HorrorScope wrote on Sep 14, 2019, 20:41:
Borderlands 3 spent good money on getting a ton of people streaming I see.

RedEye9 wrote on Aug 24, 2019, 22:12:

Burrito of Peace wrote on Aug 24, 2019, 20:29:
Do I get to play Cyberpunk 2077? Yes? No fucks given about what storefront it comes through.

heretic

Red886 wrote on Aug 6, 2019, 07:25:
for those complaining that complainers are complaining too loudly:

corp head honchos say if consumers don't complain , then they must agree with it

Titus wrote on Aug 6, 2019, 06:54:
What is your actual point ?

Titus wrote on Aug 6, 2019, 07:03:
Claiming a vocal minority without numbers is useless, as is claiming people to be guilty without proof.

Titus wrote on Aug 6, 2019, 06:54:
What idiot preorders anyway ?.

Titus wrote on Aug 6, 2019, 06:44:
I've seen no proof of actual threats other than those devs claims. Seeing the way they already behaved on their blog, reddit and discord, I have zero confidence in them not lying.

Titus wrote on Aug 6, 2019, 03:51:
If Epic wanted to be honest about being pro developer in any form, they should just start to be first party publisher.

Now they cherrypick products from developers letting them carry the risk until their product shows potential profit, let them carry the burden of going exclusive and breaking their crowdfunding promises, all for a measly minimal guaranteed sales. They're exploiting indie game devs big time this way.

If Epic had to front the cost of financing devs like other publishers do, carrying most of the risks from the start, they could not even afford a tenth of their current exclusive output. They're parasites plain and simple.

MeanJim wrote on May 30, 2019, 02:37:

Talisorn wrote on May 29, 2019, 23:49:

Kxmode wrote on May 29, 2019, 22:13:
Steam is totally dead y'all.

Well ... when it's a Steam Exclusive in all but name, you have no choice but to use Steam, do you?

And they complain about Epic. *sheesh*

Valve/Steam didn't bribe the publisher to make it a Steam exclusive.

NKD wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 17:18:

RedEye9 wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 16:52:

Competition is good for gamers, developers and publishers.

Competition is only good if the products are competitive. If the price we pay for games doesn't go down, then what's the point? Two companies piling up competing libraries of "exclusives" isn't actually competition, because if you have a product you want to buy, you only have one choice.

Mashiki Amiketo wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 13:25:

SabreT wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 09:23:

Lol if trying to discredit other people is the only thing you can contribute to this discussion then rather stfu.

How many games out of the 9300 that was released on Steam in 2018 are available elsewhere? If an Indie studio wants to release a game do you think they stand a chance to try and publish it on their own?

"When it comes to operating systems, Microsoft is essentially a monopoly. Microsoft Windows is by far the dominant operating system today. It is said to have at least a 95% share of the market. This is not technically a monopoly, but the market does show most of the characteristics of a monopoly."

You can do that all on your own, and doing so well all on your own. Remember the part we're talking about exclusivity. Reminder that Microsoft isn't paying developers to develop only on the PC - they have on their console on the other hand. Which is an appropriate comparison. "Single market lock-ins" are anti-compeitive behavior, the same way if Google or Apple only let you buy through them, and locked out competing services from selling on their platform(they do).

Your failure to understand the difference between the two does explain a lot though.

Beamer wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 09:57:
Remember the days when the game you wanted wasn't available for DOS, only Amiga or OS/2? You would have had to buy an entirely separate system to play them. Or, hell, even if something was Windows or DOS, and you had to boot separately to play them. No additional money spent, but you'd need to sit through a several-minute long reboot.

Remember the days when it was a 'choice of development' on what platform you wanted to make your game on? You could develop for DOS, Amiga, or O2/2 and ride the winds and/or market as you wanted. You remember the days when the commadore awas the primary development platform, and they didn't try to pay off companies to only sell through one storefront. If you wanted to make a proper comparison it would be like DOS developers only allowing their software to be sold at one business, and the same for Amiga and OS/2. But that didn't happen did it.

HorrorScope wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 12:31:
" People are bitching that games are exclusives while completely disregarding that exclusives have been around since, literally, the advent of mass market gaming."

This is different and everyone knows it, so no reason to play stupid about this. I believe this is easily the biggest issue and the one that caused the outrage and then other smaller bullet points since added, right or wrong.

I once again want to thank Fortnite players for spending dollars so I can get your money indirectly from Epic, as they are giving non-Fornite players free stuff! You're the real mvp.

Darks wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 09:54:

SabreT wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 09:46:

Dude, thats completely different, consoles require you to actually make a decision of which hardware you prefer to play your games on, some people buy both.

Its completely different when you have a pc, but have a company like Epic thats forcing a war by forcing exclusives. At least on Steam, you can get it on GOG too or UBI. Theirs a choice at least there. But Epics shenanigans are out of control.

lol at "Epics shenanigans" Double standards much? How many thousands of games are only available on Steam? Why do they get a pass? Competition is good for everybody. Steam will ramp up their priority for new cool features and Epic will try the same. Everybody wins. If installing another launcher on your PC without costing you anything ruins your gaming experience then get another hobby ffs

Just shut up already. The more you talk the stupider you look.

Steam was the first platform for games. So yes they are going to have a majority of the games on their platform or are you that stupid that you cant see that?

Dude, thats completely different, consoles require you to actually make a decision of which hardware you prefer to play your games on, some people buy both.

Its completely different when you have a pc, but have a company like Epic thats forcing a war by forcing exclusives. At least on Steam, you can get it on GOG too or UBI. Theirs a choice at least there. But Epics shenanigans are out of control.

Eirikrautha wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 09:02:

Mashiki Amiketo wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 08:38:

SabreT wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 06:55:
Looks like Steam has people by the balls going from all these replies. Slaves to their large library of games on ONE platform unable to work without Steam. How dare competition to the monopoly try and give developers a better cut!

Sure looks like someones being an unpaid shill for EGS. How dare people point out that engaging in the console wars on the PC platform be a bad thing, especially after Epic's statements attacking PC gamers for decades - until the bottom fell out of the console market.

Why do you think they are unpaid? There's been a lot of low-post-count pro-Epic posting recently. Nowadays, paid "reviews" and testimonials are the first step in a marketing campaign. Besides, only a shill or an ignoramus can refer to Steam as a "monopoly." While I know that economic literacy is at an all time low, the parroting of that term activates the ol' almonds...

Mashiki Amiketo wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 08:38:

SabreT wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 06:55:
Looks like Steam has people by the balls going from all these replies. Slaves to their large library of games on ONE platform unable to work without Steam. How dare competition to the monopoly try and give developers a better cut!

Sure looks like someones being an unpaid shill for EGS. How dare people point out that engaging in the console wars on the PC platform be a bad thing, especially after Epic's statements attacking PC gamers for decades - until the bottom fell out of the console market.

Darks wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 08:33:

SabreT wrote on Apr 19, 2019, 06:55:
Looks like Steam has people by the balls going from all these replies. Slaves to their large library of games on ONE platform unable to work without Steam. How dare competition to the monopoly try and give developers a better cut!

Apparently you haven't bene paying attention. A friend of mine bought a game, didn't like it tried to refund it. Got told no. He was still even under the terms at which it could be refunded. So yea, fuck Epic and their bullshit. No amount of bribery would ever get me to buy into their bullshit.