Pfft, when has gamers complaining ever changed anything?
What's that supposed to mean?
Agreed. My problem isn't really the exclusivity part (EA pioneered this years ago), but forcing people to use a VASTLY inferior product that's missing extremely basic features (like wishlists and voice chat) annoys the shit out of me. They find time to keep spending money on shit like new outfits in Fortnite and moneyhatting developers, but they're still 6-12 months out for basic fucking features. Why can't devs still release their stuff on Steam with a 30% markup compared to the EGS? That way people that want it cheap can still get it from the EGS and the people that want it on Steam will pay 30% more, but still get basic stuff like wishlists and voice chat.
I don't know when you got your information, but maybe it's not current. The government circa 2015-2016 (when Tencent was making major global acquisitions) is very different from how it is now.
Replying to y'all together because the answer is related.
For me EGS games cost up to about 30% more.
Then educate yourself. A lot of great arguments as to why EGS is shit has been put forth numerous times in the numerous EGS threads on this very site.
Ironic that your profile picture is of one of America's greatest writers, but you can't read any of the million threads full of posts that will answer your question for you and have to have people spoonfeed you this information
You: "I don't give a shit about other's issues or opinions"
"B-b-but I'd never use these features!! Why are you so mad about them!! I DONT NEED THEM SO NEITHER DO YOU!".
The million dollar question. If only someone knew... ;)
There's a lot of factors in that case (it was going to be the only UE4 game on Vita, a handheld that was niche at best, the Switch had since launched and basically killed the Vita stone dead) whereby I don't think it's a great comparison. But yeah, I did see a bunch of outrage from Vita loyalists (mainly on Twitter), so I do think you're wrong here.
I don't use twitter so I'm not sure how it went there. All my impression is strictly here on era of which I based my response and quotes in my last reply. As one person in that thread put it. Schadenfreude is rampant here as long is it doesn't affect them personally.
No context is being lost. You said the Epic Store does not impact you as much as it does others. That's all I quoted, and you reaffirm this in the above post. That's fine. Cool. Other people are telling you why it impacts them more than it does you, and you do not care. Again, sure, I guess, you aren't required to give a shit about anyone else's problems. I just don't know why you're still here if you aren't interested in having a conversation, or why you expect others to care about your opinions when you disregard theirs. You're fine with the feature set the EGS offers. Cool. We get it.
even if there wasn't (there was) was it because they shifted development resources and made a decision that it might not be worth it?
By not promising it to be on a specific store/platform (linux)? It's not rocket science.
Fortnite is (for all intents and purposes) a free to play game. People who play free to play games tend not to buy videogames.
They probably tell devs they have 100m users on their platform, but probably hide the fact that Mr. Steamspy has stated that people who play F2P games rarely pay for games.
What lol, this is not true at all.
yeah but is it? the Wii u audience was nothing, will be even less. the PC isn't going anywhere. and these people have long memories. gfwl is still a punchline to this day. It seems like a really bad bet to me.
https://galyonk.in/your-target-audience-doesn-t-exist-999b78aa77ae
You don't think it's bad business to take someones money promising that it will come to the platform of their choice only to later say they can have it a year or more after release.
If youre accusing epic of exploitation then feel free to put every single developer who does the same thing with f2p games and sell skins. Im assuming this developer needed more financial backing to help pay their employees and get the game out and epic decided to help. so where was valve? Can they not do the same thing for crowd funded games?
It seems like it was the average publisher who did this, Annapurna. Early crowd-investors in the game already got back 220% of their investment, and it's likely it was the publisher who signed with Epic.
