It does when they are taking it off steam for the epic store. If they weren't being given something than it would still be on steam but it's not.And? You original comment was about exclusivity.
Not being on steam doesn't make it exclusive to Epic store, that''s like saying Ubi games were exclusive to steam until now.
No. They signed that deal because they'll keep more of the profits. There's a big difference in the splits. I can see moneyhatting a few desperate Indies but the price tag to a AAA dev expecting to sell millions just to get people to try your launcher doesn't make any financial sense. It makes less sense than moneyhatting on consoles because you aren't getting someone to buy your closed ecosystem. Even if they try your launcher, if they don't like it, they won't use your launcher again unless forced to. On the other hand, buying a console for a 3rd party exclusive means other purchases will likely be made through that ecosystem.
Moneyhatting big devs isn't a sustainable business model for launchers. It'll never pay itself back. Whatever Epic could afford to pay would be peanuts compared to overall sales profits. It's the margins that matter. Likely Ubisoft is making a play to get Steam to offer more competitive margins.
Ffs you have Satisfactory's dev telling us that Epic paid, and you're still telling us there's no moneyhatting ?
Valve will bring Blizzard games to Steam. Believe!
Sorry fam, you're definitely the one coming off as clueless and antagonistic laughing at people with genuine issues with this. Regional pricing is a big fucking deal for people as is the ability to get refunds.All of your posts in this thread make you come off as a bit of a loon mate. You've not posted anything to convince me that Ubisoft are being paid by Epic to put The Division 2 on the Epic Store. Until news comes out that such a thing happened, maybe cool it with the conspiracy theories yeah? A subsidiary of THQ Nordic is not the same as one of the largest publishers in the industry.
No. They signed that deal because they'll keep more of the profits. There's a big difference in the splits. I can see moneyhatting a few desperate Indies but the price tag to a AAA dev expecting to sell millions just to get people to try your launcher doesn't make any financial sense. It makes less sense than moneyhatting on consoles because you aren't getting someone to buy your closed ecosystem. Even if they try your launcher, if they don't like it, they won't use your launcher again unless forced to. On the other hand, buying a console for a 3rd party exclusive means other purchases will likely be made through that ecosystem.
Moneyhatting big devs isn't a sustainable business model for launchers. It'll never pay itself back. Whatever Epic could afford to pay would be peanuts compared to overall sales profits. It's the margins that matter. Likely Ubisoft is making a play to get Steam to offer more competitive margins.
there's no 30% cut for big publishers, but nice try
Shitty regional pricing makes.it.more expensive
Shitty 2 refunds a year policy.
No Linux
No offline mode
Fuck that shit.
Let's not get too hasty here jeez.
Epic most be playing hardball by securing these newer releases then. Really curious how this turns out then.
No, it doesn't. The entire point of the openess of PC gaming is choice, this decision is a direct opposite to that.At the end of the day you'll still be using Uplay so why all the complaining?
The no Steam no buy BS has to end guys once and for all.
At the end of the day you'll still be using Uplay so why all the complaining?
The no Steam no buy BS has to end guys once and for all.
At the end of the day you'll still be using Uplay so why all the complaining?
The no Steam no buy BS has to end guys once and for all.
At the end of the day you'll still be using Uplay so why all the complaining?
The no Steam no buy BS has to end guys once and for all.
What? I called someone out for whataboutism and then responded to their points anyway.
Yeah, it makes no sense on Ubi's part. The cut via UPlay for them is zero, which is better than the cut Epic takes. Also, seems like they are going out of their way to advertise this being on Epic's launcher rather than their own.Yeah. The new rules were specifically designed to prevent this exact circumstance.
I can at least understand indies selling out to Epic. But this is stupid and senseless.
Again, caring about those features is fine. Preferring the game to come to the client of your preference is fine.
Saying you won't buy it if it doesn't come to that client implies the features matter more than the game.
It's like owning an XBox One and a PS4 and refusing to buy Spiderman despite really wanting to play it because you have most achievements on XBox One and you prefer the dashboard there.
Just buy it from Uplay and Ubisoft gets 100% of the transaction. You will be using Uplay anyways.I don't care about which storefront it's on, I'm not skipping on that game. Hopefully the Epic store is solid by the time the game launches.
Why does it need competition when it's best in class in basically every aspect by a far margin compared to everyone else? Its feature set isn't even close to being matched by anyone else. All this does is force fragmentation, which hurts the consumer.
I don't mind to be honest. A steam competitor was bound to happen
My bad.What? I called out for whataboutism and then responded to their points anyway.
Explain why.
I wait for that. Explain me what needs to be done and how does moneyhatting games will make things better.
Because I have something to reply to that bullshit:
they even give you 20% off full priceJust buy it from Uplay and Ubisoft gets 100% of the transaction. You will be using Uplay anyways.
lol, do you actually believe the bolded? Ubisoft are more business-savvy than EA. They understand the benefits of reaching a market outside their own ecosystem. Epic offers a more bespoke selection that allows their offerings to stand out among the crowd. Ubi clearly understands the benefits and downsides to making the switch, and has determined that it's going to be a worthwhile risk. Reducing this down to a moneyhat is ignoring that Ubisoft is the most forward-looking of all the AAA's and likely has a grasp of the situation.Lol @ thinking that a publisher that has accepted money hats from platform holders will miracously not take a money hat from another publisher that is currently making just as much money as said platform holder.
Like, I'm not sure you are aware, but there's this thing called Uplay where Ubisoft gets 100% Of the money. Surely if the cut was the issue it would be Uplay exclusive.
They already did, and increased the cut.Games not coming to Steam means Valve may finally take a hard look at their revenue sharing with developers.
That's why we're saying competition is good.
Suuuureeee... Call me when Epic Store or any other launcher has the same, or many of the features, Steam has.Steam may have the best feature set from a consumer stand point, but clearly there is enough money on the line from a Publisher perspective for them to start experimenting with other models compared to Steam. There will be some chaos in the short term as it sorts itself out. Steam is becoming a victim of their own success now that PC has grown large enough for major players to make moves and grow their market share. It will take time but will ultimately move back toward consumer friendliness once the war for storefront revenue share is settled.
Games not coming to Steam means Valve may finally take a hard look at their revenue sharing with developers.
That's why we're saying competition is good.
a moneyhatting publisher that's removing purchase options isn't competitionI don't mind to be honest. A steam competitor was bound to happen
Seems to be getting a lot of games as of late though. Wouldn't be surprised if more big games comes exclusively to it. Fortnite has done wonders to Epic GamesEpic's store at its current state in no way "competes" with Steam in terms of feature set.