring to this quote from their statement on the harassment:
The game looks great but for $20 and less than 2 hours to complete is a hard buy. I think $15 would have been a good sweet spot.
The sad thing is that unless this game is a surprise blockbuster hit, none of the people who are so vocal about the EGS will actually buy it, and will have completely forgotten about this by the time the devs next game comes out, so this weird idea of winning or earning the 'loyalty' of the fan base won't mean shit.
Yeah i agree on that. Curious if its go up on humble and other key sellers soon to get a tempting discount on jt.
As if wanting your game to be successful--in addition to calling out shitty practices--is a crime. The guy should have just stealth released it on Steam and kept fucking quiet, I guess.
I mean... this is totally anecdotal but I have no interest in the game - It's literally the exact opposite of games I generally like as I dislike both horror and puzzle games but I still bought the game to support the dev. I know there's a couple of others in the thread that have bought it just to support the dev as well and I'm sure there are others outside of ERA who will do the same. It almost certainly won't be enough to make up for the guarantee that Epic's offer would have bought but I hope it gets close enough to show that not taking Epic's deal isn't completely shooting yourself in the foot and that there are other valid routes. At least that's my hope anyway, voting with my wallet and expressing my opinion is all I can do.
First of all:
You don't need to want to buy a game to care or not if it's EGS exclusive. Because things are the way they are, sometimes it has an impact to greater effect than just one game.
I'm definitely against EGS exclusives. Would I have bought all of those games ? Certainly not. Maybe half a dozen would've been a day one purchase. A dozen would've been a day one purchase depending on other stuff. Some would've been years late. But then again, I'm not blaming smaller devs for taking a deal. Props to them for doing so and getting money, they'll just have to accept that I'm not going to buy their game for now.
But there's also support to a policy as a whole. And I don't see from a good eye Epic's policy and wishes for the platform. Feature sets are a thing. And while not only Epic is lagging super behind here, to the point they have yet to be on 2009 levels, there's also stuff they wont support by design, on purpose, to push for a business model. One in which you're basically shopping in walled gardens and in which 3rd party stores have no place. One in which user reviews and content doesnt matter. One in which curation should heavily prevail. One in which discoverability has no place but influencers should be a model to promote games.
The problem is, there are 99 problems with EGS. But some people will only retain "cloud saves and shopping carts" despite those being cited either because they're necessary to some... or because they're the most basic thing in the world.
You can give Valve a lot of shit for a lot of stuff. But yeah, that snarky comment about "hey, they give holidays to their developpers while others are struggling" was dumb as fuck. Of all the thing you could complain about, you actually decided to pick on the right one for devs.
I'm in the same boat as you, and judging by the Steam reviews you are definitely right there are others.
That sounds like him, but I missed it and don't see anything in the OP. What did he do now?
Edit: Just ran into it. This sounds pretty par for the course given his weirdly desperate love affair with EGS.
It's certainly a Rorschach test for how you feel about the thing as a whole. I'm not going to say I'm losing respect for Jason as a whole because I really like a lot of his journalism, but suffice it to say I can't go with him or Mat on these opinions.
I mean, when Jason goes on record to claim "It'd be funny if Death Stranding became an Epic Games Store exclusive if it released on PC, because the internet would explode" 2 weeks after Ooblets devs harassement, that's pretty messed up.
Read and/or quote my entire post thank you; you selective picked it way out of context.
My glee? I just think the dev made a bad call revealing business discussions and should be judged for it...
I've been out of the loop following gaming news. When did all these cynical idiots pop up?
"He turned down EGS and is telling people about it for clout"
He says he turned down EGS so it's available on more storefronts and where people who followed development preordered it. No shit he was approached and would eventually be getting asked about EGS or if they approached him. This convo could've happened on or after release as well and had the same reaction.
Some people want guaranteed money, some want as many people to play their work as possible. Neither are 'wrong' goals to aim for as a small/indie dev.
The beef here should be games not being big enough that EGS let's them on their store if they want to stay on others.
"He turned down EGS and is telling people about it for clout"
He says he turned down EGS so it's available on more storefronts and where people who followed development preordered it. No shit he was approached and would eventually be getting asked about EGS or if they approached him. This convo could've happened on or after release as well and had the same reaction.
Some people want guaranteed money, some want as many people to play their work as possible. Neither are 'wrong' goals to aim for as a small/indie dev.
The beef here should be games not being big enough that EGS let's them on their store if they want to stay on others.
User Banned (3 days): hostility toward other users
I like Schreier and his brand of journalism, I think his work is invaluable in the industry but I saw him in front of a camera a couple of times, in interviews etc, he seems like a manchild and a kind of person who would dunk on the DARQ devs.
It was early on in this thread whre the motives of this developer were being question by the usual "concerned" fence sitters and pro egs posters. Plenty of tut tutting and concern at the dev taking a screenshot of an unsolicited non-confidential email go back up his story. The narrative became he was doing it for the pr which slowly transformed into this disgusting "martyr" shite. I don't think most actually read what the developer wrote tbh. This should be a nothing burger.
How is Schreier's take not a 100% on the money here? We're literally looking at proof here with a 9 page thread on an indie game that wouldn't be have been seen by many of you otherwise. There is barely any motivation to write this article other than promoting his game and I don't blame him for it because its a way to stay loyal to the fans and gain new ones but come on, how naive are you guys?
EDIT: Also immediately jumping down Schreier's throat just looks childish.
EDIT: Also immediately jumping down Schreier's throat just looks childish.
Schreier taking the pro-EGS stance is about as predictable as it gets.
Here's your entire quote.
Don't play the out of context card. You referred to a developer not accepting Epic's deal as a "martyr trick".
That's the second time I've seen this term used to attack the developer for keeping their word instead of giving in to EGS.
- Status