-
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.
Epic declines to sell SkateBIRD on the EGS because the developers wont ditch Steam [update: see threadmark for dev comment]
- Thread starter Tygre
- Start date
1. They are spending lots of money to move already announced games in my preferred platform away from it.
2. They are cheating small developers with short term plans that will ruin the confidence of the players
3. They are rejecting games in their store if devs don't allow exclusivity deals.
4. They are reducing the threshold of minimum list of features expected in a gaming platform
5. They are affecting in Kickstarter projects setting a precedent about not being available on the original platform
Their backend is so shit and are operating on the absolute minimum, it'd take them weeks just to get the Epic classics to their store.
Plus it's not useful ammo on their war against Steam so they won't bother.
Look at the 3 titles in the middle
Please tell me what I'm missing here, I can't tell what I'm supposed to be seeing.
The Goose game, Shenmue and The Sinking City as games you can be interested if you google skatebird. Dant21 offer me a reasonable explanation, but I think it happened too fast o_O it would be cute (and creepy) if Google could know somehow which games are in danger to be involved in a EGS controversy before even happen xD
OHHH that's what he meant by titles. I was staring at the video titles in the middle of the screen and I couldn't understand what I was missing.
What do you mean? QuanticDreams' games made it unto EGS just fine.
Steams failures in preventing harmful and bigoted content to appear on their platform is something that is worth going after them for, and they have been and will continue to be for as long as it remains a problem. Inversely they are also dragged for their overzealous restriction on LGBT games. This does not mean that Epic automatically is a better platform, because they let no one, but a privileged few unto their store. Also if you failed to understand the joke, QuanticDreams' games almost all feature one or more creepy rape scenarios.
Last edited:
Believe it or not, a lot of people in the world are capable of doing multiple different things in a day.
i mean, it sure is an interesting tidbit.
but throwing a storefront with infinity money that may eventually become your business partner under the bus isn't a good move for your own business.
but throwing a storefront with infinity money that may eventually become your business partner under the bus isn't a good move for your own business.
here, i'll solve the mystery for you
People care about having access to the games on the service of their choice. Nobody is happy to have their libraries fragmented. Nobody is happy they have to use so many services to get the content they watch, nobody likes being inconvenienced, be it by logging in to so many different services, not having access to the features they use (controllers, family share) or having to remember which service offered which game. It's all a giant headache, more barriers to bullshit you don't have to put up with in the console space. Playnite/GOG are bandaid fixes to the bigger problems of the market. And even then, they can't fill in all the gaps. None of this is a boon to the customers, the persons you and I are. So lets stop pretending that this is for the consumer good, when the big man himself can't find even one grounded reason as to why people should buy their games from their store outside of "we're not letting developers sell it anywhere else"
It's pretty clear to me that Epic is just after Steam (and to some extent GOG), they don't seem to mind games being on other closed but not hugely significant platforms like the Windows Store. I don't see why the outrage is so hard for people to understand, they're coming into this whole thing with the most anticompetitive methods possible... anyone who likes to see open markets should be completely against their goals of paying the creators to limit consumer purchasing choice. At every level this is anticonsumer.
In related news, Valve has been busy funding the open source XRDesktop (not tied to SteamVR, open for all headsets), Proton 4.11 including a new kernel futex feature for synchronizing memory across multi-threaded scenarios (open source, patches go back to wine and are also not restricted to Steam in any way), glibc and linux kernel updates for the futux feature (again open to all applications not Valve only) and plenty more things that are generally GOOD for the consumer instead of just paying to hurt your competitors. Nice sarcastic summary I saw earlier today that covers the last month or two of some of their development, but this goes back many years and is always done in an open and pro-consumer way.
In related news, Valve has been busy funding the open source XRDesktop (not tied to SteamVR, open for all headsets), Proton 4.11 including a new kernel futex feature for synchronizing memory across multi-threaded scenarios (open source, patches go back to wine and are also not restricted to Steam in any way), glibc and linux kernel updates for the futux feature (again open to all applications not Valve only) and plenty more things that are generally GOOD for the consumer instead of just paying to hurt your competitors. Nice sarcastic summary I saw earlier today that covers the last month or two of some of their development, but this goes back many years and is always done in an open and pro-consumer way.
But isn't it better to have exclusives and prevent competitor from having exclusives? By only allowing exclusives you're helping the competition
That is what I was thinking, it is a nice short term gain over the popularity of hating on Epic and getting your game more exposure, but if you are making more games in the long term this could bite you in the ass
i think it looks quite bland so far but maybe it improves a lot until release.
Why? Outside of limited competition the main advantage of being on epic is the fees associated but at this point if your not on the epic gamestore this early getting on it later isn't gonna be any better than going on steam/origin/gog cause it's gonna get increasingly hard to get noticed anyway
What if Tim "Delboy" Sweeney is playing 4D chess with us ? He knows we don't like this exclusive bullshit and EGS is getting a lot flack for the exclusive bullshit they are doing. Sooooo by making skatebird a defacto steam "exclusive" he can spout verbal diarrhoea on twitter crying "wah wah why you picking on poor little me and my poor little company when steam has exclusives too wah wah wah". After all it isn't the first time Tim has tried to lay the blame for Epics tactics at steams door.
Well it is either that or Tim and co couldn't manage their way out of a paper bag.
Well it is either that or Tim and co couldn't manage their way out of a paper bag.
But it won't work. Steam has never money-hatted a product to be on Steam only. They don't require or force games to be Steam only.
That is a classic deflection technique. Of course people do ot spe d the entire day ot all the time they have bitching about EGS. But posters like the one you quoted want to make that the issue instead of the BS EGS is doing.
Yes, I didn't know this game existed, but I'm getting it now. :)
Y'all just really want reasons to rage at Epic huh?
They rejected a developers application for free money when that developer is definitely releasing primarily on Steam. Wow, what a surprise.
Their indie grant program is obviously in service to stocking EGS with exclusive content. Not surprising.
Their PR about just doing it for the devs was obviously bullshit, we've known that for months.
At some point you'd think people would just get the point of what EGS is doing here and move on with their lives. When they do something actually relevant then the rage might be justified, but this is just a bitch-fest fueled by already known issues with EGS and probably more by their lack of bandwidth than their market strategy/policy.
Good on the dev using the Epic hate boner to rack up extra sales though, get that paper.
They rejected a developers application for free money when that developer is definitely releasing primarily on Steam. Wow, what a surprise.
Their indie grant program is obviously in service to stocking EGS with exclusive content. Not surprising.
Their PR about just doing it for the devs was obviously bullshit, we've known that for months.
At some point you'd think people would just get the point of what EGS is doing here and move on with their lives. When they do something actually relevant then the rage might be justified, but this is just a bitch-fest fueled by already known issues with EGS and probably more by their lack of bandwidth than their market strategy/policy.
Good on the dev using the Epic hate boner to rack up extra sales though, get that paper.
It's not equivalent though. With console exclusives you need to buy a new piece of hardware. You might not have the room for it or the money.
Nothing is stopping a pc user from getting a game on Epic's store apart from brand loyalty and the aversion to have a second launcher.
I understand the point of a store and they are well within their rights not to sell items they do not wish. The issue is quite different. The issue is the money-hatting field exclusives that prevent or delay releases on other storefronts and removing other games that were once on other storefronts for preorder. Also removing games from platforms/storefronts that were kickstarted with those in mind. Has nothing to do with not wanting a particular game on theirs.
quoting myself from a similar comparison with console exclusivity :
"The aversion to have a second launcher" is quite the simplification of an issue that there's more to.
Using the brand loyalty term is also a sign of you perhaps not completely understanding the situation fully.
the thing is Tim Sweeney keeps saying how he is doing this for the industry and especially for indie devs who are suffering under the 30% cut that valve takes on steam
For real, like if GOG, itch.io and other stores/platforms doesn't exits lmao
I did not claim they were comparing Sweeney to Hitler at all. What? I just think "sick fucks" is reserved for actual sick fucks, not people like Sweeney. He's an asshole no doubt, but language matters and "sick fucks" doesn't apply here and is indeed a hyperbolic thing to say. That's all I said.
Maybe don't read too much into things and tell others what they actually meant next time lol.
It's not just indie devs either, even Microsoft got denied unless they'd drop Steam. (Halo Master Chief Collection and Gears 5)
https://www.pcgamer.com/xboxs-phil-spencer-on-game-pass-steam-and-the-epic-games-store/
https://www.pcgamer.com/xboxs-phil-spencer-on-game-pass-steam-and-the-epic-games-store/
Imagine calling yourself a sage, thinking you are wise and that you know your stuff so you gotta make a post and end with nonsense like this.
It seems like we both get up for work at the same time and both dislike putting words in people's mouths.
Problem is I never did that. I never said they compared Sweeney to Hitler, I said "sick fucks" isn't applicable to Tim Sweeney and brought examples where it actually is.
While you act like I accused the other poster of comparing Sweeney to Hitler, which is the very definition of putting words in people's mouths.
If you can't see the difference I don't know what to say, have a nice work day.
Epic has put up a "we're doing this for the struggling developers" PR facade. This situation is an example of them not actually caring much for developers if they can't use them as a weapon against Valve.
Just my opinion, but she's totally fine to say her game didn't make it into the store. She honestly doesn't seem to fussed with it and even said in her tweet that things could change after launch. The game not making it into the store isn't 'throwing your business partner under the bus', it's simply stating a fact and I highly doubt Epic would hold it against them, they're a business and deal in money, not hurt feelings.
Anyways, combing through Tim's recent tweets, these seem to suggest that they are purposely limiting the amount of games they're accepting because of infrastructure not being in place yet and IIRC a while back he said that they're choosy about titles because they need to be set-up manually so deals get priority.
Epic not being interested makes me 1,000 times more interested in this title. Your loss Tim, it looks like a fun game but I guess that's not the most important factor when deciding which games to put up on your storefront.
The cost of the platform providing access to the game doesn't change the fact that if the game is restricted to single platform for the purpose of boosting the desirability of that platform, it's an exclusive game.
The contention people have with EGS is that it was initially billed as a platform to open up PC digital gaming from the near-monopoly of Steam, with lower prices for consumers and better terms for developers. What we're fast approaching instead are competing walled-garden platforms, which does nothing to improve competition for consumers.
Yeah, this is all I see as well. I assume it's because I don't follow interviews and what TS has said or official statements from EGS, but if EGS spends money to keep a game off Steam I 100% get it and it has zero effect on me since I don't have strange brand loyalty to Steam.
HOWEVER, it appears people in other parts of the world are forced to spend more money in their region so it's actually a big deal if they can't get it on Steam with the prices they are used to paying. That's 100% a good enough reason for me to be like, yeah, that sucks. I'd be upset too.
So carry on.
