Steam telepítése
belépés
|
nyelv
简体中文 (egyszerűsített kínai)
繁體中文 (hagyományos kínai)
日本語 (japán)
한국어 (koreai)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bolgár)
Čeština (cseh)
Dansk (dán)
Deutsch (német)
English (angol)
Español - España (spanyolországi spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (latin-amerikai spanyol)
Ελληνικά (görög)
Français (francia)
Italiano (olasz)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonéz)
Nederlands (holland)
Norsk (norvég)
Polski (lengyel)
Português (portugáliai portugál)
Português - Brasil (brazíliai portugál)
Română (román)
Русский (orosz)
Suomi (finn)
Svenska (svéd)
Türkçe (török)
Tiếng Việt (vietnámi)
Українська (ukrán)
Fordítási probléma jelentése
E téma közzétevője a kérdése válaszának jelölt egy hozzászólást.
Hozzászólási szabályok és irányelvek
Hozzászólás jelentése
Was the word slave master used? And yeah working for someone is a matter of obligating yourself to fulfil their requests, and orders within reason and scope of your contract in exchange for compensation.
Simple. You create customers by giving peopel a reason to buy your product. Before someone buys they aren't a customer and once they purchase they become a customer.
Because you can't help yourself when it comes to throwing your money at shinies hmm?
Ness_and_Sonic was talking about fans not purchasing a game. Tito rightfully answers that without fans you have the customers left. Customers and fans are not the same.
Regarding most games I own and have played I'm a customer, not a fan.
Unfortunately, Epic's giving people a reason NOT to buy from them. They're actively ticking people off with these exclusivity deals. Besides, even big name games aren't above blowing it big time. Example Duke Nukem Forever, Sonic the Hedgehog 2006.
I can assure you that I would have been interested in a PlayStation 4 if it wasn't one thing Sony did that crossed the line. Still haven't bought one.
If you have a guaranteed revenue and less direct competition on said platform, why not?
Besides, more customers on a platform doesn't guarantee more revenue for your game. For people who simply want to buy and play their game the features of the platform are irrelevant. As is for the real fans of a game.
Gamers go where their games are, the platform is less important than you make it to be.
Strangely enough DN4E didn't blow it. It actually was fairly well received. I mean the fact it existed at all was enough to spark curiosity. As for Sonic 2006... Well at least it wasn't Shadow the Hedgehog. As for giving people a reason not to buy. Well really the people who are raging have likely either already bought on epic or were never going to buy from epic no matter what. You don't count the latter as lost revenue, they were never part of your audience.
And so did others and yet the PS4 is an undeniable success.
I disagreed with DIablo 3's always online crap and didn't buy it. The game still exists, made alot of cash. Do you see the point I'm making about very loud minorities.
The interesting thing what epic is doing is actually smart. People like myself see no reason to buy something on epic if its available on steam because steam is more convenient for me. The only way they'd get me to seriously consider installing yet another launcher is if they had some game I wanted but couldn't get anywhere else. ALl the store fronts have games like that. You'll only find the HL and DOta games on steam. You'll only find the ol SSI catalog on GoG, and you'll only find Starcraft and warcraft on blizzacti....nd now there are game syou'll only find on Epic for a short peiriod of time.
STudy business. Then a lot of this stuff won't seem so odd to you.
That depends. Again study business. I mean you seem to have missed the point he was making that someone isn't a customer...until they actually buy something. You can turn non-customers into customers with the right marketing and sales tactics. And sometimes going to a smaller more focused market is more profitable.
Niche marketing was probably a topic you missed.
Neither does a higher split. 88% of 100 < 70% of 200. Also, a lot of these features Steam has is useful. Given that Linux distros are freely available, Linux support helps make PC gaming more affordable as you don't have to pay hundreds of dollars for Windows. Not everyone can adapt to playing with mouse and keyboard and/or probably has a certain controller they prefer to use or even use for certain games. If a game doesn't support your DS4 controller natively, Steam would handle it. And Sonic Mania with a Genesis/Mega Drive 6-button controller (nostalgia
So why did people want Bayonetta 2 on PS4 instead of getting a Wii U for it?
A temporary limit with a guaranteed revenue. And afterwards the game gets released on Steam. One could say it also gives opportunity to expand the potential customerbase by such a move.
All optional things that are neat, but not required. None of that guarantees that a game will do better on Steam than on the EGS.
Because you'll always have a part of the customerbase who want certain things. But that's a hardware difference, meaning you have to purchase a whole different console to actually be able to play the game. A difference you don't have in PC gaming, as the true platform (your PC) is the same whether you shop on Steam or Epic.
Comparing apples to oranges won't make your point, mate.
2.) Sony's "success" if you want to call it that was just a result of Microsoft blowing it with the Xbox One. However, I feel like they pushed PS3 owners away at the same time. Mainly because Valve did reveal their user numbers the month before the PS4 and XBO launched and then updated them less than a year and a half later.
3.) It only seems smart. If the Steam option is taken away, it may result in those on the fence about getting the PC version buy the console version. If bought new, it wouldn't be as good if bought from Epic as from what I understand, Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft don't offer that 88% that Epic does. If bought used, they get 0%. (Not good for the publisher) Alternatively, it could result in Epic getting an anti-trust lawsuit. (Not good for Epic). Anyway, if Epic really wanted people to buy from their store front, they'd be using Fortnite as a gimmick or looking into something other than delaying other options.
4.) Throwing your existing install base isn't a smart idea, though. That was why systems like the PS2, PS3, Game Boy, Game Boy Advance, DS, and 3DS still continued to get support after the next system launched. Epic might be offering a bigger cut, but a bigger cut doesn't mean more money if the audience is there and as I've seen, people won't always go to the platform the game is released on if there's something bothering them about that platform. It limits their sales.
5.) Bayonetta 2 is just one example of people not buying the game on the system it was released for. Another would be Dead Rising 3.
2.) Nope, but the opposite side of it is Epic has a smaller audience. If anything, it just limits the sales people who trust Epic enough to install their launcher, which is something I find hard to do given the way they're actively getting games such as Metro Exodus, The Walking Dead the Final Season, and Anno 1800 removed from other stores.
3.) Again, the features of those stores are important. There's no guarantee features from the Steam client will work with games purchased from other ones if you import them into Steam, even if they're newer games.
Sony, has consistently heald a high market share of the console market ever since the play staystation 2. I think the PS4's success may have been you know, proof that they know what they are doing.
No It seems smart to people who actually understand business strategy. You might try learning some. As usual your arguments and stance seems to be based entirely on the DUnning-Krueger effect. Businesses look at alot of things and thing over longer time periods than you seem to be capable of grasping.
Dead RIsing 3 also sold quite well, about as well as Dead rising 2.
Again you want to believe a narrative and you know just enough to hit the peak of the DUning Krueger effect. You're pretty much the example of why STeam changed reviews the way they did and will probably need to change it again. Hopefully to ban off-topic review bombers from being able to leave reviews at all.
DNF is mixed at best... Oh wait... Let me guess, it was review bombed regularly?
Not really. There was a pretty huge shift to PC gaming at that time. It took Steam 10 years to get that 65 million they had before the start of console gen, then it jumped to 125 million in less than a year and a half later. Strange how for all the PS4's success, it wasn't able to move that many PS4s during that same time period.
Again, a higher percentage doesn't mean more money. Based on number crunching, Steam has an estimated 200,000,000 users. 70% of that is 140,000,000. Epic offers 88%. Doing some number crunching, Epic would need 159,090,910 users to beat the amount from that 70%. This is just based on user numbers alone and not factoring in the revenue tiers among other things to keep this simple. Also, while Fortnite itself might have a huge install base, I don't see Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, and Apple allowing separate store fronts on Switch, PlayStation 4, Xbox One, and IOS (iphone). This is why I'm curious about Epic's install base. Companies are giving up quite a bit by delaying GOG, Steam, and Discord versions to give Epic a head start.
It didn't help with the Xbox One's preorders, though.
All these bad reviews wouldn't happen if developers actually took time to consult customers before doing big things like this. Heck, Metro Exodus should have been a red flag not to do this with Borderlands 3. Also, have you considered what would happen if "off-topic" negative reviews got banned? My guess is the negative reviews would just claim the game is glitchy and broken when they do something people don't like instead. At least the current system keeps that kind of thing from becoming the norm and lets people and developer/publishers know more specifically what the real issue is. However, I think letting people review developers and publishers with those ratings being displayed on the page and being their own separate rating would improve things by mitigating developer/publisher actions away from the game's reviews.