LOL, that's hilarious. Well, probably not so much for the guy himself, but.... dear god... at least the guy they sent all that info to confirmed he deleted it, though I suppose Epic Games has no...
LOL, that's hilarious. Well, probably not so much for the guy himself, but.... dear god... at least the guy they sent all that info to confirmed he deleted it, though I suppose Epic Games has no way to make sure...
Well I guess if you're spending all your money on subsidizing $weet deal$ you might not have as much for internal process analysis and data security protocols.
Well I guess if you're spending all your money on subsidizing $weet deal$ you might not have as much for internal process analysis and data security protocols.
I found the post so funny. But honestly, it was a simple human mistake (though it can have big consequences, I get it). As long as this doesn't happen it should be ok. And I do understand this is...
I found the post so funny. But honestly, it was a simple human mistake (though it can have big consequences, I get it). As long as this doesn't happen it should be ok. And I do understand this is easy to say from someone who never uses the Epic Store.
Edit: Forgot to add, I do think Epic should still face whatever repercussions there are
For me personally, it's the complete lack of Linux support. They're forcing (timed) exclusivity of series with previously famous Linux support (Borderlands 3, Metro, someone said Satisfactory is...
For me personally, it's the complete lack of Linux support. They're forcing (timed) exclusivity of series with previously famous Linux support (Borderlands 3, Metro, someone said Satisfactory is Epic-exclusive now? Throw that in there too) and locking it onto a platform with 0 Linux or macOS support. The platform itself is almost objectively worse, even ignoring the lacking OS support.
It'd be one thing if games were becoming Epic-exclusive because Epic was competitive. They're just throwing their pile of cash that they happened to stumble onto at everything without actually putting any effort into actually competing. Their one trick is "steal games from Steam" and when they keep on yoinking amazing, Linux-supportive games and making them completely untouchable that starts to grate.
Valve's exclusivity comes from the network effect, which isn't great, but there's literally nothing stopping any publishers and devs from moving away from Valve, or just publishing on other platforms like they already do. And a lot of the good Valve has done is freely available for everyone. Valve has earned a lot of good will.
I'd argue that Valve is kind of on a downswing itself, and that the Network effect is/was starting to be chipped away at by them approving everything except the things that gives them bad press,...
Valve's exclusivity comes from the network effect, which isn't great, but there's literally nothing stopping any publishers and devs from moving away from Valve, or just publishing on other platforms like they already do. (...) Valve has earned a lot of good will.
I'd argue that Valve is kind of on a downswing itself, and that the Network effect is/was starting to be chipped away at by them approving everything except the things that gives them bad press, their first original game in forever being a port of the Steam Store to a card game, and relying on the algorithm god's to figure out recommendations. I also think that, yes, Epic stepped in it with Metro, and picking up Rocket League and taking it off the Steam catalog is egregious, but Epic or somebody is going to provide a serious challenge to Steam, whatever good will they have is going to evaporate over some dumb thing, and they just won't know what hit them.
(If you'll indulge me telling you how I think that will happen, Proton and Steam Link Anywhere are going to be intergrated into a Stadia Competitor which will be advertised as the new way to play, games will be optimized for that, it will suck, and that will leave Steam with a minority chunk of PC gaming market share, until there is no longer a PC gaming market to share.)
Personally I have a hard time believing anything even slightly Stadia-esque will be able to get off the ground within the next few decades. Consumer internet just ain't up to the task. Half the...
Personally I have a hard time believing anything even slightly Stadia-esque will be able to get off the ground within the next few decades. Consumer internet just ain't up to the task. Half the time I struggle with YouTube. I think Steam knows better than to put all their eggs into a half-woven basket. That's not to say they'll ignore the basket, though. Seems a bit weird to predict a PC gaming apocalypse caused by something that seems likely to me to go completely unused by the vast majority of people.
Correlation isn't causation. I believe that in 20 some years what we look at as a Personal Computer will be unrecognizable to the current tower and monitor form factor with a keyboard and mouse. I...
Seems a bit weird to predict a PC gaming apocalypse caused by something that seems likely to me to go completely unused by the vast majority of people.
Correlation isn't causation. I believe that in 20 some years what we look at as a Personal Computer will be unrecognizable to the current tower and monitor form factor with a keyboard and mouse. I also believe that Steam isn't going to be the dominant game marketplace with everyone rolling their own stores and hardware for VR, TV and Mobile. Do I think Valve trying cloud streaming is going to be a death knell, no, but I don't think they have a plan past "sell the game on the computer."
"the current tower and monitor form factor with a keyboard and mouse" has survived for over 20 years, and the (QWERTY) keyboard in particular has been around for well over 100 years; I'd be...
"the current tower and monitor form factor with a keyboard and mouse" has survived for over 20 years, and the (QWERTY) keyboard in particular has been around for well over 100 years; I'd be surprised if things changed by so much that the PC of 2040 is unrecognisably different to the computers of today.
From what I can tell, people are shouting at publishers for moving to Epic, not for moving away from Steam. You don't see huge torrents of abuse directed at indie devs who put their stuff on Itch,...
From what I can tell, people are shouting at publishers for moving to Epic, not for moving away from Steam. You don't see huge torrents of abuse directed at indie devs who put their stuff on Itch, for example.
When they move to Epic after having been teased with the game on Steam (some people had even already paid money for Metro on Steam I believe), sure. At this point even if they cut that crap out...
When they move to Epic after having been teased with the game on Steam (some people had even already paid money for Metro on Steam I believe), sure. At this point even if they cut that crap out Epic already has a bad taste in everyone's mouth, I don't think that's salvageable any time soon. Even if a company makes the choice to move to Epic without being bribed, they'll get shouted down at this point.
Don't speak for everyone. I don't care about Linux support and I'm not particularly put off by their business practices when I balance that against Steam's near-monopoly on most of the market.
At this point even if they cut that crap out Epic already has a bad taste in everyone's mouth
Don't speak for everyone. I don't care about Linux support and I'm not particularly put off by their business practices when I balance that against Steam's near-monopoly on most of the market.
I didn't mean to sound aggressive. One of the things that regularly irritates me about Reddit and a lot of other social media is how often people will loop me, the lurking reader, in with their...
I didn't mean to sound aggressive. One of the things that regularly irritates me about Reddit and a lot of other social media is how often people will loop me, the lurking reader, in with their view as though I agree with everything they're saying.
If you just meant that Epic has already left a bad taste in your mouth, I understand. That's totally fair, especially given how much you want companies to support Linux for gaming. But that ain't me, and I genuinely thought you meant to include me (more specifically: people like me) in "everyone." I wouldn't have spoken up if I knew what you meant.
Everyone is not everyone who is criticizing Epic. It's everyone. That's a mob I want no part of.
Valve doesn't pay devs to use their platform, much less pay them to only use their platform - devs could also sell their stuff on Origin, GOG, etc if they wanted. After the terrible initial...
Valve doesn't pay devs to use their platform, much less pay them to only use their platform - devs could also sell their stuff on Origin, GOG, etc if they wanted. After the terrible initial launch, they became the best option for PC gaming compared to GFWL et al. (And they arguably still are the best option, especially when you consider Linux support, which Epic is actively hostile to and GOG has yet to mention with regards to their launcher.)
Also I think that some people are a bit resentful because they think game devs are their buddies who look out for the people who play their games. Seeing the fact that they'll take money to go to...
Also I think that some people are a bit resentful because they think game devs are their buddies who look out for the people who play their games. Seeing the fact that they'll take money to go to another platform is a reminder of the harsh reality that they operate like a business to try and get to that bottom line.
Because for better or worse, Epic made it explicit. They are paying people to keep their game off of Steam for a time, and are now buying developers and making their games no longer available on...
Because for better or worse, Epic made it explicit. They are paying people to keep their game off of Steam for a time, and are now buying developers and making their games no longer available on Steam to purchase. If you are working off the supposition that all games worth having come to Steam, then anything that gets in the way of that is going to rub you the wrong way.
Because this is not de facto. This is bought and paid for exclusivity. Remember how people did not enjoy that they could only get an iPhone subsidized with AT&T for the longest time? Similar to that.
Because this is not de facto. This is bought and paid for exclusivity. Remember how people did not enjoy that they could only get an iPhone subsidized with AT&T for the longest time? Similar to that.
Because like I said in my other comment, what Epic is doing isn't real competition, it's just using the ridiculous amount of money they have from Fortnite and huge venture-capital investments to...
Because like I said in my other comment, what Epic is doing isn't real competition, it's just using the ridiculous amount of money they have from Fortnite and huge venture-capital investments to try to force their way into a market that they're not capable of legitimately competing in with their product.
What Epic is doing isn't the healthy sort of competition. It doesn't help consumers, and doesn't motivate Steam to improve anything, because currently the only thing Epic is doing to "win" is spending a lot of money on exclusives and games to give away for free.
What is a "de facto" exclusive if it's not a first party exclusive? I don't know how to answer this question. I thought you were referring to first party titles when you used the term earlier. US...
What is a "de facto" exclusive if it's not a first party exclusive? I don't know how to answer this question. I thought you were referring to first party titles when you used the term earlier.
US consumers were unhappy for years that they could only get the iPhone subsidized with one company. Most people weren't customers of it, and it wasn't even available across the entire country. Because Apple and AT&T entered into a mutually beneficial agreement for themselves, they ended up harming the consumer. The consumer should never have to pay for corporations' profit.
For me it's Satisfactory. I had been waiting for it, but then Epic managed to get an Exclusivity deal. I'll take the free games Epic is giving out, but I'm not giving them any money.
For me it's Satisfactory. I had been waiting for it, but then Epic managed to get an Exclusivity deal.
I'll take the free games Epic is giving out, but I'm not giving them any money.
There's a fair amount to it, but I think the shortest explanation is that the Epic Store has absolutely nothing compelling about it, and Epic knows it. All else being equal (no sales or anything),...
There's a fair amount to it, but I think the shortest explanation is that the Epic Store has absolutely nothing compelling about it, and Epic knows it. All else being equal (no sales or anything), if a customer has a choice between Steam and Epic to buy a game, there's no reason that they would choose to buy it on Epic, because it's worse by practically every measure.
Because of that, Epic's main strategy has been to force people to use their store by paying for exclusives. Steam absolutely needs some competition, but this is more of an anti-competitive strategy than a competitive one, and won't help improve anything.
LOL, that's hilarious. Well, probably not so much for the guy himself, but.... dear god... at least the guy they sent all that info to confirmed he deleted it, though I suppose Epic Games has no way to make sure...
Well I guess if you're spending all your money on subsidizing $weet deal$ you might not have as much for internal process analysis and data security protocols.
I found the post so funny. But honestly, it was a simple human mistake (though it can have big consequences, I get it). As long as this doesn't happen it should be ok. And I do understand this is easy to say from someone who never uses the Epic Store.
Edit: Forgot to add, I do think Epic should still face whatever repercussions there are
Incoming GDPR lawsuit in 3...2...
I'm not in on the circlejerk, why does everyone hate Epic? Is it because "DAE Fornite is for kids" or something?
For me personally, it's the complete lack of Linux support. They're forcing (timed) exclusivity of series with previously famous Linux support (Borderlands 3, Metro, someone said Satisfactory is Epic-exclusive now? Throw that in there too) and locking it onto a platform with 0 Linux or macOS support. The platform itself is almost objectively worse, even ignoring the lacking OS support.
It'd be one thing if games were becoming Epic-exclusive because Epic was competitive. They're just throwing their pile of cash that they happened to stumble onto at everything without actually putting any effort into actually competing. Their one trick is "steal games from Steam" and when they keep on yoinking amazing, Linux-supportive games and making them completely untouchable that starts to grate.
Valve's exclusivity comes from the network effect, which isn't great, but there's literally nothing stopping any publishers and devs from moving away from Valve, or just publishing on other platforms like they already do. And a lot of the good Valve has done is freely available for everyone. Valve has earned a lot of good will.
I'd argue that Valve is kind of on a downswing itself, and that the Network effect is/was starting to be chipped away at by them approving everything except the things that gives them bad press, their first original game in forever being a port of the Steam Store to a card game, and relying on the algorithm god's to figure out recommendations. I also think that, yes, Epic stepped in it with Metro, and picking up Rocket League and taking it off the Steam catalog is egregious, but Epic or somebody is going to provide a serious challenge to Steam, whatever good will they have is going to evaporate over some dumb thing, and they just won't know what hit them.
(If you'll indulge me telling you how I think that will happen, Proton and Steam Link Anywhere are going to be intergrated into a Stadia Competitor which will be advertised as the new way to play, games will be optimized for that, it will suck, and that will leave Steam with a minority chunk of PC gaming market share, until there is no longer a PC gaming market to share.)
Personally I have a hard time believing anything even slightly Stadia-esque will be able to get off the ground within the next few decades. Consumer internet just ain't up to the task. Half the time I struggle with YouTube. I think Steam knows better than to put all their eggs into a half-woven basket. That's not to say they'll ignore the basket, though. Seems a bit weird to predict a PC gaming apocalypse caused by something that seems likely to me to go completely unused by the vast majority of people.
Correlation isn't causation. I believe that in 20 some years what we look at as a Personal Computer will be unrecognizable to the current tower and monitor form factor with a keyboard and mouse. I also believe that Steam isn't going to be the dominant game marketplace with everyone rolling their own stores and hardware for VR, TV and Mobile. Do I think Valve trying cloud streaming is going to be a death knell, no, but I don't think they have a plan past "sell the game on the computer."
"the current tower and monitor form factor with a keyboard and mouse" has survived for over 20 years, and the (QWERTY) keyboard in particular has been around for well over 100 years; I'd be surprised if things changed by so much that the PC of 2040 is unrecognisably different to the computers of today.
Apart from droves of people shouting at them on the internet when they do
From what I can tell, people are shouting at publishers for moving to Epic, not for moving away from Steam. You don't see huge torrents of abuse directed at indie devs who put their stuff on Itch, for example.
When they move to Epic after having been teased with the game on Steam (some people had even already paid money for Metro on Steam I believe), sure. At this point even if they cut that crap out Epic already has a bad taste in everyone's mouth, I don't think that's salvageable any time soon. Even if a company makes the choice to move to Epic without being bribed, they'll get shouted down at this point.
Don't speak for everyone. I don't care about Linux support and I'm not particularly put off by their business practices when I balance that against Steam's near-monopoly on most of the market.
You know what I meant dude. Everyone who is vocal against Epic. And I only listed my own reasons. Most don't care about Linux either.
I didn't mean to sound aggressive. One of the things that regularly irritates me about Reddit and a lot of other social media is how often people will loop me, the lurking reader, in with their view as though I agree with everything they're saying.
If you just meant that Epic has already left a bad taste in your mouth, I understand. That's totally fair, especially given how much you want companies to support Linux for gaming. But that ain't me, and I genuinely thought you meant to include me (more specifically: people like me) in "everyone." I wouldn't have spoken up if I knew what you meant.
Everyone is not everyone who is criticizing Epic. It's everyone. That's a mob I want no part of.
Valve doesn't pay devs to use their platform, much less pay them to only use their platform - devs could also sell their stuff on Origin, GOG, etc if they wanted. After the terrible initial launch, they became the best option for PC gaming compared to GFWL et al. (And they arguably still are the best option, especially when you consider Linux support, which Epic is actively hostile to and GOG has yet to mention with regards to their launcher.)
Also I think that some people are a bit resentful because they think game devs are their buddies who look out for the people who play their games. Seeing the fact that they'll take money to go to another platform is a reminder of the harsh reality that they operate like a business to try and get to that bottom line.
Because for better or worse, Epic made it explicit. They are paying people to keep their game off of Steam for a time, and are now buying developers and making their games no longer available on Steam to purchase. If you are working off the supposition that all games worth having come to Steam, then anything that gets in the way of that is going to rub you the wrong way.
Because this is not de facto. This is bought and paid for exclusivity. Remember how people did not enjoy that they could only get an iPhone subsidized with AT&T for the longest time? Similar to that.
Because like I said in my other comment, what Epic is doing isn't real competition, it's just using the ridiculous amount of money they have from Fortnite and huge venture-capital investments to try to force their way into a market that they're not capable of legitimately competing in with their product.
The article I linked in that comment is good, and here's another good one that looks at some different aspects: Why Steam Can’t Meet Epic’s Price Challenge
What Epic is doing isn't the healthy sort of competition. It doesn't help consumers, and doesn't motivate Steam to improve anything, because currently the only thing Epic is doing to "win" is spending a lot of money on exclusives and games to give away for free.
A reasonable comparison is when Amazon destroyed Diapers.com by eating a huge loss on diaper sales until they had no choice but to stop trying to compete.
What is a "de facto" exclusive if it's not a first party exclusive? I don't know how to answer this question. I thought you were referring to first party titles when you used the term earlier.
US consumers were unhappy for years that they could only get the iPhone subsidized with one company. Most people weren't customers of it, and it wasn't even available across the entire country. Because Apple and AT&T entered into a mutually beneficial agreement for themselves, they ended up harming the consumer. The consumer should never have to pay for corporations' profit.
For me it's Satisfactory. I had been waiting for it, but then Epic managed to get an Exclusivity deal.
I'll take the free games Epic is giving out, but I'm not giving them any money.
There's a fair amount to it, but I think the shortest explanation is that the Epic Store has absolutely nothing compelling about it, and Epic knows it. All else being equal (no sales or anything), if a customer has a choice between Steam and Epic to buy a game, there's no reason that they would choose to buy it on Epic, because it's worse by practically every measure.
Because of that, Epic's main strategy has been to force people to use their store by paying for exclusives. Steam absolutely needs some competition, but this is more of an anti-competitive strategy than a competitive one, and won't help improve anything.
It's a little outdated now, but this is a pretty good article that goes into it, by an indie dev I like (he makes the "Cook, Serve, Delicious!" games): https://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/DavidGalindo/20181210/332517/The_Epic_Store_In_Its_Current_State_is_Not_Good_for_Anyone.php
Mistakes happen. People are human.