Please Do Not Move To Epic Game's Store

[Rin]

I've been hearing stories about games leaving steam once they're out of Early Access. Since the game is almost done I've been worried that the game might move to the Epic Game's Store. Please don't do this I love this game I don't want it to go.

[Ray tracing is faster]

Ursprungligen skrivet av uЙЯёLiAвLӗ Carmuh:

The only monopoly here is Steam, EGS is small potatoes compared to Steam.

Idiotic and flat out incorrect statement. Market leader != monopoly. Steam games can be purchased legally from other stores like Green Man Gaming, where Valve doesn't incur their infamous 30% profit margin. There are other competitors as well. They do nothing at all that can be associated with a monopoly (anymore).

Educate yourself:
https://www.intelligenteconomist.com/monopoly-market-structure/

Ursprungligen skrivet av uЙЯёLiAвLӗ Carmuh:

pull up a chair
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1107671681517211649.html

takeaways
All this other stuff about data going to Tencent, another app launcher, exclusives are bad for gaming etc - are all just noise; because sitting down and considering how good competition is for gaming, is too much work.

Competition is good, and Epic's business practices are about destroying it via monopolizing it. Yeah, they can't make every game out there exclusive, which just means there is no super easy win for them.

Ursprungligen skrivet av uЙЯёLiAвLӗ Carmuh:

When a competing company goes out and builds a massive financial war chest, it's for one thing - and one thing only. Going to war in a highly competitive battleground.

In this case, the war is with Steam.

A war in which, by all accounts, they stand ZERO chance of EVER winning


This was never about beating Steam. It's about disrupting it enough to carve out a portion of a multi-billion Dollar industry. Starving Steam of content isn't going to kill it. In fact, it's akin to Disney pulling Marvel content off Netflix. They'll survive it.

You're taking Tim Sweeney's words to heart lol. Yeah Epic probably won't achieve a monopoly but the only way to be sure of that is to not support it, since we vote with our wallets so it is up for the consumers to decide.

If we all buy up all these Epic Games exclusives, there will be more exclusives and they probably won't be timed anymore. How about we don't support the guys buying out exclusives... better safe than sorry.

Ursprungligen skrivet av uЙЯёLiAвLӗ Carmuh:

There is absolutely NOTHING unique about the Steam v EGS fiasco because that's how competition works. And no matter how many times Tim Sweeney has to go on the record outlining *precisely* what their goal is, very few care because of tribalism.

Whereas Gaben is the God for the "No Steam, no buy" morons, Tim Sweeney seems to be your God. You really believe every word he utters is absolute truth. Actions speak louder than words and look at the actions Epic Games have been taking, all strongly anti-consumer. Also Epic Games poaching games like they've been doing IS unique for gaming. It's a first.

[thray]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Some kind of mech:

Yikes

Slow your roll
None of those words were mine, everyone of them is from a professional in the industry and not some rando in a forum.

A PROFESSIONAL IN THE INDUSTRY (hint, it's not Tim Sweeney)

Let that sink in for a minute.

A Professional in the Industry


I use Steam, Humble Bundle, The Microsoft Store, EGS, Ubi, Amazon, GOG, Origin etc etc etc

If you want to limit yourself to only one, no one cares.

I chose to play games and not Tilt at Windmills.

[Ray tracing is faster]

Let me dumb it down for you. Is Epic Games buying out games and making them one year exclusives bad for gamers? If yes, should gamers support this?

The fact that you think I want to limit myself to one platform shows that your reading comprehension fails.

[Forward Bias]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Some kind of mech:

Let me dumb it down for you. Is Epic Games buying out games and making them one year exclusives bad for gamers? If yes, should gamers support this?

The fact that you think I want to limit myself to one platform shows that your reading comprehension fails.

You keep saying everything "hurts" and is bad for gamers, yet you have not shown any empirical evidence to back your claims up. All you say is "exclusive bad, therefore gamers are being hurt" yet I have yet to see any legitimate evidence to back such up.

It is a free platform that takes two minutes to install. There's no barrier to entry. The games cost the same. The only difference is the launcher, the games are the exact same. It isn't hurting consumers. The only thing it is bad for is gamers' egos.

You have no evidence that it is hurting the consumer other than your own feelings on the matter. Unless you can provide me with actual statistics showing how something like this is hurting your everyday gamer, stop pushing that narrative. You're basing your arguments off of your feelings, not off of objective information.

You base your arguments off of previous mentions that exclusives are bad. The "anti-consumer" buzzword has been thrown around so much its laughable. Everywhere I see this argument, its the same thing. Somebody sees this "argument" thrown about, so they pick it up and continue spouting it off. Then they cite other peoples arguments as a support for their own.

Where is the evidence that this is hurting gamers? Anyone care to base this on anything factual, instead of just saying "Well it hurts gamers"? Based on what? Where's the proof of price gouging? Where are the gamers that are hurting? Where is a legitimate analysis showing that consumers are being taken advantage of? Anytime you are faced with real questions that require evidence, you people immediately clam up and start spouting off how you already mentioned it is hurting gamers. But where? Repeating something a hundred times doesn't make for an argument, it only makes you repetetive.

[Ray tracing is faster]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Radboy16:

You keep saying everything "hurts" and is bad for gamers, yet you have not shown any empirical evidence to back your claims up. All you say is "exclusive bad, therefore gamers are being hurt" yet I have yet to see any legitimate evidence to back such up.

It is a free platform that takes two minutes to install. There's no barrier to entry. The games cost the same. The only difference is the launcher, the games are the exact same. It isn't hurting consumers. The only thing it is bad for is gamers' egos.

You have no evidence that it is hurting the consumer other than your own feelings on the matter. Unless you can provide me with actual statistics showing how something like this is hurting your everyday gamer, stop pushing that narrative. You're basing your arguments off of your feelings, not off of objective information.

You base your arguments off of previous mentions that exclusives are bad. The "anti-consumer" buzzword has been thrown around so much its laughable. Everywhere I see this argument, its the same thing. Somebody sees this "argument" thrown about, so they pick it up and continue spouting it off. Then they cite other peoples arguments as a support for their own.

Where is the evidence that this is hurting gamers? Anyone care to base this on anything factual, instead of just saying "Well it hurts gamers"? Based on what? Where's the proof of price gouging? Where are the gamers that are hurting? Where is a legitimate analysis showing that consumers are being taken advantage of? Anytime you are faced with real questions that require evidence, you people immediately clam up and start spouting off how you already mentioned it is hurting gamers. But where? Repeating something a hundred times doesn't make for an argument, it only makes you repetetive.

What's laughable is that you see the issue and just ignore it. Games are the same cost? Already addressed: I buy my new mainstream releases from Green Man Gaming for $48 or $52 often. At release. People buy them for even less from key stores like G2Ă.

The fact that you can only buy Epic Store exclusive games from Epic at their prices is objectively worse for the consumer. What's not to get about that?

You apparently need me to explain to you why exclusivity is bad, more choices is good, and why monopolies are bad for the consumer. Having more choices (and incidentally no monopoly) puts less power in the hands of one corporation and more power in the hands of the consumer to choose the platform they want, and to get a better price due to there being multiple storefronts to choose from who have their own sales and what not.

Are you as blind and stupid as you're portraying yourself to be, or does this actually confuse you? All I've done was provide facts and evidence this entire time, while all you've done is confront it and say "it's not an issue."

[thray]

Radboy, you're wasting your time. All he can do is personally attack you which means he has nothing.

[Ray tracing is faster]

Lists facts but has nothing? And the personal attacks have come from both sides in equal measure. Perhaps mine just sting more since they're actually applicable.

It was clear from the get go you two (or anyone who doubts Epic exclusivity being anti-consumer) just turn a blind eye to the problem, but it has gotten really hilarious since then.

[BROLY 32]

Drop it dude, you're fighting Black Mesa's Steam forums boogeyman himself.
He's been at it daily for years.

[joje]

Why would anyone even ask that question in da firdt place

[Crusta]

I'm totally fine with them wanting to sell their game at Epic Store. Whats the problem? As long as the product remains unchanged here on Steam then who cares.

[thray]

Ursprungligen skrivet av joje:

Why would anyone even ask that question in the first place

Because it is the new popular thing that people love to hate. As can be seen by the faux outrage in this thread.

[thray]

Another professional in the gaming industry comments on the EGS;

“I think competition is good… There’s a Monopolies and Mergers Commission for a reason. And I think for any business it’s good to have peers that are keeping you focused on improving your offering. I applaud Epic for doing this, I think it’s actually good for Steam too because the competition kind of makes them go: ‘Oh fudge, we better sit up, take notice and do something about it’.”

Rebellion’s Jason Kingsley on Epic

[Ray tracing is faster]

Ursprungligen skrivet av uЙЯёLiAвLӗ Carmuh:

Another professional in the gaming industry comments on the EGS;

“I think competition is good… There’s a Monopolies and Mergers Commission for a reason. And I think for any business it’s good to have peers that are keeping you focused on improving your offering. I applaud Epic for doing this, I think it’s actually good for Steam too because the competition kind of makes them go: ‘Oh fudge, we better sit up, take notice and do something about it’.”

Rebellion’s Jason Kingsley on Epic

Now just think, a professional working at a game studio. Who does he speak for? Are the Epic exclusivity deals good for them, or the consumer? Two completely different things.

You can quote all the people you want but it doesn't change the obvious facts, which are:

For the consumer:

- The more choice, the better because it puts less power in the hands of corporations and more power in the hands of the consumer.

- EXCLUSIVITY is all about NO CHOICE. Epic Games buys out games and makes them one year exclusive, no choice for consumers during that time.

- To make matters worse, games from Epic Store can only be purchased through them. They have full control over the pricing.

It would be good for consumers if games were simply available on Epic Store, Steam, GOG, Origin, uPlay on day 1. That would be the ideal scenario. But instead, Epic buys out exclusivity for a year, the ultimate anti-consumer move. They function like a monopoly, unlike Steam for which I can buy games from other stores like Green Man Gaming for a different price (and as a bonus, Valve won't incur their 30% profit margin).

What Rebellion's Jason Kingsley is really saying is that the Epic exclusivity deals could be good for studios like his. No ♥♥♥♥. Epic guarantees the game's success by paying them enough so that if the game sold 0 copies it would still be a success.

[Olde]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Some kind of mech:

Epic guarantees the game's success by paying them enough so that if the game sold 0 copies it would still be a success.

How is that even possible? What kind of sustainable business model is that?

[Ray tracing is faster]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Olde:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Some kind of mech:

Epic guarantees the game's success by paying them enough so that if the game sold 0 copies it would still be a success.

How is that even possible? What kind of sustainable business model is that?

They admitted that it isn't sustainable. They just think it's an easy way to build a user base.