Huh... the gameplay may be wildly different but it looks basically like a reskin of Transistor rather than something totally new, and I honestly don't know how I feel about that. :/ But I love...
Huh... the gameplay may be wildly different but it looks basically like a reskin of Transistor rather than something totally new, and I honestly don't know how I feel about that. :/ But I love rogue-likes and Supergiant hasn't let me down yet, so I will probably pick it up anyways. Thanks for the heads up.
edit: Oh, FFS... another Epic Games Store exclusive, too? First The Pathless and now this? sigh... Steam really needs some competition but I fucking loathe exclusives. I guess I won't be picking it up after all. :(
My issue isn't really with having to install another launcher, although I am not super stoked about that either because of how much background crap they typically install along with the actual...
My issue isn't really with having to install another launcher, although I am not super stoked about that either because of how much background crap they typically install along with the actual launcher itself. E.g. Steam/Origin/Uplay/Stardock/Twitch/Oculus all have Client Services, Web Helper Services and a few have Repository and Auth Managment Services too, as well as third party Anti-cheat Services like EasyAntiCheat, PunkBuster, etc. etc. etc. Yes, I can stop the services and set their startup type to disabled or manual, can delete all the unnecessary files and dependencies, and clean my registry of their traces, but that's a giant PITA and all that work is often completely undone when the client updates and they just get reinstalled again, so it's pointless to even try. All that shit adds up over time and bogs your system down.
However all that aside, my issue is mostly with the anti-consumer practice of exclusive titles continuing to become more prevalent in the PC gaming sphere. It's not something I really want to support.
There is a significant difference between companies releasing their own in-house developed games exclusively on their sales platform and companies paying independent third-party developers to...
There is a significant difference between companies releasing their own in-house developed games exclusively on their sales platform and companies paying independent third-party developers to release their titles exclusively on their platform like Epic, Discord, Facebook/Oculus and the console companies are currently doing. And AFAIK Steam has never done the latter.
But even if they have, a boycott of Steam (and even Origin) is unfortunately virtually impossible as a PC gamer at this point, which is precisely why I said "Steam really needs some competition". However if their new competition does shit that is just as bad or worse than anything Steam does, I have a hard time supporting them (e.g. Green Man Gaming selling grey market keys, which is why I stopped buying from them). At least GOG and Amazon/Twitch have yet to stoop that low, which is precisely why I have both their clients installed, buy from them whenever I can (esp GOG, who I <3) and genuinely hope they're successful in chipping away at Steam's market-share. Whereas Epic, Discord and Facebook/Oculus can fuck right off, as far as I'm concerned.
I support GOG by buying as many games as I can from them instead of Steam, and likewise with Humble (although the vast majority of games on Humble are unfortunately Steam versions anyways),...
I support GOG by buying as many games as I can from them instead of Steam, and likewise with Humble (although the vast majority of games on Humble are unfortunately Steam versions anyways), because they are both generally ethical companies. I have also started buying games from Twitch Desktop somewhat regularly now too as well. However because I am trying to avoid supporting any Steam competitors that are potentially less ethical and more anti-consumer than Valve that somehow means I "don't really want a Steam competitor, despite paying lip service to it"? Huh? Why? It's about trying to choose the lesser of evils for me and is really that simple.
You say you don't want to support Epic et. al because they have exclusive games, while conveniently ignoring Steam is also the exclusive store for the vast, vast majority of games (most other...
You say you don't want to support Epic et. al because they have exclusive games, while conveniently ignoring Steam is also the exclusive store for the vast, vast majority of games (most other stores just sell Steam keys).
It's about trying to choose the lesser of evils for me and is really that simple.
To me, it sounds like you don't mind the evil, as long as it's the evil you already have your library on.
How is independent developers choosing to exclusively release their games on Steam, even though they are not contractually restricted in any way from releasing them elsewhere, in any way Valve's...
How is independent developers choosing to exclusively release their games on Steam, even though they are not contractually restricted in any way from releasing them elsewhere, in any way Valve's fault? Just because that situation also has the word "exclusively" in it doesn't mean it's the same thing as what people are referring to when they say platform exclusives, which are an actual problem and involve exclusivity contracts that artificially restrict the market and lock developers in to one particular platform.
The former type of "exclusivity" is a choice developers are making based on a myriad of healthy competitive factors like market share, features that one platform offers over the others, etc.... whereas the latter is essentially bribery being committed by a platform in order to gain a competitive advantage through artificially restricting the market and removing choices from consumers on where they can buy something, which is distinctly anti-consumer. Now if Valve, as part of their Steam sales agreement, forced developers to only release games on Steam and no other platform, that would be more comparable to what is going on with platform exclusives and I would stop supporting them in a heartbeat if they started doing that. But they don't.
Now, what Valve does do that is anti-consumer is only sell their own in-house developed games exclusively on Steam, but practically every publisher with their own digital sales platform does that... EPIC included! So how can you hold that against Valve/Steam and not the others? The only exception that I am aware of in this regard is CD Projekt/GOG, which is precisely why I buy from GOG whenever I can!
Because there is choosing and "choosing". Like independent device manufacturers "choosing" to join Google's OHA, or small businesses "choosing" to sell on Amazon. Even "competitive" is a stretch...
How is independent developers choosing to exclusively release their games on Steam
a choice developers are making based on a myriad of healthy competitive factors
Because there is choosing and "choosing". Like independent device manufacturers "choosing" to join Google's OHA, or small businesses "choosing" to sell on Amazon. Even "competitive" is a stretch here, but healthy is not even close.
Now if Valve, as part of their Steam sales agreement, forced developers to only release games on Steam and no other platform, that would be more comparable to what is going on with platform exclusives and I would stop supporting them in a heartbeat if they started doing that. But they don't.
Gee, I wonder why. Surely it's because of the goodness of their hearts and nothing nefarious like, I dunno, their total domination and stranglehold of the PC games market?
So let me get this straight... you're blaming Valve for their market dominance despite them having done nothing underhanded to achieve it? And no, your purely hypothetical, "well they would have...
So let me get this straight... you're blaming Valve for their market dominance despite them having done nothing underhanded to achieve it? And no, your purely hypothetical, "well they would have if they needed to", doesn't count.
So what exactly is your proposed solution here to their market dominance? Boycott Valve for no legitimate reason and instead just blindly support any and all competitors to them even if they are doing worse shit than Valve ever has? And because I don't do that and instead choose to only support platforms like GOG that I feel aren't potentially worse than Valve, that means I "don't really want competition", am just "paying lip service" to the idea, and "don't mind the evil"?
Honestly, to me it sounds like you just have an irrational hatred for Valve, it's clouding your judgment, and you're attempting to take it out on me by making repeated personal attacks against my character, simply for criticizing their competition.
For you, maybe. It does count for some. You also seem to be forgetting that Steam started with exactly the same strategy: exclusives. Remember the launch of HL2? I do, vividly. On the contrary, as...
your purely hypothetical, "well they would have if they needed to", doesn't count.
For you, maybe. It does count for some. You also seem to be forgetting that Steam started with exactly the same strategy: exclusives. Remember the launch of HL2? I do, vividly.
Honestly, to me it sounds like you just have an irrational hatred for Valve
On the contrary, as a Linux gamer I have a huge amount of appreciation for Valve.
repeated personal attacks against my character
Questioning your reasoning is in no way a personal attack.
Do we know whether the title is exclusive because Epic reached a deal with the developers, or is it just because the developers will get a better cut from this store? I also generally dislike...
Do we know whether the title is exclusive because Epic reached a deal with the developers, or is it just because the developers will get a better cut from this store?
I also generally dislike exclusives, but if the devs chose Epic because they'll get a larger share of the games sold, I don't really interpret that as anti-consumer.
I doubt we can ever really know exactly why they did it unless they admit it, but you do make a good point... I wouldn't necessarily hold it against Supergiant if rather than being paid directly...
I doubt we can ever really know exactly why they did it unless they admit it, but you do make a good point... I wouldn't necessarily hold it against Supergiant if rather than being paid directly to release elusively they were just offered a better deal than Steam's 30% cut.
I think it's fairly safe to assume they are getting something additional... otherwise why wouldn't they just release on both platforms even though one takes a slightly bigger cut (but even so has...
I think it's fairly safe to assume they are getting something additional... otherwise why wouldn't they just release on both platforms even though one takes a slightly bigger cut (but even so has significantly more market share so it likely evens out in the end)?
I have a couple issues with the Epic launcher/store in particular. Their refund policy is abysmal: Not allowed unless the law forces them (Store EULA, section 9 ), they also don't have an...
I have a couple issues with the Epic launcher/store in particular.
Their refund policy is abysmal: Not allowed unless the law forces them (Store EULA, section 9 ), they also don't have an automated way to process them, resulting in this.
No Linux client: with the steam client I can launch Windows games and oftentimes it will just work. Manually setting up a game to work in wine is cumbersome at best, even with tools like Lutris.
I am a bit worried this might be the first Supergiant game without a Linux version... I have no idea how digital store exclusivity works. Would it be possible for Supergiant Games to sell the...
I am a bit worried this might be the first Supergiant game without a Linux version...
I have no idea how digital store exclusivity works. Would it be possible for Supergiant Games to sell the Windows and Mac versions of Hades exclusively through Epic Store, and the Linux version through Steam?
The exclusivity for Hades and Meatboy Forever os both 12 months, I'm unsure if it's the same for all the titles (I'm interested in Journey, for example) But it leaves the door open for Linux...
The exclusivity for Hades and Meatboy Forever os both 12 months, I'm unsure if it's the same for all the titles (I'm interested in Journey, for example)
But it leaves the door open for Linux releases elsewhere, just much later.
They mention that in the future it will be on a variety of platforms at release. I imagine that because they are selling the game at a deep discount for early access they want to maximize their...
They mention that in the future it will be on a variety of platforms at release. I imagine that because they are selling the game at a deep discount for early access they want to maximize their revenue share. Selling it on Epic's store front is an easy way to achieve that. If it stays exclusive to Epic for PC on GA I'll join you in being pissed because I want to play this on my linux machines just like their other games.
Thanks for the info. I am still disappointed about the exclusivity agreement, but if it's only for EA then I suppose it's not quite as bad as I was worried it was. Especially since I was planning...
Thanks for the info. I am still disappointed about the exclusivity agreement, but if it's only for EA then I suppose it's not quite as bad as I was worried it was. Especially since I was planning on waiting until EA was over to play it anyways.
So I bought it and played some yesterday. It definitely feels like a transistor reskin - but that's not necessarily a bad thing (since transistor had some very smooth combat). There's obviously...
So I bought it and played some yesterday.
It definitely feels like a transistor reskin - but that's not necessarily a bad thing (since transistor had some very smooth combat). There's obviously different weapons and the skills, etc. are diff too.
There's a pretty steep difficulty curve (probably because it's still in beta) and there's some balancing issues that need to be worked out (the spear is probably the best weapon by far, and I think aphrodite's blessings are the best), but all in all it's a lot of fun in the state it currently is in. I didn't notice any bugs or performance issues except one time the game dropped below 60fps for maybe 200ms after I cleared a room.
They address that in their FAQ: Your games are known for characters and story. How does that fit with Early Access? The opportunity to deliver story in a serial fashion during Early Access is one...
Your games are known for characters and story. How does that fit with Early Access?
The opportunity to deliver story in a serial fashion during Early Access is one of the many reasons we were excited to go this route with Hades. Think of our Early Access launch as the pilot episode of a new series. You can look forward to meeting close to 20 different fully voiced characters, and experiencing the setup for the story, along with hours of unique events and interactions.
You can engage with the narrative as much as you like, so if you just want to dive in for a quick hack-and-slash session, Hades has you covered. Our Early Access launch build does have a specific endpoint in terms of how far into the Underworld you can go, and you won’t be able to get to the end of the story just yet -- we’ll be saving that for when we’re finished. Along the way, we’re going to keep adding characters and events, bringing the story closer to the climactic ending we have in mind. Note that you can continue playing Hades indefinitely due to its structure and design.
In other words sounds like they're taking the mobile game model, with timed events and story released over time. Wonder if that also means paid DLC later on?
100% with you here, as much as I loathe early access and yet another game store/launcher I bought this in a heartbeat. I probably won't be able to devote a bunch of time to it anytime soon but I'm...
100% with you here, as much as I loathe early access and yet another game store/launcher I bought this in a heartbeat. I probably won't be able to devote a bunch of time to it anytime soon but I'm excited to play it some.
Huh... the gameplay may be wildly different but it looks basically like a reskin of Transistor rather than something totally new, and I honestly don't know how I feel about that. :/ But I love rogue-likes and Supergiant hasn't let me down yet, so I will probably pick it up anyways. Thanks for the heads up.
edit: Oh, FFS... another Epic Games Store exclusive, too? First The Pathless and now this? sigh... Steam really needs some competition but I fucking loathe exclusives. I guess I won't be picking it up after all. :(
Can I ask why you're so averse to using another launcher? It's not like you have to buy the launcher like you would a console.
My issue isn't really with having to install another launcher, although I am not super stoked about that either because of how much background crap they typically install along with the actual launcher itself. E.g. Steam/Origin/Uplay/Stardock/Twitch/Oculus all have Client Services, Web Helper Services and a few have Repository and Auth Managment Services too, as well as third party Anti-cheat Services like EasyAntiCheat, PunkBuster, etc. etc. etc. Yes, I can stop the services and set their startup type to disabled or manual, can delete all the unnecessary files and dependencies, and clean my registry of their traces, but that's a giant PITA and all that work is often completely undone when the client updates and they just get reinstalled again, so it's pointless to even try. All that shit adds up over time and bogs your system down.
However all that aside, my issue is mostly with the anti-consumer practice of exclusive titles continuing to become more prevalent in the PC gaming sphere. It's not something I really want to support.
There is a significant difference between companies releasing their own in-house developed games exclusively on their sales platform and companies paying independent third-party developers to release their titles exclusively on their platform like Epic, Discord, Facebook/Oculus and the console companies are currently doing. And AFAIK Steam has never done the latter.
But even if they have, a boycott of Steam (and even Origin) is unfortunately virtually impossible as a PC gamer at this point, which is precisely why I said "Steam really needs some competition". However if their new competition does shit that is just as bad or worse than anything Steam does, I have a hard time supporting them (e.g. Green Man Gaming selling grey market keys, which is why I stopped buying from them). At least GOG and Amazon/Twitch have yet to stoop that low, which is precisely why I have both their clients installed, buy from them whenever I can (esp GOG, who I <3) and genuinely hope they're successful in chipping away at Steam's market-share. Whereas Epic, Discord and Facebook/Oculus can fuck right off, as far as I'm concerned.
Honestly, it all sounds like you don't really want a Steam competitor, despite paying lip service to it.
I support GOG by buying as many games as I can from them instead of Steam, and likewise with Humble (although the vast majority of games on Humble are unfortunately Steam versions anyways), because they are both generally ethical companies. I have also started buying games from Twitch Desktop somewhat regularly now too as well. However because I am trying to avoid supporting any Steam competitors that are potentially less ethical and more anti-consumer than Valve that somehow means I "don't really want a Steam competitor, despite paying lip service to it"? Huh? Why? It's about trying to choose the lesser of evils for me and is really that simple.
You say you don't want to support Epic et. al because they have exclusive games, while conveniently ignoring Steam is also the exclusive store for the vast, vast majority of games (most other stores just sell Steam keys).
To me, it sounds like you don't mind the evil, as long as it's the evil you already have your library on.
How is independent developers choosing to exclusively release their games on Steam, even though they are not contractually restricted in any way from releasing them elsewhere, in any way Valve's fault? Just because that situation also has the word "exclusively" in it doesn't mean it's the same thing as what people are referring to when they say platform exclusives, which are an actual problem and involve exclusivity contracts that artificially restrict the market and lock developers in to one particular platform.
The former type of "exclusivity" is a choice developers are making based on a myriad of healthy competitive factors like market share, features that one platform offers over the others, etc.... whereas the latter is essentially bribery being committed by a platform in order to gain a competitive advantage through artificially restricting the market and removing choices from consumers on where they can buy something, which is distinctly anti-consumer. Now if Valve, as part of their Steam sales agreement, forced developers to only release games on Steam and no other platform, that would be more comparable to what is going on with platform exclusives and I would stop supporting them in a heartbeat if they started doing that. But they don't.
Now, what Valve does do that is anti-consumer is only sell their own in-house developed games exclusively on Steam, but practically every publisher with their own digital sales platform does that... EPIC included! So how can you hold that against Valve/Steam and not the others? The only exception that I am aware of in this regard is CD Projekt/GOG, which is precisely why I buy from GOG whenever I can!
Because there is choosing and "choosing". Like independent device manufacturers "choosing" to join Google's OHA, or small businesses "choosing" to sell on Amazon. Even "competitive" is a stretch here, but healthy is not even close.
Gee, I wonder why. Surely it's because of the goodness of their hearts and nothing nefarious like, I dunno, their total domination and stranglehold of the PC games market?
So let me get this straight... you're blaming Valve for their market dominance despite them having done nothing underhanded to achieve it? And no, your purely hypothetical, "well they would have if they needed to", doesn't count.
So what exactly is your proposed solution here to their market dominance? Boycott Valve for no legitimate reason and instead just blindly support any and all competitors to them even if they are doing worse shit than Valve ever has? And because I don't do that and instead choose to only support platforms like GOG that I feel aren't potentially worse than Valve, that means I "don't really want competition", am just "paying lip service" to the idea, and "don't mind the evil"?
Honestly, to me it sounds like you just have an irrational hatred for Valve, it's clouding your judgment, and you're attempting to take it out on me by making repeated personal attacks against my character, simply for criticizing their competition.
For you, maybe. It does count for some. You also seem to be forgetting that Steam started with exactly the same strategy: exclusives. Remember the launch of HL2? I do, vividly.
On the contrary, as a Linux gamer I have a huge amount of appreciation for Valve.
Questioning your reasoning is in no way a personal attack.
Going back to the original topic of exclusives, here's what one developer who made their game Epic-exclusive says about it: https://rebel-galaxy.com/rebel-galaxy-outlaw-launching-on-epic-games-store-qa/
I think everything on that page is very reasonable. If you disagree, I'd love to hear why.
Do we know whether the title is exclusive because Epic reached a deal with the developers, or is it just because the developers will get a better cut from this store?
I also generally dislike exclusives, but if the devs chose Epic because they'll get a larger share of the games sold, I don't really interpret that as anti-consumer.
I doubt we can ever really know exactly why they did it unless they admit it, but you do make a good point... I wouldn't necessarily hold it against Supergiant if rather than being paid directly to release elusively they were just offered a better deal than Steam's 30% cut.
I think it's fairly safe to assume they are getting something additional... otherwise why wouldn't they just release on both platforms even though one takes a slightly bigger cut (but even so has significantly more market share so it likely evens out in the end)?
I have a couple issues with the Epic launcher/store in particular.
I am a bit worried this might be the first Supergiant game without a Linux version...
I have no idea how digital store exclusivity works. Would it be possible for Supergiant Games to sell the Windows and Mac versions of Hades exclusively through Epic Store, and the Linux version through Steam?
The exclusivity for Hades and Meatboy Forever os both 12 months, I'm unsure if it's the same for all the titles (I'm interested in Journey, for example)
But it leaves the door open for Linux releases elsewhere, just much later.
They mention that in the future it will be on a variety of platforms at release. I imagine that because they are selling the game at a deep discount for early access they want to maximize their revenue share. Selling it on Epic's store front is an easy way to achieve that. If it stays exclusive to Epic for PC on GA I'll join you in being pissed because I want to play this on my linux machines just like their other games.
Thanks for the info. I am still disappointed about the exclusivity agreement, but if it's only for EA then I suppose it's not quite as bad as I was worried it was. Especially since I was planning on waiting until EA was over to play it anyways.
So I bought it and played some yesterday.
It definitely feels like a transistor reskin - but that's not necessarily a bad thing (since transistor had some very smooth combat). There's obviously different weapons and the skills, etc. are diff too.
There's a pretty steep difficulty curve (probably because it's still in beta) and there's some balancing issues that need to be worked out (the spear is probably the best weapon by far, and I think aphrodite's blessings are the best), but all in all it's a lot of fun in the state it currently is in. I didn't notice any bugs or performance issues except one time the game dropped below 60fps for maybe 200ms after I cleared a room.
They address that in their FAQ:
Your games are known for characters and story. How does that fit with Early Access?
The opportunity to deliver story in a serial fashion during Early Access is one of the many reasons we were excited to go this route with Hades. Think of our Early Access launch as the pilot episode of a new series. You can look forward to meeting close to 20 different fully voiced characters, and experiencing the setup for the story, along with hours of unique events and interactions.
You can engage with the narrative as much as you like, so if you just want to dive in for a quick hack-and-slash session, Hades has you covered. Our Early Access launch build does have a specific endpoint in terms of how far into the Underworld you can go, and you won’t be able to get to the end of the story just yet -- we’ll be saving that for when we’re finished. Along the way, we’re going to keep adding characters and events, bringing the story closer to the climactic ending we have in mind. Note that you can continue playing Hades indefinitely due to its structure and design.
In other words sounds like they're taking the mobile game model, with timed events and story released over time. Wonder if that also means paid DLC later on?
100% with you here, as much as I loathe early access and yet another game store/launcher I bought this in a heartbeat. I probably won't be able to devote a bunch of time to it anytime soon but I'm excited to play it some.