I'm curious: why do random forum members think they know better than business folk, suits and devs when it comes to their product?
It's weird.
-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Super Meat Boy Forever release window set, will be Epic Store exclusive for a year
- Thread starter Vaelic
- Start date
I'm curious: why do random forum members think they know better than business folk, suits and devs when it comes to their product?
It's weird.
My concern is more for the user experience.
I hope Epic's push doesn't contribute to making
- No free cloud saves.
- No family sharing.
- No Linux support.
- Limited number of refunds.
- No mod hosting.
- No in-home streaming.
- No cloud screenshots.
- No user reviews.
- No discoverability features.
- No achievements.
- No leaderboards.
- No advanced controller rebinding and universal controller support.
- No developer pages.
- No community guides.
- No big picture mode.
- No VR support.
- Limited regional pricing
- No free key generation / external key sales.
Exactly.
It's amazing how the most business savvy move also always happens to be the most convenient and familiar to them too.
User Warned - Arguing in Bad Faith
Lol people want a monopoly because it's convenient for them.
Good thing Epic just invites well known devs whose other games were successes on Steam to their store then.
hmm
There have been several developers chiming against this.
From a financial POV, it is stupid. By putting the game in Steam and other storefronts they will get more sales than just one store.
Epic Store is a new store that lacks features that consumers are already used to that have Steam. And if they want to convince the people that play Fortnite to buy their game... well, good luck. One of the reasons Fortnite was a big success is because it is F2P.
Oh yes, Valve is trying to have a monopoly by allowing developers to generate free keys and then those developers sell those keys either through other stores or their own websites while Valve doesn't get a single cent for each key sold.
I'm curious as to why you think posting in threads discussing these issues disqualifies the multiple people who work in and around games from having valid opinions. There are plenty of qualified and informed people discussing this stuff here, maybe it's on you that you don't know who these people are.
Like, are you seriously calling Durante a "random forum user"? You're either uninformed or being extremely disrespectful. By all means disagree with people, but don't just disregard them because you don't know who they are.
Yeah, that's one of the reason why accepting this deal is dumb. Being the "Fortnite store" didn't bring one extra eye to any other of Epic's games and every game of theirs except Fortnite is dead, dead, dead. I really don't see why a indie would have a better fate.
Valve does not restrict games from appearing on other stores. Valve does not charge for steam keys. Valve's success is based on the success of their own properties and the value that Steam itself provides.
I wouldn't have a problem with Epic if their major incentive for consumers wasn't "We are going to strong arm our way into forcing you to use our service for the indie games you want, as opposed to the service of your choice"
So instead of actually reading the replies which explained to you why people have problems with the Epic client, you are just going to shitpost instead.
Got it.
Not really. I don't see how it's a good reason at all but we will see how it turns out. If it doesn't get the sales he wants I hope he realizes that it was a bad decision but I suspect it will just lead to those devs blaming others.
Out of the two other major games the epic launcher was housing previously Paragon and Unreal Tournament the first was a real ill fated attempt to break into a genre who had already two dominant kings LoL and DotA and Unreal while a good game is just a game out of time right now. Arena shooters are just never going to be successful on the market like they were in the early 00's and late 90's. Quake Champions has seen similar anemic numbers in its userbase and spiked when it was given away for free but then has quickly plateaued back down again.
Their move with Fortnite was one of the smartest decisions they ever made though. They established themselves early as one of the dominant players in one of the most trendy game genres right now. They have millions of people already using the launcher for Fortnite. I think if they are aggressive in expanding the feature set of the store especially with things it urgently needs (like regional pricing) it has the best shot of actually being a legit threat to the throne eventually.
This thread is so confusing to me. Taking a check for exclusivity to support another launcher isn't a big deal to me, and it's hard for me to empathize with the arguments of people up in arms. Seems like it could very well be a good business decision all around.
One thing I didn't catch on page one, does this exclusivity extend to console and mobile devices? Or PC only? Edit: nevermind, I must have clicked on another page or something. It's in the OP, which I never actually saw
Double edit: there are two threads on this and the other thread had console info, and that's what confused me. Heh. So consoles in 2019 too.
One thing I didn't catch on page one, does this exclusivity extend to console and mobile devices? Or PC only? Edit: nevermind, I must have clicked on another page or something. It's in the OP, which I never actually saw
Double edit: there are two threads on this and the other thread had console info, and that's what confused me. Heh. So consoles in 2019 too.
Last edited:
As someone that rarely get games on the release day, i'm sorta okay with this time exclusivity. I can wait one year to have these games on Steam and 2 years to have discounts, since there's no way i will touch the Epic Store without regional prices.
Can't really blame the devs trying to testing grounds in a new store with better cut and visibility, assuming they didn't just took out their game from the Steam database like happened with several ones. But i also understand the point of people boycotting them.
Tbh, i wouldn't bet any coins on the Epic Store future relevance, as it stands.
Can't really blame the devs trying to testing grounds in a new store with better cut and visibility, assuming they didn't just took out their game from the Steam database like happened with several ones. But i also understand the point of people boycotting them.
Tbh, i wouldn't bet any coins on the Epic Store future relevance, as it stands.
That quote is hilarious to me considering their game is going to be an Epic store exclusive. It's also amazing me to me that they don't realize Steam has become what they call the "one choice" on PC because the other storefronts don't even bother to provide anywhere near the same benefits to consumers. The Epic store is an absolute joke feature wise.
There's a lot of "steam begging/whining" in this thread. I wonder how long it'll take for mods to make it a bannable offence just like port begging.
It's funny how the steam fanatics are sounding exactly like console fanboys.
It honestly makes a lot of sense for indies to go to the epic store, especially because of how saturated steam is.
It's funny how the steam fanatics are sounding exactly like console fanboys.
It honestly makes a lot of sense for indies to go to the epic store, especially because of how saturated steam is.
Last edited:
When Unity 1 launched in 2005/2006, it didnt have all the features Unreal Engine 2 had at the time.
Now, it's the most ubiquitous engine around with a very engaged community.
Give it time. Competition will force them to aggressively improve. Expecting feature parity day 1 is just ridiculous.
The problem people have is that their initial efforts are going towards sabotage of other storefronts. They're not paying indies to put their games on their store. They're paying indies to not put their games on other stores.
That isn't competing, it's sabotage. And it doesn't bode well for what they might do if they get the market share to throw their weight around
I'm curious as to why it's ridiculous to expect a company like Epic (who aren't strangers to the PC gaming market) to launch a storefront that's as feature parity as possible to the main competitors storefront they are hoping to steal customers away from?
No-one was forcing Epic to launch their storefront in such a barebones manner, they could have let it cook for a few more months while they worked on those features.
So games missing industry standard features because they used early versions of Unity got a free pass?
lol you sound like someone who is like how dare anyone call out epic. They must be steam fanboys when the truth is epic doing this third party exclusive is not a good thing and when the sales are not where they need to be than I hope they look at what lead to that.
Its not especially when epic store has been around for years and the only thing they are doing is third party exclusives. It's ridiculous you and others defending epic.
I see it more as paying for more engaged users. I think a better alternative, from a PR perspective though, may have been aggressive discounts for this game and others to help drive adoption
Epic's launcher has been around for years.
Epic is floating in Fortnite money and the best they can do is moneyhat a few games, dishonestly brag about one number (88%) for a very select few developers without talking about other issues like regional pricing or key generation and off-launcher sales, without providing any sort of feature roadmap, or any guarantee that the health of the marketplace is any of their concern.
I'm not impressed and I have no faith that if Epic were to become the dominant marketplayer they would have anyone's best interests at heart.
Sounds like I'm waiting a year to play this game while the developers wonder why nobody is buying it and blaming Steam for it
A foundation built on strong arming consumers into becoming engaged? Nah, I'll take my risks with steam and other storefronts.
Steam isnt a platform though. Since it's not a platform, it's not platform warring. This is the reason why people like you can shitpost in these threads .
Not saying there aren't better ways (I suggested an alt), but I think your framing it as "sabotage" was off base, that's all.
No one expects full feature parity.
Launch parity in 2018 with their competitor's 2008 features though? That's not an unreasonable ask in any way, shape or form.
Hey if there is no need to any feature parity, Valve should just focus on competing with the time Epic abandoned the PC market due to 'Piracy'.
People love to bring up how Steam wasn't amazing earlier in its life.
It doesn't result in a better consumer experience at all right now. I don't think anybody made that point.
If this results in a really bad consumer experience, it won't work out long term. It could be good long term though.
People having to use multiple programs vs using a single platform is a trade off that's made all the time outside of video games. It's annoying, but it usually drives progress.
The question is how far does it need to go to "get there" for most people. I don't use Origin, so I can't comment on the state of their store. But I'll say I don't 95% of Steam's features. It's just a store for me. And if people like me make up 80% of PC gamers, then that means different launchers may serve different people in different ways without investing heavily to meet the needs of long-tail consumers.
Again - I know nothing about Origin. I don't know what makes it unique aside from EA games (and maybe that's all they bank on). My point is that Steam parity isn't necessarily needed for most people, and so user acquisition is probably a higher priority in order for Epic to justify putting more budget behind its launcher in the first place.
At the very least, Epic will have to offer regional pricing if they want this thing to be treated seriously. And if they need another year or two to get all the arrangements set, it'll be far too late by then.
Indeed, and that's kind of the trick with this kind of stuff. Because if people just give Epic benefit of the doubt and rush in there now that they're doing this stuff and just start buying everything there anyway right from the get-go, then, well, what incentive does Epic have to actually improve and add those features if people just start buying stuff there regardless? That doesn't exactly give them much incentive to add those missing features and actually improve the storefront, if that's what people want.
As people say "vote with your wallet." And if people vote to support Epic regardless of those missing features and stuff from the storefront, well, don't hold your breath if they don't show up for quite some time because you're quite literally telling them that stuff doesn't matter at all, so why would they care exactly? That's something that I definitely don't get about the "it will get there" stuff myself at least, 'cause it's kind of just overlooking that whole aspect of it and just taking it for granted that those features will show up eventually, when in reality, no, those aren't to be taken for granted at all and aren't guarantees at all, especially if people just end up rushing in regardless.
Well said. Sure, I'd like devs to get a better deal, but I'll certainly not put that above me having a better experience.
Besides, many devs have explained how they still feel Steam is a better deal for them because of the features they get, so even that's questionable.
Yes indeed competition is a good thing
Honestly a lot of things have astonished me on this board but people complaining about increased competition has to be the most astonishing
