RDR 2 Steam delay shows that publishers can treat Steam users like crap because Valve won't do anything

[Mendax]

Steam's becoming a joke. 1 month delay and you allow it? Unless you do something PC gaming will return to 2007.

[Start_Running]

Erebus eredeti hozzászólása:

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

Shopping cart is of lower priority compared to the other things they have been working on.

You can read what improvements have shipped here both in the "recently shipped" and in "Releases/Patch notes", and you can see what they are currently working on as well. Shopping cart is not in the currently working on section, it is set for future development instead.

https://trello.com/b/GXLc34hk/epic-games-store-roadmap

And yet a simple transaction I put through Steam the other day for a game and it's DLCs wouldn't be possible on Epic. I'd have to have contacted my "provider" to ensure that no fraud was happening.

If Steam or GOG operated like that I just would be a lot less stuff. ♥♥♥♥ going through a payment process for every item be it a 60$ one, a 10$ one, or a 1.99$ one. Asinine.

Unless one looks at it fropm the psychological standpoint. I.e Its a fast way to habitualize people into making purchases from your store.

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

Gamers deserve better games, and a better economy for developers can lead to better games, and that is by far more valuable than any fluff on a store, well at least to people PC gamers that actually care more about games than they do about the store they buy it from.

'Better' is a loaded word, because there's no consensus as to what 'better' looks like.
You're also making the assumption that developers will take that as a reason to make better games or just to churn out more of the same game sthey're already making. The easier it is to make a profit the less pressure there is to put effort into the game :)

[Paratech2008]

Heck with Epic's guaranteed profits the games can be mediocre as heck and the publishers are guaranteed X sales. It makes mediocre profitable whereas Steam forces competition.

[Erebus]

Start_Running eredeti hozzászólása:

Erebus eredeti hozzászólása:

And yet a simple transaction I put through Steam the other day for a game and it's DLCs wouldn't be possible on Epic. I'd have to have contacted my "provider" to ensure that no fraud was happening.

If Steam or GOG operated like that I just would be a lot less stuff. ♥♥♥♥ going through a payment process for every item be it a 60$ one, a 10$ one, or a 1.99$ one. Asinine.

Unless one looks at it fropm the psychological standpoint. I.e Its a fast way to habitualize people into making purchases from your store.

Eh, maybe.

Psychologically speaking spending significant amounts of money prompts sort of a pain response. And jumping through extra steps makes someone less likely to "impulse buy". Doubly so if there is a chance of having to call a bank cause your payment method got bricked from too many transactions in a small window of time.

The advent of Steam, GOG, and similar brought about enough convenience that people impulse buy way before they will ever have time to play stuff. Huge game backlogs really weren't a thing before convenient digital distro existed. Even during sales it provides a boost because people might grab a dozen things they are only sorta interested in when they can do a single transaction easily for it all. Every Steam sale one of my friends gets I swear at least 40-100 titles (of wildly varying quality). If it were a separate transaction for each I can guarantee it would be too much headache to persist unless he really really really wanted the various titles.

[Trundle]

Is this Steam Vs Epic discussions part 3? It made no sense.

[Xaelath]

𝐓𝐫𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐥𝐞 eredeti hozzászólása:

Is this Steam Vs Epic discussions part 3? It made no sense. :conwayshrug:

Guess who started it.

[Start_Running]

Erebus eredeti hozzászólása:

Start_Running eredeti hozzászólása:

Unless one looks at it fropm the psychological standpoint. I.e Its a fast way to habitualize people into making purchases from your store.

Eh, maybe.

Psychologically speaking spending significant amounts of money prompts sort of a pain response.

Initially until one does it frequently enough. It's tyhe same thing that MTYX's deal with. getting someone to make their first MTYX purchase is hard, getting them to nmake their second.. is a little easier. and so it progresses.

And jumping through extra steps makes someone less likely to "impulse buy".

Well consider Amazon. When buying kindle books you have to use one click shopping which requires you to buy one item at a time.. It seems to be working for them...and they've been doing it for almost 10 years .

Doubly so if there is a chance of having to call a bank cause your payment method got bricked from too many transactions in a small window of time.

You generally only need to do tyhat once or twice before most banks make a note on your accouunt about it.

The advent of Steam, GOG, and similar brought about enough convenience that people impulse buy way before they will ever have time to play stuff. Huge game backlogs really weren't a thing before convenient digital distro existed. Even during sales it provides a boost because people might grab a dozen things they are only sorta interested in when they can do a single transaction easily for it all. Every Steam sale one of my friends gets I swear at least 40-100 titles (of wildly varying quality). If it were a separate transaction for each I can guarantee it would be too much headache to persist unless he really really really wanted the various titles.

How hard was it for you to make your first steam/GoG purchase. Hopw many mental blocks and barriers did you have to push aside for that?

[Erebus]

Start_Running eredeti hozzászólása:

Erebus eredeti hozzászólása:

Eh, maybe.

Psychologically speaking spending significant amounts of money prompts sort of a pain response.

Initially until one does it frequently enough. It's tyhe same thing that MTYX's deal with. getting someone to make their first MTYX purchase is hard, getting them to nmake their second.. is a little easier. and so it progresses.

And jumping through extra steps makes someone less likely to "impulse buy".

Well consider Amazon. When buying kindle books you have to use one click shopping which requires you to buy one item at a time.. It seems to be working for them...and they've been doing it for almost 10 years .

Doubly so if there is a chance of having to call a bank cause your payment method got bricked from too many transactions in a small window of time.

You generally only need to do tyhat once or twice before most banks make a note on your accouunt about it.

The advent of Steam, GOG, and similar brought about enough convenience that people impulse buy way before they will ever have time to play stuff. Huge game backlogs really weren't a thing before convenient digital distro existed. Even during sales it provides a boost because people might grab a dozen things they are only sorta interested in when they can do a single transaction easily for it all. Every Steam sale one of my friends gets I swear at least 40-100 titles (of wildly varying quality). If it were a separate transaction for each I can guarantee it would be too much headache to persist unless he really really really wanted the various titles.

How hard was it for you to make your first steam/GoG purchase. Hopw many mental blocks and barriers did you have to push aside for that?

No MTX aims to be under the threshold where the "pain response" enters the equation. The whole "eh it's just a dollar".

Banks knowing habits only goes so far. You do enough little transactions in a small timeframe they will want to talk to you to confirm someone else isn't running around on <x> store.

And a lot of things on amazon that used to be 1 click only, now work with carts (or at least they did last I tried).

[PocketYoda]

If a game goes to epic i will not get it no matter what that game is. To me its basically another console platform i do not own and never will.

[SqueakyTweaky]

Rocket01 eredeti hozzászólása:

I get it on Rockstar Launcher, I have GTA V on Social club, and u take advantage to get max payne 3 to play multiplayer, is still alive

Max Payne sucks.

[Paratech2008]

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

Ganger eredeti hozzászólása:

Sorry, I was confused. Well you would think so but I highly doubt it. The extra money taken from epic will be pumped back into the business, extra bonuses for the CEOs, given to shareholders. I don't see better games being made tho unless the publisher decides to increase the budget for said games.

I was specifically talking about the Indies/AA market, that is where the extra money would go to make better games.

Name games where this happened.

[Xaelath]

Paratech2008 eredeti hozzászólása:

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

I was specifically talking about the Indies/AA market, that is where the extra money would go to make better games.

Name games where this happened.

Imagine those Extras money who's also go to AAA used to something like Break Point lol.

88/12 for the sake of developer/publisher?
No it was greed that got them.

[Silverkite]

will you just stop playing the circlejerk game with him?

[Trundle]

Xaelath eredeti hozzászólása:

Paratech2008 eredeti hozzászólása:

Name games where this happened.

Imagine those Extras money who's also go to AAA used to something like Break Point lol.

88/12 for the sake of developer/publisher?
No it was greed that got them.

Here there better face value 12% profit 88% crappy

[Paratech2008]

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

Paratech2008 eredeti hozzászólása:

Name games where this happened.

Double Damage was able to increase the size of their development team and have a higher budget for their second game. The didn't spend the same amount of money as they did not the first game and pocket the rest. Their second game is better than the first, More content, better features.

CD Project went from a 7 man team for Witcher 1 and look at how the budget and team sizes got bigger for each game, they didn't stay to a 7 man team, spend same amount as first game and pocket the rest.

Now think what could happen for indie developers who don't see extreme success as those, but only get just enough to pay for development costs and not much profit, while still making a great game, but how they could do more with their talent if they were able to get more.

Now , think of some of your favorite games, do you think they could be exactly the same, 100% the same, if the developers had 25 to 50% less money then what it did take them to do it with or do you think the game would have had less content, features, and/or possibly quality?

Do you really think it is absolutely impossible for any developer to ever make better games if they had more money compared to less money?

I was referring to games being sold on Epic, since when did CDProject benefit from Epic? Heck Epic doesn't want games sold on Steam or GOG.

[Start_Running]

Erebus eredeti hozzászólása:

No MTX aims to be under the threshold where the "pain response" enters the equation. The whole "eh it's just a dollar".

It's a little bit of both. THe idea is however to get you in the door first. Once you start buying, you're more likely to keep buying.

Banks knowing habits only goes so far. You do enough little transactions in a small timeframe they will want to talk to you to confirm someone else isn't running around on <x> store.

And again they will eventually notice the pattern. with payment processors and stores. Again Amazon's ebntire kindle library is sold via on-click. That is literally thousands of products.

Thing about One CLick is that it encourages you to keep your CC info stored with the store .

Eisberg eredeti hozzászólása:

Paratech2008 eredeti hozzászólása:

Name games where this happened.

Double Damage was able to increase the size of their development team and have a higher budget for their second game. The didn't spend the same amount of money as they did not the first game and pocket the rest. Their second game is better than the first, More content, better features.

And certainly those gains can;'rt have anything to do with increased experience in game development and working from feedback gained from the first game hmmm? What games did they make again?

CD Project went from a 7 man team for Witcher 1 and look at how the budget and team sizes got bigger for each game, they didn't stay to a 7 man team, spend same amount as first game and pocket the rest.

yes and have you noticed not many people speak about Witcher 2?

Now think what could happen for indie developers who don't see extreme success as those, but only get just enough to pay for development costs and not much profit, while still making a great game, but how they could do more with their talent if they were able to get more.

If you don't see a lot of profit from making a great game... either your game wasn't so great, it was poorly marketed, or your overheads are waaay too high and you need to trim some fat.

Now , think of some of your favorite games, do you think they could be exactly the same, 100% the same, if the developers had 25 to 50% less money then what it did take them to do it with or do you think the game would have had less content, features, and/or possibly quality?

Some of them, yes. See, the make up factor in all of this is time. Where funds are lacking then one spends more time.

Do you really think it is absolutely impossible for any developer to ever make better games if they had more money compared to less money?

Actually the silent hill franchise kinda shows that more money does not equal better games. I dare say Daikatana might have actually been a decent game if they had tightened the purse strings on that development cycle. And we might have actually seen STar CItizen release by now... there are innumerable examples of games being ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ because the developers, lacking propper bugetary constraints started succumbing to feature creep. On the other hand there are many games, great games, that are that way because the developers, lacking funds, were forced to tighten their decsign and focus on solid core gameplay loops and narrative. You know the sorts of things that do not require a high budget to implement.

And again your enntire argumaent is based on the idea that a dev even will. Let's look at it this way. See the FNAF series... Look at 1, and look at 6. Does the increased availability of funds look like it added much to the game?