-
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.
Sweeney on the “We don’t want to do that ever again” statement RE: Metro-style deals. "Epic is open to continuing to sign funding/exclusivity deals"
- Thread starter Deleted member 1849
- Start date
It was pretty obvious the first time around that what was meant there was they didn't want to move a game off a platform people had already bought it on, but some people chose to assign it a different meaning to suit their stance on Epic as a whole.
To be fair the original statement wasn't from him.
But considering the "We" in both of the statements, we can consider the entire Epic team to just be rotten.
Lol.
What a great message to send people. "Hey! What we said last month? Fuck that! It's a new month!"
What a great message to send people. "Hey! What we said last month? Fuck that! It's a new month!"
Yeah, that's what i understood.
Being available for pre-order and taken from the last minute probably isn't a smart investment of their resources.
But they'll continue to do these deals until at least the end of the year
OP
OP
I'm not denying he is a hypocrite, because he has shown himself to be one on multiple occassions, but the original comment wasn't from him. It was Steve Allison.
No, you can still buy it on steam up until launch day, so if you want it there you can still get it.
Yes, I had this conversation with Tim Sweeney himself last week and posted about it in another thread. I don't like what he's saying, but I think what he means is that they're trying to avoid situations where a game is already announced for Steam and is pulled off because of an EGS agreement. It still sucks, but it's less shitty in the end.
I did try and ask if it was Epic themselves that were reaching out to try and make these deals, or publishers reaching out but he did not reply.
I did try and ask if it was Epic themselves that were reaching out to try and make these deals, or publishers reaching out but he did not reply.
It was from a representative from Epic. If they want to explicitly say that he misspoke, then fine, but they seem to want to have it both ways.
Similar to how they said Epic store will have games cheaper than rival stores, but then they are in fact charging more for many games.
Epic, Take Two, Devolver... just in case you needed a reminder that money rules the world and there's nothing you can do about it.
I don't think this statement really holds up to much scrutiny.
Clearly, they originally made the statement about not wanting to do it again because many consumers felt burned by it. But now he has plausible deniability re: who instigated it, and he can say he didn't want to deny a publisher's wishes based on previous plans.
The issue, though, is that the problem remains the same for the group that complained about it in the first place: consumers. Saying a publisher approached them about it first changes nothing for them. That spurned feeling is what they wanted to avoid in the future, no?
Clearly, they originally made the statement about not wanting to do it again because many consumers felt burned by it. But now he has plausible deniability re: who instigated it, and he can say he didn't want to deny a publisher's wishes based on previous plans.
The issue, though, is that the problem remains the same for the group that complained about it in the first place: consumers. Saying a publisher approached them about it first changes nothing for them. That spurned feeling is what they wanted to avoid in the future, no?
I'm not really mad at Epic about this at all. They weren't the ones who put up steam stores or made promises to their (future) customers about where to get the game - the developers and publishers did. When Epic comes a-knocking all they have to do is say:
"No thanks, we told our fans x, now we will do x. For our next game we'll talk"
That's it. Instead they're choosing to take a deal they don't actually need to take and now Epic is the bad guy? Nah. There's plenty to dislike about the Epic store but this I'm not really bent out of shape about.
"No thanks, we told our fans x, now we will do x. For our next game we'll talk"
That's it. Instead they're choosing to take a deal they don't actually need to take and now Epic is the bad guy? Nah. There's plenty to dislike about the Epic store but this I'm not really bent out of shape about.
The problem stems from the fact that they previously took responsibility and now they're shirking it. As Lewie said above they can't have it both ways.
If they don't want something to happen, they have the power to stop it from happening.
.
This is what I came to post. Great post! Devs/Pubs are not being forced to take Epics money...
User warned: inflammatory comparison
LOL.
"Gun manufactures don't kill people. People kill people!
Leave gun-makers out of it!"
this is how hurt gamers are over this. comparing launcher exclusivity to ACTUAL MURDER
we really have done it yall
At some point an Epic junior staffer is going to hand Sweeney a phone with dummy twitter account.........
You understand the difference... stop mischaracterizing.
You understand the difference... stop mischaracterizing.
That statement was so obviously in reference pulling a game off of another platform after preorders and such were already open there and not all exclusivity deals. Are the people mad about this purposely being this dense?
And Epic is not forced to offer it either, especially when they know consumers were already expecting (and sometimes even preordering it) on another platform. It goes both ways.
The way they spoke before made it seem like they realized it wasn't a good look for either party, regardless of who instigated the deal. Now, it seems like Sweeney is of the mindset that consumers feeling spurned is fine, as long as the publisher is cool with it too.
I tend to think consumers who didn't like it before won't see a notable difference between the two scenarios, but maybe I'm wrong.
OP
OP
For large publishers, half of what you say is true.
However, that doesn't stop the fact that it is Epic's strategy to be offering these deals in the first place. They are both at fault.
Strictly speaking of culpability, it 100% is.
Please don't confuse analogies with literalism.
"Blame the fact that money transactions can happen between two large companies behind closed doors that is anti-consumer and not the companies themselves.
They are just taking advantage of a system that is there. The companies are blameless. Why are we so quick to blame them? One likes money upfront. The other likes control.
Hate the system and not the players. Consumers are entitled. Shut up and download our free launcher."
/s
They are just taking advantage of a system that is there. The companies are blameless. Why are we so quick to blame them? One likes money upfront. The other likes control.
Hate the system and not the players. Consumers are entitled. Shut up and download our free launcher."
/s
Last edited:
Its a terrible analogy. No one is dying over this. People just have to download a different launcher. Its ridiculous to even mention gun companies in this discussion.
AFAIK I've only seen one person in this thread make this mistake. But he's directly responding to someone talking about the Metro deal (and supposedly Anno too). I doubt most people took it as him not doing exclusives anymore. The takeaway most had (I think rightly so) was that they didn't want to pull exclusives from another store that was taking preorders -- especially close to launch with almost no notice.
He seems to be walking even that concession back now.
Well it certainly seems like you are. See below. "lmao"
That's fine.
I also plan to continue ignoring all their exclusives, so we are even in that sense.
I also plan to continue ignoring all their exclusives, so we are even in that sense.
It's not just another launcher. This has been proven wrong every single fucking time. Please, stop using this dumb "argument", it's just not true.
You don't have a better product if you have to "force" (for lack of a better word) your costumers to shop there.
If people are only using the Epic Store because Epic bought exclusive games to host on their store, instead of because it's a better platform well..... that says a lot.
If people are only using the Epic Store because Epic bought exclusive games to host on their store, instead of because it's a better platform well..... that says a lot.
A bit of a disingenuous comparison. These companies absolutely have a hand in securing these deals, they're not naive about what they're doing.
User Warned: Trolling and antagonizing other members
It is literally another launcher. If you enable 2FA its perfectly fine (which everyone should be using anyways).
If you are on Linux you can't use it. If you live in China you can't use it. Regional pricing is still fucked up 2 months after being established making games extremely prohibitive in lots of countries. You aren't allowed to buy the games on sites like GMG. Are you even a PC player? This is basic stuff on Steam that users can't use because Epic decided to moneyhat developers to attract players instead of making their platform better.
In the case of Epic I can simply not use their store, and honestly they've made it easy by just being the only place to buy their games.
My style of shopping is a complete 180 from how they want me to shop.
As for the publishers, well...I'll buy what I want of theirs on my terms and on the platform I choose. More importantly my business and money will go to the developers/publishers that don't engage in this behavior first.
I mean, I own consoles too so more money for Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft. There's a lot of fish in this ocean.
Completely agree.
I only take umbrage with the post suggesting that it's all on publishers, and poor, little Epic's hands are 100% clean.
"They just waved huge bags of Fortnite Bucks in front of the publishers. They're completely innocent!"