Steam 설치
로그인
|
언어
简体中文(중국어 간체)
繁體中文(중국어 번체)
日本語(일본어)
ไทย(태국어)
Български(불가리아어)
Čeština(체코어)
Dansk(덴마크어)
Deutsch(독일어)
English(영어)
Español - España(스페인어 - 스페인)
Español - Latinoamérica(스페인어 - 중남미)
Ελληνικά(그리스어)
Français(프랑스어)
Italiano(이탈리아어)
Bahasa Indonesia(인도네시아어)
Magyar(헝가리어)
Nederlands(네덜란드어)
Norsk(노르웨이어)
Polski(폴란드어)
Português(포르투갈어 - 포르투갈)
Português - Brasil(포르투갈어 - 브라질)
Română(루마니아어)
Русский(러시아어)
Suomi(핀란드어)
Svenska(스웨덴어)
Türkçe(튀르키예어)
Tiếng Việt(베트남어)
Українська(우크라이나어)
번역 관련 문제 보고
이 주제의 작성자가 게시물을 질문의 답변으로 표시하였습니다.
토론 규칙 및 지침
게시글 신고
No, I'm not interested in anything they have to offer. I am disgusted at Tim trying to cheat with exclusivity deals and feel that if that's the way his company is going to play, we'd be better off if Epic got hit with an anti-trust lawsuits for these deals or went bankrupt.
Actually, I consider the practice of buying exclusivity deals highly questionable, to put it lightly. I wonder if Epic bans people who buy software for unfair advantages in Fortnite.
The simple problem with conspiracy theories is that they exist in the mind, not in the evidence. Its why you can't really get rid of them no matter how much actual evidence is presented.
No. So we can say you are incapable of seeing a gap the width of an 8 lane highway.
And it might surprise you to know that retail stores do this ALL THE TIME. Games and otherwise. It just works the otherway around.
Take book or magazine publishing. The publishing house/distributor will typically say they will burchase any unsold copies back from the store after a given period. This happens in book stores, music stores, supermarkets, electronics and appliances, etc...
Wow. lots and lots to unpack there. Firstly EPic getting hit with anti-trust lawsuits is impossible.. because what they are doing is a standard business practice. It's how things have operated on consoles since consoles were a thing , it is literally how microsoft broke into the console market with the Xbox, and how SOny broke in with the Playstation.. It is the standard publish model that existed before the advent of digital platforms like steam.
Secondly. No. If EGS for example of shaving 20% off the price of every game you wouldn't be complaining, you'd be praising them right now so don't lie. You'd love it if EGS was bribing consumers.. and in a way they actually are with the fortnightly freebies.
So... how in heck have you managed to be a gamer and support such a questionable system. I mean any time a publisher signs a developer.. that's exactly what happens and its exclusive. WHen a developer lands the game rights to an I... that's exactly what happens....
And your last statement is essentially more conspiracy. Insinuating that people who buy on EGS won't get flagged for cheating on Fortnite...
Standard practice doesn't mean it's legal. I remember back in the days of Blockbuster, they did a certain thing that I won't discuss too much here other than say it's a "taboo subject".
I don't want their random games and don't care about the price difference. I could have bought Sonic Mania on sale when it still had Denuvo, but instead waited until it was removed and paid full price for it. That should give you an idea of the kind of person you're talking to.
I see what consoles have become and blame exclusives as a contributing factor.
Point I was trying to make their was the practice is pretty like cheating as they're paying for an advantage instead of earning the respect of gamers.
a.) Sell and make a profit with their mark up; or
b.) SHip it back to the supplier at the supplier's cost and recoup at the very minimum what they paid for what ent unsold...
Compart that to the revenue guarantee where the publisher:
a.) Sells a certain number of copies/makes a certain amount of revenue; or
b.) Epic cuts the publisher a check for the difference in revenue.
Essentially its guaranteeing a certain number of sales, whether its being bought buy gamers, or by the EGS itself.
Actually they didn't. None of the many lawsuits filed against blockbuster had to do with 'piracy' . Copyright infringement, licenes violations, etc, yes, but not piracy.. And in all cases BB was either found not guilty, or altered their practices to address the issue.
Sure you don't, because you've never waited on a sale or deep discount sale to buy something. You paid ful MSRP for all the games in your library.
I'll take your word for it.
[auote]I see what consoles have become and blame exclusives as a contributing factor.[/quote]
Have become? You mean a more open market than they actually used to be? Man you must have hated the 8 through 64 bit era of gaming.
Its no more cheating than me booking a band to play at only my events for a a month. IT's no different than any book publisher does. It''s legit, its legal and it's pretty much how the world has worked since forever.
You may just be noticing it now but trust me when I say, its been going on. And again I don't recall seeing you protesting all the exclusives Steam has.
Honestly I think the easiest solution is to simply ban review bombers from reviewing and once the ban is adminsitered, all reviews they've made, are no longer counted and are set to private.
Pretty sure BB did violated copyright with what they did when a game wasn't available for rent in the 16-bit era of gaming.
Only happens based on timing, not really waiting for sales.
I could show a filtered purchase history to show when I purchased it and how much I paid. Don't want to show the entire list because of stalker types, though.
Online ransomware filled garbage boxes. Exclusivity deals were a contributing factor in that, I'm confident in it.
Except their is a huge difference. Digital media means be at both places at the same time. That's something not possible with physical media.
I've never seen Steam buy out exclusivity deals. For all I know, you're making it up.
You want reviewed censored? I think a much better solution would be to hold all the companies that caused review bombings such as Deep Silver, 2K, Gear box, etc. all responsible for their actions.
As said you seem to have a very onesided outrage .
Unable to rent in the 16 bit era? That's more or less when they experienced their biggest growth. Your information is a little off the mark there. And yes BB did get called for copyright violation, they solved that be no longer distributing the original game manuals with rental copies (at least for Nintendo games), and using their own self made manuals.
yeah. It was the manuals. Of course their relationship with Saga was a lot better.
Your confidence is a factor of the Dunning -Krueger effect. It will pass..
SO you're saying it was impossible for a game to be sold in 2 stores at once?
You're starting to really reach now.
CS was purchased by valve, as was DOta and Portal. They purchased the exclusivity of those games. SEcondly,.ALl GS has done is found a way to incentivise developers. They can't compete with Steam on Market reach (yet) so they counter on bonuses. Like how one company might not be able to offer a prospective employee as high a salary as another buuut they can offer flex-time. Its also like how the original Xbox was sold at a loss, or Sony incentivised third party developers when the playstation came out.
Review bombs aren't reviews, anymore than flatulence counts as communication. They neither reflect the product, nor the writers onest opinions about the product. They are as much reviews as a string of randob letters is a phone number.
And there is literally nothing a company can do to prevent review bombs. or backlash. THe backlash comes in of itself from a small percentage of the actual population. A small self-centred, overly-self-entitled, emotionally unstable percentage.
No, I remember they also did something with cartridges. I remember something with generic almost blank labeled cartridges. Again, it's a taboo subject and I'd rather not go further into it.
Apparently, Epic Games thinks it's impossible.
How long ago was that? Also, if they have to pay third parties to sabotage the competition to not release on other stores at the same time, they shouldn't even be in the competition.
Actually, they serve as warnings for the general public that you might want to avoid the product in question.
If review bombs were an act of god, I would agree with you, but review bombs aren't act of god. These companies have to do something to push their luck. Examples include bait'n'swaps, abusive DRM and EULAs, delayed releases for making other games exclusive to other store fronts, breaking gambling laws, censoring negative feedback, ban-happy community forum, etc.
Translation, if they were doing it to the games you weren't interested in yyou wouldn't mind'
Well tough tits. That's how competition works. You will have to choose as a consumer. Wait, Capitulate , or abstain. Choose one, and leave others to do the same.
Yeah. Your memory and understanding have already been proven to be quite faulty so unless you can provide a ciatation. You may mbe confusing the law suit Nintendo filed against Atari (Tengen) for their unlicensed carts.
No EPic games does think its possible. That's why they're striking deals to alleviate that possibility for a time. They are giving the publishers reasons not to sell it on other storefronts for a period. That's business. You give your customers a reason to choose you over the next brand.
That's not sabotage. That's how businesses and competition worjks. They gave the developers a reason and the publishers accepted. It's no different than one company offering you a higher salary and perks for working with them as opposed to someone else. It's no different than you selling something tothe guy willing to pay $100 as opposed to the guy who'll pay $20.
That's business.
Self-centred, overly-self-entitled, emotionally unstable...All fair descriptors for god.
And the kicker is, whatever you do or do not do will always piss off some facet of your fan base. No matter what. SO you will always have a review bomb.
Bait anmd swaps exist mostly in the minds of gamers and not in the actual actions, so devs have no real way of controlling that.
I've yet to encounter any DRM I'd call abusive. A DRM generally only rears its head when you do something you really shouldn't be or are using the game in some fashion that goes outside the proper usage case..
All games come with EULA's If they didn't you'd have waaay more problems.
That's just a regular business decision. No more you pushing your luck by choosing to work at one company instead of another. I mean. You as a cuystomer are free to shop wherever you want, so why shouldn't a producer be free to sell wherever they want?
Yet to see an actual case of this. You can't break an interpretation of the law that has yet to codified and ratified by the legal system. It's like saying you can retroactively break the speed limit when the speed limit is lowered a month later.
Negative feedback is seldom censored. Though assthe saying goes.. it needs be constructive and most people I've heard ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ aboutr that basically consider shouting and ranting to be some form of feedback.
There's nothing wrong with it.
Silencing people is wrong and Orwellian.
Steam penalizing users for voicing there concerns will only invalidate user review scores. They are pointless if everyone isn't counted.
More importantly, all you are doing is driving people away from the platform.
Now lock this thread simply because I posted in it. Like all mods do. Because anything other than "Valve is perfect and no one should question them" gets moderated. While mods lie and say they don't defend Valve.
See that's the issue. Review bombs rarely have anything to do with the actual game. You literally have Tales from the Borderlands being reviewbombed because of Take2's decision to make Bl3 a 6 month exclusive on EGS.
So you have anb entirely different game, made and published by an entirely different developer, being bombed. What about those reviews actually reflects the product?
I do not consider that as bad a thing as I might have a month ago. The sort of people that are outraged about this are the people who are actually creating the problem.
Maybe try to be more constructive in your posts?
...and that is significant to a large number of users. You think these people come from the ether? That they are imaginary?
No. These are real people voicing their concerns over the actions of companies that make these games.
You think Gearbox makes nothing from Tales?
That's the point. They make exclusivity deals for profit. That is the issue gamers are upset about.
The only thing companies like Gearbox care about is money. Their CEO has made it clear he doesn't care about customer concerns or opinions.
Gamers are reacting in the only way they can: using their voice.
More to your point... Reviews do reflect the product. Because Gearbox benefits from additional sales of Tales.
...and why would you think that? Criticism is not wrong. Companies should not be above reproach. They should be held accountable.
This "problem" was created when they decided that a tiny bit more money was more important than customer convenience.
It makes no sense to hold customers accountable for the actions of a company that directly impacts customers. It's not as if customers had any say in how Gearbox (or 2k if you prefer) handled this situation.
I'm not doing anything wrong. Your moderator buddies won't allow any sort of discussion with you.
What Epic's doing isn't competition, though. During the exclusivity period, they're not competing with anyone.
Nope. It's not those. I remember seeing a Sega Genesis cart with a label that was barely anything more than red stripes when researching this matter. If you're an American gamer, you might recognize them from the left side of the cartridge of some of the later games, but the stripes were all of it. I've a hunch what those were and I know they're not Sega CD backup RAM cartridges. Those had blue stripes on the side and top with a picture of CDs on it.
Again, they're not allowing these games to launch on the other store fronts at the same time they do. Almost like they feel like their store front can't exist if it has to sell all third party games on their store if other ones had them at launch, too. Not like they have a big game to fall back on as part of some kind of store gimmick instead to incentivize purchases from Epic instead.
Again, digital goods are different from physical ones. There's not a good reason they can't be on Steam, GOG, Discord, and Epic at the same time. In other words, instead of getting 100 over 20, they can get 120.
Let me try explaining it again. You want to believe that this stuff will happen regardless of what's done, so maybe explain it with a familiar science experiment you might have done as a kid. Think of the gamers as baking soda. The choices these developers make acts something like vinegar. Some choices act as a small amount. Others act as a larger amount. It's possible to avoid the results of that over flowing if you don't go overboard with the vinegar compared to the container. Unfortunately, some companies tend to underestimate how much vinegar their actions compare to and end up with that mess. It's one reason asking the fan base before doing something this big is a good idea.
From what I understand, you might get an occasional bad review, but if you're getting them in bulk, that's not a good sign. Here's an example of a game that for the life of me, I don't see any sign of review bombing, just an occasional bad review: https://store.steampowered.com/app/390330/Mekazoo/
No Man's Sky's launch was all in people's minds? Guess there was some hive mind activity going on there. However, I don't buy that one. Here's another example of a terrible choice, but had nothing to do with Steam. Drive Club. Not the best game, but Sony announced it as a launch game for PS4 owners and said there would a PS+ edition at that time. People didn't get it at the console's launch like Sony would. This just goes to show it's not PC games that there's issues with this kind of trash.
You've been lucky, then. Not everyone is, though. Example, that person told the game had its offline mode fixed, then told to go online. Worse yet is the game is designed to be played offline.
Again, not all EULAs say things that should be concerning like a "game becoming obsolete and not fixing."
Again, digital media is a bit different than physical objects and workers. A person delivering pizza for Dominoes can't be doing that while they're on the clock somewhere else. Digital media can be in multiple places at once. In fact, more places its sold on means more sales. However, delaying a release for a major platform just to make it exclusive to another store is tempting fate. Besides, the issue isn't them selling the game on Epic. It's that it's only on Epic. However, I guess less sales is better for a company and skipping a market of an estimated 200 million for 6 months to a year is a good decision.... if you want to lose sales and get bad reviews for it.
Companies didn't think loot boxes were gambling at first, but if they hadn't bothered implementing those things, governments wouldn't have stepped in and sided with gamers that were unhappy about these things and made it official.
If there's at least a hint of what the company did wrong, it's possible to use those hints to solve a puzzle. Example, the ASCII of someone giving the Epic game store the bird would be useful in figuring out the mistake, especially when other pieces bring it up in different ways. Figuring out their blunder that triggered the mess would be the first step in trying to fix it. However, the reason people go for reviews is it affects sales, therefore means makes it more effective.
lets be honest. People will wait, and buy it when it eventually comes. All historical data shows that. Caveat being that the game is actually good.
But getting devs to choose them over steam for the period is competition. You seem to be forgetting that we aren't the primary customer Valve and Epic are aiming for.
Oh then you saw something that didn't last very long. That was actually a deal between BB and Sega that allowed BB to produce those carts. It's liked like the FDS Kiosk thing they had in japan for the nintendo.
Here's the details:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrUWIHasHPQ
Always pays to look deeper and ask questions rather than make assumptions.
just like how McDonalds wants you to eat their Big Mac and not BK's whopper. That's how choice works.
Again you're overlooking that we gamers are a secondary commodity in this competition. Publishers are, and always have been the primary commodity.
Actually that's not how it works. A market is not infinite. There are only so many people that will buy a given game. The number is finite.
So say you know 100 people will buy your game. You have a choice between store A, Store B, and Store C.
Store A - Will give you 88% and is willing to guarantee a certain minimum number of sales (say 500)
Store B - Will give you 70% but offers a larger audience but does not give you a guarantee on Sales
Store C - Is like Store B but only has a relatively small audience.
Now if you're smart, you'd certainly want to have most of your copies sold through Store A because you get more per sale and they're willing to guarantee 500 sales. Now what you don't Sell through Store A you can put on Store B, and if you feel like it Store C.
It's the same logic behind sales and price reductions. You have 1000 people that will buy a game. SOme will pay $60, some will pay only $50, aothers won't give more than $40 all the way down to $10.
Now what do you do. DO you sell to those 1000 at $10's because everyone will buy it at that price? ♥♥♥♥ no. You start selling at $60, then when you've sold as many as you can at $^0 you drop to $50, then to $40, all the way down to $10. You make waay more that way. Lo and behold that's exactly what we see.
And there you go trying to equate two different things.
Gather 100 people, and say you'll treat them to ice cream but you'll only buy one flavour for everyone. No matter what flavour gets chosen some percentage of that 100 are going to be unhappy.
And havce you ever noticed that the same could be said for any game prior to a review bombing. Check what the review charts for Chuchel and any of the BL games looked like.
Also the game you pointed out has a very small userbase. I mean with less than 100 reviews you can't say it's a popular game.
You're harping on one specific example again. You're overlooking the overwhelming number of cases where the drm is essentially invisible to the consumer.
Actually there is such a line in every EULA.. They state quite clearly that they do not guartantee support or availability of online services, like multiplayer. Maybe you should actually read EULA's before you comment one what they do or do not say.
You really think so? Lol! Then you've never had to get creative with income generation. Many it most be nice having a life that comfortable.
All business decisions tempt fate, that's the nature of business.
So why aren't you equally critical of developers only selling on Steam and not putting their games up on GoG and EGS? Why aren't you angry at that?
Because you really think people ain't going to be going over to buy BL3 on EGS. Dude. This is PC space. This isn't the console wars . PC gamers go where ever the games they want are sold at the price they want.
The giovernments didn't side with gamers dear. The governments are totally fine with loot boxes existing in games. The governments just want the publishers to pay the governments the appropriate license fees and taxes for such transactions is all.. In otherwords. The governments want a slice of that loot box pie. You know governments. They see someone making money, they try to find somee way to tax it. :)
Yeah but that ascii rt doesn't say anythinga bout whether or not the game is good, fun, playable, etc now does it. So if it says nothing about the game and answers no questions a prospective buy would normally have...then why should it be counted. It's like counting goats with sheep.