Support NeoGAF

[Burger]

Ehh?
https://www.greenmangaming.com/games/sekiro-shadows-die-twice-pc/
cheaper than directly trough steam and official. (even if only 5%)

but i guess using fat print must mean you are right.

Uhh the bold was me mocking the person I was quoting, it's supposed to appear histrionic.

My point was that having something exclusively on a particular launcher is not anti-consumer and is not anti-competitive. It's extremely common. Diablo 3 uses Battle.net, Fallout 76 uses whatever Bethesda call their thing, Sekiro uses Steam, Metro uses Epic and so on.

Narcos is only on Netflix. American Gods is only on Amazon.

The croissants I like are only at this one place around the corner from where I work.

It happens everywhere.

 

[Jenenser]

Selling a Steam key is still selling through steam.
Steam sold that key to the greenmangaming website

Steamgenerates keys for the publisher. the publisher can sell these keys to other stores and steam doesnt even get a share of that sell.

it can only be played/installed trough steam. other stores are still able to sell the game (thats why there is still a hint of competition). might just be semantics. but its an important difference.

 

[Jenenser]

Uhh the bold was me mocking the person I was quoting, it's supposed to appear histrionic.
...
It happens everywhere.

ups! brainfart on my part.

but your analogy is kinda weak.
And i kinda don't want this to happen.

id rather see the game in both stores and with a pricewar. (the thing that lts the consumer profit the most) and epic couldvepaved the way. instead of paying the publisher orbitant amounts to have exclusivity, it couldve axed 20% of the price and pay for it out of theyr own pockets.

there, a possible way, that is pro consumer and would make people flock to the epicstore.

Hope i could express myself clearly, sry if not. im tired. -_-
Edit: and even a doublepost... sry.

 

[brian0057]

Uhh the bold was me mocking the person I was quoting, it's supposed to appear histrionic.

My point was that having something exclusively on a particular launcher is not anti-consumer and is not anti-competitive. It's extremely common. Diablo 3 uses Battle.net, Fallout 76 uses whatever Bethesda call their thing, Sekiro uses Steam, Metro uses Epic and so on.

Narcos is only on Netflix. American Gods is only on Amazon.

The croissants I like are only at this one place around the corner from where I work.

It happens everywhere.

Just because "everyone else is doing it" doesn't stop this from being anti-consumer since there's no competition.
In order for competition to exist, the consumer has to make a meaningful choice and exclusives are the antithesis of that.

What launcher is better, Steam or Epic? With exclusives, that question doesn't matter anymore since Epic is FORCING you to use their launcher instead of ENTICING you to use it.

For example, imagine that when Avengers: Endgame comes out, one particular chain of theaters makes the movie exclusive to them and them alone. Now, if people want to see the movie, they are FORCED to use those theaters instead of the ones they want. In this case, the theaters are no longer competing for who has the better seats, the best screens, or the biggest food selection. They're instead competing for who has the most exclusives, and since they're no longer competing on features they can disregard them.

As for the "Origin, UPlay, Battle.net, etc..." defense? They make the games they're selling on those stores. If they want to use THEIR own stores to sell THEIR own games instead of using Steam, GOG, or whatever, they can do it (which is still anti-consumer, by the way).

This exclusivity deals made by Epic are done with the sole purpose of making Steam look worse. Period.
This doesn't benefit the consumer in any way.

Also, your croissant analogy is flawed since no one owns the rights to what a "croissant" is. Maybe it tastes different depending on the store, but at the end of the day you're still getting a croissant. There's no "Steam" version of Metro Exodus that people can buy that can replace the one on Epic. This is what we like to call a MONOPOLY., that thing people accuse Steam of being but aren't.

 

[Burger]

Just because "everyone else is doing it" doesn't stop this from being anti-consumer since there's no competition.
In order for competition to exist, the consumer has to make a meaningful choice and exclusives are the antithesis of that.

What launcher is better, Steam or Epic? With exclusives, that question doesn't matter anymore since Epic is FORCING you to use their launcher instead of ENTICING you to use it.

For example, imagine that when Avengers: Endgame comes out, one particular chain of theaters makes the movie exclusive to them and them alone. Now, if people want to see the movie, they are FORCED to use those theaters instead of the ones they want. In this case, the theaters are no longer competing for who has the better seats, the best screens, or the biggest food selection. They're instead competing for who has the most exclusives, and since they're no longer competing on features they can disregard them.

As for the "Origin, UPlay, Battle.net, etc..." defense? They make the games they're selling on those stores. If they want to use THEIR own stores to sell THEIR own games instead of using Steam, GOG, or whatever, they can do it (which is still anti-consumer, by the way).

This exclusivity deals made by Epic are done with the sole purpose of making Steam look worse. Period.
This doesn't benefit the consumer in any way.

Also, your croissant analogy is flawed since no one owns the rights to what a "croissant" is. Maybe it tastes different depending on the store, but at the end of the day you're still getting a croissant. There's no "Steam" version of Metro Exodus that people can buy that can replace the one on Epic. This is what we like to call a MONOPOLY., that thing people accuse Steam of being but aren't.

All of your arguments are completely mad.

Epic are not doing this to make Steam look bad, they are doing it to carve out some market share. Steam does not have a monopoly on selling PC games. There is no restraint of trade here. Benefits to the consumer are not an inherent right. Steam has products on its store that are exclusive for gods sake.

As I've said before, this is all complete nonsense that has happened before when HL2 came out with Steam. Nobody asked for Steam, nobody wanted Steam, I'm boycotting Steam etc.

 

[Dr.Morris79]

I remember when Steam came out with the launch of Half Life 2 and the reaction was the same then as it is now. Incensed gamers lamenting how they couldn't just launch the installer off the CDROM and play it like any normal game - it needed some grade A bullshit called Steam which (can you believe it) needed to be online.

It was bullshit, Steam totally and utterly knackered the second hand market and physical ownership of games.

And people rolled over and let them.

 

[sol_bad]

As I've said before, this is all complete nonsense that has happened before when HL2 came out with Steam. Nobody asked for Steam, nobody wanted Steam, I'm boycotting Steam etc.

Valve didn't money hat publishers and developers. They created a space to sell games on with many features for developers and consumers. The industry slowly moved to Steam over time.

Publishers liked the convenience of Steam DRM rather than coming up with their own bullshit DRM method. Publishers were too lazy to make their own store and gravitated to Steam. Independent developers realised it was dumb to try and advertise their own web site when they could just use Steam for maximum exposure.

The 2 scenarios are entirely different.

It was bullshit, Steam totally and utterly knackered the second hand market and physical ownership of games.

And people rolled over and let them.

It's going to happen on consoles soon too so you better get used to it.

 

[demigod]

Right now, Epic is effectively subsidising these games, paying Devs to make them.
For all we know some of theses game wouldn't even have come out if not for the money Epic gave them.

There are giving a guaranteed return for Devs. This is not bullshit.
The decision is made by the Devs who have every reasons for wanting their games to be successful.

Your comment was bullshit. Those games were already made without Epic's money. They're moneyhatting on games that are almost finished to be exclusive on their store. Ya'll can enjoy the EGS store, but don't try to lie to defend their actions.

 

[LordRaptor]

Steam is the only place where you can purchase Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice for PC. There is no competition with a rival store for this game, the price is the price.

No, there are plenty of storefronts selling steam keys for Sekiro (and pretty much every fucking PC game ever thats released as a steam key).
All of those storefronts are in competition with each other.

The EGS is THE ONLY place you can buy EGS exclusive games. There is one single storefront.

I don't see how you're 'mocking' me, when you are factually incorrect.

 

[-MD-]

My point was that having something exclusively on a particular launcher is not anti-consumer and is not anti-competitive. It's extremely common. Diablo 3 uses Battle.net, Fallout 76 uses whatever Bethesda call their thing, Sekiro uses Steam, Metro uses Epic and so on.

Blizzard owns Diablo and Battlenet
Bethesda owns Fallout 76 and their launcher
Sekiro is on steam because it's steam
Metro is on Epic's store because they gave someone a bag full of money to keep it away from other services

That's the difference.

 

[LordRaptor]

Steam built price competition into the steamworks publisher SDK at pretty much day 1.
They allow for any publisher (including self publishing) to generate steam activatable keys at their own discretion, for sale anywhere.
Steam sees zero income from these retail keys. They only get revenue from sales made directly through store.steampowered.com.

So any retailer can sell steam retail keys, that activate on steam and are treated the same as titles purchased directly through steam.
Price competition between retailers is built into the system. It is very rare that a day one release will be the cheapest option directly from steam, because steam is usually set at the RRP / MSRP, and publishers routinely sell products to retailers at trade pricing, which is below the RRP / MSRP, because retailers have to make money too.

Other digital storefronts don't fucking do this.
They make their own storefront the only place to purchase a title. They charge MSRP / RRP for that title, even though they save money on traditional retail infrastructure costs.
There is no pricing pressure from competing storefronts, because there are no fucking competing storefronts.

I literally don't get how this difference escapes peoples understanding.

 

[Codes 208]

Shouldn’t they be too busy playing Sekiro to be working on games right now?

 

[Grumpy Toe Nail]

It's surely here to stay. If they wanted to back out, now should probably be the best time to it.

I think the most interesting thing about EGS will be how fast they can build quality store. If they stick to their road map, they will have the most important features implemented by the end of this year, including a new store app for iOS and Android, which Valve have, but has currently abandoned. I hope that it will be more common to release games on BOTH stores in the future.

It will, right now epic is using its only option. People would use it even less if it wasn't for the exclusives. How else are they going to convince people this early. Only reason steam didnt have exclusives is because it had no competition mostly. People complaining about launchers/store shouldnt be playing PC.

 

[MetalSlug]

I'll just not buy the games then unless they come to Steam.

 

[brian0057]

It will, right now epic is using its only option. People would use it even less if it wasn't for the exclusives. How else are they going to convince people this early. Only reason steam didnt have exclusives is because it had no competition mostly. People complaining about launchers/store shouldnt be playing PC.

"Their only option."
"How else are they going to convince people this early?"

Maybe by offering features that Steam doesn't have? Maybe sell at cheaper prices? Offer a DRM-free option, thereby also undercutting GOG?
Geez, it's almost like it's a competition or something.
But apparently a monopoly is the way to go.

"People complaining about launchers/store shouldnt be playing PC."

Yeah, screw those people and their... *squints at note*... "choices."
Why choose the platform you want to use when you can be forced to use one specifically or forego the game entirely... or, you know, yar har, mattey.

 

[Grumpy Toe Nail]

"Their only option."
"How else are they going to convince people this early?"

Maybe by offering features that Steam doesn't have? Maybe sell at cheaper prices? Offer a DRM-free option, thereby also undercutting GOG?
Geez, it's almost like it's a competition or something.
But apparently a monopoly is the way to go.

"People complaining about launchers/store shouldnt be playing PC."

Yeah, screw those people and their... *squints at note*... "choices."
Why choose the platform you want to use when you can be forced to use one specifically or forego the game entirely... or, you know, yar har, mattey.

But people like me dont even like steam features, i want nothing going on usually in the background when i game. I just use discord for social. I say keep the store to a minimum and pass that savings onto customers/dev's.

Was saying they shouldnt play PC if having to open two launchers is too much "work". Epic store is having choices, competition is good. Steam wont change until another company forces them too. Thinking everything has to be on steam is a bit retarded. I dont hear people complaining about blizzard not being on steam.

 

[LordRaptor]

Steam wont change until another company forces them too.

I legitimately don't know how anyone can say this with a straight face with the sheer number of things they've added and improved over the years in the face of - lets be honest - nominal competition from anyone else.
Everyone elses 'tactic' is put up a bare-ass minimum viable product webstore, then leave it alone and cash in on sales.

e: Like... you may or may not like what things Valve chooses to spend time developing, but they clearly do develop things because they think it will be good for PC gaming in general, not because they're trying to fuck over someone elses storefront.

 

[Grumpy Toe Nail]

I legitimately don't know how anyone can say this with a straight face with the sheer number of things they've added and improved over the years in the face of - lets be honest - nominal competition from anyone else.
Everyone elses 'tactic' is put up a bare-ass minimum viable product webstore, then leave it alone and cash in on sales.

But thats what i want, those companies do that because they want to avoid steams bullshit 30% cut. I don't need every launcher to try and do everything. If you dont like the epic store just fucking close it when your done... I'll happily buy epic if they keep games prices down. And by change i mostly mean their price cut, i personally dont need anymore feature added.

 

[lukilladog]

If you think that this game of "the one that has more money to buy exclusives wins" is good for competitiveness, you need to give it some more thought.

 

[demigod]

It will, right now epic is using its only option. People would use it even less if it wasn't for the exclusives. How else are they going to convince people this early. Only reason steam didnt have exclusives is because it had no competition mostly. People complaining about launchers/store shouldnt be playing PC.

I'm voting with my wallet, will not be buying this game at all no matter which platform.

But people like me dont even like steam features, i want nothing going on usually in the background when i game. I just use discord for social. I say keep the store to a minimum and pass that savings onto customers/dev's.

Was saying they shouldnt play PC if having to open two launchers is too much "work". Epic store is having choices, competition is good. Steam wont change until another company forces them too. Thinking everything has to be on steam is a bit retarded. I dont hear people complaining about blizzard not being on steam.

Please stop, this is not competition. This does not benefit the consumer at all unless you like Epic snooping on your data.

 

[manfestival]

But thats what i want, those companies do that because they want to avoid steams bullshit 30% cut. I don't need every launcher to try and do everything. If you dont like the epic store just fucking close it when your done... I'll happily buy epic if they keep games prices down. And by change i mostly mean their price cut, i personally dont need anymore feature added.

I really find it hard to agree with your standpoint based on your argument that I have read in this thread. Just seems you are completely sold but not providing solid counterpoints to what the others are saying here that are not sold on this strategy.

 

[Gamezone]

But people like me dont even like steam features, i want nothing going on usually in the background when i game. I just use discord for social. I say keep the store to a minimum and pass that savings onto customers/dev's.

Was saying they shouldnt play PC if having to open two launchers is too much "work". Epic store is having choices, competition is good. Steam wont change until another company forces them too. Thinking everything has to be on steam is a bit retarded. I dont hear people complaining about blizzard not being on steam.

Why do Steam have to change? It's currently the client with most features, and more are yet to come. EGS is NOT competition. Their store is garbage, and they know that, so their only solution is to remove our choice. Release every game on BOTH platforms and let them compete. That's competition.

 

[Gamezone]

It will, right now epic is using its only option. People would use it even less if it wasn't for the exclusives. How else are they going to convince people this early. Only reason steam didnt have exclusives is because it had no competition mostly. People complaining about launchers/store shouldnt be playing PC.

"People who can't accept being forced to shit PC clients shouldn't be playing PC."

 

[RedVIper]

I remember when Steam came out with the launch of Half Life 2 and the reaction was the same then as it is now. Incensed gamers lamenting how they couldn't just launch the installer off the CDROM and play it like any normal game - it needed some grade A bullshit called Steam which (can you believe it) needed to be online.

Steam making their own game and publishing it in their own store is totally the same as Epic throwing money at third party devolopers to keep them from publishing on other stores for a time, except it isn't the same, at all.

Steam is the only place where you can purchase Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice for PC. There is no competition with a rival store for this game, the price is the price.

Your Disney analogy is weird as Jobs was on the board at Disney - and Iger is on the board at Apple.

Because From/Activision decided they only wanted to publish there, not because Steam told them they couldn't publish somewhere else. I don't think anyone cares that games are available on Epic Store, they care that Epic doesn't let games be published anywhere else.

 

[IbizaPocholo]

 

[Bullet Club]

It's out now.

 

[IbizaPocholo]

Review: Observation - Space Survival Story with Some Surprises

I'm just looking, I'm not spyin'

www.pushsquare.com

 

[xrnzaaas]

It's out now.

Wait for a sale huh? Guess I'll wait for the PS4 version to reach the current price of the EGS version.

 

[Terce]

Does EGS have a shopping cart yet?

 

[ParanoidRED]

Just bought this on the EGS, was ready to get it on PS$ but it was almost 1/3 of the price there

Excited to give it a try, read a lot of great reviews

 

[mckmas8808]

Isn't this game going to be playable on PSVR?

 

[Stafford]

Yeah, I'd buy this because it's right up my alley. Then I see it's not for Xbox One, sigh. 2019 and we still get this shit.

 

[Bullet Club]

 

[IbizaPocholo]

Stream and download Launch Trailer from Observation in very high quality

Stream and download Launch Trailer from Observation in very high quality

www.gamersyde.com

 

[alabtrosMyster]

I remember when Steam came out with the launch of Half Life 2 and the reaction was the same then as it is now. Incensed gamers lamenting how they couldn't just launch the installer off the CDROM and play it like any normal game - it needed some grade A bullshit called Steam which (can you believe it) needed to be online.

I had been thinking about that for a while, and my conclusion is that for PC gaming to even survive it needed Steam or something of its nature - the reason being that you already had the convenience of piracy, which was a much more convenient way to get games, and it didn't use any shelf space either (also, pirated games are free) - I'm sure convenience played a big role in the rise of Steam.

 

[ROMhack]

Does look good this. Dare I say... epic.

 

[Revolutionary]

Picked it up for $12 on Epic. Only played through the intro but I'm digging it so far. Wish there were more sensitivity options, though. The mouse acceleration feels off, and I don't see any forums or place I can let the developer know.
If only Epic had forums for their games like a certain other game store..

 

[Kadayi]

Wait for a sale huh? Guess I'll wait for the PS4 version to reach the current price of the EGS version.

Wait for a Steam Sale in reality

 

[IbizaPocholo]

 

[Dirk Benedict]

Just because "everyone else is doing it" doesn't stop this from being anti-consumer since there's no competition.
In order for competition to exist, the consumer has to make a meaningful choice and exclusives are the antithesis of that.

What launcher is better, Steam or Epic? With exclusives, that question doesn't matter anymore since Epic is FORCING you to use their launcher instead of ENTICING you to use it.

For example, imagine that when Avengers: Endgame comes out, one particular chain of theaters makes the movie exclusive to them and them alone. Now, if people want to see the movie, they are FORCED to use those theaters instead of the ones they want. In this case, the theaters are no longer competing for who has the better seats, the best screens, or the biggest food selection. They're instead competing for who has the most exclusives, and since they're no longer competing on features they can disregard them.

As for the "Origin, UPlay, Battle.net, etc..." defense? They make the games they're selling on those stores. If they want to use THEIR own stores to sell THEIR own games instead of using Steam, GOG, or whatever, they can do it (which is still anti-consumer, by the way).

This exclusivity deals made by Epic are done with the sole purpose of making Steam look worse. Period.
This doesn't benefit the consumer in any way.

Also, your croissant analogy is flawed since no one owns the rights to what a "croissant" is. Maybe it tastes different depending on the store, but at the end of the day you're still getting a croissant. There's no "Steam" version of Metro Exodus that people can buy that can replace the one on Epic. This is what we like to call a MONOPOLY., that thing people accuse Steam of being but aren't.

The only meaningful choice is to wait or not buy the game, but so many people are just weak-willed and, while some people do say they will vote with their wallets, you see the hypocrisy because they can't miss out on "muh new gaem" which is secretly going on in the back of their minds, if even subconsciously.

I've 'missed' out on quite a few games because of the Epic Store Exclusivity, and if PC publishers/devs never release on Steam, they can go fuck themselves into closure, for all I care.

 

[BlitzerRadic]

Literally every single title that has so far come out as Epic Games Store exclusive has done so at the last minute.
The games have already been made. Epic shopped around to see who was willing to kill a golden goose for a quick buck.

And what's wrong with that? Do devs and publishers not have free will to make decisions that benefit them?

 

[Blancka]

Steam making their own game and publishing it in their own store is totally the same as Epic throwing money at third party devolopers to keep them from publishing on other stores for a time, except it isn't the same, at all.



Because From/Activision decided they only wanted to publish there, not because Steam told them they couldn't publish somewhere else. I don't think anyone cares that games are available on Epic Store, they care that Epic doesn't let games be published anywhere else.

But the end result is literally the exact same for the consumer so why does it even matter? At the end of the day it's the "what" part that affects consumers, not the "why part".

 

[LordRaptor]

And what's wrong with that? Do devs and publishers not have free will to make decisions that benefit them?

swooping in with a moneyhat to cockblock other platform is not 'subsidising game development'.
When MS bought temp exclusivity for the GTA IV DLCs last gen, they weren't 'subsidising development of GTA IV'.
They were just spending money on a marketing deal that temporarily made their platform look a bit better than another for a period of a few months.

Moneyhatting temporary exclusives is a dick move in the console space. Its the same fucking dick move in the Pc space.

 

[IbizaPocholo]

 

[SweetShark]

I played the game and I must say sadly cause I get very easily disoriented, I didn't enjoy it so much...

The story and its conclusion was good, so I can only suggest if you have a huge problem like me (losing your sense of direction easily), just wait for a big sale.

Also I will admit the story have similarities with a space movie I saw, but it have a "what if" moment which was a terrifying (in a good way) experience for me.

 

[IbizaPocholo]

Observation was released by Devolver a bit more than a week ago but we couldn't propose any footage before now. Here are the first 23 minutes of this very spacial adventure in which you play the role of an artificial intelligence. As astronaut Emma F

Observation was released by Devolver a bit more than a week ago but we couldn't propose any footage before now. Here are the first 23 minutes of this very spacial adventure in which you play the role of an artificial intelligence. As astronaut Emma Fisher appears to be left alone on a space...

www.gamersyde.com

 

[Bullet Club]

It's now out on Steam.

 

[nemiroff]

Edit: Ah, ffs, it's a thread revival..

 

[peronmls]

It’s not anti-consumer, it’s anti your feelings. Epic are using their bank account to buy a place in the market. Developers are getting large cheques - it’s great! People wouldn’t use the Epic launcher otherwise. The GOG launcher as Jim Sterling said is what happens with a build it and they will come approach.

I’ll buy games on the Epic store if it helps light a fire under the ever so slovenly Valve.

Everything the devs or epic does is FOR THEMSELVES. They are not doing it for the consumer. The buisness way is to save every penny. How is what epic and other devs doing GOOD for EVERYONE?

 

[Burger]

Everything the devs or epic does is FOR THEMSELVES. They are not doing it for the consumer. The buisness way is to save every penny. How is what epic and other devs doing GOOD for EVERYONE?

Of course they are, it's a business?

I purchased Observation on the Epic store when it came out. It was a transaction that was smooth, and I really enjoyed the game. Highly rated.