there i fixed it for youWill be fun revisiting these threads in 1 or 2 years when gfwl is fucking huge and nobody cares anymore.
there i fixed it for youWill be fun revisiting these threads in 1 or 2 years when gfwl is fucking huge and nobody cares anymore.
Will be fun revisiting these threads in 1 or 2 years when EGS is fucking huge and nobody cares anymore.
If that is the case then it would be cause for sadness.Will be fun revisiting these threads in 1 or 2 years when EGS is fucking huge and nobody cares anymore.
Yeah and they make videogames.EA is a successful company that regularly rates high in the most disliked corporate entities.
Company does things that companies who want to be competitive do and I don't like it...
Like seriously, what company do you expect doesn't want to spread their influence?
That isn't a rating of the harm or benefit to the planet. It is a reflection of their unpopularity within the markets in which they operate. Note that their position in those lists isn't really the issue, it is more that that they're just plain disliked.Yeah and they make videogames.
Videogames.
Its not like they are poluting the planet or something.
Will be fun revisiting these threads in 1 or 2 years when EGS is fucking huge and nobody cares anymore.
To be fair, it's not just Epic screwing up PC gaming with their store, it's literally all of the major publishers. EA, Activision/Blizzard, Bethesda, and Ubisoft all have their own download managers and launchers, each with their own account system and variable levels of broken interoperability with Steam.
I'm a self-declared progressive that has amassed a collection of over 2500+ games supporting a company that also shamelessly sells toxic shit called "FEMINAZI: The Triggering". Corporate fuckery yields great rewards indeed. We are all hypocrites to some extent because nothing we ever engage with will fully align with our preferences. Companies will never be your friends and you make a big mistake "liking" any one of them at all. Don't put corporations on a pedestal - them be called Valve nor Epic. Be wary of them all equally.If that is the case then it would be cause for sadness.
It essentially means corporate fuckery yields great rewards. It also doesn't meant it will be liked, EA is a successful company that regularly rates high in the most disliked companies in the world.
The argument against exclusivity is the driving force behind anti-EGS sentiment.What to point out the posts that give you this impression? Because this feels like a pretty horseshit statement.
All of this is bullshit if you don't at least suspect PC Gamer having some sort of positive bias towards Epic Games.To be clear: you are doubling down on the statement that PC Gamer is giving Epic positive coverage as a direct result of Epic's sponsorship of the E3 PC Gaming Show 2019? Do you have any evidence to back up your outlandish claim?
Since you seem to have no concept of journalism code of ethics, I would encourage your attention to be directed to the Society of Profession Journalists (SPJ) Code of Ethics: https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp
Notably, there is a section titled "Act Independently":
These are standard code of ethics that every institution follows, including PC Gamer. There is no evidence to suggest that PC Gamer has violated their responsibility to act independently. Were you to have evidence, I am positive it would be major news to virtually every major gaming news outlet, and they would be eager to report on it. Obviously, you don't have that evidence.
You are comparing not being allowed to push conspiracy theories to a thought-crime. I hope you realize how absurd this leap in logic is. ResetEra has a moderation standard that they behold themselves to in order to ensure healthy discussion. For example, bigotry is banned from this forum. That does not mean that not allowing someone to post bigoted statements is a thought crime. You're still free to have bigoted thoughts, but they aren't welcome nor accepted here.
What you have done is suggest that PC Gamer's coverage is pro-biased because they are receiving funding from Epic for that coverage which is incredibly inflammatory. This is not the same as saying that PC Gamer has a pro-Epic PoV or bias in its coverage. I hope you can see and understand the difference.
Epic games is everywhere now. Steam really needs to do something before this gets out of hand..
I don't think it's kosher for a media outlet to be partnering with a major gaming brand without putting up big honkin' disclaimers in their articles that invoke said brand or its competitors. Surely this isn't a controversial position to take or of a vilifying nature?
I'll explain the reference: yesterday displayed a message that read "The Epic Games Store Megasale is happening right now! Sign up for 2FA to get $10 to spend in the store.". I can't tell if handing out store credit for functionally nothing is supreme confidence or supreme desperation.I've played games and shopped from storefronts that offered material rewards for enabling MFA and I can't see evidence of such behavior stunting the growth of the industry. If free games are hobbling GOG or Humble I'd be curious about the evidence to support that.
It's buried in the
I'd consider that more in the realm of negligence. Which beats fuckery.I'm a self-declared progressive that has amassed a collection of over 2500+ games supporting a company that also shamelessly sells toxic shit called "FEMINAZI: The Triggering". Corporate fuckery yields great rewards indeed. We are all hypocrites to some extent because nothing we ever engage with will fully align with our preferences. Companies will never be your friends and you make a big mistake "liking" any one of them at all. Don't put corporations on a pedestal - them be called Valve nor Epic. Be wary of them all equally.
At the very least, Yakuza 3-6 plus Judgement, then presumably the Taxman remasters of Sonic 1 and 2 and possibly even Colors and Unleashed. That's just the ones I'm hoping for, anyway.
these types of incentives still feel completely irrelevant to overall market growth though. Companies should do things like this because it's very very hard to convince customers to secure their access to their games without doing so. A $10 coupon doesn't throw a scent of desperation of arrogance to me. Just a deal that helps a customer put their account into an indisputably more secure state. Which is why I brought up the WoW/steamguard examples and why I can probably find other similar deals from companies who don't get called desperate for doing so.I'll explain the reference: yesterday displayed a message that read "The Epic Games Store Megasale is happening right now! Sign up for 2FA to get $10 to spend in the store.". I can't tell if handing out store credit for functionally nothing is supreme confidence or supreme desperation.
PCGamer confirmed SEGA denied an invitation because the "timing wasn't right"
Scroll up the thread.
It's buried in thehowling pit of wounded fanboyscomment section but their community rep had this to say:
I'm assuming 'minimal involvement' means we won't see new ports announced by Sega at the show.
The backlash won't die out. People who game on PC let Microsoft have it when it came to Games for Windows Live (and the Windows Store upon release).That's what I think. Wait out the backlash. Normalize their bullshit. Accept begrudgingly. Hope their PR takes root and is perceived as true.
It's fine to have an own launcher for your own games. Nobody is complaining that Fortnite is exclusive to the EGS.
I've never seen any store hand out store credit without expecting the end user to buy something first. Given that it's been advertised in the Fortnite client, that's potentially millions of dollars that Epic's going to have to pay out to other devs (assuming you can't buy V-bucks with the credit). For comparison, last year Valve had a sale whereby you got a $5 discount on your first purchase of $50 or more. Basic maths would reveal that Valve could afford the discount out of their own cut (and they did confirm to developers that they would be wholly funding the promotion out of the store's cut).these types of incentives still feel completely irrelevant to overall market growth though. Companies should do things like this because it's very very hard to convince customers to secure their access to their games without doing so. A $10 coupon doesn't throw a scent of desperation of arrogance to me. Just a deal that helps a customer put their account into an indisputably more secure state. Which is why I brought up the WoW/steamguard examples and why I can probably find other similar deals from companies who don't get called desperate for doing so.
The same can be said of Microsoft being close to the NSA as well.
I'm surprised it took them this long to start accusing people of being gamergaters. I figured it would happen not long after they likened being anti-Tencent with being racist towards China.
That was one of the more prominent reasons nobody liked the mandatory Kinect in the initial Xbox One package. Of course, we now live in a world where people actively buy Amazon Echos and Google Home smart-speakers, without concern about who could be potentially listening to the voice recordings, but that's a different discussion.I get what you're saying but it's rarely if ever brought up in threads about Microsoft's games or hardware
You said:
This is a blanket statement that could be applied far beyond the Epic Games Store to all sorts of other topics. "A publication" and "one side of a debate" are broad terms that can apply to a host of circumstances, which is why I raised the WaPo/NYT and the anti-vax movement as a counterexample to your statement. If you intended it for only the Epic Games Store, a simple way to say this is: "It is unethical to only cover one side of the Epic Games Store." Your blanket statement is inaccurate because there are plenty of counter examples in the world where it is ethical.
I mean yes. Obviously. Coupons are meant to incentivize purchases and facilitate recurring revenue from a customer who has cleared the first giant hurdle of all e-commerce, entering a credit card. Every form of marketing from base discounts to virtual tchotchke to affiliate programs very obviously costs money, an equation clearly factored into every steam coupon clogging up my inventory or Wario64 tweet in my timeline. That's why twitch let people renew gift subscriptions at an 80% discount. I expect this from services in 2019 and don't see a cartoonish mustachio'd villain creeping behind a shadowy pillar laughing as I browse such offers. Attributing ulterior motives to this stuff is a big 'yeah no shit' moment, Epic is doing what most big service based companies do.I've never seen any store hand out store credit without expecting the end user to buy something first.
I think Jeff still has that shirt.Just think I should post this here as a friendly reminder regarding a certain conversation in this thread.
https://www.resetera.com/threads/10-years-since-jeff-gerstmann-was-fired-from-gamespot.8496/
It's not exactly Conspiracy Theory to say that media outlets are going to have a different editorial direction on certain topics when the subject of an article is their biggest sponsor.
Frankly, there does come a point where "swinging really hard" does start looking like "is desperate for people to shop at their store".I mean yes. Obviously. Coupons are meant to incentivize purchases and facilitate recurring revenue from a customer who has cleared the first giant hurdle of all e-commerce, entering a credit card. Every form of marketing from base discounts to virtual tchotchke to affiliate programs very obviously costs money, an equation clearly factored into every steam coupon clogging up my inventory or Wario64 tweet in my timeline. That's why twitch let people renew gift subscriptions at an 80% discount. I expect this from services in 2019 and don't see a cartoonish mustachio'd villain creeping behind a shadowy pillar laughing as I browse such offers. Attributing ulterior motives to this stuff is a big 'yeah no shit' moment, Epic is doing what most big service based companies do.
Epic is swinging really hard with the sheer dollar values involved but if they have those cash reserves I don't see why they shouldn't be swinging for the fences here.