Instal Steam
login
|
bahasa
简体中文 (Tionghoa Sederhana)
繁體中文 (Tionghoa Tradisional)
日本語 (Bahasa Jepang)
한국어 (Bahasa Korea)
ไทย (Bahasa Thai)
Български (Bahasa Bulgaria)
Čeština (Bahasa Ceko)
Dansk (Bahasa Denmark)
Deutsch (Bahasa Jerman)
English (Bahasa Inggris)
Español - España (Bahasa Spanyol - Spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (Bahasa Spanyol - Amerika Latin)
Ελληνικά (Bahasa Yunani)
Français (Bahasa Prancis)
Italiano (Bahasa Italia)
Magyar (Bahasa Hungaria)
Nederlands (Bahasa Belanda)
Norsk (Bahasa Norwegia)
Polski (Bahasa Polandia)
Português (Portugis - Portugal)
Português-Brasil (Bahasa Portugis-Brasil)
Română (Bahasa Rumania)
Русский (Bahasa Rusia)
Suomi (Bahasa Finlandia)
Svenska (Bahasa Swedia)
Türkçe (Bahasa Turki)
Tiếng Việt (Bahasa Vietnam)
Українська (Bahasa Ukraina)
Laporkan kesalahan penerjemahan
I think the other responses may be too pessimistic.
There's a fair chance there'll be a WB sale as part of the Halloween event - superheroes now being a very "Halloween" thing.
If not they are likely to be a "category" (although Lego may have its own thing) in the late Autumn sale (so last week in November).
S.x.
I understand the unwillingness to use Epic as a platform - or at least not to buy games there.
Is this a permanent - never on Steam - or a delayed Steam release ?
I acknowledge that other people think and budget differently but personally I don't tend to buy games in their first twelve months after release because the difference between the price the game is released at and the price I pay for it on Steam can be 1,200 % (uplifting my purchase price to release price). So the developers delaying a year to publish on Steam just pushes back my purchase a year.
For gamers who have a reasonably wide gaming interest Steam has about 20,000 games I'd guess and of those at least 1,000 are very high quality (acknowledging there's a degree of subjectivity involved). The general experience I'm seeing is that in depriving gamers the option to purchase on Steam a lot, but by no means all, are choosing to spend their money on a different game on Steam, like the person to whom I'm responding (sorry, can't do Cyrillic text).
I acknowledge for gamers who love a particular franchise and are prepared to pay release prices to get their hands on the next instalment straight away it's a major issue. It's also those gamers who provide developers and publishers with their key revenue source.
Epic's strategy undoubtedly unequivocally is aimed at damaging Steam's revenue and is deeply unpopular with most gamers. Developers and publishers who get a better "deal" from Epic may have more conflicted views. Those that care solely about the money will definitely back a purchase on Epic over a purchase on Steam. Those that have a bad or a stormy relationship with the gaming community may like Epic's policy of silence. However those developers that have generally a good and constructive relationship with the gaming community may miss the community feedback and reading all their good reviews. A side impact of Epic's lack of a community is reduced "word of mouth" promotion on a good game. Concerned Ape's Stardew Valley might have never made it to publication on Epic, let alone become the huge success that it has.
On one level it's failed. Steam's balance sheet is undoubtedly better (just look at the very big increase in concurrent users over the past two years) now than pre-Epic but it would have been even better without Epic.
There again Epic's strategy certainly has given it a substantial degree of recognition in the gaming community. I'd question the long term strategy of a company that can literally give all participating gamers thousands of dollars worth of free games and yet be deeply distrusted and disliked in the gaming community.
S.x.